My annoyance with cut scenes reached a head in the KotOR games, where the running joke amongst my friends is that the Starforge gives you the power of the cut scene. Time and again, a fight would start, my party would handily begin trouncing the villain with almost no threat, and then the cut scene would kick in when his HP hit a certain point and he'd then narrate you into somehow losing. "You must run! I'll hold him off!" "No, actually, just let us go ahead and finish him, it will save a lot of trouble."

Conversely, one of my favorite parts of Thief: Deadly Shadows was one of the cut scenes. The principle villain starts monologuing about her impending victory, on the corner of the screen you notice Garrett carefully sidle off, and then she's completely confused when she finishes her speech and you've escaped.

So, essentially, it comes down to whether the cut scenes support or destroy the feel of the actual play of the game. The KotOR scenes would have been much more palatable if they'd actually showed the villain use some device or power to which you don't currently have a counter (and let you counter it later), rather than assuming that it had been a difficult fight when it wasn't. Meanwhile, the Thief scene supported exactly the kind of actions you'd take if you were in control; letting the villain's stupidity work for you while you do an end-run around. It actually improved the feel of the game by controlling your character to do what you'd do anyway, and giving you a chance to see how funny it is rather than concentrating on the controls.
 

Sometimes cutscenes are nice, sometimes they are not. I own both the original Final Fantasy Tactics, and the PSP War of the Lions version, and I prefer the original without the movie cutscene.

My favorite type of cutscene is the standard jRPG cutscene where it is all played out in the game world with dialog boxes.

Of course, I don't think Final Fantasy 7 Crisis Core would be much of a game if it wasn't for the cutscenes.
 

I think I can completely agree with what Stephen says. The cut scene has to be adaptive to how you're playing, or at least consistent with how the character is designed. And not just 'how the author of the game thinks things should be played', but a consistent world-feel.

This is where GTA-IV really works, because the characters act realistically. As previously mentioned, KOTOR would leave you feeling rather flat because they did things in the cut scenes that the characters wouldn't do.

A cutscene can be a good way to keep the story going, and it allows for a very cinematic, dramatic feel. If used right, they can feel like a reward to the player, or can be used to set up the big set-piece events, or can be used to brief the players on what should be happening. However, I think that over-use of cut scenes is something of a problem, and as games like Portal have shown - if you don't need it, don't use it.

So, basically, I would suggest - as a non game author, of course, so with no experience at all :D - if you want to put in a cut scene, ask is there a better way to do it, and if there is - use that. If you can do it in-game, or leave the player in control, do so. On the other hand, if you've got a real point to make, and with to set up a dramatic set piece, where the characters are going to act consistently with their normal character traits and reactions, and things aren't going to jar the player - go for it :D
 

I think it does come down to the purpose of the cutscene, and how it is executed.

In Vespers, we plan on using a few brief cutscenes, but mostly it is to ensure that the player hears and sees an important advancement of the plot. The scenes do not affect the character or prevent certain choices or actions, however. The problem is that the freedom of action provided in some games, like first-person perspective games, provides too much opportunity to miss some event that is very important to the story.

In Vespers, for instance, the first cutscene takes place when one of the monks is discovered dead. The conversation that takes place between the rest of the monks is an important, back-and-forth argument that results in one character being accused and locked up.

It's important that the player watch and hear the discussion, since it impacts the subsequent direction of the game. But if we allowed complete player freedom, too many players would wander off, not pay attention, get in the way of the sequence, whatever. So we made the decision to have the conversation take place as a brief cutscene.

The debate about how much freedom to offer players in situations like that is an interesting debate, but I don't think we can trust players to role play enough to be sure the important stuff isn't just lost on some of them.
 

This is what we used to call the "Player is staring at his shoelaces when the Tyranosaurus Rex Attacks" problem.
 

Forcing stupid actions on the part of the player is a big part of my complaint, yes. Just nailing the player's feet down to make them watch things that are happening that they wouldn't drastically object to isn't a problem to me.

I like story in my games. I don't like being forced to play the fool. :)

A lot of times it's simply bad writing - the person scripting the scene wasn't thinking about the PC's involvement. Or they ASSUMED that the PC would be in a certain situation, which can be dangerous in the sort of RPG that allows a lot of character freedom. If you're supposed to be playing a specific set character, it's fair to mandate that this character behaves in this way. If the player is supposed to be setting their own path...
 

i have nothing constructive to add.

I _hated_ the socalled interactive cutscenes in the tomb raider anniversary edition on ps2. It suddenly became a modern version of dragons lair.

BLEAGH

oh and final fantasy 7, the entire game was a cutscene and everyone (but me) loved it. go figure.
 

Some excellent points have already been made (particularly by Lazerfx), but let me throw in my $0.02 worth. =)

I'm not a huge fan of cut scenes; generally it seems that they are handled poorly and only serve to remove the player from the game.

The rule should be: Any time the player is busy playing the game, do not interrupt him! (No, I don't care how cool or necessary you think your cut scene is...)

So with that said, cut scenes can be used to good effect at times when there is a lull in the action or when the player is "done" or inactive.

What I mean by "done" is, for example: A mission or level requires the player to set demo charges and exfil via helicopter. A perfect place to use a cut scene in this situation is as the charges detonate, the player sprints for the helicopter and jumps on as it takes off. Pan around for explosion and insert witty dialogue. =)

In this example, 1) The cut scene does not interrupt game play (The level is done...); 2) Serves as a reward, i.e. the player gets to see the results of his actions; and 3) Provides a breather before the player is re-inserted into the action.

As far as interaction between characters goes, I prefer it to be, well, interactive. And yeah, don't nail my feet to the floor, please. If the dialogue is of uber important to the game-play, then come up with something other than a cut scene. Like if the player starts to wander off, have an NPC interrupt with something like, "Excuse me but you really need to hear this!" and not continue speaking until the player returns.

At any rate, I think cut scenes should be a last resort; if you can't figure out a way to incorporate the event/action/dialogue into the game itself, then, and only then, you can use a cut scene.

One thing cut scenes are perfect for (since the player is not directly involved): Flashbacks.

Finally, if the player is staring at his shoelaces, he deserves to be eaten! Never, ever try to protect the player from his own stupidity! (It's generally impossible anyway.) =P
 

@ Stu: Couldn't agree more! I just couldn't get into those, even though they looked fantastic; too much watching and not enough playing. =\
 

One more point. (Along the lines of, "Don't make the player do things he wouldn't normally do.")

Do not ever physically move the player in a cut scene! (Unless, perhaps, it's a level transition or something like that.)

Case in point: In Quake 4, there is a minor boss fight where a cut scene has the player wander away from cover, out into the middle of a room, and then leaves him there with no recourse but to get his ass shot off! Terrible! I was like, "No! You idiot! Where are you going?!" (I seriously wanted to meet the designer at this point and slap him around.)
 

I loved FF 7 - except for the cut-scenes that would play when summoning. Particularly the final battle with Sephiroth... he'd fire off one of those 2-minute-long cut-scenes every other round. I could SWEAR that epic 40-minute-long battle would have taken about 1 minute, tops, if those cut-scenes were taken out.

Having the player moved as part of the cut-scene... that sounds a lot like what Whiner described. That happened to me in Neverwinter Nights a couple of times.... truly annoying. "I don't play that way!"
 

I think cutscenes shouldn't be used in games unless for the purpose of showing the player that something is going on meanwhile elsewhere. If I wanted cutscenes I can also watch a movie. Especially annoying are cutscenes in RPG's (e.g. NWN2, KotOR) where they certainly not belong (Oblivion is a good example that's not using cutscenes).
 

I'm actually surprised to find that people are so anti-cutscene... I'm not necessarily a fan of them, and there are often better ways to get a point across, but unless they're particularly egregious (like in Xenosaga or the MGS series), I find them innocuous at worst.
 

I think xeno makes some good points, but there are some that I have to disagree with, at least in part.

The rule should be: Any time the player is busy playing the game, do not interrupt him! (No, I don't care how cool or necessary you think your cut scene is...)

The problem that I have with this is that I think it presumes one particular style of gameplay, whether that's a typical action FPS game or even RPG, where "levels" are organized a certain consistent way, with defined beginnings, middles, and ends based on clearly defined objectives. Adventure games can be structured this way as well, but they can also incorporate other, more varied structures, and cutscenes can be used in the middle of action to help define important points in the narrative. The cutscenes in Vespers, for instance, are used as triggers for important, dramatic shifts in the storyline.

As far as interaction between characters goes, I prefer it to be, well, interactive. And yeah, don't nail my feet to the floor, please. If the dialogue is of uber important to the game-play, then come up with something other than a cut scene. Like if the player starts to wander off, have an NPC interrupt with something like, "Excuse me but you really need to hear this!" and not continue speaking until the player returns.

For interaction between the player and characters, I think this is generally (but not always) true. I say this because the first main cutscene in Vespers is a dialog between the NPCs which does not involve the player character, and thus there is no real interaction that is being subverted. But even in cases where the interaction does involve the player, the removal of the interactive component doesn't always have to be interpreted as Bad. A lot of it depends on the implementation skills of the designer. There are plenty of interactive fiction games that implement the equivalent of cutscenes where the player character's interaction with NPCs is scripted, with no "choice nodes"; if the author requires a certain action or interaction to take place, there is nothing wrong with scripting it, as long as it is written and implemented well. I don't see why that cannot also apply to graphical games.

And my personal feeling about implementations that could be scripted but aren't, thus allowing players their usual freedom but accounting for it with NPCs who warn the player and stop talking until he starts paying attention to them again, is that they don't necessarily work as well. But it really depends on the context; if it's a typical character interaction, I think that would be fine, but an important turning point in the narrative (like the cutscene in Vespers) would fail miserably if the conversation stopped while the player fuddled around doing something completely unrelated.

At any rate, I think cut scenes should be a last resort; if you can't figure out a way to incorporate the event/action/dialogue into the game itself, then, and only then, you can use a cut scene.

I don't necessarily agree with generating hard and fast rules that apply across the board. I think it will always depend on the type of game, the context within the game, and the event/action/dialog's impact on the narrative (if there even is one).
 

@Rubes:
"The problem that I have with this is that I think it presumes one particular style of gameplay..."

While my examples are indeed taken from FPS-type games, there is no presumption here. It's pretty simple: If I, the player, am currently involved in playing the game, then yes! I'm going to be annoyed if you suddenly interrupt me! Doesn't matter what kind of game! Because now I'm not playing any more -- I'm not participating anymore -- I'm only watching. And we don't generally pick up a game to just watch it, right? =)

"...cutscenes can be used in the middle of action..."

I completely disagree! If the player is "in the middle of action", he is most likely pretty involved with playing at that moment -- do not interrupt him! Wait for a natural lull in the action to provide your "dramatic shift."

"A lot of it depends on the implementation skills of the designer. ... there is nothing wrong with scripting it, as long as it is written and implemented well..."

Bingo. Therein lies my fundamental problem with cut scenes. In my experience, most of the time the implementation is heavy-handed and badly-timed.

"I don't necessarily agree with generating hard and fast rules that apply across the board."

Call them rules, guidelines, whatever; there needs to be something there as a foundation, right? And of course, there are always exceptions to the rules. But you had better know exactly what you're doing and what the outcome will be before you start breaking the rules.

Let me reiterate, and I'll leave it at that:
1) Cut scenes take the player out of the game and thus, should be used sparingly and at the correct moments.
2) Corollary to #1: Never interrupt the player while he's playing, i.e. "in the middle of action."
3) Never use a cut scene (or any other mechanism, for that matter) to force the player to do something he wouldn't normally do. Nobody likes being pushed around.
4) Always keep in mind that you're creating a game, not a movie. (Yeah, I'm talkin' to you, Square!) =)
 

I really don't disagree with any of that. I think our interpretations of "in the middle of action" are probably different. I wasn't implying that a cutscene could occur while the player is in the middle of mowing down a group of zombies, of course, but rather in the middle of a particular "level", as opposed to always the beginning or end.

And certainly when there is a lull in the action, so to speak, although again I'm coming at this from a predominantly non-action-style game perspective (eg, adventure games) rather than action-style FPS-type games. So in this respect there are likely different definitions of "a lull in the action."

I haven't played a ton of games, but I can't recall too many that have used cutscenes more than sparingly, or inserted them right in the middle of a firefight or something. I do agree that cutscenes that mess with the player or make him do unreasonable things are poorly designed and/or implemented.