Quick-time events are just a "Simon Says" mini-game. It is supremely lazy game-making; not a single gamer I know likes QTEs and I would venture to say that not a single copy of any game ever was sold because "Oh! This game has awesome quick-time events; I'm going to buy this game right now!".

I don't think QTE can define a game, but it can enhance it.

Years ago I played God of War and really enjoyed the QTE kill animations. It made me feel, well, like a God of War.

I wouldn't be surprised if that's the exception to the rule though. Shenmue had some terrible QTEs (my biggest criticism were that they were unpredictable). Also, too many FPS games have QTEs whenever some animal bites you. It's practically a trope now.

Isn't guitar hero (etc) basically giant QTE games?

Guitar Hero is a form of twitch-based game (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitch_gameplay). Where a QTE would be "hit the F key as many times as you can in 5 seconds", guitar hero is "hit the F key exactly when it needs to be hit".

I'm generalizing though. Some QTEs are a form of twitch gameplay (in which they require the player to hit at the perfect time), but twitch gameplay is not a form of QTE. What does set QTEs apart is that they are not, in fact, the whole game but are a sudden change of gameplay style which is gone as fast as it arrived.

I think the idea of a quick-time event is to make a cinematic experience more visceral/engaging, so it's not necessarily lazy... I mean it is more work than just putting the cutscene in after all. Anyways, maybe it's misguided and definitely overused, but I think it's pretty extreme to call it lazy. At some point pretty much every game devolves into "press button to make thing happen".

I think they were selling-points for Shenmue and God of War. That was before most people realized they were pretty much non-gameplay.

Quick time doesn't mean "mash button", it means "press button at the correct time".

Honestly, I've never found them to make things more engaging. If I'm interested in the story, having to fumble with the controller during otherwise static periods pulls me out of the narrative (in contrast to just letting me keep playing during these events - that does seem to increase engagement).

My view is that it's theoretically possible to design interesting quicktime event system, but that it tends to mash your verb-space together. In general, you get a stronger message with a clearer relationship between the button the player pressed and the verb in the game.

It's worth noting that quick time events are old. Here is a video of Day9 and friends playing through King's Quest 6 from Sierra's days of yore. Video has about two minutes of cutscene followed by a 1 or 2 second time window needing interaction. Day9 and crew miss the critical moment the first time round. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDKpm0r5MCQ&list=UUaxar6TBM-9...