[nordic_guy]

Drum roll please...
With games like Syberia, Broken Sword 3 and Uru on its list, Gamespot still figured Silent Hill was the best adventure game of 2003, which is kind of weird considering its not even an adventure.
I can't really see why they have merged the two genres together here before, except from lack of games, but with quality adventures like BS3, Uru and Syberia, why can't a real adventure win for once?
Next year, how about creating a new genre and call it survival-horror? Especially considering another game of that genre had managed to sneak into the line of adventure games(Fatal Frame II).
It's a slap in the face for companies like Revolution and Microids when an adventure game can't win in its own genre.

[ragnar]

Considering that Syberia came out 2002 it would be rather strange to have it on a best list for 2003. And I also seems to remember that it won an adventure of the year title in such an online magazine (I think it was Gamespot, but am not entirely sure).

[Moosferatu]

Originally Posted by ragnar

Considering that Syberia came out 2002 it would be rather strange to have it on a best list for 2003. And I also seems to remember that it won an adventure of the year title in such an online magazine (I think it was Gamespot, but am not entirely sure).

The Xbox version came out this year.

[nordic_guy]

Oh no, it was there among the nominees. The "list" I was referring to was the list of nominees in the Best Adventure Game section.
They conisted of:
BS3
Fatal Frame II
Silent Hill 3
Syberia
Myst: Uru

So I don't think it won last year, or else they wouldn't have nominated it.
Chances are, though, that they nominated the console version, which came out this year.

[BacardiJim]

The really absurd part of the whole thing is that there was already a separate action/adventure category! Yet somehow SH3 and FF2 were placed in the adventure category, with SH3 winning.

And there are still a few poor, misguided souls running around who insist that Gamespot isn't biased against adventure games...

And yes, Syberia was chosen as the best Adventure game of 2002. The only other nominee was *shudder* Shadows of Destiny. Syberia was also nominated as the "Best Game No One Played."

Normally I'm a proponent of recycling, but in some instances....

[RemiO]

Yeah, they're probably sitting around laughing their asses off, knowing they've pissed off all the hardcore adventure fans out there...

Either that, or maybe they have a different definition on what adventure games are. I don't necessarily agree with them, and I don't feel that SH3 is a pure adventure, but taking it personally is going a bit far.

[James]

ah this is ass. bs3 is clearly the breath of life that we and the genre needed. silent hill 3 is tame in comparison.

[Tanukitsune]

I remember creating a thread saying that survival horror was related to adventure, but not a pure adventure anyway....
But SH3 winning is kinda depressing...
It could have been worst.... Tomb Raider might of won!
That reminds me in a Spanish forum I visit a kid asked for help in Zelda:WW at the adventure section....
And someone said Worms was an adventure game...

[mycroft]

You guys are whiners.

Silent Hill III is the very definition of an excellent all-encompassing adventure game.

Why, look at all the engaging dialogue..er wait...how about all them puzzles..no hold on...ah yes..monsters.What adventure game would be complete without monsters...and guns too shoot them with.

Lucasarts could learn a thing or two about adventure games from Konami.

Hooray for SH III as best Adventure Game of 2003, hooray for Konami, hooray for Gamespot !


*dies*

[Marek]

Genre definitions aside, the story that GameSpot is somehow biased against adventure games is just a complete myth. There was a time around 1998 that GameSpot blatantly ignored some of the adventure games that were coming out. If I can blow my own horn here for a moment, I contacted GameSpot back then, befriended one of the editors, and pointed them towards adventure games they hadn't even heard of before. Nowadays they do an excellent job of covering all the adventure games. You can disagree with their scores, but come on. If you have to tell hardcore gamers whether to play The Crystal Key, I think the answer will be "no". There are SO many games out there in all these genres GameSpot covers that have better production values, better writing, better artistry, and so on, than the average 'multimedia CD-ROM adventure game'.

As for the inclusion of Silent Hill in their awards feature, I disagree with that, but it's not so bad as some sites putting, uhh, Mario and Luigi: SuperStar Saga in the same list as Broken Sword: The Sleeping Dragon. Let's also not pretend the adventure community itself is not a little guilty of stepping outside of the genre's boundaries from time to time. I mean, Just Adventure+ gave Thief 3 one of their "best of 2003" awards (which I think is okay, given how much other awards went to pure adventure games, but why is GameSpot getting all the criticism?).

I guess this was a rant. Oh, and that editor I mentioned no longer works at GameSpot, so I'm not under GameSpot's magical spell or anything.

[BacardiJim]

Originally Posted by Marek

which I think is okay, given how much other awards went to pure adventure games

Did we look at the same list?

In the general Special Achievement awards there were 17 categories for a total of 85 nominations. Only one pure adventure game was even nominated: URU, which won for best Sound Effects.

In the Best Adventure Game genre category, one of the nominations was a recycling of last year's winner (Syberia), two were pure adventure games (If you grant that both URU and BS3 are pure adventure games) and two were action/adventure games... despite there being a separate Best Action/Adventure Game category specifically for such titles.

Let's extend our look back a year now. Last year Gamespot only bothered to nominate TWO games for Best Adventure, Syberia and Shadow of Destiny.

Soooo....... we have Gamespot telling us that Syberia is the only decent p-n-c adventure of the last 2 years. That the innovations of URU and BS3 don't even deserve to be mentioned alongside the stunning achievement of adding an onlline component to the (hardly new) Japanese sensation of Dance Dance. That the professional actors of CSI and Law & Order don't even deserve a nod for their voice acting talents. That the stories of BS3, Runaway and Salammbo weren't even worthy of mention.

And that only URU was as good in any way as the platformers and hybrids that got 84 of the 85 general nominations.

Statistically, that shows a bias, Marek.

[Moosferatu]

Originally Posted by BacardiJim

Did we look at the same list?

In the general Special Achievement awards there were 17 categories for a total of 85 nominations. Only one pure adventure game was even nominated: URU, which won for best Sound Effects.

In the Best Adventure Game genre category, one of the nominations was a recycling of last year's winner (Syberia), two were pure adventure games (If you grant that both URU and BS3 are pure adventure games) and two were action/adventure games... despite there being a separate Best Action/Adventure Game category specifically for such titles.

Let's extend our look back a year now. Last year Gamespot only bothered to nominate TWO games for Best Adventure, Syberia and Shadow of Destiny.

Soooo....... we have Gamespot telling us that Syberia is the only decent p-n-c adventure of the last 2 years. That the innovations of URU and BS3 don't even deserve to be mentioned alongside the stunning achievement of adding an onlline component to the (hardly new) Japanese sensation of Dance Dance. That the professional actors of CSI and Law & Order don't even deserve a nod for their voice acting talents. That the stories of BS3, Runaway and Salammbo weren't even worthy of mention.

And that only URU was as good in any way as the platformers and hybrids that got 84 of the 85 general nominations.

Statistically, that shows a bias, Marek.

Wow, it's ok. It isn't worth getting bent out of shape about. My personal opinion of GameSpot's awards this year isn't the highest, but that is in more areas than just adventures. I'm sure that there are plenty of FPS fans out there that were quite mad about PDO winning the best Shooter award. It also blows my mind that BG&E didn't get an nomination for best music. Stupid stuff happens. To be quite honost I'm not surprised that none of this years adventure games were nominated for best story though. I mean, BS3's story was ok, but it definitely wasn't anything new or earth shatering. But also on that same note it was interesting that PoP got a nomination in that same catagory. Granted I haven't played the game yet, but from the reviews I've read the story was ok, but basically just took place in the intro and ending cutscenes.

Oh, and I think Marek was refering to JA+ and not GameSpot in that quote.

[BacardiJim]

Oh, and I think Marek was refering to JA+ and not GameSpot in that quote.

Oooops! I see that now. Sorry, Marek. My bad.

[remixor]

Originally Posted by BacardiJim

The really absurd part of the whole thing is that there was already a separate action/adventure category! Yet somehow SH3 and FF2 were placed in the adventure category, with SH3 winning.

I haven't played any of the SH series, but I agree this is really unfortunate.

And there are still a few poor, misguided souls running around who insist that Gamespot isn't biased against adventure games...

Come now, that's no way to talk about your editor in chief.

And yes, Syberia was chosen as the best Adventure game of 2002. The only other nominee was *shudder* Shadows of Destiny.

It's worth mentioning that SOD got a HUGE amount of positive feedback on these boards. I'd never heard of it myself before seeing it mentioned here but picked it up due to the amount of discussion it generated around here.

Syberia was also nominated as the "Best Game No One Played."

I think you probably mention this as a negative thing, but to me it fits. The only people I know who have played Syberia are the ones here. Certainly none of my real-life gamer friends knew anything about it until I brought it up.

Normally I'm a proponent of recycling, but in some instances....

[eriq]

Silent Hill 3 sucked. The monsters looked retarded and weren't scary. The main heroine looked like a tranny. And the whole stupid scary carnival thing was done before. LAME.

Broken Sword 3 deserves to be Adventure game of the year!

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Jeezus Cripes, eriq! Down, [fan]boy!

I agree that SH3 was mistakenly shoved into the adventure category. But then Gamespot has always been rather, well.....retarded in that department, making mistakes all the time. They'll stick anything with one puzzle in Adventure. Why even take them seriously, they know nothing about the nuances and concept of the genre. I never rely on them when it comes to adventures.

I dunno, I'd probably choose Uru over the very scant pickings as best adventure. It has everything going for it - progressive design, identifiable adventure elements, innovation, immersiveness, and beauty.

[BacardiJim]

Even if you exclude In Memoriam because it wasn't released in North America, there were still a fair number of adventure games that got their share of critical acclaim: BS3, URU, Runaway, Dark Fall, Salammbo, Law & Order 2, Black Mirror, Conspiracies. You'd think they could have scrounged up five nominees out of these eight.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

As I stated, what does Gamespot know about the adventure genre?