i left out the ones i haven't played, my point about twitch reaction based games (Super Hexagon,Super Meat Boy,Trials Evolution) is that they aren't difficult in my opinion because they don't require thought just reaction, just like a QTE.
...???
Okay, so when presented with a screen in Meatboy, you don't think in the slightest about what you're going to do and then progressively tweak what you're doing until you've finally beat a level? Is this somehow easier than the Walking Dead? I haven't played the game, but I'm genuinely confused here.
And while I think it's great that the team got to celebrate a victory (they all seemed pretty happy), it IS the vgas and therefore the victory feels significantly more mild to me.
Oh and there is another thing I'm really getting sick of which is the idea that the harder a game is the better it is. Absolute bollocks that. Super Meat Boy for example I just find annoying and not enjoyable in the slightest. Trials HD & Evolution on the other hand I've had a lot of fun with.
Oh and there is another thing I'm really getting sick of which is the idea that the harder a game is the better it is. Absolute bollocks that. Super Meat Boy for example I just find annoying and not enjoyable in the slightest.
While I think difficulty doesn't make a game, I think to each their own on whether the game is fun or not. I have yet to beat the game, but I still really enjoy it. I find the challenge fun.
Typical of attitudes on here that a chance to celebrate a success is also used as a stick to beat the company with.
Success at what? It's a popularity contest in the most superficial sense. I'm not knocking TTG, I'm just saying this isn't really that impressive. Especially considering it's the VGAs.
Success at what? It's a popularity contest in the most superficial sense. I'm not knocking TTG, I'm just saying this isn't really that impressive. Especially considering it's the VGAs.
How did I make your point? I just said I wasn't knocking TTG. Which means I'm not using it as a stick to beat the company with. The fact of whether or not TWD is a good game or a hard/easy game has nothing to do with the fact that winning something at the VGAs is not impressive.
How did I make your point? I just said I wasn't knocking TTG. Which means I'm not using it as a stick to beat the company with. The fact of whether or not TWD is a good game or a hard/easy game has nothing to do with the fact that winning something at the VGAs is not impressive.
Just the whole belittling their success by not calling it a success at all. Comes across as a bit bitter in my view. That was the point I felt you made for me, regarding the post you quoted - nothing to do with my earlier comments about difficultly in games and quality.
For a studio of this size winning a popularity contest (which is what it essentially is) is impressive.
Okay, so when presented with a screen in Meatboy, you don't think in the slightest about what you're going to do and then progressively tweak what you're doing until you've finally beat a level? Is this somehow easier than the Walking Dead? I haven't played the game, but I'm genuinely confused here.
And while I think it's great that the team got to celebrate a victory (they all seemed pretty happy), it IS the vgas and therefore the victory feels significantly more mild to me.
when presented with a level on Super Meat Boy you basically instantly know what to do (obviously some thought is required but that part is easy) the game is about making fiddly reaction based moves to finish the level, in my opinion that doesnt make a game dificult just fiddly, and i didn't say it was easier than TWD, i said "you can describe a game as hard or easy depending on how you look at it" and the way i look at Super Meat Boy is that it is an easy game with an irritating control system
While I think difficulty doesn't make a game, I think to each their own on whether the game is fun or not. I have yet to beat the game, but I still really enjoy it. I find the challenge fun.
Exactly. It's a to each their own kind of thing. Heck, the Force Unleashed games are some of the easiest I've ever played, and I still enjoyed them. Skyward Sword is my favorite of the Zelda series, and yet it isn't that overly difficult.
and the way i look at Super Meat Boy is that it is an easy game with an irritating control system
You can bash anything in SMB as long as you like but the controls are the best the genre has to offer. Name even one platformer with better controls.
Are you sure you aren't thinking of They Bleed Pixels?
You can bash anything in SMB as long as you like but the controls are the best the genre has to offer. Name even one platformer with better controls.
Are you sure you aren't thinking of They Bleed Pixels?
they are both irritating to me, it's not SMB specific, i find almost every platformer irritating
when presented with a level on Super Meat Boy you basically instantly know what to do (obviously some thought is required but that part is easy) the game is about making fiddly reaction based moves to finish the level, in my opinion that doesnt make a game dificult just fiddly, and i didn't say it was easier than TWD, i said "you can describe a game as hard or easy depending on how you look at it" and the way i look at Super Meat Boy is that it is an easy game with an irritating control system
That's not true. No amount of different controls would make the levels any easier, because they're specifically tailored to the controls. The level design is 80% of the difficulty in SMB. Also, these shits at the VGAs couldn't even get Gabe Newell's name right.
How about Dungeons of Dredmor, then? Half the achievements are about dying in interesting ways. Because you die. A lot.
And it's turn-based, so tons of time for thought.
He'd just say it's random. Which it is. But he wouldn't know that the difficulty does not com from the randomness but from the game being out to murder you horribly. :cool:
Journey is a beautiful game and I would have been quite fine with it if it had won.
Agreed. What I've seen and played, it's a fantastic looking game. Still, I won't be one of those that says "This award means nothing" just because it's the VGAs. The fact that a smaller studio won that award does mean something. Heck, the fact that Journey was nominated means something.
He'd just say it's random. Which it is. But he wouldn't know that the difficulty does not com from the randomness but from the game being out to murder you horribly. :cool:
I know. I had a nearly perfect run in terms of best equipment, best mix of skills, etc... breezed through nearly every level... and Dredmor still killed me at the end. Repeatedly.
Agreed. What I've seen and played, it's a fantastic looking game. Still, I won't be one of those that says "This award means nothing" just because it's the VGAs. The fact that a smaller studio won that award does mean something. Heck, the fact that Journey was nominated means something.
The fact that Journey won ANY award, and no less than three on that, says enough.
Agreed. What I've seen and played, it's a fantastic looking game. Still, I won't be one of those that says "This award means nothing" just because it's the VGAs. The fact that a smaller studio won that award does mean something. Heck, the fact that Journey was nominated means something.
I wonder if the Grammy nominated composer of Journey felt that way when he was handed his VGA on the red carpet before the show began.
Im guessing there are some unseen budget concerns that prevented them from airing everyone getting their awards on stage.. maybe they couldnt afford to book the venue.. or dedicate that much airtime... but it was still a darn shame.. to see some of these people cheated out of their moment to shine in front of their friends and peers.
I wonder if the Grammy nominated composer of Journey felt that way when he was handed his VGA on the red carpet before the show began.
While I think it's amazing that a video game soundtrack is finally getting recognition(it's about bloody time, I've heard better soundtracks out of Mario and Zelda than some films for years), I don't think Journey's going to get the Grammy. I'd love to be proven wrong, but my bet's on The Dark Knight Rises.
How about Dungeons of Dredmor, then? Half the achievements are about dying in interesting ways. Because you die. A lot.
And it's turn-based, so tons of time for thought.
i own both FTL and Dungeons of Dredmor on steam and i have played FTL for just over 37 hours (i enjoy problem solving and planning) but only just over 2 hours into Dungeons of Dredmor and i don know if i would count all the deaths in Dungeons of Dredmor as making it hard because you are expected to die, i prefer a normal RPG over rouglikes where you are expected to compete the game but they make it hard (in my opinion) like baldur's gate
After seeing how the awardees were treated in the pre-show, it's impossible to treat this award with any REAL favor. It's a really big deal that Telltale beat out games like AC3, though, in such a shallow show.
It doesn't surprise me that AC3 lost. I love the AC series as a whole but AC3 was the weakest. Story sucked, main character sucked, controls sucked, and it was full of pointless side quests to make up for a very brief and badly written story. However, I don't think TWD truly deserved the title and most certainly not best adapted game. I would give it to ME3 before I would TWD even though ME3's ending was disappointing, at least I had three choices whereas TWD gives nothing. If anything the award will just tell them that their game was fine the way it was and season 2 of the game will be the same old same old. If anything, fans of the show itself gave it the vote regardless of whether they've played it or not.
when presented with a level on Super Meat Boy you basically instantly know what to do (obviously some thought is required but that part is easy) the game is about making fiddly reaction based moves to finish the level, in my opinion that doesnt make a game dificult just fiddly, and i didn't say it was easier than TWD, i said "you can describe a game as hard or easy depending on how you look at it" and the way i look at Super Meat Boy is that it is an easy game with an irritating control system
There are two separate aspects of a game's difficulty. The difficulty of figuring out what to do, and then the difficulty of actually carrying that out. Some games have one or the other, some have both, and some have neither. Games that have neither are terrible games (good story or no, in my opinion. It shouldn't be a game if it has no gameplay challenge). I suppose it's all down to opinion on whether or not games that have one or the other are bad or good. I personally like having both difficult. It also depends on how they're presented I guess.
You could have a game that's easy to figure out but stupid hard to accomplish. Or really difficult to figure out but once you do it's a cakewalk. Whether or not it's annoying depends on how fun the game makes the challenge and how satisfying the reward of accomplishing it is.
I get your outlook on SMB. I've felt this way about more than a few games in my life and they have pushed me to the point of cheating just to get by the dumb section. But it also matters what the purpose of the game is. Is it more to try and figure out what to do (like an adventure/puzzle game) or to try and actually accomplish it with all the obstacles and challenges that stand between it and you (like SMB)? And which do you enjoy more? And then there's a thousand flavours of either.
Something like BTTF, on the other hand, was neither difficult to figure out or to accomplish. And the story was just ok. It survived purely on nostalgia. I haven't met a single player who has never heard of BTTF and yet enjoyed the game. Then again, I enjoyed The Stanley Parable and Dear Esther which have basically no gameplay whatsoever, but rather interactive narrative. I guess experience is worth something by itself once in a while. But in those cases the interactivity was treated as something special. I don't know, it felt different.
TWD, from what I've played and seen, is not bad story-wise, but the puzzles are fairly simple. I like that you can walk and that there are actual game puzzles beyond QTE, but it still pales in comparison to the adventure greats of years passed. Not my cup of tea. And I loved the storytelling of the comic and show.
TWD is not a puzzle game, i to enjoy the old school point and click adventure games, but that is not what TWD is, the "challenge" in the game is the moral choices made and the personal relationships that can be formed by the choices you make and the things you say, if there were hard puzzles in TWD it would break the reality that is created by the brilliant story telling and acting that the game has, and also some arbitrary choice at the end of the game of red, blue or green would just ruin it, in my opinion that isn't what "choose your own ending" should mean, if you are going to affect the ending it should be multiple choices throughout the game that change it, not one choice at the end.
It doesn't surprise me that AC3 lost. I love the AC series as a whole but AC3 was the weakest. Story sucked, main character sucked, controls sucked, and it was full of pointless side quests to make up for a very brief and badly written story. However, I don't think TWD truly deserved the title and most certainly not best adapted game. I would give it to ME3 before I would TWD even though ME3's ending was disappointing, at least I had three choices whereas TWD gives nothing. If anything the award will just tell them that their game was fine the way it was and season 2 of the game will be the same old same old. If anything, fans of the show itself gave it the vote regardless of whether they've played it or not.
TWD is not a puzzle game, i to enjoy the old school point and click adventure games, but that is not what TWD is, the "challenge" in the game is the moral choices made and the personal relationships that can be formed by the choices you make and the things you say, if there were hard puzzles in TWD it would break the reality that is created by the brilliant story telling and acting that the game has, and also some arbitrary choice at the end of the game of red, blue or green would just ruin it, in my opinion that isn't what "choose your own ending" should mean, if you are going to affect the ending it should be multiple choices throughout the game that change it, not one choice at the end.
Yes, I see that. What I'm trying to say is that TTG pretty much made a visual choose-your-own-adventure novel and got more money than ever compared to any of their original adventure games. Why would they want to go back to Sam and Max or something when they can make twice as much money with TWD?
Yes, I see that. What I'm trying to say is that TTG pretty much made a visual choose-your-own-adventure novel and got more money than ever compared to any of their original adventure games. Why would they want to go back to Sam and Max or something when they can make twice as much money with TWD?
i get what you mean, hopefully the money they made can mean that it wont be a trade of one game for the other, hopefully they can make both
i own both FTL and Dungeons of Dredmor on steam and i have played FTL for just over 37 hours (i enjoy problem solving and planning) but only just over 2 hours into Dungeons of Dredmor and i don know if i would count all the deaths in Dungeons of Dredmor as making it hard because you are expected to die, i prefer a normal RPG over rouglikes where you are expected to compete the game but they make it hard (in my opinion) like baldur's gate
This is preferences. I loved Baldur's Gate as well, mainly due to needing to strategize to get past any battle, but I feel Dungeons of Dredmor is very similar in scope. My most recent character I spent a lot of time trying to figure out skills that would complement each other well and allow this character to succeed in all the ways the dungeon demands and then level up the skills in a way that would be beneficial to completing the dungeon (get the defense up first and then start working on the offense). This character made it to level 15, whereas my previous best attempt only made it to level 9.
It's the same with Legend of Grimrock. I spent a lot of time figuring out how I was going to structure my group so that I'd have balance and versatility.
I would agree that certain types of games have gone downhill. RTS in particular. Starcraft II is pretty much the only big RTS that's been released recently and the campaign was super easy, especially compared to the original. But I think it was because of the emphasis on the multi-player.
i get what you mean, hopefully the money they made can mean that it wont be a trade of one game for the other, hopefully they can make both
Why would they want to, though? The reality is that TWD has MANY times the fanbase as Sam and Max does, so why would they bring out a game that would likely cost about the same to make but get them less than half of what TWD made?
the "challenge" in the game is the moral choices made
In the end the moral choices don't matter as much as you are making it out to be. I liked the way TWD adjusted to me, little things characters remembered etc. But you still got through the game no matter what you did as long as you didn't fail the QTEs that you can win (in Episode 5 there are some you aren't supposed to win and that you cannot win).
I think the most challenging QTE was at the end of Episode 2 because you really need to be fast or die. But then again you restart just a few seconds before that.
Why would they want to, though? The reality is that TWD has MANY times the fanbase as Sam and Max does, so why would they bring out a game that would likely cost about the same to make but get them less than half of what TWD made?
i couldn't even come close to answering that, i don't know how their business is set up or the desires of the people who work there or whether it would be possible for them to work on two games, i guess we will find out
In the end the moral choices don't matter as much as you are making it out to be. I liked the way TWD adjusted to me, little things characters remembered etc. But you still got through the game no matter what you did as long as you didn't fail the QTEs that you can win (in Episode 5 there are some you aren't supposed to win and that you cannot win).
I think the most challenging QTE was at the end of Episode 2 because you really need to be fast or die. But then again you restart just a few seconds before that.
the QTE's aren't supposed to be hard just add to the immersion, there is no win or loose condition in TWD, and morality is a personal thing that affects the way you feel, sure the game is reasonably linear but the impact it has on you can change depending on how you play the game, if you want high scores or a win and loose condition TWD is not the game for you
Starcraft II is pretty much the only big RTS that's been released recently and the campaign was super easy, especially compared to the original.
The campaign is as easy as you make it. If you are not trained in RTS and want to get all the achievements for a mission before you move on you will get stuck pretty soon.
If you set it to a low difficulty and blitz through it just to get your bullshit ending (and yes it is bullshit to sell you the next full price campaign) then it will be just that. The game has several skill levels. If you think it's easy on highest settings well okay. I think it's impossible.:D
Why would they want to go back to Sam and Max or something when they can make twice as much money with TWD?
Devil's Playhouse, from the beginning when it was released, always felt like it was a final sendoff to TTG's old adventure fans. They even changed the game mechanics quite a bit. Perhaps in an effort to warm those fans up to what was coming? I don't think we'll see anything like that again, anyway. I doubt we'll be seeing another Sam & Max. At least not in the near future. And by near future I mean 5-10 years or something. If ever.
Perhaps another adventure developer will cut a deal with Purcell for a new Sam & Max adventure game.
The campaign is as easy as you make it. If you are not trained in RTS and want to get all the achievements for a mission before you move on you will get stuck pretty soon.
If you set it to a low difficulty and blitz through it just to get your bullshit ending (and yes it is bullshit to sell you the next full price campaign) then it will be just that. The game has several skill levels. If you think it's easy on highest settings well okay. I think it's impossible.:D
I set it to something in the middle (can't remember what the settings were) when I first tried it and didn't have time to try any other settings, but I guess my real issue here is that the original Starcraft didn't have difficulty settings. It just had a campaign that was tailored to start out at a lower setting to teach you the basics and then ramp up into seemingly impossible challenges by the end. And I would have preferred that. I don't like having to guess at what level of player I am. I could have started at the highest setting and worked my way down
One of my favorite RTS games, Age of Empires II, had an easy setting the equivalent of most moderate or difficult settings in other strategy games. I never beat that game until a few years ago, when I tried to give it another shot now that I kinda understood how strategy actually worked... and even then there was a level that I only beat by the skin of my teeth.
Easy has turned from a setting that slowly ramps up over time to handholding. And at a certain point, the difficult difficulty settings cease to be about whether you are analyzing your situation correctly and more about how many hotkeys you have memorized and how fast you can hit them. I honestly don't play often enough for that.
I guess what I really wanted was a "the campaign was designed to play at this setting" button and then options to make it harder or easier if you needed it.
Well the problem here is clearly that they want you to see the end so they can sell you the next 2 parts of the story for 60$ each. If you never see the end why would you buy the next game.
Age Of Empires 2 didn't care because it was a complete game on it's own (with the greatest RTS-campaigns I've ever seen).
Comments
...???
Okay, so when presented with a screen in Meatboy, you don't think in the slightest about what you're going to do and then progressively tweak what you're doing until you've finally beat a level? Is this somehow easier than the Walking Dead? I haven't played the game, but I'm genuinely confused here.
And while I think it's great that the team got to celebrate a victory (they all seemed pretty happy), it IS the vgas and therefore the victory feels significantly more mild to me.
While I think difficulty doesn't make a game, I think to each their own on whether the game is fun or not. I have yet to beat the game, but I still really enjoy it. I find the challenge fun.
Success at what? It's a popularity contest in the most superficial sense. I'm not knocking TTG, I'm just saying this isn't really that impressive. Especially considering it's the VGAs.
Thanks for making my point.
Or did he mean old school gamers, as in gamers who are at school, where the school is kinda old?
This one I guess.
Just the whole belittling their success by not calling it a success at all. Comes across as a bit bitter in my view. That was the point I felt you made for me, regarding the post you quoted - nothing to do with my earlier comments about difficultly in games and quality.
For a studio of this size winning a popularity contest (which is what it essentially is) is impressive.
when presented with a level on Super Meat Boy you basically instantly know what to do (obviously some thought is required but that part is easy) the game is about making fiddly reaction based moves to finish the level, in my opinion that doesnt make a game dificult just fiddly, and i didn't say it was easier than TWD, i said "you can describe a game as hard or easy depending on how you look at it" and the way i look at Super Meat Boy is that it is an easy game with an irritating control system
Exactly. It's a to each their own kind of thing. Heck, the Force Unleashed games are some of the easiest I've ever played, and I still enjoyed them. Skyward Sword is my favorite of the Zelda series, and yet it isn't that overly difficult.
Are you sure you aren't thinking of They Bleed Pixels?
they are both irritating to me, it's not SMB specific, i find almost every platformer irritating
Journey is a beautiful game and I would have been quite fine with it if it had won.
That's not true. No amount of different controls would make the levels any easier, because they're specifically tailored to the controls. The level design is 80% of the difficulty in SMB. Also, these shits at the VGAs couldn't even get Gabe Newell's name right.
How about Dungeons of Dredmor, then? Half the achievements are about dying in interesting ways. Because you die. A lot.
And it's turn-based, so tons of time for thought.
He'd just say it's random. Which it is. But he wouldn't know that the difficulty does not com from the randomness but from the game being out to murder you horribly. :cool:
Agreed. What I've seen and played, it's a fantastic looking game. Still, I won't be one of those that says "This award means nothing" just because it's the VGAs. The fact that a smaller studio won that award does mean something. Heck, the fact that Journey was nominated means something.
I know. I had a nearly perfect run in terms of best equipment, best mix of skills, etc... breezed through nearly every level... and Dredmor still killed me at the end. Repeatedly.
The fact that Journey won ANY award, and no less than three on that, says enough.
I wonder if the Grammy nominated composer of Journey felt that way when he was handed his VGA on the red carpet before the show began.
While I think it's amazing that a video game soundtrack is finally getting recognition(it's about bloody time, I've heard better soundtracks out of Mario and Zelda than some films for years), I don't think Journey's going to get the Grammy. I'd love to be proven wrong, but my bet's on The Dark Knight Rises.
i own both FTL and Dungeons of Dredmor on steam and i have played FTL for just over 37 hours (i enjoy problem solving and planning) but only just over 2 hours into Dungeons of Dredmor and i don know if i would count all the deaths in Dungeons of Dredmor as making it hard because you are expected to die, i prefer a normal RPG over rouglikes where you are expected to compete the game but they make it hard (in my opinion) like baldur's gate
It doesn't surprise me that AC3 lost. I love the AC series as a whole but AC3 was the weakest. Story sucked, main character sucked, controls sucked, and it was full of pointless side quests to make up for a very brief and badly written story. However, I don't think TWD truly deserved the title and most certainly not best adapted game. I would give it to ME3 before I would TWD even though ME3's ending was disappointing, at least I had three choices whereas TWD gives nothing. If anything the award will just tell them that their game was fine the way it was and season 2 of the game will be the same old same old. If anything, fans of the show itself gave it the vote regardless of whether they've played it or not.
There are two separate aspects of a game's difficulty. The difficulty of figuring out what to do, and then the difficulty of actually carrying that out. Some games have one or the other, some have both, and some have neither. Games that have neither are terrible games (good story or no, in my opinion. It shouldn't be a game if it has no gameplay challenge). I suppose it's all down to opinion on whether or not games that have one or the other are bad or good. I personally like having both difficult. It also depends on how they're presented I guess.
You could have a game that's easy to figure out but stupid hard to accomplish. Or really difficult to figure out but once you do it's a cakewalk. Whether or not it's annoying depends on how fun the game makes the challenge and how satisfying the reward of accomplishing it is.
I get your outlook on SMB. I've felt this way about more than a few games in my life and they have pushed me to the point of cheating just to get by the dumb section. But it also matters what the purpose of the game is. Is it more to try and figure out what to do (like an adventure/puzzle game) or to try and actually accomplish it with all the obstacles and challenges that stand between it and you (like SMB)? And which do you enjoy more? And then there's a thousand flavours of either.
Something like BTTF, on the other hand, was neither difficult to figure out or to accomplish. And the story was just ok. It survived purely on nostalgia. I haven't met a single player who has never heard of BTTF and yet enjoyed the game. Then again, I enjoyed The Stanley Parable and Dear Esther which have basically no gameplay whatsoever, but rather interactive narrative. I guess experience is worth something by itself once in a while. But in those cases the interactivity was treated as something special. I don't know, it felt different.
TWD, from what I've played and seen, is not bad story-wise, but the puzzles are fairly simple. I like that you can walk and that there are actual game puzzles beyond QTE, but it still pales in comparison to the adventure greats of years passed. Not my cup of tea. And I loved the storytelling of the comic and show.
I guess I'm just thinking out loud.
ME3?! That's not an adaptation.
Yes, I see that. What I'm trying to say is that TTG pretty much made a visual choose-your-own-adventure novel and got more money than ever compared to any of their original adventure games. Why would they want to go back to Sam and Max or something when they can make twice as much money with TWD?
i get what you mean, hopefully the money they made can mean that it wont be a trade of one game for the other, hopefully they can make both
This is preferences. I loved Baldur's Gate as well, mainly due to needing to strategize to get past any battle, but I feel Dungeons of Dredmor is very similar in scope. My most recent character I spent a lot of time trying to figure out skills that would complement each other well and allow this character to succeed in all the ways the dungeon demands and then level up the skills in a way that would be beneficial to completing the dungeon (get the defense up first and then start working on the offense). This character made it to level 15, whereas my previous best attempt only made it to level 9.
It's the same with Legend of Grimrock. I spent a lot of time figuring out how I was going to structure my group so that I'd have balance and versatility.
I would agree that certain types of games have gone downhill. RTS in particular. Starcraft II is pretty much the only big RTS that's been released recently and the campaign was super easy, especially compared to the original. But I think it was because of the emphasis on the multi-player.
Why would they want to, though? The reality is that TWD has MANY times the fanbase as Sam and Max does, so why would they bring out a game that would likely cost about the same to make but get them less than half of what TWD made?
In the end the moral choices don't matter as much as you are making it out to be. I liked the way TWD adjusted to me, little things characters remembered etc. But you still got through the game no matter what you did as long as you didn't fail the QTEs that you can win (in Episode 5 there are some you aren't supposed to win and that you cannot win).
I think the most challenging QTE was at the end of Episode 2 because you really need to be fast or die. But then again you restart just a few seconds before that.
i couldn't even come close to answering that, i don't know how their business is set up or the desires of the people who work there or whether it would be possible for them to work on two games, i guess we will find out
the QTE's aren't supposed to be hard just add to the immersion, there is no win or loose condition in TWD, and morality is a personal thing that affects the way you feel, sure the game is reasonably linear but the impact it has on you can change depending on how you play the game, if you want high scores or a win and loose condition TWD is not the game for you
The campaign is as easy as you make it. If you are not trained in RTS and want to get all the achievements for a mission before you move on you will get stuck pretty soon.
If you set it to a low difficulty and blitz through it just to get your bullshit ending (and yes it is bullshit to sell you the next full price campaign) then it will be just that. The game has several skill levels. If you think it's easy on highest settings well okay. I think it's impossible.:D
Devil's Playhouse, from the beginning when it was released, always felt like it was a final sendoff to TTG's old adventure fans. They even changed the game mechanics quite a bit. Perhaps in an effort to warm those fans up to what was coming? I don't think we'll see anything like that again, anyway. I doubt we'll be seeing another Sam & Max. At least not in the near future. And by near future I mean 5-10 years or something. If ever.
Perhaps another adventure developer will cut a deal with Purcell for a new Sam & Max adventure game.
I set it to something in the middle (can't remember what the settings were) when I first tried it and didn't have time to try any other settings, but I guess my real issue here is that the original Starcraft didn't have difficulty settings. It just had a campaign that was tailored to start out at a lower setting to teach you the basics and then ramp up into seemingly impossible challenges by the end. And I would have preferred that. I don't like having to guess at what level of player I am. I could have started at the highest setting and worked my way down
One of my favorite RTS games, Age of Empires II, had an easy setting the equivalent of most moderate or difficult settings in other strategy games. I never beat that game until a few years ago, when I tried to give it another shot now that I kinda understood how strategy actually worked... and even then there was a level that I only beat by the skin of my teeth.
Easy has turned from a setting that slowly ramps up over time to handholding. And at a certain point, the difficult difficulty settings cease to be about whether you are analyzing your situation correctly and more about how many hotkeys you have memorized and how fast you can hit them. I honestly don't play often enough for that.
I guess what I really wanted was a "the campaign was designed to play at this setting" button and then options to make it harder or easier if you needed it.
Age Of Empires 2 didn't care because it was a complete game on it's own (with the greatest RTS-campaigns I've ever seen).