Can enough story, looks, and good sound design make up for less interactivity?

edited February 2011 in Jurassic Park
I don't have a too much of a problem with the QTE-storytelling mechanics from HR. What I don't like is the apparent loss of character control.

The preview they did with Giant Bomb had bland "exploration". Standing in place and looking around the scene? Quick traveling by looking at pictures? Well, that's one way to sidestep complaints about the walking in TTG games, but I'm not sure if this experiment will be worthwhile. Don't forget that Heavy Rain also had multiple solutions, so sticking with the same strictly linear puzzle design could work against the game.

I'm onboard for the rest BttF, but this looks TOO movie-like. What could one achieve from playing through it rather than just watching it on YouTube? You guys will have to sell me on JP.

Comments

  • edited February 2011
    Well the problem I have with the game is that because they are taking away interactivity the poorly animated models, flat voice acting, and wrong Tyrannosaur sounds are much MUCH more noticeable. I hope they iron out the game a bit.
  • edited February 2011
    I too doesnt mind the QTE mechanics and even the quick travel within certain puzzle moments anymore, and I'm sure they will improve animations and sound, the rest looks good. I understand that with this kind of gameplay you can achive moments and storytelling you wouldnt be able to do with traditional gameplay.

    But my last and biggest concern is really the we cannot control the character and wont be able to explore the movie sets by walking around in them.

    Like I said in an other thread, exploration is one of the most important things in a franchise-based game. Look at the Ghostbusters-Game, every once in a while you are able to walk around the fire-department, which has no relevance to the story or gameplay at all, but its there cause fans enjoy exploring the headquarter of the ghostbusters with all the details and props from the movie. Even in Bttf you get to explore Hill Valley of the 30s and Docs laboratory with all the details. And now in Jurassic Park we are not supposed to move the character at all, no free exploring, but staring at pictures like in Myst. You cant be serious!

    I actually really want to know if there will be free movement and exploration (and for the record, I'm not talking about Sandbox or FPS or even big levels) in some sequences, cause that really decides if I'm gonna get this game or not.
  • VainamoinenVainamoinen Moderator
    edited February 2011
    Tromeritus wrote: »
    Can enough story, looks, and good sound design make up for less interactivity?

    No.
  • edited February 2011
    It depends on how memorable the story is... I do not think that Heavy Rain is all that replayable.. but the story and atmosphere make it worth every penny. But when you really look at it there is not much "game" there... Heavy Rain is also the only game I have played that I thought the QTEs where not bothersome.... so there you have it... Im hoping JP's QTEs do not outright piss me off.
  • edited February 2011
    In the end it has to be fun and entertaining.
  • edited February 2011
    The question maybe is: Is controlling the character or walking around really unnecessary and pointless? Can you achive the same feel when giving certain camera views to switch between them and skip the walking part, or does it feel different when walking manually to certain places where the camera then switches to the given views mentioned. Does "walking" itself give something to the overall feel or is it just point- and needless.

    I think just the fact of controlling the character and walking between the important scenes instead of just switching between them or "quick travel" does add more immersion and simply give the feel that I'm walking around in an environment, it just gives me more the feeling that I'm controlling whats happening on screen, that I'm in there, even if its an illusion. I dont think I'm the only one who feels like that.

    Maybe the solution is to give the player an option, that he can move around when he wants to and if he does feel like thats just a chore, let him use the quick travel function. Maybe by unlocking the "Short-Cuts" by visiting the place the first time or by switching it on and off in the menue. At least in bigger places wheres not just about solving one big problem like seen in the demo. Hopefully someone from the team will tell us how its gonna be in the game...
  • edited February 2011
    So far, the only problem I have with the game is that they're not using the original T-Rex roar. However, I like that we're finally getting an actual story line in a Jurassic Park game. I also don't have a problem with QTE's. I've played and enjoyed Heavy Rain several times and it never got old for me.

    As for the lack of interactivity. I don't think there is a lack on interactivity. You're still interacting with different items and places in the enviroment. You're just doing it with out having to walk. I said this on another thread, but I compaired Jurassic Park to the traditional point and click adventure games. You click on an area of the screen and and the character walked that way.

    That makes me agree with what they said in the 15min demo. Since this is an adventure game The walking isn't necessary. In fact, it would probably just get in the way. In BTTF, walking is the worst part of the game. It might just be the PS3 version but when the camera changes angles it seems to confuse the character and you end up walking in the wrong direction. It would be easier and more fluid to just click where you want Marty to go so he can walk that way. This is basicly what Jurassic park is doing. I like that it's going to have a more traditional Adventure Style to it. And I don't think we're getting a lack of interactivity because of QTE's. Granted, we're not getting as much as you would in other games but you have to keep in mind this is an adventure game. The problem is that everyone is thinking about the game they want and not about the game they're getting. And the game we're getting appears to be a very awesome Jurassic Park game.

    I still understand the want for exploration. I would play an open world Jurassic Park game too. I'm a huge fan of Trespasser. But that's just not the game we're getting right now. And that's not a game that TellTale would make.
  • edited February 2011
    Lol this thread reminds me of the Rage HD (id Software) and Infinity Blade (Epic Games/Chair Ent.), for iOS, free roaming/on rails brouhaha.

    Needless arguments toward a developers vision.

    As long as it's fun and worthwhile, I dont care how you interact with a game.
  • edited February 2011
    To reiterate, I'm not talking about free-roam at all, just the apparent lack of agency compared to other TTG games (much less adventure games as a whole).
  • edited February 2011
    Tromeritus wrote: »
    To reiterate, I'm not talking about free-roam at all, just the apparent lack of agency compared to other TTG games (much less adventure games as a whole).

    Yeah, why does everybody always assume that Sandbox is meant when talking about this? Nobody wants it to be free-roam and most of us dont have a problem with these QTEs by now. But many of us want to walk around, at least in some sequences, even if its just in a limited area, like in Bttf.

    When walking is so tedious and unnecessary, why didnt they skipped it in Bttf then? When P&C is the same than direct controlled walking, why did Telltale changed that interface after all? Why didnt they sticked to simple Point&Click interface? Maybe because it does feel different? I mean why did Quantic Dream keep the movement of the character by the player in both Indigo Prophecy and Heavy Rain when its so pointless?

    I just see no reason why they removed that basic gameplay-element completely, cause it DOES feel like its missing and unnecessarily damages the gameplay feel many would have.

    And I dont think comparing this JP-Game to classic adventures makes sense, cause this gameplay-mechanic IS something new just like Heavy Rain, and I dont thnk telltale is trying to go back to the roots of adventure gaming with this.
  • edited February 2011
    Sadonicus wrote: »
    The question maybe is: Is controlling the character or walking around really unnecessary and pointless? Can you achive the same feel when giving certain camera views to switch between them and skip the walking part, or does it feel different when walking manually to certain places where the camera then switches to the given views mentioned. Does "walking" itself give something to the overall feel or is it just point- and needless.

    It is when there's no sense of urgency. Like in Back to the Future. Artie McFly was grabbed by Biff's goons and brought to the alley behind the speakeasy. You are tasked with walking across the town square to save Artie *cue urgent music* You can run from the courthouse to the alley, yes, but you could just as easily take a leisurely stroll to the alley without any repercussions. The lack of punishment for not getting there in time breaks immersion, and ruins a potential puzzle. Is this running at all necessary in this scenario?

    And another thing: Telltale is good at building an attractive environment, but judging from Back to the Future, they can't populate that environment with interactive elements. So in Telltale's case, walking isn't necessary if the environment is just pretty to look at.
  • edited February 2011
    I dont think the whole game will consist of urgent fast-paced moments. So in the slow paced suspenseful investigating sequences, why should it be unnecessary? How can you build suspense when only clicking between given camera views? Only though cut-scenes?
  • edited February 2011
    Sadonicus wrote: »
    I dont think the whole game will consist of urgent fast-paced moments. So in the slow paced suspenseful investigating sequences, why should it be unnecessary? How can you build suspense when only clicking between given camera views? Only though cut-scenes?

    I agree that maybe they should at least make it an option to walk around in the investigative scenes, but the button prompts on-screen that tell you what you can interact with are a step in the right direction, alleviating the tedium of a pixel hunt of trying to find what items you can and cannot interact with. The opposite end of the spectrum, however, is making EVERYTHING in the environment interactive, creating opportunities that wouldn't feel like they belong in a Jurassic Park story, such as ramming the young triceratops with the Jeep, an out-of-character move for someone like Dr. Harding.
  • edited February 2011
    If I wanted to watch a movie I would just watch a movie. No matter how story-focused adventure games are they still have the element of exploration, puzzle solving and choice about where to go and what to do. These are important elements.

    Maybe future videos will prove me wrong, but as of now the game seems to be a movie with quick-time events constantly and I have no interest in that what-so-ever.

    King's Quest better not be like this... that would seriously be a letdown.
  • edited February 2011
    If I wanted to watch a movie I would just watch a movie. No matter how story-focused adventure games are they still have the element of exploration, puzzle solving and choice about where to go and what to do. These are important elements.

    Maybe future videos will prove me wrong, but as of now the game seems to be a movie with quick-time events constantly and I have no interest in that what-so-ever.

    King's Quest better not be like this... that would seriously be a letdown.

    Completely agree with you. The gameplay video just proves this. This is what I call a railway track of a game put to the extreme. It doesn't seem like it will have any replay value at all, nor does it seem to capture the Jurassic Park feel... That feeling of fear, terror and the urge to survive.

    Again, I'm not bothered as I won't get the game, and there will be those who will fork out the cash for this sort of thing, I just think Telltale is making a mistake with this one...
  • edited February 2011
    I'm not gonna lie, this style of game would not be my ideal game style for JP or walking dead.

    walking dead would be more like dead island, a huge free roaming landscape with sidequests, depth to characters and just general feeling of survival with memorable characters.

    JP would be an open world island with many areas to explore...again kind of like the dino crisis games with more freedom.

    HOWEVER, having said that...they are the easy options.. and I think that TT are known well enough for story and interactive story telling that if anyone can do an adventure game like this justice, its them. as long as it's entertaining and feels authentic, I can live with it, and happily purchase. Its nice to see someone thinking outside the box when it comes to properties.

    I am a little worried about it not being a more traditional game type, but BTTF is getting solid reviews so I have a lot of faith in TT, JP and WD.
  • edited February 2011
    JP would be an open world island with many areas to explore...again kind of like the dino crisis games with more freedom.

    http://www.computerandvideogames.com/164062/features/long-play-trespasser/?site=pcg
    :D
  • edited February 2011
    LOL, thinking of people who thought Heavy Rain was too much of a movie, compared to this its the most interactive experience ever made :)
  • edited February 2011
    Sadonicus wrote: »
    LOL, thinking of people who thought Heavy Rain was too much of a movie, compared to this its the most interactive experience ever made :)

    If only there was a like button, it would save me the time of writing a post!
  • edited February 2011
    I can't speak too much about the story without knowing more, but the looks of the humans, and the sound design (from humans and dinosaurs) are not anywhere close to good enough to make taking out interaction an ok idea. Heavy rain was kind of boring to play at times but at least it looked amazing.
  • edited February 2011
    RexMaster wrote: »

    LOL I should have added a ''GOOD''' open world JP title

    Operation Genesis was a great game also
  • edited February 2011
    LOL I should have added a ''GOOD''' open world JP title

    Operation Genesis was a great game also

    Go die.
  • edited February 2011
    Can enough story, looks, and good sound design make up for less interactivity?
    Of course, that's what good movies are about.

    The problem is that a) TT aren't really good in stories (look at the mostly mediocre stories and characters they did so far), b) they aren't good/experienced with a more realistic look so far (look at BTTF, compare Jurassic Park with very good up to date shooters), c) they are generally good in sound design (nothing memorable but at least very well fitting atmos, the voice acting is very good but they just tend to overcompress over and over again and d) a little bit of interaction can turn out beeing more annoying than no interaction or full control as compared to the first one you can feel kind of stressed by having to interact at all and compared to the second option it can be subchallenging.
  • edited February 2011
    They said in the videos that their will be puzzles where you have to think hard about. In that case, I'd imagine that you have some freedom to move around. What drives me crazy is when people say that about Heavy Rain. They obviously didn't play the game. You can move the character around the screen in Heavy Rain, you can walk in circles if you want to.
  • edited February 2011
    taumel wrote: »
    Of course, that's what good movies are about.

    The problem is that a) TT aren't really good in stories (look at the mostly mediocre stories and characters they did so far), b) they aren't good/experienced with a more realistic look so far (look at BTTF, compare Jurassic Park with very good up to date shooters), c) they are generally good in sound design (nothing memorable but at least very well fitting atmos, the voice acting is very good but they just tend to overcompress over and over again and d) a little bit of interaction can turn out beeing more annoying than no interaction or full control as compared to the first one you can feel kind of stressed by having to interact at all and compared to the second option it can be subchallenging.

    Right...

    And when TOMI was being released these forums were larger than life and full to the gills with excited fan boys, new members after being subjected to the first episodes.

    TOMI had HUGE expectations from a very very large fan base, and over all the game was well recieved. I see very few reviews if none at all rememberable, that say TTG can't tell a story well, or that TOMI failed to tell a story. I remember no truly incriminating complaints about the material of the story.

    Some people enjoyed Heavy Rain, some people are really bored of shooters, some people sleep naked, some people can stand on their heads. The majority of people who play this game will hopefully know what they're getting into, so that they won't be disappointed with the end result.

    You can do with this, or you can do with that. I have a pretty good idea what they're going for and it looks great to me...different than their previous titles, in the approach...
  • edited February 2011
    I've played a few railed shooters just to get a feeling how it works out and they all sucked. Not my cup of tea. Also there are games where i want just more freedom than in others and as an adventure gamer i generally do want to explore, find out things on my own, i want an aquarium effect, i want it to be effective, comfortable but also not too limiting.

    As i once wrote already i did enjoy Dragon's Lair. I also did enjoy Tender Loving Care but i did not enjoy Heavy Rain this much.

    Dragon's Lair was proud of what it was, a stunning looking game with a great atmosphere with simple but well designed working mechanics, perfect simple design.

    Tender, Loving, Care was dissapointing in aspects like steering, interface and graphics but it told an interesting story for adults with good characters. The psychological pseudo tests were fun, William Hurt was good and the nurse was really hot. You probably could sell those scenes as porn clips as well. Anyway it was adult content, again no wannabe.

    Heavy Rain couldn't life up to the expectations and pretended to be something what it wasn't. It had nice visuals but it wasn't interesting or complex, too flat and uninspired. No depth of the characters and so on. I had many hopes after the stunning casting trailer but the game wasn't great anymore.

    Quicktime events work when the story is really good or when the bubbles are interesting to explore. So it can make sense teleporting from one bubble to another one as many 3d games are having problems in a way that it's just a drag to travell around in the world when you only want to accomplish a certain task but you have to walk and walk... That's why those maps or double clicks on exit zones are so comfortable, at best it's an option.

    The problem is that it really has to be interesting, more as you converge to a movie like experience, because it can happen that you simply prefer watching the movie. One way to make it still an interesting game to play, is to offer great characters, options and interesting puzzle bubbles. Without them there is no real reason for a game anymore.

    Another reason is most probably based on the technical restrictions of their engine. Obviously i have no idea what their engine is capable of but i would be very much surprised if it would be able to deal with all the problems you're facing when moving on a larger island in one piece you're used to from AAA engines like a Cryengine 3. Loading a scene as it used to be and dislaying some content in there, that's what it can do already and that's probably the reason why we'll end up with this.

    And so on, still, in the end, i favour a classical 2D/2.5D/3D point&click adventure where the focus is on aspects i do enjoy as an adventure gamer. Not because i'm oldskool but because i know i do like these type of games and this technology already can prepare the stage for a great adventure. I don't want poly pushed 3D bubbles in the first place, instead i want a great adventure game. My gfx needs a.o. will be staisfied in Rage at the end of the year. I'm unsure about how my adventure needs will be fulfilled.
  • VainamoinenVainamoinen Moderator
    edited February 2011
    RexMaster wrote: »
    Go die.

    Not in this forum, no. That's "I am of a very different opinion because..." and certainly not "Go die".

    Thanks for listening.
  • edited February 2011
    Irishmile wrote: »
    It depends on how memorable the story is... I do not think that Heavy Rain is all that replayable.. but the story and atmosphere make it worth every penny. But when you really look at it there is not much "game" there... Heavy Rain is also the only game I have played that I thought the QTEs where not bothersome.... so there you have it... Im hoping JP's QTEs do not outright piss me off.

    I'm the opposite. I think that Heavy Rain is very replayable with the multiple endings and a story, which is memoral and emotional.
    I guess the lack of interactivity doesn't bother me as much as some, because I love a good story, much the same as a great film.
  • edited February 2011
    If I wanted story, looks, and sound design, I'd watch a movie.

    I play games for the gameplay, which is apparently absent from this so-called "game."
  • edited February 2011
    Not in this forum, no. That's "I am of a very different opinion because..." and certainly not "Go die".

    Thanks for listening.

    Actually then i woulda had to type, uh... six more words... God now u got me to count em and waste even more time! :mad:
Sign in to comment in this discussion.