I just learned this by finding the game's coming soon/pre-order page on Steam. Apparently it's old news though, with a little teaser trailer and everything.
Anyway, yeah... the next Walking Dead game will be a Clem-centric, direct continuation kind of sequel, apparently taking place a few months after the first game.
If memory serves, they already mentioned that she'd be showing her little face in some capacity, but I was expecting something more along the lines of a cameo rather than the star role.
So, those of you who played the first game, thoughts on this?
Personally, I find myself ambivalent. Certainly more than I thought I would be.
On the one hand, I can't help but point out that the story was already all complete and self contained and really wasn't begging for a continuation. Also, my milking sense is tingling. Not full on tingling, but there was definitely a twinge. Let's call it 10% tingle. I'd hate to think Telltale, who are rapidly becoming one of my favourite devs, are just going through the motions to capitalize on the surprising success of the first game and Clementine's character in particular.
On the other hand, any gripes or tinglings I might have are struggling to be heard above the internal din of, "Fuck yeah, Clem's back!" Plus, at least we won't be left with that thrice-damned, motherfucking, post-credits cliffhanger from the first game.
Perhaps I should just have a little more faith. After all, I originally dismissed the first Walking Dead as yet-another-bloody-zombie-game and look how that turned out. Besides, The Wolf Among Us has shown that Telltale didn't just get lucky the first time.
[sub][sub]Third bloody time I had to type this out. Browser kept crashing every time I hit the 'post' button, because hey, fuck that Zhukov guy and his excessively verbose posting habits. Let's teach him a lesson by making him type it all out three times.[/sub][/sub]
Anyway, yeah... the next Walking Dead game will be a Clem-centric, direct continuation kind of sequel, apparently taking place a few months after the first game.
If memory serves, they already mentioned that she'd be showing her little face in some capacity, but I was expecting something more along the lines of a cameo rather than the star role.
So, those of you who played the first game, thoughts on this?
Personally, I find myself ambivalent. Certainly more than I thought I would be.
On the one hand, I can't help but point out that the story was already all complete and self contained and really wasn't begging for a continuation. Also, my milking sense is tingling. Not full on tingling, but there was definitely a twinge. Let's call it 10% tingle. I'd hate to think Telltale, who are rapidly becoming one of my favourite devs, are just going through the motions to capitalize on the surprising success of the first game and Clementine's character in particular.
On the other hand, any gripes or tinglings I might have are struggling to be heard above the internal din of, "Fuck yeah, Clem's back!" Plus, at least we won't be left with that thrice-damned, motherfucking, post-credits cliffhanger from the first game.
Perhaps I should just have a little more faith. After all, I originally dismissed the first Walking Dead as yet-another-bloody-zombie-game and look how that turned out. Besides, The Wolf Among Us has shown that Telltale didn't just get lucky the first time.
[sub][sub]Third bloody time I had to type this out. Browser kept crashing every time I hit the 'post' button, because hey, fuck that Zhukov guy and his excessively verbose posting habits. Let's teach him a lesson by making him type it all out three times.[/sub][/sub]