Story Is More Important than Gameplay, Says Ninja Theory

I agree.
As an example DMC 3 has a much better story than 4,but DMC 4 has better gameplay than 3.
I easily enjoyed 3 over 4.Both amazing games though.

My chances of buying, let alone playing and finising a non-story based game diminish with each succeeding year / generation. About the only non-story based games I play are the social ones, like Buzz.

Story can make up a lot for relatively monotonous gameplay. But equally engaging / immersive gameplay can make up for a pretty superficial / simple story. Gameplay and story certainly compliment each other.

disagree what about minecraft no story no graphics only in beta kicks any game that has a good story

Story, and Gameplay go hand in hand. Both are essential to making a truly good game. In some cases more so than others.

For rpg's I agree with that statement most.

Story > Gameplay, but both are necessary for a AAA game. See Kingdom Hearts, Final Fantasy (The Tactics games are a great example of this,) MGS, most Super Mario Bros. games, Zelda, and Metroid.

Disagree.

Good gameplay with skimpy story is acceptable, and players will enjoy it.
Good story with bad gameplay is unplayable, players will hate it.
Good story with good gameplay makes for a top tier game. Players will become devoted fans for years. See: Half Life

I guess Heavy Rain goes to show that if you have a good story it makes the game, as imo and this is just from the demo the gameply was mah, but i can see myself buying this game and finishing it cos its ment to have a great story, and if its anything like indego propecy (*sory about spelling im drunk haha) i will like it alot :D

And this is why their games will continue to perform at mediocre or less levels.

Gameplay is bu far more important than story, even do story does help many games likes BioShock or Metal Gear, but to others is practically not necessary like a fighting games. gameplay > flashy story. The story is just a complement for videogames.

And Bandai-Namco thinks this is the future of the company?

:/

His right and everyone else who disagrees with him is a fool and hates games.

That's pretty much everyone's stuck up attitude towards this guys opinion, except in opposite land. That was fun and I hope I blew a few minds.

Duh? Story is often what makes a game into a B graded game, and additional gameplay and good visuals make a good story into an A.

Well now I know what happened with Heavenly Sword...

This quote pretty much defines the majority of comments in here
"I still see a prejudice, actually. I still come across a lot of people who say, 'it's a game and it doesn't need a story

And he is right, not only on his views about STORY DRIVEN games needing to have more emphasis on story rather than gameplay and especially the prejudice that still exists against people that think this way about that particular kind of games

Give this man a trophy. I'm glad somebody has the guts to tell the truth about gaming. Games are for stories, not for playing. This has been true in all of the greatest games, including Tetris, Pong, Pac-Man, NBA Jam, Mario Kart, Space Invaders, Street Fighter 2, Minesweeper, chess, basketball, strip poker, and Monopoly.

I hated Metal Gear Solid 4 because tbe cutscenes got in the way of the gameplay. Actually i am really tired of games trying to be movies, if i wanted to watch a movie i would watch a movie. That is why so far SMG 2 is the best game this year, no bullshit cutscenes or story to get in the way of the game

People buy products for different things, if ninja theory develops like this is because they have an audience that likes it, so anyone that comes here and tries to play absolute on how things should be didnt consider that.

@kenryoku_maxis amen brother. i can't believe he used RE4 as an example of a good story, which we all know was a complete joke. RE4 was a good game because of the gameplay and not the story. Any game would die quickly with crap gameplay, but i have loved plenty of games with a bad story.
Gameplay is the main factor i look for in a good game, after that maybe the physics, the atmosphere and then probably the story and graphics.

ummmmm, NO. Gaming is not primarily a story-telling medium; there's a reason that a game can be forgiven for a bad story but boring or frustrating gameplay is not acceptable under any circumstances.

For some people, story is a selling point. For others its graphics. And still others, its some 'gimmick' like tag mode or dressing up your characters. But when it really comes down to it, you are still playing a game. And no matter how many hours of cutscenes you add and how 'lifelike' the graphics are, you still have to make a game that's fun to play somewhere. Otherwise you're just making an interactive movie. And history has proven that games that tried that approach as the main focus didn't last long.

Also, I find his example of RE4 to be laughable. The story is hardly the strongest point in the game. Even fans make fun of the story in RE4. Its the improved gameplay and variety of how you can play the game compared to previous titles that makes the game amazing for its time.

@Maneco

Just goes to show you how something can be viewed by different people. Many people think Twilight Princess was 'weaker' than other Zeldas because it focused so much on story and as a result had less focus on gameplay. And even Nintendo admitted that was partially the problem later on. Or more accurately, they tried to do too much with the game that they lost focus on what made a Zelda game at its 'core'.

I agree.

Not every game need a story, but story-based games are more special. They engage (just like his RE4 example) and make you expand your mind.

Just think about how lame it's the idea of: "it's just a game, it doesn't need a story". Let me put it this way: "it's just a song, it doesn't need a story".

Do you know what I mean? ;-)

Sometimes, it's better to have a good story than gameplay. Twilight Princess focused too much on that lame gameplay and became weak in story.

uhhhh. mario games??

Sorry but I play games because they are fun...if they have a great story then that is just a bonus. Most of the JRPGs I have played have ridiculous and convoluted stories but the game play is fun. Dragon Age Origins had great game play and a great story. But if you are more interested in story than game play then go watch a movie.

A story driven game only needs decent gameplay while a non-story driven game needs nothing less but stellar gameplay. If the person's reason for playing a game is to find out what happens next in the story they won't notice that the gameplay is lacking. It just becomes an obstacle you have to get around to see where the story goes. If the gameplay is good the game will be better, but so long as it's decent you'll enjoy it as a whole even if it's the story that keeps you coming back.

Gameplay is always the most important part for me, even in story-heavy games. If a game has a superb story but gameplay that bores me there's a 99% chance that I won't finish that game.

i couldn't agree more.

Utter nonsense, that's like saying CGI matters more than story in movies.
Most of the best (and best selling) games ever made have very basic stories, because that is NOT what 99% of people buy and play them for.

People want to have FUN, and they do this via interaction through gameplay. If they want story, they'll read a book or watch a movie.

Absolutely not. Having both, like the article says, is great. However, if you're focusing so much on the story that the gameplay gets neglected, then you're not making a game, you're making an interactive movie. And sadly, I see more and more "games" going in this direction...

I played all of the Halo series coop not knowing what was going on and loved the game for its gameplay, yet Uncharted story and great gameplay made for a better game. Point is story helps a lot but can't carry on its own that is why I gave up on JRPG's good stories (sometimes) boring, repetitive gameplay.

I have personally noticed a shift in gaming. Story seems to be an important hook to a lot of gamers these days, but I also suspect that's because a lot of developers have game play take a backseat to story, graphics, flash and hype. Putting game play as a low priority. A game like Puzzle Quest has to me shitty story, but it's a fantastic blend of game play and does really well. The Story is the glue not the content.

I agree with sauss that it's all relative. But since Ninja Theory has brought on Alex Garland to co-write Enslaved, I'm really looking forward to its story specifically.

I guess he is right.
Game Rankings scores
. SMG with story -- 97.46.
. SMG2 without story -- 97.20.

And for the record -- Heavenly Sword -- 80.65 with criticisms related to gameplay.

Mike from Morgantown

I agree with them. Story is the most important thing to me. Then gameplay, music, and then graphics.

Games like Ikaruga and Sin and Punishment don't need a heavy story. On the other hand, FF does. It depends on the type of game you're playing.

i disagree. both are to important, but i don't need HD graphic's or 3D. the game just needs to look good.

RE4 is a classic example of a ludicrous story in a great game
The acting and story are bad but at least it bridges the scenes to get you to the excellent controls and gameplay.

I wonder if developers actually hire professional writers to do the story
Or if the programmers actually do the writing

Title is a bit misleading imo

Its a relative situation. Some games a story driven, and works great, and has very appeal, and some others are more gameplay oriented, and they also work great.

After a work day, I might just want to pop up RE4, and play the mini mission for a few minutes rather than the main story.

@Rainbird

I don't know about the others, but I was being somewhat fictitious, seeing as the title completely takes what Tameem Antoniades said out of context. If he would have said "Story is better than Gameplay! Huzzah!" rather than "If you're doing a [story-based] game, it's got to be the story, actually." then the title might be on to something...

Ah well, like you said, he has somewhat of a point. A story has to be an important part of a story based game (shocker). But it's sort of funny seeing him use RE4 of an example. The story in that game, like the other RE games, is pretty ridiculous and cliched at times.

Hasta Luego. *shoots rocket launcher*

I still think in an "either or" situation, gameplay trumps story.

He says it's for story-based games, so Pac-man, Tetris and what have you don't count obviously.

I agree with him to a point, if you're doing a game based on story, then your story needs to hold the game together, and when you have both good gameplay and good story, both are elevated somewhat. If it's more important than gameplay, that's a whole other deal.

Take that Pac-Man!

I disagree. I guess this is my objection to games becoming more cinematic, but if the gameplay sucks, I can't play the game. Sorry! But if the game has amazing gameplay but mediocre story, I can still play it.
I do agree that an amazing story can elevate a game from good to great, but as long as the gameplay is there as well.
just my opinion of course.

I still think gameplay is more important but hell, if you can also put in a good story, even better! I sooooooo enjoyed MGS3 for that!

I agree with him about the part where he says it's the symbiosis. I think MGS3 manages that incredibly well, and has a perfect balance of it as a result.

You know what? I agree with the man. To hell with non-story games!

i have a question: what happens if the gameplay blows? and the story is fantastic, i don't think any gamer will take it while they play the game