[JemyM]

Originally Posted by Jeysie

But now that I've been reminded of the GK3 interface, I *loved* that interface. It was cool to be able to zoom the camera around, and you could do it fluidly, meaning not having to worry about getting "snagged" or falling off a cliff or anything. Then once you found something interesting, you could just interact with it and Gabriel/Grace would automatically come over, so you didn't have to worry about precise positioning.

Interesting when you mention it. When I begun playing GK3 I felt like "meh, how on earth am I supposed to play through this game, it's going to be a pain". It took me less than an hour to really love it. I loved how it saved alot of pointless walking around.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

You should also play Knights Of The Old Republic and Jade Empire if you want to see where essences of yesteryear's adventure games went.

[samIamsad]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

You should also play Knights Of The Old Republic and Jade Empire if you want to see where essences of yesteryear's adventure games went.

Too late. I flushed them down the toilet yesterday. <al bundy>Ba-WOOOSH!</al bundy>

Originally Posted by cobra

enviromental puzzles, different, more dynamic dialog systems, ..

It's not like it hasn't been done already.. seems to be an interesting book, though! (Hey, what about your first game? I'd be the first in line to order a copy!)

[phankiejankie]

Originally Posted by insane_cobra

Hey, I don't support the "point and click is antiquated" theory, read what I write, not what you want to hear.

Well it's me who should get the credit Jackal

Originally Posted by samIamsad

(enviromental puzzles, different, more dynamic dialog systems)... It's not like it hasn't been done already...

I am still waiting for the Havok engine to be used creatively in adventures. Real physics could open the door to some very interesting puzzles. Direct control works much better within such an environment, you can push things around, pile them up etc. Kinda like the gravity gun thingy on Half Life 2. Hell even the crates puzzles would be more fun that way. Mmmmm... What about a telekinetic hero?

A bit of randomness could help too. It may screw walkthroughs but will enhance replayability.

[Terramax]

With 3D game like BS3 and Grim Fandango, I most certainly prefer them as a pad control as opposed to keyboard and point and click. I feel more in control with my destiny in the game somehow.

I got so frustrated with the pc version of BS3 I went out and forked out on a separate PS2 version. I'm so glad the next one is giving you the choice.

Yes, I think the point and clicker is dead and has been for a long time. In the age where gamers are aspiring more 'freedom' in games, point and click creates a certain barrier between the lead characters in the story to the audience.

That's not to say that I hate point and click, 2D adventures like Curse of MI and BS1 will always remain most playable in that form. But more open games like Dreamfall and Fahrenheit play so much better with pad.

[Junkface]

Originally Posted by insane_cobra

Granted, such occurrences can be avoided by careful level design and camera scripting, but I still think a fixed/on-rails camera negates one of the biggest advantages of 3D enviroments - the ability to go anywhere and to look at things from any angle.

I used to share this view, but think it fails to acknowledge some of the other advantages of 3D, such as in animation and just the extra dimension that having a moving camera allows. Fixed cameras also allow developers to deploy art resources more effectively, i.e. low poly models, low res textures, etc can be used with the right camera angles in a way that's much less jarring. This remedies one of the major complaints about 3D, the more demanding system requirements. I also think for certain types of games the use of fixed camera angles can help set a certain atmosphere, for example in Bone (even if I agree with you that the cameras aren't always used perfectly) the almost diorama like quality the camera moves create in the enviroment somehow helps to heighten the fairytale mood of the valley. Fixed cameras should definitely not be the default choice for developers though.

But I think on the whole he might be right, most people want conflict, want dynamic challenges, want replayability, want uncertainty. Is there any way to include all that in adventure games without destroying the genre core? I think so - less inventory puzzles and braincrackers, more dynamic challenges (enviromental puzzles, different, more dynamic dialog systems, non-scripted character relationships...) and looser designer stories providing more space for players to develop their own stories. Sounds complicated, and it probably is, but little step by little step and who knows?

Now we're getting somewhere interesting. I think this is the best path for genuinely innovative adventure games to take, rather than the Fahrenheit style "hey let's strip out all the gameplay" approach. I'd argue that Bone is more innovative than something like Fahrenheit because it actually introduced something new to the core gameplay (the multiple characters as part of one conversation dialogue system), even if it's a very small, quiet sort of innovation.

Originally Posted by phankiejankie

Innovative or different if you prefer titles get slaughtered by the AG community. I have this feeling that Fahrenheit was much more appealing to the typical gamer than the adventure follower.

I'm a gamer of many genres who was spurred into joining the AG community because I thought Fahrenheit was being treated too well. Perhaps I'm not the typical gamer though. I agree with you that the notion that adventure = point and click is an asinine one. It's not one limited to the adventure gaming community though (I've lost count of the amount of times a mainstream/hardcore/whatever you want to call them has enraged me by referring to the whole genre as "point and clicks"), and not something I've seen crop up particularly in this thread or on this forum. Not to sound condescending, but expressing a preference for point and click, or criticising direct control doesn't necessarily relate to a control scheme's effect on genre classification at all.

Nevertheless, developers could follow the Myst V example, so everyone could be happy.

This doesn't seem a good idea to me at all. From a design perspective it would inflict the limitations of both control systems on the game, while only allowing for the most superficial of each system's benefits. How can you design a game environment or puzzle to simultaneously take full advantage of two disparate control schemes? The halfassed implementation we've seen of each in some games also doesn't give me a lot of hope that many developers would be able to implement both well in the same game at even a most basic level.

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

You should also play Knights Of The Old Republic and Jade Empire if you want to see where essences of yesteryear's adventure games went.

Being as you're quite open about the fact that you haven't played most of "yesteryear's adventure games" I'm not sure you're qualified to make this statement...

[insane_cobra]

Originally Posted by samIamsad

It's not like it hasn't been done already..

It has, but not to great extent and not in adventure games, especially not the recent ones. Except maybe Fahrenheit and Facade, don't know about Dreamfall.

I think the focus should be on interpersonal interaction. When I say dynamic dialogue, I don't mean fluid, but not entirely scripted. What you say should affect the characters, their disposition towards you and towards other NPCs. There should be non-scripted social bonding possible between not only the player character and NPCs, but also NPCs and other NPCs. Information could be transmitted and possibly slightly changed as it passes from person to person, affecting the relationships between characters (Crawford explored those ideas himself in his games Gossip and Trust & Betrayal: The Legacy of Siboot). Of course, without some superadvanced AI, the writen dialog would probably have to be replaced with a symbolic language of sorts, but together with a good facial animation and body language system, I think it would work. Hey, it's a different kind of game so why not? It wouldn't be the first time.

But enough about that. Direct control, yeah... It's good.

(Hey, what about your first game? I'd be the first in line to order a copy!)

Hehehe, don't hold your breath, for now I'm all talk and no action. I won't start working on a real game until October and even then we'll go for something reeeeeally simple, just to familiarize ourselves with the process. It will probably not be an adventure and it'll most definitely turn out quite trashy, but hey, it'll be free.

[RLacey]

Originally Posted by Terramax

I got so frustrated with the pc version of BS3 I went out and forked out on a separate PS2 version. I'm so glad the next one is giving you the choice.

You do realise that the PC version of BS3 supported gamepads, right? And that for much less than the price of the PS2 version you could have bought an adapter to allow you to connect your PS2 controller to your PC?

[Jackal]

Originally Posted by insane_cobra

Hey, I don't support the "point and click is antiquated" theory, read what I write, not what you want to hear.

I specifically didn't say YOUR theory. Who's not reading? You jumped into an argument already in progress, so maybe you shouldn't tell us what "we" are talking about if you're speaking only for yourself.

Anyway, I do agree that there are ways to innovate adventures. I still say a game focusing on a slow pace and cerebral challenges will never again capture mainstream attention. (Even if some manage to gain critical favour.)

[Crapstorm]

Originally Posted by Jackal

I still say a game focusing on a slow pace and cerebral challenges will never again capture mainstream attention. (Even if some manage to gain critical favour.)

This is a very good point that I must unfortunately agree with. The same has already happened with motion pictures.

[samIamsad]

It's always comforting to see how everybody seems to know what<generalization>people</generalization> want to play.

Originally Posted by insane_cobra

Hehehe, don't hold your breath, for now I'm all talk and no action. I won't start working on a real game until October and even then we'll go for something reeeeeally simple, just to familiarize ourselves with the process. It will probably not be an adventure and it'll most definitely turn out quite trashy, but hey, it'll be free.

Hurry up! I hope you're not planning to release it in Croatian, though. Croatian only, I mean.

[insane_cobra]

Originally Posted by Jackal

I specifically didn't say YOUR theory. Who's not reading? You jumped into an argument already in progress, so maybe you shouldn't tell us what "we" are talking about if you're speaking only for yourself.

Oh don't give me that crap, you quoted me and then said:

You're only limiting the context to adventures because the wider one doesn't support any kind of "point and click is antiquated" theory.

That very much implies that I support the theory. Which I don't. I got the impression "your" argument was about usage of p&c in adventure games, if I was wrong I apologize. I didn't say you can't compare p&c in adventures and RTS games to choose sides, I was merely stating my opinion on that specific detail. I never said I agreed with phankiejankie on anything else, you projected that onto me and I don't like people putting words into my mouth. I'll leave "your" argument alone now.

[Jackal]

Originally Posted by insane_cobra

Oh don't give me that crap, you quoted me and then said: That very much implies that I support the theory. Which I don't. I got the impression "your" argument was about usage of p&c in adventure games, if I was wrong I apologize. I didn't say you can't compare p&c in adventures and RTS games to choose sides, I was merely stating my opinion on that specific detail. I never said I agreed with phankiejankie on anything else, you projected that onto me and I don't like people putting words into my mouth. I'll leave "your" argument alone now.

While we're sparing ourselves each other's crap, try to keep in mind this isn't a private conversation. Just because I use your quote to continue a discussion you've interjected into doesn't mean it's directed just at you.

[JemyM]

The user interface have nothing to do with the genré. We have textadventures, 2d adventures, point & click adventures, direct-control adventures, first person adventures, even first person full-3d adventures.

Maybe some should start http://www.pointandclickgamers.com ?

[phankiejankie]

Originally Posted by Jackal

While we're sparing ourselves each other's crap, try to keep in mind this isn't a private conversation. Just because I use your quote to continue a discussion you've interjected into doesn't mean it's directed just at you.

I've already stated below that it is me who started the whole p&c is dead thing. So it is a pity you and insane_cobra argue over something I stated. Insane_cobra never said he agrees with me, he just pointed out something.

So let's all cool down a bit.

[Jackal]

Okay, I thought this issue was history, but for the record, we weren't arguing about that, phankie (or at least, I wasn't). I know who said what. I knew originally, too. I very carefully worded my statement based on what LOOKED like an agreement with you (given the timing and context of his comment, which matter just as much as the words), but very deliberately allowed for the possibility that it wasn't. That should have been the end of it, or if insane_cobra wanted to clarify his position on that point, he could easily have done so without the show of attitude. Unfortunately, when someone spouts off about what I have and haven't read and have and haven't said, wrongly in both instances, that's not going to go well. What followed was just the fallout of that, pointless waste of time that it was.

But yes, by all means, let this thread get back on course.