[quote=“Megatherium”]
i’d say the exact opposite, storyline should always be second to gameplay. i mean, xenosaga wasn’t crap because it had a bad storyline, it was crap because it had a bad EVERYTHING.[/quote]
Xenosaga was pretty cool. There’s nothing wrong with a game having a strong cinematic theme as long as it has the gameplay to back it up. Some may argue that XS’s gameplay was fairly by-the-numbers in terms of an RPG, but if it’s done well, who cares?
eh, ok. i hated xenogears and i don’t even consider RPGs to be real games so i can’t be a fair judge. 
i see both good story and good gameplay to be good things but i’d say that there is nothing wrong with a game having a strong cinematic theme… but only after great gameplay has been established!
What I mean is that they don’t need to worry about the gameplay so much.The two serie shave good gameplay mechanics.Now they need a good storyline.If they want to get someone like me playing the game.
RPG is one of those genres that never really “grabs me by the balls” with it’s gameplay in part because I never really played many Action/RPGs (since a turn based or half realtime combat system doens’t give me the same feeling of hacking and slashing or shooting).
In a RPG I’m either grabbed by the world,the characters or the storyline most of the time.Or in somecases when they are really RPGs the amount of cool things I can do in terms of decisions.
[quote=“Parn”]
Man… I want to live in the real world, where Sega makes nothing but perfect games. I am so sad now.[/quote]
I was right.You are living in a fantasy world.
I’ve already partially explained that in the first page to this topic. If Sega has any ambitions of being top dog in the third party world,which they have
stated that they do then they would have to create games that would appeal in the individual markets to acheive that goal.
In japan it’s RPGs. While Sega makes good RPGs they don’t make enough of them until now. The ones being made now will be sequels to games that did well for them in the past. While they will be good if they were gonna directly challenge Square then they need to make flashier RPGs, In presentation at least. But the people hoarding over square at the moment won’t be there forever and once they leave it will only be the true RPG players left.
Does Square fulfil any true RPG player satisfaction at the moment? Does several spin off games based on FF7 cry out of desperation and pandering to the so called casual fans/mass market?
Sega has a chance to show how good they’re are in RPGs to people who may have never played one before. It won’t be overnight of course but if they are of any quality of their past glories,then I can’t see them not building up a reputation in this area among gamers until they get their FF7 moment.
Did I miss something? Isn’t that exactly what I said?
And I read you just like a used copy of Reader’s Digest. Not only are you delusional, but you’re also a liar to boot. You’re doing an excellent job of ignoring me so far.
In the meantime, I will continue to find it hilarious how any form of obvious sarcasm flies right over your head.
Your too amusing to ignore for long.
Dragon Force - If I remember correctly, these were the Sega Ages remakes, right? I highly doubt Sega of America or Europe would bother releasing those. Like I’ve mentioned before, those Sega Ages games aren’t necessarily the pinnacle of quality…
Xenosaga - Interesting attempt at introducing more spiritual themes into game stories, but ultimately, too verbose, too heavy-handed, and too non-interactive. There was about 30 minutes of gameplay on the entire second disc. Designers need to learn that games are an interactive medium, and the stories should blend with the gameplay in such a way as to reflect that aspect of the medium. Games such as Half Life and Ico do a superb job of exactly that.
And it’s ridiculous to place priority on story vs. gameplay. Both are equally important. If story wasn’t important, then why aren’t you a huge Pokemon fan? The gameplay in that is fantastic… if you remove the sugary-sweet layer of kiddie-ness. See what I mean? The two are inseparable.
Well Sega brought together the original team that developed Dragon Force, so I’m inclined to believe that they won’t butcher their own game. Of course, stranger things have happened (how on Earth did the PS2 conversion of Virtua Fighter 2 manage to be worse than the original arcade game?).
I’m not holding onto any hope of seeing the game reach our shores on the PS2 anyway. It’s a shame that goold-old Working Designs didn’t translate Dragon Force 2 for the Saturn on top of the original. I sometimes find it hard to believe that there isn’t a market for those types of games here.
VF2 for PS2 is worse than the original? From what I’ve seen, it looks nearly identical… And I have friends who are hardcore fans of the arcade, and they seemed to be rather pleased.
I read the game’s textures were worse than the arcade version and that there’s some occasional slowdown. Apparently they tried to directly emulate the Model 2 hardware on the PS2 (I assume this was done to make future conversions easier).
You’re talking about XenoGEARS, not Saga.
D’oh. You are correct, sir. I’ve played the very beginning of Xenosaga, but not enough to pass judgement on it.
Although, from what I hear about the cutscenes, I really wished they had incorporated the feature form PDZ that allowed you to rewind/fastforward cutscenes. In fact, all RPGs should. =\
Nope, they are not equally important. I still actively play Phantasy Star Online, and it has absolutely zero to do with storyline. It is the gameplay that ultimately matters when it comes to videogames. The fact that you had to add in an extra tidbit to try to drive your point home:
…doesn’t help much. The atmosphere that Pokemon delivers is precisely why I DON’T play it.
An excellent storyline does wonders to supplement what is a great game, but you do not require an excellent story to have a great game. The original Sonic games are held in high esteem, but none of them have engaging plots. Neither does Streets of Rage 2, Phantasy Star Online, NiGHTS: Into Dreams, and numerous other well respected Sega titles.
Tetris remains an all-time favorite for on-the-road trips, and it has never had a storyline worth acknowledging.
Edit: I just reread your post again and looked at it from another perspective, and I think I see what you’re trying to state… I don’t honestly associate atmosphere and storyline together. Sonic The Hedgehog had no real story aside from “stop Dr. Robotnik” and I was just fine playing the game. The atmosphere didn’t bother me, but if you’d have thrown in a pink porcupine in place of Sonic, and have me run through dark dreary environments, I’d have been less inclined to play.
Pokemon may be a lot of fun, but the atmosphere is what drives me away, storyline and gameplay be damned.
unless ‘taking a seat behind’ means that it is more important, i think we were on opposing sides.
erm… was that directed at me? i think one of the big problems here is that i took a break from the topic and then hopped back into it. are we ONLY talking about RPGs here?
if you are only talking about RPGs, then i agree that storylines should come first. silly me.
Wow, you’re right. My bad. Though the rest of my message was in direct contradiction with that screwed up line. Heh.
You’re talking about Panzer Dragoon SAGA, not Zwei. 
It wasn’t directed at anyone in particular, but yeah… I meant RPGs/adventure/any game that actually has a story (meaning, puzzle games don’t count :P).
The reason why I gave the example of Pokemon was to demonstrate how important a proper setting/story is to enjoy those types of games. For videogames, due to the interactive nature of the medium, setting an inextricable part of the story. In fact, in games such as Ico and Half Life, the setting is the story. Particularly in the case of Ico, the story is merely an outline… the details of which are filled in by your interactions with the environment and with Yorda.
PSO was used as an example, but again, I ask you… was that game as good as it could be? You could have a game with kickass gameplay and crappy story, and it’d still be playable, but does it make it great? No… you need both.
well, i wouldn’t call pokemon or PSO’s gameplay great… a better example (at least for me) would be gunvalkyrie. they didn’t spend a lot of time on the story but the gameplay was great and i still think it succeeds as a game because of that. would i have liked a better plot? sure, but if gunvalkyrie had a wonderful story but played like FF… i would be very upset.
i say you NEED gameplay, but story is greatly appreciated.
when i’m dreaming up game ideas, i develop both gameplay concepts and storyline in tandem. i think they work best that way- you come up with a cool cinematic idea (a character doing some kind of cool move) and then you figure out how to work that in for the player to use. or you come up with some crazy enemy design and then figure out a way to have him enter the scene.
but for a game to please me personally, it just needs to nail the gameplay. that’s why i’m a fan of GV, virtual on, treasure games, etc.
Whether or not you like Pokemon’s gameplay is another thing, but the game itself is a brilliant interactive version of a game that kids have been playing for years: trading cards. It feeds the obsessive-compulsive nature of kids, and provides constant rewards/feedback to the player. It’s a very elegant, simple design. From a pure design standpoint, it’s fantastic.
Okay, perhaps I should clarify more. Gameplay is what is essential to all games. You can’t have a game without there being, well, gameplay. However, to make a great game (again, with the caveat of puzzle games, etc not counting here), you need both.
Exactly my point.
As for games like GunValkyrie, Treasure games, etc, they’re fine and dandy for what they are. Tests of reflexes, etc. However, in order for the genre to move forward as an acceptable medium, there needs to be more depth to the background. The games you mentioned are closer to being toys, but we’re talking about interactive storytelling here 
it’s funny, i always referred to FPSs and other action games that i thought were shallow as reflex testers. have you read into any of the studies being done on how gaming effects the brain? there’s the one about how when a gamer is really in the zone in a really intense game, he generates the same levels of alpha waves as a monk deep in meditation. there’s another thing called flow state which is when a direct connection is made between the gamer and the game - when the gamer stops thinking (press the B button, press the B button, press the B button) and instead associates his thoughts directly with the character’s action.
i don’t think many gamers take gaming to this level, but these trance like states are primarily what i play games for. that’s just my fist shaking rebuttal to referring to my games as reflex testers 
but i do agree that better storylines need to be incorporated to make games more respected. the problem that i see is a marginalization of gameplay and no significant improvement in storylines.
do you have any interest in being a developer or do you prefer mysterious background operations?