1-Up provides Suggestions for Telltale Franchises.

edited July 2011 in General Chat
The brain geniuses over at 1-Up have apparently run out of good ideas, so they have posted a list of franchises they'd like to see from Telltale.

The list can be found here.

My Commentary on their picks.

The Goonies: I've never seen the movie, and I don't know anybody who has especially fond memories of it, so why would Telltale release a game based on a non-existant franchise?

MacGyver:Seriously? MacGyver? The man can make anything happen with seemingly mundane objects. Do you relly think that the average gamer has the puzzle-solving skill of Richard Dean Anderson?

Beavis and Butthead: No. Just... no. No way. Nu-uh. No-ho-ho-ho no. No.

Raymond Chandler's Detective Stories: Why specifically Raymond Chandler? Why not Agatha Christie, or more obviously Sherlock Holmes? What possible reason is there to highlight the man who once said "When in doubt, have a man with a gun bust in"?

Maniac Mansion: Well, I may agree with this one, but frankly, it should have been too obvious.
«1

Comments

  • edited July 2011
    1 up(to me) doesn't have a lot of good choices for what telltale can do for adventure games. Telltale should take a crack at Sin City(Although thats my opinion). Thats the only movie I can think of at the moment that can work out as an adventure game.
  • puzzleboxpuzzlebox Telltale Alumni
    edited July 2011
    My first response was to marvel at how much Raymond Chandler looked like Humphrey Bogart. Then I realised I am an idiot.
  • edited July 2011
    The Goonies: I've never seen the movie, and I don't know anybody who has especially fond memories of it, so why would Telltale release a game based on a non-existant franchise?

    I loved The Goonies! It was silly and nonsensical, but it was terrific when I was a wee little thing.
  • VainamoinenVainamoinen Moderator
    edited July 2011
    Some obvious suggestions, some bad ideas, and on the whole, a really yawny read! I think we've heard a lot more and better suggestions on these forums. :D
  • edited July 2011
    And you're German, so you know what would work as an adventure game.
  • edited July 2011
    All spec articles are boring to me. Maybe I've been in the internet too long. I mean I could sit and make lists of things all day and no one would care.
  • edited July 2011
    MacGyver is the greatest most fitting idea for an adventure game ever and anyone who says otherwise can die in a fire.
  • edited July 2011
    MacGyver is the greatest most fitting idea for an adventure game ever and anyone who says otherwise can die in a fire.
    But only for a classic adventure game where you can experiment and try using everything on everything and mixing items to get other items... no this last BTTF game where you find a bug every time you do something that's not originally intended...
  • edited July 2011
    You're right. Stay the hell away from MacGyver Telltales!
  • edited July 2011
    So basically you agree with none of them.
  • edited July 2011
    No, Beavis and Butthead is probably right up their alley right now.
  • edited July 2011
    I actually think Beavis and Butthead is a good idea for a game.
  • edited July 2011
    Loved The Goonies, though after BTTF and the information currently released on Jurassic Park, I don't want to see anymore franchises I loved potentially ruined by Telltale. As for MacGuyver, that would make a PERFECT adventure game. But Telltale aren't up to the task of (or aren't willing to) create an adventure game with puzzles of that level of depth.
  • edited July 2011
    Gibush wrote: »
    I actually think Beavis and Butthead is a good idea for a game.

    Oh, no, no no no no no no no NO. No. No. No. No.


    ...No.

    Beavis and Butthead ITSELF is not a good idea.
  • edited July 2011
    See, here's where that funny differing tastes thing comes into play...
  • edited July 2011
    I don't think i'd lay cash down for any of those, at least the way I imagine them turning out in my head.
  • edited July 2011
    I have fond memories of the original two Beavis and Butt-head adventure games, and would love to play a new one.

    MacGuyver is a great series for an adventure game, though I don't know that Telltale could pull it off.

    Maniac Mansion is a no brainer.

    And while I've never seen The Goonies, you're very, very wrong if you think that nobody cares about it anymore.
  • edited July 2011
    Scnew wrote: »
    While I've never seen The Goonies, you're very, very wrong if you think that nobody cares about it anymore.

    All I'm saying is that you shouldn't take too many chances on a game based off a singular movie.

    Honestly, would YOU buy a game based on a singular movie that you haven't seen, at least not for years?
  • edited July 2011
    I liked the Beavis and Butthead adventure game... it had its moments.
  • edited July 2011
    All I'm saying is that you shouldn't take too many chances on a game based off a singular movie.

    Honestly, would YOU buy a game based on a singular movie that you haven't seen, at least not for years?

    I'm gonna go on a guess here, but I'll say there are more people who know of The Goonies than there are who know of Sam & Max.

    But if you want to go on with your "Neither I nor some people in my immediate circle know of this, therefore it cannot be popular" argument, go ahead.

    Just remember, most movie franchise games suck, and some games that come from nowhere end up being popular. There's no garantee whatsoever, but The Goonies would lend itself to adventure games beautifully. You can doubt it if you will.
  • edited July 2011
    Irishmile wrote: »
    I liked the Beavis and Butthead adventure game... it had its moments.

    Am I the only person in the world that remembers that there were two?
  • edited July 2011
    I'm gonna go on a guess here, but I'll say there are more people who know of The Goonies than there are who know of Sam & Max.

    But if you want to go on with your "Neither I nor some people in my immediate circle know of this, therefore it cannot be popular" argument, go ahead.

    Just remember, most movie franchise games suck, and some games that come from nowhere end up being popular. There's no garantee whatsoever, but The Goonies would lend itself to adventure games beautifully. You can doubt it if you will.

    I'm not denying that it may be popular, I'm just saying that it's NOT A FRANCHISE.
  • edited July 2011
    I'm not denying that it may be popular, I'm just saying that it's NOT A FRANCHISE.

    So? I don't see why you couldn't make an adventure game based on one movie alone if you can make games based on nothing at all. :P
  • edited July 2011
    Scnew wrote: »
    Am I the only person in the world that remembers that there were two?

    Maybe... I wonder what you win... I just checked and the one I have is Do U... reading the description of the other I know I have played it... I should do some searching in my storage shed.. I think I have both.... Don't you hate that?
  • edited July 2011
    I'm not denying that it may be popular, I'm just saying that it's NOT A FRANCHISE.

    That's just semantics. That's not what we're talking about here.
  • edited July 2011
    If you make a game/book/sequel for something... it would technically then make it a franchise...
  • edited July 2011
    I don't know why Lucasarts ever made Monkey Island 2. I mean, it wasn't even a franchise before that.
  • edited July 2011
    Lol that's very true.
  • edited July 2011
    Scnew wrote: »
    I don't know why Lucasarts ever made Monkey Island 2. I mean, it wasn't even a franchise before that.

    Yeah, 'cuz at least "Star Wars" was the fourth film in the series, right?
  • edited July 2011
    All I'm saying is that you shouldn't take too many chances on a game based off a singular movie.

    Honestly, would YOU buy a game based on a singular movie that you haven't seen, at least not for years?

    You really don't have any concept of how well loved The Goonies is by the masses do you? I'm not a huge fan myself (aside from reasons of nostalgia), but still it's like the proverbial milkshake to all the boys (and girls) in the yard. Also, don't make that "it's not a franchise" argument because it blows harder than a Vietnamese prostitute during happy hour*. Besides, producing a game would make it a franchise, right?

    * I'm copyrighting that gag by the way peeps. I've been dying to use that one for a while now... thanks for providing me with an opportunity StrongBrush#Uno.
  • edited July 2011
    Irishmile wrote: »
    If you make a game/book/sequel for something... it would technically then make it a franchise...

    Yes, but the Goonies is at least a 25-year-old movie that never got a sequel, game tie-in or anything else remotely related to the idea of it becoming a franchise.
    Scnew wrote: »
    I don't know why Lucasarts ever made Monkey Island 2. I mean, it wasn't even a franchise before that.

    It was because LucasFilm Games' (Now Lucasarts Entertainment) customers and gamer fans showed, after the first game came out, that they clearly wanted a sequel. They showed enough support for Lucasarts to do so, and with that, the adventure continued. Same thing goes for Maniac Mansion 2 and the new Sam and Max series. If enough fans show that they will support something, the company will have an assured audience and the game will ell well.

    On another note, how many people do you honestly think would support a game based on one movie that gave no intention of wanting a continuation, let alone one in a completely different field?
  • edited July 2011
    Just because it's an old movie with no sequels doesn't mean it couldn't be a game. Though that's probably the very reason why a game was never made for it.

    I'm trying to think of an old movie that got a video game years after the fact...I'm sure there is one. Bottom line, just because it "isn't a franchise" doesn't mean a game wouldn't be successful.
  • edited July 2011
    Yes, but the Goonies is at least a 25-year-old movie that never got a sequel, game tie-in or anything else remotely related to the idea of it becoming a franchise.



    It was because LucasFilm Games' (Now Lucasarts Entertainment) customers and gamer fans showed, after the first game came out, that they clearly wanted a sequel. They showed enough support for Lucasarts to do so, and with that, the adventure continued. Same thing goes for Maniac Mansion 2 and the new Sam and Max series. If enough fans show that they will support something, the company will have an assured audience and the game will ell well.

    On another note, how many people do you honestly think would support a game based on one movie that gave no intention of wanting a continuation, let alone one in a completely different field?

    The Goonies had a game... I owned it when I was a kid... it sucked.
    Goonies2.jpg
  • edited July 2011
    Yes, but the Goonies is at least a 25-year-old movie that never got a sequel, game tie-in or anything else remotely related to the idea of it becoming a franchise.

    BEEEEEEEEEEEP! Wrong.

    The Goonies had TWO games, including one that came out on several systems.
  • edited July 2011
    Irishmile wrote: »
    The Goonies had a game... I owned it when I was a kid... it sucked.
    Goonies2.jpg

    Hey, don't bash it. I kinda hated it too until I got what I was supposed to do and how the map worked, etc.

    Then I liked it. But it was one of my first NES games, so that might be it.
  • edited July 2011
    Dude. I loved Goonies 2. That game was an investment. I still remember when I saved the Mermaid.
  • edited July 2011
    BEEEEEEEEEEEP! Wrong.

    The Goonies had TWO games, including one that came out on several systems.

    A couple of questions:

    Do you own either/both of them?

    If not, do you know anybody who does?

    Or, if you do own both of them, are they actually competent, or just half-assed copy and paste games?
  • edited July 2011
    On another note, how many people do you honestly think would support a game based on one movie that gave no intention of wanting a continuation, let alone one in a completely different field?

    Back to the Future Part 3 made it pretty clear that the series was over. I mean they destroyed the DeLorean and Doc gave them a speech about going off and living their lives and making their own future. And yet 21 years later, plenty of people were totally psyched to see it continue.
    Or, if you do own both of them, are they actually competent, or just half-assed copy and paste games?

    I had to edit this into my post just because it describes the early BTTF games to a tee.

    Second edit: Also, it doesn't matter if you think they can't, because Goonies never say die!
  • edited July 2011
    Scnew wrote: »
    Back to the Future Part 3 made it pretty clear that the series was over. I mean they destroyed the DeLorean and Doc gave them a speech about going off and living their lives and making their own future. And yet 21 years later, plenty of people were totally psyched to see it continue.

    That's because there was still hope that the series would continue with Doc's Time Train.
  • edited July 2011
    A couple of questions:

    Do you own either/both of them?

    If not, do you know anybody who does?

    Or, if you do own both of them, are they actually competent, or just half-assed copy and paste games?

    I own both. One as an import japanese famicom cart. The second as a US NES cart.

    They were both interesting takes on platforming games. While the first one (1986) is a straight-up action game with some puzzle aspects, the second one (1987) attempted to integrate some elements of adventure and exploration in it - similar to what Metroid did, but in a different way. They were pretty niche games that were quite different from the movie they were based on. But it might have been for the best, because I can't imagine the machines at the time being powerful enough to render a proper Goonies experience (it was 1986). SIERRA or LucasArts might have been able to do a good one.
This discussion has been closed.