[krismort]

Hello

Im new here but oldtime adv fan like alot of people out there and for me it
has been sad to watch the "demise" of the point'n'click adventures, if one can call it such.
However I like the idea of mixing adventure elements into other gaming genres which can be seen in alot af games today. I was wondering if anyone around here has made some thoughts about innovative adventure game design which hasnt been seen or been made before. Or maybe someone onyone got ideas on how adv elements could be mixed into other game genres which hasnt been seen before? Or why not say: How other game elements could mixed with the adv genre.

Personnaly I yet have to see a multiplayed point'n'click adv game! Does anyone if such a game exist ?
Could it be possible to create ? Would it be playable / fun ? Or would Ã*t be
to roleplay like.
Well if anyone have had the same thought about a multiplayer point'n'click adventure game and how it could be done... let me know becourse I've been wondering if it was possible right since sierra commanded the Space Quest 7 team that they had to impleat multiplayer in the upcomming SQ7 before it was canned.
Of course they must have thought of doing a SQ7 shooter or something or makeing a some arcade part of the game multiplayer supported.
I kept thinking if it was possible to actually make a multiplayed adventure game and how it could be done. ... well enough of the babble!... If anyone is interested I'll continue the talk.

- Kristian Mortensen

[Bard09]

[The following is a look at massively-multiplayer adventures. I hadn't thought about network-play adventures when I wrote it.]

I've given this a lot of thought after the demise of Uru. I loved that game because of its implications for multiplayer adventure gaming. Although it had its share of clicheed puzzles (hide and go seek primarily), Uru pinpointed the core design element that all multiplayer adventures in the future will need:

The necessity of an unique, UNKNOWN setting that can scale to thousands of people "realistically."

Setting the game straight in the heart of D'ni had it been discovered by modern-day archaeologists in 2004 was a stroke of genius. By putting the focus of the game on exploration of the unknown and justifying that exploration in a real-world setting, the puzzle-solving elements and massive amounts of people in the gameworld made a LOT of sense.

Try to think of a good setting for a multiplayer Grim Fandango or Space Quest that incorporates solely adventure-game elements (ie no combat or intensive action segments). It really doesn't work outside of creating an entire "world."

And if you're creating an entire "world," what world wouldn't have combat or action in the traditional sense?

Uru figured out that to have a good multiplayer adventure game, setting is absolutely key. In a large, established world, motivation to explore the unknown is limited. And-- at the current point in time-- plot elements of single-player adventures are almost impossible to scale on a massive level if you don't emphasize exploration in some way.

Scalability of the setting is also important. You can't just provide your multiplayer adventure with the entire game on the first day. People need to know that their world isn't limited to what's presented in front of them when exploration is a crucial puzzle element. Since arbitrary statistic or skill requirements as in other MMORPGs can't prevent people from entering areas, it all boils down to puzzle solving ingenuity which can't be as easily controlled.

Uru had the metanarrative of the D'ni Colinization and Yeeta, plus the theoretical addition of hundreds of new linking ages.

That possibility, the scalability to endless exploration, is pretty critical. You don't have that kind of potential in many other settings. You'd have to get pretty inventive. Parallell universes (Sliders, anyone?) A world yet to be explored? (Greek mythology would be make fantastic adventure gaming universe)

In other words, you can't just plop a bunch of players in The Land of the Dead without giving them a reason to explore that makes sense on a massively-scaled level.

[Hamfast]

I think multiplayer adventure games could be a possibility. Look at a game like Maniac Mansion - all you would have to do is allow different players to be different characters and you would have a multiplayer game. A good multiplayer adventure game would revolve around communication, trading items, perhaps timing (one character distracts the guard while the other character sneaks in and grabs the item, etc.)

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by krismort

Im new here but oldtime adv fan like alot of people out there and for me it has been sad to watch the "demise" of the point'n'click adventures, if one can call it such.

Why sad? P&Cs are not going away any time soon. Just check out the upcoming titles this year.

However I like the idea of mixing adventure elements into other gaming genres which can be seen in alot af games today. I was wondering if anyone around here has made some thoughts about innovative adventure game design which hasnt been seen or been made before.

Left to right - Fahrenheit, Missing (In Memoriam), Façade.

Oh man, you should have been here a few years ago. We had so many discussions (and discourses) over how to innovate the adventure game. Heated arguments aside, many us here did agree that the genre needed to be re-thought, re-considered, re-conceptualized.

Take a look at the three titles above. They, imo, represent the new generation of adventure gaming experience. And it's not just in terms of technology upgrades, either, as so many hardcore adventurers are always complaining about. These three games are changing the fundamental constructs of the adventure genre itself, by presenting such groundbreaking ideas as shifting multi-character perspectives, pervasive gameplay incorporating the Internet itself, and plunging the player into a collaboration with the very plot itself to steer the narrative direction of the game. And in defiance to these ignorant adventure gaming Luddites, it is in fact the technology that is helping to make these changes possible. The fact that these particular innovations do not seem to be happening to games in any other genre at the moment is itself startling - ironic, considering you'd never even dream of it in an adventure game.

Personnaly I yet have to see a multiplayed point'n'click adv game!

I personally would find that boring, but then I've always felt that a real time 3D world is the best setting for a multiplayer (and coop) experience. What I love about a 3D multiplayer world is precisely the freeform exploration it allows you and other players, all done on-the-fly. With a 2D world, it must all be pre-rendered, which severely limits you right there. Someone has to keep churning out hand drawn or computer rendered flat worlds, there is no possibility for a scene to continue when your avatar reaches the right side of the screen, and an edit or fade-in to the next scene would rudely destroy the immersion. It would look and feel absolutely awkward.

If anything, why not an axonometric view, like in Diablo II. Or in 3D where the camera can swivel around the characters and even zoom in on them, as in Neverwinter Nights? I think that's more fair than a flat 2D background that perpetually 'slideshows'. And that's it. I'd hate to play a slideshow multiplayer game, the idea sounds quite silly.

[Jakek]

I just thought I'd bring up the only network enabled adventure I know of: Zork: GI. If anyone has played the multi-player mode they will know it was one of the worst ideas of all time. One player played the game, while another player (somewhere on your LAN) sat sending the equivalent of IMs to you telling you what to do. Really, you were better off just having a friend sitting over your shoulder bitching. It was an awful, awful idea.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Good gawd, Jakek, what a stupid idea that was!

Zork: The Backseat Driver

LMAO!!

[Jakek]

It wasn't MY idea. It's the company's idea, I just noticed it.