Why I don't like Telltale Games(not a rant)

[Tacticus Winter]

Another supposed 10/10 Telltale Games release. Certainly on one of my most favorite topics as well, Game of Thrones, which I spent nearly 2-3 months total of my life, watching and understanding, and familiarizing myself with the lore.

But Telltale Games jumps the gun again, and makes a game on a TV Series where decisions mean everything.

Now, before I get into depth on the topic, I do not own any of Telltale Games' games, BUT, I have watched COUNTLESS hours of gameplay from countless different YouTubers and Let's Players.

And please, keep the comment section clean, constructive criticism is all that needs to be there. I'll alert a moderator if anything gets out of hand.

So, on the to the main point:
The main question you ALL will ask is "How do you NOT like these games?"

Well first it comes to hours of gameplay. Most YouTubers have estimated the gameplay hours of this latest release to total between 10-16 hours total(meaning all episodes combined). I DONT agree with this one bit. Game of Thrones' world is well over the size of Russia, Canada, China and the U.S combined, which should total 4-6 hours on it's own. Then you come down to the lore and decision making, this is where Telltale Games COMPLETELY misses out of the point of "Freedom".

Not many people will agree, but this latest hit gives you NO FREEDOM, as at one point the King of a House that is struggling. There should be ENDLESS decisions that you could make, not just 5-10 scripted ones. Or for example, when Ramsay arrived at Ironrath and Ethan said he had a plan, WHERE WAS THE PLAN? There is so much missed hot spots that could have tripled the game's sales.

Now my view on their Walking Dead series is completely different, as there you HAVE limited decisions. But when you are the king of an ENTIRE House, you should have more than enough freedom.

If you really think about it, wouldn't the king of a house have a lot more to do?
I can go in depth further, but for now, this is the main portion of dissapointment.

Now on to supporting points.
RPG Type. Game of Thrones, is a RPG. You have a role as a character where decisions matter. But this game MURDERS that aspect. What makes an RPG an RPG is to play that role. You can't play a role when you have limits of doing so that change the aspect of a certain role.

I want to build my army, I want to decide what happens with the food, I want to go and fight, I want to go to King's Landing. I don't want to send someone and then play as them for 10 minutes.

There are so many similarities when comparing an RPG to Telltale Games' games, but when you play it or watch it, there seems to be a lack of that RPG feel because you feel so limited.

Next.
The Lore. The lore is spot on, in MOST categories. But the fact that you are limited to 4-5 different places, just makes the game feel unbearably linear and narrowely scripted. I dont mind a bit of scripting, but the scripting needs to be so much more broad. Why don't I have the freedom to negotiate with other houses? Why don't I have the freedom to leave my castle seeking recruits for my army? WHY?

There is much unbelievably wasted potential for a decade breaking game that can test the ages for millenium's to come. Imagine guys, in Telltale Games' world, if you lead the charge of one of Robb Starks armies, oh dear god, I would have an ♥♥♥♥♥♥. But nope, you are limited to ♥♥♥♥.

(NOTE: I have not said anything good, yet, mostly because of the blatancy of the good aspects, like audio, graphics, dialogue, ect...)

Moving on.

(I will come up with more but as of now, I am exhausted.)
Please comment! CONSTRUCTIVE criticism is ALWAYS welcome!
If I missed anything please let me know!
Thanks :),
Tacticus

(Final Review Score: 7.2/10- Slightly Above Sub-Par)

[TwistedLogic]

To counter both your points. The 'Choices matter' is about the character interactions... not the overarching plot or story. The Telltale games have always been a strong story with complex interactions between characters. It is these character interactions that you influence, not the story. With just part 1, it is hard to see as there are no repercussions immediately noticeable, but the choices make a difference with characters. Not sure I can say this in any other different ways xD

[Pothocket]

TL;DR another guy whining about how TT does their interactive stories.

[Talon]

For all those who say choices shouldn't matter, here's one possible way they might have done it w/o changing the take-away outcome of episode 1.

There is a big hole in the argument that they can't add a critical branching point or two over the course of the story. One that naturally leads to a different entirely outcome with friends and enemies changing or at least in how the major plot points in the story are resolved.

Just looking at Episode 1, the major point is the build up to Ethan's death by psycho ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ and the take-over of the Forrester family hold..

Let's consider the following set of possibilities that do not change the outcome of episode 1 but offer real narrative significance to how you actually get there (heavy spoilers ahoy!):



1. You choose to fight.

Your general takes a few of the Forrester elite men that he can trust and lays a few harrassing traps and spoiling ambushes along the trail Ramsey and his men are coming down where the Forresters are disguised and dressed up as bandits or highwaymen looking to capture Ramsey for ransom with orders to hit and fade in effect diverting or delaying Ramsey's party's approach by riling up the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥'s blood lust on a merry hunt presumably long enough for these Forrester allies to reach the Hold and shore up its defenses enough to make an impression on the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ that you are not to be toyed with and murdered casually out of turn.

You order your soldiers to bar the gate preventing Ramsey's entourage from entering at any cost once you seperate Ramsey and the Fatman from the rest of his soldiers with a preplanned gesture perhaps with the intent to take THEM hostage and ransom THEM for protection and guarrantee's of safe conduct written in blood and kind from Roose Bolton by holding the ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ and his toady hostage long enough to gain the protection of the crown or the Tyrells (in the form of the good queen) with enough other allies from the surrounding area to prevent future bad behavior from the Boltons by making it too costly for Roose Bolton to kill the Forresters.

Roose Bolton does value his ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ heir's life, doesn't he?

Things go south when Ramsey manages to take one of the Forrester clan as hostage (the sister, perhaps?) with a stolen knife instead and compels surrender forcing the young lord to capitulate or start losing family members. The young lord complies and the outcome proceeds as normal.

2. You choose to bargin with a madman.

Ramsey is a predator sensing weakness here and starts coyly demanding more and more land and concessions before Ramsey finally tells you that you are barginning with coin that is already his before he starts bargining with your sister, brother, and mother's lives which you must ransom with the young lord's life and the other concessions.

A desperate fight by general or diplomat sentinals along with what few men they have in the courtyard goes sour since you let his entourage inside the keep. A short but desperate fight ensues in the courtyard and the same outcome is projected over the outcome just with more of the unimportant Forrester and Bolton soldiers now lying dead in the courtyard but the killing has made Ramsey Snow very, very happy so he spares your lives and the craftmen needed to keep the Ironwood flowing while also taking the boy or the sister as a hostage.

3. You choose diplomacy like you can reason with a sadist that gets off on fear, torture, and murder.

Ramsey is shown into the great hall and treated like a lord. In this one everything can proceed as it does when you choose the diplomatic sentinal and the diplomatic options.
No need to change the last option since you've differentiated it sufficiently from the other two enough to satisfy those who want weight and variation attached to their choices in the narrative.

[Jaii der Herr]

You just seem to have wrong and way over the top expectations of this game.
Telltale games are more an interactive movie.

But even if it was more of a rpg/strategie hybrid like you would have liked. It's not reasonable to expect such a huge amount of freedom in a game that focuses on (cinematic) story telling. The cost's in time an money would explode for adding such features you'd like to have.

[Berserkerface]

This game is not an RPG. Its not trying to be an RPG. Its a steamlined point and click adventure. I'm sorry your favorite franchise did not get adapted into your favorite videogame genre. Maybe try Dragon Age: Inquisition. (Although even that game lacks the amount of freedom you want).

[RobOda]

Why feed the troll?

He's just flat out said he doesn't own any Telltale games and his opinion is based youtubing and let's play. You don't get the experience of the game unless you bloody well play it. =/

[Pothocket]

Publicado originalmente por himmatsj:

Publicado originalmente por robref:

Why feed the troll?

He's just flat out said he doesn't own any Telltale games and his opinion is based youtubing and let's play. You don't get the experience of the game unless you bloody well play it. =/

For Telltale's games, a lot of people just YT or Stream it. You don't miss much really.

Except for missing the entire point of the games in the first place...

[Dr. Universe]

The game is not about having your choices matter, it is about getting personal with the game. The choices and dialogue are well written enough to cover a large aspect of how you could react. The game is about you. What you would do or say. I like those game because they make me care enough and pressure me enough to make irrational decision and react close to what maybe I would really say.

If you don't play the game, you can't like it. Because you miss the entire experience.

[Pothocket]

Publicado originalmente por himmatsj:

Publicado originalmente por Pothocket:

Except for missing the entire point of the games in the first place...

Which is what?

Which is the difference between passively observing a story or directly taking part in it.

[Tacticus Winter]

Wow, geez, I was gone for an hour and already 13 comments, lol, thats a record.

[Tacticus Winter]

Publicado originalmente por himmatsj:

Well, I do think that you expect too much. RPG level total freedom and endless amounts of choices is really way, way over the top. First of all, Telltale must make choices in their game matter. If you watch multiple playthroughs of EP1, you will realize that the game is VERY limited choice wise. Your decisions and choices have near zero appreciable bearing on the plot, contrary to what the game advertises.

I have zero knowledge of GoT, and I am merely a fan of Telltale, so perhaps that's why we may have different expectations and disappointments.

Well I may have missed out on a point here, and you brang it up. Im talking about time between major events as well, like during EP1, before Ramsay comes, I would like to be able to address my troops, the citizens, get a scouting report or something, not just skip directly to the events, roaming and freedom is very linear.

Major events have limtied choices, obviously.

[Tacticus Winter]

Publicado originalmente por Berserkerface:

This game is not an RPG. Its not trying to be an RPG. Its a steamlined point and click adventure. I'm sorry your favorite franchise did not get adapted into your favorite videogame genre. Maybe try Dragon Age: Inquisition. (Although even that game lacks the amount of freedom you want).

It has all or most, rather, of the same aspects as an RPG(Role Playing Game, maybe the definition has changed). There is just so much potential for more here, funding shouldnt be a problem after the massive success of Walking Dead, but I don't know, it's up to the fanbase if they want to keep the same narrative.

[Tacticus Winter]

Publicado originalmente por Pothocket:

Publicado originalmente por himmatsj:

Which is what?

Which is the difference between passively observing a story or directly taking part in it.

There is only a slight difference. You know what happens, I had an emotional orgasm while watching the Walking Dead games sometimes. The only is difference is you're not playing it.

[Pothocket]

Publicado originalmente por Tacticus:

Publicado originalmente por Pothocket:

Which is the difference between passively observing a story or directly taking part in it.

There is only a slight difference. You know what happens, I had an emotional orgasm while watching the Walking Dead games sometimes. The only is difference is you're not playing it.

You say that but you don't play TT games so you actually have no idea what the difference is. This is why no one's going to take you seriously.

[twincast]

Publicado originalmente por Pothocket:

Publicado originalmente por himmatsj:

Which is what?

Which is the difference between passively observing a story or directly taking part in it.

True, but since there's ever fewer gameplay and seemingly ever fewer choices in them, there isn't much to actively interact with left in Telltale's games.

I try to consistently role-play a personality, but I have long stopped wrestling with myself about the potential effects any choice may have, for they do not matter; it really isn't more than almost passively selecting dialog choices anymore.

By contrast Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons has exactly zero choices (aside from whether you do a couple of side objectives), and it's still a good story when merely watching it, but its major storytelling strength derives straight from its gameplay mechanics.