The Big Picture: Off the Charts

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT
 

mireko:
In what universe is Metal Gear Solid a good or even an interesting story? It's one of the worst movies I've ever seen, and I've seen Manos.

In an universe where 90% of the dialogue and scenes of characters standing around doing nothing would be cut. If it were put in a movie-form, necessarily that would happen, and even if it wouldn't be stellar, it would be better than the cutscenes in games.

When I think of "Story" in games, the story-telling doesn't always come to mind as much as context, which attaches meanings to the elements of a game (characters, locations, etc.) to remember/refer them by, be it Eastern or Western. Take Demons' Souls for example:

* Story: The player is a silent adventurer on a quest to defeat an evil entity.
* Context:
** A stark contrast of Bolivia: between the "prosperous land" mentioned in the intro and the mess the player ended up in. [Uncertainty; Horror]
** The player dies soon after entering Bolivia. The soul remains, but cannot pass on even though, by in-game implications, it normally should. [Helplessness; Weakness]
** All five stages display just how much the land has fallen throughout. [Horror; Fear; Chaos]
** Amidst the hordes of hell-spawn and abominations, the player can die very very easily. [Survival]

These are just a handful of general context presented within the very first hour of the game. Sure, DS has a minimal/simplistic story, but it holds a lot of context by which it can be remembered. Various developers naturally prefer various methods to merge that context with their games, be it through cinematics (many modern titles), bodies of text (visual novels and many RPGs) or just passive narration (Demons' Souls); maybe there are more. I don't find one method to be superior/inferior to another; as long as the context is coherent enough, the players can take it in without much difficulty, and ultimately left an emotional impact on them after it's over, I'd call that a game's "Mission Accomplished".

I don't care how good the director might be, games are inherently designed in completely different ways to a movie. They deliver an experience that the GAMING audience desires. Movies are designed to deliver an uninteractive experience for MOVIE-WATCHERS. Making a video game movie is a Monumental task. Anyone capable of conquering such a feat, will have the foresight to think.... 'hmm... maybe i could work with the GAME makers, and integrate the story into their All ready established franchise.' This could create an interesting and very much in-depth way of creating a story for a game.
Some of you may, therefore, complain that this is just profit mongering. But, wouldn't you pay for an in-depth, immersive gaming experience? Even if that means you have to sit through 90 mins of prequel material?

And please don't quote Assasin's Creed at me. That was not a movie. That was a pile of dog shit.

I couldn't sit through the first Uncharted game because it's bloom got boring at the story bored me fromt he get go, so hopefully the movie does better

I did start the 2nd game last night, and find the story a little more satisfying so far. Yes it's got National Treasure syndrome, but the levels started feeling sprawling, and I started to enjoy the game, maybe because I was picturing the Prince of Persia doing all this only unable to run on walls and flail while making wise-ass jokes, but the way it's told so far through flashbacks makes me wonder what the hell happened that Drake was on a train, and also how the hell he can leap across chasms and such with half his blood on the OUTSIDE of his body

Hopefully the film is able to capture that feeling I'm getting from the second game, because rarely do I enjoy the "let's see how it all happened through flashbacks" approach to story telling, who knows, it could work

Considering what examples he comes with for "truly good games with a great story"... yeah, he is a console fanboy.

And those games haven't got a good story either.

And saying a "good story for a western game" shows a real bias for Japanese games... which often have a ridiculous story. Especially RPGs.

And they already did Mario. Remember the disaster it was?

By the way, in which universe does Movie Bob lives where Metal Gear Solid ISN'T a movie?

Wait... what are you saying? It's a game!? Could've fooled me Kojima.

Tomb Raider: Uncharted.
So promising.

Bob:
...for a western-developed game...

Yeah, it's a real shame there isn't an androgynous whiny teenager with an oversized sword and garish outfit in this game.

But I kid, and digress. The reason for Hollywood's constant and unabashed failure in making particularly good or honest video game adaptations, be they a fairly bad Silent Hill or a reprehensible Alone in the Dark, is actually a problem with the medium.

Books, movies, comics, tv shows: they all differ in many ways, but they do share a single constant. They all lack any form of viewer input(save for Choose Your Own Adventure, I guess). Sure, TV shows bow to ratings demands, as do book series, comics, and movie sequels. But none of these media are interactive.

Despite what jawless, crotchety old men may mindlessly blurt out, games are an artistic medium unto themselves. But the world they create differs from those created by competing media. The player crafts his/her experience far more than the game does(at least, if the game's any good at what it does). The art involved in a game becomes more than just a story woven by the developer, but a reflection of the player his/herself. Movies can't do that. They can come close, even as far as keeping themselves vague enough that the viewer will craft a perspective that differ wildly from their fellow man, but ultimately everyone sees mostly the same thing, in slightly different ways.

When creating a game, one has to create a reasonable, believable(not realistic, just believable) world, with a sort of underlying consistency. Games often have the luxury of subtlety: depending on how you play a game, there may be entire corners of that world you are completely unaware of. Games have hours upon hours to unravel their story and conjure up their characters. Movies have two hours to accomplish all this. Games have the upper hand with a lot of things: the player is more disposed to identify with their character, since if they don't care for how long they live they're not going to get far in the game. The player is often driven by other, less story-like aspects to complete the game, therefore having a reason to have their ass glued to the chair. Movies have to establish a story, make it involved enough to keep one watching, all while actually managing to tell a story.

Try as one might, cramming 10-80 hours of gameplay into a two-hour film reel is a herculean task, made all the more difficult by a director/writer/producer/actor/grip's passing interest in the medium they are taking things from. So, until you get someone who's actually chomping at the bit to make a movie based on a game, you're going to get mediocre sludge for the time being. Not good enough to be a standalone movie, not loyal enough to the source material to make for a compelling piece for the fans.

my only problem with... no that's a lie I have a lot of problems with this movie. My main problem is Mark Wahlberg, he can't act!

YES Dane Cook is a GIANT DOUCHBAG!!!!!!!
love your work Bob (apart from your last big picture :P) keep it up

A 'good' western game story being roughly on par with the script of a late era Steven Segal movie? Are you fucking kidding me?! You have, in one fell swoop, belittled the achievements of Black Isle, Bioware, Double Fine (Psychonauts was fucking awesome) and Lucasarts (you know, Monkey Island, the kick-ass Indiana Jones games, and the only good thing associated with Jedi Knights in the new millenium (other than KOTOR but I count that under Bioware) Jedi Knight II, Jedi Outcast)!

Not only this but in the same sentence you have implicitly held Eastern (read Japanese) games in higher regard, despite the fact that they have released the exact same Pokemon story for the past fourteen years, Square, whilst producing competent games, have lost all passion in the Final Fantasy games; producing such bullshit for us to deal with as Tidas in Final Fantasy X; Final Fantasy X-2 in its entirety; and the cast of Final Fantasy XIII, the only likeable one being Sazh, the one who contemplates suicide every two minutes!

Granted I've been largely unable to play Dragon Quest so I'll leave that out of my assessment but I'd be willing to say that the standards of game stories are roughly on par across the developing community. Suffice to say that Baldur's Gate and Baldur's Gate 2 are still in my top ten game stories of all time list whilst Japanese games barely feature.

tkioz:
He's Bob and He's a pretentious biased Nintendo/Japan loving douche that dresses up opinion as fact.

Quoted for Truth.

Those were some good points as always, I love this show.

Woawoawoa.

Folks, folks. You've all missed the really thing that MUST be pointed out.

The escapist should start selling the "just my opinion hat."

That is all.

joebear15:

Macrobstar:
ARGH, FFS Bob stop making me hate you, uncharteds story was good i agree, but when you put in "for a western developer" seriously? WHAT PLAnET ARE YOU ON, Bioshock, Dragon age, mass effect, Red dead redemption

three games do NOT make up for 99% bad and you know it , stop being defensive and be honest.

But since when are non western developers better?

starwarsgeek:

Quick question about Van Hellsing. Does he have a generations-long feud with Dracula or fight a large array of monsters (mummies, Frakenstein's monster, werewolves etc)

Actually yes to most of the list you mentioned. The opening scene he fights frankenstein, werewolves, vampires and other assorted baddies throughout the movie. And yes he and drackula have a very long history... it's eluded that Van Helsing is also immortal. Also the new Belmont in the latest Castelvania looks like he was modelled off of Hughe Jackman.

The entire "Castelvania" series was modeled after the legend of Van Helsing. The only thing that they don't really have in the movie is a big whip lol. So The Castlevania movie has been done already. Not only that but it had Kate beckensale and Hugh Jackman in it and it still barely made money. So based upon that I doubt you'll see a castelvania movie any time soon.

starwarsgeek:
The story itself is founded on stereotypical characters, but the setting is interesting enough to potentially make up for it. Maybe that's what Bob meant with the "for a Western game" comment. A western gaming with a less-than-great story doesn't often have the setting to back it up.

Actually the problem is the exact opposite. You can have the most amazing setting in the world for your story but if your characters are 2 dimensional and boring then your movie is going to suck. No one is going to care about your characters or worse yet they are just going to come off as hoaky stereotypes. Story/Plot & character are the most important aspects of any kind of movie. You have to look no further than youtube to see this in action. Nearly all of the most successful videos on youtube are shot in crappy settings often inside or around someone's house, the supermarket etc. Yet people tune in day after day to check them out? why? because they love the main character of that particular channel. People don't watch "epic mealtime" for the recipies They watch it to see what the main character is going to say next, how balsey he's going to be.

The problem with these classic nintendo games is that the majority of them are fairly mute 2 dimensional characters. Why? because we are supposed to impart ourselves onto said characters as we are the player. Could Zelda or Metal Gear or Mario become good movies? Possibly. Mario would only work in an animated format because let's face it that's a kids movie and the characters are too cartoonish to make sense in live action. But in all three movies they would have to spend a tremendous amount of time fleshing out the characters in order to make the real people that the audience could relate to and want to watch.

This guy Kinda sums it up best:

StriderShinryu:
Honestly, as far as Uncharted is concerned, I don't care about the film one bit. I played the games when they were called Tomb Raider and Drake had a much larger chest, and I watched the movies already when they were called Indiana Jones.

Most of these ideas have been done before with more interesting storylines and characters. Zelda could be equated to any fantasy epic where some kid finds out he's the hero of the land. (King Arthur and the sword in the stone, Eragon, Chronicles of Narnia etc.) Metal gear can be equated to the Bourne Identity movies or any big action hero movie. Mario... well that can't be equated to really anything because it simply has no real characterization... even the smurfs had more characterization than most of the cast of the Mario franchise. And Castlevania I've already talked about.

The point is without good, fully realized characters no one is going to care about your movie. Mass Effect on the other hand has much more going for it. While you could say it's a star wars/star Trek knock off, (lets face it the setting is nearly identical) the part that makes it worthwhile to become a movie is that it has great characters with a great epic story and those are the aspects that make it unique and different.

Commander Shepard clearly has a strong personality (one of my personal favorites is youtubing the "commander shepard is a jerk" videos). And so do all of the other cast members because they are voiced by real actors and there are literally hours of dialog fleshing out the personality of each one. In fact some of the missions actually lead you to learn more about each of the characters and their history. Not a whole lot of additional script writing/characterization would be needed to bring those characters to the big screen.

People don't care about setting nearly as much as they care about characters. Often times people will not even care about story. They just want to see how one of their favorite characters reacts to any given situation... that's why reality TV is so popular.

Anyway I hope you guys can get the point I'm trying to make here. The old "great" franchise games will probably never be made into movies because the main characters were never fleshed out fully... they were merely vessels for us to project our own personalities on for the most part and let is "live" as the character for a few hrs while we play the game. And like any good book Hollywood will never be able to match the power of our own imagination.

So true, so so so true.

Video game movies are bad because the stories and mythologies they from are actually pretty bad. I can count the number of actually good video game stories on a single hand, and they shy in comparison to that of a descent book, not even a great one. There isn't a game that something the likes of McCarthy, Dickens, Twain, Herbert, or any famous author has churned out.

The main issue is time for the most part, games are just too new, and the written word is ages old so there is a lot more time for great stuff to get made. Plenty of schlock has been made in the last 8000 years, and the number of actually quality pieces of writing is probably in only the thousands.

Even games that have "great" stories are basically bad genre novels. Mass Effect is a marginal sci fi novel, Dragon Age is hack work fantasy, Most JPRGs are just digital versions of mediocre fantasy manga, Metal Gear solid is at best a high concept action film and convoluted low budget action film that tried to give it self a failing story, and the rest follow suit.

The best story examples aren't even that truly remarkable.

Planescape Torment is a pretty solid fantasy novel with some pretty good writing and a interesting fantasy concept. I'd say its about China Melville good.

Final Fantasy Tactics has a pretty engaging tragic story that is on par with a good anime.

FF6 has a pretty muddy convoluted plot, but the characters themselves, how they deal with the struggles at hand, and how each one reaches a believable turning point gives FF6 a strong position. But its still gather the gang and save the world by the numbers stuff at it's core.

Portal is pretty slick, but its a great short film at best. There isn't much "story" there but what is there is complex and interesting.

Monkey Island 1 gets a nod for being something interesting Imho. It's like what if Monty Python made a pirate movie? And for that it's wonderful.

I didn't play Gabriel Knight, The Longest Journey, and Silent Hill 2... so anyone want to comment?

A lot of the old Lucas Arts point and click adventure games are some of gaming's best story examples actually. But their point and click adventure games... waa wa wa...

So yeah not much to pull from in reality.

Kitten

Recently I bought the orange box. I had never played any of it's games, and was trying to find something to keep my mind off SC2 when I saw the unassuming box just sitting there on the shelf. So I bought it thinking, hey I've heard good things about this games, they're supposed to be classics yada, yada.
Half life 2 and portal are easily some of my favorite games now. They would be amazing as movies if only with the competent directors to translate their subtleties

Well, I've already been semi-scooped on this post, but as the earlier posters took a more terse approach, I feel I can get away with being more verbose.

The Uncharted movie, as described by David O. Russell, is a Lovejoy-style (as in the novels by Johnathan Gash*) crime/suspense thriller set in the world of art and artifact dealing. While the film might end up in some scenic locales, they'll be considerably more urban then the environments of the games - Venice, Florence, Zurich, that sort of thing.

I have no problem with a movie in that vein - Johnathan Gash's Lovejoy novels are wonderful and are one of my favorite mystery/suspense series. However, that doesn't fit in with the concept of the Uncharted game series.

The Uncharted game series is, basically, a series of modern-day pulp adventures with a two-fisted hero (Nathan Drake) searching the world for various lost treasures (Shangri-La, the treasure of Sir Francis Drake, etc.) while having to contend with heavily armed force of bad guys out to get the treasure first (Mercenaries, rival treasure hunters with more resources then ethics, etc.). At some point in the story, the occult comes in, with it being revealed that the treasure in question has some dark power that would make it dangerous to the outside world if used by the bad guys (raising zombies, turning people into super-strong berserker warriors, whatever). This changes the heroes' objective from an attempt to find the treasure first and get it out (because "It Belongs In A Museum") to preventing the bad guys from removing the treasure, and destroying it if necessary.

Throughout all of this story, the player is generally in remote exotic locations, usually jungles, ruins, mountain passes, etc. Occasionally towns in remote portions of the world - but never spending any notable period of time in any more metropolitan locations (though Uncharted 3 will change that, with levels in London, apparently).

To make a equivalence - this would be more like an adaptation of Stephen King's "It" that dumped all the elements of horror (and the bits where the main characters were children), and instead focused the plot on a bunch of childhood friends, now adults, coping with aging and mortality. You can get a good movie with that premise, and there is a good movie with that premise. However, it's not It, and it's definitely not a Stephen King story.

EDIT: Somehow my first sentence wasn't actually a complete sentence. That has been rectified.

EDIT^2: One other point I should clarify - we currently get plenty of tense suspense thrillers. They're, frankly, only slightly more expensive to make than romantic comedies, dramadies, and general dramas, in terms of production values. Pulpy adventure films, particularly ones that spend more time in exotic locales instead of our own backyard? Much more uncommon. We have the Pirates of the Caribbean series (which is more of Swashbuckly adventure film, though there are some pulp elements - and some of the classic pirate swashbucklers were written in the pulp era), and that's currently it. The National Treasure series generally stays in the Continental US (unless National Treasure 3 involves returning the long lost crown jewels of the Hawaiian royal family to Hawaii), the Mummy series bombed in is last outing (and that was a while back), as did the last theatrical outing of Clive Cussler's two-fisted adventurer, Dirk Pitt (which is a pulp name if I ever heard one), bombed so spectacularly that it's basically killed any chances of getting future Pitt films.

So, I'd say we could do with one more pulp film in the world.

darthotaku:
I've seen alot of people bashing Moviebob about his "For a western developer" line, and I think it's funny that they bring up the same five games. Probably because those few games are the exception. Most games that I play for a good story aren't western made games because western games put more emphasisi on making a profit rather than making a touching story and gameplay.

I think you might forgetting the rule that %90 of EVERYTHING is shit.

Traun:

danpascooch:

Zhukov:
Whoo boy.

You just had to throw in that "for a western developed video game" line didn't you?

I'm not even gonna touch that. Because if I did it would just consist of me yelling, "Bioshock!" over and over.

And now I've started touching that.

...

I'm outa here.

Don't forget Mass Effect.

Seriously, why did he say "for a western developed game? Is it because JRPGs are always so fresh and innovative? Lol, I know it's an opinion, but this is about as close to factually incorrect an opinion will ever be.

Mass Effect had a bad story. If you wanted to include a modern game with a good story you could have went with Winter Voices.
Anyway, he said it because he is starving for attention. If you haven't noticed Moviebob is the online equivalent of Fox News, go through all his videos on "The Big Picture" and you will realize that everything he says is for sensationalism and that he tries to spur some controversy, mostly because this is the only way he can lure viewers. As someone said it earlier:

tkioz:
He's Bob and He's a pretentious biased Nintendo/Japan loving douche that dresses up opinion as fact.

Currently, I'm just watching him for the ego-boost.

I'm not even going to argue with your fact-like statement that it was "bad", or bother to talk about Winter Voices (which I've never even heard of), but I'll present another amazing Bioware game. Knights of The Old Republic 1. If you think that has a bad story you meet legal criteria to be committed.

themerrygambit:

Actually yes to most of the list you mentioned. The opening scene he fights frankenstein, werewolves, vampires and other assorted baddies throughout the movie. And yes he and drackula have a very long history... it's eluded that Van Helsing is also immortal. Also the new Belmont in the latest Castelvania looks like he was modelled off of Hughe Jackman.

I did not know this...sounds pretty awesome. I'll have to find this Van Helsing movie :)

Actually the problem is the exact opposite. You can have the most amazing setting in the world for your story but if your characters are 2 dimensional and boring then your movie is going to suck. No one is going to care about your characters or worse yet they are just going to come off as hoaky stereotypes.

Sorry, I should have elaborated more on that. What I meant was the setting would be a good foundation for a good movie script. Whoever's writting the script for a film adaptation of a game would...or should, anyway...be encouraged to expand any main characters who are flat and/or two dimmensional in the source material. Link's characterization (he's courage incarnate. Besides that, he's literally a "link" between the player and the game world) works fine in the context of the game, but he'd be boring to watch in a Zelda movie, so I'd expect the writer to expand on him (hopefully someone who's never even heard of the cartoon). I wasn't suggesting that neat backgrounds and visuals can save boring characters, but that those settings combined with a writer expanding on the characters would potentially make a good/great.

Anyway I hope you guys can get the point I'm trying to make here. The old "great" franchise games will probably never be made into movies because the main characters were never fleshed out fully... they were merely vessels for us to project our own personalities on for the most part and let is "live" as the character for a few hrs while we play the game. And like any good book Hollywood will never be able to match the power of our own imagination.

Yeah, probably, but I still think a good enough writer could pull it off.
Thanks for the well-thought-out reply...I usually just get ignored or, occasionally, called a fanboy of whatever I'm discussing (especially if it's Nintendo).

And, yes, "Commander Shepard is a Jerk" is fantastic ;)

I am in a bit of a tough spot here.

On the one hand, I'm sort of with Bob. O'Russell is a pretty good director (not a great director, mind you, he IS wildly overrated) and easily the best shot at a decent game movie. Heck, Three Kings is pretty much an edgier source of inspiration for Battlefield Bad Company. His plans to change the core concept are not immediately obvious but still acceptable (if your main guy is going to be a descendant of Francis Drake you might as well make the thing be related to his bloodline) and his casting choices, although bizarre, are safe by O'Russell's standards, as the list of people willing to work with him once, let alone multiple times, is increasingly short.

I'm very mildly optimistic, veering on neutral.

Now, about the merits of Uncharted's story, though.

The general "it's good for a videogame" take on it is a manifestation of gaming's self-awareness. It is not good for a videogame, it's good for an action movie. The Mummy was a good movie, and I feel this is on par in characterization and theme. It is head and shoulders above both National Treasure movies.

Uncharted 2 in particular is very well written. Sure, the characters are action movie clichés, but that is very much the point. Uncharted 2 puts them in interesting places, which is what matters in an action movie in the first place. Uncharted 2 plays up the death of a few people and does it seriously. It talks about betrayal (which is a corny theme, but so is "fortune and glory" in Raiders) and actually places most characters in situations where their allegiances are shifting, unclear or challenged. It doesn't dumb down its women.

This bit, by the way, has a lot to do with the fact that it's written and directed by a woman, who also happens to be my favourite game writer, bar none. Amy Henning also did the Legacy of Kain series, which is what Twilight would have been if it was as intriguingly homoerotic as Interview with the Vampire and as soap opera-ish as Buffy. And also cool.

So no, I'm not inclined to "get real" about Uncharted. Uncharted is well plotted, it's well staged, it has flat characters in interesting situations (which is better than good characters in uninteresting situations, in my book) and it's nowhere as dumb as people seem to want to believe it is.

malestrithe:

Mirrored Jigsaw:

darthotaku:
(words)

(Name five generally agreed upon great stories from eastern games.)

I'll give you 7 because I'm feeling generous:

Silent Hill, Legacy of Kain, Shadow of the Colossus, Ico, Okami, The first Metal Gear Solid, Castlevania: Symphony of the Night

Actually, I give here. Challenging you to name good stories was a useless exercise that doesn't make my point, but the point still exists that people name the same games because the same games come to mind. A society may not have a consensus on what's good and bad, but it has an idea, and people tend to pull from a list of a few examples that the majority can understand and agree upon.

If I want to convince people that western games have great story, I'm going to use Bioshock, Portal, Prince of Persia, Heavy Rain etc as an example because they are games most of us have played and most of us enjoyed the story of.

malestrithe:

As for the 5 examples given, are you purposely limiting yourself to games that appear on the 360? If so, for what reason?

What five examples? I don't know what you're referring to here.

malestrithe:

Also, generally agreed upon by who? The gnome that exists where you are pulling these names out of?

Again, I don't know what names you are referring to, but I'd say that I'm referring to games generally agreed upon by people. Is Shadow of the Colossus not generally understood to have a great story, and is Final Fantasy not conflicted?

Macrobstar:

joebear15:

Macrobstar:
ARGH, FFS Bob stop making me hate you, uncharteds story was good i agree, but when you put in "for a western developer" seriously? WHAT PLAnET ARE YOU ON, Bioshock, Dragon age, mass effect, Red dead redemption

three games do NOT make up for 99% bad and you know it , stop being defensive and be honest.

But since when are non western developers better?

there not, and if they are its only marginally. I believe that its a problem with all games

danpascooch:

I'm not even going to argue with your fact-like statement that it was "bad", or bother to talk about Winter Voices (which I've never even heard of), but I'll present another amazing Bioware game. Knights of The Old Republic 1. If you think that has a bad story you meet legal criteria to be committed.

Yes, because a game needs 50 million USD in advertisement to be good. I won't argue about KOTOR though, it had a good story.

I agree with Bob on the fact that most movies just take the "look" of a game and then turn it into... well a movie.
Which is why I never understood why Uncharted was ever a target.
I can't see how any movie that takes that look wouldn't just be another Indiana Jones, Tomb Raider or National Treasure-esque movie... because in essence that's what style Uncharted is in the first place.

Surely there are more original themes/games you could pursue?
All slightly rhetorical seeing as I realise Uncharted was probably chosen for it's popularity over any other aspect.

PS forcing long-time members to use Captcha is still lame as hell. Chances of us turning into a spam bot after years of frequenting the site without incidents are slim to none.

HankMan:
So according to Movie Bob: Red Dead Redemption, Mass Effect, Bioshock and Dragon Age don't exist. I'd hate to live in his world

To be perfectly fair, and this goes out to ALL the people mentioning these games, NONE of those titles has a particularly groung breaking, innovative, or great story. Their stories are by the numbers generic stuff, or easily summarizable. What makes the stories in those games good is the way in which they are presented- each done with a brilliantly realized setting, and delivery. Viewed on a level of strictly writing, however, they are merely generic-good.

HankMan:

Srdjan Tanaskovic:
So Baz Luhrmann is making a movie based on The Great Gatsby

thats bad how?

It's in 3D
That's never a good sign

I can't imagine what exactly in Great Gatsby you would want in 3D

The girl being hit by the car in 3D wouldn't exaclty be tasteful.

Bob, you say gamers should be happy that some good talent is going to be making a VG into a movie instead of complaining that they arent doing it right. You dont once seem to adress that some of these people may be complaining because they dont think it should be done at all.

I agree with your opinions on how an Uncharted movie will turn out to be, and why it will be so. However, Bob, I think you have made a big lapse in judgement when you said that you don't have to play a game to understand its story thoroughly, whereas it is what you have to do exactly.
See a game is an interactive experience and the 'narrative' of a game isn't based on just what the cut-scenes or cinematics tell you. It is all about the interactions of the player with the created environment. A game's tutorial level may say much more about the narrative than an entire archive worth of cut-scenes. And , on top of "cashing in" as you so cleverly named the title of your video, the aforementioned mentality prevalent in many people not really familiar with the medium is a problem in and of itself. That kind of perspective has to change if we are to ever see an actual good game-based movie.

Edit: Oh yeah, this post would have been unfair without a shout-out to the true originators of these theses, Extra Credits

Sadly I have never even touched the Uncharted franchise, despite being a PS3 owner. The only thing I know about it, is that Nathan Drake is one of the hundreds of voices under Nolan North's disgustingly large belt.

Maybe this movie will be decent, maybe it will suck. All I'm going to say is that everyone - and I mean everyone - who's going to willingly put themselves through another video game movie adaptation, shouldn't have any high hopes, ever.

I really getting sick of people getting the delusion that after suffering through the last 20 or 30-odd videogame films, they think the next one will be somehow different. It's almost as disgusting as the Highlander fanbase, except in that case the first one was actually good.

I wish I lived in a mental bubble world where the year is always 1985, Mario serves me free drinks and Princess Peach gives me blowjobs on a regular basis then I too could be a big Nintendo fan like Bob. =P

Not insulting the guy, he's entitled to his tastes and opinions like anyone but man when it comes to games I really have difficulty agreeing with him. Western games always have bad story? I mean come on with stuff like Bioshock, Mass Effect, Assassins Creed, saying that is just crazy.

Funny because Uncharted has been made once before... just by Uwe Boll. What are we forgetting that one now that a supposedly good one is coming?

In that case... YAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAY

Anyways you made an interesting point, though I would like to point out that in my personal opinion Scott Pilgrim was the first ever totally awesome Gamer movie and don't you go saying it's not a gamer movie.

Also I doubt there will ever be a adaption movie that some fan will never nit pick... because believe me they are out there... ^^;;

LazyAza:
I wish I lived in a mental bubble world where the year is always 1985, Mario serves me free drinks and Princess Peach gives me blowjobs on a regular basis then I too could be a big Nintendo fan like Bob. =P

Not insulting the guy, he's entitled to his tastes and opinions like anyone but man when it comes to games I really have difficulty agreeing with him. Western games always have bad story? I mean come on with stuff like Bioshock, Mass Effect, Assassins Creed, saying that is just crazy.

If you watch his overthinker stuff on Screwattack, You will facepalm all the way throught them. Like when he calles FPS worst genre ever

As a gamer more than a lover of films all I can say is if the story hasn't changed despite fan protest, then the story must be pretty good for the director to refuse changing it. That's my view on the argument.

(Btw, how old is that Uncharted footage Bob? Elena was brunette in it.)

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here