I have to mention Molyneux with Fable II. He really knows what gaming is all about.

He really dislikes the cutscene approach to gaming. He designed Fable II so that besides the 90 second intro, the player won't have to endure NOT playing for more that 20 seconds at a time. I think thats brilliant.

He truly wants the story and plot evolve around the gameplay. That's why Fable II is one of my most anticipated games and why I skipped out on MGS4.

Well, I hope he learned it after 2004, because the first Fable's story, plain and simple, sucked. The game was good, of course, but the story was so horrible and cliched that it was more fun to just wander and do things than to continue the story.

 While it was a bit cliche, I don't think it was horrible. I really enjoyed Fable despite its shortcomings.

And that's another thing I like about Molyneux, he know when something is wrong with his games. He wasn't thrilled about Fable. Fortunately, he is saying Fable II improves on everything that was wrong with Fable, including the plot.

I think the reason why Fable 2 is going to the lack of cutscenes approach is simple:instead of telling a story, Molyneux wants the players to make up their own stories which is bascially the goal of many WRPGs

Did you even read the article? His point, and its a good one, is that MGS, RE and FF (and their ilk) don't tell the story through the game, but through cut scenes. He's drawing a line between "FVII" the video game, in which you do things that matter, and "FFVII" the movie, in which you lose control over your character and story. The game has no effect on the story, and the story only adds context to the game.

I would say BioWare has been brilliant at being able to tell stories within the game. In fact, I just finished replaying Baldur's Gate I, and am in the middle of BGII. Your actions have actual consequences that are not predetermined. You may progress as hero or villain, or something in between. Most quests have multiple outcomes. NPCs can be influenced and guided by you in the game. Cut scenes are rare (and usually used to show something outside you character's POV). This has been true of every BW game I've ever played, and they all excel in telling story without breaking the illusion of player control over the story.

Well other then insulting my apparent lack of imagination, you still haven't said anything. You haven't stated what this more is? The only way to tell a story is though comunication.

These game generally are not our games, they're someone else's game that they let us play, these are not our storeys, they're a story someone else is telling.

If I want to use my imagination with a game, I make my own then my imagination actually matters. Fact is I can Imagen anything i want with someone else's game, it doesn't change anything.

And still it doesn't really say how game telling should work, it just says it doesn't like pre defined characters and cut scenes.

On baldur's gate, much as I love it, that game fails at what it tries to do, try being a complete bad as villain in the game and it's almost impossible with the guards and you still have to do some quests which always contradict which way you play. added to the fact that all advents still lead to the same conclusion it's just an illusion of choice which is what all games really have.

Fable 1 imo also had a great illusion, I went from being a evil mage to a paladin to a ranger by the end of the game, which took away from the whole sence of my actions really mattered and defined my game

people should realize once and for all that videogames are FOR PLAYING. Not storytelling. The story is just an excuse to involve the user in the game not backwards.

Games are not art. They are entertainment. They can have "artistic" stuff but that's it. They may become art one day but not copying another one (filmmaking).

I am happy that the cinematic era is coming to an end. It was about time.

The cinematic era isn't coming to an end though.

Do you guys really expect every game to use the same type of story telling as Half Life, especially Japanese developed games? As much as I like for video games to be considered an art form, they aren't. They are entertainment. Gameplay is a bigger concern than how a story is told. Even if a game's story was a literary masterpiece, if that same game isn't very enjoyable when it comes to gameplay, then I will not continue to play it. The writer of the article is entitled to his own opinion but he shouldn't have to force us to chance other peoples' opinions. Therefore, as long as the game is ultimately fun enough to play, then I don't care if a game's story is progressed with or without cutscenes.

Firstly, the cinematic era ain't going nowhere, MGS4 released this year, and more and more games with good stories will come out. Who's to say that is coming to an end because some dude from a website said so?

People shouldn't realize anything because there's no only way to make videogames. There'll be games with zero stories which rely only on their gameplay (which to me feel a bit incomplete). And there'll be games which merge great gameplay with an ellaborate, complex (and, if you want, non-interactive) story. I've been enjoying them since I played my first JRPG, and I'd take them any game over a game with no story.