Apparently Blow said: the problem with video game cutscenes is game devs don't study the theory around cinematography, or lighting, or blocking, or what even makes a good acting performance, they just autistically copy things without understanding what makes it work

I tend to agree. For example, typesetting used to be THE discipline. As a printer of centuries past, one would set the type, on a press, and know how to operate the machine, all while also manually spell-checking the content for accuracy, and loading paper, and unloading, and all the other things associated with creating typography in the 1600s.

Fast-foward to today, and typeography is one dialog box with a couple of arrows and some graphics explaining how these numbers impact the text. Kerning, font, shape, size, position, color, and every other potential attribute are CONSIDERED AND HANDLED by the software technology.

It used to be a discpline, that of ‘printing;’ It was a complex, life-long, family-business-style endeavour.

Now, that discipline is a minor, albeit still important, subset of a now much larger and much more complex practice.

Like all other old technologies and methods, all the techniques of film and tv will be ‘compressed,’ and the entire legacy media apparatus will be consumed by interactive entertainment cutscenes dialog boxes.

Put differently, Blow is describing the concept of ‘an image of an image’ written about by Guy Diebold (sp?) in Society of the Spectacle.