[After a brisk nap]

Originally Posted by Wormsie

In Cirque de Zale there's a puzzle in which you need to give a basket of goodies to a random pimp. In return the pimp will... I don't remember what it was, but I'm sure it wasn't that necessary or important. She'll help you somehow.

There is no difference in the basic structure of those puzzles. However, the pimp is just a random person thrown out to the streets. After the first encounter you will never see her again. The pimp doesn't tell you anything that would help you with the game later on, and it isn't really an integral part of the plot.

It's been a while since I played Cirque, but the way I remember it, the pimp did play into the story of the game. You get some sort of leaflet advertising the career in prostitution, which you need in order to convince the acrobat to quit her job in the circus you're trying to sabotage. Then later you recruit one of the hookers to be your new acrobat. This is even brought up in the end sequence, where you're trying to hit on her and getting rebuffed.

I therefore think the puzzle was quite well integrated in the plot. I'm not a big fan of the puzzles in the game, since most of the time you're just carrying objects from one screen to another, but that's a problem with the nature of the puzzles much more than how they fit into the story.

Originally Posted by Wormsie

Another example is from the award-winning game Apprentice II. None of the puzzles actually are a part of the story. In fact, you solve a number of puzzles that have nothing to do with the plot in order to make the plot progress. The game can be fun, but it's not very good game design.

I don't think that's entirely fair. All the puzzles tie into Pib's efforts to be recognized as a magician (or apprentice, at least). There's no real plot development in the game, but for such a relatively brief one I don't think that's critically important.

Anyway, Ian Schlaepfer acknowledged this concern in the interview for the 20004 TCN Awards:

Originally Posted by Ian

I read one comment on Apprentice 2 that criticized the progression of the story. I never really thought about it, but he definitely had a point. There are a lot of puzzles Pib solves, but nothing really happens in the game. If anything, the things Pib does are mere busywork between Ironcrow’s two visits to the tower. There is no gradual build-up to a climax and a resolution (although there is an initial equilibrium and a disruption). In the game’s defense, it is a chapter from a larger story, but the only real story that occurs in the first two games can be found in the opening and closing sequences. Maybe I was too focused on trying to make it fun.

Originally Posted by Wormsie

Simply put, we have to get rid of making these parody adventure games. Apprentice II was otherwise very good and well developed as a game, but its puzzles has very little to do with the plot itself.

I fail to see the connection between parody games and lack of integration between puzzles and plot. When you say "parody", are you talking about games that are clear Sierra/LucasArts pastiches, or just humorous games in general? Regardless, I don't see any evidence of a correlation with arbitrary puzzles.