@blaznwiipspman1: It is, no doubt. Is like a feedback loop, it makes them money so they keep betting on it but as budgets become bigger and bigger so are the risks, so they are extremely conservative with what they put out.
That's quite similar to what Miyamoto said about RPGs back in the days. For example, this 1992 interview:
The Future of RPGs – 1992 Developer Interviews
—I guess when we say “RPG”, in reality there are many different types.
Miyamoto: That’s why when I’m asked what direction RPGs as a whole are headed in, I feel like I can only respond “I don’t know.” There’s games, for example, like Final Fantasy, which emphasize presentation and graphics… which are clearly different from what Dragon Quest and Zelda are doing. If you ask me about specific individual cases, I might be able to give some kind of an answer.
It’s not at all certain that the interactive cinematic approach of Final Fantasy, which is currently the most common style for RPGs today, will continue indefinitely. Something new may emerge with time. And if we look at games like Zelda, the question there is how long will users continue to enjoy this gameplay of directly controlling your own character. For the players who have grown up with action games, though, I expect they’ll continue to enjoy that kind of action gameplay for a long while yet. Ultimately, whether you’re looking at Final Fantasy or Dragon Quest, I don’t think you can talk about these games as if there’s a single process. And that’s also why I sense a danger in trying to fix a definition to the term RPG.
—The importance of the story is often highlighted when talking about RPGs, but what are your thoughts regarding the connection between the story and the gameplay?
Miyamoto: They probably can’t be thought of entirely separately. I think one can only speak that way when the gameplay already exists, to which I want to say, ok—but try creating a new gameplay system from scratch. Because Dragon Quest already has a well-established system, I suppose there’s a higher weight put on the story. It’s why Dragon Quest leans heavily on the writerly talents of Yuji Horii. For me, I don’t place a lot of emphasis on those things in my game design endeavors, so my efforts always begin from the gameplay system side, trying to create something that could support and bear the weight of an interesting story.
In video games, I think the important thing is that it feels good when you’re playing it. And that quality is not determined by the story, but by the controls, the sound, and the rhythm and pacing. No matter how good your story is, it won’t make a difference there. There is such a thing as “compatibility” between the story and gameplay, though. I do think it’s important to create a good match there. And in a game, while the story might advance via multiple threads and storylines, your experience as the player, of course, is linear and singular: a good story can smooth over that discrepancy and make it all feel natural.
Interestingly, Miyamoto was already using the term "cinematic" to describe Final Fantasy back in 1992... five years before FFVII. He was clearly talking about FFIV and FFV, which would not be considered cinematic today, but were quite "cinematic" by 16-bit standards.
@jaydan: it's not bait, it was miyamotos thoughts on movie games. You have to understand that Miyamoto san is very polite and this is doubly true because he's Japanese. If you read between the lines, at what he's really saying, you can tell his thoughts.
"Movie games are trash, and hell will freeze over before I make a movie game"
--Miyamoto, 2023
Even hardwenzen recognizes this fact, that miyamoto is trashing the cows and Playstation.
@hardwenzen: Well be awaiting those troll tears when Tears of the Kingdom releases on the greatest system of all time. Until then, we be playing the greatest FPS ever known to man and one of the greatest games ever made. Get back to your Switch looking game Monster Hunter Rise.
@hardwenzen: Well be awaiting those troll tears when Tears of the Kingdom releases on the greatest system of all time. Until then, we be playing the greatest FPS ever known to man and one of the greatest games ever made. Get back to your Switch looking game Monster Hunter Rise.
Gameplay>presentation+graphics. All of this while they aren't even capable of producing simple animations.
@hardwenzen: Nintendo didn’t make those animations. That’s a third party company. Troll harder mate, your embarrassing yourself.
Its a first party game.🤭When it sells a ton, you praise nintendo because of this franchise. When they releasing something laughable, you try your hardest to distance nintendo from them.🤭Accept it, Nintendo is 10-15 behind its competition. It is what it is.
@hardwenzen: lol your butt hurt continues. Just because the legend himself threw shade. When a man of Miyamotos stature speaks, people listen.
Sony and Playstation are embarrassing gamers and trying to drag us down unto movie hell.
MS and Nintendo still putting up the good fight though.
Nobody listens to Nintendo. Its fans left, and got themselves an xbox to play Elden Ring, and the millions of children and casuals that own it, don't even know who Miyamoto is.
@hardwenzen: uhh plenty of people respect the man. He's the most known game developer out there, he's a giant. Sadly you might be right that most people don't know him today.
Nobody left Nintendo, many of us love the system. I have it as my secondary, and it's honestly a fantastic console. I've put almost 12 hours and nearly half way through Metroid prime. It's still one of the greatest games of all time.
@hardwenzen: uhh plenty of people respect the man. He's the most known game developer out there, he's a giant. Sadly you might be right that most people don't know him today.
Nobody left Nintendo, many of us love the system. I have it as my secondary, and it's honestly a fantastic console. I've put almost 12 hours and nearly half way through Metroid prime. It's still one of the greatest games of all time.
How would you know that? You're an nft investor that i warned in 2021 that by early 2023, that thing will be remembered as a meme.
@Jag85: this is a very interesting article, and it's clear that he's stuck to his vision for his life. He sees gameplay as first and foremost. Every Nintendo system has been guided by this principle too, so it's crazy to see the influence Miyamoto has over Nintendo.
@blaznwiipspman1: Troll claims no one listens to Nintendo while replying in a thread about hundreds of articles, sites, and gamers listening to an interview. 🤦♀️
@Jag85: this is a very interesting article, and it's clear that he's stuck to his vision for his life. He sees gameplay as first and foremost. Every Nintendo system has been guided by this principle too, so it's crazy to see the influence Miyamoto has over Nintendo.
Ironically, Miyamoto was himself a pioneer of video game storytelling. The original arcade Donkey Kong was the first video game to develop a story through cutscenes. That laid the foundation for all the cutscene-driven video game stories around to this day. But Donkey Kong was still overall a gameplay-driven experience, a game design philosophy which Miyamoto and Nintendo have maintained to this day.
Miyamoto has never been against good storytelling or cinematic games. This thread was derailed from the start.
His personal philosophy has always been gameplay first. He thinks of the gameplay, mechanics, etc., and the puts a story to that game.
I also don't get the hate for "movie" games. I found God of War (one of my favourite franchises) to be amazing, and though I was weary of the move to an Uncharted level of dialog etc., it's wonderfully done. Do I want that in a Zelda game? Probably not.
Miyamoto has never been against good storytelling or cinematic games. This thread was derailed from the start.
His personal philosophy has always been gameplay first. He thinks of the gameplay, mechanics, etc., and the puts a story to that game.
Taking what Miyamoto says out of context makes for a good SW thread though, I guess.
@sonic_spark said:
I also don't get the hate for "movie" games. I found God of War (one of my favourite franchises) to be amazing, and though I was weary of the move to an Uncharted level of dialog etc., it's wonderfully done. Do I want that in a Zelda game? Probably not.
It sounds like you do get the hate for "movie" games. The bolded shows that you prefer gameplay over long cinematics and dialogues. Should in other words be easy for you to see how that stuff annoys people.
Well good on Miyamoto and I agree, gameplay should come first because these are GAMES after all. I like what John Carmack said years ago "story in video games is like a porn movie. Its expected to be there but its not important".
You can have great stories in video games absolutely, but if you dont make the gameplay first and foremost be fun, then im not going to give a shit.
Well good on Miyamoto and I agree, gameplay should come first because these are GAMES after all. I like what John Carmack said years ago "story in video games is like a porn movie. Its expected to be there but its not important".
You can have great stories in video games absolutely, but if you dont make the gameplay first and foremost be fun, then im not going to give a shit.
John Carmack is a Miyamoto fan, so makes sense he'd have a similar game design philosophy. To most old-school industry veterans, gameplay always came first.
Nothing proves this point more than Skyward Sword vs. BotW. Skyward Sword is pretty fun, sure, but the constant interruptions in the gameplay from lengthy cinematics were really infuriating to say the least. It was a prime example of how a story can really get in the way of a gaming experience.
BotW, on the other hand, mostly did away with a linear story, and in doing so did away with all the roadblocks and needless interruptions that come with it. The focus on exploration and freewheeling gameplay was what that franchise desperately needed after SS.
The same could be said in regards to the Souls games.
Just like our local sheep and graphics, you pretend to dislike what you can't get. Nintendo has no idea what motion capture is. Imagine them trying to create a game with such incredible presentation, it rivals cinema.
Exactly the same thing applies to story. They have been regurgitating the same childish "save the princess" for 30 years, and have the audacity of talking shit about well written stories, something that immerse you into the cast? gtfo.
Just like our local sheep and graphics, you pretend to dislike what you can't get. Nintendo has no idea what motion capture is. Imagine them trying to create a game with such incredible presentation, it rivals cinema.
Exactly the same thing applies to story. They have been regurgitating the same childish "save the princess" for 30 years, and have the audacity of talking shit about well written stories, something that immerse you into the cast? gtfo.
Are videogames just suppose to aspire to cinema?
In presentation? Why not? All that it does is show us what wasn't possible not too long ago. Its not like those insanely well presented titles such as TLOU2 don't have any gameplay. In fact, its gameplay is better than the majority of third person shooters.
Just like our local sheep and graphics, you pretend to dislike what you can't get. Nintendo has no idea what motion capture is. Imagine them trying to create a game with such incredible presentation, it rivals cinema.
Exactly the same thing applies to story. They have been regurgitating the same childish "save the princess" for 30 years, and have the audacity of talking shit about well written stories, something that immerse you into the cast? gtfo.
Are videogames just suppose to aspire to cinema?
In presentation? Why not? All that it does is show us what wasn't possible not too long ago. Its not like those insanely well presented titles such as TLOU2 don't have any gameplay. In fact, its gameplay is better than the majority of third person shooters.
Really, really low bar, and I still don't really agree. Naughty Dog couldn't even get the shoulder swapping right, despite sticking the camera really close to the characters' shoulders. Among best third person shooters with terrible visibility when moving around right corners unless aiming the gun? I think not.
Just like our local sheep and graphics, you pretend to dislike what you can't get. Nintendo has no idea what motion capture is. Imagine them trying to create a game with such incredible presentation, it rivals cinema.
Exactly the same thing applies to story. They have been regurgitating the same childish "save the princess" for 30 years, and have the audacity of talking shit about well written stories, something that immerse you into the cast? gtfo.
Are videogames just suppose to aspire to cinema?
In presentation? Why not? All that it does is show us what wasn't possible not too long ago. Its not like those insanely well presented titles such as TLOU2 don't have any gameplay. In fact, its gameplay is better than the majority of third person shooters.
Really, really low bar, and I still don't really agree. Naughty Dog couldn't even get the shoulder swapping right, despite sticking the camera really close to the characters' shoulders. Best third person shooter with terrible visibility when moving around right corners unless aiming the gun? I think not.
I've heard this criticism before. What is it with you wanting the shoulder swap so bad? If the game had you aim with the left shoulder, that would sux, but you have your standard position, and TLOU2 is not a tactical third person game, its not important to have.
Just like our local sheep and graphics, you pretend to dislike what you can't get. Nintendo has no idea what motion capture is. Imagine them trying to create a game with such incredible presentation, it rivals cinema.
Exactly the same thing applies to story. They have been regurgitating the same childish "save the princess" for 30 years, and have the audacity of talking shit about well written stories, something that immerse you into the cast? gtfo.
Are videogames just suppose to aspire to cinema?
In presentation? Why not? All that it does is show us what wasn't possible not too long ago. Its not like those insanely well presented titles such as TLOU2 don't have any gameplay. In fact, its gameplay is better than the majority of third person shooters.
Really, really low bar, and I still don't really agree. Naughty Dog couldn't even get the shoulder swapping right, despite sticking the camera really close to the characters' shoulders. Best third person shooter with terrible visibility when moving around right corners unless aiming the gun? I think not.
I've heard this criticism before. What it us with you wanting the shoulder swap so bad? If the game had you aim with the left shoulder, that would sux, but you have your standard position, and TLOU2 is not a tactical third person game, its not important to have.
It's a stealth action shooter. Extremely important to have in all those close quarters, because you have to know where your threats are.
Just like our local sheep and graphics, you pretend to dislike what you can't get. Nintendo has no idea what motion capture is. Imagine them trying to create a game with such incredible presentation, it rivals cinema.
Exactly the same thing applies to story. They have been regurgitating the same childish "save the princess" for 30 years, and have the audacity of talking shit about well written stories, something that immerse you into the cast? gtfo.
Are videogames just suppose to aspire to cinema?
In presentation? Why not? All that it does is show us what wasn't possible not too long ago. Its not like those insanely well presented titles such as TLOU2 don't have any gameplay. In fact, its gameplay is better than the majority of third person shooters.
Sure, it can. Video games and cinema share some similarities. But they are fundamentally different mediums of art and entertainment. Video games have their own unique qualities and strengths such as interactivity, player agency and immersion. And that's where Nintendo and a lot games gravitate towards. Sony is more cinematic which make sense as they make movies as well. I'm happy both exist.
In presentation? Why not? All that it does is show us what wasn't possible not too long ago. Its not like those insanely well presented titles such as TLOU2 don't have any gameplay. In fact, its gameplay is better than the majority of third person shooters.
Really, really low bar, and I still don't really agree. Naughty Dog couldn't even get the shoulder swapping right, despite sticking the camera really close to the characters' shoulders. Best third person shooter with terrible visibility when moving around right corners unless aiming the gun? I think not.
I've heard this criticism before. What it us with you wanting the shoulder swap so bad? If the game had you aim with the left shoulder, that would sux, but you have your standard position, and TLOU2 is not a tactical third person game, its not important to have.
It's a stealth action shooter. Extremely important to have in all those close quarters, because you have to know where your threats are.
Better to have it than not? Yes. Important? Absolutely not. I played my first playthrough on the highest difficulty available on day one. Never have i asked myself why can't i shoulder swap.
This shoulder swapping is important for games where you can corner peek and one shot kill a bunch of mobs by doing so. This is not a game like that.
Just like our local sheep and graphics, you pretend to dislike what you can't get. Nintendo has no idea what motion capture is. Imagine them trying to create a game with such incredible presentation, it rivals cinema.
Exactly the same thing applies to story. They have been regurgitating the same childish "save the princess" for 30 years, and have the audacity of talking shit about well written stories, something that immerse you into the cast? gtfo.
Are videogames just suppose to aspire to cinema?
In presentation? Why not? All that it does is show us what wasn't possible not too long ago. Its not like those insanely well presented titles such as TLOU2 don't have any gameplay. In fact, its gameplay is better than the majority of third person shooters.
Sure, it can. Video games and cinema share some similarities. But they are fundamentally different mediums of art and entertainment. Video games have their own unique qualities and strengths such as interactivity, player agency and immersion. And that's where Nintendo and a lot games gravitate towards. Sony is more cinematic which make sense as they make movies as well. I'm happy both exist.
Both exist, but not on a Nintendo system, and that's a problem. On Sony systems, you get both, the gameplay focused titles from the likes of Fromsoft, and your high presentation Sony exclusives. Same can't be said about what's on offer from Nintendo, be it third or first party titles.
Really, really low bar, and I still don't really agree. Naughty Dog couldn't even get the shoulder swapping right, despite sticking the camera really close to the characters' shoulders. Best third person shooter with terrible visibility when moving around right corners unless aiming the gun? I think not.
I've heard this criticism before. What it us with you wanting the shoulder swap so bad? If the game had you aim with the left shoulder, that would sux, but you have your standard position, and TLOU2 is not a tactical third person game, its not important to have.
It's a stealth action shooter. Extremely important to have in all those close quarters, because you have to know where your threats are.
Better to have it than not? Yes. Important? Absolutely not. I played my first playthrough on the highest difficulty available on day one. Never have i asked myself why can't i shoulder swap.
This shoulder swapping is important for games where you can corner peek and one shot kill a bunch of mobs by doing so. This is not a game like that.
You're out of your mind.
That's some absolute garbage visibility. Imagine an enemy is walking just outside of the left part of a frame. One button press would have allowed the player to see them. Instead you are forced to zoom in, limiting your field of view, and then press one of the face buttons to bring the camera to the other side. So inefficient.
Lol @ "If the game had you aim with the left shoulder, that would sux"
Thanks for confirming Sony fannies don't care about gameplay, only looks.
Really, really low bar, and I still don't really agree. Naughty Dog couldn't even get the shoulder swapping right, despite sticking the camera really close to the characters' shoulders. Best third person shooter with terrible visibility when moving around right corners unless aiming the gun? I think not.
I've heard this criticism before. What it us with you wanting the shoulder swap so bad? If the game had you aim with the left shoulder, that would sux, but you have your standard position, and TLOU2 is not a tactical third person game, its not important to have.
It's a stealth action shooter. Extremely important to have in all those close quarters, because you have to know where your threats are.
Better to have it than not? Yes. Important? Absolutely not. I played my first playthrough on the highest difficulty available on day one. Never have i asked myself why can't i shoulder swap.
This shoulder swapping is important for games where you can corner peek and one shot kill a bunch of mobs by doing so. This is not a game like that.
You're out of your mind.
That's some absolute garbage visibility. Imagine an enemy is walking just outside of the left part of a frame. One button press would have allowed the player to see them.
Its a third person game lol. Take cover, and turn the god damn camera which allows you to see way passed your character's vision. This is no big deal at all. This is not escape from tarkov or the og Ghost Recon and RainbowSix titles.
Miyamoto has never been against good storytelling or cinematic games. This thread was derailed from the start.
His personal philosophy has always been gameplay first. He thinks of the gameplay, mechanics, etc., and the puts a story to that game.
Taking what Miyamoto says out of context makes for a good SW thread though, I guess.
@sonic_spark said:
I also don't get the hate for "movie" games. I found God of War (one of my favourite franchises) to be amazing, and though I was weary of the move to an Uncharted level of dialog etc., it's wonderfully done. Do I want that in a Zelda game? Probably not.
It sounds like you do get the hate for "movie" games. The bolded shows that you prefer gameplay over long cinematics and dialogues. Should in other words be easy for you to see how that stuff annoys people.
I could see why someone would dislike having a lot of dialogue/set sequences. After playing BOTW and being as die-hard a fan of the series as they come, I wouldn't outright be against more elements that the movie games have. But I just don't think it will fit the series in the same way that God of War did. Of course the original trilogy has a detailed narrative, but I was less concerned about more story/dialogue versus the actual change to the gameplay which went over the shoulder instead of a free roam third person. I should have been more clear in my post.
That said, I would love for Zelda to get more out of the technical graphics (TP and OoT being examples), and I do welcome the voice acting a cutscenes.
It's a stealth action shooter. Extremely important to have in all those close quarters, because you have to know where your threats are.
Better to have it than not? Yes. Important? Absolutely not. I played my first playthrough on the highest difficulty available on day one. Never have i asked myself why can't i shoulder swap.
This shoulder swapping is important for games where you can corner peek and one shot kill a bunch of mobs by doing so. This is not a game like that.
You're out of your mind.
That's some absolute garbage visibility. Imagine an enemy is walking just outside of the left part of a frame. One button press would have allowed the player to see them.
Its a third person game lol. Take cover, and turn the god damn camera which allows you to see way passed your character's vision. This is no big deal at all. This is not escape from tarkov or the og Ghost Recon and RainbowSix titles.
Take cover so that you can see? Wtf am I reading? Turning the camera will only help partially. It doesn't solve the problem like proper shoulder swapping. You have given no reason for it not to be there.
They could have allowed you to swap all the time by assigning it to R3, then moved the flashlight to L3 and assigned the points of interest that were on R3 to Triangle. Those points of interest where Ellie comments on something in the distance as a button prompt appears on the screen are so infrequent and always in quieter moments that they would not have interfered with the normal functions of Triangle.
You are not giving any excuses. I used shoulder swapping all the time in Metal Gear Solid V, Max Payne 3 and Control. It's not a feature that only tactical shooters benefit from.
I thought about your shoulder swap complaints while playing Returnal. Which in that game, would be pretty useless lol.
But yeah, makes perfect sense for the TLOUs, as it did in the Splinter Cells, Metal Gears, etc. Mildly annoying when games of that type seemingly make such a simple oversight.
I thought about your shoulder swap complaints while playing Returnal. Which in that game, would be pretty useless lol.
But yeah, makes perfect sense for the TLOUs, as it did in the Splinter Cells, Metal Gears, etc. Mildly annoying when games of that type seemingly make such a simple oversight.
I brought that up in regards to Returnal once, after looking up the control scheme, but resisted the urge to keep talking about it later because of how open the environments look.
Just like our local sheep and graphics, you pretend to dislike what you can't get. Nintendo has no idea what motion capture is. Imagine them trying to create a game with such incredible presentation, it rivals cinema.
Exactly the same thing applies to story. They have been regurgitating the same childish "save the princess" for 30 years, and have the audacity of talking shit about well written stories, something that immerse you into the cast? gtfo.
Are videogames just suppose to aspire to cinema?
In presentation? Why not? All that it does is show us what wasn't possible not too long ago. Its not like those insanely well presented titles such as TLOU2 don't have any gameplay. In fact, its gameplay is better than the majority of third person shooters.
Sure, it can. Video games and cinema share some similarities. But they are fundamentally different mediums of art and entertainment. Video games have their own unique qualities and strengths such as interactivity, player agency and immersion. And that's where Nintendo and a lot games gravitate towards. Sony is more cinematic which make sense as they make movies as well. I'm happy both exist.
Both exist, but not on a Nintendo system, and that's a problem. On Sony systems, you get both, the gameplay focused titles from the likes of Fromsoft, and your high presentation Sony exclusives. Same can't be said about what's on offer from Nintendo, be it third or first party titles.
You're right for exclusive games. But neither does Sony. Sony also makes a specific type of game which is why it's best to have both. I mean, it's best to have it all. Though Microsoft has slipped ever since they introduced Kinect.
It's a stealth action shooter. Extremely important to have in all those close quarters, because you have to know where your threats are.
Better to have it than not? Yes. Important? Absolutely not. I played my first playthrough on the highest difficulty available on day one. Never have i asked myself why can't i shoulder swap.
This shoulder swapping is important for games where you can corner peek and one shot kill a bunch of mobs by doing so. This is not a game like that.
You're out of your mind.
That's some absolute garbage visibility. Imagine an enemy is walking just outside of the left part of a frame. One button press would have allowed the player to see them.
Its a third person game lol. Take cover, and turn the god damn camera which allows you to see way passed your character's vision. This is no big deal at all. This is not escape from tarkov or the og Ghost Recon and RainbowSix titles.
Take cover so that you can see? Wtf am I reading? Turning the camera will only help partially. It doesn't solve the problem like proper shoulder swapping. You have given no reason for it not to be there.
They could have allowed you to swap all the time by assigning it to R3, then moved the flashlight to L3 and assigned the points of interest that were on R3 to Triangle. Those points of interest where Ellie comments on something in the distance as a button prompt appears on the screen are so infrequent that they would not have interfered with the normal functions of Triangle.
You are not giving any excuses. I used shoulder swapping all the time in Metal Gear Solid V, Max Payne 3 and Control. It's not a feature that only tactical shooters benefit from.
You stick to a wall to see around the corner, angles that you wouldn't otherwise. Be it by taking cover while crouched or hugging a wall. The dead angles that you're referring to don't matter at all. If FoV was super tiny, it could be an issue peeking over/around obstacles without being able to shoulder swap, but that's not a problem in TLOU2. This feature is only important in tactical games, which this isn't.
Log in to comment