I thought about something while unloading the dishwasher. It might sound to you like the same thing I said above, but it seemed different to me so I thought I'd share.
I was thinking about what existing fans of the genre have some to expect from adventure games. For me, the first things that come to mind are puzzles, item combinations and clicking stuff. That's what defines an adventure game for me.
Now, I realise that the title has "adventure" in it. And I'm not saying that I don't think of a sense of humour, strong characters and a compelling story when I think of adventure games, but to me an AG can be an AG without them. Probably not a good AG, but still one. While without them, it starts feeling like something else, even if it has the story elements (which are hardly exclusive to AGs anyways).
I was thinking, when releasing an AG, AG fans who get it are going to expect a certain thing. Now, people might have different expectations than I do, but I guess I feel mine are reasonable ones.
When creating BTTF to attract new gamers and making it different from what "old-timers" have come to expect, there is a disconnect, of course, and that's what you're seeing here with our reactions.
But also, that means you're building a new set of things that the newcomers will learn to expect.
So if afterwards you throw an AG that's different, one that use oldies would like and want and recognise as familiar, there is going to be that new group who is going to have the same reaction as we're having right now ("why are you changing things? I bought that game because I expected it to be like your other stuff!")
And so it seems to me this "step" is not playing in your favour, unless the change is permanent.
So my worry is that it's the case. That the change is permanent. If you do get a new audience, wouldn't you want to keep it by doing things they have liked in the past and want in the future? And if you create two distinct types of games, the one I consider AGs and the one I'd be more likely to call interactive movie, don't you run the risk of disappointing everyone if you don't label them differently in a very clear way?
@Dashing: that Miyamoto article was very interesting, but I'm not convinced I needed to read it twice in a row.
I've been waiting for his review since the new episode was released. It has gotten so extreme reviews (excellent or terribly bad) that I would love to read what he thinks about it.
I imagine that it will be something along the lines of Andrei's review, but more detailed.
I tried playing the fourth game when it came out, but it intersected with me obtaining Portal 2. I tried to play it after I finished Portal 2's campaign, but that intersected with me moving out of my dorm and being generally busy with school and intern-related tasks. I tried to play it yesterday, and then I ended up playing Plants vs Zombies for ten straight hours. And then I tried to play it today.
....I honestly can't do it. I can't bring myself to want to continue playing this series. I ran into an open door that I couldn't walk through without clicking on it, and an open fence with an invisible wall in front of it. While the "pill puzzle" requires something that could, potentially, be considered "thought", I just am not compelled to continue this game.
Part of me wants to do a full analysis, to explain why this sort of thing is simply not okay in a measured, intelligent way. Maybe cut back on the sarcasm and jabs this time around. But I honestly do not have the drive anymore. Back to the Future: The Game is easily one of the worst things I have ever played, a sterling interactive example of how not to make a game. If this is the future, I want no part in it. I don't know if I'll ever finish playing these games, I don't know if I'll play episode 5 at all. It's just so dull, so without flavor. There is only so long that terrible can remain fascinating, and I haven't run into enough wholly new atrocities to examine.
I entirely expect that my analysis of Episode 4 will remain a small word file and selection of screenshots detailing the start of the game through Doc Brown's escape.
The thread we're talking in right now was such a success, people working in Telltale actually gave a damn; a big one, and this is important. Harsh and legit criticism; not everytime someone does that -and does that well. It just, shouldn't be left right in the middle. It's your choice, but I think people need what you may offer.
EDIT: I also want your analysis threads in my BttF:tG DVD.
I would if I could think of anyone. Honestly, I don't know anyone who would help out with this sort of thing. I know a couple people I could count on to snag a few odd screenshots for me, and I talked with some people about bugs and other minor flaws when making the first game, but the act of actually playing through and noting all my observations was more or less a singular task for me, and a rather daunting one that really had me stressed and exhausted by the end of it.
The thread we're talking in right now was such a success, people working in Telltale actually gave a damn; a big one, and this is important. Harsh and legit criticism; not everytime someone does that -and does that well. It just, shouldn't be left right in the middle. It's your choice, but I think people need what you may offer.
I know that, and honestly that was my main reason for wanting to continue. I felt like that kind of impact was important, and I really appreciated the time the lead designer put into reading it.
EDIT: I also want your analysis threads in my BttF:tG DVD.
Obviously I should fire up fraps, play through the entire series, and create my own running commentary, heh.
I would if I could think of anyone. Honestly, I don't know anyone who would help out with this sort of thing. I know a couple people I could count on to snag a few odd screenshots for me, and I talked with some people about bugs and other minor flaws when making the first game, but the act of actually playing through and noting all my observations was more or less a singular task for me, and a rather daunting one that really had me stressed and exhausted by the end of it.
I was thinking of someone playing it FOR you (at least for a portion of it so that you won't get as stressed) while you watching it and catching on the weak points. Not like showing you a quickrun of the episode, but pressing on the obvious issues for you or letting you see the bad decisions in game design. It may be kind of... artificial, perhaps, as you're not always the main player (although I think you're good enough at emphatizing so it may not be that big of a problem) but it'll be surely less tiresome. You still have to sit through it, though
I ran into an open door that I couldn't walk through without clicking on it
Yeah, I found that ridiculous too.
Maybe cut back on the sarcasm and jabs this time around.
I really do prefer to read your articles without the sarcasm, not just for me founding it good to my tastes but so I can share your analysis' with the great people at notgames.org forums. (check that website out, you'll like what they're trying to achieve there, read what not-games.org is all about here. I like to know what are your thought on the not-games project)
I understand all the reasons you gave, but I still suggest you finish it.
Why?
This episode feels a little bit more like an adventure game, all a bit still a flawed one. But you can see some things have changed.
There are some ridiculous things like Marty counting alt1986's Doc as an unreliable person stranger to give Original Doc's notebook to ... but yet there are some good points that make this game at least feels like an adventure game. Like being able to use an item on all characters (the green biscuits) though it's not required of the player to do so to get the plot going. (you can do so just for fun and the good thing about it is that you don't get a predefined absurd reply).
I was thinking of someone playing it FOR you (at least for a portion of it so that you won't get as stressed) while you watching it and catching on the weak points. Not like showing you a quickrun of the episode, but pressing on the obvious issues for you or letting you see the bad decisions in game design. It may be kind of... artificial, perhaps, as you're not always the main player (although I think you're good enough at emphatizing so it may not be that big of a problem) but it'll be surely less tiresome. You still have to sit through it, though
I can't see that working. So much of my process for this analysis involved very direct contact with the thing. It was less a methodical stab at every possible action(at least later on) and more a targeted "Can I do this? What if I did THAT first? Can I press this button instead?" Being able to switch gears fairly quickly was somewhat important to being able to try so many options in a short period.
Well, Majus fired up Adobe Flash instead. So why not just firing up your Microsoft Word?
I know I said "Word File", but I actually only use Google Docs or OpenOffice(which I then upload to Google Docs later).
...also, wait, what are you saying here?
Anyway, does anyone know if I can take the existing controller support for BttF: The Game and map the screenshot key to some unused button on my 360 controller?
Oh yeah, I also want to know what you think about the storyline, Dashing. Mostly because you seemed pretty frustrated when Marty and Young Emmett rejoined in the second episode, and, well, it's the second reunite.
I know I said "Word File", but I actually only use Google Docs or OpenOffice(which I then upload to Google Docs later).
Uh, I mean, your Word software. My bad.
What I'm saying is that I'd be gladly ordering the DVD just to read long .DOC files. No need for all the video and sound and all that, it would take a lot of work that I wouldn't want, for example, even my greatest enemy to suffer through.
Oh yeah, I also want to know what you think about the storyline, Dashing. Mostly because you seemed pretty frustrated when Marty and Young Emmett rejoined in the second episode, and, well, it's the second reunite.
Indeed.
There's a truly interesting emotional conversation between young doc and Marty towards the end al la first episode's strongly performed rendered dramatic scene between Marty and young Emmet.
I really do prefer to read your articles without the sarcasm, not just for me founding it good to my tastes but so I can share your analysis' with the great people at notgames.org forums. (check that website out, you'll like what they're trying to achieve there, read what not-games.org is all about here. I like to know what are your thought on the not-games project)
I read the thing you linked to and the "About" section, as well as a couple blog entries, and honestly I still don't know exactly what this is about. It came off to me as a lot of pretentious wording adding up to, well, nothing, but obviously that was not the intended perception. It could be that my brain feels somewhat preoccupied at the moment, in which case it might just be that I'm having trouble digesting any slightly vague messages.
I understand all the reasons you gave, but I still suggest you finish it.
Why?
This episode feels a little bit more like an adventure game, all a bit still a flawed one. But you can see some things have changed.
There are some ridiculous things like Marty counting alt1986's Doc as an unreliable person stranger to give Original Doc's notebook to ... but yet there are some good points that make this game at least feels like an adventure game. Like being able to use an item on all characters (the green biscuits) though it's not required of the player to do so to get the plot going. (you can do so just for fun and the good thing about it is that you don't get a predefined absurd reply).
Actually, that's part of the problem, in a way. A lot of what kept me going when going through Episode 3 was the fact that the entire period of player interaction was filled with examples of how to make one of the worst games ever made. Every step of the way was so broken that it was fascinating to look at WHY it was so broken. From what I've played, Episode 4, on the other hand, it just...bad, in a boring way, rather than bad in a fascinating example sort of way, if that makes sense. It's technically better, but less interesting, heh.
What I'm saying is that I'd be gladly ordering the DVD just to read long .DOC files. No need for all the video and sound and all that, it would take a lot of work that I wouldn't want, for example, even my greatest enemy to suffer through.
Oh, okay. Right now, my file only covers the portion of the game set in the Citizen Plus...uh, "prison"? It is probably the Bureau of Discipline. Anyway, right now it'd be a relatively short read, though obviously a good deal longer than many of the reviews in the Review Thread.
I read the thing you linked to and the "About" section, as well as a couple blog entries, and honestly I still don't know exactly what this is about. It came off to me as a lot of pretentious wording adding up to, well, nothing, but obviously that was not the intended perception. It could be that my brain feels somewhat preoccupied at the moment, in which case it might just be that I'm having trouble digesting any slightly vague messages.
I'm sorry. I should have introduced the origin of that project better then.
The design challenge that not-games.org offers is originated from the heads of the "tale-of-tales" company whom made "The Path".
I suggest reading the forums.The notgames.org's forums introduces the project better than the blog post since they are not vague and are simple discussions so you can read them in your present condition.
All in all, it's a place in which creative and successful indie developers (like the developers of Amnesia: The dark decent) and other creative yet-to-be-successful developers and people interested in the cause gather around and discuss re-inventing games and game design. Visiting the forums is the best way to get to know the inquisitive.
Actually, that's part of the problem, in a way. A lot of what kept me going when going through Episode 3 was the fact that the entire period of player interaction was filled with examples of how to make one of the worst games ever made. Every step of the way was so broken that it was fascinating to look at WHY it was so broken. From what I've played, Episode 4, on the other hand, it just...bad, in a boring way, rather than bad in a fascinating example sort of way, if that makes sense. It's technically better, but less interesting, heh.
It perfectly makes sense. I understand completely.
Although you can still pull analysis-worthy bits out of it, like you mentioned the door problem earlier.
I was so interested by the story's twist and it's dark theme that I forgot that door problem but you can, say, control yourself, you can manage to stay focused to find the analysis-worthy bits.
I have to say that even if it's not analysis worthy, it has an interesting emotional conversation between young doc and Marty towards the end of the episode which is very similar to the first episode's strongly performed rendered dramatic scene between Marty and young Emmet which I've heard you thought was the only good thing about the 1st episode.
Oh, okay. Right now, my file only covers the portion of the game set in the Citizen Plus...uh, "prison"? It is probably the Bureau of Discipline. Anyway, right now it'd be a relatively short read, though obviously a good deal longer than many of the reviews in the Review Thread.
I would if I could think of anyone. Honestly, I don't know anyone who would help out with this sort of thing.
I'd totally help if I weren't taking finals right now. If you put it off 'til next Thursday, I would be able to. I could...ah...watch a playthrough on youtube! Or something...
I just have to finally agree with Dashing. The gameplay used to be fine, but an attempt to make us think that actually requires no thought is worse then just no thought. In addition, the Story has grown incredibly stale, and the same plot devices and set-pieces just can't keep me wanting to play the game anymore. I was actually considering towards the end of the fourth episode just to look up what happens and not bother with it, and that is an incredibly terrible thing to say for something that started off in a fairly enjoyable way.
I liked the episode but I just dont get how Doc marrying miss goodytwoshoes Edna allows him to take over the whole town. I mean how does someone just take over a whole town? Biff did it with money in BTTF 2 but Doc and Edna convincing everyone to be good citizens just seems more far fetched.
Dashing, a little question... Did you do this kind of analysis for Tales? I imagine they wouldn't be as harsh, but it would be interesting to see, specially now that the game has sort of "settled down" with the community.
Dashing, a little question... Did you do this kind of analysis for Tales? I imagine they wouldn't be as harsh, but it would be interesting to see, specially now that the game has sort of "settled down" with the community.
No, I didn't. I probably made posts about the game that might contain some observations about it that are fresh off playing the episodes. For example, Lair of the Leviathan was my favorite episode, and I absolutely adored it despite the inclusion of Murray.
My first attempt at something like this, though, was with the second episode of Back to the Future, though. I felt like the gameplay was terribly lacking in Episode 1, and when I said so it seemed like people were incredulous about it. I felt like taking apart the puzzles in a mechanical way and showing how little interactivity was actually there was the best way to show this, because it's hard to argue with "4 items, 2 objects you can use them on, and 3 of the items make no sense being combined with either object". That's objectively not a puzzle.
My second episode analysis was more of a running commentary, and was more or less a failure. This one faired a lot better, though I would dial back a bit on the sarcasm and try and be more level-headed and objective in the analysis if I had to do it or something like it again.
The Devil's Playhouse and Back to the Future, combined with a variety of small decisions, actions, or lack of action in certain situations that add up to quite a bit of disdain for the company's trajectory if it can be predicted by their last two season-length titles.
The Devil's Playhouse and Back to the Future, combined with a variety of small decisions, actions, or lack of action in certain situations that add up to quite a bit of disdain for the company's trajectory if it can be predicted by their last two season-length titles.
Devil's playhouse wasn't all that bad. A few great innovations in it.
No real innovations, really. We had a wheel-based conversation system, like Mass Effect. We had a puzzle system that was intended to allow powers to break up the typical adventure game "use item on thing" dichotomy, but what we ended up with instead was a system very similar to one that utilizes an inventory, but with items that we use many times to achieve the same thing, leading to a worse game overall. It felt to me like the core idea behind the powers was never fully or correctly executed, and the end product suffered greatly as a result.
I really liked that they tried to do something different, but I was really disappointed by the result too. I think it had the potential to be awesome but found it too easy. It ended up being the kind of game I'd rather watch a walkthrough of than play, and I feel that's a shame.
I really "crossed the line" into being frustrated rather than supporting and expectant for things to change when Jurassic Park and Back to the Future where announced. I hadn't liked the direction taken before then but though it might change. However, they were promoted by highlighting the things about the previous games that I didn't like ("cinematic experience" for instance) so I felt it probably was the direction they'd always wanted to go towards and there was no changing it now.
Unlike Dashing though, I don't have the masochism to play a game I don't like several times in a row to make a point. (I only have the masochism to sit there and listen to him complain as he does it >.>). I'm glad he did though, it's good to be able to express in a more detailed and specific way what one likes and doesn't like. That's something I've had trouble with before, and I end up going over the board in either praise or criticism as a result, which leads people to find me creepy or frustrating.
No, I didn't. I probably made posts about the game that might contain some observations about it that are fresh off playing the episodes. For example, Lair of the Leviathan was my favorite episode, and I absolutely adored it despite the inclusion of Murray.
I agree about Lair being the best one. At first my favorite was Trial and Execution, but after the trail part is finished, it doesn't hold up.
Lair is really how all the season should have been, in terms of puzzles at least. It's funny, it's ingenious, it's creative and most of all, it's fun!
But what about the rest of the season? What do you think of it?
The review isn't as nice as I'd have liked it to have been. I spent three straight days doing essentially nothing but eating, sleeping, and playing this game in order to examine every moment in the greatest detail possible. Eventually, I feel like my frustration and exhaustion hurt my writing stylistically. The points are of course accurate, but I feel like I got lazier as the analysis went on, so I feel like the quality slips the further in you get. Still, credit where credit is due, it IS pretty comprehensive.
I hope you do one for the Jurassic park ''adventure game'' (don't get me wrong i liked the game but i think it was ment to be a adventure game not quick time events)
Errr... methinks Dashing would have to buy and play that one first. Probably nothing like that will happen in the near future.
Pretty much this.
I have no plans to purchase any Telltale games in the foreseeable future. One of them buys three games I actually want, so it's really hard for me to justify giving money to a company to do something that I hate.
Comments
I was thinking about what existing fans of the genre have some to expect from adventure games. For me, the first things that come to mind are puzzles, item combinations and clicking stuff. That's what defines an adventure game for me.
Now, I realise that the title has "adventure" in it. And I'm not saying that I don't think of a sense of humour, strong characters and a compelling story when I think of adventure games, but to me an AG can be an AG without them. Probably not a good AG, but still one. While without them, it starts feeling like something else, even if it has the story elements (which are hardly exclusive to AGs anyways).
I was thinking, when releasing an AG, AG fans who get it are going to expect a certain thing. Now, people might have different expectations than I do, but I guess I feel mine are reasonable ones.
When creating BTTF to attract new gamers and making it different from what "old-timers" have come to expect, there is a disconnect, of course, and that's what you're seeing here with our reactions.
But also, that means you're building a new set of things that the newcomers will learn to expect.
So if afterwards you throw an AG that's different, one that use oldies would like and want and recognise as familiar, there is going to be that new group who is going to have the same reaction as we're having right now ("why are you changing things? I bought that game because I expected it to be like your other stuff!")
And so it seems to me this "step" is not playing in your favour, unless the change is permanent.
So my worry is that it's the case. That the change is permanent. If you do get a new audience, wouldn't you want to keep it by doing things they have liked in the past and want in the future? And if you create two distinct types of games, the one I consider AGs and the one I'd be more likely to call interactive movie, don't you run the risk of disappointing everyone if you don't label them differently in a very clear way?
@Dashing: that Miyamoto article was very interesting, but I'm not convinced I needed to read it twice in a row.
That would require him to get them, though, so he won't.
The answer is "No, because he'd have to play it".
I imagine that it will be something along the lines of Andrei's review, but more detailed.
We all do some mistakes in life. You profit whenever you turn back while you're riding on the pathway of mistake.
Never give up! Never surrender!
....I honestly can't do it. I can't bring myself to want to continue playing this series. I ran into an open door that I couldn't walk through without clicking on it, and an open fence with an invisible wall in front of it. While the "pill puzzle" requires something that could, potentially, be considered "thought", I just am not compelled to continue this game.
Part of me wants to do a full analysis, to explain why this sort of thing is simply not okay in a measured, intelligent way. Maybe cut back on the sarcasm and jabs this time around. But I honestly do not have the drive anymore. Back to the Future: The Game is easily one of the worst things I have ever played, a sterling interactive example of how not to make a game. If this is the future, I want no part in it. I don't know if I'll ever finish playing these games, I don't know if I'll play episode 5 at all. It's just so dull, so without flavor. There is only so long that terrible can remain fascinating, and I haven't run into enough wholly new atrocities to examine.
I entirely expect that my analysis of Episode 4 will remain a small word file and selection of screenshots detailing the start of the game through Doc Brown's escape.
Well, you can do it WITH someone.
The thread we're talking in right now was such a success, people working in Telltale actually gave a damn; a big one, and this is important. Harsh and legit criticism; not everytime someone does that -and does that well. It just, shouldn't be left right in the middle. It's your choice, but I think people need what you may offer.
EDIT: I also want your analysis threads in my BttF:tG DVD.
I know that, and honestly that was my main reason for wanting to continue. I felt like that kind of impact was important, and I really appreciated the time the lead designer put into reading it.
Obviously I should fire up fraps, play through the entire series, and create my own running commentary, heh.
I was thinking of someone playing it FOR you (at least for a portion of it so that you won't get as stressed) while you watching it and catching on the weak points. Not like showing you a quickrun of the episode, but pressing on the obvious issues for you or letting you see the bad decisions in game design. It may be kind of... artificial, perhaps, as you're not always the main player (although I think you're good enough at emphatizing so it may not be that big of a problem) but it'll be surely less tiresome. You still have to sit through it, though
Well, Majus fired up Adobe Flash instead. So why not just firing up your Microsoft Word?
I know I'm delusional.
I understand all the reasons you gave, but I still suggest you finish it.
Why?
This episode feels a little bit more like an adventure game, all a bit still a flawed one. But you can see some things have changed.
There are some ridiculous things like Marty counting alt1986's Doc as an unreliable person stranger to give Original Doc's notebook to ... but yet there are some good points that make this game at least feels like an adventure game. Like being able to use an item on all characters (the green biscuits) though it's not required of the player to do so to get the plot going. (you can do so just for fun and the good thing about it is that you don't get a predefined absurd reply).
I know I said "Word File", but I actually only use Google Docs or OpenOffice(which I then upload to Google Docs later).
...also, wait, what are you saying here?
Anyway, does anyone know if I can take the existing controller support for BttF: The Game and map the screenshot key to some unused button on my 360 controller?
Uh, I mean, your Word software. My bad.
What I'm saying is that I'd be gladly ordering the DVD just to read long .DOC files. No need for all the video and sound and all that, it would take a lot of work that I wouldn't want, for example, even my greatest enemy to suffer through.
There's a truly interesting emotional conversation between young doc and Marty towards the end al la first episode's strongly performed rendered dramatic scene between Marty and young Emmet.
Actually, that's part of the problem, in a way. A lot of what kept me going when going through Episode 3 was the fact that the entire period of player interaction was filled with examples of how to make one of the worst games ever made. Every step of the way was so broken that it was fascinating to look at WHY it was so broken. From what I've played, Episode 4, on the other hand, it just...bad, in a boring way, rather than bad in a fascinating example sort of way, if that makes sense. It's technically better, but less interesting, heh.
Oh, okay. Right now, my file only covers the portion of the game set in the Citizen Plus...uh, "prison"? It is probably the Bureau of Discipline. Anyway, right now it'd be a relatively short read, though obviously a good deal longer than many of the reviews in the Review Thread.
The design challenge that not-games.org offers is originated from the heads of the "tale-of-tales" company whom made "The Path".
I suggest reading the forums.The notgames.org's forums introduces the project better than the blog post since they are not vague and are simple discussions so you can read them in your present condition.
All in all, it's a place in which creative and successful indie developers (like the developers of Amnesia: The dark decent) and other creative yet-to-be-successful developers and people interested in the cause gather around and discuss re-inventing games and game design. Visiting the forums is the best way to get to know the inquisitive.
Although you can still pull analysis-worthy bits out of it, like you mentioned the door problem earlier.
I was so interested by the story's twist and it's dark theme that I forgot that door problem but you can, say, control yourself, you can manage to stay focused to find the analysis-worthy bits.
I have to say that even if it's not analysis worthy, it has an interesting emotional conversation between young doc and Marty towards the end of the episode which is very similar to the first episode's strongly performed rendered dramatic scene between Marty and young Emmet which I've heard you thought was the only good thing about the 1st episode. I'd like to read that article too.
I'd totally help if I weren't taking finals right now. If you put it off 'til next Thursday, I would be able to. I could...ah...watch a playthrough on youtube! Or something...
Maybe I wouldn't be such a help after all.
My first attempt at something like this, though, was with the second episode of Back to the Future, though. I felt like the gameplay was terribly lacking in Episode 1, and when I said so it seemed like people were incredulous about it. I felt like taking apart the puzzles in a mechanical way and showing how little interactivity was actually there was the best way to show this, because it's hard to argue with "4 items, 2 objects you can use them on, and 3 of the items make no sense being combined with either object". That's objectively not a puzzle.
My second episode analysis was more of a running commentary, and was more or less a failure. This one faired a lot better, though I would dial back a bit on the sarcasm and try and be more level-headed and objective in the analysis if I had to do it or something like it again.
The Devil's Playhouse and Back to the Future, combined with a variety of small decisions, actions, or lack of action in certain situations that add up to quite a bit of disdain for the company's trajectory if it can be predicted by their last two season-length titles.
Devil's playhouse wasn't all that bad. A few great innovations in it.
Not really.
I really "crossed the line" into being frustrated rather than supporting and expectant for things to change when Jurassic Park and Back to the Future where announced. I hadn't liked the direction taken before then but though it might change. However, they were promoted by highlighting the things about the previous games that I didn't like ("cinematic experience" for instance) so I felt it probably was the direction they'd always wanted to go towards and there was no changing it now.
Unlike Dashing though, I don't have the masochism to play a game I don't like several times in a row to make a point. (I only have the masochism to sit there and listen to him complain as he does it >.>). I'm glad he did though, it's good to be able to express in a more detailed and specific way what one likes and doesn't like. That's something I've had trouble with before, and I end up going over the board in either praise or criticism as a result, which leads people to find me creepy or frustrating.
I agree about Lair being the best one. At first my favorite was Trial and Execution, but after the trail part is finished, it doesn't hold up.
Lair is really how all the season should have been, in terms of puzzles at least. It's funny, it's ingenious, it's creative and most of all, it's fun!
But what about the rest of the season? What do you think of it?
The review isn't as nice as I'd have liked it to have been. I spent three straight days doing essentially nothing but eating, sleeping, and playing this game in order to examine every moment in the greatest detail possible. Eventually, I feel like my frustration and exhaustion hurt my writing stylistically. The points are of course accurate, but I feel like I got lazier as the analysis went on, so I feel like the quality slips the further in you get. Still, credit where credit is due, it IS pretty comprehensive.
I was really impressed by the analysis, regardless of whether I agree or disagree upon it.
I have a longer, sincerely nitpicking JP review in the making, but I just can't get myself to finish and post it.
I have no plans to purchase any Telltale games in the foreseeable future. One of them buys three games I actually want, so it's really hard for me to justify giving money to a company to do something that I hate.