• NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Yeah. Its immediate gratification.

    You can get into a cod or fortnite game in less than five minutes from boot to boots on the ground. You can get into a fight in an open world game in even less time. And so forth.

    If you aren’t into the (delightful) love story? The (extended cut) Fall Guy is 20 minutes to the first stunt and about 45 minutes to the first fight scene. Personally? I think the movie would have benefited from even more time with Ryan Gosling just crying to some t swizzle in the car but it (like Drive, another spectacular Gosling film that nobody but me likes) was marketed as an action movie and people are going to just take out their phones or their gameboys if you make them wait that long.

    Its similar logic to “I don’t have time to watch a 90 minute movie tonight. So instead I’ll watch six episodes of a tv show”

    • Executive Chimp
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 months ago

      On the flip side many people put 100+ hours into a single game and a movie lasts maybe 2. Games can have delayed gratification too.

    • snooggums@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      2 months ago

      I think instant engagement is a better description than instant gratification. Some books, movies, and games can pull off quick engagment but a lot have a gradual buildup as well. A gradual buildup with audio, visual, and active participation is just easier to become engaged quickly.

      Some games do have rapid engagement on subsequent plays like you mentioned, although I would say COD has a pretty slow engagement for me when it starts up after an update and makes me watch those short background clips I don’t care about. Much slower than the cold open on good comedy shows or the opening scene of Jurrasic Park.