Quote:
|
Originally Posted by EasilyConfused
Jake, the question of audience is important. You seem to be saying that pre-teens want stuff that's really for them, not for a mixed audience (like Harry Potter and much of what passes for "children's" culture these days is--a mishmash of innocuous stuff plus veiled jokes for adults--think of Robin Williams in Aladdin). But were the LucasArts games really for kids EITHER? It seems to me that that humor was as much or MORE adult, and maybe that's what you're saying. That we shouldn't pander to kids?
Just trying to help/figure out . . .
 |
No I didn't say they want something that's for them and not other groups. That's definitely not what is needed. See the current terrible "tween" market for horrible examples of people trying to make products "just for 9-12 year olds." (google for "tween" if you're really curious).
I used Harry Potter as an example of something that was good but not a perfect fit, because it skews young on first glance but appeals to older people, wheras the things that drew me in when I was ~10-13ish were things that were maybe the other way around - they looked maybe a bit older but actually hit all the right buttons for me. I think that might be ideal.
Yar! I think Lacey's point about the stories of the Monkey Island games might be close, in that younger kids get something different out of it than, say, me, but he's wrong too. At least for me, I got a lot of the jokes as a kid, and loved the piratey story and exotic locales, but it wasn't until later replays that I picked up on the ongoing themes and respected the occasional surreal bit more.
The Spider Man movies are probably another example, or the Pirates of the Caribbean movie. To a kid at least, those things look a bit older than them, but really they're exactly for them. Adults can get something out of them too but I don't really think that's who they're for, or who will benefit the most from them.
Obligatory sidebar: Some of that adult-benefit might come from the Alladin-esque two-layered humor, but that's not really it either. If it was, people would think Shrek is brilliant (some people find it funny, you know, because it contains jokes, but I don't think anyone would call it brilliant). I think the reason stories like the ones I mentioned (and Disney's Aladdin, even) appeal to everyone is just because they hit on important themes, situations, lessons, and human moments in a way that is very true. There's emotional passion behind them. That's another issue though.
I guess the backwards-Harry Potter appeal is the connection between Monkey Island 2 and dressing like you're older, too, but that's not quite right either
Not what I was going for I mean, though I guess that's part of it.
Anyway that's not the point of this thread is it? Er maybe it is. I mainly wanted to say that I agree that there is room for adventure games marketed at pre-teen to early-teen kids, and that just because they might like something that isn't an adventure game, they might like adventure games too.
Gaming as a 'space' has become a lot more narrow thanks to loud marketing, hollywood tie ins, EA, console certification, and that sort of thing, but that doesn't mean people are different. They just don't know, because nobody is trying anymore.
