16th November 2004, 2:03 PM
Quote:Maybe not straight as it is, but it'd make a fine book if it was expanded on some.
The story isn't that interesting.
Quote:But my main statement was that both are better when adapted and not taken straight... maybe games can be more directly closer to movies most of the time, but if you look at some genres you see strong influences by books as well.
Of course, as I've already stated Kojima himself was heavily influenced by the books of Kobo Abe (in particular the novel "Kangaroo Notebook"). Anything, from books, movies, nature, and of course life itself can heavily influence any artistic venture. That wasn't my point. My point was that movies can actually be put into games and blended with the gameplay in a way that books cannot.
Quote:For something like MGS obviously the movie influence is very strong, and maybe there aren't games quite as strongly tied to books, but I've mentioned a few that are somewhat close and anyway overall MGS probably is not the future of gaming. Too non-interactive.
You've obviously never played any of the MGS games for very long, or at the very least failed to understand them. Even if you skipped all of the cut scenes in MGS2, for example, the most significant themes and ideas that Hideo Kojima wanted to get across are realized. To explain any further would completely spoil the game for you, but believe me when I say that the game is not just in the cinemas. This is not Xenosaga, where the cinemas were made in a way that the entire story could be understood even if there was no gameplay. No, the gameplay of MGS2 is vital to the story. The same goes for MGS1, but not as much as MGS2.
Quote:They are different, but about equal in the effectiveness of doing what they set out to do. Sam & Max tries to be a comic book-inspired game. It succeeds brilliantly. Indy Fate tries to be like a new Indy movie. Again, it succeeds brilliantly. And Grim Fandango tries to be film noir. I guess the difference there is that the thing Grim is trying to be is a more complex thing, but that should not take much away from the effectiveness of the other games at succeeding at doing what they set out to do...
Film noir is not more complex than comic books or serial adventure movies. It's a great mistake to believe that. Those are just genres, neither being inherintly more complex than the other. Grim Fandango isn't successful because it tries to do film noir (which it only partially does, it's really not a whole lot like the genre as you may believe), it's successful because it blends conventions from video games and movies exceedingly well and presents its story like no other pc adventure game I've played. I'm not going to get into specific artistic and technical details. You either see that or you don't. That's okay that you don't care for these sorts of things. Like I said, Once Upon A Time In The West vs. Tombstone.
Quote:It seemed like you were trying to say that Grim was head and shoulders above the rest and that the other LA adventure games were irrelevant and when I tried to mention them you dismissively said that Grim was way better. You seem to retreat a bit from that in this post, which is good... I was just trying to make the point that if you talk about how well Grim does things you have to talk about LA's style in general because of how consistent it is, despite differences between games.
I never retreated from anything, I merely stated my opinion more clearly for you, so it was your own assumptions that retreated. On a gameplay level I prefer other adventure games, but on an artistic level (not just in terms of visuals, but on a literary level as well) it is indeed head and shoulders above the rest. It is a shining example of how to tell a story in a video game.
Quote:First, we are not talking about high literature. We are talking about fantasy literature. Now, I love to read fantasy books, but I'll certainly admit that they generally don't try to be great literature. And I'd say that BG is a perfectly good fantasy work, the equal of most of the books in that class. I will also say that expectations for the majority of these games to go far beyond that is a false hope because in the majority people aren't as intrested in that. Simple stories are popular because not everyone appreciates complexity. This is why Planescape: Torment failed relative to Baldur's Gate: BG is comfortable for fantasy fans. It's about what you'd expect from fantasy. Torment is not. It does more, and tries very deliberately to be different. And for this, it did not sell anywhere nearly as well at retail and did not get even a spiritual successor.
Fantasy literature can be "high" literature. Good literature is good literature, simple as that. You can enjoy something without it being exceptionally good. Perhaps that is what you're insecure of. There's nothing wrong with you enjoying your fantasy books, after all everything is subjective, right? But there are certain standards that art is generally judged by. It's not perfect, but it is the best way of somewhat objectively providing what is great and what is not.
Quote:See my previous response. Then... what is this ideal that games should try to match? Where do things so far outclass them? It is not among many of the direct influences from other media formats into games, that's for sure -- comic book games aren't hugely less intelligent than the comic books overall
That is actually not true. It's not impossible, but I've yet to see a "comic book game" with the level of quality and intelligence as "Watchmen" or "Sandman".
Quote:, action-movie games the same, general fantasy games too... sci-fi? Games may be behind for hard sci-fi, but there are some pretty good sci-fi titles out there. But maybe hard sci-fi is something games should explore more...
I guess where the difference is is that games have less of the top layer -- the ones that do make you think more. There are some movies and books like that, but there are fewer games. However, you are making sweeping statements about games being behind that aren't really accurate when you look at most of the material that is popular in the movie or book worlds and that games would be taking as their influences.
Still. Could games use more games that go beyond? We have some, but not as large a percent as in other media formats that must be admitted... so yes, they should. But that won't happen until those games start selling well, and that is often just not really the case! At best the ones I can think that come even close of sell decently; often it is worse. (see Torment, primarially, though stuff like The Longest Journey would also qualify... I'd mention Ico, but I have no idea how that sold...)
I'm not suggesting that all games should become Citizen Kane. No, we need our simple and entertaining stories. I'm talking about method and execution. Most games do not execute their stories very well, and that is why they are not taken seriously by the mainstream. It may take a bunch more ICOs and MGS2s in order for gaming to gain that respect, but not everything has to be complex. The stories just need to be told well, and currently very few of them do that.
And ICO sold pretty poorly, even though it got major critical acclaim and just about everyone who actually played it for a certain amount of time fell in love with it.
Quote:MGS2? They caught people on the action and the predecessors which were different, so that's a special case. And people disliked it, as you have said, and didn't understand.
They didn't understand it because they refused to believe that games can be as strong pieces of art and story as the best movies and books. But MGS2 is a special case since its goal was to get a certain reaction out of gamers, most of whom were flat-out baffled and/or offended by it. But saying any more would spoil it for you...
Quote:*shrugs indifferently*
If you like movies you owe it to yourself to see Once Upon A Time In The West.
Quote: can't understand anything wrong with telling your story in the majority thorough conversation.
You see, that's my point. You just don't understand. You don't understand what makes a good book or a good movie, and I don't fault you for that. It's when you act like you do know what you're talking about that I have a problem with.
Quote:It's a very standard way of storytelling in movies and books, so of course it should translate over to games! This complaint of yours is quite mystifying to me... BG tells its story just as well as anything in the category of books that it's trying to copy. Is that the most intelligent kind of books? As I have said, no. But I at least enjoy reading them, so playing a game that acts out the same way is great. It's almost as close as you can get to D&D in a game... or at least it was when it came out. BGII of course eclipsed BGI is almost every single way.
No books tell stories completely through lines of dialogue. If it were all just raw dialogue you would have nothing. In movies you can get away with that because the visuals do the narrating. It would not work if it were just two people statically standing in front of each other and exchanging dialogue.