Why is tv and movies considered to be something videogames should aspire to be?

Why is tv and movies considered to be something videogames should aspire to be?
How the hell are they more "art" than videogame?
They generally don't tell better stories than videogames. Hell, the best TV show stories are worse than many videogame stories and movies aren't much better.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=crmkQjAXVHU
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Because it's easier to program shitty cutscenes than decent gameplay
And people (the mainstream) don't like to play or give a certain amount of effort

Video games have VERY LOW standards for story because most devs focus on gameplay

So as a result, Hollywood rejects are able to make a movie with mediocre writing that would've gotten a 6/10 otherwise and then just market it as a video game and get an instant 10/10

Your pic is proof of this effect, we'll call it the "Uncharted Effect" Because Uncharted is arguably a staple of this. Now everytime a movie-game gets 10/10s I'll just say "Looks like the Uncharted effect" unless the writing is actually good on its own but I doubt that will ever happen because all the decent writers are out making actual movies instead of marketing bad movies as games.

It's easier to watch a movie than to play video games.
Anyone can watch a movie, even the most complicated black and white german french kino shit ever made just requires you to sit in front of a screen and watch shapes interact with each other.

A video game requires agency from the player, and a certain degree of competence.
It teaches you a system, and then expects you to work within that system.
So, in an industry that aim to cater to the widest possible audience and the lowest common denominator, making a video game that is just like a movie is the QUINTESSENCE of the correct direction to take in order to make the most possible amount of money.

Your fault for idolising hacks like kojima. This is your doing.

Fixed that for you.

It's sad that these movie games even have worse stories than many examples of well written games that also have good gameplay.

The difference is that the MGS series (before 5) wasn't anything like these movie games.
It had cutscenes that were pure cutscenes and it had gameplay that was pure gameplay. Almost none of the half and half bullshit you see where all your character is doing is walking around or jumping "cinematically" with very little player input.

Stop your weak excuses and rationalizations.

Your response to that criticism is so weak and laughable i'd swear you were Mark in disguise.

But is a difference.
I don't mind a game wanting to have a good story if it doesn't hurt gameplay. The metal gear series had both good writing and good gameplay.

Enjoy your citizen kanes. You're the cause.

...

That is some shit logic user. It's like saying I am the cause of COD because I bought Doom.

If you bought nudoom, yeah.

I didn't but how would not buying a game that came out in 2016 stop a game that came out 12 years earlier?

Excuse my samefag but I also want to make a quick observation

The Last of Us and Uncharted were made by Naughty Dog

Naughty Dog is headquartered in Santa Monica California.
Santa Monica is part of the LA metro area AKA Hollywood. So it actually makes a lot of sense for Naughty Dog to hire a bunch of Hollywood guys to make a low-budget CG movie, render it in real-time, and then call it a game instead. Because they probably realized repackaging a movie into a game would instantly make its ratings from a 6/10 to a 10/10

Just an observation

Buying it in 2016 makes sure the same shit comes out in 2017 and 2018 and 2019 and 2051.

Ok, but I didn't buy new Doom and time doesn't flow backwards.

Because normalfags approve of them and worship the people involved in making them.

Game developers, who work in the same area, are jealous and starving for a piece of that limelight, despite getting paid better on average. They want the fame more than the money at this point. Gotta puff up that ego.

Except NuDoom isn't like COD. It's like Halo mixed with HL1.

you what m8

If we are going to try to find a better example at least actually find a better example.

...

Good luck seeing through all the pixels
At least post the Dark Mod

I seriously doubt you've ever played thief 1 if you're citing it as an example of great gameplay in 2016. Both it and MGS are outclassed by Chaos Theory.

Are you implying gameplay is better in 2016 than it was when Thief was released?

No way.

I know this thread's already derailed, but a lot of it comes from the MUH ART crowd who happen to be fat, bleating sheep that need their hobbies validated by society.

Yes, I think gameplay has improved since 1998. If you don't, you're delusional.

Am I being baited?

Movies & TV had the same issue at first, just regurgitating and basing films as just recordings of plays and vaudeville. It's only when they expanded and went into territories where the medium would lose something as a play or act only did cinema and the like found itself as an artform.

The issue is that many devs trying to tell a story only know how via the cinematic method, needing to direct a linear hallway so you can't break from the narrative they want, or likely lose it with any open world shit inbetween cutscenes. Coupled with scripting cinematic shit is easy and lacking pesky variables (note how open world games tend to fuck up basic AI shit or anything out of simple boundaries) and it becomes an easy grab. Just focus on modeling fancy realism and filters (framerate be damned; making it stutter at 24 frames or so makes it all the more "cinematic") and make it mention "deep" shit and repeat.

Consider that even something like Sonic has messages and choices but doesn't have the whole "cinematic" flair and pompousness. You see how the bad future is rusted and broken down, so you earn good futures via collecting time stones or visiting the past to break the Generators– no last minute "Save Planet" or "Don't Save Planet" choice. Video Games need to do their own thing and remember to still be games

Kid, are you serious? I'm obviously not saying 2016 was full of good games (although we did get a few), I'm saying we've improved significantly since thief 1 came out.

And just so you know, shitting on CURRENT YEAR doesn't make MGS' gameplay any less garbage

Except 1998 was the best year in videogame history and gameplay only got worse from there.

tbh books are pretty linear and they sometimes manage to tell a good story. There's nothing wrong with linearity in games, devs/writers just suck at it like they suck at the rest of making vidya.

They aren't. The people who say that don't actually care about video games, they just failed in other industries and are trying to make it with games. If they look at the transition from theater to film they would see that the best films of old are the ones that really took advantage of things film could do that theater couldn't do. If you see a lot of the really old films will have stuff from one angle, like they are preforming on a stage and the camera is recording that stage. A Trip to the Moon is a perfect example of this. Then go and watch Buster Keaton and you'll see changes in camera angle that follow the movement, use of depth, camera tricks that make use of framing, and so on. At it's time it was revolutionary and pushed the medium forward, now you see it everywhere. Watch vid related to see what I mean.
They aren't. Measuring how much more "art" one medium is compared to another is a useless exercise.


The decent writers are doing both.


There's more potential for good gameplay but the majority of the devs aren't taking advantage of the added resources.

There hasn't been a modern stealth game that has given what the first thief offered.

...

Because film has been the #1 most popular form of art/entertainment for decades. Videogames are still in their infancy, so many people are trying to use techniques from a different, pre-established medium (film) on games to "push" them further. They often do the opposite, but they see success since shallow games with nice aesthetics sell well. I don't think "movie games" like TLOU or Uncharted shouldn't exist, I'm glad they do tbh, I just wish they weren't so highly praised and the whole industry wasn't starting to sway in that direction. What novels are to visual novels, movies are to games like Uncharted 4 and David Cage stuff.

Because of jews. If you don’t know this by now, you’re retarded.

Also the time Thief released which is what the conversation was about
Thanks for showing everyone you are underage. it released in 1998 kid.

Because "muh cinematic experiences".

All shit to completely dismiss, mock and encourage others to join in.

The people getting into the industry don't like video games.

...

...

Why are these people ashamed of their medium?

They didn't want to be in the medium. They're dropouts from others and desperately want to go back.

This.
People keep talking about when we will have the "Citizen Kane of Gaming", but they usualyl don't understand why Citizen Kane is so revered. It was one of the watershed movies that used techniques only available in cimema to make points. Camera angles, focus changes, editing etc was impossible in the same way in books and theater, so it was one of the first movies that couldn't have its emotional beats copied onto another medium. It could only really exist as a film.
Games who now try to be the "Citizen Kane of Gaming" don't seem to understand this. They think all they have to do is make a great story with a nice setting and whatever else. All this can be done in any other medium. The only way a game can attain that same status is to use aspects unique to a game to do the same.
How this can be done I have no fucking idea, but looking at how the first Souls games used difficulty spikes to mirror the hopelessness of the protagonist's situation is a good start. Matching gameplay with whatever message you are trying to send the player. Not make a piss-easy boss fight and then have some epic cutscene where it looks like the hero of the story was on death's door by the end.

I like to think the Citizen Kane of video games was Super Mario 64, purely through just how many ways Mario could move. Jumps, triple jumps, backflips, long jumps, wall jumps, dives, along with crawling and sidling, ground pounds, sliding, etc. etc. All of this was capable with one joystick and a few buttons, and I have a hard time thinking of other games–Mario games included–that let you move around as freely as Super Mario 64, and the entire game is built around that liberated movement. I think it shows just how deeply you could control a video game character. Because all video games are about controlling something, I think that makes it very significant.

This.
If anything Mario 64 would be the citizen kane of gaming for inventing the modern 3D camera and movement system.
But they would never let a childs be considered that.

It's a good start in that way, but youi don't really get that much of a sense of progression in SM64. The biggest issue is that every Bowser fight, which should be epic showdowns, are just re-hashes. Even the final boss, with it's epic music, green "scary" filter doesn't do anything but repeat the same formula, so again the gameplay doesn't match the other aspects of the fight.
The movement and camera are great innovations, but I personally feel they don't really match with all aspects of the game. But for what the aim of the game was, it worked very well. I just feel it's underutilized,or that the goals that you achieve with the movement system are a little too repetitive. Doesn't really match the whole "youi ahve to save the princess really fast" to dick around with awesome controls collection more stars than you need.

Super Mario 64 was the The Birth of a Nation of video games. It was revolutionary in it's execution and pushed the industry forward in a time when it was still relatively young. We haven't had a Citizen Kane or The Holy Mountain of video games yet.

Blame the film and television industry.
Unlike literally every other art industry, the film industry is extremely defensive, and when it sees a threat to its supremacy it lashes out.
In the case of vidya, they saw interactive movies, and moved to de-legitimize vidya by calling them "not enough like movies, and therefore not art."
This pushed a bunch of hipsters to learn how to make films so they could apply that knowledge to video games and make them an art form of their own… by trying and failing to be movies.

Thanks a lot Roger Ebert.

You're thinking about this all wrong.
Vidya is not a medium for Citizen Kane, but for Pulp Fiction.
Leave Citizen Kane to the faggots in the ivory towers jerking themselves off to a gilded idol, we're out for an entirely different award.

I'm not sure I follow. Can you explain what you were going for? I get that we shouldn't be artsy shit like Citizen Kane, but what part of Pulp Fiction should games be striving for?

His metric was expression so faggots tried win his approval until he gave up and removed himself the discussion. However, the damage has been done.

The most artful thing about Bioshock Infinite is the skill and style it displayed in destroying its own plot. Still not as masterful as Mass Effect's narrative seppuku, but a respectable runner-up.

It has less to do with the movie industry being a den of Jews and more with the fact that vidya is filled with film school rejects that have no idea what to do with the medium, so they default to making shitty movies pretending to be games.

It's like film in the early days, when technicians fucking around with the technology to replaced with the perpetual Marxist parasite, artists, who proceeded to ape theater because they are stupid fucks with nothing in their pozzed brains.


You simply know all the cucks seeking his approval really wanted to work in Hollywood but either weren't Jewish enough or simply didn't have the necessary talent, so they settled for "second best".

Who the fuck seeks the approval of a film critic when making a game?

I was just looking for a film different enough from Citizen Kane to illustrate the difference between film and vidya.

Fresh WebM for all your Uncharted 4 needs.

I guess what he's going for is that Pulp Fiction is ultimately many different small stories interwoven together where the point isn't the stories themselves but actualy how their interact with each other, how each on their own wouldn't amount to a small sitcom epidose, but all together work quite well.
Or how the movie isn't just about telling a story, it's about showing awesome crazy things happening while also telling a story.

Videogames shouldn't care so much about a specific character that they center entirely around it and every other character, plot or story revolves around him to the detriment of the gameplay. Essentially, Uncharted would be the actual Citizen Kane of vydia seeing how everything swings around Nathan Drake.

Instead, good storytelling comes from more subtle things that happen while also playing a videogame.
For instance, the recordings you find on the ground in System Shock 2 don't seem like a very original way to give you exposition. But they work quite well.
You get to know the story of VonBraun and everything that happeend before the current situation while also playing the game. You can skip them, you can listen to them and you can do either while shooting at The Many. It never gets in the way of the game but it's present and well detailed.

Even the story itself isn't about how you're the single most important being ever, here to save the galaxy except in the very end but rather how there's a story here between Shodan and The Many, there's a story surrounding Xerxes, there's another about a director trying to make mothers for The Many, there's some others about a love couple and ambitious people. There's many different stories, all woven together on top of your own story.

And when you think about great games, the same thing happens, where the world itself is like a library full of good stories that you can know for greater context and it involves you personnaly without making you the big hero until the final part of the game where things get very personnal and it makes sense to be that invested. Deus Ex does this, Thief does thi, etc.

Blown the Fuck out.

I'm glad someone else thinks the same way I do about Uncharted games.

whats the full video?

It's a 30 minute video
youtube.com/watch?v=crmkQjAXVHU

Is this guy on HRT? He sounds like another videogame player transitioning to another sex because he's a fucking faggot. Wouldn't surprise me since all videogames do is lead you to be a tranny in america anyway.

He has a wife and a kid.

Come on fam.

Didn't mean to post that video. In the boopers real at the end, about 37:32, you can hear his wife and kid.


What meme arrows?

In the youtube replies.

MY WIFE'S SON

Tetris is the Citizen Kane of gaming. It's boring as a book, impossible as a play and absurd as a movie.

The real reason high res, professionally-acted by A-list actors, detailed dramatic shit is all the rage now is due to the fact that the conglomerates of the video game industry are copying the same strategy they have for movies.

Companies that get too large have investors, board members and shareholders. In the case of video games, these old rich assholes couldn't tell the difference between a polygon and a Pokemon. Imagine the glazed look on their faces if you, as a developer, try telling the investors a novel gameplay mechanic that makes your RTS game different from the rest. They don't give a rat's ass. Now imagine showing them something similar to a movie, which they recognize. They can be excited and approve that project.

The whole push for games to be more "mature" and "art" is what the industry is trying to do to attract money from people that have never played a video game. It's a balancing act between pleasing the shareholders and selling copies in any way possible. The actual quality of the video game is nearly last on the list of priorities.

Trolls take this news and tease you fags about what's "art" or not and chastise you for playing "kids games". It's effective because we could all be learning a new skill instead of spending our time shitposting and building a steam backlog. But it's nobody's business how you spend your time except your own, and in this bleak world of ours expecting 100% willpower from everyone at all times is ridiculous.

tl;dr it's not what players think is fun, it's what bigwig rich assholes think will sell, and all they understand is movies.

SM64 was revolutionary because it was the first, not the best. The prototypes are not as great as the 10th or 30th iteration.

the reason is this: the geek inherently feels inferior to the charlatan (jew), and no matter how FUCKING SMART you are, and how much fucking math you know, in the end, the politician type, the charlatan type, rules the world, above stephen hawkings, above the scientists, and a jew that makes retarded superhero movies will rule over a game designer unless the game designer decides to grow some testicles and do his own fucking thing. But you see, the sitting position you are when in a computer? not good for your balls

How was TLoU? I enjoyed the small beginning segment I did play, but never had the time to go beyond it.

Because the declining rate of profit on investment means that publishers/developers are forced to find ways to turn games into more and more consumable experiences, meant to be "played" once so that consumers can quickly move on to the next one. It's the same logic behind planned obsolescence.

Gameplay has been fucked thanks to retards like you. You probably think The Order has some good ass gameplay.

I honestly wish people would stop using the "art" argument as if it's always detrimental and videogames shouldn't strive to be it, just because the term is badly used so often.
Yes, hipsters use it to shield themselves from criticism and the suits use it to try and atract a bigger demographic.

That still doesn't take away from games benefitting from being treated as art, the same way woodworking or dancing or playing music do.
There's a good amount of skill in making videogames and celebrating that skill should be important.
There are many videogames that invoke strong emotions on the player or present good chalenges that are fun to clear and all of those should be emphasized.

But the most important aspect is perhaps the idea that, just like any other art form, videogames should be worth only as much as it's fans want to pay for them and artists should "perform" for the sake of the art, not for the cash. At leads the idea of videogames being treated like art would stop the concept of treating them like a product to package and sell for the masses.

Hating on "videogames are art" just because hacky fags mis-use the term is like hating classical art because of modern art.

because normalfaggots are retarded niggers

Art is about expression and some people just want to make a fun game. With this goal of expression, faggots usually mean
1) Pushing what they can get away with calling art.
2) What progressive message that it is pushing.

Also, the Internet and post modernism/modern art killed the medium. What value does post-modernism do to a medium? Post-modernism is when a medium is running out of ideas. What does constantly saying everything is subjective accomplish? Art is subjective yet we got perspective, composition, color theory, anatomy, etc. Without standards, the popular becomes the good. Standards only go up or down. When it isn't going up, it is going down.


This but add casualization, no missable content, and lack of depth.

What a puppet.

But that's the thing, if art is expression then several videogames are art.
Fallout for instance is the author's expressing his take on war, violence, the lack of morals and the repetition of past mistakes. It's his expression of what the world would look like after a war had ravaged the planet and how we'd make the same mistakes again because it's human nature.

Then you have several others that are expressing certain feelings, ideas or just fun concepts or even just the execution itself.
Jet Set Radio would be art not just for the visuals and the music but for how it's gameplay passes so well the concept of freedom in movement and creative expression.

There are still good artists and good musicians today making good art that people can enjoy, despite the large amount of Miley Cyrus or post-mdoernist you can find.
Similary, there are many games made recently that can be considered good examples of art as videogames, despite the large amount of walking simulators and pretentious crap you find.

It's because of hipsters.

Pretentious hipsters don't know shit about art, that's why they can put a literal turd on a pedestal and call it deep and meaningful.

What hipsters do care about is social status, glamour and virtue signalling. Hollywood and films in general have a very glamorous culture built around them and hipsters want to be a part of that, they automatically assume it's superior to vidya culture because all of the celebs and established hipsters are in there.

Hipsters are also extremely superficial people, so whenever they see a game that superficially resembles the culture they aspire to, they'll praise it as the best thing ever, and they'll praise it on the terms of that foreign Hollywood culture, like calling a game "the Citizen Kane of gaming".

Yes but not all videogames are art (or at least primarily art). That is because artistic expression isn't a defining characteristic of video games. It is more important for a game to be fun rather than push a message or express a feeling from the author. Judging video games as if this is the main priority is like stuffing a square peg in a round hole (it would only work on a small peg or one made of shitty materials). Instead of making a video game for the express purpose of fitting the criteria why not analyze existing video games?

I don't know why, but this made me a bit sad. Maybe it's because as a kid, I found video games to be exciting, something that you can lose yourself in. You can test your reflexes or your mind. Now, they're mindless trains that take you from one noninteractive cutscene to another. My kid self would be so disappointed.


Fuck the author and his take. The focus should be on the player. Boardgames never had this or needed this, video games don't either.

I mean, I know the industry is full of wannabe hollywood writers, but from a business standpoint is it really cheaper to use shitloads of cutscenes? Maybe someone with more experience can weigh in on that.

One of the big things that hurts the industry today imo, is that the suits aren't actually all that great of business men. Their only sense of "business" is to toss as much money into marketing as possible and hope the game sells. Shrewd marketers will save gaming.

They should. But not in the "artistic expression" meaning only. Quake can be considered art, both in how it's designed and how it's played and yet it does not have a pretentious story or over done aesthetics nor does it need them.
Gracefully moving around is a form of artistic expression, having precise aim and hand-eye coordination is a form of artistic expression. Carefully dodging guards in a Thief game in the fastest possible way is an artistic expression.

Just because a bunch of pretentious hipsters conditioned most people to believe artistic expressions is "we subjectively cry out about our feelings", it doesn't mean they own the concept or that it's right at all.


Gary Gigax and Steve Jackson games begs to disagree. Someone has to make those games for you after all. The authors of Cyberpunk as well.

Marxists are taking video games to be used as a tool. Current video games are easier so more can play. Current video games are more of a passive experience with just enough interactivity that your brain engages more with it (brains absorb a lot more information when you're doing something interactive opposed to the usual method of sitting down and being told by a teacher). This is perfect for subverting the minds of its players.

Some hipster faggots getting into gaming is not a coincidence. It is by design to lower its quality, to open it up for more players but more importantly, to turn video games into a propaganda tool.

I "played" that "game" for about 1 hour, it was the worst thing in the world.

Man, I just had to double post to call you a whiny cuck.

everybody already knows marxists are whiny sucks, shut up

I wish Hollywood would hurry the fuck up and make a live-action version of Last of Us and change absolutely nothing from the plot.

Then when the movie came in with 14% on rottentomatoes, people would have to start admitting it wasn't some groundbreaking work of art.

Video game writers desperately want to be movie writers but lack the skills. Movie writers desperately want to be playwrights or authors, but lack the ability. It's talentless hacks all the way down.

You see marxist propaganda everywhere though, and you're pratronizing as fuck.
Those that matters to subvert see the propaganda and are immune to it. Those that could fall for the propaganda are too stupid to be subverted, the explosions and the cinematic overtakes their brain.

Quit your conspiracy theories and your cold war witchs hunt, some people just like games you don't and some faggots are just too lazy to make good gameplay. It's not always about politics.


Well, Assassins Creed is getting a movie, so maybe others will follow behind?

Anyone have that Gintama image about modern vidya and its shitty cutscenes?


They already made it. It's called The Last Airbender :^) and it was terrible.

Oh and why is Miyazaki not ded yet?

But that is the player not author. My point isn't that video games aren't or most video games aren't; my point is that most video games aren't primarily classified as art. One informal measure of art is the sincerity of the author which can't be quantified or proven. If someone reads a report of game trends and just put into a generic TPS maker, it isn't art. Or a sketch of a face in a wanted poster isn't artistic expression (or at least deliberate artistic expression). Anatomy is mostly medical than artistic. Similarly to how an architect needs to know the basics how to make a house before designing a fancy building.

...

money
next question
also money

but really, its so they can shove advertisements into everything and have the same people who make movies work on video games since theyre the ones that control the world anyways

Low barrier of entry.
Lowering the bar.
Grading on a curve if you will.

Casualization takes place because challenge decreases mass market appeal.
You get watered down products because the majority doesn't mind.

People who don't play games can enjoy those cinematic experience games because they don't play games.
They want the same cinematography found in movies with shot-reverse-shot dialogs and the like.
They don't want Hardcore Henry as too many of them get motion sickness.
They are too impatient to take the time to question NPCs and too stupid to figure out well designed puzzles.
What they want and will always want is a quality they can see with their eyes, the graphical.
They don't think about having well designed AI or level design.
They don't experiment with their abilities.
They want hand holding though and through as they are usherd from one scene to the next like cattle.
They want a theme-park ride.

They want games to be movies because the average movie audience is sheep that suck down popcorn and watch Michael Bay movies.
Because unlike theme-park rides movies get showered in accolades and I'm willing to bet theme-park ride designers aren't as egomaniacal as movie directors.

The answer is kikery
Vydia is a meritocratic medium, not only for the players but also for the devs, we do not hype shitty vydia because it's shit, but kikes hype shitty movies and shitty art they use as insidious subversive propaganda to brainwash people with their Marxist cuckery,

Merit however scares the kikes cus it means they won't have the playing field with the scale tipped in their favour, they can funnel all the shekkels they want into making the perfect propaganda vydia but then comes some random nobody from nowhere ad creates a massive hit like cave story, FNAF or Mine Craft that BTFOs kike propaganda

That's why they were pushing so hard to inject postmodernist art tendencies in the medium, cus if normalized, that postmodernist bulshit would have allowd them to spread concentrated bullshit propaganda further than ever before, while destroying this medium as they did with most art museums

Fortunatelly the magic of capitalism BTFOed their pathetic attempts at Postmodernising the medium, as that kind of bullshit simply does not sell.

The only thing left for them is to normalize "le interactive movies" AKA visual novels wich they can hype or sink acording to wether or not they aproove of the propagandy content of sais visual novel

TLOU is the perfect example of Jewlywooded vydia. Nice presentation and story, but mediocre mechanics copy pasted from better games hyped to hell and back because "muh degenerate homosexual missenegation propaganda"

Adolf said it best
Jews are not artist but poor imitators devoid of any originality, passion or creativity. They have no intention of creating jaw dropping, awe inspiryng beauty but an assembly line producte to sell to the masses instead, and through the cronyism and nepotism of their "art critic" buttbuddyes they hype their own bullshit trying to eleveta it as high art when in realitty they are nothing but media hyped frauds and snake oil slaes men

Because making games more like movies or tv-shows gives you less freedom to shape your experience. The less freedom to shape your experience, gives them more control over it and therefor can make you believe you're playing something good and manipulate you into experiencing and thinking along the lines of what they want.

because film achieved legitimacy years ago while bideo lames are still treated like dirt by the msm and society at large. sjcucks and film school dropouts want to be respected without actually being capable of developing a good game, so they're constantly pushing the narrative that games need to be more like film to be art.

EL OH EL

Look m80, I played Chaos Theory on release date, along with all the other (pre-Conviction) games in that series. It's a great game, one of my favorites. But I played The Dark Project for the first time last year, and it's fucking phenomenal. I'd put them on a par with each other, but for different reasons–Thief was a trailblazing piece of game-as-simluation, and Chaos Theory was pure sneaking gameplay polished to a sheen. The Dark Project has never been "outclassed" by any stealth game that followed it, not even by Thief II.
MGS is shit, though.

The first what, exactly? 3D was not exactly a new concept in 1996. It wasn't even the first 3D platformer.

Bump because I want an answer to this question. I see people (who had an N64 when they were kids) say that SM64 is some kind of revolutionary industry-changing game, and it just wasn't. The fact that it was your first 3D game doesn't mean 3D gaming didn't exist beforehand.

they're absolutely not. Most movies and tv-shows I watched in course of my 22 years of lifetime suck fucking ass, and I don't ever want video games to be like them. That's what bugs me, so many superficial, pretentious retards think movies are already better than video games, when that couldn't be further from the truth

Because thats what retards want.

This.
TLoU is just an interactive movie with a better engine than Telltale's Corridor Simulator series.

...

Pretty much this is the gist of it. CK was a movie that made use of cinema-only exclusive tricks to make itself unique. But devs are stupid and try to achieve 'CK' by treating it as a film when they should treat it as a game.
What kind of tricks are exclusive to the medium that is a videogame? Gameplay, of course. But they forget about it.
Examples of creative use of gameplay to illustrate points or make unique experiences would be MGS with the Psycho Mantis fight (that's right) or Nier's ending D where your character erases his own existence to save another character - this makes the game delete all savefiles for that character AND blacklists the name you used so that you can't start a new game with that same name).

These are just loose elements, though. There is no game cohesive enough that uses every trick in the book to make itself THE 'CK'.

The "Citizen Kane of gaming," if you want to be a pretentious fuck and call it that, was Deus Ex. It was built around co-authorship between the designers and the player, something that's only possible in video gaming. That doesn't mean it's the best game ever, or the platonic ideal of what a game should be, or even necessarily a masterpiece–and neither was Citizen Kane.
We should all move on with our lives now.

Agreed, the plots and characters of the Uncharted games are Kingdom of the Crystal skull-tier, if not slightly worse at times. Movie reviewers may not have decent standards but even they would shit all over the writing in any of these dogshit cinematic games written by hollywood dropouts.

The people making games have only a superficial understanding of what "art" means for film. Unfortunately they have even less of an understanding of it in video games. So when they try to make their games "artistic" they look towards their superficial understanding of film, which is why to them games are "art" when they're cinematic wankfests that undermine the game itself and what could have been used to create actual game art.

Making video games is a craft, not an art.

The "nerd culture" boom isn't a coincidence either since tech companies make great profit off of selling their products while serving the establishment(government and military).

I would say that it is both. Thinking of games as a craft also leads into this cancerous mentality.

But your pic related isn't about craft, it's about conveyor manufacturing. Craftsmen are proud of their work, factory owners are proud of their income.

Truly one of the few universal goods in the world. Thank you for posting some user, man was really incredible for all the shit he did.

I don't play interactive movies…

because plebs

Yeah user the entire series wasn't anything like movie games except for the game that actually focused on gameplay and trimmed most of the fucking useless cutscene fat and the abysmal story and exposition delivery. Because if there's something I like about my video games is that the game pressing a mandatory pause button and have me sit through 5 minutes of boring, flatly acted, mind numbing dialog that I could have easily inferred from events in the game or looking at cool shit I'd rather actually be playing.

Are you fucking serious
Movies and books don't have interactivity
Games are ALREADY doing things that can't be replicated in other mediums

Craft is about skill. Art is about expression.
Someone forging the Mona Lisa is a skilled painter but not necessarily passionate about painting.