Time to give this thread a head start...
Start commenting!
Well yeah, nice suggestions...
But i disagree with...3 and 4, they do let us choos who we wanna talk to and leave whom we dont, and the more the main chars die the more impact the game has on players, well (no spoilers) a main charecter just died in their another game and it was ok, coz it had the impact. If u wanna say 'they should die at long time intervals.' then i agree...
To be fair, basically all three of their recent games (Borderlands, GoT, Minecraft) all do at least four of these (key words being at least four. I'd say some of them actually do all five)
More time to talk and get to know characters, more of a clear idea where the story's going, less rampant character death (although given that 2 of these games are more light-hearted and comedic, that's probably why), and more choice tailoring/personalization.
I really do like to think that they've listened to the criticisms of S2 and have started to apply them to their newer games. I'd say I have definite faith in S3 turning out for the better.
one solution to the killing all the main characters thing, would be to introduce lots of characters, the TV show has the same problem, obviously there are many character who most likely won't die, but then there are loads who you think have a good chance of dying, but there are so many you sort of let yourself like a few of them, because maybe they will live long enough to have a good story.
obviously the problem is that there are only 5 episodes of the game so it would be hard to introduce so many characters, but the game does have quite a few characters but most of them are obviously gonna die, either because they are bad, or they are part of another group that clearly doesn't fit into the main game, so really it is more of a subtle structure problem the game has when telling a story that if feels like all the main characters die.
I think Telltale needs to stop this five episode tradition, I feel like the story of S2 suffered a lot as a result. Maybe players don't want long, drawn out episodes but personally I don't see any problem with extending the episode count.
one solution to the killing all the main characters thing, would be to introduce lots of characters, the TV show has the same problem, obvio… moreusly there are many character who most likely won't die, but then there are loads who you think have a good chance of dying, but there are so many you sort of let yourself like a few of them, because maybe they will live long enough to have a good story.
obviously the problem is that there are only 5 episodes of the game so it would be hard to introduce so many characters, but the game does have quite a few characters but most of them are obviously gonna die, either because they are bad, or they are part of another group that clearly doesn't fit into the main game, so really it is more of a subtle structure problem the game has when telling a story that if feels like all the main characters die.
I'm not convinced that they purposely choose how many episodes are in a season. They probably write a rough draft of the story for a game, and determine how many episodes they need from that. Of course, it's not always an exact measurement. Sometimes things might change during development, and they end up having too much story to fit all 5 episodes, leading to them trimming things down. And if you hit those roadblocks while you're already mid-way through the story, well, then it becomes an even bigger problem. The fact that Telltale does live episodic development probably doesn't help either.
I feel that S2 suffered mostly due to the type of story they wanted to tell; a more free-form one. I feel like they didn't have a super clear idea of where S2 would end, nor where it would really go, and that it was more of a 'make it up as we go' attempt that story-telling. The problem with that style is when you hit any kind of roadblock, you have to compensate for it. If you come up with too much story, you might have to trim things down. Or maybe things sound longer in your head, then on paper it ends up shorter than you thought. If that happens, you either end up having to pad things out, or try to figure out how to extend it. All of that is made more difficult when you don't have an end-game in mind.
For example, S1's ending was basically one of the first things written for the game. The entirety of the game was built around the final scene, and everything was just leading up to (and into) that. S2 on the other hand, they probably didn't have much of an idea where it would end up. I remember in an interview somewhere that one thing they settled on early in S2 was that they wanted to have multiple endings, which probably explains why they never had much of an end goal in S2, besides moving forward, and to some degree, trying to find Wellington. Multiple endings aren't always bad, but I can imagine they make coming up with a concrete ending fairly difficult, especially given the 'making-stuff-up' style they were already going with.
I guess the easiest way to sum it up is I feel that S2 was an attempt at a bunch of different writing/story-telling techniques that quite simply don't work that well with their model. Trying to write a free-form story with multiple endings in mind, balanced between multiple writers, within an episodic development cycle? With all due respect to Telltale and the devs, that doesn't sound like something that blends together too nicely. It sounds like a mix of concepts that don't work together with each other all that well. Like making a sandwich out of chocolate cookies, pizza, whipped cream, and vegetables. I mean, you could make a sandwich like that if you were a real go-getter, and a few of those things can work together (ex. whipped cream + cookies). But all four as one thing? Not so much
I think Telltale needs to stop this five episode tradition, I feel like the story of S2 suffered a lot as a result. Maybe players don't want long, drawn out episodes but personally I don't see any problem with extending the episode count.
Agreed. It's a shame though that TWD Season 2 had to be where they learnt their lesson, I'd much rather have seen them make a strong Season 2 comparable to the first rather than a Minecraft game at all if I am to be brutally honest.
To be fair, basically all three of their recent games (Borderlands, GoT, Minecraft) all do at least four of these (key words being at least … morefour. I'd say some of them actually do all five)
More time to talk and get to know characters, more of a clear idea where the story's going, less rampant character death (although given that 2 of these games are more light-hearted and comedic, that's probably why), and more choice tailoring/personalization.
I really do like to think that they've listened to the criticisms of S2 and have started to apply them to their newer games. I'd say I have definite faith in S3 turning out for the better.
Yep, I meant the long intervals between deaths.
And by choosing to whom to talk to I meant free walking around like in the first season.
It was nice to have long conversations and choose the questions.
Time to give this thread a head start...
Start commenting!
Well yeah, nice suggestions...
But i disagree with...3 and 4, they do let us c… morehoos who we wanna talk to and leave whom we dont, and the more the main chars die the more impact the game has on players, well (no spoilers) a main charecter just died in their another game and it was ok, coz it had the impact. If u wanna say 'they should die at long time intervals.' then i agree...
Some of these are going to sound odd, but here some of my wishes for stuff to happen on a Season 3 too:
1. A Difficulty Setting - Not rea… morelly for interactive storytelling part, but for the moments where you have quick time events. For me at times I find them WAY too easy like the game is just being nice and giving you the time you need to finish it. Granted people had faster and slower reaction times for things and it can depend on a person's age too [my stepdad for example who is in his 50's, sucks at quick time events that were in Silent Hill Origin that he straight out gave up on the game.] but I really wouldn't say no for an option for a tougher difficulty where you can have a shorter time frame to react to events or have tougher button smashing moments where you have to think a little on your feet.
It'd just be something cool to have after completing a season or to have fun with while waiting for the next episode to come out, and gi… [view original content]
I feel like Telltale were still experimenting with S2 and it just happened to be less successful than S1. According to praise I've heard from others on Telltale's newest titles, they are definitely improving. I think S3 will be their biggest and best game when it releases and hopefully Michonne shows how Telltale have responded to criticism and if it's good, give the fanbase good reason to be hopeful for S3.
To be fair, basically all three of their recent games (Borderlands, GoT, Minecraft) all do at least four of these (key words being at least … morefour. I'd say some of them actually do all five)
More time to talk and get to know characters, more of a clear idea where the story's going, less rampant character death (although given that 2 of these games are more light-hearted and comedic, that's probably why), and more choice tailoring/personalization.
I really do like to think that they've listened to the criticisms of S2 and have started to apply them to their newer games. I'd say I have definite faith in S3 turning out for the better.
I wouldn't even really blame the multiple endings, but rather the lack of a concrete objective throughout the story altogether. If they had a concrete end goal in mind, and then used the alternate endings to give people their own tailored ending/intro to Season 3 afterwards, then I don't think the multiple endings would have been as much at fault. To clarify, I'll give a rhetorical example for Season 1 - everybody could reach the ending with Lee dying (and Telltale could plan the game around that scene still), and then they still could have had multiple branches while still having the emotional impact and gravitas of Lee's death.
I think they a more concrete end goal that wasn't just "survive" would've helped people care more.
I'm not convinced that they purposely choose how many episodes are in a season. They probably write a rough draft of the story for a game, a… morend determine how many episodes they need from that. Of course, it's not always an exact measurement. Sometimes things might change during development, and they end up having too much story to fit all 5 episodes, leading to them trimming things down. And if you hit those roadblocks while you're already mid-way through the story, well, then it becomes an even bigger problem. The fact that Telltale does live episodic development probably doesn't help either.
I feel that S2 suffered mostly due to the type of story they wanted to tell; a more free-form one. I feel like they didn't have a super clear idea of where S2 would end, nor where it would really go, and that it was more of a 'make it up as we go' attempt that story-telling. The problem with that style is when you hit any kind of roadblock, you have t… [view original content]
Well that's the thing, all 3 endings set up a perfect scenario to add more characters. In the Jane ending, Clementine said something about turning Howe's into a home, similar to Alexandria, which brings in more people. Kenny's ending features the highly populated "Wellington", giving plenty of characters, and the AJ ending gives us plenty of places Clem could wind up. She could even find herself in an Alexandria style area. So the problem isn't the amount of episodes, the problem is simply, will they do it?
one solution to the killing all the main characters thing, would be to introduce lots of characters, the TV show has the same problem, obvio… moreusly there are many character who most likely won't die, but then there are loads who you think have a good chance of dying, but there are so many you sort of let yourself like a few of them, because maybe they will live long enough to have a good story.
obviously the problem is that there are only 5 episodes of the game so it would be hard to introduce so many characters, but the game does have quite a few characters but most of them are obviously gonna die, either because they are bad, or they are part of another group that clearly doesn't fit into the main game, so really it is more of a subtle structure problem the game has when telling a story that if feels like all the main characters die.
if they do continue on with clementine's story after the 3 endings, i really don't think they will basically make 3 games, i think at best, we would get 3 different halves of a first episode, if they did do basically 3 stories that would not help the problem, it would triple it, it is hard (and expensive) to have many characters in one story it would just be worse with 3.
and really there are 4 ending endings because in the kenny one there are two really different (in terms of future consequences) endings, the jane ones seem less consequential in the grand scheme of things, but you could say there were 5 endings
Well that's the thing, all 3 endings set up a perfect scenario to add more characters. In the Jane ending, Clementine said something about t… moreurning Howe's into a home, similar to Alexandria, which brings in more people. Kenny's ending features the highly populated "Wellington", giving plenty of characters, and the AJ ending gives us plenty of places Clem could wind up. She could even find herself in an Alexandria style area. So the problem isn't the amount of episodes, the problem is simply, will they do it?
I think Telltale needs to stop this five episode tradition, I feel like the story of S2 suffered a lot as a result. Maybe players don't want long, drawn out episodes but personally I don't see any problem with extending the episode count.
if they do continue on with clementine's story after the 3 endings, i really don't think they will basically make 3 games, i think at best, we would get 3 different halves of a first episode,
The Walking Dead: Season 1: Episode 1: A New Day. Released April 24th, 2012. The game ran until November that year.
The Walking Dead: Season 2: Episode 1: All That Remains: Released December 17th, 2013. The game ran until August of 2014.
The Walking Dead: Season 3: Episode 1: ???: Releasing "Mid 2016"?, also the creators have noted that the game will be considerably larger than the last 2 seasons.
Now, notice how the gap between Season 2 and 3 is slightly larger than the gap between Seasons 1 and 2. Meaning they're taking a lot more time with Season 3, also meaning that they can make 3 separate games. (Hopefully.) Truly, the only problem there is how they're gonna do it. If they do it right, it can be fantastic, otherwise, it'll be just as bad as Season 2.
and really there are 4 ending endings because in the kenny one there are two really different
True, but we can just chalk it up as the Wellington ending still, considering they said "Check back in a few months, we might be able to let you in then."
if they do continue on with clementine's story after the 3 endings, i really don't think they will basically make 3 games, i think at best, … morewe would get 3 different halves of a first episode, if they did do basically 3 stories that would not help the problem, it would triple it, it is hard (and expensive) to have many characters in one story it would just be worse with 3.
and really there are 4 ending endings because in the kenny one there are two really different (in terms of future consequences) endings, the jane ones seem less consequential in the grand scheme of things, but you could say there were 5 endings
They've gotten better with that, I think. In S1 it was especially noticeable, but in S2 they started making a lot more unique models, and added more variety to the older ones (different hair, shirts, etc)
if they do continue on with clementine's story after the 3 endings, i really don't think they will basically make 3 games, i think at best, … morewe would get 3 different halves of a first episode,
The Walking Dead: Season 1: Episode 1: A New Day. Released April 24th, 2012. The game ran until November that year.
The Walking Dead: Season 2: Episode 1: All That Remains: Released December 17th, 2013. The game ran until August of 2014.
The Walking Dead: Season 3: Episode 1: ???: Releasing "Mid 2016"?, also the creators have noted that the game will be considerably larger than the last 2 seasons.
Now, notice how the gap between Season 2 and 3 is slightly larger than the gap between Seasons 1 and 2. Meaning they're taking a lot more time with Season 3, also meaning that they can make 3 separate games. (Hopefully.) Truly, the only problem there is how they're gonna do it. If they do it right, it can be fantastic, otherwise, it'll be just … [view original content]
This is a really fantastic list. You're pointing out things that are both practical (i.e. not writing two possible episodes for every decision) but would improve the game's effectiveness at telling a story.
I can see this in Season Three. In recent titles of Telltale, they did this. I disagree with the fourth one, kinda. It'd help us get attached to the character. Even if we dislike them, it's good to see a familiar face. (Unless they are not at all likable.) Where I agree with this, is that Kenny (Although I am a fanboy of Kenny's.) got waaaay too much screen time after he was introduced.
Okay, I got a new list of 5 to add. Pull up a chair and grab a beer, because these have been on my mind a while.
1. Scary zombies, scary things.
I'll excuse the Michonne game reusing the same walkers since it is a short series to fill in the gap with the wait for Season 3, but I'd really like to see more walker designs, and scarier. Create some new walkers and have them look frightening, have blades stuck in them, missing limbs, guts hanging out, blood, not just the same generic Frankie-Big-Nose-Big-Chin I keep seeing around and you know who I'm talking about. I want to see walkers of various ages, and to be reminded time to time that they were human beings, but that they’re something still to be feared rather than only an obstacle in the way.
Imagine how much scarier it would've been if we'd seen something like this happened to the people at Howe's when the herd washed over the place, instead of only the aftermath:
To be in situations where a character might not have a weapon or there's a whole pack of walkers trapping them in, is something I want to see more of, and sometimes for unease to be reflected in the surrounding. Fear isn't always 'turn off the lights and boom, scary setting. I’d love for more moments of tension where you're genuinely left frightened on what's about to happen, and not even from a visible threat, but something as simple as securing an eerily quiet building, and not knowing if there’s anything human or dead in there, or the silence broken by a noise and you can’t figure out where it’s coming from; for fear to be created from a visual or audible nature, without a threat being presented.
2. For the power of storytelling to not be underestimated through hubs.
Even with improvements with Minecraft Story Mode and having more playable sections to both explore and communicate with characters, this is still one of my greatest concerns for Season 3, especially when Tales from the Borderlands [despite how epic that finale was] managed to sneak out any hubs when transporting characters back to the present.
Aside from the story, the hubs are what drew me to TWDG. It gave me a kick of nostalgia from playing games like Parasite Eve 2 and the earlier Resident Evils and Silent Hills where you went around and read what was on the protagonist's thoughts from inspecting an object, or the said object reminding them of something or someone. Now remember in these old games, there are times you will go long stretches without any cutscenes, it was through these hubs, we got stories told, the inner workings of what was going on in a character’s mind, or insight into people who used to live in a house or work somewhere who we’re never even introduced to, but just from a few pieces of dialogue alone, we discover that.
If hubs are limited, then the story has to be exceptional, above average, because if it isn’t, there isn’t much for the game to fall back on. In my opinion, hubs are just as important to the tale as the plot is. A.K.A, exploration is the hardcore porn I live for, the human curiosity of wanting to walk around a room and look at some teacups and hear what the characters have to say or how they’re feeling in that moment when they look a mirror and see their tired reflection.
The exaggeration of having to figure out how get a train started won’t be missed, but the limitations I’ve seen in a few games of late have me fearing that for something like TWDG that could benefit with hubs, it’ll once again suffer the lack of them as Season 2 did, even if it isn’t as apparent. Season 1 had that formula more-or-less right, and I would give anything for Season 3 to recapture some of that formula in a more polished up state.
3. Combat segments, pew pew, swoosh swoosh.
The new combat Minecraft Story Mode recently introduced within the game’s episodes, even despite it’s basic and easy to win state, I would love to see a TWDG equivalent of that, to fight a walker for the very first time in that style where we have to strike or jump back, but still allow for the quick time events as Minecraft has also allowed. TWDG could even be more daring since it might be a one-hit game over scenario with walkers, or have a stamina bar instead of cute hearts so we're not just standing there smashing button every time walkers get close.
On the subject of interactive gameplay as well, to see those shooter segments from Season 1 return in some other form with less wobbly controls would be a plus as well.
But seriously, THIS with Minecraft combat:
Potential to be --><-- really, really awesome.
Imagine being able to play as Clementine in that mode trying to take down a walker. It’d be so exciting to see it happen if they worked on those controls! Speaking of which...
4. Expansion on the game controls/vibration controls
One thing I can’t wrong Season 2 for, is the way it improved the quick time events from Season 1, as have many Telltale games have done since, but it could do more. I did say before in another post on this thread about having a difficulty setting for gamers that want a challenge [and I still stand by that] but having the same button mash prompt of cross followed quickly by either triangle, circle or square, we've seen this done over and over again that it's become predictable.
I would love for Season 3 to mix it up more, to button mash different buttons other than only cross, to be able to shake the control to throw something, or to wriggle the analog stick to free the protagonist in danger perhaps. It doesn’t have to be up to Heavy Rain standards of insanity, but some more variety would really go a long way, and I don't think such changes would be difficult for new gamers to grasp. If they can mash cross they can mash triangle or L1 too.
The last one on this part is a sensory one. There’s an old game I played years ago called Red Ninja: End of Honor [near impossible to beat] and it did something that blew me away that I haven’t seen another game do since. When a character was dying, the protagonist placed her hand on that character's body, and through the vibration on the controller, you were able to hear that dying character’s heart beat until it stopped and was gone. It was amazing! It put you in that moment, and made you feel part of it.
Given TWDG is about telling a story, and playing at your emotions, I would love for that emotion I felt in that moment years ago to be replicated again, to make better use of the vibration control function that often gets neglected in games for the sake of acknowledging an ‘explosion’ or losing health. Take that scene with Rebecca and Clementine for example where Clem can listen to the baby, imagine if you’d been able to feel through the controller the baby kick against Rebecca’s belly, or when Lee got bitten on his left wrist, only the vibration on the left hand side on the controller went off. There’s such missed opportunity with this thing. Even if it was only for the console versions, it would be so amazing and emotional to respond to moments like this on that level.
This is the scene from Red Ninja I was talking about. I wish I could recreate the feeling of the heartbeat on here, but you'll just have to take my word for it.
In response to combat segments, I think there's a lot they can do with the basic system they've set up in Minecraft.
I think the easiest way to solve the problem of spamming attacks in TWD would be to have all the attacks be slow, but powerful. Hitting a zombie either kills it in one hit, or knocks it back and stuns it. However, if you miss, you're wide open for a counter-attack. They could wrap QTEs into that: missing a swing on a zombie results in it lunging at you while you're trying to recover, leading to the good old QTE of trying to push it off so you can try again.
As for the concept of 'health', the easiest way to raise the stakes is to only give you two or three chances to win the fight, or it's game over. Like the above, if you miss a hit on a walker, it'll lunge at you, you'll get a QTE to push it off, and then you get to try again. If you fail the second/third time, the walker kills you and it's a game over.
If you successfully land a hit on a walker, you'll either kill it in one hit, or you end up staggering it, leading to a little combo finisher move on it, or something. Maybe you could have fights with different weapon types, to add some variety. For example, fighting with a knife/machete, which just requires you to land one hit in order to kill it. Then in another scene, you have to use a hammer instead, which takes you at least two hits to kill a walker as opposed to a knife, which makes it a bit more difficult, but also more interactive (combo attacks, finishers, etc)
Basically, not all that much different than the current thing they have in Minecraft, except a bit slower-paced and with higher stakes. I mean, as it stands in the Minecraft version, it's nearly impossible for the player to die. In TWD, a 'three strikes and you're out' system is the only thing that would really work.
Human fights are ones I imagine could also be interesting. If they refine the mechanics of the bandit raid in Long Road Ahead, you could make more cover-based shooting segments like that. The same basic type of combat scenario, but with a much shorter 'fuse' for staying out of cover could work pretty well. Currently, during the bandit raid, you can keep your head poked out for a set amount of time before the screen goes red and you're forced to back out, but this timer takes so long that you can literally kill all of the bandits before the screen even starts going red. And it doesn't matter if a bunch of bandits are shooting at you when you look out of cover, they will never hit you until the screen goes red and the invisible timer hits zero.
What they should do is make that fail state based on the enemies themselves, and not just a global 'fuse time'. Like, if you poke your head out while 2 or more guys are shooting at you, you'd get smoked immediately. But if you poke your head out just before they do, or just after a few of them go down, you can take them out just as they pop back up. It'd be a rudimentary system, the basic cover-shooter, but that kind of sloppy fighting style would fit right in to TWD. I imagine most gun fights would pretty much boil down to both sides taking potshots at one another until someone finally dies anyways, so even if it's simple, crappy gameplay, it serves a purpose, and fits into the world/story.
I can think of other QTE segments they could do different as well. One type of QTE that could work are those tug-of-war type ones, where you essentially 'fight' an enemy by trying to move your crosshair to a specific spot on the screen, or have to keep it focused within a small circle, or something like that. I think they had a few QTEs like that in Jurassic Park, if memory serves correct. I think those are simple/lenient enough QTEs to bring back into their games again. Frankly, any type of QTE that isn't QQQQ-E, AAAA-Y, or XXXX-O is fine by me.
Also, more one-on-one fight sequences like in TWAU, or to a smaller extent GoT would be nice, too. TWAU's brutal and physical fighting sequences would fit right into the world of TWD. Also, more fight sequences like in All That Remains would be great, too (Winston chase, shed walker fight). I like the idea of those hectic fights where you're just scrambling around, trying to grab a weapon or anything you can use to take out your attacker, or just using the environment in general, like in the Winston chase (trying to hide behind trees, trying to push him into a walker, etc)
There's a lot of cool possibilities with combat/fight scenes, and they should really take advantage of them. Take all of the good aspects of S1, TWAU, and Minecraft, and you could make some badass, memorable action scenes.
Okay, I got a new list of 5 to add. Pull up a chair and grab a beer, because these have been on my mind a while.
1. Scary zombies, scar… morey things.
I'll excuse the Michonne game reusing the same walkers since it is a short series to fill in the gap with the wait for Season 3, but I'd really like to see more walker designs, and scarier. Create some new walkers and have them look frightening, have blades stuck in them, missing limbs, guts hanging out, blood, not just the same generic Frankie-Big-Nose-Big-Chin I keep seeing around and you know who I'm talking about. I want to see walkers of various ages, and to be reminded time to time that they were human beings, but that they’re something still to be feared rather than only an obstacle in the way.
Imagine how much scarier it would've been if we'd seen something like this happened to the people at Howe's when the herd washed over the place, instead of only the aftermath:
Skip to … [view original content]
I agree with all 5 things. Also, yes to more episodes in this season like it has been said in this thread. (yay rhymes!)
Also, not for this season, maybe not even for the next, but soon. Please, update your engine. Or, just find a way to make your games run better. I have to admit, it can be a bit choppy sometimes (I know my "Previously on..." segment in EP6 of Game of Thrones took 10 minutes. Every time it would fade to black, 1 minute would go by before I see the next segment of it.) and some of the loading times break a bit of the tension. (I mostly felt that during TFTB.)
For the "previously" segment, let the game load your choices beforehand so that it plays in one good chunk in the beginning, for the loading, maybe make some chase scenes transition between one scene to the next, so that it makes them a bit longer.
This is not hating on Telltale, just giving a bit of constructive criticism.
In response to combat segments, I think there's a lot they can do with the basic system they've set up in Minecraft.
I think the easiest … moreway to solve the problem of spamming attacks in TWD would be to have all the attacks be slow, but powerful. Hitting a zombie either kills it in one hit, or knocks it back and stuns it. However, if you miss, you're wide open for a counter-attack. They could wrap QTEs into that: missing a swing on a zombie results in it lunging at you while you're trying to recover, leading to the good old QTE of trying to push it off so you can try again.
As for the concept of 'health', the easiest way to raise the stakes is to only give you two or three chances to win the fight, or it's game over. Like the above, if you miss a hit on a walker, it'll lunge at you, you'll get a QTE to push it off, and then you get to try again. If you fail the second/third time, the walker kills you and it's a game over.
If you succes… [view original content]
Comments
good shit. good shit right here son. TT take notes.
Time to give this thread a head start...
Start commenting!
Well yeah, nice suggestions...
But i disagree with...3 and 4, they do let us choos who we wanna talk to and leave whom we dont, and the more the main chars die the more impact the game has on players, well (no spoilers) a main charecter just died in their another game and it was ok, coz it had the impact. If u wanna say 'they should die at long time intervals.' then i agree...
The guy who started the thread should be hired by telltale, now
Please see this Telltale, much agreed.
To be fair, basically all three of their recent games (Borderlands, GoT, Minecraft) all do at least four of these (key words being at least four. I'd say some of them actually do all five)
More time to talk and get to know characters, more of a clear idea where the story's going, less rampant character death (although given that 2 of these games are more light-hearted and comedic, that's probably why), and more choice tailoring/personalization.
I really do like to think that they've listened to the criticisms of S2 and have started to apply them to their newer games. I'd say I have definite faith in S3 turning out for the better.
Another thing is that they need to stop killing the whole cast every season, there is little point if everyone has to die.
one solution to the killing all the main characters thing, would be to introduce lots of characters, the TV show has the same problem, obviously there are many character who most likely won't die, but then there are loads who you think have a good chance of dying, but there are so many you sort of let yourself like a few of them, because maybe they will live long enough to have a good story.
obviously the problem is that there are only 5 episodes of the game so it would be hard to introduce so many characters, but the game does have quite a few characters but most of them are obviously gonna die, either because they are bad, or they are part of another group that clearly doesn't fit into the main game, so really it is more of a subtle structure problem the game has when telling a story that if feels like all the main characters die.
I think Telltale needs to stop this five episode tradition, I feel like the story of S2 suffered a lot as a result. Maybe players don't want long, drawn out episodes but personally I don't see any problem with extending the episode count.
I'm not convinced that they purposely choose how many episodes are in a season. They probably write a rough draft of the story for a game, and determine how many episodes they need from that. Of course, it's not always an exact measurement. Sometimes things might change during development, and they end up having too much story to fit all 5 episodes, leading to them trimming things down. And if you hit those roadblocks while you're already mid-way through the story, well, then it becomes an even bigger problem. The fact that Telltale does live episodic development probably doesn't help either.
I feel that S2 suffered mostly due to the type of story they wanted to tell; a more free-form one. I feel like they didn't have a super clear idea of where S2 would end, nor where it would really go, and that it was more of a 'make it up as we go' attempt that story-telling. The problem with that style is when you hit any kind of roadblock, you have to compensate for it. If you come up with too much story, you might have to trim things down. Or maybe things sound longer in your head, then on paper it ends up shorter than you thought. If that happens, you either end up having to pad things out, or try to figure out how to extend it. All of that is made more difficult when you don't have an end-game in mind.
For example, S1's ending was basically one of the first things written for the game. The entirety of the game was built around the final scene, and everything was just leading up to (and into) that. S2 on the other hand, they probably didn't have much of an idea where it would end up. I remember in an interview somewhere that one thing they settled on early in S2 was that they wanted to have multiple endings, which probably explains why they never had much of an end goal in S2, besides moving forward, and to some degree, trying to find Wellington. Multiple endings aren't always bad, but I can imagine they make coming up with a concrete ending fairly difficult, especially given the 'making-stuff-up' style they were already going with.
I guess the easiest way to sum it up is I feel that S2 was an attempt at a bunch of different writing/story-telling techniques that quite simply don't work that well with their model. Trying to write a free-form story with multiple endings in mind, balanced between multiple writers, within an episodic development cycle? With all due respect to Telltale and the devs, that doesn't sound like something that blends together too nicely. It sounds like a mix of concepts that don't work together with each other all that well. Like making a sandwich out of chocolate cookies, pizza, whipped cream, and vegetables. I mean, you could make a sandwich like that if you were a real go-getter, and a few of those things can work together (ex. whipped cream + cookies). But all four as one thing? Not so much
Agreed. It's a shame though that TWD Season 2 had to be where they learnt their lesson, I'd much rather have seen them make a strong Season 2 comparable to the first rather than a Minecraft game at all if I am to be brutally honest.
I know I have said this a lot, but if they want to improve season 3 they should bring back the writers from season 1 that left Telltale.
Yep, I meant the long intervals between deaths.
And by choosing to whom to talk to I meant free walking around like in the first season.
It was nice to have long conversations and choose the questions.
Old me used to be so cheery, and this was right before the finale too. It's kind of sad to look at.
I still stand by what I said back then.
I feel like Telltale were still experimenting with S2 and it just happened to be less successful than S1. According to praise I've heard from others on Telltale's newest titles, they are definitely improving. I think S3 will be their biggest and best game when it releases and hopefully Michonne shows how Telltale have responded to criticism and if it's good, give the fanbase good reason to be hopeful for S3.
Telltale should also stop re-using the same walker models over and over again, it kind of bothered me in season 2.
If they just make season 3 like season 1 was then it will be no problem
I wouldn't even really blame the multiple endings, but rather the lack of a concrete objective throughout the story altogether. If they had a concrete end goal in mind, and then used the alternate endings to give people their own tailored ending/intro to Season 3 afterwards, then I don't think the multiple endings would have been as much at fault. To clarify, I'll give a rhetorical example for Season 1 - everybody could reach the ending with Lee dying (and Telltale could plan the game around that scene still), and then they still could have had multiple branches while still having the emotional impact and gravitas of Lee's death.
I think they a more concrete end goal that wasn't just "survive" would've helped people care more.
I agree with all of this so much. In fact, you're better than any of the season 2 writers at the moment.
Well that's the thing, all 3 endings set up a perfect scenario to add more characters. In the Jane ending, Clementine said something about turning Howe's into a home, similar to Alexandria, which brings in more people. Kenny's ending features the highly populated "Wellington", giving plenty of characters, and the AJ ending gives us plenty of places Clem could wind up. She could even find herself in an Alexandria style area. So the problem isn't the amount of episodes, the problem is simply, will they do it?
if they do continue on with clementine's story after the 3 endings, i really don't think they will basically make 3 games, i think at best, we would get 3 different halves of a first episode, if they did do basically 3 stories that would not help the problem, it would triple it, it is hard (and expensive) to have many characters in one story it would just be worse with 3.
and really there are 4 ending endings because in the kenny one there are two really different (in terms of future consequences) endings, the jane ones seem less consequential in the grand scheme of things, but you could say there were 5 endings
yeah, imagine a 10 episode telltale game (hopefully not over two years) that would be an epic, compared to 5
The Walking Dead: Season 1: Episode 1: A New Day. Released April 24th, 2012. The game ran until November that year.
The Walking Dead: Season 2: Episode 1: All That Remains: Released December 17th, 2013. The game ran until August of 2014.
The Walking Dead: Season 3: Episode 1: ???: Releasing "Mid 2016"?, also the creators have noted that the game will be considerably larger than the last 2 seasons.
Now, notice how the gap between Season 2 and 3 is slightly larger than the gap between Seasons 1 and 2. Meaning they're taking a lot more time with Season 3, also meaning that they can make 3 separate games. (Hopefully.) Truly, the only problem there is how they're gonna do it. If they do it right, it can be fantastic, otherwise, it'll be just as bad as Season 2.
True, but we can just chalk it up as the Wellington ending still, considering they said "Check back in a few months, we might be able to let you in then."
This ^
They've gotten better with that, I think. In S1 it was especially noticeable, but in S2 they started making a lot more unique models, and added more variety to the older ones (different hair, shirts, etc)
i wouldn't get your hopes up for 3 games in one, they still only sell it once
What do you mean?
This is a really fantastic list. You're pointing out things that are both practical (i.e. not writing two possible episodes for every decision) but would improve the game's effectiveness at telling a story.
I can see this in Season Three. In recent titles of Telltale, they did this. I disagree with the fourth one, kinda. It'd help us get attached to the character. Even if we dislike them, it's good to see a familiar face. (Unless they are not at all likable.) Where I agree with this, is that Kenny (Although I am a fanboy of Kenny's.) got waaaay too much screen time after he was introduced.
easiest way to improve Season 3 is to add longer and detailed clementine death scenes
It is not about what happens, it is about how it happens, and that adapts your choices
Okay, I got a new list of 5 to add. Pull up a chair and grab a beer, because these have been on my mind a while.
1. Scary zombies, scary things.
I'll excuse the Michonne game reusing the same walkers since it is a short series to fill in the gap with the wait for Season 3, but I'd really like to see more walker designs, and scarier. Create some new walkers and have them look frightening, have blades stuck in them, missing limbs, guts hanging out, blood, not just the same generic Frankie-Big-Nose-Big-Chin I keep seeing around and you know who I'm talking about. I want to see walkers of various ages, and to be reminded time to time that they were human beings, but that they’re something still to be feared rather than only an obstacle in the way.
Imagine how much scarier it would've been if we'd seen something like this happened to the people at Howe's when the herd washed over the place, instead of only the aftermath:
Skip to minute 2 minutes 5 seconds in:
This game is nearly 16 years old, the graphics are as dated as the acting, and yet this intro still holds out to me because of the cinematography with how it's shot. It shows us how the dangerous the dead are in overpowering the living despite everything thrown at them, and those zombies look creepier than the walkers in TWDG. These are the zombies that would give me nightmares, and have over the years.
To be in situations where a character might not have a weapon or there's a whole pack of walkers trapping them in, is something I want to see more of, and sometimes for unease to be reflected in the surrounding. Fear isn't always 'turn off the lights and boom, scary setting. I’d love for more moments of tension where you're genuinely left frightened on what's about to happen, and not even from a visible threat, but something as simple as securing an eerily quiet building, and not knowing if there’s anything human or dead in there, or the silence broken by a noise and you can’t figure out where it’s coming from; for fear to be created from a visual or audible nature, without a threat being presented.
2. For the power of storytelling to not be underestimated through hubs.
Even with improvements with Minecraft Story Mode and having more playable sections to both explore and communicate with characters, this is still one of my greatest concerns for Season 3, especially when Tales from the Borderlands [despite how epic that finale was] managed to sneak out any hubs when transporting characters back to the present.
Aside from the story, the hubs are what drew me to TWDG. It gave me a kick of nostalgia from playing games like Parasite Eve 2 and the earlier Resident Evils and Silent Hills where you went around and read what was on the protagonist's thoughts from inspecting an object, or the said object reminding them of something or someone. Now remember in these old games, there are times you will go long stretches without any cutscenes, it was through these hubs, we got stories told, the inner workings of what was going on in a character’s mind, or insight into people who used to live in a house or work somewhere who we’re never even introduced to, but just from a few pieces of dialogue alone, we discover that.
Skip to 41 seconds for short example:
enter link description here
If hubs are limited, then the story has to be exceptional, above average, because if it isn’t, there isn’t much for the game to fall back on. In my opinion, hubs are just as important to the tale as the plot is. A.K.A, exploration is the hardcore porn I live for, the human curiosity of wanting to walk around a room and look at some teacups and hear what the characters have to say or how they’re feeling in that moment when they look a mirror and see their tired reflection.
The exaggeration of having to figure out how get a train started won’t be missed, but the limitations I’ve seen in a few games of late have me fearing that for something like TWDG that could benefit with hubs, it’ll once again suffer the lack of them as Season 2 did, even if it isn’t as apparent. Season 1 had that formula more-or-less right, and I would give anything for Season 3 to recapture some of that formula in a more polished up state.
3. Combat segments, pew pew, swoosh swoosh.
The new combat Minecraft Story Mode recently introduced within the game’s episodes, even despite it’s basic and easy to win state, I would love to see a TWDG equivalent of that, to fight a walker for the very first time in that style where we have to strike or jump back, but still allow for the quick time events as Minecraft has also allowed. TWDG could even be more daring since it might be a one-hit game over scenario with walkers, or have a stamina bar instead of cute hearts so we're not just standing there smashing button every time walkers get close.
On the subject of interactive gameplay as well, to see those shooter segments from Season 1 return in some other form with less wobbly controls would be a plus as well.
But seriously, THIS with Minecraft combat:
Potential to be -->
<-- really, really awesome.
Imagine being able to play as Clementine in that mode trying to take down a walker. It’d be so exciting to see it happen if they worked on those controls! Speaking of which...
4. Expansion on the game controls/vibration controls
One thing I can’t wrong Season 2 for, is the way it improved the quick time events from Season 1, as have many Telltale games have done since, but it could do more. I did say before in another post on this thread about having a difficulty setting for gamers that want a challenge [and I still stand by that] but having the same button mash prompt of cross followed quickly by either triangle, circle or square, we've seen this done over and over again that it's become predictable.
I would love for Season 3 to mix it up more, to button mash different buttons other than only cross, to be able to shake the control to throw something, or to wriggle the analog stick to free the protagonist in danger perhaps. It doesn’t have to be up to Heavy Rain standards of insanity, but some more variety would really go a long way, and I don't think such changes would be difficult for new gamers to grasp. If they can mash cross they can mash triangle or L1 too.
The last one on this part is a sensory one. There’s an old game I played years ago called Red Ninja: End of Honor [near impossible to beat] and it did something that blew me away that I haven’t seen another game do since. When a character was dying, the protagonist placed her hand on that character's body, and through the vibration on the controller, you were able to hear that dying character’s heart beat until it stopped and was gone. It was amazing! It put you in that moment, and made you feel part of it.
Given TWDG is about telling a story, and playing at your emotions, I would love for that emotion I felt in that moment years ago to be replicated again, to make better use of the vibration control function that often gets neglected in games for the sake of acknowledging an ‘explosion’ or losing health. Take that scene with Rebecca and Clementine for example where Clem can listen to the baby, imagine if you’d been able to feel through the controller the baby kick against Rebecca’s belly, or when Lee got bitten on his left wrist, only the vibration on the left hand side on the controller went off. There’s such missed opportunity with this thing. Even if it was only for the console versions, it would be so amazing and emotional to respond to moments like this on that level.
This is the scene from Red Ninja I was talking about. I wish I could recreate the feeling of the heartbeat on here, but you'll just have to take my word for it.
Skip to 1 minute 24 seconds:
enter link description here
5. For this to never happen ever again:
I mean it, you're smarter than this Telltale.
No more poopy deaths. Even the surprise one, please don't make them poopy.
In response to combat segments, I think there's a lot they can do with the basic system they've set up in Minecraft.
I think the easiest way to solve the problem of spamming attacks in TWD would be to have all the attacks be slow, but powerful. Hitting a zombie either kills it in one hit, or knocks it back and stuns it. However, if you miss, you're wide open for a counter-attack. They could wrap QTEs into that: missing a swing on a zombie results in it lunging at you while you're trying to recover, leading to the good old QTE of trying to push it off so you can try again.
As for the concept of 'health', the easiest way to raise the stakes is to only give you two or three chances to win the fight, or it's game over. Like the above, if you miss a hit on a walker, it'll lunge at you, you'll get a QTE to push it off, and then you get to try again. If you fail the second/third time, the walker kills you and it's a game over.
If you successfully land a hit on a walker, you'll either kill it in one hit, or you end up staggering it, leading to a little combo finisher move on it, or something. Maybe you could have fights with different weapon types, to add some variety. For example, fighting with a knife/machete, which just requires you to land one hit in order to kill it. Then in another scene, you have to use a hammer instead, which takes you at least two hits to kill a walker as opposed to a knife, which makes it a bit more difficult, but also more interactive (combo attacks, finishers, etc)
Basically, not all that much different than the current thing they have in Minecraft, except a bit slower-paced and with higher stakes. I mean, as it stands in the Minecraft version, it's nearly impossible for the player to die. In TWD, a 'three strikes and you're out' system is the only thing that would really work.
Human fights are ones I imagine could also be interesting. If they refine the mechanics of the bandit raid in Long Road Ahead, you could make more cover-based shooting segments like that. The same basic type of combat scenario, but with a much shorter 'fuse' for staying out of cover could work pretty well. Currently, during the bandit raid, you can keep your head poked out for a set amount of time before the screen goes red and you're forced to back out, but this timer takes so long that you can literally kill all of the bandits before the screen even starts going red. And it doesn't matter if a bunch of bandits are shooting at you when you look out of cover, they will never hit you until the screen goes red and the invisible timer hits zero.
What they should do is make that fail state based on the enemies themselves, and not just a global 'fuse time'. Like, if you poke your head out while 2 or more guys are shooting at you, you'd get smoked immediately. But if you poke your head out just before they do, or just after a few of them go down, you can take them out just as they pop back up. It'd be a rudimentary system, the basic cover-shooter, but that kind of sloppy fighting style would fit right in to TWD. I imagine most gun fights would pretty much boil down to both sides taking potshots at one another until someone finally dies anyways, so even if it's simple, crappy gameplay, it serves a purpose, and fits into the world/story.
I can think of other QTE segments they could do different as well. One type of QTE that could work are those tug-of-war type ones, where you essentially 'fight' an enemy by trying to move your crosshair to a specific spot on the screen, or have to keep it focused within a small circle, or something like that. I think they had a few QTEs like that in Jurassic Park, if memory serves correct. I think those are simple/lenient enough QTEs to bring back into their games again. Frankly, any type of QTE that isn't QQQQ-E, AAAA-Y, or XXXX-O is fine by me.
Also, more one-on-one fight sequences like in TWAU, or to a smaller extent GoT would be nice, too. TWAU's brutal and physical fighting sequences would fit right into the world of TWD. Also, more fight sequences like in All That Remains would be great, too (Winston chase, shed walker fight). I like the idea of those hectic fights where you're just scrambling around, trying to grab a weapon or anything you can use to take out your attacker, or just using the environment in general, like in the Winston chase (trying to hide behind trees, trying to push him into a walker, etc)
There's a lot of cool possibilities with combat/fight scenes, and they should really take advantage of them. Take all of the good aspects of S1, TWAU, and Minecraft, and you could make some badass, memorable action scenes.
I agree with all 5 things. Also, yes to more episodes in this season like it has been said in this thread. (yay rhymes!)
Also, not for this season, maybe not even for the next, but soon. Please, update your engine. Or, just find a way to make your games run better. I have to admit, it can be a bit choppy sometimes (I know my "Previously on..." segment in EP6 of Game of Thrones took 10 minutes. Every time it would fade to black, 1 minute would go by before I see the next segment of it.) and some of the loading times break a bit of the tension. (I mostly felt that during TFTB.)
For the "previously" segment, let the game load your choices beforehand so that it plays in one good chunk in the beginning, for the loading, maybe make some chase scenes transition between one scene to the next, so that it makes them a bit longer.
This is not hating on Telltale, just giving a bit of constructive criticism.
SO MANY LIKES
Okay?
I chose to give back Arvo's supplies. Nothing changed.
Don't bring back characters from the previous seasons just because of fan service. Season 2 went down hill with the return of Kenny.
So you were not an asshole instead of being one. That changed
I truly hope season 3 will be amazing.
So? Luke still died, Mike still abandoned me, Jane and Kenny still fight.