Ahhh....but that's an SRPG.  Whereas in your average JRPG I think that there is alot less strategy involved with each move, and can often devolve into "smack thing until you need to heal or the thing is dead".  

I see where you are coming from, but I don't think what you are talking about is true for the majority of RPG's.  

I just don't understand when cutscenes became this aweful thing that everyone hates.  I've always loved cutscenes in all of my games.  Some of my best video game memories are from cutscenes.

 Planescape has an 800.000 word script. How can you say that it integrates it into its gameplay? The whole game is more like an interactive novel.

 It's quite pathetic when developers adher to the demands of fans. We've seen it happen with MGS3 where Kojima listened to complaining players and compromised the story to make it more accomodating for the public. A true artist doesn't compromise his vision regardless of what anyone around him says because if he does it will no longer be true to his original creative intentions. Fan service is what destroys any artistic ambition in games.

 As for you commenting on the industry being interactive, have you forgotten that there is near 20 hours of gameplay? MGS has always been known to be a cinematic experience first and a game second and I'm baffled why people would be upset and surprised by this news considering MGS' track record.

 You mixed things: Action-centric games are actually the ones that use, and are more excused on using cutscenes, because they are usually light on story and do not need to utilize methods on incorporating it on gameplay as muc, which would also help the action gameplay be completely by itself, which is OK.

Story-Heavy or Story-centric games (such as RPGs and Adventures), those are the ones that really need to put the story inside the gameplay. That's why many of them use outlets such as:

- NPC Interaction, a great way for interactive dialogue scenes, and leaving the player in full control.

- Optional content, necessary to spread the story without losing any amount. It would also give the player the choice to how much he wants to play it. It's also a great way to increase replay value.

- Story-specific gameplay, which is about features that are very story-related, but it's not optional and impacts the gameplay heavily. One example is Planescape: Torment's main character, the Nameless One, an 'immortal' which loses his identity and memory every times he dies. When the player(in control of Nameless One) dies, he doesn't lose the game, but he re-awakens with his entire memory removed. What better way to explain death, rebirth and immortality than to actually experience it in the game

Adventure games, the most story-centric genre, don't have many cutscenes, believe it or not. They instead use ALOT of NPC interaction to keep the story going. Perfect example: Grim Fandango, an 18hours Adventure and only has like 30min of cutscenes in the entire game.

As for RPGs: Fallout 1&2 (everything optional, amazing stories), Planescape: Torment (best story ever), Baldur's Gate 2 (Bioware's finest).

Funny you mentioned Bioware, when they are actually using Less interactivity in their games than before (and are nowhere near as good as their early times). Kotor and Mass Effect were extremely linear (ME not as much), and there was much less optional content and NPC interaction than Bladur's Gate 2. Let's hope Dragon Age won't be like them, and be more like BG2.

MGS4 and JRPGs are the aberrations of the Story-Centric games since they support heavily cutscenes, and that directly contradicts the Industry norm. But they're from japanese developers, so it's not surprising.

 Read my comments above. 

Hey, not all sayings are JRPG specific (who else dislikes that word?), and this one isn't.  Still, you're right in that a lot of RPGs amount to pressing the attack buttons until the enemies turn into bloody pulps however not all RPGs are Final Fantasy.  There are some where *shock* strategy is involved from the weapon you select to the actions in battle you perform.  Baten Kaitos Origins is a good example of an RPG where the system is actually very challenging to work with (it's too bad the story is a steaming pile of poo).  Even Skies of Arcadia did something neat with SP management.  How about Valkyrie Profile where there was a lot to be said for attack timing making or breaking certain fights.

Also, it's not so much that people dislike cutscenes rather just that people like to play games and when you're watching a cutscene you don't actually feel like you're playing anything because... well... you're not.  I was put off by Okami's obscene intro length because I wanted to play the game, not stare at small movie.  If you really like cutscenes then you'd probably appreciate CGI movies more than actual games because that's 100% the part you like.  The rest of us want the game to shut up and let us play with maybe a cutscene every once in a while for things you can't do in-game yourself or that just look really nifty as cutscenes.  Also, a lot of people (including myself) want to see more work done on the in-game models so that it's not painful to go back to the game after a cutscene.

Aka going from this:

 To this:

Why are we still discussing this?

It's been proven false and exaggeration.

So, let's move on... Which version of GTA IV is better?

Don't worry, it happens from time to time. I've done it myself once or twice.

I've only said that Kojima is a poor story teller, not a bad game designer.  MGS4 will probably have solid gameplay and be fun inspite of the cutscenes, but people make Kojima out to be this grand video game visionary and he's not.  He's a good game developer that isn't a great story teller but is so thoroughly convinced that he is that he indulges himself in extensive cutscenes that tell overcomplicated stories.

MGS has not always been that way.  MGS2 was where the true self indulgence began.

But as I've read MGS4 uses the ingame engine for its cutscenes, so you shouldn't have to worry about the difference in game models for this particular case.

For the other issues, well then just skip over it, if all you want is to play the game. I have no problems with that and don't really mind if people hate cutscenes, but badmouthing a game for having cutscenes, when it is clearly what the fans of the series wanted, seems pointless. If you want to make MGS4 without cutscenes and piss off all the MGS fans, be my guest.

 It also makes many of them look great. Bioware is nowhere near as good as their early years, their writing is severely lacking. Many developers have already surpassed them: Valve, Obsidian, CDProjekt, Turbine, Telltale are some of those.