/lit/ - Literature

>>9642572
You say that given time things will improve, but the improvement comes with maturity. I see no sign that video games are set to do that. Bloodbourne is just King's Field with sleeker action and better visuals. The industry isn't moving forwards and I see no reason to believe that it will with time. The two ways I imagine it could would be that new video game writers build on the works of others to slowly build a /v/ canon (unlikely, the best video games have accomplished so far is 90% apeing other mediums) or the industry poaches writers from other mediums and puts them to work, allowing video games to build off of what's established in literature and wherever in a way that's at least professional (for some reason video games love spending ten million dollars have Patrick Stewart speak for five minutes but are loathe to hire the guys who wrote all of his most memorable lines and instead leave that job to whichever intern drew the short straw).

Which corporate overlords are tripping over each other trying to create GOOD storytelling? Where are the AAA releases using GOOD storytelling as a selling point? A few fartsniffers releasing a The Last of Us sequel every few years (not even a very good game, by storytelling or game standards) doesn't count for anything. There's no mainstream drive to innovate, or even do a good job, in storytelling and you know it.

>>9642658
>we can make better quality games and they still sell
It looks to me more like people are reaching the opposite conclusion but I know that's too general a claim to be helpful. Cheap crap seems plentiful and all of the expensive stuff plays it pathetically straight.

Nobody's made Shakespeare that's better than the original as a movie but there are undeniably Shakespeare screen adaptions that stand on their own. Derek Jarman's 'The Tempest' is one of my favourite movies.

>>9585845
Derek Jarman's 'The Tempest' is a masterpiece. Jarman is the ultimate cinematic pleb filter.