[SnorkleCat]

Originally Posted by Lucifiel

Eh well, I'd prefer for game puzzles to at least have a response of some sort: if it fails or the move is not the right one, at least produce a reaction of some sort. Otherwise, you're often forced to try and think like the developer which is kinda annoying.

And that right there is what I don't like having to do. Anyone can cook up an illogical scheme that makes no sense. I feel no triumph when I solve a puzzle by simply trying every object on every other object. Also, if I know I need to break a window, for example, I feel that I ought to be able to break it with the shovel OR the hammer OR the stick OR the heavy glass paperweight I plucked off the desk, and NOT JUST with the Day Old Hard Salami I haven't found yet. You know what I mean?

[Risingson]

It's weird and funny for me that the only adventure game I've managed to enjoy in the last...years are the ones done for the Nintendo DS (I insist: the best purchase I've made this year). Phoenix Wright, despite its childhood, its repetitive gameplay, its logical plots, its incoherence, its lacks of real puzzles, is a game that you enjoy. I've uninstalled Tunguska, Keepsake, every game done by Frogwares or Kheops...

And I feel always bad when I'm enjoying sameish games like Puzzle Quest and not adventure games, which used to be my favourite genre.

[sierramindy]

What about adventure games that start out great and end with a sudden letdown because the adventure, fun part stopped and the game turned into something else, too much and too hard action parts that killed not only the character but the fun of playing, or into puzzles that are too hard and too complicated to be enjoyable as adventure?
I have 2 examples in mind. One is Dreamfall where the part with Zoe was a dream to play, but then came April and the troll cave where action/stealth took over and the adventure went into a fall as far as I was concerned and I quit. Later I read a lot of complaints about the way the ending turned out so I'm happy that I didn't even bother going there.
The other is Destination: Treasure Island where I was having a great time playing as Jim Hawkins (well, he was in the inventory) and enjoying the piratey music and story until near the end where a confounded complicated puzzle requiring some form of logic, strategy, or higher brain power than I have (probably higher than Jim has, for that matter) and I had to go to the walkthrough for the first time in this game. This was followed by yet another puzzle better suited to a Myst-type game, which I avoid like the plague. There is yet one more such puzzle to fool with using the walkthrough for the third time, of course, but I haven't done it yet because that will be the end of the game with Jim and Long John Silver finding the treasure and I'm not ready to say "goodby" to Jim yet!

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by Melanie68

Or it could have nothing to do with the outside lives of AG developers (of which I personally do not know enough about to judge). In her original post, fruithead also mentioned some games she had fun with as well. I think whenever you get one of these 'I'm sick of/disappointed in adventure games' threads, trying to put all the blame on adventure games isn't fair.

I would agree - to a point. It could as well have something to do with the demands of what sells. After all it is a business and everyone involved needs to make their mortgage and car payments. So it seems natural to make the same thing over and over because you know people will buy it - over and over.

But then we are also talking about developers (writers, modelers, etc.) as artists, and whenever there is any kind of creativity involved something from somewhere in the artist's life will sneak into the work. This I know from personal experience. I had also picked it up from past articles interviewing people like Jane Jensen, Tim Schaefer, David Cage, Benoit Sokal, and Roberta Williams.

I've not been able to finish many adventure games lately either - sure, some of them haven't clicked with me, but it's probably more due to my own state of mind (and stress) at the moment. The cause of AG slumps is often multifactorial.

It may be more accurate to say that your current state intervenes with playing any kind of game, then.

Originally Posted by Henke

That could very much be the case, at least I think that Schafer and Jensen read more and look at other things for inspiration that the average game designer doesn't (but this is of course just guessing). I mean how many games looks and works more or less the exact same way? If I see another shooter with some guy in a shiny helmet I'll puke.

The evidence is the work itself. You could, for example, state that Bioshock is basically similar to most other first person shooters. And yet it has enjoyed critical acclaim for being a different kind of first person shooter, and on various levels. Ken Levine was inspired by how extremism in philosophical beliefs often leads into very dangerous waters (as it were) in terms of moral choices; in this case, Objectivist fundamentalism. He took a unique view and theme and worked with them in intelligent ways, ways that most other developers working with the first person shooter genre hadn't thought of.

The theme of Bioshock lent it a different kind of atmosphere than most other first person shooters. In a way it's kind of similar to how Jane Jensen worked the nuances of human relationships - that between Gabe and Grace - and had those nuances colour our experience of playing the Gabriel Knight games, all while still having these games function mechanically as adventure games.

[Lucifiel]

Originally Posted by SnorkleCat

And that right there is what I don't like having to do. Anyone can cook up an illogical scheme that makes no sense. I feel no triumph when I solve a puzzle by simply trying every object on every other object. Also, if I know I need to break a window, for example, I feel that I ought to be able to break it with the shovel OR the hammer OR the stick OR the heavy glass paperweight I plucked off the desk, and NOT JUST with the Day Old Hard Salami I haven't found yet. You know what I mean?

Oh yeah!!! I know what you mean. For example in Scratches: why couldn't I pluck the stem of a plant with my hands? Why did I have to spend my time hunting for a pair of shears? And oh yes, I also had this puzzle in Scratches where I HAD to break a window with a stone. Sure, the window was really high but why couldn't I use anything else?! I had a ton of inventory items and sure, throwing a lamp was dangerous but why not the shovel or something else? After all, a stone has heavier mass than a shovel.

That said: I hope Gray Matter doesn't go the way of Scratches. Many games these days have an abundance of rooms whose beauty is thwarted by the ugliness of badly-implemented puzzles.

[Risingson]

Now. I'm really upset. But really really upset, mad, angry and so.

I've just played the first episode of the first season of the new Sam & Max. It's a game that has sharp dialogues full of valid information that also tells you thing about the world and the characters, impressive techical values, ingenious puzzles and classic point 'n click gameplay.

Now. Why, if this exists, must we accept dullness like the frogware-kheops-any-other-boring-european-developer adventures? Why still some people say that mouse control isn't valid for adventures and point 'n click is passé? Is it THAT difficult to design a game this way?

At least I've recovered the love for adventure games.

[Merricat]

Essentially, what I want in an adventure game is 3rd person perspective (I used to play 1st person, but nowadays, it makes me physically ill; it's a shame, as I am also no longer able to ride roller coasters, which I once dearly loved), a good-looking environment, interesting characters, and a sense of humor. I don't want to kill or injure anyone, nor do I wish to be killed. In fact, I don't care to have my skills as a moving character come into play at all--I don't want to run, jump, sneak, or hide. I prefer taxing my brain, and don't mind having to consult a walkthrough, although I do mind if the solution is outrageously absurd. I don't play other kinds of games. I play adventure games--for better or worse--usually both, and often in the same game. I don't mind, or care, if people want to play other genres, and I don't believe that one genre is intrinsically better than another. It's all down to preference, baby, and for me, adventure games are it. That's why I'm here. Tra-la-la.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by Merricat

Essentially, what I want in an adventure game is 3rd person perspective (I used to play 1st person, but nowadays, it makes me physically ill; it's a shame, as I am also no longer able to ride roller coasters, which I once dearly loved), a good-looking environment, interesting characters, and a sense of humor. I don't want to kill or injure anyone, nor do I wish to be killed. In fact, I don't care to have my skills as a moving character come into play at all--I don't want to run, jump, sneak, or hide. I prefer taxing my brain, and don't mind having to consult a walkthrough, although I do mind if the solution is outrageously absurd. I don't play other kinds of games. I play adventure games--for better or worse--usually both, and often in the same game. I don't mind, or care, if people want to play other genres, and I don't believe that one genre is intrinsically better than another. It's all down to preference, baby, and for me, adventure games are it. That's why I'm here. Tra-la-la.

But you already have all that in today's adventure games. You seem to be implying that you don't.

[Merricat]

Oh, no, I'm not implying anything--if that's what you infer, then I haven't been quite clear-- I was merely making a kind of mission statement or declaration, but since you mention it, yes: there have been adventure games that turned me off because they have strayed from the boundaries of what I usually find--for example, Broken Sword, a series I adore, came out with BS III, which required some skills that I do not possess (the sneaking, the timed elements, plus endless box moving, which was annoying). Likewise, Monkey Island Kombat practically made me cry with frustration, and I was unable to finish the game--a real shame for me, as I am exceedingly fond of the other Monkey Island games. Now, I'm not saying that there aren't people who enjoyed those games; I am merely stating for the record that I'm a bit of a purist when it comes to AGs. Not that I'm against innovation--I just prefer using my brain rather than the mouse, and besides, I need to have my mouse hand free for things like drinking. I'm probably not saying anything that hasn't been said before, and better, ad infinitum. I just like to say it.

[Steve Ince]

Originally Posted by Merricat

Not that I'm against innovation--I just prefer using my brain rather than the mouse

Wow! Using your brain to control your games sounds really innovative.

[Merricat]

Yes, indeed, Mr. Ince, I am amazing! And clumsy!

[Risingson]

It's funny that this is cyclical: during the 80's most of adventure games (or proto adventure games) had some arcade parts in them: in Knight Lore, Alchemist, The Great Escape and so on you used objects and jumped or shooted when necessary, and in the first modern adventures there were still some arcade parts in them, as if it was too risky to avoid all the classic elements in gaming (the fightings in Indy3, the movement problems in king's quest, the flights in Mean Streets...). There was a time that someone decided that dead-ends, arcade parts, sudden deaths and such were mostly annoying and were avoided.

And that's why it surprised me when some of those elements came back in the last years, and magazines excused the arcade parts in Fahrenheit or Dreamfall (now that I mention it: I had to uninstall this game a few days ago for being that cheesy and unchallenging - meaning boring) as being part of the future of adventure games. So, at the end, it is just like everything: trends, fashions.

[Merricat]

Like bellybutton rings. Risingson, you are wise.

[Steve Ince]

Originally Posted by Merricat

Yes, indeed, Mr. Ince, I am amazing! And clumsy!

Sorry, I realise now that my response may have come across as sarcastic, when, actually, I found your comment genuinely funny. It just seemed like you were saying you were controlling your games with your mind and not having to touch your mouse at all.

As Marco said (in this thread: http://www.adventuregamers.com/forum...ad.php?t=21164) "I had a tough time following your train of thought" (slightly edited).

[Merricat]

I was laughing the whole time, I assure you. Good to know that you were laughing, too. With me, that is.

[Steve Ince]

Cool

[Lucien21]

Originally Posted by Steve Ince

Wow! Using your brain to control your games sounds really innovative.

And maybe possible.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,12...s/article.html

[Steve Ince]

That's actually really cool. One of the problems wit action games is not the action, but transfering what they want to do in their minds into key or button presses.

[Merricat]

Exactly--the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak. Or in my case, clumsy. And then I could have both hands free for drinking and whatnot, while cutting a swath of danger with my mighty brain.

[Steve Ince]

My partner, June, is worried that I'm getting too clumsy. I keep dropping things, banging my head and so forth. She's concerned it's indicative of some bigger problem. It is - getting a little long in the tooth.