Adventure Gamers - Forums
You are here: Home → Forum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread
Post Marker Legend:
-
New posts -
No new posts
Currently online
Warning! Playing Scumm Games and Classics Can Cause a Serious Adventurer’s Block :)
Surely you can not make a Myst type Game with that escaping Location feature
Why not?
You could activate a machine that drops you in an underground room with no apparent ways of getting out again, for example. Escape the room!
It’s something you can implement almost anywhere, in any game.
In a larger adventure game, having a few “escape the room” or “stuck in one location” puzzles can be quite entertaining, imo.
I liked getting thrown in prison, or getting hung up above a pit of acid in Monkey Island 2, for instance.
Also (but I realize that this is a pretty farfetched argument): isn’t “trying to advance to another part of the island” not more or less the same as “escaping my current location(s)”???
but if want to mention some of Autumn Moon Adventures or Daedalic’s they had nice limited vast locations which were satisfying enough so i can not disagree with you, they have not dsiappear but they just became an exception.
You’re correct. I never said differently.
If you like the vast exploration parts so much, then just embrace these exceptions.
Personally I have absolutely no problem with “5-6 location chapters” like in Lost Horizon for instance. Eye of the beholder. De gustibus non est disputandum. Etc. 
If are thinking i am craving for the “Order a Hintbook” days , then i must tell of course not but lets not get carried away. adventuring had always been about being satisfied about yourself and feel reward after each Puzzle , but never a walk at park .
That’s the great challenge that all developers have to face: make the game (and its puzzles) challenging enough so it doesn’t become a walk in the park, but also make it solvable.
It’s a thin line, and it’s not even in the same place for all players.
There’s always going to be discussions when trying to compare difficulty levels for games…
and that explains it all
It nearly always does… 
The truth can’t hurt you, it’s just like the dark: it scares you witless but in time you see things clear and stark. - Elvis Costello
Maybe this time I can be strong, but since I know who I am, I’m probably wrong. Maybe this time I can go far, but thinking about where I’ve been ain’t helping me start. - Michael Kiwanuka
If are thinking i am craving for the “Order a Hintbook” days , then i must tell of course not but lets not get carried away. adventuring had always been about being satisfied about yourself and feel reward after each Puzzle , but never a walk at park .
That’s the great challenge that all developers have to face: make the game (and its puzzles) challenging enough so it doesn’t become a walk in the park, but also make it solvable.
It’s a thin line, and it’s not even in the same place for all players.
The thing is no game is unsolvable. Personally, I’m against trying to appeal to all players in any respect, because that is always going to remove what is unique about the game. In fact i’m against telling “all developers” to do anything unless it’s to make a non-buggy game.
If you did try to make your game satisfy everyone we’d end up with an industry producing hundreds of the same game each year, instead of a wide range to choose from with some games that one group of gamers like and some another group likes.
What some people call “unsolvable” games (and show me a game that is truly unsolvable!) is actually a category that exists and has fans, and trying to campaign for their removal would be like trying to remove any other unique aspect of an adventure game that some people might not like.
So in my opinion there’s no problem. If you don’t like hard games, I would say don’t play them, just like I avoid playing games with too much gory horror.
And difficulty levels are a bad idea. If you add difficulty levels you are not making an integrated game but a story with puzzles attached, no matter how well you design it. That might be okay in an RPG or action game which has a consistent ‘enemy toughness’ element, but not adventure. When you go down that road you’re not far off making novels with an option to change the difficult words into easy ones, or music albums with a button to remove the bits you don’t like. And even though I dislike horror, I wouldn’t play a horror game with an option for ‘less horror’ because that would ruin the game.
The thing is no game is unsolvable. Personally, I’m against trying to appeal to all players in any respect, because that is always going to remove what is unique about the game. In fact i’m against telling “all developers” to do anything unless it’s to make a non-buggy game.
Good point. Diversity is always a plus and there’s simply always going to be games that some people just don’t like. Absolutely no shame in that. You can’t please everyone, and trying will often always hurt the overall quality.
If you did try to make your game satisfy everyone we’d end up with an industry producing hundreds of the same game each year, instead of a wide range to choose from with some games that one group of gamers like and some another group likes.
Have you looked at what mainstream publishers produce in the AAA-market? Nothing but variations on the same two-three games, imo, because to them it’s “the safe route”.
Thank god for innovative indies! 
And yes, I know I’m generalizing. It’s for effect.
The truth can’t hurt you, it’s just like the dark: it scares you witless but in time you see things clear and stark. - Elvis Costello
Maybe this time I can be strong, but since I know who I am, I’m probably wrong. Maybe this time I can go far, but thinking about where I’ve been ain’t helping me start. - Michael Kiwanuka
I looked through this thread and I have only one thing to say to people who complain about games not being like they used to make them anymore:
yeah! there always nothing but a good laugh to make anyone forget what he was bothered of/by. and to be grateful for even having such a great game like Secret files 3 or Hoodwink.
Thanks
LOL that’s maybe a bit too sarcastic Advie 
.
so i can not disagree with you, they have not dsiappear but they just became an exception.
They were always the exception. The difference is, time has filtered all the older junk from our memories, whereas we have to live through each and every lousy release now. The percentage of good games may have been slightly higher in the past, but I’m sure it’d be easy to come up with a list of turds from any year two decades ago.
Every since we started doing the Aggies, I start out thinking “ugh, this was kind of a weak year.” And yet by the time we hit the end, there are some really standout games competing for the top spots.
I agree with Jackal. It’s just like the music of yesteryear. It all seemed to sound good, because you don’t remember the rubbish the music industry turned out then. That’s with every branch of short-lived consumer products, I think.
Well Chief i am Afraid i need to object here, and say that what you said is not close to the truth enough ,i will not go into a big explanations and reasoning but let me ask you this:
who made that 100 Adventures of ALL time list, wasn’t it not made by you guys , so….. (i don’t need open the list to check, but i know) what/how is the number of titles that were developed at late the 80’s and the 90’s (The classical period) comparing to the titles that came after?.
another Question Sierra had presented more than 80 adventure in less than two decade how many of those (or percentage) were below average ?, same to LucasArts they developed more than 20 title, same question .
the most selling adventures like KQ6,Myst,MI2,GK2 when were they released?.
how/why did Tim exceed 3 Millions dollars with his kickstarter. (i doubt it was because he made Stacking)
at last (though i can still can go on and on) game like Syberia and Still life and moment of Silence ...etc aren’t they really exceptions considering their small numbers?.
i don’t want be negative at all when the next years hold so much good things to come for the Adventure scene, but facts are just facts (total recall remake was worst than the original ) we can not just go on a say that nothing had changed or the new/modern adventures that developed are being just like how the precedence used to be .
Those are just anecdotal arguments, Advie. You’re cherry-picking the best games from decades past and ignoring all the rest. There were great games back then, no question, but there was a lot of crap as well.
what/how is the number of titles that were developed at late the 80’s and the 90’s (The classical period) comparing to the titles that came after?.
If you’re asking the question, why don’t you do the math? It’s probably not nearly as different as you think. But the answer is meaningless anyway. 50, 60, even 70 great adventures spread out across a decade-plus still just points to the exceptions, not some trend of consistently brilliant adventure game design.
another Question Sierra had presented more than 80 adventure in less than two decade how many of those (or percentage) of the games below average there?, same to Lucasarts they developed more than 20 title, same question .
Depends who you ask. Some will say lots. But again, so what? How many below average games have Telltale, Amanita, or Daedalic released?
the most selling adventures like KQ6,Myst,MI2,GK2 when were they released?.
Where are your sales figures coming from? I’d be surprised if KQ6 or even GK2 outsold The Walking Dead or Heavy Rain. But even if they did, you’re talking about best selling games in an era much different from today. A brand new, high quality Myst game from Cyan today wouldn’t come close to the original figures. Plus, of course, sales and quality are two entirely different things.
how did Tim exceed 3 Millions dollars with his kickstarter. (i doubt it was because he made Stacking)
Schafer didn’t make Stacking (though Double Fine did). But if we’re asking circumstantial questions, how did Jane Jensen and the Tex and Space Quest guys barely scrape together enough to meet their shoestring goals? They all made great games in years past; their Kickstarters have nothing to do with anything.
facts are just fact
Facts are indeed facts, but I’m afraid you haven’t posted a single “fact” yet.
ok i must admit my words would never beat yours, Jack.
but you wanted one fact at least,right? ;
those games from decades past made the golden age of Adventuring.
ok i must admit my words would never beat yours, Jack.
but you wanted one fact at least,right? ;
those games from decades past made the golden age of Adventuring.
But the term “golden age” of adventuring has nothing to do with the quality of the games. Back then, Doom hadn’t been invented yet, the internet with all its distractions didn’t exist, and most people could only get a few channels on their TV (at least here in Europe). People played AGs because there were far less other things to distract them. And in that time computers were still new and not as normal as they are today, which meant that the average age of computer owners was much lower then. There were almost no fortysomethings playing games back then, and even less women, while many adventure games are nowadays played by women in their forties. And so we are back to this post:
I also don’t think it’s purely a matter of gamers “afraid to get stuck”. Time has become a crucial element. When I was younger (as in: still going to school, no girlfriend/wife, no household), I had plenty of time to play games, and when stuck I could easily backtrack to pixel-hunt all locations again or to try everything on everything. Now I don’t have that amount of time, so I actually prefer playing games that are a bit easier, if only to advance faster within them.
Besides, way back when, before the internet was commonplace, it often happened that being stuck meant you could no longer continue the game. I don’t know about you, but I prefer to actually be able to *finish* a game, instead of having it sit on a shelf unfinished because I was stuck.
ok i must admit my words would never beat yours, Jack.
but you wanted one fact at least,right? ;
those games from decades past made the golden age of Adventuring.
But the term “golden age” of adventuring has nothing to do with the quality of the games.
I’m not sure what you mean. There were tons of great games (and lots of crap too), and that’s what the words mean. Advie is spot on but I don’t think he’s saying everyone should experience the nostalgia he does. I know I do.
And what does the (very debatable) fact that people have less time have to do with this? I’m missing something crucial here.
But the term “golden age” of adventuring has nothing to do with the quality of the games.
I’m not sure what you mean. There were tons of great games (and lots of crap too), and that’s what the words mean.
That’s exactly it. There were many more games but it’s debatable if the average quality was better than it is now.
And what does the (very debatable) fact that people have less time have to do with this? I’m missing something crucial here.
The point I tried to make is that the games have changed bacause their target audience has changed. There was a long discussion about that in the “Testament of Sherlock Holmes” thread.
But the term “golden age” of adventuring has nothing to do with the quality of the games.
I’m not sure what you mean. There were tons of great games (and lots of crap too), and that’s what the words mean.
That’s exactly it. There were many more games but it’s debatable if the average quality was better than it is now.
Yes, of course. Well maybe we can ask Advie what he meant by ‘golden age’ because it’s either that or simply that there were a lot of great games. Much more than there are in the post-2000 era, at least.
You are here: Home → Forum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread
