without cutscenes no idea. although the cutscenes actually make up part of the games importance considering it's a story driven game
Has anyome timed how long the order 1886 gameplay is?
- Thread starter Fonejackerjon
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I'm not conservative at all, I want to see more of the new and unexplored, those games you mention are old (they were good for the time, I'm not saying they weren't btw). There is nothing to be explored with cutscenes its been done, we've been doing them for the past 20-30 years, if it hasn't been done by now it's not worth doing. It's time to move forward, people are frustrated that we are just seeing the same old tried and tested formulas over and over again, and VR can't come soon enough.MysticSlayer said:
Half-Life and Portal are examples of games that don't have cutscenes, the player is a participant through-out the game.
Total participation works for some games/stories, but there are things you can't really do through gameplay. For instance, switching perspective to another party would mean giving the player control over that party, which may undermine what the storyteller was trying to accomplish.
Oh, and Xenoblade old? That game turns 5 this year. If you're thinking about Xenosaga, sure, those games went overboard with the cutscenes, but we're talking Xenoblade and that one is actually a pretty good example of good use of cutscenes. They're used to show things that can't be achieved through gameplay (robots destroying things in spectacular fashion and other visially impressive stuff) and don't overstay their welcome.
Oh, and Xenoblade old? That game turns 5 this year. If you're thinking about Xenosaga, sure, those games went overboard with the cutscenes, but we're talking Xenoblade and that one is actually a pretty good example of good use of cutscenes. They're used to show things that can't be achieved through gameplay (robots destroying things in spectacular fashion and other visially impressive stuff) and don't overstay their welcome.
By most accounts, it weighs in at around 5-7 hours. Approximately 50% of this is cut scenes, meaning 2.5-3.5 hours each of gameplay and non-interactive (and unskippable) cutscenes respectively. Of the gameplay, a lot of it is QTEs also. Whatever is left is a series of corridors and chest high walls.
Actually, just because you can move around during the "story segments" doesn't mean they aren't cutscenes. You still have no choice but to go through them, except you can't skip them because they're "gameplay".inmunitas said:
Xenoblade is old? The game is less than five years old, and that's going on the Japanese release. It's been out for an even shorter time in Europe and North America. Same with Mass Effect: The trilogy ended less than three years ago. So by your argument, Half-Life and Portal's methods shouldn't be used anymore because those games are even older than Xenoblade or Mass Effect.inmunitas said:
Even in that case, games like Half-Life, Portal, and BioShock don't really get rid of cutscenes entirely. Even beyond the brief moments where those games remove all input from the player, most of their story is still told by blocking player advancement until they watch and listen to events unfold. In other words, despite letting the player goof around while the story unfolds, they're still presenting their story in basically the same way a cutscene does. Both stop players from advancing until they are over (or skipped) and present their story through visuals and sound. At best, the Half-Life model may take a break to let you flip a switch, but that's only a less obnoxious form of QTEs. The only real break from this stop-advancement to flesh out the narrative is BioShock's audio diaries, as those don't stop advancement while you listen to them, but those are presenting their narrative entirely through audio, not gameplay.
In short, you haven't really provided any examples of how to break from cutscenes. All you've done is point to games that thinly veil their cutscenes by letting you walk around a small room waiting for a door to open while they take place. And I'm not saying that to demean the Portal or BioShock games. In fact, they are some of my favorites of all time. However, they don't really provide any reason to break from traditional cutscenes.
And as far as blandness is concerned: You're missing the point of the complain. You're not going to fix that by just changing the way you present the story. If the aesthetics are still washed-out brown and grey, people will still complain. If the gameplay is the same as every other game on the market with nothing meaningful to add to the formula, people will still complain. If the story still uses the tired cliches that every other story uses, people will still complain. The problem with homogenization isn't the fact that we are using the same tools. The problem comes from using those tools soullessly to capitalize on the success of other products. But if a game has interesting characters and a decent story, people will love it regardless of if there are cutscenes or not, because what makes something unique is in what it is presenting, not entirely how it is presented.
Someone has made a movie of all the cutscenes in the game.
According to the previously posted http://howlongtobeat.com/game.php?id=20067 the average run time is 7-10.5 hours. Subtracting the length of the cutscenes gives 3.5-7 hours of gameplay. A speed run of the game at 4 hours and 33 minutes will have only 1 hour and 16 minutes of gameplay if skipping cutscenes is impossible.
According to the previously posted http://howlongtobeat.com/game.php?id=20067 the average run time is 7-10.5 hours. Subtracting the length of the cutscenes gives 3.5-7 hours of gameplay. A speed run of the game at 4 hours and 33 minutes will have only 1 hour and 16 minutes of gameplay if skipping cutscenes is impossible.
Nope, it's the entertainment industry. Hardware and such is tech.inmunitas said:
Whether or not to implement cutscenes has little to do with the technology available. We've seen little sprites act out all sorts of things and it's not like nobody bothered experimenting with interactivity. The opera scene in Final Fantasy VI would be a good example, you have to remember your lines and move on cue. Developers are doing the same thing now, but with more advanced graphics.
That's treading pretty murky ground isn't it? The more story-driven a game is, the more similar watching it on youtube is to playing it for free.Drathnoxis said:
Except that the innovations we're talking about have little to do with technological advances. From a gameplay perspective a game like Beyond: Two Souls doesn't do anything really different from stuff like Final Fantasy VI's Opera House. Sure, they're using mocap and other fancy tech to make it looks shinier, but the way the gamer interacts with the game hasn't changed.inmunitas said:
That still doesn't do anything to support your earlier statement (well, implication) that games like Mass Effect and Xenoblade Chronicles only used an "outdated" tool such as cutscenes because they are "old" and it was just "for their time" but is no longer necessary because we've supposedly advanced beyond that.inmunitas said:
But why is it so important that they must do something new with cutscenes when cutscenes, as they stand, told both games' stories very well? Is there some new technology that could tell the same story more effectively? Would their well-loved stories have been done even better with another method, and if so, how would that other method improve the stories? Until you can actually address those questions, everything you say about these games' age, technology, and the supposedly outdated and lazy nature of cutscenes is absolutely meaningless.inmunitas said:
May I recommend people actually play the damn thing?
This discussion of "oh, __% of the game is cutscenes" is moronic, considering that means nothing to the overall quality of the final product. I liked the game! I liked the cutscenes! I liked the story! See the game as a whole package, rather than constantly nitpicking bits and pieces.
It's funny how these things work: most of the people criticising the game flat out say they won't play it because it's too short, while the people who HAVE played it - at least the ones I know - actually rather liked it!
This discussion of "oh, __% of the game is cutscenes" is moronic, considering that means nothing to the overall quality of the final product. I liked the game! I liked the cutscenes! I liked the story! See the game as a whole package, rather than constantly nitpicking bits and pieces.
It's funny how these things work: most of the people criticising the game flat out say they won't play it because it's too short, while the people who HAVE played it - at least the ones I know - actually rather liked it!
How is gaming suppose to progress and refine as an art form and basis for story telling if developers are not experimenting with the methods of how a story may be told with a game, without loosing the essence of what makes a game fun (the challenge and competition). We don't know the "best" method of telling a story with a game because we don't know the limits of how a story may be told with a game. For example "Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons" is one of the few games that have actually experimented with storytelling in a game.MysticSlayer said:
There is not just one 'best' way to tell a story in a game. It really depends on the type of story you want to tell. Thomas Was Alone worked well with a narrator, because it'd be weird to see rectangles talk. Instead, the game let you imagine their interactions with the help of the narrator and the platforming in the game.
Would this work for Virtue's Last Reward? No, because it wouldn't be able to pull off some of those plottwists without the main character narrating. It's vital to the story that you see everything from his perspective.
Virtue's Last Reward is text heavy and that worked well for that game, but A Bird Story didn't need a single word. This simple story couldn't have been told effectively if it had relied on prose instead of just images and interaction. The little boys imagination brings the story to life.
Developers are experimenting with storytelling. Either you aren't playing these game or you simply failed to notice it.
And seriously, thee's no reason to re-invent the wheel if a developer has found a method or tool that works well with the story they're trying to tell. Xenoblade's cutscenes were great. That game knew when it needed them and when to throw the player back into the action.
Would this work for Virtue's Last Reward? No, because it wouldn't be able to pull off some of those plottwists without the main character narrating. It's vital to the story that you see everything from his perspective.
Virtue's Last Reward is text heavy and that worked well for that game, but A Bird Story didn't need a single word. This simple story couldn't have been told effectively if it had relied on prose instead of just images and interaction. The little boys imagination brings the story to life.
Developers are experimenting with storytelling. Either you aren't playing these game or you simply failed to notice it.
And seriously, thee's no reason to re-invent the wheel if a developer has found a method or tool that works well with the story they're trying to tell. Xenoblade's cutscenes were great. That game knew when it needed them and when to throw the player back into the action.