Forums - Gaming Discussion - MGS4 to have 90 minute long cutscenes?

90 Minute Cut-scenes? Uh...
Ability to Pause Cut-scenes? WOOT!!!!!!!!!



Around the Network
Majin-Tenshinhan said:
Imagine watching 85 minutes of a cutscene and then the console freezes.

Good fun. :p

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

I just got kicked in the Balls ouch.

Curse you majin for even jinxing us that way.



 
from xberserker of Neogaf


TheBigFatJ said:
Words Of Wisdom said:

My interpretation of the point was different.

Essentially consider this: You're plaing a standard turn-based RPG game and the developers want to enact an airship battle. Now unless you want to take this to new levels of awesome like Skies of Arcadia did and have an entire 2nd battle system dedicate to airship/monster battles, you make a cutscene. You could also make a minigame just for this instance but many people hate stupid minigames in RPGs so that's probably a bad idea unless you plan to do this a LOT and can put a lot of effort into the minigame.

The point I am making with the example is that there are times when in order to tell the story, the best tool is a cutscene. This is particularly true where the system would not given the player involvement anyway and rewriting it to do so would not be worth the time/effort. I much prefer to play the game rather than watch cutscenes (heck I'd rather read text than listen to voice acting because it's faster and I get can get back to playing quicker), but I understand that there are times when they are very useful.


I'd concede that there are times when cutscenes are useful, but you can usually do things in a better way with games. Look at the example with Half Life: you worked through the entire story, setting, etc. This is a very simple example of a back story, but it made the game all that much more interesting.



Look at my example again and consider how to do it.  Skies of Arcadia obviously put lots of time and effort into a clever and creative battle system for airship battles but when you have one airship battle in the game (and not 20-30), how much effort do you think this merits?

I agree with the point that a developer should do as much in-game as possible, but I think the choice is rarely as simple as "Do we do this in-game or not?" 



Personally I love cutscenes, but hated the fact that you had to advert all attention to them (in the past), because I always got interupted during one and missed a key part of the storyline. This'll be great for me if you can pause it.
I love games and I love movies, so I think it's great when you can mix the two passionatly (not talking about games based on movies, I hate them, with some exceptions).



David

Around the Network
DTG said:
Majin-Tenshinhan said:
psrock said:
Majin-Tenshinhan said:
I was already pissed with this game, now I practically hate it. And don't get me wrong, I love the series.

How people can condone and appreciate this baffles me.

how long have you been playing it ? i dont think its out yet .


Check up on your reading skills, pal. I never said I played it. I hate it because it's taking steps backward from what MGS3 had, and now it has 90 minute cutscenes. I don't have to play it to know that 90 minute cutscenes don't fall into my fancy.


MGS3 was the step backwards from MGS2. How can MGS4 be a step backwards if it returns to MGS2's form?


Billy, why did you switch accounts? To trick us into believing that there were actually two MGS2 fans as rabid as you?




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/

Words Of Wisdom said:
TheBigFatJ said:
Words Of Wisdom said:

My interpretation of the point was different.

Essentially consider this: You're plaing a standard turn-based RPG game and the developers want to enact an airship battle. Now unless you want to take this to new levels of awesome like Skies of Arcadia did and have an entire 2nd battle system dedicate to airship/monster battles, you make a cutscene. You could also make a minigame just for this instance but many people hate stupid minigames in RPGs so that's probably a bad idea unless you plan to do this a LOT and can put a lot of effort into the minigame.

The point I am making with the example is that there are times when in order to tell the story, the best tool is a cutscene. This is particularly true where the system would not given the player involvement anyway and rewriting it to do so would not be worth the time/effort. I much prefer to play the game rather than watch cutscenes (heck I'd rather read text than listen to voice acting because it's faster and I get can get back to playing quicker), but I understand that there are times when they are very useful.


I'd concede that there are times when cutscenes are useful, but you can usually do things in a better way with games. Look at the example with Half Life: you worked through the entire story, setting, etc. This is a very simple example of a back story, but it made the game all that much more interesting.



Look at my example again and consider how to do it. Skies of Arcadia obviously put lots of time and effort into a clever and creative battle system for airship battles but when you have one airship battle in the game (and not 20-30), how much effort do you think this merits?

I agree with the point that a developer should do as much in-game as possible, but I think the choice is rarely as simple as "Do we do this in-game or not?"


It's harder to implement the story inside the gameplay than paste come cutscenes. It can take more talent, more time, and therefore be more expensive...  but the harder it is the more potential it has. Planescape: Torment is the perfect example of it (I'm not sure if any game will ever surpass it in terms of story).

I never played Skies of Arcadia so I'm just following up on your comment, but there are always limitations such as budget, time constraint and hardware limitations. However, if you had none of those limitations, what was there to stop you? Did Kojima have any limitations at all? Certainly not budget or hardware. And possibly not much on time either.



cool :)



Like some have said, if it exists the ninety minute cutscene is probably just the ending, or perhaps it's used to summarize the series so far (there's, what, six or seven games now?). That said, I still think it's a mistake. I, for instance, loved Final Fantasy VI, but its twenty-minute plus ending was longer than I could stomach: there's no way in hell I'm sitting still for ninety, no matter how gripping it may be. Of course, I'm pretty sure that Metal Gear Solid fans are accustomed to watching the game as often as they're playing it, so perhaps the problem is that I'm just not the target audience, so to speak.



I think my biggest disappointment with this is Kojma's desire to continue to make a game into a movie instead of blending the two a la Mass Effect. I don't mind cutscenes but developers need to learn to take advantage of the medium's strengths better. Instead of locking the player out of the story (like cinema does), welcome the player into the scene and give him/her options for movement, conversation, and manipulating the scene.

After all, the industry is referred to as interactive media, right?




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/