User Avatar Image

The Walking Dead

posted by Woodsyblue on - last edited - Viewed by 1.5K users

Seeing as it seems like the obvious front runner for Telltale's new mystery project I thought we should start a thread about The Walking Dead. Just a place where people can share their thoughts on the comic books/TV series and whether or not people think it has the potential for a good game.

I live in Australia where the show hasn't aired yet so I haven't seen it but one of my friends has a copy so I'm probably going to end up watching it some time in the next couple of weeks. I have been interested in seeing it for some time now, largely for the big part Frank Darabont played in production. I've never read any of the comics.

51 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • @Woodsyblue said: I see what you are saying and your point is well made but I still disagree. First off Telltale doesn't have a lucrative licence like Star Wars just sitting in it's back pocket like LucasArts did. Every game they licence they will owe a share of the profits to the rightful owners, thus diminishing their returns.


    Which is universally the same. It's the same for Sam and Max and Back to the Future, it's the same between Tales and the supposed Walking Dead game. It's not like you're comparing owned IP to licensed properties here, Telltale has thus far ONLY done licensed properties. They've made this trade-off for EVERY game they've made, and they seem to think it's a worthwhile trade.

    Second off even the licence games they make, like Back to the Future and Wallice & Gromit, are designed just like the classic adventure games (with the exception of being episodic). They are still fun and quirky adventures in the same vein and structure as the LucasArts classics. I'm also willing to bet that future games, like Jurassic Park, will be as well, though admittedly they have to experiment to try and ad an element of danger, but at the end of the day it will still be an adventure game.


    Last I checked, adventure games need to contain puzzles. In their last two games, they've done their best to deny and hide the existence of in-game puzzles. Back to the Future, their latest game, provides not one, not two, not three, but four sources of hints for a game that has very few points of possible interaction, a very small inventory, and a game design that prods you with the answer at every given opportunity no matter how much you try to shake it off. This is because they want to crack the "Grossman's Mother-In-Law" demographic, because once that person is drawn in, they most assuredly have everyone(as per the referenced article). Telltale chasing a non-adventure audience isn't speculation on my part, it's the current reality.

    LucasArts was an exception in the industry because they had licences like Star Wars and Indy sitting around that appeal far more to mainstream audiences. LucasArts is sinking its own ship though, the Star Wars licence is becoming stagnant, more and more gamers are realising that rushed crappy games like the Force Unleashed just isn't worth their time.


    No, they aren't. The Force Unleashed broke sales records, and the sales for the second game were strong on both major console platforms for which it was released. It's nice to live in a world where good guys win, where poor judgement and lazy, slipshod efforts lead to financial failure. But this world, the one that we actually live in, is not that world.

    If it wasn't for the mega hype surrounding their licences they'd probably already be under.


    If it wasn't for the Star Wars license, they might be under. And as far as Telltale's finances are concerned, if a certain license puts them well into the black regardless of effort put into it, I think that Telltale will do what everyone else in recorded human history has done and follow the money to more mainstream pastures.

  • Rather Dashing: minting new nihilists since 1989.

  • Its true though.... Companies will do what they will to make money.. its not really that hard to understand.... Right now TTG is known as the little company that makes decent adventure games... but lets say Universal really likes BTTF and JP, and they say ..... How about you make the next Bourne movie tie in game.... and we will pay you a ton to do it... fans will buy it up and everyone gets a huge payday.

    BUT it has to be a shooter.... You honestly think that TTG would say no?

    Now lets say THAT shooter puts them on the map as a company that makes great shooters.. and they make more money doing that than Sam & Max.... eventually they would say... "you know we make more money doing this why are we still making adventure games for a small group of gamers when we can make a bunch more making shooters?"

    all that is an example but its pretty much what killed adventure games in the past.

  • @Rather Dashing said: Which is universally the same. It's the same for Sam and Max and Back to the Future, it's the same between Tales and the supposed Walking Dead game. It's not like you're comparing owned IP to licensed properties here, Telltale has thus far ONLY done licensed properties. They've made this trade-off for EVERY game they've made, and they seem to think it's a worthwhile trade.

    This is true but you seem to think Telltale is going to find a licence that will allow them abandon the pursuit of quality. I personally don't see that happening for reasons I will outline below.

    @Rather Dashing said: Last I checked, adventure games need to contain puzzles. In their last two games, they've done their best to deny and hide the existence of in-game puzzles. Back to the Future, their latest game, provides not one, not two, not three, but four sources of hints for a game that has very few points of possible interaction, a very small inventory, and a game design that prods you with the answer at every given opportunity no matter how much you try to shake it off. This is because they want to crack the "Grossman's Mother-In-Law" demographic, because once that person is drawn in, they most assuredly have everyone(as per the referenced article). Telltale chasing a non-adventure audience isn't speculation on my part, it's the current reality.

    That you imply that the BttF doesn't contain puzzles is personal opinion. It contains puzzles just like the LucasArts games of old, they just aren't as challenging so you have decided to deem them invalid. I won't deny that they are much easier, because they are, but making games easier is an industry wide epidemic.

    The simple truth is that all games are easier now than they were twenty years ago. Adventure games are not alone. Mario Galaxy is a cakewalk compared to the original Mario Bros. Your modern day shooter can't even be muttered in the same breath with Wolfenstein.

    I personally have no problems with Telltale adding hint options to their games as long as they continue to keep the option to turn them off. Turning away potential costumers because their games are too hard doesn't serve anyone. Telltale just need to find that balance between satisfying the hardcore games without scaring away potential newcomers. How well they do at that will always be a matter of debate.

    @Rather Dashing said: No, they aren't. The Force Unleashed broke sales records, and the sales for the second game were strong on both major console platforms for which it was released. It's nice to live in a world where good guys win, where poor judgement and lazy, slipshod efforts lead to financial failure. But this world, the one that we actually live in, is not that world.

    LucasArts survive because of the mega hype surrounding their licences. They are very lucky in this regard. If a game like The Force Unleashed didn't have a Star Wars Licence it would sell like garbage and I personally believe that future FU games sales will suffer as a result of the poor quality of their predecessors.

    @Rather Dashing said: If it wasn't for the Star Wars license, they might be under. And as far as Telltale's finances are concerned, if a certain license puts them well into the black regardless of effort put into it, I think that Telltale will do what everyone else in recorded human history has done and follow the money to more mainstream pastures.

    You are working under the assumption that Telltale will find a magical licence that will allow them to make money without putting any effort in. These licences are very rare and usually get gobbled up by the major publishers like EA and Activision. You can remain pessimistic if you like but I just don't see it happening. The Telltale dream licence was Monkey Island and I believe that is their best series to date, though that is just my personal opinion.

    Edit:
    @Rather Dashing said: Its true though.... Companies will do what they will to make money.. its not really that hard to understand.... Right now TTG is known as the little company that makes decent adventure games... but lets say Universal really likes BTTF and JP, and they say ..... How about you make the next Bourne movie tie in game.... and we will pay you a ton to do it... fans will buy it up and everyone gets a huge payday.

    BUT it has to be a shooter.... You honestly think that TTG would say no?

    I think that would be stupid business by both parties. A bad move from Universal to ask a niche adventure game developer to abandon all that they are good at to make a shooter and bad business on Telltales part to accept a game so outside their field of expertise.

    While it is true that game companies aren't confined to one genre, Retro Studios is a fantastic example if a company that switched genres when they made Donkey Kong Country Returns, I just don't see it happening for Telltale. They've established themselves as a maker of adventure games and have created a very successful business model from it. Changing all that to make a kind of game they have no experience in would be incredibly risky for them.

  • Sorry for double posting but I really want to get this thread back on point. We've gone way off topic and that's as much my fault as anyone's.

    I've watched the first three episodes of The Walking Dead and so far I'm quite enjoying it. There is a good mix of likable characters and fun to hate characters and humor is good.

    It would be well suited to an adventure game format. A straight action game wouldn't make as much sense. Characters are discouraged to fire loud weapons like guns and are forced to use their brains more to escape predicaments (read: zombies). I don't know how the danger would be handled but I think it has a lot of potential to work as an adventure game (not that anything has been confirmed :))

    Also: this!

  • I think it would work far more as a Survival Horror game. Though the two genres have their roots in the same place, they branched off into distinctly different genres some time ago.

    Also, not reading the comic? For shame.

  • A Survival Horror game would also work great. Something akin to the older Res Evil games, or even Amnesia. The dynamic would work really well because firing a gun would be a last desperate resort.

    I don't really read many comics but after I finish the show I think I'll look into it :)

  • If you don't read comics, you're missing out. The vast majority of long-running series from DC and Marvel aren't worth a damn these days, but there's a lot of classics in the medium that really are worth reading.

    Also, I really think the comic should be read first because the show is adapted from it, and it gives you a far greater understanding of where the show comes from. You can go "Oh, I see what they did there. They moved this element up a few episodes". Or "oh, I see, they added those characters to this scenario. Actually, it probably works better on TV.", and "OH MY GOD WHERE DID THAT COME FROM" and "OH MY GOD WHERE DID THAT COME FROM IT IS AWESOME". Seriously, the show is a GREAT supplement to the comic book, and you don't have to read much of it to catch up to the show's run. I highly advise you to change priorities on this one.

  • hmmm, I'm going out tomorrow, I'll see what Borders has. Trying to find any kind of book or comic like that is a pain in Australia. Borders is the only place with any section and it doesn't matter where you go it's all grossly overpriced. Every time I go to America I come back with a suitcase worth of books because it's just so much cheaper to buy them over there. Their hardbacks are cheaper than our paperbacks of the same book, no jokes. I'm probably going to end up buying this stuff online.

  • @Woodsyblue said: hmmm, I'm going out tomorrow, I'll see what Borders has.


    Here is a guide to the various releases. There are the Issues, released monthly, then there are the trade paperbacks(or "volumes") that contain 6 of those, etc etc all up to the Compendium which contains 48 monthly issues. The limited editions cost far more per issue, the Compendium is really cheap per-issue.

    Also, I'm not sure what might be different in Austraila, but I assume you get at least one of these.

Add Comment