Gamer Limit Banner

Lost Odyssey's "A Thousand Years of Dreams"

A couple of weeks back, Jeff Effendi posted that “games without storylines suck”. He claims that without a strong narrative to guide our actions, not even the deepest mechanics or the most cohesive designs can carry a game. Players do need direction, but only basic incentives are required. Expanding the role of story very rarely makes games any better.

Where is line drawn to separate “good” narrative from “bad” narrative? A lot of the most beloved games feature the simplest of narratives that, while not Oscar-quality epics, are not necessarily “terrible” either. As long as the game provides the right amount of context for your character and his/her mission, you’ll never worry about not getting enough mileage out of your ride.

I mark the PlayStation era and games like Metal Gear Solid and Final Fantasy VII as the birth of the cinematic movement. Prior to that time, most games delivered story not with voice acting or lengthy scrolls of text, but through the context of your on-screen actions. In fact, a lot of pivotal information such as backstory was relegated to ancillary materials like manuals or strategy guides.

Sonic the Hedgehog saved the world with speed and inference

Consider Sonic the Hedgehog for the Sega Genesis. You play as a blue hedgehog who runs at breakneck speeds to rescue his animal friends from the sinister Dr. Robotnik. That’s the extent of the story; even so, a lot of information was withheld from the game itself. Unless you read the manual, you’d have no clue about the significance of the Chaos Emeralds. More surprisingly, at no point during the game was Robotnik’s name ever mentioned.

The adventure itself was the story. You began in your lush homeland, raced through ancient ruins, made your way through the city, and finally arrived at the villain’s robot factory. Though no clear link existed between levels, you formed a link in your mind. When you smashed your first Badnik and freed the trapped critter within, you discovered that these robots were just your friends in need of your aide. All this was relayed with nary a word of dialogue.

Most people would say Sonic the Hedgehog had no story. Why? Because there weren’t any cutscenes or Eleventh Hour reveals? Other games of the era such as Mega Man and Super Mario Bros. employed similar bare-bones narratives – didn’t bother anyone. Even Pac-Man featured humorous intermissions that served as rewards for completing a number of levels.

The "Space" in Space Invaders was all it took

The key word here is “context”, object and event associations that every game uses to engage an audience. Space Invaders was about a single turret defending the Earth from an alien swarm, but imagine if it was titled Shoot ‘Em Down and the enemy sprites were edited to appear less alien. The sci-fi hook capitalizing on the recently released Star Wars film was the big draw, and I doubt the game would have been remembered without it.

It’s more appropriate to say that games require strong context rather than strong story in order to be any good. As long as a game presents a cohesive world with adequate incentives, any extra data to flesh out the story is just window dressing. That’s why the sports and puzzle genres don’t require any kind of framing fiction, only adherence to a set of rules that make sense in the context of the game.

So when Jeff says that “games without storylines suck”, he’s referring to that extra window dressing. He wants games to push literary and cinematic benchmarks, for narrative to graduate from a mere supplementary diversion to one of the chief focuses of the medium. If we subscribe to this, we must assume that there is a point at which narrative is rich enough to ensure a memorable experience.

New Super Mario Bros. Wii revives the spirit of the NES

That brings me right back to my original question: where is the line drawn between good and bad? Can a game only be good if the story meets some nebulous complexity benchmark? Certainly the “rescue the princess” scenario in New Super Mario Bros. Wii doesn’t hinder what is regarded as a revival of the essence that defined the NES generation. Would it have benefited from a dose of Machiavellian intrigue or interwoven plot threads?

Saying that gaming needs to evolve as a storytelling venue is almost an admission that there are no significant genres or innovations left to discover. As such, the only way to advance is through the generous application of literature and film techniques. Is gaming so stale that the only way to muster an interest in future endeavors is by hanging on to the promise of greater overlap with other disparate and more developed mediums?

I’m disgusted by the notion that the only way a game can be memorable is through its story. Not to discredit impactful scenes like the death of Aeris or the battle against GLaDOS, but if video games cannot inspire and excite on the merits of game design alone then what does that make gaming? Is it just a vehicle for interactive story-telling?

Missile rides in Contra III

Remember finding your first hidden 1-up in Super Mario Bros.? How about being chased by the Mecha Dragon in Mega Man 2? Or rocket-surfing in Contra III? Or rolling a wad in Katamari Damacy? None of these are directly related to key events in their respective game’s narratives, but you’d be hard-pressed to say they didn’t leave a lasting impression on gamers.

These types of gameplay moments are effective because they celebrate user control. The more innovative the technique employed, the more likely you’ll see it influence the play styles of future titles. Even the most vocal supporters of expanded narrative have to admit that emotional connections to particular gameplay traits and applications are at the very least as strong as the connections to those memorable triumphs in story-telling.

Perhaps the issue in Jeff’s specific case is that he’s immersed in a very narrow variety of styles. In his article, he name-dropped Killzone 2, made frequent references to gunplay, and posted images of top-shelf, Hollywood-ized epics. If that is in any way a reflection of his current gaming habits, I can understand why he would turn towards narrative as the key differentiator. If the games you play place heavy emphasis on story, naturally you’ll have a strong desire to witness evolution in that direction.

Halo 3 multiplayer

Besides, all this discussion is really only relevant in the single-player space. Is the reason so many people purchased Modern Warfare 2 or Halo 3 because of the engaging narrative or because of the robust online multiplayer that lengthened the life of the titles indefinitely? In the Smash Bros. franchise, the single-player modes are forgettable afterthoughts while the free-for-all brawls are the real meat and potatoes. Given how multiplayer is the medium’s biggest draw, clearly there are other elements that users value more than how “deep” and “engrossing” the story is.

Pumping up story for the sake of pumping up story may please some people, but I don’t see it having an effect on gaming evolution to any significant degree. We should have no problem forming connections and maintaining interest as long as games provide adequate context and the elements of play and user empowerment continue to be refined and distilled.

That should be how gaming gains credibility.

  1. While I agree games don’t NEED big expanded story lines, they’re not nearly as good as games with story lines. Take the 16-bit era you used so much. Sonic vs. Chrono Trigger now which ones better? Lots of people will have different answers. Some will say Sonic because they rather that type of game while others will say Chrono Trigger because of the story and gameplay. Either way you go about it you and the other guy is wrong. There is no definite answer, there is only opinions. I would much prefer a game with a story so that I feel like i’m working towards something. The next person in line might say otherwise. Either way I can name 20 different reasons why your wrong and 20 different reasons why your right. No definite answer.

  2. There are two different schools of thought here. Ludology and Narratology. There are great games from both sides and deciding whether a game should have a story or not is based on the developers ultimate goal. Sonic would be terrible with a story, and Chrono Trigger would be terrible without.

    This is like trying to decide who is right in politics. It’s all personal opinion for the player and the developer.

    If you want a great example of a game that is able to combine both of these without losing anything, PLEASE play Shadow of the Colossus; If you have not already.

  3. Shadow of the Colossus is a classic, I love that game.


    I just think games should evolve into something more than mindless entertainment, but that’s just me. I think we’re passed the Chuck Norris flicks, the Steven Segal B-grade movies. We’re looking for something more in cinema (ie. District 9, Hurt Locker), something with more meaning. And to me, the same can be said about videogames. Without a storyline to take away with us, games will forever be mindless entertainment.

    To those who play videogames for just that, it’s perfectly fine. But for those who want to feel like they’ve gotten to know new characters, a deeper understanding of a universe, and a tale to remember, games with storyline would indeed be a better fit.

    Nonetheless, a great write-up, I enjoyed reading it.

  4. @Jeff

    I agree totally, my personal opinion is i’d much rather games with a great storyline because I love getting to know the characters. It helps me hype up for sequels to come in the future. I do play some games without story lines, but I would much rather sit down with an RPG and be engrossed in the story and characters.

  5. Either argument is too restrictive, because it depends entirely on the style of game. Sometimes it can be annoying wading through textual backstory in games like Soul Calibur, when all you want to do is get fighting. However, I couldn’t imagine playing an epic RPG without an equally as epic story. Think back to Final Fantasy VII when Airies dies and the genuine sadness you feel because of the connection you have with the character. Anyhow, good article!

  6. I do think you make a good point about “context”. When I discuss this in reviews, I usually call it “good direction” or “use of non-verbal communication”, something which the vast majority of narrative-driven games seem to completely ignore as a powerful narrative device.

    Still, I can’t entirely agree that storylines in games don’t matter; a good narrative can absolutely be what drives a game (i.e the entire Adventure Game genre). It can also take a game that’s mediocre on paper and turn it into a wonderful, unforgettable experience (Ico), although Ico was powerful because of its “context”.

    So, I guess I think that storylines in games can, in some cases, take an otherwise mediocre experience and turn it into a remarkable one. Not all games need cinematic, narrative-driven stories, though. Good article, and I’m really glad you brought up the concept of “context”! Games need to stop ignoring that aspect of narration.

  7. I cannot get behind this as an idea that storylines do not matter or the way that you have outlined what a storyline is. To use one of your examples of sonic and its storyline I have to say your agument seems more directed at story telling technique than at storylines.

    While noone will be telling their kids the brave tales of sonic what you have missed is that narrative defines gameplay as much as gameplay can define narrative. Without the narrative to tell why you are doing it finding your first 1up or riding a missile mean nothing.

    If you compare a game now to a game from 20 years ago they are almost unrecognisable as the same beast. Every area in games has improved 1000% with the exception of stroryline (with a few removed) and that is a shame. We still chase princesses, collect rings and all our bases belong to them.

    Its not about adding twists for the sake of twists, or pumping up as standard and i don’t need mario to have a love triangle or sonic’s quest for rings be an allegory of the economic climate. What I need are games to step up and move forward and storytelling is the element of gaming dragging its feet.

    There was a point where just a moving image was enough to be a film, a handful of pictures was enough to be a comic and a pleasing melody enough to be a song. All of those mediums had to grow and character development, emotional resonance, social commentary and well crafted narratives had to appear. There was a time when a simple repetitive action blending both skill and luck was enough to be a game but now i need more and people have the means to give me more so i expect it and i expect it to be good.

    That is how gaming moves forward and anything else is a step backwards

  8. @Cynicalmonkey

    You are growing up before my eyes!

    • avatar Neto

      That’s cool! But I don’t use webkinz friedns! I do have an iPad though, but I can’t play just plain webkinz which I love to play. Please Ganz can you make Webkinz World available on ipad.

  9. @Cynicalmonkey

    Agreed 100%, that’s what I’ve been trying to say.

  10. I will say that Mario Galaxy is possibly the best game this generation, and had little to no story (nor did it matter).

  11. avatar Joe

    I find that this fad of making games try to be hollywood blockbusters with intricate storylines is hurting the video game industry. the more ‘movie-ized’ a game becomes, the less of a game it actually is.

    the 2 best examples of this are Metal Gear Solid 4 and Uncharted 2. now both were met with over the top critical acclaim, but in reality all they do is try and make a game less like a game and more like a movie.

    take Uncharted 2 for example: every single thing in that game is so scripted that i could play it through from start to finish 5 times, and the only thing that would change on each playthrough is how quickly i killed the enemies in the pre-determined shootout areas. theres never more than one way to go, because the story requires you to be at a certain point every few minutes. if theres a room i need to get to, i have to climb that trail of bricks mysteriously sticking out of the wall leading to the room, because the story says that i need to do it that way so the last brick can fall out and as such i have no way back down.

    ive been a video game player for 20+ years, and this trend is worrying me. i like to play video games, not merely hold forwards and press x every now and then in an effort to get to the next cutscene. Metal Gear Solid 4 was the worst for this – I completed the game in 18 hours, and 11 of that was spent watching boring, repetitive cutscenes that just rambled on about the same thing in every single one. I would finally get the controller and control of the character, only to find that i start at point A on one side of a linear map, and just have to get to Point B, while shooting wave after endless wave of infinitely respawning bad guys, or by waiting for the gaps in the pre-determined and static patrol routes of the enemies so i could sneak up to the next shadow and do it all again.

    never have I ‘played’ 2 games that left so little gameplay and progression up to the player. then seeing how these 2 games have rated so highly and been awarded every award under the sun and been called the best games of all time, it just makes my heart sink. is this what people actually want out of video games? if you want to see the next hollywood blockbuster, why not just go watch it? i dont want my videogames to just be a series of connect the dots in order to make it ‘cinematic’.

  12. Many old games didn’t have storylines because of the technological limitations of older systems, which is why many of the examples used in this article as “good games that don’t need storylines” are retro games or retro revivals, which refuse to grow up with the rest of the gaming industry. Games today have storylines because we have the technology to deliver more than just “mindless action” (although there ARE some times when you just want to Michael Bay it up and blow up everything). Tetris has no story, and is awesome. Tetris was released in the 80′s. Games have evolved since then, and advances made in storytelling are a key area in gaming becoming legitimatized and recognized as an art form and a “real” narrative/entertainment medium.

    But Cynical Monkey basically made all the other good points (and very eloquently, I might add), so I’ll stop there.


    @ Tony

    “Let me just say that you are wrong.” :P Nice write-up, though!

  13. @Joe

    You definitely have some valid points, especially about MGS4. I’m currently playing the game, and it just feels like I’m forced to go from point A to point B to watch a long drawn out conversation that’s way too complicated to enjoy. Also the bouncing around from one end to the other leaves a very unsatisfied feeling.

    On the other hand, I personally enjoyed all the cinematics in UC2. Call me a simple minded person, but I was so entertained by the balance of game play and cinematics that I really appreciate the block buster movie aspect of it. You play through a fun and exciting adventure and watch an epic cut scene or watch the characters’ personalities unfold. Maybe it’s just me, but I really enjoyed the game.

    As you mentioned though, the drawback to the storytelling is that nothing is going to change the second time around when you want to play the game a different way or unearth hidden secrets.

    • avatar Melvin

      I really sulhod get around to it, I did like MW2 very well, although the missions always seem too short. The problem is that when I bought it and I finished the missions of mw2..suddenly my life got crazy and I didn’t have any online gaming time since I bought it. And now the next one is up hmm difficult decission. Reply

  14. avatar Dino

    dude a game with a story is a matter of opinion, personally i find a game with a story IS THE BEST i cant stand games without storys the only reason i would play a game without a story would be to beat a friend at it but i dont find many of those.

    a game with a story is a more fulfilling experience then games without stories the games mentioned here are all old school games short of halo. dude storys are really important sence if halo is your why storys are not important in modern gaming i hate to break this to you but… HALO SUCKS BALLS, and no one wants to mention it but games like halo and modern warfare 2 they really only have one thing thats memorable and thats playing them with good friends its not the game that makes the memories or makes it a great game even its the people you play with,

    in games with good and great stories it dosent matter if you are playing with friends or not( they are better with friends though) you get conected to the charecters even though they are not allways the best you really feel a conection to the charecters sometimes as little as just laughing your ass at the scene in Drakes fortune where eddy gets eaten by the nazis after screaming no one messes with eddy, to something as touching as the end of mgs4 where snake put the gun in his mouth at a grave. i cryed my eyes out (i hated what happend after the credits that was a rape of mgs) but still its memories like that where the single game becoms something like a great book its so memorable its just amazing

  15. Oww, the absence of grammar burns my eyes!

    On a serious note, though, cynicalmonkey pretty much mirrors my thoughts.

  16. avatar Jordan Garski

    You know what I call a game without story? Stupid. It’s like reading a book without words. Yeah, you get to turn a lot of pages… but it proves nothing.

  17. avatar Joe

    @Curtis Takaichi:

    I did enjoy Uncharted 2 for the most part, but the whole time i was thinking ‘why didn’t they just make this a movie instead of a game?’. It just kinda felt like i was just moving through the timeline of a movie at my own pace – I could never go backwards, and I could go forwards at my own speed, but only in the direction the movie goes.

    It felt like nothing I did mattered, as if I got anyone else over to play it it would look basically exactly the same. I mean, even the AI is designed to constantly keep you moving forward – if you stay behind cover for about 10 seconds, the AI will throw pinpoint accurate grenades at you to force you to move. It’s all geared towards making it look like a movie to the person playing (or watching), with little regard towards how it actually plays.

    Now having said all that, I am glad that I played through it because despite how generic the whole story is, and how many times they had the same sort of cutscene where someone would jump for a ledge, miss it, only to be caught at the last second by someone (seriously, I must’ve counted about 12 of them), the acting, motion capture and voice work that has gone into it is just incredible, and it’s a pleasure to watch. I probably would’ve had more fun if it had been a 1.5 – 2 hour CG movie instead of a 8-10 hour ‘connect the dots’ style game.

  18. avatar Jason T

    I’d have to disagree with this article. A game without a storyline is comparative to a movie like 2012. Sure it’s fun, but once you leave the cinemas, you take nothing away from it. You can have your Michael Bay games, but when it’s all said and done, the rest of us would like a game that truly mirrors our advancement as a medium. We want our The Godfather, we want our Pulp Fiction, we want videogames to be just as memorable. Storylines, to me, do just that.

  19. avatar Guy

    Story in games came long before the PS era with mostly graphic adventures and RPGs on the PC (try the Ultima series or Gabriel Knight for example). If anything, the PS only diluted story in video games for the hyperactive teen crowd.

    In some cases, a good enough gameplay is enough because gameplay matters most. But for two exact games, a game with a *good* story is tenfold better then a game with no story.

  20. avatar David Macphail

    Generally speaking, storylines in games DO matter, especially in this current generation. How are we supposed to move forwards as an industry if we have the exact same storytelling methods we were using 15 years ago?

    The best comparison i could give is Uncharted 2 VS Gears Of War 2. Uncharted 2 won, as one forum poster already mentioned, every award under the sun. Gears 2 didn’t, why? They are both Third – Person, Cover – Based Shooters with fun online modes. However Uncharted 2 delivered an unequalled storytelling performance throughout the single – player campaign, while Gears 2 was submerged in mediocrity because of it’s lack of decent narrative. If the developer is going to make you run around for 8 hours cutting aliens in half with a chainsaw then the least they can do is tell you WHY you’re doing it. In Uncharted there was a REASON for the events happening, that is the advantage of good storytelling, you know what is happening and you know why you have to do something.

    The most advanced storytelling we have gotten out of some of this generations “Big” games like Halo or Gears Of War is this:

    Main Character: I am a hero.
    Supporting Character: I am also a hero, however to a lesser degree.
    #Aliens fall out of the sky#
    Main Character: Look, aliens!
    Supporting Character: I don’t like them, maybe we should kill them?
    Main Character: Look, i found a gun that doubles as a chainsaw or some other kind of weapon capable of bodily harm.
    Supporting Character: Perhaps that would be of use in this situation?
    #End dialogue#

    That’s being generous to those games, the real dialogue between characters wasn’t nearly as to – the – point as my interpretation of it. If we relied on games like this to carry the industry every other form of entertainment would have remained lightyears ahead of games.

    Fortunately, we had a couple of shining lights that broke the “Killing aliens for absolutely no reason at all” trend. MGS4 and Uncharted 2 showed that our industry CAN move forward as a medium by delivering fantastic gameplay, unparalleled graphics and amazing storytelling all rolled into one. Heavy Rain is another game looking to push even further forward.

    The fact of the matter is, a believable story helps to make you more immersed in the game world, a good story can make you feel a connection with the characters and care what happens next. I don’t mind running around shooting aliens for a lengthy amount of time but if there isn’t a good reason for me to do it then what’s the point of even making the game? Giving the player a gun and saying “Shoot aliens for the high score” is something i would’ve expected 20 years ago but after a while the industry needs to expand and evolve.

    Good storylines in games are a must this generation, if we are to be taken seriously as a medium we need to take a serious approach to the idea of fully involving the player in the game world. MGS4 and Uncharted 2 pushed this industry forwards in terms of storytelling and they deserve all the praise they got. Hopefully other games this year, such as Heavy Rain, Final Fantasy XIII and The Last Guardian can continue the trend.

  21. avatar Jazz

    It’s all circumstantial. On one hand, heavy plot can plow over gameplay if you’re sloppy. However, when used, you can make a game really charming and memorable with minimum effort and only a small budget.

  22. avatar randombullseye

    I’ve never agreed with a title then read a paragrah and a half and assumed I agreed with the jist of an article more.

    Seriously, storylines are usually sup-par save the day storylines anyway. It’s not that difficult to do something cool with a neat premise and just run from there. Save the princess, kill all enemies, move right, it doesn’t matter. Half the time I skip those things anyway.

    • avatar Dathrang

      There seems to be a lot more action in Black Ops so it’s supinrsirgly full on for what I thought would be more of stealth/sniper kind of game compared to the MWs.Also there’s an intense zombie game attached that I lasted all of 30 seconds before freaking out completely and shutting it down Reply

  23. avatar Joe

    Oh great, David McFail is here to ruin this conversation as well.

    Pay no attention to him, he is the biggest PS3 fanboy around N4G and all the sites that get posted on it. He admits that he does not and never has had a 360, yet somehow he criticizes all the 360 exclusives like he knows them like the back of his hand lol.

    Gears of War 2 indeed does have a storyline. You do know why you’re fighting, who you’re fighting, and what you’re trying to achieve. Also, anyone that says Halo 3 doesn’t have a storyline, let alone a compelling one, obviously hasn’t played it or any of the preceeding Halos. There are Halo novels for crying out loud, all expanding on the rich universe that Bungie created.

    Uncharted 2s storyline is just B-Grade Indiana Jones, and both Uncharted and Uncharted 2 feature the exact same ‘twists’ and ‘turns’ story-wise. Uncharted 2 didn’t win awards because of its story, it won awards because of the hype around it and its looks in screenshots and movies released before its release.

    Please guys, if you want to have intelligent conversation like what had already been posted in this article, you’ll just ignore McFail.

  24. actually joe while there is some ps3 allegiance there he makes valid points

    gears of war has an absolutrely terrible storyline and dialogue i played both games and loved the first so much i was willing to buy the second release day. i also feel that halo has a terrible soryline they have just been repeating since the first game (i beieve that ign even did a video of the entire halo plot in 5 minutes if you don’t believe me, its on waypoint) and i have played all the halo games.

    having outside media to flesh out the plot such as books comics and movies doesn’t mean the game has a good story in fact in halo’s case i would say the opposite as without the outside media they don’t provide much story.

    i honestly don’t believe you have played uncharted 2 because that game is worthy of its rewards and for the record its not a b grade indiana jones rip off its an a grade indiana jones rip off.

    while i appreciate your defence of intelligent conversation and trying to prevent people reading the unsubstanciated bias opinions of some one trolling rather than offer points you would of been quicker by not posting.

  25. Ha ha! Fuck anyone who didn’t love the Thousand Years of Dreams in Lost Odyssey. One of the first games to make me baw in a long time ;)

  26. avatar Joe


    I guarantee you I have played Uncharted 2, I bought it on release and have played it to completion on normal difficulty. If you need further proof, give me your PSN ID and I can add you, and you can see my trophies for Uncharted 2 :) .

    Uncharted 2 is a B-Grade ripoff because honestly, the story is so predictable and cheesy that its hard to ignore. The ‘backstabs’, then the ‘oh i wasnt being a traitor i was pretending’, the frequent aforementioned ‘catch the person by the hand as theyre falling to their death’ cutscenes…….none of these plot elements are staples in an A grade movie as theyre just so blase’. Uncharted 1 and 2 are just both full of them. The story in both games are pretty much carbon copies of each other, just with the minor details and locations changed.

    Gears of War and Gears of War 2s acting is pretty horrid, no doubt. The storyline on the other hand I think is very underrated. In the first game, we knew nothing – the Locust just attacked. Who were they? Where are they from? Why are they fighting? We started finding out little details about the locust and about Marcus.

    The second game we found out more about Dom, the Locust, and potentially their origins. We found out more about Marcus and his past (that was alluded to in the first game). Meeting the Queen was a big story-piece as who wouldve guessed she’d be human? All of a sudden that adds a whole new dimension to the story. Gears 3s story should be a cracker, hopefully it’ll answer the unknown about the Locust more than anything.

    Halo, while yes, IGN did a ‘Halo in 5 minutes’, think about how short that would be if they did it on Uncharted. 1 minute maybe? Hell, you could explain the storyline for the entire Star Wars saga in 5 minutes. The storyline is so open and detailed that theyre making an entire prequel (Reach) based on something that was fleetingly mentioned back in the original halo, but was mentioned as a pivotal point. We know Reach falls, but we don’t know what happened or how. Honestly, when playing the Halo games you might not take in all of the story, but when you go back through a second time (or read about it on the net, wikipedia for example) you pick up on much more of the storyline.

    McFail thinks that games like MGS4 are ‘industry changers’ and the best games available, purely because they’re not on the 360. There’s no if’s or but’s about it, he is a full blown PS3 fanboy. He regularly admits he doesn’t have a 360, never has and never will, and that he hasn’t even played any of these games that he ridicules.

    I mean, take a look what he said on an article about Halo: Reach:

    “There are no 360 games that appeal to me at all. I don’t like generic FPS games with no story and bad graphics so i won’t be playing Halo: Reach. In fact, generic FPS and bad graphics pretty much sums up all 360 games so i guess i won’t be playing any of them.

    Microsoft’s online service is a joke and you would have to be utterly stupid to pay twice for your internet connection”

    Doesn’t really sound like a logical or un-biased guy, does he?

    • avatar Dangvan

      Yehuda1) I think being unselfish, or alsuiittrc, is something that goes against natural human instincts- mainly the instinct of survival. Giving up something for the welfare of someone else in certain circumstances puts you at a disadvantage to them and in a society that is not structured like ours would be quite the disability. Altruistic deeds done in modern times i believe are done for the sake of making one’s self feel good, like you are helping to better society, it is not done out of selflessness. 2) In my opinion, reasons behind actions do and don’t matter depending on the circumstance. Even if someone does not understand how volunteering or giving charity help a cause they are still devoting resources to it and helping out. If the objective is not personal gain then i think the motive behind charitable actions is not important, although one should know what they are helping.

    • avatar Pavel

      lo k has hecho colgando este video en yobuute es que los de naughty dog vean el video y solo dejen hasta el 2ba o 3r segundo cojer los potenciadores nos has jodido

  27. avatar Matt

    Rebecca S1) I don’t think that people are nalrualty altruistic. Everyone does things for selfish reasons even if that reason is just feeling good about themselves. People respond to specific incentives in order to gain for themselves, or in order to feel good about something that they’ve done. For example, if you take decide to give someone who you don’t know money, then both of you are really gaining something. The other person gains money, and you gain the satisfaction of knowing that you did something good. 2) The reason why someone chooses to do something positive for another person, doesn’t matter as much as the act that is being done. If you choose to give someone money, it doesn’t matter why you are doing it, what matters is the fact that the other person is benefiting. We can hope that everyone does things out of the kindness of our hearts and willingness to help others, but even if the reason is why not? the fact is that something positive is still being done.

Leave a Reply