One of my main heuristics for if a videogame is worth playing is if it only works as a game. As in if you transported it out of the medium, it loses a lot. The adaption can still be good, hell, the game can still be good but I don't think they're interesting in the art form that is videogames.
My main example here'd be TLOU. The netflix adaption was pretty much a hit because of course it is. The story is entirely linear, it's very clearly subdivided into combat -> exploration -> story, allthough sometimes the order changes. It's all polished to a mirror sheen, the gameplay is fun, hell, the brutality ties in thematically instead of being a back-of-the-box selling point to edgelords (allthough it is also that) but functionally it could be a movie or a series and it is and it works.
So whats your videogame that only works as a videogame, and most importantly, why? I think Disco Elysium is the free bingo square for this community on this one and the reasons are endless, but I'll start with something that surprised me recently: the new Hitman games.
They have movies but they're shit, all the comics and tie in novels I assume are for people into hitman lore because the story isn't really anything to write home about - mostly existing to get you to next location - but the the experience of playing hitman can't be recreated in another format because the interactivity is such a big part of it. I mean sure, "shoot someone in the head" basically always works. It's one of my main criticisms about a lot of games I have that give you a whole host of options to tackle a mission which all pale in effectiveness to "have a bit of aim and do headshot with the starter pistol" but somehow it's way more fun to hoist rich dipshits by their own petard.
It depends on whether you include a different medium just ripping the lore out of the game and telling the story devoid of gameplay mechanics.
Starcraft broodwar, for example, could easily be adapted into a sci-fi war against the aliens type movie but wouldn't be able to capture anything about how an RTS is played or feels.
A movie about managing resources in a context that doesn't really apply to anything in the real world (spend all your money all the time any resources left over are wasted) sounds pretty tough to do.
Disco elysium could be adapted into a movie, similarly, if it plucked the story and setting out of the gameplay. All the internal dialogue might have to be cut or turned into a cheap allegory for mental illness like so many movies do these days. Starts off following this eccentric vagabond collecting cans in a shopping bag talking to himself through a drunken stupor until you meet kim and realize harry's a detective.
What I'm saying is that I don't think a movie can accurately represent videogame mechanics but probably can represent the storyline from basically any game.
My real answer is VVVVVV
i think sort of bureaucratic drama about resources can work for starcraft movie tbh (capturing both frantic optimization and war itself), either sorkin or tony gilroy style (or less action-y edge of tomorrow), put some clock in the soundtrack to hardwire time limits and you got it.
I would be so into it, honestly. I used to watch pro starcraft every single day
therefore i think mechanics are not barriers to adaptation, but player choices influence are, so idk how you can make undertale or disco a movie, only with some sort of groundhog day device i can see them both making sense
Bandersnatch or whatever the 'choose your own adventure' movie is on netflix. Could be something like that, maybe?
I think I've lost the juice for arguing about this though so I concede that the choices affecting the narrative of the game would be tough