By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
pokoko on 18 July 2016
Edit Thread
Veknoid_Outcast said:
pokoko said:

Then simply don't play it, right?  I mean, sometimes in the next few years Nintendo will probably release two or three jumping simulators.  I'm going to have zero interest in those.  I played enough platformers in the NES/SNES/PS1 eras to last a lifetime.  So what, though?  Should I say that the continued development of platformers is detrimental to the medium of video-games?  Right now, games with a lot of storytelling are popular, which means that a lot of people like them.  That a lot of people like them is ample enough reason for their continued development.

To be honest, I'm not even sure what 'cinematic' means, or why people suggest that it's inherently bad.  If a game doesn't have enough game-play then the problem is that it doesn't have enough game-play.  Story sequences leading to other sections of game-play is not a bad thing unto itself.  Plenty of games have done this well so we know that it's entirely possible.

I don't understand. I'm not allowed to voice my opinion on video games unless it conforms to what's popular? All I said was the interview raised red flags. If Ms. Hennig claimed the new Star Wars game was a 2D platformer, or a "jumping simulator" as you like to call them, wouldn't that raise red flags for you? You're entitled to your opinion and favorite genres, and so am I. Why can't I articulate my feelings again?

Cinematic refers to something sharing the qualities or characteristics of cinema. Why is that bad for games? Simply put: a movie has a set beginning, middle, and end, and only a single author. Every time the movie is watched, it is the same. Well, the point of games, for me at least, is many beginnings, middles, and ends, and many authors - both developer and player. And the game is always different each time. That is why the two media do not belong.

I'm not talking about your opinion on what you like, I'm talking about your position that something other people like is "bad for games".

What if I said games with cartoon-style characters are bad for gaming because they provide little impetus for immersion or empathy?  Would that be a valid statement?  I don't think so and I mostly prefer characters with more substance.

As for your definition of cinematic, don't most games have set beginnings and endings?  Do you mean linear games?  Games that depend on levels?