Instalar Steam
iniciar sesión
|
idioma
简体中文 (chino simplificado)
繁體中文 (chino tradicional)
日本語 (japonés)
한국어 (coreano)
ไทย (tailandés)
Български (búlgaro)
Čeština (checo)
Dansk (danés)
Deutsch (alemán)
English (inglés)
Español de Hispanoamérica
Ελληνικά (griego)
Français (francés)
Italiano
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesio)
Magyar (húngaro)
Nederlands (holandés)
Norsk (noruego)
Polski (polaco)
Português (Portugués de Portugal)
Português-Brasil (portugués de Brasil)
Română (rumano)
Русский (ruso)
Suomi (finés)
Svenska (sueco)
Türkçe (turco)
Tiếng Việt (vietnamita)
Українська (ucraniano)
Comunicar un error de traducción
Normas y directrices sobre discusión
Denunciar este mensaje
You realise you've highlighted a large flaw in your point. You've pointed out that SuperMassive are a AAA developer which therefore means a far larger budget and can feature branching storylines but a smaller indie company with a far smaller budget can't.
And that would be the point you've made as you've highlighted that a larger developer with a larger budget can make a game with a branching storyline.
I think that this way we could explain situations like:
- there are some bugs and developers need to do patches - that's fine. Nowadays there are so many options to build your PC that it's impossible to test everything.
- some people are new in the game therefore they cannot really assess how much it will take to release a title. And the mistake is not just a month but much longer. This happens even in big companies unfortunately.
- length of the game based on the money invested
- etc.
I get that they probably had a smaller budget so they didn't develop that much. But it's one thing not being able to do something and it's another if you advertise your product that you did.
I'd use the following metaphor.
Assume we aren't talking about games, but e.g. about appliances. If some company would advertise that their vacuum cleaner not only vacuums but also perfectly washes your carpets then you expect the product to do so. And if it doesn't do the job, you return it and demand your money back, or some responsible committe would impose the change in product description and advertisment so that it doesn't show incorrect information and the buyers get for what they actually pay.
In this game, I see all the time that my decisions make a difference. The problem is that we might slightly get this in season 1. We could save one person and they would be our companions. Some people liked as more or less. Visibly, throught the game play, not just one dialogue. Granted, the endings and storyline isnt' really branching, but at least if you replayed the game you would get to the result in slightly different manners.
Here, in season 3, it looks like hardly anything matters. there are just small things, that have absolutely no impact for more than 2 seconds during the dialogue, like keeping the batteries, saving the candy bar etc. You seem to have a choice throught the conversation. Supposingly important ones (selected with timer), but then when I see the play of the others it looks like it doesn't change anything. Maybe one sentence is added or cut from conversation, but it doesn't change the mood or even short term outcome. The choices from previous seasons don't matter. We just see different flashbacks. That's it. It didn't shaped Clementine's character. No matter how you played it, everyone's Clementine is the same. And the change in Clementine's characted based on your decisions was advertised as well.
So that's why I don't think they should advertise so much that your choices are so important. I admit rarely any games has completely different scenarios based on our play. But this one (and I mean seasons 3) has almost none. Thus leading many players to comment about how poorly it's executed.
Until Dawn is not the answer. It has different outcomes but almost all of them are in the final 2 chapters where characters die if you fail quick time events and there isn't enough time to make this a big deal. The rest is pretty much like Telltale, cause and effect that change dialogue and not much else.
Proper branching stories are few and far between.
This is absolutely false, you can constantly make decisions that impact the game from what I'd consider to be the early section of the middle of the game-- mainly because you can't really die with people at the very start of the game.
Sure, some of the deaths are QTEs both early and late, but even though I like games like Telltale and LiS, Until Dawn probably does the "divergent plotlines" the best.
Yes, I know writing and game development are different mediums to a certain extent, but it's not just Until Dawn that's done it. Even the first two Mass Effect games, even Dragon Age: Origins had done it before, having a large variety of choices that define your individuality, making every replay a unique one. Telltale could learn A LOT from the pre-EA Bioware IMO (you know, before EA decided to muck up the company with its shady schemes).
Honestly, I could only think of one example that Telltale's done right in the CYOA department - The Wolf Among Us. I think that's the only game of theirs with truly unique endings, not "different flavored path leading to the same ending", or in TWD S2's case, two flavored endings. Even ME3 had three flavors.
It's a ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ shame PC games suck so ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ hard nowadays in terms of CYOA. Master Race my ♥♥♥♥-stained ass. All we get is Telltale and Choice of Games milking all that money from fools desperate to get into the genre, while console fans enjoy their Until Dawn, Heavy Rain, and Beyond Two Souls ( two other excellent examples of CYOA). I've been planning forever to buy a PS4 just to finally play CYOA the way it's meant to be played.
an episodic adventure made by a humble studio that is soon to be about 20-25 hours long with every episodes choices affecting one another. can you think if you happened to be able to save carley 5 hours in and then have her continue the story 25 hours in with all different lines and everything? or instead save dough and have double the lines for him? also how would you put them in a such branched out story? irrelevant arguement
I have been saying this over and over. I'm going take a screen shot, and copy this post into the thread. "Buy life is strange" further PROOF. You CAN make choices matter.
Interesting that you ADMIT the choices not only matter but matter more then Tell Tale. You didn't just say..some addtional secnes like you always do. Therefore I won. Choices can matter.