Are games better at telling stories?

Are games better at telling stories than other types of media like novels and movies? With games maturing, they are being taken more serious as form of conveying a story to the player. Interested in this subject, I decided to research this question, so I am curious in how others experience this. Do you think games are more suitable to tell stories than for example movies? If you want to help me find out, please participate in my research project. At the end of the user study, you can optionally leave your email address if you want to get notified about the results of this research. I am looking forward to hearing your experiences and opinions on this subject.

Possibly....

Depends on the type of story you are trying to tell. Each medium has its strengths and weaknesses.

Each medium also tells the story different from the others.

No. Name one game that does not rely on another medium to tell a story. For example, cut-scenes are basically just a video clip in a game, not the game itself. Or how about all those JRPG's that rely on text bubbles with a picture of some characters face, thats basically a comic book. Or how the audiologs of Bioshock are just a radio play.

The only games that actually have a decent story are games like Minecraft or Civilization. The stories that I hear about players crafting their own experience and finding wonder are the real story.

That's a really poor excuse. That's saying comic books are books because the text bubbles have text in them. Or movies have actors like plays do.

Also, to name an example, Bastion. None of the important story in that game is conveyed through cutscenes. I'd also say Mass Effect. Conversations are part of that game's story telling and it is exactly what makes them great. I even dare say XCOM, because playing the game makes you attached to the soldiers you have and it makes each encounter a story of its own.

I don't think games are significantly worse than any other medium. I can really appreciate an awesome story in a movie, like Interstellar that I saw recently. I can really appreciate a good comic like the new Amazing Spider-Man issue and I can really enjoy a game like Mass Effect that I'm replaying.

In general I've never really felt like the average story in a video game is appreciably worse than the average story from a movie, book, comic, or whatever else, and have always thought the inferiority complex some people have about video game storytelling is a little silly. There are many games that are fantastic at world-building or character driven storytelling, there are many games that simply tell silly action-style romps, plenty that have more mysterious, abstract narratives, etc.

I feel like people who consistently think video games tell horrible stories in comparison to books or movies don't really read much books or watch many movies. There's a lot of schlock out there. Walk into a book or comic store and most things aren't exactly winners.

Depends on the story, in general I'd say it's not. And there is a lack of things to prove that otherwise. Though I do think games have the potential to really hammer home some specific kinds of stories in a more engaging way.

EDIT: Also your questionnaire is busted. Nothing happens if I try to click it. Reading in Chrome.

You guys already mentioned that many games rely on other mediums to tell their stories, but on the flip side of that, Brothers defining moment was conveyed entirely through gameplay and it's profound because it's conveyed through the gameplay. Incredible moment, and a prime example of what video game stories are capable of. However, moments like that are not super common, so I'd say games still have a ways to go.

@marokai: In my case it's never been about comparing the average junk of books to the average junk of games. In the grand scheme, I put high standards on story telling and writing. So most MEDIA in general, won't hold up to those standards. Now the argument for games is simply that it doesn't have much yet that meets or exceeds them. For all of the garbage and absolute bullshit you can find in movies or books, there are still masterpieces out there that hold up under decades of scrutiny, excellent pieces with layers upon layers of craft. And games kind of doesn't, the games where writing and story are considered for that level of excellence can be counted on one hand. It's most likely just a matter of time and experience, it is a young medium after all. But the main point still stands, I couldn't tell you if the average game is written better or worse than the average movie (I'm actually hunching on better) but for the absolute top, games are just outclassed.

Lame (IMO).

At their best, games are better at telling stories than movies. When compared to a good book though, that's a tough fight. It takes an expertly and carefully crafted game with a single vision that permeates the whole experience. Excellent gameplay, visuals and sound combined with an excellent story greatly enhances your attachment to the elements of the story (characters, plot, etc).

I'd argue that games aren't bad at telling stories, they're just not as interested in telling stories. Games seem more interested in context to serve mechanics, though lately, with the push to create better story telling in games, the writing overshadows the mechanics and you end up with pretty bland gameplay under a story that may be motivating enough to keep you playing. That, or you end up with a good game with a story that is trying way too hard to be taken more seriously.

I think the discussion of gaming and story telling falls under a bad habit of trying to compare gaming to other consumable media when gaming would be better compared to creative media. Like @monetarydread implied, gaming, when done well, is more comparable to being the writer/director of a film rather than being the film itself.

Though, would say something like Braid and Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons does a good job of conveying sub-contextual story telling within the mechanics of the game. Also, dare i say it, the Tell Tale formula, when done well, creates a better sense of outcome based on personal choices than most story telling mediums; i'd imagine the "visual novel" genre does as well, without all the, "still a videogame" identity problems Tell Tale's games are developing.

Games are better at creating an engrossing world to explore, and create a narrative out of, while inferior at telling a traditional story, for the same reason: player interactivity.

No. Like, some game stories are alright, but none really stand out to me as being great. Sure, games have the potential to tell a great story but cock it up somehow anyway.

@tobbrobb: I don't necessarily disagree on that specific point, but as you alluded to, it's more of a factor of games being super young rather than games just somehow being inherently more immature or unable to tell compelling stories. Games haven't existed for very long as we know them, and genuine attempts at serious storytelling in video games have existed for much less.

I always found the Tomb Raider reboot as the best example of everything wrong with storytelling in modern games. Weird little diary entries that contradict what is happening in the game or cinematics well designed years in advance and then blowing up bunnies for XP. So when you look at that and just see how that game was made, you can see really how it could work well if not better.

Batman Arkham Asylum, is an odd duck. You see the game is an adaptation of the Grant Morrison 25 year old graphic novel..... there for it's the worst adaptation of all time. But it's an interesting narrative experience. I'm fairly certain Paul Dini had very little writing to do and was more or less trying to patch up what the developers were already working on.

Because right it's a weird problem of praising writers when it's really a group development. Level and set designs have more story telling then actual written words, in my humble opinion Left 4 Dead series is the best example of this. Especially how valve seeds their settings with little clues for those who care to find out more of this story.

No. Games have gotten better at telling stories, but don't confuse that with games being better than other mediums at telling stories.

I don't have much to add to this subject, I rarely enjoy game stories though and Cara Ellison pretty expertly articulated the reason why I dislike them pretty accuratly in this tumblr post:

"

While there are exceptions, there is still a lot of games writing which involves pretty much coming to a finished game, looking at the levels, and trying to work out a way to connect all those pieces together with some kind of narrative glue. Or then have a story which you have to lose half the levels for, and then work out what story you can tell with that. Even ones which start with a synopsis end up passing through dozens of hands after that, and what you end up with will bear little relation to that original text.

In general, a writer in a videogame is a job akin to a texture artist. You are wrapping detail over a pre-existing structure. Yes, it has an important aesthetic effect, but in terms of importance, you’re kinda set-dressing

"

This for instance is the way Far Cry 4's developers proudly pronounced their story was thought up, whihc is... troubling to say the least.

I still think that books convey the best stories, followed by some of the great Oscar-y movies, followed by games.

I enjoy the stories in games more than other media, even if they don't have the same depth or academic value as some of the best literature or film.

Maybe...

No medium is absolutely best than any other, it all depends of the experience you want to create. Some stories are better suited for books, some for animation, some for movies... The important thing (that many designers don't get) is that a game uses what makes games unique to better portrait a story. Having a game deliver all its narrative through cutscenes is as bad as a movie delivering all its narrative through dialogue.

@hermes: Yes this.

Are they better at telling stories? LOL. No.

Could they be better at telling stories? Also no, sadly. A medium without perfect control over its pacing and some other aspect to worry about (being a game) will forever be at a disadvantage when it comes to telling a story.

Gaming does have one relevant advantage over passive media however: interactivity. This should, in theory, give it the unique ability to make a player feel responsibility in way which a book or movie could never match. A game can't tell you a story better than a book can, but it does have the potential to tell you more about yourself - which is arguably a more worthwhile endeavour. Granted, that potential has largely gone untapped so far due to the nature of the industry, but it's there.

I like to think of games as an experience simulating medium and not a story telling medium. I think a game's story is only better served by being in a game when the story derives some kind of meaning from the player's interaction with the world. For instance, the player's desire to survive in The Last Of Us leads to understanding Joel as a character and why he kills indiscriminately.

They definitely could and a handful of games have shown that it's possible, but by and large game developers aren't pulitzer prize winners or anything.

This is an unanswerable question. Are movies better at telling stories than books? What about songs? Nobody can say definitively.

They all have their strengths and weaknesses and are better at doing certain kinds of things.

Personally, I feel games strengths are currently being squandered in an effort to be more like movies and television, only shittier. Once games start to get out of this phase of believing they need to be like that to be taken seriously, we'll see what games can truly do. Believe me, we've not seen anything yet, where games are at right now is just the beginning. The medium is in it's teenage years right now, constantly aping it's idols in order to appear more mature. It'll grow out of that, eventually.

For me right now games like The Last of Us represent that perfectly. Trying to emulate film and TV too much is holding the medium back.

All I know is I have a really hard time sitting through movies these days games keep my interest much longer.

The only stories games are better at telling are those that revolve around player agency. Pretty much any other kind of story will be told better in a different form.

All media has its cons and pros ..... what videogames can has above film making is that you can explore the world you are in and not suffer for it unlike movies were such a thing would kill the pacing of the film or a book were it would just be pages and pages of descriptions which would also kill it (as an example try reading Notre Dame and just hate the many pages of descriptions). I for one dont regreat any of the videogames stories that I have played... well except Heavy Rain and LA Noir which have some very jarring plot holes and or poor characterization.

I also never dislike the audiologs-dieries etc. It works on videogames because technically you are the one driving the narrative foward with player interaction. Also I do like the hybridity of videogames and film (because I like film) and books/comicbooks as well and dont feel it is worse for it. But thats just me.

No. I would say games are way inferior to books in telling stories, and somewhat inferior to movies. Sure, you get some kind of personal narrative with games because you are the one controlling it (seemingly). But because the developer has to mold the story around that fact, I think the creative freedom for the writers goes out the window. Some bits are cut because it didn't generate gameplay, it was too expensive to design, it slowed down the pacing, it demanded too many cutscenes or too much inner monolouging which would bore people.

Sure, an author will cut stuff too if it doesn't fit, but then it's all about benefiting the story, and not some other elements like gameplay.

I'd day worse. Modern games seem to focus a lot more on gameplay pacing. So it seems like story stuff could get cut to keep you playing.

Less meandering, I suppose, but less substantial stories.

Books at much better at telling stories. Games are better at playing.

Generally speaking, no, they are not the better medium at telling traditional stories. But I don't necessarily consider that a negative. Games offer a level of interactivity unlike other mediums, and with that interactivity, you can do far more than tell a traditional story. Take a game like Gone Home, for example. It does tell a story, but that story would not be nearly as effective if it you were reading about or watching a character traverse the house. That story works because you are in control, and you decide how to tackle the situation. The pace you move at, and the visual/audio clues you take in all shape your experience. It's far more personal, and meaningful.

That's not to say I don't enjoy games like Call of Duty or The Last of Us that are more aimed at providing an experience not dissimilar to film/tv, but I feel storytelling in games is at its best when it utilizes what makes it different from other mediums to enhance the narrative, not accompany it.

Hard to say. I think that character development and script writing in games are getting better, but the stories they tell aren't really interesting or even that good. Plus video games are in an awkward spot for story telling. You would have to sacrifice game time to have a better paced visual experience and I don't feel like people would be willing to basically pay $60+ for a movie experience.

I also don't really like comparing games to movies, because that implies a very boring linear experience. To me, the best kinds of games are the opposite of what we experience when reading books. With books, we're told a story, but in our minds we're constructing the world through the author's words. With games though, we're given a setting, world, and virtual space to run around in. It's kind of up to the gamer to decide what their story is going to be.

The best stories in games I've played, and I generally play the games that are lauded for their stories, have come no where near the best novels I have read. There is just no comparison, anyone that says otherwise has not read enough good books.

You would have to define "better at story telling" first, though.

Theoretically, yes. Games as an interactive medium have a unique way of engaging the player with the story: as the protagonist, the player has a chance to shape the narrative to his or her own tastes, and through their actions make the story their own and unique. Take the Bioware games. Every game allows the player to make their own choices and let them take control (and ownership) of the story. Every protagonist is shaped by the player's choices and alters the story enough to make every player their own storyteller.

On the other hand the amount of manpower and resources needed to allow a player that freedom is insane, so video games fall back on the well worn conventions of books and movies. It's less a free-form playground and more a rollercoaster ride in which the player chooses which path to go down to, but not what actually happens in that path. Take the Bioware games: for all the moral choices you make, every choice puts you on a set path until the next choice. The player is basically the person manning the railroad switch, putting the train on a certain track, watching as the train goes by and rushing ahead to the next switch.

The right answer is "it depends."

I don't know that a book would have done justice to Super Mario Bros. 3.

By the same token I can't imagine a very good game based on Pride and Prejudice.

Hahahaha... No.

Sorry, I wrote this in haste as I was leaving for work. Now that I have time to actually detail my opinion.

I said the word, "Story," when I actually meant, "narrative." There is a difference, and my opinion is that games are terrible at telling a narrative because they have to rely on other mediums to get the job done. There are very few examples of games that use the mechanics of, "play," to craft a narrative that can only be told through this medium and this medium alone. It is this reason that I say that games have not succeeded in telling a story, instead developers rely on taking as much of the, "play," aspect out of it. Think about it, there is a reason why almost all narrative driven games are linear, that is because developers need to find a way to take control away from you to tell their story. Also:

• Comic books have the word book in it for a reason =)
• Movies and Plays are essentially the same thing, but presented in different mediums. The craft has evolved, not unlike video games, but there is a direct comparison to be made and all you have to do is watch any movie made before 1960 to see an example of the similarities between the two.
• Bastion has the story conveyed through audio logs, like Bioshock. Just google, "bioshock: a radio drama," and you will see that there is nothing that actually playing the game adds to the story.
• Mass Effect can, again, be reduced to a choose-your-own-adventure novel that has been interspersed with some 15-minute shooting segments. I feel that there is a dichotomy between the two segments and the developers never even tried to blend those two ( Note: I have yet to play ME 3 so I could be wrong with this statement). I also feel that every argument about the agency of choice adding to the experience can transfer over to a choose-your-own-adventure novel as well. [ Note: Imagine how thick the Mass Effect: Choose-Your-Own-Adventure book would be. = ) ]
• Xcom / Civ /Minecraft / GTA (goofing around the world) / or basically any open world game is where my idea of native game storytelling comes into play.

In X-Com, what makes the game special is that you develop a relationship with your squad-mates and that can elicit a real emotional response when something happens to them. This is not narrative though, it is an emergent story that was crafted by the player, but, there is a difference between story and narrative in this context.

I don't think it's so much "better", but that it has the capacity to induce a much stronger emotional reaction than other media would, due to user interaction. Especially in games where choice is involved, if the storytelling would evolve enough with it, then it could cause a very strong emotional reaction due to the sense of agency that you feel over the story, binding your own mental and emotional state with the lead character's. That is the truly unique thing that games have over any other medium in terms of storytelling, and where I feel its greatest strength comes from. Unlike in something like a Choose Your Own Adventure book, the visual and aural depiction of the events on screen are much more likely to elicit feeling than the rather shallow storytelling of such books generally would.

Choices aren't the only way that games can do this, though. Metal Gear Solid 4 has a perfect example of another approach, which is the Microwave scene at the end. The button mash asked of the player is an incredibly simple one, but the way it plays off of the action on screen draws you in, and makes you connect with the character in the game in a fascinating way. The way in which it makes you do something a little uncomfortable, for such a long period of time, just flows fantastically with the story it is telling. And on the subject of Metal Gear, Metal Gear Solid 3 also displays powerful use of just pressing a single button in the scene after the final boss fight. Only one button, but it still manages to make you respond in a way that you wouldn't with static media.

There's more examples than these, obviously, like X-Com as someone mentioned before, but I just wanted to focus on those two. However, at the end of the day, a good story is a good story, no matter the medium. One is not a better choice than the other. They merely use different techniques to achieve the goal they aspire to.

Emergent narratives are far more an experience than consuming any linear narrative, there's no point in even comparing them.

As far as "traditional" book-ass stories, no, games are the worst at that.

But if you mean the story a world or atmosphere can tell, and the possibilities created in real sandboxes, than duh, games slam that title all up and down the mat.

Certainly not. The only cases where videogames might have an edge is where players make their own stories. Like the examples of Minecraft and Civilization given above.

More examples of good video game stories would be the crazy battles of EVE Online, thousands of players coming together for a real-time conflict over territory. It's the kind of story that gets news articles written about it. They're good stories in the way that some stories from history are good. Or maybe XCOM. I never got particularly attached to my characters (probably horrible save-scumming lead to this) but I have a friend who named his squad after myself and our other friends. He could tell a story about pretty much every character and connect them to the real life people. In his game I was a crack sniper and I believe one of only 2 of the original squad to make it through to the end.

Most of the time I've heard where games have a good story, it's with the expressed (or unexpressed) caveat, "it's good for a game story." I thought the stories of the expansions to Final Fantasy XI were really well-written, the characters were interesting and the worlds created were excellent, but it still pales in comparison to good fantasy literature (might be better than trash fantasy novels though).

Some people like the story in MGS. I think those people are crazy, and are confusing "quantity" with "quality." The stories are fairly interesting but lack depth, are too convoluted, have too many plot-holes and go in too many weird directions that make no sense.

Mostly devs know that gamers are in it for satisfying gameplay so a good story, good music, etc. are good insofar as they add to the gameplay and don't detract from it. One of the most egregious examples of video game story being thrown under the rug because it wasn't the focus, was Diablo 3. Blizzard pretty much said "that's not what people are here for [so we can make our game's story dogshit bad]." Uncharted's story is fun in an Indiana Jones kind of way but I don't think I gained much from experiencing the story other than some light entertainment. Not like I grew in some way from seeing that story.

@el_contrarian: Well maybe not a book about Super Mario 3 but what about a Movie?

But, more seriously, this question seems more about personal taste then anything. Games can bring you into a story better if done right but just like with absolutely every medium, there are great examples of stories and absolutely wretched examples of stories. Does it really matter if a story point is in a cut-scene? No. Should every story point allow you to move during the scene especially when you may miss the story beat? No.

It's a relatively new medium when put into comparison of books, plays, movies, comics, or what have you. They've all had ups and downs, triumphs and failures. It may not be fair to compare and contrast when each and every medium has its own merit.

No, they're just different. The comparison is impossible as they are different mediums.

Books are still the best way to tell a story, but no one likes to read anymore.

not at all

Good games doesn't tell stories, they give experiences. That's not to say games have any sort of exclusivety on giving experiences. I went to watch Interstellar earlier this week and while the story of that movie didn't blow me away in any way, watching that movie on a big screen and with an awesome sound-system was a great experience.

The vast majority of my most memorable moments with games are not about what some character did to some other character or anything like that, they're about what I did.

I think video game stories have gotten better over time, and are miles ahead of what they were even 10 years ago, but they have a long way to go and there is still a lot of cheese, especially in Japanese games. Unfortunately, most of the bigger games these days are basically the summer-popcorn-movies of the video game world, so we aren't seeing much more than the same old shit that Hollywood has been doing for the last 30 years. It's entertaining, don't get me wrong, but it's not exactly what I would consider "good" stories or storytelling. (except for Metal Gear. That's pure gold!)

I think for the stories in games to progress, two things need to happen:

1. Games writers need to break away from the hollywood cliches and come up with something original for once
2. The rest of the world (specifically the media business) needs to take video games seriously as the $81.5 billion dollar industry that it is

I think the biggest problem is obviously just bad writing, or the easy mass-marketed story that got focus-tested to hell and dumbed down to the lowest common denominator to appeal to largest audience (once again, the same shit that hollywood has been doing for the last 30 years). While that might work for some things, I think it really does a disservice to the medium as a whole, and as time goes on it just gets more and more bland and uninteresting (see: Call of Duty, Assassins Creed etc.). Until someone tries to do something else, I think it's just going to get worse. I'm not really an indie game guy, but I do admire how a lot of indie games (in general) try to at least do something interesting with the stories and try to make them the primary aspect of the game. For this to work you need to have a writer who understands how interactive games work, and how to write a halfway decent story. I think having a fresh set of eyes coming in from outside the industry to look at things and write a story is the good place to start.

I really don't see why the can't compete with books, movies, comics, etc. Yes, the focus of video games is to make an interactive, fun experience, but that doesn't mean that they can't make a game with a fantastic story. It's just that, most often then not, developers are more likely to focus on the gameplay, considering that in the end, for most people at least, it's what makes video games worth buying.

The thing is, books are more likely to always surpass every other form of media in story telling, simply because books have no merits without a good plot. Video games, comic books, and movies have something to fall back on. For example, a game might have a lame story, but if the gameplay and the visuals are great it's very possible that the game itself will be successful. Same goes for movies, since they can utilize the visuals to their advantage. Books, on the other hand, don't have the luxury of such excuses. So it's not the fact that video games don't have the potential to match books for their great stories, but it's really rare for a game to be heavily oriented around the plot.

As flawed as your logic is I'll entertain your argument.

Silent Hill 2 .

Video games are much better at immersion in a story (if done right).

Otherwise I find they are too young in concept to compete with the best novels, books, etc.

It really depends on the story being told. For example, I don't think the ending of Red Dead Redemption--the part where the credits actually roll--would have been anywhere near as effective with any other form of media. And I can think of a few other games, such as the Stanley Parable, that wouldn't work at ALL in a non-interactive format.

I don't think any medium is inherently better at telling stories than another, it's just a matter of preference. I'm certainly more interested in video game story telling, but I love all kinds of stories.