LÖVE

Hi! I'm new around here, but I've been using love2D for a little while now and this game design question has always been on my mind since day 1. I want to tell a story, but I also want to do that without sacrificing game-play time. People like Konjak prefers game-play over story, and likes games that focus on game-play first, and story second, while there are also people like Hideo Kojima, who can be described in almost exact opposite terms. So knowing I can't quite please everyone, I've decided to keep the bare-bones main story the focus of the mandatory story segments, and have extra bits of lore available for those who seek them, my issue is that I'm not sure just how much story I want to tell in relation to gameplay.

So I come asking you lovely people how you like your story presented in-game, and how much time you like spent on story. Hopefully with a little bit of external knowledge I''ll be able to get over this stump.

I'd hazard toward 0:infinity in favor of 'gameplay'. Story is secondary. If you have a great story, it still won't convince many if the game plays like a enigma machine. The opposite is much more common and successful: game-play with little to no story.

I totally agree. I also think it's often a beginner's mistake to focus on the story - many people new to gamedesign have great story-ideas, but lack the knowledge of how to make it into a great game.

One more point: Stories are very difficult to tell right. There's a few indie games who do it right (Bastion, Concerned Joe come to mind), but you really have to put a lot of effort into it: great voiceovers, nice-looking cut-scenes, amazing grraphics etc. It's often not worth the effort, unless you decide that this is what your game should be about and focus on it - then it can work out very nicely (see the two examples above).

So I second szensk: Worry about gameplay first. A story is a nice thing to have, but it's not needed most of the time. And if you add a story, do it right.

It depends on the game completely. Tetris is a great game with no story. Metal Gear can show you 15 minutes of story with no gameplay. Both are great.

And then there is games like Bioshock 2 with great gameplay and tons of story.

I'd say it's pretty genre-specific. RPGs tend to have lots of focus on the story while puzzle, action and racing games for example focus more on gameplay. There are plenty of exceptions of course. I guess the best answer is something like "it doesn't matter as long as at least the one you have the most of is done right".

Thanks everyone! I figured that cautioning towards the side of game-play was the right way to go, but I felt a little unsure because I also wanted to tell a story. For my game I'll probably work on my game-play first and my story second with everyone's tips in mind. Thanks a ton!

Story doesn't have to be separate from gameplay. Chrono Trigger is a great example of an RPG which seemlessly blends the two. For example, several "dungeons" in the game are just special events in the normal inhabitated locations, rather than separate monster-infested levels -- that means you get fights, dialogues, and cutscenes all in the same places instead of having the typical village/dungeon dichotomy.

Even something as simple as the intro sequence to Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis blends gameplay and cinematic presentation.

It’s also nice when the gameplay and story are complementary, e.g. Lost in Blue and the survival mini-games together with the story of being stranded on an island. That said, I share the opinion that gameplay comes first. If you already have a story in mind then it can be a source of ideas for gameplay, but personally (with rare exceptions) I would focus on molding the story to fit the game and not doing the reverse.