Number of time periods, as long as it's greater than one, shouldn't even be a real issue to anyone in the first place. Again, if you're saying that it should "just happen" to need five, then that's not what you're asking for. You're asking for an inorganic writing process that forces several rewrites until a story with a larger selection of time periods is necessary presents itself.
I agree with you, but I also understand why someone might be disappointed if there aren't more time periods. For all we know, this could be the last BTTF story we ever get. If someone's excited to see a new Marty and Doc adventure, but they're not a fan of the 30s as a setting, they're likely to be disappointed that this is the only adventure we're getting.
I think forcing more time periods into the story using contrived means would be worse than putting up with a time period you might not care for, but I still get where a disappointed person would be coming from.
but they're not a fan of the 30s as a setting, they're likely to be disappointed that this is the only adventure we're getting.
On the other hand, what other unique time periods other than 30s do we have left to explore in the BttF universe? I mean, 10's and 70's are all good and well, but I wouldn't call them having a distinct flavor in comparison to 30's, 50's and 80's.
You're asking for an inorganic writing process that forces several rewrites until a story with a larger selection of time periods is necessary presents itself. That's not "just happening" to need something, that's demanding something regardless of the story that internally makes sense.
Which, again, is why Telltale is writing the game and I'm not. Again, though, the trilogy itself has five time periods and is a pretty organic story (though II & III are more closely connected with each other than they are with I, having been written at the same time, and adding the whole "chicken" thing, but still).
Surely, though, you can appreciate why some people were anticipating five time periods in the game (since there were five time periods in the trilogy and the game is split into five episodes), and why there might be some slight disappointment that there's not five time periods in the game. Personally, I feel the Telltale crew are good enough writers to have come up with a story that does involve five time periods and is organic. But, they went a different direction, and there's nothing wrong with that.
On the other hand, what other unique time periods other than 30s do we have left to explore in the BttF universe?
1890s, 1900s, 1910s, 1920s, 1940s (though that's pretty close to 1950s), 1960s (which was the original conception of BTTFII), 1970s (you could have some fun with Marty as a kid, having to avoid his own younger self). If they wanted to do the future: 1990s, 2000s (the BTTF universe versions), or the far future.
1890s, 1900s, 1910s, 1920s, 1940s (though that's pretty close to 1950s), 1960s (which was the original conception of BTTFII), 1970s (you could have some fun with Marty as a kid, having to avoid his own younger self). If they wanted to do the future: 1990s, 2000s (the BTTF universe versions), or the far future
I'll just quote myself:
all good and well, but I wouldn't call them having a distinct flavor in comparison to 30's, 50's and 80's.
(though, to be honest, I thought about 70s and Marty meeting his younger self [I don't get your thought why he will gave to avoid him, it's not like the 8 years old Marty will think that the 80's Marty is him], but I don't consider 70s to be that much of an interesting decade stylistically speaking).
Why do we need more time periods in the first place? Why should we want them?
Which, again, is why Telltale is writing the game and I'm not. Again though, the trilogy itself has five time periods and is a pretty organic story (though II & III are more closely connected with each other than they are with I, having been written at the same time, and adding the whole "chicken" thing, but still).
Surely, though, you can appreciate why some people were anticiapting five time periods in the game (since there were five time periods in the trilogy and the game is split into five episodes), and why there might be some slight disappointment that there's not five time periods in the game. Personally, I feel the Telltale crew are good enough writers to have come up with a story that does involve five time periods and is organic. But, they went a different direction, and there's nothing wrong with that.
Not really. As time travel stories, the Back to the Future series sucks. There have been fare more interesting explorations of time travel for the sake of exploring time travel. "Exploring" time periods is, um, not the series' strong suit.
The important part is the character development and the exploration of basic and personal human questions. When I read the synopsis, you know what I felt? Amazed. I was shocked that they honed in so well on that, and created an outline that allowed us to explore a different character-based question that is so basic and mundane that it is completely identifiable: "What if I didn't do that?" Talk about exploring your potential! Doc Brown has a family fortune after all(all of which he poured into developing the Flux Capacitor), what would he spend it on if not science? What if he had latched onto a different passion? What if, in those formative years when you have no idea who you are and you grab onto the nearest thing for dear life, Doc Brown had decided to go with something else?
THAT'S heavy. THAT is taking what made the first film so amazing, capturing it, and forming it into something new.
The idea that the "number" of time periods might even be "too few"? That didn't even cross my mind ONCE before I started reading this thread. Because what Telltale has here, if they pull it off right, is the makings of a truly engaging exploration of our potential, and what we can do to make our future what we want it to be, how we can do something we truly love, and love doing it, and succeed, if we just work hard enough toward that end goal. We have a true sequel to the Back to the Future films, something that will have the length and depth to truly explore these themes and settings to their fullest.
People in the BTTF universe are always supposed to avoid other versions of themselves. Lest the space-time continuum be destroyed.
Say that to Doc who met himself in 1955. Anyway, considering the 'It's me!' yell of Jennifers, you should not as much as to avoid other versions of yourself, but as to avoid getting recognized. And kid Marty wouldn't recognize his older self.
1985 Doc didn't really "meet" 1955 Doc per se. 1955 Doc never knew who he was talking to, and 1985 Doc tried to hide his identity and get away as fast as he could as soon as he realized who he was talking to. If they did a "kid Marty" story, 1985 Marty would have to hide his identity in much the same way, or avoid kid Marty altogether.
The important part is the character development and the exploration of basic and personal human questions. *snip*
Again, though, I don't see why we can't explore these themes over five (or x number) different time periods. Just like the trilogy did. As for why we should want more, that's part of the fun of the series as a whole. Marty discovering a whole new Hill Valley every time he arrives in a new time period. His wandering around the courthouse square in amazement in 1955, 2015, 1985-A, and walking up the street to see the courthouse being built in 1885. Waking up to a new version of Lorraine. The entrance of a different Tannen. Figuring out how to "fit in" to a new time period. Again, these aren't the themes or the raison d'être of the BTTF trilogy, but they are an essential part of the fun of the movies, at least for me.
1985 Doc didn't really "meet" 1955 Doc per se. 1955 Doc never knew who he was talking to, and 1985 Doc tried to hide his identity and get away as fast as he could as soon as he realized who he was talking to.
THen tell that to Biff who actually called himself a distant relative And spent a pretty long time along with his younger self (who DIDN'T recognize him, even after old Biff starts up his car and ONLY Biff knows how to do that).
Anyway. What's the point of the 70s (the ONLY period where Marty would be a kid) if we won't have Marty actually INTERACT with kid-Marty? Just remembering yourself as you were younger can, sometimes, lead to interesting character developments and self-revelations, now imagine what could've been done with interaction.
Biff isn't exactly the sharpest fellow in the movies, you know.
I know. My point is, as long as your younger self doesn't recognize you, you're fine and the time continuum fine, and the universe is fine. And I don't see any possiblity of a kid-Marty (7-8 years) recognizing his older-self, it's just something that wouldn't come to his mind.
I know. My point is, as long as your younger self doesn't recognize you, you're fine and the time continuum fine, and the universe is fine. And I don't see any possiblity of a kid-Marty (7-8 years) recognizing his older-self, it's just something that wouldn't come to his mind.
Nah, Doc was just wrong. Jennifer recognized herself twice over at the same time and just fainted.
I know. My point is, as long as your younger self doesn't recognize you, you're fine and the time continuum fine, and the universe is fine. And I don't see any possiblity of a kid-Marty (7-8 years) recognizing his older-self, it's just something that wouldn't come to his mind.
Biff doesn't know the "rules" of time travel, though. You can be sure if Marty had to do something involving his younger self, Doc would tell him to avoid (or disguise) himself at all costs.
Biff doesn't know the "rules" of time travel, though. You can be sure if Marty had to do something involving his younger self, Doc would tell him to avoid (or disguise) himself at all costs.
Sure, if it would be an older Marty. But, rules of time travel aside - let's look at this from the story perspective: if we have Marty travel to the 70s, and we have a young 7-8 years old Marty there, then not making him actively interact with his younger self for some time (preferably, in my opinion, lengthy time) is a crime against character insight development (whatever that development might be, depends on the plot and the point where Marty's character has to come).
Sure, if it would be an older Marty. But, rules of time travel aside - let's look at this from the story perspective: if we have Marty travel to the 70s, and we have a young 7-8 years old Marty there, then not making him actively interact with his younger self for some time (preferably, in my opinion, lengthy time) is a crime against character insight development (whatever that development might be, depends on the plot and the point where Marty's character has to come).
Wouldn't figuring out how to indirectly interact with a character make for some crafty puzzles, though?
Sure, if it would be an older Marty. But, rules of time travel aside - let's look at this from the story perspective: if we have Marty travel to the 70s, and we have a young 7-8 years old Marty there, then not making him actively interact with his younger self for some time is a crime against character insight development (whatever that development might be, depends on the plot and the point where Marty's character has to come).
I don't think Marty needs to actually "interact" with himself in a direct sense. He would probably try to avoid himself(for timeline-not-ruining reasons), but "invisibly" alter events slightly to benefit himself and gain insight into his own character by watching an important part of his earlier life(a dream he wanted to fulfill, a person he cared about, something along those lines). It seems to me that what Telltale went worth works better though, since we don't get much Doc development and the whole trilogy is spent developing Marty.
gain insight into his own character by watching an important part of his earlier life
Sounds too cliche. Actually, there's nothing really wrong with that idea, but I do find interacting directly to be more interesting, especially in the BttF case. Marty already 'invisibly' saved himself in 1955, for example, and the 'avoidance' interaction is explored pretty well in the movies.
since we don't get much Doc development and the whole trilogy is spent developing Marty.
Yeah, I agree with that. The accent on Doc is a big plus. But, hey, we're talking hypothetically about the 70s here (I don't think we'll see that Time Period in the BttF game. In the first season at the least, if there will be others)
Sounds too cliche. Actually, there's nothing really wrong with that idea, but I do find interacting directly to be more interesting, especially in the BttF case.
Well, them's the rules. Knowing Back to the Future, though, they can be bent or broken once or twice at dramatically-relevant times.
Well, them's the rules. Knowing Back to the Future, though, they can be bent or broken once or twice at dramatically-relevant times.
Or be broken by main characters themselves, like Doc marrying Clara Anyway, I don't say Marty should SEEK his younger self, I'm saying I think he should interact with him, directly . Their meeting would have to be an accident of some kind (like they always are, lol), even to the point that Marty could (maybe) even not recognize that it's him at the start of the (first?) conversation. And of course, I don't mind a mix between direct and indirect interaction
EDIT: I want to point out why I'm so pro-direct: by interacting directly with his younger self Marty would feel the simple, naive, pure (or whatever, depends on how Marty behaved himself as a kid ) logic and view on life directly on himself (himolderself), instead of being a passive character. Not to mention, he wouldn't view the Marty-kid with Marty's OLD parents (meaning his own past self), but Marty-kid with Marty's new parents, and their pasts probably differed somewhat. Maybe it could lead to something like Marty + His memories of HIS childhood and himself in his childhood + Interaction (direct ) with the alternate kid-Marty who has other parents (well, the same people, but let's face it, they're not the same) = character development
Or be broken by main characters themselves, like Doc marrying Clara Anyway, I don't say Marty should SEEK his younger self, I'm saying I think he should interact with him, directly . Their meeting would have to be an accident of some kind (like they always are, lol), even to the point that Marty could (maybe) even not recognize that it's him at the start of the (first?) conversation. And of course, I don't mind a mix between direct and indirect interaction
EDIT: I want to point out why I'm so pro-direct: by interacting directly with his younger self Marty would feel the simple, naive, pure (or whatever, depends on how Marty behaved himself as a kid ) logic and view on life directly on himself (himolderself), instead of being a passive character. Not to mention, he wouldn't view the Marty-kid with Marty's OLD parents (meaning his own past self), but Marty-kid with Marty's new parents, and their pasts probably differed somewhat. Maybe it could lead to something like Marty + His memories of HIS childhood and himself in his childhood + Interaction (direct ) with the alternate kid-Marty who has other parents (well, the same people, but let's face it, they're not the same) = character development
But wouldn't Marty coming into contact with himself create a time paradox, that would result in a chain reaction that would unravel the very fabric of the space time continuum, and destroy the entire universe? However, that is just the worse case scenario.
But wouldn't Marty coming into contact with himself create a time paradox, that would result in a chain reaction that would unravel the very fabric of the space time continuum, and destroy the entire universe? However, that is just the worse case scenario.
Not if he uses a fake name. It's like in the third Harry Potter movie- Potter thought he had seen his father across the lake in the first time through, but, in reality, when they used the Time Turner, he realized that he himself had cat the Patromus.
In other words, Marty could be walking down the street and see a kid in a yellow jacket, look down at his own clothes and his watch and say, "Hey, I think around this time I met this weird stranger who wore clothes like mine... Maybe it was me?"
That Harry Potter like situation with time traveling is similar mistake what BTTF movies do. It does not make sense to get shot from yourself and then later time travel to shoot yourself again. Because you would be already dead to even time travel to do that event, so it can't happen.
Even in Harry Potter case it was just logic denying plot device to make good storyline without caring of logic behind it and even BTTF relies on that sometimes.
Regardless of whether or not you'd shoot yourself or whatever, that's not how time-travel works in bttf. Every time they time-travel into the past they change the events there. There are no self-fulfilling prophecies or anything like that.
Even in Harry Potter case it was just logic denying plot device to make good storyline without caring of logic behind it and even BTTF relies on that sometimes.
Granted, it's been a while since I read Prisoner of Azkaban, but I don't remember it being illogical. It used a Bill and Ted-style Stable Time Loop, and stuck to the rules to the best of my recollection.
Granted, it's been a while since I read Prisoner of Azkaban, but I don't remember it being illogical. It used a Bill and Ted-style Stable Time Loop, and stuck to the rules to the best of my recollection.
Actually, that scene was more of a pre-destination paradox. Once Harry realized that it was himself that saved them the first time, he knew he had to do it again. And because it happened in the past from his perspective, it was pre-destined that he'd save himself.
THe fact remains we don't what happens in Episode five, or any of them. If they had a mass of different time periods it wouldn't feel like BTTF, maybe a game to be made with a more epic scope eventually when they make the new trilogy.
BTTF2 only had 3 periods, Future, Alternate 1985 and 1955.
The fact that we are now going to play with an alternate "present period" is really exciting as alternate 1985 was probably the most interesting plot wrinkle in the entire series.
NVM: Seems that the site updated and has a brief synopsis about each one!
If they had a mass of different time periods it wouldn't feel like BTTF
I still don't buy this, since the trilogy has five time periods. I guess it depends on whether you separate each movie into its own story, or if you see the trilogy as being one whole self-contained story, which I do. That probably has to do with the fact that a) each sequel is directly linked to the movie before it, with the overlapping endings/beginnings and b) I've watched the trilogy back-to-back-to-back more times than I've watched any one of the movies individually. If you're going based off of just I & III (or even just II), then yes, having a whole bunch of time periods in the game wouldn't feel like BTTF. But if you're going off of the trilogy as a whole, having four or five time periods in the game would feel just like BTTF. It all depends on how you look at it.
They are seperate movies. They vary wildly in story, theme and tone. The biggest difference is BTTF1, when it was initially made they had ZERO plans for a sequel, they just thought it would be funny if they showed Doc time traveling to the future. THOUGH as far as trilogies go this one of the few that always seem to pick up IMMEDIATELY after the last one left off, so I can understand your POV.
They are seperate movies. They vary wildly in story, theme and tone.
Yes, and if Telltale had made a BTTF game with four or five time periods, each episode could do just that as well. Kind of like "Devil's Playhouse" does*. An overarching story is told throughout the season, but each episode has its own unique story, theme and tone. I would have had no problem with that considering, like you pointed out, that's exactly what the trilogy is like.
*Note, I am not comparing the Sam and Max and BTTF universes with this statement, just game/movie forms.
^
I was under the impression that was where they were heading already with their latest games.
So far, TOMI and Bone are their only episodic games that are in chapters and not "seperately themed" episodes, although all of their games have an overarching story ("Strong Bad's" is pretty slight, though). It sounds like BTTF will be chaptered like TOMI.
Comments
I agree with you, but I also understand why someone might be disappointed if there aren't more time periods. For all we know, this could be the last BTTF story we ever get. If someone's excited to see a new Marty and Doc adventure, but they're not a fan of the 30s as a setting, they're likely to be disappointed that this is the only adventure we're getting.
I think forcing more time periods into the story using contrived means would be worse than putting up with a time period you might not care for, but I still get where a disappointed person would be coming from.
On the other hand, what other unique time periods other than 30s do we have left to explore in the BttF universe? I mean, 10's and 70's are all good and well, but I wouldn't call them having a distinct flavor in comparison to 30's, 50's and 80's.
In time travel stories, most people usually go back to the periods between the 50's and the 90's. Nobody's really ever done the 30's as far as I know.
Which, again, is why Telltale is writing the game and I'm not. Again, though, the trilogy itself has five time periods and is a pretty organic story (though II & III are more closely connected with each other than they are with I, having been written at the same time, and adding the whole "chicken" thing, but still).
Surely, though, you can appreciate why some people were anticipating five time periods in the game (since there were five time periods in the trilogy and the game is split into five episodes), and why there might be some slight disappointment that there's not five time periods in the game. Personally, I feel the Telltale crew are good enough writers to have come up with a story that does involve five time periods and is organic. But, they went a different direction, and there's nothing wrong with that.
1890s, 1900s, 1910s, 1920s, 1940s (though that's pretty close to 1950s), 1960s (which was the original conception of BTTFII), 1970s (you could have some fun with Marty as a kid, having to avoid his own younger self). If they wanted to do the future: 1990s, 2000s (the BTTF universe versions), or the far future.
I'll just quote myself:
(though, to be honest, I thought about 70s and Marty meeting his younger self [I don't get your thought why he will gave to avoid him, it's not like the 8 years old Marty will think that the 80's Marty is him], but I don't consider 70s to be that much of an interesting decade stylistically speaking).
Not really. As time travel stories, the Back to the Future series sucks. There have been fare more interesting explorations of time travel for the sake of exploring time travel. "Exploring" time periods is, um, not the series' strong suit.
The important part is the character development and the exploration of basic and personal human questions. When I read the synopsis, you know what I felt? Amazed. I was shocked that they honed in so well on that, and created an outline that allowed us to explore a different character-based question that is so basic and mundane that it is completely identifiable: "What if I didn't do that?" Talk about exploring your potential! Doc Brown has a family fortune after all(all of which he poured into developing the Flux Capacitor), what would he spend it on if not science? What if he had latched onto a different passion? What if, in those formative years when you have no idea who you are and you grab onto the nearest thing for dear life, Doc Brown had decided to go with something else?
THAT'S heavy. THAT is taking what made the first film so amazing, capturing it, and forming it into something new.
The idea that the "number" of time periods might even be "too few"? That didn't even cross my mind ONCE before I started reading this thread. Because what Telltale has here, if they pull it off right, is the makings of a truly engaging exploration of our potential, and what we can do to make our future what we want it to be, how we can do something we truly love, and love doing it, and succeed, if we just work hard enough toward that end goal. We have a true sequel to the Back to the Future films, something that will have the length and depth to truly explore these themes and settings to their fullest.
Say that to Doc who met himself in 1955. Anyway, considering the 'It's me!' yell of Jennifers, you should not as much as to avoid other versions of yourself, but as to avoid getting recognized. And kid Marty wouldn't recognize his older self.
Again, though, I don't see why we can't explore these themes over five (or x number) different time periods. Just like the trilogy did. As for why we should want more, that's part of the fun of the series as a whole. Marty discovering a whole new Hill Valley every time he arrives in a new time period. His wandering around the courthouse square in amazement in 1955, 2015, 1985-A, and walking up the street to see the courthouse being built in 1885. Waking up to a new version of Lorraine. The entrance of a different Tannen. Figuring out how to "fit in" to a new time period. Again, these aren't the themes or the raison d'être of the BTTF trilogy, but they are an essential part of the fun of the movies, at least for me.
Judging from the screenshots in the Bejeweled Blitz game.
Also in the behind the scenes vid the director states "you'll be going through all kinds of different time periods".
I'd like to see 3 differenent time periods as a minimum(with 1986 included).
Judging by the art we might be returning to 1985 and visit the events of BttF1.
I also think we'll be visiting 1985.
THen tell that to Biff who actually called himself a distant relative
Anyway. What's the point of the 70s (the ONLY period where Marty would be a kid) if we won't have Marty actually INTERACT with kid-Marty? Just remembering yourself as you were younger can, sometimes, lead to interesting character developments and self-revelations, now imagine what could've been done with interaction.
see? this theory (the woman is doc mother) fits.
I know. My point is, as long as your younger self doesn't recognize you, you're fine and the time continuum fine, and the universe is fine. And I don't see any possiblity of a kid-Marty (7-8 years) recognizing his older-self, it's just something that wouldn't come to his mind.
That sounds very wrong :rolleyes:
Sure, if it would be an older Marty. But, rules of time travel aside - let's look at this from the story perspective: if we have Marty travel to the 70s, and we have a young 7-8 years old Marty there, then not making him actively interact with his younger self for some time (preferably, in my opinion, lengthy time) is a crime against character insight development (whatever that development might be, depends on the plot and the point where Marty's character has to come).
Well... I guess it would, but I don't see it interesting from a character perspective.
Sounds too cliche. Actually, there's nothing really wrong with that idea, but I do find interacting directly to be more interesting, especially in the BttF case. Marty already 'invisibly' saved himself in 1955, for example, and the 'avoidance' interaction is explored pretty well in the movies.
Yeah, I agree with that. The accent on Doc is a big plus. But, hey, we're talking hypothetically about the 70s here
Or be broken by main characters themselves, like Doc marrying Clara
EDIT: I want to point out why I'm so pro-direct: by interacting directly with his younger self Marty would feel the simple, naive, pure (or whatever, depends on how Marty behaved himself as a kid
I never said he'll see his old parents.
Damn sorry I need to learn to read more closely.
But wouldn't Marty coming into contact with himself create a time paradox, that would result in a chain reaction that would unravel the very fabric of the space time continuum, and destroy the entire universe? However, that is just the worse case scenario.
Not if he uses a fake name. It's like in the third Harry Potter movie- Potter thought he had seen his father across the lake in the first time through, but, in reality, when they used the Time Turner, he realized that he himself had cat the Patromus.
In other words, Marty could be walking down the street and see a kid in a yellow jacket, look down at his own clothes and his watch and say, "Hey, I think around this time I met this weird stranger who wore clothes like mine... Maybe it was me?"
Then again, only a suggestion.
Even in Harry Potter case it was just logic denying plot device to make good storyline without caring of logic behind it and even BTTF relies on that sometimes.
Granted, it's been a while since I read Prisoner of Azkaban, but I don't remember it being illogical. It used a Bill and Ted-style Stable Time Loop, and stuck to the rules to the best of my recollection.
Actually, that scene was more of a pre-destination paradox. Once Harry realized that it was himself that saved them the first time, he knew he had to do it again. And because it happened in the past from his perspective, it was pre-destined that he'd save himself.
BTTF2 only had 3 periods, Future, Alternate 1985 and 1955.
The fact that we are now going to play with an alternate "present period" is really exciting as alternate 1985 was probably the most interesting plot wrinkle in the entire series.
NVM: Seems that the site updated and has a brief synopsis about each one!
*Note, I am not comparing the Sam and Max and BTTF universes with this statement, just game/movie forms.
I was under the impression that was where they were heading already with their latest games.