The Post-Game Thread (now with moar games!)

[Mr. MR]

Any gamer worth his salt will vehemently deny the latter. Srsly, go play moar games. Even the DS has games that top it (Strange Journey <3). And Journey, like its creator's previous works, is pretentiousness incarnate. I don't think I've ever seen his games make anyone's top story lists.

Well I don't know anything about Journey except that it applies the Heroes Journey to video games which also mean applying some of the steps to game mechanics and that is what intrigued me.

I'd even debate MM's place compared to other Zeldas when it comes to storytelling. It's methods are easily the most confounding, as relegating memorable story moments to obscure and tedious sidequests is hardly a good way to get your story across. An entry like, say, TP, recalls a previous hero of time during a petty tutorial sequence, which is astoundingly awesome and effective.

Consider that MM uses storytelling in ways only games can and using it in a way to make all the side quests intriguing in discovering the world. While TP uses conventional methods relating to what I assume to be Atonement with the Father.

I have to go now but I do want to discuss memorable moments in games

 

[WiiAssasin]

Well I don't know anything about Journey except that it applies the Heroes Journey to video games which also mean applying some of the steps to game mechanics and that is what intrigued me.

That's virtually every video game ever.

Consider that MM uses storytelling in ways only games can and using it in a way to make all the side quests intriguing in discovering the world. While TP uses conventional methods relating to what I assume to be Atonement with the Father.

I have to go now but I do want to discuss memorable moments in games

MM shares similarities with films like Groundhog Day, so it's not a media-exclusive storytelling structure. There isn't too much world-building in MM, as it was a one-time game and it lacks lore compared to other entries in the series. Sidequests in MM accomplish what other sidequests in other games do, albeit MM's are more counter-intuitive due to time-management and schedules.

 

[Tragonight]

GGs Assasin. You're really good at landing those Back-airs. I can't deal with the starting and ending lag it has.

It also doesn't seem like a safe approach because Back Slash. Is Shulk the only character you play or do you tend not to wander off from your main?

 

[WiiAssasin]

I occasionally switch to Reyn and co. There's only like 7 other characters to choose from, so diversity is limited.

 

[Mr. MR]

That's virtually every video game ever.

Not so. The Monomyth is more complicated than that.

MM shares similarities with films like Groundhog Day, so it's not a media-exclusive storytelling structure. There isn't too much world-building in MM, as it was a one-time game and it lacks lore compared to other entries in the series. Sidequests in MM accomplish what other sidequests in other games do, albeit MM's are more counter-intuitive due to time-management and schedules.

What I was referring to was not the Groundhog Day scenario but the unique way it's used in world discovery, not at all similar to world building, that only video games can use better than any other medium.

As for it being less memorable than other videos games, I agree. But that does not take away from story and only helps with replaybility. Experiences and emotions are fleeting and can rarely be recalled with such vividness compared to experiencing it outside of recollection. There is hardly any enjoyment in a story plot but rather by the emotions storytelling can touch.

 

[WiiAssasin]

Not so. The Monomyth is more complicated than that.

That's the gist of it, from what I gathered. Expound on this if I missed something.

What I was referring to was not the Groundhog Day scenario but the unique way it's used in world discovery, not at all similar to world building, that only video games can use better than any other medium.

Video games provide many advantages over other media, that's undeniable; yet I do not see how MM did something unique among its peers when it comes to world discovery.

Experiences and emotions are fleeting and can rarely be recalled with such vividness compared to experiencing it outside of recollection. There is hardly any enjoyment in a story plot but rather by the emotions storytelling can touch.

This is the big nono part of your argument that is disagreeable. You seem to be advocating style over substance. This isn't Highlander. Both storytelling and emotions/presentation can coexist and in fact can benefit one another tremendously when done right. Aeris' death did not make FF7, no matter what those waifuist's and weaboos claim. It was all about the amnesiac cloud and his bucket adventure as he derped around with a bishounen and his mom. Oh, and a large marketing budget with purty graphics, but time did away with the latter.

There is in fact plenty of enjoyment in story plot, which is why I recommend that you play plot-rich games (not Journey).

 

[Mr. MR]

That's the gist of it, from what I gathered. Expound on this if I missed something.

Have you read the Hero with a Thousand Faces?
Every step has meaning. If used vainly, it loses it's potency.

Video games provide many advantages over other media, that's undeniable; yet I do not see how MM did something unique among its peers when it comes to world discovery.

The fact that it uses sidequests to tell pieces of a whole story and so reveals pieces about the Uncanny World in MM

This is the big nono part of your argument that is disagreeable. You seem to be advocating style over substance. This isn't Highlander. Both storytelling and emotions/presentation can coexist and in fact can benefit one another tremendously when done right. Aeris' death did not make FF7, no matter what those waifuist's and weaboos claim. It was all about the amnesiac cloud and his bucket adventure as he derped around with a bishounen and his mom. Oh, and a large marketing budget with purty graphics, but time did away with the latter.

There is in fact plenty of enjoyment in story plot, which is why I recommend that you play plot-rich games (not Journey).

Plot/Story ≠ Storytelling
It is storytelling that works emotions, not the plot. Storytelling is what gives character actions meaning and in turn the plot meaning
Presentation is everything in entertainment. With poor presentation the best story on Earth means nothing.
The same is true the other way around. Comedians are able to take meaningless things and give them meaning.

In short the plot should be used as a device for storytelling not the other way around.

 

[WiiAssasin]

Every step has meaning. If used vainly, it loses it's potency.

Sounds the same as my summation.

The fact that it uses sidequests to tell pieces of a whole story and so reveals pieces about the Uncanny World in MM

Anju and Kafei didn't contribute to the main story regarding the falling moon to my knowledge.

It is storytelling that works emotions, not the plot. Storytelling is what gives character actions meaning and in turn the plot meaning
Presentation is everything in entertainment. With poor presentation the best story on Earth means nothing.
The same is true the other way around. Comedians are able to take meaningless things and give them meaning.

In short the plot should be used as a device for storytelling not the other way around.

I assume that you are siding storytelling and presentation in contrast with story and plot.

Your one-sided view is noxious to yourself and the gaming community. What of the text-based games of yesteryear that lack the flair for creative storytelling methods? Even modern hits like Dark Souls have piss-poor presentation, yet its fans love the story and the game's lore is acknowledged by many to be pretty darn good. Nobody likes reading item descriptions to piece a story together, but they did it anyways.

Morrowind, a 12 year old game that tells its story through paragraphs of text and lacked the tech, voice acting, and set pieces of Skyrim and Oblivion continues to be a fan favorite. Earlier this year, a ton of lore got added to the game, courtesy of Morrowind's head writer, which has launched the title from a personal top favorite rpg to potential GOAT.

Visual novels are all about story. Certainly Ace Attorney's precedence of story over presentation doesn't make it worthless.

A polished turd is still a turd, and placing it between two slices of fine bread will nary get anyone to try it. Surely every ingredient must be considered.

 

[Mr. MR]

Anju and Kafei didn't contribute to the main story regarding the falling moon to my knowledge.

What is the meaning of the whole game. All the symbolism. The despair of fate in the from of inevitable doom. They represent hope even at the very end of all.

I assume that you are siding storytelling and presentation in contrast with story and plot.

Your one-sided view is noxious to yourself and the gaming community. What of the text-based games of yesteryear that lack the flair for creative storytelling methods? Even modern hits like Dark Souls have piss-poor presentation, yet its fans love the story and the game's lore is acknowledged by many to be pretty darn good. Nobody likes reading item descriptions to piece a story together, but they did it anyways.

Morrowind, a 12 year old game that tells its story through paragraphs of text and lacked the tech, voice acting, and set pieces of Skyrim and Oblivion continues to be a fan favorite. Earlier this year, a ton of lore got added to the game, courtesy of Morrowind's head writer, which has launched the title from a personal top favorite rpg to potential GOAT.

Visual novels are all about story. Certainly Ace Attorney's precedence of story over presentation doesn't make it worthless.

A polished turd is still a turd, and placing it between two slices of fine bread will nary get anyone to try it. Surely every ingredient must be considered.

You don't understand what I mean by presentation. The power of storytelling is it incites emotion by use of meaning.
What gives games the power to incite emotion is how we present meaning through storytelling to game components like mechanics, graphics, and lore. Without proper storytelling such things become meaningless, forced, and obtrusive.

 

[Splash_King]

Finished breedin', hurrah. Now for Fire Emblehhhhhhh... I'm too tired after a week of no sleep... tomorrow. im so comically bad at fire emblem fan-ing i cant even make this stuff up

Presentation is everything.

Even aforementioned turd sammiches are pawsitively accentuated by proper presentation. Ain't just what ya got, it's how ya show it.

Wonder which is more important. Y'all have fun findin' that out.

 

[WiiAssasin]

What is the meaning of the whole game. All the symbolism. The despair of fate in the from of inevitable doom. They represent hope even at the very end of all.

Big problemo: This is Zelda you're speaking of. Not an indie game nor an RPG. Zelda. Nintendo. You're free to see whatever you want, but that doesn't mean it's there. It's like those guys that say Mario is secretly racist/communist/ondrugs, and have somewhat viable evidence supporting it. Still doesn't make it true. Nintendo especially wouldn't bother making one of its largest and most important franchises into such an in depth experience. And if I recall correctly, MM had a very small development cycle to get itself together. It's very easy to project symbolism where there isn't any in the first place. Happens all the time irl. Games are no different.

You don't understand what I mean by presentation. The power of storytelling is it incites emotion by use of meaning.
What gives games the power to incite emotion is how we present meaning through storytelling to game components like mechanics, graphics, and lore. Without proper storytelling such things become meaningless, forced, and obtrusive.

Second problemo: The purpose of storytelling is in fact story, not emotion. You want to instill emotion, try your local pharmaceutical or a psychologist. Emotion and other elements play second fiddle and serve to complement the story.

I do see what you're trying to say, though. A game light on story can be moving when presented well. Xenoblade, while being bare-bones in comparison to its predecessors, had a damn well-executed story. In part, it's because they combined enjoyable gameplay and unique mechanics with the relatively plain story into an engaging world.

But you seem to be hell-bent on claiming this is the only method. Definitely is not the case, and many games would give you a run for your money.

Even aforementioned turd sammiches are pawsitively accentuated by proper presentation. Ain't just what ya got, it's how ya show it.

Youyouyou. Stop confusing the man. Mr, don't eat the sandwich. That's not how any of this works.

 

[Mr. MR]

Big problemo: This is Zelda you're speaking of. Not an indie game nor an RPG. Zelda. Nintendo. You're free to see whatever you want, but that doesn't mean it's there. It's like those guys that say Mario is secretly racist/communist/ondrugs, and have somewhat viable evidence supporting it. Still doesn't make it true. Nintendo especially wouldn't bother making one of its largest and most important franchises into such an in depth experience. And if I recall correctly, MM had a very small development cycle to get itself together. It's very easy to project symbolism where there isn't any in the first place. Happens all the time irl. Games are no different.

Development
Motivated by the commercial and critical success of Ocarina of Time, Nintendo started plans on a new Zelda game for the Nintendo 64. Originally, however, this new title was going to be a remixed version of the 1998 installment for the Disk drive accesory; when dungeon designer Eiji Aonuma showed complaints to Shigeru Miyamoto about having to develop essentially the same game, the latter then proposed him to create a new installment, but in only one year.[SUP][6][/SUP]
After doing some experiments, the development team implemented the time-based system, so that they could create a more compact and dense game, and which allowed the title to be developed in only 18 months.

As an extra note, the original name of this game was Zelda Gaiden (ゼルダの伝説 外伝),[SUP][7][/SUP] which means Zelda Side-story. This was changed in the middle of development in order to reinvent the game. Lastly, as noted above, this is the first Zelda game to be fully directed during development by Eiji Aonuma.

It's true that the game had a short development cycle but that does not mean the game wasn't thought out. Plus this wasn't the only example of a game that was rushed and became a masterpiece (Melee).
Second point: To choose to make a new story and not remix the old one for profit was from passion for the game series.
Third point: the themes in MM are obvious. Fate, Death, Inevitable Doom, and the Power to Change amoonguss others.

Second problemo: The purpose of storytelling is in fact story, not emotion. You want to instill emotion, try your local pharmaceutical or a psychologist. Emotion and other elements play second fiddle and serve to complement the story.

I do see what you're trying to say, though. A game light on story can be moving when presented well. Xenoblade, while being bare-bones in comparison to its predecessors, had a damn well-executed story. In part, it's because they combined enjoyable gameplay and unique mechanics with the relatively plain story into an engaging world.

But you seem to be hell-bent on claiming this is the only method. Definitely is not the case, and many games would give you a run for your money.

I admit storytelling isn't the only reason why we play games. The original reason why games were made was for gameplay, the same reason why we play sports. Eventually people found ways to tell stories through interactive experiences in games. This is where storytelling becomes a focal point in video games (the other point being gameplay). Often games keep gameplay and storytelling separate and distingsh the two, however if gameplay and storytell complement each other, the game's storytelling becomes much more expressive in meaning and so in emotional value.

Also what is the purpose of stories if it's not instilling emotion? What is the worth of art without emotion?

 

[WiiAssasin]

It's true that the game had a short development cycle but that does not mean the game wasn't thought out. Plus this wasn't the only example of a game that was rushed and became a masterpiece (Melee).
Second point: To choose to make a new story and not remix the old one for profit was from passion for the game series.
Third point: the themes in MM are obvious. Fate, Death, Inevitable Doom, and the Power to Change amoonguss others.

Aonuma has also worked on the other Zeldas. Surely you do not believe the rest of the titles are also Shakespearean efforts? And even if you were to go the extra mile and say it was only MM that is divinely inspired, he has certainly never mentioned any of the in-depth symbolism that you claim exists within it. Keep in mind MM is the entry with the shortest dev cycle as well. The time-travelling mechanic took center stage, according to your gathered source.

The original reason why games were made was for gameplay, the same reason why we play sports.

Negative. If you mean video games, their purpose was more akin to board games and the like. Competitive gaming came along much later, and still isn't anywhere near sports, aside from maybe Korea. There was hardly an audience for such events at the time.

Eventually people found ways to tell stories through interactive experiences in games. This is where storytelling becomes a focal point in video games (the other point being gameplay). Often games keep gameplay and storytelling separate and distingsh the two, however if gameplay and storytell complement each other, the game's storytelling becomes much more expressive in meaning and so in emotional value.

Also what is the purpose of stories if it's not instilling emotion? What is the worth of art without emotion?

Ah, but many video games are about gameplay. In these events, what purpose does story serve? In Mario, Metroid, fighting games, strategy games, puzzle games, etc. There are hardly any of these with emotion as a core element, but they undoubtedly have story.

Rhetoric aside, storytelling is essentially communication. Therefore, storytelling can be said to serve the same functions as communication. Yes, emotion is one of them, but you can do pretty much everything else with it. Exchanging info, warnings, entertainment, causing self-reflection, addressing issues, comparisons to irl phenomena. One doesn't speak for the sole purpose of instilling emotions on others. Neither do video games.

 

[Mr. MR]

Aonuma has also worked on the other Zeldas. Surely you do not believe the rest of the titles are also Shakespearean efforts? And even if you were to go the extra mile and say it was only MM that is divinely inspired, he has certainly never mentioned any of the in-depth symbolism that you claim exists within it. Keep in mind MM is the entry with the shortest dev cycle as well. The time-travelling mechanic took center stage, according to your gathered source.

Seriously you cannot deny the symbolism and themes in Majora's Mask. They knew very well what they were doing.
The greatest shame would be to have the artist tell you what his art means. As Don Henley put it: "My only regret would be having to explain it in detail to you, which would defeat the purpose of using literary devices in songwriting and lower the discussion to some silly and irrelevant argument about chemical processes." (Talking about the Wine Spirit line from Hotel California)
That being said, art is also subjective but usually the artists know exactly what they're doing.

The time-traveling mechanic was brilliant and actually attributed to storytelling.

Negative. If you mean video games, their purpose was more akin to board games and the like. Competitive gaming came along much later, and still isn't anywhere near sports, aside from maybe Korea. There was hardly an audience for such events at the time.

Since video game's inception it has been about competitiveness. What are the purpose of high scores? There is a winner in Pong. There is even a documentary about the Donkey Kong competitive scene:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_King_of_Kong:_A_Fistful_of_Quarters

If you are suggesting video games to be closer to video games (edit: Board Games my bad), it could be true. But then again, board games can be even more cut throat than sports; Chess, Shogi, and Igo/Baduk as examples.

Ah, but many video games are about gameplay. In these events, what purpose does story serve? In Mario, Metroid, fighting games, strategy games, puzzle games, etc. There are hardly any of these with emotion as a core element, but they undoubtedly have story.

Rhetoric aside, storytelling is essentially communication. Therefore, storytelling can be said to serve the same functions as communication. Yes, emotion is one of them, but you can do pretty much everything else with it. Exchanging info, warnings, entertainment, causing self-reflection, addressing issues, comparisons to irl phenomena. One doesn't speak for the sole purpose of instilling emotions on others. Neither do video games.

I am not denying the fact that gameplay can stand alone from traditional storytelling and we do get emotions from competing with ourselves or with others. In that case however, gameplay itself becomes storytelling, where we are the authors and characters who overcome and win and sometimes fail and fall short. Just like in the Smash Documentary or the DK Documentary but even on the smallest level of a child playing it for the first time, we become the story. It is an interesting thing you bring up communication. It is true; Storytelling is communication, Art is communication, Sports is communication. As we compete against one another we communicate through actions. As we examine art, the artist is communicating with us. Communication is the most emotional thing that we do and could be the very essence of emotion. Everything which you denote as communication has connection with emotion. We communicate not only to instill emotions or to keep back emotions within others but within ourselves more importantly. Storytelling is an art that connects meanings and relates them or contrasts them for the purpose of touching the soul through emotion. A bit cheesy at the end but you get the point.

 

[WiiAssasin]

Seriously you cannot deny the symbolism and themes in Majora's Mask. They knew very well what they were doing.

Then you lean towards the belief of Zelda being Shakespearean work. That is quite interesting...

I, myself, find Superman 64 to be a tragedy on the level of Romeo and Juliet.

The greatest shame would be to have the artist tell you what his art means. As Don Henley put it: "My only regret would be having to explain it in detail to you, which would defeat the purpose of using literary devices in songwriting and lower the discussion to some silly and irrelevant argument about chemical processes." (Talking about the Wine Spirit line from Hotel California)
That being said, art is also subjective but usually the artists know exactly what they're doing.


The time-traveling mechanic was brilliant and actually attributed to storytelling.

Even Henley ended up explaining the significance of his work. Aonuma did not. Nor, to my knowledge, has he ever done that.

Plenty of game devs do tell of their reasons for a story being the way it is through interviews, or at least hint to it. MM is getting a remake, which would present a perfect opportunity for us to delve into his almighty emotion storytelling presentation through some QA. He won't, though. We both know that.

The time-travelling mechanic was brilliant, no doubt about it. Never been done before, and it was implemented fairly well.

Since video game's inception it has been about competitiveness. What are the purpose of high scores? There is a winner in Pong. There is even a documentary about the Donkey Kong competitive scene:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_King_of_Kong:_A_Fistful_of_Quarters

If you are suggesting video games to be closer to video games, it could be true. But then again, board games can be even more cut throat than sports; Chess, Shogi, and Igo/Baduk as examples.

Competitiveness=/=sports. The free market is not a sport. Government elections are not sports. Sports have been here for thousands of years to get to where they are. Video games can only dream to catch up and reach the caliber and prestige of such activity. Merely having a competitive aspect doesn't denote it it to being on par with sports.

Chess is pointless now that we have computers. It's very hard to call those competitive.

I am not denying the fact that gameplay can stand alone from traditional storytelling and we do get emotions from competing with ourselves or with others. In that case however, gameplay itself becomes storytelling, where we are the authors and characters who overcome and win and sometimes fail and fall short. Just like in the Smash Documentary or the DK Documentary but even on the smallest level of a child playing it for the first time, we become the story. It is an interesting thing you bring up communication. It is true; Storytelling is communication, Art is communication, Sports is communication. As we compete against one another we communicate through actions. As we examine art, the artist is communicating with us. Communication is the most emotional thing that we do and could be the very essence of emotion. Everything which you denote as communication has connection with emotion. We communicate not only to instill emotions or to keep back emotions within others but within ourselves more importantly. Storytelling is an art that connects meanings and relates them or contrasts them for the purpose of touching the soul through emotion. A bit cheesy at the end but you get the point.

No! No emotion. We did not invent communication because of emotion. Emotions exist just fine even if one were to never communicate, ergo communication is NOT the essence of emotion. I don't know where you're getting your reasoning from, but it's very wrong. Friggin' plants and cells communicate with one another, but they aren't doing it because of feels.

Now you're making me dislike Shulk.


In other news: I'm buying Crusader Kings II.