[SnorkleCat]

Ok...just finished Secret Files: Tunguska.

I think there may have been about one or two moments when we actually understood WHY a certain thing was supposed to happen...but generally, the entire game was spent blundering into puzzles because the characters' thought processes were unnatural. The suspension of disbelief was more than I could handle, and it felt like the 'puzzles' were there to just keep us from getting to the end too quickly.

I'm not morally opposed to the magic pants inventory, but if one spends the whole game picking up the most absurd junk (for no explainable reason) in order to accomplish the most obscure and illogical tasks AND these tasks have nothing whatever to do with the plot...then doesn't that just make it a big guessing game and not actually adventure game? Shouldn't there be some logic involved for something to actually be called a puzzle?

I feel unfulfilled. I'd like to know what other people's opinions are.

[Davies]

Hee hee! I've just said exactly the same thing in the "Worst adventure game moments" thread.

Making a puzzle difficult does NOT equate to throwing in a load of random guesswork. It was always French-made games that were especially notorious for this sort of thing. Where does "Secret Files" come from?

[SnorkleCat]

Hmm..I think Secret Files is German....

[bresto]

i think its german

[Kurufinwe]

I spent several paragraphs discussing Tunguska's puzzles in my review of the game. Everyone should of course read (or re-read) that most insightful article , but, for the lazy ones, let's just say that I agree with the general sentiment.

(and yes, it's a German game)

[buddi]

What a waste of time that game was. It's a pity, the storyline seemed to have a lot of potential, but yeah... the so-called puzzles were ridiculous. I also found the characters smarmy, wooden and unlikeable.

[SnorkleCat]

I spent several paragraphs discussing Tunguska's puzzles in my review of the game. Everyone should of course read (or re-read) that most insightful article , but, for the lazy ones, let's just say that I agree with the general sentiment.

Whoo! There should be a rating on that review ...what, with all that slow undressing of puzzles

...And just so I don't derail my own silly thread, can I just say that as I reflect over the Tunguska experience, I am suddenly gripped by a chilly thought.
Are those kinds of puzzles just a modern adventure gaming convention that must simply be allowed and accepted....like in a Broadway musical when people start dancing and singing in unison?
I feel ambivalent about inventory puzzles anyway, but surely there's a more meaningful way to handle them than this- especially in a story that's supposed to be exciting and intriguing rather than funny... I'm not sure. This experience has just made me even more leery of inventory games...

[HeinzHarald]

How do you make inventory based puzzles challenging? I can think of three major ways:

* you can make the hotspots/items difficult to find.
* you can be vague about what the player is supposed to do.
* you can stretch the logic of the solution.

Tunguska gave the player the option of showing all the hotspots, so they're left with the other two. If the player doesn't know what to try to do next the puzzle isn't very well integrated into the story, which leaves the alternative of not so logical puzzles. And of course if you try to keep the solution logical you need to make the player guess what he or she is supposed to do for there to be a challenge. A logical ("real-world logic") inventory puzzle is usually very simple if you have the goods.

What I'm trying to say is this has always been a fallacy of inventory based puzzles. A difficult inventory puzzler will use at least one of the above (a good one probably a humble measure of all three). I suppose the general trend today is to lessen the hotspot searching, which might explain your chilly thought since the developers are (if I'm right) left with my other two options if they want to make challenging inv puzzles.

For comparison you can look at Dreamfall. It didn't use any of the above and as a result the inventory based puzzles were quite simple.

[AprilLives]

In Tunguska, I seem to recall sometimes needing to apply ordinary items in unusual ways. This doesn’t defy logic but rather stretches the imagination and calls for improvisation … IMO a fun way to solve puzzles in a game.

[Crapstorm]

Excellent analysis, HeinzHarald! I have nothing to add to that. Bravo!

[Len Green]

~~ SnorkleCat ~~... I feel unfulfilled. I'd like to know what other people's opinions are.

Well I do NOT feel 'unfulfilled' !
What the heck ???
IMHO, It was not a MAGNIFICENT game but on the whole, the pros far outweigh the cons.
Taking it all in all I found it a definitely enjoyable game!

If we all 'scientifically' analyze every facet of every well above average effort, and gripe & nitpick and 'demand' that every game be no less than fabulous, we shall only assist the doomsday prophets who predict the early demise of the Quest/Adventure genre.

This doesn't mean to say that we have to enjoy crap or cease to criticize faults... but "Tunguska" overall is NOT crap !!

[jacog]

Wow, that's a really angry sounding post there.

[Crapstorm]

Yeah. It's remarkable how upset some people get when others don't enjoy games that they like.

[Melanie68]

Let's keep this as a discussion about the game at hand and not an analysis of others' posts please.

[Len Green]

I am VERY MUCH too old and have played too may hundreds of Adventures to get angry or upset over trivialities such as pure differences of opinion (which are normal & inevitable!) about the pure enjoyment of games.

This particular phenomenon of running down pretty good Quest/Adventures seems to delight some players and is far from being the isolated case of "Tunguska". I've seen it not infrequently elsewhere !

Sometimes this sort of post is not content with mere criticism of one aspect or another but more or less trashes a whole pretty good (not fantastic) game or sub-genre of games !

What a waste of time that game was.

"Worst adventure game moments"

This experience has just made me even more leery of inventory games...

I have said so before (on this Forum & I think others) and repeat yet again :-

To praise a lousy game as excellent is extremely bad from any number of viewpoints.
Just one :- If a newbie reads that a Quest game is wonderful, purchases it, and finds that it is tripe... s(he) is quite likely to never buy another. This is extremely bad policy.

But to trash Adventures which are OVERALL good, entertaining, and generally enjoyable, is counter productive to the genre as a whole ... and that's what I dislike !

Constructive criticism is VERY useful and helpful (as I know from well over 2 dozen beta-testings... and also the analyses invested in posting over 3 dozen walkthrus).
Destructive criticism (especially when unaccompanied by redeeming features) is not productive !

[jacog]

(all of what Len Green said)

Welllll, with Secret Files there was the below average storyline, poor translation, really sub-par voice acting, complete lack of meaningful character development etc. etc. This is all my personal opinion and I am entitled to have it and voice it, as is anyone else, including you.

The starting post was merely pointing out the nonsensical puzzles that stand out like a sore thumb against what is supposedly a serious story. The idea with such a post is to start a discussion. The topic is inventory puzzles. Secret Files was used as an example, since it was immediate and fresh in the thread starter's memory.

I agree about constructive criticism, and to me constructive would be to continue the discussion and talk about what makes one like or hate a certain type of inventory puzzle, where the abovementioned game may have gone wrong with some, right with others etc etc. Perhaps also why some liked them, some not.

I still would like to know peoples' opinions.

Unconstructive is jumping up and down like a child instead of offering a calm and mature point of view.

The adventure game is not as popular a genre as it once was, and cheerleading for each and every title that comes out will not save it. And instead of asking where the world went wrong, we could look at the genre itself, and at what might put people off.

Read this article - it has been linked to elsewhere as well. I am inclined to agree with it, and so did many who have lost interest.

We love adventure games, story games, puzzle games, call 'em whatever - and we put money into that system to keep it alive... why not demand better quality writing and design? It's really not unreasonable.

( deleting multiple expletives before post submission )

[TalC2]

I'm sorry, but using GK3 as an example of a genre destroyer is not only silly, but also dead wrong. I (no words to describe how much) disagree with that person. I'm tired of childish people crying about the cat//moustache/harley puzzle in GK3. Grow up people...

[HeinzHarald]

Originally Posted by Len Green

Destructive criticism (especially when unaccompanied by redeeming features) is not productive !

You seem to be in the wrong thread. The author of this thread didn't like the puzzles in Tunguska, felt they ruined the game, gave a few reasons why, and wondered if she was alone in thinking this. If this is to be called criticism it seems constructive to me. This thread never was and I'm quite sure was never intended to be a "let's smack Tunguska's ass"-thread, if you pardon my french.

If you have anything interesting to add about inventory puzzles in general or in Tunguska then please do.

[jacog]

I'm sorry, but using GK3 as an example of a genre destroyer is not only silly, but also dead wrong. I (no words to describe how much) disagree with that person. I'm tired of childish people crying about the cat//moustache/harley puzzle in GK3. Grow up people...

I loved Gk3, it was a moody, cozy and interesting conspiracy and mistery. There were only a few goofy puzzles in it, but they stuck out like the CN Tower and broke the mood. Why is it childish to have issues with that puzzle?

And besides, the example was not to say that GK3 destroyed the genre, but rather to point out absurdity within the genre.

And let me just add this:

Adventure gaming is not dead!

To paraphrase a GameSpot podcast interviewer in an interview with Ron Gilbert... it can't suck and be dead at the same time.

[numble]

Originally Posted by TalC2

I'm sorry, but using GK3 as an example of a genre destroyer is not only silly, but also dead wrong. I (no words to describe how much) disagree with that person. I'm tired of childish people crying about the cat//moustache/harley puzzle in GK3. Grow up people...

Hey that guy put his money where his mouth was and collaborated with Tim Schafer in the development of Psychonauts, so I'm sure he has some influence.