"We ah, managed to inverse the quantum emulator in the ga-hey! the positron servos and created a brand new game with countless options with no worry of space limitations because all of the coding exists in the fifth dimension where someone else has already coded it for us. The game is awesome, but ah, it seems that no one can run it on a personal computer until uh the year 3000."
I realize it may seem obvious, but around here... you never know. Part of designing a successful game is to make it as user compatible as possible to the mass of potential system configurations. More choices require more programing which requires more memory. Bigger isn't always better.
nailed it
besides if bioware/ea couldn't do it, a tiny company in comparisson sure as shit ain't gonna...
still kudos for trying
i reckon if every games company worked together and colaborated a full choose your own adventure game could be made (but would probably suck)
Agreed! I would love for her to make it back purely on a fan level, but there is no way in heck I would ever support them actually doing it. It would just ring false no matter what. Heck, THEY LEFT HER ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD! If she was still alive, they would have noticed breathing or a pulse on her. So as much as I like Carley, I would rather her stay dead to not tarnish her memory. If they do though, I will probably throw a brick through my screen!
Agreed! I would love for her to make it back purely on a fan level, but there is no way in heck I would ever support them actually doing it. It would just ring false no matter what. Heck, THEY LEFT HER ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD! If she was still alive, they would have noticed breathing or a pulse on her. So as much as I like Carley, I would rather her stay dead to not tarnish her memory. If they do though, I will probably throw a brick through my screen!
Agreed! I would love for her to make it back purely on a fan level, but there is no way in heck I would ever support them actually doing it. It would just ring false no matter what. Heck, THEY LEFT HER ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD! If she was still alive, they would have noticed breathing or a pulse on her. So as much as I like Carley, I would rather her stay dead to not tarnish her memory. If they do though, I will probably throw a brick through my screen!
To add to this, even if she did somehow live, being knocked out that long would undoubtedly leave her with brain damage.
Only in movies do people get knocked out and wake up hours later fine. It real life, with no hospital, she's be as good as dead anyway.
the whole 'the game is my first twd experience' kinda baffles me like why people watch tv shows mid season/mid episode then go on forums and complain nothing makes sense...
but i have learned quickly on here that not many people have the due dilligance to research stuff before throwing money at the screen.. they see high reviews lots of praise and buy stuff thinking it's one thing then being unpleasantly surprised when their rash purchase turns out to be something well made but not their 'cup of tea'
Since the game is my only TWD experience, I'll explain. I'm a fan of Telltale, so I was interested in their new game. Telltale has a good rep with me, I know TWD is popular, and I've liked zombie games before. Why would I research more? Good game company, popular series ... sold.
I am a bit disappointed with TWD. TWD has complex characters and situations, but then teaches people to not empathize with those characters or care about the situations by being too predictable. The formula is to introduce new people, make people care about them, and then kill them. So, after the first couple times, the audience that's left either pretends to not see the formula, or keeps playing to find out when and how people die.
Good storytelling needs to be a bit less predictable, so what defines TWD is also what hurts it.
We'll see, though. Maybe TWD isn't that predictable (I'm only going based on these 3 episodes), and maybe Telltale has a couple tricks left.
the whole 'the game is my first twd experience' kinda baffles me like why people watch tv shows mid season/mid episode then go on forums and complain nothing makes sense...
but i have learned quickly on here that not many people have the due dilligance to research stuff before throwing money at the screen.. they see high reviews lots of praise and buy stuff thinking it's one thing then being unpleasantly surprised when their rash purchase turns out to be something well made but not their 'cup of tea'
That's a pretty poor attitude.
I spend a fair amount to research, thanks. Certainly, more then an hour was spent reading through this stuff. That's not a snap decision by any means. Same deal for other games. Hard Rain, for example, was actually one I skipped out on. It sounded good when I first heard of it but on a closer inspection, it wasn't quite what I wanted. I got the vibe that it wouldn't be quite my thing. I watched walkthroughs instead and, yea, I'm glad I didn't buy it. I also decided against the Fable series.
There is NOTHING wrong with buying a game based on a review though. That's how most people make their choices. I go watch movies based on nothing more then a preview trailer and maybe a movie review. Some of them suck but you know what? I know they will suck before a half hour is up. I should know if I'm going to like this game before episode 1 is done. That should give me the basis to know.
You expect me to put 10 hours and more watching a tv show or buy a bunch of comic books in order to understand everything? There is a limit to due diligence. I read up on the website, checked a number of reviews, heck, I even checked out some walkthroughs on the first episode. I also put it against my experience with typical zombie fare and made a decision.
Yea, I got that people would die but what is the sense on killing everyone likable that you spent 6 hours developing? Finding out that a person you save gets killed anyway? Don't toss me that they can't handle a different character.
Carley/Doug could have just as easily gotten the broken leg here which would limit their roles in the next episode. There are ways short of outright killing the person you save. It's especially annoying because every other time you choose to save someone it turns out not to matter. The death is always predetermined.
Look, keeping Clem around is fine but, in the end, she isn't really a comrade, she is a burden. For the most part, they have done an excellent job minimizing the problems inherent in having a child dependent and she is certainly a likable character but I'd like some relationships with adults that can be reliable friends rather then a group of people I don't trust and fight with. Kenny could have been it but he was really argumentative at points and just went through such a shock that I'm leery of him. He's likely to snap like Lilly did. Also, is this a game that is only suppost to cater to hard core fans of the Walking Dead that like buckets and buckets of painful deaths?
Even if I did go that far to find out that this is supposedly a game for a particular niche, there is no possible way that the cast the series could possibly be as small as this game is. If I had known too much about the plot the story would have been ruined. The first chapter was good. Second chapter was a bit grim but still okay. You have to get to episode 3 before you find out how bad it REALLY gets and then I hear that they want it to get worse for the final two.
I'm very much NOT used to thinking of every person as a disposable victim when so much time has been put into developing the character. Especially not if they are likable characters that the readers emphasize with. It doesn't make sense to me to kill them off at this point. This isn't some sweeping opera of a game. It's a 10 hours long with a focus on narrative.
Why make a narrative based game only to kill all the people in it early on? As games go, this one is exceptional in it's willingness to kill off major characters. I really have no experience with this level of death. There is no reasonable way to expect it.
PS. The reason why it's acceptable to have an option to kill Lilly is that just because the game "might" become cannon (I'm told Lilly has a novel that also does her origin), that doesn't mean every choice is cannon. In fact, almost all choices will be non cannon, even simple choices like the responses you give, give details about what the cannon Lee is like. So killing Lilly is a non cannon choice and if the game actually got incorporated into the official backstory, that choice would simply have not been picked for it.
wow toma long speech and yet still proving my point, it's not a poor attitude when the forums a full of those types of people questioning everything and failing to grasp the simple fact no one is safe, you say all the deaths are likeable characters ? erm what about larry and duck ? not everyone liked them ? also it's shock value which is one of the foundations of twd.. if you like someone bodn with them, they are going to die cos you least expect it. but after a while yes it may get predictable but other stuff isn't..
my comment in a nut shell is people ASSUME everything like you your self have done but with out paying for it, a bit cheeky imo how many lets plays have you seen ? just one full walkthrough by one person or a few with different choices in the same episode ?
reviews are peoples often 'biased' opinion which change with the person writing it.. the graphic whores, the game play whores etc..i admit i used to follow reviews and use that to make an informed decision till i got stung by them and bought a game that wasn't my thing, so know and for a while i make my own mind up using info i research.
I didn't say every character that died is likable and you are just being rude, Milosuperspech.
It doesn't prove your point at all. I'm not assuming anything, I'm making reasonable guesses based on the information I gathered. You are asking for an unreasonable amount of due diligence and the fact is, there are a LOT more disposable characters in the comic and series then there is in this game. That alone makes a pretty big difference.
In horror movies, the more likeable characters tend to live longer not die out in the third act. That is what this game is more akin to. For the tv show and comic series, those things can go on for years. This is 10 hours of gameplay. That is a very different format style and combine that with supposedly being given choices... Choices mean that you can change things for the better, save people that might die otherwise.
Given all that, why should so many people be dead at this point? There is a difference between saying anyone can die and just killing off so many characters that your emotional involvement with the relationships, the primary focus in this game (remember, it's not a shooter where you just blast everyone), suffers.
Where do you get this attitude that you need to insult everyone that is upset about how the game is turning out?
I guarantee that nearly every single person who comes on here and says "i'm done" and "i'm not gonna play it if..." will still buy and play it just like before. Then they'll come back and find something else to whinge about.
Fact is people, it's a game about trying to survive death therefore..... PEOPLE DIE! So don't give it all that crap about this, that and whatever. Play the game, enjoy it for what it is......
"We ah, managed to inverse the quantum emulator in the ga-hey! the positron servos and created a brand new game with countless options with no worry of space limitations because all of the coding exists in the fifth dimension where someone else has already coded it for us. The game is awesome, but ah, it seems that no one can run it on a personal computer until uh the year 3000."
I will play it through no matter what happens. Unfortunately those who say that no character is exempt from death has it wrong. Unless TTG switches you from one character to another between seasons the character of Lee will never die seeing as how that is the "playable" character in the game. On top of that leaving Lee without Clementine to "care" for/protect leaves the question of how low can the plot line become after the character you have been tasked with protecting has been killed, leaving another character that cannot be killed in the series. Understandably the comics have used and gone through characters to change things up and freshen up the series you still have the base characters still living, still surviving.
After episode 3, TWD is too bleak (for me). Not just the murders, but the suicide, deaths, and the team interactions.
As for this statement the basis is survival in a post apocalyptic zombie infested world, how bright of a future do you really foresee coming from this kind of state of reality.
toma since your new to the forums how about you check some old 'dead posts' and see for yourself instead of assuming you know me based on a few posts..
Yea, I got that people would die but what is the sense on killing everyone likable that you spent 6 hours developing? Finding out that a person you save gets killed anyway? Don't toss me that they can't handle a different character
your exact words.
you don't have to watch a tv show for '10 hours' all at once do you ?
and if you wanna get all personal take it to pm's instead of taking threads off topic? also i find it funny how no one else as a problem but a select few do it's like you got banned and came back just have a go at me and my wild rants which is what they are rants you don't have to take them so seriously... bottom line i'm messing with you so just accept it move on and ignore me..
I'm assuming nothing, you are the one that is being rude to me. I don't need to read other posts you make to know how you are treating ME, thanks.
My first post in this thread didn't talk about you at all. I made the specific point that my interest might fade after episode 5, this is because I bought the season pass on steam so I'm obliged to finish it at this point but I'm not happy with the way it's gone so I made a post here. At no point did I say I wouldn't finish the game.
Now you are suggesting I might have been banned already and came back just to mess with you. Arrogant much? Man, take your own advice and leave me alone. Every post I made was on topic because the thread is about how this game "crossed the line". So I have posted what I don't like and all you do is be rude and keep saying that what I say is invalid because I didn't do enough research beforehand.
Whatever though. Since you say I should ignore you I guess that just means you are telling me you just like to troll people and are therefore not worth listening too. I'll keep that in mind from now on.
"this is a staff announcement.....will TOMA02 please put his toys back in the pram, I repeat will TOMA02 please put his toys back in the pram.....thank you...."
to be honest your initial blurb was so long things got lost in my understanding of what the you're saying cos it was all over the place and in some cases irrelavant.
did specifically complain about your doing research NO i mean't other who don't SHOULD, but it's too fking simple for some to do that, but people would rather blame others for their problems then face them themselves..
so i disagree, get over your self then you make me out to be the bad guy who's arrogant now ?
and just an fyi i wasn't in anyway being rude or arrogant just stating my opinion, but as is often shown some people think thats a crime.
It's a storyline. No video game with a story has ever let you deviate from its railroad for longer than 15 minutes. Look at Heavy Rain and Mass Effect, no choices "matter". [Nothing remarkably changes until the very end of Heavy Rain when characters can suddenly die, and there are multiple endings. Even the most simple of games can have multiple endings - they mean nothing to the argument of choice.] The PAX video clears up a lot of the definition of "tailored", if you haven't seen it. They use the clothes metaphor: they are fitted to your dimensions, but you're not making clothes from scratch.
That said, there's a huge "branching" decision coming up in episode 4 that seems to somewhat contradict this. You're gonna have to wait for that to see how much this game can deviate from its storyline before coming back to the single ending that was promised.
So, to close on a pithy rewording: If you think telltale or any game manufacturer has the capability to deliver "branching plots", "countless choices with several subplots" and "80 gigs of optional, redundant choices"...then you are sorely mistaken. We're probably 20 years from recapturing Choose Your Own Adventures in Video Game form.
I would settle for some meaningful choices that at least change the path of the story and characters involved.
The Doug + Carly choice appeared to be one. The decision to try save Larry (or not) appeared to be one.
The was the worst part of episode three for me it closed all of the interesting storylines that were left over from episode 1 &2 and the choices of previous episodes really had zero impact on how they were closed.
I mean one of the thing that drew me to the game was the dialogue options and agonizing over every big decision wondering if I made the right move. Now looking back it just seems like I wasted my time and it was pointless.
It's a storyline. No video game with a story has ever let you deviate from its railroad for longer than 15 minutes. Look at Heavy Rain and Mass Effect, no choices "matter". [Nothing remarkably changes until the very end of Heavy Rain when characters can suddenly die, and there are multiple endings. Even the most simple of games can have multiple endings - they mean nothing to the argument of choice.] The PAX video clears up a lot of the definition of "tailored", if you haven't seen it. They use the clothes metaphor: they are fitted to your dimensions, but you're not making clothes from scratch.
That said, there's a huge "branching" decision coming up in episode 4 that seems to somewhat contradict this. You're gonna have to wait for that to see how much this game can deviate from its storyline before coming back to the single ending that was promised.
So, to close on a pithy rewording: If you think telltale or any game manufacturer has the capability to deliver "branching plots", "countless choices with several subplots" and "80 gigs of optional, redundant choices"...then you are sorely mistaken. We're probably 20 years from recapturing Choose Your Own Adventures in Video Game form.
That's really not what I'm talking about. Look at the first witcher for example. Their was one overarching storyline but you had three various groups you could align yourself to get there (squirrels, order, or stay neutral) each with their own individual subplots that's what I would have liked to seen from telltale.
It didn't have to have optional missions but it could have continued to focus on the power struggle within the group (Lee, Lily and Kenny) with the player having the option of taking control or throwing his support behind either Kenny or Lily.
To me that was one of things that originally drew me into the game.
That's really not what I'm talking about. Look at the first witcher for example. Their was one overarching storyline but you had three various groups you could align yourself to get there (squirrels, order, or stay neutral) each with their own individual subplots that's what I would have liked to seen from telltale.
It didn't have to have optional missions but it could have continued to focus on the power struggle within the group (Lee, Lily and Kenny) with the player having the option of taking control or throwing his support behind either Kenny or Lily.
To me that was one of things that originally drew me into the game.
Sigh... Telltalle ISN'T Bioware. That would require some planning for episode 3 and more voice-acting and stuff, and even if there was that power struggle, in the end people would end up whining because "it doesn't make a difference, because now Lilly is gone, Kenny doesn't care anymore, choices don't even matter, whine whine whine".
The Witcher is made by CD Projekt RED not bioware.
I doubt they are much bigger then Telltale (probably alot smaller). The difference is they focus on quality not quantity.
I wouldn't be opposed if AMC gave the rights to another company to make a proper decision based Walking dead game. Maybe bioware, CD Projekt RED, square enix, or Obsidian Entertainment.
Why make a narrative based game only to kill all the people in it early on? As games go, this one is exceptional in it's willingness to kill off major characters.
The main character is Lee.
His motivation is Clementine.
The story will end when the main character either fails or succeeds in regard to his motivation. Everyone else is fodder (welcome to The Walking Dead). If that's unacceptable, play something else.
The Witcher is made by CD Projekt RED not bioware.
I doubt they are much bigger then Telltale (probably alot smaller). The difference is they focus on quality not quantity.
I wouldn't be opposed if AMC gave the rights to another company to make a proper decision based Walking dead game. Maybe bioware, CD Projekt RED, square enix, or Obsidian Entertainment.
My mistake. They only used Bioware's engine. But seriously, I've played the first chapter of The Witcher and I stopped because it was getting boring and repetitive. It was just too long and the story wasn't all that interesting. Telltale has an amazing story going on with this game, and a lot of people seem to disagree on the choices mattering or not subject.
I'm sorry if the game is not working for you, but I'm completely satisfied with the choices mechanic, and I'd say most people would agree Telltale is doing an amazing job with this, especially on the story part.
The story is decent. I just don't think it fits with gameplay of a choice given game. Thats the rub for me.
In episode three I kind of felt a couple of things were forced. Lily and I were BFF's (I played both sides of kenny and Lily uptil her dad dying). So when she snapped it was kind of out of character for my canon playthrough.
In another play-through, where we were enemies it was completely in line in her charcter. She was broken and had noone in the group she could talk to or trust. You could see the cracks forming.
katjaa is a lesser extent the same thing. She displayed a strength that kenny could not throughout episode 1& 2. She remained calm cool and collected under the toughest scenarios (gun to her head, running out of food, fixing up injuries) even when her son was dying she was calm.
Now some people have mentioned it may have been a front and she may have been putting on a brave face for the good of the group. I don't know to me there was no signs she was capable of killing herself. It just seemed a little forced considering my interactions with Katjaa.
Which is one of issues I have. You would think over the span of how many months we have spent in a group my interactions would have some bearing on her decision making process. But nope it's bullet to the head either way.
Both deaths were preventable in my book. I would have liked my interactions with both characters to have made some sort of impact on the events that unfolded.
Okay, Lee's interactions with Lilly had absolutely nothing to do with her snapping and killing someone. As we all know, she cared only about protecting the group her own way (by staying at the motel instead of leaving, for example), and she honestly thought she was protecting the group by killing the traitor, and she was pretty sure about who it was as well(even if she was mistaken if you saved Carley), so that was completely not out of character.
About Katjaa's death, remember when she says she loves Duck more than life itself? That's all.
Which is one of issues I have. You would think over the span of how many months we have spent in a group my interactions would have some bearing on her decision making process. But nope it's bullet to the head either way.
Who the hell are you/Lee in relation to Katjaa and her dying child, especially in comparison to her husband?
Who the hell are you/Lee in relation to Katjaa and her dying child, especially in comparison to her husband?
Probably her best friend?
But that wasn't the point. I would like to think our conversations and time together as friends made some impact along the way on the decisions she made.
I guess not. Lily was going to blow away Carly and Katjaa was going to bow out regardless of what was said. Should have just called her a fat cow the entire game for the difference it would make.
I would think the honour of best friend belongs to her husband. As her friend, she does thank Lee/you. Whether you agree with her choice or not, it was her's as a mother to make.
in ep1 katjaa tells lee upon meeting him and clem the world has changed for the worse and she hoped it would get sorted out "going back to our lives"
duck dying/turning proved to her the world isn't going to be fixed anytime soon.. in other words she lost all hope and kenny was loosing it before duck..
The Witcher is made by CD Projekt RED not bioware.
I doubt they are much bigger then Telltale (probably alot smaller). The difference is they focus on quality not quantity.
You are sorely mistaken. CD Project is more than three times as big as Telltale Games (TTG has just passed the 100 employee threshold, while CDP has been above 300 for a while/ as of 2008). CDP made more than 40 million $ in 2007 alone, and I assure you that in Poland, they can get far more workforce for that money than Telltale in the US. In 2007, Telltale would have killed to be anywhere in the vicinity of making millions. CD Project published The Witcher ... Telltale Games published CSI: Hard Evidence. See where this is going?
But that wasn't the point. I would like to think our conversations and time together as friends made some impact along the way on the decisions she made.
I guess not. Lily was going to blow away Carly and Katjaa was going to bow out regardless of what was said. Should have just called her a fat cow the entire game for the difference it would make.
So, to use a real world analog, you have a dog. You feed it at the right time and play with it. Its name, you decided, is Frisky. After owning him for five weeks, Frisky is hit by a car and killed. Does that immediately make you question the worth of loving him?
No, or I at least hope not. The decisions in the game are arbitrary because there is never supposed to be a right answer or "optimal" playthrough. If you kick everyone who gets near you, you'll have the same story as if you loved everyone and cursed the gods when they were taken too soon. I'd like a game with more deviating plotlines too, but I'd never try to take back a choice because it didn't change the universe. Pet the dog or kick it - he always dies eventually.
Episode 3 broke much of the fourth wall by revealing the narrative design. By the end of Episode 3, players have the decision to either act dumb and continue suspending disbelief, or admit that they are playing because they like watching people die. Episode 4 could address the relationship with the player and find a way to reel people back in and rebuild some trust. If instead the game continues as before, then it's a game for players who like watching people die and not much else.
Well said. I happen to agree the most with the bold bit.
"We ah, managed to inverse the quantum emulator in the ga-hey! the positron servos and created a brand new game with countless options with no worry of space limitations because all of the coding exists in the fifth dimension where someone else has already coded it for us. The game is awesome, but ah, it seems that no one can run it on a personal computer until uh the year 3000."
So, to use a real world analog, you have a dog. You feed it at the right time and play with it. Its name, you decided, is Frisky. After owning him for five weeks, Frisky is hit by a car and killed. Does that immediately make you question the worth of loving him?
No, or I at least hope not. The decisions in the game are arbitrary because there is never supposed to be a right answer or "optimal" playthrough. If you kick everyone who gets near you, you'll have the same story as if you loved everyone and cursed the gods when they were taken too soon. I'd like a game with more deviating plotlines too, but I'd never try to take back a choice because it didn't change the universe. Pet the dog or kick it - he always dies eventually.
but what if the person driving the car was your best friend? they know you like to let Frisky play in the road by your house, surely their behaviour would be influenced by your relationship with them.You've always been good to them so Frisky shouldn't have to die
but what if the person driving the car was your best friend? they know you like to let Frisky play in the road by your house, surely their behaviour would be influenced by your relationship with them.You've always been good to them so Frisky shouldn't have to die
Sure. They run over your dog and this time it's a tragic accident and they apologize to you repeatedly. Were they ever your friend in the first place, or did they always know they were going to someday kill your dog?
same ole same ole in here:
"Why??? Why do people have to die?? Its so unfaiirrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr"
Fantasy land
People have been dying since episode 1...see a pattern here?
Deal with it.
Comments
"We ah, managed to inverse the quantum emulator in the ga-hey! the positron servos and created a brand new game with countless options with no worry of space limitations because all of the coding exists in the fifth dimension where someone else has already coded it for us. The game is awesome, but ah, it seems that no one can run it on a personal computer until uh the year 3000."
nailed it
besides if bioware/ea couldn't do it, a tiny company in comparisson sure as shit ain't gonna...
still kudos for trying
i reckon if every games company worked together and colaborated a full choose your own adventure game could be made (but would probably suck)
Agreed! I would love for her to make it back purely on a fan level, but there is no way in heck I would ever support them actually doing it. It would just ring false no matter what. Heck, THEY LEFT HER ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD! If she was still alive, they would have noticed breathing or a pulse on her. So as much as I like Carley, I would rather her stay dead to not tarnish her memory. If they do though, I will probably throw a brick through my screen!
check out my carley page for my fan fic
Sweet. We also have a unique story for Carley on our RP here: http://thewalkingdeadvgrp.proboards.com/index.cgi
To add to this, even if she did somehow live, being knocked out that long would undoubtedly leave her with brain damage.
Only in movies do people get knocked out and wake up hours later fine. It real life, with no hospital, she's be as good as dead anyway.
Since the game is my only TWD experience, I'll explain. I'm a fan of Telltale, so I was interested in their new game. Telltale has a good rep with me, I know TWD is popular, and I've liked zombie games before. Why would I research more? Good game company, popular series ... sold.
I am a bit disappointed with TWD. TWD has complex characters and situations, but then teaches people to not empathize with those characters or care about the situations by being too predictable. The formula is to introduce new people, make people care about them, and then kill them. So, after the first couple times, the audience that's left either pretends to not see the formula, or keeps playing to find out when and how people die.
Good storytelling needs to be a bit less predictable, so what defines TWD is also what hurts it.
We'll see, though. Maybe TWD isn't that predictable (I'm only going based on these 3 episodes), and maybe Telltale has a couple tricks left.
I mean, look at Rosita.
That's a pretty poor attitude.
I spend a fair amount to research, thanks. Certainly, more then an hour was spent reading through this stuff. That's not a snap decision by any means. Same deal for other games. Hard Rain, for example, was actually one I skipped out on. It sounded good when I first heard of it but on a closer inspection, it wasn't quite what I wanted. I got the vibe that it wouldn't be quite my thing. I watched walkthroughs instead and, yea, I'm glad I didn't buy it. I also decided against the Fable series.
There is NOTHING wrong with buying a game based on a review though. That's how most people make their choices. I go watch movies based on nothing more then a preview trailer and maybe a movie review. Some of them suck but you know what? I know they will suck before a half hour is up. I should know if I'm going to like this game before episode 1 is done. That should give me the basis to know.
You expect me to put 10 hours and more watching a tv show or buy a bunch of comic books in order to understand everything? There is a limit to due diligence. I read up on the website, checked a number of reviews, heck, I even checked out some walkthroughs on the first episode. I also put it against my experience with typical zombie fare and made a decision.
Yea, I got that people would die but what is the sense on killing everyone likable that you spent 6 hours developing? Finding out that a person you save gets killed anyway? Don't toss me that they can't handle a different character.
Carley/Doug could have just as easily gotten the broken leg here which would limit their roles in the next episode. There are ways short of outright killing the person you save. It's especially annoying because every other time you choose to save someone it turns out not to matter. The death is always predetermined.
Look, keeping Clem around is fine but, in the end, she isn't really a comrade, she is a burden. For the most part, they have done an excellent job minimizing the problems inherent in having a child dependent and she is certainly a likable character but I'd like some relationships with adults that can be reliable friends rather then a group of people I don't trust and fight with. Kenny could have been it but he was really argumentative at points and just went through such a shock that I'm leery of him. He's likely to snap like Lilly did. Also, is this a game that is only suppost to cater to hard core fans of the Walking Dead that like buckets and buckets of painful deaths?
Even if I did go that far to find out that this is supposedly a game for a particular niche, there is no possible way that the cast the series could possibly be as small as this game is. If I had known too much about the plot the story would have been ruined. The first chapter was good. Second chapter was a bit grim but still okay. You have to get to episode 3 before you find out how bad it REALLY gets and then I hear that they want it to get worse for the final two.
I'm very much NOT used to thinking of every person as a disposable victim when so much time has been put into developing the character. Especially not if they are likable characters that the readers emphasize with. It doesn't make sense to me to kill them off at this point. This isn't some sweeping opera of a game. It's a 10 hours long with a focus on narrative.
Why make a narrative based game only to kill all the people in it early on? As games go, this one is exceptional in it's willingness to kill off major characters. I really have no experience with this level of death. There is no reasonable way to expect it.
PS. The reason why it's acceptable to have an option to kill Lilly is that just because the game "might" become cannon (I'm told Lilly has a novel that also does her origin), that doesn't mean every choice is cannon. In fact, almost all choices will be non cannon, even simple choices like the responses you give, give details about what the cannon Lee is like. So killing Lilly is a non cannon choice and if the game actually got incorporated into the official backstory, that choice would simply have not been picked for it.
my comment in a nut shell is people ASSUME everything like you your self have done but with out paying for it, a bit cheeky imo how many lets plays have you seen ? just one full walkthrough by one person or a few with different choices in the same episode ?
reviews are peoples often 'biased' opinion which change with the person writing it.. the graphic whores, the game play whores etc..i admit i used to follow reviews and use that to make an informed decision till i got stung by them and bought a game that wasn't my thing, so know and for a while i make my own mind up using info i research.
It doesn't prove your point at all. I'm not assuming anything, I'm making reasonable guesses based on the information I gathered. You are asking for an unreasonable amount of due diligence and the fact is, there are a LOT more disposable characters in the comic and series then there is in this game. That alone makes a pretty big difference.
In horror movies, the more likeable characters tend to live longer not die out in the third act. That is what this game is more akin to. For the tv show and comic series, those things can go on for years. This is 10 hours of gameplay. That is a very different format style and combine that with supposedly being given choices... Choices mean that you can change things for the better, save people that might die otherwise.
Given all that, why should so many people be dead at this point? There is a difference between saying anyone can die and just killing off so many characters that your emotional involvement with the relationships, the primary focus in this game (remember, it's not a shooter where you just blast everyone), suffers.
Where do you get this attitude that you need to insult everyone that is upset about how the game is turning out?
Fact is people, it's a game about trying to survive death therefore..... PEOPLE DIE! So don't give it all that crap about this, that and whatever. Play the game, enjoy it for what it is......
lol
As for this statement the basis is survival in a post apocalyptic zombie infested world, how bright of a future do you really foresee coming from this kind of state of reality.
your exact words.
you don't have to watch a tv show for '10 hours' all at once do you ?
and if you wanna get all personal take it to pm's instead of taking threads off topic? also i find it funny how no one else as a problem but a select few do it's like you got banned and came back just have a go at me and my wild rants which is what they are rants you don't have to take them so seriously... bottom line i'm messing with you so just accept it move on and ignore me..
My first post in this thread didn't talk about you at all. I made the specific point that my interest might fade after episode 5, this is because I bought the season pass on steam so I'm obliged to finish it at this point but I'm not happy with the way it's gone so I made a post here. At no point did I say I wouldn't finish the game.
Now you are suggesting I might have been banned already and came back just to mess with you. Arrogant much? Man, take your own advice and leave me alone. Every post I made was on topic because the thread is about how this game "crossed the line". So I have posted what I don't like and all you do is be rude and keep saying that what I say is invalid because I didn't do enough research beforehand.
Whatever though. Since you say I should ignore you I guess that just means you are telling me you just like to troll people and are therefore not worth listening too. I'll keep that in mind from now on.
did specifically complain about your doing research NO i mean't other who don't SHOULD, but it's too fking simple for some to do that, but people would rather blame others for their problems then face them themselves..
so i disagree, get over your self then you make me out to be the bad guy who's arrogant now ?
and just an fyi i wasn't in anyway being rude or arrogant just stating my opinion, but as is often shown some people think thats a crime.
I would settle for some meaningful choices that at least change the path of the story and characters involved.
The Doug + Carly choice appeared to be one. The decision to try save Larry (or not) appeared to be one.
The was the worst part of episode three for me it closed all of the interesting storylines that were left over from episode 1 &2 and the choices of previous episodes really had zero impact on how they were closed.
I mean one of the thing that drew me to the game was the dialogue options and agonizing over every big decision wondering if I made the right move. Now looking back it just seems like I wasted my time and it was pointless.
That's really not what I'm talking about. Look at the first witcher for example. Their was one overarching storyline but you had three various groups you could align yourself to get there (squirrels, order, or stay neutral) each with their own individual subplots that's what I would have liked to seen from telltale.
It didn't have to have optional missions but it could have continued to focus on the power struggle within the group (Lee, Lily and Kenny) with the player having the option of taking control or throwing his support behind either Kenny or Lily.
To me that was one of things that originally drew me into the game.
Sigh... Telltalle ISN'T Bioware. That would require some planning for episode 3 and more voice-acting and stuff, and even if there was that power struggle, in the end people would end up whining because "it doesn't make a difference, because now Lilly is gone, Kenny doesn't care anymore, choices don't even matter, whine whine whine".
I doubt they are much bigger then Telltale (probably alot smaller). The difference is they focus on quality not quantity.
I wouldn't be opposed if AMC gave the rights to another company to make a proper decision based Walking dead game. Maybe bioware, CD Projekt RED, square enix, or Obsidian Entertainment.
The main character is Lee.
His motivation is Clementine.
The story will end when the main character either fails or succeeds in regard to his motivation. Everyone else is fodder (welcome to The Walking Dead). If that's unacceptable, play something else.
My mistake. They only used Bioware's engine. But seriously, I've played the first chapter of The Witcher and I stopped because it was getting boring and repetitive. It was just too long and the story wasn't all that interesting. Telltale has an amazing story going on with this game, and a lot of people seem to disagree on the choices mattering or not subject.
I'm sorry if the game is not working for you, but I'm completely satisfied with the choices mechanic, and I'd say most people would agree Telltale is doing an amazing job with this, especially on the story part.
From Gary Whitta's article for PlayStation Blog:
It pretty much speaks for the entire game to date and he's talking about episode 4 in specific.
In episode three I kind of felt a couple of things were forced. Lily and I were BFF's (I played both sides of kenny and Lily uptil her dad dying). So when she snapped it was kind of out of character for my canon playthrough.
In another play-through, where we were enemies it was completely in line in her charcter. She was broken and had noone in the group she could talk to or trust. You could see the cracks forming.
katjaa is a lesser extent the same thing. She displayed a strength that kenny could not throughout episode 1& 2. She remained calm cool and collected under the toughest scenarios (gun to her head, running out of food, fixing up injuries) even when her son was dying she was calm.
Now some people have mentioned it may have been a front and she may have been putting on a brave face for the good of the group. I don't know to me there was no signs she was capable of killing herself. It just seemed a little forced considering my interactions with Katjaa.
Which is one of issues I have. You would think over the span of how many months we have spent in a group my interactions would have some bearing on her decision making process. But nope it's bullet to the head either way.
Both deaths were preventable in my book. I would have liked my interactions with both characters to have made some sort of impact on the events that unfolded.
About Katjaa's death, remember when she says she loves Duck more than life itself? That's all.
Who the hell are you/Lee in relation to Katjaa and her dying child, especially in comparison to her husband?
Probably her best friend?
But that wasn't the point. I would like to think our conversations and time together as friends made some impact along the way on the decisions she made.
I guess not. Lily was going to blow away Carly and Katjaa was going to bow out regardless of what was said. Should have just called her a fat cow the entire game for the difference it would make.
I would think the honour of best friend belongs to her husband. As her friend, she does thank Lee/you. Whether you agree with her choice or not, it was her's as a mother to make.
duck dying/turning proved to her the world isn't going to be fixed anytime soon.. in other words she lost all hope and kenny was loosing it before duck..
so she took the only option left to her.
You are sorely mistaken. CD Project is more than three times as big as Telltale Games (TTG has just passed the 100 employee threshold, while CDP has been above 300 for a while/ as of 2008). CDP made more than 40 million $ in 2007 alone, and I assure you that in Poland, they can get far more workforce for that money than Telltale in the US. In 2007, Telltale would have killed to be anywhere in the vicinity of making millions. CD Project published The Witcher ... Telltale Games published CSI: Hard Evidence. See where this is going?
So, to use a real world analog, you have a dog. You feed it at the right time and play with it. Its name, you decided, is Frisky. After owning him for five weeks, Frisky is hit by a car and killed. Does that immediately make you question the worth of loving him?
No, or I at least hope not. The decisions in the game are arbitrary because there is never supposed to be a right answer or "optimal" playthrough. If you kick everyone who gets near you, you'll have the same story as if you loved everyone and cursed the gods when they were taken too soon. I'd like a game with more deviating plotlines too, but I'd never try to take back a choice because it didn't change the universe. Pet the dog or kick it - he always dies eventually.
Well said. I happen to agree the most with the bold bit.
LOL
but what if the person driving the car was your best friend? they know you like to let Frisky play in the road by your house, surely their behaviour would be influenced by your relationship with them.You've always been good to them so Frisky shouldn't have to die
Sure. They run over your dog and this time it's a tragic accident and they apologize to you repeatedly. Were they ever your friend in the first place, or did they always know they were going to someday kill your dog?
"Why??? Why do people have to die?? Its so unfaiirrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr"
Fantasy land
People have been dying since episode 1...see a pattern here?
Deal with it.