comment: >
  
  I hate videogames that are movies. If i want to see hours and houra of long ass cutscenes i will watch a tv show. I want gameplay
context: I think this more depends on writer/director/developer. All od them can tell a great story, all of them can make a terrible story too. Doesn't matter what form they choose, the form itself doesn't guarantee it will be good.  Some media has both so we can comparw and say that the Avenger movies are infinitely better than Avengers video game, but the Guardians of the Galaxy is good both as a game and a movie. Resident Evil games are better than Resident Evil live action movies and shows, but the last Predator game and movies sucked. Or the Witcher, games and books are phenomenal, the show started good but not close to the book and video game. There are also a bunch of cash grab games made based on movies that are utterly terrible.
  There are millions of examples of different combinations, all proving that the talent of people doing the media is the only thing that will make it good or not. >
  
  No doubt, it is all up to the creators behind them. My point is that video games actually have a higher ceiling then movies for what they can achieve in story telling. Is it incredibly difficult for someone to make a game that good? Yes…but the same can be said for any great story told in any way >
  
  The problem, imo, comes from the fact, when video games tries too hard to tell a story through cutscenes, and where gameplay has no fucking role...
  That imo, is not true video game storytelling (not that those stories suck, they are usually good for the most part, but if they aren't good, the game itself feels boring as a whole) >
  
  Nor necessarily. Plague tale's gameplay sucks. But the game in itself is pretty great. It's story is done very well. It combines both gameplay and cutscenes. Which kinda worked well in innocence and worked great in requiem. 
  Gow and it's sequel are the perfect examples of cutscene based narrative done well. They are absolutely amazing. They have really good focus on narrative and gameplay. The cutscnes go great with the gameplay >
  
  I was mostly focusing my argument, to games like rdr, Whose story is just one of the best writing ever in all of  fiction , but the gameplay, actually hinders the enjoyment of story, because the connection b/w gameplay and story isn't too great. Imo, the story of rdr and rdr2 specially, would do much great, if they were a high budget tv series, with no changes to the actual story. >
  
  Rdr tells an amazing story just the thing is they didn't focus much on the gameplay. It feels boring at times. They should have reduced the amount kf actual gameplay sections in teh campaign and just focus on teh main storyy >
  
  Yeah, imo, games like rdr, would do so much better, if they were, either complete linear,
  Or the gameplay decisions actually affects the story ( i meant the choices made through gameplay, and not choice menu like in the game mass effect) >
  
  Games can definitely tell a good story, but they’re kinda limited in what kind of stories they can tell.
  Most games rely on a sense of achievement and progress: you, the main character, get better and more powerful, you defeat bigger and stronger enemies, face more challenging puzzles, etc. Story-telling wise, this eventually gets tiring.
  Also, games require more action than some stories need. You need to keep the player engaged in more exciting ways than a viewer or a reader. This immediately rules out a bunch of topics, and restricts it to stories that can only be told with a certain pace.
  In the end, I think games can tell a good story, but they have more restrictions than film regarding what type of stories can be told. This is not necessarily a bad thing, I just don’t think the medium is as universal as film (yet) >
  
  I think uncharted 3 is a good example of Game superiority over movies.
  It doesnt have a super complex story tho but damn the Game delivers.
  A more obvious choice would be the last of us which is actually being adapted right now into a series with next to minimal modifications and being well received Even by people that have no idea the script is from a Game from 2 gens ago. >
  
  I think you are right about the potential of games to tell awesome stories. But at the same time most game criminally underuse that ability.   
  Also a lot of games that do, make a shit job of making it work with a gameplay. RDR2 is good example of bad offender here. The game has Arthur reevaluating his morals as an outlaw in story scenes while having him be the worst murderhobo during actual missions because Rockstar never reevaluated their mission design since fucking vice city. >
  
  
  I dont want to read a book,  I want to PLAY a video game.
  I dont want to watch a film, I want to PLAY a video game.
  When I'm playing a video game, I want to PLAY a video game, not read a book and watch a movie. >
  
  definitely agree, and I have gotten my father (who loves movies and books) to appreciate some of those games you've listed. >
  
  That’s awesome, I always feel bad for people who love good stories but are missing out on what I think are some of the best >
  
  While games have a great potential for telling a story indeed, all those things you mention can detract from the story as well. It all depends on the game. In a book the story is the narrative is the only thing that exists so it gets full attention. A movie has the audiovisual aspect too, so there are movies that focus on looking cool, but have piss poor story. A videogame has even more elements that the developers can focus on, at the expense of story, like gameplay and level design.
  There are many critically acclaimed games with barely any storytelling. >
  
  No doubt, I’d argue movies more consistently tell good stories, but in terms of what can tell the best story? I think a video game done correctly is hard to beat >
  
  I think it's useless to compare mediums in these terms. Books, motion pictures and videogames are all capable of incredible storytelling and it only depends on how good the writers/directors/authors/developers/etc are. I understand your point tho, videogames and in some sense animation don't command the same cultural respect movies and books do. But that's changing. >
  
  I'd say a video game by virtue of it being a video game has poor story, take the last of us for example, people laud it as this amazing immersive and story heavy game, but actually it's got horrible story telling, because what the character expresses in cutscenes you can discard during gameplay, if you give me a cutscene of a character being visibly upset and vomiting at the thought of killing someone and then seconds after it ends allow me to continue slitting throat left and right then the story just becomes laughable, like how am I supposed to take you being upset seriously if you're still mercilessly cutting down people and you're surrounded by corpses? At that point the story becomes a joke, and the only way for it not to become a joke after that is to either allow no gameplay or not allow you to kill people anymore after that. And of course if no gameplay is allowed it becomes just like a movie, and if no killing is allowed people would have found the game boring.
  Stories in video games are good, so long as you only compare them to other video games, if you tried to play any game off as a movie it'd be laughed out of the cinema. >
  
  Ghost of Tsushima actually does this well, imo. >
  
  Unpopular yes, but with good reason. Games stories suck, even the very best game stories are b-grade movies at best, and yes that includes the "greats", you just remember it better than it was because your attachment is built though gameplay.
  Put it this way, if you stripped most gameplay from a game and put a fight scene (lets assume its great) video game stories would suck, because the fighting/gameplay is the point, not the story. >
  
  It's true. In pure storytelling mediums, the ceiling is much higher because the story is all they have. It is the priority. Games are different though; gameplay is the priority. Gameplay is king. A game with great gameplay can carry a bad or even nonexistent story. But a game with awful gameplay cannot be carried by an amazing story. >
  
  They certainly could but let's be real here, most video game stories suck. >
  
  Books don't lag tho >
  
  Neither do single player games lol >
  
  Tell that to my single player Minecraft world >
  
  Tone down the mods then lol vanilla single player games wouldn't make it past publishers if they lagged a lot unless it was a shitty indie game. >
  
  Only mod I have is optifine. Without it it's literally unplayable. 
  Creative mode has no lag tho, it can even handle command blocks >
  
  Sounds like a hardware issue minecraft should be playable on potato pcs >
  
  Nah but normies and old people dont play red dead redemption 2 because they think videos games are below them >
  
  Are you truly comparing the effort required to make a  rich/deep game, compared to a book? >
  
  No this post has nothing to do with effort, just the ability to tell a story. Books always have the edge because they allow the reader to use their own imagination fully. >
  
  I hate videogames that are movies. If i want to see hours and houra of long ass cutscenes i will watch a tv show. I want gameplay >
  
  There are games with less then 5 minutes of cutscenes that still tell incredible stories like bloodborne that I listed in the original post. >
  
  No, as any from soft game the story isnt great, in fact they are basic as shit, go somewhere and kill that, rekindle the flame and stuff
  Which isnt the same as worldbuilding, in that case they are brilliant. >
  
  The world tells the story? You can boil any story down to make it sound basic. Bloodborne for example has an incredibly complex story with many characters but you have to discover those story’s for yourself. It tells the story through its world building, the two aren’t exclusive from one another >
  
  The last of us 2 is as intense as Schindler's list >
  
  I guess I know why visual novels are actually a type of game... They have to be one in order to tell their story in a, well, visual and interactive way. >
  
  All of these are too different a medium to compare >
  
  Interactive Media >
  
  Video game stories won't be able to rival movies and books until they get rid of achievements/trophies and collectables.
  VG:  intense cut scene where a companion is kidnapped by the villain and held hostage. Demands are made and a timeline set for the protagonist.
  Cut to Protagonist: Hang on while I check every bathroom stall for a coffee thermos. 
  Story narrative broken. >
  
  Games can tell better stories and have a bigger impact, but it almost never happens. For me a game to have a bigger impact then movie has to give you some sort of choice that can't happen in movies, like the final of first season of walking dead game, or something like "spec ops: the line" and undertale.
  There is also some stories that just wouldn't work as a movie but work well as a game, like Hades and Undertale again. >
  
  I think games tend to screw themselves when they have the most inorganic road blocks be it for story reasons or just the map doesn't go there.
  My favorite roadblock example is in lumiose city in Pokemon x and y, they basically road block you by saying there's a city wide black out meanwhile right fucking behind the guy blocking you, you can see lights and shit in the background and not that I was SUPER immersed to begin with but any immersion I had got ripped right away.
  A good map example is from Simpsons hit and run where in certain buildings they'll have wet floor signs or ropes blocking you or just invisible walls on the map to prevent you from going out of bounds and that shit just kills me a little. 
  Stu love both of those games so it doesn't matter a whole lot but it dampers the experience a lil >
  
  Soul Reaver/Legacy of Kain approves ✅ >
  
  Not so much, no. Fundamentally, the problem with storytelling in games is that games inherently are trying to do something else at the same time: be a game. Even with the best of storylines, it still needs to compromise between telling that story and having good gameplay, as well as allowing for player choice. 
  Non-interactive media don’t have that problem, and can focus on telling a story. Which isn’t to say that there aren’t specific strength games have in terms of storytelling, particularly in terms of world building, but they’re certainly nowhere close to books or film. 
  Also don’t agree with your ranking of books over film, not sure where you’re getting the idea from that that’s the consensus. They each tell stories in their own specific way, it doesn’t make much sense to rank them. >
  
  I was just saying that’s how most people see it. Books/ writing stories have been around for ages and produces the most legendary and well known stories of all time, many of which have been made into great movies. 2 hour movies can tell an incredible and impactful story but it is hard for them to match a well written book because they can not reach the same level of detail nor get as in depth with each character. >
  
  Video games can make you feel like a character with immersive gameplay. Maybe you want to understand how someone lived during medieval times or during the world wars. Movies and TV shows are better at storytelling. And don't even talk about books. They've been here for many years and will stay forever. >
  
  Can’t believe no one has mentioned Read Dead Redemption 2. Would make almost anyone cry. One of the best games of our generation. >
  
  I believe that except your own emotions you can't really know what's going through your perso mind >
  
  IMHO a piece of entertainment designed exclusively to entertain through a narrative will always be better at telling a story than a piece of entertainment designed primarily to entertain by linking visuals with hand/eye coordination and reaction time.
  Like, a car that is also a boat is pretty cool, but it's never going to be as good of a car as a car is, or as good of a boat as a boat is.  A video game that is also a story is pretty cool, but it's never going to be as good of a story as a story that's just a story. >
  
  I get what you are saying, but also there are movies and books out there that tell the most brain dead and poorly thought out stories imaginable. So there are certainly cases where video games beat those out despite not being only focused on story telling (great video games tell stories with the gameplay too) >
  
  I agree there are examples of video games with stories of a higher quality than bad stories in books or movies.
  On the whole, however, a product trying to do one thing (tell a story) rather than two things (tell a story + be an interactive game) is almost always going to be better at doing that one thing (telling a story). >
  
  I think that’s true, but in very rare cases video games can tie both the gameplay and story together in a way that heightens both. This is why I think video games have the potential to tell greater stories although it is incredibly difficult to do so. >
  
  Disagree. The gameplay always breaks up the story too much and makes you forget a lot of it. >
  
  If it’s done right they should mold together >
  
  Never really does though. Gameplay segments are too long. Not saying games can’t have good stories, but they aren’t a better medium at getting them across than movies or books. >
  
  Well if you don’t enjoy gameplay they certainly won’t be for you (some games are actually more cut scenes and dialog then gameplay but I get your point) but I think for a lot of people the gameplay makes the story even more impactful. It connects you to the story in a way movies and even books can’t >
  
  I don’t know, I don’t see how searching every nook and cranny for collectibles and loot and shit makes you more immersed in the story. That’s the way a lot of people play games. I’ve never played a game where you simply stuck to the narrative the whole time without being distracted by doing other things along the way. >
  
  While a lot of gamers do that you certainly don’t have to (in most games). My girlfriend who is new to games just played god of war 2018 and did not even realize you could open chests until I told her half way through, and she still didn’t care too. She played for the story and put the game on the easiest difficulty so she could just worry about story, no grind, no collecting. >
  
  Okay, but that’s not really how games are designed to be played though, thus they aren’t better than films and books as far as telling a story. Some are fine at telling stories I just don’t think the medium is as good as a movie or book. Well just have to agree to disagree. I won’t respond anymore. >
  
  
  
  It is medium, not median. 
  
  
  My opinion is that different mediums have unique features that make them better at telling different kinds of stories, utilizing different techniques. Thus, a great movie, book, game, tv show, or play is one that utilizes the uniqueness of it's medium to create an experience that does not easily translate to another medium.
  
  
  This is why I prefer an experimental, partly bad work, over a conventional, boringly good work. This is also why TLOU adaptation works better than the HALO one. >
  
  what movies are you watching >
  
  My top 3 right now are probably blade runner 2047, Django, and the green mile >
  
  What kind of movies and stories do you like in general? >
  
  I used to be big on action adventure but now I’m really into character driven stuff. Basically I like stuff that focuses on how the characters grow and change and if that’s done right I don’t care about the setting >
  
  I don't think video games right now can compete with film or books on storytelling. They're just not there yet and the bar for writing in video games is too low. People think The Last of Us is a masterpiece, but it's pretty generic stuff compared to good TV, film, and books.
  Not to say there aren't exceptions. Disco Elysium is a better story and a better storytelling device than most books and film. It has incredible writing from start to finish, and deserves praise. But examples like that are few and far between. Most games vaunted for their writing just aren't particularly noteworthy relative to stories in other mediums. At the rate the medium is evolving, I'm not sure video games will ever catch up in that regard. >
  
  The last of us is doing pretty incredible so far as a TV show, but yeah I agree that as a whole movies and tv are ahead but video games can be better, though it may be rare. >
  
  It all depends on the particular piece. If the book is bad, almost any game will have a better story than that book. It's just that the game helps you get a better feel for the characters because you're playing for them. I, for example, like to play gacha games on bluestacks. They have quite simple plots and yet I still enjoy playing them because I get immersed in the plots. Sometimes I'm distracted from the immersion by in-game ads, though. But fortunately in bluestacks there is an airplane mode, which removes in-game ads. 
  And well, I have not read enough books, so I probably have such judgments. >
  
  I've been saying for years that video games are the best way to experience a story. Key word here is experience because you get to actually be part of it instead of just watching it as a bystander. >
  
  The problem is that, a video game with the best story, won't be the game with the best gameplay. We're approaching the point where games, just stop feeling like games for the sake of the story >
  
  2018 GOW and Spider-Man? I feel like we are getting closer and closer to the perfect blend. >
  
  How are books better than any of them? >
  
  It’s hard to beat your own imagination, which is something only books can really let you use when telling a story. You give the characters voices, imagine the locations. Hogwarts for example is awesome in the movies, but can never be as amazing as you might imagine it when reading about it because there is no limit to how you might imagine it. Basically books allow story’s to be told in a way no other media can, plus all of the greatest stories are from books/ in writing >
  
  I disagree personally, as you can only really be immersed in a story when it includes visual and audio elements. The imagination can be strong but doesn’t always do what the author intended. >
  
  I think the best written stories leave room for the reader to imagine certain things however they like while still getting across what the author intended. 
  But if audio and video help you get even more immersed who am I to say that’s wrong. They certainly do add something simple words cannot! >
  
  It really depends on the person and their preferences.  Some like books better.  Some like tv/movies.  Some prefer video games.  This is likely very generational as well, with generations that did not grow up with TV preferring books, and so on. >
  
  Consider small series as well. For example cyberpunk edgerunners was a deeply impactful series to me, I've heard similar stories for over the garden wall. Frankly adventure time is an amazing over arching story but with just a ton of entertainment for smaller minds in between. >
  
  The problem is that in terms of storytelling, even the best gaming stories pale in comparison to the greatest writers. It's fine though, the medium is different and if a  game has a decent  story and amazing gameplay it is a good game. Novels need to have an amazing story or all is done for nothing. >
  
  I think this more depends on writer/director/developer. All od them can tell a great story, all of them can make a terrible story too. Doesn't matter what form they choose, the form itself doesn't guarantee it will be good.  Some media has both so we can comparw and say that the Avenger movies are infinitely better than Avengers video game, but the Guardians of the Galaxy is good both as a game and a movie. Resident Evil games are better than Resident Evil live action movies and shows, but the last Predator game and movies sucked. Or the Witcher, games and books are phenomenal, the show started good but not close to the book and video game. There are also a bunch of cash grab games made based on movies that are utterly terrible.
  There are millions of examples of different combinations, all proving that the talent of people doing the media is the only thing that will make it good or not. >
  
  No doubt, it is all up to the creators behind them. My point is that video games actually have a higher ceiling then movies for what they can achieve in story telling. Is it incredibly difficult for someone to make a game that good? Yes…but the same can be said for any great story told in any way >
  
  The problem, imo, comes from the fact, when video games tries too hard to tell a story through cutscenes, and where gameplay has no fucking role...
  That imo, is not true video game storytelling (not that those stories suck, they are usually good for the most part, but if they aren't good, the game itself feels boring as a whole) >
  
  Nor necessarily. Plague tale's gameplay sucks. But the game in itself is pretty great. It's story is done very well. It combines both gameplay and cutscenes. Which kinda worked well in innocence and worked great in requiem. 
  Gow and it's sequel are the perfect examples of cutscene based narrative done well. They are absolutely amazing. They have really good focus on narrative and gameplay. The cutscnes go great with the gameplay >
  
  I was mostly focusing my argument, to games like rdr, Whose story is just one of the best writing ever in all of  fiction , but the gameplay, actually hinders the enjoyment of story, because the connection b/w gameplay and story isn't too great. Imo, the story of rdr and rdr2 specially, would do much great, if they were a high budget tv series, with no changes to the actual story. >
  
  Rdr tells an amazing story just the thing is they didn't focus much on the gameplay. It feels boring at times. They should have reduced the amount kf actual gameplay sections in teh campaign and just focus on teh main storyy >
  
  Yeah, imo, games like rdr, would do so much better, if they were, either complete linear,
  Or the gameplay decisions actually affects the story ( i meant the choices made through gameplay, and not choice menu like in the game mass effect) >
  
  Games can definitely tell a good story, but they’re kinda limited in what kind of stories they can tell.
  Most games rely on a sense of achievement and progress: you, the main character, get better and more powerful, you defeat bigger and stronger enemies, face more challenging puzzles, etc. Story-telling wise, this eventually gets tiring.
  Also, games require more action than some stories need. You need to keep the player engaged in more exciting ways than a viewer or a reader. This immediately rules out a bunch of topics, and restricts it to stories that can only be told with a certain pace.
  In the end, I think games can tell a good story, but they have more restrictions than film regarding what type of stories can be told. This is not necessarily a bad thing, I just don’t think the medium is as universal as film (yet) >
  
  I think uncharted 3 is a good example of Game superiority over movies.
  It doesnt have a super complex story tho but damn the Game delivers.
  A more obvious choice would be the last of us which is actually being adapted right now into a series with next to minimal modifications and being well received Even by people that have no idea the script is from a Game from 2 gens ago. >
  
  I think you are right about the potential of games to tell awesome stories. But at the same time most game criminally underuse that ability.   
  Also a lot of games that do, make a shit job of making it work with a gameplay. RDR2 is good example of bad offender here. The game has Arthur reevaluating his morals as an outlaw in story scenes while having him be the worst murderhobo during actual missions because Rockstar never reevaluated their mission design since fucking vice city. >
  
  
  I dont want to read a book,  I want to PLAY a video game.
  I dont want to watch a film, I want to PLAY a video game.
  When I'm playing a video game, I want to PLAY a video game, not read a book and watch a movie. >
  
  definitely agree, and I have gotten my father (who loves movies and books) to appreciate some of those games you've listed. >
  
  That’s awesome, I always feel bad for people who love good stories but are missing out on what I think are some of the best >
  
  While games have a great potential for telling a story indeed, all those things you mention can detract from the story as well. It all depends on the game. In a book the story is the narrative is the only thing that exists so it gets full attention. A movie has the audiovisual aspect too, so there are movies that focus on looking cool, but have piss poor story. A videogame has even more elements that the developers can focus on, at the expense of story, like gameplay and level design.
  There are many critically acclaimed games with barely any storytelling. >
  
  No doubt, I’d argue movies more consistently tell good stories, but in terms of what can tell the best story? I think a video game done correctly is hard to beat >
  
  I think it's useless to compare mediums in these terms. Books, motion pictures and videogames are all capable of incredible storytelling and it only depends on how good the writers/directors/authors/developers/etc are. I understand your point tho, videogames and in some sense animation don't command the same cultural respect movies and books do. But that's changing. >
  
  I'd say a video game by virtue of it being a video game has poor story, take the last of us for example, people laud it as this amazing immersive and story heavy game, but actually it's got horrible story telling, because what the character expresses in cutscenes you can discard during gameplay, if you give me a cutscene of a character being visibly upset and vomiting at the thought of killing someone and then seconds after it ends allow me to continue slitting throat left and right then the story just becomes laughable, like how am I supposed to take you being upset seriously if you're still mercilessly cutting down people and you're surrounded by corpses? At that point the story becomes a joke, and the only way for it not to become a joke after that is to either allow no gameplay or not allow you to kill people anymore after that. And of course if no gameplay is allowed it becomes just like a movie, and if no killing is allowed people would have found the game boring.
  Stories in video games are good, so long as you only compare them to other video games, if you tried to play any game off as a movie it'd be laughed out of the cinema. >
  
  Ghost of Tsushima actually does this well, imo. >
  
  Unpopular yes, but with good reason. Games stories suck, even the very best game stories are b-grade movies at best, and yes that includes the "greats", you just remember it better than it was because your attachment is built though gameplay.
  Put it this way, if you stripped most gameplay from a game and put a fight scene (lets assume its great) video game stories would suck, because the fighting/gameplay is the point, not the story. >
  
  It's true. In pure storytelling mediums, the ceiling is much higher because the story is all they have. It is the priority. Games are different though; gameplay is the priority. Gameplay is king. A game with great gameplay can carry a bad or even nonexistent story. But a game with awful gameplay cannot be carried by an amazing story. >
  
  They certainly could but let's be real here, most video game stories suck. >
  
  Books don't lag tho >
  
  Neither do single player games lol >
  
  Tell that to my single player Minecraft world >
  
  Tone down the mods then lol vanilla single player games wouldn't make it past publishers if they lagged a lot unless it was a shitty indie game. >
  
  Only mod I have is optifine. Without it it's literally unplayable. 
  Creative mode has no lag tho, it can even handle command blocks >
  
  Sounds like a hardware issue minecraft should be playable on potato pcs >
  
  Nah but normies and old people dont play red dead redemption 2 because they think videos games are below them >
  
  Are you truly comparing the effort required to make a  rich/deep game, compared to a book? >
  
  No this post has nothing to do with effort, just the ability to tell a story. Books always have the edge because they allow the reader to use their own imagination fully.