And I actually liked the Silent Hill movie. Am I doing it wrong?
the game distances itself from normal video games on that aspect becuz the moment a NPC tells me "press the action buttom to" the immersion is lost, it is something we all know and if this game is trying to change that we should celebrate it, not critize it
If it takes being a film to be recognized art, well, then I hope that video games are never recognized art. I hope that by playing games that people will sneer at me and cast insults upon me. As long as the medium isn't sabotaging itself I'll be able to take the disapproval of critics and snobs.
HR doesnt'feel' right to me. At no point. It trys too hard to emulate reallity or movies. Where other games not making a deal of off theire gamingness this one just trys to hard to be not what it is... a game instead a movie experience.
Hope i explained it well so you get what i mean, english isnt my first language.
JIM STERLING HAS NO CONCEPT OF ADVERTISING OR MARKETING
JIM STERLING WRITES BASELESS INFLAMMATORY ARTICLE DUE TO IGNORANCE OF WHAT ADVERTISING AND MARKETING ARE
CLOSE MINDED PEOPLE READ ARTICLE AND AGREE WITH AFOREMENTIONED AUTHOR
yep, that pretty much sums it up!
There will be a lot of comments totally missing the "big picture" of the problem, though
That's the reason i actually wish that the game will fail. Because it may help Quantic dream understand, that they always "cripple" the experience while trying to make it better (not that i didn't like Fahrenheit or Omikron)
I mean, Sony Pictures is also trying to do a version of SotC. Its like they don't care about their own accomplishments. Just make it a movie, right? Make it HD, make production expensive, force smaller developers out into the cold so they don't get in the way of your big budget blockbuster games.
I never really gave a shit about Heavy Rain. So much money funneled into a game full of zombies with a healthy flesh tone. There's just too many instances where the people don't move like people and it creeps me the hell out.
instead of trying to outdone the original source material, havent you thought it might be a TRIBUTE to it?
no of course not, its just your ussual assumptions and ignorant opinions, instead of ASSUMING, what the devs were trying to say with an inoffensive label on a game havent you tried asking them what they meant?
Movies are a more popular medium than video games. Quantim Dream says "buy this because its more popular".
Makes sense to me.
if you have the time, respond to my comments, albeit i know its easier for you to have a one way discussion
I'd like to point out a game with a fantastic story, or to be more precise a series. Phoenix Wright. I can safely say that half of the stories that come out on the big screen are no where near close as well crafted as Phoenix Wright.
From just a few bullet points you condemn this game and the team for not having pride in their work and saying they have the idea that film is the be all and end all, blah, blah. I love it when people like you make such radical judgement calls based on just a few words. Ever consider that they might be challenging the film medium by saying this? I think they are, and they are videogame pioneers for doing so.
I will go out on a limb here and say Metal Gear Solid has a better and deeper story then any movie released in the last 10 years. And not just because it's longer, it's just better
Your section on video game to movie adaptions is dead on, however.
Games are fun because you play them to see a story unfold, movies are fun because you watch how someone else handles a situation. Mixing the two entirely different form of storytelling just hasn't worked, ever.
Hollywood production value. I have no f'king clue what it means. Most of games seem to have pretty good production values including the ME2.
All I see is a dodge marketing with fluffy shit that I don't need to know or read about. The character design in the game is god awful as well (there I said it). It's on my rental list if this breaks the 85 or high rating just to see how this game supposed to break the new ground in the video gaming.
Games aspiring to be "cinematic" is a good thing in the long run, because essentially what developers are trying to do is legitimize games as a form of art. Early in film's history (around 1915-1925), filmmakers, auteurs and scholars and academics did the same thing - they compared film to the theater, and to literature, because at the time no one took film seriously and the only way to legitimize it was to compare the things it had in common with art forms that people recognized.
Same goes for games. The gaming industry is young, very young. Right now, no one who isn't a video gamer takes games seriously, so people have to say to other people "hey guess what, this is a lot like a movie". Soon, if history has taught us anything, video games won't have to do that and they'll be recognized on their own as a legitimate art form. But until then, you're stuck being compared to movies.
They're opening the video game medium to a broader audience; a different audience. This isn't some new revelation. Cage has been saying this from the start. It's not meant for the typical gamer. It's clearly designed for those with a more open-mind towards things.
how the hell did evolution allow someone with your level of intelligence live enough to learn how to use the internet?
let me tell you sir, feeble pseudo-onomatopoeias like yours are neither an adequate response nor a response worthly comment in fact ive done enough by letting you know how stupid you are
Do you have any suggestion to define what Heavy Rain is? Maybe you'll share it in your review. But it does and should feel like an interactive movie. All games are interactive. But not all feel like movies, and this is not an insult to games that don't feel like movies. To label a movie as a comedy is not an insult to thrillers.
I haven't played Heavy Rain yet obviously, but I think marketing and the game itself are very different. Saying "this is the best game ever" means nothing to a consumer. I think the "its like a movie" marketing angle is to get rid of the very negative view average day people have when they think of video games.
For example, you say people should stop saying when games will get the "Citizen Kane" of games, which I might add people should not stop saying. They're not saying Citizen Kane is what movies should be, its that Citizen Kane was universally hailed as a fantastic piece of art that could only be done in the film format. So when people say that, they're looking for a universally hailed piece of art that could only be a game.
And then you say "when will we have another super mario brothers." Super Mario Brothers is a great game to play, but to say its as central to games and Citizen Kane is to movies... that's ridiculous. Games are generally seen as "for kids" and "no thought all stimulation" and you think the perfect example against those complaints is a game where you play a plumber saving the princess of the mushroom kingdom? Its a very fun game, but people don't like Citizen Kane because its "fun" or Sgt. Peppers. Lonely Hearts Club because its "fun."
Movies are much more frequently regarded as to be taken seriously, that there's a point to the movie or at least a possibility that the creator is trying to say something through his respective medium, not create "a fantastic triple AAA experience." That's what i think the marketing is trying to do, get people into the mindset that "oh this is something serious, and its a game" not "well I couldn't get a script approved by the film companies so I made a game."
If the creator is trying to say that games will never reach that point, well then yeah fuck him. But I think that'd be more telling through the game itself (which you can't talk about unfortunately) rather than the marketing.
Hope that wasn't too long. I like the article, just disagree.
99% of modern games are shit and gamers are to blame for it.
Quantic Dreams isn't drawing comparisons to Hollywood to say that videogames aren't worthy. They're drawing comparisons to say that videogames are worthy. They're not criticizing videogames. They're championing them. They're inviting comparisons to the best films to say that, "yes, videogames can be a storytelling medium as good or better than film!" They're openly challenging Hollywood with statements like that.
Articles like this are the same defensive reactions that makes the self-conscious videogame industry only appear more self-conscious. Be proud of the videogame industry, but don't pretend like we don't have weaknesses to improve upon that other mediums do better. Don't have that knee-jerk reaction to game-to-film comparisons. Invite them. We're better than film and we'll prove it and we'll only be getting stronger as a result. Film has been in a creative lull recently. Videogames, on the other hand, have only been getting more creative. We need to capitalize on that with better writing and voice acting that showcases the strengths of our medium.
If Quantic Dreams deliver that, then that's one step forward.
You also forget that film has been around for over a hundred years while games haven't even been around half that long. The general public can relate to movies. No matter who you are, you've seen a movie. Many people out there have never played a game, or are a very 'casual' gamer. And I hate to be 'that' guy, but there are many films in existence right now that not a single game can even touch. I mean from a narrative perspective, from a character perspective, and from an emotional perspective. There are things movies can make you feel that games cannot because of the non-existence of interactivity.
And of course on the flip side of that exists games. Which can also give you an experience that film can never give because of the interactivity. Both mediums have incredible strengths and gaping weaknesses. There's no reason to be a fanboy. Accept them both.
no, you have to either take off your shirt or already have the prize and take a picture of it. lol im still a bit bitter.
While a lot of other people compare games to movies.. I really think it should be the other way around. I mean, you compare to the medium that has more quality to it. While Movies certainly are a great medium. They lack interactivity. Games on the other hand delivers almost all the components of movies, in addition to interactivity. That is, if you want to compare both mediums.
I believe games are being compared to movies because movies have been there long before games established itself as an independent industry.
Good article.

surf dtoid with 

Rising (10+)
People you follow
















follow