[jackshaftoe]

You like adventures, I like adventures. It’s why we’re all here.

But a few things have occurred to me as of late:

1) The POSSIBLE pinnacle of the genre, Monkey Island, was released about 17 years ago. It’s fair to say that quality-hunters have to dig deep into the bargain bins, second hand shelves and eBay to find quality back-catalogue titles.

2) As this site’s frequently updated news section shows, adventure games are still alive and kicking. But, high-profile, mainstream titles are fewer and farther between these days. So for adventure gamers looking to get regular fixes or just those of us who like the occasional curiosity we might have to broaden our search criteria a little bit.

3) Those mainstream titles are having to push our expectation of the genre to reach wider audiences. That’s why we have fighting and stealth creeping into our games. So adventure games nowadays aren’t always a pure point-and-click experience.

So the question is: what games would you recommend that aren’t exactly adventure games, but have the general spirit of an adventure game?

Lots of folk would suggest that the adventure game didn’t die out, just filled it’s locations with zombies and became Survival Horror. But there have been plenty of other titles name-checked on this site as well: Knights of the Old Republic, Ico and Shenmue to name just a few.

So what games would you name? Adventures, but not exactly adventures? And why.

Me, I’d suggest:

Disaster Report (Zettai Zetsumei Toshi in Japan and SOS: Last Escape in Europe) on PS2.

There’s a bit of platforming and dodging environmental hazards, but the physical challenge is probably no greater than Fahrenheit. Other than that it’s all-out exploration with progress happening via collecting and using items. You even get to meet some characters. Pretty adventure-y I’d say.

Your turn.

[stuboy]

Originally Posted by jackshaftoe

we have fighting and stealth creeping into our games.

A lot of people don't seem to acknowledge that many of the older "purist" titles had arcade sequences (CMI, S+M, FOA, FT etc.) or constant perils and reaction-based death sequences (KQ1, SQ, BS etc.) In short, as adventure games have waned in popularity, the faithful have become more and more "protectionist" and less forgiving about what is a "pure" adventure. In the old days, it was; "We've made an AG. It has a combat minigame halfway through", "Oh, fine". Nowadays it's; "We do have a bit where you have to sneak past a guard", "ITS NOT A PROPER ADVENTURE!"

[jackshaftoe]

Exactly!

Although I can understand why. I think part of the pleasure of adventure games is that they let you relax. You don't see a game over screen if you take your hands off the controls for a few seconds.

Add to that the fact that often the action sequences can be quite badly implemented (I'm looking at YOU BS3) amd that many folk came to the genre through games like the Monkey Island series or others where there weren't any skills challenges and you can understand the aversion.

And, now you mention it, I seem to remember one of the Quest For Glory titles having a combat sequence where my hardy adventurer kept getting killed by a tiny bat.

Now let's add Silent Hill 2 to the list!

[bruno321]

Shenmue!

And as it has been said, The Nomad Soul? Although I can't really agree since I haven't played it It's on my Dreamcast-To-Play list.

[Ninth]

To me it's just a matter of doses. A game with too much action stops being an adventure game and becomes an action game. Of course, that means that there's a no man's land where we could argue until our fingers are sore.
Fahrenheit or The Nomad Soul belong to this no man's land, while Dreamfall or Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, with so little action, belong clearly in the adventure game's country, and Tomb Raider in the action-adventure's on.

Anyways... Anachronox and Beyond Good and Evil could be AGs, except that they're not, and they're both awesome.

[MoriartyL]

I disagree with the premise of the question. Games like Knights of the Old Republic are not just not adventures, they don't feel like adventures. That games which are not adventures could have "the spirit of an adventure" is a load of hooey. If it had that spirit, we'd call it an adventure. A better question would be "Where can I find good stories outside of adventures?" or if you prefer "Where can I find good puzzles outside of adventures?". Both very straightforward questions that will get you what you're looking for, as opposed to the vague and confused question you are posing here.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Where did the 'magic' of the adventure games of yesteryear go? They migrated into the games of other genres.
Left - Beyond Good & Evil; Right - Silent Hill 2.

Excerpts from...


The Cold Hotspot: A critique of the state of adventure games: Part 2: Warmed over leftovers | AdventureDevelopers.com

You've heard it countless times before. According to the media the adventure game is dead. Or dying. Or at least no longer important. The irony is that other genres, like role playing games (RPGs) and first person shooters (FPSs), have been borrowing key attributes and techniques of the adventure game for years, and even some of them are doing it better now than most modern adventures. You can discern this in titles like No One Lives Forever 2, Star Wars: Knights Of The Old Republic, Deus Ex, Beyond Good & Evil, and Fable. When this happens, the game expands into new territory, it grows, deepens, and the player often discovers a new way to have fun. The game innovates and the genre diversifies. Silent Hill 3, despite its survival horror pedigree, features wickedly difficult puzzles on par with that of Myst or The Longest Journey. Fable, an RPG, rewards players for thorough exploration by allowing them to discover peripheral but enriching stories about the game's world and characters, very much like an inquisitive dialogue tree in any adventure game.

...when was the last time the news mentioned an adventure game character like George Stobbart instead of Lara Croft, or Kate Walker instead of Gordon Freeman? Why has the adventure game genre slipped under the public radar while thrilling games like Halo 2 and Half-Life 2 enjoy being on the covers of magazines and the headlines in newspapers?

I imagine it has much to do with the fact the adventure game genre in the most general sense has done nothing new and rakishly exciting in the past several years. Why would, say, PC Gamer or even The New York Times run a headline saying "Another Egyptian/Templar/Atlantis Themed Point-&-Click Adventure Game Released"? Many of us in the gaming community blame the media for their lack of attention, but seriously, is it really their fault that they have nothing new to say about our beloved genre? Why would they want to feature a game type that has largely remained fundamentally the same in design, concept, and technology for ten years, and generally, decidedly, has very little to offer in terms of new gameplay, narrative style, and other features?

"Today I mostly see exercises in using 3D Studio Max or Maya, and not an effort to bring a unique vision (however simple it can be!) onto the screen, and then infusing it with personality," observes Marek Bronstring, owner of the gaming site Adventure Gamers. "It's like all these games are too shy, wanting to wear the same clothes to fit in, and avoid doing something interesting for fear of being laughed at by the rest of the group. People might not laugh at them, but no one looks at them either."

The golden days of Lucas Arts and Sierra are pretty much done, so it seems pointless to cling to them and demand that they produce games that are carbon copies of what we had in 1995, knowing full well that they would be wasting their money. After all, we 'hardcore' adventurers are, realistically, a very small niche market now, and games have become a huge business, the stakes are much higher, companies have far more to lose today.

However, it seems that many of us are not necessarily looking for the carbon copies per se, as we are thirsting for what made those great adventure games great in the first place: quality, originality, and creativity. These, in the end, constitute the 'magic' that had left the adventure game and, ironically, migrated into the games of other genres.

What about the unforgiving context of the reality of commercial viability and market demands? In an interview at Rebell.at, Monkey Island games mastermind Ron Gilbert had this to say: "Most decisions come down to this. One of the problems with modern adventure games is that they can cost a lot of money to do in full 3D, and there is not the sales to back it up. But, the market would not accept a 2D game either, so adventure games get screwed."

[Periglo]

Originally Posted by jackshaftoe

So the question is: what games would you recommend that aren’t exactly adventure games, but have the general spirit of an adventure game?

Psychonauts had a definite adventuresque flavour, at least in my opinion.

[Larry Emmo]

From what I hear Silent Hill is supposed to have a bit of an adventure feeling to it and some other game...but I cant quite remember which one. Blair Witch project too a bit apparently.

[Risingson]

Oviously adventure games are not adventure games when they are not adventure games.

[Dale Baldwin]

Originally Posted by Risingson

Oviously adventure games are not adventure games when they are not adventure games.

But that wasn't the question

[MoriartyL]

Originally Posted by Dale Baldwin

But that wasn't the question

Well, if you think about it logi-cully, the question could be read thusly:

"When is NOT (an adventure game [is] an adventure game)?"

To which the answer is indeed "when they are not adventure games", which -we could further point out- is equivalent to a null set.


Ah, but -you interject- we are misreading the question! Quite right, old chap. In fact it should be interpreted like so:

"When is (x | x is not an adventure game) an adventure game?"

To which the answer is also a null set. So you see, it doesn't really matter how you read the question, because no matter what your interpretation there are no correct answers to it.


It should also be noted that since there are no sensible answers to the initial question, this thread (past the initial question) should be nonexistent in itself (a null set). So let us please cease this foolishness.

[Larry Emmo]

Or to put it simply without using all those big words, he should change it to what adventure-like games can you recomend or something like that to end the confusion for people who dont read the entire thread.

Like Little big adventure.

[Risingson]

Originally Posted by MoriartyL

Well, if you think about it logi-cully, the question could be read thusly:

"When is NOT (an adventure game [is] an adventure game)?"

To which the answer is indeed "when they are not adventure games", which -we could further point out- is equivalent to a null set.

This also proves that when something is "null", it can have random and surprising values.

[ssa]

I will have to recommend Morrowind (Elderscrolls 3) .

Sure there are some action, but It's up to you whether or not you want to emphasize on it.

What I liked about it was that you dont have to be good at fighting, better to use your puzzle-solving scills and figure out the best ways to beat them or avoid them (made easier through invisibility and levitation scills).

There are loads of quests to accomplish at your own pace. Endless exploration possibilities on a vast map. Those (like me) who like reading can search out all the books. (And as a side note to another thread on this forum: there are lots of huge rats.)

I can't stand pointless violence and get freaked out by action games. Meaning: If I can stomach Morrowind, I'm sure anyone can. (Whether they want to is a different question.)
My ex tried to get me to like action by buying games like Alone in the Dark 4 and Silent Hill 2. Sure there are some adventure elements (read collecting items and some puzzles) but I was constantly battling my way through zombies or other monsters. Doom feels less violant (at least there I know what the goal is).

I dont mind grey zones but I'd prefere if games like Silent Hill 2 was labelled with the emphasies on action not adventure - it lessens the confusion.

[cwapitm]

The Tomb Raider games, Indiana Jones and the Infernal Machine, or King's Quest VIII. All were more focused on action, but they did have some light puzzles. I would consider them more to be action adventure though.

[ssa]

So let us please cease this foolishness

I hope we shall never cease beeing foolish. I could never face that kind of world.

[wildcat]

Originally Posted by Larry Emmo

Or to put it simply without using all those big words, he should change it to what adventure-like games can you recomend or something like that to end the confusion for people who dont read the entire thread.

Like Little big adventure.

And Mr Smoozles Goes Nutso

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by Larry Emmo

From what I hear Silent Hill is supposed to have a bit of an adventure feeling to it and some other game...but I cant quite remember which one.

Silent Hill 3

Actually the Silent Hill games as a whole had a LOT of adventure feeling to it. They feature a choice of 3 levels of difficulty for the puzzles (how often does that happen with adventure games?), the highest of which are on par with - and can ever surpass - many puzzles in bona fide adventure games. I've played Silent Hill, Silent Hill 2, and 3, and the puzzles are WICKED. The games - especially the first Silent Hill - also featured an impressively explorable world by way of minute details that, when looked closer at, crack open backstories, insights into the various characters you meet, and the history of certain places in the game.

In many ways the Silent Hill series often trumps most adventure games of the past decade in terms of sheer richness, depth, intellectual challenges, and character complexity.

Blair Witch project too a bit apparently.

Absolutely. I've played Blair Witch Vol. 1: Rustin Parr, and I can vouch for it. The puzzles were very good, intricate, and very well integrated into the story, mythology, and logic of the gameworld. Again there is a choice of puzzle difficulty (why the hell can't adventure games have this by default?!!). I loved spending time in the town library, that's where you got a huge lot of the game's backstory AND hints on how to deal with adversity further into the gameplay. Beautiful looking game, effectively suspenseful and macabre atmosphere.

I wish more adventure gamers had discovered this game.

[MikaelS]

Originally Posted by Ninth

To me it's just a matter of doses. A game with too much action stops being an adventure game and becomes an action game. Of course, that means that there's a no man's land where we could argue until our fingers are sore.
Fahrenheit or The Nomad Soul belong to this no man's land, while Dreamfall or Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, with so little action, belong clearly in the adventure game's country, and Tomb Raider in the action-adventure's on.

I second that.