S.T.A.G.E. said:
curl-6 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
curl-6 said:
veritaz said:
It's a blend of both, which is why i said it's a different experience. I think it succeded in what it was setting out to do and it shows in the fans, profit, reviews.
|
But the problem with playing both sides of the field is that ultimately you have to succeed as one or both. Heavy Rain wouldn't pass the standards expected of good movies, and because it reduces gameplay to a series of QTEs it doesn't win out as a game either. The erosion of gameplay quality in favour of story and visuals, the Hollywoodization of gaming, is already a grave threat to the medium, and Heavy Rain is a game that exemplifies this trend.
|
Who cares what the standards are the hollywood movies? The game is a push in the right direction to get games to be more interactve and give control over an story and make it your own. Not every game is the same and the variety is what makes its personal value seem. Games have proven themselves to become a medium which has always strived to become the point between films and life, in which you control the outcomes of situations and go into actual worlds. Games were always mean to evolve and technology allows that to happen. Games can still be games, but it also depends on how good you've become at gaming. Casual games are still games, story driven games are still games, you have to finish it, as simple as that.
|
By moving towards films though, games move away from their own identity as a unique art form and therefore lessening the medium's greatest strength. I have no problem with games giving the player control over a story's outcome, but when QTEs take the place of what could and should be playable scenes, and when story is prioritised above gameplay, it's like a car trying to be a boat and ending up as a weird hybrid that works on neither land nor water.
|
Um...not true at all. If you've seen how powerful games are they are on the verge of having near CG-like graphics in action adventure game. The animation with the power of artistic, story and gameplay direction are making games simulators (just like they were in the old days) of our favorite superheroes, action stars and more. Remember when you played Batman, Action beat em ups back in the day and other various licensed titles? Well obviously they were trying to immitate the movie realm and other areas of the arts like comics. Look at DBZ and Naruto for instance. Those games could've been just like street fighter, but modern technology has allowed for them to play closer to the show. As technology increases we will be truly simulating the worlds weve wanted to be in. You are the gamer and the game is made to be played. If you want old school alone thats you. Games are not like a car being a boat. Games are the true medium that lets you ride the movies (unlike Universal Studios) and take part in the existence of the characters and follow them for 8-12 hour (or more) stories. It's always been that way...most just weren't paying attention.
|
Except that prior to the 7th gen gameplay was almost always kept front and centre. Now we get extended QTE sequences or even non-interactive cutscenes where gameplay would have been a better choice. I have nothing against games that follow a cinematic story. But games are just that, games. You play a game, you watch a movie. When the watching takes precedence over the playing, a game has failed to accomplish the core goal of the medium.
