I'll agree that it doesn't need to be a gun, but by god it needs to be something other than a wannabe movie.

Jay520 said: Kasz216 said: Euphoria14 said: If by this he means we should have more games like Heavy Rain, then I agree. I am fine with titles that play out in that style instead of all of my titles being focused on things like gunplay or melee. I actually have a couple of guys at work who don't really game much at all but they absolutely loved Heavy Rain, stating that it was one of the best games they have ever played. Before that they used to play the CSI and NCIS games. These same guys got bored with LA Noire after a while too saying they like the interrogating and some of the chase down sequences, but don't care for all the driving, shooting, etc... They just want to focus on solving the crimes and that is it. So yeah, while some here may disagree with what he saying, I absolutely agree. There is room for all types of experiences. No need to tie us down to specific styles of gaming. down to specific styles of gaming... not... but I think you'd want to limit gaming to well... games. Something like Heavy Rain fits "interactive movie" far more then "Video game". Like how a "Choose your own adventure book" isn't ever described as a board game or game... it's an interactive novel. An interactive novel would still be a 'book' though, right? In the strictest sense, Heavy Rain is definitely a video game. The game constantly presents you with a series of contextual challenges which progressed the game, saved the player's life, solved mysteries, etc. Heavy Rain is no less of a game than DJ Hero or any other game based on contexts. It's just so fixated on the story that it becomes associated with movies.

I fail to see the difference.  Games prevent you with a series of contextual choices.  So do Visiual novels.

happydolphin said: I love this paragraph especially “In general, I don’t like game mechanics, I mean it’s the idea you do the same things through different levels. I think, in my mind, it’s an ideas I don’t really like because I love to do different things and like to see the story moving on and I like to do different things and different scenes, not do the same thing over and over again. If it involves violence at some point fine, if it makes sense in the context. But violence for the sake of violence, it doesn’t mean anything to me anymore.” He doesn't like traditional game mechanics, and wants some more fluid game mechanic, evolutive and adaptive to story events and context. This is the natural progression of gaming, and it's exciting honestly. I understand there are limitations especially in the context of online, but still there are ways to mesh the two and the prospective is exciting.

Story should twist itself in whatever broken-neck way it needs to for the sake of game mechanics. If you want to make a visual novel, this is fine, but make no bones about what you are making and don't attempt to make bastardized gameplay just for in defying calling a spade a spade.

Kasz216 said: Jay520 said: Kasz216 said: Euphoria14 said: If by this he means we should have more games like Heavy Rain, then I agree. I am fine with titles that play out in that style instead of all of my titles being focused on things like gunplay or melee. I actually have a couple of guys at work who don't really game much at all but they absolutely loved Heavy Rain, stating that it was one of the best games they have ever played. Before that they used to play the CSI and NCIS games. These same guys got bored with LA Noire after a while too saying they like the interrogating and some of the chase down sequences, but don't care for all the driving, shooting, etc... They just want to focus on solving the crimes and that is it. So yeah, while some here may disagree with what he saying, I absolutely agree. There is room for all types of experiences. No need to tie us down to specific styles of gaming. down to specific styles of gaming... not... but I think you'd want to limit gaming to well... games. Something like Heavy Rain fits "interactive movie" far more then "Video game". Like how a "Choose your own adventure book" isn't ever described as a board game or game... it's an interactive novel. An interactive novel would still be a 'book' though, right? In the strictest sense, Heavy Rain is definitely a video game. The game constantly presents you with a series of contextual challenges which progressed the game, saved the player's life, solved mysteries, etc. Heavy Rain is no less of a game than DJ Hero or any other game based on contexts. It's just so fixated on the story that it becomes associated with movies. I fail to see the difference.  Games prevent you with a series of contextual choices.  So do Visiual novels.

I'm not familar with visual novels but I would assume the number of contextual choices is far fewer than in a video game. Unlike Heavy Rain, or any other video game, where the game almost always gives you a challenge which dictates the character's fate.

I can understood why many see Heavy Rain not as a video game using the connotation of the word 'video game' but using the denotative definition of a video game, then Heavy Rain is undeniably a video game.

Honestly, I'm not too oncerned with whether or not this is identified as a video game or not. If you feel that it's more of a interactive movie than a video game, then that's your call, it's really not an interesting topic to discuss imo. My main point (which I admit wasn't clear) is we shouldn't discourage developers from developing these types of titles if they do find critical & commercial success without damaging the industry ( which I don't think they are).

most heavy rain threads turn into arguments about semantics. :P

Jay520 said: Kasz216 said: Jay520 said: Kasz216 said: Euphoria14 said: If by this he means we should have more games like Heavy Rain, then I agree. I am fine with titles that play out in that style instead of all of my titles being focused on things like gunplay or melee. I actually have a couple of guys at work who don't really game much at all but they absolutely loved Heavy Rain, stating that it was one of the best games they have ever played. Before that they used to play the CSI and NCIS games. These same guys got bored with LA Noire after a while too saying they like the interrogating and some of the chase down sequences, but don't care for all the driving, shooting, etc... They just want to focus on solving the crimes and that is it. So yeah, while some here may disagree with what he saying, I absolutely agree. There is room for all types of experiences. No need to tie us down to specific styles of gaming. down to specific styles of gaming... not... but I think you'd want to limit gaming to well... games. Something like Heavy Rain fits "interactive movie" far more then "Video game". Like how a "Choose your own adventure book" isn't ever described as a board game or game... it's an interactive novel. An interactive novel would still be a 'book' though, right? In the strictest sense, Heavy Rain is definitely a video game. The game constantly presents you with a series of contextual challenges which progressed the game, saved the player's life, solved mysteries, etc. Heavy Rain is no less of a game than DJ Hero or any other game based on contexts. It's just so fixated on the story that it becomes associated with movies. I fail to see the difference.  Games prevent you with a series of contextual choices.  So do Visiual novels. I'm not familar with visual novels but I would assume the number of contextual choices is far fewer than in a video game. Unlike Heavy Rain, or any other video game, where the game almost always gives you a challenge which dictates the character's fate. I can understood why many see Heavy Rain not as a video game using the connotation of the word 'video game' but using the denotative definition of a video game, then Heavy Rain is undeniably a video game. Honestly, I'm not too oncerned with whether or not this is identified as a video game or not. If you feel that it's more of a interactive movie than a video game, then that's your call, it's really not an interesting topic to discuss imo. My main point (which I admit wasn't clear) is we shouldn't discourage developers from developing these types of titles if they do find critical & commercial success without damaging the industry ( which I don't think they are).

I don't disagree with that... with the exception that I don't think we should discoruage developers from creating such things even if they don't find critical and commercial success.

People should be free to do whatever they like, and pretty much everything has an audience or some kind... and if someone wants to make it, why the hell not?

My point is... everything on a DVD isn't a movie.  Everything on a Videogame console isn't a videogame.

 

This becomes VERY important going into the modern age of multiformats.  Example... Ebooks.

E books are books.

If I were to release "Catcher in the Rye" for Xbox 360 and put it on an DVD, it would be no less a book.

If I were to release "Catcher in the Rye" in movie theatres where every minute the "Page" turned to the next wall of text,  or if it was all scrolling text... it's not a movie, it's a book.

To refer to things based on there format instead of context is wrong.

TruckOSaurus said: happydolphin said: TruckOSaurus said: While they are linear in the sense that there's only one way you can go, you're less limited in the ways you can tackle a certain stage. I think Mega Man is not a very good exemple for linearity since you can choose the order in which you beat the bosses which in turn opens up many variations on how you handle the following stages. If you take a look at Castlevania which doesn't allow level selection, there's always the variation of how you handle the enemies, obstacles, which sub weapon you choose to carry, when you choose to use it. All of this explains why these games could be replayed many times over even though you always went from point A to point B. Okay, Ninja Gaiden is one of my favorite classic NES games, and it's totally linear, despite some flexibility in going backwards a tad so as to retake your forward run, but that's it. But I bet each time you replayed it you altered you playstyle, adapted it to avoid taking damage in certain sections, saved your energy for a boss so you can pound him with ninja stars, opted to keep a subweapon because it shot downwards and you knew you'd be dealing with enemies on lower ground later on, etc...

For sure! I would redo it and try to perfect it! I do that with classics all the time! :D

I think I might have been unclear this far as to what I saw for a vision. Within the context-driven actions, it may not be a cinematic adventure per se where actions are pre-programmed. In other words, one player could do a much better job than another, and could even be ranked over a points system or by achievements. Cinematic adventures are but one possibility within the variety of what would be the intensely story-driven genre.

For example, you're in an area where you are bare hands, no items, and you need to make your way beyond obstacles to get to the next thread in the story. The objects you find along the way will help you get there, but you need to find the objects, and execute the actions properly. Say you only have a knife, and, for instance, you find material to make a hut or something, or make a passage over a chasm. Maybe you'll need animal bones and ligaments? The challenges are always new and so the player is always interested, like in a good book, the face-offs are always new and fresh. Takes thos to a whole other level where you can play this online with other people and cooperate. What about a LOST game? When you try to bring new ideas, it's hard but the trick is to not choke them with "oh that'll never work" mentality.

I don't think I'm doing a good job at expressing this though. :(

Mr Khan said: happydolphin said: I love this paragraph especially “In general, I don’t like game mechanics, I mean it’s the idea you do the same things through different levels. I think, in my mind, it’s an ideas I don’t really like because I love to do different things and like to see the story moving on and I like to do different things and different scenes, not do the same thing over and over again. If it involves violence at some point fine, if it makes sense in the context. But violence for the sake of violence, it doesn’t mean anything to me anymore.” He doesn't like traditional game mechanics, and wants some more fluid game mechanic, evolutive and adaptive to story events and context. This is the natural progression of gaming, and it's exciting honestly. I understand there are limitations especially in the context of online, but still there are ways to mesh the two and the prospective is exciting.   Story should twist itself in whatever broken-neck way it needs to for the sake of game mechanics. If you want to make a visual novel, this is fine, but make no bones about what you are making and don't attempt to make bastardized gameplay just for in defying calling a spade a spade.

I understand what you're expressing, and I trust that you undstand that Cage is not advocating cinematic adventures per se, but a focus on context-driven actions which of course may lead to cinematic adventures, but also to much more elaborate context-driven action games such as Conker. As such, this type of content still has a long way to go before coming to maturity and bringing consoles games to where they're mean to be from an immersion standpoint.

Kasz216 said: I don't disagree with that... with the exception that I don't think we should discoruage developers from creating such things even if they don't find critical and commercial success. People should be free to do whatever they like, and pretty much everything has an audience or some kind... and if someone wants to make it, why the hell not? My point is... everything on a DVD isn't a movie.  Everything on a Videogame console isn't a videogame.   This becomes VERY important going into the modern age of multiformats.  Example... Ebooks. E books are books. If I were to release "Catcher in the Rye" for Xbox 360 and put it on an DVD, it would be no less a book. If I were to release "Catcher in the Rye" in movie theatres where every minute the "Page" turned to the next wall of text,  or if it was all scrolling text... it's not a movie, it's a book. To refer to things based on there format instead of context is wrong.

I guess I included the critical & commercial success thing because I don't think we should actually encourage developers to release critical & commercial failures. We should discourage such a thing imo. That can't be good for the industry.

As for the Heavy Rain thing, I don't want to discuss it anymore (I can see when I've lost a debate). I guess I sort of felt insulted when people kept saying HR wasn't a game & felt obliged to say something.

CGI-Quality said: Indeed. The problem with quoting David Cage (and devs like him) is that people don't actually  grasp what he's trying to say and read too far into the words on the screen. In truth, this article is nothing new, he's said such stuff before, but he's never tried to be cocky, condescending or insulting about it. The GT interview puts much of this article in perspective. Then again, there's really no need to defend Cage at this juncture - anyone who didn't like him before hasn't exposed themselves now. The rest who respect what he's about however, know he's bigger than the words he speaks.

I understand your frustration, but I believe, whether I'm right to or not, that people, when presented the argument more clearly or when disambiguated, can come to understand things and quotes better. You also corrected me in one of the exclusive threads, and once I understood, I was quick to correct.

We have a lot of smart people here, it's just that the mindset might be a little off since we're all online. But I believe in the intelligence of people for the most part. Am I wrong? Maybe I am, but I generally like to give the benefit of the doubt. Mind you I'm also a little newer so I haven't reached that place yet.

Having said that, it does kind of suck that people throw what he said with little consideration, but I'll try to show them they're wrong to, hopefully I won't suck too much at it.