I loved many old-school adventure games like the Sierra ones where your choices could have profound impacts on the way the story unfolds. I think that was more practical for the game content creators to offer branching narratives because they only had to deliver economical pixel art and didn't require voice actors to voice the dialogue and so forth.
With the new-style adventure games like Wolf Among Us, their production values have skyrocketed. We got hours and hours of cinematic cutscenes, voice acting for the dialogue, awesome graphics and artwork, and loads of animation... but I think that large increase in production quality has come with a grave cost with adventure games of such sort becoming far more linear in nature.
Have you ever tried Quest for Glory series?In those, even your very first choice of whether you want to play as a fighter, thief, wizard, or paladin completely changes the way the story unfolds along with numerous choices you are presented while playing any one of these four character types.
Meanwhile, with Telltale Games, they often offer choices that present a little dialogue like, "This character will remember that." Except it changes almost nothing or actually nothing at all. I really dislike that so much. It kills a lot of my ideas of an adventure game being a type of role-playing if the choices don't really matter.
I haven’t tried Quest for Glory. I didn’t even finish TWAU yet. I’m still halfway through. It’s intriguing but I can’t judge yet.
I do think TWAU is at least one of the finest of the Telltale Games. It's also the first one I ever tried so I didn't quite understand their formulaic approach to adventure games just yet. The artwork and characters and story are really cool. I just tend to miss those old adventure games where we can completely change the way the story unfolds with branching paths that can even alter the ending in a profound way.
I totally see what you’re saying! I feel like graphics are getting better at the expense of good plots/fleshed out characters generally speaking.
I see it as a general trend in lots of adventure and RPG types of games. As they get more and more cinematic, they have to reduce the impact that the player's choice has on the story and make the story far more linear. Since allowing players to substantially alter the course of the story requires creating exponentially more content.It's like what if, in the middle of Lord of the Rings, Aragorn was slain in battle? To account for that one little possibility and how it impacts the entire story, we'd have to write hundreds of new pages worth of story to account for it.Some of my favorite adventure games and RPGs from childhood like Fallout 1&2 and QFG actually halfway managed to accomplish allowing such profound choices (although with some economic decisions and overlap in storylines, but still enough new content in response to what a player chose to make it feel like it had a very big and deep and cascading impact on the world and the storyline).But it was cheaper to do that back then since they didn't have to devise endless new cinematic cutscenes, or require voice actors in the studio to record thousands and thousands of pages worth of branching dialogue, or anything like that. It was much cheaper to produce much more content. So it was also cheaper back then to allow players to make choices that have a very deep impact on the rest of the story.
Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions
It is very very intriguing
It’s fun but it disappointed me at the end tbh.
That's too bad! I'm glad you had fun, at least. :)