Originally Posted by Chaotica
sorry, it is not because "most of the people" think that way that everyone have to think that way. Wanna speak about literature? I have few friends who actually read all of Harry Potter books and did not like it at all.
Wanna speak about video games standards? I did not like Baldrur's gate nor I liked the Elder Scrolls.
About cinema? My ex did not like the Lord of the Rings.

I agree, there are codes and techniques about "how to make a blockbuster" but they change. so if you wanna speak about what is the best option to make money yeah you're right buddy... thing is I like less and less AAA games because they are just clones, big companies not wanting to take any risks and maximize the profits.
The funny thing is that those "general rules" are slowly killing them. People want new things, this is the reason why crowfunding is working so well. As does Steam

I am not going to lecture you but what killed the US cinema in the 60's was that it remained stuck in its rules and codes.


uuuum, like I said a lot of times already this isn't about personal preference which you seem to confuse with the objective qualities of art (which a coherent plot is part of). It also isn't about cynically produced shovelware by AAA developers. New things aren't generally made by having moronic, nonsensical plots that are more like a string of random events than an opus. There are exceptions of course - Finnegan's Wake or The Naked Lunch, but those are the exception not the rule. Their whole idea is to experiment with plot structures and language. They aren't made randomly with no thought whatsoever like mass produced clones for the lowest common denominator.

I think you misunderstand my intentions and where I'm coming from. Games aren't advanced or easily made enough to turn storytelling on its head yet. Since the medium is still very young we have a lot of way to go. There is some qualities that good RPGs have shown throughout the years that are actually thought-out and there is a reason they are given as examples and their method to be regarded as a staple. BG2 is an example of densely packed content, well designed encounters and well-balanced systems that complement each other, PS:T is an example of good writing, narrative pacing and interesting setting, KotOR 2 is an example of fantastic character development, very well thought-out narrative and the deconstruction of the manichean universe of Star Wars, I really could go on. They have been shown to work not only in practice, but the technical skills and philosophy behind them has been deemed to be in the right direction.

My point is that there are some things that you have to adhere to to be taken seriously. Nobody takes Bethesda's writing seriously because it can't even get the most basic elements of storytelling right. BiowEAre is in the same boat, though their problem is the illogical progression of the narrative. It's very hard trying to explain artistic theory and concepts like this, but suffice it to say I'm not trying to be a douche-bag, trust me. I might sound snobbish, but it isn't my intention, I just stem from my somewhat extensive knowledge of literature, art in general and, of course, video games. My intention is to have a debate, but it's very frustrating when people don't understand the basic premises of the discussion, but start accusing me of all kinds of stuff when I try to explain. Yes, my writing style is a bit blunt, but I don't mean to offend or insult anyone.