What I'm about to say will ruffle feathers, but here it goes: The Gunstringer is a functional and sometimes entertaining game completely marred by developer Twisted Pixel's infatuation with full-motion video. 

Now, if I've managed to hold your attention long enough to prevent an angry and uninformed comment lambasting my credibility, I'll explain. FMV isn't a terrible thing. Deus Ex: Human Revolution and Child of Eden both incorporate video into very striking and effective parts of their visual style. It can even be entertaining, as the Command and Conquer series' continued use of it proves. But, for however useful and amusing slapping footage of a real person into a game might be, full-motion video is easily abused.

One of my many obsessions is collecting '90s full-motion-video games. I enjoy the desperate attempts at innovation that shine through in FMV. Developers had just started harnessing the power to use video when they decided to put it in their work. They could insert a clip, make a character speak to the player in real time, and string together filmed scenes into a hopefully more detailed and immersive experience. Unfortunately, this brilliant idea collapsed on the shoulders of the people carrying it: the actors.

It's no secret that games like Crime Patrol, Phantasmagoria, Night Trap, and Sewer Shark had very bad actors. Developers had nearly microscopic budgets by modern standards, and that definitely limited who they could hire. But beyond having very little money to work with, the people who filmed games faced a serious challenge: capturing multiple sequences for each player action and choice. Actors had to film scenes and variants in order to tell a full and multi-faceted story. Stilted acting was the consequence of doing this cheaply and quickly.

Full-motion video doesn't have to be cheesy these days, but this idea seems completely lost on some people. Since 'Splosion Man, Twisted Pixel's use of fourth-wall-shattering FMV has increased at a staggering rate. The Gunstringer hinges on the idea that you are a puppeteer guiding a skeleton marionette on his quest to avenge his death. The whole story takes place on a stage, in front of an overacting and distracting FMV audience. 

The Gunstringer is a functional Kinect-based shooter that you can play either standing or sitting. It's amazingly precise and responsive -- things many Kinect games haven't been. The story is a bit shallow, but it is an amusing allusion to Spaghetti Westerns and '70s revenge films. Without the FMV, it's actually fairly enjoyable.

But the FMV clashes with The Gunstringer's core gameplay. While it coincides with the idea that the whole game is actually a play, its continued use serves as a cheapening distraction. Audience members overreact to the Gunstringer's actions so much that it blows right past being funny and nostalgic to being pointless and agitating.

This audience, when combined with the FMV special attack in Comic Jumper, demonstrates that someone needed to be in Twisted Pixel’s office explaining why this development style suffered a terrible death. Ironic reference is not a solid premise for critical design, and I fear the day we all start accepting it. The Gunstringer could be an amazing game if it weren't for the FMV so many people find "charming." Even though I collect dreadful and ridiculous things, I don't want that capsulated past creeping into the 21st century.

The Gunstringer isn't actually as revolutionary and creative as so many critics claim. It is a poster child for doing too much without a firm editorial presence. I don't believe creative minds need to be compartmentalized, but I do believe not every idea is a good one. For the Gunstringer, the idea of the game taking place on a stage is interesting, but allowing the audience to repeatedly intrude on the experience is unnecessary.

Full-motion video isn't the future. We learned that in the '90s, and I definitely don't want to go through that again.