[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by jjacob

I think he meant that it'll be a refreshing and unique blend of genres (or perhaps styles is more appropriate here), as Deus Ex was. Up until Deus Ex, shooters had been fairly straightforward and superficial.

I think rare games like Thief, Deus Ex, and System Shock 2 help trigger re-examinations and an awareness of the the arbitrariness of genres in games, and help make the industry and gaming culture more conscious that boundaries between genres can, and sometimes must be, malleable, especially in times when some dramatic change is necessary, if only for the sake of freshness.

I'm not saying adventure games are that, but one must admit by looking at the genre's track record of recent years that the genre is stuck in a mid-life crisis, so to speak.

I think it is stuck. Has been for too many years. We - developers, publishers, and gamers - need to perpetuate a dynamic dialogue, not about what adventure games are, but about what they can be, how they can be so, and how they can improve on all levels. This doesn't necessarily mean that there is no room for 'hardcore traditional' adventures, but it shouldn't mean that that should be the ONLY source material that developers and publishers must work with. And perhaps many of them don't care to offer something a little more progressive and original, so to be blunt they should expect to be criticized for not choosing to be fresh in ideas, they should expect to be largely ignored by the bigger representatives of the gaming press and by extension, those outside the tiny circle of adventure gaming 'purists'. That's how the world works.

It can only make for more interesting and better quality games and we can all benefit if more and more variety is offered.

You got indie developers catering to die-hard nostalgia gamers who'd love to jump in a time machine and go back to 1986, medium-sized commercial developers releasing crappy adventure sequels, like twenty orso small dev teams consisting of former LA staff (with no big achievements so far other than Psychonauts, a platformer, oh.. and Bone )etc. etc.

One of the problems, I think, is that you have indie or small budgeted developers who have their passion and vision to make a potentially great (or at best, high quality) game for whatever amount of money invested. However, their vision is often informed for the most part only by all the other adventure games they've played and loved in the past. They're severely limited by what they're familiar with, by what they know only.

And along with all that are the conventions and constraints (in many cases technological constraints) of those games they've played and loved. Why copy and mimic the puzzles and now predictable plot devices of a game from 1990 that was created by a very highly talented designer when you can just about wipe the canvas clean and 'invent' your own new concepts, theories, and ideas? Or at the very least, critically examine the lapses in quality in adventures of the past several years and ask, 'How can I make this existing idea BETTER in my own game?'. Why stick with conventions all the time just because it's what you're familiar with?

Now you look straight into my eyes and tell me that's not a sad state of affairs, without blinking Here's hoping Dreamfall will put some life back in the genre, and receive attention from all sorts of gamers, not just us.

Realistically, I honestly think that Dreamfall, like Indigo Prophecy, may just end up being anomalies within the genre we so arbitrarily define as 'adventure'. It would have to take a more concerted effort over a longer period of time to create a ripple effect whereby more and more adventure game publishers and developers are almost forced to rethink what constitutes an adventure game content-wise, and for all practically purposes. After all, many of the most commercially successful ideas were orginally very daring and defiant.