Originally published July 2016

Welcome back to my analysis of story-telling in video games. Last time, I discussed the common purpose behind implementing stories in video games and how it differed from film, TV, and books. This time, I'll be briefly mentioning and discussing examples of video games that make the smart decision to keep their stories in the background.

Discretionary Storytelling

The more involved the story is in the experience of a video game, the more it can help the game if it's good. Or, very often, it can hurt the game if the story isn't very good. I can write off a bad story if it's barely there and doesn't affect the overall experience. I can write off the stories that blatantly copy other ones if it's just in the background. I can't write off bad stories when they're constantly in my face, reminding me of how important the story is to the experience.

Let me provide some positive examples of games that succeed without an overt storyline before we get to the bad, though. Super Meat Boy, for instance, is a good game built on solid gameplay mechanics. It has a particular art style that is appropriate to the material. It also has the right amount of cuteness to go with its morbidity. Yet, the story of Super Meat Boy is nothing more than Meat Boy's girlfriend being kidnapped and he has to save her. Sounds familiar, right? There are frequent references to older video games, including the one from which it stole the premise, and utilize the references throughout the various cinematic moments. With all the set pieces and cutscenes, the story is nothing more than a simple backdrop to the gameplay.

A slightly more involved story example would be XCOM: Enemy Unknown. I've talked about this game plenty in the past, but if you didn't know, it is a game about aliens invading and humanity banding together to stop the invasion. There are some events and changes to the overall scenario along the way involving psychic links and a possible agenda the aliens have, but there are less than 6 total story-focused missions in the whole game. These particular missions are usually there to introduce new enemy types or to act as bookends to chapters that mark the game's progression. Upon completion of these "story" missions, there's usually a cut-scene and the typical enemy encounters are more difficult, indicating that you have progressed to another chapter in some way. The rest of the missions, meanwhile, are about just killing the damn aliens with good strategy and positioning. Thus, a majority of your focus in XCOM is directed at the star of the show: its gameplay.

Then there are games that tell their story by giving the player even less information. Shadow of the Colossus, one of the best games from the PlayStation 2, has a very minimalist approach to its story. You play as a guy who's brought a dead girl with him to a distant and secluded land. We can assume he has some connection to the girl, because why would he be going through the trouble of bringing her to this place if he didn't care, right? We don't know if the girl was his lover or his sister because it's never said, but we can tell that he cares about her by how he treats her body. What is he planning on doing? Well, considering that he's communicating with some ancient gods in this assumed-to-be forbidden land, I would guess he's trying to resurrect her. We can assume these are deities of some sort because we keep looking up at some glowing light when it speaks to the protagonist. There's nothing to confirm it beyond that and we can't completely trust these deities because they're in a forbidden land. How do we know it's forbidden? We don't, but we can assume the land is forbidden because he came here alone, through a long path, and through several gates to get here.

All of this information is conveyed to us through minimal lines of dialogue and assumption. The fact that he's by himself, the fact that he seems conflicted about what he's doing, and the sacrilegious stigma behind resurrecting the dead is more than enough to tell us he probably shouldn't be doing what he's doing. Nonetheless, we don't know much for sure, so we go along with his quest and go killing Colossi for the sake of his dead friend. Once the goal is established, the story does not update until all the colossi are dead. It's a simple rinse-and-repeat scenario that is good from start to finish simply because the gameplay is so satisfying.

XCOM and Meat Boy are examples of good games with uninvolved stories. The stories themselves aren't really bad, but they're nothing special either. They're just backdrops to provide that little extra push of motivation to the player, to give a reason for them to try to win. Shadow of the Colossus does the same but gives the player even less information to let them assume some of the details and figure it out on their own. Then there are games that don't have a story at all. Civilization V, for example, is a good game that has no story other than the background of the character from history you're playing. The story that is there comes from the player's personal experience with the game.

I find it rare that a game has a good enough story that it really works to the game's advantage over everything else, especially when it's the main focus. As much as I enjoy a good story with a well-crafted and intricate plot, some of my favorite games over the years have managed to keep their stories out of harm's way.

Next time we'll discuss the examples of misfires in video game storytelling where the plots served only to hurt the overall experiences.

See the other posts about story in video games here:

• Part 1

• Part 3

• Part 4

• Part 5