[stepurhan]

Originally Posted by nomadsoul

One achieved , you can move to next stage of adding more content and convoluted plot.

This is the bit that it's easier said than done. Even only adding two branches to the plot at the start creates two entire stories worth of additional content to create (though, dependent on how the branches are set up you may be able to parts in both branches). The more branches you add within the story, the more you have to produce (much of which won't be seen by any player who picks one branch and doesn't replay games to find otehr routes)

Professor Layton (which I have played to completion) isn't a great example of the choice you're talking about. The story actually progresses in a pretty linear fashion. Your choice is pretty much limited to what order you do puzzles in (which, being stand-alone, have no direct effect on the plot). The freedom to leave a puzzle you can't solve until later is welcome but it's nothing like the sort of choice you were originally proposing.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by Mikane Zaprick

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.

Aren't other kinds of games doing this already, though? Take, for example, the single player RPG Oblivion (link to trailer). You start on a journey to find the sole heir to Emperor Uriel Septim VII, who was assassinated, in order to help save your land of Tamriel from impending threat of the gates of Oblivion that, once opened, would unleash hordes of malevolent forces on all. But that is merely the main story. Along the way you are completely free to explore and dive into nearly countless subplots, side quests, and challenges.

Grand Theft Auto IV offers a sandbox version of this, too. As Niko you have your own personal story to discover but enroute to it you may do whatever you want - enter races, go on vigilante missions, become a thief and courier, follow romance and date, take friends out on the town, get drunk, etc. You can even simply ditch your vehicle and walk all around the city from dawn to dusk and eavesdrop on pedestrian chatter, stop and buy a hot dog from the street vendor, take in a cabaret or comedy show, ride the subway, or go on a helicopter tour. All these things emerge from, and eventually lead back to, your true reason for being in Liberty City.

It's on one level nothing but filler, but on another level it plunges you deep into the story and gameworld, thus creating an emotional, psychological, cultural, societal, and even political connection between you as the character and that world, so that experience is as complete as possible.

Are there adventure games that do these things to envelope you in that kind of experience, but instead of action and violence the challenges involve brainwork?

Originally Posted by nomadsoul

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'.

Heh heh, that's a spot-on analogy. And yet those same historians keep wondering why no one gives a damn about their "dull tomes of trite accounts".

[Mikane Zaprick]

Originally Posted by MZ

...some technique that can be utilized more... one of the best ways to 'fake' non-linearity ...is the implementation of red-herrings and/or idle chatter ...create the illusion, at least, of freedom!

Yes, indeed.

I am sure there are more than a few good examples of this. The term 'sandbox' you used is one I have heard and seen in gamer forums and reviews and such... so I know I'm not bringing up an entirely new concept, just pushing for more of it in adventures as a way to, if not re-invent, keep what I perceive the proper adventure alive. I appreciate you citing those two examples from beyond the Adventure Game world. I've never played either but I know at least one of them is wildly popular. So... good good good, eh?

And I really think the technique is best suited to adventure games - even if I would seem to be biased in that direction as an nearly exclusively AG fan.

I have seen this in AGs too, for sure. I think Boakes has even impressed me so far as to use it (the red herring) in the inventory (!). Where I was able to pick up and tote around an item or two that never came into use at all. I loved this and am 'ashamed' (hyperbolic term) that I can't remember if it was Boakes or another of my favorites of late that put this into effect.

I would love to see more of it. Many modern (loose term) action games have, along with their new (again a loose term) physics engines, made it possible to 'use any object' as a projectile/weapon kind of thing. This, again, is part of the scheme I am hoping to see more of in the AG world.

"I gotta get in that room, I believe"

In the world of Thief (yes even moreso in the dreaded TDS!), for instance, I can get in like this or like that or like this or like that; and, btw, I won't be sure I needed to get in there until I do, of course... whereas if I find a fishing pole and a cherry bomb propped up against the door in a typical AG, I know I need to use them to get in and that I do need to get in... typically.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by Mikane Zaprick

The term 'sandbox' you used is one I have heard and seen in gamer forums and reviews and such... so I know I'm not bringing up an entirely new concept, just pushing for more of it in adventures as a way to, if not re-invent, keep what I perceive the proper adventure alive.

And that is what I've been generally addressing all these years. You most likely are a veteran of adventure games, but I'm not. I've only played a certain number of them, but I was quick to notice that after a while they all start to look alike, play alike, feel alike, and I got bored. I wasn't bored, however, with how the narratives were presented, or even how the gameworlds were presented. It was something else. And as a seasoned gamer I found that mildly revolting...

Originally Posted by Trep

The incest contained within the almost hermetically sealed genre of adventure has trapped both game designers and gamers themselves into instinctively thinking that a puzzle must be both elemental and obscurely difficult, as well as 'stereotypically puzzle-y'. That is, it must look and behave like puzzles they have encountered innumerable times in past games. While this mindset is understandable, it's painfully constricting as it leads both parties - gamers and designers - into a cul-de-sac of redundancy, and has produced laughably recyclable and artificially integrated obstacles. Quite a sin: let he who is without prior experience in the 'poke - pencil - through - keyhole - to - knock - key - out - onto - newspaper - below' puzzle cast the first stone.

Discussing the convention of the tired 'puzzle-cutscene-puzzle-cutscene' approach, Jake Rodkin, writer for the games site Idle Thumbs, says: "At their core adventure games are nothing but this weird linear puzzle skeleton -- that is what makes them work. But if that's all there is, any illusion of choice, of exploration, of interaction, of discovery -- especially by people who can't read and infer directly into the abstracted scripts of the game -- is completely obliterated...the genre has done it to itself - ideas have been rehashed time and again in the last 15 years without any new blood."

- The Cold Hotspot: Part 2: Warmed over leftovers

It naturally leads to a couple of questions: Are there not other ways to experience an adventure game besides the typical story-puzzle-story-puzzle-story spiel? If so why has there not been any kind of trend or meme that explores other ways?

And I really think the technique is best suited to adventure games - even if I would seem to be biased in that direction as an nearly exclusively AG fan.

It can definitely be suited to other kinds of games, whether the underlying concept is narrative, abstract theme, environment, or even symbolism.

"I gotta get in that room, I believe"

In the world of Thief (yes even moreso in the dreaded TDS!), for instance, I can get in like this or like that or like this or like that; and, btw, I won't be sure I needed to get in there until I do, of course... whereas if I find a fishing pole and a cherry bomb propped up against the door in a typical AG, I know I need to use them to get in and that I do need to get in... typically.

The "puzzles" in the story of the upcoming Splinter Cell: Conviction encourage multiple solutions from
the player, ranging from confrontation to discreet infiltration.

A Thief game is very good example of this flexibility that is lacking in most adventure games of the past decade. Splinter Cell is another series that did this. In fact, I highly recommend you watch this brief video of the upcoming Splinter Cell: Conviction showing how multiple solutions encourage the player to be creative. Imagine replacing the action bits with logical steps demanding brainwork, cunning, and Machiavellian planning. Notice, too, that multiple solutions emerge naturally from the gameworld, not imposed on them like how many adventure games do it.

The puzzle is a fixture that needs to be figured out, but it's the solution that is not fixed. The player is free to explore options, maybe even combine options. RPGs have been doing it for years. Action/adventures, too. Even certain adventures - Dreamfall, for example - did it.

But that doesn't necessarily mean that the puzzle is dumbed down, it just means you have more than one way to solve it, and how you go about it depends on what's attractive to you. And as you pointed out, advancing technology can lend itself greatly here to the point where solutions based on, say, physics, or light, or A.I. trigger the player to be creative in ways a typical and traditional adventure game puzzle never allowed him/her to be.

[oerhört]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

A Thief game is very good example of this flexibility that is lacking in most adventure games of the past decade.

I agree, however, to be clear, Thief is a very good example of the flexibility that is lacking in most games, period.

Although adventures often seem to be especially rigid.

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

Notice, too, that multiple solutions emerge naturally from the gameworld

How? It all looked very designed to me.

Or do you mean to say that it all looks like natural actions to take in an environment such as the one depicted? If so, I'd say that's also true for a lot of good adventure games.

The one big difference I see between the Conviction approach and the point-and-clicker is the elasticity of approaches that will be "good enough", and I agree that adventures should look into that. However, it's a bit harder to do (or, I find it a bit harder to imagine) those kinds of interleaving challenge structures when they need to be non-violent and provide a coherent story.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by oerhört

I agree, however, to be clear, Thief is a very good example of the flexibility that is lacking in most games, period.

Possibly because many developers focus on other things besides that.

Although adventures often seem to be especially rigid.

Which is ironic considering that early adventures were so progressive, even innovative. Myst is one example. The original Adventure was, too.

How? It all looked very designed to me.

You misunderstood. Emergent as in the solutions logically exist in the natural gameworld, not imposed on it. You're inserted into a situation where you don't have to guess the one solution the designer built into it. Instead you're offered a number of possible solutions, each one with different details but all pointing to figuring out the challenge.

One example of this is can be viewed in this gameplay clip (skip to 5:00) of the upcoming Silent Hill: Shattered Memories. Simplistic problem, yes, but it illustrates how solutions can be natural and indigenous to the gameworld. In this case there is just one solution. But you can engineer that puzzle to be more complex, like rendering the system offline and finding out how to put it back online to unlock the security door, or some other complication that still respects the gameworld.

If so, I'd say that's also true for a lot of good adventure games.

What would be a good example of this? Particularly from a game released in the past couple of years?

Otherwise I disagree with it generally. In my opinion many adventure games feature puzzles for the sake of puzzles, intruded into the gameworld with details not necessarily native to that gameworld. Who in a gameworld modeled more or less on the real world, for example, would construct a slider puzzle that once solved opens a door or container? The answer to that is the game's designer.

This was an extremely annoying detail (and typical of the genre) I found when playing Still Life, a fairly modern adventure. The moment I saw it I threw my hands up and said, "WTF! How many damn times must these idiots stick in a slider puzzle and it doesn't even make sense in this situation!!!!"

The one big difference I see between the Conviction approach and the point-and-clicker is the elasticity of approaches that will be "good enough", and I agree that adventures should look into that. However, it's a bit harder to do (or, I find it a bit harder to imagine) those kinds of interleaving challenge structures when they need to be non-violent and provide a coherent story.

What do you mean by "good enough"? Could you elaborate, please?

It may be harder to do, but not impossible, I trust.

And I'm not sure what the inclusion of non-violence has to do with it. A good adventure game can exist where the player can non-violently solve a certain dilemma that results in a violent solution just as it could result in a non-violent one. Playing a game with violence in it is up to the individual player. I don't think non-violence is a requisite for a good adventure game.

Non-action, however, could be a requisite. That is, solutions that don't necessarily demand quick reflexes from the player and instead asks him/her to use his/her brain.

[Mikane Zaprick]

gameplay clip (skip to 5:00) of the upcoming Silent Hill: Shattered Memories.

That was an encouraging preview in a lot of ways. This is what's amazing and depressing: that so much of the technology and technique is there, yet adventure games -- which I still maintain are the perfect platform for these things -- are not just stagnating but apparently regressing.

Hidden Objects? Really? Glorified Pixel Hunts! And Pixel Hunts Are Not Meant To Be Glorified, goshdamnit...

Of course it's also depressing* that even with all the things 'right' about what they've shown us there... it appears that for some GODAWFUL unreason third person perspective, with it's wildy herky-jerky and immersion-breaking PsOV still hasn't been kicked in it's long-teeth until it's dead and gone.

*Personally, IMO, I think, if you ask me.

[oerhört]

Trep: I'll elaborate later, when I find the time.

Mikane Zaprick: I'd like to point out that the hidden object genre, although it has grown stale now, was originally not a case of regression but actually provided an interesting and very easy-to-learn offshoot of the adventure genre, as far as I'm aware. The audience was (and is) not necessarily the same as with AGs, and a lot of the hidden object games could obviously do with more ambition, but in itself the genre actually one of the few new developments that have occurred the past few years with relation to the adventure genre.

I find it especially interesting when tricks developed in HOGs are applied "back to the mother genre", in more traditional puzzle adventures such as the recent Pahelika, which provided a lot more satisfying audiovisual microrewards than many modern adventures I've played.

[Mikane Zaprick]

Mikane Zaprick: I'd like to point out that the hidden object genre, although it has grown stale now, was originally not a case of regression but actually provided an interesting and very easy-to-learn offshoot of the adventure genre, as far as I'm aware.

Well, you see, as far as I'm aware it's very much a regression to the kind of things you could find in a childrens' weekly magazine from the 50s, 60s, 70s or before... and it's never been interesting.

So, I have to disagree.

And I should further like to point out that it has crept its way into games that are being sold as AGs.

Let me spell it out as I see it:
A. HOGs are mind-numbing crap - not 'casual'.
B. HOGs are creeping into the studios of once reliable Adventure Game developers.
C. This trend oughta be fought tooth-and-nail because it amounts to a further dumbing-down of our beloved genre.

Lastly, I've been told to 'watch my language'. I will not. I don't know if it's because the busy-body who told me to watch my language is some sort of dim-witted Jesus Freak, an arbitrary dim-wit, or just simply a dim-wtted busy-body, but I'm not going to worry for a second about just what silly notions this dim-wit has about some particular words being scary.

So, it's been nice talking to y'all, it really has... but goodbye.

[Fantasysci5]

Originally Posted by Mikane Zaprick

Lastly, I've been told to 'watch my language'. I will not. I don't know if it's because the busy-body who told me to watch my language is some sort of dim-witted Jesus Freak, an arbitrary dim-wit, or just simply a dim-wtted busy-body, but I'm not going to worry for a second about just what silly notions this dim-wit has about some particular words being scary.

So, it's been nice talking to y'all, it really has... but goodbye.

It's very bad form to insult a moderator. I asked you that because we try to keep these forums suitable for many ages.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by Mikane Zaprick

That was an encouraging preview in a lot of ways. This is what's amazing and depressing: that so much of the technology and technique is there, yet adventure games -- which I still maintain are the perfect platform for these things -- are not just stagnating but apparently regressing.

By that highlight, do you exclusively play adventure games? Or are you at least curious and open enough to explore other game types if they offer you something compelling enough that you're willing to learn a new way to play? Like, say, a very intriguing story, or particularly titillating challenges that in some ways remind you in essence (not in execution) of a favourite adventure you've played before?

Hidden Objects? Really? Glorified Pixel Hunts! And Pixel Hunts Are Not Meant To Be Glorified, goshdamnit...

"Goshdamnit"? LOL, that's charmingly...provincial. I think "goshdarnit" would've been a better choice, though, if you wanted to drive the provincialism home.

Anyway, I ardently agree about pixel hunting. For something that was originally implemented due to technological limitations, it sure has become a kind of sacred cow among conservative adventure gamers.

Of course it's also depressing* that even with all the things 'right' about what they've shown us there... it appears that for some GODAWFUL unreason third person perspective, with it's wildy herky-jerky and immersion-breaking PsOV still hasn't been kicked in it's long-teeth until it's dead and gone.

*Personally, IMO, I think, if you ask me.

Again, does this perspective have to do with you playing only adventure games, with very static flat 2D backgrounds? Because - and I say this based on anecdotes - I almost never hear complaints about similar PsOV from veteran gamers who play a variety of games - adventures, first person shooters, third person action/adventures, isometric strategy games, RPGs, etc. Perhaps old time conservative adventure gamers are so used to a fixed perspective that they may easily become disoriented when moving into real time 3D.

BTW, the Silent Hill games have always been known for intently disorienting the player. That's conventional in its lexicon, the idea of visual or physical imbalance or unsteadiness lending to the psychological and emotional theme running through the story, the characters, and the gameworld itself. Silent Hill gamers have always embraced this.

[Eyeball Kid]

I'd like to see Telltale do a Sandman art approach to one of their episodic series. To have several seperate stories based in the same universe, but with different art direction everytime. How cool would that be? Alternatively, with TOMI they could make these five episode season in one style, and then another season in a different style. As long as the art direction isn't purely cosmetic, but have an effect on the story and gameplay.

Perhaps there'll be a Sandman series one day as well, alongside with Calvin and Hobbes (oh yeah!) and Gabriel Knight: The new mystery. Imagine if all these would come true within the next ten years? I'd also like to see someone do a series of standalone 'short story' games as well, where each episode has its unique story and direction. Sort of the video game's equivalent of Silly Symphonies or something (omg! Another great idea: Imagine a Disney lisence to create a series of short adventures!) Oh hell, if I carry on dreaming these pipe dreams I'll soon be out of my mind....too late...AAAARGH

[...]

Personally sometimes I wonder if there is too much of a hang-up on things like game-play, simulation based or otherwise, and puzzles in general.

One of my favourite 'adventures' recently was a game called Dear Esther. But the problem is it has nothing one would call 'game-play'. Where does something like this fit into your guys gaming world view?

[Trumgottist]

Originally Posted by Eyeball Kid

Calvin and Hobbes (oh yeah!)

A Calvin and Hobbes game will never happen for (at least) two reasons.

1) Watterson has stopped making more C&H comics, because he felt he was done with it, and didn't want to start repeating himself.
2) There is no (official) Calvin and Hobbes merchandise, also because of Watterson's decision.

While I in some way think it's a bit sad there won't be any more Calvin and Hobbes, I also think it's very cool.

[Gonzosports]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

BTW, the Silent Hill games have always been known for intently disorienting the player. That's conventional in its lexicon, the idea of visual or physical imbalance or unsteadiness lending to the psychological and emotional theme running through the story, the characters, and the gameworld itself. Silent Hill gamers have always embraced this.

As an aside: what's funny about this observation is that, the massive-super-completely-absurd amounts of fog in the town of Silent Hill is that it was done to mask the PSX's distance rendering limitations. The thing is, it worked as a way to disorient players, add a sense of eerie atmosphere, and to mask the baddie about to jump at you.

One of the times where a tech limitation actually brought out an interesting new avenue to frame the narrative.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by Gonzosports

As an aside: what's funny about this observation is that, the massive-super-completely-absurd amounts of fog in the town of Silent Hill is that it was done to mask the PSX's distance rendering limitations. The thing is, it worked as a way to disorient players, add a sense of eerie atmosphere, and to mask the baddie about to jump at you.

One of the times where a tech limitation actually brought out an interesting new avenue to frame the narrative.

I know, isn't it great?! On another ironic but related note, the same could be said about the point & click interface in adventure games, but that it never evolved beyond what it still is - a mini-game of find-the-hotspot. And how old is that interface? 20 years or more?

[Eyeball Kid]

Originally Posted by Trumgottist

A Calvin and Hobbes game will never happen for (at least) two reasons.

1) Watterson has stopped making more C&H comics, because he felt he was done with it, and didn't want to start repeating himself.
2) There is no (official) Calvin and Hobbes merchandise, also because of Watterson's decision.

While I in some way think it's a bit sad there won't be any more Calvin and Hobbes, I also think it's very cool.

Yes, that is a problem. Plus the fact that Watterson has a talent for hiding away from the public eye. But as games become more advanced and more interesting to previous "non-gamers" perhaps a company such as Telltale would be able to pursuade him. Watterson is an intelligent artist and has an eye for quality, and maybe a game adaptation could be just the way to provide an interesting and fresh angle to the Calvin and Hobbes universe.

What I think would be a bigger problem though is finding the right writer to do a proper pastishe/imitation of the writing style as I doubt Watterson would be willing to actively collaborate even if he let someone make a game. I'm not too worried about the adaptation of the art style as I think there are a lot more of talented visual artists in the industry than writers. Watterson's writing style can be quite subtle and ambigous and might be harder to imitate than a Monkey Island and Sam & Max type of writing style as these series can rely on self-commenting and exaggeration to cover up flaws or limitation in the gameplay/story/content

I really respect Watterson's decition to stop making more C&H comics though and it really just encourages fans to go back and reread the classics. Many comic book creators don't seem to know when to end a series and move on to the next project.

[mgeorge]

Originally Posted by noknowncure

Gah! The smug arrogance of some Adventure Game fans - The constant, self aggrandizing desire to paint the rest of the public as vapid dullards who aren't prepared to think.

Guess that explains the extinction of the crossword and the trivia quiz.

No. Must be because they're thick. Unlike the Adventure Game Audience, solely populated by the cream of Dr. LucasArts Academy for gifted intellects - 'Pushing a pencil through a keyhole and catching the key on a scrap of paper since 1832.

God that had me laughing out loud. Vapid dullards. LucasArts Academy for gifted intellects Hahahaha!

I'm not trying to be rude here, but this guy,(or girl) has a point. It seems like some folks around here do think if you play an RPG or FPS you are a "vapid dullard".... God, laughing again.

Anyway I'm going to finish reading this thread before I comment, but found this statement so amusing I had to post!

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by noknowncure

Gah! The smug arrogance of some Adventure Game fans - The constant, self aggrandizing desire to paint the rest of the public as vapid dullards who aren't prepared to think.

Guess that explains the extinction of the crossword and the trivia quiz.

Interestingly there's at least a few crossword puzzle apps for the iPhone; here's one. Another one was developed by The New York Times. Great example of a classic game adapted to the times.

Originally Posted by mgeorge

God that had me laughing out loud. Vapid dullards. LucasArts Academy for gifted intellects Hahahaha!

I'm not trying to be rude here, but this guy,(or girl) has a point. It seems like some folks around here do think if you play an RPG or FPS you are a "vapid dullard".... God, laughing again.

Rampant snobbery can be found (or can find you) in the fan base of any kind of game. Even the adventure game. Which is, yes, very amusing. I love how these misguided people are so quick to snub those of us who [also] play FPSs, RPGs, RTGs, and other very challenging digital entertainment pursuits, given that many of these gamers are computer science majors, engineers, post baccalaureate accomplished, scientists, historians, and even intellectuals.

I say whatever kind of game it is, enjoy it however you want to. Just because it's an adventure game doesn't make that game or you superior to any other kind of game or gamer.

[Zack]

In my opinion, I do not think that Adventure Games are dead, they just don't look exciting and fun to play anymore.

A few years ago, The last Adventure game I played that I really enjoyed was Dreamfall: The Longest Journey, the sequel to one of my all-time adventure games. It was amazing, the story and setting was very imaginative, and exciting, It was great to see April Ryan again, grown up and living in Arcadia. And it had a real Empire Strikes back kind of cliffhanger, which I was not expecting. The combat, and Stealth sections were the only frustrating thing about the game.

Since then, there has not been one single adventure game that I wanted to play, or got my interest. Now, I just play story-driven action games on my X-Box 360 that I bought two years ago.

I agree with the person on this thread on that we need new Innovation and great writing in Adventure Games. My idea of a great adventure game is a great and exciting story, a likable lead character, puzzles that make sense and aren't brain-bustingly hard, and very pretty, realistic, or cartoonish graphics. Hopefully we will get a game in the near future that's in the same Caliber, as The Longest Journey, Grim Fandango, and other great games that were made years ago.