Graphic novel types games are nothing news, there are literally gazillions of them (even ignoring the H ones) in Japan and several of them features much bigger choices/consequences than Walking Dear or Heavy Rain did. Those sort of games are basically the gaming equivalent of the "You are the hero" books.

Nothing wrong with that, it's a gaming genre in it's own right, but it's definitely not anything new, and most definitely not the evolution of point and click adventure games or even gaming in general.

Half Life 2 is not told in any interactive way whatsoever. Gordon doesn't react at all, let alone in any interactive way. He gets a mission and does it, while it's hidden nicely it's no more interactive than the story of Doom or Wolfenstein.

I'm guessing you mean Morrowind when you mention the western RPG and I think i've found why we're butting heads here. For you the storytelling comes in something you make up in your head, you react in gordons stead, you roleplay the reactions in the wiki-esque information boxes in TES. But that's not what game storytelling is about for me. There's a saying in movies; show, don't tell. that applies to games too, the game should accomplish bringing about the story instead of expecting your own imagination to. I could use my own imagination to give super mario bros. a harrowing and emotional rollercoaster of a story, but that doesn't make the game itself anything more than a great side scroller, if it want's to be more it has to do that itself.

The game IS very easy to begin with, if you have some notion on how to use a gamepad you shouldn't have any issue finishing it.

Remember when FMV games were all the rage? Yeah, that didn't last either.

Anyway, the game may be linear but how is that much different from say any regular point'n'click adventure? Those are (with some very very very rare exceptions) just as linear with merely having the illusion of choice. Ultimately they're railroading you down that storyline just as much, while halting your progress with sometimes obtuse puzzles and oftentimes a lot of running back and forth. Sure, I really like those games, but, at the end, they're not much more than interactive stories either.

Not to sound condescending but I just don't think you understand the basic difference here. In Half Life 2 the story is told through actions playing out within the game environment which you interact with. Story is told through things hanging on walls, background animations, overheard conversations as you walk past and interactive doodads you might never touch.

In Walking Dead and games like it you pick an option and a scene plays, just like a movie. It's nothing new and it's not really progressing gaming stories, more just emulating other mediums. So it annoys me to see it heralded as the next big step in gaming.

Yeah we're going to have to agree to disagree on this. I understand the difference, i just disagree with the importance you place on it.

game was good but the fact that the developer lied about your choices matter pissed me off, i dont care if my choices mattered in this movie kind of game but dont lie about it and go beyond monthly release date trying to make people believe you are working hard to make new choices implementation crap,

Disagree it's important for a good experience or disagree it's important when speaking about video game storytelling being improved or progressed?

Because I am fine with the former and only dislike the latter.

Do you want to see a game which moves storytelling in a fascinating and utterly fantastic direction? Play Bastion. The Walking Dead is cool in what it does, but even The Witcher did it better as far as I'm concerned. Hell, Planescape did.

Wasn't my type of game first two times around I've tried it either. Then I got into it and pretty much finished it in two sessions. It's brilliant.