So after I beat Metal Gear Solid 4, I've been thinking and mulling over this topic for a while. Is the cutscene still the best way to tell a tightly woven narrative in games? But what about the interactivity, isn't this technically a setback for the medium? And what about game like Resident Evil 4 and God of War, that have Dragon Lair style interactive cutscenes?
Well, after weighing the two types of storytelling in games;
1. Scripted
2. Emergent
I think I'd have to say that yes, MGS4 may not be the "best" example (aka xenosaga-esque length and confusion worthy cutscenes), but cutscenes are still the best way to tell a tightly woven narrative in games because there is nothing left to the hand of the player, everything is controlled by the designer and storyteller, who want you to see the story from their point of view. In this case, I sometimes feel that interactive cutscenes are inapporpriate as what this does is:
Force the player into one state (passive viewing of the cutscene), but then tries to interject interactivity suddenly, a rude awakening almost. If people in theatres were asked to do something like this, I'm sure the popular reaction would be very different. It's mixing two different mediums, but in a way that is unnatural. I feel that cutscenes in RE4 and games like Asian Dynamite do this poorly sometimes, even MGS4, although the alternative camera angle and flashback option is interesting.
However, if the cutscenes and interactivity are worked well together though, the outcome is amazing, much like the final boss fight in MGS4, no spoilers here, but if you've played it, it's mostly cutscene, but it feels like the player is controlling the action at all times. The key here I think is that:
The start and end of the cutscenes are controlled directly by the player. The very short length is also instrumental in this amazing demostration of illusionary player control.
Emergent narrative may catch up someday, but I think that even with emergent storytelling, most of it is dependent on the rules and system of the game that it is limited to. Most of these happen within MMORPGS or other online based games, which is a great example of open world design with an extremely limited (kill, quest, chat, etc) system, no matter how complex it seems, they filter down to a few base systems with highly restricted actions. And when mechanics and systems get completely opened up, like Second Life, well, sure, there is emergent narrative, but is it a game anymore?
And now, an outline of some brief thoughts on MGS4, hit the jump for the full article:
Top 5 Things I like about MGS4:
1. Possibly the strongest final boss fight in any game I've ever played.
2. The versatility of gameplay.
3. Core narrative and character design conveyed through game mechanics.
4. Drebin's shop system.
5. Production values.
Top 5 things I hate about MGS4:
1. Long and convoluted cutscenes.
2. Overattention to minute details.
3. Drebin's Shop and the case of the massive arsenal.
4. Install times between chapters.
5. Metal Gear Online.
Full thoughts on MGS4:
Top 5 Things I like about MGS4:
1. Possibly the strongest final boss fight in any game I've ever played. The fight really conveyed the feeling that this was the last chapter i n the book of Solid Snake, and it was done with some extremely clever interactive cutscene integration with the gameplay. I really felt satisfied with what I was doing as the player during and after the fight, and I think that is the most important aspect. As a sidenote, the second to last boss also gave me the willies during the battle.
2. The versatility of gameplay. Always a norm in the series, The Metal Gear Solid franchise is designed to be a stealth shooter, but it doesn't punish players for playing it with their own, more preferred run and gun styles. It does however, reward players for playing the game like it was designer intended. This is the way that games should be designed, don't punish players for playing the game in a way may be preferable to them over your own design, but do reward them for doing so. It's a simple equation that will also add extra replay value, I myself went through the game 2 times and am on my third playthrough.
3. Core narrative and character design conveyed through game mechanics. I have to admit, I hate the fact that the great hero Solid Snake is now an aged relic of the past, without the incredible physical badassery that he stood for. However, the way that the game is played now, the player comes to realize that the other side of Snake, his sheer willpower and unwavering resolve, and at least to me, that's even more impressive.
4. Drebin's shop system. Accessible anywhere, Drebin's automatic feed of points earned from Snake snagging downed foes weapons just adds to the versatility of the game, You can pick up ammo for your weapons at anytime, even during boss fights, there's no more of the "Oh No! I forgot to stock up on ammo for this weapon, or I don't have the right weapon, and now I'm totally screwed!" moments. Players also have the versatility to earn points by taking foes weapons or just being super sneaky and collecting a hefty bonus at the end of the stage.
5. Production values. I really need to just say...wow. Just wow. I hate the long cutscenes in the game, but they would have become completely unbearable if not for the amazing production values in each and every one of them. Because these are scripted events, Kojima and co. really had the opportunity to tighten up each cutscene to be on par with Hollywood blockbusters. If cutscenes must stay, each game should strive to be better and better, starting with MGS4. Just to point out, I thought the Raiden-Vamp fight and Snake-Microwave ordeal were done incredibly well, you wanted to look at both screens at the same time, like you were actually there in person.
Top 5 things I hate about MGS4:
1. Long and convoluted cutscenes. While great production values really saves MGS4 here (barely), I have to say...there is something about making your cutscene concise and long enough to tell your point without getting into the realm of boredom. MGS4, and cutscenes in games generally are not really good about this. Surprisingly, a game that has cutscenes that add just enough flavor and are of what I think the right length is the Subspace Emissary Mode cutscenes from Super Smash Brothers Brawl.
2. Overattention to minute details. For example, sure, it's "realistic" that if Snake opens a garbage bin and your foes are downwind they'll smell it and come looking for you, but really, it's just one more mechanic tacked onto a long long list of mechanics that add surprise and frustration to the game, not more fun. Point in case, while you were playing through MGS4, did you really ever stop and look at the wind direction gauge in the upper right hand corner? Or how about the Vamp fight? Did you have to stop and look in the instruction booklet/faq for that one CQC maneuver you never used? Think about how many people had to do that. Infra-Red Solid Eye was the one mechanic I think worked out with this formula though, especially in the snowy final areas. I think everyone can think about games that suffer from this.
3. Drebin's Shop and the case of the massive arsenal. Yes, it is absoultely great that you can access Drebin's shop from everywhere, but at the same time, it completely destroys a core of the classic MGS, nay, action genre gameplay. Think about if you could stop at anytime to buy a tool or ammo for a gun you needed in games like Tomb Raider or Megaman, instead of relying on the rest of the equipment in your arsenal. Case in point, even by the end of the first chapter, Snake has quite the massive collection of artillery, but most of these guns will not even get a cursory glance since there are guns that are just flat-out better than others. No-one will choose to use the other ones if they basically have access to unlimited ammo whenever, even during a boss fight. World of Warcraft does this in essence to other games like Final Fantasy XI. Keep your player options limited in scope and balance the crap out of them so that all options are viable, don't make a billion options and then make others much more useful and overpowered.
4. Install times between chapters. I'm not sure what happened here, could we not have a full install option so we wouldn't need to spend 3+ minutes installing a chapter everytime we want to go back and show our friends a cool cutscene or an amazing weapon? I understand that the full install probably is huge, but just think about even installer design back in the Baldur's Gate and Fallout days. They were options, and that is the key word. Many people may not have much space on their systems, and it is a nice break when you are actually playing the game for the first time, but it is supremely frustrating when we do want to chapter hop for any reason. Perhaps this is one of those technical things that Kojima was frustrated about with the PS3 when he said it wasn't "strong enough".
5. Metal Gear Online. First off, we won't even get into the Konami ID, PSN ID, etc. etc. registration system. But really, after MGS3 Subsistence, you'd think there would be some improvement in the:
1. Making the online battle system more flexible, MGS was built to be a 1P game at it's core.
2. Making match-making for even level players more well...even.
3. See 1. Alot.
It is nice to see that a lot of detail has been put in to make a wide variety of multiplayer match types and well designed levels (manapault anyone?), but...match types with bad game design still make for a bad match. The key to a good game designer is to elicit feedback from the most important group to you, the players, and to take the good ideas and bad ideas and implement what you think is the best. That being said, I feel Kojima really didn't do any of this, or even much user testing. The trend these days is: Short, well-scripted game (CoD4) and endless multiplayer. In the case of MGS4, it's Short, well-scripted game, horrible multiplayer. I really wanted to love MGO, but in the end, it fell well short of the 1P game.
If you have any comments, feel free to post, I would love to hear some feedback on anything here. That being said, I think I write too much, so if you slogged through that, you sir, are a champ.
Comments (2)
Monique: Calculon, a fight scene has broken out at the special effects warehouse. Come quickly before a fiery explosion chases someone down a hallway.
Calculon: I have no choice but to-
Announcer: If you want Calculon to race to the laser gun battle in his hover-Ferarri, press 1. If you want Calculon to double-check his paperwork, press 2. Enter now.
Chair: You have pressed 2.
Fry: No, I didn't!
Chair: I'm almost positive you did.
I completely agree with you on this. I've found that most people harbor an unnaturally strong disdain for "chose your own adventure" stories. (Note: NEVER write a story from the 2nd person point of view)
In the context of a video game, certain things should always be kept OUT of the player's control in order to maintain necessary literary techniques to keep the story interesting.
Could you imagine what would happen if you shouted "Don't go in there!" at a horror movie and the character actually listened to you? Most boring story EVER.
But I suspect that's a reason why most games have vast differences between story scenes and gameplay. In older games, the story was relegated to a single cut scene after the final boss--it was the motivation for playing the game.
Posted by Jake | July 9, 2008 12:37 AM
Posted on July 9, 2008 00:37
the microwave and the raiden-vamp battle were different times. the raiden-vamp battle was with the ray gun and the suicide gekkos....just pointing out.
Posted by mike miller | October 24, 2008 2:55 PM
Posted on October 24, 2008 14:55