The Walking Dead (from Telltale Games) - Catch All

Eleima wrote:

So... on the final episode:

Spoiler:

Anyone truly believe that Kenny survived that?

I really hope not.

Spoiler:

f*ck Kenny. He's a spineless, puffed-up, self-absorbed, deluded redneck sack of sh*t. I f*cking hated Kenny, the whiny little baby, and I nearly dropped the controller choosing the option to say as much, I hit the button so hard. Greasy little coward got his family killed.

Kenny:

Spoiler:

He was almost as upset about losing that frickin boat as he was his family.

About the boat:

Spoiler:

I think we was upset because he had pretty much been in denial the entire time (see the "stop the train" incident). The boat being stolen was just the straw that broke the camel's back.

And regarding Kenny:

Spoiler:

I don't think he'll be back. We can't be 100% sure since he didn't have an onscreen death, but I don't see anyone coming back from that. And it would be cheap if they saved him.

If I could tell Telltale Games something...

Spoiler:

... it would be that a game like this needs failure paths.

The entirety of the game's tension for me was the singular need to keep Clementine safe. Every decision was weighed against that. So, finding that, no matter what I do, Clementine is in the room with me and the security guard at the end, takes all the teeth out of the game.

Failure has to be an option. And not "game over, try again?" failure. I mean failure that continues the storyline to an ending. There needs to be a real threat that the thing I'm so afraid of actually can happen. Otherwise, the tension is just a facade. I'm not too upset about it this time around, as this was a first bold attempt to break out the adventure game from a strictly single path to a rewrites-around-your-choices branching path. But failure paths need to be added in to the equation.

As it is, it's like a Choose Your Own Adventure book with all the bad endings removed, and that's just unsatisfying.

*Legion* wrote:

If I could tell Telltale Games something...

Spoiler:

... it would be that a game like this needs failure paths.

The entirety of the game's tension for me was the singular need to keep Clementine safe. Every decision was weighed against that. So, finding that, no matter what I do, Clementine is in the room with me and the security guard at the end, takes all the teeth out of the game.

Failure has to be an option. And not "game over, try again?" failure. I mean failure that continues the storyline to an ending. There needs to be a real threat that the thing I'm so afraid of actually can happen. Otherwise, the tension is just a facade. I'm not too upset about it this time around, as this was a first bold attempt to break out the adventure game from a strictly single path to a rewrites-around-your-choices branching path. But failure paths need to be added in to the equation.

As it is, it's like a Choose Your Own Adventure book with all the bad endings removed, and that's just unsatisfying.

Spoiler:

Are you finding this out after the fact? I was able to play through without any additional information so I didn't know exactly how things would play out and as other actions had led to the removal of characters from the game, it seemed somewhat possible.

*Legion* wrote:

If I could tell Telltale Games something...

Spoiler:

... it would be that a game like this needs failure paths.

The entirety of the game's tension for me was the singular need to keep Clementine safe. Every decision was weighed against that. So, finding that, no matter what I do, Clementine is in the room with me and the security guard at the end, takes all the teeth out of the game.

Failure has to be an option. And not "game over, try again?" failure. I mean failure that continues the storyline to an ending. There needs to be a real threat that the thing I'm so afraid of actually can happen. Otherwise, the tension is just a facade. I'm not too upset about it this time around, as this was a first bold attempt to break out the adventure game from a strictly single path to a rewrites-around-your-choices branching path. But failure paths need to be added in to the equation.

As it is, it's like a Choose Your Own Adventure book with all the bad endings removed, and that's just unsatisfying.

Fair enough, but...

If Clementine dying was a possibility I don't think I'd have been able to take it emotionally.

Which is wonderful to be able to say that about a game. But maybe in season two?

Rahmen wrote:
Spoiler:

Are you finding this out after the fact? I was able to play through without any additional information so I didn't know exactly how things would play out and as other actions had led to the removal of characters from the game, it seemed somewhat possible.

Spoiler:

Yes, after the fact, which is why the tension worked for the first playthrough, but come Season 2, I'll be less inclined to believe in the danger.

At least the limits of this game didn't become obvious until after the conclusion of the game. An example of a worse instance of this is L.A. Noire, a game which completely lost my interest when it became obvious that whether I correctly solved cases or not didn't make a damn bit of difference.

I'm wondering if they only do just Season 2 next, that failure paths will exist so that the story can be wrapped up. Perhaps that's something that they're planning next.

So many possible scenarios that could work in Season 2. Will it be another story from the beginning of the apocalypse? Or will it be set six months or so after it begins, when it becomes clear that there's no rescue coming? Personally, I'm happy to move to another set of characters. I'm not sure I can really say why, but I'd rather leave Clementine's character as she was at the end.

My husband and I watch the show. I've read a fair number of the comics, and my husband has read just about all of the comics as well as the novels Kirkman wrote about the Governor and Lilly. I bought this for him, but he hasn't yet touched it. It's making me crazy, because I really want to see how he reacts to it. I also want to scream at him because IMO it's so much better than any of the other Walking Dead stuff that's come out.

Be careful what you wish for, Concentric! Like you guys, we watch the shows, I've read almost all the comics, and I really wanted to see how my husband would react to the game. Three episodes later and all I'm getting is "I thought we'd be playing together", "yeah, but what you choose doesn't really matter in the end", and "attached to the characters? meh." Meanwhile, I was literally in tears as early as episode one (that answering machine gets me every - single - time).

I agree that it'd be nice to see them use a completely different set of characters. I can't help the feeling that this story's been told, and whatever Clementine's fate, the rest of the characters have their stories pretty much wrapped up at this point. The only thing I'm wondering about, and I'd definitely like some feedback/opinions/theories on this one, is regarding Christa (incoming spoilers for episodes 4 & 5):

Spoiler:

I became pretty clear to me in episode 5 that Christa was pregnant. Now we've all discussed ad nauseum Lori's pregnancy in the TV series, but I'm curious as to how the game will/would handle the issue. Are they going to ignore it completely? Whatever our morals/ethics right here, right now in the civilized world, you can't deny that a newborn is a liability in a world full of flesh eating zombies... :(

Finally, I completely agree with you, Legion. Failure should have been an option. Maybe that's what's missing in my husband's eyes... Food for thought!

Introducing the potential for failure also introduces the notion of an "optimal path", which is undesirable for numerous reasons. I would dispute the claim that tension cannot exist without a meaningful chance of the thing you don't want happening to happen; movies, books and TV are expert at generating tension even when you know outside the context of the fiction that X character is too valuable to be killed off.

4xis.black wrote:

Introducing the potential for failure also introduces the notion of an "optimal path", which is undesirable for numerous reasons. I would dispute the claim that tension cannot exist without a meaningful chance of the thing you don't want happening to happen; movies, books and TV are expert at generating tension even when you know outside the context of the fiction that X character is too valuable to be killed off.

.... and can be so much better when that belief lulls you into a false sense of security, as seen in Psycho (big shocker to audiences when it first came out) and Martin's 'A Song of Ice and Fire' series.

I bought into the tension for every character except Lee. I didn't think they would ever go so far as to let Clem die, but I also never thought a major video game maker (especially Tell Tale) would have the PLAYER actually have to

Spoiler:

actively kill a child. I'm still not over this. When I went out in the woods with Kenny at the end of Ep. 2 to 'put Duck out of his misery' I had no problem saying Lee would do it, but I still cannot believe they made me, the player, point a gun at a child's head and press the 'shoot' button. I had to step away for a few days at that point. Replayed it a couple of times and shamefully looked up some spoiler text to see if I really had to do it. Learned my only choice was to just do it or back out a choice earlier and went that route. It may only be a game but that was a line I could not cross.

Then in the very next episode they made me smash a different kid's head. Because he had already turned it seemed less bad, but I saw Tell Tale were not going to let me off the hook. If I wanted to finish the game it had to be done.

Yeah, I could have asked Kenny, but the fact that the clear and full option to shoot a living child yourself was _in_ the game was not what I expected and I am still not comfortable with it. I finished this a few weeks ago but have not been able to get over that part.

Despite my few misgivings, this is still the best game I've played in years - for what it made me feel, think, and do.

*Legion* wrote:

At least the limits of this game didn't become obvious until after the conclusion of the game. An example of a worse instance of this is L.A. Noire, a game which completely lost my interest when it became obvious that whether I correctly solved cases or not didn't make a damn bit of difference.

Agreed. I didn't really feel limited during the game itself, and that's what matters. It's not like I was planning on playing it through multiple times anyway.

Regrading a failure path, I'm not sure if that would really help the game -- I know it would make sense in the world of The Walking Dead, but all you're going to do when you see the "zombies ate your brain" end screen is to go back to the last save point and reload anyway so how is that all that different from restarting after you fail a QTE?

edosan wrote:

Regrading a failure path, I'm not sure if that would really help the game -- I know it would make sense in the world of The Walking Dead, but all you're going to do when you see the "zombies ate your brain" end screen is to go back to the last save point and reload anyway so how is that all that different from restarting after you fail a QTE?

Spoiler:

Failure is not your death. Failure is failing to protect someone or something else. Example: Clementine dies. Story continues on with the rest of the characters. Not a "you died, restart" screen.

This kind of swings with my idea of how someone should make a Superman game. Superman should never have a health bar, and there shouldn't be a city full of kryptonite to make Superman vulnerable. The game should be a sequence of save-this-person save-that-person events. If you succeed, they're saved. If you fail, they die, and you continue on (and preferably the story adjusts to this). You feel like sh*t, but tough titties Superman, you need to shake it off and save the next one. No restarts, no do-overs, just a sequence of one-chance events.

Point is, it's not your character who dies from success or failure. It's others, and your story continues on either way.

*Legion* wrote:
edosan wrote:

Regrading a failure path, I'm not sure if that would really help the game -- I know it would make sense in the world of The Walking Dead, but all you're going to do when you see the "zombies ate your brain" end screen is to go back to the last save point and reload anyway so how is that all that different from restarting after you fail a QTE?

Spoiler:

Failure is not your death. Failure is failing to protect someone or something else. Example: Clementine dies. Story continues on with the rest of the characters. Not a "you died, restart" screen.

This kind of swings with my idea of how someone should make a Superman game. Superman should never have a health bar, and there shouldn't be a city full of kryptonite to make Superman vulnerable. The game should be a sequence of save-this-person save-that-person events. If you succeed, they're saved. If you fail, they die, and you continue on (and preferably the story adjusts to this). You feel like sh*t, but tough titties Superman, you need to shake it off and save the next one. No restarts, no do-overs, just a sequence of one-chance events.

Point is, it's not your character who dies from success or failure. It's others, and your story continues on either way.

But by determining that it's not your character's death or not that defines success or failure, haven't you just limited the choices in a meaningful and fundamental way that is just as significant as the limitations set in the existing game?

Spoiler:

In my case, I didn't start with my success or failure being determined by Clementine's fate. I was invested in Lee. Clem's fate only became meaningful over time - something that evolved with excellent story-telling. But it still wasn't concrete until Lee was bitten. At that point, my fate was determined, so the only success I could have was to save Clem. It was my last chance of success and made my playing the last episode almost desperate. It's why the final scene had such a personal impact. My wife and 13 year old son also played the game and all of us had the same tearful reaction to the last scene.

By starting off with Clem's life or death being the determining factor of a game, you've predefined the role of my character and taken away a significant portion of the journey I was able to experience in the first game. I don't see how that is any better than pre-determining the story (which is unknown to the player), but I can see how it's significantly worse.

Granath wrote:
Spoiler:

In my case, I didn't start with my success or failure being determined by Clementine's fate. I was invested in Lee. Clem's fate only became meaningful over time - something that evolved with excellent story-telling. But it still wasn't concrete until Lee was bitten. At that point, my fate was determined, so the only success I could have was to save Clem. It was my last chance of success and made my playing the last episode almost desperate. It's why the final scene had such a personal impact. My wife and 13 year old son also played the game and all of us had the same tearful reaction to the last scene.

By starting off with Clem's life or death being the determining factor of a game, you've predefined the role of my character and taken away a significant portion of the journey I was able to experience in the first game. I don't see how that is any better than pre-determining the story (which is unknown to the player), but I can see how it's significantly worse.

Spoiler:

If Clem died in her parents house, and Lee continues on through the rest of the story, I think the game loses something, but there could be benefits to that, as well. The problem with *Legion*'s example, though, is that Lee could NEVER die, and thus you can ONLY make Superman games.

Also, please make that Superman game!

TheCounselor wrote:
Spoiler:

If Clem died in her parents house, and Lee continues on through the rest of the story, I think the game loses something, but there could be benefits to that, as well. The problem with *Legion*'s example, though, is that Lee could NEVER die, and thus you can ONLY make Superman games.

Also, please make that Superman game!

Spoiler:

How is the "Lee could NEVER die" situation any different from exactly what we have now? The game doesn't continue if Lee dies now.

Having QTE sequences where Lee can die is not incompatible with what I'm talking about. I'm talking about failure paths that continue the story, which don't stop anyone from still having "Lee dies" situations that require re-doing the sequence. In fact, I don't want to get rid of those.

Spoiler:

If Clem died in her parents house, and Lee continues on through the rest of the story, I think the game loses something, but there could be benefits to that, as well.

Spoiler:

Allowing Clem to die doesn't mean she has to be capable of dying from the very start. It just means that at some point, you could make a mistake that gets her killed. It doesn't mean that EVERY choice has to have a mistake that puts her in danger of death. Just that the number of such paths is no longer 0. At some point, my bad choices should have that level of bad consequence.

The whole premise of the game is that I'm supposed to protect Clem, but the fact is, it's Clem that's Superman.

So I'm watching Season 2 of The Walking Dead on Netflix, and is it just me or is

Spoiler:

Episode 2 of the game, practically the same?

Boo. Just bought this in the humble bundle and found out you can't remap the keyboard keys. Seriously? I can't believe they don't let you do this. I'm so very very disappointed in Telltale for this. Glad I only payed a couple of bucks for this. /rant

I played with a 360 controller and it worked quite well. At least until it screwed up my savegame in episode 4 :-/

complexmath wrote:

I played with a 360 controller and it worked quite well. At least until it screwed up my savegame in episode 4 :-/

The controller screwed up the save game?

Yeah, the lack of remap in any game sucks, but I didn't have trouble with the default keys in the Walking Dead. Most of the time you are just point and clicking anyhow.

I know my Logitech keyboard has some remapping feature but I still haven't used it so can't comment on it. I do regularly map keyboard keys to my Razor mouse using the Razor software when the game doesn't support remapping or just doesn't support the two side buttons on the mouse.

No, the game screwed up the savegame. There was some issue where if you installed episode 5 at the wrong time it was likely to cause that problem, I believe. The controller is pretty natural to use though, and adds some tension for the combat moments because aiming with it is difficult compared to the mouse.

Walking Dead 400 Days DLC shows up in Steam database

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthre...

Telltale has been teasing this for days.

http://vine.co/v/b3gbMwUuD1x

https://vine.co/v/b3twh3FAVFP

woohoo!

cheesycrouton wrote:

Boo. Just bought this in the humble bundle and found out you can't remap the keyboard keys. Seriously? I can't believe they don't let you do this. I'm so very very disappointed in Telltale for this. Glad I only payed a couple of bucks for this. /rant

That really made me irritated, too. I've never gotten around to playing it yet, probably because of that. I didn't buy Gunpoint because of that.

Guess I'll eventually play it with controller.

Crap trailer but I'm still very excited!

From what I understand this ties to season 2. Right?

Yeah, from what I've read it's a 'bridge' between season 1 & 2. Trailer isn't the best, and I am doubtful this will be as good as a full season story. I'm just excited to have some more of this, regardless.

So is this just one big stand alone game, as opposed to season one being episodic?

As far as I can tell, yeah. Maybe not on the 'Big' side though... They are classing it as DLC for season 1. Although, it does say:

Destructoid note that the episode will be broken down into five short stories, each focusing on a different character and focused around the truck stop seen in the trailer. Decisions made in season one will have an influence on proceedings and what happens here may have an impact in season two.

I still hope they're releasing it as 1 package though and not split into 5.