Cutscenes Are Gaming's "Failure State," Says THQ Exec

[Silent Biohazard Solid]

To say that games shouldn't have cutscenes is like saying that ALL games should have 15 minute Metal Gear cutscenes. Different people think differently. Anyone who thinks their way has to be the only way is a totalitarian jerk, like the guy who made the statement at THQ in the first place.
Why can't there be balance? Some havily storydriven games have long cutscenes, and there's plenty of people out there who love games like that. Some games focus on getting you into the game as soon as possible, and never take away the control, like Dead Space, people like those two. Why can't the two coexist?

Can't we all just get along!?

 

[Dice Warwick]

it all depends on the game, a moment in the game, and the character the player plays as. RPG's are were they can be strongly used.

 

[Evil Tim]

Spoiler

Colossi tend to get more vicious and powerful as you progress through the "chain," with the toughest being fairly obviously malevolent or at least totally invested in Wander's destruction. I see this as later colossi having more of his essence in them.

Spoiler

I always thought that perhaps each one was some aspect of Dormin's whole; perhaps the original ritual was designed to divide his mind and gradually tear him apart until all that was left were wandering beasts with only single instincts to drive them. The small Colossi are his passions, which he has little use for, the vast, passive Phalanx his intellect. He guides you through them in the order he thinks you can defeat them, but also because he wants you to see there is good and peaceful intent in him before showing you the towering form of hate that stands at the edge of the world.

By then, I think, Wander understands, perhaps even regards Dormin as a kindred soul; both are subject to a cruel loss at the hands of Emon's people for reasons they see as unjust. He looks up at Malus, immense in stature and yet bound in boots of iron, unable to use any of his great power to take revenge, and sees justified anger rather than the form of an evil god. That's why, in the end, he gladly offers his body to Dormin to exact revenge on Emon. With Agro seemingly gone, Dormin is the closest thing to a friend he has left in the world.

Spoiler

I assume Colossi that are trying to murder Wander before he even does anything are doing so because they want him dead... So maybe they are evil?

It requires a thinking mind to be evil, and there's little evidence of that. The lion doesn't chase a child because it's evil, it chases the child because it's a lion. Perhaps it's all they know how to do. Or perhaps they, as aspects of Dormin, share some of his knowledge and know what Wander has come to do.

Spoiler

Second, a bunch of the village turn up and try to seal Dormin away. Also, I believe Dormin is hurt by the same sword Wander uses to kill Colossi. These are indicators that either Wander's village is full of evil/deceived people, or Dormin is at the very least not "good" in the traditional sense of the word.

Spoiler

I don't think it's supposed to be a simple matter of good and evil; Dormin doesn't seem to embody either.

Emon is shown as a fanatic, always talking about things in terms of curses and evil; he sees it as simply good versus evil, but a fanatic seldom has a balanced view of the world. Clearly, his people believed Dormin deserved a hideous fate, but whether he did is left up in the air; certainly, Dormin does nothing that suggests he intends to bring destruction to anyone but Emon, and Emon at that point was trying to kill someone who had served Dormin faithfully. After everything Wander did, it's hardly a sign of evil that Dormin acts to protect him.

Also, look at those ruins; a great society once lived in the valley. Is Emon's version of history perhaps that of the victors in a war against Dormin's people? Was he simply an enemy god rather than an evil one?

Spoiler

Third, Dormin's kind of a jerk. He's one of those guys who sells you a car without letting you know the transmission is totally shot. Yeah, it's your fault to not ask about every individual part of the car and how it works, but he's a jerk not to bring up an obvious downside of doing business.

But he does tell Wander.

"But heed this, the price you pay may be heavy indeed."
"It doesn't matter."

It's not that Dormin didn't want to tell him; Wander cuts him off and says he'll do it no matter the cost.

 

[Samurai Goomba]

Snip

Wow, you remembered a lot of things about SotC I had forgotten. The symbolism of the Colossi in particular is really interesting, like the point you made about the shackles. With today's modern games, I rarely see that kind of attention to detail used to directly enhance the storyline. I guess maybe Bioshock does a similar thing with the Splicer costuming.

Spoiler

Another interesting thing you mentioned about the landscape is the almost total lack of animals. At first I had thought it was because "oh, it's the forbidden land," but yeah, obviously some kind of society used to live there, what with all the ruins. So what killed the animals? I don't think it was the Colossi, as they seem to be magical in nature, not to require any food (they have Dormin Energizer batteries) and ignore what little wildlife there is in the game.

Oh, there are some animals, but it doesn't make sense for there not to be any larger predators or prey in the areas of lush vegetation. Now, one could chalk it up to PS2 system limitations, but I wonder if there's some story explanation for this? Did a Dormin Hiroshima bomb go off when he got sealed away? I dunno.

I can't really tell myself whether Dormin helps Wander because of virtuous qualities or self-interest. Maybe the game was designed so his motivations would be vague. Most (or all) of the situations where Dormin actively gets involved, there is some benefit to him. Like with protecting Wander. Did he do that because Wander was loyal and freed him, or because Wander had absorbed so much residual Dormin energy himself that he was the perfect vessel? He does absorb a little piece of Dormin from every Colossus, if we follow your logic that every piece represents a different aspect of Dormin, then we see a possible reason for Dormin to take possession of Wander's body, perhaps to ease his transition into a corporeal form.

 

[MercurySteam]

It's funny considering Saints Row 2 has some of the best cutscenes of all time.

 

[Evil Tim]

Spoiler

Oh, there are some animals, but it doesn't make sense for there not to be any larger predators or prey in the areas of lush vegetation. Now, one could chalk it up to PS2 system limitations, but I wonder if there's some story explanation for this? Did a Dormin Hiroshima bomb go off when he got sealed away? I dunno.

Spoiler

Well, I believe the game explanation is to increase the feeling of emptiness and strangeness to the land, but as for the story, perhaps it's more evidence of the massacre of Dormin's people; an invading army that killed anything it could find, believing all of it to be tainted with unholy power. The only remaining things are those too small to find like the lizards or too hard to kill like the birds.

Spoiler

I can't really tell myself whether Dormin helps Wander because of virtuous qualities or self-interest. Maybe the game was designed so his motivations would be vague. Most (or all) of the situations where Dormin actively gets involved, there is some benefit to him. Like with protecting Wander. Did he do that because Wander was loyal and freed him, or because Wander had absorbed so much residual Dormin energy himself that he was the perfect vessel? He does absorb a little piece of Dormin from every Colossus, if we follow your logic that every piece represents a different aspect of Dormin, then we see a possible reason for Dormin to take possession of Wander's body, perhaps to ease his transition into a corporeal form.

Spoiler

Well, there's no reason it has to be one or the other; helping Wander helps him. However, he does seem in no hurry to recruit Wander to his cause at the start of the game; he tests him, asking him if the dead staying dead is not "the law of mortals" and telling him without prompting that it will be a heavy burden for him to carry; he seems almost surprised that Wander wants to help him, not eager to use him.

Dormin says at the end that he's "borrowed" Wander's body, which rather implies permission and that he fully intends to give it back (which he does). Perhaps he has his own reasons for requesting to do so, but I think at that point he genuinely respects Wander; after all, even though he's sealed away he returns Wander's body to him (albeit not exactly as he might have done otherwise) and brings Mono back to life as he'd promised to. He's a god of his word, it seems.

 

[Dhatz]

theres one thing about bulletstorm in this regard thats supreme: hold zoom to look at important moments. It didnt replace cutscenes, yet.

 

[ZippyDSMlee]

Ya know what.... I like cut scenes what I can not stand is bad or luke warm mechanics that are boged down with some kind of pseudo realism and poor balacneing.

 

[Vidiot]

I wonder about his opinion on the Mass Effect style dialogue wheel. I always felt that it was a cool mechanic that allows the player to take an active role in the conversation without overloading the screen with the entire written script. Honestly, that's my favorite thing in the Mass Effect games. Also, judging by the demo, looks like DA2 is going to improve on it.

 

[Ca3zar416]

I would love to see more story told outside of cut scenes. I'm not an expert but I'm sure you could tell the story as the game was played. When I'm playing and then there's a cut scene I just feel interrupted and get taken out a bit.

 

[Something Amyss]

So... this guy never played Red Dead Redemption, did he?

It isn't a bad way to present a story. Just another way. Gah, I hate it when people bash cutscenes... every now and then, I like to finish a big fight and then sit back and enjoy a little movie as a reward. It's a good way to relieve tension. It can also be a good way to build it up... if the character is getting hyped up, and the player likes the character, they'll probably get hyped up too.

The big problem is, it's not really a storytelling element of gaming.

When you rely on cutscenes, you move away from the gaming elements. As you yourself say, you're watching a "little movie."

...Which is kind of what he's saying, rather than "bashing" cut scenes. You're relying on a narrative style from another medium. The fact that you like them is largely irrelevant, as the failure of the medium exists even if you enjoy it.

 

[Something Amyss]

I would love to see more story told outside of cut scenes. I'm not an expert but I'm sure you could tell the story as the game was played. When I'm playing and then there's a cut scene I just feel interrupted and get taken out a bit.

Yeah, it's been done, too. It's more than possible, it happens.

And I agree. People talk about immersion, and usually use it to justify "realism," but the fact is, little is more immersion-breaking than a cut scene. Having control wrested away from me to show a cut scene is a huge "let's pull you out of this world...Here, watch a pretty movie because we can't keep you interested within our own medium."

 

[SimpleJack]

I feel like Bioware has pulled off cutscenes pretty well, Mass Effect sort of gave you a way to control the cutscene and develop your character further...
Also, I dont remember THQ making an incredible amount of games.
The last one I remember was the game based on the Spongebob movie...yeah, exactly...

Oh I'm sorry, I can't hear you over the sound of the many games THQ published, and the Spongebob movie game is quite good thank you.

I guess I agree with the general statement that devs should work harder to not use cutscenes instead use their biggest advantage of control.

Ok, first of all, a large amount of games doesn't make a sound, unless they're piled on top of each other and they fall into water or something.
Secondly, I also liked the sponebob movie game, so yeah, i just havent really seen a lot of games that theyve made since then... you got a short list...?

Your wish is my command. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_THQ_games]

omg Disney Princess is my favourite game!!!

 

[Nouw]

Snip

That's good to hear >.>

 

[SimpleJack]

Snip

That's good to hear >.>

...what the hell i never said snip....

 

[Nouw]

Snip

That's good to hear >.>

...what the hell i never said snip....

It's to show a long series of quotes/text to prevent the page from looking untidy and over-loaded.

 

[SimpleJack]

Snip

That's good to hear >.>

...what the hell i never said snip....

It's to show a long series of quotes/text to prevent the page from looking untidy and over-loaded.

oh....-_- thenks....

 

[CowsMoo]

I agree with THQ here. Cutscenes break the action. You don't feel as "in" the game if the game is going "here let me take away your control to show you this movie".

Now, I'm not against cutscenes, sometimes they are needed. In the first Halo, on the second mission, there is an objective "get across the chasm". You press a button and the game takes control of the camera and shows you a bridge activating. This is short, but done to convey game information. It show's you activating a bridge, and exactly where the bridge is from you current location. These kinds of cutscenes are alright. Cutscenes at the beginning and end of missions are "meh"; they are not necessary, but they clearly show a break in the action, changing of levels.

What I don't like is cutscenes in which it interrupts the flow of the game to show you interaction between characters. There's no reason, in the middle of a level that I don't have control over my guy, or even see it from his view. Especially in fight scenes or something. If you are going to have an Awesome fight scene, why not have the player do it? (Note: This does not mean quick time events). Instead of showing my character running for a door while the ceiling is collapsing, have me do it. And for the love of Gaea, don't do a cutscene of me barely escaping. Just, no cutscene is necessary there.

Bioshock, Half Life 2, and Cod 4 did awesome jobs at this and are considered some of the best games of the last decade.

Obviously this is limited to First/Third person games, as it is hard to do RPG or RTS wise...

Stop saying Bioshock didn't have cutscenes. It had like seven. The intro, the first time you inject a plasmid, when you first meet a little sister, Andrew Ryan, after you get knocked out, the ending scene, and than the final Good/Bad movie.

Also, about the exec, let me just say,

Red dead redemption
Saints Row 2
Legend of Zelda OOT
Deus Ex
Grand Theft Auto 4.

All games made better by cutscenes. You don't always need to have a scripted in-game sequence for the game to be good.

 

[ultratog1028]

I agree with THQ here. Cutscenes break the action. You don't feel as "in" the game if the game is going "here let me take away your control to show you this movie".

Now, I'm not against cutscenes, sometimes they are needed. In the first Halo, on the second mission, there is an objective "get across the chasm". You press a button and the game takes control of the camera and shows you a bridge activating. This is short, but done to convey game information. It show's you activating a bridge, and exactly where the bridge is from you current location. These kinds of cutscenes are alright. Cutscenes at the beginning and end of missions are "meh"; they are not necessary, but they clearly show a break in the action, changing of levels.

What I don't like is cutscenes in which it interrupts the flow of the game to show you interaction between characters. There's no reason, in the middle of a level that I don't have control over my guy, or even see it from his view. Especially in fight scenes or something. If you are going to have an Awesome fight scene, why not have the player do it? (Note: This does not mean quick time events). Instead of showing my character running for a door while the ceiling is collapsing, have me do it. And for the love of Gaea, don't do a cutscene of me barely escaping. Just, no cutscene is necessary there.

Bioshock, Half Life 2, and Cod 4 did awesome jobs at this and are considered some of the best games of the last decade.

Obviously this is limited to First/Third person games, as it is hard to do RPG or RTS wise...

Stop saying Bioshock didn't have cutscenes. It had like seven. The intro, the first time you inject a plasmid, when you first meet a little sister, Andrew Ryan, after you get knocked out, the ending scene, and than the final Good/Bad movie.

Also, about the exec, let me just say,

Red dead redemption
Saints Row 2
Legend of Zelda OOT
Deus Ex
Grand Theft Auto 4.

All games made better by cutscenes. You don't always need to have a scripted in-game sequence for the game to be good.

But those cutscenes did something that other games normally don't do in cutscenes: It never takes you out of First person view. Also it explains the loss of control in the story.

I'm not saying cutscenes are bad. Sometimes a game is better with cutscenes as opposed to the First-person cutscenes. And notice, the games you named are mainly Third person games. First person cutscenes make no sense in third person games as your view is already "outside" the character.

 

[BrotherRool]

I want to just put it out here, that whilst I agree that cutscenes whilst brilliant aren't the ultimate true method of game storytelling and that Half Life tells a good story through new techniques,

one method they use is TERRIBLE and that's the one people mistake for the good one.

I'm talking about the "having a cutscene happen near your player" that Half Life does, and is then copied by games like Assassins Creed. Closely related by people just talking over a radio whilst you play.


It does nothing, it breaks immersion because you're character is no longer reacting to the world realistically, instead of participating, like they do in a cutscene, you're character becomes a moron, wandering round the lab instead of facing the scientist talking to them. The player has no control, he has to listen to the cutscene, yet making him think he does. Either this leads to distracted wandering around whilst the talking happens, which detracts from the story, or the player stands still and watches. IE it's a cutscene but a really bad one from an awful angle.

What half life did right is environmental story-telling. Copied by Bioshock. Bioshock's story is infinitely better than Assassins Creed in presentation.


Another thing, I don't always want to be my own player, stories are about interesting characters and making the protagonist a blank slate can work some stories but not character stories. It shouldn't always be done. Uncharted is probably one of the most far ahead on that front, by designing the sequences so that the player can be involved but will be doing the right thing, like when you're running away from the bad guy and all the cinema that happens in-game instead of in-cutscene.

Finally shout out to the bit in Uncharted 2 where if you try to take a punch at a guy you hate, he decks you and will eventually kill you. It explains the story (why isn't he trying to escape?) and it correctly predicts how the player will feel and stops the story and cutscene being disconnected like would have happened if the guy was just invincible to being punched.