Video Summary - Games Are Losing Their Soul to Cinema

Overview

The video argues that mainstream game culture and criticism have “lost their soul” by chasing cinematic respectability instead of embracing what games uniquely can do.

Core thesis: games don’t need to justify themselves as “art”

The presenter insists that gaming is art and criticizes the industry for treating games as “real art” only when they mimic other media—especially film.
Unlike film (which is widely assumed to be art), games and game criticism often adopt an apologetic consumer-product framing—reviewing games like “toys” or “Lego sets.”
Praise tends to arrive only once games resemble cinema.

“Cinematic games” are defined as games trying to become movies

The presenter rejects the vague label “cinematic” and proposes a stricter framing:

“Movie games”: games where the player mainly runs and jumps through scripted events, with frequent actor takeover during cutscenes and strong attempts to reproduce film language.

They also argue these games typically borrow stylistic DNA from a narrow slice of movies/TV drama rather than learning from cinema’s full range.

A “possibility space” scale: what games allow players to do

The essay develops a spectrum based on how much interactivity (player agency) a game offers:

Limited: curated, constrained experiences
- Examples mentioned: Dear Esther, Mouthwashing
Open: maximal freedom
- Example mentioned: Breath of the Wild

The scale supports the claim that some constrained games can still be artistically rich, but:

Movie games typically reduce possibility space while being praised as though their cinematic framing is the main point.

Critique of “movie game” masterpieces: The Last of Us

The presenter’s sharpest criticism targets The Last of Us:

The gameplay is described as mechanically familiar and mostly used to deliver story beats:
- stealth/cover/shooting
- crafting/upgrade structure is viewed as shallow
The story and performances are acknowledged as compelling, but the presenter argues they’re delivered in a way that treats the player as an “actor” expected to hit marks like a film character—rather than as someone whose actions fundamentally shape meaning.
Cutscenes “box in” gameplay (e.g., black frames), so what the audience “loves” feels like content packed into film-like segments instead of something that emerges from play.

Conclusion: The Last of Us is framed as succeeding as passive drama, but falling short as an interactive medium.

What “good use” of the medium looks like: Nier: Automata and Undertale

The presenter contrasts movie games with games that use interactivity in ways film can’t replicate.

Nier: Automata

Praised as something “only a video game can do.”
The essay emphasizes mechanical structures that create lived experience, not just narrative display.
Highlights genre-shifting gameplay and the idea that player effort becomes morally/experientially meaningful.
Culminates in an ending that requires sacrifice, which the presenter argues cannot be duplicated in passive media.

Undertale

Used to argue for choice-based morality as a uniquely game-capable form.
Since combat isn’t mandatory, the game incentivizes deliberate compassion.
The presenter claims a movie can preach mercy, but only a game can repeatedly require the player to choose it and feel the consequences within play.

Why reviewers focus on movie games

The presenter claims game criticism drifted because movie games are:

Easy to like and hard to hate (approachable, emotionally predictable, bingeable)
Friendly to review workflows, especially under deadlines and crunch
Centrally designed around feelings, letting critics describe emotions rather than analyze interactive design

They cite an example review for Mixtape to illustrate a pattern where critics may:

loop on personal resonance (e.g., “nostalgia” reframed)
offer limited critique of actual gameplay systems
focus more on emotional affect than medium-specific evaluation

Why movie-game filmmaking “can’t work” in full

The essay argues games trying to be films face fundamental limits:

In games, players can deviate, so developers must guide behavior using constraints, “mark hitting,” camera/lighting tricks, and UI/scene direction.
Because gameplay demands interaction and clarity of affordances, cinematic framing techniques often become awkward—or require “yellow paint” solutions to direct attention.
Once control returns to the player, cinematic grammar breaks down:
- conversations and camera language fail
- the presenter uses cinematic composition ideas (e.g., the 180° rule) to argue that player agency disrupts clean film language

Example of a better model: 007 First Light

The presenter holds up First Light as a model where a Bond game better imitates what Bond films do:

pace
observation
bluffing
tension

…while preserving interactive freedom. Scripted set pieces function as punctuation for player-led problem solving rather than constant dominance by passive cinematic moments.

Final prescription

The presenter calls for the industry and critics to stop apologizing for games.
Instead, they argue for work that uses interactivity as interactivity—not as a wrapper for cinema.
The uniquely beautiful aspect of games (and why they deserve respect as art) is the lived experience of playing:
- uncertain
- variable
- player-dependent …in ways passive media cannot replicate.

Presenters or contributors

Main presenter: (unnamed in subtitles; author of the video essay)
Referenced critics/reviewers:
- Noah Gervais
- James Beckett
- Roger Ebert (as a comparison)
- plus cited outlets/voices such as GQ, Empire, Vice, IGN, Washington Post
Video streamer referenced: ConnorDog
Character/platform contributor referenced: Toby Fox (Undertale)
Review source referenced: James Beckett (NNN review source)
Editor cameo: Raven (“Hi, editor Raven here”)
Creator/release contributors referenced (for Nier: Automata ending/music voice work): director and composer are mentioned but not named in the subtitles

Games Are Losing Their Soul to Cinema

Key takeaways