[samIamsad]

Originally Posted by MaryScots

But you are right, the post you quoted sums it up. It's short and significant.

Short? He, you should sit through the extended cut! http://forums.idlethumbs.net/showpos...0&postcount=78

[Fairygdmther]

Well, I wish you had found that last week! While I still don't totally agree with it, it might have stifled some of the arrogance seen here in the mega-marathon thread.

FGM-Lyn

[MaryScots]

I now this thread, and scanned over it a while ago. This post is the second longest and the long ones are the exception not the rule. However, it's the content of the post that matters and if one has to explain again and again there must be something wrong with the way of the explanation, that's why I said 'give examples' and early on, rather than at a point where everybody is confused and almost angry.

This might have spared you blisters on your fingers, SJH.
And don't get me wrong here, I like discussions but I would also like to have the opportunity to participate rather than just read along.

OK, that's all I wanted to say about this, I don't want to go off-topic or make it personal.

[mszv]

Wow, lots to talk about.

One of the things that's interesting about the "right in the middle of the genre" adventure games is where the complexity of the game lies, and also the type of interactivity. Let's see if I can make sense of this. This is from a person who actually enjoyed "Post Mortem", so you can all take this with a grain of salt.

First of all - complexity. Some other games, by my outsider perspective, have an interface that, while not exactly "complex", has a learning curve (though that gamepad I bought is going to help) - what keyboard commands do what - that sort of thing. A lot of adventure games have an easy interface.

But, I think that most of the complexity for adventure games is not in the game itself. I'm not sure if it's like that for other types of games, don't think so. Adventure games - you wander around, you find a puzzle, you stop. You draw a chart, write stuff down. Most of the time you aren't in the game while you are doing this - oh the game may be up on the screen, but you are writing notes, working stuff out, that is, if you are figuring out the puzzles by yourself. This is for puzzles that aren't inventory puzzles. Then you jump back in, wander around some more, listen to some dialogue. More stopping to write stuff down, and not (for the most part), in game either. You do get rewarded with advancing the story, sometimes seeing characters, and you get to see pretty cut scenes.

My point is that even if adventure games are trying to give you some concept of urgency or danger or excitement, the "traditional" ones end up being rather leisurely. I also think that (yes I realize that others don't think so) that if the puzzles take too long to solve (for me this translates to hard, not for you perhaps) - this breaks up the story too much. Then there's the dialogue. Now, for many dialogue driven games (hope I don't have to give examples) - the whole purpose is to exhaust the dialogue. It's great, you never miss anything, but it's not great in that your actions don't have consequences.

I like adventure games because they are leisurely, and, particularly if I can get help with the puzzles, I always get it. I think that also makes them formulaic. The puzzles all seem to be the same to me - oh, perhaps I'm not the best judge of that - think I was the only person who actually liked the drawing puzzle in Post Mortem! Time has no meaning. Aside from solving the puzzles, my actions don't seem to have consequences. Yeah, it's nice because it's so predictable, and there's no pressure. I like that part, but I think these things make them less than great immersive experiences.

For all of that, if a game manages to move me emotionally, then I'm happy. If I can be moved emotionally, and can have the experience of "being there", so much the better. Syberia and Syberia 2 did it for me. Myst IV did it for me. As I said before, I really liked Post Mortem, though I just wish it would have been "better" - those static backgrounds (looked nice as pictures) and the way the characters looked and moved - that wasn't working that well for me. I am looking forward to Still Life - I liked the lead character in Post Mortem, and I want to see what happens to him and his granddaughter. I also want to see Prague in, can't remember the exact decade "20's"?. Yeah, not perhaps a great reason for playing the game, but it's my reason!

I don't have much in the way of recommendations on how to make adventure games better - I'm not a game designer. Perhaps I'd be better of playing another game genre - but I'm not a particularly dedicated gamer. I would offer a few suggestions
- find a way for people to solve puzzles without resorting to going outside the game. If you can't solve the puzzle while playing the game, I think there is something wrong with the puzzle.
- different sorts of puzzles - situational? I'm a little weak on this.
- figure out a way for time to have some meaning, without making it too hard
- 3D - I just like 3D. I don't want to see pretty static pictures, I want to feel like I'm really there, which for me means much more free-form movement. Then again, for me, games are all about simulations.
- more stuff to interact with, some of which does not have to do with solutions to the game. GTA was popular because you could do a bunch of stuff. I don't see why you can't put some simulation stuff in adventure games, just for fun. I think that if you are stuck on a puzzle, you should stilll have something to do in the game, apart from just wandering around. Maybe there is an easy way for you do advance story and gameplay, doing something else, while you figure out the hard puzzle.
- figure out how to limit cut scenes (which I love). If cut scenes are where you see a bunch of movement, story, drama, why can't that happen in the game? This is from someone who adored the cut scenes in Syberia and Syberia 2, and I replay them. But, I think Benoit Sokal would really like to make movies, instead of games. I hope he keeps making games, even if he does make movies. Successful crossover stuff is rare.
- the normal "for me" - the visuals should look spectacular. I didn't buy my fancy graphics card (came with my new machine, goodie, didn't have to install it), so a game would look average. I want it to look great.
- Interesting stories, and character with lives.

All for now.