I'll still have to say it, but it's unfair to compare games to movies; hell I might not even say unfair, simply, well, they don't always and shouldn't always be matched with each other on everything. That said, I won't say that the argument he is posing is unreasonable. In the gaming industry, genius/flexibility in creativity isn't always found on how good your "script" is, no matter how many times that guy from Heavy Rain would tell you. But then again, Heavy Rain is the type of game of which its quality relies heavily on the quality of the storyline. In video games there is a lot outside of that to consider(and in movies too I must say), SMG2 isn't being praised for its creativity based on the quality of its storytelling...
In a way, I do agree with what the guy is trying to say. The reason why I mostly shrug off people's views that a company like Nintendo should focus their tales/games towards a more adult oriented audience, is because the quality in Nintendo games is found outside of that, their charm too. What I do worry about, is all these companies stating that they're doing their best to focus on good, quality storytelling, only to find myself dissapointed again and again by the finished product. I'm not asking for a novel here(yet), and I realise that having a workable storyline and original setting integrated in game design is a freaking huge challenge, but do I still believe that developers can come up with something better than Gears of War(being tout out by the gaming community as good storytelling) on a saturday afternoon? I sure as hell do.
The above said, I think he is taking some things a little too seriously, and yes, Roger Ebert's argument has its share of holes in it, but on a superficial level there is a bit of sense in what he is saying. I made the decision to make a career out of this industry a few years ago exactly because it's kind of in the state this guy is telling us it is. It's growing, it has a lot of improvements to do, and more than any industry it needs creative minds to show and extract that potential, it still needs to prove itself to the public in many ways because some of the points the guy has made aren't exactly untrue. I find that this is an exciting time for it, a time when developers have the means and tools to shove Ebert's argument right in his ass. Then again, he's the guy that states Cameron is on the top of the world due to Avatar, and I can't help but make that connection: What the hell is so good about that movie that video games haven't been able to reach such a level of quality yet? I think many games have, in fact, already reached the quality presented in Avatar--sorry Avatar fans, but in that respect I do agree with what David Wong is saying here.
I do feel however that video games are getting there and will get there eventually, that things will in fact get better. However, again, we shouldn't just judge the quality and potential of this medium, based on a very parochial view of just how good their storyline is period. There is a lot more to video games than that.
Log in to comment