User Avatar Image

Why are there so many negative people on this board saying this game sucks now?

posted by DatDude on - last edited - Viewed by 448 users

It's sort of insane.

People don't realize what telltale are. They are a small budget studio, they don't have the scope or the resources to produce games that are on the same level (in terms of production or vision) compared to heavy rain, or beyond 2 souls.

This is an independent studio that charges it's customers 5$ per episode, 20$ in all..while most studios charge you 60$ + 50$ of DLC.

You guys are so ungrateful. Sure did the walking dead have flaws? Sure, absolutely. But was it not a masterpiece? I truly think it was.

The game was the first time i ever gave 2 shits about the characters and there struggles. It's the first time that it presented characters going through real human struggles, and the writers brilliantly showed the audience the use of the human condition through lee and clementine.

The writing was brilliant as well..I mean seriously pick up gears of war, pick up hitman absolution..pick up any game off the gamestop rack and just compare it to the walking dead's writing, and narrative and it will just make you laugh and open your eyes how truly terrible narrative and writing it is currently in video games.

What telltale was able to do with a shoe string budget and limited scope and vision is nothing short of amazing.

All I hope is that the sales of the walking dead will truly be the stepping stone for them to grow as a company.

46 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • @Evinshir said: Except, of course, that his motivation was kind of questionable and his ability to get to Savannah, find The Marsh House, set up a trap and wait while the city is overrun - not to mention his Walkie Talkie and the logistics of how he kept up with the train - all begger belief.

    Seriously. How did the guy manage to get his car to Savannah without anyone noticing, as quickly as a train, on roads over-run with Walkers and debris without having any issues with petrol?

    It felt very unrealistic at that point in the game because the number of pure coincidences and events that would had to have happened to allow him to get there at that time... makes it very contrived.

    All well made points. I think his character was great and was simply stating why I thought he made for a final antagonist while others were disappointed because he simply wasn't a stereotypical bad guy; I loved that entire sequence with him in it. His motivation seemed to be revenge intially, but I think that was more of a mask for this man to cope with his own failings as a father and person and put them on Lee's character to hate him and kill him as a twisted form of dealing with his own insecurities. That's why no matter how good Lee can be, this man will always find a reason to torture and kill him and take Clem away from him since he needs someone to focus his hatred on, who better than the people than who stole from him; that's the "villain" inside him.

    As for his actions, I definitely agree that it required a little too many leaps of faith to accept how he stayed alive and traveled for so long. I think it boils down to the fact that Telltale just wanted to make it a given that this man was very resourceful and intelligent; many groups have survived, so it was plausible this man could as well. I, for one second, don't believe that this man did not have to rely on horrible measures himself to survive; he seems to be trying to convince himself when he speaks to Lee that he is a good man, implying to me that he did horrible things before himself to survive.

    The roads to Savannah were pretty deserted when the group was in the RV and the train did need to stop several times to get to Savannah. Campman having a car made it much easier for him to navigate into the city and the Marsh House was in plain site. Everything else, I didn't think it was necessary to tell how he survived since we've seen so many other people do it; the guy was obviously intelligent and resourceful. I agree though that it's very contrived in places, but once it became apparent that this guy wanted some type of revenge and was in range, it was always going to be contrived.

  • @darknessofheart said: All well made points. I think his character was great and was simply stating why I thought he made for a final antagonist while others were disappointed because he simply wasn't a stereotypical bad guy; I loved that entire sequence with him in it. His motivation seemed to be revenge intially, but I think that was more of a mask for this man to cope with his own failings as a father and person and put them on Lee's character to hate him and kill him as a twisted form of dealing with his own insecurities. That's why no matter how good Lee can be, this man will always find a reason to torture and kill him and take Clem away from him since he needs someone to focus his hatred on, who better than the people than the people who stole from him; that's the "villain" inside him.

    As for his actions, I definitely agree that it required a little too many leaps of faith to accept how he stayed alive for so long. I think it boils down to the fact that Telltale just wanted to make it a given that this man was very resourceful and intelligent; many groups have survived, so it was plausible this man could as well.

    The roads to Savannah were pretty deserted when the group was in the RV and the train did need to stop several times to get to Savannah. Campman having a car made it much easier for him to navigate into the city and the Marsh House was in plain site. Everything else, I didn't think it was necessary to tell how he survived since we've seen so many other people do it; the guy was obviously intelligent and resourceful. I agree though that it's very contrived in places, but once it became apparent that this guy wanted some type of revenge and was in range, it was always going to be contrived.

    The thing is - his motivation and execution was weak. I liked the idea that they were going for, personally. I liked that he wasn't a cat stroking, moustache twirling, laser aiming bond villain.

    But he was an obvious plot device to challenge Lee's motives. His revenge was just an excuse to have a character who challenged Lee.

    The problem is that his revenge plan was poorly planned out by the writers - he is the weakest point in the story because he is so blatantly a device rather than a fully developed character. Even his story about his family is full of plot holes about the timing of events and the motivations of himself and his wife. Which is a shame because most of the characters even the consequential ones were well developed.

    I think at that point TTG were kind of rushing themselves to get to a November deadline rather than being willing to take the time to get that scene perfect.

    Which isn't to say it sucked - it was still a good scene. It just needed to have been developed more and it needed to be more acknowledging of the different types of Lee people had played up to that point.

  • @Evinshir said: Okay, as someone who has written professionally and currently is working on a couple of projects for funding, I'm going to let you in on a little secret.

    Writing two different plot lines does not take up any more resources than writing one. In fact the development process of writing usually sees *dozens* of plot lines created and tweaked.

    This game could have run exactly the same for four episodes and had a simple branching into a number of alternate plot lines in episode 5 with only a few small scene changes with the large bulk of the "multiple endings" only showing up in the final scene - and it would have all felt the every choice along the way impacted the story.

    They didn't need to have dozens of endings. Even just three or four would have worked - and these would just be in the epilogue.

    TTG have already shown they have resources to have alternate conversations and scenes. So what this seems to have come down to is that they had decided from the outset to not have a branching storyline but a single story that gave the illusion that the player had any choices.

    That's not a resource issue, that's an ambition/creative choice issue.

    How is that not a resource issue?

    Creating more cutscenes or scenarios equals paying your developers to put extra time into the game..which means your paying them by the hour until they finish.

  • @Evinshir said: Okay, as someone who has written professionally and currently is working on a couple of projects for funding, I'm going to let you in on a little secret.

    Writing two different plot lines does not take up any more resources than writing one. In fact the development process of writing usually sees *dozens* of plot lines created and tweaked.

    This game could have run exactly the same for four episodes and had a simple branching into a number of alternate plot lines in episode 5 with only a few small scene changes with the large bulk of the "multiple endings" only showing up in the final scene - and it would have all felt the every choice along the way impacted the story.

    They didn't need to have dozens of endings. Even just three or four would have worked - and these would just be in the epilogue.

    TTG have already shown they have resources to have alternate conversations and scenes. So what this seems to have come down to is that they had decided from the outset to not have a branching storyline but a single story that gave the illusion that the player had any choices.

    That's not a resource issue, that's an ambition/creative choice issue.

    Sure you do - and of course all of those cutscenes, art assets and all that alternate VA work makes itself and for free too.

  • My only hope is that this game will be a virus. Hopefully more people will hear about our praises and heralds and will purchase this game and will allow telltale to expand as a studio and have a higher production value for season 2.

  • @JabbaDaHuttX7 said: I don't see anything he said as implausible. There shouldn't be a reason why choices couldn't branch out at the *last* episode in the series. An actual, *real* epilogue would have been good too.

    Still costs money dude

  • The way how I see it is that the people hate it because they killed off Lee which didn't surprise me. The reason for no surprise would be because I figured that if kept alive there would be comic requests and I don't see how a person who is differently made by over a million people could be put in. Also before someone says that Clementine is still alive, I would like to point out that as of July 6 2012 Telltale announced they would be making a season 2 which in other words mean an excuse to kill Clem and wrap up the semi-cliffhanger that was the end of episode 5

  • @DreadMagus said: Some are in denial about Lee... which is understandable, he was a fantastic character.

    Some were expecting an open world/choose your own adventure... which I find amusing.

    I'm sure there are other reasons, but these are the two most common ones from what I can tell.

    I didn't know what I was expecting. I just remember reading a review when the first episode came out. It had good responses. Then a friend gifted it to me on Steam. Was the best gift I've ever gotten.

    I'm glad it wasn't open world honestly. The story was so gripping it made up for not being some over the top action game. I'd rather play this than that up coming walking dead FPS game. :rolleyes:

  • @JabbaDaHuttX7 said: As does the game, even if it's only 20$.

    The profit margins are much different selling your game for 20$ compared to 60$ +50$ of dlc equating to roughly 110+ dollars per copy...

    Plus it's not like everyone bought the season pass. Some people just bought 1 or 2 episodes

  • The game wasn't bad just episode 5 was goddamn awful. Rest of the game stands pretty well.

Add Comment