How about making the character stop for a second or so every time the angle changes? You could click the mouse button to keep moving immediately, or something like that.
Wouldn't have to be absolutely perfect, just an optional system.
You could also have the cursor be an arrow pointing away from the character. Clicking (and possibly holding) the mouse would move the character in the direction designated by the arrow. This way you could just keep the button pressed and move the mouse around, to keep the character moving.
You could also make the character adjust its speed by moving the cursor further away.
When you enter a new scene, or the angle changes, the character could stop and you'd have to press the mouse button again to make the character move further.
How about making the character stop for a second or so every time the angle changes? You could click the mouse button to keep moving immediately, or something like that.
A clunky workaround for what would be an already clunky control scheme.
Millions of people have been playing games using WASD for decades now and it has proven to be a satisfactory method for driving characters. I don't think that adding a control option that's far worse and more unintuitive than point-and-click or WASD would benefit anybody, including the handful of people who think they want it.
If there was a good alternative to keyboard control for driving characters around in games with 3rd person fixed cameras, it would be in widespread use.
How about the other idea then, click and hold the mouse button to move toward the cursor (that could be shaped as an arrow pointing in the direction you would move)? Doesn't seem clunky to me. This would allow you to still click on various hotspots as the character would not follow the mouse automatically.
Right click could be for running. Or if you want the right click for something else, right click while holding the left button down could be for running. I think it would be great, don't see why this would be so clunky.
...including the handful of people who think they want it.
So they only *think* they want it.
I'm sorry but that's condescending.
How about the other idea then, click and hold the mouse button to move toward the cursor (that could be shaped as an arrow pointing in the direction you would move)?
This scheme too has issues that make it undesirable.
Yes. If you've never played W&G with any of these novel control schemes you're suggesting, it follows that you don't have the necessary information to decide if any of them are preferable to the control scheme it shipped with.
Please keep control feedback limited to bugs or suggestions for the control scheme that shipped with W&G. I appreciate that the community is so interested in debating this topic, but I can assure you that everything mentioned in this thread and more was brought up long ago and discussed to death in control scheme meetings at work -and some were even prototyped. WASD won out for W&G.
Again, I'm sorry if you find the control scheme unsatisfactory. We have our reasons for using it in W&G and it's going to stay for the season.
//EDIT: I forgot, there's another thread that started about alternate control schemes. Feel free to continue speculation there.
There's really no way you can know whether 'this handful of people' only think they want mouse controls. There might very well be people that would like controls like that, even if the majority would not.
And I don't think the last suggestion was all that novel, I've played games with controls not too far from that. Granted, it would be difficult to make it intuitive in a game like this, but I'm not convinced it's impossible to make the game playable using some sort of mouse controls.
However, the controls as they are right now are definitely very good for keyboard controls, I like how you're still allowed to use the mouse to find hotspots and such. So for what it is, it's certainly a good system.
But alright, I'll shut up about this in this thread, then.
There's really no way you can know whether 'this handful of people' only think they want mouse controls.
I'm positive that a lot of people here would appreciate point-and-click. I'm also positive that the point-and-click alternatives that have been brought up here are not something that could ever be made intuitive enough to ship with a game with W&G's requirements. Not because they're bad ideas, but because there are actually only a couple control schemes that people can use comfortably and the kind of game we made excludes most of them.
Fact is I've never seen Taumel not disappointed of anything.
Who are you? Anyway fact is that you're wrong. For instance regarding TTG's adventures i was pretty much pleased with 204 and as speaking of Sam&Max, as Laserschwert pointed out already, most in there was fine, nicely working point&click, inuitive and fast accessible system menu, only the inventory could be done better in my opinion but overall it was all working.
If certain camera angles/positions force you to use alternative second class steering controls i would think about if i really need those. Are they the main contribution for driving the fun in the game or do we just want to get a bit more stylish? If this is the case i actually would call this a bad decision because it doesn't focus on what's important in such an adventure anymore.
So Fahrenheit for instance was nice to watch but really not to play.
I am not interested in playing WASD adventures because it never worked in a convincing way and we already have a better working wide spread alternative, the mouse. Actually i also don't play FPS games with WASD and instead use the mouse for movements (lmb=forward, rmb=backward) which is enough for beating single player games, multiplayer is a different story.
Back to the steering: If something like a floor you normally want to click on is hidden by objects you also could think of more intelligent mouse steering interpretations/gestures. An intuitive steering of a 3d character in a 3d environment needs other input possibilities such as multitouch or a wide spread 3d tracking solution but really not WASD as it's too limited. WASD limits your steering communication to a combination of four digital signals and i doubt that even if your putting a lot of effort into pseudo AI around it or unless you're keeping a scene really simple, it will turn into something good and even if it would, it might be questionable because you might have better put this effort into other aspects.
Imagine a situation were you could offer two new games which aren't known yet:
a) Wallace&Grommit, featuring fancy camera angles and WASD steering.
b) Monkey Island with old skool point&click but a great designed story, characters and riddles.
What do you think is the better game and which one drives you more sales?
You also can see it from the perspective that it's just another one of those bad console to computer conversion multiplatform issues. Annoying if you care about a certain type of game but sadly still common.
a) Wallace&Grommit, featuring fancy camera angles and WASD steering.
b) Monkey Island with old skool point&click but a great designed story, characters and riddles.
You conveniently forget that W&G is an IP owned by another company (Aardvark) who is adamant in keeping the original look and feel of the "claynimated" series. This means cinematic framing and a more person oriented approach (hence the WASD steering).
I really don't get the complaints. Telltale Games definitely have done their homework figuring out the best user interface. I can tell immediately that a point & click approach would be cumbersome at best ... and unplayable at worst.
A little more on-topic: although I did click once or twice on the ground (unavoidable after my S&M season marathons) I did find the WASD steering very comfortable. Yes, there were a couple of times it felt a bit wonky (mainly when the camera angles changed) but it never got it the way.
Keep up the good work ... looking forward to the next episode!
This has probably been mentioned in 9 pages, but I played with a gamepad and my one major complaint is that the Save/Load screen doesn't respond to gamepad input. The rest of the menu does.
Sorry for posting this twice, but only now I found this thread, and I think my post fits better here than this thread. Feel free to delete my original post.
Well, I bought the game, since I played through both Grim Fandango (me favourite) and Monkey Island 4 with absolutely no problems whatsoever apart from breaking three computers in frustration. On the fourth, I managed alright.
And while I do understand all these "camera limitations" and stuff, I sincerely hope you're telling the truth, and it had nothing to do with the xbox, or the playstation, or the master system, or something like that... if it DID, however... well, I gotta ask... are you turning into LucasArts? Or Metallica, or whatever? Turning your back on everything that made you AFTER you turned into something worth noticing?
Edit: Crap, Deja Vu. I just read this quote and you know what it reminds me of?
Quote:Originally Posted by [TTG] Yare
Also as our CEO mentioned in a recent interview, driving the characters around directly provides a more immersive experience than any sort of mouse movement could provide.
"The controls put you smack in Manny's world", or whatever similar sh*t LucasArts was spewing around at the time.
Why would you assume that there is some evil motivation behind this decision? Have you played our poker game? It's not an adventure and doesn't have point and click controls, but I think people still find it very entertaining and very "Telltale".
I could name countless examples of pure "point and click" games that are crap. The interface is only one of many factors to making a great game. We're certainly not changing our core values, and you'd be doing yourself a pretty big disservice to pack it up now!
Destructoid put up an interesting post about the keyboard vs. gamepad controls in Wallace & Gromit. Those who have played on the keyboard but haven't yet played with a gamepad may find it interesting.
What if we figured out a way for you guys to get a gamepad for super, super cheap? Would that be interesting to you?
I think that COULD be a nice idea (Sam & Max pad, anyone? ), but not the best.
I've just finished reading posts on some Italian forums and many players are disappointed with the direct control (I'm speaking as a witness, I'm not that shocked to mock up fake reactions ). They don't hate the game just for that, but they feel "betrayed", so to speak. I wouldn't ignore the reaction if I were you.
All in all, I think that different controls for different machines are the way to go. I know, it's more taxing, it's more expensive to pull off, it takes more time, yet... it's the way to go.
If there's one thing I liked of your games was the intuitive interaction. Direct control can be intuitive with a joypad, but it's not as intuitive on a keyboard. It would be intuitive if you just had to move Wallace & Gromit around without interacting with hotspots or your inventory. Unfortunately, you have to. Heck, it's a story game, after all. There's no more intuitive way to control this kind of game on the PC than p'n'c. You point 'n' click through Windows, point 'n' click through your browser, point 'n' click to open a media file... On the contrary, I agree that Xbox 360 users don't point 'n' click.
Expanding your particular story game in the console market is an important (and I would say "mandatory") step. But I really didn't see anything in the PC version of Fright of the Bumblebees to justify the direct control. I was open to embrace it, I even defended it beforehand, just because I thought it would bring something new to the interaction. Well, it didn't. Maybe the game IS more cinematic, but Sam & Max Seasons were already far more cinematic than the majority of contemporary adventure games.
Do I think the direct control in W&G works? I do, after all.
Do I think it's necessary in the PC version? I don't.
Why would you assume that there is some evil motivation behind this decision? Have you played our poker game? It's not an adventure and doesn't have point and click controls, but I think people still find it very entertaining and very "Telltale".
I could name countless examples of pure "point and click" games that are crap. The interface is only one of many factors to making a great game. We're certainly not changing our core values, and you'd be doing yourself a pretty big disservice to pack it up now!
Well, that sets my mind to some relief. It's NOT the controls, it's the change of focus I'm afraid of. To keep the ball in the same table, LucasArts changed the controls to try and reach for the console market, not because it was better. Thus crapping all over everything that made them and. And it only got worse over time, of course.
Moving on to that table over there, Revolution kept the same style, mostly, with a few minor experimentations. Crate moving sure was fun, for the first 30 seconds. However, people complained, they listened. And behold, crate moving was no more.
Moral? Well, you can't please everybody, but if most of your costumers complain about something - and now we're not necessarily talking about this control thingy subject, mind you - change that, or drop it. ESPECIALLY if, as in Telltale's case, you've got rabid fans who will buy everything you release - and now we're not necessarily talking about myself, though I do count myself as a fan - because they like the company even more than the games. Yes, your poker game is interesting, and Telltaley. So is Wallace & Gromit.
But we've - and here I believe can speak for more people than myself - seen so many changes over the years ending up in colossal piles of that smelly brown stuff that comes out of people's rear ends, that you really can't blame us for trembling in fear at any mention of any change.
Putting it bluntly and wrapping it up: Changes are a necessary evil, and there's always room for improvement. However, if you lose focus, you'll lose fans. If you don't, you won't. Change away, but keep pouring out AT LEAST the same quality you got us used to. And tell your CEO not to say things like that anymore. It's scary.
Destructoid put up an interesting post about the keyboard vs. gamepad controls in Wallace & Gromit. Those who have played on the keyboard but haven't yet played with a gamepad may find it interesting.
Yes, Grim Fandango could also be played on a gamepad. *shudders*
Still the best adventure game ever released. Imagine if they went with point & click.
I've just finished reading posts on some Italian forums and many players are disappointed with the direct control (I'm speaking as a witness, I'm not that shocked to mock up fake reactions ). They don't hate the game just for that, but they feel "betrayed", so to speak. I wouldn't ignore the reaction if I were you.
All in all, I think that different controls for different machines are the way to go. I know, it's more taxing, it's more expensive to pull off, it takes more time, yet... it's the way to go.
This is a good idea, from OUR point of view. I wouldn't suggest something like this, nor will I expand upon it, but I will quote it, much like flinging the hook with a tasty worm attached and lay down until something bites it or it's time to go home.
To keep the ball in the same table, LucasArts changed the controls to try and reach for the console market, not because it was better.
Grim Fandango was a PC-only game, so I'm kind of confused as to how you reached that conclusion. Unless there was some canceled console port that no one knows about? That's possible, I suppose. But I think the reason the Grim team went for the controls that they did was for the same reason Telltale's doing it now - freedom of composition, and the (theoretical) added immersion of actually driving your character. Whether or not you agree with its implementation it's pretty clear that the intention with Grim was to further strip away interface and put the player more "in" the game. (Notice how there is no text UI to speak of in Grim Fandango - no sentence line, no inventory box. Manny IS the interface.) Your idea that it was all just some cynical attempt to cash in on the console market might hold water if you had actual evidence to back it up.
I'm not sure how well or accurately this supposed trend can really be evaluated seeing as LucasArts only put out one more adventure game after Grim Fandango. So by "over time" you really just mean, "with Escape from Monkey Island." It's also worth noting that the canceled Sam & Max 2 was a return to a point 'n click interface.
that you really can't blame us for trembling in fear at any mention of any change.
You really can't blame me for trembling in fear whenever one of my fellow adventure gamers trembles in fear at any mention of the word "change," as though keeping adventure games exactly where they are is somehow a preferable scenario. If you think interface has anything to do with why the majority of adventure games suck, we're just gonna have to agree to disagree, suffice it to say that I think you're focusing on the wrong things.
Interface does matter a great deal in adventure games, though. When you change the interface, the gameplay soon changes as well. It often does, anyway.
I don't think it matters nearly as much as things like the game's story, writing, puzzle design, world... the things that actually and truly make an adventure game great and which are the areas where so many adventure games are lacking. Yet there's this implied belief that, no, it all just boils down to point 'n click versus direct control. If there was something truly horrible about the way Wallace & Gromit was handled it would be one thing, but that's clearly not the case.
As the person who actually implemented the controls in Grim (please don't throw things at me), I can assure you the move was not to cash in on the console market. I can tell you Tim was very passionate about moving the genre forward. He didn't want any UI on screen, and really wanted the game to feel like a movie. He absolutely did NOT want a cursor on screen, and it had nothing to do with consoles. It has to do with story telling, and when it comes to that, Tim's one of the best.
Grim Fandango was a PC-only game, so I'm kind of confused as to how you reached that conclusion. Unless there was some canceled console port that no one knows about? That's possible, I suppose. But I think the reason the Grim team went for the controls that they did was for the same reason Telltale's doing it now - freedom of composition, and the (theoretical) added immersion of actually driving your character. Whether or not you agree with its implementation it's pretty clear that the intention with Grim was to further strip away interface and put the player more "in" the game. (Notice how there is no text UI to speak of in Grim Fandango - no sentence line, no inventory box. Manny IS the interface.) Your idea that it was all just some cynical attempt to cash in on the console market might hold water if you had actual evidence to back it up.
You're right, of course. I should've mentioned Monkey 4. That's where it really started going downhill. I only mentioned Grim because it's my favorite adventure game despite its interface, and the first game that pops in my head when you add adventure games and keyboard. But yes, it was Monkey 4 that was designed for the playstation.
I'm not sure how well or accurately this supposed trend can really be evaluated seeing as LucasArts only put out one more adventure game after Grim Fandango. So by "over time" you really just mean, "with Escape from Monkey Island." It's also worth noting that the canceled Sam & Max 2 was a return to a point 'n click interface.
That's what I mean by "over time". One LAST adventure game. For years. And then the cancellation of TWO games that the fans were feverishly expecting. It does seem to me LucasArts got worse over time.
You really can't blame me for trembling in fear whenever one of my fellow adventure gamers trembles in fear at any mention of the word "change," as though keeping adventure games exactly where they are is somehow a preferable scenario. If you think interface has anything to do with why the majority of adventure games suck, we're just gonna have to agree to disagree, suffice it to say that I think you're focusing on the wrong things.
Changes are good when they're good. In my opinion, Telltale should've directed its efforts to change its puzzle tree - which in my opinion is getting a bit tiresome and repetitive - instead of controls that were proven to be good, and which, I may add, brought alot of fans to Telltale. I seem to remember that they used the same pitch LucasArts did with Sam & Max 2. Sam & Max are back in 3D point n' click. Or maybe I'm confused? Who knows?
But, like I said, it isn't the controls themselves. It's just what might come after. Who knows? Maybe Telltale will improve, maybe they'll pull a LucasArts. Right now, all we know is they chose to implement controls which have caused lots of grief in the past for adventure gamers and are causing at least some grief now, and not only to me. We can, of course, agree to disagree, and that is many times the best solution. Each is entitled to his/her own opinion and ar*ehole.
However, forgive me for being a pessimist, but I'm pretty sure I'll live longer that way. Less disappointments, and all.
As the person who actually implemented the controls in Grim (please don't throw things at me), I can assure you the move was not to cash in on the console market. I can tell you Tim was very passionate about moving the genre forward. He didn't want any UI on screen, and really wanted the game to feel like a movie. He absolutely did NOT want a cursor on screen, and it had nothing to do with consoles. It has to do with story telling, and when it comes to that, Tim's one of the best.
You're right, Tim's the best when it comes to storytelling. I can't repeat this enough: Grim Fandango is the best adventure game I ever played. Because of the story.
However, the controls were proven to be disastrous. Don't take this personal, I'm not one to tell you how you should do your job, and it doesn't really matter to me if you did them by yourself or if you were told to do them. But it did cause a lot of grief.
Again, don't take this personal. It doesn't matter how good you are at something, you will never score 20/20. Everyone fails. What 's important is learning from mistakes - yours and others - and not insisting on them.
And again, I find myself walking out of the screen when I want to go the other way. It's frustrating.
Trust me, over the past 10 years I've heard all the complaints about the Grim controls, but I think there was a lot to be learned from them. I absolutely think Grim would not have been a special as it was if it had been point and click.
I don't think the controls were disastrous, Grim is still one of the most beloved games in spite of them. However, I do think a general lack of innovation has been disastrous for adventure gaming, which is why legends like Tim are moving away from the genre.
My take away is simply nothing ventured, nothing gained, and I think there's a lot left to be gained when it comes to story gaming! Someone's got to be willing to test out new ideas!
I dunno, Kev... you, as a programmer, insist these controls are good. I, as a user, say they're crap. I know what I can do, and you know what you can do. And I mean business-like. Again, let's not take this to a personal level or double-entendres. Anyway, I don't think there's more to be said regarding this subject, really.
Good one about the warts and experimentation. Which leads me to stray from the topic to a way more important one. Can we expect to see any more very hidden intercourse jokes like the Miss Uranus watchamacallit thingy that beauty pageant contestants wear around themselves in said pageants - I'm sorry, I'm Portuguese, can't speak a word of this Ingrish crap - in Sam & Max's office in Episode 204, if memory doesn't fail me?
Then of course, there's also the very memorable joke about the envelope not being the only thing the president licked.
You're right, of course. I should've mentioned Monkey 4. That's where it really started going downhill. I only mentioned Grim because it's my favorite adventure game despite its interface, and the first game that pops in my head when you add adventure games and keyboard. But yes, it was Monkey 4 that was designed for the playstation.
I think the portion I highlighted is probably the most important thing out of this whole discussion.
That's what I mean by "over time". One LAST adventure game. For years. And then the cancellation of TWO games that the fans were feverishly expecting. It does seem to me LucasArts got worse over time.
Well, okay, but...you insinuated that it all stemmed from an interface change. Obviously the cancellation of Full Throttle 2 and Sam & Max 2 had nothing to do with what you're talking about.
Changes are good when they're good. In my opinion, Telltale should've directed its efforts to change its puzzle tree - which in my opinion is getting a bit tiresome and repetitive - instead of controls that were proven to be good, and which, I may add, brought alot of fans to Telltale. I seem to remember that they used the same pitch LucasArts did with Sam & Max 2. Sam & Max are back in 3D point n' click. Or maybe I'm confused? Who knows?
But what it still sounds like, and forgive me if I come across as harsh (I'm not totally unsympathetic to your opinion), is that you're just adverse to change. That changing up the control mechanics is inherently bad because it's change from "controls that were proven to be good," not because there's an actual problem (or at least, an insurmountable one) with the new controls. Is point 'n click "right" simply because it's a good mechanic that the majority of adventure games have been using for twenty years, or because they're literally the only correct way for a player to interact with an adventure game?
But, like I said, it isn't the controls themselves. It's just what might come after. Who knows? Maybe Telltale will improve, maybe they'll pull a LucasArts.
I don't understand what you're trying to say with this. It's like you're trying to tie in controls with some overarching attitude that a company has toward story games. It doesn't make a lick of sense. What, if LEC had just didn't fix what wasn't broken and kept everything point 'n click, they wouldn't have ventured away from adventure games? That's, of course, insane. So I'm curious if you could elaborate a bit on this worst case scenario for Telltale that W&Gs controls may lead to in your mind.
Right now, all we know is they chose to implement controls which have caused lots of grief in the past for adventure gamers and are causing at least some grief now, and not only to me. We can, of course, agree to disagree, and that is many times the best solution. Each is entitled to his/her own opinion and ar*ehole.
Is there any adventure game with the exact same controls as Wallace & Gromit (which is a mixture between direct control and point 'n click) that you can point to and compare reception, or are you just trying to rail against direct control in general? A lot of people complained about Grim's controls - some of it was legitimate (the elevator issues), but I think most of it was just the fact that the game was daring to change the control mechanic from the same general one that had been used since 1987. People's "grief" with Grim Fandango obviously didn't stop some of them, including yourself, to hold it as the greatest adventure game of all time. If direct control isn't enough to prevent an adventure game from being the greatest of all time, you have to wonder how much a person shouldn't really worry about it, or if 10 page threads devoted to the subject comes from a genuine concern about a game's quality and not simply a concern about messing with tradition.
I think the portion I highlighted is probably the most important thing out of this whole discussion.
It might be. If by the end of the series Wllace & Gromit prove to be really good, storywise, then the controls will have become e minor nuisance by then. However, due to the same Telltale puzzle tree and story arch that we're more than used to, it's feeling like every Telltale's Sam & Max game, only with different characters and worse controls. And that's bad. THAT is where the effort should've gone too. A different way to solve puzzles and to tell the story.
Don't ask me how. If I knew how, I'd be MAKING games, not playing them. I just know it can be done, i.e. LucasArts games were different from each other, from Sierra's, that were different from Revolution's, which were different from the Discworlds, etc.
Is point 'n click "right" simply because it's a good mechanic that the majority of adventure games have been using for twenty years, or because they're literally the only correct way for a player to interact with an adventure game?
They're right exactly because noone complained about them in 20 years. And people didn't stop playing adventure games because they didn't eveolve. They stopped playing them becauseost people didn't have the patience to finish ONE, let alone buy another.
Well, okay, but...you insinuated that it all stemmed from an interface change. Obviously the cancellation of Full Throttle 2 and Sam & Max 2 had nothing to do with what you're talking about.
I don't understand what you're trying to say with this. It's like you're trying to tie in controls with some overarching attitude that a company has toward story games. It doesn't make a lick of sense. What, if LEC had just didn't fix what wasn't broken and kept everything point 'n click, they wouldn't have ventured away from adventure games? That's, of course, insane. So I'm curious if you could elaborate a bit on this worst case scenario for Telltale that W&Gs controls may lead to in your mind.
I'm just seeing a pattern here, man. The man is out there, man. He's out to get us, man. He's an evil man, man.
If direct control isn't enough to prevent an adventure game from being the greatest of all time, you have to wonder how much a person shouldn't really worry about it, or if 10 page threads devoted to the subject comes from a genuine concern about a game's quality and not simply a concern about messing with tradition.
I can tell you Tim was very passionate about moving the genre forward. He didn't want any UI on screen, and really wanted the game to feel like a movie. He absolutely did NOT want a cursor on screen, and it had nothing to do with consoles. It has to do with story telling, and when it comes to that, Tim's one of the best.
It would be very interesting to hear a bit more about that, if you have the time. I started replaying Grim Fandango like a week ago - the controls just felt awful at first, but after mere 5-10 minutes, I had no problems with them (apart from hitting the wall at times when trying to enter the elevator, which is quite fitting to Manny's character, actually ), BUT! after reaching like half of the first year, I really don't see why it couldn't be point-and-click - to me, the Sam & Max games feel quite movie-like.
I understand the drive for innovation, but innovation for innovation's sake is not necessarily good. If you can share further details about the philosophy behind the control decisions in Grim, it would be very nice to read!
And, on a sidenote, now I can't get the gamepad idea from my head
Someone's got to be willing to test out new ideas!
I am!
When you modified the point 'n' click interface with a "single-click system" and no inventory combinations for the Sam & Max Seasons I had no problem at all. It was a great idea to streamline the experience. Episodic gaming? I like it. Not-so-hard puzzles? I like them.
And I'm talking about your most powerful AND effective innovations. Whenever you proposed a drastic change in tradition I've always been curious to know what you had been cooking. That's the reason I love Telltale. I think Strong Bad was a unique experiment in mixing the Wii-casual-game style with a classic PC adventure gaming approach.
The problem with W&G is that this time the change is purely visual. I agree with the idea that good games aren't defined by their interface. What we have here? A direct control interface applied to a point 'n' click adventure game.
Tim made sure that at least 1/3 of the Grim puzzles were unconceivable in a point 'n' click interface. He managed to make the change necessary in the game-design.
I AM open to changes, but I like them when they're justified. You've always managed to justify them in the past, do that again. I played Crackpot's Insecticide and the multiple-type interactions didn't bother me, because the game was SO different from other things I tried... I just stopped worrying. I wouldn't even imagine Insecticide as a normal point'n'click.
I won't ask to ditch the direct control. I am asking for a different thing: justify the choice. "A more cinematic experience" doesn't sound a very strong reason to me. Time to change the game design too (the Insecticide one didn't work perfectly, though).
That is one of the major problem with many game companies today "Quote Playing a movie" i wanna play a game, not a movie, ergo no black bars, no other wierd stuff, Gaaaaammmmeeee not movie.
But yeah i also hope they change the puzzle structure og Sam & max, that is one of the best parts of episodic content, it gets old fast. it should feel like you are doing 3 puzzle and then the end, the goal should be to make it feel like one big puzzle. Just in the Scumm games.
And if you wanna improve, fine, improve point and click, get back the cursor from Sam & Max hits the road, where you right left and it changes, so you look at, uses, and so forth, that was very neat, also the ability to combine items. Improve there instead, of using keyboard, which again surves no purpose, when there are so many better things to improve.
Tim made sure that at least 1/3 of the Grim puzzles were unconceivable in a point 'n' click interface. He managed to make the change necessary in the game-design.
I can assure you, Tim didn't make sure 1/3 of the puzzles were unconceivable in a point 'n' click interface. He had no such agenda about changing the interface so he could make puzzles that weren't possible with point 'n' click. He was passionate about "no interface".
While developing Grim, most people played using the number pad, and I still think this is the best way to play that game. You can play W&G entirely with the number pad (or WASD if your left handed). We even considered the idea of cutting the mouse from W&G since "keyboard only" felt better for a loooong time (obviously we didn't go that route, but it demonstrates how "open minded" we can be). But Robert ([TTG] Yare) really dug in to make sure the controls worked for as many people as possible.
Plus, if you haven't played it on a gamepad, you're missing a huge aspect of it. In the real world, dramatically more people play games on a game pad on a console (myself included). There's no reason not to try to make a game that works in that context as well as PC. I would have LOVED to play Grim on a big screen with a nice home theater. That would have rocked!
Considering my keyboard set-up, I'm gad a pointer was added. The mouse controls for the inventory really are the most comfortable for me. Using WASD to move and the mouse to select/manipulat inventory has become my default control method for W&G, and it's the one that feels the most "right".
Let me try and understand this. Is the philosophy behind something like the following?
An interface, while facilitates communication and interaction, also acts as a barrier, dividing the world into two parts, "you" and the "other side". By getting rid of the interface, you can act more like you're part of the other side, and not a simple spectator / commander.
Sorry if it sounds lame - it's much clearer in my head
Plus, if you haven't played it on a gamepad, you're missing a huge aspect of it. In the real world, dramatically more people play games on a game pad on a console (myself included).
I like the fact that you're so passionate about this.
Thanks for the clarification on Tim's attitude towards Grim.
I live in the real world too, I own a PS2 and I use it.
I have no doubt that the W&G interface works better with a gamepad (as a matter of fact, I even decided to ignore the mouse when I was playing, I went with the cursor keys/Q-E combination). You have to consider that not everyone will buy a joypad just to play Telltale games.
But I'll do that, because I don't want to lose the experience. To tell the truth, I had decided to buy one as soon as I realized you were going that way.
Speaking of which, the idea of an affordable gamepad (e.g. in a special offer through the shop) could be a nice idea. I don't think it will work for everyone, but it's worth a try.
Just remember to work on refreshing the find-three-items formula.
Oh, and I wouldn't say no to a cheap gamepad. I'm not completely sure if the gamepad experience, but there is a price for everything and I might bite at the right cost.
Do you think it could be possible to implement a character-relative control as an alternative option to camera-relative control? I tried to play Grim Fandango in both modes and I discovered that the first was more comfortable with a keyboard, while the second suited best my old (now broken) gamepad.
Comments
Wouldn't have to be absolutely perfect, just an optional system.
You could also have the cursor be an arrow pointing away from the character. Clicking (and possibly holding) the mouse would move the character in the direction designated by the arrow. This way you could just keep the button pressed and move the mouse around, to keep the character moving.
You could also make the character adjust its speed by moving the cursor further away.
When you enter a new scene, or the angle changes, the character could stop and you'd have to press the mouse button again to make the character move further.
A clunky workaround for what would be an already clunky control scheme.
Millions of people have been playing games using WASD for decades now and it has proven to be a satisfactory method for driving characters. I don't think that adding a control option that's far worse and more unintuitive than point-and-click or WASD would benefit anybody, including the handful of people who think they want it.
If there was a good alternative to keyboard control for driving characters around in games with 3rd person fixed cameras, it would be in widespread use.
Right click could be for running. Or if you want the right click for something else, right click while holding the left button down could be for running. I think it would be great, don't see why this would be so clunky.
So they only *think* they want it.
I'm sorry but that's condescending.
This scheme too has issues that make it undesirable.
Yes. If you've never played W&G with any of these novel control schemes you're suggesting, it follows that you don't have the necessary information to decide if any of them are preferable to the control scheme it shipped with.
Please keep control feedback limited to bugs or suggestions for the control scheme that shipped with W&G. I appreciate that the community is so interested in debating this topic, but I can assure you that everything mentioned in this thread and more was brought up long ago and discussed to death in control scheme meetings at work -and some were even prototyped. WASD won out for W&G.
Again, I'm sorry if you find the control scheme unsatisfactory. We have our reasons for using it in W&G and it's going to stay for the season.
//EDIT: I forgot, there's another thread that started about alternate control schemes. Feel free to continue speculation there.
And I don't think the last suggestion was all that novel, I've played games with controls not too far from that. Granted, it would be difficult to make it intuitive in a game like this, but I'm not convinced it's impossible to make the game playable using some sort of mouse controls.
However, the controls as they are right now are definitely very good for keyboard controls, I like how you're still allowed to use the mouse to find hotspots and such. So for what it is, it's certainly a good system.
But alright, I'll shut up about this in this thread, then.
I'm positive that a lot of people here would appreciate point-and-click. I'm also positive that the point-and-click alternatives that have been brought up here are not something that could ever be made intuitive enough to ship with a game with W&G's requirements. Not because they're bad ideas, but because there are actually only a couple control schemes that people can use comfortably and the kind of game we made excludes most of them.
Who are you? Anyway fact is that you're wrong. For instance regarding TTG's adventures i was pretty much pleased with 204 and as speaking of Sam&Max, as Laserschwert pointed out already, most in there was fine, nicely working point&click, inuitive and fast accessible system menu, only the inventory could be done better in my opinion but overall it was all working.
If certain camera angles/positions force you to use alternative second class steering controls i would think about if i really need those. Are they the main contribution for driving the fun in the game or do we just want to get a bit more stylish? If this is the case i actually would call this a bad decision because it doesn't focus on what's important in such an adventure anymore.
So Fahrenheit for instance was nice to watch but really not to play.
I am not interested in playing WASD adventures because it never worked in a convincing way and we already have a better working wide spread alternative, the mouse. Actually i also don't play FPS games with WASD and instead use the mouse for movements (lmb=forward, rmb=backward) which is enough for beating single player games, multiplayer is a different story.
Back to the steering: If something like a floor you normally want to click on is hidden by objects you also could think of more intelligent mouse steering interpretations/gestures. An intuitive steering of a 3d character in a 3d environment needs other input possibilities such as multitouch or a wide spread 3d tracking solution but really not WASD as it's too limited. WASD limits your steering communication to a combination of four digital signals and i doubt that even if your putting a lot of effort into pseudo AI around it or unless you're keeping a scene really simple, it will turn into something good and even if it would, it might be questionable because you might have better put this effort into other aspects.
Imagine a situation were you could offer two new games which aren't known yet:
a) Wallace&Grommit, featuring fancy camera angles and WASD steering.
b) Monkey Island with old skool point&click but a great designed story, characters and riddles.
What do you think is the better game and which one drives you more sales?
You also can see it from the perspective that it's just another one of those bad console to computer conversion multiplatform issues. Annoying if you care about a certain type of game but sadly still common.
You conveniently forget that W&G is an IP owned by another company (Aardvark) who is adamant in keeping the original look and feel of the "claynimated" series. This means cinematic framing and a more person oriented approach (hence the WASD steering).
I really don't get the complaints. Telltale Games definitely have done their homework figuring out the best user interface. I can tell immediately that a point & click approach would be cumbersome at best ... and unplayable at worst.
A little more on-topic: although I did click once or twice on the ground (unavoidable after my S&M season marathons) I did find the WASD steering very comfortable. Yes, there were a couple of times it felt a bit wonky (mainly when the camera angles changed) but it never got it the way.
Keep up the good work ... looking forward to the next episode!
Well, I bought the game, since I played through both Grim Fandango (me favourite) and Monkey Island 4 with absolutely no problems whatsoever apart from breaking three computers in frustration. On the fourth, I managed alright.
And while I do understand all these "camera limitations" and stuff, I sincerely hope you're telling the truth, and it had nothing to do with the xbox, or the playstation, or the master system, or something like that... if it DID, however... well, I gotta ask... are you turning into LucasArts? Or Metallica, or whatever? Turning your back on everything that made you AFTER you turned into something worth noticing?
Edit: Crap, Deja Vu. I just read this quote and you know what it reminds me of?
Quote:Originally Posted by [TTG] Yare
Also as our CEO mentioned in a recent interview, driving the characters around directly provides a more immersive experience than any sort of mouse movement could provide.
"The controls put you smack in Manny's world", or whatever similar sh*t LucasArts was spewing around at the time.
I'm packing my bags, just in case.
I could name countless examples of pure "point and click" games that are crap. The interface is only one of many factors to making a great game. We're certainly not changing our core values, and you'd be doing yourself a pretty big disservice to pack it up now!
I think that COULD be a nice idea (Sam & Max pad, anyone?
I've just finished reading posts on some Italian forums and many players are disappointed with the direct control (I'm speaking as a witness, I'm not that shocked to mock up fake reactions
All in all, I think that different controls for different machines are the way to go. I know, it's more taxing, it's more expensive to pull off, it takes more time, yet... it's the way to go.
If there's one thing I liked of your games was the intuitive interaction. Direct control can be intuitive with a joypad, but it's not as intuitive on a keyboard. It would be intuitive if you just had to move Wallace & Gromit around without interacting with hotspots or your inventory. Unfortunately, you have to. Heck, it's a story game, after all. There's no more intuitive way to control this kind of game on the PC than p'n'c. You point 'n' click through Windows, point 'n' click through your browser, point 'n' click to open a media file... On the contrary, I agree that Xbox 360 users don't point 'n' click.
Expanding your particular story game in the console market is an important (and I would say "mandatory") step. But I really didn't see anything in the PC version of Fright of the Bumblebees to justify the direct control. I was open to embrace it, I even defended it beforehand, just because I thought it would bring something new to the interaction. Well, it didn't. Maybe the game IS more cinematic, but Sam & Max Seasons were already far more cinematic than the majority of contemporary adventure games.
Do I think the direct control in W&G works? I do, after all.
Do I think it's necessary in the PC version? I don't.
Well, that sets my mind to some relief. It's NOT the controls, it's the change of focus I'm afraid of. To keep the ball in the same table, LucasArts changed the controls to try and reach for the console market, not because it was better. Thus crapping all over everything that made them and. And it only got worse over time, of course.
Moving on to that table over there, Revolution kept the same style, mostly, with a few minor experimentations. Crate moving sure was fun, for the first 30 seconds. However, people complained, they listened. And behold, crate moving was no more.
Moral? Well, you can't please everybody, but if most of your costumers complain about something - and now we're not necessarily talking about this control thingy subject, mind you - change that, or drop it. ESPECIALLY if, as in Telltale's case, you've got rabid fans who will buy everything you release - and now we're not necessarily talking about myself, though I do count myself as a fan - because they like the company even more than the games. Yes, your poker game is interesting, and Telltaley. So is Wallace & Gromit.
But we've - and here I believe can speak for more people than myself - seen so many changes over the years ending up in colossal piles of that smelly brown stuff that comes out of people's rear ends, that you really can't blame us for trembling in fear at any mention of any change.
Putting it bluntly and wrapping it up: Changes are a necessary evil, and there's always room for improvement. However, if you lose focus, you'll lose fans. If you don't, you won't. Change away, but keep pouring out AT LEAST the same quality you got us used to. And tell your CEO not to say things like that anymore. It's scary.
Don't post things like that. People might think you're serious.
Yes, Grim Fandango could also be played on a gamepad. *shudders*
Still the best adventure game ever released. Imagine if they went with point & click.
Case in point. Thank you, Diduz.
This is a good idea, from OUR point of view. I wouldn't suggest something like this, nor will I expand upon it, but I will quote it, much like flinging the hook with a tasty worm attached and lay down until something bites it or it's time to go home.
Then I'd say your a LIAR!!!!!! no, but really, that sounds primo
Grim Fandango was a PC-only game, so I'm kind of confused as to how you reached that conclusion. Unless there was some canceled console port that no one knows about? That's possible, I suppose. But I think the reason the Grim team went for the controls that they did was for the same reason Telltale's doing it now - freedom of composition, and the (theoretical) added immersion of actually driving your character. Whether or not you agree with its implementation it's pretty clear that the intention with Grim was to further strip away interface and put the player more "in" the game. (Notice how there is no text UI to speak of in Grim Fandango - no sentence line, no inventory box. Manny IS the interface.) Your idea that it was all just some cynical attempt to cash in on the console market might hold water if you had actual evidence to back it up.
I'm not sure how well or accurately this supposed trend can really be evaluated seeing as LucasArts only put out one more adventure game after Grim Fandango. So by "over time" you really just mean, "with Escape from Monkey Island." It's also worth noting that the canceled Sam & Max 2 was a return to a point 'n click interface.
You really can't blame me for trembling in fear whenever one of my fellow adventure gamers trembles in fear at any mention of the word "change," as though keeping adventure games exactly where they are is somehow a preferable scenario. If you think interface has anything to do with why the majority of adventure games suck, we're just gonna have to agree to disagree, suffice it to say that I think you're focusing on the wrong things.
You're right, of course. I should've mentioned Monkey 4. That's where it really started going downhill. I only mentioned Grim because it's my favorite adventure game despite its interface, and the first game that pops in my head when you add adventure games and keyboard. But yes, it was Monkey 4 that was designed for the playstation.
That's what I mean by "over time". One LAST adventure game. For years. And then the cancellation of TWO games that the fans were feverishly expecting. It does seem to me LucasArts got worse over time.
Changes are good when they're good. In my opinion, Telltale should've directed its efforts to change its puzzle tree - which in my opinion is getting a bit tiresome and repetitive - instead of controls that were proven to be good, and which, I may add, brought alot of fans to Telltale. I seem to remember that they used the same pitch LucasArts did with Sam & Max 2. Sam & Max are back in 3D point n' click. Or maybe I'm confused? Who knows?
But, like I said, it isn't the controls themselves. It's just what might come after. Who knows? Maybe Telltale will improve, maybe they'll pull a LucasArts. Right now, all we know is they chose to implement controls which have caused lots of grief in the past for adventure gamers and are causing at least some grief now, and not only to me. We can, of course, agree to disagree, and that is many times the best solution. Each is entitled to his/her own opinion and ar*ehole.
However, forgive me for being a pessimist, but I'm pretty sure I'll live longer that way. Less disappointments, and all.
Cheers!
You're right, Tim's the best when it comes to storytelling. I can't repeat this enough: Grim Fandango is the best adventure game I ever played. Because of the story.
However, the controls were proven to be disastrous. Don't take this personal, I'm not one to tell you how you should do your job, and it doesn't really matter to me if you did them by yourself or if you were told to do them. But it did cause a lot of grief.
Again, don't take this personal. It doesn't matter how good you are at something, you will never score 20/20. Everyone fails. What 's important is learning from mistakes - yours and others - and not insisting on them.
And again, I find myself walking out of the screen when I want to go the other way. It's frustrating.
I don't think the controls were disastrous, Grim is still one of the most beloved games in spite of them. However, I do think a general lack of innovation has been disastrous for adventure gaming, which is why legends like Tim are moving away from the genre.
My take away is simply nothing ventured, nothing gained, and I think there's a lot left to be gained when it comes to story gaming! Someone's got to be willing to test out new ideas!
I've never insisted the controls are good (or bad), just that innovation and experimentation are a neccesisty (warts and all...).
Then of course, there's also the very memorable joke about the envelope not being the only thing the president licked.
I think the portion I highlighted is probably the most important thing out of this whole discussion.
Well, okay, but...you insinuated that it all stemmed from an interface change. Obviously the cancellation of Full Throttle 2 and Sam & Max 2 had nothing to do with what you're talking about.
But what it still sounds like, and forgive me if I come across as harsh (I'm not totally unsympathetic to your opinion), is that you're just adverse to change. That changing up the control mechanics is inherently bad because it's change from "controls that were proven to be good," not because there's an actual problem (or at least, an insurmountable one) with the new controls. Is point 'n click "right" simply because it's a good mechanic that the majority of adventure games have been using for twenty years, or because they're literally the only correct way for a player to interact with an adventure game?
I don't understand what you're trying to say with this. It's like you're trying to tie in controls with some overarching attitude that a company has toward story games. It doesn't make a lick of sense. What, if LEC had just didn't fix what wasn't broken and kept everything point 'n click, they wouldn't have ventured away from adventure games? That's, of course, insane. So I'm curious if you could elaborate a bit on this worst case scenario for Telltale that W&Gs controls may lead to in your mind.
Is there any adventure game with the exact same controls as Wallace & Gromit (which is a mixture between direct control and point 'n click) that you can point to and compare reception, or are you just trying to rail against direct control in general? A lot of people complained about Grim's controls - some of it was legitimate (the elevator issues), but I think most of it was just the fact that the game was daring to change the control mechanic from the same general one that had been used since 1987. People's "grief" with Grim Fandango obviously didn't stop some of them, including yourself, to hold it as the greatest adventure game of all time. If direct control isn't enough to prevent an adventure game from being the greatest of all time, you have to wonder how much a person shouldn't really worry about it, or if 10 page threads devoted to the subject comes from a genuine concern about a game's quality and not simply a concern about messing with tradition.
It might be. If by the end of the series Wllace & Gromit prove to be really good, storywise, then the controls will have become e minor nuisance by then. However, due to the same Telltale puzzle tree and story arch that we're more than used to, it's feeling like every Telltale's Sam & Max game, only with different characters and worse controls. And that's bad. THAT is where the effort should've gone too. A different way to solve puzzles and to tell the story.
Don't ask me how. If I knew how, I'd be MAKING games, not playing them. I just know it can be done, i.e. LucasArts games were different from each other, from Sierra's, that were different from Revolution's, which were different from the Discworlds, etc.
They're right exactly because noone complained about them in 20 years. And people didn't stop playing adventure games because they didn't eveolve. They stopped playing them becauseost people didn't have the patience to finish ONE, let alone buy another.
I'm just seeing a pattern here, man. The man is out there, man. He's out to get us, man. He's an evil man, man.
In all seriousness, again, I'm a pessimist.
Hey, I only started on page 9.
Cheers!
Now, that's an interesting turn of events in this thread
It would be very interesting to hear a bit more about that, if you have the time. I started replaying Grim Fandango like a week ago - the controls just felt awful at first, but after mere 5-10 minutes, I had no problems with them (apart from hitting the wall at times when trying to enter the elevator, which is quite fitting to Manny's character, actually
I understand the drive for innovation, but innovation for innovation's sake is not necessarily good. If you can share further details about the philosophy behind the control decisions in Grim, it would be very nice to read!
And, on a sidenote, now I can't get the gamepad idea from my head
I am!
When you modified the point 'n' click interface with a "single-click system" and no inventory combinations for the Sam & Max Seasons I had no problem at all. It was a great idea to streamline the experience. Episodic gaming? I like it. Not-so-hard puzzles? I like them.
And I'm talking about your most powerful AND effective innovations. Whenever you proposed a drastic change in tradition I've always been curious to know what you had been cooking. That's the reason I love Telltale. I think Strong Bad was a unique experiment in mixing the Wii-casual-game style with a classic PC adventure gaming approach.
The problem with W&G is that this time the change is purely visual. I agree with the idea that good games aren't defined by their interface. What we have here? A direct control interface applied to a point 'n' click adventure game.
Tim made sure that at least 1/3 of the Grim puzzles were unconceivable in a point 'n' click interface. He managed to make the change necessary in the game-design.
I AM open to changes, but I like them when they're justified. You've always managed to justify them in the past, do that again. I played Crackpot's Insecticide and the multiple-type interactions didn't bother me, because the game was SO different from other things I tried... I just stopped worrying. I wouldn't even imagine Insecticide as a normal point'n'click.
I won't ask to ditch the direct control. I am asking for a different thing: justify the choice. "A more cinematic experience" doesn't sound a very strong reason to me. Time to change the game design too (the Insecticide one didn't work perfectly, though).
But yeah i also hope they change the puzzle structure og Sam & max, that is one of the best parts of episodic content, it gets old fast. it should feel like you are doing 3 puzzle and then the end, the goal should be to make it feel like one big puzzle. Just in the Scumm games.
And if you wanna improve, fine, improve point and click, get back the cursor from Sam & Max hits the road, where you right left and it changes, so you look at, uses, and so forth, that was very neat, also the ability to combine items. Improve there instead, of using keyboard, which again surves no purpose, when there are so many better things to improve.
I can assure you, Tim didn't make sure 1/3 of the puzzles were unconceivable in a point 'n' click interface. He had no such agenda about changing the interface so he could make puzzles that weren't possible with point 'n' click. He was passionate about "no interface".
While developing Grim, most people played using the number pad, and I still think this is the best way to play that game. You can play W&G entirely with the number pad (or WASD if your left handed). We even considered the idea of cutting the mouse from W&G since "keyboard only" felt better for a loooong time (obviously we didn't go that route, but it demonstrates how "open minded" we can be). But Robert ([TTG] Yare) really dug in to make sure the controls worked for as many people as possible.
Plus, if you haven't played it on a gamepad, you're missing a huge aspect of it. In the real world, dramatically more people play games on a game pad on a console (myself included). There's no reason not to try to make a game that works in that context as well as PC. I would have LOVED to play Grim on a big screen with a nice home theater. That would have rocked!
Let me try and understand this. Is the philosophy behind something like the following?
An interface, while facilitates communication and interaction, also acts as a barrier, dividing the world into two parts, "you" and the "other side". By getting rid of the interface, you can act more like you're part of the other side, and not a simple spectator / commander.
Sorry if it sounds lame - it's much clearer in my head
I like the fact that you're so passionate about this.
Thanks for the clarification on Tim's attitude towards Grim.
I live in the real world too, I own a PS2 and I use it.
I have no doubt that the W&G interface works better with a gamepad (as a matter of fact, I even decided to ignore the mouse when I was playing, I went with the cursor keys/Q-E combination). You have to consider that not everyone will buy a joypad just to play Telltale games.
But I'll do that, because I don't want to lose the experience. To tell the truth, I had decided to buy one as soon as I realized you were going that way.
Speaking of which, the idea of an affordable gamepad (e.g. in a special offer through the shop) could be a nice idea. I don't think it will work for everyone, but it's worth a try.
Just remember to work on refreshing the find-three-items formula.
Heard loud and clear!
LOL, ok. I'll shut up about that.
Do you think it could be possible to implement a character-relative control as an alternative option to camera-relative control? I tried to play Grim Fandango in both modes and I discovered that the first was more comfortable with a keyboard, while the second suited best my old (now broken) gamepad.