Glad to see an article calling telltale out
"Spoiler warning: Multiple plot twists are mentioned for The Walking Dead and The Wolf Among Us.
“This game series adapts to the choices you make. The story is tailored by how you play.”
When booting up The Walking Dead for the first time, seeing this notice on-screen filled me with excitement and wonder. My choices, I thought, were going to change the game universe I was playing in and steer the storyline in new directions. I hesitated often, moving the joystick left to right on difficult decisions. The game kept me on the edge of my seat as I gripped the controller tightly in apprehension.
Clementine will remember that. Will she really? As it turns out, it didn’t seem to matter. After completing both The Walking Dead and The Wolf Among Us, I discovered that these ambitious projects failed to deliver their promise. " You can read the rest by following the link
Comments
I think everyone knows choices don't really matter by now.
They need to learn from mass effect when it comes to choices.
well good for that guy pointing out what people have been complaining about here for ages
They do need to work on choices, what they've got is good but if they made some choices actually matter it would be good. Like someone surviving the whole game etc. So far only one characters done that
Talk about an opinion that's been beaten to death. Does this reviewer imagine they're be innovative? We know the storylines don't branch into a dozen different directions and have since WD season one.
Destiny is destiny.
But you can better the path where it leads.
The biggest problem is that they just don't follow through that well with their choices. They think in the present instead of in the future. What that results in is a bunch of hanging threads that they have to figure out how to stuff back into the narrative.
They've set good groundwork and foundation for choices, and they do a good job at establishing immediate consequences of actions, but they haven't quite nailed the long-term repercussions/ripples that stem from these choices.
Determinant characters are a good example of some of these problems: it seems like they write the story considering them dead, rather than considering them alive. If they wrote their stories as if their determinant characters were still alive, it'd solve a lot of the problems that currently plague them. The way I see it, it's easier to chop something down than it is to build something up. If they made their roles bigger, it'd make it easier to chop their roles down for playthroughs where they're dead, rather than trying to find ways to fit them into the planned narrative they already have. As it stands when it comes to determinant characters, it feels like they're trying to figure out what to do with an extra puzzle piece when the rest of the puzzle is already complete.
IMO choices made during season 1 felt way more important ( Carley/Doug, relationship with Kenny ) than during season 2 ( Nick becoming useless, same relationship with everyone no matter what you choose ). I really hope for some improvement in their next games, if not I think a lot more people will start complaining, well, at least I hope so. Why would Telltale waste this opportunity to make their games even more awesome they already are?
It doesn't change the plot, it changes the characters (slightly). Not only has this topic been around since day one (and it's beyond stale now), it's also just a case of misunderstanding and incorrect expectations.
It is misleading, on the verge of false advertising because they should've been more clear about what your choices affect. Seeing 'the game is tailored to how you play'...that gives the impression that your choices can change the overall outcome of things, but your choices just affect how NPCs react to you; whether or not they like/dislike you and whether they trust you or not and want to help you. Because in real life, those are really the only things we have control over...is how we react.
It seems pretty flat across the board that everyone was disappointed with how little impact our choices had the the outcome of the story....so hopefully the developers/writers try to remedy that
Telltale can't make alternate universes with every different choice, that would be impossible. It's just small things that would change like dialogue or a scene would play out slightly differently. The story goes one way, it has too, just enjoy the ride. Anyone who thinks otherwise is only fooling themselves, AAA games can't do this, do you expect an indie team to?
well, no one's saying that EVERY choice has to lead to an alternative outcome, but choices should have a bigger impact of the story than just changing the dialogue options...or that's what the games should advertise
Mass Effect was the same in all honesty, as was DA: Origins. I'm going through Inquisition at the minute, so I can't speak to that, but I imagine many of the differences are cosmetic and just result in different dialog. Basically, the broad story arc will remain the same, no matter what.
Anyhow, in ME 1's case, literally no actions made in the first game had an impact on the end. Previous actions during the main story weren't referenced either as far as I remember. Only two choices that really made any impact was the Wrex choice and Kaiden/Ashley. You always end up at the same spot at the end and well . . . the ending choices didn't really affect much in the sequels. ME 2 was good though. Entire crew could die, though I'm not sure how people could mess up the job assigning or why people wouldn't fully upgrade things/do the loyalty missions.
DA: O, the treaties . . . they were mostly cosmetic differences for the end battle. It's only really from the Landsmeet on that choices really mattered, with Loghain. I do remember the order you tackled the mage tower and redcliffe quests in, when it comes to Connor, having an effect however. (Then there were a few options depending on the origin you chose)
Anyhow, basically . . . I guess BioWare's games are just better at creating the 'illusion' of choices mattering more. And the game length/game type helps in this manner. You notice it more in Telltale's games with them being much shorter. I've got to confess, however, that I'm finding the choices to matter a fair bit in GoT. If nothing else, they've certainly handled the 'illusion of choice' well, even if it's just dialog changing. It helps immerse you. But I've only played episode 2 once so far. Episode 1 I've played several times though.
Anyways, honestly . . . many games are the same. Alpha Protocol and Witcher 2 are two great games though when it comes to choices really feeling like they matter and they do actually lead to differences rather than just 'feeling like they do'. I've heard Wasteland 2 handles it well also? The main difference between Telltale's stuff and others are: the budget, development schedule (only having 2 - 3 months per episode), dev team size and the actual game type. The others being full-fledged RPGs with side-quests and Telltale's stuff essentially being interactive movies.
That's the Telltale formula and has been since S1 of TWD. The story is only Tailored to how you play, the game never promises to have a choice make a huge impact on the game, only your expectations thought otherwise. Most choices do seem to have an effect on their games whether big or small, it is only when you play one of their games the second time around that the illusion begins to disappear.
Right, I get it. I realized that a long time ago. I just agree with people that the it's misleading
I know they can't have a bunch of alternate endings but it would be nice if maybe they had two big decisions in the game that alter the outcome, but you don't know what two decisions they are. That way you really try to make the right decisions. The two big decisions in season 1 I think should have been between Carley and Doug, and stealing from the Stranger. If you saved Carley she would survive to the end. If you don't steal from the stranger Lee survives. If you save Carley, but steal from the stranger Lee dies, but Clem leaves with Carley. Two big decisions could lead I think to probably 4 alternate endings which I think could be manageable going into season 2. Especially if you have voice actors that do multiple people.
It doesn't promise? You mean saying that people's lives are in YOUR hands so make your decisions carefully? That doesn't strongly imply that your decisions can result in people living?
Yep and then they eventually die. Just sit back and enjoy the ride.
But why do they need to die? Why not come up with a more creative way to get rid of a character? Sarah finds a family member and leaves the group, or Carly/Doug get so mad over the fight with Ben they ditch the group? I mean does every single person you save need to die?
Yes but if it continues to pop up in gaming articles it could put pressure on Telltale to make some changes. If too many people realize this before buying the game, they might not buy it at all.
totally read my mind!
and the one character that does make it through to the end, it's not even because of any of the player choices
Its been something people have been complaining for a while, but I Telltale seems to be listening. Your choices have played a nice role in Game of Thrones so far, and hopefully this will be the case with Walking Dead S3 and the rest of Tales from the Borderlands.
It will never happen sadly but story branching would be so good as im sure we all know. The amount of work to make each episode would take such a long time. I always thought it would be great if our choice mattered whether you left Lilly on the side of the road or took her in the RV. When Lilly steals the RV what if you and Clementine went with her? So you have 2 completely different stories, leaving what happens to Kenny and his family etc a mystery. This is when our choices would really matter.