Kenneth offers an interesting argument for a correlation between game prices and the focus on auxiliary, high-production values such as voice acting and cut-scenes; however, I think he explicitly undermines his case that the press is to blame. The Prince of Persia and No More Heroes examples demonstrate that critics focused on gameplay defects rather than cosmetic ones, which in turn encouraged developers to further tweak the design rather than the narrative.
What does this have do with Metroid: Other M and game prices? Well, considering how many critics overreacted to the cutscenes and voice acting, Nintendo could be forced to take away focus these devices, which would be a defeat and retreat creatively. Or worse (but highly unlikely) -- it could make them spend more on a writers, actors, and a special team just for creating future Metroid cut-scenes. That's money that could be better spent on adequate advertising, programmers, character artists, level designers, and game directors: people who make the gameplay tick.
Unfortunately, other publishers would take the flashy-style route for the quick one-month cash grab. And this leaves rather good games buried in the sales chart, only to be touched when prices drop. Publishers would forget that a solid game is just a playable as one with tons of money and hype thrown at it, which turns game making into an arms race of "production values" as a main weapon that not every developer should use.
However, publishers might not have to go that route if critics weren't so incessant in wanting that kind of quality. I've read review after review where voice-acting and cut-scenes became a major craw in the foot of critics. And yes, publishers do take note of the criticisms and work like hell to fix them. This is a major problem because it makes publishers focus on really nit-picky crap that doesn't make games any better.
Look no further than Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, one of the best 3D platformers ever made: incredible level design, charming story, and great character development. Yet, so many critics couldn't let go of the seemingly repetitive combat, whiny lead character, and lack of boss battles.
So Ubisoft focused on those "flaws" and churned out Warrior Within, a game with lots of combat, a female lead whose deisgn would make a whore vomit, and just whole lot of pointless brooding that nearly buried the platforming and soul that made Sands of Time soar.
Need another example? How about No More Heroes, an honest to goodness great game on the Wii: very flashy and solid combat, wicked dialogue, campy characters, and an over-the-top goofiness that made it enjoyable from beginning to end. Yet critics couldn't let go of the open-world drabness and bizarre minigames. So what happened to No More Heroes 2? Now an open-world game that focused on tighter comabt and more of it, which zapped the wacky spirit away from the original.
When critics are unable to look at games as a whole, they come off as uninformed and ignorant -- they're nothing more than a whiny focus group who just want games to be art and respected like films.
My big beef is that this does a disservice to what games are at their core: interactive. And anything that takes away from playing the game doesn't help the industry, gamers, publishers, developers, or retailers. No one gets respect by making carbon copies of something else, so critics, please -- stop wishing for games to look like movies and criticizing them when they're not up to your own standards.
But until critics become okay with games being games, expect publishers to keep throwing money at the wrong areas because they believe that this all we want: expensive movies with moments of button pressing instead of games that overflow with good ideas. All the while, smaller games get left in the cold.
Publishers will probably want to charge for the cutscenes next, isn't that right, Mr. Kotick?
"My guess is unlike film studios that are really stuck with a model that goes through theatrical distribution and takes a signification amount of the profit away, if we were to go to an audience and say, 'We have this great hour and a half of linear video that we'd like to make available to you at a $20 or $30 price point,' you'd have the biggest opening weekend of any film ever.
