[spdiscus]

So, the new CGW reviews Indigo Prophecy, and Jeff Green's intro blurb says, "You have to go way back to the brilliant Sanitarium(1998) to find an adventure game with this kind of emotional depth. Those lamenting the dearth of intelligent, sophisticated game design featuring an honest-to-goodness adult story line don't want to miss it. Buy it to encourage publishers to take more chances like Atari did here." (Bolding is mine.)

Now, having played the demo, I'm not terribly interrested in the game: a little too slow/plodding for me, and I didn't like the controls. But, I do think I could enjoy it if I chose to give it more of a chance, because the subject matter was interesting; I just didn't like some technical aspects.

As a supporter of the "dying" adventure genre, is it my economic responsibility to let developers, production and distribution companies, and game journalists know (via purchase) that support still exists for the genre?

I'd prefer to save my money for the lower-profile games that I know I'll love, but is the state of affairs such that any signals I can send, I should? Because, honestly, no one will find out how much I love(d) Jessica Plunkenstein, or the third time through Sins of the Fathers, or the copy of Prisoner of Ice that I found at the used bookstore. And who knows if the mid-level titles will get any recognition (And Then There Were None, Runaway 2, etc.).

I don't even know what I'm curious about; I'm just looking for an interesting Sunday discussion.

Thoughts?

[insane_cobra]

Screw the genre, support the games you love. If for instance rock music was dying, would you buy Bon Jovi records just to show your support for the genre (unless you actually cared for Bon Jovi, that is)?

[Jackal]

Even if it were possible to support a whole genre through purchases (which is debatable), Fahrenheit/Indigo Prophecy doesn't belong to a genre. Not really.

The problem with "signals" is that they're so easily crossed anyway. I've said it about Fahrenheit before, and I'll say it again: the things that make the game good (character focus, optional interactivity, emotional tension, etc.) are NOT things easy to duplicate, even if you have the money to do them. The thing that IS easy to duplicate (namely: mini-games driving the gameplay) is the very sort of "signal" a publisher is likely to see in healthy sales figures.

On a side-but-related note, Atari only came on as publisher after Quantic and Vivendi cut ties well into development. I wonder if any publisher would have fully funded it from start to finish.

[After a brisk nap]

I don't think any consumer should feel obliged to support a genre. What I do believe is that it's reasonable to see a purchase as (in part) a donation to a cause you support, namely the continued production of these games. Depending on how strongly you feel about this (and how much money you have to spend on such a cause), it might make sense to buy a game even though it's priced higher than what you'd like to pay, or go ahead and buy a game that you're not sure about.

Personally, I tend to buy all indie games for sale that I think I might be remotely interested in. For one thing, the proportional influence on the sales figure is likely to be greater, and for another I think a thriving indie scene is just as important for adventure games at this stage as support from the big publishers. When I buy a big budget game, it's usually just for the game.

[neovsmatrix]

Isn't Indigo Prophecy selling well though?

It seems to really have mass market appeal. When I finally bought my PC copy from EB, the cashier there highly recommended the game saying it was "amazing".

Personally, if Indigo Prophecy is a hit, you shouldn't be compelled to buy it if it's not your cup of tea. I'd invest in the lesser known titles that need the support and you're interested in them.

[RLacey]

I've never quite understood the policy of buying any product purely to support the group that makes it. Surely it's the job of the developer to deliver a game that people will like and want to buy simply on its own merits, and, arguably, I shouldn't encourage the continued development of inferior games just so that people know that I like the genre?

[Kwiksnax]

Originally Posted by RLacey

I've never quite understood the policy of buying any product purely to support the group that makes it. Surely it's the job of the developer to deliver a game that people will like and want to buy simply on its own merits, and, arguably, I shouldn't encourage the continued development of inferior games just so that people know that I like the genre?

By all accounts (including my own) Psychonauts is an extremely good game, and yet I hear it has sold quite poorly due to abysmal advertising. Buying to 'support the artist' so to speak spreads the word about the game and encourages retail outlets to stock and display more units. Still, I wouldn't buy a bad game, no matter who made it. But I would go out of my way to find and buy a good yet under-recognised game in order to help raise the developer's profile and circumvent the poor efforts of publishers and advertisers *cough* Majesco! *cough*

[RLacey]

Originally Posted by Kwiksnax

By all accounts 'Psychonauts' is an extremely good game, and yet I hear it has sold quite poorly due to abysmal advertising. Buying to 'support the artist' so to speak spreads the word about the game and encourages retail outlets to stock and display more units. Still, I wouldn't buy a bad game, no matter who made it. But I would go out of my way to find and buy a good yet under-recognised game in order to help raise the developer's profile and circumvent the poor efforts of publishers and advertisers *cough* Majesco! *cough*

I never said that buying good games as a bad idea - I've bought Psychonauts, and I'm happy that, even if indirectly, I've helped to support the company. Had Psychonauts been rubbish, though, then I wouldn't have bought it just to support Tim Schafer. Make good games and I'll buy them regardless of who the developers are; make bad games and I won't.

[Kwiksnax]

Originally Posted by RLacey

I never said that buying good games as a bad idea - I've bought Psychonauts, and I'm happy that, even if indirectly, I've helped to support the company. Had Psychonauts been rubbish, though, then I wouldn't have bought it just to support Tim Schafer. Make good games and I'll buy them regardless of who the developers are; make bad games and I won't.

Oh definately, I totally agree. However, you and I fall more into the 'gaming geek' category (we're registered to an 'Adventure Game' forum for God's sake ) and we tend to be more proactive when it comes to finding out about new game releases. So, we know how good Psychonauts is and we bought it, great, but without good advertising the less-informed, 'casual' consumer will probably never even know that such an awesome game exists , which is a damn shame. No game stores in New Zealand stock Psychonauts. Shop assistants looked at me sideways when I asked when Psychonauts was going to hit shelves. I had to order it straight from the Double Fine store.

edit: to make my grammar slightly less crap.

[Deshrill]

I'll buy a game if the subject matter interests me, if I'm a fan of the designer, if the price is low enough (hey, I just graduated from college), or if it's a genre I've enjoyed.

Would I buy a Graphic Adventure just to support the genre? No. If it met one of my criteria listed above, I would strongly consider it. Telltale Games' online distribution system is fairly interesting, even though I am on dial up and my PC is too slow to run Bone.

[vivasawadee]

This may upset some people here but most of the adventure games I have bought have been either on sale, budget re-releases or second hand (Ebay and markets)

The only games I remembered buying at full price were Blade Runner, Grim Fandango and Kings Quest 3.

[Terramax]

Originally Posted by vivasawadee

This may upset some people here but most of the adventure games I have bought have been either on sale, budget re-releases or second hand (Ebay and markets)

The only games I remembered buying at full price were Blade Runner, Grim Fandango and Kings Quest 3.

heh, I don't think i've ever bought an adventure for more than £15 (second hand or brand new). Well, apart from Myst 4 Revelations that I couldn't play on my laptop so I then had to buy a £850 PC...

Although seeing that there aren't that many 'traditional' AGs i'm playing a game of 'catch up on the older stuff' so...

Back to the main point, I haven't yet bought 'Fahrenheit' because it doesn't look interesting enough to spend £35 on (which is what Game is charging it at).
Further more I don't want to support these all new 3D AGs that seem more like GTA with conversations and no guns.

[RLacey]

Originally Posted by Terramax

Back to the main point, I haven't yet bought 'Fahrenheit' because it doesn't look interesting enough to spend £35 on (which is what Game is charging it at).

£14.99 if you buy one of the 80 (and falling) copies on a special Halloween sale RIGHT NOW.

Or you can get it for £17.95 from mx2.co.uk

[Terramax]

... well, i'm waiting for 'Discworld 2' and 'Bladerunner' to come through the post at the moment so maybe later.

[insane_cobra]

Originally Posted by vivasawadee

The only games I remembered buying at full price were Blade Runner, Grim Fandango and Kings Quest 3.

The only adventure game I ever bought at full price was Shadow of Memories and Fahrenheit is going to be the second one. I'll gladly support the games I like by buying them at full price if someone supports me by throwing money my way. It's a bit hard spending $50 on a game when $500 goes for a standard wage around here.

[Ninth]

When I like something (that is, when I know that I will like something), I buy it. So in other words, I'm only buying games to support my own tastes.

[vivasawadee]

Originally Posted by insane_cobra

The only adventure game I ever bought at full price was Shadow of Memories and Fahrenheit is going to be the second one. I'll gladly support the games I like by buying them at full price if someone supports me by throwing money my way. It's a bit hard spending $50 on a game when $500 goes for a standard wage around here.

$500 aint too bad compared to Thailand

Lowest wage is $100 per month

Average graduate wage is $750 per month

Bank managers, Doctors, Lawyers around $2500-3000 per month

No wonder pirate games are everywhere for $2 and full priced original games are $12-15

I thought Fahrenheit was worth the money ($75 Australian dollars) but it was short 10 hours or so first time round. The replay value is ok to see the 3 different endings and bonus scenes.

I haven't touched it since I finished it and don't really feel the urge to replay it. Compare this to Monkey Island 1 and 2 which I have replayed over and over and over......

[Timbo]

I buy my adventure games.

Timbo

[Terramax]

Timbo, did you fall asleep half way through writting the first sentence?

The lack of replay value is another thing that stops me from buying 'Fahrenheit'. In fact, the reason why I buy AGs is the enjoyment of, after completing the game the first time round, playing through it again with the story far smoother, enjoying the scenery and talking to your favourite characters.

by the way, 10hours is almost too long a game for me lol. I'd prefer a game with a short story but with memorable characters and plot than a 40 hour game where we spend 70% figuring out the most insane puzzles.

If we can pay £20 for a 1.5 hour film then £30 for a game 6X longer doesn't seem that bad when you think about it.

[Timbo]

I added a period.

Timbo