A lot of games today use scripted sequences or quick time events. The good thing about this is that they normally use it to show you cool set pieces that are extremely memorable for the campaign. Sometimes designers may spend hours or even days on putting something into a game an then the player may not even notice it if the scripted sequence or the QTE was not in place. Now although these set pieces are very cool and impressive, there is still a huge amount of fun and satisfaction gained from discovering things on your own.
I have no problem with quick time events and scripted sequences in games really but I do feel that for how far gaming has come as an both a form of entertainment an industry, what it has really boiled down to in a lot of games today is having really nice looking stuff semi played for you. Almost to the point where the main focus of designers today is to create an interactive movie that leaves you with memories of sections of a game that you can talk about to a friend who had the exact same experience. There are developers who seem to do this very well, Uncharted 2 for example is a very linear and cool set piece type game, yet I have played through that single player campaign a bunch of times. But as the new Tomb Raider has QTE's and Mass Effect 3 has turret sequences I am left wondering if developers are designing more of an story for you to play through, or a game for you to experience how you want to on your own. As part of a community that I hear cry on a regular basis such things as �you�re dumbing it down!� I do understand that as a growing industry, variety is essential if gaming is to be taken seriously as a form of entertainment. So is this just simply a question of why developers cant figure out a way to direct players and not funnel them in order to show them something cool in their game, or is that too much of an ask?.
LOOK WHO CAME: