[Intrepid Homoludens]

I have a question for you guys.

If, say, someone you knew who had a university degree, a Masters degree, or even a PhD likes to game and loves first person shooters and action/adventures on the XBox 360, and you suggested they play a typical adventure game (i.e. 2D, point-&-click, inventory based or mechanical puzzles, etc.), and they refused and say that genre doesn't interest them, would you accuse them of being dumb, or even think in your mind that they're too dumb to play adventure games?

[potan]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

I have a question for you guys.

If, say, someone you knew who had a university degree, a Masters degree, or even a PhD likes to game and loves first person shooters and action/adventures on the XBox 360, and you suggested they play a typical adventure game (i.e. 2D, point-&-click, inventory based or mechanical puzzles, etc.), and they refused and say that genre doesn't interest them, would you accuse them of being dumb, or even think in your mind that they're too dumb to play adventure games?

I don't think they're too dumb to play adventure game,
When something like that happens what i have in mind is
"meh.. it's your lost buddy" and walks away heuhehe...

but seriously what i have in mind is "Probably its just not their cup of tea."

maybe similar thing as how some people loves Anime & some hates it with no reason, some likes Latte others loves Cappuccino, some prefer Asian food others like Italian food.....

so yeah can't argue with that.... and I guess it's a waste of time to force them to like something that's not their cup of tea.

[Ascovel]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

I have a question for you guys.

If, say, someone you knew who had a university degree, a Masters degree, or even a PhD likes to game and loves first person shooters and action/adventures on the XBox 360, and you suggested they play a typical adventure game (i.e. 2D, point-&-click, inventory based or mechanical puzzles, etc.), and they refused and say that genre doesn't interest them, would you accuse them of being dumb, or even think in your mind that they're too dumb to play adventure games?

Wouldn't even cross my mind. But I would consider them rather easy-going and not particularly busy with their scientific career.

[Henke]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

And from what we've seen, the genre has remained largely stagnant in terms of new ideas, concepts, technology, quality, and, particularly important, marketing and public relations. Unless someone wants to point out to me any SWEEPING and CONSISTENT PROGRESS since 2005 (and earlier), it looks to stay stagnant.

That isn't really true. If we leave marketing and public relations aside since those are solely based on having a huge distributor behind you who is willing to spend huge amount of money on your product (even despite this the gaming press have written a lot about the Telltale games since they deal with well-known licenses). Something that also should be left out is definitely technology since that has nothing to do with quality according to me. Since this isn't something that is requiered for adventuregames that is probably one of the biggest reasons for them not attracting huge publishers wanting to promote them. But as I said earlier, things are maybe starting to change in that department.

As already pointed out when it comes to new ideas and concepts the exact same thing can be said about other genres. The big difference is that there are a lot more games in most other genres coming out but the percentage of those with new ideas/concepts is about the same as in adventuregames if you compare genre by genre for say the last 10 years.

When it comes to adventuregames the ones that are at the top of my head are:

The Ace Attorney games
Fahrenheit/Heavy Rain
The Samorost games/Machinarium
The Experiment

It should also be said that a game doesn't necesarily have to be revolotionary new to be good but it's definitely something to try and aim for when it comes to gamedesign IMHO.

[Lee in Limbo]

I think there has actually been a fair bit of innovation in the AG genre in the last ten years. Sadly, almost none of it is continuous. Different developers adopt new ideas and new methods of interacting with the characters and environments, but the results are mixed, and the expectations so high that they invariably fail in the eyes of consumers and critics alike. Then the developers fold and their innovations are forgotten, with no further advancements to smooth out the rough parts that didn't fly.

The most highly visible AGs of the last decade have all stuck pretty close to home because the market is so slim around here, and we as fans are very picky and not particularly adventurous (for adventure gamers). A developer can try a whole new mechanic for conversation or object interaction, but if everything isn't pitch perfect--and yet dead simple to operate--it gets dumped like rancid restaurant rubbish. We're bad like that. We rarely reward innovation. We all WANT innovation... until it arrives and proves to be less (or more) than we were hoping for.

In the end, we just want to be mildly surprised with a fairly fresh coat of paint on our reliable old four door sedan. And yet we get hurt and defensive when people poke us with a stick to see if we're still breathing. Personally, I still favour AGs above anything else the market is putting out in any numbers... but if somebody announced a much more story-and-character-driven interactive digital medium, I'd be there with bells on.

At the rate we're going, in another decade, AGs as we traditionally think of them (a balance of dialogue and mini-game interactions with some exploration and atmospherics for flavour) will be like IF is today: Fan-driven and entirely impenetrable to anyone growing up with video games (PC and console) today. That's not to say there won't still be games like these being made, and made well. But the commercial market is going to shrivel away to nothing... with something newer and more engaging (and yet still easy on the nerves; unlike Action-Adventure or Horror Survival) moving in to take its place. That's where things are already going, and as far as I'm concerned, it's all for the best.

There's my doom and gloom post for 2010. I'm gonna go back to being sunny and supportive for the rest of the year.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by Limbsie

Personally, I still favour AGs above anything else the market is putting out in any numbers... but if somebody announced a much more story-and-character-driven interactive digital medium, I'd be there with bells on.

Watch this, Limbsie...

Mass Effect 2 - Reason why Liara is hardened (spoilers - do not watch if you hadn't yet played this game but plan to)

Mind you, this is the second "installment" of a three part series. Liara is a character you first meet and recruit in the first Mass Effect, and she comes back to Mass Effect 2 as non-squad member but still is important in the overall plot of the overarching story that spans three entire games. Talk about deep story and deep character development.

This is, of course, an action RPG, not an adventure game per se. But watch it to see how arguably far deeper it explores narrative, character, and interactive dialogue, which we know are elemental in the adventure game genre. In fact, your dialogue choices have noticeable impact on how the story unfolds (though not perhaps as dramatically so as Heavy Rain).

Notice that this sequence is entirely in-game, not a pre-rendered cutscene. Also notice the facial expressions and body language. Many emotions expressed in narrative scenes are often non-verbal; characters will often cry and, yes, shed tears in real time depending on your dialogue choices.

This could be one of the many ways an adventure game could offer us something new and fresh while still keeping its qualities as a genre intact.

[ozzie]

Originally Posted by Henke

The Ace Attorney games
Fahrenheit/Heavy Rain
The Samorost games/Machinarium
The Experiment

It should also be said that a game doesn't necesarily have to be revolotionary new to be good but it's definitely something to try and aim for when it comes to gamedesign IMHO.

Hm, I'm not sure about Ace Attorney, because Japanese adventure games have different roots, they're basically based on different conventions and find their inspiration in different titles. While western adventures have mostly their roots in titles like Myst and Monkey Island, for Japanese adventures it's more games like Snatcher and Policenauts. I'm not sure about this, though. I haven't occupied myself with Japanese adventures much so far. But you know, titles like Hotel Dusk and Another Code go in a similar direction, I guess.
Zak & Wiki, on the other hand, is probably more inspired by western adventure games.

Fahrenheit was definitely innovative, if not entirely successful.

Machinarium's specialty is the wordless player character (only special for a 3rd person game, though) and the rather environmental puzzle design.

The Experiment, like the In Memoriam titles, are indeed innovative. I haven't played any of these so far, especially since the former isn't supposed to be very good. Which shows that innovation alone isn't what anyone might want.

Maniac Mansion is not only revered because it introduced the SCUMM interface, but because it's also a good game, at least for its time. The same goes for The Last Express and its real-time scenario. That's why I call more for a vision than strictly innovation. Machinarium is a very inspired titles and you feel that the creators knew where they wanted to go with it, that they had a clear vision what the wanted to do with every facet of the game. Sometimes this results in innovation, sometimes not so much.
Anyway, as long as adventures as a whole are inspired, visionary, I'm happy.

[booB]

Originally Posted by Lee in Limbo

We rarely reward innovation. We all WANT innovation... until it arrives and proves to be less (or more) than we were hoping for.

In the end, we just want to be mildly surprised with a fairly fresh coat of paint on our reliable old four door sedan.

Finally, some truth in this thread!!!!!!!

[Fien]

Originally Posted by Lee in Limbo

We're bad like that. We rarely reward innovation. We all WANT innovation... until it arrives and proves to be less (or more) than we were hoping for. In the end, we just want to be mildly surprised with a fairly fresh coat of paint on our reliable old four door sedan. And yet we get hurt and defensive when people poke us with a stick to see if we're still breathing.

We? Who's this we? It's you. Not me.

[Henke]

Originally Posted by ozzie

Hm, I'm not sure about Ace Attorney, because Japanese adventure games have different roots, they're basically based on different conventions and find their inspiration in different titles. While western adventures have mostly their roots in titles like Myst and Monkey Island, for Japanese adventures it's more games like Snatcher and Policenauts. I'm not sure about this, though. I haven't occupied myself with Japanese adventures much so far. But you know, titles like Hotel Dusk and Another Code go in a similar direction, I guess.
Zak & Wiki, on the other hand, is probably more inspired by western adventure games.

The Ace Attorney games, Hotel Dusk, Another Code and the first Professor Layton are the only Japanese adventuregames I've played. But I thought that Ace Attorney and maybe Layton were the only ones that brought something completely new to the table (although I thought all games were good), eastern or western differences aside.

I think that the gameplay in Ace Attorney differs from all other adventuregames I played in the way you are suppose to present evidence at the right piece of dialogue rather then solving "puzzles".

In Layton you have more traditional puzzles in contrast to the ones usually presented in adventuregames since they are often more connected to the story. This actually helped increasing the quality of the puzzles.

I think that Hotel Dusk and Another Code were pretty standard in their ideas but still really good as I already stated (especially the first one).

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by Henke

I think that the gameplay in Ace Attorney differs from all other adventuregames I played in the way you are suppose to present evidence at the right piece of dialogue rather then solving "puzzles".

In Layton you have more traditional puzzles in contrast to the ones usually presented in adventuregames since they are often more connected to the story. This actually helped increasing the quality of the puzzles.

My question is, have these things influenced how many other kinds of adventure games are designed? Have enough adventure game developers critically studied these Ace Attorney and Layton as perhaps a point of departure for their own games in terms of fresh ideas? Particularly in such details as how intelligently puzzles are designed and in creating non-typical puzzles that are still challenging?

[Lee in Limbo]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

Watch this, Limbsie...
This could be one of the many ways an adventure game could offer us something new and fresh while still keeping its qualities as a genre intact.

I haven't had the opportunity to play Mass Effect yet, but I've been paying attention to it. Sadly, the combat system involved looks like something I'm not that comfortable with. however, the narrative tools are fascinating.

Originally Posted by Fien

We? Who's this we? It's you. Not me.

I would never dream of speaking for you, Fien. >_>

[Henke]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

My question is, have these things influenced how many other kinds of adventure games are designed? Have enough adventure game developers critically studied these Ace Attorney and Layton as perhaps a point of departure for their own games in terms of fresh ideas? Particularly in such details as how intelligently puzzles are designed and in creating non-typical puzzles that are still challenging?

Not yet and I actually hope that never happens but instead they come up with new ideas of their own. The main point of coming up with new and innovating gamedesigns is to make a game unique. Uniqueness is unfortunately something very rare when it comes to games of any genre (the same goes for movies, music and most things for that matter).

[Fien]

Originally Posted by Lee in Limbo

I would never dream of speaking for you, Fien. >_>

Heh. My, what a lovely protective selective memory you have!

But my point, which I'm sure you didn't miss, was that your "we" is pretentious. It claims to hold some general truth, although it's just your individual opinion.

[DustCropper]

As some have already said, I think a lot of it has to do with economics.

Back when adventures made lots of money, there was plenty of innovation. I didn't get into playing adventure games until the mid 90s, but even until the late 90s it seemed that designers were willing to take risks.

I just took a quick browse at the games that were released in 1996 and 1997 and I was surprised to see so many innovative titles.
http://www.mobygames.com/browse/games/adventure/1997/
http://www.mobygames.com/browse/games/adventure/1996/

There were titles like: Titanic: Adventure out of Time, Blade Runner, Twinsen's Odyssey, Bad Mojo, the Last Express, the Neverhood, Tex Murphy... those are just a few that I can remember off the top of my head.

These days though, there doesn't seem to be quite as much creativity going on. That's not to say that it's completely absent, as people have mentioned there are some unique games still being made like Machinarium. I played through the demo of Dreamfall last night too and found it to be pleasantly refreshing. Same with Telltale's games like Tales of Monkey Island and Wallace and Gromit, I like how they've simplified the puzzles and made adventure games more accessible to a mass audience. And although I haven't played them myself, the Mysterious Island games look quite interesting too.

But generally developers seem more cautious with taking risks these days compared to the past and I think some of that is due to the sad fact that there isn't much money in adventure games any more.

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

My question is, have these things influenced how many other kinds of adventure games are designed? Have enough adventure game developers critically studied these Ace Attorney and Layton as perhaps a point of departure for their own games in terms of fresh ideas? Particularly in such details as how intelligently puzzles are designed and in creating non-typical puzzles that are still challenging?

I think generally for a game to have a huge impact on the industry, it needs to be a significant financial success. I haven't been following games for the last few years (I only got back into them recently when I heard that there was a new Monkey Island coming out ) but I'll take a guess that among the best selling adventure games last decade were Syberia, the Longest Journey, and the Myst sequels, which is probably why so many adventure games these days imitate their styles.

[nomadarchitect]

I apologize if this has been discussed already, but this is a point that I find wicked interesting:

Originally Posted by Sughly

Yeah I'm gonna go from here because I think the discussion on FPS has kind of been covered. I think this is a huge issue with the genre because players have been what I think is dumbed down by FPS's. I know people would'nt like the comparison but I can't help but compare FPS and adventures to Hollywood and independant/foreign film. People grow up on Hollwywood and don't bother to appreciate how much better filmmaking is in independants and foreign countries because they have been conditioned somewhat to the Hollywood formula.

Now all of a sudden we have a mainstream gaming audience conditioned to action, predominantly shooting, and developers can't look past that. As long as this is the case, the majority of gamers will want to shoot and kill, and the ability to stop, slow down, interact at a calm pace and really explore story outside of action is to many unachievable.

You know, I don't think that players have been dumbed down by FPSs or empty hollywood blockbusters. I blame the weakening of story as an integral part of culture, specifically the oral sort, and the subsequent weakening of imagination. Story used to be the be all of cultural identity, how we knew who we were. Today that role is largely filled by the media sphere and it's become saturated with images of violence and materialism. TV shows us that, 9 out of 10, the mysterious doorway and the alien temple lead to death instead of discovery.

Where's the wonder? The excitement at the unknown as opposed to the fear being fostered in its place. Western culture, I think, simply doesn't encourage those things that would predispose someone to Adventure Gaming these days.

I still have clear memories from when I was extremely little of my mother making up stories about Billy Brown and the Faeries and of her reading me Stoker's Dracula by grapefruit candelabra one night when the power went off. I'm very curious to know how many other fans of this genre were heavily read to as children or had a relative who could weave a good tale.

Anyways, to the point. I love adventure games, and I agree that they're floundering, but definitely not dying. As a concept at least. It's the one place in the gaming world I can go to find story, but they're just not immersive enough to really suck me in these days for all the reasons people have mentioned. The rigidity, the rehashed plot hooks, etc. Not to say they're all like that of course! There have been some great gems recently and I'm just getting around to playing them. *joy*

What I'm really interested to see going forward is how new technologies will affect the genre, specifically things like Project Natal and improved AI which throw out the old modes of interaction. If I can literally speak to the in-game characters and manipulate the puzzles using my own hands... well I'll freak out. Having said that, with the right funding and the right creative minds involved, I think astounding things can still come out of the genre with the tech available.

That conservatism posters have been talking about definitely needs ditching annnnd maybe we can agree to stop telling stories about amnesia, WWII, caricatured dark pasts, and any of the dead horse mythological locals.

Especially WWII, and that goes for the rest of the gaming industry too. Just stop it with the Nazis already.

Cheers,

[Lee in Limbo]

Originally Posted by Fien

Heh. My, what a lovely protective selective memory you have!

But my point, which I'm sure you didn't miss, was that your "we" is pretentious. It claims to hold some general truth, although it's just your individual opinion.

I'm taking this to PM out of politeness.

[Sughly]

Originally Posted by nomadarchitect

You know, I don't think that players have been dumbed down by FPSs or empty hollywood blockbusters. I blame the weakening of story as an integral part of culture, specifically the oral sort, and the subsequent weakening of imagination. Story used to be the be all of cultural identity, how we knew who we were. Today that role is largely filled by the media sphere and it's become saturated with images of violence and materialism. TV shows us that, 9 out of 10, the mysterious doorway and the alien temple lead to death instead of discovery.

Where's the wonder? The excitement at the unknown as opposed to the fear being fostered in its place. Western culture, I think, simply doesn't encourage those things that would predispose someone to Adventure Gaming these days.

I think you've raised an extremely interesting point. It's not necessarily to say though that FPS's and Hollywood still haven't contributed to detracting people from the heart of storytelling, but become a factor in a larger picture of things, and as you say something that seems to be much more rooted in the Western audiences. I've researched some of this area before at uni, around the fear culture and whatnot and I think you are very much right about it's influence here.

I still think these aspects of gaming make people in this kind of culture feel comfortable with not wanting that same level of story that they would once have in games, and developers can say 'its okay, this is what games are now', and players are happy with that. Because of that expectation from gaming now, anything more than that seems slow and boring. It's no wonder that we're finding these great titles come out of countries less dominated by this cultural ideal such as Germany with Daedalic and King Art games.

Originally Posted by nomadarchitect

That conservatism posters have been talking about definitely needs ditching annnnd maybe we can agree to stop telling stories about amnesia, WWII, caricatured dark pasts, and any of the dead horse mythological locals.

Especially WWII, and that goes for the rest of the gaming industry too. Just stop it with the Nazis already.

Made me laugh . Very well put.

EDIT: Sorry but I forgot to mention the section on Project Natal. I think these kinds of devices aren't going to lend themselves to anything any time soon outside the realms of gimmicky Wii Sports style games. Honestly, I see it as an overhyped Wii peripheral, and look how lame the control style has become for Nintendo. I'm a big Nintendo fan, and I have a hope (misguided as it may be) that one day we will see the return of a normal controller...

[potan]

Not sure if this will add to the discussion, but sometimes i want to hear comments from what i consider as non-adventure gamer when they play Adventure Game

ok, this time it's Hotel Dusk :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9U0oOMJLmtg

fast forward to 1:57 for the comments
(while i agree with the complain about text speed..... the rest of the comments makes me want to punch them in the face)


my point is...
Adventure game is clearly not meant for some people, and those kind of gamer surprisingly grow exponentially in this day and age.. sigh

[Lee in Limbo]

Originally Posted by potan

ok, this time it's Hotel Dusk :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9U0oOMJLmtg

fast forward to 1:57 for the comments

I couldn't make it that far. The Frat Boys put me off completely.