I agree on the Assassin's Creed part. I only played AC4, but i was frustrated with the "push one button to everything".
I couldn't undestand how people enjoyed the franchise that much.

Thanks god the pirate part was awesome and well done. In the end i enjoyed AC4 a lot, but not because of the assassin part.

The better question is, what is with all the hate cinematic experiences are getting?

How hard is it to understand that some people really care about graphics, story, music, a good and memorable plot while others, don't? Pushing a button is only a part of the gameplay. As for reviewers always giving cinematic games or games with good graphics good scores, Ryse would like to say hi. If anything, graphics are taken for granted and are completely ignored in most reviews in terms of the final score they receive.

And to answer your question, for many people like me, cutscenes create an emotional bond with the character. If it weren't for them I wouldn't have liked Ni no Kuni (or cared for Ollie's quest) nearly as much as I did. Same with Eternal Sonata and it's main characters. For me the story is one of the most important parts and cutscenes help a great deal with making me care about the characters. Reading a text is not the same, hence why I watch anime and not read manga.

But the point is that I get that other people care most about gameplay and I don't criticize them. Why do you fell the need to tell others that there's something wrong with their tastes in gaming and you don't simply realize that it's nothing more than "different strokes for different folks", as already pointed out?

Sorry, you should read the "can" as "could". You can NOT do it. But this option would make the 3 star rating (you earn one of the three stars by getting full points) completely nonsense. In the actual game you sometimes have to drive a complete cup several times untill you did well in each single race. Could you save after each race and repeat each one as often as you like to, you only have to do well once on each track and then go on to the next.

You could drive race one untill you managed to get 1st - then the same for race two, three and four. But you do not have to do well in all of them in the same "playthrough".

That makes quite some sence.

If a game (without targeting a specific one) has not much more to offer other than graphics and cutscenes then people can get the whole experience simply by watching. They dont have to buy and play it themselves - it is then just like a movie.

I had the same feeling at some point during last generation, that games - regardless of how they really are - just need to look good to automatically getting 70%+. But there have been some games which did look good, but did not managed to get this score. So I changed my mind later on.

Having better graphics, but only running on 30fps with a few framerate drops will always make a better scoring than having worse graphics but running at constant 60fps. I agree with you.

Firstly - I am sorry, i never wanted to tell other players that they have a bad taste or something like this. Everything is very subjective, everyone liking other kind of games. I did not wanted my post to sound like i wanna criticize all the people which have other opinions.

Just to let you know - i really really loved Eternal Sonata. Even though - if i remember correctly - it also had quite some cutscenes, it never felt like they are disturbing the gameplay flow. In my opinion it really has been a good game. I liked (almost^^) everything about it - especially the end of the game.

At least it probably is easier to say "look at that visuals, its amazing" instead of saying "now take a look at these gameplay features". Visuals are also transported by bare screenshots, and in general they are much more obviously. They are the surface of a game, which is being seen directly from the beginning on, while gameplay features (more or less the content of a game) would take much more time to explain.

So all in all i guess it just is about "easy and uncomplicated entertainment", like watching a movie.

I can accept a few cinematic moments, but filling the whole game with them, particularly with ones with timed button mashing that triggers in-game actions otherwise impossible with the game's interface turns a game in an interactive movie, in the best hypothesis, or exposes it as a badly designed game in the worst.

Hyper Super-Ultra-Megaduper "This"

I do not mind it, but it is funny and frustrating when it goes "amazing action cut scene" to "boring walking interactive part" to "amazing action cut scene".

Why have me walk that thirty seconds? Just make it all one cut scene. I remember Metal Gear Solid 2 doing this on the Shell section.

Out of curiousity, if you and these people really care most about graphics, story, music and plot...why aren't you just watching a movie? Movies will always be better at being "cinematic" than games, but games have a huge bag of tricks that it can pull from to make engaging stories that are unique to games (the story isn't the problem...the way of telling it is). That is why I don't like the goal to be cinematic, even if the end result turns out well. 

PS: Cutscenes aren't the only way to tell a story. I consider cutscenes to be like exposition dumps in books or movies... its just a lazy way of getting information to the player because you don't have the skill to work it in organically. There can also be voice acting in games without taking control away from you as the character.

I understood that, just said I didn't feel the need to do that since I wouldn't have felt the same amount of accomplishment, and I love the buzz that comes from frustration.

I don´t get it either.

Convergence of the medias imo. Games are leaning towards movies because they want to attrack not only gamers but people that don't game at all and those that like movies.