[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by Foozwah

...it makes me laugh at the notion that 3D is going to be some kind of innovation cure-all for the adventure genre.

In other words, we don't necessarily need better technology to make new, better, and exciting challenges. Instead we need BETTER GAME DESIGNERS.

Are you listening, all you lame developers?! HELLOOOOOO?!!!!

[mgeorge]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

In other words, we don't necessarily need better technology to make new, better, and exciting challenges. Instead we need BETTER GAME DESIGNERS.

Are you listening, all you lame developers?! HELLOOOOOO?!!!!

Haha. I agree.

I recently played Post Mortem and really enjoyed it, despite what I considered very tough puzzles in the game. I had to resort to a walkthrough many times, but I found it so good because it took a different approach to the typical AG. It was somewhat non-linear which I found very refreshing and the story gripped me from the beginning.

I then started Still Life which seems to be revered here, and was frankly disappointed. It had a lot of polish and the story seemed good, but when I got to the baking puzzle, which had absolutely nothing to do with the story as far as I could tell, got frustrated and stopped playing.

So here we have 2 games. One that was made several years earlier than the other. Now we would expect the newer game to have the better graphics and more innovative gameplay mechanics. It got the graphics part right, as they were certainly better in Still Life, but as far as I'm concerned, the actual gameplay was weaker in Still Life than Post Mortem.

I'm not saying Post Mortem was a fantastic game. It did have many of the pitfalls that I personally consider weak in the typical AG, and it could have implemented the non-linear aspects better, but I enjoyed it because it brought something at least somewhat unique to the table.

So even though I'm sure Still Life had a bigger budget, I found Post Mortem more enjoyable with lesser technology. And I think it's probably because the game had a more creative team behind it. Of course this is just my opinion.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

As in any very well written adventure game, the story is revealed as both a reward for accomplishing
challenges, and as a tease to titillate you, the player, to further explore. GTA IV deposits you in a very complex
urban world where you are often at once rewarded and teased with narrative progress and the means to such progress.

Opening cinematic video | GTA IV (NSFW due to mature theme and language)

I finally finished the "That Special Someone" storyline. The ending, I thought, was exemplary of good writing, crime drama style in this case, but good writing in general. The voice acting was impressive, the direction good, the overall narrative depth satisfying. But then this main story - Niko's story (the anti-hero you play) - is only one of many in the game's tapestry of narratives, as big as the city herself, stories often weaving in and out of each other.

How I decided to explore Liberty City, her several boroughs, her seedy or posh neighbourhoods, her lightness and darkness, and her various human population, her nooks and crannies, the sights and sounds, influenced how the stories were revealed to me, in a way that only a kind of adventure game that rewards curiosity and exploration with awesome discoveries and accomplishments can reveal. I felt deep in that world with Niko, a part of it. And I felt deeply in the stories themselves, the stories (and the challenges no less) gave me a sense of purpose in that world and whatever incidents and experiences that happened emerged from the stories and the characters, not imposed on them like what a typical adventure game would do.

And then I remembered a passage from what I had written back then...

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.

- The Cold Hotspot: Part 2: Warmed over leftovers

For those of you who don't know what the hell I'm talking about, just watch the opening cinematic and pay attention to how the dialogue, music, and visuals elegantly set the tone, introducing you to the world and story of Niko Bellic - introducing you into a very deep adventure game type experience.



Another video further shows the startling depth and scope of the gameworld you inhabit as Niko and, much like a good adventure game, is pregnant with many things to discover and experience.

This is simply one way of re-thinking how an adventure game could behave (replace the action and violence with intellectual challenges, of course).

[nomadsoul]

That was my point previously, if you notice, the violence and action is added/extra element where adventure is already there. Same for Infamous, or even non sandbox games like ME RPG, or Ratchet with platforming shooting and adventure.

Adventure is one element in all these games, so if you wanna sell game with JUST adventure aspects make it more worthy of 60$, because masses will ignore.

[imisssunwell]

I don't believe for a second that the perspective—3D or 2D—has anything to do with whether the challenges are smoothly integrated with the environment. It's all a matter of game design. Badly integrated puzzles are found in both 2D and 3D games.

Of course, the puzzle design is the more important bit, but I think that is separate from the graphics used. A 3D world can only offer more potential. Good or bad puzzles can also implemented in text only adventures, while I don't mean to discredit text games, I think graphics add value to the game. The text or graphics debate is no longer a popular one today but if we were to choose between 2D and 3D, I believe 3D is the way to go.

That was my point previously, if you notice, the violence and action is added/extra element where adventure is already there. Same for Infamous, or even non sandbox games like ME RPG, or Ratchet with platforming shooting and adventure.

I don't have examples to back up my claim (hope?) as it hasn't been used much, but I think sandbox+AGs would go well together, I really hope we see such games coming up. It's sad that AG devs are happy to do a bare minimum of features that is there since the 80s.

Adventure is one element in all these games, so if you wanna sell game with JUST adventure aspects make it more worthy of 60$, because masses will ignore

Certainly, giving out a game with a fraction of features modern games have at a high price doesn't make any sense imho. The development costs weren't as high, the work put into it wasn't as much and the outcome doesn't have the same standards, why should the price be even comparable? I found Oblivion GotY 20 Euros, Mass Effect 15 Euros and Prince of Persia 2008 15 Euros again because I waited a little (very little in fact) for prices to drop, those were the PC versions. Myst for iPhone costs 4.99 Euro atm and will probably drop in the following months. Shouldn't a PC game, which doesn't offer as much as Mass Effect for PC, now cost ~7-8 Euros? Shouldn't games that are now at the same rank as Myst and other iphone games cost at most ~4-5 Euros? Shouldn't games that offer less cost less? Also Shouldn't games that are purchased online be ALOT cheaper than retail versions? The cost is lower because there is no physical medium & retail sellers involved and the price should be lower because it's effectively rental. Steam ,imho smartly, does this but I see other online sellers having the prices just a tiny bit lower, which imo is bad.
Regarding prices dropping with time, some AGs take so long to drop their price that you can find AAA titles of the previous year cheaper than AGs which came out 5 years ago, that is not reasonable pricing if you ask me.

[Squinky]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

In other words, we don't necessarily need better technology to make new, better, and exciting challenges. Instead we need BETTER GAME DESIGNERS.

Are you listening, all you lame developers?! HELLOOOOOO?!!!!

I'm working on it, dear. Give me about five years or so.

[nomadsoul]

Now you guys should talk about what you guys would do , if you have to make an AG to break market, what will be your concept to BRING change.

If i had chance, i would have made a large world with first and foremost beautiful locations with beautiful artdirection ofcourse in 3D but less dependence on shaders. Dynamic choices, like rawdanger and wayofsamurai3, changing the game nature from the beginning, but not divided in chapters.
Dynamic music, strong script but the meat of the stuff will lie in CO-OP play.

8 players can play according to their own taste, you can do contextual stuff like climbing and jumping, which is to say not every building will be interactive like infamous. You have to explore and find out, though the choices of who will live and who who will die will be depend on players.
Theme will be totally social , racial problems, human drama, slice of life. Long talks,arguments, sex, situations to backbite, legpulling in corporate, politics(changning the dynamics of city, the playe r in charge as politician will change the life and choices of all individuals as whole),making people fool, stealing, cheating on spouse, courtrooms drama etc.

So the all these guys in different positions , belonging to different strata of society are players. 8 players, 8 people with different background and gender. And their fates will come across not directly/indirectly but with their choices taken.

For e.g if corporate guy plans to make new building, he decides to take the plot.
Plot belongs to player 2, who is downtrodden guy, having crisis in family , one kid with him, divorced, struggling to make money , and given order to leave the property.

Player 3 would be lawyer fighting for choices either for corporate guy or lowlife.(he will be living seperate life and seperate game form the beginning fighting his cases, untill he will get call for corporate guy OR he wont even get a call at all, though as lawyer whe will later get other case choices of other humanplayers with different arc.

Similarly there will be female playable character, she will have choices to fall in love with any of characters, her destiny (whom to come across)will depend upon her choices as well as what other have chosen in past. If corporate guy will try to make out with you (or anyone) you can say no or yes, and starting affair ditching him later, or marrying him. Then calling the other guy at home seduce him(starting different arc within arc) have sex with him , lowlife talking chance to get revenge on corporate guy by nailing his wife. Corporate guy will catch them red handed, destroyed for life, karma of his actions going against him in story sense, but in reality those were choices made by real players. So that would be cool idea and real revolution. The real stuff will be 8 player coop, no guns/and puzzles just human relationships and humandrama to absorb players into the game.

More than 8 players will make things more complex.
You can play offline, in that scenario other players will play their roles with AI.
City will be fictional with real world inspiration.

It won't be like MMO, not more than 8 players , what i want to explore is 8 different aspects of society and their choices affecting others, player can relate and connect with them.

Its my dream game, actually all films and dramas recipe put together in one game. You dont need to create episodes since different playthroughs will result in different experience altogether covering all apsects of society and human nature in script/arcs, with added dynamics of other unknown/known real world players.
Such [roject will need heavy budget ofcourse its dram game, but it is possible not impossible, only if we have talent. Besides that its possible on in 3D, to immerse players, this cant be achieved on 2D images, you cannot tell a playable dynamic mulitplayer story countering movies and novel/books medium with images being process like 'powerpoint presentation'.

Imagine how good it will be to constantly call the corporate wife to persuade to make out with you(during your whole playthrough if you want), acting all generous where in reality you want to pay the guy back. Maybe the girl will just do it for fun, since she is actual human on other side of the planet.

Or even take lawyers pic having sex with stranger, then blackmailing him to fight his case. Agency MMO is doing something similar but again that will be just scenarios with less fixed dialogue/script, and wonder how much they will succeed.

Sorry for long post and little offtopic, but hey we need good ideas and revolution.

[oerhört]

Originally Posted by nomadsoul

Its my dream game, actually all films and dramas recipe put together in one game. You dont need to create episodes since different playthroughs will result in different experience altogether covering all apsects of society and human nature in script/arcs, with added dynamics of other unknown/known real world players.

Sounds reasonable to do.

Originally Posted by nomadsoul

Such [roject will need heavy budget ofcourse its dram game, but it is possible not impossible, only if we have talent.

Naturally. Talent is like magic, it makes practicalities such as content generation go away in a puff of smoke.

Originally Posted by nomadsoul

Besides that its possible on in 3D, to immerse players, this cant be achieved on 2D images, you cannot tell a playable dynamic mulitplayer story countering movies and novel/books medium with images being process like 'powerpoint presentation'.

The only ones I am aware of who try to do anything like what you're proposing are the folks behind Facade and Chris Crawford and his team. The first, Facade, is a game that lasts 20 minutes and whose game space consists of a single apartment, where you meet a total of two people. The other, Balance of the Planet 2000, is actually providing this interactive sort of drama IN 2D, with almost no graphics whatsoever.

Basically, you don't present an argument as to WHY this can't be done in 2D. You'd need to do that if you expect to be taken seriously.

Everyone can dream up utterly expensive and ludicrous game ideas. That's not helping the adventure game industry.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by nomadsoul

Adventure is one element in all these games, so if you wanna sell game with JUST adventure aspects make it more worthy of 60$, because masses will ignore.

This may be one thing that many traditional adventure gamers wouldn't understand. A typical game like, say, Still Life 2 tends to focus almost exclusively on one story, one linear narrative progression. It may confuse these gamers to discover many stories branching into and out of the main story, with each story presenting its own subset of challenges.

But other kinds of gamers are used to this (especially ones who appreciate titles like Grand Theft Auto IV, Mass Effect, or Fallout 3), and those kinds of gamers are a much larger market than gamers who prefer 2D graphics and 5 hotspots per screen. Thus those gamers expect a much higher amount of content as well as a higher lever of quality and consistency, especially if they must pay $50-60 for the experience.

Furthermore, the current market demands features like new downloadable content, add-ons, and naturally, improvements in technical and production quality.

Originally Posted by oerhört

Basically, you don't present an argument as to WHY this can't be done in 2D. You'd need to do that if you expect to be taken seriously.

One argument would be marketability and media exposure. I'm basing this anecdotally, but I bet a comprehensive survey would reveal that a real time 3D adventure is more likely to be noticed by gamers beyond the small niche market of adventure gamers. And that's basically because 3D is the standard these days.

Unless a 2D game does something extraordinarily innovative or unique, many gamers may not give a damn. And of course the media would look to other games...

Originally Posted by Trep

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?

...

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."

- The Cold Hotspot: Part 2: Warmed over leftovers

Everyone can dream up utterly expensive and ludicrous game ideas. That's not helping the adventure game industry.

Well, it's not like the adventure game industry is doing a good job helping themselves today, is it? I catch headlines a lot, but nowhere in the gaming and general media have I caught anything remotely new and bold attributed to an adventure game in a sustained way (that is, new things reported every few weeks or every few months). I'd say those kinds of headlines would be a good barometer of the goings on in adventure games in general.

[Gonzosports]

I read most of this thread, but...haven't read the last few. Still, I wanted to add my two cents.

In no way do I think the adventure game genre is dead.

More adventure games that I am interested come out than I could EVER keep up with.

We need to stop thinking in terms of genres - to me, an adventure game is usually that genre-busting game where the focus is on exploration, story, character, exposition and the gameplay elements serve the narrative's purpose, NOT the other way around (ie, let's make the story fit an FPS.)

To me, the genre is alive and well, and quite frankly, better than it's ever been.

With one caveat, because games have settled into genres more than ever when it comes to video entertainment, adventure games have settled into a niche where they don't always attract the topline writers/designers and don't always appeal to a mass market without the ensuring commercial exposure, so you don't always get the big, hyped, fully-funded and realized game such as a Riven anymore.

Flip side of that coin, computer tools have become so populist, now just about anybody can make a reasonable adventure game, and the independent market is fantastic.

When I think about it, it's pretty much exactly what's happened to the music industry.

[Gonzosports]

BTW, I think GTA IV is an incredible game and extremely well-designed, but I can't play it. Fictional or not, I can't shoot at law enforcement officers and feel good about it.

I just can't be that, even fictionally, bad a person. It's too real, and it makes me feel really uncomfortable.

[oerhört]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

This may be one thing that many traditional adventure gamers wouldn't understand. A typical game like, say, Still Life 2 tends to focus almost exclusively on one story, one linear narrative progression. It may confuse these gamers to discover many stories branching into and out of the main story, with each story presenting its own subset of challenges.

Speculation, though. I don't think this is a particularly important cause for concern. Adventures have been doing branching storylines in earlier times.

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

But other kinds of gamers are used to this (especially ones who appreciate titles like Grand Theft Auto IV, Mass Effect, or Fallout 3), and those kinds of gamers are a much larger market than gamers who prefer 2D graphics and 5 hotspots per screen.

Do you have data to support this claim? Could it be that the current adventure audience does not equal the potential adventure audience to the same extent that the current GTA4 audience equals the potential GTA4 audience?

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

One argument would be marketability and media exposure. I'm basing this anecdotally, but I bet a comprehensive survey would reveal that a real time 3D adventure is more likely to be noticed by gamers beyond the small niche market of adventure gamers. And that's basically because 3D is the standard these days.

Unless a 2D game does something extraordinarily innovative or unique, many gamers may not give a damn. And of course the media would look to other games...

I agree that there may be reasons to go for 3D if you want the current cutting-edge game audience, but other audiences could care less, and could be heavily affected by systems requirements if you aim too high.

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

Well, it's not like the adventure game industry is doing a good job helping themselves today, is it? I catch headlines a lot, but nowhere in the gaming and general media have I caught anything remotely new and bold attributed to an adventure game in a sustained way (that is, new things reported every few weeks or every few months). I'd say those kinds of headlines would be a good barometer of the goings on in adventure games in general.

Heavy Rain gets attention regularly, in the right manner. But yeah, I agree. I only wanted to point out that utopian ideas will solve nothing, sadly.

I'm too tired right now to suggest something myself, though. I have a lot of views on this, but basically, I'd say the correct question is not "how do we make adventure games relevant again" but rather "how can a game in 2009 be relevant by offering a primarily intellectual exercise for adults" or something.

"Adventure games," much like "puzzles," as you mention, come with a lot of unneeded ideological baggage.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by Gonzosports

In no way do I think the adventure game genre is dead.

I think that has been established as truth a long time ago, Gonzo.

To me, the genre is alive and well, and quite frankly, better than it's ever been.

I agree with this, but only conditionally. In terms of things like maintaining some kind of market foothold, expanded distribution methods (brick & mortar store, online purchase to download, Apple App Store for iPhone and iPod Touch, etc.), indie development, and diversifying platforms (consoles, handhelds, smartphones), it's alive and well.

However, in terms of marketing and a sustained level of innovation, creativity, quality, and uniqueness in general it's still pathetic. There are games that do things well, but they're not indicative of adventure games as a whole.

And the old pioneers and great developers who put this genre on the map have largely moved on to more gratifying endeavors. So far we've heard nothing from Tim Schaefer or Ron Gilbert, if they plan to do another adventure game. The Miller brothers at Cyan, despite milking the Myst series to death, finally ended that franchise creatively and are probably exploring new, more challenging ideas for games.

Also, the more visionary creators have pretty much given up working within the asphyxiating conventions of the genre. David Cage dumped it for more creative and experimental freedom, and Ragnar Tornquist threw those conventions away to be able to make Dreamfall the way he wanted it to be experienced (pissing off traditional adventure gamers in the process, but at the same gaining a new following of appreciators).

We need to stop thinking in terms of genres - to me, an adventure game is usually that genre-busting game where the focus is on exploration, story, character, exposition and the gameplay elements serve the narrative's purpose, NOT the other way around (ie, let's make the story fit an FPS.)

That makes sense. But then that could also apply to games that are not necessarily puzzle heavy. Remember, many games adopted the elements of adventure games of 10-15 years ago, many times doing a far superior job of incorporating those elements compared to many adventure games today. Even some first person shooters have been doing this for years. Hell, Half-Life (FPS) did it back in 1998! No One Lives Forever (FPS) and Deus Ex (first person action RPG) did it in 2000.

Today a lot of non-adventure games have "exploration, story, character, exposition and...gameplay elements [serving] the narrative's purpose", as you put it: Bioshock, Fable II, Fallout 3, Mirror's Edge, the upcoming Heavy Rain, Alan Wake, and Project trICO, and other titles. No longer are those elements unique to the adventure game.

If anything those titles bust the dogma of genre, much more so than a game like Sherlock Holmes.


Portal - what starts as a puzzler turns into an adventure romp with a darkly humourous psychological edge. Click the image for a
high def video sampling.

On that note, what do you think of Portal? Have you played it? If so, did you notice how it seems to start as a puzzle game, but no sooner do you start your first puzzle that you notice narrative elements subtly being introduced to you? In fact, after solving some of the puzzles, even more narrative is revealed - in environmental clues, objects, and characterization. Now doesn't that sound familiar to you? What adventure game have you possibly played before that works exactly like that? I can name one: Myst. Click the image above to see Portal in action.

With one caveat, because games have settled into genres more than ever when it comes to video entertainment, adventure games have settled into a niche where they don't always attract the topline writers/designers and don't always appeal to a mass market without the ensuring commercial exposure, so you don't always get the big, hyped, fully-funded and realized game such as a Riven anymore.

Right. But the question I ask is, why have adventure games as we know it settled into a niche? Did those developers and publishers just basically say "We're not changing, we're staying 2D and point & click!"? What's your take on this?

Flip side of that coin, computer tools have become so populist, now just about anybody can make a reasonable adventure game, and the independent market is fantastic.

In the scheme of independently developed adventure games and fan made games most of those that constitute 'anybody' are more likely to mimic what they themselves have been used to pointing and clicking. Only a scant few of them break out of that redundancy to create really new, unique, maybe even innovative games. And those are the ones deserving of attention, particularly by the media. Otherwise many indie adventures tend to be wannabes and carbon copies.

[Mikane Zaprick]

"How can a game in 2009 be relevant?

By offering a primarily intellectual exercise for adults.

Yes. Precisely.



I'm obviously goofing around with your words there. I do understand that just saying these things is nothing but saying these things.

IOW, I take your point that we can all say what would be great, but that misses the point that building any degree of non-linearity into any problem-solving story (which is what real adventure games really boil down to, IMO) is very hard.

I think, though, if I were to be asked for some technique that can be utilized more... one of the best ways to 'fake' non-linearity (the ever loving 'freedom!' to explore we all seek) is the implementation of red-herrings and/or idle chatter. Have good logical puzzles, obstacles & solutions that follow a linear path - this is essential or the game will suck; surround these with non-essential diversions; and create the illusion, at least, of freedom!

Something like that.

And now allow me to repeat your excellent call and response:

"How can a game in 2009 be relevant?

By offering a primarily intellectual exercise for adults.

[nomadsoul]

Heavy Rain gets attention regularly, in the right manner. But yeah, I agree. I only wanted to point out that utopian ideas will solve nothing, sadly.
______________


Utopian for AG developers nowadays, but not for big publishers and companies. Like EA, ubi or Sony. You can make my dream game with half the team of ME. Just same engine, same models, different level design and no shooting/RPG mechanics just plain choice/exploration based gameplay.
It doesn't need new programming skills just polishing existing code. And 8 Player coop netcode is not like something higher than say MAG, Resistance 2 or even Home.

So its not utopia , its possible. Its just that, some AG developers rising to level/standard of other companies, which can solve many things.
New idea, execution and appealing to masses.

And unless you can't dream , you can achieve. Gamedevelopers always took dreams as challenge, to achieve it, many succeed, losers fail.
Recent good examples are suckerpunch. They went for sandbox game, set the bar higher for less than 50 team members which is fairly low for today's standard, and delivered extremely fun game with unique and stylish touch. There are rough edges , in graphics but they nailed certain aspects(specially gameplay and parkour,animations) and people forgot shortcomings. So hardwork paid off, they went for it, achieved it, something beyond their workforce.


@itrepid
Right. But the question I ask is, why have adventure games as we know it settled into a niche? Did those developers and publishers just basically say "We're not changing, we're staying 2D and point & click!"? What's your take on this?

No one can answer this, i pointed it out way back on these forums that AG gamers/developers (average) are conformists, one word to define all.

It reminds me of LoK kain dialogue

Kain
The great library of Willendorf. Filled with dull tomes of trite accounts by pompous historians about 'matters that could not possibly be of interest to anyone but themselves'.

[aries323]

I like Dreamfall a lot. I just can't stand the horrible controls for it i.e, the action band. I also think that Ragnar thought he could make a quick buck or two by making the game more accessible to casual market by releasing it for xbox as well as for pc. However, I think he lost more followers than he gained, making the game as more of an interactive movie, not a game with puzzles that we all know and love so much.

Even (older) gamers who did play Dreamfall admit that the story in Dreamfall is suberp and unique; it is the gameplay and apparently lack of (difficult?) puzzles that is making the game a not so great game for them. And the stealth and action sequences... Why he put them into the game, I don't know? Maybe to apperal to the people who like action games or beat-them-ups? Some (or many?) adventure gamers also had trouble with the stealth sequences in the game, although many of these can be avoided.

The audience for adventure gamers is indeed still mostly elderly people; many of these have weakened hands or arthritis and can't be as swift to click on keyboards as younger people can. Some of these required the help of their sons or grandsons to get them through the game, especially during the stealth or action sequence.

I'm all for trying new things in adventure games; I do believe, though, if we introduce action (hand to hand combat) in an adventure game, you need to do it properly, so it is welldone. This was not the case here, as I recall...

There's a reason third person point and click, in 2D or 3D, has stayed with us for so long: It works. You control a character with the click of a mouse, directing said character to a point where she performs some tasks in order to complete the puzzles in the game.

I also think that many adventure players play third person adventure point and click games, since they are nearly the only games they can play without getting motions sickness.
[An educated guess this is - no less - mo more...]

Frogwares (Sherlock Holmes games) are actually trying something new with the Sherlock Holmes; I like the what they have been doing so far with the series. Adding a little invention here, taking an innovative risk there; we, the players can actually keep up with their changes in the adventure game conventions.

I agree that many games includes or incorporates element of the adventure game, say story, character depictions, narrative. They all lack the one element that is required to make a game adventure game in my book, and that would be puzzles or riddles. To progress in the game you need to solve a puzzle opening a door or getting out of a window or mixing some items together or even paint a portrait or roll a film.

Baldur's Gate 2 has a neat little tribute to the older text adventure games when you asked at one time to go either n,w,e,s.... Very nice touch, I've found Icewind Dale's free expansion Trials of the Luremaster did have riddles for you to solve, but they nearly all ended in combat situations.

The demo for Still Life 2 (and the full game) tries at least to adress the sillyness that the player can't have a 10-foot ladder in inventory along with a huge crowbar, a big hammer, by limiting inventory space. This is a feature, I personally like very much.

[oerhört]

Originally Posted by nomadsoul

Utopian for AG developers nowadays, but not for big publishers and companies. Like EA, ubi or Sony. You can make my dream game with half the team of ME. Just same engine, same models, different level design and no shooting/RPG mechanics just plain choice/exploration based gameplay.
It doesn't need new programming skills just polishing existing code. And 8 Player coop netcode is not like something higher than say MAG, Resistance 2 or even Home.

This is the point where I ask you if you have any experience with game development?

I gave you the two examples I know of of this kind of storytelling game. Both of those projects have taken years and the problem of interactive storytelling has proved to be rather complex.

There's a reason why Assassin's Creed, an ambitious game that took four years to finish, does not try to do this. Or Mass Effect, or Bioshock, or Portal, or GTA IV, or other high-budget, ambitious games. It's not that it's necessarily impossible, but you'd run a very high risk of spending 14 years (or 30!) in the process, like Chris Crawford and his team has. That's simply not viable in most commercial cases. The thing is, this is hard. You don't know how long it will take to crack the problem. The complexities tend to multiply when you're trying to create systems that act emergently and that react directly to each other.

But let's say you've got it all figured. Then I ask this of you: Can you provide a brief design description and production plan for this game, that shows how the product will be possible to produce?

Let's have a quick recap, you actually proposed the following, all in one single game, as being just as easy to produce as other AAA titles:

Originally Posted by nomadsoul

If i had chance, i would have made a large world with first and foremost beautiful locations with beautiful artdirection ofcourse in 3D but less dependence on shaders.

Originally Posted by nomadsoul

Dynamic choices ... changing the game nature from the beginning, but not divided in chapters.

Originally Posted by nomadsoul

8 players can play according to their own taste ... . You have to explore and find out, though the choices of who will live and who who will die will be depend on players.

Originally Posted by nomadsoul

Theme will be totally social , racial problems, human drama, slice of life. Long talks,arguments, sex, situations to backbite, legpulling in corporate, politics(changning the dynamics of city, the playe r in charge as politician will change the life and choices of all individuals as whole),making people fool, stealing, cheating on spouse, courtrooms drama etc.

Originally Posted by nomadsoul

So the all these guys in different positions , belonging to different strata of society are players. 8 players, 8 people with different background and gender. And their fates will come across not directly/indirectly but with their choices taken.

Originally Posted by nomadsoul

Similarly there will be female playable character, she will have choices to fall in love with any of characters, her destiny (whom to come across)will depend upon her choices as well as what other have chosen in past. If corporate guy will try to make out with you (or anyone) you can say no or yes, and starting affair ditching him later, or marrying him. Then calling the other guy at home seduce him(starting different arc within arc) have sex with him , lowlife talking chance to get revenge on corporate guy by nailing his wife. Corporate guy will catch them red handed, destroyed for life, karma of his actions going against him in story sense, but in reality those were choices made by real players. So that would be cool idea and real revolution. The real stuff will be 8 player coop, no guns/and puzzles just human relationships and humandrama to absorb players into the game.

And this is where it really gets lofty:

Originally Posted by nomadsoul

... all films and dramas recipe put together in one game. You dont need to create episodes since different playthroughs will result in different experience altogether covering all apsects of society and human nature in script/arcs, with added dynamics of other unknown/known real world players.

It's not enough to claim that it is possible. You need to provide some more explanation for it.

[nomadsoul]

Originally Posted by oerhört

This is the point where I ask you if you have any experience with game development?

I gave you the two examples I know of of this kind of storytelling game. Both of those projects have taken years and the problem of interactive storytelling has proved to be rather complex.

There's a reason why Assassin's Creed, an ambitious game that took four years to finish, does not try to do this. Or Mass Effect, or Bioshock, or Portal, or GTA IV, or other high-budget, ambitious games. It's not that it's necessarily impossible, but you'd run a very high risk of spending 14 years (or 30!) in the process, like Chris Crawford and his team has. That's simply not viable in most commercial cases. The thing is, this is hard. You don't know how long it will take to crack the problem. The complexities tend to multiply when you're trying to create systems that act emergently and that react directly to each other.

But let's say you've got it all figured. Then I ask this of you: Can you provide a brief design description and production plan for this game, that shows how the product will be possible to produce?

Let's have a quick recap, you actually proposed the following, all in one single game, as being just as easy to produce as other AAA titles:


And this is where it really gets lofty:



It's not enough to claim that it is possible. You need to provide some more explanation for it.

Lets just say imagine alpha protocol and remove everything shooting, stealth and other stuff.
Take the same engine, same conversation code, scripted events, and the locations(for sake of argument).
And make coop with scripted events taking place, depending upon situation/choices of others.
Thats basic lowdown, i can't tell you all because it be long a** description. But the basics will be like that.
One achieved , you can move to next stage of adding more content and convoluted plot.

Problem with these boards is that there are heavy amount of great adventure games on ps1/ps2 made by japanese mostly that made wonders in choice type gameplay(you should be glad that phoenix wright and layton, doing wonders, made it to the west i played both in japanese first and there are still ample amount of them uinknown to west).

Like rawdanger, wonder how many you played,but it it will teach you how choices gamedesign is done. Which is to say my utopia game can easily be achieved on ps2.

Its really an easy game to make, but only painstaking, programming wise too easy, but for me art direction is most important and i wont invest in project unless designers nail artdirection, which i am having hardtime finding, lol.

[Beacon]

In addition to Heavy Rain, I just found this upcoming Wii game from Japan that looks to be taking adventure games a few steps forward.

Fragile: Farewell Ruins of the Moon

Articles: 1UP , IGN

"Fragile follows the adventures of a young boy named Seto who may or may not be the last human being alive. As the lonely character searches the foggy, light-abandoned world for survivors, armed with a flashlight, he stumbles across a mysterious girl named Ren and becomes infatuated with her. Unfortunately, the two become separated and Seto embarks on a quest to find Ren again. Along the way, the hero must fight off ghosts and demons that haunt the landscapes, explore dark and seemingly empty ruins, and put together the pieces of a puzzle that will ultimately reveal the downfall of mankind."



I have seen some articles call it an RPG and others call it an adventure game. But it definitely deserves some attention.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by Beacon

In addition to Heavy Rain, I just found this upcoming Wii game from Japan that looks to be taking adventure games a few steps forward.

Fragile: Farewell Ruins of the Moon...

I found a trailer for it with English subs. Pretty, in the characteristic anime style. If you can stomach the sickeningly saccharine pop ballad soundtrack it's worth a look. Not much gameplay shown but plenty of in-game footage and cinematic.