Well that's fine (I don't know much about TLOU). But it will not the first nonlinear game which avoided the 'idiot plot'.

Well, others might like that. It is fine that different games cater to different audiences. What you do here is basically the same as saying Nintendo-games are all kiddy.

Uncharted 3 didn't really have good plot or characterizations. Man, can't find the interview or quote, but didn't ND say that they first come up with the set pieces, and then the story afterwards? I mean, what the fuck was up with the cruiseship level? It was just so hilarious how Drake literally floats back to shore and Elena conveniently finds him.

And I forgot if it was Zero Punctuation that joked about it, but ND seems to be internally conflicted with Drake's character. They keep bringing up, starting with the second game, how Drake kills so many people and have the other characters ask "Why the hell are you doing this?". But after raising those questions, they just then shrug it off and do the same old doomsday weapon at a lost city routine with 2D villains.

When you think about it, none of the characters have depth. You don't really know what motivates any of them. Everyone around Drake just sticks around him, and at best, you can really just say that the good guys want to stop the bad guys, who want to destroy/rule the world.

And don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong about that kind of story. I don't mind having basic stories, likeable characters, interesting villains, and just using that as a context for the gameplay. But it's just so funny reading such arrogant shit from Naughty Dog about story telling.

Clearly the game with guns is more mature, and not the one with an incredibly clever hilarious satirical plot (paper mario ttyd).   Cause you know, he's shooting a guy.  Shooting=mature.

LOOOOOL, you couldn't have picked a less suitable picture to demonstrate maturity and complexity in TLOU. A simple shot of Elle with mournful expression on her face would have better conveyed your point then a  oic of Joel blowing someones head off with a shotgun. Gore and violence  does not equate to maturity.

difference is i dont care if the plot is kiddy mature or whatever, but they DO care about it being so or not

This is fast becoming a discussion of its own. Your test is flawed by the fact that you are pitting together two different mediums of which only one will be able to perform on its strengths.

If I put up Se7en versus Heavy Rain, I'm pretty certain not many will be impressed by the later. The scene where you saw off one finger, an action at a time, will be that much less dramatic simply because the audience is not part of it. Make the audience play the whole thing and have them do the deed and you may get very different reactions.

My girlfriend is a squeamish person. She doesn't like horror films or gore that much, but she loved Heavy Rain to bits. Having asked her what she felt was more impressive, the head bit from Se7en or the finger bit from Heavy Rain, she always goes for the later.

It's apples to oranges here. You said we talk about stories and not interactivity...but interactivity determines story impact in games. I've had friends sit down and play Flower on my PS3 after they had watched me do the first levels. Their reactions quickly went from "Yeah, it looks pretty" to silent concentration as they played, to feelings of loss in the 5th level and a grand feeling of joy and elation as they reached the city. I've watched my friends go through curiosity of the first few levels, to smiles as they rode the wind, to a brooding concentration as they navigated the electric lines and finally to wide smiles as they brought the city back to life.

Watching something and being part of it are two different things. That's why games cannot be measured on the same scale as films or books. They are not films, nor books, but their own thing with their own set of tools by which to engage the audience.

So I can't agree to your test because by taking away a game's interactivity - be it wide areas of exploration or simple quick time events -, you defang it and force it to be something it is not.

I agree that my test will force something out of games that is part of the enjoyment. But this thread is about story/plot, and that is not ported through interactivity. Surely, to judge the game as a whole, you need all parts. But that's not the story. and that's what I'm talking about, the story of no game so far is as good as the stories presented in good movies or books. That doesn't mean games are inferior as a form of art. Poems, paintings or songs are not as good in presenting a story (even games are better at that), but that doesn't make them inferior forms of art. They have different strengths. That the same for games. Storytelling is not the strength of games. But I see some potential to become better at that front too. That's why I was interested in the interview (and felt letdown by the actual content).

I think you are falling into the trap of "Oh it has guns and violence, it must just be a generic game attempting to interest the "adult" audience".

Sure, some games use gore and violence as a selling point and then label the game as mature. Not all games are like this though. The Last of Us is going to deal a lot with the relationship between Ellie and Joel as they struggle to survive. The gore and violence isn't used as a selling point, it's used as a tool to show off just how desperate the situation has become. Like the trailers/gameplay has illustrated, the situation is so dire that the chance of another living human being betraying and killing you is almost as high as a clicker chasing you down and devouring you.  It addresses the morality of killing another human being for the sake of survival.

I think you are being far too dismissive.

I'm not being dismissive about the last of us.  There are tons of great and mature games that feature guns in them.  I don't know much about the Last of Us honestly.  My PS3 is broken, and I won't have the money to replace it for some time, which kills my interest in this game.  Could be great for all I know.

What I'm dismissing is the fact that when he wanted to prove that something was mature, his first instinct was to pull up a picture of some dude getting his head blown off.  Clearly, the argument being made by those pictures was

"Game A features a shot gun and blood and game B features bright primary colors.  Clearly game A is more mature."  I'm not trying to dismiss the last of us.  I'm trying to dismiss the idiotic and ironically immature argument that was put forth.