[RLacey]

I really don't think that the two genres merge well. Whilst there are certainly aspects of each that the other can learn from, I really, really don't like the idea of statistics affecting the puzzles. If you do this, then you remove the tight focus that good adventure games have, where everything has been designed down to the last detail. If the puzzles had to tailor themselves to the character, then I suspect it would encourage designers to have more of the riddles and code-breaking style puzzles of games such as Knights of the Old Republic - which have their place, but would make for a pretty boring game if they were the entire substance.

For those wanting to retain statistics, you also have the issue of quite how many statistic types you could actually have if you removed combat from the game - whilst you could split up the intelligence, wisdom and charisma statistics found in RPGs, I'm curious as to how, specifically, people feel that this could be done.

It is important to realise that many of the ideas you suggest, Trep, have already been done in the adventure genre - if not necessarily within a single game. There have been optional puzzles and alternate methods of solving them; there have been games in which you control multiple characters; there have been very good games in which we learn a lot about the character. As for 'levels and levels of side stories', this may simply confuse gamers rather than help them, as they would then be unsure of what puzzles they actually need to be solving to progress.

However, my biggest gripe would be with the inventory system. It isn't a conincidence that I can't think of a single true adventure game developed since the mid 1990s that hasn't featured a mysterious, bottomless inventory, and there's a good reason for this. People don't like having to go back and pick up items, aside from the design problems that can be caused if the player is able to drop objects. As for trading objects for other objects, this is already done in the context of some game puzzles, and if taken further, surely it would end up being a relatively pointless exercise. What would you trade them for, if there was no combat, and therefore no need to expendable items?

In conclusion, I'm all in favour of genre-combining - despite what I may have stated above. There are always things that designers could - and should - learn from those working in other fields (and I mean both other types of game and much more broadly). But I'm not sure that combining the RPG and adventure genres in the way that you have suggested would work. Not only are there many people who play RPGs specifically for the combat, who might be disappointed by a game that didn't have any, but there might also be adventure gamers who dislike the freeform nature. Despite what people have suggested in the past, I remain unconvinced that the RPG and adventure genres are any more closely related than, say, the FPS and the adventure game, or the strategy and adventure game...