Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst
1
2
3
  1. #41
    Indigo prophecy aka Fahrenheit did this style of game before, but without a known IP or writing staff.

    The only problem with that game was there was literally only Simon Says mini-games, and the story went off the damn wall about 75% through. In a post mortem interview, the creator basically said they spent too much time on the beginning, and thought it would keep the players hooked. The intro was engaging, true, but it easily fell off as the story just got more and more bizarre.


    edit: adventures game as a whole aren't new at all, but these style games have that morality option throw in, with branching story points based on decisions. a bit different.

  2. #42
    *sigh* TWD is nothing new at all, and it's only as big as it is because of 2 simple reasons

    - 2012 was a crappy year of gaming
    - TDW had a TV show before this game.

    Heavy Rain did it MUCH better, had it's year been as bad as last.. it would have been way more known

  3. #43
    Not a revolution imo, the ending is the same for everyone and the gameplay is pretty lack luster. Interactive movie is what I'd best describe it as.

  4. #44
    Galge/Eroge already had the "route/choice" system, Tales of xillia 2 has it also



    Tons of games have the choice system

  5. #45
    A game primarily defines itself via interactivity.

    The Walking Dead, while being a great experience, a good story, artfully told, heartwarming and touching it is by any standard a poor GAME.

    Not because it doesn't have great qualities, but because of the fact that the game-play mechanics are so rudimentary.


    I remember some of the old interactive movies from the 1990s...popular during the dawn of CDs. They were similar to TWD and were fun to watch but they weren't great games.

    TL;DR: Great experience, bad game.

  6. #46
    Mechagnome
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    628
    Quote Originally Posted by Crowe View Post
    A game primarily defines itself via interactivity.

    The Walking Dead, while being a great experience, a good story, artfully told, heartwarming and touching it is by any standard a poor GAME.

    Not because it doesn't have great qualities, but because of the fact that the game-play mechanics are so rudimentary.


    I remember some of the old interactive movies from the 1990s...popular during the dawn of CDs. They were similar to TWD and were fun to watch but they weren't great games.

    TL;DR: Great experience, bad game.
    Games have been story telling devices for a long time. Just because story is it's main pull doesn't mean it isn't a game.

    I'm up to Episode 3 at the moment and loving it but the one thing I don't like is how linear it is.

    It's like a choose your own adventure (story is a tree) except every branch bends back around and grows into the same trunk after a short period. I understand why the developers did it (creating a tree would lead to way more possibilities and way more dev time for less story for those that don't replay the game) but it is a pretty big draw back. I'm waiting for a true choose your own adventure game, TWD is just the start of it.

  7. #47
    The Patient Flagobha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Göteborg
    Posts
    242
    lol there are hundreds of similar games. The walking dead were full of glitches and the player did NOT tailor the story, the result would always end up the same anyways. Revolution? ... no

  8. #48
    I didn't really enjoy Heavy Rain, tried it for an hour on my brother's PS3 but didn't find it interesting enough to continue playing. Is this one worth picking up?
    Ashr

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •