| CGI-Quality said: The article makes some excellent points, although some of them I'd argue with. For me, it rests mainly on the execution. Many games this gen have the "me too" attitude of recycling previous ideas - and then poorly implementing them. Other IPs, such as the Uncharted series, seemed to have worked a formula that not only works, but is industry leading. So no, every IP doesn't need to head down a similar direction as Uncharted. Not because it's not doable, it's not good for every game/IP to follow in those footsteps. |
The original article spoke about a lack of resources. I had read that as technical limitations of hardware meaning that the more you throw into cinematic efforts, the less you have for other areas. Now, thinking again on it, I say the lack of resources also refers to a lack of technical competency to pull off both. The issue then is, if the suites believe the market wants more movie-like experiences, they will attempt them, even if they aren't gifted (producing a complete bullocks story like Modern Warfare 2). Or they won't put resources into other areas. Of course, take a first part effort (usually by Sony), who back something like Uncharted, and you get something that really, really works. However, how often do these happen?
I think a factor for the push for cinematic experiences is that the videogame industry wants to gain the respect that movies have, for being culturally relevant, so they end up emulating it. They don't want to think they are making toys for kids, but actually trying to make a significant exerience. Of course, take my opinion as someone who is supporting casual and retro games, and believe games should first be games.
