Adventure Gamers - Forums
You are here: Home → Forum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread
Post Marker Legend:
-
New posts -
No new posts
Currently online
Really? A 5 out of 5 on a Walking Dead?
Why are people worried about The Walking Dead destroying the entire Adventure genre?
They aren’t. A few people thought it didn’t deserve a 5-star review, and then it became a war between people who liked the game and those who didn’t. That’s how I see it anyway.
This had me thinking, why would I still pick Chaos as my GOTY? The more I think about it, the only explanation I can come up with is fear. Fear that the popularity of TWD will make such an impact on the adventure game scene, that all future adventure games will copy its direction.
Sounds like the worry exists, to me.
And just to be clear, I get the feeling. I am worried about the overall direction of the gaming industry. Whenever industry executives open their mouths, declaing f2p the one, true business model for games going forward, I just wanna scream. But in the end, that’s not how it’s gonna be. What I see, is a diversification of the medium, going off into many different directions.
I am also starting to realize, how impossible it is to predict future trends. A couple of years ago, I thought the only way for Adventures to come back into the limelight would be if someone made a big AAA title on the high end of the spectrum. But seeing the state of the AAA industry, compared to what’s happening on plattforms like Kickstarter, I now see the exact opposite.
Here’s an interesting question, though: TWD works exactly because of the emotional weight of the story. Heavy Rain tried something simliar, but didn’t quite succeed. I wonder, if this subgenre is only suited to a specific kind of story. Could a comedy game work like this? A detective story? I doubt it. But I look forward to see more experiments with this blueprint.
Here’s an interesting question, though: TWD works exactly because of the emotional weight of the story. Heavy Rain tried something simliar, but didn’t quite succeed. I wonder, if this subgenre is only suited to a specific kind of story.
I don’t know if you can’t say that. Some people loved Heavy Rain, others didn’t. And some hated The Walking Dead, seeing its story as cliched and contrived. Are you going to say those people are wrong?
That’s the problem I have with giving accolades for “emotional weight” and totally personal things like that. What if I don’t find the game emotional? If Escape from Monkey Island brought me to tears does that mean it should get 5 stars?
I don’t know if you can’t say that. Some people loved Heavy Rain, others didn’t. And some hated The Walking Dead, seeing its story as cliched and contrived. Are you going to say those people are wrong?
... Ummm ... no. On the contrary. As I said, I myself didn’t always enjoy TWD’s story. And I actually think that, by putting the emotional weight of player choice so front and center, these kinds of games might be limited to something very specific. Something, that will feel contrived and perhaps even melodramatic to a lot of people. It’s perfectly fine, to dislike that kind of storytelling. But I still think it’s an achievement, to find a format for a different kind of interactive narrative. TWD wouldn’t work with the structure of Monkey Island, and a focus on lighthearted humour would not work in a TWD style game.
All in my opinion, of course. Somebody may very well prove me wrong one day.
That’s the problem I have with giving accolades for “emotional weight” and totally personal things like that. What if I don’t find the game emotional? If Escape from Monkey Island brought me to tears does that mean it should get 5 stars?
Escape from Monkey Island should NEVER get 5 stars! Though it did bring me to tears ... but not in the right ways.
Seriously, though, I don’t disagree with you. TWD didn’t move me to tears either, but I respect that it did something different. Would I give it five stars? Personally, no. But if it had a high emotional impact with me? Sure.
If somebody does give TWD 5 stars, that person isn’t wrong, as long as he argues his case well (which the AG review does, in my opinion).
If somebody gave TWD 1 star, that person wouldn’t neceassarily be wrong either. There are certainly more than enough reasons to argue for that.
I for my part can’t deal with Myst clones. Hate em. If I had to rate Myst, I would rate it very low, because it does everything I dislike about Adventures, and none of the things I like. That’s a subjective opinion, and that’s fine. But I also have to realize, that Myst has a place in the big picture of the genre. As does TWD.
I just don’t see a problem with TWD being one of the more impactful adventures of recent years. I am just glad, that more and more Adventures are having an impact again.
I for my part can’t deal with Myst clones. Hate em. If I had to rate Myst, I would rate it very low, because it does everything I dislike about Adventures, and none of the things I like. That’s a subjective opinion, and that’s fine. But I also have to realize, that Myst has a place in the big picture of the genre. As does TWD.
So if this were 1995, you wouldn’t be the guy creating the “Really? A 5 out of 5 on a Myst?” thread and cursing it because it does everything you dislike about adventures?
That’s some admirable self-restraint you’ve got there! 
Let me just clarify a few things
This is a really good question. Why do some AG fans feel so threatened by the fact that not all adventure games strictly follow this formula? People are still going to make the games you want to play. Even *text adventures* are still being made…
This is 1993 all over again: The Walking Dead is the new Myst. We’re getting the exact same hysterical arguments from a handful of people: It’s not worthy of being called an adventure game! It’s going to ruin everything! I don’t like the game but instead of just not playing it I make it my personal business to spoil everyone else’s fun! etc.
....
I have no doubt that the same thing will happen with The Walking Dead. Hopefully it won’t take 20 years for the crazies to see reason and calm down.
I don’t believe that all games should stick to 90’s formula of AG, i also play other kind of games than AG and hybrids, and i welcome all kinds of newthinking of the AG formular, which is why i bought the game in the first place.
I have argued why i dont think TWD is an AG, but i dont hold this against TWD, a game can be a great game even if it isn’t an AG.
I just don’t think TWD is a great game!
The reason i raised the whole argument about TWD beeing an AG or not, is because this is a site devoted to Adventure Games, and i belive it is a valid discussion for such a site, especially now when the Aggie awards are near.
I don’t think TWD is going to ruin anything, as others have also pointed out, a lot of exciting things are going on right now. I just dont think that TWD will do much good for the AG genre either.
I haven’t tried to spoil anybody’s fun with the game, and if some has perceived it as such, then i apologize. But if we can’t openly discuss the qualities or lack of same for a game, here in the AG forum, then were can we discuss it?
I knew i probably wouldn’t get popular by going against the popular opinion and criticizing TWD, but seriously Kurufinwe, calling us crazies because we disagree with you?!?
You have to play the game, to find out why you are playing the game! - eXistenZ
1) It isn’t my “narrow” definition of an adventure game, it is a definiton that was reached through consensus here on the forum. If you disagree with the definition, then you are welcome to reopen the thread.
As I recall, we never made a decision in that thread, so we didn’t actually reach a definition through consensus. And besides, what we as forum members think still has little importance to what gets reviewed here. You may or may not agree with it, but the site’s definition of an adventure game is all that’s ever going to matter.
3) The “puzzles”, the object collection and the exploration, didn’t play a major part in the “experiance” (I refuse to call it a game), the main method of progress is through QTE.
But they did play a part, however small that may have been, making your argument moot.
QTE-games have become a subgenre within the adventure genre. But they’re very much adventure games.
Just be glad that we have BY FAR the broadest and most varied genre in gaming. That’s a *good* thing!
All these pointless discussions about whether or not TWD is a game, or whether or not Dear Esther is a game, or if L.A. Noire or the Portal games are adventures…
Are you controlling the character in any way? Then it’s a game!
Is it a game that focuses on puzzle solving (and QTE’s *are* puzzles and so are any inventory based actions - however easy they may be) within a narrative framework? Then it’s an adventure game.
4) That it had choises you have to make, doesn’t make it an adventure game. In fact these kind of decisions is rather unusual in adventure games and more common in other “things” like Choose Your Own Adventure books.
“Choose Your Own Adventure” books are the closest literary equivalent to ‘interactive novels’. Interactive novels are adventure games, therefore… 
It got me thinking about how insular and defensive we can be. I just love how the minute an Adventure game comes close to being popular in the mainstream we as a community fall over ourselves to declare it’s not one of ours. It’s too easy…It’s hardly a game…it’s not and adventure really…blah, blah, blah.
Instead of celebrating and shouting about how an Adventure game has become the most talked about game of the year we are bitching about whether it qualifies for our little niche club.
I fully agree with this.
What might just happen is, that other developers will look at what made TWD a success, and try to replicate the success. But what made TWD a success is not the AG elements, but the story, the atmosphere and the decisions you have to make, and these can just as well be build into other kind of games, like action games or RPG.
Wrong.
Telltale took a look at what made Heavy Rain a success, and tried to replicate the success. And they succeeded, in an entirely different narrative genre.
Also, action games and RPG’s are borrowing more and more from adventure game elements, so of course there’s going to be overlap. Pointing at that overlap to claim an adventure game should be considered an action game or an RPG is just plain wrong.
Sierra watered down text adventures by adding graphics, Lucasarts watered down graphical adventures by going from parsers to verbs to point and click and removing unwinnable states and Telltale watered down LucasArts adventures by going to QTEs and ingame hint systems. The slippery slope fallacy dictates that it’s not long now before Telltale makes Space Ace 2.
I used to think this too and it’s correct, only now I think watering down is good. The text adventures are still there, graphical adventures with parser are still there and Lucasarts-style adventures are still there. All these types of games are still being made, all that’s happened is increased diversity and choice in what you want to play.
I agree!
It’s not watering down at all, it’s diversifying. And diversity is great!
Don’t like a certain subgenre? Don’t play it! You have enough CHOICE because there’s a lot of diversity!
Long first post…
Welcome! And I agree!
But the bottom line of this thread is STILL: “read the review instead of just looking at the score, and keep in mind that it’s still just one person’s opinion”
The truth can’t hurt you, it’s just like the dark: it scares you witless but in time you see things clear and stark. - Elvis Costello
Maybe this time I can be strong, but since I know who I am, I’m probably wrong. Maybe this time I can go far, but thinking about where I’ve been ain’t helping me start. - Michael Kiwanuka
1) It isn’t my “narrow” definition of an adventure game, it is a definiton that was reached through consensus here on the forum. If you disagree with the definition, then you are welcome to reopen the thread.
As I recall, we never made a decision in that thread, so we didn’t actually reach a definition through consensus. And besides, what we as forum members think still has little importance to what gets reviewed here. You may or may not agree with it, but the site’s definition of an adventure game is all that’s ever going to matter.
My point was that it wasn’t a definition i just inventet myself, also i dont think it is much different from the “official” definition.
Okay i might have phrased it a bit “sharper” than i intended, or as the actual content of the thread warrant, that was a mistake.
The discussion was never about whether or not the game should be reviewed here on the site. As far as im concerned the staff can review whatever games they like, in fact i would rather have them review one game too many then too few.
What might just happen is, that other developers will look at what made TWD a success, and try to replicate the success. But what made TWD a success is not the AG elements, but the story, the atmosphere and the decisions you have to make, and these can just as well be build into other kind of games, like action games or RPG.
Wrong.
Telltale took a look at what made Heavy Rain a success, and tried to replicate the success. And they succeeded, in an entirely different narrative genre.
Also, action games and RPG’s are borrowing more and more from adventure game elements, so of course there’s going to be overlap. Pointing at that overlap to claim an adventure game should be considered an action game or an RPG is just plain wrong.
I simply don’t understand your point here?
I never wrote that TWD should be considered an action game or RPG!
What i was talking about, was what kind of games we migth expect in the future inspired by TWD.
You have to play the game, to find out why you are playing the game! - eXistenZ
@ Iznogood:
I had two pages of thread to reply to and took a few snippets to actually quote. It’s only a coincidence that your posts seem to have gotten ‘singled out’ in my post. Sorry about that…
The discussion was never about whether or not the game should be reviewed here on the site. As far as im concerned the staff can review whatever games they like, in fact i would rather have them review one game too many then too few.
Some posts (not necessarily yours) did make it seem that way, though, with all the “not a game” and “not an adventure game” remarks. It does sound like some here think it never should’ve gotten reviewed here.
I don’t agree with that at all…
I simply don’t understand your point here?
I never wrote that TWD should be considered an action game or RPG!
You made it sound like TWD is going to spawn a lot of QTE-type games, but I just wanted to point out that TWD itself is already an attempt to “replicate” Heavy Rain’s success.
I meant to say that TWD wasn’t the first in this particular genre.
The things you consider to be a big part of the success of TWD (like the story, atmosphere and decision-making) could indeed be integrated in other kinds of games, but those elements found their origin within the adventure genre. Saying that they could be built into other games is simply pointing out the adventure genre’s influence on current action games and RPGs, imo.
The truth can’t hurt you, it’s just like the dark: it scares you witless but in time you see things clear and stark. - Elvis Costello
Maybe this time I can be strong, but since I know who I am, I’m probably wrong. Maybe this time I can go far, but thinking about where I’ve been ain’t helping me start. - Michael Kiwanuka
I think Beyond will help reshape and rethink this interactive approach. I am fine with the idea of controlling entity and full exploring the scene, and tamper with interactive objects, possess people to sort your way out. This shows that David took
negative feedback of chickened gameplay and put some more control, cognition and
interactivity. Given the fact that TTG work on licensed properties their creativity
will have everlasting contraints to drag TWD approach, untill it will become redundant.
On that time emotional weight will feel like 24, Sons of Anarchy or other TV serials
milking.
I knew i probably wouldn’t get popular by going against the popular opinion and criticizing TWD, but seriously Kurufinwe, calling us crazies because we disagree with you?!?
My post wasn’t necessarily aimed at you in particular. There have been too many posts in this thread and others before it for me to keep track of who said what exactly.
In any case, as far as I’m concerned, you have the right to like or dislike whatever game you want. And if I had any say in what you’re allowed to post in these forums (which thankfully I don’t), I’d say you have every right to express your likes and dislikes for whatever game you want (as long as it doesn’t descend into trolling, etc.).
But people getting worked up because something they don’t like is successful or popular (even though its success or popularity causes no harm to them or any other person) is absolutely insane; I can’t think of any better word for it.
(Once again, I’m not sure if this directly applies to you or not.)
But people getting worked up because something they don’t like is successful or popular (even though its success or popularity causes no harm to them or any other person) is absolutely insane; I can’t think of any better word for it.
I only voiced a concern that popped into my head for a brief moment that made me stop and think, because the concern wasn’t making any sense to me. I allready expressed that I found my worrying to be completely silly, (afterall, I LOVED the game)I only tried to put words on the brief thought process that made me reach that conclusion. I don’t think that qualifies for insanity, I certainly was never hysterical about it. I was even embarrased to admit that I’d had that concern to begin with, and Luciens post about how defensive and insular we can be what was made realize that I even had these thoughts.
I found the original post in this thread to be exceptionally unfair to the reviewer and the site as a whole, so what I’ve mainly been doing is siding with the reviewer, whom I think did a great job. I find all reviews on this site to be very professional and informative, regardless of whether or not the reviewer actually enjoyed the game for him/herself. A lot of silly things has been said in this thread, and though I understand where you’re coming from, Kuru, the “crazy”-accusation is almost as silly as some of the silliest things that’s been said here so far 
It’s like pouring gazoline on a fire because you didn’t like that it was burning. And besides, that guy who started the fire in the first place seems long gone.
I dont know if what you said was aimed at me spesifically, but I was hoping that my posts consisted a bit more of reasoning than plain insanity. Hopefully its a little bit of both Anyway, I’m happy to finally belong, though I’d personally wish for something cooler to belong to than “The Crazies”... but I’ll take it! 
Duckman: Can you believe it? Five hundred bucks for a parking ticket?
Cornfed Pig: You parked in a handicapped zone.
Duckman: Who cares? Nobody parks there anyway, except for the people who are supposed to park there and, hell, I can outrun them anytime.
Anyone replayed or thinking to replay TWD and why find its worth replaying?
“Going on means going far - Going far means returning”
Hey, this turned into a fun thread. A few comments upon reading it (although also based more on years of observation than any particular post here).
People really need to stop being so obsessed with the future of adventure games instead of the now. And not just negatively. For everyone who fears that the success of a new game will cause the abandonment of everything they cherish, there are those who tout new games as the next big thing to restore the genre to its rightful place in the mainstream eye. Both positions are equally misguided; neither is ever true.
The problem starts with thinking of the “genre” as a THING to be nurtured or protected. It’s not. It’s a concept, an idea—a very loose, very diverse collection of styles and approaches and goals that can’t (and shouldn’t) be pigeonholed. Despite the raves of mainstream press over TWD, its success won’t suddenly mean increased sales for KING Art or Daedalic (or vice versa). And while it will no doubt spawn some copycats (whose own success will depend solely on whether they’re any good), it won’t suddenly drive all developers to neglect years of tradition that they love as much as us.
Trends have far more to do with emerging technology and easily-reproducible elements than stylistic changes (or at least, when the two go hand-in-hand). Myst clones were relatively cheap to make; Professor Layton clones are fairly easy to copy. Even slapping QTEs in a game is simple, but has anyone ever argued that the QTEs in TWD were actually enjoyable as a gameplay mechanic?. Writing great stories and meaningful player-driven experiences isn’t easy. We could only be so lucky to see that emerge as the trend after TWD.
So really, TWD (just like any other game past, present, or future) is neither the saviour nor the harbinger of doom, so let’s just celebrate it for the success it is in its own right. And then we can look forward to the slew of nothing-at-all-like-TWD games slated for next year.
The slippery slope fallacy dictates that it’s not long now before Telltale makes Space Ace 2.
Given the rest of your post, I can’t imagine you actually meant to use the word “fallacy”, but it does indeed belong there.
QTE-games have become a subgenre within the adventure genre. But they’re very much adventure games.
Whoa now, hold the fort. This isn’t true at all. QTEs are merely tolerated (by AG) as an “action” component in an adventure game so long as they don’t dominate the experience (which would then disqualify them from consideration). Games like Indigo Prophecy/Fahrenheit and Jurassic Park were really starting to push the limit of what’s acceptable. Fortunately, they were scaled back to a much more manageable level in TWD. But to be clear, QTEs aren’t in any way considered a viable adventure element on their own.
Whoa now, hold the fort. This isn’t true at all. QTEs are merely tolerated (by AG) as an “action” component in an adventure game so long as they don’t dominate the experience (which would then disqualify them from consideration). Games like Indigo Prophecy/Fahrenheit and Jurassic Park were really starting to push the limit of what’s acceptable. Fortunately, they were scaled back to a much more manageable level in TWD. But to be clear, QTEs aren’t in any way considered a viable adventure element on their own.
Have there been other QTE games that weren’t adventures?
The only four that I know of are Indigo Prophecy, Heavy Rain, Jurassic Park and The Walking Dead…
The truth can’t hurt you, it’s just like the dark: it scares you witless but in time you see things clear and stark. - Elvis Costello
Maybe this time I can be strong, but since I know who I am, I’m probably wrong. Maybe this time I can go far, but thinking about where I’ve been ain’t helping me start. - Michael Kiwanuka
You are here: Home → Forum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread
