In fairness, though, I've only seen trailers and minor game play when it comes to Survival Instinct, but it just doesn't seem like it'd be up my alley. Not to mention that you're comparing an RPG and FPS. I think, because of the forum you're posting it on, you're going to hear predominantly that people prefer TTG's The Walking Dead Game.
Personally, I do like FPS, but I prefer RPGs. And considering I prefer the comics to the show, I feel it's safe to assume I'd prefer the storyline of TTG's TWD to Activision's. However, when it inevitably goes on sale for super-cheap, I'll probably pick up a copy and give it a try hehe.
I bought the walking dead survival instinct and ended up returning it (selling) the very next day and got TOMB RAIDER! Very happy I did, cause Tomb Raider is pretty amazing, and im not a fan of the previous games.
The Walking dead throws you in the story right away, with avg graphics and boring missions. Nothing really changes, and seems like a half attempt at making a game. I found it boring, repetitive, and half assed at an attempt of the show. AVOID if you can, but I can understand people curious to see it. I would just wait on The Walking Dead (Telltale) to come out with a new episode.
....EXTREMELY BUGGY point and click game with a FANTASTIC STORY.
vs
....VERY ROUGH first person TWD version of THE LAST STAND 2.
I'd say they're equal.
The only major glitch that's actually common is the savegame one, and while that is very serious it doesn't constitute "extremely" buggy. A better example of extremely buggy would be Sonic 06, or if it counts, big rigs.
Also, i would normally expect full retail games to be far superior to flash games(even though i loved the Last Stand games).
A better example of extremely buggy would be Sonic 06, or if it counts, big rigs.
You mean to say that big rigs constitutes as a game :eek:?
Jokes aside, I haven't even played Survival Instinct and TWD by Telltale is better. I might be a little biased however, considering that TWD by Telltale is my favorite game of all time.
The only major glitch that's actually common is the savegame one, and while that is very serious it doesn't constitute "extremely" buggy. A better example of extremely buggy would be Sonic 06, or if it counts, big rigs.
Also, i would normally expect full retail games to be far superior to flash games(even though i loved the Last Stand games).
I've got a bug that makes it impossible to save on any slot but slot 3.
I gave survival instinct a 1 overall, whereas I have TWD game a 10 of 10. I experienced buggy gameplay, but the game still blew my mind. Check out the reviews of SI, and you'll understand why you SHOULD NOT buy it!!!! The game sucks so bad, and I went through the entire game(didnt buy it though :P) still, it makes telltale's bugs look super minor in comparison. There were invisible walls the walkers couldn't get through xD that and barriers you as the main couldn't get through(especially small fences).
I am a serious walking dead fan, and this game made me want to throw up. If you bought it already, try it yourself. If you like it, beat it, and then immediately sell it, unless you want to play it again, at which point you should slam your head against the nearest wall. If you haven't bought it yet, look it up. Just don't go buy it, it's terrible, and I'd hate to see people loss out $50.
I've got a bug that makes it impossible to save on any slot but slot 3.
I call that extremely buggy.
No, that's an extreme bug. The word "extremely" indicates that the game is bugged to an extreme condition, which would necessitate an extreme quantity of bugs in addition to an extreme severity as well as an extreme extent of reach. What you have is a single extreme bug that only some people have, but from what I've seen, the majority of people don't. Ergo, the game is not "extremely buggy" you are just "extremely unlucky" to suffer that bug.
Words mean things.
No, that's an extreme bug. The word "extremely" indicates that the game is bugged to an extreme condition, which would necessitate an extreme quantity of bugs in addition to an extreme severity as well as an extreme extent of reach. What you have is a single extreme bug that only some people have, but from what I've seen, the majority of people don't. Ergo, the game is not "extremely buggy" you are just "extremely unlucky" to suffer that bug.
Words mean things.
No, the game is extremely buggy. Majority of my friends, and LPers I've watched, have had their save files deleted on the computer. Most people who played on the PS3, or at least a large sum, encounter extreme lag on a regular basis. I'm not sure about Xbox people, all I know is when I play it on my Xbox I have save file deleting problems like people who play on a computer. If a couple of common gamebreaking bugs don't count as "extremely buggy", then I don't know what does.
No, the game is extremely buggy. Majority of my friends, and LPers I've watched, have had their save files deleted on the computer. Most people who played on the PS3, or at least a large sum, encounter extreme lag on a regular basis. I'm not sure about Xbox people, all I know is when I play it on my Xbox I have save file deleting problems like people who play on a computer. If a couple of common gamebreaking bugs don't count as "extremely buggy", then I don't know what does.
What should constitute extremely buggy is when it is physically impossible to play and complete any portion of the game, or the number of glitches regardless of severity is extreme(e.g. 10 different glitches on a single level).
But I would say awards and ratings speak for themselves if you really are serious. Actvision screws up 90% of the good ideas that come into their hands. SI had potential to be sweet, but ended up sucking something awful. Resold it to gamestop the day I bought it.
No - extremely buggy means (and I'm coining this) "Enough bugs that you have to fight the game to have fun."
The idea that most people (the apologists) are willing to accept substandard playability has always amazed me.
I mean, I love this game to no end -- but it was the story that kept me playing, not their coding ability.
Better get a patent on that...
There are still many people who do not have technical difficulties with TTG's game. It is indeed a widespread problem(and hopefully fixed for season 2), but extreme words should be reserved for glitches that 100% of the customers will always encounter, no exceptions.
Regardless... Survival Instincts' shortcomings are something that no one will ever be able to avoid, so it shouldn't be compared to a problem only some people encounter.
Clearly Survival Instinct is the winner here. It has cutting-edge graphics, compelling, thought-provoking storytelling, and state-of-the-art gameplay.
And what does Telltale's game have? A black guy. I mean really.
Okay... It has no thought-provoking storytelling, you can make it through the entire game with enough gas, your knife, and Gatorade xD. The graphics were worse than Telltale's considering TWD game looked comic-like on purpose, Activision tried to make the game look good and failed. State-of-the-art gameplay!? It was all the same animation! What game were you playing man!?
I just can't believe you'd say all that considering you are on a thread for Telltale :O and I'm not even biased, I'm just saying how I see the game, and it was a 3 of 10 or less for TWDSI. Activision even voted on itself to try to increase their ratings. Pisses me off.
Okay... It has no thought-provoking storytelling, you can make it through the entire game with enough gas, your knife, and Gatorade xD. The graphics were worse than Telltale's considering TWD game looked comic-like on purpose, Activision tried to make the game look good and failed. State-of-the-art gameplay!? It was all the same animation! What game were you playing man!?
I just can't believe you'd say all that considering you are on a thread for Telltale :O and I'm not even biased, I'm just saying how I see the game, and it was a 3 of 10 or less for TWDSI. Activision even voted on itself to try to increase their ratings. Pisses me off.
It was fairly obvious that aerial-ballet wasn't serious, and whether you realize it or not, responding to such a silly comment in a serious manner only gives them more to make fun of. That's all I meant.
Comments
In fairness, though, I've only seen trailers and minor game play when it comes to Survival Instinct, but it just doesn't seem like it'd be up my alley. Not to mention that you're comparing an RPG and FPS. I think, because of the forum you're posting it on, you're going to hear predominantly that people prefer TTG's The Walking Dead Game.
Personally, I do like FPS, but I prefer RPGs. And considering I prefer the comics to the show, I feel it's safe to assume I'd prefer the storyline of TTG's TWD to Activision's. However, when it inevitably goes on sale for super-cheap, I'll probably pick up a copy and give it a try hehe.
The Walking dead throws you in the story right away, with avg graphics and boring missions. Nothing really changes, and seems like a half attempt at making a game. I found it boring, repetitive, and half assed at an attempt of the show. AVOID if you can, but I can understand people curious to see it. I would just wait on The Walking Dead (Telltale) to come out with a new episode.
....EXTREMELY BUGGY point and click game with a FANTASTIC STORY.
vs
....VERY ROUGH first person TWD version of THE LAST STAND 2.
I'd say they're equal.
The only major glitch that's actually common is the savegame one, and while that is very serious it doesn't constitute "extremely" buggy. A better example of extremely buggy would be Sonic 06, or if it counts, big rigs.
Also, i would normally expect full retail games to be far superior to flash games(even though i loved the Last Stand games).
Jokes aside, I haven't even played Survival Instinct and TWD by Telltale is better. I might be a little biased however, considering that TWD by Telltale is my favorite game of all time.
I've got a bug that makes it impossible to save on any slot but slot 3.
I call that extremely buggy.
I am a serious walking dead fan, and this game made me want to throw up. If you bought it already, try it yourself. If you like it, beat it, and then immediately sell it, unless you want to play it again, at which point you should slam your head against the nearest wall. If you haven't bought it yet, look it up. Just don't go buy it, it's terrible, and I'd hate to see people loss out $50.
But I've seen gameplays of TWDSI and it doesn't seem as bad as people say it is. I'll probably get it once it 's under $20
No, that's an extreme bug. The word "extremely" indicates that the game is bugged to an extreme condition, which would necessitate an extreme quantity of bugs in addition to an extreme severity as well as an extreme extent of reach. What you have is a single extreme bug that only some people have, but from what I've seen, the majority of people don't. Ergo, the game is not "extremely buggy" you are just "extremely unlucky" to suffer that bug.
Words mean things.
Cpt. Sqweky said so. :rolleyes:
What should constitute extremely buggy is when it is physically impossible to play and complete any portion of the game, or the number of glitches regardless of severity is extreme(e.g. 10 different glitches on a single level).
The idea that most people (the apologists) are willing to accept substandard playability has always amazed me.
I mean, I love this game to no end -- but it was the story that kept me playing, not their coding ability.
Perfect answer right here.
But I would say awards and ratings speak for themselves if you really are serious. Actvision screws up 90% of the good ideas that come into their hands. SI had potential to be sweet, but ended up sucking something awful. Resold it to gamestop the day I bought it.
Better get a patent on that...
There are still many people who do not have technical difficulties with TTG's game. It is indeed a widespread problem(and hopefully fixed for season 2), but extreme words should be reserved for glitches that 100% of the customers will always encounter, no exceptions.
Regardless... Survival Instincts' shortcomings are something that no one will ever be able to avoid, so it shouldn't be compared to a problem only some people encounter.
And what does Telltale's game have? A black guy.
Okay... It has no thought-provoking storytelling, you can make it through the entire game with enough gas, your knife, and Gatorade xD. The graphics were worse than Telltale's considering TWD game looked comic-like on purpose, Activision tried to make the game look good and failed. State-of-the-art gameplay!? It was all the same animation! What game were you playing man!?
I just can't believe you'd say all that considering you are on a thread for Telltale :O and I'm not even biased, I'm just saying how I see the game, and it was a 3 of 10 or less for TWDSI. Activision even voted on itself to try to increase their ratings. Pisses me off.
I think he was being sarcastic, lol.
which one is the troll, that was some of the most blatant sarcasm i have seen in text form
It was fairly obvious that aerial-ballet wasn't serious, and whether you realize it or not, responding to such a silly comment in a serious manner only gives them more to make fun of. That's all I meant.
I'll keep my crappy jokes to myself next time!
Nah man, I just thought you were serious... lol. My bad.
Rushed Activision game VS GOTY award winning time-consuming (Episode 2 and subsequent episodes were more then a month late) TellTale game.
Exactly, so I was just taken back lol. But yeah, no question the game wins. I prefer it over all the other forms, truthfully.
I played TTG's once (technically twice since I had to replay episode 1-4 again due to a bug) while I played TR's game twice....