# Kojima: Games shouldn’t try to tell stories



## Deleted_171835 (Jul 27, 2012)

“It’s very difficult to implement a storyline into an interactive game,” he said. “I actually think we shouldn’t do that. I am not trying to tell a story.”

Kojima said how it’s more important that a player empathizes with a character in a given situation. It’s about allowing the player to feel, rather than showering them with plot points.


“You are inside a story, an environment, and acting as a certain character,” he said. “And what that character is feeling inside that environment is what I want the players to feel as they play the game. Within that environment I want the players to not only have a fun and exhilarating experience, but also think about many different things. That’s my concept.”

http://beefjack.com/...o-tell-stories/







What's Kojima smoking?


----------



## tatripp (Jul 27, 2012)

I think (although I may be wrong) that he is trying to keep video games apart from movies. He wants the player to be in the action instead of an observer. Or maybe he is smoking something


----------



## GameWinner (Jul 27, 2012)

That "The Office" GIF is my reaction right now.


----------



## SuzieJoeBob (Jul 27, 2012)

Question for this *un*intelligent man: how does one feel empathy if there isn't any plot to go by? That is the equivalent of telling someone to be emotionally impacted by Angry Birds or Minecraft.


----------



## chavosaur (Jul 27, 2012)

Idk about yall, but when a game has a storyline that pretty much makes it like a movie, its pretty badass. My case in point, Arkham City.


----------



## emigre (Jul 27, 2012)

Kojima is just trolling...again.


----------



## Joe88 (Jul 27, 2012)

now I know why no one can understand the mgs story line


----------



## Tom Bombadildo (Jul 27, 2012)

...What? I just...what??


----------



## EZ-Megaman (Jul 27, 2012)

Rather than saying that games shouldn't tell stories, I think that he's trying to say that he's more skilled at creating fun games instead of good stories.


----------



## SuzieJoeBob (Jul 27, 2012)

I just told my mother this, and she said "How the **** does this man expect to get anywhere in life? His comment annoys ME, and I'm not even one of the people he is trying to sell his product to!"


----------



## DragorianSword (Jul 27, 2012)

EZ-Megaman said:


> Rather than saying that games shouldn't tell stories, I think that he's trying to say that he's more skilled at creating fun games instead of good stories.


Yeah that's more or less what I got out of it too.
He's saying the game doesn't need a very ellaborate plot as long as through the gameplay you get the feeling that you are the character and experience exactly what he is experiencing.
For example in a horror game, you're in a dark room with eerie lighting and creepy music and you kinda feel the fear that the person you're playing must be experiencing.


----------



## DS1 (Jul 27, 2012)

Well, once again some BS website posts a 'hurr hurr, look at this hypocrite!!' soundbite as news. I don't have time to find the interview that this came from right now, but I think some people here would be interested in the actual project: http://criticalpathproject.com/
Seems to be some stuff in there that will inspire even more genius comments. Looks like Beefjack and Kotaku have a few field days ahead of them!


----------



## Clarky (Jul 27, 2012)

probably trolling, although it wouldn't suprise me if he is saying he uses similar concept to Miymoto where he tries to build a game first then build a story around it, like how the first Metal Gear had to be a stealth title because the MSX wouldn't handle as much action as he wanted and how Metal Gear Solid 3 became what it did because Konjima was fed up of using indoor locations and corridors


----------



## Zarcon (Jul 27, 2012)

SuzieJoeBob said:


> Question for this *un*intelligent man: how does one feel empathy if there isn't any plot to go by? That is the equivalent of telling someone to be emotionally impacted by Angry Birds or Minecraft.


You can't empathize with anyone in real life?
You know, since real life isn't a story.

Not having a story doesn't mean a lack of direction or emotional connection.
It's the difference between a story and a narrative.
You can have a great story and a bad narrative or a bad/no story and a great narrative.

You can watch a war documentary and feel empathy, anger, all sorts of emotions right?
But documentaries don't have a story. They don't have a plot.
They do tend to have great narratives though. They link events together with a central theme.

In terms of games it'd be like having a more immersive experience. A horror game doesn't need a plot for you to share the feelings of fear and anxiety. You don't need a story to empathize with a character suffering horrible things.


----------



## [M]artin (Jul 27, 2012)

I love ya to death Kojima but, please, shut up.


----------



## DiscostewSM (Jul 27, 2012)

Maybe he's talking more about the mix of story telling in the interactive portions. That, imo, restricts what can be interacted when the sequence is more or less scripted, and doesn't offer much in terms of being interactive, as you have to follow the script.

I'm just trying to guess what he meant.


----------



## Rydian (Jul 27, 2012)

I agree with his point, I just don't think he worded it correctly.  His point is about the distinction between having a story the player feels like they're in, and having a story separate from the player.

*Empathy is a lot more more powerful than sympathy.*
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FpigqfcvlM&feature=player_detailpage#t=733s[/youtube]
(12:33)
This segment has information on the subject, getting a player to think and feel things for themselves, not being told the character they're playing should be feeling a certain way.

Getting a player to look at a character's plight being told to them and think "oh, that's sad", is one thing, but getting a player to actually feel for a character, understand what they're going through, and be affected by it... that's more memorable for the player.  The player cares about the story more, about the characters more, _about the game_.  I've played games where "OH GOD THE WORLD IS ENDING" and I'm just "meh, I'll beat the game eventually" because I don't really care, but then I've played games where I really feel some sort of connection to the story and I have an urge to finish it or complete certain sidequests.


----------



## Qtis (Jul 27, 2012)

A good story makes up for bad mechanics in most cases. Good mechanics don't make up for a bad story. Otherwise CoD would be the number one game around the world with RPG fans.


----------



## haflore (Jul 27, 2012)

I kinda see what he's saying though... If you look at the original MGS, the story was essentially: "Evil bad guy terrorists have access to a mobile nuke launcher. Kill them.Stop them from using it to hold the world hostage."
The impact came from the way that story was presented and the relationships of the characters involved in it.


----------



## Issac (Jul 27, 2012)

and dear mr. kojima, tell me again what you wanted to be when you started your career, and what metal gear was in your eyes..

[hint: he wanted to be a film maker, and metal gear was the substitute for the movies he wanted to make, and to be able to tell a story]


----------



## pokefloote (Jul 27, 2012)

>says video games shouldn't tell stories
>makes MGS4 a movie instead of a game


----------



## Adr990 (Jul 27, 2012)

Woah, exactly the face I had when I read the Topic's title. 



Spoiler












Like seriously, is he trying to let other game developers make a game without a story so kojima himself can create more games with a story and make profit, because games WITH a story usually are the better ones out there.


----------



## DiscostewSM (Jul 27, 2012)

Well, I would say that a game that has you pressing a single button over and over for hours on end to get through part of a story is not very interactive. That's when you're basically watching a movie.


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Jul 27, 2012)

DiscostewSM said:


> Well, I would say that a game that has you pressing a single button over and over for hours on end to get through part of a story is not very interactive. That's when you're basically watching a movie.


Have you actually played a single MGS game?


----------



## haflore (Jul 27, 2012)

soulx said:


> DiscostewSM said:
> 
> 
> > Well, I would say that a game that has you pressing a single button over and over for hours on end to get through part of a story is not very interactive. That's when you're basically watching a movie.
> ...


I suspect he's talking about Call of Duty, and that button is "skip." 

J/K


----------



## Rydian (Jul 28, 2012)

ITT: People who didn't read past the title.


----------



## donaldgx (Jul 28, 2012)

nothing better than add a gun a bunch of random guys online or below par AI and call it a great game


----------



## Gahars (Jul 28, 2012)

To quote Micheal Bluth, "There really has got to be a better way to say that."


----------



## DSGamer64 (Jul 28, 2012)

If the game doesn't have a story, it's really not worth playing unless it's a puzzle or simulation game.


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Jul 28, 2012)

DSGamer64 said:


> If the game doesn't have a story, it's really not worth playing unless it's a puzzle or simulation game.


What a daft thing to say. You're essentially counting out pretty much every platformer (which don't have much stories beyond save the princess, etc.), rhythm games, the vast majority of Nintendo games and more.


----------



## Thanatos Telos (Jul 28, 2012)

Wait.....Kojima was in charge of MGS4, which is pretty much a movie with gameplay, and now he's saying this?


----------



## Clarky (Jul 28, 2012)

Thanatos Telos said:


> Kojima was in charge of MGS4, which is pretty much a movie with gameplay, and now he's saying this?



In his defence, MGS4 as also directed by Shuyo Murata and at this point in time Hideo wanted to finish off at least Solid Snake's story


----------



## SuzieJoeBob (Jul 28, 2012)

Zarcon said:


> You can't empathize with anyone in real life?
> You know, since real life isn't a story.
> 
> Not having a story doesn't mean a lack of direction or emotional connection.
> ...



You have a very good point, and one that is reasonable as well. I still think know that Kojima is doing this to just get a rise out of people...


----------



## Hyro-Sama (Jul 28, 2012)

Cool Story, bro.


----------



## DiscostewSM (Jul 28, 2012)

Maybe MGS4 is what persuaded him to think like this.


----------



## elenar (Jul 28, 2012)

I dunno, I've been telling my friends this for years.

Chess doesn't have a story; obviously it doesn't need one, people have been playing for centuries without one.

A good game is a good game because the people playing it are creating the story as they play. An expositional narrative within that game limits the players' ability to create their own story.

A game with a very detailed and robust story is enjoyable the first time you play it, but more because it's like vaguely, indirectly interacting with a movie or novel. It may contain a "wow factor" that will interest you, but you'll ask for a sequel or move on to a new game soon.

Super Mario Bros didn't have a story: you made the story. The Legend of Zelda: it is dangerous to go alone, take this. But you didn't have to. Your decision to grab it was part of the story you were creating. A cutscene that showed you taking the sword might be really neat the first time you see it, but you don't play a second time (or enjoy it as much, if you do) in the same way that a lot of times movies or novels only need to be experienced once.

I've worked on games in the past on the independent level, and I usually endeavored to compare what I was doing to chess, the king of games. If it would make chess less fun, if it seems like it would make people not play chess as often, then it's probably not a good idea if you're trying to make a true game as opposed to a "pseudo-interactive film experience."

It's just my opinion, but it's an opinion that stands up to inspection. I think it's something people should consider, and I think Kojima also understands my opinion (and shares it) in his own way.


----------



## sergster1 (Jul 28, 2012)

...Ohh kojima... what the actual hell.


----------



## gamefan5 (Jul 28, 2012)

I read hs statement. He makes a good point but the way he has worded it is confusing,

I'm not inclined to agree to his statement.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jul 28, 2012)

If anyone didn't know already, Kojima is master troll. You've all been trolled.


----------



## DSGamer64 (Jul 28, 2012)

soulx said:


> DSGamer64 said:
> 
> 
> > If the game doesn't have a story, it's really not worth playing unless it's a puzzle or simulation game.
> ...



Hence why so many games are shallow and uninteresting these days. If it doesn't have a story, what's the point in making an action game of any sort?


----------



## elenar (Jul 28, 2012)

DSGamer64 said:


> soulx said:
> 
> 
> > DSGamer64 said:
> ...



Chess doesn't have a story, what's the point of boxing millions of chess boards a year?

In the end, regardless of personal preference, people play games because they want to _play_ them. Story isn't playing. There's maybe 5 NES games with anything even remotely resembling a story: we all played the crap out of every one of them in the 80's. And we all have stories of "the time we discovered whatever" or "the secret (but bullcrap) way to do this thing!" or "this fun time I had with my buddies while playing."

That's what makes games fun. Professional sports (the ultimate game, perhaps) has a total lack of "story" as opposed to an incredible amount of natural drama that occurs when they all play a game with absolutely zero inherent story. The story is the story the players make as they strive to achieve victory against each other.

That's what games are about. Not canned dialogue-heavy "story" that you either click A through hoping it ends soon or stare at going "oooooooooh shiny!" until the next numbered sequel comes out. That's why there are so many shallow/uninteresting games these days. It's because they give you the same story that was boring 100 games ago with new characters, hype you up into believing it will be new, and then taking your 60 bucks.

Minecraft: zero story, 6 million players, immense popularity and acclaim. Tetris: zero story, millions of players, beloved game.

Just imagine Tetris having a cutscene explaining to you that you have to put the blocks into position to prevent an evil madman from using a mechanical T-Rex from launching nuclear missiles. Pretty shallow and basically uninteresting, right?

Yeah, story in games is dangerous and rarely used well.

The Princess is in another castle: all the story SMB ever needed, because you made the rest up on your own and with your friends.

Interactive movies aren't games.


----------



## BORTZ (Jul 28, 2012)

That just doesnt make any sense.


----------



## mr deez (Jul 28, 2012)

I agree - I don't think I have ever played a game where I thought the story was any good at all. It's simply not a storytelling medium, unless you do something completely different - for example dear Esther, but then it's arguable that isn't a game.


----------



## DSGamer64 (Jul 28, 2012)

I'd rather play a game that has a story and depth to it like an RPG then another lol shooter like Call of Duty which attempts to have a story but still sucks more balls then a hooker in the VIP room at a strip club.

Developers need to stop making shallow games with no depth to their stories. Sandbox and puzzle games don't need to have a story, adventure and action games that have actual characters should have a story. Enough of running around collecting shiny objects in order to complete a game with almost zero story background or development leading up to the end boss.


----------



## GameDragon (Jul 28, 2012)

mr deez said:


> I couldn't recount the story of any game ever. There is literally zero impact in having story in games, to me at least.



What kind of games do you play? I can recount the story for many games, as well as I could recount for any novel or movie.


----------



## EyeZ (Jul 28, 2012)

I purchase games for the gameplay (the enjoyment i think i will get out of playing the game)

I've bought hundreds of games and i have NEVER purchased a game for the story.


----------



## Scott-105 (Jul 28, 2012)

A good story is pretty much a bonus. To me, anyway.

EDIT: If games didn't have story, I probably would miss it though.


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Jul 28, 2012)

eyes said:


> I purchase games for the gameplay (the enjoyment i think i will get out of playing the game)
> 
> I've bought hundreds of games and i have NEVER purchased a game for the story.


Hm, MGS is one of the few (or only) series where I have purchased the game for the story primarily although I was still interested in the gameplay.


----------



## Scott-105 (Jul 28, 2012)

soulx said:


> Hm, MGS is one of the few (or only) series where I have purchased the game for the story primarily although I was still interested in the gameplay.


I agree with you there, soulx. What I don't understand is, how the creator of MGS, which has a pretty complex story imo, said this.


----------



## Minox (Jul 28, 2012)

This could just be me, but I interpreted his opinion as a statement on how games shouldn't try to forcibly tell a story but rather allow players to experience a story themselves.

I'm not sure I necessarily agree that this is true for all games in existence, but for some games I could totally agree with such an opinion.


----------



## EyeZ (Jul 28, 2012)

soulx said:


> eyes said:
> 
> 
> > I purchase games for the gameplay (the enjoyment i think i will get out of playing the game)
> ...



I can understand that if you had an interest in the series.

I purchased the 1st game and MGS4 for the gameplay, the story wasn't a factor.


----------



## SuzieJoeBob (Jul 28, 2012)

For the arguments about story vs. no story, it all depends on the genre. RPGs are almost entirely based around a storyline, whereas most racing and music/rhythm games do not.


----------



## DiscostewSM (Jul 28, 2012)

A game can have no story, yet be exceedingly enjoyable from its gameplay. Can a game be enjoyable and still be considered a game if it had a story without gameplay?


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Jul 28, 2012)

DiscostewSM said:


> A game can have no story, yet be exceedingly enjoyable from its gameplay. *Can a game be enjoyable and still be considered a game if it had a story without gameplay?*


No, considering the interactive parts are what makes it a _"game"_. If it's just cut-scenes, then it's not so much a game as it is a movie.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jul 28, 2012)

soulx said:


> DiscostewSM said:
> 
> 
> > A game can have no story, yet be exceedingly enjoyable from its gameplay. *Can a game be enjoyable and still be considered a game if it had a story without gameplay?*
> ...



In all honesty there's quite a few games with absolute shit or unremarkable gameplay but have story as a saving grace.

The first Mass Effect kinda plays like crap but has an excellent story. Most point-and-click adventure games are praised for story and the puzzles and such aren't even considered brilliant.

EDIT: But I get the point. A game with zero gameplay and no story is just a movie.


----------



## WolfSpider (Jul 28, 2012)

Maybe he meant that games shouldn't have cutscenes?


----------



## GreatZimkogway (Jul 29, 2012)

eyes said:


> I purchase games for the gameplay (the enjoyment i think i will get out of playing the game)
> 
> I've bought hundreds of games and i have NEVER purchased a game for the story.



And in constrast, the only games I DON'T buy for the story are things like Pokemon, or puzzle games.  Or MMOs.  Things I already assume I'll play with friends.


----------



## DSGamer64 (Jul 29, 2012)

DiscostewSM said:


> A game can have no story, yet be exceedingly enjoyable from its gameplay. Can a game be enjoyable and still be considered a game if it had a story without gameplay?



Some people play a game over and over again because the story is good and the gameplay is good. Some people play games repeatedly because the gameplay is great, but if a game has only decent gameplay and a crap story, what's the point in playing it over and over again? I wonder how people can play games like Halo so much and play the story mode over and over, it's got a shit story for a franchise and the gameplay is nothing exceptional, or Metal Gear games which have an excessive amount of story and cut scenes but the gameplay is horribly short. You can beat Metal Gear Solid 2 in something like 5 or 6 hours if you skip all the cut scenes, but if you watch them all the game is more like 20 hours. Those sorts of things aren't cool.

I like games with a great story and good quality game play, but what's the point in even having a story if your game is all about the gameplay but has a weak ass story, like many FPS games. I guess it doesn't give the game any context or point if there is no story.


----------



## Nah3DS (Jul 29, 2012)

oh, the irony


----------



## Uncle FEFL (Jul 29, 2012)

I think his point here is that he doesn't want a game that tells a story to the player, he wants the player to immerse himself in the story--he wants the interaction between person and game to be strong enough that you feel like you're that character.


----------



## shakirmoledina (Jul 29, 2012)

i think storyline sells the game on console ie real gaming system. what i think he might pointing at is the current games like on the tablet or phones that are just interesting but not with an interesting storyline.

i feel there is no game that has been successful but due to its storyline and direction.


----------



## Just Another Gamer (Jul 29, 2012)

Uncle FEFL said:


> I think his point here is that he doesn't want a game that tells a story to the player, he wants the player to immerse himself in the story--he wants the interaction between person and game to be strong enough that you feel like you're that character.


That only works in some genres not in every single game, FPS and stuff is fine for that so called interaction of the player in game but if its an RPG then it just feels shit cause you then play another boring blank slate character that is just as bland as another NPC in the background that just stands there.


----------



## The Catboy (Jul 29, 2012)

DiscostewSM said:


> A game can have no story, yet be exceedingly enjoyable from its gameplay. Can a game be enjoyable and still be considered a game if it had a story without gameplay?


The Ace Attorney games. They pretty much all story with little to no gameplay through out most of the game.
Honestly I think video games nowadays need more creative stories.


----------



## DS1 (Jul 29, 2012)

The Catboy said:


> DiscostewSM said:
> 
> 
> > A game can have no story, yet be exceedingly enjoyable from its gameplay. Can a game be enjoyable and still be considered a game if it had a story without gameplay?
> ...



Or more to the point, Snatcher and Policenauts, which were two of Kojima's earliest games. And that's a large reason why I think the quote is completely out of context and misread.


----------



## EZ-Megaman (Jul 29, 2012)

The Catboy said:


> DiscostewSM said:
> 
> 
> > A game can have no story, yet be exceedingly enjoyable from its gameplay. Can a game be enjoyable and still be considered a game if it had a story without gameplay?
> ...


I think those classify as visual novels since all you do is read.


----------



## Guild McCommunist (Jul 29, 2012)

EZ-Megaman said:


> The Catboy said:
> 
> 
> > DiscostewSM said:
> ...



Visual novels have more pornography.

Technically it's a point and click adventure though since the whole "puzzle solving" element is present in court battles.


----------



## DSGamer64 (Jul 29, 2012)

Pretty much. Why have a story at all if it sucks ass so bad that people don't like it? There is no immersion in the experience of a game if a game is all story and no gameplay, or all gameplay and a weak story. Sandbox types of games like Minecraft and Terraria are great for gameplay and shouldn't have stories, there is no reason to put stories in those kinds of games, same goes for puzzle games. But when you get into games that have characters and have a story, why make a game if the experience of the story is weak and uninteresting? I hate games that have a story but it's so bad that it's not worth mentioning it's existence.


----------



## DS1 (Jul 29, 2012)

DSGamer64 said:


> Pretty much. Why have a story at all if it sucks ass so bad that people don't like it? There is no immersion in the experience of a game if a game is all story and no gameplay, or all gameplay and a weak story. Sandbox types of games like Minecraft and Terraria are great for gameplay and shouldn't have stories, there is no reason to put stories in those kinds of games, same goes for puzzle games. But when you get into games that have characters and have a story, why make a game if the experience of the story is weak and uninteresting? I hate games that have a story but it's so bad that it's not worth mentioning it's existence.



Yeah, that seems more to the point of what he was saying. It's hard to_ force _a story on a game, yet so many people do it. There are at least 100 mediocre RPG titles from the PSX/PS2-era that had mildly interesting gameplay elements and terrible everything else. The story was always 'magic tree this' or 'evil wizard that', slap on anime characters only distinguishable by their hair color, long loading times, ugly repetitive textures, and you have hours of wasted childhood.


----------



## AceWarhead (Jul 29, 2012)

DSGamer64 said:


> Pretty much. Why have a story at all if it sucks ass so bad that people don't like it? There is no immersion in the experience of a game if a game is all story and no gameplay, or all gameplay and a weak story. Sandbox types of games like Minecraft and Terraria are great for gameplay and shouldn't have stories, there is no reason to put stories in those kinds of games, same goes for puzzle games. But when you get into games that have characters and have a story, why make a game if the experience of the story is weak and uninteresting? I hate games that have a story but it's so bad that it's not worth mentioning it's existence.


Like CoD, I don't even know why they bothered sticking a crappy story onto it anyways. It's mainly a multiplayer game.


----------



## Deleted_171835 (Jul 29, 2012)

DSGamer64 said:


> Pretty much. Why have a story at all if it sucks ass so bad that people don't like it? There is no immersion in the experience of a game if a game is all story and no gameplay, or all gameplay and a weak story. Sandbox types of games like Minecraft and Terraria are great for gameplay and shouldn't have stories, there is no reason to put stories in those kinds of games, same goes for puzzle games. But when you get into games that have characters and have a story, why make a game if the experience of the story is weak and uninteresting? I hate games that have a story but it's so bad that it's not worth mentioning it's existence.


"Story in a game is like a story in a porn movie.
It's expected to be there, but it's not that important."

- *John D. Carmack*

For most games, he's right. You don't need to have a good story to have a good game. Look at the many Zelda games. The story there is awfully simplistic but people still love the games because of the gameplay. Not to mention God of War or Serious Sam which both have pretty forgettable stories but people play them because the gameplay is fun. A good story isn't a *necessity* for _any_ game, it's simply an added bonus.


----------



## PyroSpark (Jul 30, 2012)

I can kinda understand what Kojima means, but he sounds kinda crazy eitherway. >_>


----------



## Rydian (Jul 30, 2012)

Well taking quotes out of context tends to do that.


----------



## Vampire Lied (Aug 2, 2012)

Not trying to bring up another argument, but the following is MY opinion:
I have played games for the story since first playing dragon warrior and FF1. A game doesn't have to contain a huge amount of story, but story and good gameplay is what keep me playing. This has slowly become an unimportant issue as online gaming became huge. For me, playing cod online is fun, but I play the story first because that's what I play for. I know ppl who buy games and never play the campaign. They go straight to online mode. To me, focusing on online cuts the fun out of the whole package. Again, just my opinion, but a game has to have some sort of story or goal, however shallow, to make me want to play and stay interested. The day they make cod totally online and kill the campaign mode is the day I stop caring about cod.(or any other game)
I DO enjoy online play, but I enjoy single player storyline way more. I'm not saying games should be interactive movies, but I have to have some connection to the char/situation. I think Kojima is hinting at more of player immersion and not that he thinks story should be nonexistent. Like making you feel like YOU are in the game. He touched on this pretty well towards the end of MSG2 with the snake/raiden comparisons and conversation about Raiden's self image and how he shouldn't try to be snake.


----------



## ouch123 (Aug 2, 2012)

Trying to give an experience rather than telling a story, sounds about right for a video game. Heavy Rain made a point of this by the producer calling the game an interactive drama instead, since the purpose of the interactivity wasn't to be gameplay per se, but to increase immersion. I think in Kojima's case, he's talking about having enough story to convey a certain experience, but not having so much that the game becomes a film. It's probably the reason why, starting with MGS3, all the main titles have interactive cutscenes. Sounds strange at first coming from Kojima, but makes sense when you think about it.


----------

