No offense to TTG, but unless BttF is the greatest adventure game of all time and the most fantastically written game in history, 90% of the people who play it will think it's boring and crappy. Just look at the Amazon reviews for Wallace and Gromit, that's what happens when people who aren't lifelong adventure fans play an adventure game.
For what it's worth, only 1 out of 29 Amazon reviews I looked at is a complaint from somebody who doesn't understand adventure games. Most of the other bad reviews are from people who couldn't get it to run at all, so it has nothing to do with the adventure genre.
By the way I played Heavy Rain and I think I'm not alone in calling it an interactive movie. That's not saying I think it's a bad game I note that it could be more engaging with some kind of puzzle play. Interactive movies and adventure games are not mutually exclusive the former being a sub-genre of the latter even if that is less puzzle centric in nature. In fact if you look on he wikipedia article on Interactive Movies it features Fahrenheit and Heavy Rain and as I quote 'Heavy Rain is akin to many interactive fiction games'.
By the way I played Heavy Rain and I think I'm not alone in calling it an interactive movie. That's not saying I think it's a bad game I note that it could be more engaging with some kind of puzzle play. Interactive movies and adventure games are not mutually exclusive the former being a sub-genre of the latter even if that is less puzzle centric in nature. In fact if you look on he wikipedia article on Interactive Movies it features Fahrenheit and Heavy Rain and as I quote 'Heavy Rain is akin to many interactive fiction games'.
I don't see the big hang up. People can say whatever they want to, esp on wikipedia. Just because it's animated extremely well, modern, looks like a movie, that doesn't make it a movie. Adventure games have had cut scenes and have been animated since forever. Broken Sword had a movie feel to it, the interactive game play was cartoon at that. I always thought playing the game felt like I was playing through a cartoon.
Disney's 101 Dalmatians (adventure game, can't find anywhere) is another example. AVS had a interactive cartoon feel to it too.
OF course so did Day of the Tentacle, and Sam and Max.
A game where you walk around a terrain, and things just POP up all the sudden and you have to interact! Battle screens, no different than Heavy Rain that has interactive screens. It's something in video games, that's ANCIENT called a "hot spot" or "trigger". Then you have a set of choices and commands, like Heavy Rain...Also you can interact with your environment in FF one, probably more than the other Final Fantasy games of later origin.
4:23 is a small example of this... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIPZrwnVd_w&feature=related
Heavy Rain is more along the lines of the Blade Runner game http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9-hTaFqh_Q
...which no one calls a interactive movie who knows video game history/ evolution!
So what if Heavy Rain has really good animation and graphics??
It deserves far more respect than to be called a interactive movie! How's it so much more different than any other animated game? With battle screens, or dialog options before it!?
It does have puzzles, it does have things you can pick up, use together. It's a game damn it! Not a interactive movie!!!!
ARGH!!!!
Similar to ancient games before it with interactivity like Final Fantasy one you can look at objects for a description walk around like a sprite!!!! Look at objects!!!! Both the guy in this video and my brother, a REAL gamer didn't notice the flower, or pick it up and think of it until a few moments later...lol. Not too many but a few.
2:49 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTp2KTblchw
Did we call Doom III a interactive movie because it looked as good as its cut scenes and transitioned into them!!!!?
IF anything Heavy Rain is a evolved game, which shows potential in the future of adventure games! "Within most scenes, the player can control the main character by moving them around the environment; they can also hold down a button to see what thoughts are going through the character's mind, and trigger them to hear an internal monologue on that thought. When the player is near an object or another character they can interact with, they will be presented with a context sensitive icon that represents what control they need to do." There's what your silly wikipedia has to say! What's so different about this and every worth while RPG and adventure game from the past!?
The game uses a technology they've been deving for years! Some sort of 3D scanning technology of live actors. Real Time 3D! This is the best you've ever been able to interact with it and it's more adventure game at heart than it is any other genre and it shows that you could make a amazing adventure game in this spirit!
A game like TOMI is almost done the same damn way! As it looks just as good as its cut scenes and transitions into them in and out smoothly and feels like a movie. Has a similar interactive basis. It's just as modern and evolved too! Which is evolved from games like Curse of Monkey Island and Escape!
This is your interactive movie! The X Files PS one game!
X-Files: The Game is a first person adventure game, which uses live motion footage, not an interactive movie. Now stuff like Dragon Lair are interactive movies: basically no control of the character and only one specific possible right action, everything else leads to failure.
X-Files: The Game is a first person adventure game, which uses live motion footage, not an interactive movie. Now stuff like Dragon Lair are interactive movies: basically no control of the character and only one specific possible right action, everything else leads to failure.
Well maybe I did under credit a little, in the evolution of video games I remember thinking X Files was pretty cool. It is a good game.
Why don't you read a definition of an interactive movie and this one is not from Wikipedia which you have chosen to criticize: "Gameplay consists of a running "movie" with several different storylines that the user can follow by making choices during the viewing, although occasionally an action/arcade sequence may be included" Well unless I was playing a different game this sounds spot on to me. You call this the evolution of adventure games but this is true in writing alone and if this is the future I would much rather have the games Telltale are making. And before you say this is different because it is not any animation or live action this is replaced in this case by scripted cutscene. Even though I agree it is a step-forward in some areas, I would not keep arguing with you because I will probably never have your same view on the matter regardless what you say.
Mainstream
n. The prevailing current of thought, influence, or activity
The defintion implies that to be mainstream.. it would have to be a game that pretty much everyone who plays games would have bought played it and really loved it..... NONE of the games some of you are arguing are mainstream fit that bill some of them may sell well... but they are NOT GTAIV or HALO... and they never will be.
Unfortunately there's always going to be people that just wouldn't give an adventure game a second look, actually they probably wouldn't give anything that's not a first person shooter a second look either but I know that there are enough Back to the Future fans out there who wouldn't normally be into games who might take an interest in this game.
Personally, I think Adventure game + BTTF is a match made in heaven. I was an immediate fan of the movie when i saw it back in the 80's as a kid and growing up I was hooked on games like Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade/Fate of Atlantis, Monkey Island, Full Throttle etc. The fact that it's being made by TellTale is just the icing on the cake.
Mainstream
n. The prevailing current of thought, influence, or activity
The defintion implies that to be mainstream.. it would have to be a game that pretty much everyone who plays games would have bought played it and really loved it..... NONE of the games some of you are arguing are mainstream fit that bill some of them may sell well... but they are NOT GTAIV or HALO... and they never will be.
Not sure if you mean adventure games even in the future never will be, but if they made a good Halo adventure game it would have a very good chance of being mainstream. While that seems unlikely, there is a decent chance that SOME major mainstream company makes SOME major license into a mainstream adventure game at some point in the future.
Mainstream
n. The prevailing current of thought, influence, or activity
The defintion implies that to be mainstream.. it would have to be a game that pretty much everyone who plays games would have bought played it and really loved it..... NONE of the games some of you are arguing are mainstream fit that bill some of them may sell well... but they are NOT GTAIV or HALO... and they never will be.
I don't think that there are any videogames at all that would fit that strict a definition
Didn't read the whole thread so this might have been pointed out before but -
Should this game actually bring adventure games back to the mainstream, I really hope that won't mean most adventure games released after it will be ridiculously easy :eek:
I don't think so, sadly. With adventure games lacking any true replay value, and folks wanting more out of their games. Such as Role Playing, Simulation and of course shooting. Which with the likes of The Sims, Fallout and *shutter* Halo. They have got all that ten fold.
I doubt, most would want to go back to the days of story telling and pure puzzle solving. Maybe if TellTale started adding in more shooting sections and other elements. Not that I WOULD want that.
...Personally, I think Adventure game + BTTF is a match made in heaven. I was an immediate fan of the movie when i saw it back in the 80's as a kid and growing up I was hooked on games like Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade/Fate of Atlantis, Monkey Island, Full Throttle etc. The fact that it's being made by TellTale is just the icing on the cake.
I totally agree. The BttF movies weren't action movies, they were adventure movies with some action. I think we can all agree that most game developers (licensed or original IP) tend to give the game protagonist a plethora of enemies to either punch or shoot, neither of which was done very much in the BttF trilogy. To continue on that same path would deliver BttF fans an updated monstrosity of the NES version. I don't want to run around punching Biff's thugs over and over again anymore than I want to avoid giant bees, guys carrying windows and park benches while on my unstoppable skateboard.
The adventure genre allow for a more cerebral game, that I think will be more accessible to those who are fans but aren't fond of beat-em-ups and FPS. The intended audience is most likely fans of Professor Layton, Phoenix Wright and hopefully some of the aforementioned classics like Monkey Island, Full Throttle, Maniac Mansion etc.
I can't see this game being done in any other genre that would do the subject matter justice.
No offense to TTG, but unless BttF is the greatest adventure game of all time and the most fantastically written game in history, 90% of the people who play it will think it's boring and crappy. Just look at the Amazon reviews for Wallace and Gromit, that's what happens when people who aren't lifelong adventure fans play an adventure game.
I can definitely see this being a problem. Wallace & Gromit is one thing, but BttF has a much bigger appeal. I've seen many comments on gaming sites (particularly Gametrailers) where people seem to be expecting it to be some kind of action game or GTA style sandbox. I'm expecting to see quite a backlash from the younger/casual crowd who were thinking the game would be something very different.
I'm sure there will be any other new fans who absolutely love it and get into Monkey Island or Sam & Max, etc. because of it. But I certainly don't see it being a return to the mainstream.
I am very excited for the game as I'm sure it will be great, I'm just worried that there will be a large group of people who totally miss the point of the game. I hope I'm wrong, but I am convinced that most people will be disappointed in what the game is.
^
Please elaborate.
I can see people being disappointed with how the game looks. And I call those people Graphix Wh*#$.
But I can't see people being disappointed with what the game is.
People that play the game either are fans of BttF or aware it's an adventure game about time travel(having seen the trailer). I don't see how this game will disappoint people that want a time traveling story. It seems it will execute it very will from the looks of things.
So I don't see what group of gamers this will be disappointing to.
Either you are a fan of BttF or you're not but you know what you're getting yourself into.
The only group of people that will not like it will be the 'graphics wh$&@'s and the haters'.
But these people are beforehand fixed on hating it. Thus not a disappointment.
^
Please elaborate.
I can see people being disappointed with how the game looks. And I call those people Graphix Wh*#$.
But I can't see people being disappointed with what the game is.
People that play the game either are fans of BttF or aware it's an adventure game about time travel(having seen the trailer). I don't see how this game will disappoint people that want a time traveling story. It seems it will execute it very will from the looks of things.
Just because someone wants stunning visuals doesn't make her or him what you elude to so skillfully.
I am still convinced that (a) Telltale IS going for impressive visuals and (b) telling tales with great visuals and wanting tales with great visuals is really a natural thing in the graphic adventure genre.
At the time, it is indeed not the question wether people who want "a time travelling story" might not be satisfied, it's more that people who want a time travelling game still don't know if they can hope to be served.
As for Shodan's worry that some people might miss the point of this game, I can understand that. A lot of people want this to be the game of their dreams, and they all have very different opinions as to how it's done the right way.
Just because someone wants stunning visuals doesn't make her or him what you elude to so skillfully.
At the moment they base their whole purchasing decision and judgement over the game solely on the graphics, yes it does. >=(
I like playing visually stunning graphics too. UC2 is one of my fav game for it's lush and detailed environments that you get to visit. It's like you're really making a trip around the world from the comfort of your bedroom.
Yet, I haven't been disappointed in any way with the trailer. I love the artistic design.
I have just accepted you can't have it all. TellTale isn't the biggest company and they are doing the best they can. I am so grateful there is a BttF in the making.
At the moment they base their whole purchasing decision and judgement over the game solely on the graphics, yes it does. >=(
Might be the wrong place to discuss this, but I find that pretty normal as well. The visuals are the most immediately striking asset of a game. You take a look, you find yourself immersed in the graphics, bam, you could like this. Most of the other qualities in mainstream gaming are far less immediate, controls being one of them. That said, story is about the least immediate. You have to essentially play the whole game before you know if you really like a given story.
So, if there are people out there who would base their entire buying decision on graphics, I wouldn't do the same thing, but I could understand it. Graphics is essentially art, and not a morally corrupt form of art, mind you.
you find yourself immersed in the graphics, bam, you could like this
Yes, but the question is why some people can only find themselves immersed in graphics that are technically the most up to date.
Why can't they see that the visuals of a game are not limited to only the technical capabilities but also design direction?
Imho if you're only striving for the 'newest' graphics then by definition that makes you a 'Graphics Wh#*@' >.>
So I don't see what group of gamers this will be disappointing to.
There seems to be an inordinate amount of people who want this to be and/or are expecting this to be "GTA: Hill Valley" for real, people who are unfamiliar with Telltale's games and have never played an adventure game before in their lives. Those are the people who will throw their controllers down in disgust when they start the game up for the first time and see what they're in for. They won't even bother to give the game a chance because it defies their expectations and will start trashing it on every forum they can find.
But you know what? Screw 'em! I'm gonna enjoy the hell out of this game, and who cares what they think!
edit: Let me backtrack a little. I shouldn't generalize like that. I'm sure some people expecting a sandbox game will give the game a chance and may end up liking it, but I feel like most won't.
There seems to be an inordinate amount of people who want this to be and/or are expecting this to be "GTA: Hill Valley" for real, people who are unfamiliar with Telltale's games and have never played an adventure game before in their lives. Those are the people who will throw their controllers down in disgust when they start the game up for the first time and see what they're in for. They won't even bother to give the game a chance because it defies their expectations and will start trashing it on every forum they can find.
But you know what? Screw 'em! I'm gonna enjoy the hell out of this game, and who cares what they think!
This is sadly very true..... I do not think the average gamer will be expecting an adventure game.. and its not like TTG is a powerhouse like EA games that everyone has heard of to be familiar with the kind of games they make.
There very well may be a little bit of a backlash from some people..... but I think Adventure game fans will really like it.... and it may.... just may make a few new adventure game fans.... but there is no way that it will change the game industry and people will start selling their copies of Halo to buy more adventure games...
There seems to be an inordinate amount of people who want this to be and/or are expecting this to be "GTA: Hill Valley"...
That's a rather negative way to look at it, and I've looked at the matter equally pessimistic for quite some time. But what is it that the new people essentially want by demanding a GTA-style game? It's not the violence and gameplay of the GTA games, that's for sure. What they might just want is to explore Hill Valley, and they haven't yet experienced a different way to explore a city than in the GTA games. But exploration is still one of TTG's areas of great achievement, and the GTA people might come to appreciate this different approach to exploration, that focuses more on individual detailed areas than on vast but repetitive explorative excursions.
appreciate this different approach to exploration, that focuses more on individual detailed areas than on vast but repetitive explorative excursions.
Yup, this is the problem with all Sandbox games. Red Dead Redemption however did very well of creating different detailed areas.
Still, for a game that's based off the BttF we expect a level of detail similair to the movies, since a lot of locations from the movies are represented.
That's why I like linearity in games. Granted you are finished earilier. But I prefer a short sweet ride wherein every environments feels different and is a joy to explore(a la Uncharted games) opposed to big dull worlds with repetitiveness that don't sell themselves.
Comments
For what it's worth, only 1 out of 29 Amazon reviews I looked at is a complaint from somebody who doesn't understand adventure games. Most of the other bad reviews are from people who couldn't get it to run at all, so it has nothing to do with the adventure genre.
Disney's 101 Dalmatians (adventure game, can't find anywhere) is another example. AVS had a interactive cartoon feel to it too.
OF course so did Day of the Tentacle, and Sam and Max.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nCvN9lSFrW8&feature=&p=A88390B54641FE48&index=0&playnext=1
Aniamted ^
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b8BoZvBU50&feature=related
GO TO 5:20 to 5:46!
You move around in the game just as much as games before it, there's a sprite, model, whatever you want to call it ,that you control.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4C4GK91nr0
It's simply has interaction, similar to ancient games before it like even Eco the Dolphin
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jsjJydC1kg&feature=related
OR even the RPG genre!
A game where you walk around a terrain, and things just POP up all the sudden and you have to interact! Battle screens, no different than Heavy Rain that has interactive screens. It's something in video games, that's ANCIENT called a "hot spot" or "trigger". Then you have a set of choices and commands, like Heavy Rain...Also you can interact with your environment in FF one, probably more than the other Final Fantasy games of later origin.
4:23 is a small example of this...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIPZrwnVd_w&feature=related
This is your interactive movie! The X Files PS one game!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hXWw6thWqI
Still a awesome game by the way...
Heavy Rain is more along the lines of the Blade Runner game
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9-hTaFqh_Q
...which no one calls a interactive movie who knows video game history/ evolution!
So what if Heavy Rain has really good animation and graphics??
It deserves far more respect than to be called a interactive movie! How's it so much more different than any other animated game? With battle screens, or dialog options before it!?
It does have puzzles, it does have things you can pick up, use together. It's a game damn it! Not a interactive movie!!!!
ARGH!!!!
Similar to ancient games before it with interactivity like Final Fantasy one you can look at objects for a description walk around like a sprite!!!! Look at objects!!!! Both the guy in this video and my brother, a REAL gamer didn't notice the flower, or pick it up and think of it until a few moments later...lol. Not too many but a few.
2:49
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTp2KTblchw
Did we call Doom III a interactive movie because it looked as good as its cut scenes and transitioned into them!!!!?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-o3Kk0WX-Y&feature=related
RAGHHHGHGHAGGHGHGHAHGHGHAGH~!!!!!!
IF anything Heavy Rain is a evolved game, which shows potential in the future of adventure games! "Within most scenes, the player can control the main character by moving them around the environment; they can also hold down a button to see what thoughts are going through the character's mind, and trigger them to hear an internal monologue on that thought. When the player is near an object or another character they can interact with, they will be presented with a context sensitive icon that represents what control they need to do." There's what your silly wikipedia has to say! What's so different about this and every worth while RPG and adventure game from the past!?
The game uses a technology they've been deving for years! Some sort of 3D scanning technology of live actors. Real Time 3D! This is the best you've ever been able to interact with it and it's more adventure game at heart than it is any other genre and it shows that you could make a amazing adventure game in this spirit!
A game like TOMI is almost done the same damn way! As it looks just as good as its cut scenes and transitions into them in and out smoothly and feels like a movie. Has a similar interactive basis. It's just as modern and evolved too! Which is evolved from games like Curse of Monkey Island and Escape!
*sigh*...
I feel better now.
X-Files: The Game is a first person adventure game, which uses live motion footage, not an interactive movie. Now stuff like Dragon Lair are interactive movies: basically no control of the character and only one specific possible right action, everything else leads to failure.
Well maybe I did under credit a little, in the evolution of video games I remember thinking X Files was pretty cool.
I probably got carried away in general.
http://ps3.ign.com/articles/113/1135448p1.html
The focus is on investigations, although there are some action elements. It could wind up being like a very modern version of Police Quest 4.
n.
The prevailing current of thought, influence, or activity
The defintion implies that to be mainstream.. it would have to be a game that pretty much everyone who plays games would have bought played it and really loved it..... NONE of the games some of you are arguing are mainstream fit that bill some of them may sell well... but they are NOT GTAIV or HALO... and they never will be.
I beat you to it.
Yeah I know....it's not a race.
Personally, I think Adventure game + BTTF is a match made in heaven. I was an immediate fan of the movie when i saw it back in the 80's as a kid and growing up I was hooked on games like Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade/Fate of Atlantis, Monkey Island, Full Throttle etc. The fact that it's being made by TellTale is just the icing on the cake.
Not sure if you mean adventure games even in the future never will be, but if they made a good Halo adventure game it would have a very good chance of being mainstream. While that seems unlikely, there is a decent chance that SOME major mainstream company makes SOME major license into a mainstream adventure game at some point in the future.
I don't think that there are any videogames at all that would fit that strict a definition
They are still a small company in the grand scheme of things, despite their quality work.
OF COURSE THIS WILL BRING BACK "PNC"/Adv. games! :-) The wheels on this bus will go round & round & round & round, etc .....
Should this game actually bring adventure games back to the mainstream, I really hope that won't mean most adventure games released after it will be ridiculously easy :eek:
I doubt, most would want to go back to the days of story telling and pure puzzle solving. Maybe if TellTale started adding in more shooting sections and other elements. Not that I WOULD want that.
I totally agree. The BttF movies weren't action movies, they were adventure movies with some action. I think we can all agree that most game developers (licensed or original IP) tend to give the game protagonist a plethora of enemies to either punch or shoot, neither of which was done very much in the BttF trilogy. To continue on that same path would deliver BttF fans an updated monstrosity of the NES version. I don't want to run around punching Biff's thugs over and over again anymore than I want to avoid giant bees, guys carrying windows and park benches while on my unstoppable skateboard.
The adventure genre allow for a more cerebral game, that I think will be more accessible to those who are fans but aren't fond of beat-em-ups and FPS. The intended audience is most likely fans of Professor Layton, Phoenix Wright and hopefully some of the aforementioned classics like Monkey Island, Full Throttle, Maniac Mansion etc.
I can't see this game being done in any other genre that would do the subject matter justice.
I can definitely see this being a problem. Wallace & Gromit is one thing, but BttF has a much bigger appeal. I've seen many comments on gaming sites (particularly Gametrailers) where people seem to be expecting it to be some kind of action game or GTA style sandbox. I'm expecting to see quite a backlash from the younger/casual crowd who were thinking the game would be something very different.
I'm sure there will be any other new fans who absolutely love it and get into Monkey Island or Sam & Max, etc. because of it. But I certainly don't see it being a return to the mainstream.
Please elaborate.
I can see people being disappointed with how the game looks. And I call those people Graphix Wh*#$.
But I can't see people being disappointed with what the game is.
People that play the game either are fans of BttF or aware it's an adventure game about time travel(having seen the trailer). I don't see how this game will disappoint people that want a time traveling story. It seems it will execute it very will from the looks of things.
So I don't see what group of gamers this will be disappointing to.
Either you are a fan of BttF or you're not but you know what you're getting yourself into.
The only group of people that will not like it will be the 'graphics wh$&@'s and the haters'.
But these people are beforehand fixed on hating it. Thus not a disappointment.
Just because someone wants stunning visuals doesn't make her or him what you elude to so skillfully.
I am still convinced that (a) Telltale IS going for impressive visuals and (b) telling tales with great visuals and wanting tales with great visuals is really a natural thing in the graphic adventure genre.
At the time, it is indeed not the question wether people who want "a time travelling story" might not be satisfied, it's more that people who want a time travelling game still don't know if they can hope to be served.
As for Shodan's worry that some people might miss the point of this game, I can understand that. A lot of people want this to be the game of their dreams, and they all have very different opinions as to how it's done the right way.
At the moment they base their whole purchasing decision and judgement over the game solely on the graphics, yes it does. >=(
I like playing visually stunning graphics too. UC2 is one of my fav game for it's lush and detailed environments that you get to visit. It's like you're really making a trip around the world from the comfort of your bedroom.
Yet, I haven't been disappointed in any way with the trailer. I love the artistic design.
I have just accepted you can't have it all. TellTale isn't the biggest company and they are doing the best they can. I am so grateful there is a BttF in the making.
Might be the wrong place to discuss this, but I find that pretty normal as well. The visuals are the most immediately striking asset of a game. You take a look, you find yourself immersed in the graphics, bam, you could like this. Most of the other qualities in mainstream gaming are far less immediate, controls being one of them. That said, story is about the least immediate. You have to essentially play the whole game before you know if you really like a given story.
So, if there are people out there who would base their entire buying decision on graphics, I wouldn't do the same thing, but I could understand it. Graphics is essentially art, and not a morally corrupt form of art, mind you.
Yes, but the question is why some people can only find themselves immersed in graphics that are technically the most up to date.
Why can't they see that the visuals of a game are not limited to only the technical capabilities but also design direction?
Imho if you're only striving for the 'newest' graphics then by definition that makes you a 'Graphics Wh#*@' >.>
But you know what? Screw 'em! I'm gonna enjoy the hell out of this game, and who cares what they think!
edit: Let me backtrack a little. I shouldn't generalize like that. I'm sure some people expecting a sandbox game will give the game a chance and may end up liking it, but I feel like most won't.
This is sadly very true..... I do not think the average gamer will be expecting an adventure game.. and its not like TTG is a powerhouse like EA games that everyone has heard of to be familiar with the kind of games they make.
There very well may be a little bit of a backlash from some people..... but I think Adventure game fans will really like it.... and it may.... just may make a few new adventure game fans.... but there is no way that it will change the game industry and people will start selling their copies of Halo to buy more adventure games...
That's a rather negative way to look at it, and I've looked at the matter equally pessimistic for quite some time. But what is it that the new people essentially want by demanding a GTA-style game? It's not the violence and gameplay of the GTA games, that's for sure. What they might just want is to explore Hill Valley, and they haven't yet experienced a different way to explore a city than in the GTA games. But exploration is still one of TTG's areas of great achievement, and the GTA people might come to appreciate this different approach to exploration, that focuses more on individual detailed areas than on vast but repetitive explorative excursions.
That is to say: They might actually love it.
Yup, this is the problem with all Sandbox games. Red Dead Redemption however did very well of creating different detailed areas.
Still, for a game that's based off the BttF we expect a level of detail similair to the movies, since a lot of locations from the movies are represented.
That's why I like linearity in games. Granted you are finished earilier. But I prefer a short sweet ride wherein every environments feels different and is a joy to explore(a la Uncharted games) opposed to big dull worlds with repetitiveness that don't sell themselves.