This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

RobotSquad: Why You Should Play The Walking Dead

#111pothocketPosted 12/9/2012 9:33:47 AM
I really like Walking Dead and think it's an important step towards the future of interactive entertainment, but I don't know if it should be game of the year. The actual core risk/reward gameplay of making choices is a NULL ZERO CHOICE. It doesn't matter what you choose.

The "adventuring" gameplay of clicking on stuff was simple and well done, and also a clever way of implementing QTEs without really feeling like QTEs. However, it's talking to people and how you react to events that's the heart of the gameplay, and I think it was a huge mistake to make all choices the right choice.

If the core gameplay is an illusion of choice it's not a game, it's interactive entertainment and should not have have been game of the year.
---
well I am not like your dad. I worked as a chef at TGIF-Mattson
#112Arucard05Posted 12/9/2012 9:34:47 AM
Interactive entertainment is literally the definition of a videogame.
---
www.bewaretherobotsquad.com
Do you want to read awesomely rad reviews and articles? No? ****.
#113darkharePosted 12/9/2012 9:40:02 AM
pothocket posted...
I really like Walking Dead and think it's an important step towards the future of interactive entertainment, but I don't know if it should be game of the year. The actual core risk/reward gameplay of making choices is a NULL ZERO CHOICE. It doesn't matter what you choose.

The "adventuring" gameplay of clicking on stuff was simple and well done, and also a clever way of implementing QTEs without really feeling like QTEs. However, it's talking to people and how you react to events that's the heart of the gameplay, and I think it was a huge mistake to make all choices the right choice.

If the core gameplay is an illusion of choice it's not a game, it's interactive entertainment and should not have have been game of the year.


looking at the game from the outside, the choices really dont matter. but experiencing the story and making a choice within the game in the heat of the moment, almost every choice walks the line of life and death. that imo is what makes the game so great. if you choose to shatter the illusion for yourself thats fine, but dont force others too.
---
i dont wanna work, i just wanna bang on my drum all day..
#114BlueJester007Posted 12/9/2012 9:41:30 AM
darkhare posted...
pothocket posted...
I really like Walking Dead and think it's an important step towards the future of interactive entertainment, but I don't know if it should be game of the year. The actual core risk/reward gameplay of making choices is a NULL ZERO CHOICE. It doesn't matter what you choose.

The "adventuring" gameplay of clicking on stuff was simple and well done, and also a clever way of implementing QTEs without really feeling like QTEs. However, it's talking to people and how you react to events that's the heart of the gameplay, and I think it was a huge mistake to make all choices the right choice.

If the core gameplay is an illusion of choice it's not a game, it's interactive entertainment and should not have have been game of the year.


looking at the game from the outside, the choices really dont matter. but experiencing the story and making a choice within the game in the heat of the moment, almost every choice walks the line of life and death. that imo is what makes the game so great. if you choose to shatter the illusion for yourself thats fine, but dont force others too.


This is what Mass Effect 3 failed to do on every level.
---
Science is interesting, and if you don't agree, you can f*** off.
#115Arucard05Posted 12/9/2012 9:43:41 AM
From: BlueJester007 | #114
This is what Mass Effect 3 failed to do on every level.


I like Bioware, but the way they've always handled "choice" is almost cute in its lack of ambition.
---
www.bewaretherobotsquad.com
Go there now! Or don't. Whatever man.
#116SunDevil77Posted 12/9/2012 9:44:08 AM
pothocket posted...
I really like Walking Dead and think it's an important step towards the future of interactive entertainment, but I don't know if it should be game of the year. The actual core risk/reward gameplay of making choices is a NULL ZERO CHOICE. It doesn't matter what you choose.

The "adventuring" gameplay of clicking on stuff was simple and well done, and also a clever way of implementing QTEs without really feeling like QTEs. However, it's talking to people and how you react to events that's the heart of the gameplay, and I think it was a huge mistake to make all choices the right choice.

If the core gameplay is an illusion of choice it's not a game, it's interactive entertainment and should not have have been game of the year.


You're just upset Dishonored didn't win.
---
These people are meat virgins. They'll be taken by the grill and delicately and tenderly be shown the ways of flavorful meat love. The first time is beautiful.
#117HeLeehamPosted 12/9/2012 9:44:51 AM
I love the people in here saying that point & click games aren't real games. Somewhere down the line shooting something became more of a game then puzzle solving. Also Broken Sword is one of the best games ever made.
#118BlueJester007Posted 12/9/2012 9:59:39 AM(edited)
Arucard05 posted...
From: BlueJester007 | #114
This is what Mass Effect 3 failed to do on every level.


I like Bioware, but the way they've always handled "choice" is almost cute in its lack of ambition.


It just seems like they got lazier and lazier with each installment. By the time I was at the end of Wrex's Tuchanka mission in 3, I was saddened because I had the horrible feeling that this massive event, this absolutely game changing event, would not matter in the long run. You can imagine my displeasure when I got to the ending choice.

The Metal Gear Solid series is not the same genre, but the way it ended its story should be standard: Tie up all loose ends and let the player know they have accomplished something. What happens at the end of Mass Effect 3? Absolutely nothing. Oh sure, Reapers are destroyed and so are the Geth (which effectively contradicts the whole Tali side mission), made human, or controlled, but you don't actually feel any satisfaction for doing it. You did not complete the mission: Stop the Reapers.What a waste of my time.

Compare this to Walking Dead. The player can walk away knowing that they did the best they could to keep Clementime safe at the cost of their own life. And that's what Lee's main motivation was: to keep Clementime safe at any cost. He died knowing that Clementine could defend herself and survive by herself like an adult. He was a good father figure.

And unlike Mass Effect 3 or MGS4, this game series is not even over yet.
---
Science is interesting, and if you don't agree, you can f*** off.
#119TheBlueStigPosted 12/9/2012 9:55:46 AM
BlueJester007 posted...
TheBlueStig posted...
CaPwnD posted...
Meanwhile, real gamers are having a s*** bunch of fun playing a game that you will never experience.

So you want games like Myst and 11th Hour to come back?

Because that's what TWD is, a point and click adventure with a bunch of QTE's thrown in.


For your own good, I would recommend playing it. Do not judge a book by its cover.

It is a point and click game, but you are simplifying it to its bare bones there. There is quite a bit of meat on those bones and you best be a carnivore if you want to play this game.


I did play it, and I deleted it, one of the few games I've ever done that to, I want my 400 points back.

Point & Click adventures died with Myst, and rightfully so, they're a copout for developers who can't get the hang of making real games with full interactive levels and proper cameras so you can see everything and not just the set walls they allow you to see.

No point & click adventure should ever win a GoTY award.
#120darkharePosted 12/9/2012 9:56:49 AM
BlueJester007 posted...
Arucard05 posted...
From: BlueJester007 | #114
This is what Mass Effect 3 failed to do on every level.


I like Bioware, but the way they've always handled "choice" is almost cute in its lack of ambition.


It just seems like they got lazier and lazier with each installment. By the time I was at the end of Wrex's Tuchanka mission in 3, I was saddened because I had the horrible feeling that this massive event, this absolutely game changing event, would not matter in the long run. You can imagine my displeasure when I got to the ending choice.

The Metal Gear Solid series is not the same genre, but the way it ended its story should be standard: Tie up all loose ends and let the player know they have accomplished something. What happens at the end of Mass Effect 3? Absolutely nothing. Oh sure, Reapers are destroyed and so are the Geth (which effectively contradicts the whole Tali side mission), made human, or controlled, but you don't actually feel any satisfaction for doing it. You did not complete the mission: Stop the Reapers.What a waste of my time.

Compare this to Walking Dead. The player can walk away knowing that they did the best they could to keep Clementime safe at the cost of their own life. And that's what Lee's main motivation was: to keep Clementime safe at any cost. He died knowing that Clementine could defend herself and survive by herself like an adult. He was a good father figure.

And unlike Mass Effect 3 or MGS4, this game series is not even over yet.


dude cover up your spoilers, even though i dont think it was intentional its still not cool.



.
---
i dont wanna work, i just wanna bang on my drum all day..