Guinea's points are so far the best, I think. I mean, by the time I got to the rocket creation puzzle, I had forgotten that not being told exactly what to do at the very slightest provocation(LISTEN TO THE WORDS I AM EMPHASIZING!!!!) simply
isn't normal, as much as I resented it.
I think puzzle COMPLEXITY needs to take a step up, and perhaps dropping down the difficulty can remove/simply steps of a puzzle in tiers. This may not be a proper solution now, though.
Things that could help that would be easy to implement:
-When Hints are set to zero, that was an active action by the player. It's an input that should mean something. I don't know what "High" hint levels do, but for 0 try to remove heavily guiding dialog or at least make the prompts take longer to occur. Things like "HERE IS THE ANSWER TO THE PUZZLE" from Emmett after the first mistake makes me feel like the game thinks I'm too dumb to even figure out that the words he's YELLING are the ones I should concentrate on(especially since I had subtitles on, and that capitalized words in the sentences....making it easier. =P).
-Make puzzles that deal with figuring out how something works. Something that requires little or no inventory and can be confined to a room, but still be a brain-teaser of some sort. The soup kitchen puzzle was nice in some ways, because you had to know how the whole system worked. If possible, make most/all of the prompts player-initiated, though. When I learned things about how the soup kitchen worked, it seemed like the game was playing some parts of that arbitrarily. Make it so that a player can explore the constructed system or device and get a general idea pretty quickly of what they're supposed to do with it, and then make figuring that out by messing with a few close-together junction points. I think this kind of puzzle would be accessible without being insulting, as long as people aren't yelling answers in your ear the moment you make the slightest mistake no matter what your hint level. High hint-level players, on the other hand, can be free to have their hints.
-Add more "steps" to the puzzles. Make the obvious action fail in some way, and then have a secondary action that has to be performed. Why does just clicking on Einstein have him attack Kid Tannen? Why can't we find a way to "get" him to attack Kid? It seems like Einstein was an arbitrary "Run Away" button, when you could have made the escape after obtaining the recording something of a puzzle(with a solution that could be repeated easily if for some reason the player did not actually get a recording).
I'd write more, because there are a ton of ways that Back to the Future: The Game could be improved in the The Game category. The problem is, I don't think Telltale
wants to make a good, engaging game that doesn't look down on the player like a younger brother or a mentally-disabled child. As long as games are designed for
Dave Grossman's mother-in-law, everyone above her on the curve is going to suffer. And while Dave Grossman's mother-in-law might finally be able to play a Telltale game, almost everyone who has any interest whatsoever in playing games happens to be somewhat above her level when it comes to understanding and reacting to gameplay cues, or
wanting to play games. You could make a film for people who hate movies by scrolling text on a projector screen, but it's not actually a film. And you can make a game accessible by ripping out gameplay elements one by one, but at some point you end up with something less than a game.
...I just realized that I've gone a bit off-topic. Excuse me.