L.B. Jeffries:
What if the quicktime event was like a choose your own adventure novel? X = do something crazy. Y = do something safe. Either choice could send you down a different chain. It'd be sort of like a dialog tree, except it's an action tree that lets the player still have some meaningful input on the cutscene.

That would be a step in the right direction, I'd say.

Hire better writers. Some video game writers forget that they're writing video games, not a trilogy of feature length films. The result is a game that bores you to death with hours of exposition with only small gameplay breaks. Cutscenes should only be used to bookend levels and add any transition that isn't possible in the normal gameplay.

A game's story should be driven by the gameplay, not by the cutscenes. Too many cutscenes can make the gamer feel like they're just observing rather than interacting. Metal Gear Solid 2 was probably the worst offender here. There's a sort-of boss fight near the end of the game, followed by god knows how many minutes of cutscenes (with only one 'mash triangle as fast as you can' thrown in for interactivity) and codec calls before you finally face the final boss for a fight that lasts no more than five minutes. There's no excuse for that.

Defenders of long cutscenes will say that those of us who complain about it are just impatient and that some games allow us to skip cutscenes if we want. First of all, not wanting to wait 20-30 minutes from the last time I actually did something in the game to the next time isn't impatience, it's me wanting to play a damn game. If I wanted a movie, I'd rent a movie. Secondly, obviously the game was designed so that you're supposed to sit there for the boring cutscenes, not skip them. If the game is meant to have a story to gameplay ratio of 3:1, it's a flawed game.

The answer is actually very simple.

We just have to convince every person that buys videogames to only the ones with good story mechanics.

Problem solved.

Cut all of these artificial methods, tricks and gimmicks; tell a story like you experience it in reality.

Life is not big on lengthy exposition, we need to explain less, stop catering to the lowest common denominator of intelligence among players (sales be damned, we're talking about quality, not profit) and leave some mystery and confusion in a game, realising a lack of total understanding is a very real thing, and one that -enhances- the experience.

Force players to think and to make their own decisions instead of holding their hand every step with very basic, clearly spoken instructions and lengthy cutscenes.

Allow -me- the choice to listen to the dying villain's monologue, or to finish him off with a gunshot and walk home.

Hurray Forums:

It's already been done quite well in my opinion. The only thing left to do is to go out there and BUY them so the gaming industry has a reason to make more. They don't really care if people say they like great stories if they don't buy them which judging by sales seems to be the case. Either that or the people who like great stories are hugely outnumbered by the people that don't.

It has been? What game? Tell me (I actually want to know, I can't think of anything at the moment)

*edit*

You know what, the last thing this forum needs is another god forsaken list of games with good plots. We all know the 5 or 6 games everyone is going to repeat or agree with over and over again, there's no point in dragging this out.

1) Buy games with good stories. It doesn't matter how they're told - if producers see that good stories are a selling point, they'll put money into them, which means employing people who are better at telling stories than you or I to do so.

2) Don't confuse "good story" with "lots of dialogue/narration". Planescape: Torment uses a lot of text to tell a great story; Portal uses a minimal, disjointed, one-way conversation to tell a good story; Final Fantasy uses a shedload of dialogue and tells a mediocre story. (I also don't think the story in Metroid Prime is anything special, but at least it doesn't force you to sit through much of it, and what is there to read is optional.)

3) Don't overdo it. If you forget the gameplay, nobody will stick with the story. See Rock Paper Shotgun's take on Pathologic (One, Two) for a description of an amazing story wrapped around a terrible game.

4) BUY GAMES WITH GOOD STORIES.

What Valve did in development was have the writers talk with the designers ALL THE TIME. That's how they integrated storyline and gameplay.

I have watched alot of movies that were an hour and a half long and had a great story. So why can't they fit 1 1/2 hour worth of story into a game? I am not saying they should make a game like Xenosaga with 50 min long cutscenes cuz that is to much. Split it up throughout the game and be sure the writers and devs are working together so one aspect isn't overshadowed by the other. And for the love of all that is holy step away from the cliches. Playing an amnesiac has lost its charm a long time ago. The M.C. remembering who they are for 3/4 of the game doesn't make for an interesting story. They can have a journey of self discovery and still remember thier past.

squid5580:
I have watched alot of movies that were an hour and a half long and had a great story. So why can't they fit 1 1/2 hour worth of story into a game? I am not saying they should make a game like Xenosaga with 50 min long cutscenes cuz that is to much. Split it up throughout the game and be sure the writers and devs are working together so one aspect isn't overshadowed by the other. And for the love of all that is holy step away from the cliches. Playing an amnesiac has lost its charm a long time ago. The M.C. remembering who they are for 3/4 of the game doesn't make for an interesting story. They can have a journey of self discovery and still remember thier past.

Huh? Sorry, mind providing an example please? ^^' At best, the only games I can think of that really had that as a plot point were Planescape Torment and some of the Breath of Fire series. A lot of the time they simply just don't go into the character's past, but that doesn't necessarily imply amnesia. Just that a standard videogame protaganist probably has a boring home life -_-.

As for writers and devs working together, yus yus yus. Very good idea.

This wasn't really meant to be a discussion on Ratio of story to gameplay, more of how you could portray a story integrated with gameplay.

Personally I don't find the Bioshock/System Shock method that integrated, as you almost need to go out of your way to find all the recordings, and it also didn't make sense why every goddamn person in the game made so many frigging recordings.

I suppose the split box setup, utilized in MGS4, where a cutscene type thing occurs in one seperate screen while the gameplay occurs in another is a decent way to do things, but you couldn't use this technique more than once or twice.

I do like the "villain speaks" while you fight method, it's basically flawless and it's engaging and fun. Or the "radio buddy" who speaks to you while the gameplay is going on, though this can sometimes get annoying.

Oddly enough, while the story itself was kinda bleh, Oblivion did a decent job of integrating Story and Gameplay, especially with the whole *spoiler* sacrifice scene in the villains hideout, for example.

Off the top of my head Alone in the Dark. There has also been quite few rpgs that have used that. Bioshock is an example but admittedly it was done well.

PedroSteckecilo:
This wasn't really meant to be a discussion on Ratio of story to gameplay, more of how you could portray a story integrated with gameplay.

Personally I don't find the Bioshock/System Shock method that integrated, as you almost need to go out of your way to find all the recordings, and it also didn't make sense why every goddamn person in the game made so many frigging recordings.

That's the thing, it makes a -little- more sense in System Shock, as the Von Braun is essentially owned by a commercial corporation. Having everyone wear a personal data device makes sense as almost everyone on board is really just an employee, a nifty little datapad with which to record audio messages, passwords etc. Where it comes apart slighty, is that the electronic text based readers are seperate from the audio discs (actually, why they're still use discs in the future I never found out), but other than that, it would be like their version of a mobile phone/orginiser. BioShock on the other hand...I can't really say -why- the average Rapture citizen would be carrying around a big honking tape recorder, at least in sections i.e. Suchong's research recordings, their use does make sense.

GothmogII:

PedroSteckecilo:
This wasn't really meant to be a discussion on Ratio of story to gameplay, more of how you could portray a story integrated with gameplay.

Personally I don't find the Bioshock/System Shock method that integrated, as you almost need to go out of your way to find all the recordings, and it also didn't make sense why every goddamn person in the game made so many frigging recordings.

That's the thing, it makes a -little- more sense in System Shock, as the Von Braun is essentially owned by a commercial corporation. Having everyone wear a personal data device makes sense as almost everyone on board is really just an employee, a nifty little datapad with which to record audio messages, passwords etc. Where it comes apart slighty, is that the electronic text based readers are seperate from the audio discs (actually, why they're still use discs in the future I never found out), but other than that, it would be like their version of a mobile phone/orginiser. BioShock on the other hand...I can't really say -why- the average Rapture citizen would be carrying around a big honking tape recorder, at least in sections i.e. Suchong's research recordings, their use does make sense.

A lot of them were e-mails and voice messages too. They had a lot more creative freedom than make-up "Diaries" for everybody.

Well, the first part would be to come up with something thats fresh and original. It doesn't matter how well something has been presented or how interective or genius a story telling device is, if the story it's telling has been done before and better then you're still going to think the game is as enticing as being invited for a hour long torture session.

Once we get that part down then we can move onto the delivery of the story.

Well, it's a temporary measure, but one thing that could work is to combine the exposition scenes with the QTE's, and make them a core part of the gameplay. This assures that people pay attention to what's going on, as well as giving them something to do during the cutscene.

Karisse:

Arbre:

aRealGuitarHero707:
they could make more cutscenes interactive like "press x not to do die" that was in RE:4 and the like
it would especially cool if they did this during pivitol moments in the plot
the player would be shocked but still have to react

Press X not to die is probably one of the worst game mechanics to have been put into games.

Quick-time events are risky at best. They require action from the player at a point where the player's mind is programmed to be given a rest - cinema.

The real horror of a bad QTE is to rely on a binary mechanic to either continue the story or slap the player with a large game over. These moments should be layered, offering options, various ways to pass a given sequence, and it should only be over time and after several unsatisfying inappropriate choices that the player should loose.
There's nothing exciting nor epic dying because you didn't press button O. That's actually very idiotic, and we seriously need to move beyond that.

Interactive cutscenes are always good, i don't mean QUICKLY PRESS A thing, because i always drop my controller when a cutscene starts & panic when it says that making it end up on the floor or hitting me in the eye.

Ones where you can walk around the room while someones talking, still be fighting enemies or being able to interrupt them.

Jakkar:
Cut all of these artificial methods, tricks and gimmicks; tell a story like you experience it in reality.

Life is not big on lengthy exposition, we need to explain less, stop catering to the lowest common denominator of intelligence among players (sales be damned, we're talking about quality, not profit) and leave some mystery and confusion in a game, realising a lack of total understanding is a very real thing, and one that -enhances- the experience.

Force players to think and to make their own decisions instead of holding their hand every step with very basic, clearly spoken instructions and lengthy cutscenes.

Allow -me- the choice to listen to the dying villain's monologue, or to finish him off with a gunshot and walk home.

This. Personally I hate exposition, but so many games rely upon it. Even otherwise great games have this habit of entirely separating gameplay from plot. This is particularly jarring in the modern context of 'realistic gaming'.

Half life 2 didn't have a great story - what it did have though was great story telling. The world you were playing through was the story - from the moment you stepped off the train, you were immersed in the dystopian 'reality' of City 17. The details were supplied through the classic 'in engine' cut scenes, but City 17 and its environs gave you all you really needed to know.

It's not quite the same, but Call Of Duty 4 had an interesting take on the Half Life style interactive cut scene. The game as a whole perhaps wasn't a story telling master class, but the intro and the post-nuke scene were pretty impressive.

Iron Mal:
Well, the first part would be to come up with something thats fresh and original. It doesn't matter how well something has been presented or how interective or genius a story telling device is, if the story it's telling has been done before and better then you're still going to think the game is as enticing as being invited for a hour long torture session.

Once we get that part down then we can move onto the delivery of the story.

You do know that a lot of Shakespeare's stories weren't original, right? Or that the first Starwars was basically a paint-by-numbers hero's journey story? The vast majority of stories in any medium are just combining elements that we've already seen from other stories. Good storytelling is what gives them their own character, rather than simply being generic spittle.

Better characters. The plot is the device by which the characters interact with the player and each other. Dak'kon was a great character whose entire life was based on the concept of *knowing*, Valygar a one-dimensional magic-hater who was so wooden he could have been voiced by Keanu Reeves.

i like the dialouge tree stuff that u see in KOTOR and Mass Effect...

the only thing that could inprove upon this is to have more choices in the scense like the descion at the end of mass effect where u decide if u save the leaders ship or not

Frankly, there really isn't a failsafe way for story and gameplay to exist within a game comfortably. Whichever method you try, it's bound to not agree with certain people.

I find it interesting on how some people use Half Life 2 as a good example of story telling without the abundant use of cutscenes. As I recall, in most exposition moments of the game you'd stay still while people talked to you. How's that different from a cutscene aside from being able to look around?

I stick to the good old cutscenes. They were there for me not mostly because of story moment but because they meant story moment with prettier graphics, and when used with not so much abundancy (Say God of War like), then they feel refreshing thus people pay attention to them.

I also enjoy unimportant interactive moments in cutscenes (Metal Gear Solid 3, Assassin's Creed) that allowed you to have different view angles to notice small curiosities but still not prejudicial if you didn't use them.

As said before, for good storytelling you need professional writers that try to deviate from usual plot devices that we see so much nowadays (Fighting evil only to find in the end that evil was influenced by a deity who you also fight; trying to recover your memory only to find out you were one of the bad guys, etc) or if they do use them, then flesh them out well so they turn pleasant to go through (Persona 3, in my opinion).

Then, create a likeable or at least connecting main character. You might have to like him (maybe that was done on purpose) but at least be able to feel the game and the story through that character since essentially you're seeing a story through the experiences of the character you're playing with. If that character feels to cardboard like, then everything around it tends to seem become less appealing.

thats a great idea except for the fact the there are deaf gamers so you cant have audio only story line info. Sadly that means we need to keep cut scenes. but then again i enjoy the good cut scenes. WE really should concentrate one make the nesscary cut scenes more cinamtic.

I fully aware that many gamers hate cut scenes but there her to stay just like cancer. we just need to take some cues on there timing and placement. Lets look at KHII when ever you did X damage to a boss they would say or do some thing same goes for when you used Ability Y. Those cut scenes lasted all of what 5 seconds. Have them integrated into pivotal battle movement makes it certain that you are paying attention when the information is being delivered.

In my opinion ,it also depends on the people playing it. I, for example, find it very hard to get into a story when I never talk to an NPC, like FEAR or Splinter Cell.
In Bioshock,the characters at least had faces and there weren't too many of them so it went very well.

Fahrenheit is a great example for how to build up the tension, but unfortunately the second half of the game was a big letdown(in my opinion). The optional QTE to for example read peoples minds really added something to the gameplay,and the splitscreen that showed different locations or camera angles gave the game a rather cinematic look (and I liked it).

slyder35:
I have the perfect solution for both camps.

Camp 1 - Just for the Gameplay - give them a SKIP CUTSCENE button.
Camp 2 - Just for the Story - give them a SKIP GAMEPLAY button.
Camp 3 - Who want both - give them achievements for being good gamers.

Yes, this is what we need... but I think camp 2 might as well watch anime then...

As for my solution, I'd... well, I actually don't have an issue with the traditional cutscene thing. I feel that ,in games that have stories that are worth it, trudging through the gameplay is my reward. If it gets too much, I can always go on the net...

To every man his own of course, but it occurs to me a great deal of the complaints with long cutscenes could be silenced by always making them skippable. Sure, in games with longer cutscenes or dialogue you'd get the sensation Yahtzee described in Mass Effect, that the game is resenting you somewhat and you forget where you are or why you're doing this. Pace the cutscenes- packing all the story information into one or two crazy-long ones makes them unwieldly and dry. If every scene contains information pertient to something happening in the actual gameplay and filler dialogue (something I hear MGS4 has in abundance) is kept to a minimum, boredom becomes more difficult.

Honorable mention should be made to the Metroid Prime series, where pretty much all the story is delivered in scans; you only read as much of it as you want, and the cutscenes are all short, usually introducing some huge new boss monster in a roaring frenzy. Again, not for every game, but they did that really well IMO. Even if you ignored every data and lore scan, you would eventually figure out where Phazon is from, what it does, and that the Pirates are seeking it out like it's the new oil. 1st Rule of Entertainment: show, don't tell. Or at least that's true for movies...

Games can offer completely different experiences than other art forms.

Game stories that take advantage of this, like Bioshock, can succeed and really move the art form forward.

I really like how BioShock did the whole "recorded diary" dialogues and radio transmissions instead of cutscenes. It really created this sort of freakish atmosphere without interrupting immersion (loading aside that is).

All cut-scenes should have a PS3 video view speed thing, where it goes 1.5 speed. Easy to understand dialogue, but faster than usual.

L.B. Jeffries:

Arbre:

aRealGuitarHero707:
they could make more cutscenes interactive like "press x not to do die" that was in RE:4 and the like
it would especially cool if they did this during pivitol moments in the plot
the player would be shocked but still have to react

Press X not to die is probably one of the worst game mechanics to have been put into games.

What if the quicktime event was like a choose your own adventure novel? X = do something crazy. Y = do something safe. Either choice could send you down a different chain. It'd be sort of like a dialog tree, except it's an action tree that lets the player still have some meaningful input on the cutscene.

for a game that has more than one way to play thru it like a man hunt or a rpg press x to fight the first bad guy with a gun or a wizard staff, you pick that and the story and npcs and game shifts to a gunplay centered element, if you press triangle and pick up razor wire or a dirk then it shifts to stealth play. you could also chose to kill the bad guys or join them instant good ending and bad ending.