Just because people don't like a game's story doesn't mean they need to demand the developers change it. Show some respect!
Any reason to have Cindy in the thumbnail huh At least Lunafreya is getting attention for once
"it feels like we have actually taken steps back in treating games more like products than art." Simply put, art, like a painting isn't added onto once it's complete. Some video games are certainly art, they are polished and complete (I'd say the remake of SOC is art). However, with the increased mentality of gaming as a service, games are certainly more aligned with being products as they are added onto, fixed, tweaked and the like. This has created more chatter and discussion, and can bring forth more backlash and negativity if a game falters. "The fans saw the story, the product of the creative side of the games’ development, as something that was damaged and in need of repair, as if writing and telling a story is the same thing as writing lines of code to make guns shoot, wheels spin, or hair sway in the wind." Developers have shown anything can be updated. If the story is fundamentally broken and doesn't act as it should to the degree that almost anyone can see that there's something missing, like a book with chapters ripped out, then yes, it is no different than code needing a fix. "This led to a more vague, indirect style or narrative delivery, with the deeper lore of Final Fantasy XV relegated to background noise and media existing outside of the game." This is simply an excuse for how they dropped the ball. Vague and indirect doesn't work when it remains vague and indirect from start to finish. A story shouldn't be deliberately broken into different mediums for the gamer to garner some sense of what's going on as they play through the game. Books might have side stories or prequels but they don't detract from the main book, they add. FF15 is a game with its story cut into pieces and put across different mediums. It forces the community to spin theories to quench their appetite of a story that was, and quite frankly, still hasn't been fully told. "Well, it seems like a team can spend years making a game, writing and telling a story, then get yelled at if it doesn’t gel with the audience until they go back and change it to something more digestible. And the publishers and developers, who have no choice but to court these kinds of rabid fans to keep their profit margins..... I don’t like it." Time spent on creating something doesn't automatically mean that if the product is seriously flawed, it's okay because it took them so long to make it so. Publishers/developers have the ability to release a product in a wonderful package, they also have the ability to release it half baked and fix it over a period of 1-2 years. You might not like that the community cries out, but the community doesn't like receiving part of a full experience. "If we’re going to insist games sit on the pedestal of art, then we need to back off and talk about these things in discussion, not yell at developers on Twitter until they make changes to their creations." Some yell but more discuss. If video games want to be considered art then they need to be less patchwork and more fully fledged experiences. Updates should be joyful, not attempts at fixing a numerous amount of flaws caused by the design/writing team.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.