During high school and lots of college, I thought that games were the next big thing in storytelling. And to an extent, I was right. Developers have taken leaps and bounds to make the interactive narrative worthwhile. Games like KOTOR and the Final Fantasy series, specifically made me come to this conclusion; their respective stories are deeper than lots of films, books, and TV shows I know.

I think we've seen a slow-down lately in it, though, because since DOOM3, gaming narrative hasn't taken any huge steps in my eyes. Half-Life 2 and Bioshock are two of the most touted narrative games, and they only improved what DOOM3 did, in my opinion.

@restedbonus: Yeah, a lot of what I am talking about does deal with novels specifically as a genre, but the medium of the written word has been around far longer than the Gutenberg press. It certainly helped the proliferation, without a doubt, but there were collections like The Canterbury Tales and even Beowulf that were divided into sections that worked like chapters long before its introduction.

You're right in that I feel the novel and the serialized TV series are probably a better comparison, the novel itself is a genre of printed media, but even hand-lettered books preserved stories long before the novel itself came into style.

And, restedbonus, you might also check out the PS2 game "Shadow of the Colossus" if you want a game that tells a story outside of the traditional D-Pad + A, B, X, Y and cutscene style.

However, books certainly ushered in an 'information age' where ideas and stories could be communicated on a mass scale. TV, the internet, blogs, films – these all owe their basis for communication to the printed word and the fictional imaginings of countless authors.

@Tesh: I have always been fascinated by games as 'texts': the stories they tell and the way that they are used as a storytelling medium. It must be difficult for games to not be reduced to a branching storyline where the player is pushed from cutscene to cutscene, a la 'choose your own adventure' novel. It is interesting to watch the way people like Peter Molyneux struggle with this strict interpretation, and seek to rebel against it. Ultimately, I think that many games are fettered by a too-strict adherence to communication via a D-Pad + A, B, X, Y buttons.

I love books. Reading is still my favorite activity. Storytelling is important to the human condition; it's how we learn from other people in ways that dry recounting of facts (or opinions) can never touch.

It's why I work in games. I'm trained to do Pixar-level film storytelling, but I prefer games and their potential for interactivity. More than once, I've thought that games are closer to the storyteller experience of bygone eras, since it's possible to have a sort of dialogue with the storyteller. Games are a bit like a campfire story mixed with a Choose Your Own Adventure book with a dash of speculative fiction thrown in. They are a way of exploring the "what if?" question in safe ways, all under a fictional framework that can sometimes be far more educational than memorizing a list of names and dates.

Stories are important. Fiction is important. TV and games are useful mediums for telling stories.

That said, I do think that for the most part, that potential is being abused or completely ignored for cheap thrills, titillation, voyeurism and power fantasies. It's disappointing, since I think that a LOT more could be done. TV on DVD is great to help sift the chaff somewhat.

I agree with your comments about books being a more free medium and allow the storyteller the scope to do what they want. I find often TV (and now films) too formulaic, trying to appeal to every audience possible and cover ever base. Although some books are effected by this it's still largely untainted ground.

You should definitely watch The Wire

Keep it up!

PD: Promise to read the whole thing later, the topic seems interesting enough