David Rodriguez, Lead Designer at developer High Voltage, has written a column for Buzzscope in which he laments the overuse of cinematics in today's video games and that marketers constantly promote games as "cinematic experiences."

Rodriguez says that he, like other gamers, is completely taken out of the experience of a title when it forces one cut-scene after another down our throats. "Apparently, I didn't buy a game about playing a game. I bought a game about walking from one contrived cinematic to another," he writes. "You know, I can buy a really good movie for like twenty bucks. That twenty bucks even gets me extra discs, with director and actor commentary, and maybe even a good plot. Instead, I just gave these asses FIFTY dollars to watch a really bad movie!"

"[Critics] were giving the game high points for its 'MTV like cut-scenes and presentation'... I let this sink in for a moment. As I sat there, with all this marinating in my head, I tried very hard to pinpoint exactly when games started getting patted on the back for this. Just when did we get to a point when THIS passed as quality entertainment? You don't ever see a movie review that reads, 'Well the plot of the movie was pretty crappy, but it had a slick video game presentation.' (Or if they do, they don't mean it in a complimentary manner.)"

Rodriguez argues that instead of focusing time, energy, and most importantly money on elaborate cinematics in games, developers should concentrate on just ensuring that their game is actually good. "You see, for the past several years, games have gotten bigger and more expensive. The cinematics have become more elaborate and complex and, as a result, the storylines have become increasingly more complicated. Still, for the life of me... I can't figure out why. We're supposed to be making games, and instead we are making ridiculous, half-assed movies," he says.

"Movies are linear, passive entertainment," he continues. "You sit there and watch the story the creators have laid out for you. You have no control over the outcome. Your favorite characters may live or die and there is nothing you can do about it. You are completely at the mercy of the director, producers and writers. Don't get me wrong, all of those things are great for a movie... but why in the name of all that is holy would you want your VIDEO GAME to do that, too?"

Rodriguez takes it one step further, though. Not only does he believe cinematics are often not necessary, but he also says that games don't need to serve as a storytelling medium. "Contrary to popular belief, you don't NEED a story any more than you need a jump button. All you need is a reason to do what you are doing, (or a goal if you will) and a reward for achieving that goal. That is all," he writes.

"When you put a story with a beginning and ending into your game, you are in fact putting an artificial lifespan on your game. Once the story is done, the likelihood of someone playing the game again is low."

Looking at games like Pac-Man or more recently Grand Theft Auto, Rodriguez says that these titles can stand the test of time because they offer great gameplay at a fundamental level. Sure, GTA has a story and cut-scenes, but at the same time it allows the player to do almost anything; the game doesn't rely on its story to provide the gamer with enjoyment.

"Instead of telling these 'great stories', I would prefer that games move towards creating an 'immersive' gameplay experience. Immersion is achieved when the game is doing all of the things the player assumes they should be able to do within the rules of the world. Now this isn't always easy to achieve and it requires a lot of investment from the development team. But my estimate is that the money saved on creating a hundred cinematics that we don't want to watch, and paying the salaries of Hollywood actors we don't care about, would MORE than cover the cost of making your world more fun to be in," Rodriguez concludes.