Why is gameplay > lore?

[De Lupe]

I can understand them ignoring the smaller things from lore for the sake of gameplay.

HOWEVER....

There are bigger things happening in lore that I feel NEED to be put in the game for story purposes; you know, things like Garrosh vs Cairne (even if it would make me sad...)

And with the new scenarios capability, they can now feature important lore things like that in game more easily.

[Kaykay]

There are blue posts that justify that the reason why certain events aren't shown in game is because Blizz believes that the gamplay is more important than the lore. Therefore, implementing the events in the game, for lore's sake, would mess with the gameplay.

I think you missunderstand the blueposter.

"Gameplay first", is an overaching blizzard game designer goal.

The reason lore events is not shown in the game, is because some things are just better in the written media. You get the chance to get behind the characters we know from the game and get a deeper understanding of their persona. Aswell as a few hints of where the overaching warcraft story-line is heading.

Ingame cinematics like the maelstrom etc. They are nice, and help set the setting of the story. But overall doesn't take much of our time as players, since a majority of players just skip the story, putting in a smaller featurelength movie would be a waste.

Creating a questzone that focuses on a specific plot and story, building up characters through questlines are aplenty, but these are stories we don't necesarily hear through the books. These are first-person stories, where we are the protagonist. Vaguely referenced by lore characters in their speeches of past battles where random heroes took on great dangers.

Whereas in the books and media, the storywriters get to put Thrall, Varian, Malfurion, Jaina, Anduin, Wrathion and Garrosh in focus. A story they simply cant tell in the game, without disconnecting the player from their character. And letting us play as Arthas for a while.

[Deleted]

Would be far more interesting if Blizzard designed the mechanics around the lore.

[Xilurm]

For everyone here who says that the reason is because it's a GAME. Have a talk with Bioware, CD Projekt Red, Naughty Dog and Square Enix.

[Deleted]

Because the guys at Blizzard believe that gameplay is what gives the game replay value and longivity. Lore is there to support the gameplay (give purpose, direction in progress). Check out some of their core values, lore isn't even mentioned.

http://us.blizzard.com/en-us/company/about/mission.html

[Drithien]

It's okay to enjoy it. But you have to admit, the game is about raid encounters and pvp, not about reading stories.

This being a role-playing game though, it shouldn't be as much as it is.

Actually, raiding and pvp being as low in players' preferences as they are; and games that actually do engage in their role-playing elements, as well as open-world gameplay, being so successful; one has to wonder why does this game still focus on these two aspects that are not that engaging to most people, and why don't they invest more in the game's story/role-playing elements that have shown to work quite well in so many other occasions. I mean Uncharted can hardly qualify as a game to begin with for goodness sake, but its story and cinematics carry it almost on their own.

Raiding and pvp are what Blizzard is trying to promote, but they are not that popular, or engaging; just look at the numbers and think of the "fun" mot people have in said activities: nothing is more exciting than grinding conquest points in bot-infested battlegrounds, or watching shows while semi-afking in lfr. And they never were to begin with. On the other hand, give most players a good story, and/or an advanced character creation and customization system, and they go nuts; Mass Effect, Uncharted, Skyrim, Minecraft, The Last of Us, and Rust are just some examples.And then there is the open-world thing, which is equally engaging for most players. And certainly far more than raiding or arenas.

With that being said, there is no excuse for the lore not to be adhered to in the game, and unravel in it. Just some false design-related decisions that seek to alleviate negative effects were there are none or are extremely faint. Seeing Cairne's final battle for example should have been a glorious cinematic in the game; the latter's financial success can pay for at least something that important to have been presented in such a manner. Not every race has to be able to play as every class, it ruins their uniqueness. Racial campaigns, and class questlines should be ever-present, they add some very important identity traits to each character. And so on.

This is not a book, certainly. It isn't a moba either though.

[Sesto]

Because the guys at Blizzard believe that gameplay is what gives the game replay value and longivity. Lore is there to support the gameplay (give purpose, direction in progress). Check out some of their core values, lore isn't even mentioned.

http://us.blizzard.com/en-us/company/about/mission.html

By "gameplay first" they clearly mean they think of their games before anything else. Nothing in the description suggests that they mean gameplay is the most important thing to them -- it is about the experience as a whole, which includes lore.

[Deleted]

By "gameplay first" they clearly mean they think of their games before anything else. Nothing in the description suggests that they mean gameplay is the most important thing to them -- it is about the experience as a whole, which includes lore.

Well if gameplay includes lore, wtf is the point of this debate? Recently Rob Pardo talked how "control is king" and they'd sacrifice pretty much anything in its sake, giving an example how mounts work in WoW. They appear and disappear in a puff of smoke, which makes no sense, but that allows you to instantly engage in combat if attacked and that's more important to them. This is the video:

http://www.media.mit.edu/video/view/...ons-2014-05-07

[Sesto]

Well if gameplay includes lore, wtf is the point of this debate?

That isn't what I said. The "Gameplay first" tagline is just an easy way to get across that they care about games before anything else. The actual description says that they care about "the success of the gaming experiences we provide our players" and that they want to "make our games as fun as possible for as many people as we can reach".

They obviously focus their efforts on the actual gameplay, but in your original post you sound as if Blizzard doesn't give a shit about the lore, which is clearly not the case here. They want to provide a solid experience as a whole -- which includes gameplay, lore, music, art, etc.

[Andyclan]

Because you play the game, not the lore
I don't even understand people who are interested in the lore, all honestly. It's pretty irrelevant when it comes to how enjoyable your raid or pvp content is.

I think you forgot the leveling aspect. Many people like to level nice and slow, and read every word of text in every quest, and explore every nook and cranny of every zone and follow the story and really immerse themselves in the fantasy world.

So to some people its just fun animation on a screen that kills time. And to others its an escape from reality and really becoming the character you've created.

[Deleted]

That isn't what I said. The "Gameplay first" tagline is just an easy way to get across that they care about games before anything else. The actual description says that they care about "the success of the gaming experiences we provide our players" and that they want to "make our games as fun as possible for as many people as we can reach".

They obviously focus their efforts on the actual gameplay, but in your original post you sound as if Blizzard doesn't give a shit about the lore, which is clearly not the case here. They want to provide a solid experience as a whole -- which includes gameplay, lore, music, art, etc.

Of course they care about lore, but it's simply there to suit the gameplay not the other way around. For instance, horde got paladins and alliance got shamans in BC for the sole purpose of balancing raid progression between the factions and lore was written to give reason for that.

[Gihelle]

Because most people who play this game care about the gameplay more than the lore.

[Belloc]

Most games tell stories.

Yeah, but no one is going to care about the story if the process of getting to it isn't fun.

Most movies tell stories, too, but if the first 30 minutes are terrible, you're probably not going to finish it.

[Thimagryn]

What about The Stanley Parable? Gameplay is virtually nonexistent except for moving around and clicking (which can be seen as shit gameplay), and yet it is lauded as an amazing game.

Is that really a game, or an interactive narrative?

- - - Updated - - -

For everyone here who says that the reason is because it's a GAME. Have a talk with Bioware, CD Projekt Red, Naughty Dog and Square Enix.

All companies that have reputable gameplay in their AAA games?

[huth]

There are blue posts that justify that the reason why certain events aren't shown in game is because Blizz believes that the gamplay is more important than the lore. Therefore, implementing the events in the game, for lore's sake, would mess with the gameplay. However, one of the many things that make videogames such a unique medium is that gameplay is the lore. The way characters act, react, and pretty much all the action establishes progression and characterization. Why bother having books, comics, other mediums that deeply affect the lore instead of just containing them as asides or isolated events that help characterize individuals? Why not focus on the gameplay first and have the lore spring from the encounter design instead of treating them as separate things?

Because Blizzard believes gameplay is more important than lore, not that lore is completely irrelevant. As for your thread title, you answered that in your first sentence.

[Deleted]

Yeah, but no one is going to care about the story if the process of getting to it isn't fun.

Most movies tell stories, too, but if the first 30 minutes are terrible, you're probably not going to finish it.

That's absolutely true.

[Bigbazz]

WoW does lore pretty well, thankfully gameplay is more important. They could do both though, lore doesn't have to suffer because of gameplay... which doesn't have to suffer for lore.

I think WoW does them both pretty well, in relative terms. Not many MMO's do lore well, and not many MMO's do gameplay as well as WoW.. None of the tab-target GCD based MMO's play as well as WoW.

[Silver Forte]

If a game is really bad but has a good story, I'm not going to want to wade through the terrible gameplay to get to the story. I'd rather read a book at that point.

[Khorm]

@OP: Because WoW isn't a single player game.

[Luko]

Because you play the game, not the lore
I don't even understand people who are interested in the lore, all honestly. It's pretty irrelevant when it comes to how enjoyable your raid or pvp content is.

Easy. I raid two, maybe 3 nights a week and play the game 5 maybe 6 nights a week. In those other 2-4 days, I couldn't give less of a damn about boss mechanics. I'm questing, collecting items, achievements, soloing rares, old content, etc etc. Ya know, playing the game, rather than focusing all of my attention into one aspect of said game.

For those of us who do everything, the lore helps to make that much more meaningful and satisfying. I'm not a huge lore nut, I've read a couple of the books on a trip once, but the relevant content lore is greatly appreciated at the time.