Heavy Rain isn't a video game

[Savagezion]

This is mostly derived from the thread "How Should We Classify Interactive Media?". Now, as for that topic, I don't have a lot to add personally. However, there is 1 section I do feel strongly about and wanted it separated from the idea behind that thread. That is the hybrid style of movie and games such as Heavy Rain.

These should get their own genre attributed to them and not be bulked into the genres that are out there. These titles could run as a market in and of themselves. I think the best way to do this is to actually target kids with titles similar to Toy Story, Shrek, etc. Now, I am not saying it would be restricted to kids titles but I think that may possibly offer the best way to get things rolling. I may be wrong on that. If things went well though, we could even see movies like Armageddon or something (popcorn flicks) that have this built in. This is a much better idea, to me, than 3D movies. It doesn't need to be CGI but can be hand drawn animation, claymation, actors, etc.

Just take deleted scenes and alternate endings they already do and add a bit more flair to them and allow the audience to navigate the story in a way they enjoy. Why not be able to watch the movie with the "alternate ending" attached instead of having to go into the DVD extras? It will still be in a controlled setting and predetermined outcomes but the viewer may actually like one particular route through the story over another. One way they like the "movie" much more than the other way, where they don't so much. Inception for example. Think of the end if you have seen it. (Don't put spoilers in the thread, please, even though it isn't hard to see it coming anyways.)

As well, we have to remember that Heavy Rain only initiated the new form of media and is not the bar that it must aspire to but rather if time was spent on titles as if it were an independent media, it should surpass what Heavy Rain has done. Some would use a QTE style, some may use direct "Select choice to continue" moments others may find new ways to do it entirely. Some might include both or multiple ways at different times. Consider Heavy Rain as "The Great Train Robbery" for films. (The first film attributed to have a narrative) It is simply the pioneering idea behind a whole new medium.

Terminology threads are usually retarded and I dislike the fact that this is being reduced to one. My structure may have not been the best to convey the idea but I am still not entirely sure how to structure it. The point being anyone who watches a lot of movies that hears about Heavy Rain is interested. A lot of the people that play a lot of games usually aren't or at most are just interested in the idea behind it. But if it never gets marketed to the people that are interested, it isn't the medium that is failing, it is the marketing that is.

Now for a discussion topic. Do you think this is a good idea? What would this new thing even be called? Random thoughts?

 

[Thaius]

Actually, though you have some points, I would disagree. The main issue being that Heavy Rain is not radically different enough to be a whole new medium, but is rather a new way to tell stories within its given medium. I would call it less the Great Train Robbery, since many, many games have already featured narratives worthy of all-time classics, and more of an entry in an existing genre that presents itself in a new and exciting way. If Heavy Rain is not a game, it would be because its gameplay would not stand up as a competitive or exciting experience out of its given context, but even then I would say it's part of the same medium; but that's an entirely different conversation.

The thing that makes Heavy Rain different is its use of a gameplay principle I call Gameplay Generalization. It didn't invent it, it simply uses it to a further extent than any other games (with the exception of the studio's earlier release, Fahrenheit/Indigo Prophecy). This is when, rather than assigning specific actions to specific button presses and actions, said buttons and actions are given more generalized meaning. In Heavy Rain, this meant assigning basic button and controller movements with basic actions, such as pressing a button repeatedly for feats of strength, or moving the right stick in given directions based on the context of the actions. In Assassin's Creed, this was given by assigning the face buttons to context-sensitive actions involving the character's head, arms, and feet/transport rather than giving them all rigid, single uses. A more classic example is the "Action Button," one button used to activate, interact, talk, whatever. These are all examples of the principle of gameplay generalization.

Quantic Dream (the developer of Heavy Rain) used this concept in a more extreme way than any other developer has. In doing so, they managed to make simple actions such as playing with your kids or crawling through air ducts no less involved than fighting or talking (in the context of the enthralling story, of course). It is not an entirely new medium, it's simply a novel application of the same concept that defines the medium as a whole: interactivity. It doesn't utilize it less or more, just in a different way that allows it to go places most games can't.

I do think that video games need a more... academic term (for lack of a better word). Kind of like how most movie critics refer to movies as "films." The popular terms for these mediums don't do them justice; consider that "movie" is just a cutesy play on the word "move," as in "motion picture," which is painfully quaint for what the medium of film has to offer. And the very presence of the term "game" makes people think of Twister and Monopoly before they think of such epic stories and intense moments as are offered by Final Fantasy, Bioshock, Shadow of the Colossus, etc. I think a name change, or at least a more respectable term, is warranted, even necessary, but I do not think it should be applied solely to Heavy Rain.

EDIT: Wow. I took a long time writing that response. I expected someone else to have by now.

Also, your thread title sounded like it would be another "Heavy Rain is stupid 'cause you don't kill things and it's not a game!" thread. It was not one of those, and for that I owe you thanks. You have a genuinely interesting discussion topic here.

EDIT #2:

It should also be noted that gameplay generalization is much different from gameplay minimization. The former is what Heavy Rain has done, and as the provided examples display, it is an old and often-used concept that Quantic Dream simply built its entire game upon. Gameplay minimization is more along the lines of Japanese visual novels, where the story simply progresses along its linear route until the player is given the occasional choice. Those would be more likely to fall under the category you are proposing, but they would still be in the same medium as other video games.

 

[Erana]

The problem with "Video games" is that it implies, that it must be visual and that its for amusement.
Anyone for the term, "Interactive digital media," instead? I mean, someone would prolly argue that that means MS word would be in the same category as a video game, but its not inaccurate to use to describe video games.

Ya, incoherient cold medicene blathering! :V

 

[NeutralDrow]

Now for a discussion topic. Do you think this is a good idea? What would this new thing even be called? Random thoughts?

New? Visual novels have existed for at least 30 years. And I still insist their interactive nature and capacity for the player to affect the in-game world is enough to classify most of them as "games."

From what little I understand of Heavy Rain, there's no question in my mind that it's a game. It's more interactive and manipulable than even the most open-ended visual novel I've played.

 

[TheSorrow1145]

An adventure in fanboy baiting.

 

[Savagezion]

Well, I live in the west where visual novels are not prevalent. They may not be new but from what I have looked up on them it seems that the Japan style seems to keep them static in graphics. I am talking about much larger scale. Where real actors are in a "movie" that has alternate paths through it. The interaction is entirely up to the "director" it could have more or less than Heavy Rain.

The title was more a take from that thread "Mass Effect is not an RPG." I found that title amusing. I am not claiming Heavy Rain is not a game. However, I do claim it is not ALL game. It's goal was to go into the realm of "visual novel" and mostly focus on the narrative through cutscenes. It is a hybrid of game and cinematic attempted focus.

It seems the term visual novel has already been founded for this hybrid mix. However, the reason I bring this up is because I don't think that by classifying "visual novels" as "games" is really doing them any good. There is a reason I probably have not heard this term yet. 1) I live in the US and these are mostly prevalent in Japan and merely a niche market here. 2) They are marketing to an audience looking for high interaction. (At least here in the US.)

The point I am making is that perhaps they should be separated from games so that they aren't looked at as constant input/interaction medium. But rather for the narrative that they are mostly focusing on. This is a "game" where a lot of time is spent watching, not doing. It is good and entertaining and I see a much wider appeal than some titles tucked away on a shelf with Killzone, God of War, etc.

Which also begs the question of if these were separated from console exclusives and seen more as "DvDs" than games, they may gain some better recognition and notoriety in the western market.

 

[Wolfenbarg]

What should it be called? Well it's still a game. I mean we call those interactive flash games where you have to get out of the room or the phone booth games, so it's still interactive to the point of being a game... It is essentially like an interactive movie though. Kind of like one of those weird movies you'd rent from the video store.

Hmm... so it has the aspects of video... and it's also a game... Sorry, can't think of anything.

 

[DustyDrB]

I just finished Heavy Rain, actually. Much of it is not unlike point and click adventure games.

Video game is a broad enough category to include Heavy Rain. It's best not to complicate things in this case.

 

[burgbrand22]

Geez, so much back and forth on Heavy Rain, I'm gonna have to give this game a rent to determine what the fuss is about. Tried the demo but didn't put enough time into it.

 

[Asuka Soryu]

Movies already have lots of interaction. You got your pause, play, fastforward and rewind(I swear they stole the 'rewind' thing from Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time") Not to mention stop. You can stop a story! You can even skip to the end~

 

[KalosCast]

Heavy Rain is a video game, it's just a boring one.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

Heavy Rain is quite obviously a video game. A person interacts with the product through an interface and through their action is able to affect the outcome of a scene and the narrative altogether. It might not be a good game in terms of it's mechanics but it is still perfectly worthy of the classification.

 

[Gigano]

What you're describing as a new genre would pretty much be an animated/live action visual novel, which already incorporate branching paths based on choices, as well (limited) interaction with the individual path along the way.

Heavy Rain was a fully animated visual novel where you could interact with tons of things along each path, and where the path you're on and the ending you got was determined by QTE-skill rather than making choices. The gameplay mechanic behind it is positively ancient, almost hailing back to text adventure games! Only now with smooth HD-graphics and animation, and QTE to replace text input. It's so old it's brand new!

I think the overall concept of "game" is broad enough to encompass it - we've got it ranging from Tetris to MW2 already - though the subgenre of "visual novel" (or perhaps "interactive movie" given how it's fully animated and textless) is what's important, just like "FPS" will tell you much more about the nature of a game than whether it's being classified under "game".

 

[Merkavar]

i just dont see any real issues with classifying a game as a movie or a move as a game or something inbetween

Heavy Rain is a video game, it's just a boring one.

boring for some. i didnt mind it.

 

[badgersprite]

It is a video game. It just breaks from some things that have been ingrained into Western gaming, such as the game over penalty for failure. Instead of that, it uses it, and the lack of saves, to further the drama. Regardless of the choices you make, or things you fail in the game, you have to continue, and you don't know what the consequences will be.

Personally, I think its the modern incarnation of the classic adventure games of old. It kind of reminds me of that, with "perfect" endings becoming unavailable depending on how you choose to meet different dilemmas.

 

[Savagezion]

I guess one of my pitfalls on this topic is all the constant wanting to "figure out the right name" for stuff that goes on here at the escapist. Don't use the word "gamer", define "hardcore", define "RPG", etc. The reason I mentioned wanting to separate this thread from the one I mentioned is because this is not the same thing exactly.

My viewpoint is that Heavy Rain (and any future games like it) are being marketed improperly as games. They are being marketed to only a small portion of the people who may be interested in them. This is something that the Wii should be really pushing IMO, instead of shovelware, but it pops up with its first heavy recognition on the PS3 and Wii probably won't see a single title like this.

In my family, I am like the odd man out. I don't care for or about 90% of the movies that come out. Even of the 10% I do care to see, I only get around to actually watching half of them. My DvD collection is roughly around 40-50ish movies. However, all of my family members have movie collections consisting of 200-400+ DvDs. I don't think my video game collection is quite at the 200 mark yet. Where I have Game Informer, EGM, or the Ecapist, they have Entertainment Weekly, Empire, and IMDB. If I mention Heavy Rain and what it is to them it piques their interest. Of course, they have not heard of it because it isn't marketed to their "demographic". If I mention it to my friends that play games alot, they say "sounds ghey" or they say it sounds "neat" but they have a bunch of other titles they are more interested in catching up on. Heavy Rain is confined not only to the video game market but to the PS3 market. Anyone outside of that small bubble probably is unaware of it. Anyone inside that small bubble isn't necessarily interested.

Video game is a broad enough category to include Heavy Rain. It's best not to complicate things in this case.

My point is, best for whom? Best in the regard it may cause arguments? As in "It's best if you don't mention that your wife/husband didn't do the dishes tonight because they are having a bad day"? Or best for making sure something like this gets out to the right people in the western audience?I am talking about what is best for the medium, not what is best to not cause arguments. Nor what is the best term to use.

Terminology threads are usually retarded and I dislike the fact that this is being reduced to one. My structure may have not been the best to convey the idea but I am still not entirely sure how to structure it. The point being anyone who watches a lot of movies that hears about Heavy Rain is interested. A lot of the people that play a lot of games usually aren't or at most are just interested in the idea behind it. But if it never gets marketed to the people that are interested, it isn't the medium that is failing, it is the marketing that is.

 

[Savagezion]

First off, thank you Imperator and Thaius and a few others for noticing my point and addressing it directly at least giving me some discussion on the topic I wanted to talk about.

What you're describing as a new genre would pretty much be an animated/live action visual novel, which already incorporate branching paths based on choices, as well (limited) interaction with the individual path along the way.

Heavy Rain was a fully animated visual novel where you could interact with tons of things along each path, and where the path you're on and the ending you got was determined by QTE-skill rather than making choices. The gameplay mechanic behind it is positively ancient, almost hailing back to text adventure games! Only now with smooth HD-graphics and animation, and QTE to replace text input. It's so old it's brand new!

I think the overall concept of "game" is broad enough to encompass it - we've got it ranging from Tetris to MW2 already - though the subgenre of "visual novel" (or perhaps "interactive movie" given how it's fully animated and textless) is what's important, just like "FPS" will tell you much more about the nature of a game than whether it's being classified under "game".

The difference is between the old tech and the new tech is that when games could pull away from text based/visual novel format, most of them did. RPGs and Adventure games have abandoned that structure of whom used them the most. The only people interested in it now are visual novels trying to do something with the format. We are talking about the difference of structure present in comic books compared to novels here. Comics decided to lean more on the illustration side and dialogue. Whereas visual novels come to rely more on visual storytelling rather than player achievement and player actions to allow the story to continue at all.

It is a video game. It just breaks from some things that have been ingrained into Western gaming, such as the game over penalty for failure. Instead of that, it uses it, and the lack of saves, to further the drama. Regardless of the choices you make, or things you fail in the game, you have to continue, and you don't know what the consequences will be.

Personally, I think its the modern incarnation of the classic adventure games of old. It kind of reminds me of that, with "perfect" endings becoming unavailable depending on how you choose to meet different dilemmas.

The above is why I think that it should be separated from the old adventure games. Even though it does share some similarities, adventure games were still similar to hat they are now. It was puzzle solving, game over, or the game would just wait for you to do something so it could react. What I am proposing is "games" that you could essentially turn on and do nothing and still reach the end credits. (Not all of them but ones built solely on QTEs or possibly even new mechanics) However, doing something would probably result in differences in the story.
Hell some people may actually like the story that is told when you do nothing over any of the iterations where you interact, thus choose to watch that one night. Additionally, the "game" should save your playthrough data one you made our way through so you can watch that version whenever you want and not have the QTEs etc. pop up.

Imagine having some control over the characters and events in Inception.

EDIT: Wow. I took a long time writing that response. I expected someone else to have by now.

Also, your thread title sounded like it would be another "Heavy Rain is stupid 'cause you don't kill things and it's not a game!" thread. It was not one of those, and for that I owe you thanks. You have a genuinely interesting discussion topic here.

Thank you for catching my point on the first response. Even if you don't agree.

Actually, though you have some points, I would disagree. The main issue being that Heavy Rain is not radically different enough to be a whole new medium, but is rather a new way to tell stories within its given medium. I would call it less the Great Train Robbery, since many, many games have already featured narratives worthy of all-time classics, and more of an entry in an existing genre that presents itself in a new and exciting way. If Heavy Rain is not a game, it would be because its gameplay would not stand up as a competitive or exciting experience out of its given context, but even then I would say it's part of the same medium; but that's an entirely different conversation.

EDIT #2:

It should also be noted that gameplay generalization is much different from gameplay minimization. The former is what Heavy Rain has done, and as the provided examples display, it is an old and often-used concept that Quantic Dream simply built its entire game upon. Gameplay minimization is more along the lines of Japanese visual novels, where the story simply progresses along its linear route until the player is given the occasional choice. Those would be more likely to fall under the category you are proposing, but they would still be in the same medium as other video games.

Indeed. Just understand before this thread,, I knew nothing of visual novels. I was unaware of game minimalization as well outside of those weird Japanese dating games. Thus my idea had to be based on Heavy Rain alone as that was my only experience with the idea in my head. WHen I mentioned the Great Train Robbery I did so to show that by today's standard, that 12 minute movie sucks. Advancements have been made and now we have people who get paid to review the story in movies alone. Imagine if they had made Toy Story like I describe. The cost would have been enormous because the animation and models are of a much higher caliber. Thus not feasible. But, once again, go back to the Great Train Robbery and how that movie was done on a budget that was modest enough to make sure they made a profit. They didn't start making movies with Casablanca or A Beautiful Mind. Those came after the artform had matured a bit and grew more favored in the public eye.
Before the Great Train Robbery people would pay a penny or two to go watch a horse eat hay on the big screen for 2 minutes. Just marveled by the technology basically. That is about where games are today, all video games. The very fact there are graphics whores attests to that.

I think video games are very accurately following the introduction of film in the late 1890s-1900s. Imagine where they will be when they are 120 years old. (2090 A.D.) Look at how far they have came in 30 years. Movies advanced rapidly early too. Introduction of narrative, editing tricks, then stars, separation in genres, sound. They went from backyard footage to Hollywood productions extremely fast.

I see this as the bridge between the two mediums. I think it would be interesting to see a gray area between movies and games surface. I don't find them terribly different myself. And yes, I am even comparing Tetris to Schindler's List there. They are both recreational Hobbies that use visual format to create mental stimulation. The only difference is one focuses on the audience for causality.

Video games already have cutscenes and are linear in story a lot but we don't call them movies. (MGS4) If movies have a small amount of interaction involved, do they immediately cease being movies?


Heads up, replies like these are missing the point:

It's a game.

It's in the video format.

It's a video game.

What should it be called? Well it's still a game. I mean we call those interactive flash games where you have to get out of the room or the phone booth games, so it's still interactive to the point of being a game... It is essentially like an interactive movie though. Kind of like one of those weird movies you'd rent from the video store.

Hmm... so it has the aspects of video... and it's also a game... Sorry, can't think of anything.

 

[WorldCritic]

Heavy Rain: It's a game, just deal with it.