PDA

View Full Version : Cutscenes



Kodaemon
21st Jun 2010, 15:37
So, who else facepalmed massively when eavesdropping on Tong triggered a non-interactive cutscene?

Developers: your'e not making a movie. You're making a game. Please, please, remember that.

Artfunkel
21st Jun 2010, 15:39
I did. Definitely not nice.

Thirdperson is okay, if boring, but a free-floating camera? No. There's a moment in Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory when you are watching a conversation from an air vent, and it's actually one of the strongest story moments in the game precisely because it stays first person.

WildcatPhoenix
21st Jun 2010, 15:40
This.

I am absolutely okay with overhearing conversations, but this cutscene was easily my biggest problem with the leaked footage. That, and the other character looked like his mom had made him a Halloween costume out of styrofoam and trashcans to wear to The Hive that evening. :hmm:

Anasumtj
21st Jun 2010, 15:51
The guy opposite Tong looked like a joke, and the cutscene itself was simply not necessary. Given everything else known about this game though, I can't say I was surprised...

I was also thoroughly unimpressed with the slow motion crash through the window as Adam escaped from the bomb explosion. Like, really guys? And then that segued into another cutscene. Ugh.

K^2
21st Jun 2010, 15:51
Developers: your'e not making a movie.
Somebody wants to explain that one to D'Astous? He seems to be under the expression that we want an "experience" as he called it.

I can't possibly the only one who was actually expecting a game from this.

Oddness
21st Jun 2010, 15:53
Annoying, yes, but that's probably the least offensive use of cutscenes in that presentation.

TrickyVein
21st Jun 2010, 15:56
You are all correct. Having to watch that poorly acted cut-scene sucked mega backside.

It seems that the creators of DX3 have envisioned exactly how everything is supposed to pan out...whether you like it or not, you're playing the game how they want you to play it. Which is not cool. Now I want to be able to kill every single character whose mundane actions like smoking I have to endure watching while "playing" the game.

And Tong looks like an AIDS suffering future version of Hulk Hogan.

Tecman
21st Jun 2010, 15:56
Not exactly face-palmed, but I wasn't happy with the choice either.

ZakKa89
21st Jun 2010, 16:16
This is my only real complaint about the footage. Stuff like that should be firstperson. Then, you really get the sense you are eavesdropping on people, which is cool.

Rindill the Red
21st Jun 2010, 18:19
I agree here.

There *were* cutscenes in DX1, usually though, only at the start and end of levels, and most notably at the end of the game.

But to pull you out of the character in the middle of the mission just so that the devs can show off body and face animations is sorta annoying.

Assassin's Creed/MGS4 both did this, a lot, but... they were third person games to begin with and nowhere near the level of Deus Ex.

What I'm thinking here, both for these certain cutscenes, and for the third person action, is that the devs implement a menu option that simply switches these features off. A toggle for "all first person". A toggle for "no in-mission cutscenes". Now we get the best of both worlds. Just start them both un-checked, and your basic consumer probably won't even check out the menu options so no prob, but the players who know what they want can play the game their way.

Kodaemon
21st Jun 2010, 18:31
But to pull you out of the character in the middle of the mission just so that the devs can show off body and face animations is sorta annoying.

Not to mention, during something as claustrophobic as duct-crawling. Peeking from behind the grate, listening to slightly distorted voices, the feeling of being somewhere you shouldn't... all ruined because the devs wanted to show off.

TrickyVein
21st Jun 2010, 18:32
The scene itself isn't so pretty to look at anyway - what are they showing off exactly?

Kodaemon
21st Jun 2010, 18:34
Beats me. But it's a CINEMATIC MOMENT!

TrickyVein
21st Jun 2010, 18:37
*grabs popcorn*

Screw this game-playing crap, lets watch a movie! Yeah...

Seriously, I feel like I'm intruding on the world which the devs have made and I'm just some irrelevant medium through which their own story can progress unhindered. This cut-scene business, it's not going away. And I've read that there are going to be many of them. The game "needs them" or something.

Badmaker
21st Jun 2010, 18:59
I have absolutely no problem about it. Its much, much better than sitting in that damn vent, doing nothing and praying God to stop the talking and continue my your playing.

The 3rd camera cover sux a lot though. The was so sweet while FPS but when he went 3rd camera mode, i lost all the connections to the game.

Rindill the Red
21st Jun 2010, 19:23
Call of Juarez had a pretty good first person cover system.

Ashpolt
21st Jun 2010, 19:35
I agree with you, Kodaemon. No need for that to be a cutscene at all, it could have been done just as easily - and better - with you retaining control of Adam. But as you say, it's cinematic!!!1 Because that's why I play games, to watch them.

This could well be a good game by itself, but an immersive simulator it is not.

booheads
21st Jun 2010, 19:41
seems like you lose control of adam every few seconds, combat or non combat.


This is getting kinda sad, they fixed all the problems from DX:IW but changed the genre of the game.

Rindill the Red
21st Jun 2010, 19:41
I wonder if the Maggie Chow apartment jump would've felt less cool if it had suddenly switched to a third person cut-scene. Yes, that moment was movie-like, but not in presentation only in action. I felt like I was the one who was doing it. I wonder if that moment would have been ruined by this new cut-scene intensive presentation style.

Ashpolt
21st Jun 2010, 19:47
^^ You would only have been able to do it if you set off an explosion in Maggie's apartment first for you to jump away from. :D

Dead-Eye
21st Jun 2010, 19:52
Yeah, I hadn't thought about this one because I was so disappointed in other things, but yeah the cutscene just about put the whole thing into prospective don't it? I mean the design philosophy behind HR. It's too much of what makes games crap and not enough of what makes games great. Deus Ex had one intro cutscene and three endgame cutscenes, that was it. This game looks like it's going to have dozens of cutscenes and everyone of them is going to make me feel like vomiting every time it happens now.

TrickyVein
21st Jun 2010, 19:53
Do you think it's possible to bring up crates of boom into her apartment for that to happen ala escape from the ton hotel by placing LAM's at points where MIB's spawn? You could dive into Jocks pad in the nick of time right before Chow's maid sets off a LAM...hmm.

WildcatPhoenix
21st Jun 2010, 21:21
Jebus, just thinking of how many moments could've been ruined (and would have been) if Deus Ex had been made in today's game development culture makes me nauseous. :eek:

I really really really hope someone in Eidos Montreal will figure out how wrong non-interactive cutscenes are for Deus Ex, but I won't get my hopes up.

Pretentious Old Man.
21st Jun 2010, 21:23
BUTBUTBUTBUTBUTBUT

Then people might have missed it! And then they might have thrown their toys out of the pram, because they have the attention span of a gnat!

OH NOEZ!101!

pringlepower
21st Jun 2010, 21:27
BUTBUTBUTBUTBUTBUT

Then people might have missed it! And then they might have thrown their toys out of the pram, because they have the attention span of a gnat!

OH NOEZ!101!

What idiot misses a critical plot point?

They were clearly going for that Mass Effect idea, showing Tong walking about in a cinematic manner, but it would've been so much better if we saw that scene in FP through the shutters and felt all sneaky.

Pretentious Old Man.
21st Jun 2010, 21:28
What idiot misses a critical plot point?

They were clearly going for that Mass Effect idea, showing Tong walking about in a cinematic manner, but it would've been so much better if we saw that scene in FP through the shutters and felt all sneaky.

Your sarcasm detector is malfunctioning.

Pinky_Powers
21st Jun 2010, 21:32
Your sarcasm detector is malfunctioning.

Damn shoty craftsmanship!

pringlepower
21st Jun 2010, 21:34
I'd better get Jaime in here to patch me up before I spy on some NSF

Pinky_Powers
21st Jun 2010, 21:41
I'd better get Jaime in here to patch me up before I spy on some NSF

He'll never touch you; just talk your ear off and tell you to get a medkit from the closet. His bedside manner has indeed gone the way of the mechanic. :hmm:

Kodaemon
21st Jun 2010, 21:42
I don't blame him, he lost one of his privates which is always hard.

WildcatPhoenix
21st Jun 2010, 21:43
I don't blame him, he lost one of his privates which is always hard.

Holy hell, I never realized how unintentionally (or maybe not?) hilarious that line is! :lol:

TrickyVein
21st Jun 2010, 21:44
And whose fault do you think that was?

"One of the refrigeration units went down" my foot. He just screwed up and doesn't have the Cojones to come clean.

pringlepower
21st Jun 2010, 21:57
eh that accent is soothing enough. he sounds so experienced and worldly

Great_Ragnarok
22nd Jun 2010, 00:18
lol I didn't notice this because I was concerned with the takedowns.
but yeah you guys are right. when you are eaves dropping you ought to be eaves dropping,
Having a cut scene intrude the gameplay is ridiculously frustrating.

TrickyVein
22nd Jun 2010, 00:22
One of the sexier voice actors in DX I must say.

Great_Ragnarok
22nd Jun 2010, 00:24
*grabs popcorn*

Screw this game-playing crap, lets watch a movie! Yeah...

Seriously, I feel like I'm intruding on the world which the devs have made and I'm just some irrelevant medium through which there own story can progress unhindered. This cut-scene business, it's not going away. And I've read that there are going to be many of them. The game "needs them" or something.

oh you said it best! that's pretty much summarizes the way the demo unveiled it self.
player input seems to be limited to moving around in the city triggering conversations,
triggering animated takedowns and triggering cutscenes.

btw that slow mo glass breaking is just silly. We are to believe that he can die from
4 bullets(realistic), but can survive a proximate explosion and land without a problem?

TrickyVein
22nd Jun 2010, 00:31
I really hope that I'm wrong on this point. All of the great elements are there to have a great game, environment is believable, design is great, sure, I can immerse myself in that, but I am going to feel the need to screw around and spite the developers if I'm forced to go through the ropes that they've set up for me. I won't do it! Screw their crummy little vision, I want to make it MINE!

Rindill the Red
22nd Jun 2010, 01:28
oh you said it best! that's pretty much summarizes the way the demo unveiled it self.
player input seems to be limited to moving around in the city triggering conversations,
triggering animated takedowns and triggering cutscenes.

btw that slow mo glass breaking is just silly. We are to believe that he can die from
4 bullets(realistic), but can survive a proximate explosion and land without a problem?

He's got the glute/legs and armpit mods fully upgraded, so yeah.

I wonder if the damage the player takes will be based on where he is hit. That way if they shoot your aug parts it takes less damage and needs a mechanic to heal, whereas if you are shot in the flesh, you'll need doctor.

TheYouthCounselor
22nd Jun 2010, 01:45
I guess the developers were trying to show off the hard work they put into the nuanced character animation and prop detail. Taking player control away seems to be an effective way of doing it.

However I agree with the rest of the hive. It's way more dramatic and sneaky (Deus Ex like) to show it happening in game as you're eavesdropping.

And secondly, the Half-Life series (and to a less extreme extent Left 4 Dead) has bar none the best character animation in any game and some of the best level detailing. THEY NEVER take the camera from the player perspective or even control away from the player. And fans notice.

The developers at VALVe didn't need to stop the game to show a non-interactive cutscene to brief the player on the critical plot point of going through Ravenholm, or rescuing Eli Vance. Nor did they need to do it to show off the animation the game is famous for. Deus Ex didn't either to inform you on the Triads blackmailing someone, or to give you Anna and Gunther's killphrase.

loke13
22nd Jun 2010, 02:22
So, who else facepalmed massively when eavesdropping on Tong triggered a non-interactive cutscene?

Developers: your'e not making a movie. You're making a game. Please, please, remember that.

You do realize that standard for videogames right?

harryfrodo
22nd Jun 2010, 05:39
I think this is where I have to put my foot down and say are you ******* kidding me?

Like, what a stupid thing to complain about. Man. I really wish I could watch that conversation from the perspective of a ventilation shaft! What a superior gameplay experience! How I will miss those! Really, I don't care. You know why I don't care? Because it doesn't matter. It's a non-interactive scene already, you might as well take control away from the player and show it from a better perspective.

Is this really an issue, or are you guys just *****ing?

Kodaemon
22nd Jun 2010, 05:42
You do realize that standard for videogames right?

Not for the sort of games DX:HR is supposed to belong to. Immersive games like Thief, System Shock, STALKER, and, well, DX...

harryfrodo
22nd Jun 2010, 05:51
Not for the sort of games DX:HR is supposed to belong to. Immersive games like Thief, System Shock, STALKER, and, well, DX...

Uh, Thief has a lot of cutscenes. What are you talking about?

Thief 3 was actually very cutscene oriented, and it didn't bother me at all. Most games today are cinematic in that regard. The use of cutscenes in HR doesn't surprise me in the slightest or bother me.

Kodaemon
22nd Jun 2010, 05:55
Those are between-level cutscenes though, nothing that suddenly interrupts your gameplay. When you eavesdrop, you eavesdrop. You can even lean against a closed door to better hear what's on the other side.

JCpies
22nd Jun 2010, 06:04
It was quite disappointing, at first I though, oh that's a bit of a shame, it's like Mirror'ss edge. Then it turned into one of those movie type cutscenes >_>

Marses
22nd Jun 2010, 06:20
The developers at VALVe didn't need to stop the game to show a non-interactive cutscene to brief the player on the critical plot point of going through Ravenholm, or rescuing Eli Vance. Nor did they need to do it to show off the animation the game is famous for. Deus Ex didn't either to inform you on the Triads blackmailing someone, or to give you Anna and Gunther's killphrase.

To say Half-Life 2 didn't have the story intricacies and depth that Deus Ex had is a bit of an understatement.

loke13
22nd Jun 2010, 06:25
Not for the sort of games DX:HR is supposed to belong to. Immersive games like Thief, System Shock, STALKER, and, well, DX... That makes no sense. Whats the difference in watching a cutscene inside a vent? Aslo implying a game can't be immersive unless its in 1st person.

Kodaemon
22nd Jun 2010, 06:28
Because, when you're in the vent, it's you, the character, spying on people. And when you get those cutscenes, you stop being the character, you're taken out of the situation, you can forget Adam's even there at all.

loke13
22nd Jun 2010, 06:37
Because, when you're in the vent, it's you, the character, spying on people. And when you get those cutscenes, you stop being the character, you're taken out of the situation, you can forget Adam's even there at all.Thats completely absurd? Once the cutscene ends guess where Adam will be? Still in the vent. Doesn't change anything either way. Adam still had to crawl in the vent to get there in the first place.

Great_Ragnarok
22nd Jun 2010, 06:38
That makes no sense. Whats the difference in watching a cutscene inside a vent? Aslo implying a game can't be immersive unless its in 1st person.

It's poor game design that's what it is.

Deux ex is about exploring the story from your point of view.
and considering that you are eaves dropping from a vent, how is it possible to
see that many angles on Tong's conversation?

This is the type of realism that made the first game great. once you get absorbed in to the
game's world you were rarely disturbed to break the immersion.

Anasumtj
22nd Jun 2010, 07:17
Thats completely absurd? Once the cutscene ends guess where Adam will be? Still in the vent. Doesn't change anything either way. Adam still had to crawl in the vent to get there in the first place.

You're dense, bud.

It's about the experience. I want to feel like I'm the one dropping in on their conversations. I don't want my vision hijacked, panning around the room, cinematically portraying a conversation that has nothing in its visuals or action to justify wresting the camera from my control. I don't want a DX game to pause every few minutes to play a cutscene. I want to experience these things as a simulation. It was that aspect of the original that tied the entire game together for me. It's what gave my playthroughs a consistent and undisturbed flow. When the game needs to take a break to show me a damn movie, I'm not being sucked into the world. I'm thinking "Hey, I'm just playing a game". These cinematic touches make everything seem artificial.

Jesus ******* Christ, how can people not understand this?

Serendipitous
22nd Jun 2010, 07:20
For everyone who doesn't understand how this is frustrating; imagine a cutscene replacing every gun fight, or playing Splinter Cell without stealth. Eavesdropping on people is a part of the game. The cutscene ruins all the suspense of staying hidden to avoid discovery, trying to pay attention to catch all the details of what they are discussing, and figuring out what it means. It also tells the player they are in almost no danger of being discovered(and if they are, they're safe because it's supposed to happen in the game).

TheYouthCounselor
22nd Jun 2010, 07:53
For everyone who doesn't understand how this is frustrating; imagine a cutscene replacing every gun fight, or playing Splinter Cell without stealth. Eavesdropping on people is a part of the game. The cutscene ruins all the suspense of staying hidden to avoid discovery, trying to pay attention to catch all the details of what they are discussing, and figuring out what it means. It also tells the player they are in almost no danger of being discovered(and if they are, they're safe because it's supposed to happen in the game).

^^^This

Also if it happens in game, you can simply keep moving and pay no attention. You could also take that opportunity to attempt break the game's plot by attacking critical characters, which was a crowning point of the original.

With cutscenes you have no option but to watch. Many games don't even allow you to skip.


To say Half-Life 2 didn't have the story intricacies and depth that Deus Ex had is a bit of an understatement.

You still must admit though HL was able to brief key plot elements, move the story along, and demonstrate amazing animation without the crutch of non-interactive/pre-rendered cutscenes. Even if it was simple.

And as for the intricacies and depth...well that's open to opinion. For sure HL has less subplots, and there is less interactivity. But DX and HL tell different stories through different storytelling methods. I myself and a large population (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/issues/issue_236/6999-Gordon-Freeman-Private-Eye) think HL (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/op-ed/2554-Portal-Less-is-More) is actually (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/issues/issue_122/2597-Slouching-Toward-Black-Mesa) one of the finest examples and achievements of interactive storytelling. The problem for some is that there are no cutscenes, not datapads that appear in the GUI, and no mission briefings that appear in the HUD. HL plays all through a single perspective and is shown and not told. Every little detail in the level design, nuances in each character speak mountains and replace the cutscenes, datapads and GUIs. It's minimalist storytelling, but it doesn't tell a minimal story.

michal.lewtak
23rd Jun 2010, 16:47
I'll just forget what I saw and hope that this was done for the purpose of the demo. Or that the team will rapidly mend this problem as soon as they stop smoking marijuana and notice how terrible it is.
The only moment i almost wanted to facepalm was when the player prepared to run at a breakable wall to break a guard's neck, triggered the takedown, but the takedown started with Adam standing there for half a second, beside the wall (and not running at it). Way to ruin that trailer moment, guys.

PenguinsFriend
23rd Jun 2010, 16:56
So, who else facepalmed massively when eavesdropping on Tong triggered a non-interactive cutscene?

Developers: your'e not making a movie. You're making a game. Please, please, remember that.

You weigh, like, 170 - 180lbs and are walking easily through a vent made out of flimsy sheet metal, without making a sound or falling trhough, and the biggest problem you had with this part of the game was the use of the cutscene??? :rolleyes:

JablesKage
23rd Jun 2010, 17:00
we all have to remember that what we saw was not even 1% of the game so in what we saw was a few cut-scenes however after the final cut-scene we may not get another for hours, and lots of un-interrupted awesome game play?

bear it in mind people...

IOOI
24th Jun 2010, 00:24
It's poor game design that's what it is.

Deux ex is about exploring the story from your point of view.
and considering that you are eaves dropping from a vent, how is it possible to
see that many angles on Tong's conversation?

This is the type of realism that made the first game great. once you get absorbed in to the
game's world you were rarely disturbed to break the immersion.

Yes! That's it! :thumb:

maikkeey
24th Jun 2010, 14:20
I don't see why people complain about cutscenes so much, I think that they are *sometimes* better than
1) having someone talk at your character via infolink, or
2) having to stand around close to certain characters listening to their conversations to get info (remember I said *sometimes*), especially if the info you need to get from them is essential to the plot, not just overhearing a helpful hint

The only problem I have with cutscenes is when they take you to a different location at the end of it without informing you before hand (like going to a chopper in DX and Jock asking if you were ready to leave). That is he only concern I currently have with the gameplay footage, because when the C4(??) goes off and you jump out of the windows you are obviously then in a different place at the end and can't go back into the building to explore it again since its blown up :/

Blade_hunter
24th Jun 2010, 14:48
So, who else facepalmed massively when eavesdropping on Tong triggered a non-interactive cutscene?

Developers: you're not making a movie. You're making a game. Please, please, remember that.

I just agree with that, Deus Ex didn't have much cutscenes and this was a real benefit for the game, but as I guessed the fact that Belletete said the game would have a lot of cutscenes, was as worrisome as we sew them.

WildcatPhoenix
24th Jun 2010, 15:03
Why is first-person so important? I'll tell you why:

Because in Deus Ex, you are meant to feel like there is a larger world going on around you. You are simply a pawn on a much larger chessboard. You don't have all the facts, you don't know who your enemies really are, and you don't even know who is pulling the strings behind the scenes. This is critical to the storyline of the original game.

I remember standing in Wan Chai Market, just reveling at the NPCs going about their business, imagining that a much much larger world was playing out in front of me. I could almost sense the conspirators at work, just around the corner, just out of reach. Gunther was out there, hungry for my blood. Walton Simons was watching. This mysterious Daedalus character was watching.

Were they really? No. NPCs were just following their programmed routes via pre-programmed waypoints. But it felt like I was there, and if I stood in place and did nothing, the game world would move on without me. The previous poster who said "the game takes place from your perspective" hit the nail absolutely on the head. Adam is the conduit we use to transplant ourselves into this story. We become Adam, and what we see is all we know. We shouldn't be able to switch to Tong's perspective or the guy with the styrofoam suit. And if we choose to bypass this conversation, that should be allowed because we chose to do so.

Decho
24th Jun 2010, 15:32
While I am actually pretty comfortable with third person cover (used to it from Vegas) and third person kill anims (though I would prefer really, really fast and brutal ones), I really do not like this taking away control at a seemingly arbitrary point. I mean, when you take cover or perform an execute move you are expecting to be dragged out of third person, but when wandering around in a vent it will be a much more jarring change as you won't be expecting it.

PenguinsFriend
24th Jun 2010, 15:55
^ kind of like farcry eh?

ThePrecursor
24th Jun 2010, 17:38
The most probably reason why they put a cutscene there is that your main mission was to find a hacker named Tong. Now let's say you would be watching in first person from the vent you just crawled into and you would still be able control Adam, that would mean you'd also be able to walk away when Tong and the other man are talking and thus missing the entire conversation where it is revealed that that guy is actually Tong Se Hong.

Another reason could be that the conversation between Tong and the other man is actually vital to the story and therefore should not be overlooked, thus making it into a cutscene to make sure you, Adam, hear the conversation.

And of course it could also be a combination of those reasons.

ChfMojoRising
24th Jun 2010, 17:44
I get the feeling the general sentiment here is that the story isn't important. Just how much it feels like you're in a new body. An MMO would be what everyone here would like the most.

~well, I dunno. That was a sudden revelation ^^;;

Kodaemon
24th Jun 2010, 17:52
The only of those reasons that would justify this being a cutscene in my mind is if it was the end of the mission. But that's not likely, since you're in a vent.

As for the two first reasons, bullcrap. How, pray tell, did DX1 manage to do without such cutscenes?

Also: there's nothing stopping them from making this the sort of first-person cutscene FEAR or Bioshock had. Just have a script fire by the vent to turn Adam's head to the vent, maybe zoom in a little for clarity, and stop him in place for the duration of the convo. Not perfect, still better than OOBE.

And if we attention-deficit idiots actually miss the fact that it's Tong, have Malik metal gear it to us via the comm link (which I bet happens anyway).

ThePrecursor
24th Jun 2010, 18:25
The only of those reasons that would justify this being a cutscene in my mind is if it was the end of the mission. But that's not likely, since you're in a vent.

As for the two first reasons, bullcrap. How, pray tell, did DX1 manage to do without such cutscenes?

Also: there's nothing stopping them from making this the sort of first-person cutscene FEAR or Bioshock had. Just have a script fire bu the vent to turn Adam's head to the vent, maybe zoom in a little for clarity, and stop him in place for the duration of the convo. Not perfect, still better than OOBE.

And if we attention-deficit idiots actually miss the fact that it's Tong, have Malik metal gear it to us via the comm link (which I bet happens anyway).

Jeez, do you really need to be that hostile. Can't you disagree with someone without ranting or something?

Kodaemon
24th Jun 2010, 18:29
Sorry, didn't really mean to, I think I slipped into my Command & Conquer 4 mode for a minute.

ThePrecursor
24th Jun 2010, 18:42
Sorry, didn't really mean to, I think I slipped into my Command & Conquer 4 mode for a minute.

I forgive :D

And I actually thought of another conclusion. The could have chosen to make this a cutscene because of the seriousness of the conversation between Tong and the man. Showing the man's facial expressions would be an indication of how serious the conversation actually is, and that Tong apparently doesn't give a damn making the man rather angry (which you wouldn't see from the vent, right?).

Btw, did anyone notice what the conversation was about? I couldn't really hear what they were talking about.

Anasumtj
24th Jun 2010, 18:50
I get the feeling the general sentiment here is that the story isn't important. Just how much it feels like you're in a new body. An MMO would be what everyone here would like the most.

~well, I dunno. That was a sudden revelation ^^;;

It's not just about the story, but its delivery as well. The unavoidable truth is that HR will likely play out more like an interactive movie than a sim.

Some people here don't want that. Don't be a twit about it, y'know?

Romeo
24th Jun 2010, 19:03
Ok, within reason here, I really like cutscenes. The most cinematic moments in Starcraft? Cutscenes. Morrowind? Cutscenes. Halo? Cutscenes. Now, obviously the ratio should be below 10% (MINIMUM) cutscene-to-gameplay here, I don't want the the DX:HR to mean Deus Ex: Heavy Rain, but using them here and there to highlight plot events, or characters, or what-have-you is just peachy in my books.

ChfMojoRising
24th Jun 2010, 19:15
@Ana: I suppose you've seen a lot more of the game than the rest of us then, since all anyone is going on is a 10 second scene in a vent shaft. And ya, delivery is important to story telling, but the story needs to be delivered. That wasn't a bad way to deliver that snippet of info. I can't imagine many people spending that moment going "Oh no! The camera popped out my head! Never even saw that happen before!" rather than "OMG that's Tong?".

@Romeo: My sentiments exactly.

Anasumtj
24th Jun 2010, 19:22
Ok, within reason here, I really like cutscenes. The most cinematic moments in Starcraft? Cutscenes. Morrowind? Cutscenes. Halo? Cutscenes. Now, obviously the ratio should be below 10% (MINIMUM) cutscene-to-gameplay here, I don't want the the DX:HR to mean Deus Ex: Heavy Rain, but using them here and there to highlight plot events, or characters, or what-have-you is just peachy in my books.

Well, I guess that's just it then.

I don't want Deus Ex to be a cinematic game. I don't think cinematic is somehow better. It suits some game experiences very well. I love all those scenes you mentioned. But Deus Ex's narrative wasn't like those games. It was moved along and sucked you in with smaller, more intimate details. Having Icarus pop up on my infolink in the DuClare chateau made a huge impact on me and was one of my most memorable moments in a game. I have the impression that if the HR team were remaking the original game, so many of its most memorable moments would probably get this cinematic treatment and deflate the experience. After all, they're willing to do it with a vent conversation. =\

WildcatPhoenix
24th Jun 2010, 19:22
Of course the most "cinematic" moments are going to be cutscenes. But video games are not about being "cinematic," in my opinion.

If I want cinema, I will...oh I dunno, go to a movie?

This is the core of the debate, and clearly several of us are quite divided on it. I'm not saying those who enjoy cutscenes are wrong, but they are obviously looking to get a much different experience from video gaming than I am.

ChfMojoRising
24th Jun 2010, 19:26
The problem with that debate is that all we're going on is an aside lasting a few seconds in a vent shaft.

WildcatPhoenix
24th Jun 2010, 19:40
We're also talking about the Adam Jensen doing his best John McClaine impression, jump-out-of-a-window-while-bomb-explodes cutscene. And everyone's favorite line of "boyscout" dialogue. :hmm:

Romeo
24th Jun 2010, 19:43
Thanks for bringing reason into the mix Wildcat. You're right, none of us will ever reach a consensus because our opinions on it are just that - opinions. I personally prefer a little visual flair in my games, others prefer not to be disturbed or taken away from gameplay, and I respect that too.

ChfMojoRising
24th Jun 2010, 19:43
That wasn't a cutscene. That was the player using two augments, one after the other. (which is kind of an expensive use of meter, but he got a lot of guys in one go).

yeah, the dialog for that big guy was pretty cheesy lol

Kodaemon
24th Jun 2010, 19:44
And generally, both of these bits (vent & explosion) illustrate a bigger problem of immersion vs. cinematics.

WildcatPhoenix
24th Jun 2010, 19:45
Thanks for bringing reason into the mix Wildcat. You're right, none of us will ever reach a consensus because our opinions on it are just that - opinions. I personally prefer a little visual flair in my games, others prefer not to be disturbed or taken away from gameplay, and I respect that too.

And EM could easily appeal to both sides (and make more sales) with the simple inclusion of a checkbox "Enable 3rd person" on the options menu.

This, to me, is a pretty easy fix if other melee weapons are included. And everyone goes home happy. :thumb:

OFF_TOPIC:
@Kodaemon- Absolutely love the sig!

Romeo
24th Jun 2010, 20:02
And EM could easily appeal to both sides (and make more sales) with the simple inclusion of a checkbox "Enable 3rd person" on the options menu.

This, to me, is a pretty easy fix if other melee weapons are included. And everyone goes home happy. :thumb:

OFF_TOPIC:
@Kodaemon- Absolutely love the sig!
I do see your logic, but then things like cover, melee and action events would all need to be re-done... I hate swapping view-points, I find it really, really breaks the immersion to me, I prefer when they simply pick a view point and stick with it, but sadly, I think it's already locked in. For good.

PenguinsFriend
25th Jun 2010, 13:41
You know what game made use of cutscenes really well? NOLF (No One Lives Forever). If you haven't played the game then go grab a copy and pop it into your system. It is awesome. The cutscenes were right on the money and added to character development.

And if you don't know what I mean when I say "may your son marry a camel" or "unacceptable symian casulties" - you haven't lived!

Ilves
25th Jun 2010, 21:12
If you haven't played the game then go grab a copy and pop it into your system. It is awesome.

Yes!


You know what game made use of cutscenes really well? NOLF (No One Lives Forever).

This is an interesting point. My first response at reading that quote was one of utter disagreement. The cutscenes were horrible by any cinematic standard (save the writing, which was awesome), mocap was jerky and technically amateurish (admittedly therefor all the more charming) and there wasn't much visual merit to them at all. But perhaps it was exactly the fact that they weren't a huge departure from gameplay that they felt so natural and unintrusive. They never broke the pace of the game other than being welcome interludes, and they never comitted the crime of showing off fancy action that you never got to re-enact in game, plus each and every one of them served the purpose of propelling the plot forward. So while don't think they're a template for current gen gaming in any shape or form, they were very well suited in that particular game.

Romeo
26th Jun 2010, 01:25
I suppose a conversation between me and my buddy only highlighted how some people feel about the cinematic feel in game. We were talking about the Overlord DLC for Mass Effect 2, and I said I was surprised to find that I absolutely loved it, whereas he found it to be some of the worst of Mass Effect 2. That all came down to the fact that I adored the incredibly story-orientated aspect of it, as opposed to him, who hated that it was very minimal in combat/action and had alot of conversation and plot details.

PenguinsFriend
28th Jun 2010, 16:04
Yes!



This is an interesting point. My first response at reading that quote was one of utter disagreement. The cutscenes were horrible by any cinematic standard (save the writing, which was awesome), mocap was jerky and technically amateurish (admittedly therefor all the more charming) and there wasn't much visual merit to them at all. But perhaps it was exactly the fact that they weren't a huge departure from gameplay that they felt so natural and unintrusive. They never broke the pace of the game other than being welcome interludes, and they never comitted the crime of showing off fancy action that you never got to re-enact in game, plus each and every one of them served the purpose of propelling the plot forward. So while don't think they're a template for current gen gaming in any shape or form, they were very well suited in that particular game.

Yeah, I wasn't referring to the quality of the cutscenes in terms of rendering and flash lighting, but the way the developed the characters, set up the new assignments, and helped advance the story.

Ilves
28th Jun 2010, 16:08
^ *facepalm* Sometimes I talk too much. http://media.ign.com/boardfaces/9.gif

PenguinsFriend
28th Jun 2010, 16:09
^ *facepalm* Sometimes I talk too much. http://media.ign.com/boardfaces/9.gif

:D Join the club

Angel-A
28th Jun 2010, 17:43
Eaves dropping cutscenes are No. How can I feel like I'm being sneaky with that crap?

PenguinsFriend
28th Jun 2010, 18:37
Eaves dropping cutscenes are No. How can I feel like I'm being sneaky with that crap?

well - you sneak to within range and then, as a reward, you get to eavesdrop and use my-special-camera-cheat-mode to see everyone in the room :D

Ragequit
28th Jun 2010, 20:16
It seems like it'll pretty hard to die in DX3, with all the takedowns and health regen and cover system
I liked DX because of the skills/augs (though some weren't as useful as others), the possibility of death (no one likes stuff handed to them, then its not a game), health regen is a joke in single player (in multiplayer it'd make far more sense for gameplay like modern warfare 2, great for the multiplayer because everything's so fast paced, but not necessary in single player), and cover systems often make it too hard to get hit, to me, that with the health regen and takedowns, will make this game pretty easy (think honor kills from AvP, instant kill nothing hard, the only fear you have is if someone else comes by)

ChfMojoRising
28th Jun 2010, 20:50
@Ragequit
Just the opposite. Tho you health regen, it works the same way as in Rainbow Six: Vegas. Meaning that you'll die very quickly in combat to the point where health regen won't matter in an individual skirmish. Also in R6:V it's pretty easy to get hit if you pop up from cover at the wrong time, you get out-flanked by enemies because you stayed in one spot too long or if you didn't notice the enemy back up that has just out flanked you. It's also easy to get hit in Gears of War, but in that game you have the benefit of being able to soak up a clip of ammo from an assault rifle into your chest.

Ragequit
28th Jun 2010, 20:55
Doesn't really remind me at all about what deus ex gameplay is about, but as for the R6:V, I've never played any of those, I've played splinter cell, aren't they both "Tom Clancy's"? I can't remember, anyways thats off-topic
Between ALL of what I said, it feels like it'll be hard to die except likely during boss fights

Pretentious Old Man.
28th Jun 2010, 21:04
Doesn't really remind me at all about what deus ex gameplay is about, but as for the R6:V, I've never played any of those, I've played splinter cell, aren't they both "Tom Clancy's"? I can't remember, anyways thats off-topic
Between ALL of what I said, it feels like it'll be hard to die except likely during boss fights

Vegas was the consolised one that cemented what Lockdown starting in completely misunderstanding the raison d'etre of the Rainbow Six franchise.

Just some helpful commenting from me there. :D

Anasumtj
29th Jun 2010, 02:06
People keep saying "Don't worry, it will be like R6:V!", but there are two problems with that.

1) R6:V does not play at all like Deus Ex.

2) R6:V is ******* travesty when you remember what the series used to be all about.

ChfMojoRising
29th Jun 2010, 04:16
I'm not saying "don't worry, it's like R6:V" except in the sense that that was a fun game~ even if it bolstered up the tactical aspect and sacrificed the strategic one.

I was just saying you don't have to worry about feeling invincible or like some John Rambo tank, blasting thru the game.

MR X
29th Jun 2010, 05:47
I'm not devestated by third person cinematics, but I'm surprised to say I agree with the general mentality here and would rather not have them except for rare occasons. A cinematic that shows me what's happening to othr characters? Fine. A cinematic that shows your own character fighting or jumping through a window or getting the crap kicked out of him? Suddenly that character is not you, it's Adam Jensen. You're suddenly reminded that you aren't REALLY in control, and that really, because you progressed to a point in the game, you're getting to see what happens to Adam Jensen next.

I can understand why a few of you are saying "who the F*$% cares if you're in first person in a vent?" That was my first reaction too, but then I started to think about why Deus Ex affected me so much more than other games.

One of the first things I thought of when I started reading this thread was the one moment in Deus Ex that has always stood out forfront in my mind.

I'm at the Versa Labs in Hong Kong (or whatever it was called), and I'm climbing through some air duct I'm not supposed to be in, hoping to find a way to sneak into that lab I'm not supposed to see. I pass over some glass (or maybe a vent, don't really remember), and as I'm crawling over it I look down to see a freaking alien on an operating table with scientists standing around it. A very ominous image.

Maybe not a surprising moment for others but I knew very little about the game when I bought it so I really wasn't expecting Aliens to be a part of it (and yeah yeah, the Greys turned out to not really be aliens anyway).

Definately an oh sh#$ moment for me. If the game had suddenly yanked the camera through the glas and down into the room with the alien (okay okay, the not really an alien) it might have been cool in the way that watching a movie is cool... but it wouldn't have gotten to me nearly as much. Why?

Because I felt like I was seeing something I wasn't supposed to see. Obviously the devs had put that glass there because I was supposed to see it and experience that moment. But the magic of Deus Ex was that it felt like I wasn't supposed to be there.

Maybe I digressed a little too much with that example but my point is I think a lot of what made Deus Ex work, at least for me personally, was that it always felt like it was ME who was "digging too deep" into the conspiracy so to speak. The cliche of conspiracies is "don't dig too deep, you might find something you'll wish you never found", yeah? The second it's a movie, that idea becomes a cliche, rather than that slightly uncomfortable tingling in the back of your neck that made Deus Ex awesome.

There were A LOT of moments in Deus Ex where it felt like I was over hearing a conversation not meant for my ears or seeing something I wasn't supposed to see.

So why does it matter if it switches to third person cinematic? Because in a video game when you see a cinematic you're being rewarded. It's the game saying "good job, you did exactly what you were supposed to do, and now we're going to reward you buy showing you what happens next." You no longer feel naughty or slightly uncomfortable because now you know you're doing exactly what you were meant to do. Obviously you were supposed to be over hearing this conversation, so you might as well relax, sit back, eat some popcorn and enjoy the show you thought you were playing. No tingling feeling in the back of your neck, because you have the comfort of knowing you've done what you're supposed to. "Oh good, a cinematic, that means I'm moving to the next stage of the game and I'll get to see what hoops I'm supposed to jump through next."

That is my best explanation of why it breaks the immersion. Deus Ex made me feel like I WAS J.C., and J.C. WAS me. It's maybe the only video game I've played that has done that. Okay, not to the point of clinical psychosis, but it always felt like I was in control, and it was always up to me to move my foot forward to take the next step, so to speak.

Somebody suggested tha maybe the devs thought the cinematic was necessary because there was important information in the conversation that the player couldn't afford to miss. I think that's a very good point, but for the opposite reason. I think part of the beauty of the original Deus Ex game was that I always had my ear glued to the speaker terrified I might miss some critical piece of information (figuratively, not literally). The game didn't baby you, and that's why it was so damn suspensful. If the player wants to be a dumbass and walk away from critical information, let them. The conversation will still probably show up in the conversaton log, or the key points will be in the mission log or whatever anyway. The people that get bored with conversations (you know the types, we all have those friends) will just jam the esc button to skip the cinematic anyway.

Anyway, no, it's not the end of the world for me, because like anybody else, I enjoy a good movie, so, therefore, I could enjoy moments like that in DX:HR. But I will never become fully immersed in the game like I was in Deus Ex.

Ilves
29th Jun 2010, 06:06
So why does it matter if it switches to third person cinematic? Because in a video game when you see a cinematic you're being rewarded. It's the game saying "good job, you did exactly what you were supposed to do, and now we're going to reward you buy showing you what happens next."

This is the essence of my gripe with the way cutscenes were presented in the leaked demo. Especially the vent one. What a reward that one was.

If you're going make the player sit through a cutscene, make it worthwile. "Sorry guys, we gotta take a break from the game, 'cause we have this great thing in store for you that we can't bring you any other way". I'd be cool with that. Two guys having a conversation, flapping their arms and prancing around an office does not really qualify. Unless their conco revealed some jaw dropping information that shattered the whole status quo, but we can't value the moment because we don't know the story yet. But I doubt it.

Ashpolt
29th Jun 2010, 10:41
<<POST>>

Totally agree with everything you said, well put.

Bluey71
29th Jun 2010, 11:06
So why does it matter if it switches to third person cinematic? Because in a video game when you see a cinematic you're being rewarded. It's the game saying "good job, you did exactly what you were supposed to do, and now we're going to reward you buy showing you what happens next." You no longer feel naughty or slightly uncomfortable because now you know you're doing exactly what you were meant to do. Obviously you were supposed to be over hearing this conversation, so you might as well relax, sit back, eat some popcorn and enjoy the show you thought you were playing. No tingling feeling in the back of your neck, because you have the comfort of knowing you've done what you're supposed to. "Oh good, a cinematic, that means I'm moving to the next stage of the game and I'll get to see what hoops I'm supposed to jump through next.

I think that's the best written description I have seen yet for the way I feel about the 3rd person 'rewards'.

MR X you would you consider putting this into the 'for the developers' thread, as it nicely covers mine, and I am sure others, concerns about the cutscenes.

Fluffis
29th Jun 2010, 11:23
@MR X:

Bloody good post, man.

Edit: And I'd also like to add that it wasn't until my fourth or fifth playthrough, that I noticed Maggie at that lab. I had completely missed her conversation with Page. I berated myself for missing it before, but at the same time found it insanely cool that they hadn't forced me to see it. It was up to me to find out.

Bluey71
29th Jun 2010, 11:38
Maggie at that lab. I had completely missed her conversation with Page.

Just to make sure, that lab you are talking about in the bottom of the Versa Life building - you can't actually get into that lab where Maggie and Page are can you?

Kvltism
29th Jun 2010, 11:47
Just to make sure, that lab you are talking about in the bottom of the Versa Life building - you can't actually get into that lab where Maggie and Page are can you?

No. You eavesdrop through the glass before they walk off.

Bluey71
29th Jun 2010, 12:13
No. You eavesdrop through the glass before they walk off.

Thanks.

Fluffis
29th Jun 2010, 12:34
Just to make sure, that lab you are talking about in the bottom of the Versa Life building - you can't actually get into that lab where Maggie and Page are can you?

Not into the corridor they're in, and you can't follow them when they leave (as far as I know), but the lab itself, yes - with the grey and all that. One of my favourite places to cause havoc by releasing the greasels. :) You didn't know that? :/ You get 3 augs there.

Edit: ah, ninja:d.

neoWilks
29th Jun 2010, 12:52
Imagine if movies were still silent pictures with cutaways to black screens with the dialogue printed for you to read. That's how I feel when I see the obtrusive cutscenes being used in DE:HR.

The strength of videogames, what sets them apart from other forms of media, is their interactivity. Every time you take away that interactivity you are diluting the medium. Movies are awesome, books are awesome, comics are awesome, each for their own unique reasons and each different than that which makes a videogame awesome. Why ought games be cinematic? The idea itself seems silly. Cinema is cinematic. If that's what you're looking for, make a movie.

If you want to make a game, interactivity is key. I'm watching a conversation from a vent, it goes into a cinematic. I've just lost interactivity. I go up to a guy, click the play button, and watch a short video of my character taking him apart. I've lost interactivity. I'm stuck in a room with a bomb about to explode, how do I get out of this? Doesn't matter, because another film reel just started rolling. Why are games so afraid of playing to their strengths?

xsamitt
29th Jun 2010, 13:13
Imagine if movies were still silent pictures with cutaways to black screens with the dialogue printed for you to read. That's how I feel when I see the obtrusive cutscenes being used in DE:HR.

The strength of videogames, what sets them apart from other forms of media, is their interactivity. Every time you take away that interactivity you are diluting the medium. Movies are awesome, books are awesome, comics are awesome, each for their own unique reasons and each different than that which makes a videogame awesome. Why ought games be cinematic? The idea itself seems silly. Cinema is cinematic. If that's what you're looking for, make a movie.

If you want to make a game, interactivity is key. I'm watching a conversation from a vent, it goes into a cinematic. I've just lost interactivity. I go up to a guy, click the play button, and watch a short video of my character taking him apart. I've lost interactivity. I'm stuck in a room with a bomb about to explode, how do I get out of this? Doesn't matter, because another film reel just started rolling. Why are games so afraid of playing to their strengths?

From a purely artistic standpoint your absolutely right.But when money is involved on a large scale then it kind of pollutes the medium.One could ask then how do you create a game without money?:hmm:

Ashpolt
29th Jun 2010, 13:27
What he's talking about is making better games - games that are more game-like. Do that, and the money will find itself.

[EDIT] And Wilks, I totally agree with your point.

neoWilks
29th Jun 2010, 13:30
From a purely artistic standpoint your absolutely right.But when money is involved on a large scale then it kind of pollutes the medium.One could ask then how do you create a game without money?:hmm:
The difference being people buy games to play them, not watch them. If people bought them to watch them, than gaming companies ought to just form movie studios.

Does anyone really think there would be a significant decline in sales if every cutscene in a game was translated into something that was interactive? For example, the bomb scene in the Demo footage. If instead of a video, you were presented with a countdown and multiple methods of escape: Punch through a wall; jump through the window; pull an Indy 4 and hide yourself in a lead safe, being flung from the explosion, and emerging 50 feet away to take in the spectacle; Or christ, maybe even disarm the bomb itself, preventing the whole situation entirely. Would anyone in their right mind respond to this by saying, "Naw, not cinematic enough."

Blade_hunter
29th Jun 2010, 13:34
To me Deus Ex made the story telling a lot along with the gameplay, but to me those cutscenes (the scene with Tong through the vent) are just a mess, not that the game shouldn't have any, but as we can see some of them are just misplaced.
The view in a cutscene doesn't matter, since when a cutscene comes during the gameplay, the immersion is already lost.

The point I want to make here is the fact that the cutscenes should be placed only for intro, endings and travels.
Why I say the travels ? I think people have spotted probably my point here, the travels are moments where players just doesn't play, so making those moments as cutscenes or even interactive cutscenes (where we can choose our drop point, even destination for example or simply have an interactive convo with the pilot) is a wise choice.

Now making them during the gameplay, so I go through somewhere, then I have a cutscene or even when I've accomplished the objective and more a cutscene, a boss comes here, oh yeah again more cutscenes ...
Sorry but cutscenes aren't a reward for me, but much more a punishment that impedes me to play.
Some cutscenes, can be good but not that often ...

xsamitt
29th Jun 2010, 13:42
I agree with you both....It is not something I desire in game at all during gameplay.And I agree it does feel like punishment.Trust me if I could change it I would.

Kvltism
29th Jun 2010, 13:57
To me Deus Ex made the story telling a lot along with the gameplay, but to me those cutscenes (the scene with Tong through the vent) are just a mess, not that the game shouldn't have any, but as we can see some of them are just misplaced.
The view in a cutscene doesn't matter, since when a cutscene comes during the gameplay, the immersion is already lost.

The point I want to make here is the fact that the cutscenes should be placed only for intro, endings and travels.
Why I say the travels ? I think people have spotted probably my point here, the travels are moments where players just doesn't play, so making those moments as cutscenes or even interactive cutscenes (where we can choose our drop point, even destination for example or simply have an interactive convo with the pilot) is a wise choice.

Now making them during the gameplay, so I go through somewhere, then I have a cutscene or even when I've accomplished the objective and more a cutscene, a boss comes here, oh yeah again more cutscenes ...
Sorry but cutscenes aren't a reward for me, but much more a punishment that impedes me to play.
Some cutscenes, can be good but not that often ...

Good points, especially re: travel. That sounds like a great idea to me.

ChfMojoRising
29th Jun 2010, 14:35
I wonder if this is a difference the cultures of those that are predominantly PC-Gamers and those that are predominantly Console-Gamers.
As a console guy, I think the only time I felt cutscenes ruined immersion is in Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes. The stuff Snake would do in the cutscenes were super epic (check out any other of Ryuhei Kitamura's work @_@) but not a single thing could be replicated in gameplay. MGS3 was a little like that, but not as bad. Usually when a cutscene pops up you either feel the epicness of an upcoming boss battle or the tension of an intriguing plot.

ThePrecursor
29th Jun 2010, 14:53
I wonder if this is a difference the cultures of those that are predominantly PC-Gamers and those that are predominantly Console-Gamers.


I was wondering this too.

It also seems to me that most PC-gamers are put off by consoles and their games (sometimes even lacking in reason why), while the other way around (console gamers on PC's and their games) those feelings are almost absent.

I guess a lot of PC-gamers feel that the rise of the console industry was a major factor in the decline of (good) PC-games.

Ashpolt
29th Jun 2010, 15:22
I wonder if this is a difference the cultures of those that are predominantly PC-Gamers and those that are predominantly Console-Gamers.
As a console guy, I think the only time I felt cutscenes ruined immersion is in Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes. The stuff Snake would do in the cutscenes were super epic (check out any other of Ryuhei Kitamura's work @_@) but not a single thing could be replicated in gameplay. MGS3 was a little like that, but not as bad. Usually when a cutscene pops up you either feel the epicness of an upcoming boss battle or the tension of an intriguing plot.

I started off as a console gamer (on the NES) and have owned every major console barring the Sega Saturn since. Though I count myself primarily as a PC gamer now, I only got into it in the early 2000s and still have all the current consoles. I don't think this is a difference between PC gamers and console gamers, I just think it's a difference between people who can see the difference between what gaming is and what gaming has the potential to be.

I'm not by any means saying that cutscenes ruin games - I don't think they fit in a Deus Ex game, but that's not the point I'm driving at here - but I do think they're a lazy way of telling a story, and they're not fulfilling the true potential of gaming. Movies are a non-interactive medium, so using traditional movie techniques in gaming is failing to realise what games can be: having a game that consists of bits of gameplay punctuated with cutscenes is akin to having a film that has a bunch of action scenes interspersed with scrolling text to tell you what's going on outside of the action: in fact it's worse, because at least that's two different non-interactive mediums colliding, rather than one interactive and one not. In short, cutscenes miss the point of games, and an over-reliance on them is both lazy and one of many things holding the industry back.

This is one of the reasons I like Warren Spector so much: he understands this. Not many game developers do.

Pretentious Old Man.
29th Jun 2010, 15:26
I started off as a console gamer (on the NES) and have owned every major console barring the Sega Saturn since. Though I count myself primarily as a PC gamer now, I only got into it in the early 2000s and still have all the current consoles. I don't think this is a difference between PC gamers and console gamers, I just think it's a difference between people who can see the difference between what gaming is and what gaming has the potential to be.

I'm not by any means saying that cutscenes ruin games - I don't think they fit in a Deus Ex game, but that's not the point I'm driving at here - but I do think they're a lazy way of telling a story, and they're not fulfilling the true potential of gaming. Movies are a non-interactive medium, so using traditional movie techniques in gaming is failing to realise what games can be: having a game that consists of bits of gameplay punctuated with cutscenes is akin to having a film that has a bunch of action scenes interspersed with scrolling text to tell you what's going on outside of the action: in fact it's worse, because at least that's two different non-interactive mediums colliding, rather than one interactive and one not. In short, cutscenes miss the point of games, and an over-reliance on them is both lazy and one of many things holding the industry back.

This is one of the reasons I like Warren Spector so much: he understands this. Not many game developers do.

Even fewer care. Does it maek teh moniezzz?

Another reason why Spector deserves Kudos.

pringlepower
29th Jun 2010, 23:40
I was wondering this too.

It also seems to me that most PC-gamers are put off by consoles and their games (sometimes even lacking in reason why), while the other way around (console gamers on PC's and their games) those feelings are almost absent.

I guess a lot of PC-gamers feel that the rise of the console industry was a major factor in the decline of (good) PC-games.

Or it's because we're ******* elitists. "We have more keys and an intuitive mouse THUS we are more complex. We transcend console understanding! Now bow before us, simpletons!"

TrickyVein
29th Jun 2010, 23:43
I wouldn't go that far, but that's the gist of it, yes, you're quite right.

Fluffis
30th Jun 2010, 02:28
I guess a lot of PC-gamers feel that the rise of the console industry was a major factor in the decline of (good) PC-games.

More like "The Rise of the Port"... Since companies started porting console games to PC, it's been going steadily downhill. But yes, consoles play a big part in the crapification of mainstream PC games. The big companies figured out that console gamers are happily willing to shell out 50-60 bucks for a game, while PC gamers start to get hesitant if it goes past 40. Of course they are going to target the console market. I don't fault them (go where the money is, is the best business strategy), but I resent them - in a way - since they stopped taking risks (as in daring game ideas) with PC games, and went with making "safe" console games.

3rdmillhouse
30th Jun 2010, 02:31
More like "The Rise of the Port"... Since companies started porting console games to PC, it's been going steadily downhill. But yes, consoles play a big part in the crapification of mainstream PC games. The big companies figured out that console gamers are happily willing to shell out 50-60 bucks for a game, while PC gamers start to get hesitant if it goes past 40. Of course they are going to target the console market. I don't fault them (go where the money is, is the best business strategy), but I resent them - in a way - since they stopped taking risks (as in daring game ideas) with PC games, and went with making "safe" console games.

See Rainbow Six franchise for further details.

TrickyVein
30th Jun 2010, 02:33
Hell, I won't pay more than $20 for a game!

Exception being Mass Effect 2, because I know it will effin blow my mind. Now I just need to buy the sucker.

Fluffis
30th Jun 2010, 02:37
Hell, I won't pay more than $20 for a game!

Exception being Mass Effect 2, because I know it will effin blow my mind. Now I just need to buy the sucker.

20 huh? I should have written 30 bucks, though... that's probably the breaking point for a lot of people.

TrickyVein
30th Jun 2010, 02:46
Go past $20 and you're talking about like, whole African villages or some cr@zy stuff like food and clothing.

I feel so sorry for anyone who would pay the outrageous amount of $50 and up for a console game. But hey, if you've got the money, why not, right?

Fluffis
30th Jun 2010, 02:57
I feel so sorry for anyone who would pay the outrageous amount of $50 and up for a console game. But hey, if you've got the money, why not, right?

I know, right? It's amazing that we don't see more discussions about why console gamers should pay more for the same game. Although, when the answer from the different devs would almost invariably be "Because we said so!", I guess there's not really room for much discussion.

ChfMojoRising
30th Jun 2010, 03:06
The reason is the cost to put these games on the console in the first place. Be it a PS3 or 360, the games need to be reviewed and a licensing fee needs to be paid to the console company. This jacks up the price a bit. It's a cost that needs to be paid for he 360 but not for a Windows version.
Why?
um... I guess 'cuz that's how it's always been? If there's any upside to it, I;d want to say that it means higher quality games~ but this console generation has had so many titles with so many bugs. This is something I'm just not use to on my console! If things keep going this way, we definitely should have cheaper games. All this posturing is doing now is keeping the raunchy porn titles off my PS3. I won't stand for censorship, especially since you took level-of-quality away!

Shralla
30th Jun 2010, 03:11
If $20 is seriously the max you'll pay for a game, you have a seriously skewed view of the worth of entertainment.

ALSO, you probably never buy anything but used, and are thus slowly killing the industry as a whole.

Fluffis
30th Jun 2010, 03:13
If there's any upside to it, I;d want to say that it means higher quality games~ but this console generation has had so many titles with so many bugs.

That's the crux, isn't it? The fact that most games actually have better quality (visually mainly, but also audio) on PC, than they do on the consoles. Also, bugfixes are so much easier to get out there on a PC - but then, a lot of the bugs will have been ironed out once they get to the PC. And still the console gamers pay more.

ChfMojoRising
30th Jun 2010, 03:18
That's the crux, isn't it? The fact that most games actually have better quality (visually mainly, but also audio) on PC, than they do on the consoles. Also, bugfixes are so much easier to get out there on a PC - but then, if we're talking ports, a lot of the bugs will have been ironed out once they get to the PC. And still the console gamers pay more.

Well, my point was that games didn't need bug fixes because there were hardly any at all. There was pretty much never any game breaking bugs either. I didn't mean quality in audio/visual but in programming. Not sure why things have changed in this current generation tho, where it's starting to feel normal enough to have a game freeze, crash, corrupt save data or have a character be stuck on an object... T___T

Fluffis
30th Jun 2010, 03:26
Well, my point was that games didn't need bug fixes because there were hardly any at all. There was pretty much never any game breaking bugs either.


Yeah, I know what you meant. I was referring to the present-day games.


I didn't mean quality in audio/visual but in programming. Not sure why things have changed in this current generation tho, where it's starting to feel normal enough to have a game freeze, crash, corrupt save data or have a character be stuck on an object... T___T

One thing: quick release means quicker money. They have to rush their programmers and such to meet a deadline. Corners are cut. Once they have announced a title, the clock starts ticking. All gamers are fickle (though I feel that console gamers are even more so, sometimes). If hype goes on for too long, interest begins to wane, since "that other big title" is coming out... possibly sooner. All developers know this. That's (probably) the main reason for bugs being as common as they are.