yes breckon should be the writer. hopefully he dont pull a Vanaman, sorry (not so much), and stays to write s3. hopefully Vanaman, when they finish his own game Firewatch (btw it looks very interesting), and he can at least write one, it is his story after all. (ahhh one can wish:))
They need to rework the entire system. Season 1, and season 2 had two things in common. They started off fun, and interesting and then a little over half way through went transitioned to depressing, and shitty. Yeah Yeah I know they are trying to stick to the comics. My opinion "fuck the comics". I want a game that gives a reason to hope for more. Not a game that leaves me at the end thinking "Wow that was fucking depressing." The games aren't just "sad" or "emotional". We see characters go from getting along one minute, to trying to kill each other the next. It's not believable.
Thought it was something like episode 3. Anyhow, that sort of proves my point. Not to you, but to others. Don't judge based on one episode. It's pretty hard for an author to hit it out of the park 100% of the time, even when it's a fan being asked their opinion.
Anyway, I stand by my earlier point too that Nick's not really as good as people are making him out to be. (When I say this, I don't actually mean he's not a good writer. Rather, I'm simply talking about the reaction to his episodes. Certainly the first episode anyway. It's the one episode that sticks out in memory as being heavily criticised, despite myself being quite happy with it and the rest of the season.)
I wouldn't say she hated Ben, I think she just realizes now that Ben was, in fact, a screw up, she never stated that she hated Ben in Season 2, but she is aware that a lot of what happened in Season 1 was his fault. Mike and Luke both got shot and, depending on your choices, it is Luke's injury that causes him to die (he can't kick the walker off his bad leg). In Amid the Ruins, other than Kenny, no one else seemed to be pissed off at Luke about what he did, Kenny was the only one that had a problem with it. What's bullshit is how forgiving Mike and Bonnie are towards Arvo, it got me pissed how they just kept defending Arvo when everything was his fault in the first place.
This guy's talent is really overstated, to be frank. The episode I liked the most in Season 2 was the first one, and I guess that's due to … morecharacters not appearing to act inconsistent because of them still being new.
I really wish the Season followed up on the premise of Clementine being all alone with a group of idiots she couldn't trust. Instead, Episode 2 suddenly turned Carlos and Rebecca into Clem's BFFs and made Clem into a jerk who hated Ben and is fine with Kenny being a belligerent jackass, and Episode 5 is full of moronic bullshit like:
-Totally deflating the stakes of the Russian standoff by having nobody on Clem's side get hurt.
-Clementine being forgiven for causing the gunfight.
-Everybody suddenly forgiving Luke for fucking Jane when earlier Kenny was eager to lynch him.
-The game not allowing us to have a proper conversation with Arvo, leading to the unpleasant situation where a bigoted jackass' torture of a f… [view original content]
What's with the Nick Breckon's worship? Sure, he could write a pretty good episodes - even though I enjoyed the work of all the writers - but he certainly needed a whole team of equally good people to make everything buttoned-up.
Not going to happen, Vanaman doesn't even work for Telltale anymore, he works at Campo Santo with Jake Rodkin. But before he left, he did help plan out most if not all of Season 2 with Breckon and oversaw the development of the first episode and thought the series was in good hands. But Vanaman and Breckon do a podcast together called Idle Thumbs, and I wouldn't be surprised if TWD came up during discussions.
yes breckon should be the writer. hopefully he dont pull a Vanaman, sorry (not so much), and stays to write s3. hopefully Vanaman, when they… more finish his own game Firewatch (btw it looks very interesting), and he can at least write one, it is his story after all. (ahhh one can wish:))
I didn't say I worship him, I just feel that he is the most competent guy to write TWD. I enjoyed the other episodes too, but his episodes to me stand out as the best of Season 2 (except In Harms Way, I like that better than All That Remains).
What's with the Nick Breckon's worship? Sure, he could write a pretty good episodes - even though I enjoyed the work of all the writers - but he certainly needed a whole team of equally good people to make everything buttoned-up.
I wasn't refering to you in particular, friend, it simply seems like a lot of people are convinced that he is the only competent candidate for this job.
I didn't say I worship him, I just feel that he is the most competent guy to write TWD. I enjoyed the other episodes too, but his episodes to me stand out as the best of Season 2 (except In Harms Way, I like that better than All That Remains).
I don't think its the switching of writers that's the problem; it's the communication between all of the writers throughout the season.
Look at it this way, Season 1 had three main writers; Sean Vanaman, Mark Darin, and Gary Whitta. Whitta was the overall story consultant so its no doubt he'd be heavily involved in the writing process, and Darin was also instrumental in the development of Season 1. Vanaman is the head writer of the season, so no explanation needed. All of these writers are very heavily involved specifically with Season 1.
Now for Season 2: Nick Breckon, Pierre Shorette, JT Petty/Eric Stirpe. Breckon's the main writer and was pretty much fully focused on Season 2. Shorette was working chiefly on Wolf at the time, Stirpe is a cinematic director if I'm not mistaken, and Petty doesn't even work at Telltale.
There's a definite difference there, in terms of how 'connected' the writers are. That especially explains some of the sudden shifts between episodes. Best example is Carver; people always mention a shift in characterization. I think the problem here is you have a writer, fresh off Wolf, come in and take the driver's seat during Season 2's mid-point; you have a set-up, a sense of direction, and this episode is arguably the most crucial to lead established plot-points towards a conclusion. However, Shorette most likely only had a broad overview of the past 2 episodes, not an inside-out knowledge of the characters and all the established subplots and character motivations. As a result, Carver's character is taken in the direction Shorette wants to take him, rather than the way Breckon wanted him to.
This also helps explain why most of the other points of interest seem to get dropped; the cabin group's murky past, the whole 'George' situation, and various other small things that are hinted at over the first 2 episodes. The other writers simply weren't fully in the loop as Season 1's were, which is what caused so much of the disjointed story elements and dropped and/or incomplete subplots.
I don't think Episode 3's writing is even that bad if we were to look at it as it's own individual episode, separate from the rest. The only episode that truly feels weak in terms of the quality of it's writing was Episode 4. Episode 3's biggest crime was that it was where the story started to become disjointed.
That was my point earlier. It's a team effort. One writer cannot write whatever they want and Nick being the lead writer should say it all really, as I imagine he had a large hand in the story of all episodes.
Basically, if it's the story of episode 2, 3 and 4 that people had a problem with, I doubt having Nick write the episodes would have had much difference because the story would likely have went in the same direction.
Then again, I've not worked in a team of writers or for a publisher. But to me, the term 'lead writer' means they oversee everything.
(So, it's mostly a coincidence in my eyes that Nick's episodes are more liked, though I'm sure little parts of the other episodes would have been different. A writer's unique style and all that. And I must admit that it does irk me that people don't seem to give the other writers any credit while giving it all to Nick. Nevermind that if the forums were to be believed, the second season is a lot of rubbish, so it doesn't make much sense to me that people would want Nick in charge again rather than someone else. But hey, I liked Season 2, so to me, all of this complaining is just standard fare for the internet and people in general.
While it's off-topic, I do hope A Game of Thrones makes choices matter more however. I don't really expect that from Borderlands and if I'm honest, I'm waiting for them to prove choices will matter in Game of Thrones. I feel it's the only thing lacking in their games/stories. Even if the choices don't matter much again, I'll still enjoy the upcoming titles. It just irks me really when something's promised and isn't delivered upon as I fell for that trap ages ago with Dragon Age 2 and 'Kirkwall changing'. Myself, I wouldn't advertise something if it wasn't true.)
I wasn't refering to you in particular, friend, it simply seems like a lot of people are convinced that he is the only competent candidate for this job.
I completely agree, you can't have guys who are already involved in one game write for another. Like you said, Shorette was already involved with TWAU and Stirpe was a designer for both TWD and TWAU and Telltale wanted him to write an episode, that's way too much work for him. And Episode 3 is a very well written episode, it's Episode 4 that sucks.
I don't think its the switching of writers that's the problem; it's the communication between all of the writers throughout the season.
L… moreook at it this way, Season 1 had three main writers; Sean Vanaman, Mark Darin, and Gary Whitta. Whitta was the overall story consultant so its no doubt he'd be heavily involved in the writing process, and Darin was also instrumental in the development of Season 1. Vanaman is the head writer of the season, so no explanation needed. All of these writers are very heavily involved specifically with Season 1.
Now for Season 2: Nick Breckon, Pierre Shorette, JT Petty/Eric Stirpe. Breckon's the main writer and was pretty much fully focused on Season 2. Shorette was working chiefly on Wolf at the time, Stirpe is a cinematic director if I'm not mistaken, and Petty doesn't even work at Telltale.
There's a definite difference there, in terms of how 'connected' the writers are. That especially explains some of … [view original content]
At first, it seems like Luke, Mike and Bonnie were kind towards Arvo to show how reasonable they were - Kenny is the one who freaks out like a moron and starts beating on a helpless guy when it's BURICKO started the gunfight and Jane was the idiot who attacked Arvo in the first place.
To be honest, the only reason why the group is so magically forgiving in the beginning of No Going Back is that Breckon felt that the story would have been even worse if the episode was 100% miserable. That's why they're totally okay with Rebecca dying, with Clem/Kenny starting the gunfight, with Luke and Mike getting shot, and with laughing off Luke fucking Jane even if it possibly led to Sarah's death.
Starting No Going Back with everyone except Clem and the baby dead would've been awesome. It also would have been way too dark for Telltale.
I wouldn't say she hated Ben, I think she just realizes now that Ben was, in fact, a screw up, she never stated that she hated Ben in Season… more 2, but she is aware that a lot of what happened in Season 1 was his fault. Mike and Luke both got shot and, depending on your choices, it is Luke's injury that causes him to die (he can't kick the walker off his bad leg). In Amid the Ruins, other than Kenny, no one else seemed to be pissed off at Luke about what he did, Kenny was the only one that had a problem with it. What's bullshit is how forgiving Mike and Bonnie are towards Arvo, it got me pissed how they just kept defending Arvo when everything was his fault in the first place.
While it's bullshit that no one died, you can't have everyone except Clem wind up dead (then you would have people saying, like you said, that it would be too dark). This would have been the perfect spot for Nick and Sarah, had you saved them, to die instead of the way they died in Amid the Ruins.
At first, it seems like Luke, Mike and Bonnie were kind towards Arvo to show how reasonable they were - Kenny is the one who freaks out like… more a moron and starts beating on a helpless guy when it's BURICKO started the gunfight and Jane was the idiot who attacked Arvo in the first place.
To be honest, the only reason why the group is so magically forgiving in the beginning of No Going Back is that Breckon felt that the story would have been even worse if the episode was 100% miserable. That's why they're totally okay with Rebecca dying, with Clem/Kenny starting the gunfight, with Luke and Mike getting shot, and with laughing off Luke fucking Jane even if it possibly led to Sarah's death.
Starting No Going Back with everyone except Clem and the baby dead would've been awesome. It also would have been way too dark for Telltale.
Scapegoating the writers is easy - we shouldn't forget that the episodes were all made by an entire team.
I can't exactly blame Amid The Ruins' writer alone for how poorly-done the episode was, when it was the fault of the QA guys for not really providing any significant differences between your outcomes (Arvo accuses you of robbing him no matter what, Kenny still gets angry at you for some contrived reason, Sarah still dies in a stupid way, there is absolutely no difference between staying at the deck for several days without food and water or leaving immediately.)
That was my point earlier. It's a team effort. One writer cannot write whatever they want and Nick being the lead writer should say it all r… moreeally, as I imagine he had a large hand in the story of all episodes.
Basically, if it's the story of episode 2, 3 and 4 that people had a problem with, I doubt having Nick write the episodes would have had much difference because the story would likely have went in the same direction.
Then again, I've not worked in a team of writers or for a publisher. But to me, the term 'lead writer' means they oversee everything.
(So, it's mostly a coincidence in my eyes that Nick's episodes are more liked, though I'm sure little parts of the other episodes would have been different. A writer's unique style and all that. And I must admit that it does irk me that people don't seem to give the other writers any credit while giving it all to Nick. Nevermind that if the forums were to be believed, the second seas… [view original content]
Scapegoating the writers is easy - we shouldn't forget that the episodes were all made by an entire team.
I can't exactly blame Amid The … moreRuins' writer alone for how poorly-done the episode was, when it was the fault of the QA guys for not really providing any significant differences between your outcomes (Arvo accuses you of robbing him no matter what, Kenny still gets angry at you for some contrived reason, Sarah still dies in a stupid way, there is absolutely no difference between staying at the deck for several days without food and water or leaving immediately.)
You're largely right, but speaking as a writer myself, albeit a traditional one though I've dabbled with interactive fiction, I'd look at storytelling faults (like choices not mattering) as a failure on my part and it's something I'd want to catch without needing anyone to tell me there's a fault there.
So while I agree with the general gist of your post in that it's a team effort, I'm not so sure the blame can be placed on the QA people either. If I was the writer of the episode and something contradicts what happened earlier (meaning it was a definite error and not something someone thinks is a contradiction), I'd look at it as not doing my job properly.
Mind you, that's the writer in me talking. I'd just look at it as a personal failing of mine and believe it's not a job for others to fix. Though sure, if the QA didn't, then they should have picked up the Arvo thing at the very least to see if it was intentional. (I.e. make sure he wasn't lying at the end of episode 4 or whatever and it was a genuine oversight)
(This is all assuming that everything follows the episode's script and a bug didn't prevent the game from recognising certain choices.)
Scapegoating the writers is easy - we shouldn't forget that the episodes were all made by an entire team.
I can't exactly blame Amid The … moreRuins' writer alone for how poorly-done the episode was, when it was the fault of the QA guys for not really providing any significant differences between your outcomes (Arvo accuses you of robbing him no matter what, Kenny still gets angry at you for some contrived reason, Sarah still dies in a stupid way, there is absolutely no difference between staying at the deck for several days without food and water or leaving immediately.)
I dunno, maybe it's also the rushed schedule - Telltale was eager to finish Season 2 by the end of 'Summer', hence the final episode appearing in the last week of August. Having a month or two per episode, with no clear overarching plan, may have affected the writing.
But Episode 3's writing was decent, if rather limited - Carver was still 100% evil, the George subplot is never resolved, the 400 Days cameos were so bad that we were better off not even having them, we never get to talk to Carver's people beyond weak-willed Bonnie and redshirt Reggie. My beef with it was down to its linearity feeling less oppressive and more a result of corners being cut. I mentioned before that the 'stealth' segments were shit, because you can deliberately try to get caught and still remain safe from detection. The title is misleading because the only "harm"/game-overs that can come to Clem either comes from the non-sequitor zombie sequence (which has no consequences), Mike dropping Clem, or you screwing around while inside the zombie horde. This is particularly egregious in the part where you steal the radios, where Tavia ends up looking either stupid or possibly even on Clementine's side.
Tavia's bizarre behavior is down to the team's incompetence, rather than the writer himself.
You're largely right, but speaking as a writer myself, albeit a traditional one though I've dabbled with interactive fiction, I'd look at st… moreorytelling faults (like choices not mattering) as a failure on my part and it's something I'd want to catch without needing anyone to tell me there's a fault there.
So while I agree with the general gist of your post in that it's a team effort, I'm not so sure the blame can be placed on the QA people either. If I was the writer of the episode and something contradicts what happened earlier (meaning it was a definite error and not something someone thinks is a contradiction), I'd look at it as not doing my job properly.
Mind you, that's the writer in me talking. I'd just look at it as a personal failing of mine and believe it's not a job for others to fix. Though sure, if the QA didn't, then they should have picked up the Arvo thing at the very least to see if it was intentional. (I.e. make sure he w… [view original content]
As predictable as it would've been, it'd have made much more sense for Luke and Kenny to be the only people who survived the gunfight alongside Clem and the baby. Bonnie and Mike were clearly expendable.
My guess is that those two were kept alive because the company changed their minds and plan to use them for the next Season.
While it's bullshit that no one died, you can't have everyone except Clem wind up dead (then you would have people saying, like you said, th… moreat it would be too dark). This would have been the perfect spot for Nick and Sarah, had you saved them, to die instead of the way they died in Amid the Ruins.
The episodes were definitely longer in Season 1, but that's not necessarily a good thing. In my opinion, Long Road Ahead is too long, the episode spends too much time either fixing the train or gettting the truck down, and Around Every Corner is a 2 and a half hour long filler episode. Also, The Wolf Among Us episodes ran about the same time as The Walking Dead episodes, about 1 and a half to 45 minute run time, and the last 2 episodes of TWAU were really short while TWD was consistant in its runtime.
That's why I thought they took out the option to shoot Mike in No Going Back, they need to have a prupose for him and Arvo so they scrapped the kill him choice.
As predictable as it would've been, it'd have made much more sense for Luke and Kenny to be the only people who survived the gunfight alongs… moreide Clem and the baby. Bonnie and Mike were clearly expendable.
My guess is that those two were kept alive because the company changed their minds and plan to use them for the next Season.
Here's my problem with who wrote Episodes 3 and 4...they already were busy with The Wolf Among Us. Pierre Shorette (In Harms Way) was also a writer for TWAU (Faith and I believe some Additional Writing credits) and Eric Stirpe (Amid the Ruins) was aa designer on both games. I know Telltale isn't that large, but they should have found people who weren't already preoccupied with one game to write for The Walking Dead, jusst my opinion.
I dunno, maybe it's also the rushed schedule - Telltale was eager to finish Season 2 by the end of 'Summer', hence the final episode appeari… moreng in the last week of August. Having a month or two per episode, with no clear overarching plan, may have affected the writing.
But Episode 3's writing was decent, if rather limited - Carver was still 100% evil, the George subplot is never resolved, the 400 Days cameos were so bad that we were better off not even having them, we never get to talk to Carver's people beyond weak-willed Bonnie and redshirt Reggie. My beef with it was down to its linearity feeling less oppressive and more a result of corners being cut. I mentioned before that the 'stealth' segments were shit, because you can deliberately try to get caught and still remain safe from detection. The title is misleading because the only "harm"/game-overs that can come to Clem either comes from the non-sequitor zombie sequence (which has n… [view original content]
You could talk to people in S1 a lot more and find stuff out about them and build relationships with them that do have an affect on the story whereas in S2 that simply isn't the case. It's too shallow and the depth that S1 had was brilliant.
The episodes were definitely longer in Season 1, but that's not necessarily a good thing. In my opinion, Long Road Ahead is too long, the ep… moreisode spends too much time either fixing the train or gettting the truck down, and Around Every Corner is a 2 and a half hour long filler episode. Also, The Wolf Among Us episodes ran about the same time as The Walking Dead episodes, about 1 and a half to 45 minute run time, and the last 2 episodes of TWAU were really short while TWD was consistant in its runtime.
You could talk to people in S1 a lot more and find stuff out about them and build relationships with them that do have an affect on the story whereas in S2 that simply isn't the case. It's too shallow and the depth that S1 had was brilliant.
Only reason S2 episodes are short is due to the cutting of puzzles and hubs. Play through the episodes of S1 doing only the important stuff and doing puzzles straight away, you'll get about 90 minutes average for all of them pretty much.
Hubs count for about 10-15 minutes extra, and the puzzles can add up to 20-30 minutes more depending on how many there are, and how big they are. I'm fine with the cutting of puzzles personally, but that extra 10-15 worth of dialogue with characters is invaluable.
Yeah, frankly, I didn't like the puzzles either such as the train in episode 3 (the train takes way too long to figure out). I would like some quick, like 5-10 minute puzzles, but if they're going to end up taking a good part of the episode, than no. But more hubs would be nice. You had some in A House Divided and No Going Back (both by Breckon) but were kind of absent in the rest of the episodes. Amid the Ruins had some, but they weren't really important.
Only reason S2 episodes are short is due to the cutting of puzzles and hubs. Play through the episodes of S1 doing only the important stuff … moreand doing puzzles straight away, you'll get about 90 minutes average for all of them pretty much.
Hubs count for about 10-15 minutes extra, and the puzzles can add up to 20-30 minutes more depending on how many there are, and how big they are. I'm fine with the cutting of puzzles personally, but that extra 10-15 worth of dialogue with characters is invaluable.
He should be replaced by those guys who wrote the 1st season. But seeing as he basically ruined all the hard work they did, I doubt that's going to happen. They probably wouldn't agree to work for Telltale ever again.
Gary Whitta: wrote Season 1, Episode 4, does not work for Telltale but was called in as a story consultant by Telltale for Season 1.
Mark Darin: wrote Season 1, Episode 2, was a designer for both seasons, and had an additional writing credit on Amid the Ruins, still works at Telltale and is currently part of the team working on TFTBL, will most likely work on Season 3.
Sean Vanaman: head writer of Season 1, wrote Episodes 1, 3, and 5. He was a part of Season 2, creating the storyline for it and oversaw the development of Season 2, Episode 1. He left in September, 2013 to form his own gaming company Campo Santo. So don't just blame Breckon, the storyline for Season 2 was also Vanaman's creation, not just Breckon's. If you think this Season was entirely Nick Breckon you're wrong.
He should be replaced by those guys who wrote the 1st season. But seeing as he basically ruined all the hard work they did, I doubt that's going to happen. They probably wouldn't agree to work for Telltale ever again.
Comments
Silent Hill 4's story was decent. It was the gameplay that was truly horrific.
yeah, It's story was decent, IF YOUR A GROMMET!
Insults are way less effective when no living soul knows what they mean.
okay, it's story is pretty decent, but only if you pretend that it's not silent hill, and it has nothing to live up to.
yes breckon should be the writer. hopefully he dont pull a Vanaman, sorry (not so much), and stays to write s3. hopefully Vanaman, when they finish his own game Firewatch (btw it looks very interesting), and he can at least write one, it is his story after all. (ahhh one can wish:))
They need to rework the entire system. Season 1, and season 2 had two things in common. They started off fun, and interesting and then a little over half way through went transitioned to depressing, and shitty. Yeah Yeah I know they are trying to stick to the comics. My opinion "fuck the comics". I want a game that gives a reason to hope for more. Not a game that leaves me at the end thinking "Wow that was fucking depressing." The games aren't just "sad" or "emotional". We see characters go from getting along one minute, to trying to kill each other the next. It's not believable.
yes
in nick breckon we trust
Thought it was something like episode 3. Anyhow, that sort of proves my point. Not to you, but to others. Don't judge based on one episode. It's pretty hard for an author to hit it out of the park 100% of the time, even when it's a fan being asked their opinion.
Anyway, I stand by my earlier point too that Nick's not really as good as people are making him out to be. (When I say this, I don't actually mean he's not a good writer. Rather, I'm simply talking about the reaction to his episodes. Certainly the first episode anyway. It's the one episode that sticks out in memory as being heavily criticised, despite myself being quite happy with it and the rest of the season.)
I wouldn't say she hated Ben, I think she just realizes now that Ben was, in fact, a screw up, she never stated that she hated Ben in Season 2, but she is aware that a lot of what happened in Season 1 was his fault. Mike and Luke both got shot and, depending on your choices, it is Luke's injury that causes him to die (he can't kick the walker off his bad leg). In Amid the Ruins, other than Kenny, no one else seemed to be pissed off at Luke about what he did, Kenny was the only one that had a problem with it. What's bullshit is how forgiving Mike and Bonnie are towards Arvo, it got me pissed how they just kept defending Arvo when everything was his fault in the first place.
What's with the Nick Breckon's worship? Sure, he could write a pretty good episodes - even though I enjoyed the work of all the writers - but he certainly needed a whole team of equally good people to make everything buttoned-up.
Not going to happen, Vanaman doesn't even work for Telltale anymore, he works at Campo Santo with Jake Rodkin. But before he left, he did help plan out most if not all of Season 2 with Breckon and oversaw the development of the first episode and thought the series was in good hands. But Vanaman and Breckon do a podcast together called Idle Thumbs, and I wouldn't be surprised if TWD came up during discussions.
I didn't say I worship him, I just feel that he is the most competent guy to write TWD. I enjoyed the other episodes too, but his episodes to me stand out as the best of Season 2 (except In Harms Way, I like that better than All That Remains).
I wasn't refering to you in particular, friend, it simply seems like a lot of people are convinced that he is the only competent candidate for this job.
I don't think its the switching of writers that's the problem; it's the communication between all of the writers throughout the season.
Look at it this way, Season 1 had three main writers; Sean Vanaman, Mark Darin, and Gary Whitta. Whitta was the overall story consultant so its no doubt he'd be heavily involved in the writing process, and Darin was also instrumental in the development of Season 1. Vanaman is the head writer of the season, so no explanation needed. All of these writers are very heavily involved specifically with Season 1.
Now for Season 2: Nick Breckon, Pierre Shorette, JT Petty/Eric Stirpe. Breckon's the main writer and was pretty much fully focused on Season 2. Shorette was working chiefly on Wolf at the time, Stirpe is a cinematic director if I'm not mistaken, and Petty doesn't even work at Telltale.
There's a definite difference there, in terms of how 'connected' the writers are. That especially explains some of the sudden shifts between episodes. Best example is Carver; people always mention a shift in characterization. I think the problem here is you have a writer, fresh off Wolf, come in and take the driver's seat during Season 2's mid-point; you have a set-up, a sense of direction, and this episode is arguably the most crucial to lead established plot-points towards a conclusion. However, Shorette most likely only had a broad overview of the past 2 episodes, not an inside-out knowledge of the characters and all the established subplots and character motivations. As a result, Carver's character is taken in the direction Shorette wants to take him, rather than the way Breckon wanted him to.
This also helps explain why most of the other points of interest seem to get dropped; the cabin group's murky past, the whole 'George' situation, and various other small things that are hinted at over the first 2 episodes. The other writers simply weren't fully in the loop as Season 1's were, which is what caused so much of the disjointed story elements and dropped and/or incomplete subplots.
I don't think Episode 3's writing is even that bad if we were to look at it as it's own individual episode, separate from the rest. The only episode that truly feels weak in terms of the quality of it's writing was Episode 4. Episode 3's biggest crime was that it was where the story started to become disjointed.
That was my point earlier. It's a team effort. One writer cannot write whatever they want and Nick being the lead writer should say it all really, as I imagine he had a large hand in the story of all episodes.
Basically, if it's the story of episode 2, 3 and 4 that people had a problem with, I doubt having Nick write the episodes would have had much difference because the story would likely have went in the same direction.
Then again, I've not worked in a team of writers or for a publisher. But to me, the term 'lead writer' means they oversee everything.
(So, it's mostly a coincidence in my eyes that Nick's episodes are more liked, though I'm sure little parts of the other episodes would have been different. A writer's unique style and all that. And I must admit that it does irk me that people don't seem to give the other writers any credit while giving it all to Nick. Nevermind that if the forums were to be believed, the second season is a lot of rubbish, so it doesn't make much sense to me that people would want Nick in charge again rather than someone else. But hey, I liked Season 2, so to me, all of this complaining is just standard fare for the internet and people in general.
While it's off-topic, I do hope A Game of Thrones makes choices matter more however. I don't really expect that from Borderlands and if I'm honest, I'm waiting for them to prove choices will matter in Game of Thrones. I feel it's the only thing lacking in their games/stories. Even if the choices don't matter much again, I'll still enjoy the upcoming titles. It just irks me really when something's promised and isn't delivered upon as I fell for that trap ages ago with Dragon Age 2 and 'Kirkwall changing'. Myself, I wouldn't advertise something if it wasn't true.)
I completely agree, you can't have guys who are already involved in one game write for another. Like you said, Shorette was already involved with TWAU and Stirpe was a designer for both TWD and TWAU and Telltale wanted him to write an episode, that's way too much work for him. And Episode 3 is a very well written episode, it's Episode 4 that sucks.
At first, it seems like Luke, Mike and Bonnie were kind towards Arvo to show how reasonable they were - Kenny is the one who freaks out like a moron and starts beating on a helpless guy when it's BURICKO started the gunfight and Jane was the idiot who attacked Arvo in the first place.
To be honest, the only reason why the group is so magically forgiving in the beginning of No Going Back is that Breckon felt that the story would have been even worse if the episode was 100% miserable. That's why they're totally okay with Rebecca dying, with Clem/Kenny starting the gunfight, with Luke and Mike getting shot, and with laughing off Luke fucking Jane even if it possibly led to Sarah's death.
Starting No Going Back with everyone except Clem and the baby dead would've been awesome. It also would have been way too dark for Telltale.
While it's bullshit that no one died, you can't have everyone except Clem wind up dead (then you would have people saying, like you said, that it would be too dark). This would have been the perfect spot for Nick and Sarah, had you saved them, to die instead of the way they died in Amid the Ruins.
Whichever writter we get, only 1 should be writting the whole season, not just a few episodes with multiple writters.
Scapegoating the writers is easy - we shouldn't forget that the episodes were all made by an entire team.
I can't exactly blame Amid The Ruins' writer alone for how poorly-done the episode was, when it was the fault of the QA guys for not really providing any significant differences between your outcomes (Arvo accuses you of robbing him no matter what, Kenny still gets angry at you for some contrived reason, Sarah still dies in a stupid way, there is absolutely no difference between staying at the deck for several days without food and water or leaving immediately.)
One person cannot be expected to write an entire season, is it ideal, yes, but very difficult. Even Season 1 had multiple writers.
I will agree on the Amid the Ruins part, how did aany of those issues not come up at all and not immediately re-written?
You're largely right, but speaking as a writer myself, albeit a traditional one though I've dabbled with interactive fiction, I'd look at storytelling faults (like choices not mattering) as a failure on my part and it's something I'd want to catch without needing anyone to tell me there's a fault there.
So while I agree with the general gist of your post in that it's a team effort, I'm not so sure the blame can be placed on the QA people either. If I was the writer of the episode and something contradicts what happened earlier (meaning it was a definite error and not something someone thinks is a contradiction), I'd look at it as not doing my job properly.
Mind you, that's the writer in me talking. I'd just look at it as a personal failing of mine and believe it's not a job for others to fix. Though sure, if the QA didn't, then they should have picked up the Arvo thing at the very least to see if it was intentional. (I.e. make sure he wasn't lying at the end of episode 4 or whatever and it was a genuine oversight)
(This is all assuming that everything follows the episode's script and a bug didn't prevent the game from recognising certain choices.)
I dunno, maybe it's also the rushed schedule - Telltale was eager to finish Season 2 by the end of 'Summer', hence the final episode appearing in the last week of August. Having a month or two per episode, with no clear overarching plan, may have affected the writing.
But Episode 3's writing was decent, if rather limited - Carver was still 100% evil, the George subplot is never resolved, the 400 Days cameos were so bad that we were better off not even having them, we never get to talk to Carver's people beyond weak-willed Bonnie and redshirt Reggie. My beef with it was down to its linearity feeling less oppressive and more a result of corners being cut. I mentioned before that the 'stealth' segments were shit, because you can deliberately try to get caught and still remain safe from detection. The title is misleading because the only "harm"/game-overs that can come to Clem either comes from the non-sequitor zombie sequence (which has no consequences), Mike dropping Clem, or you screwing around while inside the zombie horde. This is particularly egregious in the part where you steal the radios, where Tavia ends up looking either stupid or possibly even on Clementine's side.
Tavia's bizarre behavior is down to the team's incompetence, rather than the writer himself.
Didnt Sean vanaman write the entire season 1?
As predictable as it would've been, it'd have made much more sense for Luke and Kenny to be the only people who survived the gunfight alongside Clem and the baby. Bonnie and Mike were clearly expendable.
My guess is that those two were kept alive because the company changed their minds and plan to use them for the next Season.
Episode 2 was written by Mark Darin and Episode 4 was written by Gary Whitta.
What Jake said.
No.
For me Season Two was messed up and the episodes were too short!
The episodes were definitely longer in Season 1, but that's not necessarily a good thing. In my opinion, Long Road Ahead is too long, the episode spends too much time either fixing the train or gettting the truck down, and Around Every Corner is a 2 and a half hour long filler episode. Also, The Wolf Among Us episodes ran about the same time as The Walking Dead episodes, about 1 and a half to 45 minute run time, and the last 2 episodes of TWAU were really short while TWD was consistant in its runtime.
That's why I thought they took out the option to shoot Mike in No Going Back, they need to have a prupose for him and Arvo so they scrapped the kill him choice.
Here's my problem with who wrote Episodes 3 and 4...they already were busy with The Wolf Among Us. Pierre Shorette (In Harms Way) was also a writer for TWAU (Faith and I believe some Additional Writing credits) and Eric Stirpe (Amid the Ruins) was aa designer on both games. I know Telltale isn't that large, but they should have found people who weren't already preoccupied with one game to write for The Walking Dead, jusst my opinion.
You could talk to people in S1 a lot more and find stuff out about them and build relationships with them that do have an affect on the story whereas in S2 that simply isn't the case. It's too shallow and the depth that S1 had was brilliant.
I agree that there should be more of that, and, most likely, there will be more of that in Season 3, even if Breckon isn't the head writer.
Only reason S2 episodes are short is due to the cutting of puzzles and hubs. Play through the episodes of S1 doing only the important stuff and doing puzzles straight away, you'll get about 90 minutes average for all of them pretty much.
Hubs count for about 10-15 minutes extra, and the puzzles can add up to 20-30 minutes more depending on how many there are, and how big they are. I'm fine with the cutting of puzzles personally, but that extra 10-15 worth of dialogue with characters is invaluable.
Yeah, frankly, I didn't like the puzzles either such as the train in episode 3 (the train takes way too long to figure out). I would like some quick, like 5-10 minute puzzles, but if they're going to end up taking a good part of the episode, than no. But more hubs would be nice. You had some in A House Divided and No Going Back (both by Breckon) but were kind of absent in the rest of the episodes. Amid the Ruins had some, but they weren't really important.
No.
Any reason and who should replace him?
He should be replaced by those guys who wrote the 1st season. But seeing as he basically ruined all the hard work they did, I doubt that's going to happen. They probably wouldn't agree to work for Telltale ever again.
The first season had three writers:
Gary Whitta: wrote Season 1, Episode 4, does not work for Telltale but was called in as a story consultant by Telltale for Season 1.
Mark Darin: wrote Season 1, Episode 2, was a designer for both seasons, and had an additional writing credit on Amid the Ruins, still works at Telltale and is currently part of the team working on TFTBL, will most likely work on Season 3.
Sean Vanaman: head writer of Season 1, wrote Episodes 1, 3, and 5. He was a part of Season 2, creating the storyline for it and oversaw the development of Season 2, Episode 1. He left in September, 2013 to form his own gaming company Campo Santo. So don't just blame Breckon, the storyline for Season 2 was also Vanaman's creation, not just Breckon's. If you think this Season was entirely Nick Breckon you're wrong.