Support NeoGAF

[Robb]

How are these not "cinematic" yet something like nu-GoW is?

I don't disagree with you that they are also cinematic.

I disagree with you that there's a common notion that past Sony games were not cinematic. The notion, from why I've seen, is that past Sony games were not cinematic in the same way something like the new GoW (or countless other games today) are. And that notion still stands.

Just having cutscenes and voice acting is not what people consider to be a 'cinematic game' today. Even Nintendo games have those things these days, and something like Breath of the Wild would not be considered cinematic/"movie game" by any stretch.

 

[bitbydeath]

with forced walking

Forced walking is used to hide load times. It's not limited/related to any particular game type.

 

[Robb]

Forced walking is used to hide load times. It's not limited/related to any particular game type.

Not at all. There's plenty of forced walking segments in Spider-Man 2, for example, on a system praised for having some of the fastest load times in the market.

 

[consoul]

OP's list is a hell of a stretch.

With that said, from day one, PlayStation flexed its capability to do CG intros & cutscenes, CD quality audio and fully voiced dialogue.

That was a key part of PlayStation's hardware strength from the outset, so yeah I think cinematic presentation is part of their brand identity.

 

[Bernkastel]

Final Fantasy VII - lengthy story heavy adventures with tons of cutscenes and dialogue, and epic set pieces.

FF IX had the most cinematic moment though.

 

[Jubenhimer]

I don't disagree with you that they are also cinematic.

I disagree with you that there's a common notion that past Sony games were not cinematic. The notion, from why I've seen, is that past Sony games were not cinematic in the same way something like the new GoW (or countless other games today) are. And that notion still stands.

I agree, that modern PS games are cinematic in a very different sense than older PS games were. I'm just arguing that being cinematic in a general sense has always been PlayStation's core identity as a brand.

There are people who will even argue that Sony never had any identity as a publisher, or even had any good first party until near the end of the PS3 days which to me, always felt like an argument made by people who never owned a PlayStation system (namely bitter N64/GCN-era Nintendo fans jealous of all the games PS1 and PS2 were getting).

Just having cutscenes and voice acting is not what people consider to be a 'cinematic game' today. Even Nintendo games have those things these days, and something like Breath of the Wild would not be considered cinematic/"movie game" by any stretch.

Of course, that why I think ICO is a good example of what PlayStation games were back then. It was cinematic, but in the exact opposite way a game like LoU or Nu-GoW is. Rather, it's cinematic feel comes from how the game is presented and how it uses it's gameplay and mechanics to convey the themes and narrative it's trying to tell.

 

[bitbydeath]

Not at all. There's plenty of forced walking segments in Spider-Man 2, for example, on a system praised for having some of the fastest load times in the market.

Yeah, but it's there to remove loading screens, slowing everything down and giving a chance for new data to be loaded into memory.

It's not a design trait, just a memory workaround.

 

[Robb]

Yeah, but it's there to remove loading screens, slowing everything down and giving a chance for new data to be loaded into memory.

It's not a design trait, just a memory workaround.

I'm pretty sure walking around a carnival with MJ and pressing triangle to play various minigames is not used for loading and very intentionally designed as a story sequence that'd be there no matter if we had SSD read speeds of 1TB/s.

You're telling me I can fast travel in less than a second to any part of the map, but they need an entire story set-piece built around loading in new data? Unless they're loading more data than multiples the size of the entire game at once it shouldn't be necessary.

But hey, I'm not a developer.

 

[RetroGamingUK]

When PlayStation released in 1995 it was WipEout that was the face of PS in the UK.

However when everyone in my school got one following the price cut in late 1996 everyone was talking about Resident Evil

 

[deeptech]

Idk if anyone using that term knows what they mean or what others mean by it. It was always a buzzword since games were not as popular as movies, and so makers of games had to invent a way to bring them closer.

Further, to call a game cinematic is to insult it, and bring it into same category as cheap flicks. Nobody expects movie-like experience when they play games, such people go to movies etc. Fuck "cinematic" marketing buzzword shit.

 

[IDKFA]

There's been a lot of talk about PlayStation's exclusives in recent years, and how Sony's biggest releases are all starting to blend together. "Third person, cinematic, over the shoulder movie-like sad dad games" is the phrase thrown around. I won't deny that PlayStation Studios games in recent years, have started to feel pretty homogenized, and that the "PlayStation formula" as it exists now really is starting to get old.

Yet, if you actually play older PlayStation games, basically PS1-3, the handhelds, and even the PS4 early on, you notice that "cinematic gaming" or "immersive gaming" has always been PlayStation's core identity from the very beginning.

Seriously, look at the most well known games on the og PlayStation.

• Metal Gear Solid and Final Fantasy VII - lengthy story heavy adventures with tons of cutscenes and dialogue, and epic set pieces.
• Crash and Spyro - Expressive mascot characters with cutscenes and voice acting that are basically interactive cartoons.
• Parappa the Rapper - Basically shot, choreographed, and presented as a series of interactive music videos.
• Gran Turismo - They didn't call it "The Real Driving Simulator" for nothing.

And on PlayStation 2

• ICO and SotC - minimalistic art games with cinematic combat that tell story through gameplay.
• Jak, Ratchet and Sly - Evolutions of the PS1 style mascot platformer genre with more elaborate stories and characters animations
• God of War - Epic boss fights and set peices with a fixed camera.

So this wasn't something that started with Uncharted or The Last of Us. PlayStation has always been about cinematic gaming, It's actually a huge part of the brand's charm IMO. I think the difference is that these days, with a couple of exceptions, the PlayStation style has indeed become more homogenous, and formulaic with most games cut from the same third person, over the shoulder mold of The Last of Us, the game which many agree was the birth of the "modern" PlayStation formula.

Whereas before, the vibe was more similar to a music label. The cinematic "PlayStation style" used to come in a variety of shapes and sizes.

My problem isn't with "cinematic gaming" (are we really saying GT is cinematic?!).

My problem is a majority of the games are third person action games.

There was a time when Sony offered more variety. FPS, arcade racers, RPGs, odd games (Remember Tokyo Junge).

There was a good mix. Now the majority of their console exclusives are third person action titles. I want more variety.

 

[BlackTron]

So when people say "Third person, cinematic, over the shoulder movie-like sad dad games", you really think they're talking about any game that has cutscenes or voice acting, going back to titles like FF7? I don't even think the FF7 remake falls into the type of game people are complaining about.

 

[The Cockatrice]

Like everything in life things change over time and so has the word "cinematic". Sure 20-30 years ago I'd call some of those games cinematic. Nowadays not so much.

 

[bitbydeath]

I'm pretty sure walking around a carnival with MJ and pressing triangle to play various minigames is not used for loading and very intentionally designed as a story sequence that'd be there no matter if we had SSD read speeds of 1TB/s.

You're telling me I can fast travel in less than a second to any part of the map, but they need an entire story set-piece built around loading in new data? Unless they're loading more data than multiples the size of the entire game at once it shouldn't be necessary.

But hey, I'm not a developer.

I thought you were referring to where characters suddenly walk slowly.

 

[Jubenhimer]

So when people say "Third person, cinematic, over the shoulder movie-like sad dad games", you really think they're talking about any game that has cutscenes or voice acting, going back to titles like FF7? I don't even think the FF7 remake falls into the type of game people are complaining about.

I don't mean games have always literally fit that exact description. Rather, the argument that PlayStation was never about cinematic presentation period until the late PS3 era, which is what I take issue with.

Of course the Last of Us style of PS game is a relatively recent phenomenon. But in a broad sense, PlayStation has generally always been cinematic in some shape or form.

 

[BlackTron]

I don't mean games have always literally fit that exact description. Rather, the argument that PlayStation was never about cinematic presentation period until the late PS3 era, which is what I take issue with.

Of course the Last of Us style of PS game is a relatively recent phenomenon. But in a broad sense, PlayStation has generally always been cinematic in some shape or form.

Your post opened by describing a complaint about a very specific type of game "Third person, cinematic, over the shoulder movie-like sad dad games"

And then went on to basically say "but wait, Playstation has ALWAYS been BROADLY about games that include...something or other in that list of stuff"

Jet Force Gemini was third person, so in a broad sense I guess it helped plant the seed of sad dad games?

There's a huge missing link here.

I think the issue is with thinking that even having cinematics at all is indicative of the "problem", and it isn't. It's using labels without an understanding of them. Under this way of thinking, FF7 is a more problematic game than OOT just because it has higher quality CGI cinematics. Where even though two cutscenes could be the same length, one is worse because it's "more cinematic". This is false paradigm lol.

When playing it is designed as a "cinematic" experience in real-time, hand-holding, forced slow walking and dialog, lots of interrupting transitions to cut scenes, repetitive gameplay while graphical set-pieces take the stage, QTEs, and it's always with a third person character that went through the same "creative vetting", it becomes a genre in itself. You can't take a complaint about these games, look back 20 years and go "but look games always were "cinematic" bc they had cut scenes", get out of here.

 

[Jubenhimer]

Your post opened by describing a complaint about a very specific type of game "Third person, cinematic, over the shoulder movie-like sad dad games"

And then went on to basically say "but wait, Playstation has ALWAYS been BROADLY about games that include...something or other in that list of stuff"

Jet Force Gemini was third person, so in a broad sense I guess it helped plant the seed of sad dad games?

There's a huge missing link here.

I think the issue is with thinking that even having cinematics at all is indicative of the "problem", and it isn't. It's using labels without an understanding of them. Under this way of thinking, FF7 is a more problematic game than OOT just because it has higher quality CGI cinematics. Where even though two cutscenes could be the same length, one is worse because it's "more cinematic". This is false paradigm lol.

When playing it is designed as a "cinematic" experience in real-time, hand-holding, forced slow walking and dialog, lots of interrupting transitions to cut scenes, repetitive gameplay while graphical set-pieces take the stage, QTEs, and it's always with a third person character that went through the same "creative vetting", it becomes a genre in itself. You can't take a complaint about these games, look back 20 years and go "but look games always were "cinematic" bc they had cut scenes", get out of here.

Fair enough. I probably shouldn't have phrased the argument that specifically.

 

[DeltaPolarBear]

Playstation 1 games not being on a cartridge means they can store actual video. And a big part of cinematic games in those days were fixed cutscenes.

Anyway, cutscenes was a compromise to the graphic limitations of the day. Also it allows loading time. In the end cutscenes should be limited to the start and the end, and ideally if you can do a semi-cutscene while still allow player movement, it is better.

As was pointed out many times, you can have cinematic events in actual gameplay now. It is a big part of appeal for Helldivers 2 for example. And no one complain about being in a movie as long as they are actual participants in it.

 

[RoboFu]

The first 4 games you mention are not even Sony made games. And no crash and Spyro wasn't cinematic, 90% cutscene filled interactive movies.

 

[Sintoid]

Playstation pushed a lot on native CD, DVD and Blu Ray support
Making games that in a way or another make use of these media was one of the strong ideas in Sony's Marketing
But calling Gran Turismo and Crash Bandicoot "cinematic games" is really nonesense

 

[Lucifers Beard]

A lot of them weren't cinematic adventure games. Twisted Metal, Warhawk and SOCOM were pick up and play games without any real story or cinematic events.

These days the majority of games they publish are over the shoulder action adventure titles. That's all well and good, but they need to mix it up a bit. They kind of feel very similar in a way to me.

 

[Mownoc]

"Crash and Spyro - Expressive mascot characters with cutscenes and voice acting that are basically interactive cartoons."

Uh... Crash barely has cutscenes. Crash 1 has the intro and outro, and Crash 2/3 intro/outro/100% ending and then mostly just talking holographic heads. lol.

Ratchet is more understandable but saying Crash is cinematic immediately lost me and distracted me from your point lol.

 

[Generic]

I blame Square and Konami.

 

[Angry_Megalodon]

Stellar Blade's gameplay is mediocre. Without the hot chick, no one cares about it.

Speak about yourself. It's your opinion, but no, it's not mediocre by any means. It has better bosses and difficulty than a certain witch game, and definitely much better music (not even comparable) and graphics.. Anyway, the point is not about its quality but its focus,more on gameplay than on narrative.

The mantra of calling Sony's games "cinematic" is pretty dumb when most AAA have the same if not more, with worse gameplay and polish. We could also say that JRPGs are "interactive books"since you are reading texts half of the time.

 

[Gaiff]

What I'm arguing is that PlayStation games have always been cinematic, just in a different way from modern PlayStation games.

So you do note the difference with modern games. Why are you asking this question then?

"Crash and Spyro - Expressive mascot characters with cutscenes and voice acting that are basically interactive cartoons."

Uh... Crash barely has cutscenes. Crash 1 has the intro and outro, and Crash 2/3 intro/outro/100% ending and then mostly just talking holographic heads. lol.

Ratchet is more understandable but saying Crash is cinematic immediately lost me and distracted me from your point lol.

It's like OP didn't play those games.

In God of War Ragnarok, it takes over 10 minutes for the game to give you control of Kratos. There is a 2-hour section where you do almost nothing but walk and talk.

In Uncharted 4, there is a 45-minute chapter without a single gunfight and about 20 minutes of walking and talking. The rest is climbing.

OP is gonna tell us next how Super Mario 64 is cinematic because there is a 1-minute cutscene in the intro.

 

[GHound]

So you do note the difference with modern games. Why are you asking this question then?


It's like OP didn't play those games.

In God of War Ragnarok, it takes over 10 minutes for the game to give you control of Kratos. There is a 2-hour section where you do almost nothing but walk and talk.

In Uncharted 4, there is a 45-minute chapter without a single gunfight and about 20 minutes of walking and talking. The rest is climbing.

OP is gonna tell us next how Super Mario 64 is cinematic because there is a 1-minute cutscene in the intro.

Don't be too hard on him. He was still crapping himself when Crash 2 released. Though to be fair I nearly shit myself last night getting up off the floor with my cat.