Trying to please everyone with material that shouldn't have been used in the ending.
Huh? The original ending was there and satisfied their "artistic integrity" Those was the words used back then, which led to a lot of this:
The extended cut was not perfect, but I'm glad that it violated their artistic bullshit, back in the day. The game was somewhat better for it. Anyway, that's ancient history. (RIP)
I get what you are saying, but I see no innovation here. I respect the decision of having Clem as a protagonist, that's new for sure, but other aspects of the game are far from innovated in my eyes, and others. If anything, this season is a de-evolution in many aspects.
What was the innovation? Clementine and a more branching story? Well the first has not worked as well as she could because her relationship with the cast does not go beyond the basic needed to not call them one dimensional and stops there. There is no feedback to your choices or attitudes towards them and the situations they face. (?) X will remember that is just for show this time around, and no, it was not like that last time.
Then there is the controversial aspect of length. 'Tis more of a content issue, really. Despite my gripes with it (more of gripes with how the overall season was going) I can swallow my pride and say that A House Divided did very good and had enough content. I would have liked to see some things from the premiere resolved or explored upon, but really, it was ok.
It seems an arbitrary limit now, however; 90 minutes to tell a story like the Howe's community arc that could have benefited from more content and time pored into it, and thus, the length that many are asking for would almost for sure come naturally.
It is not so much as blindly asking for more length for the sake of length, but to spend more time on the strengths of the IP, which are the characters and their interactions. I have very little problems with the overall plot so far, and last episode's finale was done great, I can see why some put it as their favorite episode. I do have a problem with our cast, a little bit with our protagonist (more with the handling and writing) and very much with the on-rails feel this time around.
Well done hubs are, as I have said before, an useful tool for the exploration of the cast and the development of the protagonist by receiving feedback on the current situation and your stance towards it as well as to the people you are traveling with. There have been chances to include those simple, yet in my mind important bits throughout the season.
Maybe, Maybe not. It all depends on their artistic ingenuity and how they see fit for the game. If they listen to fan feedback and ditched t… moreheir ingenuity, It'll end up with something like Mass Effect 3 ending. Trying to please everyone with material that shouldn't have been used in the ending.
PS: That's one of many elements why Mass Effect 3 ending could have been beter.
Verdict: When you push the dev team through a certain type of gameplay and storyline, They won't innovate. They will be more concerned to add what fans think is right and then it slowly paralyzes the story. Fan feedback is good, But it doesn't have to cross the line of artistic ingenuity.
Regarding Mass Effect 3, Fans were trying to push the dev team into something they think is right, And Mass Effect 3's writing staff has barely anyone from those who wrote ME1 and ME2. And Casey Hudson is really stupid in progress of any story. He creates a good concept, But that's where his ingenuity ends. Creative Director. So, A new team leaded by Mac Walters' artistic shit got it all wrong and created the Starchild, Dun-dun-dun-da!
Regarding The Walking Dead, The dev team's vision of season 2 is that Clementine goes through the world that has absolutely no rules, Moving from one place to another, Being directed by circumstances until she gets to choose the biggest morally defining choice ever. I believe that's why they created Lee and that's why they killed him. Many people can't see beyond their own short-sighted views and they actually don't see that the fiction world is far too complicated to be judged by everyone's views. It should be judged by the atmosphere and the lore of the story and their "Artistic Ingenuity."
Trying to please everyone with material that shouldn't have been used in the ending.
Huh? The original ending was there and satisfie… mored their "artistic integrity" Those was the words used back then, which led to a lot of this:
The extended cut was not perfect, but I'm glad that it violated their artistic bullshit, back in the day. The game was somewhat better for it. Anyway, that's ancient history. (RIP)
I get what you are saying, but I see no innovation here. I respect the decision of having Clem as a protagonist, that's new for sure, but other aspects of the game are far from innovated in my eyes, and others. If anything, this season is a de-evolution in many aspects.
What was the innovation? Clementine and a more branching story? Well the first has not worked as well as she could because her relationship with the cast does not go beyond the basic needed to not call them one dimensional and stops there. There is no feedba… [view original content]
Regarding The Walking Dead, The dev team's vision of season 2 is that Clementine goes through the world that has absolutely no rules
Aye, they have a concept, a vision. It may be a really good one, but I am not criticizing the concept; I am criticizing the execution. We cannot judge the ideas only. Take the same vision and add a lot of elements that fans are suggesting, that were there before; tried and true concepts. The vision is not made poorer for it, I believe. It is improved.
Moving from one place to another, Being directed by circumstances until she gets to choose the biggest morally defining choice ever.
The thaangs that happen in-between are important, too. The finale is made only as powerful as the journey has been. As of now, we have been witness to a lot of events that - in the words of a reviewer - simply don't carry the weight that they should.
Many people can't see beyond their own short-sighted views and they actually don't see that the fiction world is far too complicated to be judged by everyone's views.
Should it be judged by a select few, then? Those with the right opinion or concepts to base their judgement on?
It should be judged by the atmosphere and the lore of the story and their "Artistic Ingenuity."
Subjective concepts that many will judge based of their subjective perspective, like most things. And again, every aspect of the game is connected.
Regarding Mass Effect 3, Fans were trying to push the dev team into something they think is right, And Mass Effect 3's writing staff has bar… moreely anyone from those who wrote ME1 and ME2. And Casey Hudson is really stupid in progress of any story. He creates a good concept, But that's where his ingenuity ends. Creative Director. So, A new team leaded by Mac Walters' artistic shit got it all wrong and created the Starchild, Dun-dun-dun-da!
Regarding The Walking Dead, The dev team's vision of season 2 is that Clementine goes through the world that has absolutely no rules, Moving from one place to another, Being directed by circumstances until she gets to choose the biggest morally defining choice ever. I believe that's why they created Lee and that's why they killed him. Many people can't see beyond their own short-sighted views and they actually don't see that the fiction world is far too complicated to be judged by everyone's views. It should… [view original content]
You act like people want to hate on Telltale. Fuck dude, I don't like the thought of abandoning TWD and TWAU, but if Telltale continues making their games like they're doing so currently then I'm out. I just don't want to wait months for an hour long subpar episode that's just screaming with untapped potential. That's not to say I'm not enjoying season 2 or TWAU, I am, but Telltale can do so much better; TWDS1 proved this. The only way they might considering putting more effort into their games is if people bitch and moan, otherwise nothing will get done. Blind loyalty is only going to lead to stagnation.
That is a point I've been trying to make ever since In Harm's Way was released.
I have also said, however, that we all can walk a fine line between critic and hater; fan and fanboy. I try to be mild these days, both to try and see it all from another perspective, and because I'm simply tired...
You act like people want to hate on Telltale. Fuck dude, I don't like the thought of abandoning TWD and TWAU, but if Telltale continues maki… moreng their games like they're doing so currently then I'm out. I just don't want to wait months for an hour long subpar episode that's just screaming with untapped potential. That's not to say I'm not enjoying season 2 or TWAU, I am, but Telltale can do so much better; TWDS1 proved this. The only way they might considering putting more effort into their games is if people bitch and moan, otherwise nothing will get done. Blind loyalty is only going to lead to stagnation.
You act like people want to hate on Telltale. Fuck dude, I don't like the thought of abandoning TWD and TWAU, but if Telltale continues maki… moreng their games like they're doing so currently then I'm out. I just don't want to wait months for an hour long subpar episode that's just screaming with untapped potential. That's not to say I'm not enjoying season 2 or TWAU, I am, but Telltale can do so much better; TWDS1 proved this. The only way they might considering putting more effort into their games is if people bitch and moan, otherwise nothing will get done. Blind loyalty is only going to lead to stagnation.
I will return to the same point, If you push them too far, It might paralyzes the storyline.
Yes, That's because they're portraying lost entires trying to find their way into a new world. Or that's the explanation i could come up with.
Yes, People who are very professional in judging by analyzing can criticize, But they also have to make mention of flaws that the game may have "Like Episode's length and Hubs", but don't push them too far and then the game should reply to those flaws. Either by fixing them or truly justifying them. Unlike Mass Effect 3's writing staff explanation of the ending. However, Current critics of Gamespot and IGN aren't really that good nor they can understand games very well. Sometimes they get it right, Sometimes they get it wrong.
Regarding The Walking Dead, The dev team's vision of season 2 is that Clementine goes through the world that has absolutely no rules
… more Aye, they have a concept, a vision. It may be a really good one, but I am not criticizing the concept; I am criticizing the execution. We cannot judge the ideas only. Take the same vision and add a lot of elements that fans are suggesting, that were there before; tried and true concepts. The vision is not made poorer for it, I believe. It is improved.
Moving from one place to another, Being directed by circumstances until she gets to choose the biggest morally defining choice ever.
The thaangs that happen in-between are important, too. The finale is made only as powerful as the journey has been. As of now, we have been witness to a lot of events that - in the words of a reviewer - simply don't carry the weight that they should.
Many people can't see beyond their own short-sighted view… [view original content]
I will return to the same point, If you push them too far, It might paralyzes the storyline.
Might, and I think you may be overestimating the level of influence we have over TT's design choices. We have, as a fanbase, been providing some very valid criticism over the months, and things remain more or less the same. I think Telltale is perfectly able to stick to their vision; they sure as hell have.
What is "pushing them too far"?
Yes, That's because they're portraying lost entires trying to find their way into a new world. Or that's the explanation i could come up with.
What is this responding to? I don't understand the answer.
Yes, People who are very professional in judging by analyzing can criticize, But they also have to make mention of flaws that the game may have "Like Episode's length and Hubs", but don't push them too far and then the game should reply to those flaws. Either by fixing them or truly justifying them. Unlike Mass Effect 3's writing staff explanation of the ending. However, Current critics of Gamespot and IGN aren't really that good nor they can understand games very well. Sometimes they get it right, Sometimes they get it wrong.
Again, what is pushing too far? If the critics and fans only do a passing mention of what they perceive to be problems, but absolutely praise everything else, you can bet there will be no change reflected when the next episode hits.
This all started very diplomatically, back when All That Remains was released. I myself joined these kinds of discussions after the release of A House Divided, when people started to get more critical of certain aspects of the game. In Harm's Way was the wake-up call for many, and halfway through the season and with no change, I see no reason not to "push too far".
The only way they might considering putting more effort into their games is if people bitch and moan, otherwise nothing will get done. Blind loyalty is only going to lead to stagnation.
I will return to the same point, If you push them too far, It might paralyzes the storyline.
Yes, That's because they're portraying lost … moreentires trying to find their way into a new world. Or that's the explanation i could come up with.
Yes, People who are very professional in judging by analyzing can criticize, But they also have to make mention of flaws that the game may have "Like Episode's length and Hubs", but don't push them too far and then the game should reply to those flaws. Either by fixing them or truly justifying them. Unlike Mass Effect 3's writing staff explanation of the ending. However, Current critics of Gamespot and IGN aren't really that good nor they can understand games very well. Sometimes they get it right, Sometimes they get it wrong.
You act like people want to hate on Telltale. Fuck dude, I don't like the thought of abandoning TWD and TWAU, but if Telltale continues maki… moreng their games like they're doing so currently then I'm out. I just don't want to wait months for an hour long subpar episode that's just screaming with untapped potential. That's not to say I'm not enjoying season 2 or TWAU, I am, but Telltale can do so much better; TWDS1 proved this. The only way they might considering putting more effort into their games is if people bitch and moan, otherwise nothing will get done. Blind loyalty is only going to lead to stagnation.
Look, Pal, I myself am new to the Mass Effect community, I'm running a project to fix ME3's flaws. I searched up the web for what people think mass effect 3 got wrong. I ended up in the worst shape possible of mental rigidity. It's a fool play to look up what people think instead of following your ingenuity. When you start to create a game or a movie, A director is visionary. He/She starts to create a world with new rules and new atmosphere and then develop it through the years to create new stories. If you keep insisting on a certain type of gameplay and storyline ignoring the atmosphere, The dev team will be paralyzed. That's pushing people too far.
What is this responding to? I don't understand the answer.
This is a respond to this.
The thaangs that happen in-between are important, too. The finale is made only as powerful as the journey has been. As of now, we have been witness to a lot of events that - in the words of a reviewer - simply don't carry the weight that they should.
They're playing loose with the story because it's set in a collapsing world, Unlike Season 1 where the world remained intact a little bit. After each episode, The world gets more loose. That's why they don't give much weight.
I will return to the same point, If you push them too far, It might paralyzes the storyline.
Might, and I think you may be overestim… moreating the level of influence we have over TT's design choices. We have, as a fanbase, been providing some very valid criticism over the months, and things remain more or less the same. I think Telltale is perfectly able to stick to their vision; they sure as hell have.
What is "pushing them too far"?
Yes, That's because they're portraying lost entires trying to find their way into a new world. Or that's the explanation i could come up with.
What is this responding to? I don't understand the answer.
Yes, People who are very professional in judging by analyzing can criticize, But they also have to make mention of flaws that the game may have "Like Episode's length and Hubs", but don't push them too far and then the game should reply to those flaws. Either by fixing them or truly justi… [view original content]
If you keep insisting on a certain type of gameplay and storyline ignoring the atmosphere, The dev team will be paralyzed. That's pushing people too far.
We know that it works. Directors benefit from feedback, too, and some "visionaries"' ideas are not that great in the end. Check M. Night Shamalan's work.
They're playing loose with the story because it's set in a collapsing world, Unlike Season 1 where the world remained intact a little bit. After each episode, The world gets more loose. That's why they don't give much weight.
Loose storyline? That was S1. S2 has been really focused. The state of the world is not the reason why those events lack strength, but the state of development of most of the cast, and the protagonist.
Look, Pal, I myself am new to the Mass Effect community, I'm running a project to fix ME3's flaws. I searched up the web for what people thi… morenk mass effect 3 got wrong. I ended up in the worst shape possible of mental rigidity. It's a fool play to look up what people think instead of following your ingenuity. When you start to create a game or a movie, A director is visionary. He/She starts to create a world with new rules and new atmosphere and then develop it through the years to create new stories. If you keep insisting on a certain type of gameplay and storyline ignoring the atmosphere, The dev team will be paralyzed. That's pushing people too far.
What is this responding to? I don't understand the answer.
This is a respond to this.
The thaangs that happen in-between are important, too. The finale is made only as powerful as the journey has been. As of now, we have been witness to a lot of events that - in the words of… [view original content]
A visionary requires that he understands every little aspect of their own story. But your vision is complete, You create your fictitious worlds without drawing attention to any elements but your imagination. When you start to restrict your vision by this and that you end up paralyzed. That's true as hell. You only have to go through it first.
Maybe you;re right about the story, Maybe I'm right. Only episode 5 will tell.
If you keep insisting on a certain type of gameplay and storyline ignoring the atmosphere, The dev team will be paralyzed. That's pushing pe… moreople too far.
We know that it works. Directors benefit from feedback, too, and some "visionaries"' ideas are not that great in the end. Check M. Night Shamalan's work.
They're playing loose with the story because it's set in a collapsing world, Unlike Season 1 where the world remained intact a little bit. After each episode, The world gets more loose. That's why they don't give much weight.
Loose storyline? That was S1. S2 has been really focused. The state of the world is not the reason why those events lack strength, but the state of development of most of the cast, and the protagonist.
See it from my way. Clem has been separated from her group after they all died and then Crista disappeared and they she ran into a bunch of unknown people who doesn't like her that caused her and Kenny to be imprisoned in Carver's camp. How can anyone develop feelings for those bunch of guys? Well, Except for blind idealistics. It's intentional to make Clem have the biggest morally defining decision in Episode 5 that will open the door to a variety of possibilities for Season 3. So that the story of the episode had to be more loose and darker. And i personally like it this way.
If you keep insisting on a certain type of gameplay and storyline ignoring the atmosphere, The dev team will be paralyzed. That's pushing pe… moreople too far.
We know that it works. Directors benefit from feedback, too, and some "visionaries"' ideas are not that great in the end. Check M. Night Shamalan's work.
They're playing loose with the story because it's set in a collapsing world, Unlike Season 1 where the world remained intact a little bit. After each episode, The world gets more loose. That's why they don't give much weight.
Loose storyline? That was S1. S2 has been really focused. The state of the world is not the reason why those events lack strength, but the state of development of most of the cast, and the protagonist.
A visionary requires that he understands every little aspect of their own story. But your vision is complete, You create your fictitious wor… morelds without drawing attention to any elements but your imagination. When you start to restrict your vision by this and that you end up paralyzed. That's true as hell. You only have to go through it first.
Maybe you;re right about the story, Maybe I'm right. Only episode 5 will tell.
How can anyone develop feelings for those bunch of guys?
They don't have to be overly positive feelings, mind you. Also, they tried justifying themselves to Clem and end up accepting her- seemingly out of the blue for some of them, I might add, but still. This is not really a thing about sympathy only, but of the cast being well written and developed characters. If I like them as a person, great, if not, great; at least there is more to them.
It's intentional to make Clem have the biggest morally defining decision in Episode 5 that will open the door to a variety of possibilities for Season 3.
And that decision is going to be taken based on how much we can sympathize, care or outright dislike the people we're traveling with. Also, that is - perhaps not intentionally - calling the entire season filler.
See it from my way. Clem has been separated from her group after they all died and then Crista disappeared and they she ran into a bunch of … moreunknown people who doesn't like her that caused her and Kenny to be imprisoned in Carver's camp. How can anyone develop feelings for those bunch of guys? Well, Except for blind idealistics. It's intentional to make Clem have the biggest morally defining decision in Episode 5 that will open the door to a variety of possibilities for Season 3. So that the story of the episode had to be more loose and darker. And i personally like it this way.
http://www.telltalegames.com/community/discussion/69906/people-finally-starting-to-wake-up-and-accept-that-working-on-4-games-at-once-is-hurting-twdseason2
This is not the first thread, and it surely won't be the last.
Maybe there's more to them, And they were just starting to reveal so. But personally, I hate all Season 2's group, Except for Alvin. Who i started to care for him through the episode and see him more "developed". I hated seeing him die, But i also hated seeing most of S1's deaths, Sooo.... I'll have to deal with it.
And that decision is going to be taken based on how much we can sympathize, care or outright dislike the people we're traveling with. Also, that is - perhaps not intentionally - calling the entire season filler.
Maybe it's not intentional, But telltale is creative enough to make me have this trust in it. As i said before, Only episode 5 will tell.
How can anyone develop feelings for those bunch of guys?
They don't have to be overly positive feelings, mind you. Also, they tried … morejustifying themselves to Clem and end up accepting her- seemingly out of the blue for some of them, I might add, but still. This is not really a thing about sympathy only, but of the cast being well written and developed characters. If I like them as a person, great, if not, great; at least there is more to them.
It's intentional to make Clem have the biggest morally defining decision in Episode 5 that will open the door to a variety of possibilities for Season 3.
And that decision is going to be taken based on how much we can sympathize, care or outright dislike the people we're traveling with. Also, that is - perhaps not intentionally - calling the entire season filler.
If making more money means killiing what made their games good, then no, they shouldn't try to make more money. You can make money without your games losing their soul; just because damn near the entirety of this industry doesn't understand that there's a balance between game quality and profit doesn't mean that a balance doesn't exist.
The ultimate goal of a business is to make profit (save indie companies), end of story. If I had the choice between:
A) Licensing from something nobody has heard about.
Licensing from a popular series that has a large fanbase and much story potential.
I'd pick B. Going where the money goes isn't a bad thing, it's about how it is handled. They could use that money to get more staff, better game quality, and all sorts of things that makes a game better, it's all about how they use it.
If making more money means killiing what made their games good, then no, they shouldn't try to make more money. You can make money without y… moreour games losing their soul; just because damn near the entirety of this industry doesn't understand that there's a balance between game quality and profit doesn't mean that a balance doesn't exist.
Yeah, the purpose of a business is to make money, but by your logic EA doing the shit that it does it completely justified because, "lol dey needs to make money!". Just as an example, Capcom turning RE6 into a souless abomination, telling the devs what to put things into the game in an attempt to make it appeal to Western audiences, nevermind the fact that these gameplay mechanics aren't what make the Resident Evil series popular or even good, is justified because Capcom's a business, and a business has to make money. Them killing a franchise in an effort to make it design-by-committee is justifed because it (supposedly) was to make the company money.
You can make money without destroying what make your games good; there is balance. Saying it's ok for Telltale to mindlessly go where the money goes and telling eveyone "well it's fine, Telltale won't sellout on us!" is wishful thinking at best and completely moronic at worst. And Telltale picking up big franchise for sole reason that they're popular is Telltale selling out since they'd be making games for the sole purpose of making money. Fables isn't a big name, but Telltale still did something great with that IP. Who cares if they pick up unknown IPs and make games out of them? If Telltale really is the fantastic company that people think they are, they should be able to make unknown IPs popular.
Fans need to pressure Telltale to make sure they go in a direction that is going to ensure they want to stick with the company, and make sure that all of that extra money does end up improving their games. You're suggesting that we let Telltale get a shit ton more money and let them run wild with it. I want to make sure they use that money/success wisely and see that they don't let success go to their heads.
The ultimate goal of a business is to make profit (save indie companies), end of story. If I had the choice between:
A) Licensing from s… moreomething nobody has heard about.
Licensing from a popular series that has a large fanbase and much story potential.
I'd pick B. Going where the money goes isn't a bad thing, it's about how it is handled. They could use that money to get more staff, better game quality, and all sorts of things that makes a game better, it's all about how they use it.
The fact is that you can't tell them how to use their money. You can beg, plead, whine, bicker, or argue all you want; it doesn't change that fact. You can voice your opinion, that's about it. I'm not trying to justify bad games, but the whole point of a business is to make money, and a business cannot succeed if money isn't made. I'm not saying you aren't justified to be pissed about poor quality, either.
Besides, you are assuming that making a Game of Thrones game is going to kill them (somehow) simply because it's a popular series and they can make a lot of money out of it. Guess what The Walking Dead has: large fanbase... lots of potential revenue... probably one of their best games ever made, possibly the best story game ever. I can hardly describe how much dough they probably made on that game. Now, they go for a bigger name, and all of a sudden they have evil intentions? I refuse to believe that. This is just irrational paranoia that the quoted person is making.
Just...
Dear God man...
Yeah, the purpose of a business is to make money, but by your logic EA doing the shit that it does it complete… morely justified because, "lol dey needs to make money!". Just as an example, Capcom turning RE6 into a souless abomination, telling the devs what to put things into the game in an attempt to make it appeal to Western audiences, nevermind the fact that these gameplay mechanics aren't what make the Resident Evil series popular or even good, is justified because Capcom's a business, and a business has to make money. Them killing a franchise in an effort to make it design-by-committee is justifed because it (supposedly) was to make the company money.
You can make money without destroying what make your games good; there is balance. Saying it's ok for Telltale to mindlessly go where the money goes and telling eveyone "well it's fine, Telltale won't sellout on us!" is wishful thinking at best and completely mor… [view original content]
This. We want things to go in a way that we think should be based on what we deem right or wrong, but that does not change what is right now, as much as we might want it to.
Both of you guys have a point.
@Ohyoupokedme sees things as they are, which is not a complete indication that he agrees with all of it. Besides, tackling new IP's is something expected of them, and were it not for the current issues I perceive this season is having, and the fear of said issues spreading to their new projects, I'd be more excited about what's to come.
The fact is that you can't tell them how to use their money. You can beg, plead, whine, bicker, or argue all you want; it doesn't change th… moreat fact. You can voice your opinion, that's about it. I'm not trying to justify bad games, but the whole point of a business is to make money, and a business cannot succeed if money isn't made. I'm not saying you aren't justified to be pissed about poor quality, either.
Besides, you are assuming that making a Game of Thrones game is going to kill them (somehow) simply because it's a popular series and they can make a lot of money out of it. Guess what The Walking Dead has: large fanbase... lots of potential revenue... probably one of their best games ever made, possibly the best story game ever. I can hardly describe how much dough they probably made on that game. Now, they go for a bigger name, and all of a sudden they have evil intentions? I refuse to believe that. This is just irrational paranoia that the quoted person is making.
Comments
Huh? The original ending was there and satisfied their "artistic integrity" Those was the words used back then, which led to a lot of this:
The extended cut was not perfect, but I'm glad that it violated their artistic bullshit, back in the day. The game was somewhat better for it. Anyway, that's ancient history. (RIP)
I get what you are saying, but I see no innovation here. I respect the decision of having Clem as a protagonist, that's new for sure, but other aspects of the game are far from innovated in my eyes, and others. If anything, this season is a de-evolution in many aspects.
What was the innovation? Clementine and a more branching story? Well the first has not worked as well as she could because her relationship with the cast does not go beyond the basic needed to not call them one dimensional and stops there. There is no feedback to your choices or attitudes towards them and the situations they face. (?) X will remember that is just for show this time around, and no, it was not like that last time.
Then there is the controversial aspect of length. 'Tis more of a content issue, really. Despite my gripes with it (more of gripes with how the overall season was going) I can swallow my pride and say that A House Divided did very good and had enough content. I would have liked to see some things from the premiere resolved or explored upon, but really, it was ok.
It seems an arbitrary limit now, however; 90 minutes to tell a story like the Howe's community arc that could have benefited from more content and time pored into it, and thus, the length that many are asking for would almost for sure come naturally.
Well done hubs are, as I have said before, an useful tool for the exploration of the cast and the development of the protagonist by receiving feedback on the current situation and your stance towards it as well as to the people you are traveling with. There have been chances to include those simple, yet in my mind important bits throughout the season.
Regarding Mass Effect 3, Fans were trying to push the dev team into something they think is right, And Mass Effect 3's writing staff has barely anyone from those who wrote ME1 and ME2. And Casey Hudson is really stupid in progress of any story. He creates a good concept, But that's where his ingenuity ends. Creative Director. So, A new team leaded by Mac Walters' artistic shit got it all wrong and created the Starchild, Dun-dun-dun-da!
Regarding The Walking Dead, The dev team's vision of season 2 is that Clementine goes through the world that has absolutely no rules, Moving from one place to another, Being directed by circumstances until she gets to choose the biggest morally defining choice ever. I believe that's why they created Lee and that's why they killed him. Many people can't see beyond their own short-sighted views and they actually don't see that the fiction world is far too complicated to be judged by everyone's views. It should be judged by the atmosphere and the lore of the story and their "Artistic Ingenuity."
Aye, they have a concept, a vision. It may be a really good one, but I am not criticizing the concept; I am criticizing the execution. We cannot judge the ideas only. Take the same vision and add a lot of elements that fans are suggesting, that were there before; tried and true concepts. The vision is not made poorer for it, I believe. It is improved.
The thaangs that happen in-between are important, too. The finale is made only as powerful as the journey has been. As of now, we have been witness to a lot of events that - in the words of a reviewer - simply don't carry the weight that they should.
Should it be judged by a select few, then? Those with the right opinion or concepts to base their judgement on?
Subjective concepts that many will judge based of their subjective perspective, like most things. And again, every aspect of the game is connected.
You act like people want to hate on Telltale. Fuck dude, I don't like the thought of abandoning TWD and TWAU, but if Telltale continues making their games like they're doing so currently then I'm out. I just don't want to wait months for an hour long subpar episode that's just screaming with untapped potential. That's not to say I'm not enjoying season 2 or TWAU, I am, but Telltale can do so much better; TWDS1 proved this. The only way they might considering putting more effort into their games is if people bitch and moan, otherwise nothing will get done. Blind loyalty is only going to lead to stagnation.
That is a point I've been trying to make ever since In Harm's Way was released.
I have also said, however, that we all can walk a fine line between critic and hater; fan and fanboy. I try to be mild these days, both to try and see it all from another perspective, and because I'm simply tired...
Are you me? This is 100% how I'm feeling.
I will return to the same point, If you push them too far, It might paralyzes the storyline.
Yes, That's because they're portraying lost entires trying to find their way into a new world. Or that's the explanation i could come up with.
Yes, People who are very professional in judging by analyzing can criticize, But they also have to make mention of flaws that the game may have "Like Episode's length and Hubs", but don't push them too far and then the game should reply to those flaws. Either by fixing them or truly justifying them. Unlike Mass Effect 3's writing staff explanation of the ending. However, Current critics of Gamespot and IGN aren't really that good nor they can understand games very well. Sometimes they get it right, Sometimes they get it wrong.
Might, and I think you may be overestimating the level of influence we have over TT's design choices. We have, as a fanbase, been providing some very valid criticism over the months, and things remain more or less the same. I think Telltale is perfectly able to stick to their vision; they sure as hell have.
What is "pushing them too far"?
What is this responding to? I don't understand the answer.
Again, what is pushing too far? If the critics and fans only do a passing mention of what they perceive to be problems, but absolutely praise everything else, you can bet there will be no change reflected when the next episode hits.
This all started very diplomatically, back when All That Remains was released. I myself joined these kinds of discussions after the release of A House Divided, when people started to get more critical of certain aspects of the game. In Harm's Way was the wake-up call for many, and halfway through the season and with no change, I see no reason not to "push too far".
Bravo Bravo Charie Delta THIS guy stole the words right out of my mouth.
http://www.telltalegames.com/community/discussion/69906/people-finally-starting-to-wake-up-and-accept-that-working-on-4-games-at-once-is-hurting-twdseason2
This is not the first thread, and it surely won't be the last.
Look, Pal, I myself am new to the Mass Effect community, I'm running a project to fix ME3's flaws. I searched up the web for what people think mass effect 3 got wrong. I ended up in the worst shape possible of mental rigidity. It's a fool play to look up what people think instead of following your ingenuity. When you start to create a game or a movie, A director is visionary. He/She starts to create a world with new rules and new atmosphere and then develop it through the years to create new stories. If you keep insisting on a certain type of gameplay and storyline ignoring the atmosphere, The dev team will be paralyzed. That's pushing people too far.
This is a respond to this.
They're playing loose with the story because it's set in a collapsing world, Unlike Season 1 where the world remained intact a little bit. After each episode, The world gets more loose. That's why they don't give much weight.
"No, Telltale, please don't make more money for yourselves!"
I thought that all episodes were master pieces, fuck me right???
We know that it works. Directors benefit from feedback, too, and some "visionaries"' ideas are not that great in the end. Check M. Night Shamalan's work.
Loose storyline? That was S1. S2 has been really focused. The state of the world is not the reason why those events lack strength, but the state of development of most of the cast, and the protagonist.
A visionary requires that he understands every little aspect of their own story. But your vision is complete, You create your fictitious worlds without drawing attention to any elements but your imagination. When you start to restrict your vision by this and that you end up paralyzed. That's true as hell. You only have to go through it first.
Maybe you;re right about the story, Maybe I'm right. Only episode 5 will tell.
See it from my way. Clem has been separated from her group after they all died and then Crista disappeared and they she ran into a bunch of unknown people who doesn't like her that caused her and Kenny to be imprisoned in Carver's camp. How can anyone develop feelings for those bunch of guys? Well, Except for blind idealistics. It's intentional to make Clem have the biggest morally defining decision in Episode 5 that will open the door to a variety of possibilities for Season 3. So that the story of the episode had to be more loose and darker. And i personally like it this way.
Aye, I guess we will be able to judge the whole picture some months from now.
They don't have to be overly positive feelings, mind you. Also, they tried justifying themselves to Clem and end up accepting her- seemingly out of the blue for some of them, I might add, but still. This is not really a thing about sympathy only, but of the cast being well written and developed characters. If I like them as a person, great, if not, great; at least there is more to them.
And that decision is going to be taken based on how much we can sympathize, care or outright dislike the people we're traveling with. Also, that is - perhaps not intentionally - calling the entire season filler.
I'm expecting episode 4 to spawn a lot more of those threads, by multiple users. Hopefully it doesn't end up like that.
Word the 90 minute revolution will be back and most likely become the 60 minute revolution lmfao
Maybe there's more to them, And they were just starting to reveal so. But personally, I hate all Season 2's group, Except for Alvin. Who i started to care for him through the episode and see him more "developed". I hated seeing him die, But i also hated seeing most of S1's deaths, Sooo.... I'll have to deal with it.
Maybe it's not intentional, But telltale is creative enough to make me have this trust in it. As i said before, Only episode 5 will tell.
The 75 minute revolution is already at hand.
I hope we get more positive threads out of Amid The Ruins.*
.*Disclaimer: "Positive threads" refer to those that praise the episode on its own merits, not "Stop complaining about Ep4"
If making more money means killiing what made their games good, then no, they shouldn't try to make more money. You can make money without your games losing their soul; just because damn near the entirety of this industry doesn't understand that there's a balance between game quality and profit doesn't mean that a balance doesn't exist.
The ultimate goal of a business is to make profit (save indie companies), end of story. If I had the choice between:
A) Licensing from something nobody has heard about.
I'd pick B. Going where the money goes isn't a bad thing, it's about how it is handled. They could use that money to get more staff, better game quality, and all sorts of things that makes a game better, it's all about how they use it.
Just...
Dear God man...
Yeah, the purpose of a business is to make money, but by your logic EA doing the shit that it does it completely justified because, "lol dey needs to make money!". Just as an example, Capcom turning RE6 into a souless abomination, telling the devs what to put things into the game in an attempt to make it appeal to Western audiences, nevermind the fact that these gameplay mechanics aren't what make the Resident Evil series popular or even good, is justified because Capcom's a business, and a business has to make money. Them killing a franchise in an effort to make it design-by-committee is justifed because it (supposedly) was to make the company money.
You can make money without destroying what make your games good; there is balance. Saying it's ok for Telltale to mindlessly go where the money goes and telling eveyone "well it's fine, Telltale won't sellout on us!" is wishful thinking at best and completely moronic at worst. And Telltale picking up big franchise for sole reason that they're popular is Telltale selling out since they'd be making games for the sole purpose of making money. Fables isn't a big name, but Telltale still did something great with that IP. Who cares if they pick up unknown IPs and make games out of them? If Telltale really is the fantastic company that people think they are, they should be able to make unknown IPs popular.
Fans need to pressure Telltale to make sure they go in a direction that is going to ensure they want to stick with the company, and make sure that all of that extra money does end up improving their games. You're suggesting that we let Telltale get a shit ton more money and let them run wild with it. I want to make sure they use that money/success wisely and see that they don't let success go to their heads.
The fact is that you can't tell them how to use their money. You can beg, plead, whine, bicker, or argue all you want; it doesn't change that fact. You can voice your opinion, that's about it. I'm not trying to justify bad games, but the whole point of a business is to make money, and a business cannot succeed if money isn't made. I'm not saying you aren't justified to be pissed about poor quality, either.
Besides, you are assuming that making a Game of Thrones game is going to kill them (somehow) simply because it's a popular series and they can make a lot of money out of it. Guess what The Walking Dead has: large fanbase... lots of potential revenue... probably one of their best games ever made, possibly the best story game ever. I can hardly describe how much dough they probably made on that game. Now, they go for a bigger name, and all of a sudden they have evil intentions? I refuse to believe that. This is just irrational paranoia that the quoted person is making.
This. We want things to go in a way that we think should be based on what we deem right or wrong, but that does not change what is right now, as much as we might want it to.
Both of you guys have a point.
@Ohyoupokedme sees things as they are, which is not a complete indication that he agrees with all of it. Besides, tackling new IP's is something expected of them, and were it not for the current issues I perceive this season is having, and the fear of said issues spreading to their new projects, I'd be more excited about what's to come.
Am not interested in the new stuff. Heck I haven't even downloaded and played episodes 3-5 of Back to the Future and I paid for them.
Telltale aren't interested in us mere mortals anyway just the big bucks.