Is he right?

You know, I'm seriously starting to hope that the game's demo will be good. God knows we need less "cinematic experiences" in vidya.
You can do it, Romero.

I swear to god, if the game has execution moves I will personally fly over and cut off his hair

user, are you aware of the concept of shitposting? Because, like you say, every thread, people always come in to say the game is shit because they know it triggers Morrowind fans really hard for the most part.

Both are required without a doubt. A game without mechanics is just a movie and a game without a story is just a tech demo. Some people lean more towards one or the other, but both are required.

Well I dunno, I loved obliteration techniques in NG2. I mean, it's the only game with execution mechanics that does them without breaking the flow of the gameplay I've ever played. But at least it kind of proves that such a thing is possible.

Am I not allowed to enjoy different things at different times for different reasons? Is it illegal to enjoy story-oriented games just because the industry started pumping bad ones out at full throttle to pander to the Hollywood audience?

I just want to play video games, I don't see what the issue is.

Story is different to world building. If you look at a lot of RPG stories they're very similar with a focus on the player being the chosen one or some other bullshit.

Having the player engrossed into the world is important if you're creating an RPG. It's why Skyrim sucks dick because there's so much story but no world building.

What's the point in stating an absolutely neutral stance?

If you want to play games, don't sit around here and talk about them. Especially when you're too dense to have any kind of significant opinion on them.

Romero is correct, especially when the "cinematic experience" is running rampant like it is today. He has a good philosophy and history, so I'm on the edge of my seat.

It's like you don't know what daikatana was

They're games first and foremost. Just because players and some devs are too shortsighted to actually realize and appreciate what good role-playing gameplay is doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

I want my gameplay games to have good gameplay, and I want my story games to have well-written, immersive worlds, that I can interact with via good gameplay. Doesn't mean I want an entire industry of Gone Homes and The Last of Uses, but I certainly wouldn't mind a few more Morrowinds and SMTs.
There's a place for story-oriented games, and denying it would be a disservice to the ones that exist already that are good.

No need to be rude.

True, true.
I still have hope
It's not like I'm preordering or anything

Go back to reddit

He should just do doom mods. That's something more his speed

Chill sperg.

Who said he doesn't have a right to one?

Go back to reddit.

Who's the sperg here?

You, idiot.

...

Where did I say that? Because I've been saying the opposite.

Oh, I know he's just baiting.

Why is Mr Holmes stopping black Cyclops?

Back to reddit you go OP.

The idea that fisticuffs is the only form of gameplay is a misconception in jrpgs. Whether you like it or not any decent jrpg has gameplay outside yhe main story.
Tournaments
Crafting
Collection
Gambling parlors
Etc.
Jrpg tend to take other gameplay mechanics and pepper them all over the game. To say this isn't gamepla is to say point and click adventures are not vidya. As well as vidya based on gambling. It's not deep but jrpgs tend to have plenty of them.

The way I see it, is that is lacking in story or gameplay can be salvaged if the other is excellent. However, a game with BAD gameplay (as in shit compared to meh) is a game that cannot be saved. Its why shit like Phoenix Wright is good, but shit like Skyrim is not. A game can survive a shitty story. But a game cannot survive with shitty gameplay. Just remember there is a difference between lacking gameplay and actual garbage gameplay.

But also keep in mind that a game that is lacking in one department needs to be great in the other, otherwise it won't fucking work. A game cannot survive on anything else if gameplay and story aren't good enough.

It saddens me that there are probably others like me, who did not know how great it is.

Personally for me, I want mechanics that compliment the story and vice versa. I don't play many multiplayer games so the online comparison hardly applies for me. After the Mother games, I've hit a good ground for what I want from my vidya. You can obsess over mechanics or story but the point in some games is to have both. RPGs can't be just mechanics and story based rpgs like Undertale are dull. Not every game out there is an fps either.

I just don't obsess over mechanic s after Isaac Rebirth. It's a stupid obsession.

Oh and I expect that Romero will fuck up his new game until proven otherwise.

HE IS DAMN RIGHT

YOU GET A BETTER STORY OUT OF A MULTIPLAYER MATCH THAN SOME 100 HOURS CINEMATIC SIMULATOR

You're a meme, kid

The first two seasons of TNG were shit, though, with things like the doctor being baffled by the fact that people in the 20th century didn't want to die.

It depends who you are. If you're a jew it makes sense. If you're not a jew then it doesn't.

Stopped reading there.
It is true, and anything else if flavor text.
I play games for gameplay, other shit is just there as bonus.

Oh dear.

I think he is right personally, and I think this bodes well for his current project. Though I'm not going to put money into kickstarter.

He may not be the hero we deserve, but he's the hero that we need. If he even gives us a mediocre classic style FPS that does well enough it could lead to more.

Maybe it'll be something like Dark Souls. An above average game shows up in a time where everything is shit, and by comparison it'll be GOTYAY material and everyone will like it except when it becomes too mainstream, then Holla Forums will start hating it.

Retards now mocking you user, but Gabe became famous with Half-Life the very same reason you just explained for these retards.

maybe they come in to say its shit, because the thread is always started with "BEST GAME EVER, OBLIVON AND SKYRIM SHIT" so when these people actually give it a shot and are disappointed they tell other people. its pretty fucking simple

*a game that is lacking

FUCK

Romero spent the last fifteen years making mobile phone games to keep his car from
being repo'ed.

If you want a life like Romero's then you go ahead and take his advice

...

How would he know

dude. he created duke nukem.

Nail on the head. That's what makes people actually get into games instead of just passively dragging them along a linear path.

He's generally right, but
Planescape Torment proves it wrong. Or you can argue player choice it allows is the gameplay mechanics. Then again, they wouldn't be possible without a story.

Epik.
People who don't care about game mechanics are those who would drop it because it doesn't have visceral cinematic combat. Morrowind's cRPG combat is gameplay. Deal with it faglord.

You are right, games are too broad to have such a saying be right 100% of the time but placescape is a very rare exception. Still a good rule of the thumb

in the autism way, yes. he's right.

I recall this retard praising Dys4ia as a game and being part of the push to get it's creator a person of no note whatsoever into large speaking events.

He's taking every one of you for a ride because he couldn't make you his bitch, And honestly he's the bitch, his wife got him whipped.

...

BINGO.

Of course this isn't a rule though, most people are dullards that need a story spoonfed to them, which is why they prefer television.

Thats a bejewled clone, nigger.

its not even supposed to be tetris are you underaged? its a literal bejeweled clone

also
it was the candy crush of the 80s/90s, only women and 30 year old fogies played it even then

My three favorite games are Quake, Umihara Kawase and Battle Garegga. Umihara doesn't have any story at all, don't even know if Garegga has a story and despite playing Quake for over a decade, I still don't have a fucking clue what the hell the story is about.

Story can be nice, but to say it's a necessity is just ridiculous. It's a nice side dish at best. Super Mario Bros 3 sold over 17 million copies and its entire story is "save the princess". Nobody played it for the gripping story, they just wanted fun platforming.

Sort of. Mechanics are definitely key. Games that focus purely on trying to tell a story and phone in the mechanics usually turn out shit. You have to have something interesting going on in the mechanics to make it work as a game (though this can tie into the story, as with games like Alpha Protocol where the fun is in seeing how your actions and choices shape events).
This is where I start to break with him. You can include a lot of story and still give the player lots of freedom. Alpha Protocol is a good example of this, as are most of the Atelier games. A game like Atelier Totori is really a perfect refutation of this false dilemma, because it's strong in all three of the things he's talking about. You've got great mechanics for the player to experiment with and master (the alchemy system), lots of freedom for the player to make his own story (since you have one large goal with lots of freedom to choose how to approach it, rather than moving from segment to segment like he's talking about), but also a very compelling prewritten story.

I had several friends that enjoyed tetris a lot back then. If you only saw 30 year old fogies playing the game then that's only your case.

in either case that experience isn't relevant to my point at all. tetris has always been a casual game

The point is you have no proof to say that.

Nobody gave a fuck about the story in Half Life. The game succeeded due to the popularity of Counter Strike.

You seem to have conflated "popular" with "casual". While it's often the case that the two overlap, it's not always like that. It's an easy mistake to make.

Tetris can actually be really fast and complex, especally when playing the master editions from japan. They get intense.

HNNNG

Exactly, popular, but definitly not casual.

how am i supposed to offer proof? is the fact the game is the very definition of casual not enough? the game is based around stacking randomized blocks, designed to be fast lighthearted time wasters with not a care in the world as you could just restart. it was the solitaire of the 90s, if it isn't casual nothing else is

Shmups have very simple controls and are usually over in less than a half hour. That doesn't make them casual.

wew lad

Following your logic, then Pong was also casual.

What is a casual game defined as?
Simple, repetitive mechanics?
Short bouts of playtime between win/lose endstates?

Chess is also easy to get into :^)

...

i have no argument against you so you have won. casual is a meaningless word, no games can ever be casual, it doesn't matter how casual the game is it isn't casual. so long as people have the potential to press buttons fast it cannot be casual. so long as there is a competitive scene (super smash bros, tetris, mario party), it cannot be casual. you have shown me the way, im glad weve come to the conclusion that candy crush isn't a casual game, it is just casually played, and that if even one person decides to, no, is even capable of match blocks faster than the average player, it is not casual. you have shown me the way, cool thread

Honestly, i would define a casual game as a game that has no complexity to its mechanics nor any higher level of play for those that like the game and want to play more. Like bejewled kind of. Begjewled really is just matching 3, not too much complexity, and really no higher level of play.

lmao

Back to tumblr faggot.

what do you expect me to say? words only have the meaning the users of the language give it. if casual does not define tetris there is nothing more i can say, you have won.

I dont even know what youre trying to say anymore.

ok

You really should have stopped after

I'm also going to sage.

It's true. Try telling a story to your friends about that time you fucking destroyed a single player RPG. It's pretty difficult outside of Elder Scrolls. The less the game controls you, the more stories you hear.

Some games are well written and worth it to play just for the story alone, I won't deny that, but I find that the experiences you get from freely playing are what stick in peoples minds.

dont mind me, just playing competitive legos

Ok, you have completely lost it

...

...

...

fuck off kid, go back to your casual dwarf fortress and quake while us adults play non-casual games

What the fuck are you even talking about?

...

figures a simple mind wouldnt be able to comprehend complex gaming.

You know, you could just… gracefully admit you were wrong.

When in doubt, DOUBLE DOWN

Holy shit just give up already

He's completely right. People making comparisons to Morrowind need to understand that genre requires story by nature, but action-driven games benefit more from having less of it.
I couldn't even finish The Last of Us a second time because the forced walking sections and >muh characterization were such a fucking hindrance. I enjoyed it the first time, but now I just want to focus on my own goals, and beating the game on the highest difficulty. Story doesn't play a role in that, it just cockblocks you from moving things at your own pace. Devs should at least allow the player to skip anything that isn't tied directly to the gameplay. Even MGS games do that, goddammit.

Also, this.

I know this is bait, but I still can't wrap my head around this.

Thread theme

oh i have admitted i was wrong, i am wrong. or at least i was. but i must not continue this conversation any longer, i have a competitive call of duty tournament to attend (im the sniper)

...

Calm down you sick cunt.

Yep.

I don't think it's so much a problem with story as much as it is with lack of player input, and story being the main culprit. Deus Ex pulled off the branching story quite excellently, letting there be a fleshed out story, but by the actions of the player instead of the almighty hand of the pretentious failed film writer.

tetrischampionship.com/
midwestgamingclassic.com/midwest-tetris-championship/

come on now
google "lego convention"

i don't think having a competitive community makes a game noncasual

but lets get back on topic right guys? i never got to answer it myself. i disagree with romero. games don't have to be about gameplay. i mean what does gameplay even mean really? not what you think it means i would imagine, a lot of words have changing definitions and they dont mean what they used to.

...

He's shitposting violently, user.

Fuck off, frog nigger.

He is right, though not entirely.
Gameplay is the most important element of a game, but if the setting of the world isn't engaging then it better have absolutely fucking mind-blowing gameplay.
The non-gameplay bits don't even need to be story, just something to make it distinct from other games in the genre.

To play devil's advocate for a moment (I just saw your posts on the front page so I don't know what the conversation is like), "gameplay" is a pretty vague term. You can quantify the technical quality of art, sound, graphics, but gameplay (and "muh gamefeel") is hard to analyze other than "It feels nice to play, everything flows well".

As an example? Describe to me what a "roguelike" is. Half the people will say shit like Spelunky or FTL or BOI, half the people will say Angband or Nethack, and half of those people will argue about semantic meanings of the Berlin settings

????

I came here just to call you a faggot.

...

This was pretty fucking user, nice metldown.

...

Now you are really being retarded. Game play is easily defined as the structure that allows a player to play the game. Telltale pick from two options are the "games" with the least amount of gameplay I can think of. Unless you want to count trash like Plumbers Don't Wear Ties, and I don't.

Gameplay is easy to define, the point of contention is how much is necessary. Romero's point that a lot of people have misunderstood is that too much story destroys a game when it impedes the player's options.

This doesn't count Morrowind, which has more than enough gameplay and the story is completely possible to skip. It also doesn't count JRPGs which have gameplay in the form dozens or hundreds of choices for the player to choose from and interact with. Shallow gameplay is still gameplay.

The problem isn't having a story, or even a good story. The problem is having no fucking game because it is bogged down by the story. Romero even says in his fucking quote that gameplay strung along by a story is good, but a game that is story with limited interactive sequences in them he isn't a fan of.

.It's more of a scale of focus decided by how you spend your playtime. A good GAME will focus toward the right side of the scale, while a bad GAME will focus toward the left. Note, a "bad game" doesn't necessarily mean a bad experience. Don't let your enjoyment of such a game color your judgment.

Less playing—-More Playing
←—Story—–|—–Gameplay—→

What was the point he was trying to make?

Ofcourse he is. Games have to have gameplay first and foremost.

...

You can't skip all the dialogue in mw, because then you wouldn't know what to do.

This should really be just about the most obvious thing ever.

git gud, mister user. Immersive simulation is king for exactly the matter you rail against it over.

I sat and listened to Warren Spector at PAX last year, and he was talking about how he thought the best games were those that delivered the environment for an experience and let every second change what's happening. He praised sports games, multiplayer shooters, fighters - every person coming away from those games should be able to excitedly tell their friend about the amazing thing that just happened, and even if that other person had played the same game their stories would be different.

Bad category are all these "MUH STORIES" walking simulator where everyone at the end of them has had the exact same experience from start to end.

I completely agreed with him - I'd never considered it in that way (and completely made sense for this to come from the dude who's name is joined to the original Deus Ex as much as it is).

So yeah, I'd say Romero is right about this.

It's been a while since It felt like this industry had some hope left.

Yes, Warren is definitely out there fighting the good fight. I think he's teaching the college level or something so he's putting his philosophy out there.

The dude is a damn legend, the industry needs more people who think like him.

I think he joined the team working on System Shock 3.

What the fuck am I reading

user you… you don't know, do you?
I'm so sorry.

...

Did Romero get shackled to the yids with massive debts after his Daikatana flop?