Topic: The Game Industry is destined to topple the Film Industry

[Stogi]

I was going to write a big article but I'm tired.


So I'm just going to say this...


The Film Industry is destined to meet a point where innovation will cease to exist. Despite smell-o-vision, taste-o-vision, feel-o-vision, the highest fidelity sound and video, CGI actors past the uncanny valley, there will be a point where we reach the limit of passive entertainment.


On the other hand, the Game Industry is destined to continually innovate. The way we interact with the world, with computers will always change and progress. There will never be a point where we stop at a level of interaction.


Though there are many other points, it is for those reasons alone that the Game Industry will topple the Film Industry and provide the more awe-inspiring moments we attribute to film today. There is no uncertainty about it.


People will forever love film. The passive nature of it will always fit a part of our lives. This is similar to how listening to music will never diminish because we play it.


Still, considering the difference in scales of innovation, games are going to provide the more visceral experiences. They may not account for the greatest stories ever told, but they will be more memorable, more tangible and simply put, more addicting than any other. There will be a point where games will feel like dreams  or nightmares and nothing can beat that.

[Oblivion]

Hm. Can I steal this debate for my Speech & Debate class?

[Chozo Ghost]

Uwe Boll is the gaming industry's ace in the hole.

[Stogi]

Oblivion sure.

[Oblivion]

Thanks. And btw, I completely agree. I never really thought about before you brought it up, but now that I think about it, it seems obvious. Now there's just the question about how long it will take film and games to reach that point. I'd say 50 years.

[Stogi]

50 years seems quite off the cuff, but whatever...I don't have a better guess.

I was going to write up a big article and provide historical and theoretical examples, but I think it is unneeded. It is pretty obvious.

[Oblivion]

Well, I figured that we'd have 3D for another 15-20 years before we start getting stuff like hologram movies. Maybe another 15-20 before it hits a stalemate?

[Khushrenada]

I like this topic. I'm going to bookmark it and when I've got a bit more time, I'm going to come back and argue in favor of film.

[Stogi]

Arbitrarily?

[S-U-P-E-R]

Don't games already outgross movie releases?

[Stogi]

Yeah but I think that was only in the UK.

[BlackNMild2k1]

Also your average game cost about 4-5x as much as a movie ticket or a DVD/BRD copy, so unless Games are out grossing Movies 4-5:1 then I don't find it a fair comparison.

[Ceric]

Also your average game cost about 4-5x as much as a movie ticket or a DVD/BRD copy, so unless Games are out grossing Movies 4-5:1 then I don't find it a fair comparison.

But, unlike a movie ticket , a game you buy once and serve the whole family.  I would stick with DVD/BRD which its mostly 1-3 times for equivalent lifecycle points.

[Stogi]

I'm not talking about money. That is bound to happen regardless.

I'm talking about what people will prefer....what they will look forward to more. Instead of someone saying they can't wait to see ____. They will say they can't wait to play ____.

And it all comes down to passive vs. interactive. People prefer interactivity. Someone would rather play, then watch. It is only a matter of time before innovations in the gaming world leaves the Film industry way, way behind. Just look in the past decade what has happened to both industries.

The Film Industry's greatest achievement are CGI, Motion Capture, IMAX, and 3D.

The Game Industry's greatest achievements are CGI, Motion Capture, HD, Motion Controllers, Touchscreens, Cameras, Microphones, 3D, Online and Voice Chat.

[BlackNMild2k1]

If were are solely talking about time spent and not dollar, then yes, eventually the gaming industry will surpass the movie industry.

Evetually I wouldn't be surprised they became 2 sides of the same coin. Interactive movies, like Call of Duty Games (oh no he di'nt.... oh yes i did), where you take an active part in the movie but all the events and conversations around you are entirely scripted.

Avatar 5: Universe Expanded now in iMaxVR3D
you get to shoot the turret guns and have your own avatar, but you are just a cog in an already scripted machine and the story progresses around you.

[Ceric]

I disagree.

To make my point I will point to Sports.  In mainstream sports very few people seek the opportunity to play there favorite sports like they seek the opportunity to watch them.  People want to be engaged but few people want to be engaged in such a way that they risk failure.  Have to really have there skin in the game and make an investment.

People like to be told stories.  To hear about adventure.  To romanticize about how it would be if it was them.  Conjure where the story could go next.  Fill in the missing details.  Most of all they don't want to work for these items.  Which games have you do just by being interactive. 

Most People don't want to make decisions in there distraction.  They have to do that all day in what they do for a living or the results of there life choices.  When I get home the last thing I want to do after a hard day of decision making is figure out whats for supper.

In the end a game is nothing more than large pool of decisions at its core.  Some games have you make a lot of decisions with few rules, ex. Sanbox games (which are too structureless for my taste).  Other games get you very close to that passive experience with few choices like CoD.  Unlike a movie where you don't have to make a choice  beyond picking the movie.

Another thing more passive media has is a more uniform experience.  It is easier to talk about a Movie or Show with someone who has seen as much as you have.  Your experience will be very similar allowing you to share a bond and have discussion into the further depth of the work by having a similar base.  In Videogames a lot of discussion is around your personal journey to the common points.  Someone who sits and grinds the beginning of LoZ2 to max out there stats first will have a different experience then someone speed running it for example.

I believe much like the written word the popularity of Films will maintain.  I do see the death of the Movie Theater itself because of home availability and how good the equipment keeps becoming at cheaper prices.

[Stogi]

In mainstream sports very few people seek the opportunity to play there favorite sports like they seek the opportunity to watch them.

This just doesn't fly. Everyone wants to be a superstar, but no one wants the life associated with becoming a superstar. No one wants to do the hard work. That's why you see very few people seek the opportunity.

People like to be told stories.  To hear about adventure.  To romanticize about how it would be if it was them.  Conjure where the story could go next.  Fill in the missing details.

People like to hear stories because they wish it was them is exactly the reason why anyone would jump at the chance of experiencing those adventures for themselves. Would you rather watch Star Wars or be a jedi?

Most People don't want to make decisions in there distraction.  They have to do that all day in what they do for a living or the results of there life choices.

So are you saying people would rather kick back and watch Batman than be Batman simply because they come home from work stressed? That's ridiculous.

In the end a game is nothing more than large pool of decisions at its core.

No it's not or at least it doesn't have to be. I think you are not using your imagination. I'm imagining games as a gateway to freedom to do whatever you want. I'm imagining the Holodeck, an interactive world where you can do anything or be anyone. I think you are imagining 'First Kid'.

Another thing more passive media has is a more uniform experience.

This sentence helps prove my point.

I believe much like the written word the popularity of Films will maintain.

Me too. As will as music and paintings and opera and sculpting.....etc.

Evetually I wouldn't be surprised they became 2 sides of the same coin.

I can definitely see this happening. The movie will allow you to play bit parts like one of the horsemen charging in LOTR or like you said, one the Na'vi in Avatar.

Still...most movies won't be like this mostly because the director won't allow them to be.

[Ceric]

In mainstream sports very few people seek the opportunity to play there favorite sports like they seek the opportunity to watch them.

This just doesn't fly. Everyone wants to be a superstar, but no one wants the life associated with becoming a superstar. No one wants to do the hard work. That's why you see very few people seek the opportunity.

Yes, because I didn't say anything about being a superstar I said " seek the opportunity to play there favorite sports"  As in Play in a recreational league, with friends, amateur etc.

People like to be told stories.  To hear about adventure.  To romanticize about how it would be if it was them.  Conjure where the story could go next.  Fill in the missing details.

People like to hear stories because they wish it was them is exactly the reason why anyone would jump at the chance of experiencing those adventures for themselves. Would you rather watch Star Wars or be a jedi?

Watch Star Wars.

Most People don't want to make decisions in there distraction.  They have to do that all day in what they do for a living or the results of there life choices.

So are you saying people would rather kick back and watch Batman than be Batman simply because they come home from work stressed? That's ridiculous.

Yes, I am.  If you say that you have never come home after a stressful day and just wanted to zonk out I wouldn't believe you.

In the end a game is nothing more than large pool of decisions at its core.

No it's not or at least it doesn't have to be. I think you are not using your imagination. I'm imagining games as a gateway to freedom to do whatever you want. I'm imagining the Holodeck, an interactive world where you can do anything or be anyone. I think you are imagining 'First Kid'.

Lets Imagine a Holodeck.  I could be anything I want to.  Thats a lot of possible choices.  What do I want to do more choices.  Interact with what part of the Environment.  More Choices.  Back to at its core its all nothing but choices.  Life is a series of choices.  The closer something gets to life the more choices you have to make.  Using my Imagination makes it even more decisions and choices because now I'm not only what I'm literally are I'm also what I'm interpreting myself and surroundings as.  Do I want to be a Dinosaur?  A robot?  A turtle?  Maybe you should be the Turtle?  Do I bring friends or do I make friends to play with?  SHould they be tall?  Should they Be Human?  Should I give them Backstories? Freedom means choice.  Freedoms means decisions.  "Freedom- The power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants without hindrance or restraint."  Making something from scratch means tuning everything.

Another thing more passive media has is a more uniform experience.

This sentence helps prove my point.

That you like to take things out of context?

I believe much like the written word the popularity of Films will maintain.

Me too. As will as music and paintings and opera and sculpting.....etc.

Evetually I wouldn't be surprised they became 2 sides of the same coin.

I can definitely see this happening. The movie will allow you to play bit parts like one of the horsemen charging in LOTR or like you said, one the Na'vi in Avatar.

Still...most movies won't be like this mostly because the director won't allow them to be.

Let me re-sum up

1.  People who Watch sports don't really play at any level in general.
2.  People in general are pretty fried by the time the get through there obligations and don't have the mental reserve to want to seek out interactivity.
3.  Games are literally nothing but logic under there.
4.  Passive media have uniform experiences because they are rigid and allow people to relate more concisely because of it.
5.  See death of Theater and the continuation of the media through other distribution.

[nickmitch]

So are you saying people would rather kick back and watch Batman than be Batman simply because they come home from work stressed? That's ridiculous.

You mean, would I rather kick back and watch Batman or spend hours running and running from the police while being shot at after having to fight a room full of guys armed to the teeth with knives and a machine guns while chasing a clown or sit back and watch Batman after a long day's work? In a holodeck world, you'll soon learn that hunting vampires, fighting terrorists and winning the Superbowl are tiring to say the least. If I'm trying to relax, being a fucking Jedi isn't gonna calm my nerves.

[BlackNMild2k1]

But it will let you resolve some anger issues related to that long day at work. and then you'll truly be able to relax.

[Stogi]

We are taking things where they don't need to be. Let's get back to Passive vs. Interactive.

Reminisce about your favorite child hood moments. Where you watching something or doing something?

If you could choose between watching a documentary about a country and travelling to that country, which one would you choose?

1.  People who Watch sports don't really play at any level in general.
2.  People in general are pretty fried by the time the get through there obligations and don't have the mental reserve to want to seek out interactivity.
3.  Games are literally nothing but logic under there.
4.  Passive media have uniform experiences because they are rigid and allow people to relate more concisely because of it.

1. Yes, people don't play any sports at all because professionals do.
2. People who work have hobbies, social gatherings, other interests other than work.
3. The fact that you don't want a Holodeck is a lie.
4. Relating to passive media isn't as fun as relating to experience. Telling you about my trip to Tanzania is far more interesting then telling you about Terminator 3.

[Khushrenada]

Is a holodeck even a game anymore or is it just a virtual experience?

What precisely makes a game? Take Phoenix Wright. To me, that is more an interactive novel. The only game part is figuring out what item to select to continue the story. It's classified as a video game but is it?

Some of what you are describing doesn't sound like a video game but a brand new form of entertainment born out of video games. Sort of like how the photo camera led to the movie projector.

In the past two years, I've probably been watching more movies in my life than I have all the years up to that point. At least it feels that way. The trade off has been that I've been playing a lot less of video games, despite the many innovations you've mentioned. In fact, I've been watching films from as far back as silent movies in 1915 to the present day with The King's Speech and Arthur.

Have I missed gaming? A bit. I still get urges to revisit past games I've already played. But that to me is much the same way as getting the urge to rewatch a movie or tv show you've seen before.

I agree with you that as far as video games go, they can create an experience equal to movies or higher right now. But a virtual experience isn't everything. I can't say I've really been moved or touched by a video game like a movie. I can't recall any video game opening up my viewpoint on a subject like movies have done. I'd be curious what you'd recommend of such instances.

For some reason, after seeing this topic, I was reminded of the series Star Trek: Enterprise. This series was set before the invention of the holodeck. On the ship, crew members would have a movie night. But the wierd thing is, they never showed anyone playing video games. It's kind of odd that a show about the future would make no mention of it. Surely, games must have been on some kind of path towards the holodeck experience. If so, it's not mentioned. I just find that kind of funny. Regardless, this is just an off-topic point.

[Stogi]

I think the term game has a connotation that sounds childish and has to include fun. It's old and needs to be revamped.  I think a better name for games, for our discussion at least, is interactive entertainment. But that is pretty broad and needs some explanation.

A game is interactive entertainment that allows you to actively compare, compete in or manipulate an experience.

[Sundoulos]

For some reason, after seeing this topic, I was reminded of the series Star Trek: Enterprise. This series was set before the invention of the holodeck. On the ship, crew members would have a movie night. But the wierd thing is, they never showed anyone playing video games. It's kind of odd that a show about the future would make no mention of it. Surely, games must have been on some kind of path towards the holodeck experience. If so, it's not mentioned. I just find that kind of funny. Regardless, this is just an off-topic point.

The only times I can recall Star Trek referencing video gaming in any form was simply to show how dangerous and addictive they were.   Also, there was Lt. Barclay and his obsession with living out his fantasies on the holodeck.
Most any other games that they did show were mostly forms of gambling.

[UncleBob]

What precisely makes a game? Take Phoenix Wright. To me, that is more an interactive novel. The only game part is figuring out what item to select to continue the story. It's classified as a video game but is it?

What's the difference between selecting the right options to advance in Phoenix Wright vs. selecting the right options to advance in a turn-based RPG like the original Final Fantasy?