Quote:
Originally Posted by Heleo
I disagree with that. I think that movies are often judged on things other than their story. Movies are judged on the acting, the costumes, the set, the special effects, plenty of things that aren't the story.
|
Okay then, fair enough, but all of those things - acting, costumes, sets, explosions, magic, girls, girls, girls - are found in computer games too, meaning that the main difference between movies and computer games is still the fact that one is interactive and the other aint, which brings me back to the original point.
***Warning, Noknowncure is speaking in broad, general terms. He is fully aware that there will be counter examples to the points he is making***
If a story is bad in a movie, the movie will usually get slated - blah, blah, blah not by everyone blah, blah, blah - however, computer games - and specifically adventure games - more often than not, are judged a lot more leniently because of the distraction of the gameplay.
What I was trying to illustrate is that if you're watching a movie, you are focussing on the story and are, to an extent, detached from the piece. When you're playing a game, you may choose to spend about an hour wandering round in a circle, looking at stuff, which is a distraction from the main story, but can be enjoyable. Because the distraction is enjoyable, people then tend to be more lenient on crappy storylines because they remember what fun they had running backwards and forwards.
Also, these days, most computer seem to insist on biting off more than they can chew. A story that can be really compelling ends up being reduced to a disjointed, poorly explained mess because things got too grand.
