As much as I love "Hit the Road", the puzzles sometimes did not make much sense. I know, logic in a Sam & Max world, I must be crazy. Thing is, I found the puzzles frustrating sometimes. "Hit the Road" was one of the few games that I really needed a walkthough to finish.

Telltale's games are awsome. I found myself looking forward to my monthy dose of Sam & Max hilarity. The first episodes were too easy, but they got harder as the season went on. It got so I could finish an episode in one or two sittings :P

Still, Sam and Max is easily my favorite adventure game that game out on 2007 or 2006.

I think Hit the Road might be looked at here through severely rose-tinted glasses.

Personally I think the puzzles in Sam & Max are excellent: sufficiently challenging, but not obscure or annoying.

That said, I don't play adventure games primarily for the puzzles, I play them for the total experience. So I'm pleased to see an adventure game series with priorities other than looking really serious/dramatic or punching you in the face with elaborate and sometimes frustrating obstacles. I mean, that's okay too, but there's so much of that right now. The Sam & Max games just give you lots of fun stuff to discover and add unexpected surreal twists to gameplay mechanics that we already know, which in my book is totally awesome.

Games like Sam & Max and Phoenix Wright have given me the most fun in adventure games I've had in years.

Season 1 became a little too... WHAT??

Define serious. I'm not sure if I should take this kind of criticism seriously.

At least for me an adventure game involve progressing storyline and puzzles that make you think.

There's as much or as little "storyline" in a game like DoTT as there is in Season 1. DoTT is not an adventure?

Serious in the sense that you can't do stuff you do in a comic without it looking silly. In a comic or cartoon,

Spoiler:

you can let the main characters crawl into a giant fish, and let it be fished up by a fisher, and then moved to the world of fish

but try doing the same in 3D, and it does not funny, it just looks weird. Thus serious in this context is that it looks more like real life. Life is serious, a comic/cartoon is not(in comparison) and that in itself makes a comic/comic more silly and funny and gives the writer more chances to do weird and really strange things without it looking weird.

Apparently, Season One has appeared on Play.com and Amazon.co.uk. The front cover image, on Play, looks like the American copy means it's in a box; but it does say it'll change. They give you the option to pre-order now for £24.99.

http://www.play.com/Games/PC/4-/3358...e/Product.html

On Amazon.co.uk, the front cover says it's PC DVD-ROM not CD-ROM. And the price is slightly higher at £25.99.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/o/ASIN/B000Q...pf_rd_i=468294

I'm not crazy about 3D, I prefer the ancient handdrawn adventures, but I really do not understand what you're saying, sorry. If you mean that Season 1with its walking statues etcetera is weird where the first Sam&Max game was funny, then I couldn't disagree more. And if you mean Season 1 is more like real life, then I envy you, you must lead a very interesting life!

If you use one of these links, Adventure Gamers gets a small affiliate commission :)

Sam & Max at Amazon UK
Sam & Max at Amazon Germany
Sam & Max at Amazon France
Sam & Max at Amazon.com
Sam & Max at Amazon Canada

I think what he means is that 2D cartoon graphics are better at establishing suspension of disbelief than 3D graphics. I can't comment on that since I haven't played Season 1.

At least DoTT has plenty of interesting puzzles. Though I'm personally not a big fan of DoTT, and the lack of real storyline is the main reason.

This makes me happy.

Really? I prefer progressing puzzles and a storyline that makes you think.

That's not the case with S&M either.

You're just not thinking hard enough. :P

Ariel Type, you haven't actually played the Telltale Sam & Max episodes, have you?

I've played through all of them, it's my job after all. "Interactive sitcom" is the best definition so far. In other words, "interactive cartoon" or "casual adventure", which is the same here. It makes an illusion of adventure game, while being simple dialog-based comedy. From this point of view I enjoyed several episodes (5, 2 and 4), but when a player or reviewer say "it's a classical adventure game at its best", I just can't understand them.

Casual adventure?

Naturally I'd like to know your definition of an adventure game. Don't skimp on the details!

Well, you're absolutely right. However, unlike yourself, I (and some others, I gather) see this as an improvement to "classical adventure games". :D

It's great that people are finding new ways to make adventure games, and because the games are smaller, improvements can be made faster. Most people agree that the games have improved over the course of the series, so hopefully things will continue in that direction.

The games are exactly what they intended to be.

On an entirely unrelated note, Squinky's quote from Gaston in Disney's Beauty and the Beast, has caused some unresolved issues to resurface within me: When I first saw the movie, my child's brain* was enraged by the fact that - despite Gaston's bold and arrogant claims - we'd just seen that Belle's book did have pictures; when she was singing to some sheep by a fountain! I'll have my revenge on you yet, Disney!

It's "Raja-the-Tiger-having-heart-patterned-boxer-short-fabric-in-his-mouth,-despite-having-only-torn-the-visiting-prince's-outer-trousers" all over again.

*Just to stress, I was entirely a child at that point, not just the brain.

That's a good quote, and true too.