It's been done numerous times in numerous other adventure games before.
Name five which have done it well.
Designing good, narrative driven puzzles and integrating them into a traditional adventure game is the brunt of the work, and I expect the task to be taken seriously when attempted. I see no reason to make optional what would then be the major interactive mechanic in the game. Puzzles are not facultative sprinkles on the traditional adventure game cake, they are the cake.
You either have puzzles or you don't. There is no sensible middle ground. Telltale decided to go another way and scene.
"For the money"? I don't think so. The ongoing steady reduction of game mechanics is the number one point of critique even among steadfast fans of the company, it's just that the newer people ask for more and larger hubs, more choices, visible consequences and more interactive dialog instead of puzzles.
If 'less game' automatically catered to the mainstream, the entire industry would be doomed.
Why not have a cinematic difficulty and a puzzle difficulty? It's been done numerous times in numerous other adventure games before.
The… more simple answer? They couldn't care any less about the fans who made them what they are, and are only interested in catering to mainstream audiences that wouldn't even be able to figure out puzzles that amount to little more than basic common sense busywork.
Monkey Island 2, Curse of Monkey Island, I think most of the Tex Murphy games did it as well, and, to a lesser extent, 100% of Telltale's earlier work had a form of difficulty setting by way of hints that gradually got more and more painfully obvious.
The point isn't that all adventure games ever have done it, the point is that it can easily be done and allows the game to cater to two different audiences. The ones who want the illusion of choice in a cinematic experience, and the ones who actually want to play an adventure game.
PS: Less game DOES cater to the mainstream. Call of Duty sells tens of millions of copies despite having a pathetically short campaign and only a handful of multiplayer maps per release.
It's been done numerous times in numerous other adventure games before.
Name five which have done it well.
Designing good, narrat… moreive driven puzzles and integrating them into a traditional adventure game is the brunt of the work, and I expect the task to be taken seriously when attempted. I see no reason to make optional what would then be the major interactive mechanic in the game. Puzzles are not facultative sprinkles on the traditional adventure game cake, they are the cake.
You either have puzzles or you don't. There is no sensible middle ground. Telltale decided to go another way and scene.
"For the money"? I don't think so. The ongoing steady reduction of game mechanics is the number one point of critique even among steadfast fans of the company, it's just that the newer people ask for more and larger hubs, more choices, visible consequences and more interactive dialog instead of puzzles.
If 'less game' automatically catered to the mainstream, the entire industry would be doomed.
Anyone who thinks they didn't move in the direction they've taken because of the appeal of mainstream low effort high reward cash is incredibly delusional. If they had any other license but The Walking Dead, they'd have failed miserably with these "games." The only reason the game was successful was that the TV show is literally one of the most popular shows to have ever existed, and people bought into it. If they had used the George Romero license to do exactly the same game with the same characters, no one would have cared, because the gameplay isn't satisfying in the slightest. Every game they've done since TWD has simply ridden its success to the bank. If TWD hadn't come first, no one would have ever heard of or cared about TWAU.
Their current direction is the most profitable direction they could take as a business, but that doesn't mean I have to like them for it, nor does it mean that I'm not allowed to feel betrayed after spending $2,000+ on their products only for them to literally never release a game that I wanted to play in the last 4 years.
"We, Telltale Games Inc, solemnly swear to revive the adventure game genre in exactly the form defined by ShodanFreeman, from the founding day of the studio till death do us part."
So what if they are going for the big name licenses? It can be both a natural progression and one that's aimed at financial security (which is certainly the case here, since you can see them gradually heading in their current direction as early as Sam & Max: The Devil's Playhouse, and that was before the big name licenses). It's OK to like things that have a big name attached to them, and it's also OK to like their current games as well as their old ones, or even just the new ones.
It's also alright that you don't like their current direction. It's a little silly to feel betrayed though. I never get that mentality. I spent thousands of dollars on LucasArts adventure games. I enjoyed them. I still enjoy them. I don't regret paying that much to buy them (the only thing I do regret is that I don't have the discs that I purchased when I was a kid anymore), and I don't regret buying the ones that are available digitally again either.
LucasArts stopped making adventure games when they cancelled Sam & Max: Freelance Police, and I was upset about the cancelation, but I didn't feel betrayed (any company doesn't just make products for just one audience, or even continue making products for any one particular audience forever, no matter how much we may wish it so). I just stopped buying new LucasArts games.
That didn't stop the fact that I still liked the LucasArts adventure games (or stop me from buying the adventure games again on the used game market or when they were released digitally). Sure, I wished that they made adventure games again, but I didn't feel betrayed by the fact that they didn't, or upset that I spent so much money on them. I just kept playing the games that I liked that they made, and played adventure games made by other companies (and the same goes with Sierra, who I also spent tons of money on adventure games in my childhood and don't regret doing it one bit).
Anyone who thinks they didn't move in the direction they've taken because of the appeal of mainstream low effort high reward cash is incredi… morebly delusional. If they had any other license but The Walking Dead, they'd have failed miserably with these "games." The only reason the game was successful was that the TV show is literally one of the most popular shows to have ever existed, and people bought into it. If they had used the George Romero license to do exactly the same game with the same characters, no one would have cared, because the gameplay isn't satisfying in the slightest. Every game they've done since TWD has simply ridden its success to the bank. If TWD hadn't come first, no one would have ever heard of or cared about TWAU.
Their current direction is the most profitable direction they could take as a business, but that doesn't mean I have to like them for it, nor does it mean that I'm not allowed to feel betrayed after spend… [view original content]
Nothing good comes from a sentence that starts out like that.
As to the 'delusional' people: Don't think even for one second that Bone was dropped in favor of Sam & Max and Monkey Island merely because of the fictitious oath Telltale has sworn according to you. Telltale has always moved towards the most popular franchises they could get their hands on, and the adventure game fans have profited from that for years.
You can't point the finger at a newly acquired popular franchise calling it "cash grab" when you only came aboard the forums because of another newly acquired popular franchise. Which undoubtedly is the case here for most of the fervent opposers of Telltale's latest venture.
Anyone who thinks they didn't move in the direction they've taken because of the appeal of mainstream low effort high reward cash is incredi… morebly delusional. If they had any other license but The Walking Dead, they'd have failed miserably with these "games." The only reason the game was successful was that the TV show is literally one of the most popular shows to have ever existed, and people bought into it. If they had used the George Romero license to do exactly the same game with the same characters, no one would have cared, because the gameplay isn't satisfying in the slightest. Every game they've done since TWD has simply ridden its success to the bank. If TWD hadn't come first, no one would have ever heard of or cared about TWAU.
Their current direction is the most profitable direction they could take as a business, but that doesn't mean I have to like them for it, nor does it mean that I'm not allowed to feel betrayed after spend… [view original content]
Bone was dropped because no one bought it. Sam and Max hadn't had a video game in a decade when they made that. Strong Bad was pretty far out of its prime when they made that game as well. Monkey Island hadn't had a game in nearly 9 years when they made that. Wallace and Gromit is barely even known in the US. When you compare any of these to Back to the Future, Jurassic Park, The Walking Dead, or Game of Thrones, you'd have to be ignorant to think they're even close to being on the same level of popularity. Some obscure 10 year old adventure game series, a web cartoon that not many people had really cared about in 3-4 years at the time of the game, and a profoundly British series are nowhere close to being even half as popular combined as even one of those franchises.
My forum join date is in 2005, if you didn't bother to check. I joined as soon as I heard that a bunch of ex-LucasArts/Freelance Police developers were making adventure games, so your argument that "another newly acquired popular franchise" brought me here is wildly incorrect. The only game they had out at the time was Telltale Texas Hold 'em, and Bone wasn't out yet. Besides that, I had never even heard of Bone before they made the games.
Anyone who thinks
Nothing good comes from a sentence that starts out like that.
As to the 'delusional' people: Don't think even f… moreor one second that Bone was dropped in favor of Sam & Max and Monkey Island merely because of the fictitious oath Telltale has sworn according to you. Telltale has always moved towards the most popular franchises they could get their hands on, and the adventure game fans have profited from that for years.
You can't point the finger at a newly acquired popular franchise calling it "cash grab" when you only came aboard the forums because of another newly acquired popular franchise. Which undoubtedly is the case here for most of the fervent opposers of Telltale's latest venture.
I bought each game Telltale made up until 2010 between 3 and 5 times over, simply because they were the only studio making the games I wanted to play. I was under the impression that when you support something you love, they will reward you by continuing to make the things that you love. The Devil's Playhouse was ten thousand times the adventure game that Back to the Future was. When there was a colossal backlash on the forums about how dumbed down and boring BttF was, they basically ignored us, and continued on their merry way. It's just too bad that Jurassic Park being a totally botched failure didn't dissuade them from continuing in that direction.
If you didn't notice, TTG ignoring their community became more and more apparent as time went by. A great example of them not caring about what anyone in their community says or wants is this atrocious new forum layout. Every single person absolutely hated it, including all of the mods, and they basically said "oh, well, shut up, it's how it will be." It took dozens of people downvoting every post Kevin made to get them to get rid of the downvote "feature", because everyone unanimously disliking it wasn't enough of a reason for them to can it.
So what if they are going for the big name licenses? It can be both a natural progression and one that's aimed at financial security (which… more is certainly the case here, since you can see them gradually heading in their current direction as early as Sam & Max: The Devil's Playhouse, and that was before the big name licenses). It's OK to like things that have a big name attached to them, and it's also OK to like their current games as well as their old ones, or even just the new ones.
It's also alright that you don't like their current direction. It's a little silly to feel betrayed though. I never get that mentality. I spent thousands of dollars on LucasArts adventure games. I enjoyed them. I still enjoy them. I don't regret paying that much to buy them (the only thing I do regret is that I don't have the discs that I purchased when I was a kid anymore), and I don't regret buying the ones that are available digitally again either… [view original content]
Anyone who thinks they didn't move in the direction they've taken because of the appeal of mainstream low effort high reward cash is incredi… morebly delusional. If they had any other license but The Walking Dead, they'd have failed miserably with these "games." The only reason the game was successful was that the TV show is literally one of the most popular shows to have ever existed, and people bought into it. If they had used the George Romero license to do exactly the same game with the same characters, no one would have cared, because the gameplay isn't satisfying in the slightest. Every game they've done since TWD has simply ridden its success to the bank. If TWD hadn't come first, no one would have ever heard of or cared about TWAU.
Their current direction is the most profitable direction they could take as a business, but that doesn't mean I have to like them for it, nor does it mean that I'm not allowed to feel betrayed after spend… [view original content]
It's 100% accurate. They collected as much money as they could from myself and other fans like me, and then effectively decided that they didn't care about making even a single game to appeal to us for half a decade. If that's not betraying your fanbase, I don't know what is.
It's 100% accurate. They collected as much money as they could from myself and other fans like me, and then effectively decided that they d… moreidn't care about making even a single game to appeal to us for half a decade. If that's not betraying your fanbase, I don't know what is.
You really shouldn't buy things with the impression that the company will keep making those things, you should buy them because you like them. If you do the former, you're only liable to get disappointed. Telltale wanted to grow, to become a publisher, and get big name licenses (they've always been that way, they started off getting the CSI license to pay for things, then moved on to bigger licenses to grow). To do that, there's no way they could stay in a niche market forever. If companies want to leave a niche market, they always end up taking risks. Sometimes that risk pays off, as it has with Telltale (the forum was as much a risk as their formula for making games. They put a lot of money into the development of it, they weren't just going to scrap it, they were going to hope that people would adapt to it, and continue to develop it to improve it, which they have (especially on the non-visable backend, as the tools we have now as mods is better in some ways than the old forum)).
There's always a chance that they'll do something more niche in the future as a one episode release in between seasons though (with a potential for future episodes if the first one sells well like Puzzle Agent or Poker Night), as they've hinted that their Pilot Program is still alive and well.
@SHODANFreeman wrote:
It took dozens of people downvoting every post Kevin made to get them to get rid of the downvote "feature", because everyone unanimously disliking it wasn't enough of a reason for them to can it.
You're partially right. It was indeed the down vote trolls such as those you mentioned who kept down voting every post that a particular forum user made just to spite people that ruined it. I was very saddened when so many of the old forum people became immature trolls, and broadcasted it proudly like so many trolls do. I really thought that they were better than that.
I bought each game Telltale made up until 2010 between 3 and 5 times over, simply because they were the only studio making the games I wante… mored to play. I was under the impression that when you support something you love, they will reward you by continuing to make the things that you love. The Devil's Playhouse was ten thousand times the adventure game that Back to the Future was. When there was a colossal backlash on the forums about how dumbed down and boring BttF was, they basically ignored us, and continued on their merry way. It's just too bad that Jurassic Park being a totally botched failure didn't dissuade them from continuing in that direction.
If you didn't notice, TTG ignoring their community became more and more apparent as time went by. A great example of them not caring about what anyone in their community says or wants is this atrocious new forum layout. Every single person absolutely hated it, including all of the mods,… [view original content]
TellTale never began as an company only targeted towards adults. They target all audiences to build diversity with light-hearted games such as Back to The Future, Sam & Max or Monkey Island before the TWD and TWAU. Even though I feel mixed about TellTale trying to make a story from Minecraft, which essentially doesn't even really have a story as much as it has you creating it yourself thorugh the world. The truth is, TellTale should be allowed to make whatever it is they want. I will be honest and admit I was skeptical about Tales from the Borderlands when it was announced back earlier last year. After playing Episode 1, I am almost considering it my GOTY for 2015 if Telltale keeps it up. Seriously, let's just wait see what happens and then we can make our own opinions about the game instead of assumptions about it before we even see a trailer of it.
You really shouldn't buy things with the impression that the company will keep making those things, you should buy them because you like the… morem. If you do the former, you're only liable to get disappointed. Telltale wanted to grow, to become a publisher, and get big name licenses (they've always been that way, they started off getting the CSI license to pay for things, then moved on to bigger licenses to grow). To do that, there's no way they could stay in a niche market forever. If companies want to leave a niche market, they always end up taking risks. Sometimes that risk pays off, as it has with Telltale (the forum was as much a risk as their formula for making games. They put a lot of money into the development of it, they weren't just going to scrap it, they were going to hope that people would adapt to it, and continue to develop it to improve it, which they have (especially on the non-visable backend, as the tools we have now as mo… [view original content]
There are much better ways to protest. Abusing the system by downvoting every single post that a single forum user posted regardless of its content is not protesting, it's trolling. In fact, that's the very definition of a downvote troll.
What "better ways" could people have protested, beyond downvoting a single user (specifically the one who had been condescending to us about how much "better" the new forums were, and how we should just accept all the new changes because he liked them) to make a point?
They were downvoting him in an effort to get them to realize that it was not a useful feature for the forum to have, not just to be a jerk. There's a pretty big difference and if you don't see that, then I don't know what to say.
There are much better ways to protest. Abusing the system by downvoting every single post that a single forum user posted regardless of its content is not protesting, it's trolling. In fact, that's the very definition of a downvote troll.
In the end, constant constructive criticism was what did it, since it took over a year for the staff to change it and they only did it when people were making so many posts asking for it to be removed (Kevin's down voting just made him stop coming to the forums, and made most of the staff afraid to come around here, which wasn't a great thing at all). All it ended up doing was making a huge mess for the moderation team since the tools weren't in place to handle much at the time (since there was so much downvoting going on, it was impossible to tell who was downvoting just staff and who was downvoting everyone, and people bragging about downvoting while we were dealing with that really wasn't helping since it was impossible to tell the entirety of who exactly those people were downvoting) so we really didn't appreciate it.
What "better ways" could people have protested, beyond downvoting a single user (specifically the one who had been condescending to us about… more how much "better" the new forums were, and how we should just accept all the new changes because he liked them) to make a point?
They were downvoting him in an effort to get them to realize that it was not a useful feature for the forum to have, not just to be a jerk. There's a pretty big difference and if you don't see that, then I don't know what to say.
The staff had largely stopped posting well before that incident (I believe around the time Yare got into some hot water for a comment he made about iPhone being more powerful than Wii), and Kevin had only shown up at that time specifically to answer questions in a thread he created. He otherwise has always been largely absent from the forums. Downvoting him had nothing to do with his limited presence here. It was made very clear that no one thought downvoting posts was a good idea, and the best way to communicate that was to make Kevin's posts an example, since they hadn't listened to the months and months of criticism they'd been receiving from users and mods alike.
How on earth could a tiny little thumbs down count on a post "make a huge mess for the moderation team"?
In the end, constant constructive criticism was what did it, since it took over a year for the staff to change it and they only did it when … morepeople were making so many posts asking for it to be removed (Kevin's down voting just made him stop coming to the forums, and made most of the staff afraid to come around here, which wasn't a great thing at all). All it ended up doing was making a huge mess for the moderation team since the tools weren't in place to handle much at the time (since there was so much downvoting going on, it was impossible to tell who was downvoting just staff and who was downvoting everyone, and people bragging about downvoting while we were dealing with that really wasn't helping since it was impossible to tell the entirety of who exactly those people were downvoting) so we really didn't appreciate it.
It took dozens of people downvoting every post Kevin made to get them to get rid of the downvote "feature", because everyone unanimously disliking it wasn't enough of a reason for them to can it.
Actually, downvotes were removed much later than that - around the end of last Summer, I believe, whereas the downvote "protesting" happened around September 2013 or so.
The staff had largely stopped posting well before that incident (I believe around the time Yare got into some hot water for a comment he mad… moree about iPhone being more powerful than Wii), and Kevin had only shown up at that time specifically to answer questions in a thread he created. He otherwise has always been largely absent from the forums. Downvoting him had nothing to do with his limited presence here. It was made very clear that no one thought downvoting posts was a good idea, and the best way to communicate that was to make Kevin's posts an example, since they hadn't listened to the months and months of criticism they'd been receiving from users and mods alike.
How on earth could a tiny little thumbs down count on a post "make a huge mess for the moderation team"?
It took dozens of people downvoting every post Kevin made to get them to get rid of the downvote "feature", because everyone unanimously dis… moreliking it wasn't enough of a reason for them to can it.
Actually, downvotes were removed much later than that - around the end of last Summer, I believe, whereas the downvote "protesting" happened around September 2013 or so.
@SHOWDANFreeman wrote:
How on earth could a tiny little thumbs down count on a post "make a huge mess for the moderation team"?
"Since there was so much downvoting going on, it was impossible to tell who was downvoting just staff and who was downvoting everyone, and people bragging about downvoting while we were dealing with that really wasn't helping since it was impossible to tell the entirety of who exactly those people were downvoting"
We had to deal with constant complaints about downvote trolling, and the old forum people bragging about downvote trolling publicly just made it worse. Since no tools were in place to track who was downvoting who, we couldn't tell if all of the old forum members who were trolling Kevin and other members of staff by downvoting all of their posts were trolling others, so we couldn't assure people that those posts that were posted publicly that boasted about the trolling didn't extend to other people (and to be honest, we couldn't be sure of that ourselves).
Since it was just shrugged off by Kevin and other members of staff as trolling, and it was only a year after that after people made countless posts of constructive criticism about the downvotes that finally made the staff remove the downvote function, the old forum members downvote trolling Telltale staff and then posting publicly that they were doing it really didn't accomplish anything beyond increasing the anxiety of other forum members, which just made things a huge headache for the moderation team around here.
The staff had largely stopped posting well before that incident (I believe around the time Yare got into some hot water for a comment he mad… moree about iPhone being more powerful than Wii), and Kevin had only shown up at that time specifically to answer questions in a thread he created. He otherwise has always been largely absent from the forums. Downvoting him had nothing to do with his limited presence here. It was made very clear that no one thought downvoting posts was a good idea, and the best way to communicate that was to make Kevin's posts an example, since they hadn't listened to the months and months of criticism they'd been receiving from users and mods alike.
How on earth could a tiny little thumbs down count on a post "make a huge mess for the moderation team"?
i would also like to add the blackwell series into this. whitch does a very good job of haveing it's puzzles integrate into the story. sure most of them are dialogue puzzles and investigation but it works.
Monkey Island 2, Curse of Monkey Island, I think most of the Tex Murphy games did it as well, and, to a lesser extent, 100% of Telltale's ea… morerlier work had a form of difficulty setting by way of hints that gradually got more and more painfully obvious.
The point isn't that all adventure games ever have done it, the point is that it can easily be done and allows the game to cater to two different audiences. The ones who want the illusion of choice in a cinematic experience, and the ones who actually want to play an adventure game.
PS: Less game DOES cater to the mainstream. Call of Duty sells tens of millions of copies despite having a pathetically short campaign and only a handful of multiplayer maps per release.
They collected as much money as they could from myself and other fans like me, and then effectively decided that they didn't care about making even a single game to appeal to us for half a decade.
That logic is hard to follow. The 'betrayal' here, the "money collection", the central morally corrupt thing in your words seems to be that they actually made games for the traditional adventure gamer target group. Had they continued that path, they would have continued "grabbing money" from you. Surely you were relieved when they stopped doing that so you could stop having your money taken.
It's 100% accurate. They collected as much money as they could from myself and other fans like me, and then effectively decided that they d… moreidn't care about making even a single game to appeal to us for half a decade. If that's not betraying your fanbase, I don't know what is.
Okay, I don't like the idea of a Minecraft story mode. It sounds dumb. When I say this, that doesn't necessarily mean I want Telltale to make something "mature". Also, can we stop associating mature with quality? They're not the same thing.
They used us to bolster their pocketbooks and résumés and then cast us aside when they landed licenses big enough that they didn't need us. Does that make you happy?
They collected as much money as they could from myself and other fans like me, and then effectively decided that they didn't care about maki… moreng even a single game to appeal to us for half a decade.
That logic is hard to follow. The 'betrayal' here, the "money collection", the central morally corrupt thing in your words seems to be that they actually made games for the traditional adventure gamer target group. Had they continued that path, they would have continued "grabbing money" from you. Surely you were relieved when they stopped doing that so you could stop having your money taken.
Constructive criticism failed for months and months before people downvoted Kevin as an example of why the system was moronic. Any criticism of it was dismissed as unimportant, much like every other criticism of the forum roll-out was utterly ignored by Telltale staff. That's why the downvoting protest occurred. Not because people were "trolling". You really don't know what trolling is. Trolling is doing something to get an emotional reaction out of someone. The only purpose behind downvoting Kevin was to try to get the downvote feature removed by demonstrating how absurd it was/can be. Hardly trolling.
@SHOWDANFreeman wrote:
How on earth could a tiny little thumbs down count on a post "make a huge mess for the moderation team"?
… more"Since there was so much downvoting going on, it was impossible to tell who was downvoting just staff and who was downvoting everyone, and people bragging about downvoting while we were dealing with that really wasn't helping since it was impossible to tell the entirety of who exactly those people were downvoting"
We had to deal with constant complaints about downvote trolling, and the old forum people bragging about downvote trolling publicly just made it worse. Since no tools were in place to track who was downvoting who, we couldn't tell if all of the old forum members who were trolling Kevin and other members of staff by downvoting all of their posts were trolling others, so we couldn't assure people that those posts that were posted publicly that boasted about the trolling didn't extend to other … [view original content]
They put a lot of money and development time into the forum, for better or worse, and all they wanted was for people to give it a good while to try out before they would decide which features to add and which to remove. So, for the constructive criticism posted after people gave it a while try out (they made significant changes at about the 6 month and one year mark), they listened.
As much as I was also quite a bit upset that feedback wasn't listened to before it went live, looking back, I can see the business reason in why they just went ahead with it (and honestly, the two biggest things I disliked about the forum: nested posts and markdown, I've mostly become ambivalent towards, with the latter becoming second nature to me by this point). And, the fact that they listened to feedback after people gave it a real try to add and remove features (both the downvotes and the mod tools being examples) has resolved any anger I had regarding them not listening beforehand (especially because, as I said, with hindsight I can see why they did so from a financial standpoint).
Constructive criticism failed for months and months before people downvoted Kevin as an example of why the system was moronic. Any criticis… morem of it was dismissed as unimportant, much like every other criticism of the forum roll-out was utterly ignored by Telltale staff. That's why the downvoting protest occurred. Not because people were "trolling". You really don't know what trolling is. Trolling is doing something to get an emotional reaction out of someone. The only purpose behind downvoting Kevin was to try to get the downvote feature removed by demonstrating how absurd it was/can be. Hardly trolling.
They used us to bolster their pocketbooks and résumés and then cast us aside when they landed licenses big enough that they didn't need us. Does that make you happy?
My entire point is that they took advantage of the old school adventure community for a guaranteed installed base right off the bat, and once they no longer required their support, completely cut off ties with them and refused to ever again cater to them, despite the fact that they wouldn't even be a company without them.
A company that doesn't respect its fans doesn't deserve respect.
There is a lack of games that parents can play with their children. TTG would be a full not to cornor that market. You know how many people have kids my age, like everyone i know.
Yeah, they tried to make family games when they were smaller (Bone and Wallace & Gromit were games that the whole family could play, and Telltale marketed them that way) and they didn't have success since they had a hard time getting the word out to their target demographic. Now that they're bigger and all of the gaming sites are reporting on everything they do, they don't have that problem anymore, so it makes sense that they'd try again.
There is a lack of games that parents can play with their children. TTG would be a full not to cornor that market. You know how many people have kids my age, like everyone i know.
I think your entire point is that an independent studio isn't catering to your or your demographic needs and you're whining about it. Funny thing is, there are actually some old Telltale fans who have played their earlier games and are still around being optimistic on where the studio could go next. Things change, and apparently that's too much for you to handle, so now you're going on a pointless, petty rampage that does nothing but badmouth Telltale, yeah good luck with that.
My entire point is that they took advantage of the old school adventure community for a guaranteed installed base right off the bat, and onc… moree they no longer required their support, completely cut off ties with them and refused to ever again cater to them, despite the fact that they wouldn't even be a company without them.
A company that doesn't respect its fans doesn't deserve respect.
I like the idea of the minecraft story (Not canon to the original game) . Even though it is different from the violent games and it may not bring the SAME thing as them I firmly believe that this game will have it's own charm to it. Also I don't believe that violence and maturity = good game.
Tales of Monkey Island is where they peaked, in my opinion. I don't agree that puzzles hinder the narrative, as adventure games have had gr… moreeat stories and great puzzles for 30 years. It would only hinder the narrative for people that aren't smart or patient enough to solve them, and I am fine with there being a "cinematic mode" difficulty setting where the puzzles are auto-solved/non-existent, but I don't find an adventure game that is void of puzzles to be satisfying to play.
Is this what I want? Yes. I would prefer if Telltale stuck to 18+ games.
Is this what Telltale actually SHOULD do? No. Telltale is great at making games for all ages, and honestly, it makes a nice change since we've had 5 adult games in a quick succession in the past 3 years.
Yeah, I agree. I prefer more adult theme stories (most of the comedy I like is adult humor or dark) but at the same time they have to expand. They never made just dark games so it shouldn't be what they do now.
I have two answers to this question:
Is this what I want? Yes. I would prefer if Telltale stuck to 18+ games.
Is this what Telltale ac… moretually SHOULD do? No. Telltale is great at making games for all ages, and honestly, it makes a nice change since we've had 5 adult games in a quick succession in the past 3 years.
Comments
Name five which have done it well.
Designing good, narrative driven puzzles and integrating them into a traditional adventure game is the brunt of the work, and I expect the task to be taken seriously when attempted. I see no reason to make optional what would then be the major interactive mechanic in the game. Puzzles are not facultative sprinkles on the traditional adventure game cake, they are the cake.
You either have puzzles or you don't. There is no sensible middle ground. Telltale decided to go another way and scene.
"For the money"? I don't think so. The ongoing steady reduction of game mechanics is the number one point of critique even among steadfast fans of the company, it's just that the newer people ask for more and larger hubs, more choices, visible consequences and more interactive dialog instead of puzzles.
If 'less game' automatically catered to the mainstream, the entire industry would be doomed.
Monkey Island 2, Curse of Monkey Island, I think most of the Tex Murphy games did it as well, and, to a lesser extent, 100% of Telltale's earlier work had a form of difficulty setting by way of hints that gradually got more and more painfully obvious.
The point isn't that all adventure games ever have done it, the point is that it can easily be done and allows the game to cater to two different audiences. The ones who want the illusion of choice in a cinematic experience, and the ones who actually want to play an adventure game.
PS: Less game DOES cater to the mainstream. Call of Duty sells tens of millions of copies despite having a pathetically short campaign and only a handful of multiplayer maps per release.
Anyone who thinks they didn't move in the direction they've taken because of the appeal of mainstream low effort high reward cash is incredibly delusional. If they had any other license but The Walking Dead, they'd have failed miserably with these "games." The only reason the game was successful was that the TV show is literally one of the most popular shows to have ever existed, and people bought into it. If they had used the George Romero license to do exactly the same game with the same characters, no one would have cared, because the gameplay isn't satisfying in the slightest. Every game they've done since TWD has simply ridden its success to the bank. If TWD hadn't come first, no one would have ever heard of or cared about TWAU.
Their current direction is the most profitable direction they could take as a business, but that doesn't mean I have to like them for it, nor does it mean that I'm not allowed to feel betrayed after spending $2,000+ on their products only for them to literally never release a game that I wanted to play in the last 4 years.
So what if they are going for the big name licenses? It can be both a natural progression and one that's aimed at financial security (which is certainly the case here, since you can see them gradually heading in their current direction as early as Sam & Max: The Devil's Playhouse, and that was before the big name licenses). It's OK to like things that have a big name attached to them, and it's also OK to like their current games as well as their old ones, or even just the new ones.
It's also alright that you don't like their current direction. It's a little silly to feel betrayed though. I never get that mentality. I spent thousands of dollars on LucasArts adventure games. I enjoyed them. I still enjoy them. I don't regret paying that much to buy them (the only thing I do regret is that I don't have the discs that I purchased when I was a kid anymore), and I don't regret buying the ones that are available digitally again either.
LucasArts stopped making adventure games when they cancelled Sam & Max: Freelance Police, and I was upset about the cancelation, but I didn't feel betrayed (any company doesn't just make products for just one audience, or even continue making products for any one particular audience forever, no matter how much we may wish it so). I just stopped buying new LucasArts games.
That didn't stop the fact that I still liked the LucasArts adventure games (or stop me from buying the adventure games again on the used game market or when they were released digitally). Sure, I wished that they made adventure games again, but I didn't feel betrayed by the fact that they didn't, or upset that I spent so much money on them. I just kept playing the games that I liked that they made, and played adventure games made by other companies (and the same goes with Sierra, who I also spent tons of money on adventure games in my childhood and don't regret doing it one bit).
Nothing good comes from a sentence that starts out like that.
As to the 'delusional' people: Don't think even for one second that Bone was dropped in favor of Sam & Max and Monkey Island merely because of the fictitious oath Telltale has sworn according to you. Telltale has always moved towards the most popular franchises they could get their hands on, and the adventure game fans have profited from that for years.
You can't point the finger at a newly acquired popular franchise calling it "cash grab" when you only came aboard the forums because of another newly acquired popular franchise. Which undoubtedly is the case here for most of the fervent opposers of Telltale's latest venture.
Bone was dropped because no one bought it. Sam and Max hadn't had a video game in a decade when they made that. Strong Bad was pretty far out of its prime when they made that game as well. Monkey Island hadn't had a game in nearly 9 years when they made that. Wallace and Gromit is barely even known in the US. When you compare any of these to Back to the Future, Jurassic Park, The Walking Dead, or Game of Thrones, you'd have to be ignorant to think they're even close to being on the same level of popularity. Some obscure 10 year old adventure game series, a web cartoon that not many people had really cared about in 3-4 years at the time of the game, and a profoundly British series are nowhere close to being even half as popular combined as even one of those franchises.
My forum join date is in 2005, if you didn't bother to check. I joined as soon as I heard that a bunch of ex-LucasArts/Freelance Police developers were making adventure games, so your argument that "another newly acquired popular franchise" brought me here is wildly incorrect. The only game they had out at the time was Telltale Texas Hold 'em, and Bone wasn't out yet. Besides that, I had never even heard of Bone before they made the games.
I bought each game Telltale made up until 2010 between 3 and 5 times over, simply because they were the only studio making the games I wanted to play. I was under the impression that when you support something you love, they will reward you by continuing to make the things that you love. The Devil's Playhouse was ten thousand times the adventure game that Back to the Future was. When there was a colossal backlash on the forums about how dumbed down and boring BttF was, they basically ignored us, and continued on their merry way. It's just too bad that Jurassic Park being a totally botched failure didn't dissuade them from continuing in that direction.
If you didn't notice, TTG ignoring their community became more and more apparent as time went by. A great example of them not caring about what anyone in their community says or wants is this atrocious new forum layout. Every single person absolutely hated it, including all of the mods, and they basically said "oh, well, shut up, it's how it will be." It took dozens of people downvoting every post Kevin made to get them to get rid of the downvote "feature", because everyone unanimously disliking it wasn't enough of a reason for them to can it.
Come on, that's a little dramatic with all of this 'betrayed" nonsense.
It's 100% accurate. They collected as much money as they could from myself and other fans like me, and then effectively decided that they didn't care about making even a single game to appeal to us for half a decade. If that's not betraying your fanbase, I don't know what is.
Well, guess you're just going to have to keep waiting.
You really shouldn't buy things with the impression that the company will keep making those things, you should buy them because you like them. If you do the former, you're only liable to get disappointed. Telltale wanted to grow, to become a publisher, and get big name licenses (they've always been that way, they started off getting the CSI license to pay for things, then moved on to bigger licenses to grow). To do that, there's no way they could stay in a niche market forever. If companies want to leave a niche market, they always end up taking risks. Sometimes that risk pays off, as it has with Telltale (the forum was as much a risk as their formula for making games. They put a lot of money into the development of it, they weren't just going to scrap it, they were going to hope that people would adapt to it, and continue to develop it to improve it, which they have (especially on the non-visable backend, as the tools we have now as mods is better in some ways than the old forum)).
There's always a chance that they'll do something more niche in the future as a one episode release in between seasons though (with a potential for future episodes if the first one sells well like Puzzle Agent or Poker Night), as they've hinted that their Pilot Program is still alive and well.
You're partially right. It was indeed the down vote trolls such as those you mentioned who kept down voting every post that a particular forum user made just to spite people that ruined it. I was very saddened when so many of the old forum people became immature trolls, and broadcasted it proudly like so many trolls do. I really thought that they were better than that.
TellTale never began as an company only targeted towards adults. They target all audiences to build diversity with light-hearted games such as Back to The Future, Sam & Max or Monkey Island before the TWD and TWAU. Even though I feel mixed about TellTale trying to make a story from Minecraft, which essentially doesn't even really have a story as much as it has you creating it yourself thorugh the world. The truth is, TellTale should be allowed to make whatever it is they want. I will be honest and admit I was skeptical about Tales from the Borderlands when it was announced back earlier last year. After playing Episode 1, I am almost considering it my GOTY for 2015 if Telltale keeps it up. Seriously, let's just wait see what happens and then we can make our own opinions about the game instead of assumptions about it before we even see a trailer of it.
Protesting is now considered trolling? Alright then.
There are much better ways to protest. Abusing the system by downvoting every single post that a single forum user posted regardless of its content is not protesting, it's trolling. In fact, that's the very definition of a downvote troll.
^ YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO USE ARROWS DAMNIT AND POINT AT THE THINGS YOU'RE THISSING AT ^
AND THEN USE EXCESSIVE CAPS TO MAKE SURE YOU GET YOUR POINT ACROSS.
What "better ways" could people have protested, beyond downvoting a single user (specifically the one who had been condescending to us about how much "better" the new forums were, and how we should just accept all the new changes because he liked them) to make a point?
They were downvoting him in an effort to get them to realize that it was not a useful feature for the forum to have, not just to be a jerk. There's a pretty big difference and if you don't see that, then I don't know what to say.
In the end, constant constructive criticism was what did it, since it took over a year for the staff to change it and they only did it when people were making so many posts asking for it to be removed (Kevin's down voting just made him stop coming to the forums, and made most of the staff afraid to come around here, which wasn't a great thing at all). All it ended up doing was making a huge mess for the moderation team since the tools weren't in place to handle much at the time (since there was so much downvoting going on, it was impossible to tell who was downvoting just staff and who was downvoting everyone, and people bragging about downvoting while we were dealing with that really wasn't helping since it was impossible to tell the entirety of who exactly those people were downvoting) so we really didn't appreciate it.
The staff had largely stopped posting well before that incident (I believe around the time Yare got into some hot water for a comment he made about iPhone being more powerful than Wii), and Kevin had only shown up at that time specifically to answer questions in a thread he created. He otherwise has always been largely absent from the forums. Downvoting him had nothing to do with his limited presence here. It was made very clear that no one thought downvoting posts was a good idea, and the best way to communicate that was to make Kevin's posts an example, since they hadn't listened to the months and months of criticism they'd been receiving from users and mods alike.
How on earth could a tiny little thumbs down count on a post "make a huge mess for the moderation team"?
Actually, downvotes were removed much later than that - around the end of last Summer, I believe, whereas the downvote "protesting" happened around September 2013 or so.
Wouldn't know, myself and dozens like me had already quit using the forums by then.
"Since there was so much downvoting going on, it was impossible to tell who was downvoting just staff and who was downvoting everyone, and people bragging about downvoting while we were dealing with that really wasn't helping since it was impossible to tell the entirety of who exactly those people were downvoting"
We had to deal with constant complaints about downvote trolling, and the old forum people bragging about downvote trolling publicly just made it worse. Since no tools were in place to track who was downvoting who, we couldn't tell if all of the old forum members who were trolling Kevin and other members of staff by downvoting all of their posts were trolling others, so we couldn't assure people that those posts that were posted publicly that boasted about the trolling didn't extend to other people (and to be honest, we couldn't be sure of that ourselves).
Since it was just shrugged off by Kevin and other members of staff as trolling, and it was only a year after that after people made countless posts of constructive criticism about the downvotes that finally made the staff remove the downvote function, the old forum members downvote trolling Telltale staff and then posting publicly that they were doing it really didn't accomplish anything beyond increasing the anxiety of other forum members, which just made things a huge headache for the moderation team around here.
i would also like to add the blackwell series into this. whitch does a very good job of haveing it's puzzles integrate into the story. sure most of them are dialogue puzzles and investigation but it works.
That logic is hard to follow. The 'betrayal' here, the "money collection", the central morally corrupt thing in your words seems to be that they actually made games for the traditional adventure gamer target group. Had they continued that path, they would have continued "grabbing money" from you. Surely you were relieved when they stopped doing that so you could stop having your money taken.
Okay, I don't like the idea of a Minecraft story mode. It sounds dumb. When I say this, that doesn't necessarily mean I want Telltale to make something "mature". Also, can we stop associating mature with quality? They're not the same thing.
They used us to bolster their pocketbooks and résumés and then cast us aside when they landed licenses big enough that they didn't need us. Does that make you happy?
Constructive criticism failed for months and months before people downvoted Kevin as an example of why the system was moronic. Any criticism of it was dismissed as unimportant, much like every other criticism of the forum roll-out was utterly ignored by Telltale staff. That's why the downvoting protest occurred. Not because people were "trolling". You really don't know what trolling is. Trolling is doing something to get an emotional reaction out of someone. The only purpose behind downvoting Kevin was to try to get the downvote feature removed by demonstrating how absurd it was/can be. Hardly trolling.
They put a lot of money and development time into the forum, for better or worse, and all they wanted was for people to give it a good while to try out before they would decide which features to add and which to remove. So, for the constructive criticism posted after people gave it a while try out (they made significant changes at about the 6 month and one year mark), they listened.
As much as I was also quite a bit upset that feedback wasn't listened to before it went live, looking back, I can see the business reason in why they just went ahead with it (and honestly, the two biggest things I disliked about the forum: nested posts and markdown, I've mostly become ambivalent towards, with the latter becoming second nature to me by this point). And, the fact that they listened to feedback after people gave it a real try to add and remove features (both the downvotes and the mod tools being examples) has resolved any anger I had regarding them not listening beforehand (especially because, as I said, with hindsight I can see why they did so from a financial standpoint).
You're using the pluralis majestatis here, I presume.
My entire point is that they took advantage of the old school adventure community for a guaranteed installed base right off the bat, and once they no longer required their support, completely cut off ties with them and refused to ever again cater to them, despite the fact that they wouldn't even be a company without them.
A company that doesn't respect its fans doesn't deserve respect.
There is a lack of games that parents can play with their children. TTG would be a full not to cornor that market. You know how many people have kids my age, like everyone i know.
Yeah, they tried to make family games when they were smaller (Bone and Wallace & Gromit were games that the whole family could play, and Telltale marketed them that way) and they didn't have success since they had a hard time getting the word out to their target demographic. Now that they're bigger and all of the gaming sites are reporting on everything they do, they don't have that problem anymore, so it makes sense that they'd try again.
I think your entire point is that an independent studio isn't catering to your or your demographic needs and you're whining about it. Funny thing is, there are actually some old Telltale fans who have played their earlier games and are still around being optimistic on where the studio could go next. Things change, and apparently that's too much for you to handle, so now you're going on a pointless, petty rampage that does nothing but badmouth Telltale, yeah good luck with that.
I like the idea of the minecraft story (Not canon to the original game) . Even though it is different from the violent games and it may not bring the SAME thing as them I firmly believe that this game will have it's own charm to it. Also I don't believe that violence and maturity = good game.
i agree with you why not do season 2 of WAMU it's a amazing game
What's WAMU?
I think he meant to say "TWAU" (The Wolf Among Us) but accidentally made a typo.
Moneygrabtale.
TALES WAS THE GREATEST
I have two answers to this question:
Is this what I want? Yes. I would prefer if Telltale stuck to 18+ games.
Is this what Telltale actually SHOULD do? No. Telltale is great at making games for all ages, and honestly, it makes a nice change since we've had 5 adult games in a quick succession in the past 3 years.
Yeah, I agree. I prefer more adult theme stories (most of the comedy I like is adult humor or dark) but at the same time they have to expand. They never made just dark games so it shouldn't be what they do now.