"Video games by their nature require player choices, which is the opposite of the strategy of serious film and literature, which requires authorial control."
Roger Ebert said this. He is correct.
During an average Heavy Rain playthrough, two forces constantly compete over control of the characters: the player, who wants to see interesting things and feel like his input actually matters to the story, and the actual characters, who simply want to be true to themselves.
This is what Ebert was talking about. This is why, for many, Heavy Rain just doesn't work.
"Many video games catch not only great commercial attention but remarkable critical attention as well. We have seen games like Heavy Rain, The Last of Us Part II, and even entries in the Metal Gear series described as fantastic interactive experiences, even heralded in the same way as Hollywood's greatest films.
I would suggest that not only is this an unfair comparison but also a harmful one. Video games, by their very nature, are an intricately different medium and should be weighed against one another rather than another form of media," Phillip writes for GF365.
I think Hollywood films will becoming increasingly more like video games in the future, especially as the world embraces the "new normal" from the pandemic. It makes sense, as games like Spider-Man: Miles Morales showcase just how realistically we're reaching in graphical capabilities, as well as showcase extreme action sequences in spectacular ways. And as time goes by, it'll get easier and cheaper to produce such "art", as well as create new star "actors" that never age, never die, never complain, never gets involved in scandals, etc. Technology is amazing and we're only just getting a taste of what it'll eventually be.
No. For the money spent, a quality game provides far more entertainment value than a quality movie. Especially when looking at what is going on in the world, and how a studio can attempt to pilfer from consumers by charging 30 dollars for Mulan via streaming. Ridiculous. There is no comparison....games all day.
What exactly is the David Cage experience, and is it of value? We examine two classics, Fahrenheit and Heavy Rain, to find the answer.
Quantic Dream has announced a new video series to celebrate the 10-year anniversary of Heavy Rain. Check out the first part here.
Have you played Detroit? While it’s my personal favorite, I fully understand many preferring Heavy Rain more. I’m glad you enjoyed Heavy Rain too.
Glad you enjoyed the game! Yes, Detroit is a masterpiece of a game, and their best work to date “in my opinion”
Wow, 10 years...and yet, still one of the best/most emotional/thrilling gaming experiences I’ve ever had.
So grateful to Sony for believing in Quantic Dream’s vision for this game, and giving them a chance. I’ll never forget David Cage saying “We want to challenge the player, but not with the controller, but mentally, with their decisions of “How far would you go to save someone you love” Well, they broke my emotional gamer heart lol.
My teenage son refuses to play this game, because I’ve told him in little detail the emotional impact it had on me all those years ago. Maybe one day he will.
Still have my origami crane they teach you how to make when you're installing for the first time.
it's been 10 years? wow, that was so fast, I feel like this console gen went fast as well although it hasn't. I really look forward to the PS5 this holiday season though.
Just go away destructoid. Your relevance is nil and you no longer have a place. Your banal attempts a humor are sophomoric annoyances rather than insightful witty commentary. Outside of kotaku, there isn't a more delusional staff than you will find at destructoid.
i feel dumber having read it.
the guy's whole purpose in this article is downplay Heavy Rain because it, what, gives you choices that are either "against character," or "true to character?"
he's angry because he believes that the only reason why anyone would choose certain actions is to get all the Trophies?
are you fricking KIDDING ME?
i wasn't playing the game for the Trophies. most certainly not my first playthrough.
i went through the trials the first time through for two reasons:
one, i put myself in Ethan's shoes. if my son was taken from me, and the only way i could 100% get him back would be to undergo a trial by fire, then yes, i'd do it.
two, i was staying in character and Ethan, through using L2 to understand his thoughts, made it abundantly clear that he was willing to do what it takes to save Shaun.
i never played games for Trophies, Achievements, and Accolades in the 25+ years i've been playing games, so why the flying F*CK would i need them to motivate me to play a game differently JUST FOR the sake of increasing my "gamerscore" or "level?"
if anything, this retard's article highlights how narrowminded and naive he is that all he can do is nitpick the game, and use a rigid, structured film as a reason why Heavy Rain "fails."
Seven is a GREAT film.
Heavy Rain is a GREAT game, but it's barely because of the tightness of it's mystery plot, but for the emotional affect it has on you as a player.
Heavy Rain succeeds and fails on how it draws you into it's world and characters.
i'm one of the many people who played the game, and empathized with Ethan and the rest of the cast, so their personal journey's in the game mattered to me.
Anthony whatever his name is, didn't WANT to enjoy Heavy Rain, so he went into it like just about every other gaming "journalist" goes into a PS3 game: with an air of disdain and indifference no matter how impressive the game is.
if this were a 360 or multi-platform game, there'd be no shortage of how and why it's the most amazing game in existence. we're already seeing this praise for Alan Wake (i'm not doubting Alan Wake will be great; it's from Remedy, so it's in good hands).
am i also the ONLY person that wonders why so many Playstation 3 exclusives get articles about why they "don't matter," or "aren't as good as everyone says they are," or "will fail" in some way? i don't see any articles about 360 games in the same way. i don't see any "why Gears of War fails because it doesn't have a Jump button," BS.
David Cage promised an emotional story very different from your standard game, where your choices affect the outcome.
having played the game twice now, and experienced two RADICALLY different endings and scenarios (i'm serious, in my first game, whole SECTIONS of story and plot were gone because of one choice i made).
also, the consequences of your actions don't just affect the ENDING of the game. it's not just about, "i did these choices in Act 1, so now i get to see the results in Act 3." it's immediate, seemless repercussions for subsequent scenes.
i'm offended that he thinks that all of us that are playing Heavy Rain a certain way are doing so JUST for the sake of something like the Trophies.
i played the game as cautious as i could, not to get the Four Heroes Trophy, but because i didn't want my fricking character to DIE because i CARED about their well-being! my god, what a tool.
but what did i expect from Destructoid. they are the dregs of the internet "journalist" slums we have this generation.
i wish i hadn't given them the click, but i thought it might actually be a well thought out dissection of the game, instead of a hypocrisy, double standard filled rant on how choice and not playing a game to character is suddenly BAD because the game is PS3 exclusive (Mass Effect is a poor counter, because the story and Shepard are left PURPOSELY vague enough for you to craft your own character. Heavy Rain is linear, and yet non-linear. the characters are defined, and yet open enough for you to reasonably and logically make the decision that you, as the player, feel you should).
Very good read.
may be correct IF you use Roger Ebert's definition of great films... HOWEVER, that is based purely upon Ebert's narrow vision... Ebert is (to many) a very good movie critic, but it is obvious when he made that statement that he is from a different generation and simply does not understand video games... He also an elitist, as are many movie critics (critics in general, actually -- whether they are food, movie, travel or game critics) who believes that his understanding of what makes a film great is more true than what others may think or feel.
Whether Ebert is correct or not is not important, but if you take away Ebert's opinion, then there is no basis for this silly article. And the author of it never even says if he agrees with Ebert's hypothesis. He just takes it as a truth which makes the article fail on so many levels.
Personally, I think that Ebert is wrong in his assessment and that while Heavy Rain may not (as the author points out) meet Ebert's criteria, Uncharted 2 actually does reach the level of cinematic integrity that Ebert is talking about. That is a game where while you have some control of the characters, you are taken down a predetermined path and the characters "stay in character" for the whole game, which is well written, acted and directed.
So, in my mind, Ebert and this author have already been proven wrong.