I think that all video game movies need in order to be good is the same thing that comic book movies needed. Just treat them seriously, get a good writer and director, a good cast, and put it in the theatre. Don't treat it like cheesy campy kid-stuff and it will sell.

The first Resident Evil did this, as did Silent Hill. The Resident Evil sequals departed from the video game series to become action flicks with the same name, but the first shows its roots and doesn't apologize for them.

Theno

Absolutely Ted, there is a great deal to that statement- in fact, can anyone give some examples of a "good" video game turned movie? I've heard tell that "Resident Evil" isn't so bad, but haven't seen it myself. can anyone point out a video game turned movie that has been embraced by the majority?

On the other hand, execution is half the problem- the other half is the fact that video game protagonists are by design, cyphers- so that you, the player, can imprint on them and be drawn into the game-

I always chuckle when I read complaints that Master Chief isn't that great a video game character- certainly not someone who should be included in any list of such- but the point of Master Chief is that it could be anyone under the helmet- he speaks little and does a lot- that's a deliberate choice to draw the player into the world- and its the same with Half Life- Gordon Freeman has no real backstory or personality in the game- we learn about him (and the Chief) through other characters' reactions to their presence (Half Life is a bit more clever about it, removing 98% of the cut scenes and making you a part of the exposition rather than a bystander).

But the characters are not supposed to be fully fleshed out- that's up to you. Conversely, its quite a challenge to create a story around these blank slates, and for me, not a very compelling reason to see a film based on them, when I can turn on my console or computer and actually be them. But like Ted said, if you have a director or writer with enough imagination, you can certainly create a compelling story with even the most light of material.

The last problem, is that many video games are mash ups of story concepts that have been done over and over and over again in film- the difference being that now the viewer is the participant, and the games give you a chance to live in the reality- what is Half-Life but a person's chance to run around the world of Stephen King's "The Mist" with a shotgun and crowbar? "Halo" lets you go to town a la "Starship Troopers" and "Aliens". Even "Donkey Kong" gives you a chance to rescue Fay Wray (and need I mention the spectacularly horrible Mario Brothers film?)

Point is, when there's too much "mythology" to deal with in free play, imagination and choice is limited- its also why most video game movies are poor- in the video games, we are Max Payne or the Soldier in Doom- why would we want to passively sit and watch other people being them for two hours when we can simply step into their shoes and make our own choices? I've not yet played COH, but the idea sounded fantastic- and I had hoped they would keep their mythology light, so that the players would create the mythology rather than be slave to it- you have more choice that way than having to play alongside the Justice League or Avengers, where obviously you will always be second banana- and even if you do play Superman (a disastrously mishandled game, Superman Returns) or Spider-Man (the second of which, was frankly more fun when you simply swung around the city or dove off the Chrysler building than its tedious tasks), well, you are hindered by the fact that you have to play things their way, not yours- with a blank slate, its all up to you and your imagination, and that's a story that can go anywhere.

And while I'm certainly not about to diss the pen-and-paper RPG, I feel that in terms of "immersion", video games do beat them, simply because of the immediacy. Pen-and-paper RPGs have several filters between you and the experience, mostly related to the mechanics of the rules of pen-and-paper RPGs. When you have to negotiate every action with a Game Master and other players, and relate the whole thing through speech and dice-rolling, you're somewhat detached from the experience in a way that you're not from a video game. A good video game almost hypnotizes you into becoming your character for that period of time while you're watching the screen, and I just don't think that pen-and-paper can match that (even if I do agree with you that they provide a variety of choices and options that video games are still years away from matching.)

Everyone won’t want to play Batman because everyone’s Batman is a little different, and so the game quickly turns into an arguement as to what Batman “really acts like.”

That may be the case in a pen and paper RPG, but in the computer game, everyone will want to be Batman.

To address your final question, I've found that the least successful RPGs have dealt with using other people's characters. The Star Wars RPG very quickly dismissed the idea that the players were Luke, Han, Chewie, and Leia. The Xena/Herculeas RPG that I briefly wrote for found that the event that used the show's characters were the least popular.

The reason for this is twofold. No one wants to be the guy (or gal) who got Han or Xena killed in the game. And, everyone has a different interpretation as to how that character would "really act" in any given situation. Everyone won't want to play Batman because everyone's Batman is a little different, and so the game quickly turns into an arguement as to what Batman "really acts like."

Theno

In a table top RPG the player expresses his character in every way, not just the limited decisions of a video game. And, very few RPGs have experimented with cut scenes (and, none of them have done so successfully in my observation.)

I'm the plot director of a national RPG campaign. And, it is really difficult to keep the story going. It is hard to introduce recurring enemies when the PCs often kill the opponents by the end of the event. This is something that I really liked about your Punisher article.

I also have to keep the story flowing from team to team as there is no guarantee that the same group of people are going to play together every time. So, I can't focus too much on the PC's own drama.

But, I still have an engine. The players are all a member of a large group, similar to the Avengers or the Justice League. They have enemies at different levels of power and influence. This way, since I can't ensure that Lex Luthor escapes, I have him send a trusted minion instead.

In a video game the players are used to being railroaded. The plot goes this way, and they go along with it. In an RPG, however, railroading is one of the major sins. The writer and editor simply can't assume that a character will respond this way or that and has to write the event to provide the story, but also to provide options for the judge (or DM) to use to account for the unique things that the players might do.

Theno