We've had cutscenes in games, especially linear-based games, starting with the first Resident Evil game (and many others), so I will say again, they just got better in presentation, which is why we get dismissive statements from gamers now. Gameplay mixed with a good story utilizing cutscenes is perfectly fine; sure, there is a balance to it, but games that have them have their place. You can have games like Portal 2 AND games with a focus on story, narrative, and gameplay. You don't need to consolidate it all into one single game (or expect all developers to tell a story in the exact same way). That's just boring. I also wouldn't call using cutscenes or in-game interactions taking control away from YOU, that is just one of the ways they can use to tell or add to their game. It's okay to be an observer in a game sometimes. After all, and this is important, the main way we interact with games is via button presses and analog stick movement on a piece of plastic we call a controller. Ultimately, if you really don't like having cutscenes or any form of cutscene, you can simply avoid those games; there are others who like it.I don't mind a game having a simple plot. "Peach is kidnapped and Mario needs to save her" is more than enough for me.
Now if the developer really wants to push his story into my game, sure. Just don't do it using long cutscenes. Taking away control from me to show me a cut-scene is a guaranteed skip. And if i can't skip them, its game over.
Give me more games like Portal/2 where the story is told while you are in control. Or games like Metroid Prime where the story is there if you want to discover it yourself.
Just don't do cut-scenes, that's all. Especially unskippable ones.
I see... I guess that depends on what the reviewer of the game values. If they value story and gameplay together, that will show in how they do their review. When gameplay completely outshines the story elements, it will be reflected in the review, and in that scenario, it will even trump any story aspects in that game, but that kind of thing mostly happens with Nintendo games. If you are working on a linear game, you need a tight story to go along with it. Every game is different. Variety is good. We don't need to downplay games based on what the designers choose to focus on, if a game isn't giving you what you like, you go to a game that does give you that.What I mean, putting it in terms of ratings, is giving a game7.0 (or 8.5 on a good day) just for failing on the story front in spite of rating a 9 or 10 for gameplay alone, while rating another game a 9+ for a 9/10 story but having 7 on gameplay, tops. The latter may be more aesthetically pleasing, but doesn't pass the acid test as a game as well. (Play novels and other narrative focused genres are a little different though.)