No Thinking Needed for This Game

[CANADIANEH]

your choices dont do anything, you start at A and go to B all the same no matter your choice. I was being lead throw out the game with the odd spot for me to interact with it. The game tells you to what to do, this game DOES NOT let you go left or right just straight ahead, YAWN. The story line is great but as for as interacting with the game goes, its minimal at best and you can not divert from it, you just do what it says for you to do, like a parent telling a child what to do for every action.

[David]

Originally posted by jazbodepue:

This reminds me a lot of the simcity debacle... a piece of ♥♥♥♥ that fanboys deperately try to defend.

That's an opinion, you realise, about this being a piece of crap (and possibly Sim City too, as I haven't played it but heard bad things about the drm)? And you are exactly the type of person that makes a creator not wish to interact with people. There are plenty of ways to say you don't like something, which is fine, without saying 'it's ♥♥♥♥' or being rude. It's quite possible as well to voice your opinion without calling people who like a game fanboys.

[twincast]

No matter the mainline Inkle games, TBS has lots of high quality 2D graphics, a deep chess-like combat system and quite a bit of voice-over. You can't tell me that Telltale after all their success couldn't easily do at least half of what Stoic achieved in a fully voiced game if they wanted to.

Originally posted by David:

Again, minor stuff, but it counts. There is no false advertising.

The "determine their fate" part is; at most you delay it.

[David]

Originally posted by twincast:

No matter the mainline Inkle games, TBS has lots of high quality 2D graphics, a deep chess-like combat system and quite a bit of voice-over. You can't tell me that Telltale after all their success couldn't easily do at least half of what Stoic achieved in a fully voiced game if they wanted to.

The Banner Saga is a different game. You still see the same major story beats that they want you to, though I'll grant you that it seems like there is a lot more variance. I've not completed the game, but have played some, plus saw the story map they worked out on Inkle.

Plus again, Telltale only have 4 - 8 weeks as an estimate to deliver an episode. Not much time at all to deliver branching stories, plus Banner Saga was more text based and static images if I remember correctly. Even if they had all the time in the world, it'd still be difficult and I'm talking as someone who's tried it, so it's not like I don't know what I'm talking about.

http://writer.inklestudios.com/stories/pd89

Keep in mind that is only 1,335 words long, hasn't been worked on for a while and is not polished (I've worked on other interactive fiction projects too, but they never get far, same as with standard fiction due to my own imperfections as a writer). But you can see that I bring story threads back together. No story, or very few, will ever give people the freedom they desire for the most part, depending on how much they want choices to matter.

Originally posted by twincast:

Originally posted by David:

Again, minor stuff, but it counts. There is no false advertising.

The "determine their fate" part is; at most you delay it.

No, it isn't. It may or may not apply to the main characters (though I imagine season 2 will start them off at more or less the same place for obvious reasons), as we're only on episode 1 so far, but you do get to control the fates of minor characters at the very least, even if you don't see them again.

At the very least, you'll certainly be able to shape relationships for the main characters. That's a given.

And even if yoiu do only delay the inevitable, you are still determining their fate 'for that moment in time'.

Honestly though, I really don't know why I'm debating this. I'm just wasting my time and the time of others who read this. People tend to be set in their ways, so no matter what I say, it likely won't do any good.

But what I will say is I'm not averse to criticising Telltale. I found the controls a bit sluggish in GoT and the mouse cursor was a bit hard to find before dialog timers ran out. Also, I'm quite quick to say that I wish choices mattered more. But when I say 'wish', I mean wish. I buy their games/stories, just as I buy other developers' games, with the provision that choices will only lead to minor changes. To expect otherwise is to lead to disappointment, as I know how difficult it is to make divergent stories.

I ultimately don't get why people feel the need to hang around on a game's forum and complain either. Make your voice known, then leave. It's just wasting your time. I did the same with Dragon Age 2. Complained once or twice, then dropped it, because of the promise that 'Kirkwall would change'.

[twincast]

Originally posted by David:

Originally posted by twincast:

No matter the mainline Inkle games, TBS has lots of high quality 2D graphics, a deep chess-like combat system and quite a bit of voice-over. You can't tell me that Telltale after all their success couldn't easily do at least half of what Stoic achieved in a fully voiced game if they wanted to.

The Banner Saga is a different game. You still see the same major story beats that they want you to, though I'll grant you that it seems like there is a lot more variance. I've not completed the game, but have played some, plus saw the story map they worked out on Inkle.

Plus again, Telltale only have 4 - 8 weeks as an estimate to deliver an episode. Not much time at all to deliver branching stories, plus Banner Saga was more text based and static images if I remember correctly. Even if they had all the time in the world, it'd still be difficult and I'm talking as someone who's tried it, so it's not like I don't know what I'm talking about.

Of course you arrive at the same major plot points; it's a story-based game! But in which state you do that can differ dramatically (due to both story choices and combat skill; the latter obviously not applying for most adventure games), and a number of story branches are exclusive to individual (often multi-tier) choices.

I'm not demanding, let alone expecting, a The Witcher 2 in terms of story divergence, no matter how much I'd love that, nor the amount of wildly different ways in which Wasteland 2 (which I admittedly have yet to finish) can end, but merely a discernible difference in your situation of any kind, including a character or two exclusive to your playthrough for the long haul. In other words, I'd want them to expand on the Carley/Doug situation, instead of not doing even that much anymore. (And actually needing to use my brain in a game of theirs again through puzzle gameplay of whatever kind would be much appreciated.)

The amount of voice work is a factor, of course, but their rather badly animated low-poly models with low-res textures (they use a stylish look that mostly works, but that doesn't make it any less low-end) can hardly be much more work than the mostly (but far from completely) static but incredibly beautiful 2D graphics of The Banner Saga. Even the percentage of reused assets seems round about the same, if not higher, in Telltale's games.

And the short amount of time for production and polish per episode is a self-imposed limitation; they could just as well sell a full 10 to 20 hour game with less hard breaks (with the additional benefit of then being long enough to conceivably be able to have a TW2-like middle part). I understand that "seasons" are their shtick, but I've never seen anyone on the customer side of things (and few on the developer side) who actually liked the episodic format (be that due to the inherent problems it causes or just because they have to wait for months after each short bite of a game or both), and by now they should have enough savings not to live from episode paycheck to episode paycheck, particularly since all their PC and presumably most of their console sales are season passes now anyway. Although I guess each "new" release per season gives them a sales bump due to being featured on stores' front pages again. Sacrificing (the potential for higher) quality for that seems a rather slimy motivation however, particularly when there apparently is no longer a need for it.

Originally posted by David:

Originally posted by twincast:

The "determine their fate" part is; at most you delay it.

No, it isn't. It may or may not apply to the main characters (though I imagine season 2 will start them off at more or less the same place for obvious reasons), as we're only on episode 1 so far, but you do get to control the fates of minor characters at the very least, even if you don't see them again.

Erm, to quote said (quasi) bullet point in full:

You will take on the role of different members of the Forrester household, and determine their fate through the choices you make; your actions and decisions will change the story around you.

Originally posted by David:

At the very least, you'll certainly be able to shape relationships for the main characters. That's a given.

You did that considerably in TWD:S1 but only negligibly so in TWD:S2, so I wouldn't say "certainly".

Originally posted by David:

And even if yoiu do only delay the inevitable, you are still determining their fate 'for that moment in time'.

That's a very philosophical view; it is not, however, how "fate" is thought of in common parlance.

[David]

I wasn't going to reply, as I honestly can't be bothered now and have better things to do, not to mention I think this thread is better left on the back pages, but I figured I should seeing as you typed up a long post in reply. So yeah, this will definitely be my last response. I don't have the energy for this anymore.

Originally posted by twincast:

Of course you arrive at the same major plot points; it's a story-based game! But in which state you do that can differ dramatically (due to both story choices and combat skill; the latter obviously not applying for most adventure games), and a number of story branches are exclusive to individual (often multi-tier) choices.

I know it's a story based game and that's why the major events all occur. To expect otherwise is folly. That was my point, seeing as people love to complain about Ethan.

But yes, again, they are two different games. One, a turn-based strategy game that is story rich with only text and artwork (beautiful artwork and animation at that) to tell the story. The other a cinematic, episodic game that is essentially an interactive movie/tv show with 4 - 8 weeks to deliver as an estimate to deliver new episodes. You cannot expect much more than they deliver. Note: After the two different games part, this was said more in general.

Originally posted by twincast:

I'm not demanding, let alone expecting, a The Witcher 2 in terms of story divergence, no matter how much I'd love that, nor the amount of wildly different ways in which Wasteland 2 (which I admittedly have yet to finish) can end, but merely a discernible difference in your situation of any kind, including a character or two exclusive to your playthrough for the long haul. In other words, I'd want them to expand on the Carley/Doug situation, instead of not doing even that much anymore. (And actually needing to use my brain in a game of theirs again through puzzle gameplay of whatever kind would be much appreciated.)

I can understand that and I wish for choices to matter more, but again, it's not really realistic in my mind (though including more events along the lines of Carley and Doug is, as long as they don't have much bigger roles, I guess). As I've pointed out numerous times here and on another forum under a penname, I'm actually happy with how GoT worked out. It definitely feels like there are more callbacks in the first episode alone when compared to Wolf for instance. Plus the next episode preview seems like it's open to change.

On the puzzle front, I can understand that, but it's not something I share, as I think, depending on the puzzle difficulty, they can sometimes get in the way of the story. Just a personal opinion anyway, but as you can see by looking at my profile, I do like my adventure games with puzzles. Unfortunately though for people who need puzzles and hubs, it seems Telltale's moved away from that.

Wasteland 2 is something I've not played, though I'd like to.

Originally posted by twincast:

The amount of voice work is a factor, of course, but their rather badly animated low-poly models with low-res textures (they use a stylish look that mostly works, but that doesn't make it any less low-end) can hardly be much more work than the mostly (but far from completely) static but incredibly beautiful 2D graphics of The Banner Saga. Even the percentage of reused assets seems round about the same, if not higher, in Telltale's games.

Static was the wrong word on my part, apologies. I do remember their eyes and such moving, but what I really meant was it's not like watching The Walking Dead where characters walk around and everything.

Again though, the wrong word on my part.

Originally posted by twincast:

And the short amount of time for production and polish per episode is a self-imposed limitation; they could just as well sell a full 10 to 20 hour game with less hard breaks (with the additional benefit of then being long enough to conceivably be able to have a TW2-like middle part). I understand that "seasons" are their shtick, but I've never seen anyone on the customer side of things (and few on the developer side) who actually liked the episodic format (be that due to the inherent problems it causes or just because they have to wait for months after each short bite of a game or both), and by now they should have enough savings not to live from episode paycheck to episode paycheck, particularly since all their PC and presumably most of their console sales are season passes now anyway. Although I guess each "new" release per season gives them a sales bump due to being featured on stores' front pages again. Sacrificing (the potential for higher) quality for that seems a rather slimy motivation however, particularly when there apparently is no longer a need for it.

It's a choice they've made to mimic television, which you say you know. Plus they shape the episodes based on feedback. Might or might not be a coincidence that the game they released all at once, Jurassic Park, was received rather poorly. Incidentally, with the exception of the CSI/Law & Order (possibly poker night too), the only game I don't own. Though I will buy it eventually.

Anyhow, it's definitely a mixed reaction on the episodic model and it is understandable. But I do know for a fact that some people enjoy the wait and discussions between episodes. Myself? Not really fussed either way, though I'd obviously prefer to have the episodes all available so I can play at my leisure to keep all story threads fresh.

Originally posted by twincast:

Erm, to quote said (quasi) bullet point in full:
You will take on the role of different members of the Forrester household, and determine their fate through the choices you make; your actions and decisions will change the story around you.

(had to edit the above quote slightly to get it to display correctly)

I knew the full quote. The story does change around, even if it's minimally. I'll deal with the other part further down.

Originally posted by David:

At the very least, you'll certainly be able to shape relationships for the main characters. That's a given.

Originally posted by twincast:

You did that considerably in TWD:S1 but only negligibly so in TWD:S2, so I wouldn't say "certainly".

Again, I know. But I would say that on a recent replay of episode 5, from the ice lake onwards, I did find several callbacks to previous choices which I hadn't noticed before. So, maybe a replay is called for on my end, like I intend to do for Wolf.

But yes, my initial thought was the same as what you stated until I replayed that section of episode 5.

The reason I said a given, however, is because it's clear episode 1 is already altering dialog and such based on past choices. So, for me, that is altering relationships. Of course, it might change for future episodes, especially after the reaction that Telltale are getting. it's enough to make a creator wonder why they bother, but I hope not as I sincerely feel they're on the right track now.

Originally posted by David:

And even if yoiu do only delay the inevitable, you are still determining their fate 'for that moment in time'.

Originally posted by twincast:

That's a very philosophical view; it is not, however, how "fate" is thought of in common parlance.

I realise that and was tempted to add in 'though I know fate generally revolves around life and death', or something of that nature. Though fate doesn't exactly refer to just life and death either, as a similar statement to 'you are fated to remain a penniless bum' could also be used.

Anyhow, I've said what I wanted to now. I can't be bothered stating the same thing over and over, but wanted to respond due to the reason I stated before. I did appreciate the civil discussion though and you seem better to talk to than others. If I seemed snippy at any point, it's simply because I'm tired of stating the same things over and over. :( So, I do apologise for that.

[AsKeD]

hgkghkhkjhgkgjjj

[Jaffa]

Telltale games have always been like this. They create the allusion that your choices matter but in the end you get the same ending as everyone else. To enjoy this game you need to submerge yourself in it and enjoy the story line, you need to feel like your choices matterd which when I played through episode one I did, and I was constantly second guessing myself. Thinking "crap was that the right choice?" is how the game is meant to be played.

Imagine this, Telltale's games is like two people knitting a sweater, slightly different designs but in the end you still get a sweater. It's not about the sweater, its about how much fun you had making it.

[Safavi]

For anyone of you that are wondering we are mad becuase our choices dont matter because we WISHED they did matter! If our choices in the prologue did MATTER why make it episodic? Were going to forget everything that happened last episode so why not release a season all at once? Sure it would take time but atleast we would know our choices did mater opposed same ending as everyone bassically.

We want our choices to matter because in the show or the books we cant change anything. If I wanted to save Eddard, Robb, Catelyn, Renly and etc I would. Books and the show are not an interactive medium. We cannot make the right choices that the characters might not think about. For example if I was able to go to the show/book and tell Robb to never ever go to a wedding ever and he still died anyway I would be really pissed off.