User Avatar Image

Telltale Crossed The Line

posted by Red Panda on - last edited - Viewed by 1.6K users

Is there are anything TTG can do that will make you quit playing?

A lot of people said they're done after Carley was killed. We'll see. Is there anything they can do, of have done, that will have you calling it quits?

For me, if they kill Clem in episode 4 I would not buy episode 5. They would have killed off the last fuck I gave.

I would just move on after that. I wouldn't even be a little curious what happened next.

123 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • @Master of Aeons said: It's a storyline. No video game with a story has ever let you deviate from its railroad for longer than 15 minutes. Look at Heavy Rain and Mass Effect, no choices "matter". [Nothing remarkably changes until the very end of Heavy Rain when characters can suddenly die, and there are multiple endings. Even the most simple of games can have multiple endings - they mean nothing to the argument of choice.] The PAX video clears up a lot of the definition of "tailored", if you haven't seen it. They use the clothes metaphor: they are fitted to your dimensions, but you're not making clothes from scratch.

    That said, there's a huge "branching" decision coming up in episode 4 that seems to somewhat contradict this. You're gonna have to wait for that to see how much this game can deviate from its storyline before coming back to the single ending that was promised.

    So, to close on a pithy rewording: If you think telltale or any game manufacturer has the capability to deliver "branching plots", "countless choices with several subplots" and "80 gigs of optional, redundant choices"...then you are sorely mistaken. We're probably 20 years from recapturing Choose Your Own Adventures in Video Game form.

    I would settle for some meaningful choices that at least change the path of the story and characters involved.

    The Doug + Carly choice appeared to be one. The decision to try save Larry (or not) appeared to be one.

    The was the worst part of episode three for me it closed all of the interesting storylines that were left over from episode 1 &2 and the choices of previous episodes really had zero impact on how they were closed.

    I mean one of the thing that drew me to the game was the dialogue options and agonizing over every big decision wondering if I made the right move. Now looking back it just seems like I wasted my time and it was pointless.

  • @Master of Aeons said: It's a storyline. No video game with a story has ever let you deviate from its railroad for longer than 15 minutes. Look at Heavy Rain and Mass Effect, no choices "matter". [Nothing remarkably changes until the very end of Heavy Rain when characters can suddenly die, and there are multiple endings. Even the most simple of games can have multiple endings - they mean nothing to the argument of choice.] The PAX video clears up a lot of the definition of "tailored", if you haven't seen it. They use the clothes metaphor: they are fitted to your dimensions, but you're not making clothes from scratch.

    That said, there's a huge "branching" decision coming up in episode 4 that seems to somewhat contradict this. You're gonna have to wait for that to see how much this game can deviate from its storyline before coming back to the single ending that was promised.

    So, to close on a pithy rewording: If you think telltale or any game manufacturer has the capability to deliver "branching plots", "countless choices with several subplots" and "80 gigs of optional, redundant choices"...then you are sorely mistaken. We're probably 20 years from recapturing Choose Your Own Adventures in Video Game form.

    That's really not what I'm talking about. Look at the first witcher for example. Their was one overarching storyline but you had three various groups you could align yourself to get there (squirrels, order, or stay neutral) each with their own individual subplots that's what I would have liked to seen from telltale.

    It didn't have to have optional missions but it could have continued to focus on the power struggle within the group (Lee, Lily and Kenny) with the player having the option of taking control or throwing his support behind either Kenny or Lily.

    To me that was one of things that originally drew me into the game.

  • @ihateepisodethree said: That's really not what I'm talking about. Look at the first witcher for example. Their was one overarching storyline but you had three various groups you could align yourself to get there (squirrels, order, or stay neutral) each with their own individual subplots that's what I would have liked to seen from telltale.

    It didn't have to have optional missions but it could have continued to focus on the power struggle within the group (Lee, Lily and Kenny) with the player having the option of taking control or throwing his support behind either Kenny or Lily.

    To me that was one of things that originally drew me into the game.

    Sigh... Telltalle ISN'T Bioware. That would require some planning for episode 3 and more voice-acting and stuff, and even if there was that power struggle, in the end people would end up whining because "it doesn't make a difference, because now Lilly is gone, Kenny doesn't care anymore, choices don't even matter, whine whine whine".

  • The Witcher is made by CD Projekt RED not bioware.

    I doubt they are much bigger then Telltale (probably alot smaller). The difference is they focus on quality not quantity.

    I wouldn't be opposed if AMC gave the rights to another company to make a proper decision based Walking dead game. Maybe bioware, CD Projekt RED, square enix, or Obsidian Entertainment.

  • @TomaO2 said: Why make a narrative based game only to kill all the people in it early on? As games go, this one is exceptional in it's willingness to kill off major characters.

    The main character is Lee.

    His motivation is Clementine.

    The story will end when the main character either fails or succeeds in regard to his motivation. Everyone else is fodder (welcome to The Walking Dead). If that's unacceptable, play something else.

  • @ihateepisodethree said: The Witcher is made by CD Projekt RED not bioware.

    I doubt they are much bigger then Telltale (probably alot smaller). The difference is they focus on quality not quantity.

    I wouldn't be opposed if AMC gave the rights to another company to make a proper decision based Walking dead game. Maybe bioware, CD Projekt RED, square enix, or Obsidian Entertainment.

    My mistake. They only used Bioware's engine. But seriously, I've played the first chapter of The Witcher and I stopped because it was getting boring and repetitive. It was just too long and the story wasn't all that interesting. Telltale has an amazing story going on with this game, and a lot of people seem to disagree on the choices mattering or not subject.

    I'm sorry if the game is not working for you, but I'm completely satisfied with the choices mechanic, and I'd say most people would agree Telltale is doing an amazing job with this, especially on the story part.

  • @TomaO2 said: You have to get to episode 3 before you find out how bad it REALLY gets and then I hear that they want it to get worse for the final two.

    From Gary Whitta's article for PlayStation Blog:

    ...well, if we’ve done our job right you’re going to hate us for some of the decisions this episode forces you to make.

    It pretty much speaks for the entire game to date and he's talking about episode 4 in specific.

  • Ah God... do we have to make a decision revolving Clementine, but either decision is shitty in a different way?

  • The story is decent. I just don't think it fits with gameplay of a choice given game. Thats the rub for me.

    In episode three I kind of felt a couple of things were forced. Lily and I were BFF's (I played both sides of kenny and Lily uptil her dad dying). So when she snapped it was kind of out of character for my canon playthrough.

    In another play-through, where we were enemies it was completely in line in her charcter. She was broken and had noone in the group she could talk to or trust. You could see the cracks forming.

    katjaa is a lesser extent the same thing. She displayed a strength that kenny could not throughout episode 1& 2. She remained calm cool and collected under the toughest scenarios (gun to her head, running out of food, fixing up injuries) even when her son was dying she was calm.

    Now some people have mentioned it may have been a front and she may have been putting on a brave face for the good of the group. I don't know to me there was no signs she was capable of killing herself. It just seemed a little forced considering my interactions with Katjaa.

    Which is one of issues I have. You would think over the span of how many months we have spent in a group my interactions would have some bearing on her decision making process. But nope it's bullet to the head either way.

    Both deaths were preventable in my book. I would have liked my interactions with both characters to have made some sort of impact on the events that unfolded.

  • Okay, Lee's interactions with Lilly had absolutely nothing to do with her snapping and killing someone. As we all know, she cared only about protecting the group her own way (by staying at the motel instead of leaving, for example), and she honestly thought she was protecting the group by killing the traitor, and she was pretty sure about who it was as well(even if she was mistaken if you saved Carley), so that was completely not out of character.

    About Katjaa's death, remember when she says she loves Duck more than life itself? That's all.

Add Comment