[mag]

I was going to put this in the Adventure Games forum, but I realized that it pretty much applies to gaming in general. It seems to me that too many games are based on a scifi/fantasy setting. This certainly isn't a complaint about the scifi genre. I'm a huge scifi fan myself, so it works for me. But it's not exactly mainstream. I think games could help themselves a lot by exploring other genres.

I can't even think of an adventure that isn't scifi and/or fantasy. The only one that comes to mind that might fall under that category is Full Throttle. But that had to go and include the crazy flying cars, so I'm not really sure where that fits in.

I can even understand the appeal. Creating a scifi setting is a lot easier than creating a realistic setting in terms of both design and gameplay. Of course, there are more games now that have used more traditional settings. There's historical based shooters like Medal of Honor and Battlefield 1942. There's also a lot of crime themed action games like Grand Theft Auto, Max Payne, and Mafia. But they still seem to be more of a minority in gaming. I would have thought that adventure games would be the best genre to have a more realistic setting too, but they seem to have far fewer such games. What do the rest of you think? Is there too much scifi in games, or are things fine the way they are?

mag

[Erkki]

Definitely too much. Actually I don't mind it so much, but I do wish there were more realistic games. When it comes to literature sci-fi/fantasy is most of what I read.

[BacardiJim]

Broken Sword 1
Runaway
MOST of Black Dahlia
Riddle of the Sphinx
Riddle of Master Lu
Police Quest series
Laura Bow series
Lost Files of Sherlock Holmes series
Voyeur
Sanitarium
Nancy Drew series

These are just the ones that popped into my head. However, I do believe that they are outweighed by the sci-fi/fantasy majority. Fortunately, I don't have a problem with that.

[Erkki]

Hmm... I was just thinking that even many of the games that are mostly realistic have a few sci-fi or fantasy elements. The Last Express has the firebird. Jack the Ripper has that crow. 47 is a clone. etc.

[mag]

Broken Sword is fantasy. Sanitarium is fantasy. Black Dahlia is fantasy (sorry, almost doesn't cut it). Forgot about Runaway and Police Quest. Don't know about the others. I was under the impression that Riddle of the Sphinx and Laura Bow were fantasies, but I haven't played them so maybe I was wrong.

Sherlock Holmes and Nancy Drew are good examples, though. After I posted I thought of CSI and Law & Order too. The thing about these games, though, is that they're all based on preexisting settings and stories. So I'm not really sure if that counts in favor of the game designer. But I suppose that technically they are examples of adventure that are not scifi.

Originally Posted by Erkki
Hmm... I was just thinking that even many of the games that are mostly realistic have a few sci-fi or fantasy elements. The Last Express has the firebird. Jack the Ripper has that crow. 47 is a clone. etc.

That's the thing. Even games that have a modern setting often have some fantastic element.

mag

[BacardiJim]

Broken Sword 1 is not fantasy, though BS2 certainly is. There is no magic in the first game. It is a tale of political greed and corruption.


Sanitarium is fantasy only in that many of the chapters take place within the mind of the hero. The objective elements are not fantasy at all, but deal with the attempt to find a cure for a medical plague.

{EDIT: At least, I don't remember any fantasy elements in BS1. I may be mistaken. And I suppose that by some definitions of the word "fantasy" that Sanitarium could be included as such.}

[mag]

It kind of depends on how strictly you define fantasy too. I think most people would probably consider Broken Sword and Sanitarium fantasies. BS is about a secret Templar cult (I thought I remembered some other stuff too, but I have to play it again). Sanitarium is about an evil doctor experimenting on a delusional guy. There's no magic, but it's still pretty fantastic stuff. It's certainly not your mainstream storytelling in any case.

mag

[Sky Warrior Bob]

Police Quest 1 & 2 aren't fantasy's. And right up until the end, Runaway pretty much isn't a fantasy or sci-fi. Also, while comic, it could be argued that at least some of the Leisure Suits aren't Fantasy/Scif-fi (comic, yes... but not Fantasy/Sci-Fi).

I think the reason why Sci-Fi/Fantasy prevails in adventure games is that they offer so much more flexibility than a story that is merely fictional. Thus, the tendency is to choose the easier writing medium usually prevails. Thinking up a fiction that will work as an adventure game, is a bit harder than making a sci-fi/fantasy that works as an adventure game.

Sky Warrior Bob

[LeisureSuitedLooney]

Laura Bow isn't scifi or fantasy, either. The two games (so far;spoken like a true optimist) are murder mysteries in the traditional Agatha Christie/ "Murder She Wrote" mold. They were pretty suspenseful for their time, though.

[mag]

Originally Posted by mag
I can't even think of an adventure that isn't scifi and/or fantasy.

Okay, I think I'm just gonna let that one go. I concede that there are indeed several adventure games that are not scifi. And I knew I could count on you to list all of them.

But you still can't deny that scifi/fantasy games make up a much larger proportion of games than any other genre. And that was the real point of my post. I agree with Sky Warrior Bob. It's tempting for designers to go with a scifi setting because it's so much easier to make good gameplay for a scifi game. You can pretty much make it up as you go. I think we're at a point now, though, where it's possible to make some really good non-scifi games. I'd really like to see some more of those.

I think it would be good for gaming as a whole too. Though gaming is becoming more mainstream, it's still considered by most to be more of a child's toy than anything else. And if gaming continues to be dominated by scifi games it will be easier for people to maintain that perception due to the fact that scifi is, sadly, not considered mainstream. I think that's probably why comic books have had such a hard time gaining recognition. So much of it was just scifi stuff (and not even particularly good scifi). It hasn't been until more recently that you've seen a lot of more serious comic books on the same level as their superhero counterparts.

mag

[fireside]

Well, I suppose someone could work on something else, but personally I don't think there's such a thing as too much sci fi/fantasy. It lends itself most to unique atmosphere and imagination. There have been only a few games written compared to the thousands of sci fi/fantasy books. The characters can look like anything imaginable as well as the settings. There are other reasons for doing this. We can't just clone people like we can aliens, which means at least unique faces for all the npc's. Magic is also a unique game element. I doubt I'll ever get tired of them. Developers already do historical type games, but I find them mundane, like they're trying to stuff a history lesson down my throat.

[Marek]

From Ernest Adams' little manifest from three years back:

4. There shall be no knights, elves, dwarves or dragons. Nor shall there be any wizards, wenches, bards, bartenders, golems, giants, clerics, necromancers, thieves, gods, angels, demons, sorceresses, undead bodies or body parts (mummified or decaying), Nazis, Russians, spies, mercenaries, space marines, stormtroopers, star pilots, humanoid robots, evil geniuses, mad scientists, or carnivorous aliens. And no freakin' vampires.

[remixor]

I'm also quite tired of so much sci-fi/fantasy. The ending of The Last Express grew on me eventually, but at the time I was so disappointed that the developers caved in on this excellent realistic world they created and put in that fantasy element. I'm sort of over the whole fantasy thing in general, really, not just in games. It bothers me that I get the impression that developers often don't seem to think there's anything "interesting" to do in adventure games set in our own world. It's not enough for me not to play adventure games, of course, but I'm sure there must be people who are turned off by adventures since they aren't into the whole fantasy thing. In junior high I was really into some science fiction and fantasy novels, until I realized that practically all of them are the same, and the exceptions are so few and far between that I now don't read ANY sci-fi or fantasy unless it's been specifically recommended for reasons that can be justified sensibly. I'm currently reading Dune and I must say it's pretty incredible and most definitely worth reading, but it's not going to change my opinion about the genres.

Originally Posted by BacardiJim

{EDIT: At least, I don't remember any fantasy elements in BS1. I may be mistaken. And I suppose that by some definitions of the word "fantasy" that Sanitarium could be included as such.}

I don't mean to be pedantic, but if I recall correctly I'm pretty sure BS1's ending has strong fantasy elements. I too may be mistake, however.

[fireside]

Originally Posted by Marek

From Ernest Adams' little manifest from three years back:
[/font][/color]

I remember that article and agreeing completely at the time. Since then, I guess I see characters of any kind as personification of everyday life characters. That's all they can ever be, and science fiction is the greatest what if tool of literature. It's not the elf, it's what the elf says and does that makes a story. It's his quirks and mannerisms that give him personality.

[Erkki]

Originally Posted by remixor

In junior high I was really into some science fiction and fantasy novels, until I realized that practically all of them are the same, and the exceptions are so few and far between that I now don't read ANY sci-fi or fantasy unless it's been specifically recommended for reasons that can be justified sensibly.

You've been reading the wrong books then, I guess. Actually I had the same opinion about sci-fi/fantasy before a friend introduced me to some good sci-fi novels. Now sci-fi mostly and some fantasy make up about 60-70% of the fiction I read.

I'm very picky about what books I read though, and I mostly only pick up the books that I know will be good -- I get my recommendations from friends and an excellent online sci-fi/fantasy/horror database with user reviews (it's only in Estonian though). And because of this, I've read only a few sci-fi/fantasy* novels or stories that I'd rate below 4/5.

* why doesn't the English language have a term that covers both sci-fi and fantasy? We just say 'ulme' in Estonian.

[fireside]

Originally Posted by Erkki

You've been reading the wrong books then, I guess.

Yeah, and talking to the wrong people. I had someone tell me once that he didn't read fiction because it was all just a lie. I told him he was the victim of oversimplification. The author was using characters and events to reveal a greater truth.

[Phantom]

Originally Posted by mag

It kind of depends on how strictly you define fantasy too. I think most people would probably consider Broken Sword and Sanitarium fantasies. BS is about a secret Templar cult (I thought I remembered some other stuff too, but I have to play it again). Sanitarium is about an evil doctor experimenting on a delusional guy. There's no magic, but it's still pretty fantastic stuff. It's certainly not your mainstream storytelling in any case.

I don't think so. Most people don't consider games that take place in this world with some fantastic elements to be fantasy games. Sure it's fantastic, but that doesn't make it a fantasy game. For example Sanitarium most certainly is NOT fantasy. It doesn't even have anything to do with it in my opinion. Brains exist, dreams exist and your brains can act real strange in real life too.

[remixor]

Originally Posted by Erkki

You've been reading the wrong books then, I guess. Actually I had the same opinion about sci-fi/fantasy before a friend introduced me to some good sci-fi novels. Now sci-fi mostly and some fantasy make up about 60-70% of the fiction I read.

I'm sure that's true, but I absolutely refuse to believe that the percentage of good fantasy/sci-fi is higher than the percentage of good "other" fiction.

[mag]

Originally Posted by remixor
In junior high I was really into some science fiction and fantasy novels, until I realized that practically all of them are the same, and the exceptions are so few and far between that I now don't read ANY sci-fi or fantasy unless it's been specifically recommended for reasons that can be justified sensibly.

I agree. The great thing about scifi is that it makes things very easy for the author to get his point across because he can make up a whole new world to play with. The down side of that is that because it makes things easier on the writer, a lot of bad writers go with scifi. Good scifi books are so rare it's kind of hard to pick them out. I can't even rely on book reviews because with the exception of the really big names like Ender's Game I generally disagree with the reviewers.

Also, another problem with scifi is that while it provides authors with a very powerful tool for taking on a wide range of issues, because of its setting it will always be at least partially divorced from the reality of those issues. For example, Star Trek did a lot of shows about racism. That was good, but because it's a bunch of aliens in a space ship it could never really show people how racism works in the real world.

Originally Posted by Erkki
why doesn't the English language have a term that covers both sci-fi and fantasy? We just say 'ulme' in Estonian.

Well, it's good to have the distinction even though it can get annoying to have to use both terms in a general discussion like this. But when you get down to the specifics of the genres there are clear differences. Fantasy is entirely made up. Scifi is usually based on at least a little bit of reality.

Originally Posted by Phantom
I don't think so. Most people don't consider games that take place in this world with some fantastic elements to be fantasy games. Sure it's fantastic, but that doesn't make it a fantasy game. For example Sanitarium most certainly is NOT fantasy. It doesn't even have anything to do with it in my opinion. Brains exist, dreams exist and your brains can act real strange in real life too.

Like I said, it depends on how strictly you want to define "fantasy." I've seen it go both ways. I would say (and I may be wrong, but I think most people would agree with me) that a story doesn't necessarily have to take place in a whole new world to be considered fantasy. Indiana Jones is often considered a fantasy. You can even look all the way back to Homer with stories like the Odyssey. These would probably fall more under the category of "myth" now, but if you think about it they were really the first fantasies. And most of them took place at least in part in the regular world. So the defining characteristic seems to be that element of the fantastic--something that couldn't possibly exist in the real world, whatever that may be.

As for Sanitarium, it's true that it is possible to experience delusions like that, but I'm not sure the science behind it is all that rock solid. Maybe not fantasy. But it's probably at the very least science fiction.

mag

[Erkki]

Originally Posted by remixor

I'm sure that's true, but I absolutely refuse to believe that the percentage of good fantasy/sci-fi is higher than the percentage of good "other" fiction.

Of course not. You just need good recommendations. I can give you a couple of names for starters (): almost anything by Strugatsky brothers is good, Roger Zelazny is my favourite author ("Lord of Light" is probably my favourite novel ever, but it's hard to read, especially the first time). The other ones I've read by him are the Amber series (have only read first 4), "A Lonesome Night in October", both are very good. Clifford D. Simak's "The Goblin Sanctuary" is also fantastic.
But then again, not everyone likes everything so maybe sci-fi is not for you ...

Well, it's good to have the distinction even though it can get annoying to have to use both terms in a general discussion like this. But when you get down to the specifics of the genres there are clear differences. Fantasy is entirely made up. Scifi is usually based on at least a little bit of reality.

That's not what I meant. Of course we also can make the distinction in our language (almost direct translations from science fiction and fantasy), but we can also refer to sci-fi/fantasy/horror collectively with a simple two syllable word