Poll: Scripted or Non-Scripted Sequences: Which do you prefer?

[Mistilteinn]

A lot of developers these days keep pushing for their games to be seen as 'cinematic experiences' by throwing in all of these fiery explosions, big set-pieces, and elaborate cutscenes. But at the same time, other games can include all of those, but leave it all up to the player's discretion (or luck) whether or not they want to partake in something like that. I've got a story as to what got me thinking about this, but I'll put it in spoilers since it does take up some space (no actual spoilers, though).

Spoiler

A pretty amazing thing happened while I was playing Dragon's Dogma yesterday that made me curious about this topic. I was heading along this cliff-side path to get to this fort where there was a quest I wanted to start, when my pawn and Arisen got into a fight with a Cyclops. Now, the fight isn't anything special--he's always there, and respawns after a few in-game days--but what was special was what happened. I figured I'd break the armor on its club-wielding arm just so I could disarm it, as it could pretty easily knock both of us off of the cliff and to our deaths. Well, that didn't quite work out, as I ended up pissing the beast off and he smacked my pawn off the cliff and to his death. This put me in a pretty bad situation since my class isn't that great of a damage dealer.

Now, for those who aren't aware, the game has a climbing system very similar to Shadow of the Colossus, whereby you can clamber up these giant monsters and stab away at weak points and the like. What I ended up doing was grabbing the Cyclops arm as it reeled from missing a swing at me, and I started stabbing it. This threw it off balance and caused it to stumble sideways, towards the cliff edge. I wanted to see if this crazy idea I had would work, and it did. I ended up forcing the Cyclops to stumble off the cliff and fall to its death, as I leaped off its arm at the last minute and grabbed the cliff edge.

I couldn't recall feeling more like a badass in that one moment as I looked down the cliff and saw it lying there, right next to the spot where my pawn fell (who I quickly ran down to revive). And I think what made me feel that way was that everything that happened was my own choice, and not the developer pushing me to see something 'cool'. I made the cool moment.

So, I'm curious as to what all of your opinions are on the matter. Do you like scripted events, do you hate them? Would you rather everything be left up to your actions? Any reason--or good stories--as to why your prefer one over the other, or like both equally?

 

[tippy2k2]

They both have their place and so I can't really tell you which one I prefer...

There are plenty of games that I love that are built on nothing BUT set-pieces. The Call of Duty series and Uncharted series are the two best examples of this. However, set-pieces allow for almost no replay-ability for once the piece has gone off, it's not going to ever change.

There are also plenty of games that I love that have NO set-pieces at all (or minimal; I suppose technically everything in a game is a set-piece but we'll go with the big epic stuff like Nukes going off and ships tipping over). Open world games like Skyrim and Assassins Creed are great examples of this. However, for every big "holy fuck did you just see that!?" moment, there are about nine others where nothing special really happens.

Gun to my head and I HAD to choose one, I'd go with set-pieces. I like games that take you for a ride and give you a story. Set-pieces are great ways to do this. It's not impossible without them but it takes a crafty developer to pull it off.

 

[skywolfblue]

I like scripted set-pieces. Pretty much all my favorite games (Mass Effect, Dead Space, Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood, Alan Wake etc) all have oodles of cinematic set-pieces.

When done right they add more to the story then they take away.

I feel this holds true even for open world games as well.

I loved Assassin's Creed and Red Dead Redemption because they had a powerfully told story through big events, less so Skyrim which focused a bit too hard on "do everything" and forgot to tell an exciting tale through the characters you meet and events you participate in.

That said, I do think games to need to hold onto the dynamic gameplay element. So I'm not for 100% scripting, scripting should be used when the situation calls for it.

 

[Sniper Team 4]

Scripted have their places, but a lot of the times I want to control what's going on. I'll always remember the second time I went to Markharth or whatever in Skyrim for the first time (meaning it was the first time I visited the city on my second playthrough)
Instead of letting the murderer succeed, I waited for him to draw the blade and rushed up and slit his throat. I didn't think it would work, but the game let me and I got a slightly different story because of it. I loved that. So many times I'm forced to watch something happen in scripted events that I, as the player, would never have allowed to happen if I was still in control. The most recent one is Dead Space 3. Get. Off. The. Damn. LIFT! You cry the entire time you're on it, then when it stops, instead of jumping off and hugging the ground like anyone else would in your position, you take your time. Idiot.

Now, if the scripted events are cool or just fun to watch, then okay, I like them. But lately they seem to be game developers' way of preventing the player from doing something that the player could normally easily do.

 

[Savagezion]

I really have no preference. As tippy said, if you hold a gun to my head and I had to answer honestly, I would get my head blown off. So don't do that. I love moments like you describe OP, but I also like when a game can offer a decent pace at similar encounters through scripting. Moments you described are rare in a game without scripting because we players not only take caution to avoid such a desperate gambit, but developers are also designing games to make sure acts of desperation are rare. (Lots of ammo available left around by unknown people, "hosptial" bills only cost the equivalent of $1.00, etc.) When you add those together we players are darn near unchallengeable even if you play like me and will actually handicap yourself in non-scripted games.

Non-scripted games have bad pacing issues usually due to the environment being so darn rich with loot. A major flaw I find in sandbox/open-world games is their economy goes down the toilet because they make the player a millionaire... but everything costs 1-10 dollars. So why bother becoming a millionaire? Actually, a lot of times the stuff you find is as good as or better than the best stuff vendors sell. So why bother putting money in the game at all? Overall, any real sense of progression is lost because in non-scripted games, nothing is worth anything.

Scripted games however pull away from personal ambition within that universe. I am offered a rich universe but I have to explore it on the rails set in front of me. They may have forks in the roads but they all lead to the same place usually. Which basically make your choices lose value. Some completely take away that option entirely making your perspective on the world worthless.

In the end, non-scripted games make progression lose most of its weight due to offering way too much to the player too easily. However, scripted games make your perception of your current situation lose weight sometimes even reducing it to zero requiring you to guess the developer's perspective instead. Both are strong where the other is weak.

 

[The Wykydtron]

I am finding Max Payne 3 to be a perfect example of scripted and non-scripted gameplay going hand in hand perfectly. You've got a few sections where Max pulls some action movie stunt like slow-mo shooting while on a zipline and stuff like that.
Then there's those moments where you decide to dive through some glass, shoot some goons then hopefully your momentum will carry you behind that cover so you aren't lying in the open.

Then you misjudge the jump and crash headfirst into the glass and stop dead without getting a shot off. The chance for legendary fuck ups are endless in MP3.

OT: It would really depend on how many setpieces a certain game decides to throw at me. I hate all the CoD crap because that is literally 100% of the entire single player. I might as well go and find an LP and save myself £40, if I actually still bothered with CoD games anymore that is.

Whereas a few setpieces sprinkled around is awesome when they are pulled off well.

Literally, Max Payne 3. Play it.

 

[Clive Howlitzer]

While scripted moments have their place, I vastly prefer emergent gameplay.

 

[Jimmy T. Malice]

Too much of either can be a bad thing. Too many scripted events can make you feel like you're not really in control, and too few can leave the story or even the gameplay with little direction.

 

[piinyouri]

Variety is the spice of life.
I enjoy both.

 

[CpT_x_Killsteal]

I'd say I like both of them when done right, but lately games need more unscripted sequences. Devs tend to be falling back on scripted events because they're much easier to design.

 

[Zhukov]

Variety is the spice of life.
I enjoy both.

This.

Although I'm going to vote "scripted" out of pure spite.

Cool unscripted moments rarely happen and often feel unreal due to the limitations of in-gameplay animation and the fact that the game world can never react to them in a convincing manner.

Fully scripted scenes on the other hand can feel forced and unengaging.

Presumably a perfect game would make use of both.

 

[Sectan]

I like my share of scripted moments, but unscripted takes the cake. The scripted events in CoD 4 blew my fucking mind when I first played it, but they never really compare to unscripted moments in Planetside 2.

Picture it. I ran around a rock away from enemy fire and I'm face to face with a tank as a medic. Seeing no other option I decide to jump onto it to avoid having a hole blown into me as it was turning my way. Out of the corner of my eye I see my brother running up with a launcher and fires it at the tank. I jump off just in time to see the tank blow up and still be able to limp away. All while this is playing in my head.

 

[Lovely Mixture]

Assuming the game is real-time, I think I prefer non-scripted more often.

Before I was neutral, but then came Bioshock and Call of Duty 4.....

Spoiler

Ready to kill Andrew Ryan? Too bad, here's the "would you kindly" twist. Yes I know this was supposed to be thematic and telling, but it failed to do that to me.

Ready to take down Al-Asad? Too bad, Price beats him up for you. I was even right in front of the door before Price interrupted me.

Want to stop that helicopter from crashing on Mcmillan's leg? Too bad, Price is apparently mute when faced with the Helicopter that's clearly crashing in his direction.

Ready to detain Zachaev's son after you've chased him down the whole mission? Too bad, he commits suicide. THEN WHY DID YOU HAVE ME EVEN TRY IN THE FIRST PLACE!?

Then came Metro 2033 which made me hate them.

"Hey dude, I see you're unlocking the door but do you notice that hole right there? I mean some monster could jump out of that.....You know like the monsters we've been fighting for the last hour? Dude......I'm serious."

 

[Smooth Operator]

Non scripted is the preference, I don't mind having a cinematic conclusion to an awesome fight but the pinnacle for me would be for the entire thing to be playable, and no I don't mean getting glossed over with dog shit known as QTE.

 

[XMark]

I like scripted sequences this generation, but I'll be quite disappointed if the next generation doesn't shift the focus more to emergent gameplay.

 

[shrekfan246]

I feel that "I like both equally" conveys a different meaning than "I don't have a preference", if only because it feels less apathetic.

So yeah, I'm half and half. Most open world games can't hold my interest, but some of the most hilarious things ever can come out of breaking a scripted event in a non-scripted way.

For example, near the end of Assassin's Creed III you're doing a chase sequence and there's a barrel on a pier that explodes as you run by it. One attempt as I ran by it, I happened to have Connor jump in the air right as it exploded, and the subsequent explosion sent him flying all rag-doll into the water.

And I've been going back to Banjo-Tooie lately and playing Beyond Good & Evil for the first time. While they're ultimately linear games, there's certainly something to be said about how little they actually interrupt the flow of gameplay once they get going.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

For cutscenes that involve set characters, and need their interactions to be shown, or exposition, scripted I think is needed. For the majority of cases I prefer non-scripted, and I DEFINITELY prefer not to be taken out of gameplay just to see a building collapse.

I went for both have their roles, but this shouldn't be taken as both are equally applicable.

 

[King Aragorn]

Some may call this is a cop out, but I enjoy a bit of both. I like having me some freedom, I enjoy partaking in making crucial decisions, or simply choosing what to say and how to someone.
But also, scripted events, as pointed above, stuff like explosion/interactions can be conveyed through scripted.

I think Deus Ex stroke a pretty good medium.

 

[Happiness Assassin]

Scripted set-pieces have their purposes. They can help tell a story that otherwise could not be told in a normal game environment.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Both serve to unthrall the player if done right.

Though scripted events can sometimes feel a bit more cheap and obnoxious. Like the developer doesn't have faith that audiences will enjoy themselves with the actual gameplay, so they feel the need to grab your attention with awesome stuff going on in the background, or have the "awesome" be forced onto you as a way to cordon you off.

As long as they don't shove my face in it too much, I'm good.