[MP-Ryan]

I am speaking, of course, of Tomb Raider 2013, and I have found myself thinking about this often enough that I thought it might prove an interesting discussion.

Let me just start off by saying the only console I have ever owned is a Wii, and the only games I have ever played on it were the very motion-specific ones.  QTE's are relatively new to the world of PC gaming, and Tomb Raider has been my first real experience with them (Mass Effect's Paragon/Renegade prompts aside, but they weren't particularly obnoxious).

I picked up Tomb Raider knowing it had received positive reviews generally and was supposed to be pretty engaging.  I haven't been disappointed.  You can very much see the Square Enix influence a la Batman Arkham Asylum in how this game is constructed, and that's not a bad thing.  However, there are a couple nagging issues that are irritating me.  Maybe I'm just old-fashioned.

Regardless, at a number of points in the game (I'm only 50% done), I have found myself prompted to mash certain buttons in a certain sequence - without warning! - in the middle of what appeared to be a cutscene in order to proceed (failure = death).  If you fail, the game just takes you back to the beginning of said quasi-cutscene.  The buttons sometimes make sense - fighting off a wolf I had to mash the left/right combination to simulate kicking and thrashing (I suppose), but often don't.  The most irritating part is that there is nothing in the game that distinguishes a cutscene in which you do nothing except watch from a cutscene in which you will suddenly be told to mash some nonsensical keyboard combinations as all the scenes are rendered in-engine.

In that sense, this game is one of the more film-like I've played lately and it actually wears that well.  But in another sense, I find this incredible frustration in the random happenstance of quick-time events interspersed in scenes where they are both unprompted and unnecessary.  What really brought this to a point yesterday was watching Lara fall from height, pressing different buttons shortly after each other to deploy a parachute in-scene, then watching her float.... and then discovering that oh-ho, now its not a scene any longer but a moment of gameplay where I have to actually control her - which was discovered when I failed to control her and she instead impaled herself on a tree.

Is this the latest innovation in triple-A games?  Developers can't railroad you into doing a series of precisely-animated and one-off actions, so instead they set it as a cutscene, but cutscenes are now soooo 1990s and so we instead have to hit the odd button now and then just to keep us awake?  But, of course, we can't give hints as to what is gameplay and what is not (because the game never sticks to just one camera angle when the character is controlled by the player, so that hint is out), so you will find out when you need to press buttons either by a rapid and insulting on-screen prompt, or by nothing at all... depending on the mood of the programmer.

It's just such a jarring annoyance in an otherwise entertaining game.  I know Yahtzee of ZP rages on about QTEs all the time, but I have to say that this is my first real experience with them.  Do other people find this engaging, or does everyone find this as completely annoying as I do?

Gameplay is for the player to do as they will.  Cutscenes are for essential bits the developer wants to force the player to experience or see.  The two can be merged - Half-Life 2 did this well - but QTEs are not the way for it, IMHO.  What do you folks think?

[The E]

The only time I found this concept jarring was when I first encountered it, which was sometime at the beginning of Uncharted 2. Even then, the jarringness lasted only a few moments before I decided that this was awesome, and that I wanted more of it.

Not in every game, mind you.

As I said back in the Tomb Raider thread, Tomb Raider has taken a lot of design cues from the Uncharted series, whose big thing are exactly these sort of over-the-top cinematic sequences that still allow you a measure of control. Whether they work for you or not is highly subjective, and they definitely have no place in every game, but as an evolution of the QTE concept, I find them highly successful. It's certainly more immersive and smooth than the various attempts of David Cage to do the same evolution on the concept (See: Fahrenheit, Heavy Rain, Beyond: Two Souls).

So in the end, I disagree with you on the notion that QTEs have no place whatsoever. It all depends on the kind of game you want to make, and games like Uncharted, Tomb Raider, The Last of Us are better for having them.

[StarSlayer]

I don't get particularly miffed, so long as I know to expect them and they don't make up a large portion of the gameplay.  I think I get more peeved about having to strike the same key multiple times to execute a single action.  Batman wants to remove a grate, now mash the Space Bar like they're potatoes.

[Klaustrophobia]

QTEs aren't bad by default, but they are usually bad.  the vast majority that i've encountered are shoehorned in and unnecessary at best, actively annoying usually.  a QTE can be alright if it's encountered smoothly from gameplay in a way that makes sense.  the one example that comes to mind is from FEAR 2 where you get in a fistfight with colonel vanek, who is waiting for you on the other side of a door.  you can see him, and he is taunting you the whole time.  and the button mashing makes sense.  you use the mele button, and eventually shoot him with the shoot button.  cutscene interrupting, "press ___ to not die" are terrible and need to be killed with fire.  that game mechanic is bad and the developers should feel bad.  following pop-up instructions that have nothing to do with the established control scheme of the game breaks immersion, not creates it.  some kind of hint that you're entering a QTE isn't out of line (the aforementioned FEAR one had a little tiny flashing mouse button come up, so small i didn't even notice it the first time and therefore figured out what to do on my own, which was possible because the QTE and necessary key presses were intuitive anyway), but telling me PRESS LEFT MOUSE TO TAKE A STEP FORWARD - NOW RIGHT MOUSE FOR ANOTHER STEP is ****ing awful.  there's already a goddamn control for that, and it doesn't need to be done in a cutscene via QTE.

[An4ximandros]

My problem with QTEs is that they are so over and misdone.

Having a cutscene of someone taking a **** is not made more intense by having to press a button repeatedly to make the turd come out.

And in all honesty, it feels like QTEs are just a lazy way out for devs that want to make a character do badass actions, like dodging a bullet, by forcing the event instead of letting the player be the one that makes it happen.

The half life road of "letting things happen while you play" is, in my mind, the only type of acceptable road.

[BloodEagle]

The only game I've ever played that came close to doing QTEs properly was Shenmue.

[Dragon]

Well, I've found ones in Metro 2033 acceptable. Maybe because they were few and far between until the final level. They added some tension to what would otherwise be a really long, extended cutscene. Also, Space Marine did have it's finial sequence done QTE-style, but the keystrokes made sense and it generally "felt right".

[StarSlayer]

I think it partially boils down to the fact that dirty console peasants typically hold onto their controller at all times and are thus prepared for the QTE, whilst the Glorious PC Master Race is accustomed to being able to easily sit back, disengage from the mouse and keyboard and sip Earl Grey and nibble on crumpets during the cut scenes.  Obviously such gauche interruptions can only be viewed as uncouth in the extreme.



****! Did I just miss my queue?

[FlamingCobra]

Having a cutscene of someone taking a **** is not made more intense by having to press a button repeatedly to make the turd come out.

Suda51 would disagree with you.

[Mongoose]

I'm not trying to make fun or anything, but it's kind of funny seeing this sort of sentiment expressed now, when I remember Resident Evil 4 really bringing it to the forefront and making it meme material so long ago.  Takes me back to this fun MC Chris rant.  PRESS A MOTHER****ER!!!

More seriously, I've found that QTEs generally irritate me more than anything else, but never to some huge extent.  It's usually just a "dammit, hit B instead of A," and then I move on.  I think they tend to work better when they're incorporated into shorter action sequences, instead of in the middle of dialog-heavy cutscenes where you really shouldn't be expecting any sort of required input.

[NGTM-1R]

As your first experience, you find it jarring.

I'm guessing by your second or third, you will not. While I do find the occasional "press X not to die" frustrating, this has more to do with StarSlayer's Thesis than the actual nature of QTEs.

[Scotty]

There are right ways to do QTEs, and there are terribly, horribly wrong ways to do QTEs.

Halo 4 did QTEs the right way.  RE6 did QTEs the terribly, horribly wrong way.  Can you guess what the difference was?  Halo 4 didn't have a QTE every time an enemy closed to grappling distance.  Halo 4's QTEs made sense.  Halo 4's QTEs were few and far between, and served more to give a sense of investment to the cutscene than as an actual gameplay mechanic.

Meanwhile, RE6's QTEs happen every time an enemy gets into grappling range, are the same every time with no variation except for specific enemies that trigger the animation, completely dominate every "cutscene", and do their level best to replace every boss fight with nothing but prompted button presses.

In a way, I really like the idea of QTEs for what I think they should be: Ways for a developer to engage the player in a way that extends beyond "The X button reloads".  Some complex tasks in games are just flat out unable to be handled satisfactorily (in today's game market) by walking up and pressing a "Use" button, then watching everything work.  What QTEs should NOT be are vehicles for repetitive and unnecessary gameplay mechanics.  RE is only the biggest abuser of that principle; there are many others.

[The E]

Well said.

[Scotty]

In a similar vein:  I've heard much the same about Beyond: Two Souls.  It's a game I very much want to play, and actually got for a friend for Christmas, who promptly "broke the news" that it's full of QTEs.  I'm still not sure how to feel about that, for a couple reasons.  First, I don't know if it strays into "Doing it Wrong" territory or not.  Second, I don't know whether to treat it as an actual game or as the next evolution of the visual novel.

[The E]

Have you played Fahrenheit or Heavy Rain? Cos it's like those.

Games by David Cage are all squarely in the "doing it wrong" category. Where a good QTE can break up monotonous gameplay and give you something fun to do during what would otherwise be just you watching a cutscene, these games are nothing but QTEs.

The idea behind them is, strangely enough, the same one that's behind Uncharted and Tomb Raider. It's the desire to give you the opportunity to place you inside a big blockbuster, but the way they get to that goal is vastly different. TR and UC are taking third person action games and shaking them up with QTEs, Cages games are taking old school point-and-click games and replace every interaction with a QTE.

[Scourge of Ages]

From what I've seen, visual novel is the much more accurate description. Or visual choose-your-own-adventure, but you can't see where the choices are.

Anyway, has anybody seen any gameplay footage from Ryse: Son of Rome. From what I could tell from my limited seeing, almost every kill is a QTE.

[Grizzly]

I thought at first that you were going to talk about Metro: Last Light instead, but tomb raider works too . I haven't picked it up yet, let's just hope AMD is still running that never settle bundle when I get that nice shiny new vid card.

[TrashMan]

I think it partially boils down to the fact that dirty console peasants typically hold onto their controller at all times and are thus prepared for the QTE, whilst the Glorious PC Master Race is accustomed to being able to easily sit back, disengage from the mouse and keyboard and sip Earl Grey and nibble on crumpets during the cut scenes.  Obviously such gauche interruptions can only be viewed as uncouth in the extreme.



****! Did I just miss my queue?

All of my likes....

[MP-Ryan]

To be fair to Tomb Raider, there are far fewer QTEs in the annoying sense in the 2nd half of the game.  And that is a good thing.  The QTEs are more in-gameplay events (e.g. proper timing to drop between ziplines and clear obstacles) than they were the obnoxious "press X not to die" type smattered throughout the first half - really, the first third - of the game.

I guess that's my gripe.  Crystal Dynamics, through the latter 66% or so of the game, has demonstrated that they actually do know how to make cinematic QTEs an immersive and logical gameplay feature - so why the hell didn't they manage that in the first 33%?

My original post does seem to be completely anti-QTE, which isn't totally fair to my thoughts either; I found the interrupts in ME2/3 to be decently engaging and make story sense (quick decision for quick action).  Some of the QTE-type events in Tomb Raider also make a great deal of sense.  My real problem with QTEs is this:  more is not better, and yet (judging by game reviews) it seems that many developers don't get that.  Certainly, Crystal Dynamics managed to make an otherwise excellent game with an overabundance of inappropriate QTEs in the first third of that game before they figured it out.

I also look at a number of titles that get regularly slotted into the "best games ever made" category, and there are far more that allow total player control with minimal cutscenes than there are with minimal player control that are cutscene heavy - QTEs or no - on that list.  That says something.

[Luis Dias]

Perhaps they got better in time.