What about conversations? No difficulty AT ALL. You often had 3 or 4 choices and you just had to try them all until you found the right one and that was it. In other games, conversations often had 4 or 5 levels of depth that you had to figure out to advance to the next one.
Just because it is easy doesn't mean it's a bad game.
"Heureka" moments -- i.e. your good thinking and only that getting you to progress -- are at the core of adventure games. If future games continue to be as easy as this one there may be a point at which gamers tell themselves, "There's no reason for ME to participate in playing this game if the game basically plays itself." It may start to feel like a "fake" adventure game: a guided tour through what could have been a real adventure game.
I really, really, really loved the story in the game, but the puzzles were really too easy! It was like watching a movie, and sometimes there was a pause where I had to click somewhere. I'm sorry but the best way in which I can describe this is by quoting Ron Gilbert
It seems telltale got everything the bttf fanbase wanted.
And nothing the adventure gamers wanted.
Couldn't have summed it up any better. I was actually just talking to my cousin down in Florida tonight about this game as we used to play all the old school adventure games when he would visit including all the Sierra and Lucasarts series. He was asking if it was any good and I told him the best way I could sum it up is that its an adventure game for people that hate adventure games. He said he would wait and maybe buy it if the latter episodes become more difficult.I told him not to hold his breath as obviously Telltale is seeing dollar signs with these new licenses. We might see a little bit of an increase but I dont think adventure gamers are going to see anywhere close to the game they want to see.
I don't really see the problem with the difficulty to be perfectly honest.
Some of you are comparing BTTF to Sam and Max, but it's not perfectly fair.
Sam and Max's puzzles (and Monkey Island's and Strong Bad's) tend to be fairly weird. You have to think outside the box to beat these games. Not with BTTF.
BTTF's puzzles are more straightforward. They make more sense. And that's really because of the franchise.
Sam and Max/Monkey Island/Strong Bad are "cartoony". BTTF is "realistic" (nothing to do with the artstyle, I'm talking about the universe). Therefore, the puzzles in BTTF are "realistic" and easier.
Therefore, the puzzles in BTTF are "realistic" and easier.
I respectfully disagree with this theory. In my opinion, puzzle difficulty is independent of how whacky the game plot is (provided the player has a base understanding of what's actually happening, story-wise, but that should be the case for most parts of any game, and if not you can still provide a goal-hint system; besides, if you think of it, the plot in BTTF *is* pretty whacky). In fact, good puzzles -- even in whacky games -- still should make sense, or we'll be frustrated because a) good stuff we try doesn't work and b) nonsensical stuff does work but we don't understand why.
IMO the real problem with too-easy puzzles as sometimes presented by BTTF is that the solution is often the only choice there is, because there is a very limited amount of objects, because objects cannot be combined, because multiple choice discussions can often be simply easily clicked through, because there is a very limited map, and because object-receival time and object-use time are in short distance of each other (there may be more reasons).
As an example of whacky plot with an obvious solution, take the babelfish in Douglas Adams Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: if you would have to pick up the babelfish and then put it in your ear, then that's a perfectly reasonable solution within the context of that whacky plot. So if the game would explain what a babelfish is -- "a thing you put in your ear which then translates for you" -- then it is not a hard puzzle (in fact, as whacky as putting a fish in your ear would be in real life, this wouldn't actually be a real puzzle because it would be too easy; probably, in a good adventure, there'd be some difficulty in even getting that fish).
Now, when it comes to *plot linearity*, then I partly agree with you. If one tries to create what's basically a movie with a linear movie plot, then puzzle difficulty can greatly suffer from it, because the player cannot walk around a lot and may not pick up a lot of objects. If you think of a BTTF game as basically a movie when creating it, then it could actually hurt the game part of it.
It isn't about the sense of the puzzles as the lack of puzzles.
The difficulty would drastically ramp up if there were just more items you could collect(not have to, just could) and more people you could try to interact with.
This was like a hidden item game, where most of the items were removed before you started to play.
besides, if you think of it, the plot in BTTF *is* pretty whacky).
The plot ? Sure.
I was talking more about the events and the situations.
In fact, good puzzles -- even in whacky games -- still should make sense, or we'll be frustrated because a) good stuff we try doesn't work and b) nonsensical stuff does work but we don't understand why.
Sure. I'm not denying that whacky games don't have good puzzles, just that it doesn't fit with the BTTF universe, imo, and thus makes the game easier and straightforward.
IMO the real problem with too-easy puzzles as sometimes presented by BTTF is because there is a very limited amount of objects, because objects cannot be combined, because multiple choice discussions can often be simply easily clicked through,
Fair enough.
because there is a very limited map, and because object-receival time and object-use time are in short distance of each other (there may be more reasons).
Both of those (the second being in direct relation with the first) can easily be explained by the fact that it's only the first episode and Telltale will expand on the map in later episodes (as they usually do).
Both of those (the second being in direct relation with the first) can easily be explained by the fact that it's only the first episode and Telltale will expand on the map in later episodes (as they usually do).
And let's hope the difficulty will increase in future episodes. If that's the way TellTale is going about it -- an easy first episode with increasing level of difficulty for every episode, more objects and more rooms which you need to interact with non-linerarly -- it could be a good compromise for everyone (though they make things at least *a little* harder even for first episodes, to not put off fans). Is TellTale actually getting involved in the forum in the "too easy" discussion, what's their stance on this?
The feeling I got from this one is the same feeling I've got from a lot of Telltale's first runs in a new franchise. Initially their focus is to try to get the right tone (Which they NAILED, BTW!) and the puzzle complexity suffers a touch. Just remember Sam and Max 101, Bone 101, Wallace and Gromit 101, SBCG4AP 101 - All very easy, and all those series panned out OK by the end.
On top of that, with the theme, it seems somewhat likely there will be some Back to the Future style running-around-while-avoiding-your-past-self, and perhaps they had to simplify it a touch to make sure we remember what our past self would be doing.
I have no doubt that by Episode 3 (It's ALWAYS Episode 3 for me) I'll be completely obsessed. Then Episode 5 will come and go too soon, making me want more more more...
You do realize that you've bought the whole season right? Even if every episode only takes you one hour to complete that's still £15 for 5 hours of game time.
Just remember Sam and Max 101, Bone 101, Wallace and Gromit 101, SBCG4AP 101 - All very easy, and all those series panned out OK by the end.
Actually, I think that all those games were harder than BTTF Ep1 (with the single exception of Bone Ep.1).
I understand where they're coming from with this series, but they should really think twice before losing the trust of the core adventure gaming community.
whats better, an adventure-hardcore-gamer that says: "well, the first episode was too easy, but all in all it was a really nice experience"
or a bttf-fan who's absolutely NOT in adventure gaming saying: "this game is SHIT. it was very confusing, i had no clue what to do, all this walking and talking. OMG, i cant take it anymore"
??
so i kinda understand telltale's decision for making the first episode (i hope its not like that the whole game) that "easy"
I do think it was very easy but I don't *really* care. The story is fantastic and deserves its place in the series, I can't wait for the next episode.
I wonder if people are still having a hard time getting to grips with episodic gaming - people always say the episodes are too short but it's only 1/5 of the full game so it will seem short.
I do however wish there was something to do in the buildings that you can't go in - wouldn't have to be a fully rendered room - could just be a desk, or a picture on a wall that needs to be interacted with to solve a puzzle. Heck, you could even have a conversation from the doorway if it means there's more to do.
whats better, an adventure-hardcore-gamer that says: "well, the first episode was too easy, but all in all it was a really nice experience"
or a bttf-fan who's absolutely NOT in adventure gaming saying: "this game is SHIT. it was very confusing, i had no clue what to do, all this walking and talking. OMG, i cant take it anymore"
??
so i kinda understand telltale's decision for making the first episode (i hope its not like that the whole game) that "easy"
First of all most hardcore adventure gamers are not saying "Well the first episode was easy, but all in all it was a nice experience". Not even close. I know I didn't say anything close to that. Most of the posts I have seen from adventure gamers goes more like this "This games was WAY WAY WAY too easy and ultimately it ruined the first episode. Extremely disappointing".
2nd, speaking in regards to a company that produces adventure games, the better selection would without question be the option that pleases the customers that gives your company the vast majority of its return business (adventure gamers), not the customers that are going to disappear once this series is over (non adventure gamers). Trying to argue otherwise, to make a quick buck on this series, is a big mistake. Its never a good decision to alienate your core customers and anyone who argues otherwise has no place in the business world.
3rd, its kind of hard to have someone running around saying things like ""this game is SHIT. it was very confusing, i had no clue what to do, all this walking and talking. OMG, i cant take it anymore" when there is a hint button right at the top of the page. If they still cant get it even after a hint then that is a BIG sign to stay away from the adventure genre, period. Choosing to design the game for people like this is a mistake of epic proportions. You make adventure games for people that like and play adventure games. You dont see EA designing Madden Football for people that have no interest in football games. You dont see Bioware designing RPG's for people that have no interest in RPG games. You dont see Bungie designing first person shooter games specifically for people that hate first person shooters. It makes absolutely zero sense and ultimately taking this approach is going to have poor results every single time, at least for the crowd that has the most interest in that particular genre.
9 out of 10 adventure games are too easy. It's a fact, look it up.
9 out of 10 adventure games may be too easy but they still dont come anywhere even close to matching this game in regards to just how easy it really was. Not even in the same ballpark. Not even in the same area code. Not even in the same solar system. Not even in the same galaxy. In fact, were talking a completely different universe, maybe even different dimensions altogether. Lets just sum it up by saying that even comparing BTTF's level of ease to other adventure games difficulty level is an exercise in utter futility. There is no comparison.
2nd, speaking in regards to a company that produces adventure games, the better selection would without question be the option that pleases the customers that gives your company the vast majority of its return business (adventure gamers), not the customers that are going to disappear once this series is over (non adventure gamers). Trying to argue otherwise, to make a quick buck on this series, is a big mistake. Its never a good decision to alienate your core customers and anyone who argues otherwise has no place in the business world.
The game was made for "Back to the Future" fans, and targeted towards people who don't normally play video games, and if/when they do, not adventure games. You said before that the game was made for people who hate adventure games, but I think it would be more accurate to say the game was made for someone who's never played an adventure game.
The game was made for "Back to the Future" fans, and targeted towards people who don't normally play video games, and if/when they do, not adventure games. You said before that the game was made for people who hate adventure games, but I think it would be more accurate to say the game was made for someone who's never played an adventure game.
They are an adventure game company. The game was advertised as an adventure game. That means that it should have been made for BTTF fans that liked adventure games or even adventure game fans that were unfamiliar with the IP, not BTTF fans that hate adventure games and not BTTF fans that have never played an adventure game before (take your pick).
You dont make adventure games for X amount of years, thus building up a very dedicated core customer group, and then suddenly decide your going to cater to the beginner crowd with the best IP license the company has scored yet, one that had all of this companies CORE customers literally counting the days till it was released. Its a TERRIBLE IDEA, one that I still have an extremely hard time coming to terms with. Its one of the worst business decisions I think I have ever seen in regards to gaming.
the better selection would without question be the option that pleases the customers that gives your company the vast majority of its return business (adventure gamers), not the customers that are going to disappear once this series is over (non adventure gamers).
And with some solutions, it may not even be an either-or question: for instance, if in the beginning of the game you could set a difficulty level, then that could please both fans of the genre as well as beginners (though one should be careful to even give the beginner some good puzzles, or they may never get hooked on the genre because they end up with an interactive movie and they may not like that).
Now, having the user set a difficulty level is a bit of a fourth-wall breaker (any option is a burden on the player... I'm not sure which recent TellTale game asked me about whether or not I wanted to see hints or something, and it asked it even before I started playing... how do *I* know what to select? I haven't even played yet! Don't force choices on players, allow them to skip). However, there are alternatives to this. For instance, by checking how well the player fares on the first 3 or so easy puzzles, one could increase the level of difficulty automatically if apparently those puzzles were solved quickly. This approach could repeat throughout the game: There could be extra bits of plots which, if you're detected to be a beginner, play out automatically like a movie... but if you're detected to be an advanced player, then you'd have to solve that part.
You dont make adventure games for X amount of years, thus building up a very dedicated core customer group, and then suddenly decide your going to cater to the beginner crowd with the best IP license the company has scored yet, one that had all of this companies CORE customers literally counting the days till it was released. Its a TERRIBLE IDEA, one that I still have an extremely hard time coming to terms with. Its one of the worst business decisions I think I have ever seen in regards to gaming.
Again, I have to bring up this article, because it explains why Telltale has made the choices they've made, and addresses almost all of your complaints.
In short, Telltale makes adventure games for mothers-in-law, not adventure games for adventure gamers. If you can accept that fact, you can enjoy their games on that level. If you can't... well, you can't.
In short, Telltale makes adventure games for mothers-in-law, not adventure games for adventure gamers.
You're assuming that it's an either-or choice when in fact, making a game more accessible and intuitive to use can even appeal to gamers (I would love if TellTale could come up with an even easier way to handle the inventory, for instance... quite a bit of opening and closing the inventory at the moment) -- and don't forget that the *gamers* may be the people who end up installing it on mothers-in-law computer in the first place.
Again, let the game adjust its difficulty automatically (or by selection), and then have both the benefit of gamers liking it and spreading the word to non-gamers, as well as non-gamers liking it. The article gives a perfect example of how it's important for the first room to actually introduce the genre -- don't even start with a real puzzle here, just go through the motions in the easiest way possible, even if it means to tell the player to "click there then click there" etc. (Starting with a puzzle that requires you to
shoot cheese in order to create swiss cheese is *not* a good starting point... it's a nonsensical solution, and not an easy puzzle.)
I don't think anyone here would complain if BTTF's first room would have been a quasi-tutorial. I don't think any of us is elitist, we do enjoy if everyone can enjoy the game. Guide the players who need that for as long as they need it, just know when to stop; just know when the player is apparently advancing too fast.
Right now, I'm waiting to see how Episode 2 fares before I suggest this to my friend (he's a big Back to the Future fan but I don't know how many adventure games he played).
I know the article! As a matter of fact, I even asked Dave for the permission to translate his piece into Italian.
It's groundbreaking and extremely intelligent.
That said, I think the article assumes you should design the beginning of your games that way to introduce "mother-in-laws" to the idea of "thinking by themselves".
I mean: if this first episode was designed like that to introduce a whole non-gamer audience to the adventure genre, well... that's great. It works like a charm. Best effort ever.
There would be no reason to keep the difficulty that low for the rest of the season, though: I suppose even "mother-in-laws" would end up desiring some real challenges to solve, sooner or later, once they got what adventure games are about.
Otherwise, I am afraid we need a more radical rethinking of the game design. If I remove the "traditional" challenge from an adventure game in order to make it accessible, I have to compensate the loss with extras, i.e. more looping and funny action-sequences (I really liked the lab section), relaxed minigames and an intelligent point-system (Strong Bad got it right but kinda lost it on the long run), nonlinear exploration, plot crossroads which react to my choices (see Heavy Rain, which is one hell of a mainstream story game).
Some of the plain classic adventure gaming mechanics sound a little flat if you don't charge them with a bit (just a bit!) of lateral thinking.
I'm all for Telltale experimenting with game-design to get that "mainstream" unique design-style, but BTTF is in serious need of some new ideas such as Strong Bad collateral activities, Max's psychic powers or... something else.
First of all most hardcore adventure gamers are not saying "Well the first episode was easy, but all in all it was a nice experience".
I AM saying that. I may not be a hardcore adventure gamer, but I did grow up with Sierra, so I'm used to a much higher difficulty than this. And yet, the BTTF elements I loved more than made up for any disappointments with the lack-of-difficulty.
You dont make adventureHack&Slash/RTS games for X amount of years, thus building up a very dedicated core customer group, and then suddenly decide your going to cater to the beginner crowdMMORPG crowd with the best IP license the company has scored yet, one that had all of this companies CORE customers literally counting the days till it was released. Its a TERRIBLE IDEA, one that I still have an extremely hard time coming to terms with. Its one of the worst business decisions I think I have ever seen in regards to gaming.
I think TT has done a great job making episode 1 into an extended tutorial. I hope BttF will covert many beginners into dedicated adventure gamers, allowing for bigger budget games in the future.
Sadly enough that's EXACTLY what BioWare is doing...
*sobs*
[Is hard-core RPG fan]
Well agree to disagree in regards to Bioware but the fact that you feel this way and are not at all happy about it just backs up what I am saying. Its simply not a good idea.
I AM saying that. I may not be a hardcore adventure gamer, but I did grow up with Sierra, so I'm used to a much higher difficulty than this. And yet, the BTTF elements I loved more than made up for any disappointments with the lack-of-difficulty.
First of all I was specifically talking about the reaction of hardcore adventure gamers and you openly admit you aren't one. So no offense but I could care less what your saying especially in regards to my statement. 2nd even if you were a hardcore adventure gamer, which again you openly admitted you weren't, I never said that there weren't any hardcore adventure gamers saying such a thing. I said that the VAST majority of posts that I have seen from hardcore adventure gamers aren't saying what he said they were saying. Taking both of these into account, your post proves absolutely nothing and was ultimately a complete waste of time.
"Heureka" moments -- i.e. your good thinking and only that getting you to progress -- are at the core of adventure games. If future games continue to be as easy as this one there may be a point at which gamers tell themselves, "There's no reason for ME to participate in playing this game if the game basically plays itself." It may start to feel like a "fake" adventure game: a guided tour through what could have been a real adventure game.
Part of the point of the puzzles is also to get the player interested in exploring everywhere and listening to all the dialogue to figure things out. Its a way of putting more things in the game than you can in a movie without making it boring.
One of the best adventure games is Loom, which is really pretty easy, but its nicely done.
That said, I really would like the game to be more difficult and more expansive (like being able to go in all the 1931 shops). Yet if there are puzzles they should fit the plot somehow, I found that too many in ToMI were just arbitrary to put in the game. Jungle sounds? wth.
First of all I was specifically talking about the reaction of hardcore adventure gamers and you openly admit you aren't one.
I said I MAY not be one, merely because I don't know what your standards of being "hardcore" are. I grew up on adventure games, I play adventure games more than any other genre of game, but I haven't played every adventure game ever made.
Comments
It seems telltale got everything the bttf fanbase wanted.
And nothing the adventure gamers wanted.
Great story though.
Just hope Ep2 will be longer?
"Heureka" moments -- i.e. your good thinking and only that getting you to progress -- are at the core of adventure games. If future games continue to be as easy as this one there may be a point at which gamers tell themselves, "There's no reason for ME to participate in playing this game if the game basically plays itself." It may start to feel like a "fake" adventure game: a guided tour through what could have been a real adventure game.
It's incredible that Ron Gilbert already saw this problem coming in 1989.
Couldn't have summed it up any better. I was actually just talking to my cousin down in Florida tonight about this game as we used to play all the old school adventure games when he would visit including all the Sierra and Lucasarts series. He was asking if it was any good and I told him the best way I could sum it up is that its an adventure game for people that hate adventure games. He said he would wait and maybe buy it if the latter episodes become more difficult.I told him not to hold his breath as obviously Telltale is seeing dollar signs with these new licenses. We might see a little bit of an increase but I dont think adventure gamers are going to see anywhere close to the game they want to see.
Some of you are comparing BTTF to Sam and Max, but it's not perfectly fair.
Sam and Max's puzzles (and Monkey Island's and Strong Bad's) tend to be fairly weird. You have to think outside the box to beat these games. Not with BTTF.
BTTF's puzzles are more straightforward. They make more sense. And that's really because of the franchise.
Sam and Max/Monkey Island/Strong Bad are "cartoony". BTTF is "realistic" (nothing to do with the artstyle, I'm talking about the universe). Therefore, the puzzles in BTTF are "realistic" and easier.
I respectfully disagree with this theory. In my opinion, puzzle difficulty is independent of how whacky the game plot is (provided the player has a base understanding of what's actually happening, story-wise, but that should be the case for most parts of any game, and if not you can still provide a goal-hint system; besides, if you think of it, the plot in BTTF *is* pretty whacky). In fact, good puzzles -- even in whacky games -- still should make sense, or we'll be frustrated because a) good stuff we try doesn't work and b) nonsensical stuff does work but we don't understand why.
IMO the real problem with too-easy puzzles as sometimes presented by BTTF is that the solution is often the only choice there is, because there is a very limited amount of objects, because objects cannot be combined, because multiple choice discussions can often be simply easily clicked through, because there is a very limited map, and because object-receival time and object-use time are in short distance of each other (there may be more reasons).
As an example of whacky plot with an obvious solution, take the babelfish in Douglas Adams Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: if you would have to pick up the babelfish and then put it in your ear, then that's a perfectly reasonable solution within the context of that whacky plot. So if the game would explain what a babelfish is -- "a thing you put in your ear which then translates for you" -- then it is not a hard puzzle (in fact, as whacky as putting a fish in your ear would be in real life, this wouldn't actually be a real puzzle because it would be too easy; probably, in a good adventure, there'd be some difficulty in even getting that fish).
Now, when it comes to *plot linearity*, then I partly agree with you. If one tries to create what's basically a movie with a linear movie plot, then puzzle difficulty can greatly suffer from it, because the player cannot walk around a lot and may not pick up a lot of objects. If you think of a BTTF game as basically a movie when creating it, then it could actually hurt the game part of it.
The difficulty would drastically ramp up if there were just more items you could collect(not have to, just could) and more people you could try to interact with.
This was like a hidden item game, where most of the items were removed before you started to play.
So an "Obvious item game"
I was talking more about the events and the situations.
Sure. I'm not denying that whacky games don't have good puzzles, just that it doesn't fit with the BTTF universe, imo, and thus makes the game easier and straightforward.
Fair enough.
Both of those (the second being in direct relation with the first) can easily be explained by the fact that it's only the first episode and Telltale will expand on the map in later episodes (as they usually do).
And let's hope the difficulty will increase in future episodes. If that's the way TellTale is going about it -- an easy first episode with increasing level of difficulty for every episode, more objects and more rooms which you need to interact with non-linerarly -- it could be a good compromise for everyone (though they make things at least *a little* harder even for first episodes, to not put off fans). Is TellTale actually getting involved in the forum in the "too easy" discussion, what's their stance on this?
On top of that, with the theme, it seems somewhat likely there will be some Back to the Future style running-around-while-avoiding-your-past-self, and perhaps they had to simplify it a touch to make sure we remember what our past self would be doing.
I have no doubt that by Episode 3 (It's ALWAYS Episode 3 for me) I'll be completely obsessed. Then Episode 5 will come and go too soon, making me want more more more...
I bought BTTF Episode 1 on Steam a few days ago.
It took me barely 1 hour to finish it.
I spent £15 on it.
That's more than I earn in 1 hour.
I love BTTF and on paper this is a great idea, however it was stupidly easy, and money-wastingly short.
I enjoyed the voice acting and the graphics are nice, but come on guys, where's the game?
Based on this, I'm not sure I really want to blow another chunk of money on Season 2.
For the first time in my life, I feel like I've been ripped by Telltale.
Yours Disappointedly
Actually, I think that all those games were harder than BTTF Ep1 (with the single exception of Bone Ep.1).
I understand where they're coming from with this series, but they should really think twice before losing the trust of the core adventure gaming community.
or a bttf-fan who's absolutely NOT in adventure gaming saying: "this game is SHIT. it was very confusing, i had no clue what to do, all this walking and talking. OMG, i cant take it anymore"
??
so i kinda understand telltale's decision for making the first episode (i hope its not like that the whole game) that "easy"
I wonder if people are still having a hard time getting to grips with episodic gaming - people always say the episodes are too short but it's only 1/5 of the full game so it will seem short.
I do however wish there was something to do in the buildings that you can't go in - wouldn't have to be a fully rendered room - could just be a desk, or a picture on a wall that needs to be interacted with to solve a puzzle. Heck, you could even have a conversation from the doorway if it means there's more to do.
First of all most hardcore adventure gamers are not saying "Well the first episode was easy, but all in all it was a nice experience". Not even close. I know I didn't say anything close to that. Most of the posts I have seen from adventure gamers goes more like this "This games was WAY WAY WAY too easy and ultimately it ruined the first episode. Extremely disappointing".
2nd, speaking in regards to a company that produces adventure games, the better selection would without question be the option that pleases the customers that gives your company the vast majority of its return business (adventure gamers), not the customers that are going to disappear once this series is over (non adventure gamers). Trying to argue otherwise, to make a quick buck on this series, is a big mistake. Its never a good decision to alienate your core customers and anyone who argues otherwise has no place in the business world.
3rd, its kind of hard to have someone running around saying things like ""this game is SHIT. it was very confusing, i had no clue what to do, all this walking and talking. OMG, i cant take it anymore" when there is a hint button right at the top of the page. If they still cant get it even after a hint then that is a BIG sign to stay away from the adventure genre, period. Choosing to design the game for people like this is a mistake of epic proportions. You make adventure games for people that like and play adventure games. You dont see EA designing Madden Football for people that have no interest in football games. You dont see Bioware designing RPG's for people that have no interest in RPG games. You dont see Bungie designing first person shooter games specifically for people that hate first person shooters. It makes absolutely zero sense and ultimately taking this approach is going to have poor results every single time, at least for the crowd that has the most interest in that particular genre.
9 out of 10 adventure games may be too easy but they still dont come anywhere even close to matching this game in regards to just how easy it really was. Not even in the same ballpark. Not even in the same area code. Not even in the same solar system. Not even in the same galaxy. In fact, were talking a completely different universe, maybe even different dimensions altogether. Lets just sum it up by saying that even comparing BTTF's level of ease to other adventure games difficulty level is an exercise in utter futility. There is no comparison.
They are an adventure game company. The game was advertised as an adventure game. That means that it should have been made for BTTF fans that liked adventure games or even adventure game fans that were unfamiliar with the IP, not BTTF fans that hate adventure games and not BTTF fans that have never played an adventure game before (take your pick).
You dont make adventure games for X amount of years, thus building up a very dedicated core customer group, and then suddenly decide your going to cater to the beginner crowd with the best IP license the company has scored yet, one that had all of this companies CORE customers literally counting the days till it was released. Its a TERRIBLE IDEA, one that I still have an extremely hard time coming to terms with. Its one of the worst business decisions I think I have ever seen in regards to gaming.
And with some solutions, it may not even be an either-or question: for instance, if in the beginning of the game you could set a difficulty level, then that could please both fans of the genre as well as beginners (though one should be careful to even give the beginner some good puzzles, or they may never get hooked on the genre because they end up with an interactive movie and they may not like that).
Now, having the user set a difficulty level is a bit of a fourth-wall breaker (any option is a burden on the player... I'm not sure which recent TellTale game asked me about whether or not I wanted to see hints or something, and it asked it even before I started playing... how do *I* know what to select? I haven't even played yet! Don't force choices on players, allow them to skip). However, there are alternatives to this. For instance, by checking how well the player fares on the first 3 or so easy puzzles, one could increase the level of difficulty automatically if apparently those puzzles were solved quickly. This approach could repeat throughout the game: There could be extra bits of plots which, if you're detected to be a beginner, play out automatically like a movie... but if you're detected to be an advanced player, then you'd have to solve that part.
In short, Telltale makes adventure games for mothers-in-law, not adventure games for adventure gamers. If you can accept that fact, you can enjoy their games on that level. If you can't... well, you can't.
You're assuming that it's an either-or choice when in fact, making a game more accessible and intuitive to use can even appeal to gamers (I would love if TellTale could come up with an even easier way to handle the inventory, for instance... quite a bit of opening and closing the inventory at the moment) -- and don't forget that the *gamers* may be the people who end up installing it on mothers-in-law computer in the first place.
Again, let the game adjust its difficulty automatically (or by selection), and then have both the benefit of gamers liking it and spreading the word to non-gamers, as well as non-gamers liking it. The article gives a perfect example of how it's important for the first room to actually introduce the genre -- don't even start with a real puzzle here, just go through the motions in the easiest way possible, even if it means to tell the player to "click there then click there" etc. (Starting with a puzzle that requires you to
I don't think anyone here would complain if BTTF's first room would have been a quasi-tutorial. I don't think any of us is elitist, we do enjoy if everyone can enjoy the game. Guide the players who need that for as long as they need it, just know when to stop; just know when the player is apparently advancing too fast.
Right now, I'm waiting to see how Episode 2 fares before I suggest this to my friend (he's a big Back to the Future fan but I don't know how many adventure games he played).
I know the article! As a matter of fact, I even asked Dave for the permission to translate his piece into Italian.
It's groundbreaking and extremely intelligent.
That said, I think the article assumes you should design the beginning of your games that way to introduce "mother-in-laws" to the idea of "thinking by themselves".
I mean: if this first episode was designed like that to introduce a whole non-gamer audience to the adventure genre, well... that's great. It works like a charm. Best effort ever.
There would be no reason to keep the difficulty that low for the rest of the season, though: I suppose even "mother-in-laws" would end up desiring some real challenges to solve, sooner or later, once they got what adventure games are about.
Otherwise, I am afraid we need a more radical rethinking of the game design. If I remove the "traditional" challenge from an adventure game in order to make it accessible, I have to compensate the loss with extras, i.e. more looping and funny action-sequences (I really liked the lab section), relaxed minigames and an intelligent point-system (Strong Bad got it right but kinda lost it on the long run), nonlinear exploration, plot crossroads which react to my choices (see Heavy Rain, which is one hell of a mainstream story game).
Some of the plain classic adventure gaming mechanics sound a little flat if you don't charge them with a bit (just a bit!) of lateral thinking.
I'm all for Telltale experimenting with game-design to get that "mainstream" unique design-style, but BTTF is in serious need of some new ideas such as Strong Bad collateral activities, Max's psychic powers or... something else.
I AM saying that. I may not be a hardcore adventure gamer, but I did grow up with Sierra, so I'm used to a much higher difficulty than this. And yet, the BTTF elements I loved more than made up for any disappointments with the lack-of-difficulty.
*sobs*
[Is hard-core RPG fan]
Please, lol.
Well agree to disagree in regards to Bioware but the fact that you feel this way and are not at all happy about it just backs up what I am saying. Its simply not a good idea.
First of all I was specifically talking about the reaction of hardcore adventure gamers and you openly admit you aren't one. So no offense but I could care less what your saying especially in regards to my statement. 2nd even if you were a hardcore adventure gamer, which again you openly admitted you weren't, I never said that there weren't any hardcore adventure gamers saying such a thing. I said that the VAST majority of posts that I have seen from hardcore adventure gamers aren't saying what he said they were saying. Taking both of these into account, your post proves absolutely nothing and was ultimately a complete waste of time.
Part of the point of the puzzles is also to get the player interested in exploring everywhere and listening to all the dialogue to figure things out. Its a way of putting more things in the game than you can in a movie without making it boring.
One of the best adventure games is Loom, which is really pretty easy, but its nicely done.
That said, I really would like the game to be more difficult and more expansive (like being able to go in all the 1931 shops). Yet if there are puzzles they should fit the plot somehow, I found that too many in ToMI were just arbitrary to put in the game. Jungle sounds? wth.
I said I MAY not be one, merely because I don't know what your standards of being "hardcore" are. I grew up on adventure games, I play adventure games more than any other genre of game, but I haven't played every adventure game ever made.
Fair enough. But I've seen more positive reviews than negative, even if the positive reviews come with stipulations.
I admire your openness to civil discourse.