Quote:
On the other hand, when I don't even know that I've come across a puzzle, because the elements of the puzzle are so far apart and hard to find, then I can't possibly have any idea where to start!
Now that I'm thinking about it, maybe the problem isn't me at all. I mean, this is just really really bad game design!
|
Ah, but you certainly lack experience, young padawan. And that's also the reason why adventure games have often failed to attract new players: you have a rift between those who are used to puzzles, see them coming from a mile away and certainly don't want them to be dumbed down, and those who are not used to them enough to even realise they're there.
In GK, for instance, the puzzles you had problems with would clearly appear as such to people who are used to that type of games. It's 'obvious' that the attic has to be explorable for some reason, so it's 'obvious' you shouldn't stop searching until you've found the puzzle in it. It's also 'obvious' that the cop wouldn't be in the park if you didn't have to do something with him. Same thing for the mime:
Spoiler:it's 'obvious' that Sierra wouldn't have bothered animating him and getting the tricky programming right (so that he follows you until you get too close to somebody else) if he didn't have a purpose. Now, he follows you, but stops doing so as soon as you get too close to somebody: getting him to follow you to where you want is therefore difficult: that's 'obviously' what the puzzle is about! Where are you going to get him to, then? Well, the cop. 'Obviously'.
I know it's artificial, tricky, devious, whatever. But that's the way it works. A puzzle is a battle of wits between the player and the designer, much like a crossword puzzle or a hand-made jigsaw puzzle.
Of course, it can get wrong at some point. I hated DOTT, and one of the reasons for that was that I actually solved most of the puzzles just because that felt like the kind of things the game would expect me to do to solve the puzzle, even though I only understood the logic behind my actions afterwards. That's bad design, if you ask me.
Maybe you should play some older games, where the puzzles were less devious and refined, more 'naive' so to speak. If you can put up with old graphics, I think Transylvania might be good. It was my first adventure game, and I think the puzzles mostly actually make sense. They require you to think of them as puzzles (not real life problems), but still almost make sense in a real life context (if you consider vampires 'real life', of course).
But, once again, some people hate crosswords because they lack practice and don't find them fun, and start liking them once they get used to them and have the pleasure of finding the solutions themselves. Others will never like them, no matter how many times they try. I think it's probably the same for adventure game puzzles.
