 Ok so I’ve played a few games in my life. Different genres, game systems, from different countries, even different languages. One thing that never seems to escape my attention is the simple fact that game stories tend to be one trick ponies. Not to say that game stories aren’t well written or imaginative, but there seems to be several taboos, clichés, stereotypes, whatever you want to call them, in place in most instances.
Now humans have a wide range of motivational excuses, reasons etc for doing things. Now prudence says the same could be said of non-humans. So it seems to me that games should be exploring this a bit more.
Let me give you an example. Say your playing a “D&D like game”. Your standard sword & sorcery fare. Magic, armour, dungeons you know, the usual. Why does every story have to be of revenge for family lost, to defeat a cruel villain or seeking glory and title through deeds and battle?
2004’s The Bard’s Tale did a great job of poking fun at those very things. The motivation for the story was “coin and cleavage”, which ironically enough would be a more believable reason for questing than “saving the world”. At one point your character inadvertently causes mayhem because of his own ignorance, the result of which is recognized by the NPC’s later on. Now that made this game refreshing because in the real world, whether your an optimist or not, there seems to be more ignorance and greed than virtue and righteousness.
Unfortunately, there are few games like that. Another nice option is to have a moral system like BioWare games tend to have, or Bethesda games. Oblivion, Morrowind, Mass Effect, Jade Empire, Knights of the Old Republic etc. are a few specific examples. You can choose to be a neutral rogue, an evil person, or a good Samaritan. But whether good or evil the stories still have that stereotypical motivation thing going on, mainly good versus evil.
How about a story where your tracking down a lost family member? Or maybe your really pissed off at another character and your motivated simply by the desire to beat the crap out of them? Maybe even tackle a few real issues in game form. Like crusading to eliminate racism, or bring a rapist to justice, or something like that? These games are rated “M” anyway, there are worse things in games these days than tackling real issues that’s for sure.
While we are at it, how about fewer awkward teen love stories for main characters and fewer somber main characters? Would a jovial easygoing warrior be so hard to fathom? Or a character who already has a family, very much alive, throughout the whole story? It seems to be that if your pushing for realism in games these days, you need mental realism as much as physical. All the polygons on the screen can’t compensate for hollow characters with little backstory or identifiable traits the players can relate to.
It really doesn’t matter how the story turns out, it’s how it’s motivated. Like say your doing quests or missions to pay for your car or a house for your family. Through circumstance, you become mixed up in a conspiracy or conflict of some kind, or maybe a grand destiny. The point is not everyone has such a clandestine purpose in doing the things they do. Sometimes the motivations of people are simple, sometimes primal and always have consequences good or bad.
Here’s a good example to consider, the movie “To Hell and Back” which is a biopic about Audie Murphy and starring him as himself. Here’s a brief synopsis from IMDB:
“True-life account of the military career of Audie Murphy, the most decorated soldier in WWII. Native of Texas, he was placed in charge of his many younger siblings on the death of his mother and decided to join the military at the age of 18 to provide for them. His many acts of bravery and heroism during the US military advance through Italy, France and into Germany earn him increasing rank and responsibility as well as the respect of his comrades in arms. Eventually he receives two dozen of the highest medals the US and France can bestow, culminating in the awarding of the Congressional Medal of Honor.”
Simple, believable and you can even relate to him. You can even understand him a bit just from reading that. On top of that it’s a helluva story. I’m surprised there hasn’t been a WWII game made about him already, or about someone like him.
Or how about this as an angle. Your already a King/Commander, leader of some kind. Since you’ve already got the title, you can concentrate on the story of why you made a good one. Seems to me most of the games I’ve played where you gain power and influence, you only get at the end of the game meaning you really never get to use or enjoy it’s privileges. Or maybe you had it, retired from it, and had to pick up the mantle once more, dealing with all the issues and trials that being “out of the loop” would cause for you.
OK I’ve rambled enough. It’s late and I need to get some sleep. I’ll leave this disorganized mess as is, a testament to my exhaustion and disappointment of the ending and stories of otherwise fantastic games.
 Do you have an Xbox 360 Core or Arcade model? Did you expect it to be able to do what the higher end Xbox 360s can? You did? Well, guess what? You're wrong. Dead wrong.
If you buy Burnout Paradise, the latest installment in Criterion's critically acclaimed series, you'll be forced to play it offline, unless you pay $100 to Microsoft to buy a hard drive.
"Wait a minute? Are you saying what I think you're saying?! Burnout Paradise on the Xbox 360 REQUIRES a hard drive in order to play online?!" Yes. That is exactly what I said. No typos. You MUST have a hard drive in order to play this game online. "But I thought Microsoft said 'every game will work with every Xbox 360 system'?" Yeah they did, but did you see the part that said, "But just like some games will require you to have a Memory Unit to save games, some games will require you to have a Hard Drive to experience them." OH MY GOD! NO WAY!
What does this mean? It means that if you bought a 360 Core or Arcade, you just got ripped-off big time, but not by Criterion/EA, but by Microsoft.
I know, I'm a Sony fan and tend to gravitate to them, but hear me out. Games these days need a lot of space to run, especially big open-world games like Burnout Paradise. Microsoft should have had the foresight to see that this would become a problem and launched the Core model with a 20GB hard drive and the Premium one with a 40GB or so. By not doing that, they basically limited what the developers can do with the system and make them figure out other ways of caching and quick access.
This isn't the first time that the hard drive has been required on the 360 (think of all the DLC for various games, video downloads, Final Fantasy XI, and Oblivion GOTY), but it is perhaps the most notable since Burnout has huge mainstream and casual gamer popularity, and the people who buy this game might not be the ones that have the Elite Super Deluxe model with all the bells and whistles.
The 360's lack of a standard hard drive is also holding back the game industry because now it's getting to the point where the PS3 versions of games are being effected by Microsoft's boneheaded decision. Rockstar and Capcom have already expressed problems with the lack of a hard drive, and I'm sure more are to follow.
But remember, this is one (admittedly biased) guy's viewpoint. So, readers, I ask you this: what's the solution to this problem? Should devs just leave behind Core and Arcade owners? Or what should happen here?
[Image]
|
|
