In this rush to explore interactivity, we don’t often stop to analyze what specifically counts as “good” interactivity. Just as text and film have genre conventions like grammar and camera angles that make them awkward if broken, games have their own literacy that, if broken, can ruin both the interactivity and the narrative.
“Heavy Rain”, one of the most hyped games for the PS3, is touted as an interactive narrative, however the “interactive” side of that narrative appears to be nothing more than a series of quick time events (QTE) where a button will flash on the screen and the player will be asked to press that button or suffer a penalty.
This type of gameplay has long been seen as lazy, uninspired and unfair as players often do not have enough time to look down to find the button and press it (gamers often do not think of buttons by their names but by their locations on the controller). This coupled with the penalties for failing a QTE make the experience in Heavy Rain a frustration one, as demonstrated by this Lets Play by French game critic Benzaie.
Its a disappointment since the game promised a storyline where characters could die with consequences to the plot as opposed to game over screens, and real changes in the story based on the decisions and successes of the player. Its good to see that developers are trying to incorporate narrative and interactivity in more meaningful ways, but these first steps are awkward at best.
Note: Sorry this is a bit late; this post did not want to be made.
Theories of Texts and Tech 
March 5, 2010 at 7:05 am
Couple of notes on QTE from class discussion. Showing the buttons names on the screen make us lose the immersion of the game experience, which is also why gamers don’t think of the controller when playing until forced.
Is this reaction to Heavy Rain an objection to the fetish object, the PS3, being washed?
March 5, 2010 at 8:19 am
Your comments about immersion remind me of immediacy vs. hypermediacy that we first encountered last semester in Dr. Scott’s class; I think it particularly came up with Collin Brooke’s _Lingua Fracta_, in which he talks about interface.
March 5, 2010 at 9:50 am
Actually, I loved Heavy Rain. The options were very unlike what I normally see in QTE games — specifically, in Heavy Rain, the player seemed encouraged to really think decisions through before selecting them. I often paused the game to carefully consider what I should do in certain situations. Each situation presents the player with several options for ways to react, and there are many possible outcomes for the game. This did not seem lazy at all. In fact, I thought it was inspired.
That said, I had some problems with the actual narrative of the mystery itself that had nothing to do with the mechanics of the game. There were a couple of areas in the storytelling that were classic mistakes a mediocre mystery writer might make, but the overall experience was so strong that I was able to overlook those issues.
March 9, 2010 at 10:16 am
This is why I say watching someone play is like watching someone eat, completely pointless and often incorrect. Looks like I’ll finally have to get a PS3.