Movie Games = Fake News?

Movie Games; OK, I think I understand. A movie game is like Heavy Rain or Dragon Slayer: heavy on the story and light on gameplay, right? But calling every single player game a movie game makes no sense. Kind of like calling the news from all major news outlets fake. Where did the term "movie game" come from? Haven't we gone a little too far with its use?

@DEVILinIRON: What the hell did I just read

Don't even know what part to begin with. . .

Only two kind of games I've ever known to be dubbed "movie" games.

1) a game developed to sell a movie releasing on cinema with the same licence of characters. They're usually poor made games to sell on children's ignorance.

2) Telltale formula. Because calling them games is misleading.

Never seen anyone refer Single Player games as "movie games". Seems to me you've overseen or dived in conversations with a pretty stupid crowd. Stay off IGN if you want my advice, or whatever hole has such a terrible view on games.

I think it's used more as an insult toward games that are heavy on cinematic cutscenes or are something akin to a point and click story game. I guess some seem to apply this to more games than they should, but in any case it's a silly insult. They're still games, doesn't matter if it doesn't fit your narrow definition of what a game should be. There's so many types of games to play out there that there's no point in getting worked up over a type of game you don't like.

When somebody says 'movie game', I think of narrative prioritisation over gameplay, 10+ minute cutscenes or the over use of quick-time events. Not saying all movie games are bad of course, sometimes it's a design choice for stuff like Fahrenheit, Heavy Rain or Beyond Two Souls.

Heck, MGS4 even felt like a movie game at times, but had enough of the traditional Metal Gear gameplay (even if some of it was streamlined) that it didn't completely play itself.

Movie games are boring. It’s probably the main reason I don’t own a ps4, and my ps3 was mostly ignored.

I remember ‘playing’ that Last of Us game and thinking ‘hey, I’m not enjoying playing this and I only care about the next cut scene’. That was a clue to turn it off and I went to YouTube and low and behold, a few million people agreed with me and we watched playthroughs for the story.

If you like these types of ‘games’, fine - have at it, have a ball. But don’t tell me you’re a gamer when gameplay is the last part you bring up. Every time I hear people talk about Final Fantasy 7, they never talk about the gameplay, they talk about some character death as a major plot twist, or something like that.

It means games that are full of cinematic moments that take control away from the player or frequently limit control for the purpose of telling the story. Or which negate other elements in favor of the story, like the new God of War removing the epic soundtrack so that you can hear the characters talk. God of War is boring. I think adventure games do cinematic stories a lot better. The stories of Until Dawn and the first Walking Dead, for example, are far more interesting to me than these watered down, depressing action games.

Yeah this comes across as hypocritical.

You're the same person who has made a Red Dead Redemption 2 poll thread for the games release. Which is everything you claim above. A heavy focus on its story and voice acting. While none of these games should rationally be viewed as "movie games" you cannot ignore you already like exactly what you also claim to have a disinterest in. Which comes across as the definition of hypocritical. Just state you hate Sony and call it a day_

But now putting one and two together I'm getting the idea this "movie game" dub fad spawns from the vocal tryhards at System-Wars. And considering the outspoken ones have the rationality and ideology of angry spoilt children. I think that speaks volumes how far this terms relevance should be viewed.

Sleep soundly @DEVILinIRON knowing this term is likely only used by up to six annoying fanbois with the gaming knowledge of an eleven year old who plays Call of Duty and GTAV online all year every year.

While I agree God of War (IV) suffers from the walking and talking sections popularised by HalfLife 2. It still very much is a full blown game, with interesting level design and combat mechanics as the bulk of the experience. It's ots camera is terrible, puzzles= underwhelming, and climbing sections a sneaky way to add loading screens. But I would not dub a game which is the majority gameplay as this weird and pretty stupid term that (based on the above) seems to be made up recently as a factor of console bragging rights.

But on that note I think Until Dawn was the only Telltale like experience I ever found some enjoyment in. Still controlled like garbage as was mostly a long quicktime event. So overall, as a game, is pretty trash compared to GoW (IV) something I control and have options and input fundamentals.

@RSM-HQ: Huh? I made a RD2 vs FC5 thread and I voted for FC5. I don’t even own RD2.

@Sevenizz: Far Cry 5 is cinematic too, with over four hours of story cutscenes. So thank you for proving my point.

@RSM-HQ: Ah, you mean bathroom breaks. I enjoyed the gameplay. Story meant nothing to me.

@Sevenizz: Well if you go to the restroom for an hour a time I think you should look into getting that treated. Just looking it up FC5 is known to be beaten at an average of seventeen hours

So doesn't change the 'back what you preach' message above. I have no love for long winded cinematics, but it's clear you do. Unless it's on a Playstation.

@RSM-HQ: There’s no hour long cut scenes in FC5. And after about 20 seconds, you can skip them.

Have you even played it?

@Sevenizz: No, but you also quoated not to play the games you mentioned earlier so I beg to see the point. I can watch your game if you like-

wow. . Closer to five hours. . how embarrassing lol. . An openworld with twelve hours of gameplay. .

I'll pass on the movie actually. . Have games to play.

Don't really willingly 'play' games with a lot of voice acting, gameplay in FC always seemed repetitive and streamlined. I avoid such games given the option. Also not the belief sandbox level design makes everything better (the Ubisoft way of thinking)

However, even with that way of thinking about FC5. I don't call them movie games, it's a pretty poorly thought out term. And from what I gather; you may very well be one of the few that started this minor trend on GS.

Current shooter I'm playing is called Dusk, it's a nice way to die down my Quake: Champions sessions, with non of your chit chat toilet breaks. And likely has better gameplay all considering.

Just accept it's some childish stab at Sony games and move on. If it helps, I also think The Last of Us was far too cinematic, I was more in vocal favor of Vanquish. A game primarily about gameplay.

Rationally doesn't however make your FC5 cinematic games any less 'games' of actual genres that exist and categorised. It's preference-based, I accept that and don't judge others taste, though I will point out games that break pacing. Enjoy your bathroom breaks, but you're still enjoying games which represent what you claim is a "movie" game.

i class a movie game as something like until dawn or detroit become human. i quite enjoyed them. i bought until dawn for halloween the year it released and played it with my girlfriend at the time. was really fun tbh. definitely helped playing it on halloween though.

to me, uncharted and tlou are cinematic tps with platforming sections. rdr2's a cinematic open world game. tell tale games are cinematic point and clicks etc.

bit of a non-sequitur that pal

It's Think then Type, never the other way around.

It's still a movie game. You're taking the term too literally if you think the majority of it has to be cinematic/uncontrollable.

Until Dawn didn't need deep gameplay mechanics. I expect them from an action game. Still, Until Dawn has more interesting storytelling than God of War, I think. It is able to focus entirely on the story. I disliked those kids at first, but as I learned more about them I wanted them to survive. Kratos and Atreus do nothing for me.

@ezekiel43:

It's still a movie game. You're taking the term too literally if you think the majority of it has to be cinematic/uncontrollable.

Nah the term you use just seems ill made. And it makes easy wonder why I never read something so silly a term till now.

"Movie game" as the term you use doesn't exist outside a small and recent bubble at anycase. So can rationally state no GoWIV is not. You can believe whatever you like however, not going to change your views, as I can also call D00M an apple, but it's equally redundant.

"Scripted" experiences seems to be something I've actually seen outside this thread on God of War IV and games like Uncharted, "cinematic" even.

"Movie game" is something thrown together and lazy; by people like @Sevenizz who feel the need to spite defend another chunk of plastic for brand loyality. Pretty childish. Ill need for fanbois when really Xbox owners can just brag about backwards compatibility and having fun with games like Ninja Gaiden: Black.

Which is an actual real note of praise. Would take anyday over GoWIV.

Until Dawn didn't need deep gameplay mechanics.

Speak for yourself. I loved the horror atmosphere and use of tension, but found it pretty mediocre otherwise. Better off with actual Survival Horror games for that feeling and vibe when I want to play games. You play it once or twice and toss aside like the glorified television show that it is. What else does it offer to enjoy? Nothing_

And though a certain target audience can appreciate Telltale like experiences, it's not an exception to the rule of gameplay. And you won't find many Telltale fans even mention replaying these experiences, just wanting new episodes.

I expect them from an action game. Still, Until Dawn has more interesting storytelling than God of War

Notice how I mentioned no claims to God of War IV having a good story, or even really brought it into question.

Yet it's clearly a better game, more depth in the systems, and vastly superior handling and level design (though that's not stating much with UD). All those things you don't find in movies do we. What you claim from Until Dawn? Very much so.

I prefer the term "glorified screensaver" for Telltale like games at anycase. And seems anyone can just make bad terms for anything around here so let's make that stick. . I kid because it's equally terrible.

@RSM-HQ: It's a good term that calls out the sick trend of film envy present in blockbuster games of the last decade. It gets deeper to the root of the problem and can relate to more elements than the term "scripted games." I guess I would agree with you on the rest if I found God of War fun, but I don't. I find its design mediocre, partly because of the OTS cam and underwhelming puzzles that you mentioned. So I'd rather play something like Until Dawn or a game that tries to be fun, which is partly why I'm on my Switch a lot lately.

Eh...I'm not sure that's entirely fair.

I mean, I played Heavy Rain and hated it. Mostly because I thought the story sucked. The gameplay sucked as well, but that wasn't really the issue. prioritization of story over gameplay was a design choice. And if the story had been good while the gameplay sucked, I would've found the game enjoyable. In any case, despite how crappy I found the gameplay to be, I don't think it's really fair to say that any real gamer would be talking about the gameplay first. The game wasn't really about the gameplay as much as the story. The story clearly takes precedence from a design standpoint, so I think it's absolutely fair that that kind of stuff is what mostly dominates the discussions.

Nothing wrong if you just plain don't like those kinds of games. But some people don't like horror movies, some people don't like comedies, some people don't like romance movies, and some people don't like political thrillers. And it would be pretty unfair to judge a horror movie for not being funny enough when it's not supposed to be funny in the first place. In a lot of ways I think it's more fair to critique art on the basis of how well it achieves what it's trying to accomplish, rather than on how well it accomplishes something that the makers aren't interested in in the first place. Back to Heavy Rain, I absolutely HATED the gameplay. But I just don't think that's really the problem with the game. The gameplay sucked, but it was clearly always intended to serve the story as opposed to being satisfying gameplay by itself. So the most relevant criticism is that the story sucked.