Every game that breaks from convention is going to get arguments about not being a "real" adventure. As always, it depends on how rigid one's own definition of an adventure is.
Samorost 2 has a plot, and it has characters. They're about as basic as they come, but to act like they aren't THERE is doing it a disservice. And while the puzzles in one screen aren't connected to the puzzles in another, they are all connected in service of that basic plot.
You need to rescue your dog. To do that, you need to get past a guard; to get past the guard, you need to find a way to distract him; to distract him, you need to fnd an alternate path; to access the alternate path, you need to... etc. It's absolutely linear, but I can't see how anyone can say it's a nothing but a bunch of randomly connected puzzles.
What Samorost doesn't have is any of the trappings that belong to so many adventures. But if you strip away all the
non-interactive elements of most adventures, you'll find something like Samorost underneath. But if it's these things that make an adventure worth playing, then you won't be mislead after reading the review, high score or not.
