User Avatar Image

A commentary...

posted by janizary on - last edited - Viewed by 152 users

Gentlemen, ladies, and anything in between - this is a commentary, the second one of those two is my doing, poorly constructed and horridly paced, it is mine.

I am not going to go on forever about what is already said there, I just wanted to throw it out here where someone from TellTale may see it and call me a fool for not taking into account how hard it was to do the game in the first place.

I will at least repeat my thought on replayability, Poker Night at the Inventory has unlockable tables and decks, but no achievements for doing so, this misses out on a real chance to draw players back, having an achievement for the full set of decks and tables would have gained a good deal of returning play. Additionally, had TellTale and Valve managed an accord by which additional items could have been unlocked, it would have significantly increased the interest TeamFortress 2 players would have in the title. And an alternative type of poker or two gentlemen, I am sure that much would not have been too difficult to implement, and it would have increased replay significantly for me, as I despise Texas Hold'em and prefer Five Card Draw.

I know such things were not entirely in TellTale's hands, but it's a criticism, and critics aren't really known for their deep, thought provoking commentary.

7 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • @janizary said: I despise Texas Hold'em and prefer Five Card Draw.


    Why? I suspect many people who have this opinion don't really understand hold'em. (Not all people, mind...) I preferred seven-card stud, myself, until I really "got" hold'em.

  • You have significantly less control over your hand, there is more random chance involved and less actual poker.

  • [quote]You have significantly less control over your hand[/quote]
    I'm not really sure how. Poker (at least with more than one opponent) is partly a game of folding until you get decent cards to work with. If that's not control, what is?

    [quote]there is more random chance involved[/quote]
    I'm not sure how that's the case.

    [quote]and less actual poker.[/quote]
    Strongly disagree! The essence of poker is allowing a player to infer another player's hand. Hold'em probably provides more opportunities for this than any other poker game. In Super/System, Doyle Brunson describes a hand where he called at the river with jack high -- and won. Why? 'Cause he knew the bettor had an even worse hand. Now THAT is poker!

  • Furrykey, the essence of Poker is getting a good hand, when you have no choice on what you have in that hand, it is entirely left to chance.

    However, in Five Card you have the ability to discard - you can choose to keep the A, K, Q and throw away the 3, 7 in the hopes of different cards, or scrap the entire hand if it's a complete wash.

    I dislike Texas Hold'em because you have greater control over your hand in other Poker games, putting the power in your hands, instead of in your ability to calculate what you think your opponent is doing. This is to me especially important when you don't have opponents, but rather homunculi which, once understood, are beaten every time.

    You get your kicks in the deception, I prefer the game itself.

  • @janizary said: the essence of Poker is getting a good hand


    My, lots of people will disagree with you on that one. :)

    In my opinion, poker is a game of betting. You use your chips as your primary weapon. That's what's so beautiful about the game: it's not about the cards. The cards just give you something to bet on. From there, it's a game of odds, and of people.

    This is the Fundamental Theorem of Poker as formulated by David Sklansky. As such, it is what poker is all about:
    Every time you play a hand differently from the way you would have played it if you could see all your opponents' cards, they gain; and every time you play your hand the same way you would have played it if you could see all their cards, they lose. Conversely, every time opponents play their hands differently from the way they would have if they could see all your cards, you gain; and every time they play their hands the same way they would have played if they could see all your cards, you lose.
    (Technically, it has been found that the Fundamental Theorem doesn't always apply when there are multiple players still in the hand. Nevertheless, this is the idea that is the heart of most poker play.)

    However, in Five Card you have the ability to discard - you can choose to keep the A, K, Q and throw away the 3, 7 in the hopes of different cards, or scrap the entire hand if it's a complete wash.
    But generally your actions in discarding will be dictated by what cards you have and perhaps how the players ahead of you have discarded. For example, if you have two pair, it's pretty much a given that you're going to discard the card that doesn't fit in and go for a full house (unless you think you can trick somebody by standing pat, but I don't think that's a play you can get away with too often). Since your discarding tends to be dictated by your circumstances, you arguably still don't have a lot of control over your hand, because most of the choices you have are stupid ones you'd never make anyway. Suppose you have AAKKJ. Are you ever going to discard an A or a K? No. The only choice you really have is whether to discard the J, and that will almost always be "yes" anyway. I think the choice is largely an illusion.

    I don't think a lot of skill goes into discarding unless you can read your opponents and figure out what they have -- which just takes us back to what hold'em is good for.

    The way I see it, the draw was invented as a way of putting more cards into the action and adding a second betting round, 'cause dealing five cards with no draw (likely the way poker was initially played) didn't give you a whole lot to work with. Other poker variants, including stud and hold'em, simply accomplish this by other means.

    I suppose if you can understand and appreciate these points, nothing more I can say will change your mind. But it is my hope that you do understand them before you write off games such as hold'em. :)

  • If enough people wanted something other than Texas Hold Em, they should have provided for it.
    It's mostly a matter of which one is more fun to certain people. That seems to change by opinion. I wouldn't play anything other than Texas Hold Em, but I think choice is a good thing.

    Actually, if Telltale wants the cash, they could make it a DLC.

  • It's true that poker is a chip game as much as it's a card game. It's nearly solely about betting, making decisions and observations. The 5 cards in the middle and the actions of other players give you ton of ideas for you to decide on taking a risk or not. If anything, 5 card poker is a lot more based on chance since you have NO idea of your opponents' cards and you just blindly take the risk or not.

    All critics aren't known for their deep, thought provoking commentary; but the creators of the product only take into their consideration if the criticism is close to being deep and thought provoking. It's the main idea behind positive criticism.

Add Comment