Decline This is what is wrong with cRpgs today

[Lord Andre]

Cutscenes should only ever be used in situations where gameplay can't do the job.

Examples: show something from the past, from the future or from a distant location. That's it!

If the fucking player character is there, then there's no fucking point in having a cutscene because he's there. He's right there for fuck's sake.

 

[Keldryn]

Cutscenes seem to be almost a necessity for many games with high production values. Hear me out on this.

Specifically, I'm talking about games with high fidelity visuals and the camera set close to the action.

Games with a zoomed-out, overhead/isometric perspective work very well with textual descriptions of what characters are doing.

Once you bring the camera closer, you need better visual assets, which includes more fluid animations as well as all of the trivial animations that are required to make the character look alive. But at this level of fidelity, you can't just animate each character on its own -- they will also need to interact with one another. When greeting the town mayor, it's not enough for a dialog box to tell you that the mayor shakes your hand; you need to see it happen.

To get two or more characters to visually interact with one another requires precise positioning and timing so that their animations match up. If the animations aren't fluid or don't match up perfectly, then we're making our way into the uncanny valley.

"Show, don't tell" is the rule. Cutscenes allow the designers to do this. They ensure that all involved characters are in the right positions, facing the right direction, aren't going to move, aren't performing any other actions, and aren't going to be interfered with by any PC or NPCs. They also ensure that the camera is positioned so that the player can see the interaction.

Sure, you can design a game so that you don't need any of this. But that places limitations on how human communication can be portrayed. In many ways, nonverbal communication conveys more salient information than does verbal communication. Body language, how close you are standing to the other person, how much you are looking at the person you are talking to, and such all create the greater context around the words being said.

This doesn't just apply to characters engaging in dialogue with one another. A 10-second cutscene that shows your hero enter his nemesis' lair, look him in the eyes, nod with respect, and then adjust the grip on his sword can communicate a great deal to the player.

Like any tool, they can be misused.

 

[pippin]

uncanny valley

This. Making something to be "current" immediatly dates it. I'm more willing to accept the goofy antics of FMV games than any mocap stuff from David Cage, for instance. Once again, the problem isn't the tool itself, but the intention of the devs and designers. Still, the degree of realism in games will always be there, and it's directly linked to what I just said. Back when my only game choices were Gorilla, Alley Cat, Grand Prix Circuit and Snake, I used to read a book about computer games which my uncle had, and the writer was really amazed at how realistic and detailed the graphics were in Kings Quest and The Ancient Art of War, for instance. Now we say the same about Occulus Rift and other similar stuff.

 

[bloodlover]

Cutscenes are used when you want to move the story forward or can't advance the story via gameplay. There's nothing wrong with them. I'd dare say that in some cases they are the saving grace for a game (Mass Effect for ex.). It's an interactive way of telling the story and nothing more.

I think in many games, it's more about the timing then the actual length. Imo if they are well timed, they make sense and generally don't appear just when the gameplay is in full throttle, they are great. What I don't like are random cutscenes in the middle of a fight, that trigger something plot related. That shit always kills the mood.

 

[Keldryn]

This. Making something to be "current" immediatly dates it.

Yes. Virtually every game from the past that went for a "realistic" style looks horribly dated today. If you have a strong art direction, your game will likely still look good 5 or 10 years later, even if players complain that the models look a bit too low-poly and the textures a little blurry.

Cutscenes are used when you want to move the story forward or can't advance the story via gameplay. There's nothing wrong with them. I'd dare say that in some cases they are the saving grace for a game (Mass Effect for ex.). It's an interactive way of telling the story and nothing more.
I think in many games, it's more about the timing then the actual length. Imo if they are well timed, they make sense and generally don't appear just when the gameplay is in full throttle, they are great. What I don't like are random cutscenes in the middle of a fight, that trigger something plot related. That shit always kills the mood.

I do think that modern 3D games tend to need cutscenes here and there to smooth out some of the rough edges and compensate for technical limitations. They're great for transitioning into new areas, sometimes calling attention to something that might be hard to notice otherwise. They also give you a better sense of perspective and help orient you in the world. Sometimes you want your characters to act instead of just spouting dialogue and gesturing randomly. There are often short sequences that just don't come together when there are multiple characters involved and input from the player can throw off all of the animations.

As a tool to enhance gameplay, polish up the presentation, and tweak the pacing of a game, they're great. It's when the designers think that they have what it takes to direct a motion picture that we run into trouble.

 

[Perkel]

Of all games you choose TW2 as cutscenes are shit...

Complaining that TW2 has to many cutscenese is like complaining that PST has to many dialogs. Cutscenes and by essense of that lore/world/characters is centerpiece of that game. What is more important they are mostly good with dialogs better written than what usually wooden Obsidian delivers in their "player is a doll without emotion" dialogs. (though AP was excellent with that)

Now if you would choose mass shit or for example boring Two Worlds 2 cutscenes i would agree.

IMO if you don't like world/setting/characters just drop it. You won't find here good gameplay.

 

[Hitoshura]

Let's take cars, for simplicity. There's your "casual", average brands, then you have the "rich casual" segment (bmw/mercs/audis/etc), and then you got the real fine shit: the latter costs a lot, and performs a lot, and is fucking awesome. On the other hand, in videogames, it's like we get 99% shit for casual, 0.9% "mid" segment (good games), and 0.1% EPIC stuff which still has "flaws". One of the problem with games is that they can't make the latter easily, as they couldn't justify it costing a lot (say, 500£ for a game. Not a kickstarter thing, all their revenues would have to come from the £500 copies), or couldn't justify a horribly high initial funding of the project without guarantees of return.

I agree with your analysis of the status of the video game industry but I disagree about the solution to have games that would cost much more for the players. See Destinry recently releaded, it apparently cost 500M and while I didn't play it personally, apparently the game is not very good.

In another recent thread on this forum, most codexers agreed that the apex of gaming was in the early 2000. I think this moment as the final polish of the gameplay mechanics that were introduced in the '80s, especially by D&D. I think we need to start fresh again to go forward and this is not only true for RPGs.

You can take a look a the board and card game industry, they had a golden age in the last decade and while today innovation as slowed down, there's still high quality games being released on a continual basis on different topics, target audience and play mechanics. In other words, the board and card games world is great at the moment for gamers... and also non gamers that are looking to get into the hobby! There are tons of games that I can show to non gamers that they will likely enjoy, still, these games are also loved by hardcore gamers, you don't see much of that in the video game world nowadays! The turning point was the game Setters of Catan that did show other designers that it's possible to craft better mechanics than the old school designs such as Monopoly or Risk for example. The fact that Setters of Catan was a big commercial hit also did help considerably.

Sure, motion controls and now VR is trying to do something different but I don't think they are trying hard enough as they try to piggy back that technology on the old gameplay. Personally, I'm getting sick that pretty much all type of games add pointless XP systems to add "depth".

More on topic, cutscenes. I don't think they will die anytime soon. For big companies, this is a clutch, it's easier to produce the same game years after years and simply put a fresh coat of paint (i.e. different cutscenes) than producing something really new. After all, we know that the book industry is going on for quite a while now so they know that different slightly different stories will continue to sell, why bother trying to change the actual games at all and potentially have "massive uprising" that will tank their Metacritic score with more "experimental" gameplay?

 

[DalekFlay]

Sometimes I think consoles killed the video game. Never had a console myself and banned it from my home so my kids are not totally retarded. When I look around at other families it can feel like battling against the tide. Interestingly I watch my boy play some of my games. He normally follows the "Where to go" compass leader in Bioshock Infinite or Dishonored. In games that are more open ended like Skyrim he just struggles to find something to do - gets overwhelmed by the freedom. I don't think the younger generation play any RPG games at all as I would define them.

Regards the classes - I sort of agree. I still don't know what the Bard is supposed to be - I don't think anyone does. Not a fighter, sort of a thief, can play an instrument. Who has time to play an instrument in the middle of a battle with 99 Skeletons? However, don't knock my Paladin or Monk. I loved Monks in the Bards Tale series and I used many Paladins in those early RPG games. Clerics just feel under developed in most RPGs

This isn't consoles. Consoles are just dedicated tech that plays games. In the SNES era they were different, fun and exciting. The problem with ALL games today, console or not, is mass market pandering. Nerds in the 80's and 90's begged for video games to get more popular and more respect from the general public. "Sure, the average Joe might play a little Atari and Mario Brothers sometimes, but wouldn't it be awesome if they played RPGs like me? If they were really hardcore into shooters like Quake 2?" Well congratulations 90's kid, the world grabbed on to your hobby and embraced it... and that means like every other mass market piece of entertainment it's been simplified, censored and must pander to the whims of the masses. You won!

That's the problem with (publisher) games today.

 

[Untermensch]

Cutscenes are what's wrong with gaming in general.

They're a huge pit, swallowing millions of dollars and hundreds of man-hours.

 

[HiddenX]

What's wrong with many modern CRPGs (or wannabes)?

too much hand-holding
dumbed down character creation & progression (maybe even predefined progression pathes)
quest-markers
linear exploring, linear story
pseudo choices without consequences
minimal inventory
dumbed down dialog options (with icons, to recognize good, bad and funny)
gameplay not challenging enough
'you can't fail with any character' policy
dumbed down combat, no tactic needed
no hard choices
über-balancing of classes
no replay value
too much emphasis on romance and story
far too little traps, secrets, traits, puzzles, riddles, hidden walls (= things you have to use your brain for)
no more food & water rations needed
no need to repair degrading weapons
auto-leveling
auto-mapping of everything
stats don't matter so much
player twitch skills matter more than char stats and skills
less text because of voice overs
action sequences (need to press button y in x seconds)
way too much loot
...

 

[NotAGolfer]

You wanna know what's wrong with CRPGs today?
That I don't have enough time and patience to play most of them anymore.
My backlog is like thiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiis long.

 

[Keldryn]

You wanna know what's wrong with CRPGs today?
That I don't have enough time and patience to play most of them anymore.
My backlog is like thiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiis long.

I hear you. I have games that I bought over 10 years ago that I haven't had time to play yet.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

Not enough simulationism. Gamist shit everywhere.

 

[Agesilaus]

The problem is that every rpg maker thinks that they needs to create some stupid fantasy world. Crpgs should take place in human history, not fantasy; you want gods and spells, then pick an era when gods and spells were considered real by everybody. Otherwise, bugger off, nobody cares about your childish fantasy world. I'm not going to read lore about your make believe history and magic nonsense, none of it is deep or meaningful, and when I turn off the computer it is all just forgettable nonsense that has no relevance.

Creating a game that takes place in reality, or at least classical mythology, requires education and effort, and the designer doesn't get to be a special snowflake with his deep and interesting imaginary friends. How sad. The only exception to this rule is when you want to make a game that takes place in the future, but even then you should strive to have some sense of realism.

 

[pippin]

But rpgs have been more "historical" for quite a while, and that's why most of them are your boring medieval british countryside. Oddly enough, a Narnia-like setting would be more "fantasy" than your average rpg. Take Chains of Satinav, for instance. It's not an rpg, but it's a world with fairies, dream worlds, talking animals, etc. It's light hearted fantasy, but it was funnier and more enjoyable for me than any modern rpg with their "aye sire" and other stuff.
Still, I understand what you're talking about. Inquisitor had this really cool feeling going, where most of the magic stuff was directly based on christian mythology, and it was awesome, since most devs go for this new age christian-but-not-really stuff.

 

[imweasel]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiejupbcF5A

*6 hours* of cutscenes. I've complained about games shitting you through the plot in the past, but Witcher 2 was more like shitting you from one cutscene to another. Games are becoming over-saturated with cutscenes. I'd argue that it detracts from the gameplay, but it's actually worse than that. It *removes* the gameplay element. You spend more time watching a episode of 'Game of Thrones' than actually playing a game.

Maybe you should try pressing this "magical button" instead of making a retarded thread on the codex.

Just Sayin'

 

[pippin]

Devs already thought of that and made unskippable cutscenes

 

[TheGreatOne]

Cutscenes are what's wrong with gaming in general.

They're a huge pit, swallowing millions of dollars and hundreds of man-hours.

The most retarded thing about them is that one of the biggest technical challenges and most expensive things to produce, human (e)motion&reactions, are what's cheap and easy to do in movies, where as explosions and big action scenes are cheap to produce in video games (and can be copy pasted a million times for no extra cost) where as those are the most expensive part in making a movie. If you have to hire a real actor for motion capture to make a video game character act naturally, you might as well go back to making FMV games.

Though there are some neat cutscenes in gaming. Silent Hill 2 and 3 in general have very well "directed" scenes and Warcraft 3's human ending is epic. Blizzard in general has a knack for making cinematics, might have something to do with the fact that they only have to produce 2 minutes of content every 2 years. Though technically not cutscenes, System Shock 1, Deus Ex and Tekken 2/3/5 had some really great and memorable intros.

 

[Drakron]

Ha ha ha ha ... you niggers serious?

Cutscenes are cheap, that why they are abused ... mocap is just one example of how technology advanced to the point they became so easy and cheap to produce and why they are abused because they can.

Real technological advanced is more expensive, this is why everyone is using off-the-shelf engines like Unity because it lowers costs, if you morons think we are in 1993 when Jurassic Park come out or 2001 with Spirits With ... serious, look at Spirits Within that costed 137 millions and now looks like a freaking Direct to Video movie, WC IV? 12 millions back in 96.

Licensing is the problem, almost NOBODY creates anything ... just licenses and IKEA the game ... cutscenes arent the problem, they only are when we have wannabe Hollywood Directors that want to make movies instead of games like Cage, this is a NON-ISSUE, games didnt became "bad" because cutscenes, this is pretending like we didnt had shit games in the 90's.

 

[NotAGolfer]

Back in the day pretty drawn or fake realistic pictures and later awesome cutscenes were the sugar on top of the game, some sort of reward you felt great to have unlocked and marveled at.
So designers thought, hey, people love that shit, let's make more of it.
And so they did, til half the game consisted of pretty movie scenes.
Shit, they said, what have we done? This ain't no game no more!
So to remedy their retarded move and bring back interactivity to games they invented QTEs.
























...
Game designers are retards.

 

[Bio Force Ape]

Maybe you should read books instead? Seriously tough, cutscenes are just a tool.It's just that rpg makers are really bad at crafting cutscenes...

"You don't enjoy passively sitting back and watching a story unfold while you have zero control over where it's going? Maybe try reading books instead, because you obviously don't like RPGs."

 

[mondblut]

Not enough simulationism. Narrativist shit everywhere.

Fixed

 

[Abelian]

Not enough mondblutianism. Narrativist shit everywhere.

Fixed

Ditto

 

[octavius]

Devs already thought of that and made unskippable cutscenes

Then uninstall.exe is the only choice.

 

[shihonage]

Cutscenes are one of the countless symptoms of the real problem - gradual removal of meaningful player agency.

Other symptoms of this disease are:

• Unskippable tutorial/starting areas, press C to crouch, treat you like a child, etc
  
• Simplified level design/"press forward to progress"
  
• Dialogue which does not let you say anything remotely close to what you WANT to say
• Singular solutions to problems
• Giving meaningless choices "without consequences", be it in char. creation screen or gameworld itself. Often superficially masked by "walking simulator/autistic hoarder" aspects of the game, which are enough to fool most players
  
• Routine violation of established/assumed rules, i.e. NPCs with "plot armor", inability to do a common-sense action at a crucial point, selective exclusion of an interactive object from a mode of interaction available to other objects, characters equipping different weapons after cutscene or dialogue window stops

The reasons for this are quite simple. The advancements in graphics have far surpassed the art and science of solid RPG design. There are tools to fast-track creation of forests and landscapes, but not many have worked out how to maintain choice&consequence scripting without getting lost very quickly.

Not many have worked out how to have an elegant world, where you don't have to regression-test ALL, and in return, limit many, of player's potential actions, because the design will stretch itself properly to accomodate the unforeseen.

Not many have worked out how to have several gameplay systems intersect without having to pre-babysit every such intersection.

Because, ever since AOL and XBOX and until very recently, there's been no financial incentive in making a thinking man's game.

Because thinking people are usually in the minority, surrounded by a world of mediocre minds locked in flock behavior, those who are incapable of thinking beyond what immediately surrounds them. Their peasantly desires are well-fed; they do not imagine and strive for more. Unrealized near-humans, cocooned in the comforting glow of the "epic" Mass Effect logo rotating on their "immersive" big screen TV.