T.I.M.E. Stories - Time Keeps on Slippin'

My only problem with "purchase" of this game is that the game doesn't include roofies or some other amnesia-inducing agent so that you can have replay value.

You can't trial and error the main puzzle in Asylum. You can trial and error the puzzles in The Marcy Case but you lose a lot of time.

The writing isn't primarily what you're interacting with. Much of the game is communicated via imagery.

There is a story, and it's pretty bare bones, sure. I don't think the writing is high brow stuff, but it never struck me as poor. I felt it was on par with any other storytelling game I've played (TOTAN, Sherlock Holmes, Fallen, Gumshoe).

You and Raf do an admirable job talking about it a bit in the Ding/Dent episode.

Just because the writing meets and already low standard, that doesn't mean we should be giving it a pat on the back. And since the mechanics are as brain dead as they are, yeah, the story and writing does matter. Otherwise, all you have are the puzzles, which ARE trial and error. Yeah, you'll lose, but I'm guessing that the intent was that you start over and try again. You know what I call that? Trial and error.

I don't have much to add because I haven't played it, but a comment about replay...be prepared for, over the next couple of years, more and more games with purposely limited replay value. Pandemic Legacy (and to a lesser extent Risk Legacy) opened the floodgates. A game with finite plays sold like crazy, and the legacy concept is going to turn up in a lot of ways across a lot of games. And one such way is to have these kinds of games that aren't replayable. Not only is it a result of the success of P:L and games like TIME Stories, but also because of the gaming culture that supports playing lots of games only a few times rather than only a few games lots of times.

And of course, "content packs", "expansions" or whatever you want to call the cardboard DLC will keep them going. That's a trend coming over from video games.

I'd argue that the Legacy model only works because of the persistence factor. It's world-building, where from all accounts this isn't.

I don't have a dog in the hunt here, for what it's worth. I listened to Raf and Charlie talk about it, read about it, read this review, and it all dissuades me from wanting to buy it as it seems like it's pretty much a visual puzzle where you play, fail, play again knowing what you learned last time, rinse and repeat.

With regard to the time travel setting, I think this type of play supports the setting because you could easily rationalize trying, failing, trying again with lessons learned as time travel, in a very abstract sense.

The value proposition on this game sounds bad. But a game like SeaFall, for example; if I'm paying $50ish dollars for a game that has 15 plays in it, that's fine. My group can barely claim that number of plays on anything we play. Spartacus *might* be the exception. King of Tokyo, sure, but I don't really count filler stuff.

Josh Look wrote: Just because the writing meets an already low standard, that doesn't mean we should be giving it a pat on the back.

Correct. I'm patting it on the back because my 6-8 hours of TIME Stories last year was some of the most fun I've had. As an experience I can't play another game that does the same thing. I like Sherlock Holmes (and Gumshoe which I played halfway through), but it wasn't as interesting and fun as TIME Stories. Sherlock Holmes felt more scholarly and academic, while this feels more visual and engrossing (for me).

I'm fine with other people not liking it or thinking it's shit, whatever. I don't care if no one here likes it or buys it. It's already wildly popular and did not hit the clearance rack as Barnes thought it would so we'll be seeing more and my extended group will scoop them all up.

I think it does have weak points. I think price is an issue. I think having to replay the same locations is tedious in the Asylum story, but less so in The Marcy Case. Theoretically they could design a story requiring no repetition and I hope they do.

I really dig that "I have no idea what's going to happen next" feeling. It's why I love event decks and weird encounters in games. It's one of my favorite aspects of Cave Evil where you don't know what those decks will spit out. I love content discovery and being surprised. This game is 100% that.

SuperflyTNT wrote: With regard to the time travel setting, I think this type of play supports the setting because you could easily rationalize trying, failing, trying again with lessons learned as time travel, in a very abstract sense.

You're right, that does make sense. It's the obvious pandering to gamer nerds that irrates me, and I have no tolerance for it these days (and don't anyone dare bring up Star Wars again, it's no where near Cthulhu/zombie/post-apoc levels in the board gaming arena yet...plus after years of shitty SW movies and games, let us enjoy this, will ya?). What's after the Egypt expansion? Weird War II? Cthulhu? A combination of the two?

That's been done: Achtung! Cthulhu.

@ Charlie: Here's something I'd like clarified: You said this: "I really dig that "I have no idea what's going to happen next" feeling."

But from what you and others seem to have been saying eariler, you'll find yourself going back after a failure and trying again with lessons learned. Doesn't that diminish the "NEW CAR SMELL" when you're having to replay half the game to get past the hump?

SuperflyTNT wrote: That's been done: Achtung! Cthulhu.

@ Charlie: Here's something I'd like clarified: You said this: "I really dig that "I have no idea what's going to happen next" feeling."

But from what you and others seem to have been saying eariler, you'll find yourself going back after a failure and trying again with lessons learned. Doesn't that diminish the "NEW CAR SMELL" when you're having to replay half the game to get past the hump?

You're right Pete it does a bit and that's the main point of criticism besides price that I bring up in my Review Corner review.

However, in my experience it wasn't terrible because the location progression doesn't tend to be exactly linear. It's not like running back through Resident Evil from the start and find a whole bunch of keys and sheet music all over. It's more like - "Ok, we need that one key from there and we need to talk to him to open the secret passage so we'll go to those two locations". In real time it takes us very little to retrace our steps.

Also, when you go back to a location like this we usually shift who looks at what card/clue. So if on the first go I talked to the creep woman in the corner I'll let Ben do that to read what I read earlier. Instead I'll take a gander at the painting he described and see if I notice anything he missed.

that makes a ton of sense - probably keeps the game very fresh, especially (if I understand it right) you're not allowed to share notes, really.

Michael Barnes wrote: And one such way is to have these kinds of games that aren't replayable.

Furthermore, you can't really sell those used games either, as all the little "mysteries" have been revealed already, the Risk board is customized, etc. So people who are curious must shell out for the new copy, thereby increasing sales.

Curious to know how similar this game is to Tragedy Looper.

Josh Look wrote: As a board game, it's mechanically dull and terrible value. As an RPG/adventure game in a box, it features writing below Dragonlance level and the puzzle solving is essentially trial and error. The system shows potential, but I'm not going to start praising something that doesn't exist.

Sweet Jesus -- do you mean the Dragonlance main story or the side books? The main story was good enough as far as these things go, definitely better than most of the other writing in the TSR D&D worlds (Ravenloft, Spelljammer, etc.) . The spin-offs --- woo-boy, some of those were terrible.