Printable View
or writing video games as movies
an article about how most video game developers aproach the medium wrong
they see it as ( barley) interactive movies instead of an interactive medium where you are a part of the story
not just sit back and consume it you partake in it
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2013/0...es-like-movies
in other words discuss
I absolutely love the game and yet I agree with this. Wouldn't say the game "failed" though, it's still awesome.
I hate games that emphasize story, cinematics or "mood" over gameplay. This means I have a healthy disdain for most games released in the "Action" genre over the last twelve or so years.
I don't really mind. One of my favorite video game franchises is Wing Commander which very often focuses on its cinematic storytelling over its gameplay.
Sometimes I'm in the mood for a story driven game and sometimes I'm in the mood to just make things go boom. There's plenty of games that do both of those things.
To me at least the issue isn't really that games should or shouldn't have cinematic elements to them, because that's fine, but rather that games that do often become the critical darlings while games that have good or innovative gameplay often get shoved aside.
If the additional elements can add or enhance the gameplay in anyway, I usually don't mind the whole "Movie/Novel" approach.
Hell, the combat in Planscape: Torment is beyond mediocre, but the effects mere words have on the storyline and your overall game experience are so vast and varied that I don't really mind the fact that the combat system is subpar gameplay wise.
I also think this is highly dependent upon the game.
Some games are all about story and characters, the gameplay is simply a way to move you through them.
Others the gameplay is pretty much it, and the story is there only to move you through from one segment to another.
Either can go to the extremes or settle on some middle ground.
Any individual one of those elements, or the way they are mixed, can drag down a game... sometimes a little, sometimes into a screaming bloody heap of despair and agony that no one wants to touch again.
But many games certainly do try too hard to be "Hollywood" they just want to be seen as these giant cinematic masterpieces that people oooo and ahhh over... and of course selling like crazy and making money like a big Hollywood blockbuster doesn't hurt either.
I dont think bioshock fails. It is not a good exemple of what you want to illustrate as it actually has good gameplay. I am somewhat picky about what I play and I enjoyed playing through both Bioshock 1 and 2.
I'm playing through 1999 mode now.
Torment succeeds at its story elements, not just because it's well written but it tells its tale with the player, not just to the player. So many games have a disconnect between the gameplay and the story.Quote:
Originally Posted by Occutell
Bioshock Infinite is like this. It has this unique world just begging to be explored but every couple minutes, you're taken into an obvious fighting arena with turrets set up. The action itself is really intense (at least on 1999 mode) but it feels so artificially placed in context of the story it's trying to tell. I enjoyed its action and enjoyed its story but it would have been much better if they felt like they belonged together.
One of my favourite Warren Spector quotes applies -
Quote:
One of the great challenges for videogames is that we have to stop building movie sets and start building worlds. Back in the old days, Origin’s motto was ‘We create worlds’. Somewhere along the line we lost that, and started building movie sets
Couldn't have said it better. +Rep for stealing the words right out of my mouth.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeoZeedeater
That's part of what made games like Half-Life so successful.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeoZeedeater
I read a discussion similar to this one recently and what it boiled down to the fact that most developers haven't figured out how to tell an interactive story yet, but they know how movies are made so they just do that.
It's similar to how early movies once emulated the vaudeville shows of the time until we learned how to use the tools cinema provided us more effectively. Video games have only been with us for a brief time and have only been this realistic for an even briefer time. They're not quite finished with their growing pains even if it looks like things have become stagnant.
I've heard that quote from Spector before and I love it. Also I really miss Origin.
I agree with Specter, especially if by what he means by "worlds" isn't just a sandbox or series of sandboxes with scripted "movie set" style events.
I agree with most of what you guys are saying. I've mentioned this before, but I'll say it again. Games like this are great for a single playthrough, but have very little replay value because of their emphasis on story and cinematics. I'm not saying this is a bad thing, but I do find myself preferring games with good replay value more and more. I also agree with obviously that gameplay oriented games need more respect. They kind of get the shaft, often being derided as shovelware or casual games, and I don't think that is fair to them.
Origin's motto didn't have anything to do with sandboxes but rather to make games that felt like places with back-stories and histories. They strove to create worlds that felt like they existed independent of the game, not just like temporary movie sets that moved a plot along.Quote:
Originally Posted by sheath
It's the difference between telling a story and creating an immersive experience. A good video game can do the former. A great video game should do the latter.
Pretty much the one thing modern games have that i can't stand.Quote:
Originally Posted by KitsuneNight