A critique of Telltale Games

  • Page

    of 1

    Previous Next
  • Hunam85 28 Jan 2006 16:15:42 4,114 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Right, so many of us have played Bone vol.1 i assume, and like me and the rest of the interweb you probabley wasnt too pleased with the game. It looked and sounded ugly, minigames werent varied or fun and it was horridly short. Now they have released bone on disc for order from their website for $5 more (of the cheeky original $20 selling price).

    Now ive been following the Sam and Max comic and i find it hillarious, but it seems now that the company as a whole seems to have some cash flow going for it.

    So i figured that the whole point of the first episode of bone was to rake in some cash with not much time and/or resources, and i do feel cheaped by this as many others do, but i hope that following on from this 'cheap trick' they will put out some quality titles soon, worthy of the accolades the company was founded upon.

    There is still hope for Bone and Sam and Max.

    Edited by Hunam85 at 16:16:13 28-01-2006
  • Satan 28 Jan 2006 16:30:40 137 posts
    Registered 9 years ago
    Yep.

    Damn son. Bone Vol. 1 was awful.
  • Hunam85 28 Jan 2006 21:18:22 4,114 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    Apprently it was supposed to be a kids game... kind of stupid considering the core audience is adult, well if they werent when tentacle/max came out they are now...
  • OnlyMe 28 Jan 2006 21:27:44 3,104 posts
    Seen 10 months ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Bone suffered from a few things, but I definately saw the potential. And the game is now offered on disc for those who already bought the game online for $4.99. I'm not sure what you consider a money-flow, but how do you come to that conclusion? They've released one single game "proper" game which I can't imagine sold millions. Where would the money come from?
  • Hunam85 28 Jan 2006 21:32:44 4,114 posts
    Seen 1 day ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    You see i thought that it would have sold quite little, but the game was $20.00 (where did $4.99 come from?) and ive read ALOT of people going on about the game, adventure games of this nature id assume does well. Plus the deals with publishers and other companies would have helped alot, added that the price is 100% to them i am *assuming* that they would now be established and have some money behind them, but i could be wrong, im just pretending to be an analylist :p
  • OnlyMe 29 Jan 2006 00:02:46 3,104 posts
    Seen 10 months ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    the $4.99 comes from the new offer for early adopters who bought the game already. It's mostly for those who wants a physical copy of the game.
  • Pirotic Moderator 29 Jan 2006 00:09:39 20,646 posts
    Seen 4 weeks ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    OnlyMe wrote:
    the $4.99 comes from the new offer for early adopters who bought the game already. It's mostly for those who wants a physical copy of the game.

    You know, you CAN just burn it to disc yourself right? what does that cost - like 20p or something? Or do you really want the manual which is probably also designed for kids and has big pretty pictures in it :p

    But yes, Bone is a complete pish - it wasn't even a good idea for a point and click game in the first place and it's visual style looks like something you'd get from a homebrew Netyaroze game. But at least they are trying, more than can be for Lucasarts.

    Seriously, if i win the lottery one of the first things i'd do is buy the Monkey Island franchise from Lucasarts and hire Ron Gilbert and make the proper Monkey Island III, and then read on the forums about how they all prefered the other one. happy days.

    Edited by Pirotic at 00:10:53 29-01-2006
  • morriss 29 Jan 2006 00:10:28 70,911 posts
    Seen 4 days ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Vol 2's out soon. Let's hope they make up for it.
  • DrPhil 29 Jan 2006 00:21:12 693 posts
    Seen 8 months ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    /Buys lottery ticket for Pirotic
  • Pirotic Moderator 29 Jan 2006 00:25:09 20,646 posts
    Seen 4 weeks ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    I'm not kidding, it's my dream to bring back decent computer games - even if they don't sell very well i'd want to at least let a new generation experiance the gaming goodness i grew up to! Wheres the magic in these modern games eh?
  • DrPhil 29 Jan 2006 00:30:39 693 posts
    Seen 8 months ago
    Registered 9 years ago
    I too would like to see the real Monkey Island III

    That darn unexplained carnival will haunt me till its done!
  • morriss 29 Jan 2006 00:32:11 70,911 posts
    Seen 4 days ago
    Registered 10 years ago
    Grim Fandango 2 FTW!
  • MetalDog 29 Jan 2006 01:10:55 23,708 posts
    Seen 11 hours ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    Pirotic wrote:
    I'm not kidding, it's my dream to bring back decent computer games - even if they don't sell very well i'd want to at least let a new generation experiance the gaming goodness i grew up to! Wheres the magic in these modern games eh?

    The trouble is, you guys (generally speaking) are nearly impossible to please. I've played a few games you guys have brushed off that I thought were pretty damn fine and despite all my experience, I wouldn't be confident enough to say what would sell these days apart from shiny pretty graphics. I sure as hell wouldn't be confident to the tune of many millions of pounds - do you know how high the burn rate is of most game dev studios?

    A lot of the games that are raved about with huge nostalgia here wouldn't sell at all these days because they look shite. Really good modern games with one or two minor flaws are given a 'meh, I might get it when it's cheap'.

    I don't think games overall have gotten any worse on the good to pap ratio, but I do think the gamers have, by and large, lost the ability to appreciate many fine things.

    I'm not saying Bone was good, haven't played it - but what the hell do you guys /want/ out of a game? The stuff that sails up the charts is usually not very much different from a slew of games that tank at the same time. It seems almost random.

    -- boobs do nothing for me, I want moustaches and chest hair.

  • sephy 29 Jan 2006 01:16:24 4,036 posts
    Registered 11 years ago
    MetalDog wrote:
    [The trouble is, you guys (generally speaking) are nearly impossible to please. .
    90% of people on games forums are, but they are too ignorant to realise this
  • Freek 29 Jan 2006 01:22:39 7,687 posts
    Seen 1 year ago
    Registered 11 years ago
    sephy wrote:
    MetalDog wrote:
    [The trouble is, you guys (generally speaking) are nearly impossible to please. .
    90% of people on games forums are, but they are too ignorant to realise this

    You'd aply that to Bone? A game that got criticly panned for being childish and dull?

    While at the same reading near universal praise for mainstream titles like GoW and Resi 4?
  • sephy 29 Jan 2006 01:28:09 4,036 posts
    Registered 11 years ago
    It was a general remark, my apologies (I've not played Bone)
    (and i wont retract it because it happens to be true :p)
  • Pirotic Moderator 29 Jan 2006 01:50:45 20,646 posts
    Seen 4 weeks ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    No games try to be funny anymore, that's what i miss the most about the old point and clickers - they had good characters and good plots but also had some cracking jokes!

    I don't mind if they turn it into a 3D adventure game, so long as they keep the humour i'm sold.
  • mal 29 Jan 2006 01:53:42 22,334 posts
    Seen 43 minutes ago
    Registered 12 years ago
    MetalDog wrote:
    I'm not saying Bone was good, haven't played it - but what the hell do you guys /want/ out of a game? The stuff that sails up the charts is usually not very much different from a slew of games that tank at the same time. It seems almost random.
    But the people on here who moan about the state of modern games aren't the ones that are out there buying Fifa 200x and Harry Potter and the Underpants of Stone.

    You're right that the quality of most modern games is really very very high. In the bad old days, bad games were just horrifically broken, and even the good games, if they were released today with up-to-date graphics and audio would be moaned about ad nauseum for some small design flaw.

    But that doesn't mean games haven't lost something. For Piro I guess it's the sort of relatively grown-up humour you rarely find in games any more.. For me it'd be any recognisable british cultural stamp in the games that are developed here. I guess we want the reliable quality of today's games but with the personality of older games too.

    Doesn't make Piro's dream any more acheivable though, since like you say you'd need to get a stack bigger than this week's 10m draw all to yourself to staff a studio for the duration required.

    Cubby didn't know how to turn off sigs!

  • Page

    of 1

    Previous Next
Log in or register to reply