[Marek]

What's your main reason for playing adventure games.
If other, please specify! (Not that I can think of any other reasons at the moment.)

[AGA]

What about 'all of the above'

[remixor]

Option number 2 works for me.

I've got to say, I don't have the same view of adventure games as being "games for people who like to use their brains" or anything of that nature. Honestly, most adventure game puzzles are fairly absurd (even the "good" puzzles), and I think more than indicating intelligence conquering some kind of mental challenge they just indicate that the player is rather patient and knows how to solve adventure game puzzles. It's fair I think to say that adventures cater to people who are more patient or who hold character and story (or even puzzles) to a higher degree than other game elements, but I don't think this has anything to do with intelligence. And Marek, this isn't directed at you by any means, and I know it's related only tangentially to your post It just seemed like a somewhat-fitting place for a mini-rant, since I see the aforementioned "smart gamers" thing pop up all the time in adventure gaming communities.

[Skinny Minnie]

Originally Posted by remixor

Option number 2 works for me.

...I think more than indicating intelligence conquering some kind of mental challenge they just indicate that the player is rather patient and knows how to solve adventure game puzzles....

LOL mix! You're right, though! You bring up some really good points, too, and I agree with your post.

[SamandMax]

I think as long as a game has a good story, no matter how bad it is, I'll probably like it. To me, The Dig didn't have a very good storyline (I'm not a big fan of sci-fi stuff) and never really got interested in playing it (Plus it had the dumbest skeleton puzzle ever).

A game like The Dark Half, which everyone seems to hate, I kinda liked because it had an interesting story (Mostly in part of Stephen King). You can ignore a lot of problems if you want to see how the rest of the story plays out.

[Swordmaster]

I chose #2, but I also prefer adventure games because they require little or no action sense. I like games where I can take my time, explore the screen and consider the options before proceeding - not just run mindlessly forward hittin' shootin' and mutilatin' everything and anything.

[Marek]

Remixor: I started this thread to see if an assertion I made in an article I'm currently writing actually holds up. So far it does, and I agree with you 100%.

I chose not to include an "all of the above" option because I'm curious about people's primary reason for playing adventure games. If you choose one of the options it doesn't neceserrily 'exclude' the other.

[Erkki]

I agree, and I'd say strategy games (would) give you more of a mental challenge.
(would, because most recent ones I've played just measure how fast you can build buildings and units).

[James]

It's the story really. Few other genres, primarily roleplaying games, offer such a wealth of narrative and scope for emotive involvement.

[emma]

Definately a good mix of the two. I find extreme pleasure in just roaming around taking in an AG-world, just as much as focusing on understanding and overcoming a problem/puzzle. Too much of either, and it turns a little bit tedious for me. Didn't vote, perhaps I should have clicked other, even though both of them applied to me?

[I Love Cookiemonster]

I just like all games with a good story inthem

[Henke]

Option number 2 really nails it down. A good and intresting story with many twists mixed with a really great atmosphere is what I want when I play games.

[syntheticgerbil]

I play adventure games b ecause I am a social degenerate.

[Erwin_Br]

Originally Posted by syntheticgerbil

I play adventure games b ecause I am a social degenerate.

In that case I'm wondering why the adventure genre isn't flourishing...

--Erwin

[mycroft]

Other:Escape from reality.Plain and simple.

[Marek]

I think I would put that under #2.
Escapism = exploring a different world.

[pleto4_ryan]

I chosed the second option...("game world" contains chars, e?)

[BacardiJim]

As expected, I am one of the two people who went with #1. Adventure games were about puzzling long before they even bothered to add more than a rudimentary storyline. I mean, just how much actual plot or story is there in Zork? And the entire storyline of LSL can be summed up in one brief sentence: Larry Laffer tries to get laid.

It was the puzzling, whether using the old text parser or a modified mouse/text parser that DEFINED the entire genre. I still consider puzzle design and integration the primary determinant of quality in an adventure game. This is why I can enjoy such games as Myst and its descendants as well as the more plot-driven games like Grim Fandango, and also see the Cameron Files games and Syberia for the empty (but lovely, in the case of Syberia) shells that they are.

However, I will readily admit that my opinion is in the minority. As has been frequently discussed in this forum, people no longer even want true "puzzles" at all anymore, prefering instead to be presented with "obstacles" which they can easily overcome in multiple "realistic" ways which won't slow down or interrupt the storytelling. Plot and characters have definitely taken precedence amongst the younger generation of gamers over good puzzles. And frankly, I don't care how defensive such gamers want to get about it, it DOES indicate a "dumbing down" of the genre. However, this MAY not necessarily be a bad thing. It certainly makes adventure games more accessible to the masses. I will trust that while adventure games gain more widespread popularity by lowering the mental bar, there will still be a few quality games released for those of us who like some tough mental challenges thrown in with our pretty pictures.

[remixor]

Originally Posted by BacardiJim

And frankly, I don't care how defensive such gamers want to get about it, it DOES indicate a "dumbing down" of the genre. However, this MAY not necessarily be a bad thing. It certainly makes adventure games more accessible to the masses. I will trust that while adventure games gain more widespread popularity by lowering the mental bar, there will still be a few quality games released for those of us who like some tough mental challenges thrown in with our pretty pictures.

Well, I guess I can expect you not to care about this post, but I heartily disagree with the statements I quoted. Refer to my first post in this thread for starters. In order for the genre to get "dumbed down" it must have been more intelligent than it is now. I absolutely do NOT believe that more puzzles equates to a more intelligent game. Frankly, I find this absurd. I love the classic adventures dearly, but I would never claim in a million years that their puzzles require intelligence to solve, or that intelligence was the reason they were great. They require patience, persistance, and are probably facilitated more than anything else simply be experience--the more used to solving generally completely counterintuitive puzzles you are, the easier it will become. All of this "metal bar" business is, to me, just another example of the high-and-mighty attitude taken by many adventure gamers, particularly the ones who rail against change in the genre, that I brought up in my first post. I know plenty of people more intelligent than I who would take a look at Zork and its "intelligent" puzzles, roll their eyes, and say "You call THIS smart?" I used to have the very attitude which I now condemn. But when I go back and actually PLAY those old games I once saw as being so much smarter than their modern-day counterparts, I realize they are great for different reasons.


EDIT: And BJ, in regards to your first paragraph: The question was "What's your primary reason for playing adventures?", not "What was the original model of the adventure genre?", so I'm somewhat bothered by your not-TOO-subtle attitude of superiority essentially saying "I've been around longer than you, and this is what adventures used to be, so it's the right way." There's nothing wrong with you preferring the first option! Don't think I'm trying to hypocritically indicate what part of adventures is the most important. But on the other hand, you shouldn't try to provide some all-encompassing justification for your preference. It's perfectly fine to say that you, Bacardi Jim, are a puzzle fan and you love solving them, but to equate your own personal preference with superior intelligence, and the other option as "dumbing down"--give me a break. Your Leisure Suit Larry example is also rather weak. I love movies because they offer excellent narrative possibilities not present in other mediums. Does the existence of hard-boiled action films devoid of such possibilities provide reason to invalidate what I love about movies? Of course not! Even such movies which are considered classics (just as the LSL games are often considered classic adventures) do not cancel out my own preferences.

[Wajus]

No. 2 Probably that's why Fallout is my favourite game.

BJ, the situation reverted and story is now more importantant, the puzzles are there only to support the storyline and push it further. It is only good that plot is no more just an excuse for more and more obscure puzzles. If that's "dumbing down" in your opinion than fine, but it's actually much more difficult to create such immersive and convincing (and fun also) puzzles than to just throw them aimlessly in just for "art's sake". We are here - ok, at least I am - for adventure foremost, was it the opposte way I would probably be sitting on a puzzle games forums instead.