Comments

  • edited May 2011
    http://kotaku.com/5803192/in-defense-of-back-to-the-future-the-video-game

    It's almost like she's been reading my posts in here :p

    Here you are, flame-fodder.
    *tosses scrap to the imps*
  • edited May 2011
    1. There is already a thread posted on this subject. You did not need to make another.
    2. This thread doesn't actually "say" anything. It is pure fluff without even an ounce of substance, does not at all address any of the MANY major issues with this game, largest among them being that it is NOT A GAME and calling it INTERACTIVE is probably the largest stretch you can make next to "The Holocaust Was a Bad Thing", and the rushed, sloppy nature of the whole production. It uses very vague terms without ever talking about anything concrete, with undefined ideas like "soul" and "respect" without qualifying what the hell they mean.
    3. This article gushes about everything, but never once mentions gameplay outside of a quick mention of the GENRE. I wonder why. Perhaps it's due to the uninspiring gameplay mentioned in the Adventure Gamers review?
  • edited May 2011
    7 minutes? A new record, surely? I'm impressed :)

    Edit: Ahh - I looked but my domestic blindness missed the posting of this a few hours before. Might kill this thread, or request that it be so :)
  • puzzleboxpuzzlebox Telltale Alumni
    edited May 2011
    Merged the two threads.
  • edited May 2011
    Uh... I don't like watching Lisa's videos or reading her articles. Iunno, all the page was full of irrelevant obvious statements people who don't like where the game's going are already aware of.

    Oh, and also, whenever I'm reminded of Lisa Foiles I just remember Lordkat's rant about her. Hearing Jason's incredible rage is more entertaining than anything Lisa offers as a "female gamer".
    3. This article gushes about everything, but never once mentions gameplay outside of a quick mention of the GENRE. I wonder why. Perhaps it's due to the uninspiring gameplay mentioned in the Adventure Gamers review?

    I seriously think Lisa knows nothing about adventure games but pretends to be a fan of the genre, just to appeal to the nerddom.
  • edited May 2011
    Falanca wrote: »
    Uh... I don't like watching Lisa's videos or reading her articles. Iunno, all the page was full of irrelevant obvious statements people who don't like where the game's going are already aware of.

    Oh, and also, whenever I'm reminded of Lisa Foiles I just remember Lordkat's rant about her. Hearing Jason's incredible rage is more entertaining than anything Lisa offers as a "female gamer".



    I seriously think Lisa knows nothing about adventure games but pretends to be a fan of the genre, just to appeal to the nerddom.

    I seriously think your underwear are entirely too tight.
  • edited May 2011
    She looks just like a girl who was in an episode of Malcolm in the Middle I saw today.
  • edited May 2011
    Her reasoning for the game being good is that the voices are nice and the 80's games are bad.
  • edited May 2011
    simonizor wrote: »
    I seriously think your underwear are entirely too tight.

    Little to your knowledge, my good man, I'm going commando.
  • edited May 2011
    Scnew wrote: »
    Her reasoning for the game being good is that the voices are nice and the 80's games are bad.

    That seems to be the reasoning most people are using, sadly.
  • edited May 2011
    That seems to be the reasoning most people are using, sadly.

    Yeah, but at least they don't get paid by gaming sites to do so... sigh.
  • edited May 2011
    I have nothing more to add.
  • edited May 2011
    I read most of the Kotaku article, skim reading the rest. I hear what everyone is saying, but the thing is, I don't really disagree with either side.

    Dashing and the rest of the critics probably take things a little bit too seriously, but every point they have is valid.

    On the other hand, while the game isn't perfect, it is still good; you would only be disappointed if you were hyped up for something bigger.


    I think the deep reason for most of the hatred that comes out isn't related to the game per say, more to how Telltale operates. Telltale really risen recently, but they're no Valve and they're no Blizzard in the way they work.

    Realistically, if Valve or Blizzard had a game like Back to the Future, they'd have either pushed it back or canceled it outright, as they would care about something that didn't meet their standards being in their line-up or back-catalogue more than they would care about a schedule or their investment in it.

    I think we're starting to see that Telltale have realised that quality must be a factor as well as their time-schedule. While I suspect that we'll never see Telltale turn into a Valve or a Blizzard, delays to Jurassic Park and Episode 5 (which might not technically be a delay, as there was never a confirmed date, but I still feel that someone has made the conscious decision to push back the release) are probably in the right direction.
  • edited May 2011
    Chris1 wrote: »
    On the other hand, while the game isn't perfect, it is still good; you would only be disappointed if you were hyped up for something bigger.
    You seem like(or at least write like) a reasonable person, so let's level.

    I cannot find a single good argument for why this game is good. I simply can't. At best, I can see an argument for why the outer trappings(story, muisc, basic plot outline) are good, or at least better than you'd expect from, say, a licensed THQ game without any original film involvement.

    I have to ask, because I might get a reasonable answer this time and I'm INTENSELY curious, by what criteria is this game "good", or even "not bad"? I'm trying not to be rude or abrasive here, by the way, so any hostility you sense in this reply is simply due to the third episode of Back to the Future being easily the worst thing I've ever played, and I can't understand how a reasonable person without a massive pair of nostalgia goggles permanently fused to their face can...

    ...

    I better just stop there before I get worse.
  • edited May 2011
    Chris1 wrote: »
    you would only be disappointed if you were hyped up for something bigger.

    Like, as in, something that contains even a single puzzle?
  • edited May 2011
    I have to ask, because I might get a reasonable answer this time and I'm INTENSELY curious, by what criteria is this game "good", or even "not bad"?

    It depends what you're after really. If you're after a couple of hours of peaceful escapism from a stressful life then they're as good as anything on the TV. It's a bit like Time Hollow really; you're either going to love or hate that type of game entertainment.

    If you're after anything approaching an intellectual challenge then - with apologies to the Telltale team who made them - no, it's not going to fly. I see where you're coming from, and I've got the presence of mind to see that most reasonable people would agree with you.

    While there were many sections that grated, there were some bits that I enjoyed, and I'm not hating myself for sinking my money or my time into the series. But of course all of that's just my feelings and my priorities, it doesn't mean that they mean anything to anyone else.
    Like, as in, something that contains even a single puzzle?

    Again I apologise to the Telltale team, but I think your comeback sums it up very well. I could try to argue that the puzzles take a back seat to the story, but it's more like their only worth is to pace the story out a little.
Sign in to comment in this discussion.