This begs the question: What do these reviewers (or anyone else on Kotaku, for that matter) define as a video game?
I think to simply dismiss video games as mindless action and eye candy is to naively look past the broad spectrum of emotion and potential in the creative medium.
Let's be honest, ladies and gents: most shooters certainly aren't more elaborate than Terminator Salvation, and we wouldn't pay to watch someone play them for two hours, or even listen as they described the fascinating plot to us (unless we were drunk and/or stoned and the person doing the talking were smoking hot and we were hoping to score with him/her that night).
Of course, those reviewers still fail miserably because they lump all video games together, and probably have no idea that *gasp!* there's a little more variety to video games than "Death! Carnage!! Kablooey!!! Muzzafukkaaaas!!!!"
I don't see the problem here. A lot of Video Games (MGS4, Fallout 3, Tetris etc.) gets compared to movies all the time. Even on Kotaku I've seen it happen dozens of times. Nearly no one raises their eyebrows when that happens.
So why is it suddenly so uninformed and unintelligent when Roger Ebert and other movie critics does the same thing, but in reverse?
It didnt seem to translate that well when actually put into a video game. i suppose it couldve been good, as (apparently) there is a lot of ink to dip from in the story, i think they either didnt use enough, or it was just used wrong, and done very cheaply.
WHATS WITH ALL THE RAIL SHOOTING!? THEY DONT HAVE FAST VEHICLES OR STRONG WEAPONRY IN THE FUTURE!?
@Firelance: I do think cinema has a lot of genius work (a lot!) I mean I'm always blown away with a kubrick movie no matter how times I've see it, Hitchcock is also a freaking genius. To kinda stay on topic Orson welles and kubrick are like these gods with a camera, their cinematography brings any summer blockbuster director to freaking shame.
Now, let's talk games, it's very unfair to use video games as synonym of bad quality or mindless entertainment (fair enough there are quite a few) specially when said by a bunch of people who never played a decent game in their life. But if you take into account the work and the capacity that has to be put into the developing of a game it just blows away almost all blockbuster movies and that means games have to be respected if we are to respect current cinema as well. I mean *uck how can a movie nowadays cost so much?There are so many freaking stinkers, the brilliant ones are almost all pretty cheap to make in comparison. Like Kubrick once said referring to the Hollywoods minds "the problem is not with their hearts is with their heads", a fact that doesn't seem to apply in the videogames world that much. I love this industry, I have recently played Shadow of The Colossus and ICO (and OMFG :D)and those games just prove how great and longthe videogames road is and it deserves to be respected so armchair critics stfU!
05/27/09
05/27/09
I think to simply dismiss video games as mindless action and eye candy is to naively look past the broad spectrum of emotion and potential in the creative medium.
05/26/09
Man, I really hope we one day get to the point where a video game comparison isn't such a negative thing...
05/26/09
Just for the hilarity, I mean. I'm an anime fan too, for the most part.
05/26/09
Of course, those reviewers still fail miserably because they lump all video games together, and probably have no idea that *gasp!* there's a little more variety to video games than "Death! Carnage!! Kablooey!!! Muzzafukkaaaas!!!!"
05/26/09
05/26/09
And sounds like 95% of the junk Hollywood puts out, business as usual.
05/26/09
And that Hollywood is running out of original ideas, while the gaming industry is growing bigger and bigger.
05/26/09
05/26/09
very well put
05/26/09
So why is it suddenly so uninformed and unintelligent when Roger Ebert and other movie critics does the same thing, but in reverse?
05/26/09
I guess people are asking for more depth in the characters and how they react and what not more than just action pack scenes.
cause if they can compare a overly action packed movie to a video game than something is wrong.
05/26/09
05/26/09
WHATS WITH ALL THE RAIL SHOOTING!? THEY DONT HAVE FAST VEHICLES OR STRONG WEAPONRY IN THE FUTURE!?
05/26/09
05/27/09
05/27/09
05/26/09
05/26/09
05/27/09
05/26/09
Period.
Ok, fine, maybe not Citizen Kane and Forest Gump.
05/26/09
Now, let's talk games, it's very unfair to use video games as synonym of bad quality or mindless entertainment (fair enough there are quite a few) specially when said by a bunch of people who never played a decent game in their life. But if you take into account the work and the capacity that has to be put into the developing of a game it just blows away almost all blockbuster movies and that means games have to be respected if we are to respect current cinema as well. I mean *uck how can a movie nowadays cost so much?There are so many freaking stinkers, the brilliant ones are almost all pretty cheap to make in comparison. Like Kubrick once said referring to the Hollywoods minds "the problem is not with their hearts is with their heads", a fact that doesn't seem to apply in the videogames world that much. I love this industry, I have recently played Shadow of The Colossus and ICO (and OMFG :D)and those games just prove how great and longthe videogames road is and it deserves to be respected so armchair critics stfU!
05/26/09
05/27/09
05/27/09
Dude, don't listen to them. Forrest Gump is all kinds of awesome. But learn to spell it right :)