PDA

View Full Version : "It`s not just a game, it`s a movie.."



Assassin_M
06-23-2013, 08:21 AM
"It`s not just a game.."
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lwobmpkPmB1r6aoq4o1_400.gif

"It`s a movie.."
http://replygif.net/i/513.gif


I realize this title will not attract many views, mostly because people will think i`m a bot xD anyways, Ever since Video games started taking the cinematic direction, they`v been compared to movies....now I don`t have a problem with this comparison, but rather the outlook on games (sometimes by gamers themselves) that Movies are a somehow superior medium of entertainment to games..or rather...a better phrase would be that games should "aspire" to be like movies..

The start of the phrase in the title, "it`s not just a game" can draw a smile and one`d assume it`ll go "it`s a novel, mixed with music mixed with a movie", but that smile is wiped when it`s just "it`s a movie". No doubt movies are SO much more respected and revered as mature and veteran mediums of entertainment; We can discuss its content seriously with no annoying idiot coming and turning everyone off with "It`s just a movie" granted that sometimes happens, but not to the extent as with video games.

isn't it about time already?? That games get the same respect and reverence as Literature and Film?? Heck, honestly, even the first part of the phrase can be a bit disheartening, because "it`s more than a game" still takes away from it...Video games started as entertainment for kids and teens, but it`s grown up now...they`re "not just" anymore...they convey compelling stories and meaningful experiences. one can easily draw inspiration from them, just like film and literature..so why staple video games with the "it`s just" label?? It makes me livid and I tend to lecture people who do that...

I honestly don`t know if this is a phase or not, but it needs to go away..

Agree? disagree?

roostersrule2
06-23-2013, 08:27 AM
This isn't relevant but this thread made me think of it, they need to make an Inception game.

Now for some relevant stuff, well games are getting more respect and recognition then they used to, it is the fastest growing industry in the world after all so it should be. It's just because movies appeal to a larger audience and games have always been known just for nerds, although that's changed now there are still some who think that way.

AdamPearce
06-23-2013, 08:36 AM
Easy, not enough people on videogames + bad reputation +

Console + One Game + TV = Around 1400$
TV + Box + Infinte amout of movies = Around 1000$

+Videogames are hard

> In a movie, you sit and you watch, you got emotion, attention, etc. But basically, you do nothing.
> In a game, you sit, you watch, but you have to play to. And playing is quite hard to learn if you never touched a pad in your life. And unfortunetly, all the big interesting games are pretty though to control.

For exemple, The Last of Us > In TLoU, you have basic plateform, basic puzzles, but complicated sneak and gunfights than sometimes can be hard as hell to get off with.

+ Books exists from centuries. Movies from more than 70 years. Good video games, 20 years, give'em some time.

+A videogame takes a lot of time to complete. ''Why play for 15 hours if I can watch a movie that gives me the same effet in 2 hours?''

But, fortunatly, our generetion is way more influenced by videogames than before and I won't be suprised if in 30 years Videogames will be as popular as movies or books. Unless they all trun into interactive movies.

Assassin_M
06-23-2013, 08:38 AM
This isn't relevant but this thread made me think of it, they need to make an Inception game.

Now for some relevant stuff, well games are getting more respect and recognition then they used to, it is the fastest growing industry in the world after all so it should be. It's just because movies appeal to a larger audience and games have always been known just for nerds, although that's changed now there are still some who think that way.
Well it`s too many people and stereotypes aren't helping either, because THE MOVIES always take a **** on Gamers for some reason...look at the latest comments made by an industry giant like Spielberg...that man is respected and looked as a legend, when a figure like that talks about video games the way he does, what are the results?? people listen and it makes me so angry that some of the PEOPLE ARE GAMERS THEMSELVES...like, if he has no respect for video games, then let US have respect for it...you know?? elevate in the eyes of people so that it looks relevant, not something that anyone can brush aside..

I believe the industry has outgrown this annoying phase already and it`s about time....60 years and we`re still in this phase?? come on, now...

AdamPearce
06-23-2013, 08:39 AM
This isn't relevant but this thread made me think of it, they need to make an Inception game.

Now for some relevant stuff, well games are getting more respect and recognition then they used to, it is the fastest growing industry in the world after all so it should be. It's just because movies appeal to a larger audience and games have always been known just for nerds, although that's changed now there are still some who think that way.

The Mobile Videogames is the fastest growing industry. Console and PC games aren't that popular to casuals, and that's why those are casuals.

Assassin_M
06-23-2013, 08:40 AM
Unless they all trun into interactive movies.
My biggest fear ever...that in an effort to be relevant, Games cease to be games...

AdamPearce
06-23-2013, 08:43 AM
My biggest fear ever...that in an effort to be relevant, Games cease to be games...

Well, at some points graphics are going to be real life like, thats for sure. Over that, how they will manage to still make a difference between the game and the movie...:/

Assassin_M
06-23-2013, 08:44 AM
Well, at some points graphics are going to be real life like, thats for sure. Over that, how they will manage to still make a difference between the game and the movie...:/
Graphics are fine; they can be as real as ever. it`s the gameplay that makes a game. Interactivity makes it different and brings it to life, but gameplay makes a game what it is...if Gameplay is gone, and it will if they aspire to be movies, then it`s not a game anymore

roostersrule2
06-23-2013, 08:45 AM
Well, at some points graphics are going to be real life like, thats for sure. Over that, how they will manage to still make a difference between the game and the movie...:/Visual effects aren't the reason movies are held on a higher platform then games.

silvermercy
06-23-2013, 09:40 AM
I think it's all about the stereotyping... The biggest stereotype I think that still persists is that video games are mostly catered to the geeky male teens sitting in an isolated dark room that hasn't been cleaned for 3 months at least.

When I was playing AC3 and there was a scene of Connor killing redcoats my mom asked but "isn't that a boy's game!? Why are you playing this?" I just stayed silent because I was at a loss of words... (anyway I made her later play it and climb some Boston roofs. She liked it and asked me is this all we'll be doing? It's getting boring. Where are those redcoats? LOL)


Video games DO have advantages over movies though! Here's a nice article: http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-things-video-games-do-better-than-any-other-forms-art/

http://i.crackedcdn.com/phpimages/article/3/9/4/187394.jpg?v=1

Now why games aspire to be like movies... well, I think it's because this way they are reaching to a much wider audience and also removing all the bad stereotypical talk.

AssassinHMS
06-23-2013, 11:14 AM
I'm actually ok with it. I find games to be superior to movies. To me, Uncharted is no more than an interactive movie and that's why I think it is a bad game. Games should be all about gameplay and never let the story turn them into a cinematic experience. However I don't think games need a recognition since that will only draw more and more people (mostly casuals). Not a long time ago most people who bought games were hardcore gamers or people who wanted to invest their time on them. By not getting the recognition from other people (other than actual gamers) games can be spared from becoming a casual experience. The problem is, games are becoming more and more popular and more commercial (AC for example) focusing on casuals and resulting in a far lesser experience. I think it is a good thing that games are dismissed as "just" games by people who see them as that, as just games. Real gamers will allways be a minority, the key is to make the gaming base as pure as possible (so that casuals are a minority).

Assassin_M
06-23-2013, 11:21 AM
I'm actually ok with it. I find games to be superior to movies. To me, Uncharted is no more than an interactive movie and that's why I think it is a bad game. Games should be all about gameplay and never let the story turn them into a cinematic experience. However I don't think games need a recognition since that will only draw more and more people (mostly casuals). Not a long time ago most people who bought games were hardcore gamers or people who wanted to invest their time on them. By not getting the recognition from other people (other than actual gamers) games can be spared from becoming a casual experience. The problem is, games are becoming more and more popular and more commercial (AC for example) focusing on casuals and resulting in a far lesser experience. I think it is a good thing that games are dismissed as "just" games by people who see them as that, as just games. Real gamers will allways be a minority, the key is to make the gaming base as pure as possible (so that casuals are a minority).
Actually, there are Hardcore gamers who dismiss games as "just games" i`v met more casuals with more heart towards games than so many hardcore gamers...from the net, from people I know..etc.

Appreciation does not mean "Hurrr durrr onslaught of casuals", did literature become affected by the pouring of "casual readers"? i.e, the exposure to a larger audience? No....Casual gamers don`t "make games into movies" a hardcore gamer can appreciate a cinematic experience just as much a casual would..

I think what you must understand is that a cinematic experience is not necessarily a bad GAME...it`s the watering down of gameplay itself, then the problem arises...So many great games are cinematic, in fact, the best games are cinematic games...what i`m trying to say is casual gamers aren't the ones ruining gaming..they probably have more heart towards games than so many hardcore gamers...

silvermercy
06-23-2013, 11:24 AM
I'm actually ok with it. I find games to be superior to movies. To me, Uncharted is no more than an interactive movie and that's why I think it is a bad game. Games should be all about gameplay and never let the story turn them into a cinematic experience.
Says who? The elitist hardcore gamers? Good luck with that... lol I actually liked the Uncharted game series. And many people did, too, since it became platinum and scooped a gazillion awards...


However I don't think games need a recognition since that will only draw more and more people (mostly casuals). Not a long time ago most people who bought games were hardcore gamers or people who wanted to invest their time on them. By not getting the recognition from other people (other than actual gamers) games can be spared from becoming a casual experience.
More casual hate... As if the casuals are the worst enemy of this pure race of hardcore fans and casuals are trying to dilute this superior race with their casual genes... How dare they!


The problem is, games are becoming more and more popular and more commercial (AC for example) focusing on casuals and resulting in a far lesser experience. I think it is a good thing that games are dismissed as "just" games by people who see them as that, as just games.
This repeated hate for casuals is getting boring now...


Real gamers will allways be a minority, the key is to make the gaming base as pure as possible (so that casuals are a minority).
And the game industry will then go bankrupt. Because hardcore fans cannot by themselves fund this huge industry. They need the help of the casuals they hate so much.
Anyway I don't see why casuals are brought into this discussion...

Assassin_M
06-23-2013, 11:27 AM
*sigh* there must always be this loose thread somewhere, please lets not turn this into another casual-hardcore thing...if it does turn out like that, i`ll just request this locked...

CASUALS ARE NOT THE PROBLEM...CASUALS ARE IRRELEVANT TO THE ENTIRE DISCUSSION

Sushiglutton
06-23-2013, 11:57 AM
Based on E3 I actually think the cinematic trend is not as strong anymore. Now it's more about mixing in Demon Souls/MMO inspired elements in open persistent worlds where you are in control most of the time and play together and against friends/strangers. For example the Division, Watchdogs, Destiny. Systemic content and connectivity is the name of the game :).

The problem with games when it comes to storytelling and emotional impact is that the game part disrupts the pacing and results in some very strange actions. Take Bioshock Infinite for example (a game I absolutely adore and would rate 9.5-10). There is a scene where you chase Elizabeth through Columbia. On the way there are containers to loot. What this means is that the game rewards the player for stopping to search for coins in the middle of the pursuit. From a narrative/emotional point of view this behaviour makes no sense what so ever. Most games are loaded with stuff like this.

Then there is the problem with the amount of action a game requires. Since you can only do a very limited amount of things in a game, most of them are centered around simple things like shooting and platforming and have you do these things over and over (this is no criticism, because I still love to do those things in games). This causes a couple of problems. First off the pacing of the story suffers. No movie/book with a good story would ever contain this much action, because it doesn't make any sense. If you take the Dark Knight for example (an action movie) the percentage of action in that movie is tiny fraction of what B:I has. Secondly the protagonist is frequently a massmurderer. Nathan Drake is a total psychopath for example and so is Ezio. There are a couple of ways to avoid this such as having you kill zombies or robots, but that limits the types of stories you can tell too much. For example the draw of AC is the historical (semi) realistic settings.


These problems are super, super hard to tackle. If you remove the game part the experience becomes a bit of a chore as you passively watch things happening on screen. Too much of the game part and the story/character/scenes start to fall apart. So far very few games have figured it out. I think what works best is when the story is about a world and you discover it through exploration. Prime examples are Bioshock and Dark Souls.

Assassin_M
06-23-2013, 12:03 PM
Based on E3 I actually think the cinematic trend is not as strong anymore. Now it's more about mixing in Demon Souls/MMO inspired elements in open persistent worlds where you are in control most of the time and play together and against friends/strangers. For example the Division, Watchdogs, Destiny. Systemic content and connectivity is the name of the game :).

The problem with games when it comes to storytelling and emotional impact is that the game part disrupts the pacing and results in some very strange actions. Take Bioshock Infinite for example (a game I absolutely adore and would rate 9.5-10). There is a scene where you chase Elizabeth through Columbia. On the way there are containers to loot. What this means is that the game rewards the player for stopping to search for coins in the middle of the pursuit. From a narrative/emotional point of view this behaviour makes no sense what so ever. Most games are loaded with stuff like this.

Then there is the problem with the amount of action a game requires. Since you can only do a very limited amount of things in a game, most of them are centered around simple things like shooting and platforming and have you do these things over and over (this is no criticism, because I still love to do those things in games). This causes a couple of problems. First off the pacing of the story suffers. No movie/book with a good story would ever contain this much action, because it doesn't make any sense. If you take the Dark Knight for example (an action movie) the percentage of action in that movie is tiny fraction of what B:I has. Secondly the protagonist is frequently a massmurderer. Nathan Drake is a total psychopath for example and so is Ezio. There are a couple of ways to avoid this such as having you kill zombies or robots, but that limits the types of stories you can tell too much. For example the draw of AC is the historical (semi) realistic settings.


These problems are super, super hard to tackle. If you remove the game part the experience becomes a bit of a chore as you passively watch things happening on screen. Too much of the game part and the story/character/scenes start to fall apart.
Overlooking the same sentiment implied that Cinematic = bad, this is a good post, but i`ll ultimately disagree with one thing...too much of game doesn't always guarantee a story or characters will suffer..on the contrary, there are instances when sometimes story and characters suffer, because there`s not enough game (*cough* AC III *cough*) the instance with Bioshock is all well, but i`d hardly take it as standard, i`ll agree that it doesn't make any sense, though...

ze_topazio
06-23-2013, 12:12 PM
I'm actually ok with it. I find games to be superior to movies. To me, Uncharted is no more than an interactive movie and that's why I think it is a bad game. Games should be all about gameplay and never let the story turn them into a cinematic experience. However I don't think games need a recognition since that will only draw more and more people (mostly casuals). Not a long time ago most people who bought games were hardcore gamers or people who wanted to invest their time on them. By not getting the recognition from other people (other than actual gamers) games can be spared from becoming a casual experience. The problem is, games are becoming more and more popular and more commercial (AC for example) focusing on casuals and resulting in a far lesser experience. I think it is a good thing that games are dismissed as "just" games by people who see them as that, as just games. Real gamers will allways be a minority, the key is to make the gaming base as pure as possible (so that casuals are a minority).

Uncharted is not an interactive movie, interactive movies are the likes of visual novels or something like Heavy Rain, Uncharted has tons of gameplay, explosions on the background and stuff like that, do not make it an interactive movie, besides, action games have been straight forward ever since the early days of gaming.


When cinema was invented people called it a crappier version of theater and nobody had any respect for it, video games will eventually be respected as the younger generations replace the older ones.

Assassin_M
06-23-2013, 12:13 PM
When cinema was invented people called it a crappier version of theater and nobody had any respect for it, video games will eventually be respected as the younger generations replace the older ones.
And when Theater was created, people called it a crappier version of literature.....................right?

Sushiglutton
06-23-2013, 12:27 PM
Overlooking the same sentiment implied that Cinematic = bad, this is a good post, but i`ll ultimately disagree with one thing...too much of game doesn't always guarantee a story or characters will suffer..on the contrary, there are instances when sometimes story and characters suffer, because there`s not enough game (*cough* AC III *cough*) the instance with Bioshock is all well, but i`d hardly take it as standard, i`ll agree that it doesn't make any sense, though...

Some types of stories can work well as pure gameplay, for example Dark Souls. I mean it's hardly a story at all, it's more like a state of mind but it's so consistently "told" that it becomes a powerful narrative. But for a story of the kind told in Assassin's Creed (more of a classical character driven story) the game part will get in the way imo, it's almost inevitable. I mean why is Ezio running around killing rooftop guards when he could just as easily walk the streets? A normal guard/policeman is not evil. It doesn't make any senes to kill so many of them. How come he bought the Colosseum? etc

When it comes to AC3 I agree there is too much focus on story at the expense of gameplay. But even in that game sometimes gameplay destroys the emotional impact of a scene. Take the midnight ride for example, which has been reduced to an annoying mini-game. It sooo game-y in a way that kills the immersion completely. To improve the story telling in AC I think it's important that the devs take greater care of when to have a challenge component to a mission and when to let it be "just" an experience. Let the missions be built around the things the game does well and let the other parts be more of the experience kind imo.

ze_topazio
06-23-2013, 12:32 PM
And when Theater was created, people called it a crappier version of literature.....................right?

That i do not know, people thinking cinema would never succeed, however, is well documented.

Sushiglutton
06-23-2013, 12:32 PM
When cinema was invented people called it a crappier version of theater and nobody had any respect for it, video games will eventually be respected as the younger generations replace the older ones.

For literature you need an author and a text.
For theater you need an author, a text, actors and a director.
For movies you need an author, a text, actors, a director and a cameraman.
For videogames you need an author, a text, actors, a director, a cinematographer, programmers, mission designers, animators etc.


Videogames is the latest step in the evolution of human culture. It's the most complex medium in the world. It's still immature, but it will get there :)!

shobhit7777777
06-23-2013, 12:34 PM
It depends on the game that you're trying to make

I don't think Games > Movies or vice versa

Each medium has its strengths

Its only logical that games are borrowing heavily form movies...and I think its a good thing. No harm in borrowing techniques and practices from an established industry which is in the same business as you are in - selling entertainment, touching lives, making a point and generally telling a story

I love the fact that games like COD4, Uncharted, The Last of Us etc. provide us with an engaging, well written narrative filled with excellent performances that entertain us replete with awesome cinematic set pieces with the added function of engaging and immersing us more into the universe thanks to the interactiveness.

At the same time there is no dirth of games which focus on innovative gameplay to keep us engaged and allow us to form meta-narratives. Farcry, AC, DX, Batman AA.....soooo many games which come up with interesting mechanics, systems and game worlds that IMO are products of innovative and ambitious game design/development.

Lets not forget the other games which don't have any narrative premise and eschew any exposition in favour of simplicity - Minecraft. Its just a playground!


I feel that the strength of the industry lies in making heavily narrative based games which provide a film like experience in terms of storytelling and with gameplay that supports that premise......and at the same time pump out games which are not about the narrative but the gameplay itself. Thats a massive range....a large and varied spectrum.

I feel that Games are fantastic storytelling platforms - and as such should definitely learn from the film industry.....but at the same time, the gameplay needs to grow with the narrative as well.

As long as I can enjoy a completely free-wheeling session of terrorizing the NPCs in Arkham City in innovative ways......and then swing to The Last of Us for a narrative driven focused experience that keeps me engaged....I'm happy

Lets face it...the moment you have a Human character doing things in a recognizable world.....you automatically create grounds for a narrative..."Why is he doing this?"..."How can I do that?"....questions like this whether answered by us or the devs...will pop up.

Storytelling is a byproduct of our need to rationalize everything....it is also one of the best forms and most ancient forms of entertainment. Its going to be a big part of games...lets embrace it and at the same time ensure that the narrative and gameplay grow together.

silvermercy
06-23-2013, 12:35 PM
For literature you need an author and a text.
For theater you need an author, a text, actors and a director.
For movies you need an author, a text, actors, a director and a cameraman.
For videogames you need an author, a text, actors, a director, a cinematographer, programmers, mission designers, animators etc.


Videogames is the latest step in the evolution of human culture. It's the most complex medium in the world. It's still immature, but it will get there :)!
And the next step will be the Matrix! Err.. I mean complete virtual reality! :cool:

Sushiglutton
06-23-2013, 12:39 PM
And the next step will be the Matrix! Err.. I mean complete virtual reality! :cool:

Exactly and then we start over at square one again (but in a virtual world).

shobhit7777777
06-23-2013, 12:39 PM
And when Theater was created, people called it a crappier version of literature.....................right?

Pretty sure theatre came before literature ;)

unless you discount the practice of dancing about to inform your tribe that "Mammoth herd that way...killed two of them with one spear!...true story..was epic!" as theatre...

silvermercy
06-23-2013, 12:40 PM
Exactly and then we start over at square one again (but in a virtual world).
Virtual Literature!? Or Virtual Theater...

Sushiglutton
06-23-2013, 12:45 PM
Virtual Literature!? Or Virtual Theater...

I have confused myself now lol

AssassinHMS
06-23-2013, 12:57 PM
Says who? The elitist hardcore gamers? Good luck with that... lol I actually liked the Uncharted game series. And many people did, too, since it became platinum and scooped a gazillion awards...

It's my opinion and I'm not an elitist hardcore gamer. Uncharted is like an interactive movie so it's no surprise so many people liked it. Like an ign reviewer said, Uncharted is the reason he plays video games. This only shows the amount of people who see games as movies. Quite sad really...

More casual hate... As if the casuals are the worst enemy of this pure race of hardcore fans and casuals are trying to dilute this superior race with their casual genes... How dare they!

More hardcore hate here... The problem aren't the casuals themselves but the choice to turn every game casual in order to sell. However if there weren't so many casuals this wouldn't happen and games like AC wouldn't suffer from this problem.

This repeated hate for casuals is getting boring now...

I don't hate casuals but I sure as hell don't like that they have to be the main focus of the gaming industry. They have pop music (in general) and angry birds, at least let us have assassin's creed.


And the game industry will then go bankrupt. Because hardcore fans cannot by themselves fund this huge industry. They need the help of the casuals they hate so much.
Anyway I don't see why casuals are brought into this discussion...

I'd rather a small, but good house than a rotten mansion.

OSantaClownO
06-23-2013, 01:27 PM
The point of aiming into a movie is for a more detailed gameplay -
Lets say they wanted you to kill Charles Lee in a very dramtic, slow scene, it something that was much more easier to create with a cinematic, the problem is being too lazy to achieve the goal in a way that you would actually play the game instead of watching it.

avk111
06-23-2013, 01:49 PM
This going to be a bit off-topic but lets say hypothetically speaking you take your PS3 console and couple of your collection of games and go back say to year 2000.

What will your friends think when they see the graphics and game play , im sure their jaws will drop right accross the earth's hemosphere lol

I remember back in the times before PSX came out when we used to compare old skool systems like NES and Super NES to cool GFX in Arcade stores etc...

Arcade games had much better GFX gameplay and were expensive. But look how far we got now. :)

freddie_1897
06-23-2013, 06:13 PM
just one more thread to bump

TheBearJew32
06-23-2013, 07:54 PM
"The start of the phrase in the title, "it`s not just a game" can draw a smile and one`d assume it`ll go "it`s a novel, mixed with music mixed with a movie", but that smile is wiped when it`s just "it`s a movie". No doubt movies are SO much more respected and revered as mature and veteran mediums of entertainment; We can discuss its content seriously with no annoying idiot coming and turning everyone off with "It`s just a movie" granted that sometimes happens, but not to the extent as with video games."

My take on it is that we're at that time where we can discuss the content and lore of games with someone as you would with a movie, but it will usually be over the internet. Like, when talking about a game with someone in person, it usually only goes as far as "yeah dude that mission was awesome" or "dude it took me so long to get past that part." Where we are at now is fine with me, I can get my fix about games with a deep discussion on here, and then walk down the hall and talk movies with my room mate. I think the recognition and appreciation for games is growing constantly. They wouldn't air a video game awards show on TV if it weren't.

Someone brought up that the stereotype, "games are for the basement dweller", still applies today. I disagree. So many people are interested/play games now. You don't even start with the question "Do you play Xbox or Playstation?" anymore, you ask "Hey do you play Uncharted?" I think games are catered more towards high school/college ages, But that's my perspective which is more than likely skewed cuz that's the only games i play