I think people complaining about the choices do not understand the point of this game. Like in real life, you cannot anticipate the result of your decision always. Lee tries to save Shawn but Kenny does not help, so he fails. Although the story did not change, morally Lee is not guilty for Shawns dead and people around him might remember this.
Some story lines might be a little akward for the choice you made, but this is a game, obviously it is somehow limited.
But the best part of this game is that there is no "best choice". You are free to play it as you like. No need to replay a level because you missed some batteries or spent too many ammunition.
Furthermore there are some obvious choices, leave the house immediately and Chet lives, leave it later and he is dead. In the shop you can directly decide who is going to die. Also you should not forget the many choices which make you die. For example if you decide to hit the first zombie once. Some other choices are: Lie to Hershel or tell the truth. With the screwdriver, attack the left zombie first. Hand over the gun to the bitten girl or not. Either of these choices will change the story immediately and give a totally different experience.
The other poster summed it up perfectly it's not just saving people, dialogue feels hollow as well since it always warrants the same reply and conversation conclusion within the episode.
"Not having learnt my lesson at that point, I figured you know what I'll just show the guy at the drug store, the asshole, what's what, I'll beat that guy down. Lo and behold, everything plays out exactly as it would have otherwise. I have to get heart medicine for the complete asshole. Why exactly do I have to do that? I just do. Ok then. Someone obviously tried it. Let me guess. If you agree that Ducky must be thrown out, it doesn't happen right? Color me surprised."
I was a bit disappointed with the story choices. Reminded me of LA Noir, where most game choices are superficial. If you pick Shawn he still dies the same. Even if the other chosen character died(Doug or Carlie), the other said the same things. And no matter what I said nothing changed story points, like Larry shoving you down even if you side with him. Oh and with Glenn, if you hand the girl the gun he says how can you let people give up but if you refuse he says how can you deny someone's choice! The character's in the game should have the same convictions no matter what you choose, this is unacceptable character development.
Not sure I agree with sure (apart about L.A. Noire).
I think ok that sometimes the choices you make have no effect in the end (yes, that's kind of a joke about Mass Effect 3, indeed). So it is fine if you decide to help a guy even he's still the one who dies. It was logic for Lenny to help his kid first, and somehow likely that he would panic and fails to help afterwards.
I almost agreed with you about Glenn. Sure, it would be highly unacceptable that a characters convictions change at it just for the sake of disagreeing with you. Then I asked to myself whether Glenn is the kind of guy with convictions. Not in the comics. Not in the TV series. I think Glenn is convinced that he and a she should fall in love at some point. So it is logical for him to actually disagree with Lee whatever Lee decided, because in the end he has to pull the blame on someone. But the right to kill herself or else is not the real matter.
I understand the point you made about story points. However, I find it very complex to follow such story without clear story points. It's not like playing Mass Effect (hum), Fallout New Vegas, Dragon Age, etc, kind of games with so many differents stories inside so you call mess them all and still getting some result. In this case, there is one major story that is kind of layed out (you are not travelling wherever you want in an open world with and endless number of PNJ), as far I understand, so you cannot actually expect the choices you made to completely and utterly change (branching) the outcome. I think that something to accept to enjoy the story. But I still give your enough liberty when you actually can decide about live and death of some characters.
I'm not sure it would really make sense to allow forking the main story too much.
Otherwise, the story itself was awesome, the gameplay is really good and the art style is incredible. Still the best TT game to date! Keep it up guys!
Happy to disagree. The gameplay is way below what I expected, even though I'm familiar with Sam & Max series.
- I'm sorry but that's unacceptable not to be able to configure keyboard controls (I was able to do so in Duke Nukem 3D. Since then, I assume that's not funky trendy), especially with defaults controls clearly not usable with an AZERTY or even QWERTZ keyboard.
- I would have love to remove the hints about clickable object. But for some reason, even if it's 3D, clicking on an object does not work, you have to click on some arbitrarily defined point of it (not even the center each time). Clicking on the cross of the shotgun is not enough. Really a really painy process.
These two issues should be not so hard to fix, I'd hope they would do so for the next release.
- I would have love to remove the hints about clickable object. But for some reason, even if it's 3D, clicking on an object does not work, you have to click on some arbitrarily defined point of it (not even the center each time). Clicking on the cross of the shotgun is not enough. Really a really painy process.
These two issues should be not so hard to fix, I'd hope they would do so for the next release.
I personally think that this might be a design decision to create tension. I know I had slight difficulty finding some things on my first play through because I had my hints turned off.
decisions, decisions.. unfortunately there's no way to make this into like 7 different directions, all based on whether or not a person was saved or died. The storyline is not really going to have a different overall ending for every choice, even if there was only 5 decisions per episode. (5 x 5 x 5 x 5 x 5 = 3125 different ending variants)
I don't think there's going to be a string of choices that are going to end the zombie uprising, or a string of choices that makes a satisfying ending impossible. The game itself would be a huge failure. Without that.. there's STILL room for making some decisions that change how characters interact with yours, and possibly how much assistance you manage to get from others along the way, etc. that's really all you can hope for.
This is really more of a storybook thing where the story is somewhat set, and you're really just deciding how a character interacts with it, and how other interact with you.
It's not about the finish line with this game.. it's the road to getting there, and a way to set there and say.. "I'm pleased by the actions I took, and enjoyed the storyline", rather than "I won the game due to my decisions."
A couple of things to keep in mind, regarding some of the specific decisions made:
Save Ducky, or save Shawn. You cannot save Shawn. If you try to, you will fail to save him, no matter what you do. Is that a failing of the story/game? or is that simply a part of the storyline? In real life, I tried to lift 1000 pounds and failed.. it means that regardless of making choices, it was simply not something I could do.. not an indication that the universe-at-large was faulty.
The storyline effect of Shawn dying meant that Hershel was upset, and just wanted everyone to leave. Not.. "Wow, my son's dead, but hey, you tried, so lets go get some supper, I don't know you folks, but ya'll want to move in with me? I trust ya!" His character is trying to ignore the fact that the world is all screwed up, and tries to keep folks distant. That's why he was so... "whatever" about repairing the fence.. As characters discussed to each other; he's just not aware of what's going on. The death of his son made that all-too-clear to him, and now he's hoping that if everyone leaves, life might return to normal somehow. "none of this would have happened if he hadn't let people stay here."
Glenn automatically argues for, or against, letting that girl kill herself.. That's because it was a bad situation, and no real right answer. You had to make the decision on the spot, and not every decision has a happy ending.. Even in real life, there's reasons to do stuff, and reasons NOT to do the same stuff, and you need to evaluate that on the fly. Once you assume the responsibility of making a decision, everyone else can claim, "Well I wouldn't have done that." Some folks (like Glenn) won't try to make you feel better, and share the burden of a decision that caused someone they cared about, to die.. It's human nature to say "wow.. bad choice.. this would have gone better if they'd done, THISn" and therefore lay the blame at your feet to get rid of any guilt they may be feeling themselves.
Plus.. that sort of character conflict builds the drama and tension. You want to make choices that will be popular with the other characters, but in a mature storyline, and in real life.. that's just not always possible.
The one main decision I thought was interesting was the choice on saving the guy or the girl. It means that part 2 has two different possibilities.. one where there's results based on saving the guy (and his technical skill set) or the girl (and her ability to shoot, and having a gun). The end result of episode 2 will probably be the same, meaning that either one will complain about you letting the other die, or something, but the actual storyline will play out a little differently. Maybe one dies within the context of the story, and the other just decides to leave for whatever reason. Or maybe their overall fate is decided in a later episode. Hopefully, the options available to you will be different based on their different skill sets, but neither of them are likely to make the overall storyline different enough to end in a completely different place. Unless there are indeed, multiple endings planned.
It's seriously not the function of this game to give you 3125 different stories rolled into one.. it's to give you a story that you feel like you're fitting into and becoming immersed with.. accommodating your actions to get you there.
Imagine the storyline where you decided that the boy had been bitten, and you sided against his dad.. the point where he saves you anyway would mean a LOT in that context. You'd really feel like you owed him something at that point.
I think we always have to remember that games strive to deliver an ILLUSION of control and choice. When efforts are made specifically to accommodate a variety of choices, those branches and ramifications need to be dealt with, and there will always be constraints that some will find disappointing. Emergent gameplay systems do some fascinating things, but even in the Grand Theft Auto series we can't decide to retire from our life of crime and open a bakery instead of tackling an available mission. There's certainly no algorithmic way to produce dynamic emotional storytelling of the kind The Walking Dead is trying to deliver -- it requires writing and animation and voice actors and story constructs that are of necessity limited in scope and resource investment.
Look at the old Choose-Your-Own-Adventure books -- they provide quite a few choices and sometimes branch off into wildly different pathways, but interactivity is extremely limited and the reader can't really influence things in any subtle way. Many choices are simply dead ends, not new factors that have to influence the rest of the story.
A story with one beginning and multiple canned endings is still limited in scope; what we're seeing in The Walking Dead is an attempt at something more subtle, where a conversation or remark can change the way a later scene plays without necessarily altering its outcome. I'd rather have Kenny call me a "good friend" than an "asshole" -- and whether that has a plot impact or not, it makes that scene feel very different. And the LACK of change in his actions reinforces that Kenny is a good person.
I guess I'm trying to say that plotting is NOT everything when it comes to drama and entertainment. Making a choice can be of dramatic interest in and of itself. Does it matter to the larger story whether Lee calls the smell in the barn "manure" or "shit"? No; at least I wouldn't expect it to. But it's still an interesting choice to make because it says something about how any one player's Lee is choosing to interact with Clem; is he trying to shield her from the world and preserve her innocence, or expose her to a reality that she may find uncomfortable because he hopes it will strengthen her? Or does he just not think about the best way to respond? Any of these attitudes carries risks.
I know I immediately felt bad about telling Clem to "Just hold it" the first time I played, even though "Wait a minute" means much the same thing. And I REALLY felt bad about failing, though I tried, to rescue her from the toilet biter the first time, leaving Carley to shoot to save Clem instead of Lee. Same outcome, vastly different feelings for the player.
Let's not overlook the value of subtlety in storytelling; story arcs need not get derailed to allow considerable space for nuance in experience and interpretation. Telltale's experiment here may not be wholly successful by the time we reach episode 5, but I think it's well worth trying. And if it works it could set a new benchmark for how to do this kind of thing.
The Glenn thing I have to agree with. He really should be one way or the other, not swap only because you made a particular decision. At the end, if you had given the girl the gun, he does begin to understand the reasons behind it. I have yet to play the other branch of that to the end to see his reaction there.
Actually he's behaving quite normally, sort of.
- not sure how to explain this properly, but there r times where people will complain 1 way or the other, despite what they may believe in, for the purpose of understanding what is going on or maybe to rationalise it.
Glen is just trying to figure things out or the very least figure Lee out as to why he did what he did, despite whether Glen agrees with it or not...
am I making any sense, lol
- something like 2nd guessing themselves...
usually occurs when there's a choice in a tense moment...
- another way of seeing this is,
some people ask what they like others to ask them.
hence 1 of Lee's response, "Would you had given the gun?"
The human mind, there is almost no such thing as, someone wouldn't have behave as such.
I do not expect The Walking Dead to go all Witcher 2 (in Witcher 2 there are two absolutely different second acts, not to mention all the other effects that the smaller choices have). So I understand that the story, in terms of big picture, will remain the same (most likely until the last episode when they can really branch out the storyline... I don't know their technological and budget limitations, like can an episode have two totally different starting points?), it's the details that will differ.
However, I do agree that Episode 1 sometimes does not represent the 'choice' thing very well. I like that the consequences will not be instant (like in the Witcher games), however Episode 1 does really break the illusion of choice because of its 'regardless of what you do, same thing happens'. Which, btw, I think is why TellTale should NOT include meaningful choices when it concerns characters that have a specific fate in the comics (like Shawn... let's face it, the Shawn incident is the one that is complained the most about).
Though, all in all, I prefer to wait until more episodes are released before drawing conclusions on the success of the 'choices' mechanics in TWD. And, even if they fail, the game will still have some really emotional moments and you really get attached to characters (if somebody will dare touching Clementine, I'll throw that person into a zombie horde only so I could kill him again when he turns into a zombie! ... Well, I probably won't be able to do that in the game, but I'd want to!), which for me is a definite plus.
A story with one beginning and multiple canned endings is still limited in scope; what we're seeing in The Walking Dead is an attempt at something more subtle, where a conversation or remark can change the way a later scene plays without necessarily altering its outcome. I'd rather have Kenny call me a "good friend" than an "asshole" -- and whether that has a plot impact or not, it makes that scene feel very different. And the LACK of change in his actions reinforces that Kenny is a good person.
Choices do have subtle outcomes. For example, I struggled to pick the choicest quote to say "this" to from your awesome post. Ostensibly, my cherry-picking should have little effect on the intended outcome: your understanding that I agree with your stated views and have paid you a compliment. But in choosing to quote and respond, I'm saying more about me than I ever possibly could about you, TWD, or anything else.
If anything we know 2 choices: go with kenny to the boat or go with whatever larrys daughters called to the plane, zombie entertainment always end up with using air or sea to escape the mAdness
Look,I have played through thegame 6 times now. Both episodes. Always with completely different choices. Choose different people to rescue, different people to side with. But it's still always the same. Every play regardless of any decisions seem to have too far low of an impact.
When you rescue 1 person another takes their place, doing and saying the same. All decisions seem irrelevant, maybe here and there a sentence switches during a cutscenes but that's it. Look, I have played 6(!!!!!!!!) time now with complete and utter opposite directctions and everything is still exactly the same. The whole "your choices affect the stoy" seems to be utter bull. The choice-system and interactive story seems to be only faked. I mean, after episode one,when I played 3 times with always different choices I already noticed it but I thought "oh well, maybe it will come, and 1 episode isn't enough to branch out." But now, after dozens of opposite decisions/rescues etc and comparing the results it's seems like there is no impact of it at all. Everything stays the same. WIth minor changes every now and then (a new sentence...).
I am completely disappointed so far. These decisions need to BRANCH OUT. It can niot be that the game is 99.9% the same no matter what combinations of decisions. And that's properly the reason why teltale makes you not able to skip cutscenes, to not make people replay too much to compare results? Since it's all the same? Please, branch out the story and for once let my decision be of any meaning whatsoever. Or don't lie about their impact, as so far, after 6 playthroughs I have seen NONE. /rant
Now look. This is an adventure story with an already made script. There are some things which you can change but not everything.
Now imagine what if they tried to make a game where almost EVERYTHING can be changed. This will make game have millions and millions different endings and millions of dialogues. This will be an impossible project even for biggest game companies, so this type of interactivity is really great. We might see completely open world, fully voiced adventure game only in a few decades but surely not now. Right now the only option to have open world is to get rid of actors and make text only adventure which won't be as much fun.
I think that they won't branch out the story just because they already planned the whole Lee''s adventure. You can change only your group and their opinion on you.
Now imagine what if they tried to make a game where almost EVERYTHING can be changed.
Obviously not everything. But MAJOR decision should have SOME effect. But they don't. it doesn't matter who you save or what you say to anyone. So far the story remains EXACTLY the same. Nothing gets altered. A different sentence and maybe Person X doing/saying instead of Person Y. EXACTLY the same. At least make me feel like I have SOME impact on what happens. So far, no decision ever changed anything. It's plain stupid.
that's the same they said after EP1. Now after EP2 it's still the same. that's 40% of the game already passed without any decisions making any impact on the game. Do you really believe that it will change in the next episodes??
I'm sure as the game progresses the choices become more relevant.
It's matter of practicality, if you ask me. You can't have a game that branches off wildly during every single episode. There are so many things you would have to account for that if you did, the game would be MASSIVE to hold that much information. Every time the story line branches, as well, you have to think that it's ANOTHER piece of information that could possibly import wrong, etc., and that would be a developer's nightmare when they are trying to produce a quality game in a timely manner.
For example, imagine that in the meat locker there was a way for Larry to be saved. For the remaining three episodes, they now have to program Larry's character into cutscenes, give him dialogue options, as well as programming different responses for every OTHER character based on if Larry lived or died...instead, they solidify the plot (Larry dies no matter what), and the differences you will see come from the choice of who you helped (consequences being having Lilly or Kenny be mad at you, different conversation options for having chosen to kill/not to kill Larry...).
Just like Ozzman said though, as things progress closer to the end, it will allow for the plot to branch in more different directions.
For example, imagine that in the meat locker there was a way for Larry to be saved. For the remaining three episodes, they now have to program Larry's character into cutscenes, give him dialogue options, as well as programming different responses for every OTHER character based on if Larry lived or died...instead, they solidify the plot (Larry dies no matter what), and the differences you will see come from the choice of who you helped (consequences being having Lilly or Kenny be mad at you, different conversation options for having chosen to kill/not to kill Larry...).
Just like Ozzman said though, as things progress closer to the end, it will allow for the plot to branch in more different directions.
They should have let us try to save him and him turn. that would at least seem like the choice mattered, and given a real reason for kenny to be so upset.
They should have let us try to save him and him turn. that would at least seem like the choice mattered, and given a real reason for kenny to be so upset.
I think they were looking to create a situation with Kenny and his character, however. So many of us trusted him (at least marginally) after the first episode, I thought it was a good shocking moment that really made some people re-evaluate their first impression of him. (Some people take it too far though). Besides, Kenny made it clear that Larry turning into a walker was game over.
I don't think there really was a better way to write that scene - not in a way that didn't fundamentally change what direction they wanted the character's to go. It would have been nice though, to have Kenny be remorseful instead of pissy.
I think they were looking to create a situation with Kenny and his character, however. So many of us trusted him (at least marginally) after the first episode, I thought it was a good shocking moment that really made some people re-evaluate their first impression of him. (Some people take it too far though). Besides, Kenny made it clear that Larry turning into a walker was game over.
I don't think there really was a better way to write that scene - not in a way that didn't fundamentally change what direction they wanted the character's to go. It would have been nice though, to have Kenny be remorseful instead of pissy.
I disagree having him turn would have made your choice more important than just having someone mad at you. It would have provided two outcomes but still not have strayed too far off track from the story. Having his head smashed either way just reinforces that your choices haven't had much of an impact. And you still would have either kenny or lilly mad at you for the choice you made.
Like Irene in EP 1 she shoots herself no matter what. Walking away from a woman crying for mercy would have worked very good, but your choice ultimately doesn't matter except for Glenn not agreeing.
There have been things they could have done to make your choices seem more important with out actually causing the story to vary a lot.
If you don't want to build the swing, it gets built anyway. If you chose to save Shaun then why make him die the same way instantly, why not just have him get bit but still be alive when you leave the farm, he would have still died. I think Herschel still would have kicked us out.
the choices dont seem to matter as in changing the game decisions, it changes some ways that people see you, so there IS a best choice, (spoilers)
save duck is obviously the best choice (makes kenny owe you)
siding with kenny over larry is the best choice because you cant kill duck
trusting the reporter is best cause if you dont save her who cares, and if you do save her she likes you more
chopping or not chopping off leg is the same (for now)
giving food to the kids and larry makes larry/daughter like you more and kenny like you for feeding his kid
saying larry is just looking out for his daughter makes larry/daughter like you more
trying to save larry makes daughter like you (and i really dont se how kenny can hold it against you as you save his family a million times)
i may have missed a few but you can make the best choice in terms of how much people like you, and we will find out for the others in later episodes
i do wish things would make an impact on the actual game like its annoying that if you save doug he saves you from one of the brothers, refuses the food and fixes the camcorder, but if you save reporter she saves you from one of the brothers, refuses the food and fixes the camcorder, did i say "but" i meant and in exactly the same way.
it could have been that doug would eat the food not save you and fix the camcorder but reporter would refuse the food save you but be clueless about the camcorder (Still the same but MORE different)
Let's not forget that part of the appeal of this game is discussing how you approached the major decisions in the game and discussing the reasoning behind those who chose an alternative option.
If the story diverged massively you would lose a lot of that. You see a discussion about what you did in the meat locker but can't contribute as you chose not to go to the dairy and ended up doing something else etc. I'd rather the game have 1 really tight story, with tough well thought out choices and differing relationships, than several branching stories.
Not only that but the more the story branches the more you would feel the need to replay and the less ownership you would end up feeling for your own story.
Let's not forget that part of the appeal of this game is discussing how you approached the major decisions in the game and discussing the reasoning behind those who chose an alternative option.
If the story diverged massively you would lose a lot of that. You see a discussion about what you did in the meat locker but can't contribute as you chose not to go to the dairy and ended up doing something else etc. I'd rather the game have 1 really tight story, with tough well thought out choices and differing relationships, than several branching stories.
Not only that but the more the story branches the more you would feel the need to replay and the less ownership you would end up feeling for your own story.
i know what you are saying about ownership because i have one save where i use my own moral compass (the save i own) but the others are based on choosing differently and having a distinct attitude (not owned as much) but isnt the point of a game with multiple choices to have multiple playthroughs?
and also the main appeal (apart from teltale, walking dead and zombies) was multiple stories that are tailored to suit my playstyles (discussing my choices never entered my mind)
also it isnt a choice if the outcome is the same, its like choosing the bullet that will kill you, you may have an interesting back story of why you choose the 3rd bullet on the left, but if they are all in perfect working condition and identical it doesn't matter which one you choose.
It's matter of practicality, if you ask me. You can't have a game that branches off wildly during every single episode. There are so many things you would have to account for that if you did, the game would be MASSIVE to hold that much information.
You are way exaggerating. I don't ask for every choice I make to completely change the game but I would like some impact. Maybe to change a scene or alter something. As of now,nothing you do will ever change anything. Even the "relations" with people are irrelevant. If you mess up with someone next time instead of "Hello!" that person might say, "Fuck you!" but all further exchange of phrases will continue as if nothing ever happened.
I have replayed plenty and tested pretty much everything. Compared actions/results as well as siding with different people to compare results and how they act later. Hint: absolutely NOTHING changes.
It seems in these episodes there is one defining choice that will change your story (Doug and Carly, Lilly or Kenny), and a few other smaller plot effecting ones (Killing Danny and Andy for example).
It would be difficult and time consuming to write so many different plotlines, but i am hoping that my story will be VERY different from my friend's one when the season is done.
It seems in these episodes there is one defining choice that will change your story (Doug and Carly, Lilly or Kenny), and a few other smaller plot effecting ones (Killing Danny and Andy for example).
It would be difficult and time consuming to write so many different plotlines, but i am hoping that my story will be VERY different from my friend's one when the season is done.
We can only hope.
I understand fully why it can't be all out unique.
But it's just a little "meh" to see in ep. 2 Doug and Carley pretty much doing the exact same thing. Doug just used a laser pointer and Carley used a gun. It had the same effect.
If the story diverged massively you would lose a lot of that. You see a discussion about what you did in the meat locker but can't contribute as you chose not to go to the dairy and ended up doing something else etc. I'd rather the game have 1 really tight story, with tough well thought out choices and differing relationships, than several branching stories.
Not only that but the more the story branches the more you would feel the need to replay and the less ownership you would end up feeling for your own story.
The story doesn't have to branch much to make it seem like your choices matter, which is a selling point of the game. the way they do it gives the game much less replay value, the more you play it the more you realize your choices doesn't matter.
And for a game that has only 2 hours of gameplay for 2 months it could use a little more replay vale.
But it's just a little "meh" to see in ep. 2 Doug and Carley pretty much doing the exact same thing. Doug just used a laser pointer and Carley used a gun. It had the same effect.
It's all very..vanilla.
I don't like that example very much, but it was the second episode - the first time your first choice came up in the events of the game. I doubt Doug and Carley's actions will strongly deviate from one another, at least until the end when radical changes can happen and not really change the future of the game.
The decisions you have to make don't matter enough imho in terms of how the game continues.
Example: I rescued the girl (flame me but I forgot her name right now) over the boy, cause she had the gun, so I thought I rather have that protection.
But as it turns out, you get rescued in Episode 2 by either of them. There is no big difference in how the story continues.
I think those decisions should matter much more. For example, if you rescue the boy over the chick, you should have to fight the brother instead of him getting shot or lasered.
Yeah the only thing i hate more than "no choices" in a game, is the "illusion of choice", where if you go back and try something else, nothing really changes, some people still hate you even if you saved him or whatever.
The whole choice thing seems good and solid if you only play Walking dead one time!. when you try it again you see all the cracks and the illusions.
What choices should mean in this game, is that almost everyone would end up with a different combinations of survivors at the end of the series. That would be freaking awesome.
Do you know what size these episodic games are? Do you know what kind of games Telltale has made up to this? Yes, we all want a game where every choice spirals into completely separate plotlines, but it's not feasible at this time with this company with their releases being what they are now.
Either enjoy what's currently possible or play Heavy Rain.
It's what "cinematic experiences" are all about. Voice acting doesn't come cheap and these limitations pretty much come with the territory. What TTG is doing is pretty much on par with every other such game and they're pulling it off at a fraction of the price.
You're basically paying for 2 hour movies with a bit of replay value at five bucks each, just enjoy the ride.
I agree that the your choices don't change the plot too much, but the things you say sure do change how the characters talk and treat you. I remember watching my brother play through and certain people were MUCH more hostile towards him, and it was realistic because of how he was playing.
There's still 3 episodes left people! I'm sure there's some choices we've made that have not fully played out yet. You COULD say it's an illusion of choice, but this game is supposed to have a strong narrative, that forces you to make strong MORAL choices. ie, You can't save Larry either way, but I bet whoever you sided with will carry over strongly in the next episode (besides Kenny just being a dick to you if you didn't side with him.)
As for the Carly/Doug thing, I was expecting them to get killed off in the second episode. You've got to at least credit Tell Tale for not taking the easy way out in that regard.
I agree that the your choices don't change the plot too much, but the things you say sure do change how the characters talk and treat you. I remember watching my brother play through and certain people were MUCH more hostile towards him, and it was realistic because of how he was playing.
There's still 3 episodes left people! I'm sure there's some choices we've made that have not fully played out yet. You COULD say it's an illusion of choice, but this game is supposed to have a strong narrative, that forces you to make strong MORAL choices. ie, You can't save Larry either way, but I bet whoever you sided with will carry over strongly in the next episode (besides Kenny just being a dick to you if you didn't side with him.)
As for the Carly/Doug thing, I was expecting them to get killed off in the second episode. You've got to at least credit Tell Tale for not taking the easy way out in that regard.
Yep. But I am expecting them to die in the next episode. I get the feeling that not many people will last the whole game
Yeah the only thing i hate more than "no choices" in a game, is the "illusion of choice", where if you go back and try something else, nothing really changes, some people still hate you even if you saved him or whatever.
The whole choice thing seems good and solid if you only play Walking dead one time!. when you try it again you see all the cracks and the illusions.
What choices should mean in this game, is that almost everyone would end up with a different combinations of survivors at the end of the series. That would be freaking awesome.
i agree the illusion of choice is worse than no choice, things had better add up to at least a different ending (peoples opinions of you don't count) else it would leave me feeling very disappointed (unlike a normal point and click adventure where you know there is no choices just puzzles) and i would probably recommend people don't buy it just watch it on youtube it wont be any different from playing it ultimately.
but if the ending/game was truly my own story (not totally unique i know thousand of people would have made the same choices as me) i would tell everyone to buy it
Comments
Some story lines might be a little akward for the choice you made, but this is a game, obviously it is somehow limited.
But the best part of this game is that there is no "best choice". You are free to play it as you like. No need to replay a level because you missed some batteries or spent too many ammunition.
Furthermore there are some obvious choices, leave the house immediately and Chet lives, leave it later and he is dead. In the shop you can directly decide who is going to die. Also you should not forget the many choices which make you die. For example if you decide to hit the first zombie once. Some other choices are: Lie to Hershel or tell the truth. With the screwdriver, attack the left zombie first. Hand over the gun to the bitten girl or not. Either of these choices will change the story immediately and give a totally different experience.
"Not having learnt my lesson at that point, I figured you know what I'll just show the guy at the drug store, the asshole, what's what, I'll beat that guy down. Lo and behold, everything plays out exactly as it would have otherwise. I have to get heart medicine for the complete asshole. Why exactly do I have to do that? I just do. Ok then. Someone obviously tried it. Let me guess. If you agree that Ducky must be thrown out, it doesn't happen right? Color me surprised."
Not sure I agree with sure (apart about L.A. Noire).
I think ok that sometimes the choices you make have no effect in the end (yes, that's kind of a joke about Mass Effect 3, indeed). So it is fine if you decide to help a guy even he's still the one who dies. It was logic for Lenny to help his kid first, and somehow likely that he would panic and fails to help afterwards.
I almost agreed with you about Glenn. Sure, it would be highly unacceptable that a characters convictions change at it just for the sake of disagreeing with you. Then I asked to myself whether Glenn is the kind of guy with convictions. Not in the comics. Not in the TV series. I think Glenn is convinced that he and a she should fall in love at some point. So it is logical for him to actually disagree with Lee whatever Lee decided, because in the end he has to pull the blame on someone. But the right to kill herself or else is not the real matter.
I understand the point you made about story points. However, I find it very complex to follow such story without clear story points. It's not like playing Mass Effect (hum), Fallout New Vegas, Dragon Age, etc, kind of games with so many differents stories inside so you call mess them all and still getting some result. In this case, there is one major story that is kind of layed out (you are not travelling wherever you want in an open world with and endless number of PNJ), as far I understand, so you cannot actually expect the choices you made to completely and utterly change (branching) the outcome. I think that something to accept to enjoy the story. But I still give your enough liberty when you actually can decide about live and death of some characters.
I'm not sure it would really make sense to allow forking the main story too much.
Happy to disagree. The gameplay is way below what I expected, even though I'm familiar with Sam & Max series.
- I'm sorry but that's unacceptable not to be able to configure keyboard controls (I was able to do so in Duke Nukem 3D. Since then, I assume that's not funky trendy), especially with defaults controls clearly not usable with an AZERTY or even QWERTZ keyboard.
- I would have love to remove the hints about clickable object. But for some reason, even if it's 3D, clicking on an object does not work, you have to click on some arbitrarily defined point of it (not even the center each time). Clicking on the cross of the shotgun is not enough. Really a really painy process.
These two issues should be not so hard to fix, I'd hope they would do so for the next release.
I personally think that this might be a design decision to create tension. I know I had slight difficulty finding some things on my first play through because I had my hints turned off.
I don't think there's going to be a string of choices that are going to end the zombie uprising, or a string of choices that makes a satisfying ending impossible. The game itself would be a huge failure. Without that.. there's STILL room for making some decisions that change how characters interact with yours, and possibly how much assistance you manage to get from others along the way, etc. that's really all you can hope for.
This is really more of a storybook thing where the story is somewhat set, and you're really just deciding how a character interacts with it, and how other interact with you.
It's not about the finish line with this game.. it's the road to getting there, and a way to set there and say.. "I'm pleased by the actions I took, and enjoyed the storyline", rather than "I won the game due to my decisions."
A couple of things to keep in mind, regarding some of the specific decisions made:
Save Ducky, or save Shawn. You cannot save Shawn. If you try to, you will fail to save him, no matter what you do. Is that a failing of the story/game? or is that simply a part of the storyline? In real life, I tried to lift 1000 pounds and failed.. it means that regardless of making choices, it was simply not something I could do.. not an indication that the universe-at-large was faulty.
The storyline effect of Shawn dying meant that Hershel was upset, and just wanted everyone to leave. Not.. "Wow, my son's dead, but hey, you tried, so lets go get some supper, I don't know you folks, but ya'll want to move in with me? I trust ya!" His character is trying to ignore the fact that the world is all screwed up, and tries to keep folks distant. That's why he was so... "whatever" about repairing the fence.. As characters discussed to each other; he's just not aware of what's going on. The death of his son made that all-too-clear to him, and now he's hoping that if everyone leaves, life might return to normal somehow. "none of this would have happened if he hadn't let people stay here."
Glenn automatically argues for, or against, letting that girl kill herself.. That's because it was a bad situation, and no real right answer. You had to make the decision on the spot, and not every decision has a happy ending.. Even in real life, there's reasons to do stuff, and reasons NOT to do the same stuff, and you need to evaluate that on the fly. Once you assume the responsibility of making a decision, everyone else can claim, "Well I wouldn't have done that." Some folks (like Glenn) won't try to make you feel better, and share the burden of a decision that caused someone they cared about, to die.. It's human nature to say "wow.. bad choice.. this would have gone better if they'd done, THISn" and therefore lay the blame at your feet to get rid of any guilt they may be feeling themselves.
Plus.. that sort of character conflict builds the drama and tension. You want to make choices that will be popular with the other characters, but in a mature storyline, and in real life.. that's just not always possible.
The one main decision I thought was interesting was the choice on saving the guy or the girl. It means that part 2 has two different possibilities.. one where there's results based on saving the guy (and his technical skill set) or the girl (and her ability to shoot, and having a gun). The end result of episode 2 will probably be the same, meaning that either one will complain about you letting the other die, or something, but the actual storyline will play out a little differently. Maybe one dies within the context of the story, and the other just decides to leave for whatever reason. Or maybe their overall fate is decided in a later episode. Hopefully, the options available to you will be different based on their different skill sets, but neither of them are likely to make the overall storyline different enough to end in a completely different place. Unless there are indeed, multiple endings planned.
It's seriously not the function of this game to give you 3125 different stories rolled into one.. it's to give you a story that you feel like you're fitting into and becoming immersed with.. accommodating your actions to get you there.
Imagine the storyline where you decided that the boy had been bitten, and you sided against his dad.. the point where he saves you anyway would mean a LOT in that context. You'd really feel like you owed him something at that point.
It's drama, it's why the story is interesting.
Look at the old Choose-Your-Own-Adventure books -- they provide quite a few choices and sometimes branch off into wildly different pathways, but interactivity is extremely limited and the reader can't really influence things in any subtle way. Many choices are simply dead ends, not new factors that have to influence the rest of the story.
A story with one beginning and multiple canned endings is still limited in scope; what we're seeing in The Walking Dead is an attempt at something more subtle, where a conversation or remark can change the way a later scene plays without necessarily altering its outcome. I'd rather have Kenny call me a "good friend" than an "asshole" -- and whether that has a plot impact or not, it makes that scene feel very different. And the LACK of change in his actions reinforces that Kenny is a good person.
I guess I'm trying to say that plotting is NOT everything when it comes to drama and entertainment. Making a choice can be of dramatic interest in and of itself. Does it matter to the larger story whether Lee calls the smell in the barn "manure" or "shit"? No; at least I wouldn't expect it to. But it's still an interesting choice to make because it says something about how any one player's Lee is choosing to interact with Clem; is he trying to shield her from the world and preserve her innocence, or expose her to a reality that she may find uncomfortable because he hopes it will strengthen her? Or does he just not think about the best way to respond? Any of these attitudes carries risks.
I know I immediately felt bad about telling Clem to "Just hold it" the first time I played, even though "Wait a minute" means much the same thing. And I REALLY felt bad about failing, though I tried, to rescue her from the toilet biter the first time, leaving Carley to shoot to save Clem instead of Lee. Same outcome, vastly different feelings for the player.
Let's not overlook the value of subtlety in storytelling; story arcs need not get derailed to allow considerable space for nuance in experience and interpretation. Telltale's experiment here may not be wholly successful by the time we reach episode 5, but I think it's well worth trying. And if it works it could set a new benchmark for how to do this kind of thing.
Actually he's behaving quite normally, sort of.
- not sure how to explain this properly, but there r times where people will complain 1 way or the other, despite what they may believe in, for the purpose of understanding what is going on or maybe to rationalise it.
Glen is just trying to figure things out or the very least figure Lee out as to why he did what he did, despite whether Glen agrees with it or not...
am I making any sense, lol
- something like 2nd guessing themselves...
usually occurs when there's a choice in a tense moment...
- another way of seeing this is,
some people ask what they like others to ask them.
hence 1 of Lee's response, "Would you had given the gun?"
The human mind, there is almost no such thing as, someone wouldn't have behave as such.
Wtf?
There are loads of games which are story-heavy like hell and depend on choices made. Most of them just don't come from the west
However, I do agree that Episode 1 sometimes does not represent the 'choice' thing very well. I like that the consequences will not be instant (like in the Witcher games), however Episode 1 does really break the illusion of choice because of its 'regardless of what you do, same thing happens'. Which, btw, I think is why TellTale should NOT include meaningful choices when it concerns characters that have a specific fate in the comics (like Shawn... let's face it, the Shawn incident is the one that is complained the most about).
Though, all in all, I prefer to wait until more episodes are released before drawing conclusions on the success of the 'choices' mechanics in TWD. And, even if they fail, the game will still have some really emotional moments and you really get attached to characters (if somebody will dare touching Clementine, I'll throw that person into a zombie horde only so I could kill him again when he turns into a zombie! ... Well, I probably won't be able to do that in the game, but I'd want to!), which for me is a definite plus.
Choices do have subtle outcomes. For example, I struggled to pick the choicest quote to say "this" to from your awesome post. Ostensibly, my cherry-picking should have little effect on the intended outcome: your understanding that I agree with your stated views and have paid you a compliment. But in choosing to quote and respond, I'm saying more about me than I ever possibly could about you, TWD, or anything else.
Why have what you read on a game site? Are you Brian griffin? Also I agree, let's not pass judgement on nothing...
When you rescue 1 person another takes their place, doing and saying the same. All decisions seem irrelevant, maybe here and there a sentence switches during a cutscenes but that's it. Look, I have played 6(!!!!!!!!) time now with complete and utter opposite directctions and everything is still exactly the same. The whole "your choices affect the stoy" seems to be utter bull. The choice-system and interactive story seems to be only faked. I mean, after episode one,when I played 3 times with always different choices I already noticed it but I thought "oh well, maybe it will come, and 1 episode isn't enough to branch out." But now, after dozens of opposite decisions/rescues etc and comparing the results it's seems like there is no impact of it at all. Everything stays the same. WIth minor changes every now and then (a new sentence...).
I am completely disappointed so far. These decisions need to BRANCH OUT. It can niot be that the game is 99.9% the same no matter what combinations of decisions. And that's properly the reason why teltale makes you not able to skip cutscenes, to not make people replay too much to compare results? Since it's all the same? Please, branch out the story and for once let my decision be of any meaning whatsoever. Or don't lie about their impact, as so far, after 6 playthroughs I have seen NONE. /rant
Now imagine what if they tried to make a game where almost EVERYTHING can be changed. This will make game have millions and millions different endings and millions of dialogues. This will be an impossible project even for biggest game companies, so this type of interactivity is really great. We might see completely open world, fully voiced adventure game only in a few decades but surely not now. Right now the only option to have open world is to get rid of actors and make text only adventure which won't be as much fun.
It was simply too early. I hope TellTale will start spreading themselves from episode 3 onwards.
Obviously not everything. But MAJOR decision should have SOME effect. But they don't. it doesn't matter who you save or what you say to anyone. So far the story remains EXACTLY the same. Nothing gets altered. A different sentence and maybe Person X doing/saying instead of Person Y. EXACTLY the same. At least make me feel like I have SOME impact on what happens. So far, no decision ever changed anything. It's plain stupid.
It's matter of practicality, if you ask me. You can't have a game that branches off wildly during every single episode. There are so many things you would have to account for that if you did, the game would be MASSIVE to hold that much information. Every time the story line branches, as well, you have to think that it's ANOTHER piece of information that could possibly import wrong, etc., and that would be a developer's nightmare when they are trying to produce a quality game in a timely manner.
Just like Ozzman said though, as things progress closer to the end, it will allow for the plot to branch in more different directions.
They should have let us try to save him and him turn. that would at least seem like the choice mattered, and given a real reason for kenny to be so upset.
I think they were looking to create a situation with Kenny and his character, however. So many of us trusted him (at least marginally) after the first episode, I thought it was a good shocking moment that really made some people re-evaluate their first impression of him. (Some people take it too far though). Besides, Kenny made it clear that Larry turning into a walker was game over.
I don't think there really was a better way to write that scene - not in a way that didn't fundamentally change what direction they wanted the character's to go. It would have been nice though, to have Kenny be remorseful instead of pissy.
I disagree having him turn would have made your choice more important than just having someone mad at you. It would have provided two outcomes but still not have strayed too far off track from the story. Having his head smashed either way just reinforces that your choices haven't had much of an impact. And you still would have either kenny or lilly mad at you for the choice you made.
Like Irene in EP 1 she shoots herself no matter what. Walking away from a woman crying for mercy would have worked very good, but your choice ultimately doesn't matter except for Glenn not agreeing.
There have been things they could have done to make your choices seem more important with out actually causing the story to vary a lot.
If you don't want to build the swing, it gets built anyway. If you chose to save Shaun then why make him die the same way instantly, why not just have him get bit but still be alive when you leave the farm, he would have still died. I think Herschel still would have kicked us out.
save duck is obviously the best choice (makes kenny owe you)
siding with kenny over larry is the best choice because you cant kill duck
trusting the reporter is best cause if you dont save her who cares, and if you do save her she likes you more
chopping or not chopping off leg is the same (for now)
giving food to the kids and larry makes larry/daughter like you more and kenny like you for feeding his kid
saying larry is just looking out for his daughter makes larry/daughter like you more
trying to save larry makes daughter like you (and i really dont se how kenny can hold it against you as you save his family a million times)
i may have missed a few but you can make the best choice in terms of how much people like you, and we will find out for the others in later episodes
i do wish things would make an impact on the actual game like its annoying that if you save doug he saves you from one of the brothers, refuses the food and fixes the camcorder, but if you save reporter she saves you from one of the brothers, refuses the food and fixes the camcorder, did i say "but" i meant and in exactly the same way.
it could have been that doug would eat the food not save you and fix the camcorder but reporter would refuse the food save you but be clueless about the camcorder (Still the same but MORE different)
If the story diverged massively you would lose a lot of that. You see a discussion about what you did in the meat locker but can't contribute as you chose not to go to the dairy and ended up doing something else etc. I'd rather the game have 1 really tight story, with tough well thought out choices and differing relationships, than several branching stories.
Not only that but the more the story branches the more you would feel the need to replay and the less ownership you would end up feeling for your own story.
i know what you are saying about ownership because i have one save where i use my own moral compass (the save i own) but the others are based on choosing differently and having a distinct attitude (not owned as much) but isnt the point of a game with multiple choices to have multiple playthroughs?
and also the main appeal (apart from teltale, walking dead and zombies) was multiple stories that are tailored to suit my playstyles (discussing my choices never entered my mind)
also it isnt a choice if the outcome is the same, its like choosing the bullet that will kill you, you may have an interesting back story of why you choose the 3rd bullet on the left, but if they are all in perfect working condition and identical it doesn't matter which one you choose.
You are way exaggerating. I don't ask for every choice I make to completely change the game but I would like some impact. Maybe to change a scene or alter something. As of now,nothing you do will ever change anything. Even the "relations" with people are irrelevant. If you mess up with someone next time instead of "Hello!" that person might say, "Fuck you!" but all further exchange of phrases will continue as if nothing ever happened.
I have replayed plenty and tested pretty much everything. Compared actions/results as well as siding with different people to compare results and how they act later. Hint: absolutely NOTHING changes.
It would be difficult and time consuming to write so many different plotlines, but i am hoping that my story will be VERY different from my friend's one when the season is done.
We can only hope.
I understand fully why it can't be all out unique.
But it's just a little "meh" to see in ep. 2 Doug and Carley pretty much doing the exact same thing. Doug just used a laser pointer and Carley used a gun. It had the same effect.
It's all very..vanilla.
The story doesn't have to branch much to make it seem like your choices matter, which is a selling point of the game. the way they do it gives the game much less replay value, the more you play it the more you realize your choices doesn't matter.
And for a game that has only 2 hours of gameplay for 2 months it could use a little more replay vale.
I don't like that example very much, but it was the second episode - the first time your first choice came up in the events of the game. I doubt Doug and Carley's actions will strongly deviate from one another, at least until the end when radical changes can happen and not really change the future of the game.
Example: I rescued the girl (flame me but I forgot her name right now) over the boy, cause she had the gun, so I thought I rather have that protection.
But as it turns out, you get rescued in Episode 2 by either of them. There is no big difference in how the story continues.
I think those decisions should matter much more. For example, if you rescue the boy over the chick, you should have to fight the brother instead of him getting shot or lasered.
Just my 5 coins.
The whole choice thing seems good and solid if you only play Walking dead one time!. when you try it again you see all the cracks and the illusions.
What choices should mean in this game, is that almost everyone would end up with a different combinations of survivors at the end of the series. That would be freaking awesome.
Either enjoy what's currently possible or play Heavy Rain.
You're basically paying for 2 hour movies with a bit of replay value at five bucks each, just enjoy the ride.
There's still 3 episodes left people! I'm sure there's some choices we've made that have not fully played out yet. You COULD say it's an illusion of choice, but this game is supposed to have a strong narrative, that forces you to make strong MORAL choices. ie, You can't save Larry either way, but I bet whoever you sided with will carry over strongly in the next episode (besides Kenny just being a dick to you if you didn't side with him.)
As for the Carly/Doug thing, I was expecting them to get killed off in the second episode. You've got to at least credit Tell Tale for not taking the easy way out in that regard.
Yep. But I am expecting them to die in the next episode. I get the feeling that not many people will last the whole game
i agree the illusion of choice is worse than no choice, things had better add up to at least a different ending (peoples opinions of you don't count) else it would leave me feeling very disappointed (unlike a normal point and click adventure where you know there is no choices just puzzles) and i would probably recommend people don't buy it just watch it on youtube it wont be any different from playing it ultimately.
but if the ending/game was truly my own story (not totally unique i know thousand of people would have made the same choices as me) i would tell everyone to buy it