[Vahkris]

I agree with many of your points, but disagree on others, so please remember that when reading my comments below.

Originally Posted by imisssunwell

I have nothing against indy games and it is really nice to see people putting effort to create them but they certainly cannot be considered the way forward, in this day and time this is done by commercial products.

All I'm going to say is be careful with this phrasing. See my next comment for my actual response, I just wanted to call attention to this phrase of yours. It's not something that encourages constructive commentary, FYI.

I just want AG commercial releases to be on par with every other genre, an AG under development now should be on par with Dragon Age and Bioshock 2 in terms of quality, story, graphics, game hours, replay value and gameplay. Every commercial release should be a step forward, like each KQ/MI was a step forward, not the same ol' stuff, other genres are advancing, why should the adventure genre stay stale?

But not every commercial release for other genres are advancing them. It's silly to think most releases would. There are dozens of FPS/action games released each year, but barely any of them actually innovate or are a step forward. FPS games are relatively stale themselves (it's actually common to hear "it's yet another WWII FPS"), with only a few games bringing new gameplay aspects (usually the high-profile ones). Commercial releases can easily get to the point where they only contribute to a genre's staleness, not improve it.

I agree with you, though, that I want Adventure games to have production values equal to more polished games in other genres. It's not possible to get there within a few releases, but it's a longer term goal I'd like to see.

@Mohlin I agree, dying and killing would make AG like action games, by borrowing elements I didn't mean that.

Not necessarily. In my opinion, you could have many action games changed into adventure games by changing how the player interacts with it (such as removing twitch/dexterity-based gameplay action games are known for). I think in defining an adventure game, it's the required responses the game asks from the player to progress and complete the game that is far more important than the content of the story.

Day/night cycles don't have to be combined with timers

Yup, just look at KQ4 (I'm sure there's been more but they escape me at the moment)

in fact any proper game shouldn't put such timers

Ooh, careful, see my first comment. I think it could be incredibly immersive for a game to do so, provided a mechanic is available to automatically wait until a certain time of day. I know of at least one Nancy Drew game (which is highly popular) that uses this mechanic.

@colpet There is nothing wrong with casual gaming, in fact, imho gaming should never become a second non-paying job.

Wholeheartedly agree! Since I started my career after college, I have a hard time bringing myself to play a game that's going to require a significant period of time per play-session to accomplish much. I only have a few hours after work before bed, and many times that's spent with my family. Games should be, above all else, fun...not a job.