Story is more important than combat in rpgs

[Apostle Hand]

When you have bad story but good combat, game is not good. But when you have good story and bad combat, game can be enjoyable. So having good story is paramount in making good rpg.

Having a good engaging story keep you interested in the game. What is the point of having good combat in lousy driven story? One can argue that in almost all rpgs stories are lousy so all that left is good combat. Those people identify themselves as combatfags.

 

[JarlFrank]

Story doesn't matter one little bit if the player doesn't have an effect on it.

An RPG with good combat and puzzles (like most blobbers, for example) and a barebones story is better than an RPG with a good but completely linear and non-interactive story (like 99% of JRPGs out there).

Planescape Torment isn't just good because the story is good, but because the player can shape the protagonist based on his words and actions, and there are some minor choices to be made which have consequences.
If it didn't have any of that, it would be a shit game.

Story in games is only good when it has elements of interactivity. If the story is linear and non-interactive, why is it a game? Why not make it a movie or a novel instead?

 

[Black]

When you have bad story but good combat, game is not good

Wrong

 

[a Goat]

When you have bad story but good combat, game is not good. But when you have good story and bad combat, game can be enjoyable. So having good story is paramount in making good rpg.

Absolutely fucking wrong.

STORYFAGGOTRY is the reason why we can't have good things. You can skim through terrible writing and story rather easily as due to obvious limitations only 20% or less of the actual content will be spent watching/reading shit(I'll give you that - in more modern AAA RPG's like Shitchers it's getting closer to 40%, BUT you can still skip it rather easily), can't do the same with combat. However the most important part comes from kind of production side of things. You can only "engineer" a story up to some point. At the "some" point it's still pretty shit, it just has elements that should draw you in. Then it's all hit or miss. Therefore focusing on story in RPG's, as STORYFAGGOTS would want developers to do is literally gamble. Meanwhile, gameplay design is to a degree, iterative. Take a "basis" that is fun and just do minor changed whole the time, eventually it'll be good(see Pillars vs. Pillars 2). So the obvious thing is that for 10 games you're going to get 1 "good" storygaem and 9 shit games in general with the STORYFAGGOT, mindset while with more gameplay-oriented mindset you're going to get 9 good combat romps and 1 game that, while being combat romp has some good narrative elements to it, as undeveloped as they might be.

 

[Sranchammer]

AI is the most important.

That's why everything is shit

 

[Darth Canoli]

When you have bad story but good combat, game is not good. But when you have good story and bad combat, game can be enjoyable. So having good story is paramount in making good rpg.

Just as everyone said.

Most amazing cRPG have a bad to average story.

Planescape has an average combat part (for his era); not worst than other games people here like soooo muuuch; but an amazing settings, a compelling story and some of the best NPC ever created for a cRPG among with compelling quests.

You're fucking lucky you didn't live 700 years ago or you would have burn tied to a pole.

 

[DJOGamer PT]

Just here to say OP is a fag.

Have a good day.

 

[Deleted Member 16721]

Depends entirely on the game. Ideally both would be combined to be sufficient for the total package, but in some games I prefer the story over the combat and in others the combat and gameplay over story. There is no "this one is more important" argument to be made, it depends entirely on each game and how you enjoy it. Learn to enjoy the wide range and variety of games, from story-heavy ones to gameplay-centric games. There's a whole world of good RPGs out there that excel at both and some at one or the other (and are still worth playing due to that.)

 

[Dorateen]

A narrative crafted by an independent-minded actor is more desirable, and often tales stitched together through emergent exploration and memorable battle are the pinnacle of a quality adventure worth telling. Player agency trumps developer's intentions.

 

[Lyric Suite]

There's an argument to be made that a bad story and bad writing can be a detriment to a combat based game (Starcraft 2 comes to mind. The single player missions are actually fun as far as those type of games go, but the writing is just too fucking atrocious to bear) where as bad combat may not be as much of a problem on a story driven game, but i disagree with the idea all games should have a good story and good writing first and everything else ought to be seen as secondary. In fact, i'd say your approach is one of the reasons for the decline (with every game trying to be a "cinematic" experience, even games that were previously known for their combat, like shooters. The fact the story and writing is always terrible doesn't help either).

The best solution is not to have any story or any writing in the way if your game is about combat first and foremost. A good example is Dark Souls. You can play the whole game without paying any attention to any of the narrative bits and clues. The vast majority of games by their nature are combat driven anyway, but every single one wants to shove a narrative down your throat and its always shit. Story heavy games should be rare and should be made only when you have a good writer in your team. The colossal amount of bad and generic writing and story telling is a blight on this hobby.

 

[Sigourn]

I don't mind bad stories as long as the combat is good. If a story is good but the combat is absolute dogshit, and by "dogshit" I mean "complex cRPG combat done badly" as opposed to "mouthbreather cRPG combat", I will likely drop the game.

 

[mfkndggrfll]

Story doesn't matter one little bit if the player doesn't have an effect on it.

An RPG with good combat and puzzles (like most blobbers, for example) and a barebones story is better than an RPG with a good but completely linear and non-interactive story (like 99% of JRPGs out there).

Planescape Torment isn't just good because the story is good, but because the player can shape the protagonist based on his words and actions, and there are some minor choices to be made which have consequences.
If it didn't have any of that, it would be a shit game.

Story in games is only good when it has elements of interactivity. If the story is linear and non-interactive, why is it a game? Why not make it a movie or a novel instead?

PST's story sucks.

 

[Reinhardt]

An RPG with good combat and puzzles (like most blobbers, for example) and a barebones story is better than an RPG with a good but completely linear and non-interactive story (like 99% of JRPGs out there).

Only japanese and Cleve can still make blobbers these days.

 

[Jason Liang]

Combat needs to be competent. For example bg2, Bloodlines and most jrpgs have competent combat

I can't stand rpgs with shit combat like the Fallouts and Arcanum, or retarded combat like AoD

key to a good rpg is the sense of advancement - character advancement -> combat advancement -> exploration advancement -> plot advancement, in a feedback circle

story helps separate gud rpgs and transcendant rpgs. a good story is rpg rocket fuel

 

[samuraigaiden]

Story is literally skippable in most games.

 

[Reinhardt]

You can skip story and still enjoy combat. But stories that can compensate for shit combat is almost non-existent.

 

[mfkndggrfll]

Story is literally skippable in most games.

https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/chooseyourwords/figuratively-literally/

 

[JarlFrank]

Story is literally skippable in most games.

https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/chooseyourwords/figuratively-literally/

Yes, it's literally skippable.

There is literally a button you can press to skip through dialogue lines, and a button to skip cutscenes in most games.

Literally.

 

[anvi]

An RPG with bad combat is worthless. And no games have good stories. Even the best story in a game is 'ok', and that's about 1% of games.

 

[Swigen]

OP is 100% correct. Rogue is completely carried by its lush world building and unique plot and it certainly wouldn’t have attained legendary status if the developers had skimped on the storytelling aspect in any way.

 

[Covenant]

The best solution is not to have any story or any writing in the way if your game is about combat first and foremost. A good example is Dark Souls. You can play the whole game without paying any attention to any of the narrative bits and clues. The vast majority of games by their nature are combat driven anyway, but every single one wants to shove a narrative down your throat and its always shit. Story heavy games should be rare and should be made only when you have a good writer in your team. The colossal amount of bad and generic writing and story telling is a blight on this hobby.

For my part, I found the spectre of lorefaggotry to be a constant and unwelcome shadow in Dark Souls. From all the NPCs waffling on about shit that made absolutely no sense (though I don't think this is unique to Dark Souls, so much as just that the Japanese are physically incapable of writing a dialogue scene that doesn't resemble a bad French arthouse film) to the fact that every online community discussing the game seemed to obsess over item descriptions and characters who were never even encountered in the game.

It didn't impact on the gameplay directly, but all the 'DEEP LORE' shit was a bit like playing the game with somebody masturbating loudly in the next room. Yes, you can ignore it, and it's probably not actually going to affect you, but until it's over you'll never quite be free of the fear of getting hit in the face with it.

 

[111111111]

OP, in a game, the most important thing is GAMEPLAY not the fucking text.

 

[anvi]

If you want a story why not read a book or watch TV? Makes no sense why you would insist on having a 3rd rate terrible story when you can get far better.

 

[mfkndggrfll]

Story is literally skippable in most games.

https://www.vocabulary.com/articles/chooseyourwords/figuratively-literally/

Yes, it's literally skippable.

There is literally a button you can press to skip through dialogue lines, and a button to skip cutscenes in most games.

Literally.

You can't skip events. You can ignore a story but you can't skip it.

 

[anvi]

He means you can skip cutscenes. You can't skip story unless you uninstall the game. Frank just has a low IQ which is why he likes such simple shit like Thief.