To me story is more important. When I play a game I want to have a meaty story that's really going to absorb me and bring me into its world. Movie's are capable of this, for the 2 hours or so that they last. But truly story-heavy games can draw me in for anywhere up to 40 hours +

I would also have voted gameplay if we had a second option, because that is something that cannot be overlooked. A boring game to play is a game that you aren't going to want to go back too. Its that simple. It could have the world's best story, but if it plays boring then why bother?

Hmm, from that logic I'd say story = gameplay in importance, which makes much more sense.

I should quit beating a dead horse here, but anyone who enjoys puzzle/timing games (Tetris, Brain Age, Guitar Hero, etc.) shouldn't really vote story since these games have little to no story. I'll shut up now.

This post was last modified: 02-29-2008 12:04 PM by Harmonica.

Well obviously, and I for one do not enjoy those games. Tetris was fun but it isn't a game I'd play constantly.

No, because video games have a much deeper interaction. They are built around user input, but movies are based on a story. That is why there are a lot of good movie based on books, but lots of bad games based on books or movies.

But now when technology is progressing, simple button presses and bleeps just can't compete with the latest movies, so they have to graphically and technologically match (or at least come close) to movies.

The thing that has to be done is that the game's story and setting has to be designed with all that in mind, because no matter how good the story is, if it's not fun to play, no one will find out what happened. This is why almost every movie based on a game is terrible, because the interaction is what makes games fun, and just watching the movie is what makes movies fun, so it doesn't cross over very well. Inept directors have a share of the blame too though.

This post was last modified: 03-02-2008 08:31 AM by Pancakes.