One of the core tenets of video games is its interactivity. It’s how games are often justified as a medium that can somehow be elevated beyond that of its closest cousin, film—after all, a moviegoer’s experiences are usually passive, whereas video games are supposedly not. A moviegoer has no say in how the film’s narrative is shaped, while games are the exact opposite.
It’s an odd impulse, for more reasons than one; it implies some amount of passivity in movies while suggesting that the medium is poorer for it, as well as serving as a seemingly underhanded way to justify games as more than just films with pushable buttons. But this also seems at odds with the adjective of describing a game as “cinematic”, which is loaded with some measure of self-deprecation by the player—as if games have to strive to be more like the best of films.
There are many games that want to emulate films. The progenitors of these are probably developers such as Hideo Kojima, David Cage and Sam Lake, who are clearly enamoured by movies, and whose games are heavily influenced by their favourite filmmakers. David Cage, in particular, is plain about his intention to merge cinema and games. In an interview with Game Developer years ago, Cage has said that cinematography will help "get the player emotionally involved". “If you have no emotional involvement you're just watching the pixels on screen," he said. He then elaborates on his vision to meld both cinematography and the interactivity in Quantic Dream’s games—to the point where games and films are almost indistinguishable.
Related: Sifu’s Live-action Trailer Is Much More Compelling Than The Game
Such conversations were had before, even before the advent of games. This was the same with paintings
Read more on thegamer.com