Adventure Forums - View Single Post

Scott Nixon · 03-21-2010, 06:33 AM

There's a fine line between justifiable frustration aimed at adventure game puzzle designs that follow the credo of "what was the designer thinking?" and adventure games that challenge the player to deduce logical (or at least consistent within the fiction of the title) solutions to puzzles. Subjectively, it's easily definable - if you solve a puzzle and the first thought in your head is "Why didn't I think of that sooner?" then it was probably a good puzzle - for you, anyway. Problem is the highly variable nature of what people find an acceptable bracket of lateral thought.

But it doesn't even matter, because Heavy Rain contained no player-arrived solution moments (good or bad) at all. Even the largely irrelevant exploration scenes were an abstracted mini-game of 'stumble on the next trigger volume.' It would be difficult to argue that it had any intrinsic educational value at all apart from teaching you exactly where all your controller buttons are. It has more in common with whack-a-mole than an adventure game. I don't think the comparisons to Dragon's Lair are out of order at all.

I go on about this far too much. I just honestly feel like I had one pulled over on me when I played this game. The core mechanics and design are a holdover from twenty plus years ago. I don't think Cage's ethos of games aping cinema is innovative or enjoyable. I don't want to watch a game. There was no lateral thinking needed to complete the story, and arguably very little thinking of any kind required at all. The only question this game definitively answered for me was "How much can you polish a turd?"

Quite a bit, apparently.

03-21-2010, 06:33 AM	#9
Scott Nixon Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Posts: 71	There's a fine line between justifiable frustration aimed at adventure game puzzle designs that follow the credo of "what was the designer thinking?" and adventure games that challenge the player to deduce logical (or at least consistent within the fiction of the title) solutions to puzzles. Subjectively, it's easily definable - if you solve a puzzle and the first thought in your head is "Why didn't I think of that sooner?" then it was probably a good puzzle - for you, anyway. Problem is the highly variable nature of what people find an acceptable bracket of lateral thought. But it doesn't even matter, because Heavy Rain contained no player-arrived solution moments (good or bad) at all. Even the largely irrelevant exploration scenes were an abstracted mini-game of 'stumble on the next trigger volume.' It would be difficult to argue that it had any intrinsic educational value at all apart from teaching you exactly where all your controller buttons are. It has more in common with whack-a-mole than an adventure game. I don't think the comparisons to Dragon's Lair are out of order at all. I go on about this far too much. I just honestly feel like I had one pulled over on me when I played this game. The core mechanics and design are a holdover from twenty plus years ago. I don't think Cage's ethos of games aping cinema is innovative or enjoyable. I don't want to watch a game. There was no lateral thinking needed to complete the story, and arguably very little thinking of any kind required at all. The only question this game definitively answered for me was "How much can you polish a turd?" Quite a bit, apparently.