They claimed that the story adapts and is tailored to how you play. Not the experience is tailored to how you play. There is a difference between experience and story. It was a point and click adventure game but with dialogue options. I'm sure everyone started this game believing that the actual story changed based on their choices. Most of the people defending Telltale just don't want to admit it.
i would have liked my definition of story and telltales definition to match, i but i don't think it would be lying to say that having your bro kenny by your side and that bitch lilly ruining everything is a different story to that poor lilly who lost her father and snapped in an extremely difficult time because of that bastard Kenny and that traitor ben.
that isn't even everything and they are two different stories, maybe the beginning and the end are identical but the middle is different
I'm sure everyone started this game believing that the actual story changed based on their choices. Most of the people defending Telltale just don't want to admit it.
I didn't believe that when I started the game, and -- as I've said several times throughout this forum -- there is nothing in Telltale's marketing language to indicate that the story dramatically changes based on your decisions. If they DID say that at one point, feel free to post a link, but right now you're basing your interpretation of the game on your interpretation of a single line of marketing copy.
I felt like the game was a highly personal, personalized experience. If you didn't, that sucks and that's fine, but claiming that the people "defending" Telltale "don't want to admit" anything is just your opinion.
I didn't believe that when I started the game, and -- as I've said several times throughout this forum -- there is nothing in Telltale's marketing language to indicate that the story dramatically changes based on your decisions. If they DID say that at one point, feel free to post a link, but right now you're basing your interpretation of the game on your interpretation of a single line of marketing copy.
I felt like the game was a highly personal, personalized experience. If you didn't, that sucks and that's fine, but claiming that the people "defending" Telltale "don't want to admit" anything is just your opinion.
Very well said. Probably the best "counterpoint" to that line of thought I've read in a while.
If Lee had to die, I really wanted to see Clem meet up with Christa and Omid before the game ended.
Not really a disappointment, but I was fully expecting one of the final game situations to be the boat issue, where we would have to choose who gets left behind (and you could choose yourself), since it was mentioned quite a few times by Kenny. I thought for sure that would be a scenario, but before you know it, everyone starts dying.
I hate it when people think that the only way that a game can have change in a story is if it branches out or if the game has multiple endings. The changes in this game are how people interact with you. One person can have Kenny be your friend while another can have him as someone who hates you. It changes the experience of the story.
So you're basically saying that developers should completely ignore the unique and immense possibilities that digital media have to offer and shape their stories just like the non-interactive rollercoaster ride that is a novel or a comic, rather than putting some effort into their product in order to make it a truly unique experience, where the story can branch out and is truly shaped by the player's decisions?
And no, slightly different dialogues do not match my definition of "A tailored game experience – Live with the profound and lasting consequences of the decisions that you make in each episode." or "Your actions and choices will affect how your story plays out across the entire series."
There is not a single choice in this game that has any impact whatsoever on the story.
So you're basically saying that developers should completely ignore the unique and immense possibilities that digital media have to offer and shape their stories just like the non-interactive rollercoaster ride that is a novel or a comic, rather than putting some effort into their product in order to make it a truly unique experience, where the story can branch out and is truly shaped by the player's decisions?
And no, slightly different dialogues do not match my definition of "A tailored game experience – Live with the profound and lasting consequences of the decisions that you make in each episode." or "Your actions and choices will affect how your story plays out across the entire series."
There is not a single choice in this game that has any impact whatsoever on the story.
They effect the way people interact with you. That effects the way the story is told. It fits the definition just fine. Just because you don't like that kind of change doesn't mean it's not there. They do have an impact on things in the game.
I didn't believe that when I started the game, and -- as I've said several times throughout this forum -- there is nothing in Telltale's marketing language to indicate that the story dramatically changes based on your decisions. If they DID say that at one point, feel free to post a link, but right now you're basing your interpretation of the game on your interpretation of a single line of marketing copy.
I felt like the game was a highly personal, personalized experience. If you didn't, that sucks and that's fine, but claiming that the people "defending" Telltale "don't want to admit" anything is just your opinion.
No its a fact and yes they did mislead everyone with their wording. No one said the story had to "dramatically" change not even Mass Effect's story dramatically changed but the changes were at least there whereas TWD game was more about the player's emotional experience based on the dialogue options. Anyone who thinks Telltale games wasn't trying to cash in on the whole Mass Effect deal with that "story tailored" ploy is very naive and I would love to sell you a bridge.:rolleyes:
They effect the way people interact with you. That effects the way the story is told. It fits the definition just fine. Just because you don't like that kind of change doesn't mean it's not there. They do have an impact on things in the game.
Not really, most characters pretty much say the same lines to you no matter what. Which honestly makes no sense for the situation. Others will speak slightly different lines. Once again, how does the change in dialogue change the story? If you look at the story alone, it is pretty much a linear set in stone story no matter what you choose.
No its a fact and yes they did mislead everyone with their wording. No one said the story had to "dramatically" change not even Mass Effect's story dramatically changed but the changes were at least there whereas TWD game was more about the player's emotional experience based on the dialogue options. Anyone who thinks Telltale games wasn't trying to cash in on the whole Mass Effect deal with that "story tailored" ploy is very naive and I would love to sell you a bridge.:rolleyes:
i'm glad i didn't get exactly what i expected when i bought it, but as i have said i would still like a game that is essentially like 5 TWD season 1's in one game and i think season 2 will be an improvement on season 1 (hard to beat) and have more variety.
Not really, most characters pretty much say the same lines to you no matter what. Which honestly makes no sense for the situation. Others will speak slightly different lines. Once again, how does the change in dialogue change the story? If you look at the story alone, it is pretty much a linear set in stone story no matter what you choose.
you have to try and fight your gamer training that makes you ignore dialogue and personal relations in games (because they mostly suck and have no meaning or connection with the game) and treat the dialogue choices like they are as important as a level up screen that is timed and has no respec options or a timed choice of your speciality gun
Not really, most characters pretty much say the same lines to you no matter what. Which honestly makes no sense for the situation. Others will speak slightly different lines. Once again, how does the change in dialogue change the story? If you look at the story alone, it is pretty much a linear set in stone story no matter what you choose.
They were a lot of different dialogue when I replayed it.
No its a fact and yes they did mislead everyone with their wording.
No, it's not a fact, and you saying this doesn't make it a fact. Unless you're a member of Telltale's marketing team or someone with insider information, what you just wrote is utter speculation.
No one said the story had to "dramatically" change not even Mass Effect's story dramatically changed but the changes were at least there whereas TWD game was more about the player's emotional experience based on the dialogue options. Anyone who thinks Telltale games wasn't trying to cash in on the whole Mass Effect deal with that "story tailored" ploy is very naive and I would love to sell you a bridge.:rolleyes:
The implications from several posters here are that they're frustrated with the game because the overall narrative was set in stone. I'm honestly not even sure what you're trying to say here -- that Telltale was using Mass Effect's momentum to generate interest in the game? Is that it? Even if that is the case, who cares? It's strategic marketing designed to cast a wider net and get more players. If the claim is that Telltale outright stole the idea of a tailored game narrative from whoever designed ME, that's beyond ridiculous. That's like saying I'm plagiarizing Stephen King's Salem's Lot because I wanted to write a story about vampires.
Seriously not sure what point you're trying to make here.
Not even true in the slightest, but I'm tired of getting into this argument with people. Someone else can do it.
Of course. I don't care to elaborate either because I'm always right...and if I'm not, I just run away claiming I'm too tired of backing up my assertions and let somebody else do it.
Of course. I don't care to elaborate either because I'm always right...and if I'm not, I just run away claiming I'm too tired of backing up my assertions and let somebody else do it.
what would they have to do for you to consider it to matter to you?
maybe if you said what you expected and what would matter to you we could better understand your complaints
my main problem with this game is from the outset, Telltale said choices matter, after episode 3 it was clear they didn't mean jack shit, the "choices matter" was a main selling point for the game, clearly they lied. big disappointment.
I wont be buying into season 2
i'm glad i didn't get exactly what i expected when i bought it, but as i have said i would still like a game that is essentially like 5 TWD season 1's in one game and i think season 2 will be an improvement on season 1 (hard to beat) and have more variety.
Something tells me season two will be the same thing but I'll still get it cause I at least liked the story. I would be shocked if Season two offered more actual story changing options. But I do have my fingers crossed that they will.
No, it's not a fact, and you saying this doesn't make it a fact. Unless you're a member of Telltale's marketing team or someone with insider information, what you just wrote is utter speculation.
No, it's based on common marketing sense. After games like Mass Effect where its biggest selling point were the choices it's only natural for any similar game to try and market to the same crowd. Even the most basic marketing teams know this simple fact. It's two biggest selling points were the fact that it is a walking dead video game AND its a game where choices matter. If it was only about the experience in dialogue then why not just say that? Cause it sounds pretty darn boring, that's why. Why go over stats at the end of each episode? To keep up the idea that everyone is playing a different story. You don't need to have the inside track in a company to know its simple marketing tactics.
The implications from several posters here are that they're frustrated with the game because the overall narrative was set in stone. I'm honestly not even sure what you're trying to say here -- that Telltale was using Mass Effect's momentum to generate interest in the game? Is that it? Even if that is the case, who cares? It's strategic marketing designed to cast a wider net and get more players. If the claim is that Telltale outright stole the idea of a tailored game narrative from whoever designed ME, that's beyond ridiculous. That's like saying I'm plagiarizing Stephen King's Salem's Lot because I wanted to write a story about vampires.
Seriously not sure what point you're trying to make here.
Now you're just throwing out a bunch of points that don't matter. The number one issue here is that Telltale games claimed the story was "tailored to how you play" yet never gave you options to even play anyway that was different from how THEY wanted you to play, which means it was a linear story from start to finish with a few surface changes in dialogue and scenes. In the end the creators told their own story yet pretended the player had a say in it. Which we didn't. I never said they were plagiarizing ME, that's just stupid. But they knew how popular the game was, knew their own game was a bit similar, and decided to use a bit of "wording" to suggest you would get the same story changing style of game play. You may not care that they marketed their game wrongfully to get more money but that doesn't mean everyone should feel the same as you.
what would they have to do for you to consider it to matter to you?
maybe if you said what you expected and what would matter to you we could better understand your complaints
Well, I don't think I can speak for anyone but myself, but I would love for telltale game defenders to make a list of EVERY event in the story where our choices actually mattered (made a lasting impact on the story).
Well, I don't think I can speak for anyone but myself, but I would love for telltale game defenders to make a list of EVERY event in the story where our choices actually mattered (made a lasting impact on the story).
Amen to that.
Make sure it's a choice that dramatically changed an outcome, where, if I was to pick another option, it wouldn't have happened.
I'll do two for you.
Go out at night or day after you pick up Clementine, go out at night one of the minor character you run into can be a walker, if you go at night.
Save Carley or Doug, changes allot of Chapter 2 & 3
Other than that, most choices happen even if you choose not to, want to save someone? To bad. The writer says he has to die, what? You think YOU can tailor this story? Silly goose.
Well, I don't think I can speak for anyone but myself, but I would love for telltale game defenders to make a list of EVERY event in the story where our choices actually mattered (made a lasting impact on the story).
listing every event would just be work for me, but here is a few:
(episode 1) you can chose to give Irene the gun so she can take her own life and not become a walker, (episode 5) you can tell Clementine how it was a hard decision but a good one because she didnt want to become a walker and Clementine would't want to see that and she should shoot him.
(episode 1) you can chose to save carley (episode 3) you can talk to carley and she will suggest telling everybody about your past then you can tell everybody or not
and then there is kenny, and the many things that can totally change how he treats you
these affect the relationships and dialogue in the game, to be honest these weren't the lasting consequences i was expecting, but if in the lord of the rings sauron was best buddies with gandalf and Boromir said "why cant we simply fly into mordor on those giant eagles?" i think people would say the story was changed
listing every event would just be work for me, but here is a few:
(episode 1) you can chose to give Irene the gun so she can take her own life and not become a walker, (episode 5) you can tell Clementine how it was a hard decision but a good one because she didnt want to become a walker and Clementine would't want to see that and she should shoot him.
(episode 1) you can chose to save carley (episode 3) you can talk to carley and she will suggest telling everybody about your past then you can tell everybody or not
and then there is kenny, and the many things that can totally change how he treats you
these affect the relationships and dialogue in the game, to be honest these weren't the lasting consequences i was expecting, but if in the lord of the rings sauron was best buddies with gandalf and Boromir said "why cant we simply fly into mordor on those giant eagles?" i think people would say the story was changed
1. She kills herself anyways. Clem probably wouldn't really care as Lee didn't shoot her, the killing Duck would have more of an impact.
2. Carley dies in the end. Everybody -Omid & Christa(?) and Clem also dies.
I saw no evidence of any of them dying, so whats that based on? Omid and Christa were going to make their way out of the city and could have been the shadows but even if they weren't no evidence that they died. And how does Clem standing in a field with a gun far outside of any geek crowds mean she is dead?
listing every event would just be work for me, but here is a few:
(episode 1) you can chose to give Irene the gun so she can take her own life and not become a walker, (episode 5) you can tell Clementine how it was a hard decision but a good one because she didnt want to become a walker and Clementine would't want to see that and she should shoot him.
(episode 1) you can chose to save carley (episode 3) you can talk to carley and she will suggest telling everybody about your past then you can tell everybody or not
and then there is kenny, and the many things that can totally change how he treats you
these affect the relationships and dialogue in the game, to be honest these weren't the lasting consequences i was expecting, but if in the lord of the rings sauron was best buddies with gandalf and Boromir said "why cant we simply fly into mordor on those giant eagles?" i think people would say the story was changed
Irene kills herself. It just changes some dialogue. I think the choice to save Doug or Carley is the only real choice a player can make in this entire game that matters. at least one person truly does not get saved. I haven't played the game with Doug. I would have tried it until I heard he dies the same way Carley did, rendering it pointless. I just hope season 2 is better even if it takes longer to release.
It feels like I'm the only person who kept his arm, I knew in the end it wasn't going to help him. I wish he never got bitten to begin with but then it wouldn't have been such a huge driving force for him to find Clem.
I'm also kind of upset with the fact he got handcuffed at the end (which I know was to protect Clem) but it makes me feel that he ended his life how we all saw him begin his journey: a handcuffed prisoner. I felt after all his struggle & sacrifice he still ended up where he was going before it all started, I think he deserved better than that.
I felt like it was an interesting way to end it, back at square one plus an added detriment. The ending was really sad for me, and I was so sad to see that me cutting Lee's arm did absolutely nil to save him. I felt like I was the only one who chose to cut off his arm, based on all the online gameplay vids, but I'm glad to see I'm not.
I was actually very satisfied with the ending. I know a lot of people are sad to see Lee die but I couldn't bring myself to cry as long as Clementine was going to make it. I felt like Lee died happy knowing he saved Clementine and hopefully taught her what she needs to survive without him.
It's still sad that he wouldn't be there for her but I felt as long as Clementine was still alive I had hope for the world. That she could survive what she did and not turn into another monster like the stranger. That she could understand that horror of her situation but not give in to it, it felt very comforting.
That said I still feel like episode five was the weakest one. Don't get me wrong, I loved the ending and pretty much everything from the badass rampage to the Marsh House to the credits was great. It was a great conclusion to the story. But a lot of the surrounding elements leading up to those moments felt very weak and often rushed.
The stuff in the hospital felt too brief and the transition back to the manor seemed too quick. Like there should have been a small bit where you're in the streets trying to quietly snake your way back through walkers and the like. Build a little tension so when you get back, the boat being gone feels a little more powerful. Same thing for on the roof tops, where it seemed like there should have been another obstacle to cross and a little more conversation to make the eventual split more meaningful. Christa's pregnancy in particular never seems to be properly discussed despite being repeatedly mentioned and mostly confirmed.
Who came with you and the arm decision really felt weak. I know the decisions usually don't have a major impact, but for fuck's sake your friends could have at least been sitting the near the edge of the hospital ready to pull you up when you make your jump. Having both arms could have made the stranger fight more violent and the choking portion easier. The statue throwing thing felt incredibly forced and it would have made much more sense to me to just have the camera stay on Kenny as he gets more angry and you have the option to slug him if he ever pushes you too hard.
The reveal of Clementine's parents seemed a little too contrived. Apparently in their wedding vows they decided not even death would part them. I think it would have both made more sense and be more dramatic if you saw Clementine's dad as a walker as the hospital (most likely where he died). Then you have to decide to tell Clem or not at the Marsh House. Then on the way out you see Clem's mom in the street.
That way there could be some conversation options to help shape the reveal. Like at the Marsh House you could tell her that maybe her mom is still alive since you didn't hear her die only to find her a minute later. Or you don't tell Clem her dad's dead at the Marsh Hound and then when they get to the jewelery store Clem starts asking about her dad and you got to decide if you're going to pour on the bad news or not.
My opinion:, (regardless of 20 pages of comments, sry couldn't read it all )
So in the initial post you say, you're disappointed. In a certain way I am too, and that is, that the game doesn't give me the chance to choose who's more important to me: Lee (myself) or Clem (My daughter figure).
I really really wish, there was a point where you, the gamer, could decide whether you sacrifice yourself for her, or her for yourself.
Because I know, there is no way, I would sacrifice her, so Lee could live, that's the ending Telltale gave me, and that's why I'm mostly satisfied with the ending, but I know, there are many people out there, who think completly different, and I am kinda sad, that this great game doesn't give them the opportunity to do, what they want to, but it gives them an ending, that completly contradicts the way they would've wanted the story to end.
The ending would be just so much more emotional for those, who would've chosen to sacrifice themselves, because it was their decision, not a story line preset decision.
If you read this Telltalegames, first thing I want to say is: thanks for this great game, no... awesome game, not many games are as epic considering the emotional deepness and great story. But my humble wish for season 2 is:
Please give us more alternate ways to determine the further story line, more decisions that actually change some things, and alternate endings.
In any way... I'm looking forward to season 2 :rolleyes:
I was satisfied, but I cried over Lee's death. I was disappointed at Ken's MIA or death status, because he really shouldn't have needed to sacrifice himself in those situations. Especially if Ben died. I mean over a walkie talkie? Seriously? You know where Clem is, just go get her. And yeah, I hated how you couldn't try to convince Clem her parents died, as it was extremely obvious. Also, I disliked how you couldn't save certain characters, no matter what. Like when Ben goes to jump, you couldn't have tried to help? Nobody tries to help people when they make a jump from a large building? When you saw the rim snap, you should have had the option to warn Ben, not stand there looking stupid. The fact Ben had to die so poorly in the alley also could have been better desired. I mean, carry him behind the gates, at least let him die peacefully and not get torn apart. And it would have saved Kenny a life and bullets. Also, I also think Christa's pregnancy should have been spoken about, for Kenny and Omid both knew, and I think Vernon would too. Lee seemed kinda... clueless. I would have liked better options when talking about Clementine, or talking about the past to Christa and Omid. Or how Clem never seemed to care about the others. Like she assumed Lee was the only one left? i didn't understand that. Idk, maybe I just would have preferred some things, but TWD game was phenomenal. I wouldn't ask for a better TWD game, even if some aspects weren't exactly perfect. If Telltale can make a sequel even close to as good as the first, I'd be happy. Hell, they can make as many as they like!
listing every event would just be work for me, but here is a few:
(episode 1) you can chose to give Irene the gun so she can take her own life and not become a walker, (episode 5) you can tell Clementine how it was a hard decision but a good one because she didnt want to become a walker and Clementine would't want to see that and she should shoot him.
(episode 1) you can chose to save carley (episode 3) you can talk to carley and she will suggest telling everybody about your past then you can tell everybody or not
and then there is kenny, and the many things that can totally change how he treats you
these affect the relationships and dialogue in the game, to be honest these weren't the lasting consequences i was expecting, but if in the lord of the rings sauron was best buddies with gandalf and Boromir said "why cant we simply fly into mordor on those giant eagles?" i think people would say the story was changed
Personally, I feel the biggest two in the first series are whether or not you save Carley or Doug (whether or not people see this as being 'invalidated' later on, it still makes quite some difference for several episodes) and whether you choose to save Ben's life. If you save it, Kenny almost unequivocally sacrifices himself; if you don't, there's ambiguity and a distinct possibility of him being alive.
However, all the choices in the game beyond this are really dialogue options. The exceptions to this are perhaps whether or not you make Lilly leave the group, whether or not you shoot the girl and whether a minor character is a walker. Although it eventually makes no difference (Lilly goes anyway, the minor character never appears again and the supplies get stolen regardless), it still changes something beyond dialogue.
Every other choice, though, is purely related to dialogue and character's reactions. This isn't necessarily an awful thing, but it's patently not an actual choice which changes the outcome of the game. People are not arguing that absolutely nothing changes, but that choices themselves aren't actually choices as the outcome is on rails.
The perfect example of this is the girl in the motel. Choose not to give her the gun and she takes it. Either way she ends up dead. Now, this would be perfectly acceptable if the characters it influenced actually stayed for more of the game. What I mean by this is, taking the same example of this girl, only Carley and Glen see. Given that they're both gone an episode later, it's hard to see this decision as particularly impacting, beyond the impression it makes on you as a player. While this journey that the player takes really makes an impression the first time around, and makes the game special, it is not something which has replay value, given that almost everything will turn out the same way. Neither of these characters tell anyone what you did, and so the choice is lost.
If the characters who you agonise over choosing certain lines of dialogue survived longer, or died over a longer period, people would be less annoyed. That way, dialogue which is supposedly tailored would be, as they would remember what you said/did, or have a chance to relate it to the group. There are ridiculous elements such as Carley liking what you're saying or remembering it literally seconds before she's killed. Given that the dialogue is what we can all agree is the tailored element of the game, on-rails events such as this seem to devalue that somewhat.
There is also the fact that a lot of this dialogue and the choices that you really put thought and effort into just don't seem to matter. Take your example of Kenny's treatment of you. This is something that I would agree is an example of the game being tailored, and choices having an impact, but I can also see it from the detractor's point of view: that it actually means nothing. When you say a game is tailored to the choices you make, you expect more of the game itself - and thus the story - to mould to what you did. Kenny's attitude towards you means he will/won't come looking for Clementine, and his presence changes absolutely nothing. If the game was as tailored as it is billed, you might reasonably expect that keeping Kenny onside throughout the game and thus his coming to look for Clem actually rewards you with something, i.e. a different path, an unexpected slip-up which causes a character to die who otherwise wouldn't have etc.
While this journey that the player takes really makes an impression the first time around, and makes the game special, it is not something which has replay value, given that almost everything will turn out the same way.
I gotta disagree, I've love replaying The Walking Dead game. I think I just started a tenth play through and I still enjoy trying out different dialogue options. I know you can't change the outcome but I find it fascinating to see how characters respond to what you say and love seeing their reactions. In particular seeing Kenny flip-flop between your bro or not is really entertaining and realizing that Lilly doesn't actually care about anyone really hurts.
Last playthrough I found out if you say you should keep moving at the beginning of episode four it leads to this extra argument between Christa and Kenny I hadn't seen before. And in Crawford when talking to Clementine I stumbled uonn a dialogue option to tell her to remember something Katjaa said in episode one. It also helps that a lot of the dialogue is really funny. Pretty much everything Larry says is a riot and things like suggesting splitting up to Kenny at the beginning of episode three produces a really funny result.
I do agree that they are some missed connections and some decisions lack the desired impact. For one example, I thought who came with you at the end of episode four felt wasted. (You guys couldn't at least help pull me up after I jumped from the belltower? ) But for the most part, I think the limited control over the actual story is one of the things that actually makes it so effective.
If you could simply control the outcome, then the story would basically just be another form of wish fulfillment. Which there's nothing wrong with, it's something video games excel at, but I don’t think you could make as strong a story without denying some degree of control to the player. And in the Walking Dead game’s case I think the incredibly limited story control is why people responded so strongly to it.
Take Lilly killing Carley (or Doug) for example. If the player could prevent that, if they could save Carley (or Doug) would the scene where she (or he) dies really be that tragic? If there’s a outcome where that could be prevented, would Carley (or Doug) getting shot being any more upsetting than any of the dozens of game over screens where you see Lee die when you miss a quick time event? Would it not just be a “bad outcome” people look up how to avoid?
Same thing with the actual ending where Lee dies. If there was another ending where he survives and escapes, where the ending where Lee dies be as emotional? Would it not simply be considered “The Bad Ending”. Wouldn’t it just feel like you made a mistake, and being a video game, wouldn’t you be compelled to go back and replay it so you don’t make that mistake?
I can’t speak for everyone else, but typically when games have multiple branching choices, I usually go back and play the game again to see what the other choices do. And that usually leads to me finding the outcome I like best. And that can be a lot of fun, but it doesn’t get me as emotionally involved as a story I can’t shape to my favorite outcome.
Even something like Fallout: New Vegas, a game I really love and would praise for the amount of impact a lot of your choices usually doesn’t feel as emotionally involving. It’s a ton of fun to play, but the most emotionally memorable moments were actually the ones I didn’t have much control over. Like finding out the truth behind Vault 11 or how Veronica’s sidequest always ends in tragedy.
The brilliant part of The Walking Dead game is it gives people just enough control over the story to really put themselves into it, but then repeatedly yanks it away to heighten the impact of what would have been otherwise static story points. The idea behind the decision to save Doug or Carley is to make Lilly snapping that much more shocking by killing whichever character you saved. And it usually is shocking because people typically save whoever they liked more, Doug or Carley. You have just enough influence over the story to see an impact (you get to talk and hang-out with Doug or Carley in the next two episodes) and then control is ripped out of your hands.
That still doesn’t mean I think the game is perfect or there isn’t room for improvement, but I actually think the concept of a story with a deliberately limited amount of control over it is actually a really genius idea. It allows the writers to craft a mostly consistent story without fear of having to subvert important story points for the sake of control but still gives players just enough influence to strengthen the existing emotional aspects.
I think the Stranger is a great example of how effective this technique is. His character really doesn’t change no matter what you do, but people’s opinions of him are all over the place. I’m a bleeding heart pansy so I was really sympathetic to him even though I thought he was wrong. If you acted cruelly he might make you question himself. Or if you didn’t it might make you just think he’s a hypocrite. Or maybe you just think he really is a villain who lied to a little girl to kidnap her.
The Stranger is consistent, but people’s feelings towards him aren’t, and the game let’s you project those feelings onto Lee to create a scene more effective than if the writers’ simply decided what the audience’s reactions to him should be. But it’s still a scene the writer helped craft, because if you could convince the Stranger he was wrong or your decisions convinced him you’re not a bad guy, it would be just another video game goal to strive for. A difficult level to traverse, and not a tense scene you’re put in.
We can all argue about the most effective balance between story telling and player control. I certainly believe there’s things in the game that could have been done better. But I think actually giving the player so little control was actually one of the things I think makes the story great. And I think the acclaim The Walking Dead game has received is strong evidence in favor of the design decision to deliberately limit but not outright remove story control and gaming elements in favor of creating the most compelling tale possible.
Think about this. If last year you were told that a downloadable tie-in game with the Walking Dead comic made by the same company who did Sam and Max was going to win over eighty game of the years awards, would you believe it? I wouldn’t have. Not before playing it anyways. :rolleyes:
^I agree with Jaded, I think I've played it 5 times just to look at all the stuff I missed or overlooked, find eastereggs, develop different conversation relationships, and act differently. You can have an assholish Lee, a silent-but-deadly Lee, a friendly mediator Lee, a savior Lee, a moral Lee, a father Lee, a bro Lee, or somewhere in-between. I found this extremely interesting. For the amount of time put into the game, I am astounded by the results, and wouldn't be surprised if the first few episodes of season 2 were or are close to finished. I am interested to see Clem's actions and responses from what you taught her. I think season 1 was a test to see how people would react to the game and the roots for perhaps a long tree, while season 2 used the foundation of your earlier decisions to make a more-heavily impacted tailored game. Telltale could have mean't the game would be tailored to change the experience of the first season, or perhaps what would be seen afterwards. Either way, I am anxious for the next season!
I've only played it twice (technically) and then have gone on to see parts of other people's playthroughs...... despite the similarities, at times it felt like I was watching a different game.
While the overall storyarc doesn't change, the way it's presented is.
Comments
i would have liked my definition of story and telltales definition to match, i but i don't think it would be lying to say that having your bro kenny by your side and that bitch lilly ruining everything is a different story to that poor lilly who lost her father and snapped in an extremely difficult time because of that bastard Kenny and that traitor ben.
that isn't even everything and they are two different stories, maybe the beginning and the end are identical but the middle is different
I didn't believe that when I started the game, and -- as I've said several times throughout this forum -- there is nothing in Telltale's marketing language to indicate that the story dramatically changes based on your decisions. If they DID say that at one point, feel free to post a link, but right now you're basing your interpretation of the game on your interpretation of a single line of marketing copy.
I felt like the game was a highly personal, personalized experience. If you didn't, that sucks and that's fine, but claiming that the people "defending" Telltale "don't want to admit" anything is just your opinion.
Very well said. Probably the best "counterpoint" to that line of thought I've read in a while.
Not really a disappointment, but I was fully expecting one of the final game situations to be the boat issue, where we would have to choose who gets left behind (and you could choose yourself), since it was mentioned quite a few times by Kenny. I thought for sure that would be a scenario, but before you know it, everyone starts dying.
So you're basically saying that developers should completely ignore the unique and immense possibilities that digital media have to offer and shape their stories just like the non-interactive rollercoaster ride that is a novel or a comic, rather than putting some effort into their product in order to make it a truly unique experience, where the story can branch out and is truly shaped by the player's decisions?
And no, slightly different dialogues do not match my definition of "A tailored game experience – Live with the profound and lasting consequences of the decisions that you make in each episode." or "Your actions and choices will affect how your story plays out across the entire series."
There is not a single choice in this game that has any impact whatsoever on the story.
They effect the way people interact with you. That effects the way the story is told. It fits the definition just fine. Just because you don't like that kind of change doesn't mean it's not there. They do have an impact on things in the game.
No its a fact and yes they did mislead everyone with their wording. No one said the story had to "dramatically" change not even Mass Effect's story dramatically changed but the changes were at least there whereas TWD game was more about the player's emotional experience based on the dialogue options. Anyone who thinks Telltale games wasn't trying to cash in on the whole Mass Effect deal with that "story tailored" ploy is very naive and I would love to sell you a bridge.:rolleyes:
Not really, most characters pretty much say the same lines to you no matter what. Which honestly makes no sense for the situation. Others will speak slightly different lines. Once again, how does the change in dialogue change the story? If you look at the story alone, it is pretty much a linear set in stone story no matter what you choose.
i'm glad i didn't get exactly what i expected when i bought it, but as i have said i would still like a game that is essentially like 5 TWD season 1's in one game and i think season 2 will be an improvement on season 1 (hard to beat) and have more variety.
you have to try and fight your gamer training that makes you ignore dialogue and personal relations in games (because they mostly suck and have no meaning or connection with the game) and treat the dialogue choices like they are as important as a level up screen that is timed and has no respec options or a timed choice of your speciality gun
They were a lot of different dialogue when I replayed it.
No, it's not a fact, and you saying this doesn't make it a fact. Unless you're a member of Telltale's marketing team or someone with insider information, what you just wrote is utter speculation.
The implications from several posters here are that they're frustrated with the game because the overall narrative was set in stone. I'm honestly not even sure what you're trying to say here -- that Telltale was using Mass Effect's momentum to generate interest in the game? Is that it? Even if that is the case, who cares? It's strategic marketing designed to cast a wider net and get more players. If the claim is that Telltale outright stole the idea of a tailored game narrative from whoever designed ME, that's beyond ridiculous. That's like saying I'm plagiarizing Stephen King's Salem's Lot because I wanted to write a story about vampires.
Seriously not sure what point you're trying to make here.
2 or 3 different lines at best. Wowzers, that totally tailored my story!
Not even true in the slightest, but I'm tired of getting into this argument with people. Someone else can do it.
Of course. I don't care to elaborate either because I'm always right...and if I'm not, I just run away claiming I'm too tired of backing up my assertions and let somebody else do it.
what would they have to do for you to consider it to matter to you?
maybe if you said what you expected and what would matter to you we could better understand your complaints
It was more then two to three different lines....
I wont be buying into season 2
Something tells me season two will be the same thing but I'll still get it cause I at least liked the story. I would be shocked if Season two offered more actual story changing options. But I do have my fingers crossed that they will.
No, it's based on common marketing sense. After games like Mass Effect where its biggest selling point were the choices it's only natural for any similar game to try and market to the same crowd. Even the most basic marketing teams know this simple fact. It's two biggest selling points were the fact that it is a walking dead video game AND its a game where choices matter. If it was only about the experience in dialogue then why not just say that? Cause it sounds pretty darn boring, that's why. Why go over stats at the end of each episode? To keep up the idea that everyone is playing a different story. You don't need to have the inside track in a company to know its simple marketing tactics.
Now you're just throwing out a bunch of points that don't matter. The number one issue here is that Telltale games claimed the story was "tailored to how you play" yet never gave you options to even play anyway that was different from how THEY wanted you to play, which means it was a linear story from start to finish with a few surface changes in dialogue and scenes. In the end the creators told their own story yet pretended the player had a say in it. Which we didn't. I never said they were plagiarizing ME, that's just stupid. But they knew how popular the game was, knew their own game was a bit similar, and decided to use a bit of "wording" to suggest you would get the same story changing style of game play. You may not care that they marketed their game wrongfully to get more money but that doesn't mean everyone should feel the same as you.
Well, I don't think I can speak for anyone but myself, but I would love for telltale game defenders to make a list of EVERY event in the story where our choices actually mattered (made a lasting impact on the story).
Amen to that.
Make sure it's a choice that dramatically changed an outcome, where, if I was to pick another option, it wouldn't have happened.
I'll do two for you.
Go out at night or day after you pick up Clementine, go out at night one of the minor character you run into can be a walker, if you go at night.
Save Carley or Doug, changes allot of Chapter 2 & 3
Other than that, most choices happen even if you choose not to, want to save someone? To bad. The writer says he has to die, what? You think YOU can tailor this story? Silly goose.
listing every event would just be work for me, but here is a few:
(episode 1) you can chose to give Irene the gun so she can take her own life and not become a walker, (episode 5) you can tell Clementine how it was a hard decision but a good one because she didnt want to become a walker and Clementine would't want to see that and she should shoot him.
(episode 1) you can chose to save carley (episode 3) you can talk to carley and she will suggest telling everybody about your past then you can tell everybody or not
and then there is kenny, and the many things that can totally change how he treats you
these affect the relationships and dialogue in the game, to be honest these weren't the lasting consequences i was expecting, but if in the lord of the rings sauron was best buddies with gandalf and Boromir said "why cant we simply fly into mordor on those giant eagles?" i think people would say the story was changed
1. She kills herself anyways. Clem probably wouldn't really care as Lee didn't shoot her, the killing Duck would have more of an impact.
2. Carley dies in the end. Everybody -Omid & Christa(?) and Clem also dies.
3. Kenny dies/is left. (depending on your views)
honhonhonhonhonhon
I saw no evidence of any of them dying, so whats that based on? Omid and Christa were going to make their way out of the city and could have been the shadows but even if they weren't no evidence that they died. And how does Clem standing in a field with a gun far outside of any geek crowds mean she is dead?
Irene kills herself. It just changes some dialogue. I think the choice to save Doug or Carley is the only real choice a player can make in this entire game that matters. at least one person truly does not get saved. I haven't played the game with Doug. I would have tried it until I heard he dies the same way Carley did, rendering it pointless. I just hope season 2 is better even if it takes longer to release.
It's still sad that he wouldn't be there for her but I felt as long as Clementine was still alive I had hope for the world. That she could survive what she did and not turn into another monster like the stranger. That she could understand that horror of her situation but not give in to it, it felt very comforting.
That said I still feel like episode five was the weakest one. Don't get me wrong, I loved the ending and pretty much everything from the badass rampage to the Marsh House to the credits was great. It was a great conclusion to the story. But a lot of the surrounding elements leading up to those moments felt very weak and often rushed.
The stuff in the hospital felt too brief and the transition back to the manor seemed too quick. Like there should have been a small bit where you're in the streets trying to quietly snake your way back through walkers and the like. Build a little tension so when you get back, the boat being gone feels a little more powerful. Same thing for on the roof tops, where it seemed like there should have been another obstacle to cross and a little more conversation to make the eventual split more meaningful. Christa's pregnancy in particular never seems to be properly discussed despite being repeatedly mentioned and mostly confirmed.
Who came with you and the arm decision really felt weak. I know the decisions usually don't have a major impact, but for fuck's sake your friends could have at least been sitting the near the edge of the hospital ready to pull you up when you make your jump. Having both arms could have made the stranger fight more violent and the choking portion easier. The statue throwing thing felt incredibly forced and it would have made much more sense to me to just have the camera stay on Kenny as he gets more angry and you have the option to slug him if he ever pushes you too hard.
The reveal of Clementine's parents seemed a little too contrived. Apparently in their wedding vows they decided not even death would part them. I think it would have both made more sense and be more dramatic if you saw Clementine's dad as a walker as the hospital (most likely where he died). Then you have to decide to tell Clem or not at the Marsh House. Then on the way out you see Clem's mom in the street.
That way there could be some conversation options to help shape the reveal. Like at the Marsh House you could tell her that maybe her mom is still alive since you didn't hear her die only to find her a minute later. Or you don't tell Clem her dad's dead at the Marsh Hound and then when they get to the jewelery store Clem starts asking about her dad and you got to decide if you're going to pour on the bad news or not.
So in the initial post you say, you're disappointed. In a certain way I am too, and that is, that the game doesn't give me the chance to choose who's more important to me: Lee (myself) or Clem (My daughter figure).
I really really wish, there was a point where you, the gamer, could decide whether you sacrifice yourself for her, or her for yourself.
Because I know, there is no way, I would sacrifice her, so Lee could live, that's the ending Telltale gave me, and that's why I'm mostly satisfied with the ending, but I know, there are many people out there, who think completly different, and I am kinda sad, that this great game doesn't give them the opportunity to do, what they want to, but it gives them an ending, that completly contradicts the way they would've wanted the story to end.
The ending would be just so much more emotional for those, who would've chosen to sacrifice themselves, because it was their decision, not a story line preset decision.
If you read this Telltalegames, first thing I want to say is: thanks for this great game, no... awesome game, not many games are as epic considering the emotional deepness and great story. But my humble wish for season 2 is:
Please give us more alternate ways to determine the further story line, more decisions that actually change some things, and alternate endings.
In any way... I'm looking forward to season 2 :rolleyes:
Personally, I feel the biggest two in the first series are whether or not you save Carley or Doug (whether or not people see this as being 'invalidated' later on, it still makes quite some difference for several episodes) and whether you choose to save Ben's life. If you save it, Kenny almost unequivocally sacrifices himself; if you don't, there's ambiguity and a distinct possibility of him being alive.
However, all the choices in the game beyond this are really dialogue options. The exceptions to this are perhaps whether or not you make Lilly leave the group, whether or not you shoot the girl and whether a minor character is a walker. Although it eventually makes no difference (Lilly goes anyway, the minor character never appears again and the supplies get stolen regardless), it still changes something beyond dialogue.
Every other choice, though, is purely related to dialogue and character's reactions. This isn't necessarily an awful thing, but it's patently not an actual choice which changes the outcome of the game. People are not arguing that absolutely nothing changes, but that choices themselves aren't actually choices as the outcome is on rails.
The perfect example of this is the girl in the motel. Choose not to give her the gun and she takes it. Either way she ends up dead. Now, this would be perfectly acceptable if the characters it influenced actually stayed for more of the game. What I mean by this is, taking the same example of this girl, only Carley and Glen see. Given that they're both gone an episode later, it's hard to see this decision as particularly impacting, beyond the impression it makes on you as a player. While this journey that the player takes really makes an impression the first time around, and makes the game special, it is not something which has replay value, given that almost everything will turn out the same way. Neither of these characters tell anyone what you did, and so the choice is lost.
If the characters who you agonise over choosing certain lines of dialogue survived longer, or died over a longer period, people would be less annoyed. That way, dialogue which is supposedly tailored would be, as they would remember what you said/did, or have a chance to relate it to the group. There are ridiculous elements such as Carley liking what you're saying or remembering it literally seconds before she's killed. Given that the dialogue is what we can all agree is the tailored element of the game, on-rails events such as this seem to devalue that somewhat.
There is also the fact that a lot of this dialogue and the choices that you really put thought and effort into just don't seem to matter. Take your example of Kenny's treatment of you. This is something that I would agree is an example of the game being tailored, and choices having an impact, but I can also see it from the detractor's point of view: that it actually means nothing. When you say a game is tailored to the choices you make, you expect more of the game itself - and thus the story - to mould to what you did. Kenny's attitude towards you means he will/won't come looking for Clementine, and his presence changes absolutely nothing. If the game was as tailored as it is billed, you might reasonably expect that keeping Kenny onside throughout the game and thus his coming to look for Clem actually rewards you with something, i.e. a different path, an unexpected slip-up which causes a character to die who otherwise wouldn't have etc.
I gotta disagree, I've love replaying The Walking Dead game. I think I just started a tenth play through and I still enjoy trying out different dialogue options. I know you can't change the outcome but I find it fascinating to see how characters respond to what you say and love seeing their reactions. In particular seeing Kenny flip-flop between your bro or not is really entertaining and realizing that Lilly doesn't actually care about anyone really hurts.
Last playthrough I found out if you say you should keep moving at the beginning of episode four it leads to this extra argument between Christa and Kenny I hadn't seen before. And in Crawford when talking to Clementine I stumbled uonn a dialogue option to tell her to remember something Katjaa said in episode one. It also helps that a lot of the dialogue is really funny. Pretty much everything Larry says is a riot and things like suggesting splitting up to Kenny at the beginning of episode three produces a really funny result.
I do agree that they are some missed connections and some decisions lack the desired impact. For one example, I thought who came with you at the end of episode four felt wasted. (You guys couldn't at least help pull me up after I jumped from the belltower?
If you could simply control the outcome, then the story would basically just be another form of wish fulfillment. Which there's nothing wrong with, it's something video games excel at, but I don’t think you could make as strong a story without denying some degree of control to the player. And in the Walking Dead game’s case I think the incredibly limited story control is why people responded so strongly to it.
Take Lilly killing Carley (or Doug) for example. If the player could prevent that, if they could save Carley (or Doug) would the scene where she (or he) dies really be that tragic? If there’s a outcome where that could be prevented, would Carley (or Doug) getting shot being any more upsetting than any of the dozens of game over screens where you see Lee die when you miss a quick time event? Would it not just be a “bad outcome” people look up how to avoid?
Same thing with the actual ending where Lee dies. If there was another ending where he survives and escapes, where the ending where Lee dies be as emotional? Would it not simply be considered “The Bad Ending”. Wouldn’t it just feel like you made a mistake, and being a video game, wouldn’t you be compelled to go back and replay it so you don’t make that mistake?
I can’t speak for everyone else, but typically when games have multiple branching choices, I usually go back and play the game again to see what the other choices do. And that usually leads to me finding the outcome I like best. And that can be a lot of fun, but it doesn’t get me as emotionally involved as a story I can’t shape to my favorite outcome.
Even something like Fallout: New Vegas, a game I really love and would praise for the amount of impact a lot of your choices usually doesn’t feel as emotionally involving. It’s a ton of fun to play, but the most emotionally memorable moments were actually the ones I didn’t have much control over. Like finding out the truth behind Vault 11 or how Veronica’s sidequest always ends in tragedy.
The brilliant part of The Walking Dead game is it gives people just enough control over the story to really put themselves into it, but then repeatedly yanks it away to heighten the impact of what would have been otherwise static story points. The idea behind the decision to save Doug or Carley is to make Lilly snapping that much more shocking by killing whichever character you saved. And it usually is shocking because people typically save whoever they liked more, Doug or Carley. You have just enough influence over the story to see an impact (you get to talk and hang-out with Doug or Carley in the next two episodes) and then control is ripped out of your hands.
That still doesn’t mean I think the game is perfect or there isn’t room for improvement, but I actually think the concept of a story with a deliberately limited amount of control over it is actually a really genius idea. It allows the writers to craft a mostly consistent story without fear of having to subvert important story points for the sake of control but still gives players just enough influence to strengthen the existing emotional aspects.
I think the Stranger is a great example of how effective this technique is. His character really doesn’t change no matter what you do, but people’s opinions of him are all over the place. I’m a bleeding heart pansy so I was really sympathetic to him even though I thought he was wrong. If you acted cruelly he might make you question himself. Or if you didn’t it might make you just think he’s a hypocrite. Or maybe you just think he really is a villain who lied to a little girl to kidnap her.
The Stranger is consistent, but people’s feelings towards him aren’t, and the game let’s you project those feelings onto Lee to create a scene more effective than if the writers’ simply decided what the audience’s reactions to him should be. But it’s still a scene the writer helped craft, because if you could convince the Stranger he was wrong or your decisions convinced him you’re not a bad guy, it would be just another video game goal to strive for. A difficult level to traverse, and not a tense scene you’re put in.
We can all argue about the most effective balance between story telling and player control. I certainly believe there’s things in the game that could have been done better. But I think actually giving the player so little control was actually one of the things I think makes the story great. And I think the acclaim The Walking Dead game has received is strong evidence in favor of the design decision to deliberately limit but not outright remove story control and gaming elements in favor of creating the most compelling tale possible.
Think about this. If last year you were told that a downloadable tie-in game with the Walking Dead comic made by the same company who did Sam and Max was going to win over eighty game of the years awards, would you believe it? I wouldn’t have. Not before playing it anyways. :rolleyes:
While the overall storyarc doesn't change, the way it's presented is.