Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Some questions from a storyfag who doesn't agree with other storyfags

torpid

Liturgist
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
1,099
Location
Isma's Grove
So where is Mondblut?
 

felipepepe

Codex's Heretic
Patron
Joined
Feb 2, 2007
Messages
17,274
Location
Terra da Garoa
I'm not here to cuddle anyone. I made a thread. Respond to what's written and put up or shut up.
What's written is too vague and has multiple points...is like you want a digest of the whole Codex in one thread. Go for one or two major discussion points, and also ignore the trolls and discuss back with those that are trying to understand what you want. Half of your wall of text is just taunting trolls, and you didn't replied to those that answered you, like this is some sort of social experiment where you incite us and them just take notes...

*The games' lore is often what drives the interest for Storyfag who prefer CRPGs or CRPG-lite but if you want to hear about the intricacies of theories and details for why a story is great, it doesn't transfer at all. - Again see the replies. I guess if there's any wording I would clarify it's that quests can be lores depending on how people discuss them. I don't like looking down on forum readers though but like I said, board really disappointed me.
Just NO! Quests are not lore! If you are using personal definitions, you are not gonna get a clear anwser anywhere. Lore is the cultural & historical background of the world we play in. Sometimes you will cross lore-pieces, like legendary itens or powerful ancient enemies, but any interaction or quest you do with them are your character's story, not the world lore anymore.

I read a Witcher thread where some people were claiming that the Witcher's combat system is boring and while it's a gameplay based thread, as a storyfag, it baffles me why people who like stories in their game rarely defend the fact that "in a realistic game world sense" boring automatic QTE fights are more in line with how sword fights work than intricate 1-6 men strategic battles.
Because Storyfag does not mean "realism-fag". And besides, QTE is a shitty game mechanic, I can only think of someone defending it if he doesn't want to sit through combat and just wanna see the story, much like what BioWare did for Mass Effect 3 with the new "story-mode", where the combat is almost removed from the game in favour of the story. And those kind of people should just go watch a movie.
 

grotsnik

Arcane
Joined
Jul 11, 2010
Messages
1,671
if you can't understand a clear thread like this

Grnsssbl.

A few thoughts, OP; your definition of story leaps about a lot, so I'd like to hear more about the games you cited as masterpieces. Take Clock Tower; I like Clock Tower, but it's a straight Argento homage, an atmosphere-heavy mishmash of giallo stabby stuff and unexplained, undefined supernatural elements, that never begins or tries to make a lick of sense. It's a little sensationalist horror fairytale, down to the ridiculous crows that can kill the baddie at the end.

As for a lack of story modding, regardless of actual quality, the Neverwinter Vault has a good thousand of the damn things. A few even stray away from straight fantasy into tongue-in-cheek steampunkish adventure, like the Hex Coda, or...fully reactive prostitution simulation, like Dance With Rogues.
 

Infinitron

I post news
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
97,236
Codex Year of the Donut Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
Because Storyfag does not mean "realism-fag". And besides, QTE is a shitty game mechanic, I can only think of someone defending it if he doesn't want to sit through combat and just wanna see the story, much like what BioWare did for Mass Effect 3 with the new "story-mode", where the combat is almost removed from the game in favour of the story. And those kind of people should just go watch a movie.

It looks like one of OP's unspoken assumptions is that traditional RPG combat is "gamey", time-consuming and therefore distracts from the story, while "realistic" Witcher-style combat meshes better with a storyline (it's like something you would see in a movie or read in a novel) and therefore enhances it.
 

JarlFrank

I like Thief THIS much
Patron
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
33,053
Location
KA.DINGIR.RA.KI
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
I think I understand what your problem is, and in some points (but only in some points and only a tiny little bit) I agree. You are not a storyfag. You are an immersionfag.

What you want from a game is coherent game-logic in story, setting and even gameplay. You don't give a shit about gameplay as much as you do about story, or let's call it "inner coherence". You don't care if the combat is awesome fun, as long as it feels realistic or authentic: this becomes clear as you prefer Witcher's combat (which I didn't think was bad, but definitely not perfect) to tactical turn based fights, and probably also to skill-requiring first person action combat, because it feels more realistic/more fitting to the setting. You don't want RPG-like character development because it makes no sense in any setting that someone goes from peasant to demigod in 5 weeks.

This means you're an immersionfag.

This is not a bad thing in itself, but it can become bad if you give it a higher priority than gameplay. You see, games are, first and foremost, supposed to be games. You play them because of gameplay, and naturally, gameplay has to make some abstractions to be fun. Levelling up and raising skills is an integral part of RPGs, and therefore should never be removed. It is not a story-related "power fantasy", it is gameplay. Watching numbers go up and choosing what perk to pick on level up is fun. Being rewarded for solving quests by getting XP is fun. People play RPGs because of those things - which means you cannot simply remove XP and levelling from RPGs, even though it would make more "story sense".

Therefore, it is easier to make "good stories" - by your definition - in adventure games, because their gameplay centers around solving puzzles and having dialogues and exploring a detailed game world. There's no such thing as gaining XP, becoming stronger, finding guns that do ++ damage to the last one you found. There needs to be less abstraction to make an adventure game work.

Now, in some aspects I agree with you: from zero to hero RPGs are illogical and therefore silly. I much prefer more limited power growth - still significant, but in the beginning, you would not be the weakest char in game, and in the end, there would still be more powerful beings than you (because becoming twice as powerful as the 500 year old archmage in 2 weeks is wtflol). But my top priorities in making a combat system would not be "it has to be logical within the setting", but "it has to be fun". Don't see gameplay as an immersion-breaking illogical thing, but as what it is: gameplay that makes the game fun to play, not part of the story.

That said, I believe you would very much enjoy playing Pathologic and The Void by the Russian developer Ice Pick Lodge since they're p. much the thing you're looking for. Also, play Thief and Thief 2 if you haven't yet, because you should enjoy their way of storytelling.
 

Andyman Messiah

Mr. Ed-ucated
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
9,933
Location
Narnia
original said:
Note: I apologize if I misused the term wrong. I didn't do any search. Just read a couple of topics. I've only encountered two terms I didn't understand thus far. C&C and Storyfag. Since the topics I read were writing related, I assume storyfag are about gamers who obscenely play games for their story sometimes even opting out of appreciating a game for their gameplay.
So you didn't do any (re)search, only read a few topics and made assumptions based on something you didn't really understand. Fantastic. Are you a writer of fiction by any chance? It's honestly the only way I can see you keeping your supposed writer's license.

original said:
Being a writer in a software industry aside (as that has been discussed)
cliffnotes said:
Does not need to be discussed because there's a thread made and talked of by others already
Then why would you even bring it up then if it's apparently already discussed (where exactly?) and not important? In the future, just get to the point. Don't fish for attention.

As you already have your answers, I will not reply to the rest of your post.
 

RRRrrr

Arcane
Glory to Ukraine
Joined
Nov 6, 2011
Messages
2,303
I hate long and time-consuming filler combat. And even if the long dungeon is nicely crafted that doesn't help much. I hate the misconception that games should be long and often times they actually suffer from too much filler content.
There are very few games that got (imo) the encounters right. S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Call Of Pripyat is one of them. Unlike the previous stalker games this one wasn't filled with hundreds of bandits you have to kill just to reach the next 100 bandits/monolith/another lab.

I never liked it when my PC/party was so powerful that it wiped out 20 almost identical rooms with 30 enemies each (against, almost identical). That's why I prefer adventure games. Not to mention that I have bo fucking idea how D&D combat works, never read any of the books.

The Witcher 1 got the amount of combat/dialogues/exploration right (again, imo). As a fan of the story I like the combat to be an addition to the story, not feel separate from it. An encounter with 1-4 enemies/a reasonable amount of enemies is good. But if you kill literally hundreds of enemies and venture where armies couldn't is just plain stupid. That's why I prefer stories that are not "safe-the-world-centric" as, quite shockingly, I prefer a world that doesn't need a party of 4 to do all the world else it is destroyed/enslaved/whatever.

I often see the argument that if you don't like a certain type of gameplay you should watch a film instead. But games provide something films don't...a reasonable length. There is a significantly greater amount of content that could be put in a game that in a film. And sometimes that significant amount of content and interactivity is enough for me (and probably many others) to forgive bad/overly complicated/not enjoyable gameplay.
And if the gameplay is completely linear and scripted, well...fine, as long as the aesthetics, the story, the atmosphere and the overall feeling the game has to it is good.
But I am disappointed of the stories video game have and I am about to give up the medium. I have played probably all of the new games that are considered good as well as some old games, but I can't find what I'm looking for here. I am playing Torment now (never finished it), and this is how good games get. And it's just not enough for me.

Have you ever become addicted to a game/any other sort of fiction that you start reading about the lore, get to know a lot about it, get interested in the mysteries that will never be answered, engage in long discussions just to have the epiphany that...there is interesting lore in real life, too. That you could have spend the time reading about fictional worlds doing some research on real-life subjects?

And have you noticed how much easier, more compelling and fun it is to read about fiction than real-life. Well, I am currently trying to make a shift from fiction to real world. The hardly ever read fiction right now, I am more interested in psychology, law, rhetoric and history now. But I still spend too much time at the computer doing nothing and I sometimes feel like this picture where a guy in a very untidy room is making his sim do his bed and tidy everything perfectly.

Well, the thread was without any focus, so I wrote a post without any focus. But I just need to gather my thoughts as I have been playing video games for 12 years and I'm 17, ffs. That's a considerable amount of my life and there is no way that my mind is not affected by it. The only thing I owe to games is most of my knowledge of English :D
 

Raghar

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Messages
22,507
I smell a troll. This fucker sounds too much like a trollbait we had recently at Watch refugee?
Who was it? When I looked at that thread, I seen Andhaira to complain about anti-spam system on RPG codex. The post below was from moderator who showed a surprise he has been unbanned and then following, "he has been banned for a week...".

The forum initially didn't appear as bad from when I was lurking on some threads but come on...first post requesting an explanation about fags? As someone showed newfag isn't exactly a new definition. Fag is a pretty much clear cut word. The word story in storyfag is what creates the confusion.
The post was request for the Jaesun to explain to the OP the meaning of the word fag.

Also this forum is full of literate posters, it's stated under theirs names*1. So they are posting according to theirs best capabilities. You are barely literate, and it shows.

*1 with exception of laclongquan who is novice in canibalism, or human eating. I didn't ask. And Gragt who is ferret.

Also people bringing up RPG maker type games are IMO overrating the games.
Who?
There are lots of cool RPG maker games but the ones I've encountered don't encompass the full spectrum.
When someone talked about RPG maker VX?

In terms of graphics (from an immersion standpoint), I know of only one RPG maker game that impressed me because it mimicked Saga Frontier 2's watercolor style. I can't remember the name but that had an awesome beginning but the still awkward way of navigating the environments turned me off.
You can't remember a name of a game that you liked, that's sad. It's like I will not remember a name of sir Auron.

In contrast Wesnoth had
A shitty strategy game that has bad design and was a rip off from some console games. It also shown me a Japanese text, only because I had a Japanese locale. A general custom is to allow the user to select a proper language. (or simply use English)

2 major graphical overhaul.
Mods.

In Wesnoth, even same universe mods involve themes of Post-Apocalyptic events, Planescape like torments (albeit without the reverse Nameless one pull over) and Civilization downfalls. All these while wrapped in an easier to find and install modding database.They aren't all 10/10 and many of the mods do fall short in length but in terms of depth if you're into a story, even a basic glance over all the options show much more varied introductions than many of the mods found in other games and the endings remain a huge pay-off plot wise where as many of the oft discussed games as some of you allude to, fall within the spectrum of liking a sub-quest or talking about a certain lore.

Yes some people are falling in love with that strategy game. Would you post some argument? Fact? Relevance to RPG discussion? Anything?

And have you tried that infamous BG2 mod? It looked like a main character, hopefully woman, would have a relationship with a charamant cutthroat, which would consist of rape, rape, and then finally evolves into a romantic relationship with someone who loves her and she loves him... I looked at first few pages, imagined the plot progression, didn't try that.

In fact, considering I played Magical diary recently, and tried to bang Damien, I doubt I would be willing to discuss gory details of the above mod even if I'd played that.
 

Raghar

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Messages
22,507
That was Phelot, that trolled, isn't it? I seen only the aftermath.
 

Baddygoal

Educated
Joined
Mar 1, 2011
Messages
70
JarlFrank said:
This means you're an immersionfag.

Hmmm. Hey Retinue, not RPGs but do you like the Batman games? Arkham Shitty and Arkham Assylum? Those seem perfect for you. All criticism against those games seems to be defended with "he's Batman so it's realistic he can kick ass/see through walls/whatever".
 

Captain Shrek

Guest
I am not a writer nor a game designer nor a literary degree holder.

Still I like to make comments about games.

Having qualified that, I'd say that text (as in the actual literary content) in games can be original, of great literary value and be entertaining at the same time. BUT. That's too much to expect because:

1) Games are a young genre. Haven't had enough time to mature as an art form.
2) Games are not oriented towards audience that appreciates such fine tastes in literary values (and there is NOTHING wrong with that)
3) Writers for games are usually failures at other form of literary endeavors. We have to make do with the unmotivated shit at the bottom.
4) The audience of the games can't themselves distinguish between Great literature and comic books.

Now, OP, you are asking why this audience and that writer who wrote DA2 are quarreling, you should think if your questions make any sense whatsoever.
 

Captain Shrek

Guest
Also, what would constitute a good story for games?

1) One that is gripping and interesting.
2) It is not irrelevant to the game mechanics.
3) Its not completely unbelievable.
4) It is consistent with some central theme of the game.

I would personally say that Deus Ex had the best story of the lot. To extrapolate from here, I'd say that if writers today could just deliver these things without caring too much about incorporating great social ideas (snigger) and philosophy, it'd be enough. But that's not going to happen, is it?
 

Cowboy Moment

Arcane
Joined
Feb 8, 2011
Messages
4,407
Also, what would constitute a good story for games?

1) One that is gripping and interesting.
2) It is not irrelevant to the game mechanics.
3) Its not completely unbelievable.
4) It is consistent with some central theme of the game.

I would personally say that Deus Ex had the best story of the lot. To extrapolate from here, I'd say that if writers today could just deliver these things without caring too much about incorporating great social ideas (snigger) and philosophy, it'd be enough. But that's not going to happen, is it?

I would totally second the notion that game developers should just use a simple narrative structure, and focus on realizing it well through whatever means their gameplay model allows for. Whenever they try to tackle a more complicated theme, it almost always ends up either disappointingly shallow (Deus Ex: HR and its treatment of "transhumanism") or just completely divorced from reality (DA2 and its awful attempts at depicting racism or immigrant problems). On the other end of the spectrum, there are things like Limbo, with not a line of text displayed or spoken, and maybe 30 total seconds of control being taken away from the player throughout the game - and it still tells a story just fine, and even managed to be just vague enough to invite multiple interpretations without descending into some kind of crystal dragon jesus in purgatory mindfuck.

Or take Bioshock. One thing Bioshock actually inherited from SS2 (and it sure wasn't the gameplay lololo) was telling a story through the environment alone. Bioshock actually does this quite well for the most part. But this clearly wasn't enough for next-gen, so they just had to cram it full of those nonsensical recordings. You could remove like half of those and the game's narrative wouldn't suffer much at all. There's a point in SS2 where you find a guy with a bullet hole in his head, gun in his hand, slumped against the wall with a bunch of bottles scattered around. It doesn't take a quantum physicist to figure out what exactly happened there, but Bioshock would definitely include a recording of the guy's last moments, because more text and voice acting is always better.
 

Infinitron

I post news
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
97,236
Codex Year of the Donut Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
I would totally second the notion that game developers should just use a simple narrative structure, and focus on realizing it well through whatever means their gameplay model allows for. Whenever they try to tackle a more complicated theme, it almost always ends up either disappointingly shallow (Deus Ex: HR and its treatment of "transhumanism") or just completely divorced from reality (DA2 and its awful attempts at depicting racism or immigrant problems). On the other end of the spectrum, there are things like Limbo, with not a line of text displayed or spoken, and maybe 30 total seconds of control being taken away from the player throughout the game - and it still tells a story just fine, and even managed to be just vague enough to invite multiple interpretations without descending into some kind of crystal dragon jesus in purgatory mindfuck.

Or take Bioshock. One thing Bioshock actually inherited from SS2 (and it sure wasn't the gameplay lololo) was telling a story through the environment alone. Bioshock actually does this quite well for the most part. But this clearly wasn't enough for next-gen, so they just had to cram it full of those nonsensical recordings. You could remove like half of those and the game's narrative wouldn't suffer much at all. There's a point in SS2 where you find a guy with a bullet hole in his head, gun in his hand, slumped against the wall with a bunch of bottles scattered around. It doesn't take a quantum physicist to figure out what exactly happened there, but Bioshock would definitely include a recording of the guy's last moments, because more text and voice acting is always better.

And when it did add a recording...

Date: 10.JUL.14
From: Melanie Bronson
To: {Bronson}, as log entry
Subject: re: Resist
They've killed my men and now they've killed me. I'm holding my guts inside of me with both hands. I'm almost done... resist. This is bigger than my little life, the lives of my men and the lives of the people I was forced to kill.
Resist. Humanity demands it! Resist!
:salute:
 
Joined
May 6, 2009
Messages
1,875,975
Location
Glass Fields, Ruins of Old Iran
They've killed my men and now they've killed me. I'm holding my guts inside of me with both hands. I'm almost done... typing with my nose is hard. This is bigger than my little nose, the lives of my men and the lives of the people I was forced to kill.
 

JarlFrank

I like Thief THIS much
Patron
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
33,053
Location
KA.DINGIR.RA.KI
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
They've killed my men and now they've killed me. I'm holding my guts inside of me with both hands. I'm almost done... typing with my nose is hard. This is bigger than my little nose, the lives of my men and the lives of the people I was forced to kill.

I don't know how you do audio recordings, but I just use my voice for them instead of typing.
 

laclongquan

Arcane
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
1,870,144
Location
Searching for my kidnapped sister
They've broken my arms and now they've punctured my sac. I'm holding my balls inside of me with both hands. I'm almost done... typing with my penis is hard. This is bigger than my great dick, or the balls of my line and the lives of the people I was forced to rape.
 

Retinue

Novice
Joined
Jan 6, 2012
Messages
20
Now these latter replies are certainly more interesting and up to par.

I'm certainly a horrible communicator. At no point in my entire internet forum life have I made a passionate topic which meant dearly to me and not be accused of trolling. There is nothing inconcise about this thread however.

If one were to make a keyword list for this thread for example, story or storyfag would be the main keyword.

I just don't think it needs to be expressed in an elitist forum. Not only does it convert the speaker to look down upon what should be a community that he should be looking up to for their analytical opinions which led to their unpopular opinions but the mere sentence "Duh. It should be obvious from the title that this thread is about storyfags." holds weakness to a newfag. It not only makes them look like a douche which is just one more ammo for the retards to strengthen their accusations that the TS is a troll but it holds no discussional value.

Imagine this. Someone makes a post that states all games you dislike is wrong and all games you like are superior. It would be a rhetorical truth but if everyone simply took this for face value then it defeats the point of even discussing what's wrong or right or wonderful or creative or correct or wrong about all rpg games in general. In turn if everyone accepted this then it would eradicate more than 50% of the threads in this forum. Everyone who buys into this belief can also say every thread is inconcise. The wording of choices, persistence in sequels, epicectomy, emergent narrative, combat challenging, biggest Rpg experts, old school D&D - pick some other keywords that's in the latest 1st page and it can be accused of being inconcise to anyone who doesn't want to discuss anything.

...and that's what almost 90% of the repliers are doing. Even the ones who reply politely are afraid of touching the word storyfag and if you are afraid to touch the heart of any topic, even if you do end up touching it with a ten inch pole, it would seem all over the place.

But to those who are interested in the topic, it's like a rabbit hole. If you don't understand something, you can ask specifically what's confusing about it. You don't need to hide around making a statement about how good or bad survey questions are. Hell, there are many survey questions across the internet (this forum is no exception) that get more replies than better worthwhile topics.

More importantly, survey questions are the easiest questions to answer. It's laughably hypocritical to say something is inconcise and then bring up an example of a topic theme that's the most concise and obvious in survey questions.

But then the rabbit hole for anyone who doesn't want to discuss a thread but pretends to want to also follows a straight hole. Where the only key diversion is those who make pointless retarded replies that add nothing at all to a thread or more purposeful replies that take a little more to unravel to show the poster's real bias.

Now mind you, I don't mean to make the poster above sound so bad. This is a difficult thing. I waited too long to reply and now I have to reply to many people who all bring up many different points. This isn't a bad thing. It's the hallmark of a great forum when you can't stay on one path even if you just multiquote because there are several people who bring up several great inter-branching points that stay within the realms of the heart of the thread. Maybe I'm paying too much respect for the poster because he made a comment for me to stay on board but those are the facts. Respectful post and maybe even respectful poster but also a poster who has a bad inconcise point.

Maybe the above isn't clear enough. After all, when one is being accused of being inconcise and then one makes a reply along the lines of "No! You're inconcise" no matter the layers of explanation, it sounds rude, trollish or just plain offensive.

Nonetheless if forums where more advance and I could show an argument map - the poster above basically did this.

What are you asking? -> please be more concise -> stuck between a survey question - x: error - incompatible with accusations of how a thread is inconcise -> follow up: stating the obvious about CRPGs being min-maxing power fantasies -> x: error - making a jump in conclusion following a point that was branched off because of another poster's reply about Rpg power fantasies and yet is at the same time a concise point which does not match with the original premise of the poster.

It all sounds lame but this is why argument maps were designed this way. Sometimes even the most linguistic posters can have a lame point. This is no different than someone saying I'm an immersionfag.

If someone who doesn't want to discuss the thread but wants to be polite to the TS were to read the post, they could get the impression that the poster did read the thread and respectfully if not clearly answered the thread.

It takes a certain level of honest analytical intent (not much I know as this isn't rocket science but this is the problem with pandering to people who are on the fence with a topic) to see the obvious which is that in any interactive medium: everyone is an immersion fag.

Every gamer be they graphic whores, storyfags or gameplay fanatics feel a particular immersion with a game that leads them to praise it higher than it should or hate it worse than the average hater who doesn't pick up the game at all.

If this were a less reputable board maybe such polite and detailed replies need pandering to. This board (even if as some claim it has declined) is still much more capable of raising the depth of their opinions but sadly as with any boards - the overlaying premise is that even you guys who don't stoop down to troll level just aren't interested with the topic so my post sounds inconcise or your interpretation of my post falls down like a stack of cards at the first basic observation of your counter points. Even if I spend all this time trying to explain this to you, we won't get much anywhere because you're not inherently interested about the subject. You just want your piece of pie so you can satisfy your addiction with replying to posts that seem mildly entertaining. I wouldn't even be surprised if one of you comes back only to say I said a bunch of nothings in this post. Despite my saying it's pointless to explain to you, as far as this above texts goes: I am still partially explaining it. It's just the natural consequences of trying to be respectful of the other person. Tl;dr: I respect the points of the two poster who I was addressing to in the above but frankly their counterpoints and accusations are bs. Maybe I should go into more details about their post. They still certainly brought something interesting to the table especially the one who accused me of being an immersionfag as he brought up an impression about the Witcher's "automatic" combat system (a wrong one as he didn't take into account the difference between FCR and vanilla) but just look at how many texts needs to be taken up just to "respectfully" point out the flaws in their post. Flaws that I consider on the level of stating the obvious as the points are again riddled with obvious holes that makes the points crumble at the mere attempt of discussing their points.

Now back to something more relevant to the thread:

Am I taking the term too seriously?

Yes. Yes I am. Is it wrong though? I think that depends on the ramifications. Of course, again, this all assumes we're interested in the topic.

If you want to treat it like a C&C situation: The first question of course is what's the value of discussing this term seriously in such a way that the choice of discussing it at all is worth further discussing it.

...and then what's the consequence if the choice is not discussed. There's alot of layers into this of course but as demonstrated by some of the posters, this is all concise and clear.

Even if you do not take into account all the consequences, someone disinterested with the topic could just as repeat a simple point like the lack of threads discussing the stories of videogame. It's not quite a satisfactory premise but from an overlaying theme, it's certainly a lamentable premise and any premise that's worth lamenting has at some point a certain value that makes discussing it seriously a somewhat valuable idea to someone else.

It's like with criticizing modern games. Discussing something to a certain depth may not be akin to treating it seriously at least from an effectiveness perspective as it won't change anything but it could create a community like this where one seeking opinions that are more perspectives than comments can gain part of a perspective they are looking for. What they do with that perspective? That's the downside. No one really knows. Not even ourselves. Even if we want to say by doing so we raise an important topic that elevates us beyond the common troublemakers who post trash to entertain themselves or satisfy their ego - in the end, this is just a thread. A screen that shows a series of characters that show a bunch of sentences that may or may not be read by someone influential much less inspire I or you or someone else to do something about it.

But this is unfair. You raised a valid point. You gave me the official definition, (at least within the parameters of a forum veteran) so I think if not you, others deserve "my take" after I've been informed with the actual definition.

"'storyfag' around here denotes somebody whose appreciation of the story in a game serves to help them forgive it its flaws as a game."

"You're looking for the sort of person for whom the story is the point of the games"

What's the difference between the two here?

I would say if we were to simply take this as sentences and not "try to infer between the lines" then this two are the same.

But again this is unfair. Let's infer between the lines.

What's wrong with someone appreciating the story in a game?

Is that not part of the point of stories in a game? The same can be said of gameplay making up for bad stories in a game. The same can be said of graphics making up for bad stories in a game. The same can be said for online making up for other aspects of a game.

You can't stop at this point though.

The difference between a well thought out set of criticisms of any aspect of a game is that the person first (subconsciously or consciously) wanting what's "good for them" in a game. And then if they are legitimately passionate about it, then they ask what's wrong. Finally they determine for themselves what's right and they share it. This is setting aside people who copy paste opinions and summarize them or clip them apart to create an opinion that's more "memerable".

But then the rabbit hole goes deeper.

What does it mean for the story to be the point in a game to someone?

Wouldn't this in some way mean they would forgive certain aspects of the game?

Maybe they would be less forgivable but would anyone truly be completely unforgiving in the face of a great story (to them).

I'd like to tell you a conundrum.

Most visual novels lack gameplay in the sense that would make a hardcore gamer say it's an achievement to finish a visual novel except maybe in unlocking all the endings. Still, this praise is unworthy.

One would think that most VN players are befitting of the tag storyfags. Either definition works.

Another person (a VN player) could also re-interpret this in a positive light that they focus more on the stories of games.

But can this really be true? Especially in light of the mainstream appeal of novel readers and movie watchers?

I would say it doesn't. But we're not taking this seriously yet. (Although I wouldn't be surprised if people assume I were)

To take this seriously, you would realize that VNs are more challenging for storyfags than for the average VN player. An almost paradoxical thought because it implies that there is something worse than storyfags but the term storyfag is supposed to be an extreme already.

It's as if there should be a middle ground definition like story whore.

But there isn't.

Because there isn't though, there's a lack of "personal vanity metric" for vocal gamers to discuss more stories in forums which in turn produces less story based topics as a consequence.

That's not the only thing lacking though. If it were, why would it be so bad? Also: why would it be necessary to make a thread of it at all except to rant and complain? (Of course now we've totally abandoned the ones who doesn't want to discuss the thread. They whom ranting and complaining could make sense and they, even the ones who are legit, created the argument hole for troll and troll accusations to enter legitimately in threads like this without breaking the moral code that leads to their banning.)

To make this less confusing though, let's shift to the gameplay and graphic whores.

What drives people to make better graphics and modified gameplay (for better and worse)?

Initially it may appear that, like fanfictions, it's just a case of by the numbers. If we were to simply limit to pure successful modmaking and eliminate those who are desirous but incapable of modding, it still is a by-the-numbers desire.

That's not quite true though. Even the by-the-numbers desire are started from ideas.

Ideas that are not just given birth by one skilled, lucky and ambitious son of a dreamer but ideas that become mythology because someone brought forth the argument.

Am I that person?

I don't believe so and I don't even have that delusion which is why I'm making a storyfag topic aimed at vocal storyfags even though anyone can answer and their answers could be better than the storyfags.

Let's go back now to VNs though. Not because we should but VNs do have "truer" storyfags which in turn makes for a better preview of a "what if" future.

Not in a sort of elitist definition or personal definition but subconsciously, regardless of the quality of the VNs, the truer "vocal" storyfags lay out interpretations and official definitions of VNs and these allows the creation of a community. A smaller community than most but certainly a community with a certain attitude. Attitudes that people subconsciously mimic all because certain vocal storyfags spoke their minds.

This being an example (just don't blame me if reading it creates spoilers)

http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/578844-divi-dead

The game is less well known and less praised than Fate/Stay Night but it has a richer group of story speculators. We see this all the time in movies. Even movies that are unknown give forth story speculators. What is more key is that story speculators are often different from fanfiction writers though they overlap.

This is the key that's still lacking within videogames that Rpg elitists are so close to reaching. Reaching beyond VNs even. (We see this not only in modern RPG makers who "wrongly" misuse VN graphics even the professional made ones and we also see this in the storyfag accusations.)

This is no longer your typical adventure click and point vs. interactive rpg anymore but the seed is still subtle and may still die off without anyone perceiving or caring for it.

We're now closer to interactive rpgs. The mainstream reacts to it positively and the hardcore feels it too. The mainstream now have their taste of interactive games. They just don't have a fuller taste of classic games. The hardcore now sees a better visual because they have both been on the positive and negative end. They have experienced games that have less creativity and gameplay and at the same time, they have received a conflicting dilemma that almost makes them analogically like the poorer or more subsdiized culture adopting and praising Marxists philosophies because it is the one that makes it clearest and basic of philosophical beliefs in villifying their villains.

In some ways it's much clearer with the accusations of storyfags because Marxists have to deal with complicated gray areas like the self made man who supports a more free market version of capitalism but the term storyfags is more a process of aligning story lovers with the stereotype that breeds forth the modern mainstream rpgs that these so called hardcore rail on. It is only that the hardcore has the least empathy with stories that it's much easier to create statements like storyfags because even the hardcore gamers may have a field day of accusing others of graphic whorse but animation packs, spell mods, eye candy mods still matter to them not just in mods but in the official games. Stories however matter to them the least because the ones they praise are in themselves often cruder stories and the best ones they've experienced in this interactive medium are often the least interactive. It's almost like they have a more mainstream movie culture.

Again, let's go back to VNs though, that analogy serves the clearest. Particularly because VNs are interactive videogames whose gameplay is more centric to the story not unlike life sims giving more importance to buy and sell items compared to even great rpgs.

It also helps that this is such a niche view if not also a near non-existant one for the VN community that one may be forced to look more seriously in the term storyfags and create hierarchies for it.

See the greatest challenge for a storyfag in VNs is the choice and consequences. The great VN stories are the ones where, once you unlock an ending, you're almost regretful of unlocking another one.

The ramifications are not that important if you're simply in it for a one time gaming experience. It's when you adopt a certain rankings, no different than the premise created by the many here who rank gameplays, that it's starts becoming much clearer that there is, if not a hierarchy, a subconscious ranking rivaling the rpg elitists here but in a story sense. This story sense also extends to gameplay and graphics...but only to those who can do something about it.

(Again I don't believe I can because I haven't made a game nor am I in the process of being able to learn how now but I do feel it's worth discussing and I am at this point totally focused on replying to those who feel the topic is worth discussing even if the very person who made the point above no longer wants to.)

It's why I bring up the Witcher because often times storyfags are forced to only address the potential. Rare is it that someone (often times not a storyfag) gets to create a mod that delivers the latter.

FCR not only does that to the Witcher but in order for FCR to do that to the Witcher, it relies on the Witcher's simplified combat system and overall mechanics to deliver the same "storyfag immersion".

See the complexity of the Witcher is not that it makes combat less or more better or more gimmicky, etc. etc. I'm not saying this is the intent of the game developers but rare is it that a combat system follows a certain mechanic that is praised world wide in the realm of strategy. FCR won't be praised for that but I don't think there's any shame in that because the only one game series (and the latters one don't even count) that I know of which has been praised for is the Total War series.

For rpgs though, FCR, is certainly one of the more complete and rewarding for storyfags and it is able to do this because of the potential already present in the Witcher's combat system.

I'd like to break this reply for a moment though because this trail allows me to address another point brought up by someone else which is comparing Clock Tower to Argento.

That's kind of the tricky thing when it comes to being a storyfag. In order for a story to be so good that the gamer forgives the flaws of a game when one can say no such game has 100% perfection especially rpgs then the story "must" attract them in such away that technicalities, though they may serve as justifications for their emotions, are in themselves irrelevant. It's also in this way that storyfags become much closer to the classic game lovers that serves to represent the stereotype of this forum. Most importantly, it is also in this way that Argento is irrelevant to Clock Tower unless it's a Clock Tower story criticism thread.

It's actually not that complicated. Gameplayers inherently know this. How many times have gamers read and agreed with a 7/10 rpg review and become more addicted especially as the years go by to this 7/10 rpg than a 10/10 rpg especially as the 7/10 rpg becomes much more scarce?

Yes, they often justify this intangible quality as addictive gaming but these same people, you same people, can they go on and villify addictive gaming qualities such as crafting, dungeon design and automatic combat systems as bad. It's as if you have a spider sense to distinguish between the two and it doesn't need to be communicated at all once you all agree that it's there.

This holds true for storyfags too. Story quality is important. Story uniqueness too. Videogames have a dilemma though.

There's no true uniqueness. I can justify Clock Tower has a great story because of it's scarcity or originality...but that's not true.

Resident Evil was the first but it didn't gave the same effect plot-wise as Clock Tower.

It also doesn't explain why Clock Tower is better than Clock Tower 2 and 3.

Worse, it doesn't take into account Clock Tower Snes as more people know Clock Tower for the PSX.

Worse, from a storyfag perspective, the difference between Argento movies and Clock Tower 1 is precisely because the SNES version was the Argento one and the PSX version was what made it different in that it was akin to a good Argento sequel with better presentation all wrapped in a plot sense that gives forth a better ramification of the first game all while containing unique gameplay combinations plus the scarcity which all gives it elements that makes it worthwhile from a storyfag sense regardless of whether one likes the story or not.

It's this psychology that makes storyfags so...discussion worthy especially from one storyfag to another because if we accepted this insulting but valid definition of us and we challenged our fellow storyfags to this idea that it almost comes off paradoxical.

Stories are always subjective and although graphic and gameplay has also been subjective there's always been a unification among gamers and where dissent happens, hardcore niche happens. Not so with storyfags. They/we are not pure technical story judges unless we're talking of a specific game thread like if this was totally focused on Clock Tower then we can argue about the similarities of Clock Tower and Argento but in an overall sense we're alot closer to classic gameplayers than we are to the mainstream. No different than a movie critic becoming much closer to unknown rare gem movies than they are to either Citizen Kane or The Dark Knight. Both are whom still "mainstream" in a sense.

Clock Tower doesn't come as close to FCR. Clock Tower still changed the gameplay for it's genre or whatever label it belongs.

Many games do that and they are often underpraised for that but most importantly they are considered almost "unprecedented".

For example, I don't love the RPG maker game I mentioned of whom I have forgotten the name. I don't know how the poster can get that when I specifically said:

"but that had an awesome beginning but the still awkward way of navigating the environments turned me off."

At best you could jump to the conclusion that I only played to the beginning which would be correct.

...but the bigger reason I'm including it is because I can't believe something like Three, The Hard Way can be more exposed yet something like it, though a great RPG maker game, was more of a trope breaker. Certainly deserving of praise but not something I would consider among worthy of being the easiest to find Rpg Maker game if you do a basic Google search for quality Rpg maker games.

I'm a bad Google searcher though but I'm not kidding you when I say it took me half a day to find the title for the game I mentioned since I could literally spot in only one thread.

http://db.tigsource.com/games/sunset-over-imdahl

It didn't help that all the other "famous games" I've skimmed (despite the poster stating Rpg Maker VX improved things to the "full spectrum) were still your typical "closer to fantasy games".

I could only surmise that the poster mistook my mentioning of full spectrum as being "game themes" rather than game plots because things like satire and limited area games (often metaphoric plots with symbolic endings) are definitely not new to RPG maker type gamers but the overall diversity in plots does not only stretch to themes. In Wesnoth mods, you have to really play through the end of several mods to understand what it means for diversity.

This said, I didn't just bring up this game though so I can reference it.

I think what's more important is that, just as gamers, storyfags need not be in it for the story...but still in it for the story.

Imdahl is a convenient game because you can see in that link that one gamer compares it to Legend of Mana. A storyfag would not compare it to Legend of Mana.

It has nothing to do with taste but with what a storyfag focuses their attention on.

It would be like someone saying KOTOR is BG with better graphics. It would not calculate to a BG fan and even a hater who only played the beginning would wonder what the **** is the other person talking about. This of course does not mean the other perspective is not incorrect but see just as a detailed analyst of RPG codex can raise himself beyond the typical gameplay complainer of your typical rpg player, storyfags must at least raise themselves higher to a story lover in order for them to not only forgive the game's flaws BUT most importantly fall within the parameters of being so immersed in that story that they come off as a storyfag.

If you take this psychology shift seriously enough, it's not much different from your typical RPG Codex analyst.

It may not necessarily be BG or Planescape Torment or insert rarer games but at heart an analyst who's overlaying theme may at first sound like their problem is with the gameplay, given enough details, can bring up problems that belong to the graphics (especially the interface) and the plot logic (especially the quest design). Because they are not only more vocal though but they are not unwilling to hold back, you get to the heart of the comparison.

In contrast, if I said a storyfag would love the third screenshot of Sunset over Imdahl, I would come off like a graphics whore. But remember the psychology of the definition of what a storyfag means.

You can say this is just immersion faggotry but how do you explain games where the immersion isn't there?

This brings to light the same dilemma hardcore gamers have but hardcore gamers are more forgiving of gameplay criticism than story criticism and they are also more vocal because the culture states that it's "alright" to criticize those things (lore included even though they seem to be more part of the story) than it is to criticize story.

The title isn't "Some questions from a storyfag who doesn't agree with other graphic whores or gameplay fanboys though".

It's targeted at those vocal storyfags. They are vocal so obviously they have no problem with expressing their opinions but why do they sell themselves short? I'm sick of hearing something like "...but the game has gray morals" but nobody dares to touch the ramifications of those gray morals. It's just gray morals. Something that wouldn't even fly as a basic criticism of the Matrix is suddenly accepted attitude by storyfags.

This isn't just limited to plot defenders. Reviewers don't dwelve into stories. Story dwelvers of videogames don't act as if they are dwelving into an interactive medium.

For an example of this, and hopefully this kills the idea that it's all purely an immersion faggotry thing:

I can guarantee you that to a storyfag, Wild Arms XP is better than Final Fantasy Tactics.

I can guarantee you that to a storyfag, FEDA Emblem of Justice is better than Shining Force.

...but! On average, more story lovers and story whores would prefer and love Final Fantasy Tactics and Shining Force "because of their immersion".

This isn't even about story. A storyfag would love those other games "because of their gameplay". Like classic gamers with different tastes, even if a storyfag disagrees with the immersion or the plot subconsciously what makes them forgive a certain gameplay element is the C&C.

Where C&C means choices & consequences to a gamer, a storyfag interprets C&C as D&C: Decisions and Ramifications. So why they hold back on sharing such opinions if they are vocal storyfags anyway? They have to answer that.

Going back to FCR for the Witcher, pre-FCR, what some see as automatic combat systems or even irrelevant mechanics as long as it makes the game fun or where story whores see (just as storyfags may see) gray moral decisions, storyfags already see the potential of FCR and that's what makes them forgive the game. Only FCR, intentionally or unintentionally, gives them a real concrete example of what they saw and they are no longer riddled with referencing theory and less known games.

Tl;dr version: (Though not quite in the same exact words) Storyfags may forgive...nay love the automated combat system because the game gives them an option to play a game where the musings found within the Book of Five Rings apply. A game where a single power player may still exist (after all Witcher is still an rpg power fantasy) but both the gameplay design and plot works together to "weave" a game where said powerful player has (though it doesn't necessarily mean need until FCR is installed) to take into account surroundings, terrain and crowd behaviour.

This makes it more appealing and immersive than both the mainstream easy design of modern games or the hardcore tactical "wait and choose options" of more challenging rpg games because it builds up the role of the characters.

Even better, the design of the FCR mod makes it so that even if one were to have a God mode, it's possible to screw yourself. (Though I haven't found a mod that makes God mode possible for the Witcher) For example, there's a random two ghoul room in Chapter 2 (nothing major spoiler wise) where in encountering them means you can't go up the stairs nor can you quite kill them immediately without the right oil.

This doesn't mean it's not unhackable to make the game easier but God mode is often the greatest litmus test for a storyfag because most rpgs are power fantasies and the best rpgs are ones where being powerful has ramifications. Negative ones or unlockable ones not just gameplay easing ones.

Again it's easier to understand for VNs because VNs have god mode inherent in their design. The difficulty is in the ramifications and decisions. If you mess it up, it's just a C&C game wrapped in a visual interactive game. If you do it correctly, even the most shallow games, leave you with a richer depth of What if thoughts and overall immersive experience that's difficult not because everyone subjectively praises it or you yourself accepts it but because the implications are just...unique. It's like the JFK sniper simulation. It's a basic 3d sniper shooter "sim" but people are generally disgusted by the gameplay. The only difference here is that storyfags are attuned to more gameplay elements than just sensitive game themes.

This game themes stretches even to the most mundane aspects so much so that even the, again, shallowest aspect because aspect that makes games more game forgiving. The only consequence is that often times the gamer needs more experimentation to finish a game. Often times experimentation that makes the game easier to sync with it's rpg power themes but often times storyfags stray towards challenging games anyway.

For example, my personal love with the FCR mod didn't mean I didn't mod it (save edit actually) so that it was easier. Yet why bother installing FCR at all and not just make vanilla easier?

FCR's reliance gives me the experience of stumbling upon such situations where I "died" because the creature I killed spewed some poisonous gas while killed. Why didn't I become cautious of this? Because I modded the game to full swords stats in line with the power fantasy that the hero while amnesiac is still a superb swordsman. (It also helps me see less of the save/load screen)

This design can be seen anywhere and given to a creature but only a storyfag who feels the euphoria of power possessed by the RPG power fantasy theme can receive the same euphoria from seeing why this character simply does not dominate the entire environment if he can in one birth do things that appear to take eons for the game world characters to achieve. It is a form of pseudo-immersion that only interactive games can produce but one where neither easy nor hard nor medium gameplay can replicate.

In some ways, there's some Revan-like euphoria given to the plot. Only storyfag gamers are turned off by the Revan-like implications. Another paradox.

Here, let me make a comparison: Mainstream gamers may like the Revan revelation. (They may not and then turn around with Kotor 2 and then just rationalize that the only thing bad about Kotor 2 is the unfinished design.)

Hardcore gaming plot lovers may like the themes presented in Planescape Torment and <insert some other game>

Though overstretching (especially for Final Fantasy haters), I dub this the FFVI - FFVII paradox. Both are highly praise worthy and highly immersive to the right crowd but one of the least liked FF would be the most immersive, enjoyable and best plot for a storyfag and that's FFII especially the fixed latter versions. There's many reasons for this possibility (and I'm not including my own subjective biases though with all things considered it's impossible to truly rip this apart) but if you look at it, FFII serves up many of the above hints I presented.

Finally I give you the Tales of Destiny 1 (PSX) Leon fight and the Blue vs. Rouge battle of Saga Frontier 1. Both are neither considered immersive games plot-wise nor exactly "highly praised non-controversial classic games". Most importantly though, the events I'm mentioning (read the Gamefaqs secrets if you want to be spoiled) are the equivalent of the Aeris death for a storyfag and these are not immersive scenes even for a storyfag at all.

Even more importantly, God mode changes the context and experience of these scenes. Difficulty has nothing to do with the events at all. Neither do spoilers. You can read how to unlock these all you want, the experience can't quite prepare you if you're a storyfag. (Not saying it won't for others but it will definitely for storyfags.)

Hopefully this clears up:

"I reckon it comes down to the fact that cRPGs are meant to be enjoyed in the interaction with the game, including its story, rather than appreciated solely for the story. News at eleven. A shitty story that a cRPG lets you interact with and influence is what we look for, what the storyfags of this board would probably point to. A great story with no interaction has no place in videogames. RPGs and interactive novels are not the same thing. At all."

I'm not saying there won't be people claiming to be storyfags that just want a movie or a good plot but both definitions do not fit the psychological behaviour of your original definition. (Again both definition)

Storyfags can just as much love shitty stories as cRPG can. Stories are subjective. Their subjective quality, even if you love them, do not automatically make your psyche forgive the rest of the elements of a game.

I can give you one personal example but it's going to be real hard to give one "unanimous" agreed-upon-by-most-storyfags example because of how the storyfags hold back.

This is Final Fantasy VII. I would consider Final Fantasy VII to have a great story. Far superior to all other Final Fantasies but where I differ is that I consider the story only good "pre-Aeris death".

Now why do I hold this opinion?

It's not just plot. Sure the scarcity of an amnesiac hero starting not from when they first forgot but when they first approached their lover (Tifa) but also when they first jumped from a train as an introduction (highly unique for that time in rpgs) and their first appearance in a true urban city with true characters (not just cyberpunk themes) overlayed by their joining a fantasy terrorist team (again unique as far as overall execution for that time) all gives me this opinion, it's the gameplay and graphics that seal the deal for me. Most of it coming for innovation.

The primary one is that only after TedTalks become popular and Dan Ariely talked about predictably irrational that it become more mainstream for people to have the "uglier than you" clone theory to hold much more sway among the masses, Final Fantasy VII was addressing this not just in the Zack-Cloud paradigm but also in the graphics.

Where people see the sprites, especially today, as not having aged gracefully - I see it (even back then) as an attempt to make the more appealing graphics more appealing. This was unique because the psychology behind graphics had not yet been done this way to my knowledge at the time (especially in a mainstream manner) until FFVII.

I'm not saying this is intentional but years down the line, with the advent of more fan translation, it would impress me even further that Square created Live a Live. Almost the same execution but in a more experimental manner. Even today, as a storyfag, I consider Live a Live to be the best rpg power fantasies yet paradoxically I don't consider Live a Live to be the best immersive plot wise. (Paradoxically for those who bring up immersion.)

Depth wise, I also don't consider Live a Live to have as much plot as your great CRPG. Even I may not necessarily disagree with one who can eloquently explain to me why it has both a shitty gameplay and a shitty story.

Nonetheless, regardless of whether I consider it to be shitty or non-shitty or great, I would never change my opinion with why I consider Live a Live to be among the best representation of an RPG power fantasy plot in the same manner that Final Fantasy VII (regardless of how many other opinions/games may have swayed me from their quality) would always be something I consider a storyfag game. It doesn't matter if one day I woke up considering it a bad game in any aspect or if one day I'm no longer a fanboy of it (which technically I'm not but any FFVII fanboy sounds like a FF fanboy unless they denounce it) the above reason is why time and time again I would consider FFVII a great game/story as fitting a storyfag.

It's no different than CRPG fans. You could exaggerate it to the point that there are some CRPG fans who consider two types of shitty CRPGs. Shitty CRPG games and Bioware/Oblivion/Morrowind/Dragon Age crap. Sentence-wise, this doesn't make sense as it somehow makes games like Morrowind to be both CRPG-lite and non-CRPG to a CRPG fans but because the stereotype/the attitude/the community/the vocals have been layed out. It is quite clear except for the individual details.

But that's the positive light, let's switch it to addressing the negative:

"So we have cRPG fans who are derided as/self-identify as storyfags, because they enjoy exploring the interaction between the cRPG and its story. They're generally not going to talk about interactive novels. They're not going to perform deep analysis of the story of a cRPG, because most of them are utter juvenile shit. They're not generally going to form massive modding communities, because the cRPG is not a story-telling medium, it's a medium for a game of which the story is a part.

The story is a game in RPGs and we talk about it as a game, not as a story, except in passing."

See it's not about massive modding alone. That's just a part and a part where I head towards the extreme of talking to my fellow storyfags.

If I was rude and trolling, it's almost as if the question was: "If you guys are really that passionate of storyfags that you are so vocal about it then why can't create a modding community huh? cRPG is not a storytelling medium you say? Well so was Chrono Trigger you faggot and someone was able to make a proposal using it! "

Of course this is just the bottom of the iceberg. It just has much to do with their posting. How can storyfags claim to be storyfags if someone here can say "check out the SomethingAwful forums" because I can guarantee you the reason SomethingAwful can get to this depth much like the HongFire forums is because they don't hold back on their taste. (This is all judging from my lurking.)

It's alot like scanlation community developments. Yes, the community rallies behind scanlators but in the end what makes it vocal is that people are vocal not just in words and opinions but they don't hold back. Where they have something to say or praise, they do so. Not always in the intelligent manner and certainly there's no romantic "a few gave birth to the many" but **** they were proud but they were just not loud. They were demanding and they layed it out as hard as some of the longest TL;DR CRPG ranters. They didn't just "say". They didn't just "state". They "gave". So how come the vocal storyfags don't pull this off? Again, I'm not talking about the silent ones or the rare thread makers like me. I made this thread for them.

I don't know them though. I don't know you. If it sounds like I'm desiring of digesting the Codex in one thread, forgive me, I read points. I bring up points. I make threads to people.

I don't memorize usernames. A troll name could just have argued with me but if in my next thread they wrote something interesting/worthwhile/addressing my points, that's what matters to me: the discussion.

I'm off the belief that there's nothing vague to someone who wants to discuss. What's vague becomes specific because they specifically ask. They don't just remark. They don't just pander.

I'm a lot less harsher normally as I said I'm a horrible communicator but there's nothing vague about my words to a storyfag and also I made this thread here in this manner, in this design, in this wording because I believe the forum members (based on the few threads I've read) to be capable of answering and analyzing it beyond a simple comment. If what comes back to me does not match with that expectation, then there's a chance my thread is not to those person so the poster who wrote:

"ignore the trolls and discuss back with those that are trying to understand what you want."

At the time I wrote the previous reply, the closest thing to someone making the effort is where people agreed and accepted the lack of story based threads and I still addressed those just as I am addressing the posts now.

You can only discuss back though where someone has discussed forward.

Now as far as quest being lore or not lore: it's all about context.

Remember: storyfag thread.

You already admit. Some cross lore-pieces.

My opinion is that many cross lore-pieces. To separate this, you have to take the concept of quests out of the context of how storyfags perceive it. Not always literally. We're all different even us storyfags but as I said:

Again see the replies. I guess if there's any wording I would clarify it's that quests can be lores depending on how people discuss them. I don't like looking down on forum readers though but like I said, board really disappointed me.

Again it falls in line with whether it's about technical details or it's about a thread for storyfags by a storyfag.

Also hopefully my reply above already address this:

"I can only think of someone defending it if he doesn't want to sit through combat and just wanna see the story, much like what BioWare did for Mass Effect 3 with the new "story-mode", where the combat is almost removed from the game in favour of the story. And those kind of people should just go watch a movie."

As a short addendum though, let me provide you with this imagery:

One of the story versions a storyfag wants to see is this (not necessarily the specific story he intends to gain as he does not yet know the game but one of the "vague" premises)

He wants to see a powerful character that can be defeated.

But as an interactive medium, he wants both the premise of how novels create the downfall of powerful fantasy characters (and in some ways movies akin to the Legend of Zorro) but he also needs the interactive immersion. The surprise as it may.

Yet, despite the immersion, he is also linked to his reality. In his reality there are rules but not quite the same rules as DnD though as PnP evolves there are some cross-comparisons.

Yet as stated, this is not about realityfaggotry. It's not exactly fun (even in the Witcher) to enter hostile mod accidentally by wrongly targetting certain creatures.

Worse, the immersive effect of this, almost always lead to a dead end. Rare is it that there's a bonus ending like in BG II after you've done with all the spells and perceive an event that normally can only be delegated to a very skilled few whom was able to survive the onslaught of summonings.

ME3's system (based on what I read, not having actually played it) would not provide this.

"It looks like one of OP's unspoken assumptions is that traditional RPG combat is "gamey", time-consuming and therefore distracts from the story, while "realistic" Witcher-style combat meshes better with a storyline (it's like something you would see in a movie or read in a novel) and therefore enhances it."

Tradition died several times. Fallout was a descendant for example though because of time, many may perceive Fallout as an originator.

Time-consuming needs context also. See the thread about dungeons, crafting, etc.

Witcher-style is not realistic. Oils are not realistic. Most importantly, realism would have killed the effect of a fantasy killer of ghouls that can also be killed by a ghoul not just in sloppiness but like with all fights, in chaotic non-percentage scenarios.

Finally RRRrrr... you're a storyfag but I don't believe you have played the games I mentioned in the games I presented them.

The psychology of the Witcher lies in the combat system. FCR makes this even more clear from the exaggerated difference between how easy a Witcher can eradicate a human but how difficult a Witcher must approach the supernatural which is emphasize even more if you cheat a certain way which is give full upgrades to your swords and dexterity and play the rest the normal way (so you get the euphoria of level ups.)

I've also brought up some other games and other gameplay aspects.

Sunset over Imdahl and Saga Frontier 2, though technically just having painted backgrounds, can tell a million stories from that background.

Having played Saga Frontier 2 more than Sunset, I could even say the backgrounds are so storyfag centric that when the backgrounds and events become lazy, it's almost a 2x turn off to a storyfag than it would to a normal gamer.

About the Batman games, I was curious. Definitely wasn't sure my PC could handle it but seeing the Joker turned me off.

Would I have liked those games otherwise? Who knows but I won't be trying them.

I will say this though. Batman and Robin was a horrible game but despite the fact that I could only play up to the first Freeze battle, I considered it a storyfag worthy game.

Years passed by and I finally played GTA 3. I was totally turned off. What surprised me though was that the most praised aspect of it was what most turned me off which was the graphics and the design.

Arkham City in particular from the videos I observed have the flaw in that the combat animations are predictable. Automation alone is not enough for a storyfag. A certain sense needs to be in tune. Take the Pirates remake. Simple combat with slight interactions. Could be boring too. But where lack of diversity made it boring, it was also storyfag worthy because it was one of the few games that linked age to swordfighting thus despite the unrealistic portrayals of pirates, my lack of empathy towards fantasy pirates that look like young pop stars, my lack of interest other than general curiosity with how Sid Meier portrayed Pirates (for I did not play the original but had a taste of Sword of the Samurai for DOS) all in all, it was a game I hold little special interest for but it was a game I storyfagged all over.

At Capt. Shrek, I name you not because I specifically hate you (or the opposite) but because you are the only one who fits someone who wants to discuss back but also mistook the direction of the thread and for that, though the direction your post took is the most detailed while also the most direct in raising questions, you also made a different topic.

To keep this thread from being accused further of incoherency, I shall decline to address your point except to say that even for the literary contemporaries, they are also just as vague as your common CRPG fan or storyfag or whatever other groups there may be.

These are people who's biases also lead them to focus on something else. As stereotypes of course. Individually speaking, one can only address the individual but as stereotypes goes, my opinion is that the illusion of a certain stereotype being superior to another stereotype is but a more eloquent form of racism. (Linking to this joke as I'm not sure my words can communicate the implication: )
 

Andyman Messiah

Mr. Ed-ucated
Joined
Jan 27, 2004
Messages
9,933
Location
Narnia
Right now I'm having an inner monologue about how I've fucked an artificial intelligence in the processor and flayed my dick.
 

Retinue

Novice
Joined
Jan 6, 2012
Messages
20
1. The behavioural description of storyfags goes against the depiction of it not being an exclusive elite. It is the insult that is the antithesis of elite but by aligning it with story, the insult auto-gave birth to an elite definition where it depicts more of a delicate behaviour unless it is morphed into an excuse for an insane behaviour. (Much like ADD can be aligned with autism which makes it closer to insanity or it can be aligned with common videogame behaviour for instance which makes the accusers more like they are the insane ones unless they are retards or intend to act retarded)

3. CYOA is also problematic as there's no true CYOA anymore. CRPGs and Sandbox games can fit CYOA. ...and then it can not.

Holds true for every moddable game, IF, VN, games with optional quest system, etc.

I'll wait to see how detailed or specific or interested you are before going forward with discussing the more trollish/rude aspects of your post.
 

kris

Arcane
Joined
Oct 27, 2004
Messages
8,836
Location
Lulea, Sweden
I had to be on side with clockwork knight here despite reading most of your post, I am not even sure what you really complained about or what your point was... and I still isn't.
Anyway.

Cliff notes version:
*people rarely discuss much less impart the story's beauty at all. - Read the replies by the non-troublemakers/idiots/wannabe trolls

People here many times don't discuss anything at all (its shit!), but that is beside the point. When it comes to story in games that is often just true, it is shit and there is little to no beauty in it. Story if anything should be as little in the way for the gameplay as possible. Most of the best games I played have no story at all. I mean besides from "defeat Ganon".

*The games' lore is often what drives the interest for Storyfag who prefer CRPGs or CRPG-lite but if you want to hear about the intricacies of theories and details for why a story is great, it doesn't transfer at all. - Again see the replies. I guess if there's any wording I would clarify it's that quests can be lores depending on how people discuss them. I don't like looking down on forum readers though but like I said, board really disappointed me.

From what I gather someone isn't called a storyfag for reading lore. They are that for wanting to play the newest interactive movie.

3. Why do people claim it's easier/more desiring to make better stories for adventure games? - Didn't check if it's the right link with that post but again, Codex have multiple threads about this anyway. It is also an example. I paraphrased the adventure part because I thought posters here would better empathize with other stuff other posters mention. Apparently not: http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...ve-we-writing-proper-aka-bioware-sucks.65596/

This is easy, because in a adventure game half the gameplay is in the story. You solve things to further the story.

4. Speaking of this, why do many elitist who love stories claim things like Planescape Torment or insert almost any game mentioned here beyond one thread as having good stories? - See reply. Also Planescape Torment and Fallout are stepchilds of Rpg forums. I have nothing against them specifically but it's much easier to point them out as well as their flaws as people universally herald their stories/themes/etc even though the story ramifications remain just as hollow as most sandbox rpg.

I would like to see you put them down Captain Shepard.

That's said. I don't mean to be rude as I'm the "newfag" and you guys are the old fags but if you can't understand a clear thread like this then I recommend just shutting up and going away or try asking politely.

Most people replying to you are newfags. :smug:

I'm not here to cuddle anyone. I made a thread. Respond to what's written and put up or shut up.

I am sure someone could do that better if you had something more clear to respond too. Your opening posts seems like a wild and spread out critisizm on codexers. But since it hit out in some many directions it doesn't stick to anyone. You can't take gathered opinions on 30 different people, ask about it and then tell someone to respond. Who is going to respond? Those people in particular about their little thing?

I don't need this to be bumped just so more of you can infest this thread. I don't need to know that any of you is unsure of what you're complaining about if you're not willing to hold up your end and be clear about what you're not understanding. (I'm only making this reply so I can request for the trolls to GTFO of this thread without coming off like a troll myself.)

Current day codex is about 50% trolls. Deal with it.

If you're not interested in the heart of the thread, make your thread poking fun at this thread. I don't need your pointless bumps that just makes it harder to scroll through pages just to read something related to the thread. I don't need your image posts that bring nothing of any value except to make it clearer that the poster is a dickwad who's into captions. I don't need repeated posts about my incoherent wall of texts because I can guarantee you it may be incoherent but at least it's not stupid like wasting your time commenting on how something is a wall of text. I don't even want anyone of you bothering to type how you didn't read this reply or whatever. You have better things to do in life and I have a higher standard of what it means to feel pwned. Standards where images and accusations of wall of texts and tl;drs fall way way below the spectrum of making me butthurt. I only want to discuss a thread and if you're not willing or capable of doing that again, kindly GTFO or make another thread or waste a pm or rant about it elsewhere. Trolling in this thread won't get you laid, won't make you appear smarter, won't make you more handsome, won't get you a job nor would it increase the HD size of your storage devices where you keep your images for occasions such as this.

Friendly piece of advice for you. It is better to ignore things like this than writing a slightly embarassing rant about it.
 

Haba

Harbinger of Decline
Patron
Joined
Dec 24, 2008
Messages
1,871,744
Location
Land of Rape & Honey ❤️
Codex 2012 MCA Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2
I read the posts by one of our newest members and I have to applaud his ability to evolve out-of-the-box paradigms. It depressingly rare that I am able to witness posts that truly engage synergistic functionalities in such a way. Does Planescape: Torment truly synergize interactive deliverables? I mean, to be totally blunt, it hardly does architect world-class convergence, now does it? As a writer, you have to envisioneer turn-key users - even if your stories facilitate impactful niches, if they do not embrace compelling communities, they'll remain meaningless.

Lets have a look at The Witcher. Although I am not a writer, I think that the reductive quality of the spatial relationships seems very disturbing in light of the eloquence of these stories. With regard to the issue of content, the disjunctive perturbation of the negative space endangers the devious simplicity of the distinctive formal juxtapositions.

CDP Red's work investigates the nuances of vibrations through the use of slow motion and close-ups which emphasize the Artificial nature of digital media. explores abstract and gay scenery as motifs to describe the idea of infinite space. Using next-gen loops, non-linear narratives, and neo-fascist images as patterns, creates meditative environments which suggest the expansion of culture.

The mind creates, the chaos permeates. In the trans-gender space, art objects are reproductions of the creations of the mind -- a mind that uses the chaos as a machine to materialize ideas, patterns, and emotions. With the evolution of the electronic environment, the mind is reaching a point where it will be free from the chaos to share immersions into the parameters of the delphic space. Work of Anti-Art in the Age of Artificial Reproduction, Skyrim contains 10 minimal shockwave engines (also refered to as "voice actors") that enable the user to make majestic audio/visual compositions.

measuring chains, constructing realities
putting into place forms
a matrix of illusion and disillusion
a strange attracting force
so that a seduced reality will be able to spontaneously feed on it
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom