- Primary Subject: Video Game Industry Trends: Live-Action Adaptations
- Key Update: Actor Ben Starr argues that games don't need adaptations to justify their existence, sparking a debate on the value of player agency.
- Status: Opinion / Feature Article
- Last Verified: April 28, 2026
- Quick Answer: Video game adaptations often fail because they remove the interactive agency and non-linear exploration that define the medium, turning immersive experiences into restrictive, linear stories.
I can think of dozens of video game titles that are gearing up for a film or TV adaptation. Off the top of my head, there's Call of Duty, Mortal Kombat, Ghost of Tsushima, Bioshock, The Legend of Zelda, and Street Fighter. But do we really need them?
Ben Starr, the voice actor of Clair Obscur: Expedition 33's Verso, said in an interview during this year's BAFTAs that video games don't need live-action adaptations. He acknowledged that adapting games into films or TV shows opens the IP up to a wider audience, but emphasized that video games are great because they are games.
His statement got me thinking, and I couldn't help but agree. Why do we keep adapting video games into something else? Games should be games. Let's not ruin them by constantly having to justify their existence by being something else.
Video Game TV & Film Adaptations Need to Stop - Here's Why
A film or TV adaptation of a video game rarely catches my eye - especially if it's a game I've enjoyed.
The unique thing about video games is the user experience. Video games allow you to solve puzzles, discover secrets, uncover easter eggs, and more. Some games have more than one ending depending on the choices you make. Open-world games feature more than just the main storyline, often sending you on side quests to even progress.
How can a film or TV adaptation ever encapsulate the experience of discovering things on your own? Short answer - they can't. An adaptation is a linear story, which ultimately ruins the experience and immersion that a game would have.
READ MORE: Call of Duty Movie Faces Backlash as Director Once Said Playing Games for Hours Is “Weak”
It makes sense for books or comics to get adapted to a film or show. These forms of media have a linear story, a whole universe that can go from text to visuals. They have set endings and don't have other quests that the main character needs to do. Video games, which 100% rely on the person playing the game to progress, don't.
I understand why video games get adaptations. When a game goes viral and has a unique plot, it makes sense why studios would want to adapt that. Isn't that why The Last of Us and Fallout got adaptations - the story was something interesting and marketable?
Some adaptations do it well - but that's when the games don't have a set plot. The Tetris movie, for example, is focused on securing the rights to the puzzle game. But games with deep lore and multiple endings hardly get it right, simply because the immersion is set aside to focus on one singular plot.
READ MORE: Studios Reportedly Battle for Battlefield Movie Rights in New Bidding War
We should let games be games. Let players enjoy the process of uncovering the plot, making their own choices, and using their critical thinking skills to figure out what to do next. Not everything needs an adaptation - let's do that with books instead.
For more like this, stick with us here at Gfinityesports.com, the best website for gaming news, reviews, features, and guides.