Cinematics : your opinion ?

[BillyCorgan]

I know this is not an important issue, but personally I like it when the main plot of an RPG has some cutscenes or cinematics that come describe the progress of the story.

 

And you, what do you think about ?

Edited September 29, 2013 by BillyCorgan

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

My opinion on cinematics: They don't add anything to the game for me. I wouldn't miss them if they were cut.

Edited September 29, 2013 by KaineParker

[Messier-31]

There should be a few. Dunno about the way they should be done, though. But I expect more in-game cut-scenes.

[Sabotin]

I'd like to see some, but just as a kind of bookends to chapters, not popping up randomly during game play.

 

About the style, maybe slightly animated 2d pictures and some text/narration next to them? I think that shouldn't be as expensive as having Blur animations in the game and it would perhaps fit more with what we've seen to date (this and similar). Also +nostalgia.

[Keyrock]

As few as possible.  Zero preferably.  I'm not against cinematics in general, they can add to a game, the problem is that they cost money and resources.  Project Eternity may be one of the most successful Kickstarter campaigns ever, but it's still got a very limited budget in the grand scheme of things.  The money and resources that would potentially be spent on cinematics would be much better spent elsewhere.  Give me pictures and text, I'll be happy. 

[Leferd]

Obsidian will be using something better than cinematics - Scripted interactions. I'm very stoked about these.

 

http://media.obsidian.net/eternity/media/updates/0054/pe-scriptedevent-wip.1280.jpg

Edited September 29, 2013 by Leferd

[GhoulishVisage]

Panning over a still image with a chocolatey-voiced narrator will be just dandy for me.
If they really want to splurge they can add some animation to the pictures like fluttering capes etc.

[Jarmo]

Wouldn't mind animated cutscenes, if they were done well enough.

I'm mostly expecting some IWD style splash screens with voiceover and well satisfied with those.

 

Voted for 2d animations, because it's the closest option, not expecting to see such.

[eimatshya]

Cinematics are expensive. Something like the intro movie from Icewind Dale would be OK, but I don't think full 3D cinematics are all that important, especially not in a 2D game. 

[Nonek]

The King of Dragon Pass/Darklands text and illustration method is far more gripping for me, without the massive random success factor of course.

[mcmanusaur]

If you must remove my control of my character while Story happens, it doesn't really make much too difference to me whether it's a pre-rendered cuscene or animations in the isometric view. I guess the latter is still somewhat preferable, but the former can obviously look "nicer".

[kabaliero]

do not

 

waste

 

resources

 

 

please

[PrimeJunta]

I have real trouble thinking of any game where cinematics contributed in any significant way to my experience.

 

Wait. There is one. Knights of the Old Republic. The cinematic where Darth Revan removes her mask. That did do something. So it's not completely inconceivable that they might help.

 

But that's about it really.

 

In PE specifically, I think cinematics would be a complete and utter waste of resources. I trust they won't be doing that to us. I really like the look of those ink drawing-like intertitle panels. Tell the story with those. It worked for IWD, it'll work better for PE.

[Karkarov]

Depends 110% on the quality of the cinematic and how it is used.  Many people today, at least on this forum, seem confused though.  A scene where the camera angle changes and things play out in a scripted sequence (like Revan removing HIS mask) are not "cinematics".  It is simply a camera angle shift and a series of set animations playing out all in the same "field" that you play the normal game in all in engine.  The only resource they are taking is the time invested in programming the scene, all of that can be done in Unity easily. 

 

A Cinematic is a canned movie that happens outside of the normal play field and typically contains scenes or events that do not happen in engine and are rendered completely separately by a totally different program than the engine running the game. 

 

To borrow from the Star Wars Revan theme....

 

Not A Cinematic: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EDesWVLsagI

 

An Actual Cinematic: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyYbvVAtlWk

[PrimeJunta]

@Karkarov, whose definitions are those? 'Cuz the distinction seems pretty artificial to me, especially as in-game rendering gets closer and closer to film quality.

 

By that narrower definition, though, I guess that makes my list of games that benefit from cinematics an even zero.

[LadyCrimson]

Typically don't care about them. It's not that they can't be well done/neat-o, I just wouldn't miss them if they weren't there. They're also things that I believe should be left to act-ends or the endgame or something, eg not frequent (not every "boss" encounter, say) and doesn't interrupt general gameplay. Also, if they're in there and more than 3-6 seconds long, should be skippable via the ESC key or whatever. Always.

 

Anyway ... stuff like narration over a nice painting between Chapt/Acts or whatnot is fine/I'd sorta expect that. But as others have said, I hope Obsidian won't waste resources trying to make shiny cinematics for this one. Not necessary.

[curryinahurry]

As far as intro / cinematics go; I think Icewind Dale pretty much nailed it:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67FuWzixduc  (I hope posting this is ok)

 

Given the limited budget, I would rather Obsidian spend the money on a really great narrator, and keep the cut scenes and cinematics on par with the scripted events.

[Karkarov]

@Karkarov, whose definitions are those? 'Cuz the distinction seems pretty artificial to me, especially as in-game rendering gets closer and closer to film quality.

 

By that narrower definition, though, I guess that makes my list of games that benefit from cinematics an even zero.

Uh those are THE definitions.  If it happens fully in game, in real time, in engine, it is not a cutscene or a cinematic it is a simply a scripted event.  I hope you aren't suggesting they not run scripted events because Baldur's Gate and Icewind Dale etc used them out the yin yang.  The only difference between the "not a cinematic" link I posted above and say ....  meeting Sarevok in the woods the first time and watching Gorion die is that in the Sarevok scene the camera angle stays the same. 

 

"In game renderings" as you said are just the games graphics, those graphics are being loaded when you play the game... they don't change for a scripted event.  The sith inquisitor in the video I linked doesn't suddenly get rendered in higher quality because a scripted event is happening, that is just what that character looks like in the game.  I know no one expects this to be a graphics whore game, but the in game models had better look on par with things like Drakensang at least.  I don't think that is asking too much considering the original Drakensang came out 5 years ago and had a budget likely in the same ball park as PE. At least most reviewers called Drakensang a "low budget game", so if it had more funding I doubt it was by much.

[Greydragon]

I see cinematics more as an introduction/conclusion to a scenario. A mix of 2d and 3d are fine, shifting from the simple events (sword fights, etc.) in rendered in the 3d game engine to the more complex events featuring a sequence of still images, ambient noise, sound effects and narrative text. I'll be happy if they are skippable; we will be playing the game a long time, getting trapped watching various events can be tedious. For example the Baldurs Gate 2 intro and chapter scenes became quite tedious because they were inescapable, the same with scenes in many games where you have to reload. Skipping as an option seems the user-friendly alternative for replays (Not short, next event skips but whole cinematic skips back to player control). 

[Jarmo]

KotOR, KotOR2 and Jade Empire are all borderline between in game cutscenes and cinematics.

Most/many (if not all) of the cutscenes were actually video files despite being (mostly) made with the game engine.

 

They were just rendered at higher quality settings than what Xbox or low end PC:s were capable of.

The files were limited to 640x480 (or thereabouts) resolution, so with current PC's look worse than the rest of the game.

 

The cinematics I consider utter waste of time, are just the kind we see of Old Republic or the Minotaur fight at the opening of NWN.

(NWN2 opening battle at least ties with the game and makes sense in a "oh, that's what happened there" way).

[exodiark]

I wouldn't mind 3D cinematics for intro/ending, introducing new places, or introducing companions (a la JRPGs).
But I reckon they will be too expensive, so 2D is just fine

[PrimeJunta]

@Karkarov, sorry, but I'm still not buying.

From where I'm at, a cinematic is a pre-created sequence that uses cinematic techniques to convey a message. Whether it's pre-rendered or rendered in-engine is fairly irrelevant.

 

This Revan scene, for example, uses a ton of these techniques. Intercutting, panning, zooming, rotating camera, so on and so forth. It happens out of flow of events: it's a flashback, not something that's happening to you in sequence as you play the game. It is most definitely a cinematic sequence, and a pretty good one at that.

 

A scripted event, OTOH, happens in-flow. You're doing something, and then something scripted happens. The game may or may not freeze your controls and force you to watch it passively, or it may just start happening and you may or may not stop to watch.

So in BG, the bit where Sarevok whacked Gorion was a scripted event. The opening movie where he threw that poor knight over the balcony was a cinematic. Yes, indeed, in that case one was in-engine and one was not, but that's simply because the IE doesn't let you do cinematics in-engine, being 2D and sprite-based. The KOTOR engine, OTOH, being 3D, is perfectly capable of being used for cinematics, and while the game also featured (rather bad IMO) pre-rendered cinematics, it used in-engine ones as well.

So, again, Karkarov, where does your definition of "cinematic" that makes "pre-rendered" central to it come from? It doesn't make any sense to me. A feature should be defined by its function, not by the technique used to create it. A cinematic is a cinematic. If you have to, you can always make an additional distinction between pre-rendered cinematics and in-engine cinematics, of course.

 

Edit: Oh, look what I found. 

Edited September 30, 2013 by PrimeJunta

[Jarmo]

 

So, again, Karkarov, where does your definition of "cinematic" that makes "pre-rendered" central to it come from? 

 

To me, the big difference would be when cinematic takes account of how you've dressed up your character appearing in it,

whether you're male or female and what companions are along, for example. Pre-rendered is what it is, in-game stuff can be either.

[Kjaamor]

An opening cinematic, and an ending cinematic (hopefully in addition to a Fallout style - slide show ending). I think everything else can be covered with the scripted events.

[JFSOCC]

I'm ambivalent about cutscenes. I'm not opposed to them, I love a good cinematic cutscene. I think Warcraft III has some of the best cutscenes ever made. Blizzard generally knows to do them well.

 

However, if a cutscene takes away control from the player when the player could play or act the scene out himself, it's probably taking away from the game experience.

Cutscenes should only be for narrative you could not otherwise deliver. A transition, perhaps an introduction, some exposition (though be wary of the exposition dump)

I also believe that cutscenes shouldn't involve anything which the player could reasonably influence. I shall call this the Phoenix down argument.