›

Suggestion for future episodes, Win/Lose choices

ChomposaurChomposaur
edited September 2012 in The Walking Dead
So far I'm loving the Walking Dead episodes, but I would enjoy more decisions that you can actually "fail" in a sense. The best example would be stopping Clem from eating human meat in Ep. 2 depending on how fast you get there.
Most choices in this game seems to be lose/lose ( whether you save Carley or Doug, someone still dies, so it's not really your fault ). Add a moment where choosing to investigate a certain store may get someone killed, where as avoiding it would leave everyone alive. In the comics, Rick always struggles with whether he's to blame for getting others killed, and I think it would add some depth to the game ( and to Lee ) if the player was in a similar situation.
The only problem would be that players could easily reload to pick the right options.

Comments

  • Master of AeonsMaster of Aeons
    edited September 2012
    Adventure Gaming has meant for a long time that it's impossible to die or make a choice that irredeemably breaks your game. In days of ole, you could end up in unwinnable situations by not picking up an item (sometimes it was visible, sometimes it was hidden). This was largely phased out by LucasArts in favor of a gentler approach that allowed you to choose funny dialogue options and try everything without consequence.

    Games in general have been getting easier across the gamut. While before Mario had 5 lives and had to go through each level in constant succession, now you can return to old levels to farm lives. Dying becomes less painful with every passing game. Instead of restarting the game, you lose 20 seconds of playtime. Games no longer punish players. There is Hard Normal and a new setting that makes enemies take your hand and walk you to the ending cinematic.

    While there are a few examples of being able to screw yourself into a Game Over (silence in the Kenny fight scene is one), Telltale is probably going to avoid that as much as possible. It goes against Adventure Game rules and it's contrary to modern gaming.
  • thestalkingheadthestalkinghead
    edited September 2012
    Master of Aeons wrote: »
    Adventure Gaming has meant for a long time that it's impossible to die or make a choice that irredeemably breaks your game. In days of ole, you could end up in unwinnable situations by not picking up an item (sometimes it was visible, sometimes it was hidden). This was largely phased out by LucasArts in favor of a gentler approach that allowed you to choose funny dialogue options and try everything without consequence.

    Games in general have been getting easier across the gamut. While before Mario had 5 lives and had to go through each level in constant succession, now you can return to old levels to farm lives. Dying becomes less painful with every passing game. Instead of restarting the game, you lose 20 seconds of playtime. Games no longer punish players. There is Hard Normal and a new setting that makes enemies take your hand and walk you to the ending cinematic.

    While there are a few examples of being able to screw yourself into a Game Over (silence in the Kenny fight scene is one), Telltale is probably going to avoid that as much as possible. It goes against Adventure Game rules and it's contrary to modern gaming.

    thats because games are different to real life, in a game if the is something you dont pick up or use it makes the game unwinnable that is just stupid and annoying, then you start again but this time use or pick up that thing (and the less time replaying something because you have to not because you want to the better) so they just stopped doing things like that, in real life you cant start again but in a game you can, so you have to make things different
  • shammackshammack Former Telltale Staff
    edited September 2012
    Chomposaur wrote: »
    The only problem would be that players could easily reload to pick the right options.

    That's a pretty big problem, though.
This discussion has been closed.