It’s Time for Movie Mode

Posted by Benjamin Hoyt on July 2nd, 2008 filed in Game Development, Video Games

As my latest “summer of unemployment” draws to a close (I’m starting a new gig as a Sr. Producer at Paramount Pictures in their new “Digital and Interactive” group next week), I’m forced to reflect on what I “accomplished” during the last 2+ months of “down time.”  Sadly, the answer is, “not very much.”

When my unemployment began, I delighted in telling people, “I’m actually looking forward to having some free time to focus on some things that I’ve been wanting to do more of.  For example, I’d like to spend some time on my blog, and try to get through some of the great games that came out in the last year that I haven’t had time to play.”  It was an exciting prospect and I certainly meant it when I said it.  In fact, I even tried to follow-through on it.

I especially wanted to spend some quality time with the highly-lauded Grand Theft Auto IV.  After all, I had read reviews that compared the game to Coppola’s Godfather films and Doctorow’s RagtimeOthers made equally bold claims (which were later effectively, and wisely, retracted).  It was described as the game that could finally, conclusively, demonstrate that games are “art.” (Don’t worry, this post isn’t about the “games as art” debate.  While I think that GTA IV was certainly an impressive accomplishment that serves to advance the “art” of video game creation, I think that it fares very poorly when compared to works such as these).  It was my obligation, as a video game developer, to play this game.

Regardless of the apples to oranges problems with such a comparison, I can at least say that I didn’t have any trouble watching The Godfather to completion.  GTA IV, on the other hand…simply lost my interest.  At around the 12-hour mark, the game ceased being “fun” and became a chore.  My overriding emotions were frustration and tediousness (I’m not 100% certain that’s technically an “emotion,” but I think you get my point).  In fact, I realized that I’ve basically had this reaction to several of the “best” games released this generation.

In particular, I’m thinking of GTA IV, Bioshock, and Mass Effect.  All three of these games have received stellar review scores.  All three of them were particularly praised for the quality of their story.  And all three of them I found difficult to finish, despite the fact that I was, in fact, engaged by their stories.  Two of them (GTA IV and Mass Effect) became so mind-numbingly tedious to me that I couldn’t force myself to go on.  I managed to complete Bioshock, but I played-through the second half of the game begrudgingly, mostly so that I would be able to engage in an informed conversation about it with my friend Matt Sakey.

While playing all three games I found myself thinking at times, “god, I really do want to find out what happens…but the actual ‘playing’ part is killing me.  I wish that someone out there would take the time to just record all the interesting bits, boss fights, cut-scenes, and stuff and then post them up on YouTube or something so that I could watch them.  Just cut-out all of the basically repetitive, mundane, “filler” that’s required in order to meet the 10-20 hours of gameplay/”not a rental” requirement.  I’d happily devote an hour or two to just watching the story.”  (For the record, someone may have done this. I haven’t really checked YouTube, but that’s not the point).

I think that there is probably an awfully interesting philosophical conversation to be had about what this realization implies for the direction that games are headed.  On the one hand, it seems to support the assertion that narrative is a dead-end for games.  That, as games get better and better at narrative, they get closer and closer to films (a medium to which they still pale in comparison) and that the interactive elements only serve to detract from the narrative experience.  On the other hand, one could argue that this is a sign of how effective games are becoming as narrative devices and that there’s no reason that compelling stories and genuine “fun” should need to be mutually exclusive.

These questions are really best left to game designers and philosophers, however, and I am neither of those things.  I’m a Producer.  My concerns tend much more toward the pragmatic and, as I mentioned, I’m about to start a job managing the creation of games for Paramount Pictures.  So, regardless of the outcome of that argument, I’m pretty sure that I’m going to be asked to help make some games that contain narrative.

And here is where I think that my experience with these games may have led me to an actual, honest-to-goodness, genuine, game design innovation.  (At least, if someone has already thought of this and implemented it, I’m not aware of it).  I think that the time has come for “Movie Mode.”  I am firmly convinced that story-based, narrative games ought to allow “players” to experience their stories without having to actually, actively, “play” the game.  If your game’s story is interesting enough that someone would be willing to sit beside me on the couch and watch me play it (I’m thinking of YOU Portal, Zelda, Halo…the list goes on), then why should it require ANYONE to actually play it?

Now, I realize that this is probably virtual heresy for many game designers/developers out there.  I can hear the cries now, “but the fun comes from the challenge!” and “it’s no longer a game!” or “it’s not even interactive anymore!”  Please, take a deep breath, and try to remember that the alternative is the status quo, a reality in which most people who buy your games NEVER actually finish them.  Next, set-aside your technical concerns.  For most games, it would be technically doable, if not trivial, to record a default, scripted, play-through that could be played-back in real-time, as if being controlled by a player.  (Sure, there might be some complications, but I challenge any programmer/engineer to explain why it would be impossible for more than a small percentage of games.)  Now, try to think about the possibilities…

Players like myself could play a game as long as they are interested, set down the controller, and “watch” the rest of the game.  Wouldn’t such a player be much more likely to say to themselves, “hey, I know that I eventually got bored with Mass Effect’s pathetic text-box-based excuse for exploring the galaxy, but I really did enjoy the story, and I’m sure that they managed to figure out that alien planets should have some sort of trees on them, that every gang of bad-guys in the galaxy probably doesn’t hang out in one of three generic bad-guy base layouts, and that a good RPG requires more types of loot than guns, bullets, and armor.  Maybe I’ll go ahead and get the sequel, if for no other reason than that I’m curious to find out what happens in the story…”

Or, players (also like myself) might say, “you know, I’m kinda interested in this Metal Gear Solid 4 game.  I realize that everyone says that it’s mostly just for people who are already fans of the series, though.  Maybe I’ll go ahead and get the first 3 in the discount bin and watch them on Movie Mode so that I can be ready for the new one when it comes out.” (Feel free to replace all MGS 4 references in the previous hypothetical with Diablo III references).

Or, players (also like myself) who get all the way to the last battle in Fire Emblem only to realize that their strategy of protecting their main characters from permadeath by always keeping them out of harm’s way and thereby crippling their level progression would make it literally impossible for them to beat the final boss because those are the only 2 characters in your party who can damage it might say, “screw it.  I’ll just watch this boss battle on Movie Mode,” rather than discarding the game with disgust and hesitating to ever buy another Fire Emblem game again.

Or, players (that I certainly would have been one of)  might get bored/frustrated with the Library level in Halo: Combat Evolved, and put it into Movie Mode only to watch the game get to a later point where the action picks back up, or a new mechanic is introduced, or a particularly exciting boss appears, and then grab the controller back and say, “wait!  Maybe I do want to play this after all!” (I’m also convinced that this “jump-back-in” functionality would be technically possible for a significant percentage of games).

I think that the list of benefits goes on, but hopefully you get the point.  I hope that I get the chance to explore this idea with an actual, commercial, title sometime soon.  If not, however, I hope that someone out there that’s making one of these great games that I’ve had such a hard time forcing myself to finish will read this and think it makes some sense.  In the meantime, I’ll spend my few remaining days of unemployment playing WoW and Civ IV.  They may not be the industry’s greatest narratives, and I may wind up with less to show for this down-time than I had originally hoped, but at least I’ll be having a lot of fun.


6 Responses to “It’s Time for Movie Mode”

  1. TheMadPeacock Says:

    I think you are onto a good idea with this Movie mode.

    I really liked Heavenly Sward and particularly enjoyed the characters they created, good dialog, nice interaction and humor. I made it all the way to the big boss at the end of the game but you have a 3 round fight with him and I lost interest after about 2 hours of trying to win the last round.. I gave up. It pissed me off because I am sure the movie sequence that follows the final victory is good, probably wraps the story up nicely and I am sure I would have enjoyed it.

    On the flip side..

    Having just endured MGS4’s 700 hours of bad dialog movie length cut sequences I also think a movie-less mode would be good.

    MGS4 was ok, playing a FGS (First Geriatric Shooter) was a new experience, having the hero stop mid shootout to rub his old back was funny once, annoying many many times. There was good character development but like many action movies it was ruined by the compulsory (and badly written) love affair between the secondary characters.

    So, movie mode and movie-less mode… that way the consumer decides what they like in the product.

  2. Steerpike Says:

    A very well-written and carefully considered article – makes me wonder why developers haven’t implemented this idea yet!

    I have long since lost count of the number of games I’ve quit in frustration (Devil May Cry 4 comes to mind as a recent example), but still wanted to know how the story comes out. A simple fic like this would allow me to enjoy the narrative without forcing me to endure a game I no longer like playing.

    It’s time for developers to realize that we don’t consume games the same way we consume movies – even short games take many hours, usually broken over days or weeks. A movie is consumed in one sitting. It’s unfair and unreasonable to expect gamers to “watch” games the same way they watch movies.

    Recently Warren Spector pointed out that 100-hour games are a bad idea since, as you say, many gamers never finish. “We want you to see the last level,” he said. And this is a way to help realize that goal without affecting the play of the game. Those who wish to challenge themselves can do so, those who just want to see what happens can do that. It’s a simple, perfect idea.

    Thanks for the great post!

  3. Robi Ganguly Says:

    Love the post, glad you finally got it up, you did a great job expanding on the idea we chatted about and going into more detail.

    I really think that you’re on to something here – there’s a lot of reasons for this to happen, but most importantly, I think it’s because this is really a natural evolution of games. As you hit upon, the mix of interactivity and high quality storytelling are what make games great and both pieces should be celebrated and available for consumption, separate from one another.

    Another thing that you bring up that I think has a lot of potential is this idea of being able to “catch up” on a game by using Movie Mode. I think that this could be very helpful in creating new franchises. Sports franchises are relatively easy to create on a recurring basis, once you’ve met with success. They don’t require that the consumer knows the “back story” in order to buy this season’s product. However, episodic games are more of a challenge, because of their back story. Your idea could really assist in making game franchises more easily approachable.

  4. Jamie Fristrom Says:

    I’ve yet to see a videogame story that would stand on its own as a movie; I’d rather rent whatever TV series I haven’t seen yet on netflix. Although some games, including Prince of Persia: Sands of Time, Bioshock, Silent Hill, and Soul Reaver have great stories that work precisely because they’re games; they create and then destroy the illusion of free will, for example, or play on the fact that you don’t really know your character’s motivations. Take away the interactivity and they don’t work anymore.

    I think the real problem is games are too hard, too long, too grindy. Yes, by all means, let the consumer skip or cheese through the challenges to get to the story bits; the aforementioned titles would all still work as interactive stories.

  5. Benjamin Hoyt Says:

    Hahaha. Check this out.: http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=21803

    It seems that another notable game designer thinks this idea has merit, as well. :-)

  6. Oddly Entertaining* Navel-Gazing » Great Minds Think Alike Says:

    [...] that basically describes the “Movie Mode” game feature that I proposed all the way back in July, and again via GameDaily, in September.  Inexplicably, sites like Gamasutra and Kotaku seem to [...]

Leave a Comment