We Need to Have This Conversation

  • 132 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Posted by l4wd0g (1931 posts) -

The Walking Dead was the VGA’s Game of the Year. I’ve enjoyed The Walking Dead game. It has played with my emotions, the characters were unique and had a strong voice, and forcing you to make decisions quickly was fantastic. What I didn’t like about The Walking Dead was the gameplay, or more specifically the lack thereof. It was more of an interactive movie than a game, which is fine, but it seems to me that gameplay should trump storytelling.

Aren’t games supposed to be about enjoyment? Did the gameplay bring you enjoyment?

Look at Far Cry 3. The gameplay is fantastic, but the story is total garbage. Far Cry 3 is a blast to play, and the game play is what carried the game.

What I’m trying to say is the difference between movies and games is the interactivity. Remember when Ebert talked about games not being art because they were interactive. The Walking Dead is close to proving his point. The Walking Dead’s gameplay reminded me of this

You had about as much interaction.

Did you have fun playing The Walking dead?

It’s great, just on the wrong medium.

What do you think? Should gameplay trump story.

#1 Posted by l4wd0g (1931 posts) -

The Walking Dead was the VGA’s Game of the Year. I’ve enjoyed The Walking Dead game. It has played with my emotions, the characters were unique and had a strong voice, and forcing you to make decisions quickly was fantastic. What I didn’t like about The Walking Dead was the gameplay, or more specifically the lack thereof. It was more of an interactive movie than a game, which is fine, but it seems to me that gameplay should trump storytelling.

Aren’t games supposed to be about enjoyment? Did the gameplay bring you enjoyment?

Look at Far Cry 3. The gameplay is fantastic, but the story is total garbage. Far Cry 3 is a blast to play, and the game play is what carried the game.

What I’m trying to say is the difference between movies and games is the interactivity. Remember when Ebert talked about games not being art because they were interactive. The Walking Dead is close to proving his point. The Walking Dead’s gameplay reminded me of this

You had about as much interaction.

Did you have fun playing The Walking dead?

It’s great, just on the wrong medium.

What do you think? Should gameplay trump story.

#2 Edited by FluxWaveZ (19321 posts) -

I don't get it. So you're saying that The Walking Dead would have been just the same if it was a movie or TV show (heh)? That it "doesn't belong to the medium"? You're saying that people's choices were unimportant in relation to the experience as a whole?

#3 Posted by Hizang (8533 posts) -

@l4wd0g: Somebody on the bombcast brought up Text adventures, if they are games then so is The Walking Dead.

#4 Posted by prestonhedges (1965 posts) -

@Hizang said:

@l4wd0g: Somebody on the bombcast brought up Text adventures, if they are games then so is The Walking Dead.

Text adventures have way more interaction in them than The Walking Dead.

#5 Edited by Hitchenson (4682 posts) -

It's a game. It's also the best one that came out this year.

#6 Posted by Hizang (8533 posts) -

@gladspooky said:

@Hizang said:

@l4wd0g: Somebody on the bombcast brought up Text adventures, if they are games then so is The Walking Dead.

Text adventures have way more interaction in them than The Walking Dead.

Wait what, how does that work exactly?

#7 Posted by Video_Game_King (36272 posts) -

But I can't enter into it until somebody gives me The Walking Dead.

#8 Posted by Breadfan (6589 posts) -

This concersation has been talked to death. The Walking Dead is most definitely a game. And a damn great one at that.

#9 Posted by JasonR86 (9652 posts) -

Getting hung up on 'game versus not game' seems as idiotic to me as getting hung up on 'literature versus not literature' .

#10 Posted by prestonhedges (1965 posts) -

@Hizang said:

@gladspooky said:

@Hizang said:

@l4wd0g: Somebody on the bombcast brought up Text adventures, if they are games then so is The Walking Dead.

Text adventures have way more interaction in them than The Walking Dead.

Wait what, how does that work exactly?

Like I just said. Text adventures have more interaction in them.

#11 Posted by Hizang (8533 posts) -

@gladspooky said:

@Hizang said:

@gladspooky said:

@Hizang said:

@l4wd0g: Somebody on the bombcast brought up Text adventures, if they are games then so is The Walking Dead.

Text adventures have way more interaction in them than The Walking Dead.

Wait what, how does that work exactly?

Like I just said. Text adventures have more interaction in them.

Wait sorry is that you just repeating yourself because you have no answer to my question? Ok, I'll bite.

The Walking Dead has every single thing in a text adventure + extra, so please explain to me how a Text Adventure game has more interaction than The Walking Dead. If your answer is just "Like I said" or there is no answer, I am a happy man.

#12 Posted by dungbootle (2457 posts) -

Whenever anything resembling a visual novel of some kind gets good reception, this always comes up: "is it a game, is it a game". Who cares? Is it so important to keep the categorizations so strict?

Whatever man. Whatever it is, it's good. It's really really good. One of the best anythings that I've experienced this year. As far as I see it, listening to characters, picking dialogue choices, as well as enviromental movement and shooting walkers, that's all gameplay to me. It's the same thing.

#13 Posted by MariachiMacabre (7074 posts) -
@gladspooky

@Hizang said:

@gladspooky said:

@Hizang said:

@l4wd0g: Somebody on the bombcast brought up Text adventures, if they are games then so is The Walking Dead.

Text adventures have way more interaction in them than The Walking Dead.

Wait what, how does that work exactly?

Like I just said. Text adventures have more interaction in them.

I know you're a troll and everything but that statement is so baffalingly false it's astounding. How can a text adventure conceivably have more interaction than a game with even the slightest amount of puzzle solving and QTEs?
#14 Edited by AndrewB (7568 posts) -

My other game of the year would have been a visual novel wrapped in a puzzle game. So...

Look, it's just rare for an adventure-esque game to be so popular. A lot of people might not "get" the gameplay, but even if you don't, you should at least enjoy the parts where you *do* interact with the story.

There are better examples of games with amazing gameplay and no story this year. X-Com, for example. At its core, it's a tactics game, and I freaking loooove that.

#15 Posted by prestonhedges (1965 posts) -

@Hizang said:

@gladspooky said:

@Hizang said:

@gladspooky said:

@Hizang said:

@l4wd0g: Somebody on the bombcast brought up Text adventures, if they are games then so is The Walking Dead.

Text adventures have way more interaction in them than The Walking Dead.

Wait what, how does that work exactly?

Like I just said. Text adventures have more interaction in them.

Wait sorry is that you just repeating yourself because you have no answer to my question? Ok, I'll bite.

The Walking Dead has every single thing in a text adventure + extra, so please explain to me how a Text Adventure game has more interaction than The Walking Dead. If your answer is just "Like I said" or there is no answer, I am a happy man.

Well, you've clearly never played a text adventure, so there's really not much to say that'll convince you. Go play one, I guess?

#16 Posted by Hizang (8533 posts) -

@gladspooky said:

@Hizang said:

@gladspooky said:

@Hizang said:

@gladspooky said:

@Hizang said:

@l4wd0g: Somebody on the bombcast brought up Text adventures, if they are games then so is The Walking Dead.

Text adventures have way more interaction in them than The Walking Dead.

Wait what, how does that work exactly?

Like I just said. Text adventures have more interaction in them.

Wait sorry is that you just repeating yourself because you have no answer to my question? Ok, I'll bite.

The Walking Dead has every single thing in a text adventure + extra, so please explain to me how a Text Adventure game has more interaction than The Walking Dead. If your answer is just "Like I said" or there is no answer, I am a happy man.

Well, you've clearly never played a text adventure, so there's really not much to say that'll convince you. Go play one, I guess?

I think you will find a text adventure has zero gameplay outside of choosing paths that the story goes in, if it does any more it is NOT a Text adventure. The Text Adventure in Saints Row the Third is the definition of what a Text Adventure is, and if your going to sit there and tell me THAT has more gameplay than The Walking Dead you are clearly an insane person who deserves to be eaten alive by multiple tigers.

#17 Posted by yinstarrunner (1185 posts) -

Normally, I'd be right there with you. I've long been a proponent of gameplay being far more important than story.

But the thing is... games this year just... weren't that great. IMO. We've definitely hit a stagnation stride lately. In light of that, I think it makes sense to give The Walking Dead the award, since no games are really advancing forward in revolutionary ways through mechanics, and TWD IS advancing the medium forward in writing and story.

That said, I'm surprised to see that X-COM didn't even get a nomination! It's like everybody just woke up one day and forgot about that game.

#18 Edited by Giantstalker (1606 posts) -

The Walking Dead is basically trash if you take out the story. I don't think that's an acceptable or laudable way to make a game, even in 2012, when the definition's been loosened up a bit.

Some of the recognition it gets is understandable. But for people to forgive its severe flaws is not. This is classic flavor-of-the-month thinking; hilarious but saddening to see at the same time.

Either way, shit's weak. My GOTY would've been Wargame: European Escalation, a game that was a real breath of fresh air to the tactical RTS genre.

#19 Posted by laserbolts (5317 posts) -

Dont get me wrong I enjoyed the walking dead but with way they handled the QTEs and cursor movement the game definetly benefitted from the lack of gameplay. Make the game actually fun to play with the writing and it would have been something truly special. Mark of the ninja is GOTY imo.

#20 Posted by Clonedzero (4199 posts) -

there are different genres of games for a reason.

#21 Posted by Hizang (8533 posts) -

@yinstarrunner said:

But the thing is... games this year just... weren't that great.

I don't know what your talking about there.

  • Mass Effect 3.
  • Asuras Wrath.
  • Sleeping Dogs.
  • Max Payne 3.
  • Twisted Metal.
  • Syndicate.
  • Journey.
  • Mario Tennis.
  • Black Ops 2.
  • The Darkness 2.
  • SSx.
  • Need for Speed Hot Pursuit.
  • Rock Band Blitz.
  • XCOM.
  • Dishonoured.
  • Far Cry 3.
  • Little Inferno.
  • New Super Mario Bros U.
  • Nintendo Land.
  • Halo 4.
#22 Posted by c0l0nelp0c0rn1 (1807 posts) -

@Video_Game_King: Just buy it already, it's really good.

#23 Posted by believer258 (11776 posts) -

I haven't actually played The Walking Dead but, from what I understand, it's one of the few very strong entries we have as far as video game stories go. Now, I do believe that gameplay is more important than story, but a great story can make a game something special and I don't believe this medium will ever be able to reach any sort of potential without exploring its potential as a narrative vehicle. The Walking Dead explores this, maybe a little more so than it should but something needs to do it and it needs to be a video game.

Now, excuse me while I go rethink my views on playing a game for story.

Online
#24 Posted by JasonR86 (9652 posts) -

@Hizang said:

@yinstarrunner said:

But the thing is... games this year just... weren't that great.

I don't know what your talking about there.

  • Mass Effect 3.
  • Asuras Wrath.
  • Sleeping Dogs.
  • Max Payne 3.
  • Twisted Metal.
  • Syndicate.
  • Journey.
  • Mario Tennis.
  • Black Ops 2.
  • The Darkness 2.
  • SSx.
  • Need for Speed Hot Pursuit.
  • Rock Band Blitz.
  • XCOM.
  • Dishonoured.
  • Far Cry 3.
  • Little Inferno.
  • New Super Mario Bros U.
  • Nintendo Land.
  • Halo 4.

Some people think every year is always bad for everything. I think they're depressed and project.

#25 Edited by Athadam (684 posts) -

You tell me if I can decide the choice between saving one life or another on a television series and make meaningful decisions that carry on throughout the show. There is a ton of interactivity in the Walking Dead, at least it gives you the illusion that you are crafting your own story and that your choices actually matter.

To me - this is enjoyment. Games don't have to be "fun" to be enjoyed - much like how a realistic, sad war storylike the Pianist can be enjoyed without comedic relief. Enjoyment is how much you treasured your experience with something. I treasured the Walking Dead a lot, and it's one of the few games (or movies, tv show) that has got me thinking about it way after I've put down the controller.

#26 Posted by Video_Game_King (36272 posts) -

@c0l0nelp0c0rn1:

Not yet. I have a streak going.

#27 Posted by Colourful_Hippie (4337 posts) -

@JasonR86 said:

@Hizang said:

@yinstarrunner said:

But the thing is... games this year just... weren't that great.

I don't know what your talking about there.

  • Mass Effect 3.
  • Asuras Wrath.
  • Sleeping Dogs.
  • Max Payne 3.
  • Twisted Metal.
  • Syndicate.
  • Journey.
  • Mario Tennis.
  • Black Ops 2.
  • The Darkness 2.
  • SSx.
  • Need for Speed Hot Pursuit.
  • Rock Band Blitz.
  • XCOM.
  • Dishonoured.
  • Far Cry 3.
  • Little Inferno.
  • New Super Mario Bros U.
  • Nintendo Land.
  • Halo 4.

Some people think every year is always bad for everything. I think they're depressed and project.

And/or they only played like 2 games this year and threw in the towel.

#28 Posted by Hizang (8533 posts) -

@JasonR86: Lots of people say this year sucked for games, I just don't understand where they are coming from. Oh and I forgot a few games off of that list too!

  • Borderlands 2.
  • Mark of the Ninja.
  • Playstation All Stars.
  • ZombiU
  • Hitman.
  • Assassins Creed 3.
  • WWE 13.
  • Forza Horrisons.
  • Tokyo Jungle..
  • Fez.
  • FTL.
#29 Posted by JasonR86 (9652 posts) -

@Colourful_Hippie said:

@JasonR86 said:

@Hizang said:

@yinstarrunner said:

But the thing is... games this year just... weren't that great.

I don't know what your talking about there.

  • Mass Effect 3.
  • Asuras Wrath.
  • Sleeping Dogs.
  • Max Payne 3.
  • Twisted Metal.
  • Syndicate.
  • Journey.
  • Mario Tennis.
  • Black Ops 2.
  • The Darkness 2.
  • SSx.
  • Need for Speed Hot Pursuit.
  • Rock Band Blitz.
  • XCOM.
  • Dishonoured.
  • Far Cry 3.
  • Little Inferno.
  • New Super Mario Bros U.
  • Nintendo Land.
  • Halo 4.

Some people think every year is always bad for everything. I think they're depressed and project.

And/or they only played like 2 games this year and threw in the towel.

Philistines.

#30 Posted by Vinny_Says (5700 posts) -

@Castermhief117 said:

You tell me if I can decide the choice between saving one life or another on a television series and make meaningful decisions that carry on throughout the show.

You know, one day they'll bring the existing concept of American Idol and all that shit to all TV shows and you'll regret that comment.

As for the game, I haven't played it but I've never heard anyone say anything about the gameplay in TWD. Nothing at all, nothing good, nothing bad, just nothing and that worries me. If we're just going to play video games for story then why have this industry even exist?

Want a story? Go read a book, they have the best stories, always.

#31 Posted by Jimbo (9799 posts) -

"Aren’t games supposed to be about enjoyment?"

Not necessarily, no, but interactivity should at least be a significant part of why it is considered great imo.

#32 Posted by McGhee (6094 posts) -

I haven't played it, but talk of The Walking Dead makes me think of:

Man, these were so awesome.

#33 Posted by Bobby_The_Great (1004 posts) -

@yinstarrunner said:

Normally, I'd be right there with you. I've long been a proponent of gameplay being far more important than story.

But the thing is... games this year just... weren't that great. IMO. We've definitely hit a stagnation stride lately. In light of that, I think it makes sense to give The Walking Dead the award, since no games are really advancing forward in revolutionary ways through mechanics, and TWD IS advancing the medium forward in writing and story.

That said, I'm surprised to see that X-COM didn't even get a nomination! It's like everybody just woke up one day and forgot about that game.

I couldn't disagree with you more that this year was a bad year for games, I think it has been one of the best, especially for Indie/Downloadable games. Plus, there were plenty of surprises; XCom being one of them, along with Sleeping Dogs, FEZ, Mark of the Ninja, Dust: An Elysian Tale, Legend of Grimrock and I could go on, and on.

#34 Posted by ImmortalSaiyan (4676 posts) -

Not more of this. The Walking Dead is certainly a game. Just a different kind of game.

#35 Posted by Athadam (684 posts) -

@Vinny_Says said:

@Castermhief117 said:

You tell me if I can decide the choice between saving one life or another on a television series and make meaningful decisions that carry on throughout the show.

You know, one day they'll bring the existing concept of American Idol and all that shit to all TV shows and you'll regret that comment.

As for the game, I haven't played it but I've never heard anyone say anything about the gameplay in TWD. Nothing at all, nothing good, nothing bad, just nothing and that worries me. If we're just going to play video games for story then why have this industry even exist?

Want a story? Go read a book, they have the best stories, always.

You can't compare American Idol to a game with a story like the Walking Dead. You don't have any agency in American Idol, at least not very much. Your vote is but one of millions of others - and it's very unlikely that your choice matters. There's no use trying to compare these two, one is a reality TV show and the other is a handcrafted, scripted video game.

What you do an decide in The Walking Dead really matters and can come back to haunt you.

And yes, although books may always have the best stories compared to their video game or movie counterparts, but I think games like the Walking Dead have the potential to change that - and that's why it should be Game of the Year.

#36 Posted by Jimbo (9799 posts) -

@Hizang said:

@yinstarrunner said:

But the thing is... games this year just... weren't that great.

I don't know what your talking about there.

  • Mass Effect 3.

Yes you do.

#37 Posted by MattyFTM (14366 posts) -
"There’s really no need to maintain such a narrow view of gaming. The answer to the question “what is game?” changes every year. If you disqualify The Walking Dead now, would you disqualify Monkey Island back in 1990? Zork in 1980?
All of those games fall on slightly different spots on the play-to-watch scale, I suppose, but to say that The Walking Dead isn’t even a game is a bit much.
Instead of worrying about what gaming is or isn’t, focus on what you like about games and why. It’s perfectly OK to think that The Walking Dead is lame, boring, or not for you. But to go all the way to the end and start saying that it doesn’t even fit in the same category as other, “real” games starts to feel a bit elitist, right?"

- Jeff Gerstmann, doing a better job of answering this post than I ever could. Via his Tumblr.

Moderator
#39 Posted by Little_Socrates (5675 posts) -

Music expanded when we accepted The Plastic Ono Band and Brian Eno, even if many of their experiments are ultimately not songs. I agree with the sentiment that effectiveness does not equal medium.

However, The Walking Dead is definitely a game. There are puzzles, combat scenarios, quick-time events, and a handful of choices that really do significantly affect the way characters treat you throughout the story. It's not even really necessary to defend it.

But there is no reason to feel "threatened" by The Walking Dead supplanting the kind of game you like, and you should actively seek out publications that reward your Game of the Year. I know I visit Destructoid regularly thanks to their adoration of Deadly Premonition their 2010 Game of the Year and unquestionably one of my all-time favorite games. Generally speaking, I tend not to read much not written by anyone there but Sterling, but that's because the others just don't have as strong a written voice as he does.

Spike's VGAs represent a general consensus between the more populist gamer (i.e. the judge from Entertainment Weekly) and the deeply-involved writers (like Jeff here at Giant Bomb.) That consensus is easily not definitive, though I can guarantee you'll see a lot of awards float The Walking Dead's way this year. There will be places and people who reward other games, and you should find them and follow their writing.

However, there's a bigger problem in your post.

@l4wd0g said:

Aren’t games supposed to be about enjoyment?

No. No, they don't have to be, at least not for everybody.

Ask Amnesia: The Dark Descent's intense and constant terror, or Hotline Miami's swift addiction to brutality and self-hatred.

Ask Metal Gear Solid 4's disdain for the people who adored Metal Gear Solid 2, or the Persona games' heartwrenching climaxes and Social Links.

Ask I Have No Mouth, And I Must Scream's drastic and powerful intensity.

Ask anyone who's fallen in love in Air, or Katawa Shoujo, or Analogue: A Hate Story, or Journey.

Ask those who found themselves wandering lost through Dear Esther.

Ask anyone involved in #onereasonwhy that found themselves given a voice by dys4ia or Mainichi.

#40 Posted by JoeyRavn (4962 posts) -

@Vinny_Says said:

@Castermhief117 said:

You tell me if I can decide the choice between saving one life or another on a television series and make meaningful decisions that carry on throughout the show.

You know, one day they'll bring the existing concept of American Idol and all that shit to all TV shows and you'll regret that comment.

As for the game, I haven't played it but I've never heard anyone say anything about the gameplay in TWD. Nothing at all, nothing good, nothing bad, just nothing and that worries me. If we're just going to play video games for story then why have this industry even exist?

Want a story? Go read a book, they have the best stories, always.

As it's been previously said, the gameplay in TWD is that of a graphic adventure: pick up an item, use it on other item, do adventuring. The concept is extremely simple, yet it has been around for decades now. If the argument is that there's not "enough" adventuring as in, say, Monkey Island... well, I really don't know how to answer that. I just don't see anyone complaining that the latest Halo or Call of Duty doesn't have enough "shooting" in them. How does someone like come to the conclusion that the interaction in TWD is not enough to classify it as a graphic adventure is beyond me. It doesn't help that he plainly refuses to give reasons or examples why it is so. The gameplay in TWD does what it tries to do, nothing more, nothing less.

As for your "go read a book" argument... Well, if you want interaction, go do something in real life. Want to shoot a gun? Go buy a gun. Want to drive recklessly? Get in a car and drive recklessly. What better interaction that first hand experience? And real life has the best first hand experience, always. Oh, wait.

I guess nobody will take those as valid arguments, right? So why "go read a book if you want a good story" is even a possibility? If we're talking about video games, we have to judge video games based on their intrinsic characteristics and the limitations and potential of the medium in itself. I don't think anybody would ever question the importance of a good story in a movie, even though it's a primarily visual medium, right? So why is it always such a loathed concept when it comes to video games?

#41 Posted by RandyF (138 posts) -

I don't think this was a "bad" year for video games, just not a great one. I've played most of the major releases this year and they have mostly been a little disappointing, if not majorly disappointing. Sequels to games that I love (Borderlands 2, Diablo III, Mass Effect III, Darksiders II, New Super Mario Bros. 2), which should have been some of my top favorites this year, didn't even make my list. I don't even know if I could come up with a list, because I would be making a list of 10 where 5 of them I don't even like that much. Spec Ops: The Line and The Walking Dead, games that would have been near the bottom of my top 10 in a normal year, are not my top two. XCom is up there, too.

And I think the original poster has a valid point. It is pretty much a choose-your-own-adventure book. I think it's awesome, but it's a valid criticism. I also think text adventures have more interactivity. There are way more choices in text adventures than there are in The Walking Dead. There are also puzzles and obstacles, of which there are very few in The Walking Dead. I think it's great, but I think he brings up a good point.

#42 Posted by RollingZeppelin (1956 posts) -

@MattyFTM said:

"There’s really no need to maintain such a narrow view of gaming. The answer to the question “what is game?” changes every year. If you disqualify The Walking Dead now, would you disqualify Monkey Island back in 1990? Zork in 1980?
All of those games fall on slightly different spots on the play-to-watch scale, I suppose, but to say that The Walking Dead isn’t even a game is a bit much.
Instead of worrying about what gaming is or isn’t, focus on what you like about games and why. It’s perfectly OK to think that The Walking Dead is lame, boring, or not for you. But to go all the way to the end and start saying that it doesn’t even fit in the same category as other, “real” games starts to feel a bit elitist, right?"

- Jeff Gerstmann, doing a better job of answering this post than I ever could. Via his Tumblr.

Sums up my thoughts on people calling this "not a game" perfectly.

Don't like the game? Fine, you don't have to. But it is a game, just as much as any other adventure game, regardless of what you thing games "should" be. If you hate games that emphasize story so much then go back to playing tetris, or Call of Duty, or what ever floats your boat. You're not convincing anyone who likes the game by constantly trying to devalue it, so shut up and go troll somewhere else.

#43 Posted by phrali (646 posts) -

i am as interested in playing twd as i am in playing a text adventure. I give no fucks.

#45 Posted by Red (5994 posts) -

The Walking Dead tells a very good story, and the gameplay is used to facilitate it. Those are the kinds of games I want to play. Games take quite a few liberties when trying to mix gameplay and realism--especially action games--for the sake of scope. As much as I love Uncharted, it's kind of ridiculous just how many times Nathan Drake gets shot. By taking out more free-form action segments, Telltale created an experience that, while definitely guided, was as immersive as hell. There's no other way it could've worked as a game, and if it lacked its interactivity, I wouldn't have felt nearly as strong of a connection with Lee (because I am him) or Clementine (because she is my responsibility).

#46 Posted by Hailinel (24286 posts) -

@JoeyRavn said:

I guess nobody will take those as valid arguments, right? So why "go read a book if you want a good story" is even a possibility? If we're talking about video games, we have to judge video games based on their intrinsic characteristics and the limitations and potential of the medium in itself. I don't think anybody would ever question the importance of a good story in a movie, even though it's a primarily visual medium, right? So why is it always such a loathed concept when it comes to video games?

I think it's because that there are people that feel a game isn't actually a "game" if you spend a large amount of the time watching non-interactive sequences rather than doing any actual "playing", or only have a limited amount of interactivity. I do not agree with this argument; I am only stating how I perceive it.

I have not played The Walking Dead, nor do I have any real desire in doing so. I enjoy horror stories, whether they be book, movie, or game, but there's just something about TWD that prevents it from catching my interest. So congratulations to the game for winning and to its fans, but all I can really do in this case is shrug and quietly think to myself about how Xenoblade was the best game of the year.

#47 Posted by IAmADwagon (49 posts) -

@MattyFTM said:

"There’s really no need to maintain such a narrow view of gaming. The answer to the question “what is game?” changes every year. If you disqualify The Walking Dead now, would you disqualify Monkey Island back in 1990? Zork in 1980?
All of those games fall on slightly different spots on the play-to-watch scale, I suppose, but to say that The Walking Dead isn’t even a game is a bit much.
Instead of worrying about what gaming is or isn’t, focus on what you like about games and why. It’s perfectly OK to think that The Walking Dead is lame, boring, or not for you. But to go all the way to the end and start saying that it doesn’t even fit in the same category as other, “real” games starts to feel a bit elitist, right?"

- Jeff Gerstmann, doing a better job of answering this post than I ever could. Via his Tumblr.

I was going to copy/paste this over into this thread, but as you have already done it, I'm going to eat a sandwich instead.

#48 Posted by Slag (4225 posts) -

@l4wd0g said:

...What I didn’t like about The Walking Dead was the gameplay, or more specifically the lack thereof. It was more of an interactive movie than a game, which is fine, but it seems to me that gameplay should trump storytelling.

Aren’t games supposed to be about enjoyment? Did the gameplay bring you enjoyment?

...

What I’m trying to say is the difference between movies and games is the interactivity....

Did you have fun playing The Walking dead?

It’s great, just on the wrong medium.

What do you think? Should gameplay trump story.

Wrong question. This isn't gameplay vs story, it's gameplay vs gameplay. Or really total experience vs total experience.

Walking Dead is already in two other mediums, tv and comic books, this version surpasses both because of the interactive gameplay. The gameplay is what made the story work so well. The Quick Time Events when you are jumped by a zombie, the mini shooting sequences and the time sensitive dialogue choices. Not real sophisticated stuff by shooter or fighting game standards but it does it's job real well in conveying the emotion of the story for the player. It really helps you connect to the characters.

You take this story and put it on TV without those dialogue choices and mini puzzle/action sequences, it would have been a pretty mediocre TV show. A far weaker one than the one that's airing now in its' third season.

Now you may not care for the gameplay style but at least recognize it is the interactivity that makes that story so effective and this game worth playing.

That's also why this year Walking Dead is a better GotY than FarCry3 imo, although FarCry3 is a pretty damn good game. What FarCry3 did was execute pretty darn well on existing open world shooters with an awesome depiction of a villian, but Walking Dead took adventure games to the next level. There is a novelty factor that is really working in Walking Dead's favor. It's not FarCry3's fault that Borderlands 2 and the myriad of other shooters came out this year but it does make it feel more part of the norm than Walking Dead is.

The Walking Dead is a game that's going to remembered for a long time for it's impact, I doubt that will be as true for FarCry3.

#49 Edited by High_Nunez (218 posts) -

I agree that it's a bit of a weird to argue for the validity of TWD as a game, it most certainly is, despite how disposable all the of the gameplay is. Having said that, pfffffffft...whaaaaaaatever. This game was "okay". I find a little ridiculous this game gets as much praise as it's getting, I couldn't roll my eyes anymore without causing permanent damage after hearing it that it got GOTY, but whatever, tyranny of the majority n' all that. C'est la vie.

#50 Posted by Choffy (443 posts) -

Actually, no. We don't need to have this conversation. If you don't like The Walking Dead, that's great. And while I disagree and think I won't remember a game this generation more fondly when it is all said and done, you have your opinion and I have mine.

Remember, the VGA's were awarded by multiple votes cast by multiple people. A majority of the people who were asked felt one way and it won. Awarding it the title of "Game of the Year" based on a small sample size doesn't make your opinion any more right or wrong, and it doesn't make the game better or worse.

Just shut up and enjoy playing the games you want to instead of worrying about pointless things. (I understand that's essentially what the internet is, but that's why I don't visit many message boards).

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.