I think the bad writing, especially for AAA games is an industry brand/growth problem.
How many more people would play video games now if they could really see them as non-linear interactive Scorsese movies instead of more akin to the plots their kids are watching in cartoons?
Also -- maybe there's some problem with how we think about traditional stories/writing where the author fully guides the reader and interactive experiences like video games.
The best video game stories I have as an avid lifelong gamer are from the emergent story games like Dwarf Fortress Rimworld caves of qud, kenshi, etc where I really feel ownership of the story and its not the same as everyone else's story who played the same game.
If the story quality in an 50 hour more story driven video game was higher though, I might still devote time to do that stuff these days, but as it is I almost never play story driven games except a few indie titles a year.
I think the writing in Baldur's Gate 3 is successful for what it is. It's roughly Marvel movie quality, i.e. dumb but fun, big emotions etc. It's not particularly interesting, and tbh I find the result far less immersive than games with less dialogue but more exploration - at least then I can think my own character's thoughts, instead of being this dumb mute in all the heavy dialogue trees of BG3.
>When I finally played it I couldn't believe that this was what people were holding up as being a master class of game writing.
Interesting. What games in your mind is a master class of game writing?
For a fantasy adventure story taking place in the setting of the forgotten realms the writing can't actually get better imo.
I guess your thinking of something like Last of us? Is last of us or last of us 2 truly better than BG3 in terms of writing? I would say it's equivalent. It's just a different genre. If you want deep compelling character studies with the backdrop of a typical YA setting then Last of us, Planescape torment or disco elysium is right up your alley.
These are just different genres. People often conflate good writing with the genre. It's why science fiction rarely if ever has won the pulitzer prize.
Most likely you have a genre preference in the same away the academy awards have a genre preference.
My genre preference is exactly the genre Baldur's Gate 3 is, I've played dozens of CRPGs and that's why I'm so convinced it's not anything special.
I'm also fairly convinced that the hype for it is largely from people who aren't familiar with the genre and think games are still only FPS games. Hopefully they will discover that there exists a wealth of other CRPGs out there for them to experience. Better ones.
No. Even among the existing fare the best which is Planescape torment and Disco Elysium. Baldurs gate 3 is nearly the top. I think it's better than fallout 1 and 2.
Haven't had the chance to play Disco Elysium yet, but Planescape Torment, Fallout 1 and 2 are definitely in my top 5 ever. I'm genuinely curious to see what kind of games the OP is thinking of (besides BG1/2, probably?).
I was hesitant to share my own picks because I feel that it's only inviting criticism, but I decided to assume good faith and trust that you are genuinely curious and not just looking for ammunition to nitpick me.
I will freely admit that most of these don't have the most incredible stories either. But they are all CRPGs I enjoyed vastly more than Baldur's Gate 3.
Yeah that's not a common list. Planescape torment is frequently listed as the best (in terms of writing only). No criticism here but your preferences are different enough that I would say your definitions of good and bad are outside the shared reality people usually talk about when they refer to what's the best crpgs.
The writing is not anything special. What is special is the nonlinear nature of the gameplay and how the story stays coherent around it. It's not perfect but there is not really anything else like it.
This is another absolutely baffling statement people keep making about Baldurs Gate 3.
CRPGs have done nonlinear gameplay narratives for decades at least.
Hell, even Larian's previous games do exactly this same thing. Baldur's Gate 3 has a ton of the same story beats and gameplay structure as Divinity Original Sin 2, even down to starting the game in a shipwreck!
The idea that there's not really anything else like it is just plain wrong.
Look I'm glad that so many people got their first exposure to CRPGs with Baldur's Gate 3 and think they've experienced something amazing.
I think I just finally understand how my Dad felt when my sister was trying to tell him about this amazing band called "The Beatles"
There's nothing else like it in terms of quality. Most CRPGs don't have full voice overs and animations for EVERY conversation option. Many don't allow you to just kill every single key character and still maintain narrative flow.
The writing is excellent. The plot is generic. A generic plot isn't necessarily a bad thing either. Some of the best movies follow a generic arc, Star wars the MCU are all good because of the genericness. A lot of people are just snobbish. Not you, but I feel that's where a lot of the judgement comes from.
> Most CRPGs don't have full voice overs and animations for EVERY conversation option
Dragon age had this a decade ago
> Many don't allow you to just kill every single key character and still maintain narrative flow
I am skeptical that Baldur's Gate 3's scripting is actually this resilient. Regardless, games like Fallout had this sort of behavior two decades ago.
> The writing is excellent. The plot is generic
The writing will wind up seeming better depending on how you play.
Spoiler ahead:
For example, Shadowheart has a big decision to kill or not kill an enemy of Shar at the end of act 2. My friend loved this moment because he let her choose and she chose to abandon Shar because she felt it was wrong, despite all of her firm claims to be absolutely devout. He felt it made Shadowheart nuanced and like she knew the right thing to do despite her indoctrination.
I rolled persuasion to convince her not to kill the person, and it made her seem absolutely player-centric and super easy to convince to turn her back on Shar. It was terrible writing.
But I didn't want her to kill the person. And I was honestly surprised that was her default action if you let her choose.
Vastly different experiences, one seems like good writing, one seems bad.
Fine maybe not the only one. But very very few are like it.
>I am skeptical that Baldur's Gate 3's scripting is actually this resilient. Regardless, games like Fallout had this sort of behavior two decades ago.
No fallout doesn't come close. Fallout is structured so you can't kill critical main characters until it's time. They structure the script in a way where it's impossible. This is way better than putting up invulnerability guards the way most games do.
Bg 3 solves the issue by using replacement characters. You kill off a critical person to early another person will take his place and fulfill his role.
I suspect the developers have some sort of plot hole static checker similar to type checkers that allow them to fill every possible hole.
> Vastly different experiences, one seems like good writing, one seems bad.
You are conflating bad writing with personal preference. Whether a character makes one choice or the other the writers narrate both options the quality of the narration is not what you're commenting on. You're commenting on your preferred choice. Not agreeing with a choice or even not agreeing with writing is not bad writing. For example, I wouldn't call the mien Kampf poorly written even though I disagree with it.
I mean read what you wrote. Where in any of your paragraphs was writing actually commented on? You are commenting more on plot and choices.
> You are conflating bad writing with personal preference
Seems like a silly thing to say. Of course what is good or bad writing is a matter of personal taste. I'm not conflating anything.
> No fallout doesn't come close. Fallout is structured so you can't kill critical main characters until it's time. They structure the script in a way where it's impossible.
> Bg 3 solves the issue by using replacement characters. You kill off a critical person to early another person will take his place and fulfill his role.
That's effectively the same thing. One just feels more video-gamey, but the game's linearity
What happens if you kill the replacement? Does it generate a new person to continue? Seems silly to me.
> This is way better than putting up invulnerability guards the way most games do.
That's just, like, your opinion man.
> I mean read what you wrote. Where in any of your paragraphs was writing actually commented on? You are commenting more on plot and choices.
Plot and choices are part of writing, no? This seems seriously nitpicky.
Writing isn't just "the act of putting words into a sentence", it's all of the decisions that led to that sentence existing.
If I complained that the dialogue often sounded like it came from a high school student (Karlach doing fist pumps and shouting "Hell Yeah" whenever she likes something, for example) would you similarly complain that I'm not talking about the "writing" but the "prose"?
By the way, I didn't disagree when Shadowheart seemed so easily swayed. I just thought she was a poorly written character to have her strong convictions overruled so easily.
Same with Lae'zel when she turned on the Gith queen basically because I told her to.
Two characters that never once expressed any doubts about their divine missions, both turned away from them based on a single choice I made.
>Seems like a silly thing to say. Of course what is good or bad writing is a matter of personal taste. I'm not conflating anything.
It's not silly because there's no point in talking about writing quality if 100% of it was opinion based and wildly different among everyone. Obviously we're talking about a common shared opinion on what good writing is. What I'm saying, again, obviously, is that your opinion, is NOT part of the shared opinion. But do I really need to spell it out? No. This is pedantry. Details only alluded in response to your mechanical retorts. You're fully aware of what I'm saying here but likely were unaware of what you're doing. It's fine I'm redirecting the conversation back on course.
>That's effectively the same thing. One just feels more video-gamey, but the game's linearity
Of course it's effectively the same thing. It's like saying python is the same as rust if the program output is the same. As for the linearity, there's more branches in the BG3 version, but less branches in the fallout version. Generally though the branches for both games converge on a single ending. But even BG3 here as many many more permutations on that ending. It's uncountable I believe.
>That's just, like, your opinion man.
No it's the shared opinion. Which your opinion is not a part of. Man.
>Plot and choices are part of writing, no? This seems seriously nitpicky.
Nope it's not nitpicky. You can have good writing for a shit plot and bad writing for a great plot. Bad writing includes things like grammar, poor word choice, miss-spellings poor descriptions. Plots can be made without writing. For example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIPV1iwzrzg This is an example of a plot with no writing.
>Writing isn't just "the act of putting words into a sentence", it's all of the decisions that led to that sentence existing.
Those decisions don't have to lead to writing. See above. writing is about conveying the intent. The act of conveyance is complex and nuanced. It can mask and influence the intent. For example the English translation of popular wushu novels just don't carry the same weight in the US as they do in China.
>If I complained that the dialogue often sounded like it came from a high school student (Karlach doing fist pumps and shouting "Hell Yeah" whenever she likes something, for example) would you similarly complain that I'm not talking about the "writing" but the "prose"?
Prose is part of writing. But prose refers to like the "flavor" more. Writing in general also encompasses structure, detail, descriptions outside of the flavor. Like for example imagine you have chatGPT generate a picture of a flower. Then you have chatGPT generate the same picture of that flower but as a water color paining. Two different flavors. But the angle of the camera and the time of day of capture and the details in the foreground or the background would be the "writing". Plot requires a middle beginning and end which most pictures don't have but some pictures can have an aspect of it.
>By the way, I didn't disagree when Shadowheart seemed so easily swayed. I just thought she was a poorly written character to have her strong convictions overruled so easily.
It was probably by design. They wanted a feel good story where she ended up taking the redemption route. In that case I would say the plot was also excellently designed. I think although they allow for the existence of alternate paths, they have the choices designed in a way where you are a bit funneled down a most probable path. That path is shadowheart being redeemed. It just wasn't designed for the kind of high brow ultra realistic character studies you seem to like. If you want something catered to your tastes try Disco Elysium if you haven't already.
>Same with Lae'zel when she turned on the Gith queen basically because I told her to.
It's done purposefully as I said. There's still randomness here. I only got all the characters to do what I want because I was save scumming like a mad man. The save scumming is permitted which is ALSO a design choice. The plot is engineered well, but likely not for you.
>Two characters that never once expressed any doubts about their divine missions, both turned away from them based on a single choice I made.
I believe most people were supposed to Fail that persuasion check with shadow heart. I saved scummed it like crazy so I got passed it like you did. But the algorithm wanted to bend the path in that direction anyway. You COULD convince her to kill, but you might have to save scum that too. It depends.
No problem. Apologies that it got heated and I hope you aren't leaving because of that.
To explain I only raised the temperature because you said what I said was silly and because you mocked me with the whole, "man" thing. Did not appreciate that all and I thought it was fucking rude. Wasn't that offended by it though, but I did raise the temperature in kind.
Just saying all this in case you're leaving because of that. I wanted to explain my side. If you're not leaving because of that please ignore. Good day to you too either way.
I didn't call you silly. I said I thought you said something silly.
There is a difference, and it's important. If you think someone is silly, then you won't respect anything they say. You can respect someone's opinion and still think they say some silly things.
I do not think you are silly. I apologize if you got that impression.
I do think you have a very different perspective of what makes for good writing than I do though, and I don't think there's any point continuing to discuss the matter. That's all.
> CRPGs have done nonlinear gameplay narratives for decades at least.
CRPGs have done the illusion of nonlinear gameplay narratives for decades. Baldur's Gate 3 simply has a vastly more polished version of it, rather than paying lip service like recent, mainline RPGs - anything from Bethesda for example.
It's something I've been saying for years honestly. Most game writing is bad. This has always been the case. The result is that gamers have very low expectations for the writing. And for many people now, their primary exposure to writing is through videogames and blockbuster movies, so they don't have any other baseline for comparing against. I also think that the quality of the execution matters more than the actual story. A lot of games have basically the same stories but one will be praised and the other not, because one executes the story better.
Anyways, my main point is that standards for game writing is so low that really mediocre stuff gets a lot of praise by comparison to even worse stuff.
D&D players too; your campaign will be a combination of improv and the writing of your friend who is DMing. Everyone is doing it for fun and nobody is a professional, the “writing” expectations are not super high.
The lore for D&D is extremely well done. Better than even a novel. The reason is because the game is all about lore, so the focus was on world building. While for a story the lore is their only to serve the story.
If there was some sort of writing Pulitzer prize just for world building, D&D would be up there.
I'm not talking about the novels. I'm talking about the dungeons and dragons setting which is part of the game.
Forgotten realms is just one "region" in the setting. It is one universe in a multiverse of regions. This multiverse is called Planescape. All d&d games that I know about utilize that setting. In Planescape any arch way or opening can be a potential portal to another realm. You just need the right key. The key could be an object, a leaf, or a childhood memory or a song that can take you to another world when you walk through the archway of which there are an infinite amount. The forgotten realms is one of these places. But I'm repeating myself. You played torment so you know this as it takes place in the city of sigil the city that lies at the nexus of the multiverse.
I mean there are books dedicated to just describing the d&d setting and if they gave out awards for settings, these books would win. The novels aren't part of this. That's what I'm saying.
It is a good setting for running a game in, in the sense that it is an everything-setting where you can justify access to any planes. It produces a framework where you can throw ideas at the wall and they stick pretty well.
I don’t think this sort of flexibility indicates great writing in the literary sense. It is like a better thought out version of Marvel’s multiverse stuff: a really functional way of giving somebody working in a setting the latitude to select parts of that setting as needed. It is designed by an organization to achieve a goal for the game system, not to be great art.
The goal for the game system is created to facilitate great stories. It's art, and no other piece of fantasy lore matches it in depth, breadth and consistency to my knowledge.
The amount of artists and writers who created it makes it art in my eyes. There's no other utility for it other than story telling either. If that's not art, what is it? The snobs at the Pulitzer who haven't even awarded a win to sci Fi novel may think otherwise but to each their own. In terms of the topic at hand, fantasy lore, there's few that can rival d&d.
Let's be real too. Baldurs gate and torment weren't made because of the great d&d gameplay system... The creators wanted to utilize the lore.
Planescape is a good omni-setting for telling whatever type of story in whatever type of genre you want. Other systems benefit from being more focused. Glorantha is better if you want a Bronze Age sword and sandals setting, IMO, but if you want to do funky multiverse stuff it has basically nothing for you.
Anyway, I think the reason literary organizations don’t award settings is because they are generally interested in stores, and settings are just a component of that. I’m sure you could find some industry awards for setting development, and I bet Planescape stuff does well there. They are just not as interesting to outsiders.
Also I want to push back on your “the topic at hand.” I was talking about the stories themselves. You’ve changed the topic to settings. I’m not sure I want to come along on a tangent where we talk about setting in-and-of-themselves. The article was about why game writing is often bad. I think it is not settings, games often have great settings, but poor stories.
The Pulitzer never awarded a sci Fi so it tells you what they think. It's obvious why settings don't get awards it's because world building is sorta niche. Not popular enough to be considered "serious".
Agreed on your last part. Games have great setting and not as good stories.
But my point was d&d is great for what it is: settings for stories rather then the stories themselves. I think you disagree with this, and you think the setting is more subservient to the gameplay but I'll reference Warhammer then. Warhammer clearly has a focus on setting at many times over gameplay. And my argument is that d&d is largely similar.
I mean, I doubt you are in any position to judge the writing of PS:T just based on descriptions of it.
The writing of PS:T is vastly better than an “Adventures of Drizzt Do’urden, part 153” YA fantasy novel or what have you. Perhaps it wouldn’t win a Pulitzer if it were a book, but for a computer game the writing is incredibly good.
But what’s really shocking about the writing is
1. How much of it there is
2. How well it showcases the utter weirdness of Planescape compared to your standard D&D settings like Forgotten Realms
3. How it subverts, inverts, lampshades or in any other way plays with every major high fantasy and D&D trope that you can think of. Whatever you have heard of the writing, there’s nothing generically “D&D” about it.
The pulitzer prize is a genre award. Don't rely on that. They conflate genre with good writing in the sense that only books about deep character studies or books about racism and things of that deep nature ever win.
PS:T can win a Hugo. The Hugo award is something that gets it right. They can admit they're awarding stuff to a narrow genre while the Pulitzer is deceptive in the sense they don't ever admit to the narrowness of their decisions. I don't think a Sci Fi has ever won a Pulitzer.
That attitude is representative of a lot of what's going on in this thread. This sort of snobbishness where people mistake good writing and bad writing for what is in actuality genre preferences.
I also wouldn't advertise the setting of PS:T too much. Yes it's unique, but that's only a small part of the reason why it's good. Torment's informal sequel: Tides of Numenera had the same unique setting but wasn't nearly as good because it lacked the core. Torment was good because it was compelling and haunting. The setting is just icing on the cake.
No. Planescape torment is significantly better than a YA novel. This isn't Harry Potter.
Torment can win a hugo if it was a book. It's that good. Better than a lot of hugo winners too.
I get where you're coming from though. Planescape has elements of a YA novel, it's designed to be a page turner and the like. The setting is also very unique and fantastical and that gives it a bit of a YA novel flavor because people conflate this for the reason for why it's good in their "rave reviews". Like "wow! such an imaginative setting for an adventure!" and that kind of thing.
But make no mistake the game is haunting. When you finish it you're different. It's def not just some typical adventure story in some wildly fantastical setting. Read this review, (the first part before she gets in to deep into the fantasy elements and side characters) she couldn't have put it better:
"If computer games developers ever hope to stake their claim in the mature artistic mainstream alongside painting, music and literature, it won’t happen by coming up with ever more capable engines, sweeter eye candy or addictive gameplay, though it won’t happen without them either. It will happen by drafting all of the above into the service of compelling characters such as these, characters who make you care about them, characters who send you pawing for the reload command because you simply cannot possibly conceive of moving another inch without them. Planescape Torment accomplishes all this and more, capturing the player’s heart and intellect, taking him on a long, fraught journey through one of the most unique settings I’ve experienced in any medium and wrapping it up in a stunning, jaw-dropping finale."
"Don’t approach this CRPG too lightly. It’s the gaming equivalent of War and Peace, slow to start, frustratingly obscure at times, yet once that great narrative engine finally revs up, it moves the player along with breathtaking authority. I’ve only played it once so far. Usually I play a game twice before sitting down to review it, but I’m not ready to reenter the world of Planescape Torment just yet. There’s something about this game. It’s disturbing, haunting and heavy. I’ve never seen anything quite like it."
Like her I was never able to play it twice. I was left in something of a state of awe when I finished the game, but not really... I can't describe it.. It's that same feeling when you finish a really good book.
It's unfortunate that it's wrapped up in the skin of a YA novel. But in actuality the skin only adds to it and makes it better, but at it's core it stands above that. Way above that.
BG3 is what I dreamed about videogames being like when I was a kid. It's the only one to ever live up to that dream but it did it fully and perfectly.
The writing is good, especially for a fantasy video game, and the story branches and voice acting is incredible, but the entire game is just absolutely unbelievably amazing.
I loved how when it released a lot of game studios were putting out news stories trying to lower the public's expectation for other games.
I feel more like it was just one of the few games where they really made it for the users -- and like you say all the data even said they wouldn't make that much money. Everything now not even just in video games is just about how to leech more money or attention out of people, and I think that's part of why it stood out too.
Disco Elysium is amazing because it's a story that is told in a way possible only in videogames. Your "skills" just create voices in your head that let you know things, giving you more information or dialogue choices.
You: What's a "contact microphone"?
Acele: A contact mic records sounds from inside things. Like this ice.
Encyclopedia: Your mangled brain would like you to know that there is a boxer called Contact Mike.
You: Yeah? Any news on my wife's name? How about my mother?
Encyclopedia: Nope. You're welcome.
--
Inland Empire: What if you only appear as a large singular body, but are actually a congregation of tiny organisms working in unison?
Physical Instrument: Get out of here, dreamer! Don't you think we'd know about it?
Volition: If it were true those organisms would not be working in unison.
Endurance: That's because some of them just don't have the best interests of the colony in mind.
Electrochemistry: Hey, maybe if the rest of you took a chill-pill every now and then, they'd be more motivated?
Perception: Shut up, we can't hear what he's saying!
I did and played it most of the way through and enjoyed it. Also played BG3 and loved it so it's not that I never play them but it has to be masterpiece level
How many more people would play video games now if they could really see them as non-linear interactive Scorsese movies instead of more akin to the plots their kids are watching in cartoons?
Also -- maybe there's some problem with how we think about traditional stories/writing where the author fully guides the reader and interactive experiences like video games.
The best video game stories I have as an avid lifelong gamer are from the emergent story games like Dwarf Fortress Rimworld caves of qud, kenshi, etc where I really feel ownership of the story and its not the same as everyone else's story who played the same game.
If the story quality in an 50 hour more story driven video game was higher though, I might still devote time to do that stuff these days, but as it is I almost never play story driven games except a few indie titles a year.