[smashing]

Originally Posted by sethsez

Well, this depends on what we're talking about, actually. For cell phones and such, the Japanese are far beyond America, but just about anything involving PCs is generally more widespread here.

I'd had a discussion with some of my japanese-crazed friends the other day and wondered about the reasons why the japanese ain't so involved in the more "popular" MMORPG games or even the latest games released globally. Thing is, japanese are more inclined to their own products, and pretty much chose to be ignorant to the rest. They have the connectivity to go online, and probably dominate it, like what the Koreans are doing. But it's probably the unstated loyalty to their own products (together with the language barrier perhaps) which made them more willing to play thier own anime adventure games, anime console RPG games and even arcade.

Man! Their arcade machines are so good that the youngsters here in Singapore spend most of their allowances to get peripherals, just so to play the game. For example, there's this soccer game where player need to bring their own packet of card (with names of famous soccer-star), put it in formation, before you could even start playing the game. Neat huh?

[Lanze]

Originally Posted by sethsez

Right, but the linearity of many RPGs is hardly a good point to argue if you're trying to prove the superiority of adventure games.

And Lanze, you don't do the same battles in the same order in a Final Fantasy game. You can't. The battles are random, save for boss fights.

Um, but most of the time is spent doing boss fights connected to the story, and the random battles are usually the same monsters reoccuring in the same areas. trust me I used to be a big fan of FF games

[sethsez]

Originally Posted by Lanze

Um, but most of the time is spent doing boss fights connected to the story, and the random battles are usually the same monsters reoccuring in the same areas. trust me I used to be a big fan of FF games

Oh, I know. I just got back from playing a little FFIX, actually.

What I'm saying is that it's a bit odd to claim RPGs are too linear on a forum for adventure games.

[syntheticgerbil]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

I also wanna add that this kind of linearity isn't necessarily a bad thing. If the story is excellent and I'm riveted that last thing I'd want is freedom and non-linear gameplay for its own sake. But whatever gameplay there is should be as good as possible.

That's mostly what I think as I find straying too much from linearity becomes overwhelming and I'd like to do something less time consuming instead.

When I played Quest for Glory, the first two were my favorite in terms of gameplay, the second one being the most defining. It was half linear, half not. Then the third and the fourth were extremely linear and boring. And the fifth was so openended that I just opted not to play it.

I found the first Sonic Adventure fun, actionpacked, and linear like the original games while the second Sonic Adventure just became full of boring sidequests and goals.

Really, I'd just prefer games to play like the first act of The Secret of Monkey Island, the second act of Monkey Island 2 and Curse of Monkey Island, or just about every Zelda game ever. They all have stuff you can do and sometimes different ways to do it resulting in different outcomes (more focusing on Zelda) and can be done in order or at the scattered pace of you jerking around all day.

[rtrooney]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

Are they? How do you know?

I don't. But seeing as the whole thread is based on hypothesis, why is mine less valid than any of the others?

[Intrepid Homoludens]

I never said it was less valid. I merely was curious for any kind statistically factual information on it. We need more of those to work with, if they're available.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by syntheticgerbil

That's mostly what I think as I find straying too much from linearity becomes overwhelming and I'd like to do something less time consuming instead.

I don't mind poking around consuming time, as long as it's meaningful and helps enrich my experience of the game, and as long as the management system is organized to keep track of what I've done and what I need to do next.

[rtrooney]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

I never said it was less valid. I merely was curious for any kind statistically factual information on it. We need more of those to work with, if they're available.

I have none. I am in regular contact with about ten friends from the old CompuServe GAMERS forum. Seven, who like me, operate in a Small Office Home Office environment are as frugal as I am when it comes time to upgrade equipment. None that I know of have upgraded equipment solely for the purpose of playing an adventure game.

That doesn't mean that they, like me, haven't made extensive upgrades to existing equipment. But there comes a point when even a PowerLeap CPU upgrade is no longer up to the task. Then, it is simply a bottom line situation. Until a system rather than a component upgrade is required to maintain competitiveness in the marketplace, the current system adds more $$$ to the bottom line. It's a business decision.

The other three run the gamut. One has given up on adventure gaming altogether, having found other ways, primarily golf, to provide her with leisure entertainment. The two others are not in the SOHO environment, and have systems capable of running today's adventures.

Some comments have been made about the requirements needed to play some non-adventure games. I can't comment on the validity of those comparisons. I'm not a DOOM, Quake or Half-Life player.

Again, I have absolutely no statistical information to back it up, but it's quite possible that the personalities of the two types of players are also reflected in their willingness to purchase equipment. The adventure gamer relies more on logic than hand-eye coordination to solve problems. Perhaps the latter is more prone to going for state of the art even if it doesn't make business sense.

Finally, my observations only apply to my experience in the US market. What happens elsewhere is a ????

[natalia]

Yay! My first post. I’m a complete and utter dilettante when it comes to playing computer games. I got into playing adventure games only this year when I got some super cheapo Myst box set and set aside any qualms I had about using walkthroughs.

My opinion probably isn’t worth that much, but from my own perspective I simply didn’t know that such a genre as adventure games existed until I started looking for help with playing my Myst games online. And I didn’t even know that I could find the kind of very specialized niche help online until my more computer savvy boyfriend told me about gaming forums.

For me, it was all about signal to noise. I’ve just never seen any advertisements about new adventure games (like Myst IV, or Still Life) until I serendipitously fell into adventure gaming addiction and actively sought them out myself. Whereas, even as a nongamer, I've seen ads for Half-Life, Doom, and all sorts of Star Wars games.

Phew! That’s all for now. I’m thinking this current bout of insomnia is just about over. Thanks for such a great forum!

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Hey, welcome to the community, natalia! Stay a while, we got lots of hot discussions going on here and elsewhere in the forums.

Originally Posted by natalia

For me, it was all about signal to noise. I’ve just never seen any advertisements about new adventure games (like Myst IV, or Still Life) until I serendipitously fell into adventure gaming addiction and actively sought them out myself. Whereas, even as a nongamer, I've seen ads for Half-Life, Doom, and all sorts of Star Wars games.

Part 3 of my article for AdventureDevelopers.com, Selling ice to Eskimos:

Marketing is the worst problem of the adventure genre, above outdated design and technology. What scant efforts have been made in this area is more the exception than the rule. It seems that, because adventure developers and publishers neglected the 'zeitgeist' of game design, culture, and commerce in the past several years, the genre stagnated and has steadily slipped below the popular radar, and is today suffering the consequences.

So yes, I agree with you. Adventure games generally have little to no persistent presence out there in terms of marketing and advertising, and particularly as a cultural force.

[natalia]

Thanks for the welcome, Intrepid.

Are adventure games as poorly marketed in Europe as they are here in the states? And how are people guaging interest in the games on different continents?

I agree with a lot of what's been said about the technology gap (or technology usage gap) between different countries. There may be plenty of people who play adventure games in the US who don't visit gaming forums. It definitely took me, an adventure gaming and computer neophyte, awhile to know that adventure gaming (and more general ones for that matter) forums existed (and then gather up the courage to post).

Anyway, I'm off to visit and read through some of the other discussion going on.

[James]

Welcome to the forum, I hope you enjoy your stay. In Europe (and I can speak only for UK/Eire) adventure games are marketed in a poor fashion, often with a high resolution rendered picture or an expansion of boxart as print ads, detailing little about the game. There is very little coverage of adventure games in the European gaming press, aside from asides pronouncing the genre dead. Coverage of Dreamfall and Fahrenheit has been better, but whether this will result in increased sales is unlikely; in addition David Cage did himself no favours by coming across as a frustrated film director in a 3 part interview at www.eurogamer.net

[squarejawhero]

I've found games like Sherlock and even *shudder* Legacy have always been marketed quite well in UK mags for such a niche market. Then there's the glorious Runaway advert from a couple of years back, of which I guess I'll never know what happened to it thanks to GMX Medias stony cold silence.

[James]

You'll never see a TV spot for an adventure game though - in the same way that GTA, Halo or Worlds of Warcraft are advertised - these are triple A titles - what is needed is a triple A adventure, but that doesn't appear on the horizon.

[samIamsad]

Would that do the cut? Games like Kotor, Gothic, etc. offer everything an adventure game offers, and even more. More things to do. More content. The adventure game boiled down to "puzzle game" (as in: combine each and every inventory item in the most moronic ways possible) over the years. And in most cases became more and more a test of patience. What about a game that has some really clever challenges, really interesting characters and character interaction, a story that really uses the narrative potential of its format, has reasonable production values and good marketing to back it all up? Sure, Gabe 3 (which I really like) and perhaps some others could've been such games. But they weren't.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Here's yet another thing Ron Gilbert had to say about it in his blog (excuse my self-pimping ):

Originally Posted by Ron the Grumpy Gamer

Adventure Developers has a nice (long) article up about the state of adventure games. Beiddie Rafol does a nice job of attacking all the angles, including marketing, distribution, etc.

From first-hand experience, I can tell you that if you even utter the words "adventure game" in a meeting with a publisher you can just pack up your spiffy concept art and leave. You'd get a better reaction by announcing that you have the plague.

Publishers are silly.

Jul 25, 2005