[Junkface]

Originally Posted by insane_cobra

Granted, such occurrences can be avoided by careful level design and camera scripting, but I still think a fixed/on-rails camera negates one of the biggest advantages of 3D enviroments - the ability to go anywhere and to look at things from any angle.

I used to share this view, but think it fails to acknowledge some of the other advantages of 3D, such as in animation and just the extra dimension that having a moving camera allows. Fixed cameras also allow developers to deploy art resources more effectively, i.e. low poly models, low res textures, etc can be used with the right camera angles in a way that's much less jarring. This remedies one of the major complaints about 3D, the more demanding system requirements. I also think for certain types of games the use of fixed camera angles can help set a certain atmosphere, for example in Bone (even if I agree with you that the cameras aren't always used perfectly) the almost diorama like quality the camera moves create in the enviroment somehow helps to heighten the fairytale mood of the valley. Fixed cameras should definitely not be the default choice for developers though.

But I think on the whole he might be right, most people want conflict, want dynamic challenges, want replayability, want uncertainty. Is there any way to include all that in adventure games without destroying the genre core? I think so - less inventory puzzles and braincrackers, more dynamic challenges (enviromental puzzles, different, more dynamic dialog systems, non-scripted character relationships...) and looser designer stories providing more space for players to develop their own stories. Sounds complicated, and it probably is, but little step by little step and who knows?

Now we're getting somewhere interesting. I think this is the best path for genuinely innovative adventure games to take, rather than the Fahrenheit style "hey let's strip out all the gameplay" approach. I'd argue that Bone is more innovative than something like Fahrenheit because it actually introduced something new to the core gameplay (the multiple characters as part of one conversation dialogue system), even if it's a very small, quiet sort of innovation.

Originally Posted by phankiejankie

Innovative or different if you prefer titles get slaughtered by the AG community. I have this feeling that Fahrenheit was much more appealing to the typical gamer than the adventure follower.

I'm a gamer of many genres who was spurred into joining the AG community because I thought Fahrenheit was being treated too well. Perhaps I'm not the typical gamer though. I agree with you that the notion that adventure = point and click is an asinine one. It's not one limited to the adventure gaming community though (I've lost count of the amount of times a mainstream/hardcore/whatever you want to call them has enraged me by referring to the whole genre as "point and clicks"), and not something I've seen crop up particularly in this thread or on this forum. Not to sound condescending, but expressing a preference for point and click, or criticising direct control doesn't necessarily relate to a control scheme's effect on genre classification at all.

Nevertheless, developers could follow the Myst V example, so everyone could be happy.

This doesn't seem a good idea to me at all. From a design perspective it would inflict the limitations of both control systems on the game, while only allowing for the most superficial of each system's benefits. How can you design a game environment or puzzle to simultaneously take full advantage of two disparate control schemes? The halfassed implementation we've seen of each in some games also doesn't give me a lot of hope that many developers would be able to implement both well in the same game at even a most basic level.

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

You should also play Knights Of The Old Republic and Jade Empire if you want to see where essences of yesteryear's adventure games went.

Being as you're quite open about the fact that you haven't played most of "yesteryear's adventure games" I'm not sure you're qualified to make this statement...