When Deus Ex: Human Revolution hit store shelves two weeks ago, thereby ending gaming's annual summer drought of triple-A titles, critics welcomed it with the thirsty zeal of nomads discovering an oasis in the desert.
Almost immediately, the air around Deus Ex grew thick with rapturous reviews and game-of-the-year buzz. Critics didn't adore everything about the game, of course—no one could fail to notice its exasperating boss fights and ancient-looking facial animations—but one element in particular won universal praise from public and media alike: its story. No less an authority than London's Guardian declared that "Story-wise, Human Revolution is unimpeachable," an opinion echoed everywhere from Game Informer ("Human Revolution weaves an amazing story") to the typically caustic Destructoid ("Thoroughly engrossing story") to user-review forums across the internet. (IGN's review was more measured, claiming that the game's narrative "holds together well.")
This is high praise indeed, especially coming from the very same people who so often bemoan the shoddy storytelling in today's games, where the best that players can usually hope for is that the cut-scenes won't induce actual groans. Like most readers of these breathless reviews, I was eager to pop Human Revolution into my console and experience this lauded story. After finishing the game, I have one important quibble with the avalanche of praise for Deus Ex's fiction, and I think it goes a long way toward explaining why video games typically have such unsatisfying narratives. That objection is this:
The sequence of events that takes place in Deus Ex: Human Revolution does not constitute a story. What it has is a plot, and the difference between those two, as a nerdy Mark Twain might say, is the difference between a lightning spell and the lightning bug.
But few people ever called those games brilliant stories, which is why Deus Ex deserves singling out. To confuse what happens in Human Revolution with an actual story is to confuse style with substance. A complex techno-conspiracy plot that constantly makes the player say "Wait, what's going on?" is not a story. Lovingly detailed environments and stylish design are not a story. Constantly harping on a moral-dilemma theme of humanity's troubling interface with technology is not a story—especially when you illustrate this dilemma not with revealing vignettes that involve real people, but with the tedious quasi-philosophical lectures that get shoehorned into every conversation. The elements above certainly contribute to a great story, but they, in themselves, do not add up to a story. And only stories can bring home the kind of lesson that Deus Ex wants so desperately to teach us.
Almost immediately, the air around Deus Ex grew thick with rapturous reviews and game-of-the-year buzz. Critics didn't adore everything about the game, of course—no one could fail to notice its exasperating boss fights and ancient-looking facial animations—but one element in particular won universal praise from public and media alike: its story. No less an authority than London's Guardian declared that "Story-wise, Human Revolution is unimpeachable," an opinion echoed everywhere from Game Informer ("Human Revolution weaves an amazing story") to the typically caustic Destructoid ("Thoroughly engrossing story") to user-review forums across the internet. (IGN's review was more measured, claiming that the game's narrative "holds together well.")
This is high praise indeed, especially coming from the very same people who so often bemoan the shoddy storytelling in today's games, where the best that players can usually hope for is that the cut-scenes won't induce actual groans. Like most readers of these breathless reviews, I was eager to pop Human Revolution into my console and experience this lauded story. After finishing the game, I have one important quibble with the avalanche of praise for Deus Ex's fiction, and I think it goes a long way toward explaining why video games typically have such unsatisfying narratives. That objection is this:
The sequence of events that takes place in Deus Ex: Human Revolution does not constitute a story. What it has is a plot, and the difference between those two, as a nerdy Mark Twain might say, is the difference between a lightning spell and the lightning bug.
But few people ever called those games brilliant stories, which is why Deus Ex deserves singling out. To confuse what happens in Human Revolution with an actual story is to confuse style with substance. A complex techno-conspiracy plot that constantly makes the player say "Wait, what's going on?" is not a story. Lovingly detailed environments and stylish design are not a story. Constantly harping on a moral-dilemma theme of humanity's troubling interface with technology is not a story—especially when you illustrate this dilemma not with revealing vignettes that involve real people, but with the tedious quasi-philosophical lectures that get shoehorned into every conversation. The elements above certainly contribute to a great story, but they, in themselves, do not add up to a story. And only stories can bring home the kind of lesson that Deus Ex wants so desperately to teach us.
There's more to the article, but the parts i put up and highlighted really got me thinking. Some people don't mind or even like a story in their game (Most COD players) but i dig narrative driven games. It's sort of what drives the player to continue on his or her journey that the game designers have weaved together.
The writer of his article using Deus Ex points out that having excellent elements to a story doesn't necessarily give players a good story. It's a real interesting line here. I complete Deus Ex about a couple days ago and walked away thinking the story was pretty good. However it was good only compared to other videogames, its to the point where we can't compare books and movies to video games but other games to games. Not too sure how to correctly explain it, but in the realm of a game, Halo, Final Fantasy and a bunch of other games have good stories; however when we compare those stories to other mediums, they don't stand up so well.
It really interesting seeing how a well developed videogame character compares to a well written book character or even actor. Wouldn't you think it would be easier to develop a good videogame character because of the amount of time spent on the character vs a movie. In a movie, you spend at most 2-3 hours with a character and if the character is well written, you feel like you've know him or her forever. Yet on the other hand videogames give us a character for hours upon hours and most of the time their flat one dimensional beings with no emotion.
Not too sure how to correctly articulate myself at the moment, but i would love to hear what some other people have to say on the subject.
Comment