What I don't get is something that's been bugging the ASS out of me for a LONG time now...

WHY is MORE content a BAD THING?!
"Oh boo hoo, this game is too long, I have a job y'know!"
"Oh boo hoo, this game has several feature films worth of film time for 60 bucks, how DARE they give me so much to watch?!"

wow... I really hope you can pause the scene without skipping it... I hate it when I have to pee and accidentally skip a scene that I can't re-watch without loading a checkpoint from half an hour ago.

EDIT: ok, i guess there is a pause function, but it'd also be nice if you could fast forward or rewind in scenes that long. I won't really complain unless I see PLEASE INSERT DISK #2 in the middle of an action scene

propertyofcobra:
What I don't get is something that's been bugging the ASS out of me for a LONG time now...

WHY is MORE content a BAD THING?!
"Oh boo hoo, this game is too long, I have a job y'know!"
"Oh boo hoo, this game has several feature films worth of film time for 60 bucks, how DARE they give me so much to watch?!"

I really don't see anyone going "boo hoo" on this thread. It's simply a difference of opinion on what constitutes a good game. Some people want a cinematic experience, some people want an interactive experience. If you like watching a story unfold instead of pushing the plot along through gameplay, well and good, but let's keep the "you like something different than me" ridicule to a minimum, hm? Sarcasm is bad for the skin.

I'll live, as long as they're cool.

Pause function or not, if there's not some dialog box that says "The following cut scene is 87:42:17 long, would you like to save?" Then it's a really stupid feature for those of us who have to, you know, work for a living.

Hang on a second, something's bugging me here. If the 90 minute cutscenes are supposed to act as breathers in between all the action, you do realise that you are going to be watching a full hour and a half of characters doing nothing but talking to each other, right?

Conversely, if these cutscenes have action sequences in them to spice things up a tad, it begs the question of why didn't they make those action sequences parts of the actual game in the first place?

This is just mind-boggling. Games are supposed to be interactive. If the devs want lots of cutscenes in the game to tell the story, then fine, but 90 minute lumps are too much. And no, I'm not some ADD ridden X-box fanboy who can't go five minutes without killing something. I'm a dude who buys games to play them, not watch them. If Valve can tell a cohesive, interesting story in a game with nary a cutscene in sight, then the dudes at Konami don't have much of an excuse for this mindless self-indulgence. Whoever it was who said they don't want to pay to have some failed screenwriter jack off over their PS3, I agree with you heartily good sir.

Wow...there's a reason for me to buy a PS3 gone. I agree with jeffers on this one. If you want to tell your story through cut-scenes, fine. But be reasonable about it. 1 and a half hour long cutscenes? Sorry, I'd rather watch The Usual Suspects.

See a game with 90 minutes OF cutscenes is nothing abnormal. I'm about 3/4 of the way through GTA4 and the in game stats tell me I have watched about 250 cutscenes. Granted, some of these are like 30 seconds long, but many are not.

If this really is a single cutscne lasting more than an hour and approaching one AND a half hours, then wow. I'm lucky if I find that much time to play games in a single session. I'd hate to spend it all watching a single cutscene, unless it was the ending of the game and REALLY good.

propertyofcobra:
What I don't get is something that's been bugging the ASS out of me for a LONG time now...

WHY is MORE content a BAD THING?!
"Oh boo hoo, this game is too long, I have a job y'know!"
"Oh boo hoo, this game has several feature films worth of film time for 60 bucks, how DARE they give me so much to watch?!"

A valid point, especially since a few months ago it was trendy to criticise a game for only having a 6-12 hour long campaign. Long games only please critics - though sandbox games like GTA4 can be forgiven by the public since they've got a non-linear progression in place.

This does sound like a prank.....though if it is true......THAT IS GLORIOUS!!!!!!!

though I'm hoping you can fast fullward through scenes not just pause them.

This does sound like a prank.....though if it is true......THAT IS GLORIOUS!!!!!!!

though I'm hoping you can fast fullward through scenes not just pause them.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:
Hang on a second, something's bugging me here. If the 90 minute cutscenes are supposed to act as breathers in between all the action, you do realise that you are going to be watching a full hour and a half of characters doing nothing but talking to each other, right?

Conversely, if these cutscenes have action sequences in them to spice things up a tad, it begs the question of why didn't they make those action sequences parts of the actual game in the first place?

This is just mind-boggling. Games are supposed to be interactive. If the devs want lots of cutscenes in the game to tell the story, then fine, but 90 minute lumps are too much. And no, I'm not some ADD ridden X-box fanboy who can't go five minutes without killing something. I'm a dude who buys games to play them, not watch them. If Valve can tell a cohesive, interesting story in a game with nary a cutscene in sight, then the dudes at Konami don't have much of an excuse for this mindless self-indulgence. Whoever it was who said they don't want to pay to have some failed screenwriter jack off over their PS3, I agree with you heartily good sir.

This is everything I was thinking and more. It's just sloppy storytelling and even sloppier game design.

propertyofcobra:
What I don't get is something that's been bugging the ASS out of me for a LONG time now...

WHY is MORE content a BAD THING?!
"Oh boo hoo, this game is too long, I have a job y'know!"
"Oh boo hoo, this game has several feature films worth of film time for 60 bucks, how DARE they give me so much to watch?!"

I'll be the first one to cheer when a game is long. Of course it should be the game that's long, not the cut-scenes that the designers made to convince themselves how intellectual their game is. When I hear about a game that has this awesome story you only have to watch full movie length cut-scenes to enjoy I don't think "wow, that sounds like a great game", I think "wow, someone clearly thinks games aren't good enough; aren't a worthy enough storytelling medium for this genius auteur".

PurpleRain:
That is stupid. Point closed. Why would the player want to sit through a movie length cut scene and not be involved in it? I don't care if they explain the history of the universe; watching a movie in a game just isn't right. Two medias shouldn't mix like that. People PLAY games. People WATCH movies. People READ books. People don't go to the movies to read 90mins of scrolling text just as people shouldn't play a game to watch a 90min cut scene.

Ok, rant over. Just think it's so stupid.

That's actually a good point.

However, I only agree in part. I absolutely love the incredible scope and zaniness of MGS stories. The first time through the game I'm going to love every second of those long cut-scenes and bask in the glow of an insane, convoluted yet still well-written story. However, in replaying MGS2, I've noticed that there is very little in the way of actual gameplay. MGS3 seemed to rectify that a bit by lengthening the gameplay and cutting down a tad on cut-scenes, but I am still really hoping that MGS4 will have a ton of gameplay and not still cop-out with all of about 3 hours of actual gameplay in a 15 hour game.

Either way, I'm still totally psyched about MGS4 and can't wait for it, whether the gameplay time is there or not.

Well, searching about it so some closure should be given around here, I ended up coming across this:

http://forums.gametrailers.com/showthread.php?t=408844

Old Gamepro Denies MGS4 90 Minute Cut-scene Rumor

"I've beat the game twice, and am the author of the forthcoming [GamePro] review," Shuman said. "Ninety-minute-long cinemas in MGS4 sounds like an exaggeration. Like the other MGS games, MGS4 definitely has a cinematic quality. And yes, some of the cut-scenes in the game are elaborate and occasionally lengthy. But not a one, to my recollection, even approaches 90 minutes."

So, we've all been had? How dare they!

It wouldn't matter if there were cut-scenes that long. You'd still probably have to play the game 3 times to understand what is going on anyway.

I love everything about the MGS games except probably the camera (it felt irritating being able to go into first person, but not have your view permanently first person while you move around, making being caught frustrating sometimes)

If there are 90 minute cutscenes in the middle of this game, they best have video controls in there, let me pause it and get a drink halfway through, i've no problems otherwise, Kojima knows how to entertain.

This could be the first really decompressed game. I like it just because of the genre-bending; contrary to what someone said earlier mediums of entertainment need to mix with each other in order to develop interesting new mediums. I'd rather have some failed experiments than some sort of fiction concentration camps where books, movies and games are denied all inter-racial contact in the name of purity.

And I doubt team Metal Gear can even produce a failure. I'm with the school that more equals better; give me special features to the eyeballs, give me extended cuts and hell yes give me a game that takes - at a guess - 30 or 40 hours to complete. I have all the time in the world to play it. :)

The next time anyone criticizes KH or KHII for having too many cutscenes, I will now have a ready comeback. Thank you.

Divinegon:
Well, searching about it so some closure should be given around here, I ended up coming across this:

http://forums.gametrailers.com/showthread.php?t=408844

Old Gamepro Denies MGS4 90 Minute Cut-scene Rumor

"I've beat the game twice, and am the author of the forthcoming [GamePro] review," Shuman said. "Ninety-minute-long cinemas in MGS4 sounds like an exaggeration. Like the other MGS games, MGS4 definitely has a cinematic quality. And yes, some of the cut-scenes in the game are elaborate and occasionally lengthy. But not a one, to my recollection, even approaches 90 minutes."

So, we've all been had? How dare they!

Oh... I was hoping it was real. Well, the article I posted did say "Approached." Maybe they only get to the 70 minute mark, or so. Either way, for everyone who hasn't read the aricle, I'll post the link again.

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=189543%C2%A0

and here is the link to the GT thread that "Divinegon" was kind enoughb to find.

http://forums.gametrailers.com/showthread.php?t=408844

(even though it's above, I figured redundancy is good here.)

If it's 90 minutes total of cutscenes, I don't see the issue... I've played other games with that or more and enjoyed them. (Indeed, 90 minutes total sounds a little short for MGS4 to me.) If it's 90 minutes in a block, well, that does sound a bit on the longish side; that's a feature-length movie, not a cutscene. I doubt any game designer, no matter how eccentric, would make players sit that long doing nothing.

Now I could see 90 minute blocks with mixed cutscenes and interactive but non-combat scenes, especially at the start if you count tutorials in that total.

-- Steve

If it's 90 minute-long cut scenes, someone needs to play them DVDA's "Montage" song.

Anton P. Nym:

Now I could see 90 minute blocks with mixed cutscenes and interactive but non-combat scenes, especially at the start if you count tutorials in that total.

-- Steve

That might be how it is. If you've seen the opening scene to MGS4, it's mostly a cutscene, an occasionaly it makes you walk a few feet, or crawl under something, or something else tutorial like.

90 minutes? Meh.

Ugh, this is why I've given up on Metal Gear games. I don't care if it's 90 total minutes of cutscenes or one cutscene that is 90 minutes long, it's fucking ridiculous.

Games are first and foremost about the gameplay, that's why they're called 'games', all else is secondary. Now granted, a good story can enhance the experience, but only if it's told properly. Cutscenes should be no more than five minutes long and at the very most, every hour of gameplay. Metal Gear games are to the point where there's 20 minutes of codec exposition for every 10 minutes of gameplay. That's not a good ratio. That's just poor storytelling.

A good game can integrate the story into the plot so that gameplay doesn't feel interrupted. Look at Half-Life 2 and its episodic content. Beautiful story integration. ...-wait, did I say "good" game? Okay, okay, I've made it known that I think HL2 is average but that's mainly for the generic FPS gameplay and the "check your brain at the door" plot. I will say this though, the way that plot is told is really good. I wish more games took this approach. Another good example: Bioshock.

If Hideo Kojima wants to make a movie, then he should make a fucking movie. I for one am tired of spending over half of a game listening to people talk about the horrors of war and corrupt governments.

L.B. Jeffries:

Indigo_Dingo:
Then why did people enjoy To Kill A Mockingbird being in The Darkness, or those lovely t.v. channels in GTA IV? the future is now, baby, the walls between the the traditional medias are being torn. If a game can use cinematography to make its point, then more power to it.

Now I just hope they'll give me a pause and a rewind button, and a "Do you really want to miss this cutscene, and hence half the bloody plot?" warning, as I always kick myself when I miss something in a cutscene.

This.

As long as the game is upfront about it being cutscene heavy and it tells me that it's all about the plot, then what's the problem? I grew up on interactive ficiton and long ago accepted that the only way to really get an interesting or deep story in a game is if it makes me put down the controller occasionally.

Jenny Creed:
This could be the first really decompressed game. I like it just because of the genre-bending; contrary to what someone said earlier mediums of entertainment need to mix with each other in order to develop interesting new mediums. I'd rather have some failed experiments than some sort of fiction concentration camps where books, movies and games are denied all inter-racial contact in the name of purity.

Wordy McWord to everything.

mspencer82:

Games are first and foremost about the gameplay, that's why they're called 'games', all else is secondary.

I thought they were called VIDEOgames. I don't see why we shouldn't dwelve more on the potential they have as a visual medium.

This thread is one of the reasons why gaming has gone down hill. The back of game boxes used to say "2 HOURS OF CINEMATICS!" and people would go crazy, ranting and raving over the story telling elements. Now, gamers get a double wammy and people complain that it's "too long."

Go away. Please. I'm so sick and tired of not being able to buy a game because there isn't anything worth buying. It mainly has to do with the influx of frat boy gamers and x-box kiddies who can't play anything that doesn't revolve around GUN and IMPATIENCE. It's sad that people are complaining about paying $50 for a combination of full length (high quality) video game and more-than-full-length-motion-picture movie that, chances are, will be much MUCH better than the majority of garbage that we gets spewed at us all the time (Speed Racer anyone?).

If you don't like long games, go play Peggle, please.

mspencer82:
Games are first and foremost about the gameplay, that's why they're called 'games', all else is secondary. Now granted, a good story can enhance the experience, but only if it's told properly. Cutscenes should be no more than five minutes long and at the very most, every hour of gameplay. Metal Gear games are to the point where there's 20 minutes of codec exposition for every 10 minutes of gameplay. That's not a good ratio. That's just poor storytelling.

Games are about the gameplay, you are correct. You are forgetting one of the most important elements of gameplay, though. That element is player immersion. If it takes them 20 minutes for them to convey what they need to convey so you feel like your actions are making an impact in the world, then good.

It becomes incrediblly drab and dull when the only information you are given is "Go here." Then, when you get there they tell you "Do this." No thanks.

Okay, i'm getting confused.

Does MGS4 have 90-minute LONG cutscenes?
or
Does MGS4 have 90-minute TOTAL cutscenes?

I read the article 10 times and it says 90-minute LONG cutscenes.

And for all of you people saying "I hope it has a pause button/skip button/button button" read the damn article.

EDIT: Alright, so i guess MGS4 won't have full 90-minute cutscenes (thank you Mstrswrd

I wouldn't mind cut-scenes that long. As long as they don't do what they did in Twin Snakes on the Cube: make every boss fight completely irrelevant by having the entire fight in a cut-scene after you've finally managed to beat that damn boss.

Sometimes I felt like I wasn't even supposed to play that game. As if me fighting against Raven in the tank was completely pointless because Snake kicked a grenade in there with so much class and style after I took such a long time basically trying to do just that, except with the fucking flying abilities or extremely precise kicking of grenades.

Even if the game had a 90 minute long cutscene, I bet it would be the (fanservicey) ending anyway. I wouldn't worry too much about it, really.

Indigo_Dingo:

PurpleRain:
That is stupid. Point closed. Why would the player want to sit through a movie length cut scene and not be involved in it? I don't care if they explain the history of the universe; watching a movie in a game just isn't right. Two medias shouldn't mix like that. People PLAY games. People WATCH movies. People READ books. People don't go to the movies to read 90mins of scrolling text just as people shouldn't play a game to watch a 90min cut scene.

Ok, rant over. Just think it's so stupid.

Then why did people enjoy To Kill A Mockingbird being in The Darkness, or those lovely t.v. channels in GTA IV (I liked the Space Republicans)? The future is now, baby, the walls between the the traditional medias are being torn. If a game can use cinematography to make its point, then more power to it.

Now I just hope they'll give me a pause and a rewind button, and a "Do you really want to miss this cutscene, and hence half the bloody plot?" warning, as I always kick myself when I miss something in a cutscene, either by being distracted or by accidentally pressing any button, which the game interprets to mean I want to skip.

People loved it because, and I loved it because, it was completely optional. You didn't run into it if you didn't want to. It was a TV. It wasn't stuck in your face and told to like it, or miss an entire plot. To Kill a Mocking Bird didn't FORWARD the plot in any way. (TRhough I enjoyed the Duskfall video)
Sitting through a fucking movie while trying to enjoy a god damned game, if fucking ludicrous unless optional without missing anything. It's pushing the boundaries between enjoyable and tedious. Seriously. The only way to get the story out of the game is waste days on end watching cut scenes? The only replay value offered in such a situation is to learn the plot. Now, I like MGS. But when you have to watch a god damned movie to figure out what is going on? Balls. Straight up balls and shitty story writing. This tells me that the game ittself is going to be shit. If you can't tell the story through actually playing the game, you have failed to make the story and the game worth playing. Take the story out, and you have a good, albeit pointless, game. Keep the story in, and you have a big hunk of shit if you can't play it out.

Credge:
Games are about the gameplay, you are correct. You are forgetting one of the most important elements of gameplay, though. That element is player immersion. If it takes them 20 minutes for them to convey what they need to convey so you feel like your actions are making an impact in the world, then good.

It becomes incrediblly drab and dull when the only information you are given is "Go here." Then, when you get there they tell you "Do this." No thanks.

Fine, if 20 minutes of storytelling is needed for immersion, make it part of gameplay. There are games out there who don't rely as heavily on cutscenes that have MUCH better stories that Metal Gear Solid. In most games the stuff that happens in a cutscene could be folded into the gameplay. Instead of watching your character sneak into a room to listen to the bad guy tell every detail of his plan, how about being able to control the player walking in and finding a good hiding spot?

I don't see how immersed you can feel in a game that takes control away from you every five minutes.

I'd rather be told "go here" and "do this" than have the game say "look, the main character is going here", and "look, he's doing this". I prefer a little more interactivity.

As far as the codec conversations, they sometimes tell you what you need to know in order to move on, but it's always sandwiched in with a bunch of useless information. I seriously doubt that in the middle of a top secret mission one of the support people is going to go on and on about their tragic childhood, or whether love can bloom on the battlefield.