aStingyMiser
I'm using pretty confident in my opinions, which comes as both a gift and a curse depending on the planetary alignment, but one thing that I've never been able to explain is how I can go from absolutely despising such story-based games like The Walking Dead (believe you me, I've said my piece on that game), and then literally going out of my way to find excuses to gush over Phoenix Wright. It's... contrasting, to say the least.
For a while now I've searched for a way to properly explain this to the people who have shat upon me for DARING to insult Telltale's only game to actually get anything resembling a positive reception. A lot of people have pointed out this little loophole in my logic, and I hope to put it to rest now.
The beautiful thing I've noticed about Phoenix Wright is that, while it's hard to deny that it puts story ahead of gameplay, the most important thing to the story IS the gameplay, and vice versa. Sure, there's the humor, the writing, and the characters (and the maymays); that goes without saying. However, I sincerely think that the games would not be nearly as enjoyable as they are had it not been for the excellent gameplay.
I know what some of you are thinking: "But it's just pushing buttons! How can it be fun when there are DVD menus that have more intensive control schemes?" That's a fair point, I guess, though I'd like to the this opportunity to point out that almost any turn based JRPG suffers a similar problem. However, I have to point out the fact that Phoenix Wright is less of a white-knuckle endurance test (I'm resisting the urge to just make the rest of this thread a love letter to Vanquish or Bayonetta) than it is a reading comprehension exam. I know, that sounds lame, but it's the best way I can describe it. Without an awesome story to engage and focus the player in addition to entertaining gameplay to actually make someone want to play, you have, at best, half of a game. The thing that makes Phoenix Wright work is that the gameplay and story are completely reliant upon and intertwined with one another.
Which brings me to the total antithesis of this idea, The Walking Dead. First, might I point out that had it not been for the incredibly overrated TV show, this game would have been a bigger flop than the first three cards dealt in a river in a poker hand in which very large objects are used as cards. Even if we assume that the story is fantastic, though-which it isn't-we can't just go ahead and say that a poorly masqueraded point and click adventure game is going to be the next Half-Life 2. (Before anyone says anything, I needed a fairly universal example.) Quick time events, clunky at best movement controls (on the off chance you're actually in an area where you're supposed to move), and an ultimately meaningless choice system mean that the gameplay component of this "entertainment software" is all but non-existent. The gameplay and story could not repel each other more. It's easier mixing oil, water, and antimatter together without a violent explosion while simultaneously dividing by zero than it is trying to mix the two halves of this game together. It is all but undeniable that the gameplay in this game was nothing but an afterthought added in afterwards in order to make money off of this. All The Walking Dead is is a miniseries designed in a 3D graphics engine duct tape to a choose your own adventure novel. And before you say it: even if you enjoy this game for its story, that's half of the game. And even that's being generous.
I'll admit, Phoenix Wright has all but forced me to revise my opinions about story-over-gameplay games, but I still see no reason to change my mind about The Walking Dead. If this doesn't explain to you the difference between these two approaches, I don't now what will, unless of course you pay Heavy Rain or do something equally stupid like jam a nail through your eye socket. It's the difference between eating delicious hot dogs or separating the animal scraps and organs and discarded slaughterhouse waste and eating those instead. I hope you can see it.
71 Replies
aStingyMiser
Also: inb4 tl; dr.
Also also: if you're curious about why the title sucks, character limit. Sorry. Twas the best I could do.
aWSOMN360
I started reading this with enthusiasm, then i scrolled down. Also, this is pretty much the most pointless thing ever written. Pretty much you used 6 paragraphs to explain what i can explain in one sentence. I enjoy Phoenix Wright more than i enjoy the walking dead.
aWSOMN360
@AStingyMiser: I would say fair enough, but seeing how empty the paragraphs were in terms of an argument i will not allow it.
Deleted User
have u played the walking dead?
Eddie
@Neku:
Probably because this used to be a place where you could do that, and people would actually address them and have intellectual conversations about stuff.
It seems things have changed.
Deleted User
Deleted User
Neku
@Eddie: But what intellectual conversation would you get out of that? He forced out every bit of his opinion on the matter. After that it's just you agree with him or not, which doesn't make for a good display of intellect. You can argue specific points of the opposing argument (which probably wouldn't do anything because the opinion is strong and already made), or you could agree (which wouldn't make for a very intellectual conversation). I've seen him post these sarcastically and in earnest, and I almost always see the thread go to shit. Which begs the question: why?
forcep BANNED
The Walking Dead is an excellent show. The game is excellent. All you have proved to us is that you have differing tastes from most people.
aStingyMiser
The amount of stupid here is seriously killing me. If you would like an explanation of why your post was stupid, please formally request it. Otherwise, I'm not fucking responding to all this shit. Go fuck yourselves, all of you.
SpongeyGString Akari~n!
@AStingyMiser: Technically my post was a lie. I read up to the first comma and then killed myself.
aStingyMiser
@SpongeyGString: Are you suggesting that that somehow makes your post intelligent? And might I also point out that that isn't where the first line ends?
SpongeyGString Akari~n!
@AStingyMiser: I'm not suggesting that at all, I just assumed it started as it meant to go on.
M4xwell Insanitarium
Pretty interesting read. Sadly, due tot he face I have played neither of the games, I cannot give personal references/experiences to discuss/compare, but I see your point.
aStingyMiser
@DashingRainbow: This relevant post could only have come from someone deserving of 4th Top Poster.
aStingyMiser
@forcep: You're suggesting that I'm butthurt, and I'm not. I'm responding to shitty posts like yours that have made this thread; nay, this forum a cesspool of retardation.
aStingyMiser
@M4xwell: You know you're excluded from that list because you actually have a small grain of fuck when you post.
JohnStephen
This is a pretty pointless thread. It's pretty much "I like X more than Y, listen to my dissertation on the subject". The two games are totally different! The worst part here is you presenting your own biased opinions as fact.
To add on to this, you make some pretty bad points, let's debunk a few:
"For a while now I've searched for a way to properly explain this to the people who have shat upon me for DARING to insult Telltale's only game to actually get anything resembling a positive reception."
You're kidding, right? Telltale's games are immensely popular, look at the later Sam and Max games, the Back to the Future games, the Wallace and Gromit games, and more.
"I know what some of you are thinking: "But it's just pushing buttons! How can it be fun when there are DVD menus that have more intensive control schemes?""
I don't think anyone has ever said this in defense of The Walking Dead, which is Point and Click.
"The Walking Dead. First, might I point out that had it not been for the incredibly overrated TV show, this game would have been a bigger flop than the first three cards dealt in a river in a poker hand in which very large objects are used as cards."
The show is very good, but I've only ever watched one episode. So in no way was my enjoyment of the game based on the popularity of the show. I found it great, and so did many, many other people.
"Even if we assume that the story is fantastic, though-which it isn't-we can't just go ahead and say that a poorly masqueraded point and click adventure game is going to be the next Half-Life 2."
Poorly masqueraded point and click? Are you trying to say it pretends to be anything but a point and click? No one says it's not, that's like saying Half-Life isn't an FPS, or that Command and Conquer isn't an RTS.
Neku
@AStingyMiser: I still don't think I get it though. Who are these posts for?
Despite the fact that I like reading these, most of the people don't have that strong of an opinion or don't care to read. Either way that doesn't seem like that is a positive response to the original opinion. What's the point? It's like your coaxing this annoying side out of the people here.
Don't get me wrong, I like these types of posts, it's just they never really seem to go anywhere but down.
JohnStephen
Just checked, you haven't completed Act 1 of TWD. Unless you did it on Steam and Xbox, which I doubt seeing as you hate it, you have hardly played enough to bash the game so much.
aStingyMiser
@JohnStephen:
Let's counter-counterpoint these.
1. Oops. You got me there. I was under the impression all they made were shitty QTE games like Jurassic Park. Perhaps I was mistaken. Either way that wasn't a cornerstone of my argument, that was a little ceramic pot I put next to it to spruce things up a little. Not really shattering my argument with this one; I concede my mistake.
2. But people have said this to attack Phoenix Wright. And I've heard people who have said this.
3. Again, not at all a cornerstone. This was a little buzz I threw in as a bonus.
4. Again again, I've heard plenty of people try to convince me that somehow it's more than point and click or quick time events. That was directed at them. Eddie and Clobbit are examples.
aStingyMiser
@JohnStephen:
The first time I criticized the game was solely around the first act. One thing turned to another and I became known for insulting the game.
aStingyMiser
@Neku: You weren't there when people would actually give tow fucks about what other people said.
Neku
@AStingyMiser: I understand, I've been lurking chat for probably eight months now (without a hiatus). But things changed, this is how things are now. I feel like you're expecting too much out of many of the new people here now. I just feel bad that you don't get the responses that (I would imagine, only speculation) you expect.
aWSOMN360
@AStingyMiser: True, you're just feeling nostalgia, making memories seem better when realistically nothing has changed.
Eddie
@aWSOMN360:
These are three I can remember.
http://internetboxpodcast.com/chat/topic.php?id=4236
http://internetboxpodcast.com/chat/topic.php?id=3702
http://internetboxpodcast.com/chat/topic.php?id=2008
I don't feel like shuffling through old threads to find more.
Eddie
@Neku:
Because that is the point of a discussion. There is no point in talking if we are just going to sit here and list facts. Discussion is mostly opinion based (However you can use facts to back up your opinion).
If he won't change his opinion that's his problem, but it doesn't mean we can't have discussions about why.
(Also knowing Stingy, he is willing to discuss and listen to your point, or at least provide a counter argument)
aWSOMN360
@Eddie: Yes, but those are topics people usually already have a well thought out opinions towards. This is something less relevant and near pointless, thus the only thing in here being spam.
aStingyMiser
@aWSOMN360:
You mean to tell me you only talk about things you actually have spent a long time thinking about them? When you walk into a restaurant, do you have to sit there for a few hours afterwards before you decide what kind of tip you give? When you go to the movies, do you sit through a few showings before you make a judgement on them? This isn't building a house or curing cancer; think, decide, respond.
aWSOMN360
@AStingyMiser: No, but when i want to at least sound like i know what im talking about i put some thought into it, unlike most people on the internet.
Guest
Eddie and Kanjoos win, all your bases are belong to them.
aStingyMiser
@aWSOMN360: Then think faster. I do that. Everyone should be a lot more like me. I'm swell.
aStingyMiser
@aWSOMN360: Come to think of it, I wasn't making an argument. I was explaining myself. People can respond with "good explanation" or "I don't understand" or "Shut up, asshole, that's a fucking stupid way of explaining things." They can also talk about whether or not they liked The Walking Dead or Phoenix Wright and why, or if they agreed with my points or not. People not reading what I said is not my problem when said people are talking about problems with my statements.
aStingyMiser
@aWSOMN360: Yeah, sorry, I'm distracted. Oh, and one more thing. What are you trying to prove, anyway? That I wasted my time writing a 6-paragraph dissertation? Clearly, as no one's responding to it. I didn't need someone else to tell me that. Or are you juts being difficult because you have some kind of grudge against me? Or are you just an asshole normally? People know why I'm doing this because I'm confrontational and an asshole. You, though...
aStingyMiser
I guess because asking people to read something is too much, so I'll tl;dr it:
The Walking Dead understands how you can tell a story. Phoenix Wright understands how a GAME can tell a story.
aWSOMN360
@AStingyMiser: Why? I never really think of reasons, i just kind of go for it and see how things turn out. Hasn't failed me yet. And if you're wondering if i have a grudge? No, i don't hold grudges.
aStingyMiser
@darkjungle: I'm sorry, I fail to see why this thread deserves to be, as you put it, fucked.
JohnStephen
@AStingyMiser:
Maybe because it's you going on a meaningless rant that I'm not sure many people care enough about to read?
aStingyMiser
@JohnStephen: Saying "not many" implies you suspect that there are a handful of people who care and are trying to prevent me replying with "NO DERE ARE PEPLE WHO DOES" in response to you saying "no one cares." Thus, we can deduce that there are people who care, and thus, the thread isn't meaningless.
Overtoad
Games seem to come down to story and play in a similar way to how most arts come down to "meaning" vs "experience"... in fact, it's the same damn argument except that a good story can still come down solely on the "experience" side and play mechanics can have ingrained significance (like Flower or Alan Wake).
I think that with games - as with most things - it's more enjoyable if one's open to both in equal capacity.
More tangential note: The Walking Dead tv show seems to be in large part a set up for the games (though all iterations of the franchise have been wildly successful). If you pay attention to the themes, it's all about decision-making, which seems to be what the games are ALL about (I'm broke-ass, so I haven't played them). If you watch the first episode of the show, an achievement sound pops in the background when Rick shoots his first zombie at the police station (2 years before the game's release)!
You must be signed in to reply.