Gabriel Knight - What was I missing?
 

Okay I remember back in 94 having played Gabriel knight 1 and it was one of my favorite games of all time. Recently I just replayed it, and to my shock, it still feels like the best game of all time, even with its 10 year old design and all its quirks. So I decided to play GK2 though I had my reserves at first because it is FMV, and I'm not a big fan of them. I'm almost halfway through, and again this game is a fine example of why I love adventures and I am here writing about them. What makes the gabriel knight games so darn good? And why can't the adventures of today capture that?

Adventures now days have no budget.

Hee~! All the recent topics in this forum seem to be concerned on issues of the status of AG. Why have the question of "why can't AG of today be like that of the good olde days?" arise all the sudden?

Anyway, to answer to your query of why today games can't be as good? It's all down to budgetting issue. In the good olde days, there are money for developers to design whatever games that could capture the crowd, since there were actually a big group of people (proportion-wise, of course) willing to pay for the best games AG around then. This in turn invited competitions, with most of the games in the market being either action or adventure at that time, many companies started to release clones (Myst clones or XXX Quests clones), while some more ambitious developers stood by and created original ideas which would ultimately stand the test of time, and went to become a legendary status. Many of the LucasArts games were such legends, leading the pack in how stories were told (Grim Fandango, Secret of Monkey Island, Day of the Tentacle, Sam & Max: Hit the Road etc.), and created outstanding puzzles that were much more sophisticated than the key stuck in the keyhole of the other side of the door.

Nowadays, with lack of a large base of potential consumers, fewer publishers are willing to stick their neck out for untested ideas. Hence most games keep to the same-olde tested formulae, making the scene look a bit stale. Still, once in a while some great games to come to pass. Just look out for Indigo Prophecy and DreamFall! :D

Most games don't keep to the same old tested formulae, it's obvious from SoccerDude's post that the formulae are lost. So while it has a little bit to do with lesser budgets, the main problem is in the lack of creativity. And mind you, in this case by creativity I don't mean innovation.

So what made Gabriel Knight games so great? Jane Jensen and the team capable of bringing her vision to life.

To be honest I would much rather gaming companies make a Gabriel Knight 1 type game now days instead of the usual junk we get now. I'm talking same graphics etc. They would actually save money.

Add to that quality and consistency and that's pretty much the beef of what I've been ranting about for the past few years. But it seems to be looking better these days, I hope it's not just a trend.

Personally I'm not that fond of "time block" games, where you have to do a certain thing to get into the next time block. GK3 is an exception, but that's mainly due to some really clever puzzles, the soundtrack and the story.

I loved GK3. One of favourite games of any genre ever, it's up there with Deus Ex, KOTOR, Half-Life, etc.

I also love GK3, I even started replaying it yesterday..

Surely you hope that the increase in quality and consistency is a trend, and isn't just a phase? ;)

At least, I do, though I'm not sure that it is a trend just yet.

SoccerDude, in my humble opinion, when Jane Jensen can't get financing for a real adventure game there's trouble in paradise. The old days are gone. Like someone said above...adventure games rarely get a decent budget anymore. I think that, like most mediums, there is one major creator. It's the creators I get excited about more than the games themselves (basically I can predict a game's quality better if I trust the designer). Unfortunately, as I said, Jane Jensen can't get money to make her next game. Roberta Williams (King's Quest, Laura Bow) is gone. Tim Schafer (Day of the Tentacle, Full Throttle, Grim Fandango) has moved into other game genres. Jordan Mechner (The Last Express, which I think is Top 5 all time) has gone back to Prince of Persia games. I think Ragnar Tornquist is overrated. And so on...

Now for the good news: Lee Sheldon (The Riddle of Master Lu, Dark Side of the Moon) is working on And Then There Were None, so I'm very excited about that one. Benoit Sokal (Amerzone, Syberia) is hard at work on Paradise, which I have high hopes for. Charles Cecil is working on a new Broken Sword game. Some ex-LucasArts guys are creating A Vampyre Story. So, there is hope...just not as much as there used to be. :P

It's not all of a sudden. That's all we talk about around here. :P

That's exactly what I mean. If they just create the same type of game like GK1, with the same graphics like 94, just hire Jane Jensen to do the story, it would cost less than most games released today and be more fun. You might even make money off it, seeing how many people hunger for these types of games.

Awesome :) Can't wait to buy it after I finish GK2.

Your approach is spot on, sir - playing them in chronological order greatly adds to the impact. I would enjoy hearing your thoughts upon finishing the lot.

All of the GK games are superb. I have all 3 in my personal Top 10 adventure games. Having said that, I must now warn that GK3 unquestionably has the weakest lead villain of the series (especially after GK2, which has the greatest in all adventure games as far as I'm concerned), and the pacing isn't quite as perfect as the first two. It's still fantastic, I'm just saying...

Hear, hear! A good story is a good story, regardless of how it's illustrated. If the graphics are less sophisticated, more effort can be spent on making a satisfying story. And that's really what adventures are all about. I'm not saying we should go back to 3 colors, but as far as I'm concerned the best graphics any adventure game can benefit significantly from were already possible in the late 90's.



Since unfortunately I have not been able to persuade anyone here that exploration games are not adventures, I'll have to waste my time, and the space in this thread, making the obvious exception here: The games such as Myst which you call adventure games can always benefit from more realistic graphics, and they don't need much -or anything, for that matter- in the way of story. Back to the thread now.

Then why do they have so much story? The Myst games have plenty. Oh...whoops...I guess it would be better described as characterization (mostly through visuals) and at least in the mediums I prefer, characterization always comes before plot.

I've only really played the original Myst. Didn't care for it much. Beautiful visuals, nice sound and good puzzles. But the game lacked much interaction. I just didn't like the game. I felt the game had a lot of BACKSTORY, but as for a real plot, or a real character you can identify with, it just isn't that type of game. Which is why I don't like it much. I prefer games where I can identify with the main character, that have good plots and lots of interaction in the world.

Well I see your point then because all of the other Myst games had more characterization and plot than the first, heh.