Adventure Gamers - Forums

There’s an interesting new AG article on “no’s” in adventure games, or limitations that players meet when solving puzzles, often accompanied by tedious generic responses.

There’re many points to discuss, but I’ll keep the focus on one - I believe the mentioned restriction when looking for clues or solving puzzles is closely related to “sense of freedom” we, as players have. There could be several ways to give player more “freedom”:

Locations: Freedom or interaction that screens/locations give you are probably more “important” in adventures than in other games because of exploration factor, and the fact that adventures are “slower”, thus spending more time looking and interacting with each of those screens and everything on it. One specific example:

In Toonstruck, you’re arriving at the town square and see many shops around. I believe, for a more “immersion” in the game world, game should let you enter each of these shops. In Tales of Monkey Island Episode 1 on Flotsam Island, you’re seeing many locales but can’t enter any of them, which could break the immersion. Of course, there’re many other things to it - like the graphics itself, number of objects to interact with… But too much is too much - I think no one wants adventures to follow HOGs in terms of stuffed screens.

Dialogs: You’re often moving forward in terms of the dialog, but how could dialogs give more sense of a freedom? You should be able to talk with someone on all relevant things for a more convincing dialog. Again, there’re some examples with rich conversation:

even though some might argue that the biggest flow of The Longest Journey is too much of it. Or it could be pretty straightforward, with few or none dialog options, simply following the story:

Story: We can discuss about having non-linear plot, multiple endings… but the key here is probably in giving a player illusion that he’s the one crafting the story. I think we can agree that some of the most linear games are at the same time the best adventures. In Monkey Island 2 for example, there’s one central story, but no two players are going to experience it exactly the same - some will solve specific puzzle earlier, some will travel between islands in different order… I’m not even going to mention The Last Express. But you can also have a straightforward moving story, which is still believable and feels like you’re the one living it. In a way, it could be that “story” in relation to “freedom” comes last and depends on all other game elements.

Puzzles - And probably the most crucial aspect when talking about freedom of choice. It could be having multiple solutions to a single puzzle, but not necessarily - some of the often praised games have only one solution to each of the puzzles. But “feedback” when looking for solution is obviously of much importance. Honestly, I don’t mind sometimes for a game to tell me: “You can’t do that”, or give me another generic response:

like when I want to smack the head of the bad guy with a basket which would be too easy, IF other game elements pay up for it, if I’m suspecting there might be something more clever to it, if I’m motivated enough to explore and think. Heck, I don’t even mind sometimes to hear: “It’s a door”, only if my character won’t continue to describe ALL things in such a way.

When speaking of feedback or freedom, couple of games do interesting things:

In The Whispered World there’re no generic responses, or they’re quite rare. Even though we can debate on how it’s more welcome for a response to guide you to the right solution and give hints, you can still use everything on anything. In Al Emmo, not only you can talk to sky or cactus on each of the screens if you want to, but similar to Broken Sword, each of the characters have different comments on everything in your inventory. Kheops was on the right track, like with Return to Mysterious Island, with complex inventory system - ropes and knots, anyone? and I’d really like to see how’d they further develop their system.

Oscar - 22 July 2012 12:48 AM

Diego, it sounds as if you’ve made up your mind that more freedom is always a good thing and want to discuss how we can achieve that.

But I didn’t - like I said, more is not always better:

- Too many hotspots and things to inspect on a single screen could kill the fun of it.

- Vast and detailed dialogs could become overwhelming and boring.

- Too many story branches and having 20 different endings does not necessarily mean a better story.

And as for puzzles - they’re certainly the most important area. But I believe the right balance should apply to it, too. I can’t stress enough how often I’ve wished for a game to acknowledge my own logic to the puzzle, but a game should not aim to be a real-life simulator. I think it all boils down to a good puzzle design. Even if there’s only one solution to a puzzle, if that solution brings the “Aha!” reaction in most of the players, you don’t need multiple puzzle solutions. However, if there’re 2 puzzle solutions, where both are perfectly logical, and both bring the “Aha!” effect with majority of players, then we can discuss how it is even better design scenario, and what I think AG article is trying to explain. However, having many solutions to a single puzzle could bring an opposite effect - everyone should be able to solve a puzzle, thus the puzzle will be easier. That’s why I brought examples in locations, dialogs… as less could indeed sometimes be more.

Oscar - 22 July 2012 12:48 AM

I’ll make another thread if you don’t want us to put those things here and would prefer to focus on the practical aspects.

No need for that, you can discuss everything here. Me myself have strayed away from the original article.

Oscar - 22 July 2012 12:48 AM

One thing that drives me in adventures is seeing places I can’t get to, and it’s that ‘unfreedom’ that makes me want to adventure forth and reach those places.

But that is not “unfreedom”, if you’re still able to enter those places later on - it’s just a nice motive BUT the game should hint to you somehow that you’re not able to enter those places AT THE MOMENT.

I agree that lots of interaction with the surroundings and people is really good (but it is possible to have too much of this, though I’d suspect it’s really rare) and there are multiple ways to keep player immersed. I rather have no real choices and a great story and interface than a crappy game with “free world” and choices.

millenia - 22 July 2012 11:24 AM

I rather have no real choices and a great story and interface than a crappy game with “free world” and choices.

I agree, and I’d take you’re a story buff , but puzzles should still follow the quality of the story (unless we’re talking interactive movies) and that’s where “freedom” walks in. Having “free” story is quite a subjective term - but puzzles, dialogs… or to say - your actions, are the ones who are giving you sense you’re crafting that story.

Jackal - 22 July 2012 12:15 PM

What’s far, far more important is giving the player the illusion of freedom.

That’s it, I knew there was a better wording to it. And puzzle&feedback;-wise, I think I know what you’re referring to. Let’s imagine a scene like this:

We’re guessing we should pick up some grapes. If we try something like:

USE Fishing Rod on Grapes - your character could say something like - Grapes won’t bite it, or They’re Grapes, not Goldfish. And even I’m not fishing grapes! makes a difference to I’m not fishing that!, which would be a generic response on each occasion you’re using fishing rod at the wrong place, because you’re sensing the game has acknowledged your specific action.

USE Book on Grapes - Yes, let’s just beat the cr… out of grapes, instead of “No” might be more amusing.

USE Bow (and arrow) on Grapes - this one is closer to the solution, so the game might tell you something like Not a bad idea, but I’m not Robin Hood!. You’re more assured you need grapes, but you should think of something different, until you cut the grapes with your knife.

It’s quite a rudimentary puzzle, and even though generic responses like “I can’t use the skeleton arm with that” are not without its charm, it shows more illusion of freedom. However, I think we’re overlooking an important aspect which can be seen even on this simple example - it needs a TREMENDOUS more work with game design, scripting etc… and it doesn’t guarantee for a better game. I’m not saying it can’t be done, but it grows exponentially with bigger and longer games, because of the amount of stuff you’re carrying, characters, locations… I will repeat examples like Daedalic games which could be a step forward, or Al Emmo which has unsurpassed level of interactivity and “illusion of freedom” IMO. But even that way, the game still needs to make right balance in not hinting “too much” for it’s own good, and needs a really clever design to put it all together.

Yes it’s a workload but it does add to the immersion. And it doesn’t have to be every item for every hotspot, it’s enough if there are some funny combinations with comments (assuming it fits the style of the game) and the hinting comments, where you almost get it right.

I don’t even understand why some games have hotspots that tell you “it’s a door”. And that’s it. Yeah, amazing. At least add a little bit of the character’s flare there. “That’s an ugly door” is already much better. And for the wrong item combinations… AoM games tell you how to do it wrong. In addition to the fact that the items only work when the rock is used with paper and not when the paper is used with rock, there is the exactly same “not gonna happen” etc. response to everything. Doesn’t say why, doesn’t say when you have the right idea but you’re still missing something. Terribly frustrating and annoying. Any game maker should bother with these kind of details.

diego - 22 July 2012 03:08 PM

However, I think we’re overlooking an important aspect which can be seen even on this simple example - it needs a TREMENDOUS more work with game design, scripting etc… and it doesn’t guarantee for a better game. I’m not saying it can’t be done, but it grows exponentially with bigger and longer games, because of the amount of stuff you’re carrying, characters, locations… I will repeat examples like Daedalic games which could be a step forward,

Edna and Harvey: The Breakout is amazing in this respect. Absolutely amazing. There is a guard Edna locks in a room early in the game. That’s it, you will never have to deal with that guy again. But if you feel like it, you can climb up the roof and talk to him through the window. You can show him each and every object in your inventory and he will give a unique response. 

I recently played a casual game that allowed me to use either of 2 sharp items to cut things and either a hammer, rock or crowbar to smash open boxes and barrels.  It was realistic to be able to use what was at hand rather than having to go hunting for a specific object with similar characteristics.  I mean, I’ve hammered nails in with my heel, so don’t tell me no when I’m carrying a perfectly good item that would do the trick in real life.

diego - 22 July 2012 07:13 AM

Even if there’s only one solution to a puzzle, if that solution brings the “Aha!” reaction in most of the players, you don’t need multiple puzzle solutions. However, if there’re 2 puzzle solutions, where both are perfectly logical, and both bring the “Aha!” effect with majority of players, then we can discuss how it is even better design scenario, and what I think AG article is trying to explain. However, having many solutions to a single puzzle could bring an opposite effect - everyone should be able to solve a puzzle, thus the puzzle will be easier. That’s why I brought examples in locations, dialogs… as less could indeed sometimes be more.

Yes, having multiple solutions makes the puzzle easier. And that’s all it does. Sure, the replay value will be higher if the developer is smart enough to mention it in the manual, but it doesn’t change the experience of first-time players at all. There’s a puzzle, I find a solution and move on. In the Last Express you can hide from the police in three different places. It didn’t occur to me that my solution wasn’t the only possible one until I read about it afterwards. The same goes for so-called optional puzzles. Most of the time the player doesn’t know they’re optional.

But that is not “unfreedom”, if you’re still able to enter those places later on - it’s just a nice motive BUT the game should hint to you somehow that you’re not able to enter those places AT THE MOMENT.

Some games do hint. For puzzles too. They say something like “hm, that’s not a bad idea”, so you know you’re on the right track with your combination of objects. In stand-alone puzzles or the Mystian type of puzzle there’s immediate feedback, so we’re really only talking about inventory puzzles.