[Fien]

I had a closer look at both lists. Actually, there's not much difference, not counting the many casuals and rereleases.

AG doesn't have Pagoda's Chronicles of Mystery: the tree of life. And The Path is conspicuous by its absence, which is all the more remarkable because a *revamped interactive novel* for the DS like Jake Hunter: memories of the past did make AG's list.

Pagoda doesn't have AG's Heaven and Les Miserables. Of course there may be one or two differences I missed, but both lists count about 40 adventures. Definitely not 50, unless revamped rereleases like Myst are included.

[Jackal]

Ah, right. Leaving Tree of Life off was just an oversight when making up the article. It was certainly an eligible 2009 game.

Not sure what you're disputing about the 50. The casuals are in a list of their own, so all that's required is counting. But whatever. If you're dismissing more of those as not adventures, no biggie to me. Casuals are eligible here anyway, so the point is moot to the Aggies.

[Fien]

Not sure what you're disputing about the 50. The casuals are in a list of their own, so all that's required is counting. But whatever. If you're dismissing more of those as not adventures, no biggie to me. Casuals are eligible here anyway, so the point is moot to the Aggies.

Casuals are eligible in ALL 18 categories?? That's good to know, because no other adventure site I frequent has gone that far and I assumed casuals were only eligible in their own category.

I have lost all interest in these tainted Aggie awards.

[AndreaDraco83]

What's the big deal about casual adventures being eligible in every category? When the nominations appeared, you didn't raised this doubt upon seeing that 3 Cards to Midnight was nominated for Best Writing - Drama, and this is the only case in which an adventure lite made it to a non-casual category.

So what's the problem?

[Fien]

Originally Posted by AndreaDraco83

What's the big deal about casual adventures being eligible in every category? When the nominations appeared, you didn't raised this doubt upon seeing that 3 Cards to Midnight was nominated for Best Writing - Drama, and this is the only case in which an adventure lite made it to a non-casual category.

Actually, I did object. Read my comments on the main page.
If AG allows a non-adventure game like 3 Cards to Midnight, then why is The Path not even on the game lists?? Interesting that nobody feels like answering that question. Will you answer it?

PS: And while you're at it, please tell me which category I should add to the 39 "traditional PC adventures" to come up with the magic number of fifty adventures: the 9 rereleases or the 12 console games with only one or two real adventures?

[AndreaDraco83]

Bah, I can't really understand the attitude, Fien. The Path wasn't eligible because, despite being a slightly story-based experience, it has nothing that clearly bring it near to a traditional adventure, while the games you criticize - like 3 Cards to Midnight, which is still and undoubtedly a lite adventure - has puzzles and brain-teasing conundrums, characters to interact with, a quite original (and challenging) twist to the definitely casual HOG mechanic, and a fully developed story which even entails some moral choices. These elements - clearly in the "adventure field" - are the reason why 3CTM was included and the lack of these elements are the reason why The Path wasn't even reviewed (we only dedicated to it a feature article. I know: I wrote it ).

Aside from this, yes. You have to add the ports/updates and the console titles to reach 50. Is there a problem? It seems to be that both these categories includes titles that can be well considered full-fledged adventures, or interactive movies/novels (and I'm sure you'll have nothing against this sub-category being considered a proper adventure) or puzzle-driven titles (again: another category worthy of the title, no? Goblins 4, anyone?)

[Fien]

I went back to last year's Aggies to see if casuals were allowed. They were. I must have repressed the disturbing memory of casual Return to Ravenhearst getting the players' votes in the category Best Concept. That's the same category I had in mind for The Path! What was I thinking...

I'll make a prediction. In a few years, there will be a long list of 40-50 casuals and a list of a 10-12 "traditional" adventures. Thank God I still have a large pile of unplayed "traditional" adventures.

[Fien]

Pray, tell me, what is the big difference between the interactive movies on the list and The Path?

And I don't like your "Bah". What's wrong with my "attitude"? I am not allowed to post my opinion?? Isn't that what this thread is for?

[dekaneas297]

It's funny how in almost every thread there are massive objections about casual games, yet there are being defended and labelled by using ridiculous tags as "adventurish", "hybrid", "lite", "somewhat" etc. Pity.

[AndreaDraco83]

Originally Posted by Fien

What's wrong with my "attitude"? I am not allowed to post my opinion?? Isn't that what this thread is for?

You're certainly allowed to post your opinion, and this thread is indeed for discussion. However, statements like: "I have lost all interest in these tainted Aggie awards." are hardly constructive in a discussion, hence the negative attitude I was referring to.

Originally Posted by Fien

Pray, tell me, what is the big difference between the interactive movies on the list and The Path?

Didn't I already answered? Character to interact with, actual puzzles (easy or hard doesn't matter) to engage, a fully developed story.

[Sughly]

Originally Posted by dekaneas297

It's funny how in almost every thread there are massive objections about casual games, yet there are being defended and labelled by using ridiculous tags as "adventurish", "hybrid", "lite", "somewhat" etc. Pity.

It's hard for me to say on the most part since I haven't actually played that many casuals, but for the few I have - namely Drawn: The Painted Tower, I'm very happy I did, and very pleased to see it in the nominations. If having more casuals in the lists means having more games like this, then bring them on!

[Fien]

I feel the urge to post more, but there's no point and it won't be appreciated. So I'll just state for the record that I don't agree with anything you said. Not about The Path (now and in the past), not about counting the console/hand category (with hardly any adventures), not about the concept of the interactive movie.

Originally Posted by AndreaDraco83

You're certainly allowed to post your opinion, and this thread is indeed for discussion. However, statements like: "I have lost all interest in these tainted Aggie awards." are hardly constructive in a discussion, hence the negative attitude I was referring to.

True.

[HaroldO]

Originally Posted by AndreaDraco83

You're certainly allowed to post your opinion, and this thread is indeed for discussion. However, statements like: "I have lost all interest in these tainted Aggie awards." are hardly constructive in a discussion, hence the negative attitude I was referring to.

I beg to differ. maybe "tainted" was a bit too much but I still think he expressed his disappointment in a respectful manner. Negative feedback can be constructive feedback and I think that was the case. Some gamers draw a very distinct line between what some call adventure and casuals and it's not hard to imagine how they feel about seeing a genre specific award including games they perceive as being from a different genre. At least, that's what I assume. It reminds me of when Desperate Housewives was named Adventure Game of the Year by PC Gamer.

That said, I have nothing against "casual" adventures being eligible.

[Intense Degree]

Originally Posted by Fien

I'll make a prediction. In a few years, there will be a long list of 40-50 casuals and a list of a 10-12 "traditional" adventures. Thank God I still have a large pile of unplayed "traditional" adventures.

No, don't worry about that Fien, Casuals are only a passing fad and traditional adventures will always be around as long as people still love them, which they do!

Remember, Adventure Games "died" some time ago already and casual games aren't going to do any long term damage.

[Sughly]

Originally Posted by Intense Degree

Remember, Adventure Games "died" some time ago already and casual games aren't going to do any long term damage.

I can't resist the opportunity to point out a comment in a magazine I read recently - 'Retro Gamer' (I think it was British?). The issue was specializing in the adventure genre, and the inside cover had comments from the writing staff on their favourite games and adventure experiences. A few commented that adventures died a long time ago, but even worse was a comment from another.

Something along the lines of "I have no favourite as adventure games to me are the equivelant of hitting two rocks together". His favourite game posted was something akin to Gears of War 2 (full of sophistication and detailed character study and quite certainly beyond the hitting rocks metaphor).

When there's so many gamers like this these days, it's no wonder we can't make good adventures sell better while the latest shoot em' up sells millions. Sorry for the drastic stray off topic...

[rtrooney]

There are too many replies to quote, so I'll just have at it.

Casual games are not a passing fancy. Witness the success of BigFish, Oberon, SpinTop. There is a market for these games that is not going to go away. They may not be the Adventure that 'you', whoever 'you' are, thinks of as an adventure game, but others certainly do.

Does Wallace and Grommit deserve to be in an adventure category as a series? Don't know, but it is in the Voice Acting list, and it got my vote.

There are three casual games that appear often outside the Casual Game category. They are 3 Cards, Dire Grove and Painted Tower. Without telling you which one I voted for in that specific category, I will tell you that each one received at least one vote in a category other than Casual Games.

I think this (2009) has been a fairly bad year for commercial adventure games. I'm biased. My best estimate is that for every commercial AG I've played, I've played six CGs. And, by and large, I've enjoyed the CGs more.

That's not to say that I haven't enjoyed an AG or two. I have. But some developers, e.g., Frogware seems to have developed the same boilerplate adventure engine that causes people to complain about CGs.

That's about it for me, for tonight. I'll be back tomorrow trying to deflect the slings and arrows.

[Linque]

I didn't know about these Aggie awards before, this is a really cool concept! I don't really understand the rage against casual games - they hardly ever compete at anywhere close to the same level an any categories as full length adventures, and when they do they certainly deserve to have a shot at it. We're here to support all kinds of adventure games, aren't we?

Thanks for doing these awards, I hope this'll become a long tradition and be recognized more and more in the gaming industry.

I really don't get the cynicism that's so prevalent on these boards. While there are good discussions here often, often times I don't enjoy reading some threads because of the many snide remarks and negative attitudes. It's just games, we're supposed to be entertained by them.

[Intense Degree]

Originally Posted by rtrooney

That's about it for me, for tonight. I'll be back tomorrow trying to deflect the slings and arrows.

Not at all, I very much respect your point of view.

To my mind, "casual" is a genre that spans a wide range of games, from Hidden Object to Plants vs Zombies type games and maybe beyond. However, the "crossover" element with Adventure Games seems to be the Hidden Object type of game, and I think that when many "Traditional Adventure" fans rail against "casual" games, it is hidden object games to which they are referring. I think this is because from a cursory glance at the boxes look like they might be trads, which can end up disappointing people when they get it home! (Happened to me with Death on the Nile - should have looked at the box a bit more closely! ).

Now I love Plants vs Zombies/Braid etc. and I am more than happy to play them, in the same way I also play some RPG's and RTS'. i.e. there is nothing wrong with playing them just because they are not adventure games.

When I said that casuals are a fad, what I was really referring to was Hidden Object games (and I didn't explain that properly above - very much my bad! ), which is what I personally see as the "Adventure/Casual crossover area". In respect of HOG's I honestly don't see them being around more than a few years before people are bored with them and moving on to the next thing. Supposedly, these are games which are marketed at people who would not really call themselves "gamers" and who want to play something relatively quick and easy without too much depth to get bogged down in. Now I do not say that there is anything wrong with this, or that "real gamers" can't enjoy them too, but to my mind they are a different category of game to a trad adventure and not likely to keep people interested for years and years.

"Adventure" is a broad heading which many people use to encorporate styles other than "trads" such as "action/adventure", which is not my personal definition (not to say I'm definitely right though! ) and I think that is part of the problem for some of us "trad" fans. We feel like the sort of games we love above all others (not to the exclusion of all others though) is being diluted and there is that fear that the current resurgence in AG's will tail off, and/or be replaced by other types of game, just like in the 90's again!

Personally, I have no problem with people playing and/or enjoying casual games of any type, as I do myself, but some crazy, over-protective and jealous side to my love of "trad" AG's wants them to be kept separate in their own "genre" and not mixed in with HOGs and Action/Adventure etc.

Now I have to accept that that is only my viewpoint and others may well quite correctly disagree with me, but as always, labels and definitions mean different things to different people. I do not want to attack casual games or gamers but when a new Agatha Christie or Sherlock Holmes game comes out as a HOG, I do feel disappointed (because I feel like I missed out on a trad) and the old paranoia that the trad will disappear returns!

Anyway, I've now been going on far too long and off topic so I will shut up!

[Mazinger z]

Have you heard the "Runaway A Twist Of Fate" MUSIC????

It´s great!!!! Please vote!!!!

[Fien]

Originally Posted by Intense Degree

No, don't worry about that Fien, Casuals are only a passing fad and traditional adventures will always be around as long as people still love them, which they do!

Remember, Adventure Games "died" some time ago already and casual games aren't going to do any long term damage.

I'm fine with casuals. As long as they stay in their own territory and don't have consequences for my beloved adventures. Too much too hope for imo, but it's good that not everybody is as pessimistic as me.

And Harold, thanks.