| enditall727 said: But you are. And you DON'T have a point about the cutscene.. A game that allows me to interact within some of the cutscenes? OH GOD THIS IS SO TERRIBLE!! You actually attempted to call it too many cutscenes. I dont see the problem. It's an interactive cutscene and you dont like it. YOU are the problem. Also, it does immerse you in the game more than it would just watching the cutscene and you dont need to be frightened. Resident Evil 4 never frightened me. The only game that I feel can really frighten me these days is maybe a good Silent Hill. Does that mean that RE4 cant feel frightened anybody else just because it didn't really frighten me? Either way these interactive cutscenes are better and are welcomed in the future as long as they are done right( they did it perfectly in the demo when the hybrid started making his way toward galahad). I just feel that this isn't the ideal gameplay to show off at E3. It would've been fine if you just kept it about them improving the gunplay or something. But but but.. it has too many cutscenes! ..Stop it |
You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of my point:
The problem is not the interactivity of the cutscenes. Interactive cutscenes can be okay in some scenarios, but I still hold them on the same level as regular cutscenes. They need to be used sparingly, and avoided if possible.
The problem is the frequency of cutscenes that take you out of control. I find it hard to believe that you don't see what I am talking about even if you don't agree with me. The first video that I posted showed gameplay broken up into 10second pieces, fractured by cutscene after cutscene. That to me feels like I have no agency in the world and it feels like my goal is to get to the next cutscene as opposed to survival or completing a mission.
Whether or not the game actually has multiple paths that the game can go down, these cutscenes can give players the illusion of lack of choice. To the player, it can feel like they aren't the character in the world, they feel like they are just watching a static story play out and shooting things along the way.
Heres a couple videos for you (first one is infinitely more important):
-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0RFoGvkQfs
This video talks about how much agency you need in games. Key sections:
-Around 1:30 when he begins talking about TLOU. The way The Order is designed would put that section as a cutscene, or at least break it up with cutscenes, taking away the player's feeling of agency. This makes them feel safe in the thought that whatever is coming up will be a point to the story and likely a cutscene. I am just performing the necessary actions to get to that point. What I am asking for is the game to make you feel like you are the character, and that your decision to go around that corner is meaningful, because, while it is not a true choice, whatever happens will be determined by your own ability to adapt and you really are alone without the cutscenes to calmly guide you through.
-Also, look at 3:30 where it talks about "bad shooters". That is what the first half of this demo does. You don't have much gameplay choice. Sure, you can change weapons, but honestly, the only thing that really does is change what the explosion looks like. If you try to move around, you get riddled with bullets (as shown by the player who seemed to try to move around). Your gameplay choice is to play whack-a-mole with your enemies. As Dan said "there is no choice involved, just doing".
By what I've seen, this game does not give me enough to make me feel like my decisions matter. In fact, it seems like it was designed specifically to make me feel like my decisions don't matter, whether they have any real effect or not.
-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGXIR2dlktc
This video talks about cutscenes in games. Key sections:
-As this video starts it says that we shouldn't do away with cutscenes entirely. I first want to clarify that I don't disagree. I think that cutscenes largely have a place at the beginning or ending of level, but should be replaced with gameplay when possible. My main problems comes with mini cutscenes of the few second variety that break up the gameplay for no real reason. These sacrifice player agency and control to make the game more cinematic. I do not believe that games should aspire to be movies, I think they should aspire to be the best games they can be.
-This video starts by talking about downsides to cutscenes and I think R@D falls victim to many of these, but he tends to brush over the ones I'm leaning more on right now.
-The second part of the video talks about the places to use cutscenes in the game. I don't think there is much to talk about here, but I can agree with all of it, just to clarify my stance.
PS: I don't like how you are trying to belittle my point without actually putting any effort into this discussion. I am here to have a discussion on the place of cutscenes in games, and whether or not The Order uses them effectively. I have stated my point, your counterpoint seems to be simply "No, you are wrong". Or possibly, your argument is "interactive cutscenes>static cutscenes" which isn't what I was talking about here and I don't really disagree with. My discussion is "Cutscenes (both interactive and static)<Pure gameplay" which is very different than what you are discussing
