Telling stories: How much is that ending in the window?

As games have evolved, so too has the role of storytelling in the titles we play. As we turn the corner on 2008, we asked multiple industry personalities across all walks of game development on titles such as Dragon Age: Origins, Bionic Commando and Guild Wars for their thoughts.
Epic Games' Michael Capps recently caused quite an uproar among gamers with his suggestion to offer the conclusion to games as premium DLC rather than as part of the core experience. As the latest in our continuing week-long feature, we asked our panel of industry personalities what they thought of the proposal. Interestingly, much of the group was noticibly more tight-lipped in their responses than when answering other questions.
Epic Games' Michael Capps recently caused quite an uproar among gamers with his suggestion to offer the conclusion to games as premium DLC rather than as part of the core experience. As the latest in our continuing week-long feature, we asked our panel of industry personalities what they thought of the proposal. Interestingly, much of the group was noticibly more tight-lipped in their responses than when answering other questions.

I could see serializing a story into smaller chapters, perhaps, so long as the player was aware that was what they were getting into up front. So long as each chapter came out in a timely fashion, the player could choose to continue along the story? That might work, I don't know. Keeping an ending for DLC, however, sounds a bit like withholding it for extra cash, whether it's intentional or not.
I don't know about you, but I expect some kind of resolution to a story I purchase. Can you imagine watching a movie and getting to the end and the screen goes dark? "For an extra $2 you can see the ending! Come to the ticket booth now!" There'd be a riot! I doubt that's what any company would intentionally try, but I think it'd be a hard sell to convince the players out there that it was something beneficial.

Unless designed and structured as serialized content, this would be very detrimental to the experience because from the player's perspective an ending does exist; the point where content runs out. A cliffhanger is not exciting simply because the protagonist is left hanging from a cliff.

The whole DLC bit just feels like another tacked on solution to something that is broken in its core.

Developers, or more likely, publishers are looking at different ways to get players to pay out. In doing so, ideas come up that push the envelope of acceptability. I'm sure to many the idea of forcing players to download the end of the game seems like a rip-off. However, if you told the player that they had to pay micro transactions for each individual level of a game, but the first level was free and the total cost of the whole game was the same as a normal game, they wouldn't have a problem with it even though both are forcing the player to pay for the last level.

I am against it. I think a game should be complete even if the ending may not be reached by the player. That is not to say that that there is not a place for additional content in games – these are more like sequels. A game, like a story, should resolve.

I guess it depends whether the DLC is free. I would be pretty aggravated as a gamer if I bought an adventure game and I had to pay extra to get to the end. If in Planetfall I had to pay extra to find out what happened to Floyd the droid I might feel very differently about that game than I do today.

With any good story line, there should always be a beginning and an end. You can't cheat the players out of that. But we love the idea of getting further mileage out of the investment into the original full story and adding additional elements down the line. Downloadable content is a great way to do that. The question remains how to provide extra content without the playing feeling ripped off.

I haven't heard anything about that, so I'm not aware of the pros and cons that people may be discussing.
Tom Gaubatz, producer for publisher Mastiff
I think the idea was misconstrued and it's not as ridiculous as it sounds, but personally I couldn't stand behind it. The game business is moving from creating products to creating content. Packaged products are inefficient in a lot of ways, but the nice thing about them is that they provide a stable canvas for artistic expression. I still buy CDs because albums stick with you more than songs. You wouldn't buy a painting and say to the artist, "Can you cut off the corner and give me a discount?" I think that most developers would want to know that anyone buying the game at least has access to their vision.
Well, the flip side is that not everyone is going to play to the end of the game anyway, and that's why the idea makes sense. I guess I'd say that if we as developers want to keep the ability to express a unified artistic vision, it's our responsibility to make games that people want to finish.











Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
LeadBoxx @ Dec 24th 2008 10:23AM
Here is a story.....
http://i40.tinypic.com/xkneae.jpeg
Mike @ Dec 24th 2008 10:34AM
that's not a very good story.
LeadBoxx @ Dec 24th 2008 10:36AM
I thought it was great!
samfish @ Dec 24th 2008 10:41AM
SCANDALOUS!
DarrenHollywood @ Dec 24th 2008 10:45AM
I actually think that's really freaking funny.
Wiinterfang @ Dec 24th 2008 10:53AM
Mind=Blown'd
Jakka ( The Order of Haters of Balance) @ Dec 24th 2008 11:36AM
X Box 360? How many parts is that? Three. What else has three parts? That's right, a triangle!
http://uspeednews.free.fr/donnees/ico/s/Sony%20-%20Logo%20PlayStation%20Triangle%20Rond%20Croix%20Carre.jpg
Mitsuo @ Dec 24th 2008 12:25PM
you know what else has 3 parts? A tri-force
▲
▲ ▲
Mitsuo @ Dec 24th 2008 12:26PM
bawww didn't work. >=[
Crazypuppet @ Dec 24th 2008 10:39AM
he said he wanted to include a unique code in every copy of his game for the ending. So that people who bought it used would have to purchase the ending.
syrik zero @ Dec 24th 2008 10:46AM
And what about people with no internet? They just get left with a black screen?
coil780 @ Dec 24th 2008 10:41AM
I think Capps' comment was misconstrued by a majority of the gaming public. He was not suggesting "premium DLC endings" as a way to drag a few more dollars out of gamers; he was suggesting a counter to Gamestop's obscene "$5 off" used-game resale market.
Look at the exact quote: "If you want to fight the final boss you go online and pay USD 20, but if you bought the retail version you got it for free."
The second half is the key part: IF YOU BOUGHT THE RETAIL VERSION, YOU GOT IT FOR FREE. In short, it's identical to the "premium" DLC that's been included with several recent titles, such as Rock Band 2's 20 free songs. If you bought a used copy of the game, the chances are that the DLC code had already been used. Congrats: you saved $5... and missed out on 20% of your potential song list.
Is that the right way to discourage the used game market? By itself, I don't think so... but combined with a $10 price drop, I think it would be a powerful incentive to buy new.
samfish @ Dec 24th 2008 11:04AM
Well that's bullshit, too.
We as gamers have every right to buy and sell used games as we do with any other friggin' product. We shouldn't be penalized for doing what every other entertainment medium consumer does.
If developers and publishers are that bent out of shape over used game sales, then maybe it's time they finally got their friggin' costs under control so that used games aren't so detrimental to their bottom line.
T @ Dec 24th 2008 11:17AM
I spent $60 for the rights to a game that I now hold in my hand. If at any point in time I exercise my right to sell said product via a garage sale, rummage sale, yard sale, used games store, or whatever...that is entirely within my right.
I supposed you'd support Hollywood if they decided to do the same with DVD movies...in order to stop the rental industry from cutting into sales.
Tb4M @ Dec 24th 2008 11:19AM
Pretty soon, Epic will start charging for maps that are already on the disc . . . ZING!
But on a serious note, I want the whole game, even if I buy it used. It doesn't make sense, especially if someone can't hook up their console to the internet.
Mr Khan @ Dec 24th 2008 12:24PM
Developers should perhaps put actual replay value back into their games (and not rely on the crutch of online multiplayer to do so). My most treasured games are games i have played many times, and i have been able to do so because they are dynamic and content-packed enough to let me do so without getting bored as piss
WiredKnight @ Dec 24th 2008 5:03PM
That wasn't even his idea. I don't know why Joystiq keeps fucking this up, but he's quoted as saying "I've talked to some developers who are saying..."
syrik zero @ Dec 24th 2008 10:43AM
The biggest issue with not including the entire game at its release is that not all people have access to the internet. I have a few friends that live in the boonies and can't connect to Xbox Live because the internet service is not fast enough. They don't any of the game updates. They will time to time bring their 360 over for updates and get a few games updated if possible.
For these people at least I would think having DLC to finish a story would be unfair. Having DLC to add to the story is fine though. No one needs to have that. It's just a bit of extra fun if you enjoyed the packaged game.
Skub @ Dec 24th 2008 10:53AM
I think it's funny how the man that suggests this is the lead of Gears of "WHERE'S MY WIFE?!" I would have cared, maybe, if the idea were presented by someone with at least a little storytelling talent.
WiredKnight @ Dec 24th 2008 5:05PM
Mike Capps is the president of Epic, not the lead designer of Gears. Idiot.
reebo @ Dec 24th 2008 10:58AM
This idea is completely ridiculous. I only read what was before the jump because I'm sure if I continue this dry retching will transform into full-fledged vomiting.
Used or not, if I buy a game I want the entire fucking game. The video game industry used to be chill, I really don't feel like getting nickled and dimed by another corporation.
ToRo @ Dec 24th 2008 1:52PM
"The video game industry used to be COOL, I really don't feel like getting nickled and dimed by another corporation."
There I fixed it for you. The word chill should never be used to replace the word cool. I see a lot of kids from the suburbs doing that. It's a pet peeve of mine.
lilahkins @ Dec 24th 2008 11:25AM
I don't think that anyone in the game industry would be irritated by personal used game sales--i.e. I have game x for sale, and you would like to buy it from me.
What they have a problem with is the EB Games/Gamestops of the world, who buy back your used games for virtually nothing, and resell them for $5 less than retail. I can't think of many other industries that can get rich off of someone else's product without having to give some sort of compensation in return.
The solution here is not to penalize the player--the solution here is to make the EB Games/Gamestops of the world pay a percentage of their used game sales back to the publisher. They want to eke major profit unfairly? Let the publishers go after them, not us.
Evan @ Dec 24th 2008 11:27AM
Has storytelling really evolved? The trend seems to be going the wrong way.
- Sandbox games: There may be characters and story events scattered around the world, but there's no director. Gone is the pacing and sense of urgency.
- Customizable avatars: This removes the most interesting important part of a story, the main character, and replaces him with our boring selves.
- Shooters: Many gamers eschew the single-player campaigns that tell a story, to play online matches that occur randomly and independently of the storyline.
- RPGs: These games seem to tell their story at an increasingly slower pace. You can spend more time running to the next location than doing anything interesting. In movies, they don't show the characters brushing their teeth, taking a dump, and sitting in traffic for their 20 minute drive to work. I don't want to see that, it's boring, so they just cut to the interesting events in the character's life. But many games make us sit through those long periods between events.
joe.arc @ Dec 24th 2008 11:47AM
And yet here we have tons of people who went ape over GTA4's so-called story. Heh.
Anyone else getting tired of the mute protagonist style btw?
Mr Khan @ Dec 24th 2008 12:22PM
I quite like the mute protagonist style. I certainly felt more connected to Link or Samus than i did to the very talkative Fox, Sonic, etc.
FrannieBaby @ Dec 24th 2008 11:31AM
Scenario:
ME: All right, I beat that f**king toad thing and now I am a winner at Super Mario Bros. 2!
NES: Deposit $5 to see end of game pls
ME: WHAT. Oh, all right.
[$5 fed to NES]
NES: It turns out it was all a dream. Lesson: never lick Toad before bed.
ME: RAGE
Ethan @ Dec 24th 2008 11:41AM
I like the idea of having a respite period at the end of a game, something after the main objective is over. The grand ending sequence is often a bit boring. I'd love to write for games.
RudyHuxtable @ Dec 24th 2008 11:43AM
That idea, no matter the context, is offensive. Because we're already getting nickeled and dimed by EA and other developers. If THIS kind of idea catches, then we're REALLY fucked.
Stupid and irresponsible.
joe.arc @ Dec 24th 2008 11:51AM
No we're not. If enough people stop buying their crap they'll refrain from using strong-arm tactics against consumers.
syrik zero @ Dec 24th 2008 11:53AM
If they didn't make so many games that I really have been loving I wouldn't be buying them in the first place.
Alien Lord @ Dec 24th 2008 11:50AM
It's publisher thinking like Tom Gaubatz, producer for publisher Mastiff that makes me dislike publishers. They are unfortunately a necessary evil.
joe.arc @ Dec 24th 2008 11:54AM
Anyone else finds it amusing that the best stories in gaming are told via mute protagonists? It's getting tiring however.
Marius @ Dec 24th 2008 12:34PM
what ever happen to unlockables?
Im tired of hearing about DLC especially when its announced before or right after the game is release
BigD145 @ Dec 24th 2008 2:14PM
Hollywood failed at storytelling a few decades ago. Games aren't quite as old, so we haven't been seeing it until recently.
David @ Dec 24th 2008 2:46PM
The whole idea of paying to see a game ending is preposterous. If games were half as good as they were 10 years ago we wouldn't have this issue with people trading in games. Also, the whole idea of raising the end price of games for the user is a load of Microsoft Vista or ME take your pick. It seems to me that $49.99 is a fair price to pay for a game an equilibrium price. If the games cost the person damn near a hundred dollars especially "collector edition" versions of the game, then hell yes people are going to buy it used. The majority of the games anymore are not even worth $50. Spore would be a very good example. I wouldn't want to pay $50 for a DRM crack-baby, but that is a different story. Besides most of the endings have been sucking for games and I wouldn't want to buy a used game and have to pay for a crappy ending. Fable II was one of the biggest let downs as far as the final part of the story was concerned. I mean at least the first one had Jack to fight in it. A word to the game industry, clean up your act.
Taco_Hell @ Dec 24th 2008 3:49PM
Wait..what? Um, excuse me but if memory serves, 10 years ago games were a worse than they are now. There was an abundance of bad controls, bad camera angles, horrible stories and characters in the N64 and PS. The reason why people are trading games now is the fact that they can. I've known many people who the moment they discovered EB Games (before GameStop bought it), traded in many of their PS and N64 games. And while Fable's story ended awkward, it still doesn't mean that the rest of the game was bad.
BigD145 @ Dec 24th 2008 3:58PM
People trade in games because they still want to pay $35 or less for a new game. Hand in 10 sh!t games and the cashier will tell you, "That'll be $37 dollars (damn taxes)."
Brent Powell @ Dec 24th 2008 4:31PM
Okay, so did anyone play Golden Sun? You beat the lighthouse and then the credits roll and you are sitting there saying where the hell is the rest of my game!? Well, I find it hard to belive that developers are considering selling endings when they don't even include them on all the games as it is now. Who wasn't pissed about Halo 2's non-ending. Also there is one word that strikes fear in the hearts of endings, Shenmue. So stop talking about selling me an ending until you actually produce endings in your games to begin with! I wouldn't pay two cents for half of the endings my games already have! Rainbow Six Vegas, Splinter Cell Double Agent, the list goes on and on. It's like the ending is an add for the next game in the series! Screw that!
Flamefang92 @ Jan 7th 2009 12:54AM
I agree completely with Anet on this subject.
dragonbloodthirsty @ Feb 17th 2009 7:49PM
I buy almost exclusively used games at this point. I don't play enough to keep up with "what's current", and by the time I get around to wanting a game, it's not being produced anymore. I'm still playing on my GameCube and thinking about getting a Wii, while tooling around on the PS2.
I'd probably just quit with the consoles all together if I couldn't buy used. New games are just too costly for what they offer: $50+ dollars for 10- hours of content, plus whatever the system cost.
I think there's too much emphasis on "art" and not enough on "gameplay" too. There was a day where games made up for their lack of artistic appeal with "story" and "gameplay", but I feel like it's gone the other direction now, with art making up for lack of story and gameplay.