Found a recent two-part Telltale interview - Interesting read
Blind Sniper
Moderator
I found these two interviews from today and yesterday where Telltale talks about their future goals. Part 1 talks about Fables and Walking Dead, while Part 2 talks about other subjects such as Telltale's future, why they cancelled King's Quest, and their new direction. It's interesting overall. I'm posting these here because I am curious about what old and new Telltale fans think of the different views.
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/05/16/telltale-on-wolf-among-us-following-the-walking-dead/
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/05/17/telltale-on-weird-experiments-revisiting-comedy/
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/05/16/telltale-on-wolf-among-us-following-the-walking-dead/
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2013/05/17/telltale-on-weird-experiments-revisiting-comedy/
Sign in to comment in this discussion.
Comments
Bruner touches on quite a few interesting points in Telltale's present gaming philosophy.
role-playing. It's ironic how this is addressed when these last weeks, I have put up literal walls of text in another forum about why the idea of 'role-playing' in games is ludicrous. Arriving at a 'interactive narrative' through choices is one thing, but suggesting that role-playing was actually possible? Role-playing is make believe, is pretend, is acting. And as such needs an audience. I'm not role-playing for my computer. It isn't good at this and doesn't appreciate my efforts at all.
skill based versus story based gaming. The stark opposition Bruner details shocked me, because I believe only skill based games can actually be challenging. Sure, I see how 'choices' can still make a type of a "game", but games which are not skill based naturally are for small children. With "choices" that pride themselves of being so ridiculously 'balanced' that 50% of players go for one and 50% for the other option. Without any fear of taking a wrong step, what's 'choosing' but a game of purest luck, Snakes & Ladders in Fabletown?
The game tries to react to the player's suspicions. "Skill" as detailed above can also mean your thought process and how you communicate it to the game. How a problem based game is able to register your thoughts and react to them is VERY important, and has always been in adventure games. Bruner really presents interesting ideas about the adventure game fundamental "stop and think". And I believe this kind of communication with the game is the right thing to do. Still, the game doesn't work with reward or punishment, at all. You can not make a wrong call. Take the risk of failure away, and of course all you can do is succeed. That sounds like a game which doesn't need me to play itself.
"QTE-ish combat". The Walking Dead hadn't much to add to the mechanics of Jurassic Park, I'm afraid to say. The basic idea was to give the player more direct control by synching mouse clicks with strikes. So that's probably the mechanics we'll see in The Wolf Among Us. Well, it's no progress since Fate of Atlantis mechanics-wise. But at least it will look sooooo much better.
Telltale 'gearing up' for simultaneous releases. Well, isn't that what I had suspected for years.
I'm not saying every TWD fan is an complainer because i have been to the TWD forums a lot and i have seen mature people who can talk in a mature way about the game. But it does not excuse all the threads where there was complaining about the same thing over and over, spoiling the episodes for no reason, and hoping that
Well, since you asked...
I think that Telltale has stopped making the kind of games I'd like to play, and, judging from that interview, is going all-in (so to speak) on continuing to get further and further away from that type of game. It's hardly surprising at this point. I dunno what keeps me coming back to check for some sign they might ever make something I'd really want to play again - nostalgia? blind hope? plain foolishness? Beats me.
Obviously this trend has been a long time coming, but the existence of the King's Quest announcement strung me along for quite a long time with the belief that Telltale would make another solid adventure game. At least that's finally settled.
In a logical way, I understand. The Walking Dead is Telltale's biggest success yet; why wouldn't they push further in that direction? I certainly wouldn't want to constrain them from making new kinds of games and attracting a new audience, but for a time I hoped there would still be room for them to cater a bit to their original audience as well. There isn't; this has been made so clear it might as well be in an <h1> tag on their front page.
I've been replaying the Sam and Max games over the past few weeks. I'm playing the Devil's Playhouse right now, and it's really impressive how far Telltale came from their beginnings. Seasons one and two, while some of the funniest games I've ever played, felt modular and recycled, although two much less so than one. With season three they finally escaped that feeling altogether (which, I should point out, they had already done with Tales of Monkey Island), with each episode delivering a really clever new twist and each having its own setting, tone and theme. What's more, they had implemented some really clever adventure game mechanics. In Season 1, all of the solutions were pretty blindingly obvious. In season 2, some puzzles required lateral thinking. Season 3 had you doing interesting things like considering the uses of the ability to teleport beyond being a mode of transportation. And then, just when they were getting really good at making adventure games, they stopped doing it.
In the interview, Kevin says this about King's Quest: "We have a new audience that we’re trying to serve. We’re trying to be very progressive about things. I think that it would be a disservice to King’s Quest to go out and reinvent it as something it’s not. It would be a disservice to a lot of what Telltale is doing right now to not try to do the kind of innovative things that we’re pushing boundaries with." I don't think this could be a lot more clear - 1) we have a different audience now, 2) we never want to go back to the old one, 3) it would have been a bad idea to try to fit King's Quest into our new paradigm (he's right about this), and 4) We don't want to make traditional adventure games anymore. I also remember reading an interview with Dan Connors where he said similar things and implied that their new audience would have no clue what to do with being put in a room and asked to solve a puzzle, etc.
Maybe I'm the only one! Game of the Year speaks for itself, and I see why people like Walking Dead - Nice graphics, strong writing, cinematic. I think that Telltale has focused so much on that cinematic feeling, though, that they've moved away from what makes a game a game, and interviews indicate that they intend to move further in that direction.
So, to sum up, I'm not satisfied. It stinks to see a game company I was a fan of declare the games I loved to be the past, not a modern direction, and to generally pretend they were never about adventure games anyway (It's also implied in that interview that their current direction is just part of the evolution they've been undergoing ever since the Bone games). Sorry if it comes off like I'm angry; I'm not, that would be rather extreme. I admit it, though: I feel left behind.
I am wondering what this mysterious thing they're going to announce at E3 is, though.
In general, I'm more interested to see whether if TT will go back to adventure games reliant on puzzles, as opposed of narratives that seemed to be almost entirely reliant on choices that get you through the game.
Anyways, I'm always happy to see more info about TWAU!
Back when Telltale Games started to produce their games. They were ones who pretty much helped to revive the genre.
What now, and actually posting coherent comments in the GAME FORUMS again? coolsome, WTF?
...to be honest, it would be great to finally see a few more of the general chat bound oldies back in another section...
That's the right way to look at it. I'm only seeing people these days who can not utter a critique of Telltale's present "direction" without dumping on its 'new audience'.
I don't think so. I believe this extreme 'pure interactive story' direction will eventually lead to a cul de sac. And when you reach the end of this street, all you can do is turn around and retrace your steps. It could be quite a while though.
No, no, not 'just'. Season 3 was absolutely great because it didn't only introduce new adventure mechanics, but could also introduce new mechanics every episode if it chose to do so. That was absolutely great, but don't portray the changes, i.e. the story focus as something 'sudden'. It was always there, it has intensified with almost every game Telltale has made. Season 3 already had a whole lot of cutscenes, a really complex story, and particularly in The Penal Zone, you were thankful when they finally gave you control of Sam again because there wasn't that much of it in episode 1.
More and deeper story was always the focus, and you can see a very natural development from Bone to The Walking Dead. Season 3 was the game to make you really, really care for dog & rabbit detective team, far more than comic or TV series ever attempted to. And that really was part of its irresistible allure. When Season 3's ending brutally pulled you back into the kind of deus ex machina "whatever" storyline Purcell's comics are kind of famous for, riots broke out among the fans.
Yes, I've read that quote about 100 times. :cool:
And that is probably the central thing. The player is not solving problems any more. They're still in the game to a degree, they're still solved, or not, or whatever, around the protagonist. If the main character solves them, great stuff, but the player certainly doesn't. I like a full fledged inventory and item combinations as much as every adventure gamer, but I readily believe that a lot of new problem solving paradigms could be implemented with great fun for the ol' adventure game crew which just loves the 'stop and think' moments as the only ones which really make you feel part of the story.
Don't fall into that trap. Of course The Walking Dead is a "game", it's just one you and I can not connect to as much. But how could we dismiss these games, games that bring its audience to unashamed tears? It's a moving, it's a strong kind of storytelling. As someone with a degree in literature, I can't just declare this invalid.
Story focus is just fine and I agree with you it was a natural progression, but the departure from proper puzzles did seem rather sudden to me.
Ho boy, I remember that. Y'know, I don't think the last episode of Season 3 works quite as well as the rest of it, though it's still a good and worthwhile entry. I always thought it was kind of odd that they brought the whole story arc - the toybox, norrington, etc. - to a very impressive climax in episode 4... and then had another thing happen. Episode 4 felt more like a final episode to me than 5 did. But that's a totally different discussion.
It's not invalid, I'm just not sure "game" is the word for it. I see a game as an interesting problem or set of problems to solve, at its essence. That's just semantics, I don't mean to dismiss it as a piece of storytelling. The main issue I have is, like you say, I can't connect to it as much. I feel like the game, if we want to call it that, doesn't need me.
I'm not arguing with you, by the way - I agreed with nearly all of what you said. Thanks for spotting that I never meant to dump on the "new audience;" I hope they enjoy their experiences, but it's really not for me, a longtime TTG fan, and I just felt like venting a bit about that. And I'm done.
He says the detective part of the story is supposed to be mentally challenging, at least as much as traditional adventure game puzzles. If that's true, this might be the bridge in the gap between Telltale's old and new direction that they (and we) have been looking for.
I really can't see it as optimistic:
So there essentially remains a way for the player to communicate his thoughts to the game, and there is a way for the game to evaluate and give feedback to this communication (again, both VERY important things in the adventure game), but there is no 'result' of that thinking process, nothing is 'solved' with the input the player gives to the game. Best case scenario, Wolf eventually finds out who the murderer is anyway and the player gets a pat on the back for having handed in his whodunit voting paper with the correct answer early. But, oh my, that would possibly be too judgemental of the game, wouldn't it?
Still, the departure from TWD's leftover puzzle mechanic shards must be embraced. You either try to do it right or not at all. I didn't bother 'fixing the swing' or 'getting the cookies', because this was obviously not what TWD was supposed to be good at.
I am skeptical of Telltale's claims. The "difficult choices" gimmick in TTG's manipulative and cheaply exploitative TWD was a sham because, almost no matter what choices you made, the game followed in the same, pre-determined direction.
With every new Telltale release there is less and less actual "game."
What disappoints me the most is how many in the gaming press have uncritically swallowed whole Telltale's talking point about how these kinds of interactive movies are the future of adventure gaming and that classic adventure gaming is the past. TTG promotes the self-serving notion that traditional adventure gaming is dead, and yet adventure game fans still continue to support the company and beg them to develop a LucasArts-style adventure, which TTG couldn't do well even if they wanted to.
I hate to say it, but Telltale Games is anything but a friend to the traditional adventure game community. It's not a company I have a lot of respect for. This interactive movie factory just piggybacks off the popularity of well-known franchises, and I wonder if this is the year we'll see original IP from them.
Telltale has not said what you're saying they're saying. They're saying it's the future for them. It's going where the money and fame has led them. Many, many people loved TWG because it let you make decisions that reflected you. Be a jackass and the relationships were damaged. Long term you could force Kenny to leave by being a jerk, or come to Ben's aid, a character he despised and a relationship that had grown since episode 3 with pure anger, and in the end redeem those two. You could determine whether Ben fell to his death and completely missed the culmination of that relationship entirely. While the overarching plot ends at the same place, the nuance and details of how it gets there change based on actions, and yeah that's a big deal. When you have people doing Let's Plays and crying because they're so invested in the game, yeah that's a big deal.
But there are plenty of places to go for point and click adventure games. I don't buy EA games because I don't like shooter games. I buy Telltale games because I like stories. I bought Last Door because I like point and click and horror. I'm going to buy Deponia because I think Daedalic makes decent adventure games.
When you and your friends played tag as kids, was it a game? Is tic tac toe a game? Is basketball a game? Wikipedia defines it as "structured playing, usually undertaken for enjoyment and sometimes used as an educational tool."
While I see that as a key problem of TWD, things are not as clear cut here.
If we define a game as an environment in which interactive elements are key, we would have to define 'choice' as an interactive element, but 'consequence' as an element that is passively experienced. So, by rendering more choice but less consequence to the player, wouldn't you actually make a game more interactive?
That is a bunch of gross and factually incorrect assumptions.
1) I don't see any company statement concerning the liveliness of the adventure game. Recent statements made explicit that Telltale is not about to return to traditional adventure game mechanics, but no disrespect was expressed with said statements.
2) Adventure game fans are rather torn concerning the new direction. I assure you that among the internet communities I am active in - in this respect, Telltale's forums and the German adventure-treff people - opinions differ GREATLY as to whether it's a valid path for adventure games to take. Like it or not, Telltale's 'new audience' contains far, far more traditional adventure game players than you'd ever admit.
3) Telltale designers have proven that they have a theoretical knowledge as well as a creative grasp of traditional adventure game mechanics as well as a profoundly expressed love for the genre. If they WANTED to, they could beat the LucasArts adventures of old in the ground by employing the same game philosophy. Heck, they could beat Fate of Atlantis hands down if they got the Indy license and were willing to really go for a similar kind of experience. That is, the fuck, the actual reason why the traditional adventure game fans would WANT Telltale and in fact, as you say, BEG them to do it!
4) Seizing on existing franchises is a wise business move on the one hand, but it has also become clear that Telltale is able to identify key concepts of said franchises and make a better story out of them. The Walking Dead was a franchise they, in my opinion, didn't even 'do justice'. They took the basic zombie story and inserted some decent fleshed out characters with actual backstories instead of the crap Robert Kirkman routinely treats his readers with. They surpassed the franchise (for which, granted, I don't have much love lost).
Y'know, I'm not sure about tag. It depends on how you play it. The other two are games by the definition I gave (they contain problems you are expected to solve, such as "how do I get this ball into that basket despite the fact that people are trying to stop me?") and in ways that TWD isn't. Anyway, I was talking about video games.
I don't mean to suggest that my definition of "game" should be everybody's. It's meaningful to me.