[Eyeball Kid]

I flip a coin, I look at the sky, I take a sip of wine. Regularly. And now I'll try to use the good old "why not" as opposed to the slighty more defensive "why do":

What about the point'n'click-interface is worth keeping?
What does point'n'click do to gameplay?
Why should we be afraid of experimentation with other ideas?
Would a 3D game be less ironic?
Do people choose adventure games out of pacifism?
What do you think of the weather today?



TLJ was a game with a good story, but did it fully realize the potential of the medium?
Would a new Sam'n'Max lack atmosphere simply simply because you would have to move that wacky canine around using a keyboard or gamepad?
Is it all about nostalgia?

And no, I don't do aerobics

[avatar_58]

Is it needed? Nope. Does 3D hurt adventures? Nope. Is gamepad movement worse? Nope, but it has a bad track record with games like MI4.

Personally I'm all ears for innovation and new things in adventure games. I'm tired of the same old myst-like 1st person games and mysterious island has turned me off inventory puzzles for the next millenia.

Thats why I'm so picky with what I get these days. Dreamfall is probably going to be my only adventure game purchase for 2006

[FranksPlc]

Hey avatar_58 you might want to try Broken Sword: The angel of Death. It will have point and click and gamepad compatibility. You'll enjoy it. I like gamepad support better for 3D adventure games though. But anywho.
Later folks.
Chris Franklin

[Dasilva]

Originally Posted by avatar_58

Thats why I'm so picky with what I get these days. Dreamfall is probably going to be my only adventure game purchase for 2006

Know the feeling.

[jjacob]

Originally Posted by Dasilva

Know the feeling.

Same here, although I'm definately going to give Paradise a try. Part of the game is pre-rendered "Syberia style" and part of the game is supposedly real-time 3D, although there's no footage of it yet.

[avatar_58]

Originally Posted by jjacob

Same here, although I'm definately going to give Paradise a try. Part of the game is pre-rendered "Syberia style" and part of the game is supposedly real-time 3D, although there's no footage of it yet.

Mind you, if it starts out as slow as Syberia I'll pass. I generally liked Syberia but I almost stopped playing during the university area. I don't understand why it won so much acclaim for something so dull.

[jjacob]

Originally Posted by avatar_58

Mind you, if it starts out as slow as Syberia I'll pass. I generally liked Syberia but I almost stopped playing during the university area. I don't understand why it won so much acclaim for something so dull.

I had difficulty in certain areas as well, but overall the game(s) did manage to suck me into its surreality (or whatever). It's also *loaded* with not-so-obvious symbolism. I recommend you give Trep's article on Syberia a read

*searches for Trep's article..

[avatar_58]

Yea, but I wasn't so fond of it. At the end I was left wanting more (havent played syberia 2 yet) however at the same time I am left wondering if the next one will start out as slow and drab as the first.

[jjacob]

Originally Posted by avatar_58

Yea, but I wasn't so fond of it. At the end I was left wanting more (havent played syberia 2 yet) however at the same time I am left wondering if the next one will start out as slow and drab as the first.

Well actually the two games were first meant to be one, so that would explain it Part two literally picks up where one left off, and it generally has more stuff happening, to me it felt like a pretty satisfactory conclusion.

By the by; here we are, Trep's article.

[avatar_58]

Ah, thats what I thought. Maybe I will get it then, next time I find it. Anyway...this is a tad off topic....

[Ninth]

Originally Posted by avatar_58

Yea, but I wasn't so fond of it. At the end I was left wanting more (havent played syberia 2 yet) however at the same time I am left wondering if the next one will start out as slow and drab as the first.

You make it sound like slow is a bad thing. It may be for you, but I like slow (not exclusively, of course).

[avatar_58]

Originally Posted by FranksPlc

Hey avatar_58 you might want to try Broken Sword: The angel of Death. It will have point and click and gamepad compatibility. You'll enjoy it. I like gamepad support better for 3D adventure games though. But anywho.
Later folks.
Chris Franklin

I haven't played a single Broken Sword game. I saw one of them for a cheap price, but I was warned away from it by a fan of the series (the third one maybe?)

[aBoyinPERIL]

Originally Posted by Eyeball Kid

1. What about the point'n'click-interface is worth keeping?
2. What does point'n'click do to gameplay?
3. Why should we be afraid of experimentation with other ideas?
4. Would a 3D game be less ironic?
5. Do people choose adventure games out of pacifism?
6. What do you think of the weather today?

1. Ease of use when inventory searching - I like to spend my time concentrating on the adventure - I hate manouvering a character round in wobbly circles and bouncing off walls so much they look drunk. I hate this element and it ruined BS3 for me. If they slicken up a manouver system that at least integrates seamlessly with the change of camera angles - I'll give it a try...

2. Allows you to exact your hypothesis right away, why the point and click does it's thing you are already planning a stage ahead or supposing what the outcome might be.

3. We should never be afraid. Although we have had a few catastrophies to indicate so - but I feel they need to make mistakes in their experimentation in order for them to reach a breakthrough. I'm all for 3-D but I'm not for crappy camera angles and the focus of the game being on how you move your character around the screens. Perhaps we should be afraid of too much lending from other game genres...

4. 3-D less ironic? Hmmm. Not sure what you are getting here - in my mind an adventure game could be text based - 2-D, 3-D whatever. The most important thing are the attention to details - story, involvement, movement, and satisfaction.

5. I think this is an excellent question. I've often thought of this myself. I think it is attributed to the same feeling you get to a well written book. It is pure escapism to the nth degree. Pacifism...? Not in it's entirity - maybe as opposed to playing a more visually and interactively violent game in any case. But to me adventure gamers require a depth most other genres don't call for. This of course can be off putting to those unused to the genre who are put off by long narratives, lots of exploring, and a lot of dedication basically.

6. Weather is dull but it's Friday!

[avatar_58]

Originally Posted by aBoyinPERIL

But to me adventure gamers require a depth most other genres don't call for. This of course can be off putting to those unused to the genre who are put off by long narritives, lots of exploring, and a lot of dedication basically.

Well now this I don't agree with, being a fan of multiple genres. RPGs require just as much, if not more, exploration and long narration by characters. In Oblivion alone I've probably talked to hundreds of characters and had many stories play themselves out much like an adventure.

Just wanted to point that out.

[aBoyinPERIL]

Originally Posted by avatar_58

Well now this I don't agree with, being a fan of multiple genres. RPGs require just as much, if not more, exploration and long narration by characters. In Oblivion alone I've probably talked to hundreds of characters and had many stories play themselves out much like an adventure.

Just wanted to point that out.

The key word I used here was "most" other genres. I accept the view on RPGs...

[Jeysie]

1. What about the point'n'click-interface is worth keeping? What does point'n'click do to gameplay?

I find PNC to be the most efficient form of interface for adventures.

After all, most of the time the whole point of an adventure is to interact with various bits of the environment. I'd rather be able to click on a bit of the environment and have the character go up to the bit to interact with it in some way automatically, instead of having to spend time fiddling with getting the character just in the right spot.

Adventures require a precision of positioning that I find irritating to achieve with direct control.

Now, if there's ever more games in which being able to move a 3D character within a 3D environment is integral to the puzzles, it'd be worth more. But the 3D adventures I've played so far have pretty much just been 2D gameplay with 3D graphics.

2. Why should we be afraid of experimentation with other ideas?

I'm not personally afraid of experimentation... I just don't think it's worth changing what works unless you can find something that works better. Change just for the sake of change, or just to "keep up with the times", doesn't interest me.

3. Would a 3D game be less ironic?

I'm not sure... what's so ironic about 2D/text adventures that 3D could be less ironic?

4. Do people choose adventure games out of pacifism?

Hmm. Well, that's part of the reason I choose adventures, yes.

Although it's less that I don't like virtual violence, and more that I find most video game combat at best boring, and at worst extremely frustrating.

5. What do you think of the weather today?

I don't know... I don't go out unless I have to. At least it's not snowing today like it was two days ago. (C'mon, it's freakin' April, what's with the damn snow, Mother Nature?)

Peace & Luv, Liz

[Terramax]

Back to the first comments of this thread, it's easy to think if there's going to be any evolution in AG games... but then again, you can say the same about any genre.

Where's the next step in racers? Can you get any more realistic than the latest Gran Turismo or any more Arcade than Ridge Racer?

And RPGs - where's the next step now? We've got MMORPGs and ultimate graphics like in Oblivion and Fable. And the Japanese ones like Final Fantasy can't have battle systems any more complicated, stories any more dramatic and barely anything that original.

The only reason why people wonder what's going wrong with AGs as opposed to there genres is because these games don't sell as well. But IMO this is the faults and wrongs with those buying games and the publishers not selling the games the right way than it being the fault of the programmers of these AG games.

[spaceship789]

>What about the point'n'click-interface is worth keeping?
>What does point'n'click do to gameplay?
>Why should we be afraid of experimentation with other ideas?

The first graphic adventure games actually were originally keyboard controlled. Things like the early sierra series Kings quest and early lucasfilm games, eg labyrinth. When point and click came through it made games much more enjoyable, more time thinking less time banally controlling your character, and avoiding obstacles. The mouse sped things up in adventure games, just like it sped things up on the desktop.

Things are a different story on consoles. Players have a digital stick and an analog stick instead of a mouse and keybaord. The analog stick is more often used for controlling characters walking than it is as means of moving a pointer.

As a side note, the radial menus (ie right click, and the menu items are set out like numebrs on a clock) are the next big thing in desktop user interfaces. From a user point of view, they are more efficient than standard windows list-style menus. The adventure games which use such an interface were quite ahead of their time.

[avatar_58]

Originally Posted by Terramax

The only reason why people wonder what's going wrong with AGs as opposed to there genres is because these games don't sell as well. But IMO this is the faults and wrongs with those buying games and the publishers not selling the games the right way than it being the fault of the programmers of these AG games.

That was true back in 96-98 when the so called decline of adventure games begun. Sierra and Lucasasrts stopped making them and as a result, people stopped buying them. Ipso facto the publishers got the idea they weren't popular any more. A sad chain of events if you ask me.....

However these days the reason they don't sell isn't so much the buyers fault anymore. There are one too many generic adventure games versus the show stopping amazing ones. In fact the only one I can remember having played in a long time is Indigo Prophecy and that was because it tried to be different.

I'm willing to bet that people will cry about Dreamfall trying to break free of the standard adventure game elements, but in the long run I can see it being another game we remember for years as opposed to a game we try to forget.

[RockNFknRoll]

Point & Click makes a game completely different than keyboard control, for the most part.

Often times with keyboard control, your options for what to do in a certain space are very limited. And then when you come across an object, it is very obvious. The fun thing with a point n click is that when you enter a new screen, there are no handicaps. YOU have to find the relevent objects and hot spots with your pointer, you don't have to run around until you see an icon pop up.

I just think for adventures, point & click is by far the most efficient and the most open-ended, intellectually challenging. Incorporating some puzzles with keyboard controls is totally fine, but Broken Sword 3 type controls does NOT make a good adventure game, because it lends itself to crate-pushing type puzzles and it just feels like a step back in terms of playability. It's almost always a contrived attempt to be different