Videogame script writer Tom Jubert has drawn a parallel between the state of videogame storylines and cinema and reckons game plot is still in the black and white era.
"It seems contradictory to suggest film is capable of doing just that, but that gaming is somehow different - there's not a leg to stand on", Jubert told CVG when asked if he views videogames as a palatable medium through which to offer commentary on topical issues.
"Gaming's an unfortunate term we've been saddled with", Jubert, who has worked on the Penbumra horror adventures and Black & White 2, added.
He says that a lot of games, especially those of a few years ago, are intellectually akin to a game of tennis, or Snakes & Ladders, but these days that's not really a fair appraisal as interactive entertainment is better.
"Of course," Jubert continued, "topical relevance being palatable and it actually occurring is a different story.
"Blacksite gets a lot of flak for its botched political message - but at least they gave it a shot. Bioshock was altogether less ambitious. But it's early days - in cinematic history we'd still be in black and white".
I agree with the man totally, but it is very hard to acheive the same feeling in games that you can experience with real actors in movies. A solution may be to use grade "A" script writers for narrative heavy games but the costs would be hard to bear. Just let games be games and movies be movies, is that so hard to live with?
People who say things like this inevitably come across as somewhat ill-advised, or not fully aware what they're talking about.
Video game stories have come on in leaps and bounds, and many games offer palpable parrellels between events in the game world and events in real life. And I don't just mean recent titles- although there certainly are recent titles that do so very well, Bioshock, Mass Effect, and Assassins Creed being just a couple of games that offer a compelling storyline and strong script that pulls you in.
But going back a little further- Final Fantasy X's carefully told tale of religious oppression, and Planescape: Torment's exploration of what it is to be human are some of the strongest storylines and scripts I've ever had the pleasure to enjoy. Lines from Torment, in particular, still echo in my mind today.
All I can say is, if game scripts are still in the black & white era, than I cannot wait to see what the future will bring.
It's a shame game plots aren't actually in the 'black and white' era as Mr Jubert suggests, because they had far more intelligent stories and sharper dialogue in the 1930s and 1940s than they do now.
If game scripts being comparable to modern cinema means endless remakes, TV show/comic adaptations and everyone nicking ideas off each other, then better to be old-fashioned, I reckon
"Blacksite gets a lot of flak for its botched political message - but at least they gave it a shot. Bioshock was altogether less ambitious. But it's early days - in cinematic history we'd still be in black and white".
Surely Blacks**te gets a lot of flak for being a terrible game. As for Bioshock, i thought the storyline was quite good
So this guy was a script writer on a sandbox game (Black and White 2). Forgive me, but I don't remember a whole lot of scripting in that game.
There's also the argument that Black and White movies had much better scripting that many of todays special effects blockbusters, but that's just being pedantic!
There's a few problems you have in a game compared to a movie.
The fact movies are told 3rd person means they can skip to other characters to build up backstory. In a game you are controlling one person (at a time) so switching to random other people during a mission or flicking back and forward between scenarios would add loading times for each area and interrupt the game experience.
I thought CoD4's story, while a little cliched, was well told. You got a fairly believable real-world situation, you got characters with a bit of personality, a flashback to build some history and a conclusion.
I haven't played the game but I know that one of the main reasons critics loved bioshock was that it had great story telling, so much so that it won several awards from various websites etc just for that part of the game. this tells me that the guy in the article really doesn't know what he is talking about, maybe he should go play silent hill 2 or legacy of kain then come back and say the same thing.
If games get too script heavy, it just means countless cut scenes, and nobody wants that. Remember the interactive movies of the Mega-CD era? *shudder*
I don't like his dismissal of Bioshock. That's one of the best examples of what he's talking about. I suspect jealousy.
Indeed. Brilliant story, and one of my favourites of last year.
I agree too . Bioshock had one of the best video game stories. It was very thoughtful, very clever and raised lots of interesting points. Like bereclain I also thought FFX told a pretty good story, and there are plenty others.
Video games are different to movies. They aren't directly comparable, and so the way narrative is developed is always going to be different. Most game stories are s**t though, but the same is also true of many films! In a way though, it is similar to the argument comparing the narrative of films to books.
It's a shame game plots aren't actually in the 'black and white' era as Mr Jubert suggests, because they had far more intelligent stories and sharper dialogue in the 1930s and 1940s than they do now.
If game scripts being comparable to modern cinema means endless remakes, TV show/comic adaptations and everyone nicking ideas off each other, then better to be old-fashioned, I reckon
are you kidding me?
1930s/40s cinema (I don't know where you're from, but TV didn't really pick up in England here till in the late 40's/early 50's, and even in America it only became popular in the late 40s/early 50s) was awful. Studios were reknown for putting out one type of film, ie, one studio was known for romantic films, another for drama etc etc. The introduction of sound made it so that cinema became almost primative are microphones were appalling and then there was all the experimental s**t such as different forms of sound and colour.
Anyway,
I do sort of agree with the man. Although I only buy 'great' games, with good storylines - I imagine the more generic games' storylines are quite boring and predictable. Infact, most games have an element of predictability about them - as Dajmin says, films will always have the advantage in storytelling.
It's a shame game plots aren't actually in the 'black and white' era as Mr Jubert suggests, because they had far more intelligent stories and sharper dialogue in the 1930s and 1940s than they do now.
If game scripts being comparable to modern cinema means endless remakes, TV show/comic adaptations and everyone nicking ideas off each other, then better to be old-fashioned, I reckon
are you kidding me?
1930s/40s cinema (I don't know where you're from, but TV didn't really pick up in England here till in the late 40's/early 50's, and even in America it only became popular in the late 40s/early 50s) was awful. Studios were reknown for putting out one type of film, ie, one studio was known for romantic films, another for drama etc etc. The introduction of sound made it so that cinema became almost primative are microphones were appalling and then there was all the experimental s**t such as different forms of sound and colour.
Anyway,
I do sort of agree with the man. Although I only buy 'great' games, with good storylines - I imagine the more generic games' storylines are quite boring and predictable. Infact, most games have an element of predictability about them - as Dajmin says, films will always have the advantage in storytelling.
This shouldn't be an argument about which era of cinema is the best, but the late 30's and 40's arguably produced some of the best films ever made - films that absolutely stand up even today. Many are black and white, and the assumption that black and white equals crap is wrong.
This shouldn't be an argument about which era of cinema is the best, but the late 30's and 40's arguably produced some of the best films ever made - films that absolutely stand up even today. Many are black and white, and the assumption that black and white equals crap is wrong.
Yes, but the problem with looking back on an era is that only the best examples of the period tend to survive, so while there were some classics - It doesn't mean they were a representative of the majority.
Grim Fandango (Wikipedia it and read the plot, then play it)
I agree with him on the whole though, Grim Fandango was part of a dying breed of games. For the most part games that do have stories are horribly cliche'd. Save the princess/save the world, or do the previous 2 things with a bunch of orcs, elves and pixies.
There's a few problems you have in a game compared to a movie.
The fact movies are told 3rd person means they can skip to other characters to build up backstory. In a game you are controlling one person (at a time) so switching to random other people during a mission or flicking back and forward between scenarios would add loading times for each area and interrupt the game experience.
I thought CoD4's story, while a little cliched, was well told. You got a fairly believable real-world situation, you got characters with a bit of personality, a flashback to build some history and a conclusion.
Definately agreed. I doubt the cliché, too. It was supposed to be taht way. It was scripted well and immersive. Much better than any blood film that's come out in a long time.
It seems ironic (not to mention odd that nobody's mentioned it) that somebody stating that many games scripts are stuck in the 'black and white' era worked on a game called... Black and White 2.
His comments are predictable. Comparisons to television are too general to be useful. Vidoegames, sad to say for him, do not all have to rely on superb script or even any dialogue between characters at all. The Sonic the hedgehog series has not become any better since in went into 3D and having him spout dialogue and have motives worthy of Shakespeare would totally miss the point of the edgy, fast, game. Since when did the Mario games need great scriptwriters?
The 'art' of vidoegames is often in the atmosphere created, the animation, the level design, the music. In a series like Monkey Island a witty script is very necessary but in many games, with inferior scriptwriters, all we are left with is a load of over-serious sci-fi cliches that would be better off just concentrating on gameplay.
Hmm... I seem to have read this article differently to everyone else. Is this not in response to comments recently where games have been slated for not being able to tell a story as well as a film (the director of Pirate of the Caribbean and that article in one of the papers claiming kids could get more for soaps than a game, for example.) In affect, Jubert is saying that we are still at an early period of game development, not that it is impossible or no one is trying. As the medium grows new methods will emerge that will change how games are made and written.
His criticism of Bioshock, however, is uncalled for. Great story, that went beyond the political ideologies and into the psyche of humans, and was even able to criticise its own medium. Many in Hollywood could only dream of creating a film story in the same league as Bioshock.
That's it? When I clicked on the link I expected to find some deeply thought out editorial piece, instead I get this quick quip about the short-sightedness of video game screenplays.
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court, 30 Monmouth Street, Bath, UK BA1 2BW England and Wales company registration number 2008885
. Bioshock had one of the best video game stories. It was very thoughtful, very clever and raised lots of interesting points. Like bereclain I also thought FFX told a pretty good story, and there are plenty others.
