I think I'm alone amongst every gamer I've ever met in my love for the Max Payne series. I think of them as one of the first videogames in which I engaged with the story and the characters at a level on par with movies. However, I understand how this story of an NY detective's quest for revenge over the murder of his wife and child at the hands of drug addicts, communicated through noir comic-book panels could be seen by many as entirely clichéd, and I suppose that's partially right.
However, it's not just the comic-book panels that convey the (admittedly, easily achieved) grime and darkness of Max's world, it's all the little things. It's Max's continuous smirk as he sinks ever lower into the world he previously devoted his life to destroying. It's the hidden camera you find aimed at the bed in a hookers hotel room. It's learning that she's selling the footage from her sexual exploits to porn kings for some extra cash. It's the manic gibbering of the drug addicts in alleyways, lost in a stupor of illusion and paranoia. It's in the terrifying playable dream sequences where you hurtle Max mindlessly though a never-ending maze of tunnels, before nudging him precariously along a path of spilt blood over an abyss of absolute nothing.
It's things like this that differentiate the world-building proficiencies of videogames from the 'what-you-see-is-what-you-get' techniques of cinema. It was the first game I remember playing that showed all the things you can do in a videogame that you can't do in movies. Videogames can spend all the time they want in building up a world or atmosphere by including countless tiny details like the surrendered sigh Max makes whenever he is forced to resort to taking the drugs he was sworn to wiping from the streets in order to continue his bloody rampage against those he feels are most responsible for his family's murder. Movies can only have a single shot focusing on a single object or conversation for a limited time before being forced to move to the next piece of exposition or action before your average audience (read: imbeciles) stop paying attention after 90 minutes. Sure, the plot may have later derailed into the videogame fodder of conspiracies and ancient organisations made all the more contrived by a sequel which did a complete John Milton but it delivered it's world and characters with such gusto and magnificence as to make any reservations over the fact that it's a "third-person-shooter-with-bullet-time" entirely invalid.
Now, with the recent announcement of Max Payne 3 I can feel only a mixture of anticipation and reservation. Will Rockstar be brave enough to keep the old formula to maintain the story and atmosphere or resort to making it fiercely dark, excessively violent and giving Max a beard to appeal to modern gamers? Will audiences who have had their fill of Bullet Time (oops, sorry. Tequila Time) in such ballerina gun fests as 'Stranglehold' and '100 Bullets' be able to put up with relatively archaic gameplay to engage with the story? If GTAIV is anything to go by, I have absolutely nothing to worry about. Sam Houser's ability to combine brilliant shooty gameplay with a compelling story has been proven more than once now. So, I'll maintain my optimism for now. Bring the Payne.
However, it's not just the comic-book panels that convey the (admittedly, easily achieved) grime and darkness of Max's world, it's all the little things. It's Max's continuous smirk as he sinks ever lower into the world he previously devoted his life to destroying. It's the hidden camera you find aimed at the bed in a hookers hotel room. It's learning that she's selling the footage from her sexual exploits to porn kings for some extra cash. It's the manic gibbering of the drug addicts in alleyways, lost in a stupor of illusion and paranoia. It's in the terrifying playable dream sequences where you hurtle Max mindlessly though a never-ending maze of tunnels, before nudging him precariously along a path of spilt blood over an abyss of absolute nothing.
It's things like this that differentiate the world-building proficiencies of videogames from the 'what-you-see-is-what-you-get' techniques of cinema. It was the first game I remember playing that showed all the things you can do in a videogame that you can't do in movies. Videogames can spend all the time they want in building up a world or atmosphere by including countless tiny details like the surrendered sigh Max makes whenever he is forced to resort to taking the drugs he was sworn to wiping from the streets in order to continue his bloody rampage against those he feels are most responsible for his family's murder. Movies can only have a single shot focusing on a single object or conversation for a limited time before being forced to move to the next piece of exposition or action before your average audience (read: imbeciles) stop paying attention after 90 minutes. Sure, the plot may have later derailed into the videogame fodder of conspiracies and ancient organisations made all the more contrived by a sequel which did a complete John Milton but it delivered it's world and characters with such gusto and magnificence as to make any reservations over the fact that it's a "third-person-shooter-with-bullet-time" entirely invalid.
Now, with the recent announcement of Max Payne 3 I can feel only a mixture of anticipation and reservation. Will Rockstar be brave enough to keep the old formula to maintain the story and atmosphere or resort to making it fiercely dark, excessively violent and giving Max a beard to appeal to modern gamers? Will audiences who have had their fill of Bullet Time (oops, sorry. Tequila Time) in such ballerina gun fests as 'Stranglehold' and '100 Bullets' be able to put up with relatively archaic gameplay to engage with the story? If GTAIV is anything to go by, I have absolutely nothing to worry about. Sam Houser's ability to combine brilliant shooty gameplay with a compelling story has been proven more than once now. So, I'll maintain my optimism for now. Bring the Payne.
