Heavy Rain is an interactive movie thing. The game is interesting, but stupid. The controls are weird. You don't control these people so much as you "direct" them, giving indications of where and when to walk and turn, and dictating conversations by choosing different emotions. This might have worked, but filling the shoes of a film director is not properly represented. From what I can tell, the game doesn't really require the player to make tough decisions, even though it would appear so. It's disguise; disgusting deception. I replayed the demo several times, and I tried so hard to deviate from the intended course, but it was impossible. The game only allows you to make choices at very specific times, which of course is not real choice at all. There is even a sequence where a guy has an asthma attack, and you are required to sequentially input buttons to save him. I decided to let him suffer. Well, nothing happens. The animation loops over and over. The sequence is only there for the player to feel "immersed," but the player has no real consequential input. Lame. In the end I wound up trying to kill my character in whatever way possible, to unearth any trace of consequence. There was none. Good game design deigns that the player character and the goals required for progression carry a certain amount of interest to the player. A good (and ancient) way of doing this is challenge; the player cares about what happens in-game because of negative feedback. There is no discernible challenge in Heavy Rain.
So Heavy Rain pretty much fails as a game. At even a basic level it is a conflicted mess. Then how about as a movie? Not any better. The character models are horrendously animated. Metal Gear Solid 4 had millions of cutscenes, but at least the characters animated well and successfully emoted. The characters of Heavy Rain live in the deepest regions of the uncanny valley. Motions are generally stiff, facial expressions are... just plain weird, but most importantly, the eyes are dead and wooden. Eyes are so, so important in animation. They are the single most expressive part of character, and one of an animator's greatest tools of emotion. Even Disney figured this shit out decades ago, I don't know what the deal is with Heavy Rain. Really no excuse. And when judged on cinematographic levels, compared to "real" films, Heavy Rain's camera work is boring and stilted. Shots have zero compositional value; there is no intelligence behind the placement and framing. If you're going to make a game that is deeply rooted in cinematic style, you should probably know a thing or two about filmmaking, first. This is why Kojima's games actually work; the guy is a filmic obsessive. Too bad his unique style has become trend.
Obviously I haven't played the full game, so I can't give a full opinion. Maybe all of these problems work themselves out, but I doubt it. The only intention I can think the game developers had was to create an immersive experience. This is a terrible reason to make a game, because the result is cheap and manipulative. This isn't an intelligent, moral-driven adventure; it's a glorified quick time event that manipulates the player. Ironically, the best way to sum up Heavy Rain is it that pushes players' buttons; the player becomes the quick time event, with their emotions as the timed button sequences. This makes for a possibly immersive and intense experience, but in the end is insultingly shallow, a shallowness that I think will be revealed in time as the game is replayed. I admire the game for trying something new, and having read interviews with David Cage and getting to understand his game design philosophies, he seems like a noble enough guy with good intentions. He cares about games as an art form and wants to see them evolve into something special. But if this is the future of interactive media, then there will never be an art form. The entire medium will be artistically dead in a few years.
Shenmue was better at this sort of thing. At least in that game you were given an interesting world that you were encouraged to explore. Not to mention the controls made sense. And that was 10 years ago!
So Heavy Rain pretty much fails as a game. At even a basic level it is a conflicted mess. Then how about as a movie? Not any better. The character models are horrendously animated. Metal Gear Solid 4 had millions of cutscenes, but at least the characters animated well and successfully emoted. The characters of Heavy Rain live in the deepest regions of the uncanny valley. Motions are generally stiff, facial expressions are... just plain weird, but most importantly, the eyes are dead and wooden. Eyes are so, so important in animation. They are the single most expressive part of character, and one of an animator's greatest tools of emotion. Even Disney figured this shit out decades ago, I don't know what the deal is with Heavy Rain. Really no excuse. And when judged on cinematographic levels, compared to "real" films, Heavy Rain's camera work is boring and stilted. Shots have zero compositional value; there is no intelligence behind the placement and framing. If you're going to make a game that is deeply rooted in cinematic style, you should probably know a thing or two about filmmaking, first. This is why Kojima's games actually work; the guy is a filmic obsessive. Too bad his unique style has become trend.
Obviously I haven't played the full game, so I can't give a full opinion. Maybe all of these problems work themselves out, but I doubt it. The only intention I can think the game developers had was to create an immersive experience. This is a terrible reason to make a game, because the result is cheap and manipulative. This isn't an intelligent, moral-driven adventure; it's a glorified quick time event that manipulates the player. Ironically, the best way to sum up Heavy Rain is it that pushes players' buttons; the player becomes the quick time event, with their emotions as the timed button sequences. This makes for a possibly immersive and intense experience, but in the end is insultingly shallow, a shallowness that I think will be revealed in time as the game is replayed. I admire the game for trying something new, and having read interviews with David Cage and getting to understand his game design philosophies, he seems like a noble enough guy with good intentions. He cares about games as an art form and wants to see them evolve into something special. But if this is the future of interactive media, then there will never be an art form. The entire medium will be artistically dead in a few years.
Shenmue was better at this sort of thing. At least in that game you were given an interesting world that you were encouraged to explore. Not to mention the controls made sense. And that was 10 years ago!
