[Intrepid Homoludens]

No, it wouldn't. Remember that scene with the Grippler in The Longest Journey? I remember playing that. Very simple scene, but very effective, regardless of the fact that very little action was involved. Even though I knew I couldn't 'die', my heart was racing for April! It was awesome, I was actually scared for her!

[Wormsie]

There's a similar scene in Gbriel Knight 3 where you are...

Spoiler:

...sneaking around on Montreaux's attick and he hears you and you've got to hide yourself. I spotted instantly where Grace had to hide, but the whole scene still worked very, very well. It was a scary, exciting moment.

[Sly Boots]

Voted for the second choice. Like someone mentioned before there's a big IF, and that is "IF the action is well implemented".
That said, I don't like action elements added to a classic adventure, but I love (good) mixed genres (Adventure+Action+RPG+FPS), like Anachronox, Deus Ex, The Nomad Soul, BG&E(haven't played it yet but I'm sure I'd love it, ), QFG and so on.
But a classic adventure with a few easy unnecessary action sequences will hardly appeal to me.

[Fickfack]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

No, it wouldn't. Remember that scene with the Grippler in The Longest Journey? I remember playing that. Very simple scene, but very effective, regardless of the fact that very little action was involved. Even though I knew I couldn't 'die', my heart was racing for April! It was awesome, I was actually scared for her!

Oh, if that's the sort of thing you were referring to then I'm all for it. I didn't even think of that as an action sequence.

[Bastich]

Originally Posted by Intrepid

Really, it would be easy to do, but it's always been [mostly] badly executed because of the conventions. If you think that action is impossible in a point-&-clicker, you're wrong. RPGs and real time strategies have been doing it for years! Look at Neverwinter Nights, or Dune, or Command & Conquer: Generals. It also has to do with them not studying games from other genres, quite obvious.

I admire your optimism. You should bottle it and send me some as I seem to suffer from a severe defecit. Think about the fact that probably around 50% of action games, which are developed with ONLY action in mind, wind up sucking really bad or are at best passable. If action game developers don't get it right most of the time, what percentage of adventure developers are going to and still pull off a good story and puzzles also? Rather close to zero. They have tried for at least 20 years to do it, and have never truly succeeded without putting so much action in that it became an action-adventure instead.

[Zanthia]

action also often means ability to die. I don't like to die . I don't like any dead ends.

[gillyruless]

I've never understood the desire for action sequences in adventure games. If I want action in my gaming, I will go and play action-oriented games not adventure. I don't want to start another "what is an adventure game" debate but I have to say one more time that if a game features many heavy action sequences then it just is not an adventure game no matter how adventure-like in other aspects it might be.

There are many good action/adventure games (eg Silent Hill, BG&E etc.), so if you want action with adventure then go ahead and play those. I never understood why people feel that adventure games need to evolve and feature things such as action elements. Games featuring these elemenst are already out there so why try to change the traditional P&C gameplay? Please educate me, why do you feel the need to have the adventure games to be more like BG&E when BG&E already is a game just like itself because it is itself. Er, that made no sense but I think you still get my point.

Would somebody (*winks to Trep*) educate an adventure-game-loving fool or just leave me in peace with my adventure games?

[Ninth]

Originally Posted by gillyruless

Would somebody (*winks to Trep*) educate an adventure-game-loving fool or just leave me in peace with my adventure games?

I'm more on the conservative side, but I guess the main reason for wanting AG to evolve is the want to see more audience, and therefore more money (=>quality - and I know this is debatable) involved. And thus to have the adventure genre flourish once again (or for once).
I myself see no reason why classical adventure couldn't share the market with more ambitious ones, innovative in a gameplay kind of way.

[gillyruless]

Originally Posted by Ninth

I'm more on the conservative side, but I guess the main reason for wanting AG to evolve is the want to see more audience, and therefore more money (=>quality - and I know this is debatable) involved. And thus to have the adventure genre flourish once again (or for once).
I myself see no reason why classical adventure couldn't share the market with more ambitious ones, innovative in a gameplay kind of way.

Damn. I was in a fighting mood but what Ninth said is so reasonable that I really can't say anything to refute it.

There's nothing wrong with having different types of games sharing the market. What I don't want happening is to have the traditional adventure games gradually phased out altogether. Let's face it, the suits in the gaming industry are not known for their intelligence (as displayed in the cancellation of S&M2). I can easily see the gaming industry in general making the decision on the genre that LA made on S&M2.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by Zanthia

action also often means ability to die. I don't like to die . I don't like any dead ends.

Okay, YOU need to go back to design school, mister. What makes you think that just because there's action means you automatically die?

Originally Posted by gillyruless

There are many good action/adventure games (eg Silent Hill, BG&E etc.), so if you want action with adventure then go ahead and play those. I never understood why people feel that adventure games need to evolve and feature things such as action elements. Games featuring these elemenst are already out there so why try to change the traditional P&C gameplay? Please educate me, why do you feel the need to have the adventure games to be more like BG&E when BG&E already is a game just like itself because it is itself. Er, that made no sense but I think you still get my point.

Would somebody (*winks to Trep*) educate an adventure-game-loving fool or just leave me in peace with my adventure games?

Why should action be included in an adventure game? Well, not ALL adventure games need action, it depends on things like story and theme. Usually action is used as a tool for lending suspense and a sense of immediacy which helps immerse the player more. But it's how well that action bit is done that determines the player's experience, whether their heart races faster and wants to see their hero win, or they make their way to the game's designers and shoot those designers' brains out for f&#king up an otherwise good game because of crappy action added.


In a perfect adventure game, this action sequence from Beyond Good & Evil would eliminate the threat of death and allow the A.I. to automatically help the player through. Click pics for large.

In my opinion, introducing action elements in an adventure game without turning it into an action/adventure is very possible, but tricky. There are a bunch of logistics involved, and it's really a matter of balancing everything out so that the [adventure] gamer can still feel the suspense while manipulating the action intuitively and effortlessly, and even without the threat of dying.

Watch this trailer from Beyond Good & Evil. Pay close attention to the brief sequence of Jade running and jumping on the rooftops. As it is, the game automatically makes her jump and all the player needs to do is steer Jade around. Now, imagine if we can tailor this sequence to a more pure adventure game - in this case then we can eliminate the threat of dying and just have Jade automatically duck/defend attacks from the enemy and still automatically jump. All the player needs to do is steer her. No dying, but there's automatic jumping and dodging, and this part will not end until the player reaches the key area in the level. But, the suspense and immersion is still intact because of player involvement. And now, I'm sure Zanthia would love to play an adventure game like this.

Originally Posted by Ninth

I'm more on the conservative side, but I guess the main reason for wanting AG to evolve is the want to see more audience, and therefore more money (=>quality - and I know this is debatable) involved. And thus to have the adventure genre flourish once again (or for once).
I myself see no reason why classical adventure couldn't share the market with more ambitious ones, innovative in a gameplay kind of way.

Exactly what I've been saying all these years I've been here at AG! Exactly what I've been saying. And yet people still misunderstand me and kick my ass!

[bbX1138]

I think Full Throttle is a good example of action in adventure games at two points.
Firstly, the Mine Road section, which is partially to be aspired to for blending action and adventure (find the right object for the right opponent). Unfortunately, some of these pairings are quite random, and the Cavefish one depends on very dextrous handling to accomplish.
Secondly, the bike/truck/jumbo jet end section. Although this is actually pure adventure, it superbly gives the impression of action through a succession of obvious, single click, closely-packed puzzles, almost to the extent of Dragon's Lair/Space Ace gameplay. It usees the tools of adventure to create action.

[Erwin_Br]

Originally Posted by bbX1138

Secondly, the bike/truck/jumbo jet end section. Although this is actually pure adventure, it superbly gives the impression of action through a succession of obvious, single click, closely-packed puzzles, almost to the extent of Dragon's Lair/Space Ace gameplay. It usees the tools of adventure to create action.

Yes, now *that's* ingenious game design. Wouldn't it be so much easier to let the player jump and run his way out of that hazardous situation instead?

I'm not adverse to action in an adventure game, but it shouldn't be used as an easy way to throw in some obstacles. (As in the crate puzzles in BS3)

--Erwin

[Zanthia]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

Okay, YOU need to go back to design school, mister. What makes you think that just because there's action means you automatically die?

BACK to design school? How can I go back to place I never was ?
Lets put it like that: the bigger half of action means death if you fail. And the smaller part means getting stuck if u fail. Thats what I don't like in action games- u have to repeat same thing over and over again, without any changes. in AG if u r stuck, u know at least that didn't find something.

[remixor]

Of course, if you don't complete an action sequence, you generally know what you're supposed to be doing, whereas if you can't complete a puzzle, you probably don't have the slightest idea...

EDIT: Of course, I love puzzles and don't think action should supercede puzzles in an adventure, I just don't think that was the best example.

[Ninth]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

Exactly what I've been saying all these years I've been here at AG! Exactly what I've been saying. And yet people still misunderstand me and kick my ass!

Die, you 2D hater!!
<- ass kicking pan
Trep

[log p]

Originally Posted by Ninth

Die, you 2D hater!!
<- ass kicking pan
Trep

and the lethargic evolution of adventure gaming perpetuates itself

[Robert_Cath]

I voted for B. I don't like adventure games without action. Of course, I just like a little bit of action, without outshadowing the real adventure genre.

[Kolorabi]

Originally Posted by remixor

Of course, if you don't complete an action sequence, you generally know what you're supposed to be doing, whereas if you can't complete a puzzle, you probably don't have the slightest idea...

And, of course, if you get stuck with a puzzle, you can use a walkthrough, but if you get stuck with an action sequence...

[log p]

Originally Posted by Kolorabi

And, of course, if you get stuck with a puzzle, you can use a walkthrough, but if you get stuck with an action sequence...

you punch a wall?

[Intrepid Homoludens]

No, you try try again.

Or you get a saved game from a friend, or you cheat.