Cinematics Do Matter? 71
In direct contradiction to a discussion we had about David Jaffe's opinion on the subject earlier today, GameDaily Biz has an editorial up arguing that cinematics and story are very important game elements. From the article: "There have been times in our industry where sub-par product has been sold through its cinematics, but there have also been times when products have failed to live up to the promise of its creators. The merits of if a cinematic and/or story detract from a game experience is rather mute, as story is one of the oldest and fundamental forms of entertainment, expression and communication"
Re:heh (Score:2)
1999 called. They want their joke [suck.com] back.
Btw, I think you misunderstand the slashdot slogan. It's an 'or' construct, not an 'and' construct. And if you want to flame me for being a geek about that, then you're definitely reading the wrong website.
But I wish you well at Digg. Your insightful and reasoned commentary will fit right in with all the "Digg! This is kewl!" comments. Although if you throw your toys out o
Re:heh (Score:1)
Ahaha that site is great. However, the best part is I've never seen it before (kinda weird, ehh?)
Re:heh (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:heh (Score:1)
We already discussed this today! Is it really a topic worth posting a SECOND time, for a SECOND discussion?
Re:heh (Score:2, Informative)
Re:heh (Score:2)
What's very sad is that some people cannot comprehend the fact that other views or perspectives even exist. Next time you encounter someone who you're having this problem with, poke them with a few questions and see what I mean.
Re:heh (Score:3, Insightful)
That's funny. This article wasn't posted to the front page, it was posted to the Games section. Yes, article stories now appear on the front page in a condensed form, but the articles in the gray boxes are specifically articles that interest a smaller group.
If you're not interested in a section, go to Preferences, Homepage [slashdot.org], and disable it. You don't have to read articles you aren't interested in, that's the entire
digg, etc. (Score:2)
I assume that this was meant as a joke/troll
But there is something worth mentioning. Digg is similar to Slashdot, but the key difference is the manner of selection of stories. At slashdot, the stories are chosen by the editors, to the amazement of the readership, who may or may not agree with the choices. At digg, the submitted stories are voted on by the membership, and those that score well enough make the frontpage. This is not always a good thing.
Thus you have t
Re:heh (Score:1)
If you can't appreciate a real website, please do the rest of us a favor and leave like you're saying you will.
[yes, I am aware my karma is about to plummet, but some things just are more important than karma!]
omg spoiler! (Score:5, Interesting)
Cinematics are very effective in the right situations. Would a cinematic be a selling point for me if I wanted a new hack n slash? Probably not. Would I be disappointed if the next installment of FF had no cinematics? Deffinitely.
Re:omg spoiler! (Score:2)
Your argument obviously boiling down to the fact that it's genre that matters - you can't make a blanket statement that cinematics do/don't matter. And I agree. (For the record, I'm not ashamed to admit that I did cry like a baby when Aeris died in FF7 - and I knew it was coming!
Re:omg spoiler! (Score:3, Informative)
Far older games, which had even simpler graphics, benefited more. Yes, I do agree that plot is more important
Re:omg spoiler! (Score:2)
Re:omg spoiler! (Score:2)
Are Civilizations RTS games ? Do they have missions ?
Re:omg spoiler! (Score:2)
There's also the obvious point that the cinematics have to be good to have the intended effect, and given that the skills required to make good cinema are rather different than those required to make a good game in general, many de
Re:omg spoiler! (Score:1)
Re:omg spoiler! (Score:2)
Re:omg spoiler! (Score:2)
Those of us who didn't see it.
LK
Re:omg spoiler! (Score:1)
Well as true as that might be, part of me was yelling:
Cast Life2 on her, you dumb ass!
Story, not cinematics (Score:5, Insightful)
Finat Fantasy Tactics, which has one of the most complex stories I've ever followed in an RPG, had no FMV. It is lauded by many as one of the greatest games of all time even though it came out after the FMV-heave Final Fantasy VII. People loved that game, too. Would it have meant less if Sephiroth killed Aeris using the in-game engine? No. The event is what moves us, not the pretty graphics.
Give me story-telling the way Half-Life 2 does it (interactive). Or the way Sly Cooper does it (slide show / comic book). It should be non-intrusive, and it should feel appropriate in the game's world. If that means we use the in-game engine, great. If it means we use FMV, that's okay, too. All I want is to make sure there's a good story to tell before you dump all your money into shiny FMV.
Re:Story, not cinematics (Score:1)
Re:Story, not cinematics (Score:2)
It would have to me. FF7's non-combat graphics engine really sucked. There are naunces that you could not get with FF7s engine - The look of shock on Aeris' face, the way Cloud moved when he released her body at the funeral scene, Sephiroth's insanity in some of his scenes. You simply can't show those things without either an FMV, or a better graphics engine.
FF6's graphi
Re:Story, not cinematics (Score:1)
Re:Story, not cinematics (Score:2)
It is possible to communicate plot and emotional characters without using FMVs or high-quality in-game engines. But FMVs (properly used) make your set pieces even better than they would be without them.
Yes, the old FF engines work. But if you added FMVs to them (in the right places, at the right ti
Re:Story, not cinematics (Score:2)
Actually, no, they wouldn't. 2D sprite graphics are far enough from reality that my brains interpret them in purely symbolic mode, adding all the missing details in as long as there's enough cues. Pre-rendered 3D graphics are close enough to reality that my brains try to interpret them as reality, which means that missing details don
Re:Story, not cinematics (Score:2)
That was true... (Score:2)
Some of the better ones use combinations, e.g. some really impressive texturing or animated textures for background, etc, combined with realtime rendered character graphics etc.
Game engines and graphics cards have come a long way since FF7. Render farms can do a better job as well, of course, but at some point there will
Re:That was true... (Score:2)
Re:Story, not cinematics (Score:2)
Re:Story, not cinematics (Score:2)
I think you missed the point... (Score:2)
in other news... (Score:1, Offtopic)
rich people have lots of money
water is wet
I'm so confused (Score:2)
Re:I'm so confused (Score:1, Funny)
You are supposed to like cut scenes in FFVII. You are also supposed to like cutscenes in Ninja Gaiden, and some of the shorter, funnier ones in Halo.
You are NOT supposed to like cutscenes in FFX. You are supposed to think that that game was basically a movie where you got to move the guy on screen once like every hour and a PS2 controller instead of a remote.
There. Now you have opinions. Be
Starcraft (Score:5, Insightful)
They are superb, funny, and even today they look nice.
However, if you skip them, you don't lose much from the history, and the game is just as good.
Re:Starcraft (Score:3, Interesting)
Reward (Score:2)
Fast-forward to Warcraft III and realtime-rendering cutscenes. While this could have been done with a better engine to be more impressive, it simply was not Starcraft. It was less rewarding, and even a bit sappy. One could argue that the overall plot was sappy at points, but I think a more little rewarding FMV (there were so
Re:Starcraft (Score:2)
The StarCraft cutscenes weren't my favorites, but they were still worth watching, independant of the game.
Re:Starcraft (Score:1)
What was that last part? (Score:1, Offtopic)
Merits sure is quiet!
Re:What was that last part? (Score:2)
I for one... (Score:1, Offtopic)
Cinematics cannot be the central focus (Score:2, Interesting)
The primary reason I stopped playing the final fantasy titles was because the cinematics became much more important then the gameplay.
The primary problem is that non interactive elements in games are not very replayable. Once the novelty of watching a long animation sequence wears off, I want to be able to skip it. And if I am forced to sit through
MUTE???? (Score:1, Offtopic)
This is one of my HUGEST pet peeves in the grammatical world. Let's go through this again:
A point in argument can be MOOT. It can then be considered either up for debate, or unworthy of debate, having been previously settled. Depends on the definition you want to use.
A point in argument cannot be MUT
Cinematics detracting? (Score:1)
Really? Yeah, try explaining that one to the maker or consumer of an interactive porn game. Much like the movies their based upon, there is no story or plot, regardless of how hard they try to make one.
not cinematics (Score:1)
Cinematics are No. 4 (Score:3, Interesting)
The order of game creation should go:
Gameplay
Story
Graphics
Cinematics
I'm paying $30-$50 to play a game, not watch a movie. Well done cinematics, when they add to the story and aren't in the way (and can be skipped if I want to), are great, but should only be implemented after good gameplay and story are pretty much wrapped up.
When developers decide that story matters, (Score:4, Insightful)
On the rare occasion a game actually have a well written story, then, by all means, tell it however you want to. If not, don't force me to watch it.
Use the force, Kyle! (Score:1)
Re:Use the force, Kyle! (Score:1)
Knights of the old republic 2 though...I am playing through it again so that I can be a different type of Jedi, but I can't skip through the cutscenes that I have already seen...just another bug from Obsidian rushing it out the door.
Re:Use the force, Kyle! (Score:3, Insightful)
*AHEM* you're forgetting it's LucasArts you're talking about. These guys are movie makers (Indiana Jones, anyone?), they obviously got experience on these things. I think there's simply no comparison between them and other game companies. I'd put them in a separate category.
Cinematics nice, but unnecessary (Score:2)
Interesting stories are made with interesting c
Game makers piss me off with cut scenes.... (Score:2)
Helps story, hurts gaming (Score:2)
I would like to say that, unless they're taking the place of a loading screen, cinematics need to be skippable. As much as I love Nintendo, this is something that they're very bad about. The last boss of Paper Mario: The Thousand Y
Re:Helps story, hurts gaming (Score:2)
Too true! I was willing to give Unreal 2 a go (at a bargain bin price) but the cutscenes on the ship made me tear my hair out.
I'd be interested to know what percentage of the budget the cinematics take up in eg a Warcraft III that used the game engine VS the pre-rendered epics you get in a typical modern Final Fantasy.
Cinematics _might_ not matter... (Score:1)
Just another game tool. (Score:1)
Cinematics are just like every other part of a game. If its in and it improves gameplay its good, if it doesnt its bad. Really it is no different to graphics, sound or any other tool in games.
That said I have to support this article more than the previous one. This article recognises they are not always a good