A Defense of FMV Adventures

[mag]

I've been thinking about it, and it seems to me that it could be possible to make a really good FMV adventure game using current technology. Now I can already hear everybody on the boards moaning, but just hear me out.

If you think about it, what's really fundamentally different between FMV adventures and animated adventures? All an FMV adventure does is replace those animations with actual film. The really horrible sins that FMV games commit are in other areas that both types of games share. If you think about it, where most FMV games fail is in the design. It feels too restrictive. There's not as much to do. Most of them feel like watching a movie where you just click on something every once in a while to keep it going. But I don't see any reason why an FMV game can't have exactly the same design as a regular adventure, just replacing the animations with filmed movies. This is especially true now since current technology allows for games that require much greater space and processing power.

It's probably a moot point since FMV is dead forever. And I'm not saying it's going to happen. I'm not even saying I'd like it to happen. I think 3D is a much better avenue worth exploring. I'm just saying it could happen. Who knows? If the whole FMV fad had come five or ten years later we might be looking at those games a lot differently.

mag

[Jake]

Maybe if you were able to afford to film every performance from 30 angles at once, Matrix style, you could do it, otherwise FMV's would be stuck back in time with Myst style slideshows and the inability to move around in the scene whenever any action is happening...

[Intrepid Homoludens]

:D What Jake said.

[crabapple]

When is a game considered an FMV game?
How much film footage does it have to contain before it's considered FMV?

Exile was fairly recent, and it had bits of film footage in it.
But as far as I know Exile isn't considered to be an FMV game.

But isn't Pandora Directive considered to be an FMV game? Yet the only FMV
in Pandora Directive that I remember was in cut scenes and conversations.

So where's the cutoff point?

[Intrepid Homoludens]

http://www.kompjuterskeigre.com/img/slike/2003/06/jane4.jpg

I think the crossover line is where you can actually control the 'live action' character in-game, such in GK2.

[mag]

Originally posted by Jake
Maybe if you were able to afford to film every performance from 30 angles at once, Matrix style, you could do it, otherwise FMV's would be stuck back in time with Myst style slideshows and the inability to move around in the scene whenever any action is happening...

Yeah, it would be a step back relative to 3D games. But how is looking at a filmed scene from one angle significantly different from looking at a hand drawn scene from one angle? Because that's really what most of your classic point and click adventure games are.

Besides, it doesn't necessarily have to be "Matrix style." TV shows and movies always reshoot the same scene multiple times to get it at different angles. That's why so many of them have minor continuity errors in certain scenes.

Although, I agree that the cost involved in making a good FMV game would be the biggest problem.

mag

[crabapple]

I think the crossover line is where you can actually control the 'live action' character in-game, such in GK2.

But wouldn't that limit the FMV distinction to 3rd person games?
Or do you consider conversations with other characters using FMV
to be sufficient to call the game an FMV game?

[Intrepid Homoludens]

...I agree that the cost involved in making a good FMV game would be the biggest problem.

:D You have no idea.

[remixor]

Well, I think one of the things is simply how FMV looks in comparison to hand-drawn 2d animation. Most FMV games I've seen look like they were shot using second-rate equipment and film, more akin to what one expects from the production value of a soap opera rather than a film or a high-quality television program. Also, I think our eyes expect to see animated (2d or pre-rendered 3d) figures in more static poses, whereas with FMV it can be jarring if everything isn't always constantly fluid. This, by the way, is a big problem I have with just about all first-person photo-realistic adventures. Some of them are great games, but visually, they almost all creep me out because they seem so dead. Of course, almost all of them end up having cliche "dark" plotlines that attempt to justify this, but I'm getting kind of tired of that at this point. Anyway, sorry to diverge. My conclusion: all else equal, FMV=cheesy.


EDIT: I'm in a library right now, so I didn't really take the time to fully read all the responses in this thread. Hopefully mine is still relevant.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

But wouldn't that limit the FMV distinction to 3rd person games?
Or do you consider conversations with other characters using FMV
to be sufficient to call the game an FMV game?

That too. The novelty of FMV games, the interaction, is that you are - theoretically - more immersed in dealing with a 'real' world (as opposed to a computer generated world).

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Well, I think one of the things is simply how FMV looks in comparison to hand-drawn 2d animation. Most FMV games I've seen look like they were shot using second-rate equipment and film, more akin to what one expects from the production value of a soap opera rather than a film or a high-quality television program.

...My conclusion: all else equal, FMV=cheesy.

Yep, I agree. There's this sort of.... cheap, homemade quality in the look FMV games. Playing it, you can't thinking that each scene was shot in a studio, it pervades your mind and distracts from the gamplay. You're unable to sustain a suspension of disbelief. At least that's how I feel about it.

[fov]

Intrepid beat me to it. I was going to say that Sierra did it best.

My problem with first-person, 3D FMV games is that the gameworld looks NOTHING like the cutscenes. Conspiracies is a prime example.

Now, if the art could be more photorealistic, I'd be perfectly happy to have a 3D world with FMV cutscenes. But as long as the art is going to look different from the video, it's too jarring for me. Never the twain shall meet, and all that crap.

Even without the FMV, I liked the realistic style Sierra moved into in the early 90s. I liked how in PQ4, there were actual candy bars and soda cans for sale in the convenience store. It's a nice blend of realism and animation, IMO. Of course, GK2 and the Phantasmagoria games do this too.

Most FMV games I've seen look like they were shot using second-rate equipment and film, more akin to what one expects from the production value of a soap opera rather than a film or a high-quality television program.

This is why the X-Files game will always be the epitome of how FMV should have been used, for me.

Speaking of FMV, does anyone know anything about Silent Steel (http://www.mobygames.com/game/sheet/p,5/gameId,7993/)? I saw it today at the goodwill -- seems to be an FMV strategy game. I never heard of it. The jewel case said something about it being an "intelligent movie." Didn't buy it because they wanted nine bucks for it, but it piqued my curiosity.

-emily

ps oh wait - I may have misunderstood Intrepid's point. My point was that as long as you can control the FMV character in the game, and have him look vaguely like his FMV counterpart (as the Gabe ego does in GK2), there's no reason that FMV is any different than an animated game with cutscenes. I don't think that 3rd person perspective is required for a game to be considered an FMV game, though.

[mag]

Originally posted by fov
Speaking of FMV, does anyone know anything about Silent Steel? I saw it today at the goodwill -- seems to be an FMV strategy game. I never heard of it. The jewel case said something about it being an "intelligent movie." Didn't buy it because they wanted nine bucks for it, but it piqued my curiosity.

I actually have that game. And I use the term "game" very loosely here. This is what people mean when they make a distinction between FMV games and interactive movies. It's more like Star Trek: Borg in that way (although with a bit more interaction than Borg). You just watch the movie, and every once in a while you have to choose from a list of decisions that will determine the outcome. I guess it's worth a look if you've got nothing else worth playing, but I wouldn't exactly recommend it. It's certainly no GK2. It's also VERY difficult to figure out the correct choices. So if you do play it just make sure you have a walkthrough handy.


Originally posted by remixor
Well, I think one of the things is simply how FMV looks in comparison to hand-drawn 2d animation. Most FMV games I've seen look like they were shot using second-rate equipment and film, more akin to what one expects from the production value of a soap opera rather than a film or a high-quality television program. Also, I think our eyes expect to see animated (2d or pre-rendered 3d) figures in more static poses, whereas with FMV it can be jarring if everything isn't always constantly fluid.

A valid point. I think a lot of that too is because of the poor video quality that a lot of the games had at the time. And even with that those games usually took up several CDs. Now that we have DVD games, I'm not sure video quality would be as much of a problem.

Also, most game companies then didn't have as much money as they do now. So the sets and the equipment could well be much better if somebody were to try an FMV game today. I think a lot of the problems with FMV games is just a sad consequence of the times in which they were created.

mag

[DomStLeger]

I think 3D motion capture is the way to go, 3D characters modelled on actors. I agree with jake, straight FMV is just too limited with current technology.

[Bastich]

Depending on how strict a definition of FMV you have, I tend to agree with mag. There is no reason why an FMV game has to be any different than a normal 2D P&C game. The only real difference is photography vs. drawing. It isn't that technologically difficult anymore to composite multiple layers of video over each other allowing interaction within a video framework. Getting people who can act is the problem, not the technology...

[Christina]

I want to add in a few more suggestions for how an FMV game made today could be better than those of yesteryear. They could be shot digitally, which cuts the cost and time of production down significantly - thus they could put more money towards shooting on real sets and on location, not with blue screen and 2D backgrounds. Also by shooting digitally it makes it much easier and therefore cost effect to include effects later.

[Jake]

From the look of GK2 and most any other FMV game, they look like they were shot on analog video anyway, not film, which is relatively cheap, and then digitized immediately for editing and post stuff. Price aside, digital video would look a thousand times nicer, and something like final cut pro (or better yet after effects or shake) can do professional quality proper bluescreening and color correcting and stuff, so even without sets you could theoretically make a far less shitty looking FMV game.

[remixor]

From the look of GK2 and most any other FMV game, they look like they were shot on analog video anyway, not film, which is relatively cheap, and then digitized immediately for editing and post stuff. Price aside, digital video would look a thousand times nicer, and something like final cut pro (or better yet after effects or shake) can do professional quality proper bluescreening and color correcting and stuff, so even without sets you could theoretically make a far less shitty looking FMV game.

Yeah, this is what I meant, but I still just can't shake the feeling that such an effort would still come out cheesy somehow... :shifty:

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Yeah, remixsie, I seriously can't shake off that 'cheesy' aspect of FMVs, as if a live action movie were trying, so damn hard, to be a computer game. http://cmw.dailymoviereviews.com/contrib/blackeye/GCrolleyesgold.gif

cheesy
Pronunciation: 'chE-zE
Function: adjective
Inflected Form(s): chees·i·er; -est
1 a : resembling or suggesting cheese especially in consistency or odor b : containing cheese
2 : SHABBY 3c, CHEAP
- chees·i·ness noun


Merriam-Webster online

[mag]

Originally posted by remixor
I still just can't shake the feeling that such an effort would still come out cheesy somehow...

I guess I can understand that given FMV's rather dubious history. I would like to say though, that I admire your cynicism. We need more people like you working on these games.

mag

[mycroft]

Getting people who can act is the problem, not the technology...

I agree.

I can easily associate the word cheesy with FMV games. The production quality is of course a vital issue, but IMO the thing that plagues the FMV games is mediocre (read cheesy) acting. Something that technology cannot improve upon. It is ironic that one of the greatest strengths of a FMV game (Establishing a strong emotive connection with the player by the means of real-life actors), is also its weakest point. GK2 is regarded as one of the greatest FMV adventures. IMO, the (cheesy?)acting makes the otherwise passable story into a B-movie type escapade.

[Curt]

I don't think FMV is dead, I think it's just taking a long vacation. It will be back, I'm sure (or I hope).

For me personally, some of my favourite games have involved FMV. The Tex Murphy series, Spycraft, Black Dahlia and to some extent Zork Nemesis. All extremely high quality adventure games that succesfully incorporated the use of video footage and real actors (even if some of the acting of secondary characters was a bit cheesy in some cases). I never took to GK2 because of what I saw as poor acting, so it has to be done right (although GK2 was still extremely popular among the AG community).

I'd love to see more, as long as they are as well done as those I've mentioned. But, of course, at the moment it is just not cost effective.

But I see no reason why the advancement of technology can't be almagamated with this rather timeless medium. A character played by a good actor will always help immerse me more in a game than Doms suggestion of 3D characters based on actors. Of course, well draws 3D models with topnotch voiceovers are a worthy substitute.

[fov]

Video/photography also becomes dated more quickly than animation, which may contribute to the "cheese" factor people are mentioning.

Conspiracies was just released in the states, but was made in I think 1998? And already looks dated.

-emily

[SamandMax]

I like FMV games. I'm probably the only person in the world who liked Foxhunt.

[lakerz]

I like FMV games. I'm probably the only person in the world who liked Foxhunt.

Yep, I think you are the only person who liked Foxhunt. :P

[The Silent Dude]

The FMV's were always troubled by the lack of good products. The gameplay was too limited in some ways.

But despite this, I had a lot of fun playing FMV like the Tex Murphy games or GK2. Indeed I consider them to be some of the best games ever.

Proper done FMV's can be a lot of fun.

[Helen]

The FMV's were always troubled by the lack of good products. The gameplay was too limited in some ways.

But despite this, I had a lot of fun playing FMV like the Tex Murphy games or GK2. Indeed I consider them to be some of the best games ever.

Proper done FMV's can be a lot of fun.I agree, I love FMV, cheesy or not. ;)

[Leonardi]

FMV takes the player out of the game. I felt much more immersed on Gabriel Knight: Sins of the Fathers, Grim Fandando and Sanitarium than in Gabriel Knight 2. Most of the time the FMV sequences feel so different than the actual gameplay that they destroy any illusion the player might have had that he was there.

FMV makes you realize at every single moment you are playing a videogame. Graphical adventures do not.

Oh, and I don't consider the Tex Murphy games FMV games. Their use of FMV is adequate, nothing like Gabriel Knight 2, for instance.

[mag]

Originally posted by Leonardi
Oh, and I don't consider the Tex Murphy games FMV games. Their use of FMV is adequate, nothing like Gabriel Knight 2, for instance.

I'm probably just misunderstanding this, but are you saying that any game that uses FMV well is not a real FMV game?

Of course, I'm not so sure that would be wrong.

mag

[smartfish13]

Let's remove the fact that FMV games do not have Hollywood professionalism and consider the basic concept.

It's true, FMV games don't and fundamentally couldn't have the same level of immersion that 3D or pre-rendered games do. It is impossible to control your character to the same extent.

However, most of the frustration I find in adventure games comes from characters that not only behave out of my control, but act in ways that defy common sense. Characters that are lewd or sarcastic to the point of absurdity. Kleptomaniac characters without any consideration or feeling.

I believe that we could ignore less control if our main characters were sensible enough to behave like we would. Gabriel Knight 2 succeeded because of its great, however linear, storyline

[michael1123]

Yeah, remixsie, I seriously can't shake off that 'cheesy' aspect of FMVs, as if a live action movie were trying, so damn hard, to be a computer game.

And as if a computer game was trying, so damn hard, to be a film.

But even if you correct the bad acting and poor appearance , the main problem with FMV games is lack of interactivity. Even with GK2, which is easily the best FMV game ever made, all you can do is click on an object to interact with it. Sure, the game used a lot of clever ways to allow you to still solve complicated puzzles with this, but it was a huge step down from GK1, which had a phenomially innovative system of interaction with something like 10 different icons and ways of interacting with objects. With FMV games it just isn't feasible to allow the player to interact with objects in multible ways, as each way would multiply the amount of film that would have to be shot for the game.

Can a FMV game be great? Definitely. And great FMV scenes can even add some top quality film elements that other games cannot, as some of the best scenes in GK2 can do. But it would take a hell of a lot more time and money to create a FMV game that is phenominal, than to create an animated game of the same quality, for not much more benifit.

[Leonardi]

I'm probably just misunderstanding this, but are you saying that any game that uses FMV well is not a real FMV game?

Of course, I'm not so sure that would be wrong.

mag

Well, every game, even action games, have cutscenes. Tex Murphy uses FMV for dialogue mostly. The action itself happens in the game world. In Gabriel Knight 2, even the actions (moving an object, picking it up, whatever) also happened as FMV sequences.

So what I meant is that, the way I see it, the heavy use of FMV during the course of the game - even for menial tasks - is what makes the game feel more than a bad movie than a good game. I wish FMV was used only for dialogue, while the real gameplay happens without FMV sequences.

[scoobdoo]

Who needs to defend them? The Tex Murphy series is, for me, the definative adventure game experience.

[Ninth]

Who cares if a game is in FMV, in 3D, or in 2D, as long as the graphics fits the story? :confused:
If somebody comes and make a great FMV game, like GK2 was, all the better. If nobody does, well, I'm not going to cry over FMV's grave. I'm too busy already crying over the lack of good games to worry about the type of graphics the unprobable new great ones are going to use.