Story vs. Freedom

[Seehkuuh]

Hey guys.


I have one big problem that's been bugging me for quite a while now.


I'd like to hear some opinions about "Story" vs. "Freedom" within games, since I can't really decide for one of those.


Do you prefer playing games in which you follow a consequent story line and characters, which you are forced to play as?


Or do you prefer let's say ... choosing a background story (and maybe even character creation) yourself and just roam through an open world as your virtual self (kind of)?


Right now, I believe best would be the second choice, but with optional followers as for example in the elderscrolls series.


What is your personal taste / why would you recommend or not recommend doing one or the other?


I know, that first choice would be easier tech-wise, but I feel I would rather love to have more freedom and thus maybe having multiple choices at some points of a game.


Thanks.

 

[PsychicToaster]

Freedom within the story. The choice to wander aimlessly, sacrifice all the townsfolk to some imaginary god of murder you made up, trying to collect every cheese wheel in the game, and assist everyone and their mother with senseless requests to do all their dirty work for them. All the while the main story is right there in front of you, waiting to be completed. 


Ive designed a lot of my areas as hubs, with side zones that you can explore and often complete story quests while you're at it. The world is open, but none of the enemies scale with you. You may accidentally stumble into an area you shouldn't be in(encounters aren't random, so saving won't screw you)


I have made sure that the areas you go to follow the story, but can easily be left to go and explore, do side quests, gather, etc. Think of it as a line someone drew boxes around at various points, and boxes around the boxes. Follow the line, explore a box, go into a different box, and so on. 

 

[LaFlibuste]

Well, both have strengths and weaknesses. And it's more a spectrum. On one end, you have highly story-driven games in which you play pre-determined characters. These don't give the player a lot of room. Somewhere in the middle you have games with a predetermined story but a blank player character (sometimes party, even). Games based on table top pen and paper RPGs (Neverwinter Nights, Shadowrun Returns) tend to do this a lot. Another example would be Pillars of Eternity. A step removed from there, you have the elderscroll series, in which there's still a story but even more freedom, and finally games where there's only an open world and barely any story. I think most MMORPGs fit in there, roguelikes and maybe games like minecraft, to some extent.

The thing is, the more freedom there is, the more heavily these will be a factor:


1) More job for the developper;


2) A game's that less driving, maybe less engaging. They can be very engaging, don't get me wrong, but it has to come from the player. Custom, "blank" characters may be a the center of the story, but they are a step removed from it as they can't really have any serious ties with the game world. More open worlds may even mean the player has to create the narrative himself. This is not necessarily a bad thing in itself, but gets in the way of creating an engaging story. It's not for everyone and not for every game.


Personally I tend to like both ends of the spectrum (although maybe the ultra-free/open a little less), it's really a matter of choosing what is the most adapted to what you want to create. There is no right or wrong answer to this in my opinion.

 

[SirPizzaRolls]

I prefer open-world games where I can roam around and complete quests for people, with the main goal to get the best stuff.


HOWEVER, I have found that it can get kind of boring without a big, overall thing to be working towards other than better stuff. So I think the best thing to do would be to have a main story, but also at any time allow the player to traverse and do whatever they wish to, and then go back to the main story at any time.

 

[PsychicToaster]

It is important to note that if you are going to do a more open-world game, make the world feel alive. It shouldn't be empty and dead. Skyrim unfortunately had this problem. The world was vast, beautiful, and as cold as the climate in the game world. Long stretches of nothing. You would rarely stumble onto a neat NPC with an engaging and interesting quest to give you. Little side content felt meaningful. 


Choice, consequence, and depth should be an integral part of an open game world. Not just "go here and do this because you were asked to"  

 

[Caitlin]

Actually, there doesn't have to be one or the other, not anymore and with RPGs, a bit of freedom actually does give replay ability.  Not that I think the best example has been created, yet, but so far, the best version of that concept has to be "The Witcher".  You have characters and a story, but freedom, too.  The biggest problem with character creation that I have is, the fact, that most of those same game play the same, no matter who you create.  You chose a human (same reaction), an elf (same reaction), Dwarf (no change in sight), and the same goes for choosing between genders, too.  Many times, those same games actually have a certain character in mind, even down to the sex of the character and there is very little replay ability in those games.  Don't get me I really love and adore The elder scrolls games, but that's only one of three issues I have with it. 

 

[PsychicToaster]

I recommend playing Ultima VII. Or a close second, Morrowind. Truly great examples of how an open RPG should play. 

 

[kovak]

If you watch Westworld you'll get some extra ideas as well.

 

[Dr. Delibird]

I like a mix of the two.

My rule of thumb is that if a game feels like it is "rail roading" me then I general end up being bored gameplay wise even if the story is what keeps me invested (CoD Black Ops 2's campaign is a perfect example, gameplay wise I feel like I am forced to rush through and stuff but I stick around because there are some story elements that draw me in).

Whether I have a predefined character or a self made one, if I feel like I am basically just sitting behind the camera (and opperating it) in a movie then it doesn't matter if I am playing as Dankus Memeus or Cliche Fantasy Character because at this point the gameplay bores me and unless the story makes me want to stick around for some reason I will probably just leave.

I like to have some sort of freedom in gameplay but I don't want it to impact on the story. I am one of those people who gets an itch to play a sandbox game and then maybe 15 minutes in I am just bored. I need a story hook that makes me feel the need to stick around. Gameplay can only take something so far, ESPECIALLY when it is an RPG or has certain RPG elements (customisation for example).

A table top game with a good GM/DM is a great example of how I like my freedom and story elements to coincide with each other.

 

[rue669]

All story. Freedom bores me to tears. I guess that's why I prefer JRPGs to Western RPGs. 

 

[PsychicToaster]

All story. Freedom bores me to tears. I guess that's why I prefer JRPGs to Western RPGs. 

Lol. Conversely, I can't stand JRPGs because while they may be all story, a lot of the time I feel like the stories might appeal to the average 15 year old. Over the top, POWER OF HEART AND SOUL AND FRIENDSHIP anime nonsense. I'm sure this is a very unpopular opinion on these forums, but I just cringe when I read the dialogue. They're so linear it feels like I'm being pushed along an adventure line while also being spoonfed the storyline like a baby. It also just doesn't feel very interactive. That isn't to say I haven't played some wonderful JRPGs(Dark Souls, the really old Final Fantasy series, Fire Emblem, Chrono Trigger) but the majority of them are not my thing. Neither are a lot of newer Western RPGs. I mostly only play old games and a handful of new ones. 

 

[kaukusaki]

I like them both I love a good story and I also like to explore worlds and do random things lol


I had morrowind for a decade and still hadn't finished the main quest 

 

[Wavelength]

I like having an overall narrative that a video game tells - open worlds and sandbox gameplay tends to be better represented in P&P/Tabletop RPGs - but when video games offer some freedom in when you do everything, and especially in how you do everything, that's really nice.  I think my ideal kind of RPG would be one where you know you need to get into a heavily-guarded town - but you can do it by finding the fabled cloak of invisibility, or sneaking in through the overly large sewers, or draw the town's guard out from their posts, or plead your case to a local noble who can vouch for you, or ambush and fight a guard and steal their uniform, or craft that uniform yourself.

 

[Verdelite]

Personally, I really dislike having too much freedom in an RPG. Making choices is nice, but I feel like if you have too much control over what's happenning, then the plot feels shallow. Of course you can have intrigues and all kinds of plot twists even if its a very open-worldish RPG, but what I'm getting at is the ties of the player character to the world: his background, his allies, etc. They don't feel real to me if you can suddenly treat your childhood friend like crap for no particular reason other than the whims of the player. And of course, the more options are given, the less fledged out it usually is.


I want a protagonist that is as  much a character of the world as everyone else is. I don't like self-insert protags. I feel like you can't root for them as much as you can for a character that you've grown to like throughout the story. And that's difficult for a bland main character that lacks character progression.

 

[Milennin]

For me, the plus about more linear kind of games is that it's easier to balance the battles to be challenging. I find that in games that give you lots of freedom, they tend to be easy or have shallow mechanics, because they need to take in account all the different paths the player can take, so it limits the developer to design tight challenges; and players who like to try out everything end up way stronger than intended for an area. Or another problem with open world games is that they're often grindy, because there are so many things to be done, and they all require a lot of time investment (gathering tons materials used in crafting/alchemy, all sorts of different skills to level up, lots of wandering around and exploring random areas).

 

[Wavelength]

There's also room for games with very strictly-controlled narratives, with a ton of freedom in gameplay and also a little freedom over little details.  Persona 3 & 4 do an exceedingly good job of this - you pretty much can't diverge from the intended plot except right around the end of the game, and even the choices that you're given in events and conversations usually amount to one or two different lines of dialogue and then right back to the intended action.  However, the player has a lot of freedom in what kind of gameplay they want to engage in every in-game day: building up social relationships in slice-of-life scenes, skill-building, shopping, battling through the current "plot-related" dungeon, grinding a previous dungeon to find new bosses to take on, visiting the Velvet Room to fuse Personas, etc.

 

[Webby]

It depends on what genre your game is. When it is an RPG, then it is most likely story-driven, when it is an Adventure, then freedom of choice.


One concept of delivering story that's pushing the players to be free is most likely non-canon RPG/games in general because it doesn't affect the universe


at all. It has good, bad or true endings because the player made that happen...

 

[tlbearer]

I have to say that the best video game that I every played that did freedom within the storyline of the game was Steambot Chronicles for the PS2. I loved the game with all my heart as there was an overarching story that you had to do to get to the next town or such, but you could take your time and had so much freedom from point A to point B. You could buy clothes for the characters, buy food and even an apartment and stuff for the apartment. There were side quests, you could be the good guy or the villain. The robot you control, called a trotmobile, is not only how you got around for traveling from place to place but also how you fought enemies and competed in the battle tournament. You could even rebuild a town if you wanted to and customize your bot. There is probably more that I am forgetting but it is worth a play if you can find it.


I love it when games do this as I want to be able to explore but I also want to feel drawn back to the overarching story so that I continue on with the game. I am hoping that Final Fantasy XV does this correctly because if they do it will be awesome but it they don't it might kinda hurt the game. 

 

[Zeustiak]

I have been pondering this question as well, as I am starting to build the foundation of my game and figuring out where I want to take it and how I am going to get there.  


When thinking about character development, giving all possible character combinations personality is a giant undertaking.  How do you properly build events and NPC interactions when you as a developer don't know who the NPC is going to be talking to?  To properly do events and have NPC/player dialogue you basically need to create a separate game for each possible class/race/gender/personality combo or otherwise you will have to make some really generic events and dialogues that fit every situation.  That can be obviously bland, even if executed in the best possible way.  


And that is just the player development aspect.  


Then you have the player's freedom to wander around and do whatever they want when the world is burning to the ground.  You start to build some incredulity into the player's mind as they wonder why you are collecting chicken eggs when the village next door is currently under siege(and remains so until you decide to mosey on over).  


I think in order to build a truly dynamic and open world, you need that world to go about it's business while the player is off screwing around.  Did some side quests while the main quest was screaming for your attention?  Your home town is now gone.  Here is a quest to rebuild it, but oh by the way the big bad is still out there wrecking villages.


Realistically, creating a relatively linear story line with personality and an epic ending is quite a bit of work.  Creating such a world with personality AND freedom is going to be a huge amount of work. 

 

[Dullstar]

I definitely go for story rather than freedom.


That said, you should probably think about what sort of game you want to make, and then go with what seems the most appropriate for that game. A story would be highly innapropriate for something like Minecraft, for instance - but is a driving force and a necessary part of Chrono Trigger. Games like Super Mario Bros. get away with a princess-has-been-kidnapped-oh-noez-go-save-her excuse plot because you're playing for the gameplay and not for the story.


When you think about your game, where do you start? Do you start with characters? You probably value character development and interactions, in which case you're going to want a strong story to show them off. Do you start with the world? Freedom may play a larger role. Gameplay mechanics? It'll depend on the gameplay mechanics. Everything needs to support everything else. If your game is about exploring a world, a story may become restrictive. If your game focusing more on character development, you're going to want a more complex story.