There are many games with a lot of story content with few puzzles, and others with lots of puzzles and not much story to go along with them. Of course these are extremes and most games have a balance of both, and while I think most people would prefer a good balance (as I do), I'd like to discuss those extremes and the games which are in those styles.
Take the Rhem series. You arrive at the start of the game with almost no information why you are there. You complete these puzzles with the only reward to get to take on new puzzles. At the end of the game there is not much reward except a brief thank-you and a "see you next time". I enjoy the challenge and mystery of Rhem but sometimes it's too much and I find I would appreciate some progression in what little plot there is (like Myst does).
Gobliiins might be another example of the puzzle-heavy variety, putting you in an environment full of puzzles with a line or two of dialogue and the instruction "solve this". Because of this, some might think of it as a puzzle game rather than an adventure. I don't think this is true, I think there is a concrete line between adventure and a puzzle games and not a sliding scale. Unlike Rhem, in Gobliiins and Myst the story is embedded in the environment and puzzles - the puzzles are not "stand-alone".
On the other side of the ring there are games with lots of story - Dreamfall, Jurassic Park, A Mind Forever Voyaging. I can enjoy this type of game as long as I'm not watching cutscenes non-stop. I REALLY hate cutscenes, and will get tired of a game which overuses them. In a game where I'm guiding the player I don't mind the lack of puzzles. If I want to watch a movie, I will go to the cinema
So. How much story do you like in your games compared with how much puzzling there is? Do you have a preference - lots of puzzles or lots of story? Is there a "right" and "wrong" way to do each style? Which games do it well and which ones do it badly?
