windbane said:
Indeed, I did read the article. Did you? It's interesting that you take a jab at Kojima even though nothing in the article indicates that his method is bad. In fact, you have a blantant untruth in the 2nd sentence of your post: " I find it especially interesting that cutscenes were actually harmful, and disengaged the players" That's not what the article said at all. " What Went Right1. Cutscenes with overarching emotional themes. Uncovering the "perfect" cutscene, in terms of power of physiological emotional response, proved to have no formula. Just like their cinematic movie counterparts, game cutscenes have no single creative blueprint. As you can imagine, a horror film evokes a different set of emotions than a comedy, but both may be powerful and effective pieces of art. What we did find is that games like Gears of War, F.E.A.R., and Call of Duty 3 consistently engage players by specializing in a particular thematic emotion." They then give 3 examples of games they studied and how the cutscenes were beneficial. About Gears of War they said of the cutscenes: "Together, over 80 percent of players reacted with one of the 10 most intense engagement responses of the game, no small feat for a title with bloody chainsaws and huge courtyard battles." Sounds like a ringing endorsement to me. Their examples of bad cutscenes are briefings in GRAW2 and the info on battles in Resistance. Well, duh. Those aren't very exciting cutscenes. Where they should have given more credit to Resistance is under the section about novelty weapons, because I felt Resistance had great weapons. Their conclusion also contradicts your claim: "Clients (and family members) always ask us if there's a single formula to compelling, engaging media, whether it's a video game, advertisement, or a movie. The truth is, there isn't. But there are definite trends in what makes engaging and successful gameplay. At the end of the day, each of these successful games relies on superior execution and creativity to craft a uniquely engaging experience. Our big surprise is just how important the little things, like throwing a grenade, can be -- even more engaging than that epic and highly-scripted plot events. Little things add up to more enjoyable experiences, higher Metacritic scores, and higher sales. In short, more fun. As we've seen, there are definitely some "rules of fun" that hold across these titles, and in some cases, across games in general. More interestingly, though, we're looking forward to seeing how future titles innovate and break these rules. As players expect more and more from their game experience, smart risk-taking in game design may be the only way to truly stand out in the crowd." Your example of CoD4 is false because it does have cutscenes. That's why I mentioned that in my response. Also, most reviews mention the pacing of games if they are good. That's not a new concept. I happen to love all the little things, great combat, great cutscenes, and great pacing of MGS games, so pardon me if I defend a guy that you had no justification to attack based on this article that really presents no new information other than telling us that some Xbox games did a good job. |
Did you read past the first page?
"However, other titles in this study struggled with maintaining engagement during cutscenes more than any other element. Players say they want them, but cutscenes in general are not as engaging as combat or other interactive gameplay. All too often, cutscenes simply served as the cursory bridge between two levels.
Underperforming cutscenes showed a distinct pattern. Most were highly informational and involved "talking heads" or narration."
The first part compares what cutscenes work best, but cutscenes as a whole don't engage as much as actually playing, and ones that are just informational, talking heads, or narration did worst of all. All you quote is a feel good "everybody does a good job in their own way" blanket statement that can justify anything.
COD4 is hairsplitting. It has next to no cutscenes that you aren't in control during. You are almost always in your characters head, and that is a great thing. It increases immersion.
There is a difference between defending a guy and saying everything he shits is gold, and the point of the article had nothing to do with Xbox, so get off your fanboy horse.
I feel sad for this topic, it had so much potential.
You can find me on facebook as Markus Van Rijn, if you friend me just mention you're from VGchartz and who you are here.