The Walking Dead is not a good game, great story but horrible gameplay

[xPixelatedx]

Yeah from what I've seen it's just an interactive movie, it doesn't look like a video game at all. I know there are several games like that now, but honestly they don't interest me in the slightest. I don't mind when games have great stories, but if it's just a great story (and not much else), then.. eh. If I was in the mood to be entertained by that, I would go do what a reasonable person does and get some highly acclaimed movies/shows/books, which I do, when I want that. But I play video games for a very specific reason: to play.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

If I was in the mood to be entertained by that, I would go do what a reasonable person does and get some highly acclaimed movies/shows/books, which I do, when I want that.

Thank god we have a reasonable person such as yourself here to lecture us about how unreasonable and ridiculous we are for not sharing your preferences in media. Whatever would we do without such reasoned advice? Just continue enjoying our story-focused adventure games, I guess, like a bunch of uncultured savages.

 

[hooblabla6262]

Personally, I love point&click adventure games.

I wasn't even going to recommend The Walking Dead game to my friends, cause they enjoy a faster pace.
Then one of my friends notices the icon on my desktop, loads it up, and falls in love with it.
Suddenly, all my roommates are playing the game.

It may have minimal gameplay, and I'm kinda glad it did.
The Walking Dead is about people coping in a zombie apocalypse, not zombie smashing.
That being said, the other Walking Dead game that has yet to be released will more than likely be much zombie smashing.
Will it have as great a story? Doubtful.
Will it still be awesome in its own way? I hope so.

 

[DrunkOnEstus]

I've been playing Heavy Rain again recently, and the atmosphere around today makes me realize that these kind of stigmas have got to go. I can't call bullshit on their "interactive drama" claim, because while the gameplay certainly is a series of the most complicated QTEs in the history of games, it suits the nature of what you're doing and you should be there for the story anyway. Why not just watch a movie about serial killers? The game allows you to change the course of the events, and to make things easier or worse for the characters you become fond of. People who don't or can't remember "choose your own adventure" books probably aren't going to feel like this is the coolest innovation ever.

I've unfortunately only played episode 1 of The Walking Dead, but it seems I need to finish that up pretty soon. I imagine the premise is similar, though: "Good gameplay" is a very subjective thing and not a bullet point on the box, and is liable to be minimized to enhances the story and its purposes.

 

[Cheeseless]

Predicting some flak here, when i say constraints i don't mean keeping people from mucking about, i mean keeping them from attempting what won't have any results at all besides what amounts to an error message. Imagine if point and click logic applied to first person shooters with open terrain? There would be no penalty for leaving the battlefield, so if you wandered to far you would reach the end of navigable terrain and just fall off it, which would surely not be the devs' intentions and would result in an "error" situation just as if you tried to use Crowbar on Clem.

How come every time i try to write a quick few words i end up with a waall of text? Must be because I'm Portuguese.

 

[Cheeseless]

I've been playing Heavy Rain again recently, and the atmosphere around today makes me realize that these kind of stigmas have got to go. I can't call bullshit on their "interactive drama" claim, because while the gameplay certainly is a series of the most complicated QTEs in the history of games, it suits the nature of what you're doing and you should be there for the story anyway. Why not just watch a movie about serial killers? The game allows you to change the course of the events, and to make things easier or worse for the characters you become fond of. People who don't or can't remember "choose your own adventure" books probably aren't going to feel like this is the coolest innovation ever.

I've unfortunately only played episode 1 of The Walking Dead, but it seems I need to finish that up pretty soon. I imagine the premise is similar, though: "Good gameplay" is a very subjective thing and not a bullet point on the box, and is liable to be minimized to enhances the story and its purposes.

Heavy Rain is awesome because it accepts completely that's it's little more than a QTE-o-rama, which makes it more focused around steering the story by the player, like you said.

 

[Stampede]

It's a point and click adventure game when you get right down to it. By your definitions those are not games either? Besides, it had more interesting and varied gameplay than modern shooters like CoD or Battlefield 3.

That said, it can't be Game of the Year in the same year that saw Crusader Kings 2 out. But it is certainly better than 99% of the dreck that got released.

exactly right its a simple point and click adventure. you may not like the simplicity of the point and click mechanics but its still a game and belongs to one of the oldest genres

The problem with point and click games is that they were never much fun, you just played them for the story. The underlying gameplay was bad which means they aren't technically good games, just good stories.

haha people actually do enjoy point and click adventures, thats why you can still buy them now. i dont like them as a general rule but im not going to dismiss an entire genre of gaming as not being games purely because i dont like the game play

Here is the answer to your whole topic. Read what wombat of war wrote... very... carefully... Or actually, you know what? Let me help you with that:

"haha" - Because it's actually kind'a funny how you fail to see the avalanche of reasons why you shouldn't make topics like this.

"people actually enjoy point and click adventures" - Implying that story > gameplay is not a game flaw but rather a game TYPE and like any game type there are those who enjoy playing it.

"that's why you can still buy them now" - Further reinforcing the idea that the game was made a certain way for a reason and that it holds to specific views that ultimately give us the final product.

"i dont like them as a general rule but im not going to dismiss an entire genre of gaming as not being games purely because i dont like the game play" - The reason why making topics like this is a poor way of spending your time. I better way, now that it is done, is to reflect on that line, give it some thought the next time you have nothing better to do.

Personally (sorry for riding your post so much, wombat of war) I enjoy the notion of gameplay ----> skills ----> fun in any genre. I play shooters competitively and even though I love every aspect of competitive play it can get harrowing and demanding. At times like that I want to poor a few days of my gaming time into something that demands different elements of the gaming pallet and actually takes me for a ride, relaxes me with long, well done conversations, hits me in the stomach every few hours and actually brings a tear to my eye, all at the price of clicking a few preset triggers...

 

[xPixelatedx]

Thank god we have a reasonable person such as yourself here to lecture us about how unreasonable and ridiculous we are for not sharing your preferences in media.

I was just saying it seems extravagant to make a video game with just a story and no game-play, when there are so many better venues to display your work to the world that have been around and are proven to work better for that style. Yeah, I do think that's more reasonable, but that's just my opinion. No need to get mad, bro.

 

[bafrali]

I don't know what you were expecting from a point and click adventure game. Sure it may be boring to some people. But We clearly see that most people who like it, like it for what it is. It is like Mass Effect. Combat may not be anything great compared to a solid TPS but people are there for the story anyway. What you are doing is like watching a tragedy and criticizing it for not being funny.

I never understand why people have a hard time grasping the term "genre".

 

[ItsAChiaotzu]

If I was in the mood to be entertained by that, I would go do what a reasonable person does and get some highly acclaimed movies/shows/books, which I do, when I want that.

Thank god we have a reasonable person such as yourself here to lecture us about how unreasonable and ridiculous we are for not sharing your preferences in media. Whatever would we do without such reasoned advice? Just continue enjoying our story-focused adventure games, I guess, like a bunch of uncultured savages.

I have really nothing to add to this debate other than that I think the OP is wrong, but your posts have compelled me to just ask why you need to write in such a contrary and sardonic style? Does it strengthen your argument? No. Does it make your opponent any more likely to come round to your viewpoint? No. Is it really quite annoying? Yes.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

I was just saying it seems extravagant to make a video game with just a story and no game-play, when there are so many better venues to display your work to the world that have been around and are proven to work better for that style. Yeah, I do think that's more reasonable, but that's just my opinion. No need to get mad, bro.

That's not anger. That's sarcasm. Sadly we don't have a "U Sarcastic Bro" meme with which to terrorize people.

And I disagree with you. Games are a very different venue for the delivery of story than a book or a film. There is no writ that says a game cannot be be used as a medium for the delivery of a largely linear narrative, and there is a long history of games doing exactly that.

I'll be happy when there are fewer people in this forum browbeating others into accepting their definition of what "a game" is supposed to be in full on No True Scotsman fashion though, I'll admit that much.

I have really nothing to add to this debate other than that I think the OP is wrong, but your posts have compelled me to just ask why you need to write in such a contrary and sardonic style? Does it strengthen your argument? No. Does it make your opponent any more likely to come round to your viewpoint? No. Is it really quite annoying? Yes.

Do you often frame your lectures in the form of didactic conversations with yourself?

 

[IamGamer41]

I totally agree.Its also not much of a story when the main character falls down like 5 times in the first episode.Its like they couldn't come up with anything better to create suspense.

 

[Legion]

Where is the discussion value here?

You have basically made a thread to state an opinion, and claim that other peoples opinions are wrong.

 

[Mordekaien]

The thing is, they succeeded in making a game about decisions with adventure elements and strong story driven gameplay. And they made an adventure game that I can enjoy, and that's a rare sight in these times. I doubt that any other genre would suit the game as good as this one.

 

[Zen Toombs]

You have basically made a thread to state an opinion, and claim that other peoples opinions are wrong.

But their opinions are obviously wrong. Duh.

OT: Wait, minimal gameplay is bad gameplay?

 

[Legion]

You have basically made a thread to state an opinion, and claim that other peoples opinions are wrong.

But their opinions are obviously wrong. Duh.

OT: Wait, minimal gameplay is bad gameplay?

I think that the creators of Pong, Pacman and Space Invaders should hang their heads in shame. Clearly they made terrible games.

 

[Veldt Falsetto]

Predicting some flak here, when i say constraints i don't mean keeping people from mucking about, i mean keeping them from attempting what won't have any results at all besides what amounts to an error message. Imagine if point and click logic applied to first person shooters with open terrain? There would be no penalty for leaving the battlefield, so if you wandered to far you would reach the end of navigable terrain and just fall off it, which would surely not be the devs' intentions and would result in an "error" situation just as if you tried to use Crowbar on Clem.

How come every time i try to write a quick few words i end up with a waall of text? Must be because I'm Portuguese.

See what I found fun with point and click adventure games, especially the comedy ones, is that lets just say you tried to kill a character you obviously couldn't they'd come out with some witty remark that makes you love the characters even more. While I don't see this sort of thing in The Walking Dead maybe if when you tried, as you said using a crowbar on Clementine, maybe Lee should have just said, "Nah I don't think so" or something similar.

Anyway OT, I love the gameplay in The Walking Dead, if you've been playing the 3 series of Sam and Max that Telltale have done you can see just how much they've evolved the genre, that free-walking mechanic using the left stick? Yeah that sort of thing was pretty much not present in any point and click and Telltale only implemented it in series 3 of Sam and Max. It's this sort of thing that makes TWD a great game...same with Heavy Rain, the fact that they are pretty much Point and Click EVOLVED that gets me.

 

[shrekfan246]

Yeah, uh... I'll see how simply I can put it.

What do I primarily do when I play League of Legends? Point and click on things. I point and click to move, I point and click to attack, I point and click to escape enemies, I point and click to fire skill shots or use support abilities.

What do I primarily do when I'm playing... hell, any first- or third-person shooter? Point and click on things. I point and click to aim and fire at enemies, I point and click to pick up ammo/collectibles (depending on the game), I point and click to advance dialogue.

What do I primarily do when I'm playing an RPG? Point and click on things. I point and click to attack enemies, I point and click to manage inventory, I point and click to choose dialogue options (depending on the game), and I point and click to use spells/abilities.

I've been playing a lot of Persona 4 Golden lately, and while I'm absolutely loving it so far, I'd like to ask how there's any more depth to the gameplay than in The Walking Dead? In P4G, most of the actual gameplay is either selecting answers to questions, running around locations examining things, or running around dungeons and getting into typical turn-based JRPG combat that involves - you guessed it - scrolling and clicking on things.

There's something I've been thinking about the past few days since I heard Arin (a.k.a. Egoraptor) mention it on Game Grumps: How many games out there are actually over something like 30 hours long without any padding? Bioshock, Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Persona 4, Final Fantasy, Assassin's Creed, The Witcher 2, Dark Souls, Darksiders II, Torchlight II, unlocking characters in Super Smash Bros., Skyrim, Fallout 3/New Vegas, hell, Batman: Arkham City. These are all games you could put countless hours into, but you know what? After about 8-10 hours, you've usually seen the extent of the 'new' things they're going to throw at you. This isn't always the case, but a lot of the time the gameplay and subsequent time played are artificially extended by various means - Travel time between locations, endless dungeon diving through similar-looking areas, fetch quests, even a lot of side quests are usually just inane drivel added in to lengthen the play-time you'll give the game. But this doesn't mean it has any more depth than a short, tight game like The Walking Dead.

 

[veloper]

I don't know what you were expecting from a point and click adventure game. Sure it may be boring to some people. But We clearly see that most people who like it, like it for what it is. It is like Mass Effect. Combat may not be anything great compared to a solid TPS but people are there for the story anyway. What you are doing is like watching a tragedy and criticizing it for not being funny.

I never understand why people have a hard time grasping the term "genre".

I've seen this argument come up in the thread a couple times and I have to get this out of the way: TWD is NOT your typical point & click adventure game.

I love the genre, particularly the classic Lucas Arts adventures, but I have only luke warm feelings about TWD, because the game deviates lot of the classic formula.

That doesn't mean you cannot like TWD, but it should not be hard to understand that other players may have had different expectations.
As for point&click, TWD was much more press a button(or the Q key) repeatedly and fast, than the "use inventory object with other object" typical for the genre. Really there's more quicktime events than point&click adventuring. Episode 1 still had some light puzzles and after that there was a steady decline. Then there's shooting stuff on top of that.

 

[Cheeseless]

Yeah, uh... I'll see how simply I can put it.

What do I primarily do when I play League of Legends? Point and click on things. I point and click to move, I point and click to attack, I point and click to escape enemies, I point and click to fire skill shots or use support abilities.

What do I primarily do when I'm playing... hell, any first- or third-person shooter? Point and click on things. I point and click to aim and fire at enemies, I point and click to pick up ammo/collectibles (depending on the game), I point and click to advance dialogue.

What do I primarily do when I'm playing an RPG? Point and click on things. I point and click to attack enemies, I point and click to manage inventory, I point and click to choose dialogue options (depending on the game), and I point and click to use spells/abilities.

I've been playing a lot of Persona 4 Golden lately, and while I'm absolutely loving it so far, I'd like to ask how there's any more depth to the gameplay than in The Walking Dead? In P4G, most of the actual gameplay is either selecting answers to questions, running around locations examining things, or running around dungeons and getting into typical turn-based JRPG combat that involves - you guessed it - scrolling and clicking on things.

There's something I've been thinking about the past few days since I heard Arin (a.k.a. Egoraptor) mention it on Game Grumps: How many games out there are actually over something like 30 hours long without any padding? Bioshock, Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Persona 4, Final Fantasy, Assassin's Creed, The Witcher 2, Dark Souls, Darksiders II, Torchlight II, unlocking characters in Super Smash Bros., Skyrim, Fallout 3/New Vegas, hell, Batman: Arkham City. These are all games you could put countless hours into, but you know what? After about 8-10 hours, you've usually seen the extent of the 'new' things they're going to throw at you. This isn't always the case, but a lot of the time the gameplay and subsequent time played are artificially extended by various means - Travel time between locations, endless dungeon diving through similar-looking areas, fetch quests, even a lot of side quests are usually just inane drivel added in to lengthen the play-time you'll give the game. But this doesn't mean it has any more depth than a short, tight game like The Walking Dead.

They do have more depth. They have the same pointing and clicking that TWD does, but the fact is, poiting and clicking in those games makes the little man on the screen do different stuff: either through making him perform different actions or having a different significance from the point-and-click game's eternal "rub this on that to open door". Yahtzee sort of makes this point in his Amnesia review. Or maybe it's some other review, but the point (without any clicking) is that other games make your pointing and clicking a far more contextualized, adaptive, and purposeful deal.

Besides, you're talking about out-of-game control methods, which isn't a good way to apply the term "playability", as it refers more to the degree and variety of control you have over your ingame representation. I'm speaking for myself on this definition, though.