Editorial Deus Ex, and Why Game Narratives Fail

[Burning Bridges]

Deus Ex HR has a good story, it has it's downsides, but it's pretty solid. It positively surprised me.

Are you guys serious? I have watched some videos and could only shake my head about this popamole bullshit.

 

[SoupNazi]

Wow, you watched some videos.

 

[Burning Bridges]

What else is there to it? You mean if I watched the cutscenes on my own computer something would fall from my eyes and the gameplay would suddenly emerge?

Simply give me a link to 1 video that shows that the gameplay is not popamole.

 

[SoupNazi]

What else is there to it? You mean if I watched the cutscenes on my own computer something would fall from my eyes and the gameplay would suddenly emerge?

Simply give me a link to 1 video that shows that the gameplay is not popamole.

You're looking for gameplay in cutscenes? I see.

 

[Spectacle]

so the lord of the rings sux because there's no story, just situations and lore digressions?

You'll actually find a lot people who think that, especially in the literature departments of most universities. They cant wrap their head around that sometimes the protagonist is a vessel for portraying the story rather than the subject of it.

 

[curry]

couldn't agree more.

 

[Burning Bridges]

What else is there to it? You mean if I watched the cutscenes on my own computer something would fall from my eyes and the gameplay would suddenly emerge?

Simply give me a link to 1 video that shows that the gameplay is not popamole.

You're looking for gameplay in cutscenes? I see.

Very good answer.

 

[Angthoron]

What else is there to it? You mean if I watched the cutscenes on my own computer something would fall from my eyes and the gameplay would suddenly emerge?

Simply give me a link to 1 video that shows that the gameplay is not popamole.

You're looking for gameplay in cutscenes? I see.

Very good answer.

Most of the game isn't in the said cutscenes, nor is the majority of the story. It's not fantastic, but it is solid, supported by various supplementary reading materials in hacked terminals, news broadcasts, pirate radio and datapads/books. Surprising, but there you go.

 

[Seolas]

JC had no real emotion in the first either. The closest was the famous meme-inspiring.

"A bomb!"

... but no one cared, the game was fantastic and memorable.

HR is about 7/10 on the DX 10/10 scale (IW being at best 4/10) so Jensen's lack of emotion may stand out - or maybe he is just emotionally destroyed after what happens to Megan and his dog.

 

[RK47]

If you take Bloodnet and compare it with Jensen, it's almost alike. Augmented (Vampires) attacks him and wants to kill his friend. He's trying to stop them. He became Augmented (Vampire) himself, yet Ransom Stark needs blood and will have to sacrifice his Humanity to continue at some points. And losing Humanity completely fails the game.

This is powerful stuff and motivation.

Jensen had no limitations. He was basically either a robot ninja or terminator depending on how you build him. He's nearly a flawless. It's strange that they didn't put anything there. It made him very forgettable.

 

[baronjohn]

Jensen is old and has seen a shitload of action as a SWAT officer, he is already a developed and complicated character, not a fucking naive 16 year old boy. Expecting him to "grow" in the 2 or 3 days over which the game takes place is fucking retarded.

 

[SoupNazi]

(Technically it's a few more days because of the trip in the ship which Prickards mentions took like 5 days or so.)

 

[Angthoron]

Jensen is old and has seen a shitload of action as a SWAT officer, he is already a developed and complicated character, not a fucking naive 16 year old boy. Expecting him to "grow" in the 2 or 3 days over which the game takes place is fucking retarded.

Yeah. Also, I have to also call "bs" on his lack of "development", and I have an example with that, too.

At first, like from first "mission" onwards, Jensen is basically just doing his job. Sure, his boss is sort of his friend, but at the same time, Jensen is basically just a hired ex-cop doing his thing, with or without augs.

Then he gets to Hengsha and finds out

Spoiler

that Megan is alive

and suddenly he's like Fuck Orders, We're Going To Montreal. Sure, he doesn't sound like a hormone-filled teenager while at it, but this is basically a character interest shift right there, turning from an impersonal routine to something that he has to do for himself.

So yeah, lack of character development, my ass.


@RK47 - also, that. Of course we could argue that he lost his humanity all at once in that attack, but I don't buy it. Game should've offered chances to get MOAR augs, and that would be the struggle that the player could see then, upgrade self, or stay human and therefore lame-er. For example, off the top of the head.

 

[Gylfi.Fenriz.Conquests]

so the lord of the rings sux because there's no story, just situations and lore digressions?

You'll actually find a lot people who think that, especially in the literature departments of most universities. They cant wrap their head around that sometimes the protagonist is a vessel for portraying the story rather than the subject of it.

I refuse to believe that academics can think that! They would criticize all those novels that are nothing but a collection of picaresque adventures, the Don Juan, Canterbury tales, Tristram Shandy, or those french philosophic tales like Jacques the fatalist. They are great because the joy of reading and narrating a situation PER SE is more important than the global coherence of a story and its main character's purpose and life, and this is even more true in videogames, where immediate interaction rules over the other elements.

And it goes to show how flexible story-telling is. To preach about obeying one style alone, a story that must revolve around a character's life and expectations because that's what people want, is absolutely ridiculous, it's like writers can only write new Oliver Twist's... then again some shmoe wrote that article, who cares.

 

[Gord]

so the lord of the rings sux because there's no story, just situations and lore digressions?

You'll actually find a lot people who think that, especially in the literature departments of most universities. They cant wrap their head around that sometimes the protagonist is a vessel for portraying the story rather than the subject of it.

I refuse to believe that academics can think that...

Who knows, there are certainly people with very "refined" tastes.
Take gourmets eating stuff like e.g. raw oysters, or snails, insisting that they taste great (they might, I never tried, tbh) while the average person might find the thought itself disgusting, well...

What I want to say is, besides that I think eating snails is disgusting, is that there are always people that try to elevate them above others in their consume of certain things and that not only find great pleasure in this but also to some degree lose their ability to find pleasure in those simpler things in life.

 

[Castanova]

so the lord of the rings sux because there's no story, just situations and lore digressions?

You'll actually find a lot people who think that, especially in the literature departments of most universities. They cant wrap their head around that sometimes the protagonist is a vessel for portraying the story rather than the subject of it.

Sorry, but they're mostly correct. If your main character is just a cipher for the audience then why have that character at all? You could remove the character and tell the same story. Characters that are ciphers for the audience are cheap tricks to try to capture audience empathy without earning it. Also, it is appealing to dumb people who would fail to understand what's happening without someone to explain it to them.

A perfect story has no wasted elements and a main character that serves no intrinsic purpose is a massive wasted element.

Frodo in LOTR is a crappy character because there is nothing about him that makes him suitable to be "the one." He's only "the one" by virtue of his relationship to his uncle or whatever. He has no real character traits or anything. He's just a random Hobbit. His struggle with the allure of the ring has nothing to do with his own character. The ring does that trick to everyone.

 

[bhlaab]

what a dick

 

[Archibald]

Sorry, but they're mostly correct. If your main character is just a cipher for the audience then why have that character at all? You could remove the character and tell the same story. Characters that are ciphers for the audience are cheap tricks to try to capture audience empathy without earning it. Also, it is appealing to dumb people who would fail to understand what's happening without someone to explain it to them.

A perfect story has no wasted elements and a main character that serves no intrinsic purpose is a massive wasted element.

Frodo in LOTR is a crappy character because there is nothing about him that makes him suitable to be "the one." He's only "the one" by virtue of his relationship to his uncle or whatever. He has no real character traits or anything. He's just a random Hobbit. His struggle with the allure of the ring has nothing to do with his own character. The ring does that trick to everyone.

 

[sgc_meltdown]

yes lets define what good story and narrative really are while we're defining good rpgs

I have no doubt there will be much objectivity and no true lover of stories would disagree with whichever interpretation

tell me more my friends

 

[BelisariuS.F]

It looks like that this dude thinks that
plot = story-driven storyline
story = character-driven storyline

 

[sgc_meltdown]

It looks like that this dude thinks that
plot = story-driven storyline
story = character-driven storyline

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/plot

the plan or main story (as of a movie or literary work)

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/story

the intrigue or plot of a narrative or dramatic work

derp derp

 

[BelisariuS.F]

It looks like that this dude thinks that
plot = story-driven storyline
story = character-driven storyline

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/plot

the plan or main story (as of a movie or literary work)

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/story

the intrigue or plot of a narrative or dramatic work

derp derp

LOL

function plot()
{
the plan or main story() (as of a movie or literary work)
}

function story()
{
the intrigue or plot() of a narrative or dramatic work
}

 

[Castanova]

It's pretty simple really.

Bad story: "Someone told me there was a guy robbing [XYZ] bank. He got arrested."

Less bad story: "I was at the XYZ bank yesterday and someone robbed it while I was there! I had to get down on the floor and everything. The cops came and negotiated the robber's arrest after he took a dude hostage."

OK story (i.e., LOTR): "I was at the XYZ bank yesterday and someone robbed it while I was there! I had to get down on the floor and everything. The cops came and the robber took me hostage for no apparent reason!!! But it all worked out in the end."

Good story: "I was at the XYZ bank yesterday and someone robbed it while I was there! I had to get down on the floor and everything. The cops came and, you know me and my big mouth, I told the robber to turn himself in. Because I spoke up, he took me hostage and made demands. The cops failed to negotiate with him and I thought I was going to die. But I ended up using my big mouth to smooth-talk the robber into releasing me and turning himself in."

 

[Zomg]

Frodo in LOTR is a crappy character because there is nothing about him that makes him suitable to be "the one." He's only "the one" by virtue of his relationship to his uncle or whatever. He has no real character traits or anything. He's just a random Hobbit. His struggle with the allure of the ring has nothing to do with his own character. The ring does that trick to everyone.

Frodo is humility, responsibility and mercy. A lot of the book is that anyone else would have killed the unredeemable Gollum, even the other hobbits, and in the end Gollum is necessary for the destruction of the ring because not even Frodo is desire-less enough to do it. Tolkien created a dream world saved by mercy, Frodo's character is central.

You can characterize someone without transforming them in-work, and also not make them a "cipher" (i.e. a blank but sympathetic character, a character you are supposed identify with).

note: didn't play HR didn't read article

 

[Phelot]

But first we must discuss what an RPG is and what it means to us.