• Log In | Sign Up

  • News
  • Reviews
  • Games Database
  • Game Discovery
  • Search
  • New Releases
  • Forums
continue reading below
Advertisement

Adventure Gamers - Forums

Welcome to Adventure Gamers. Please Sign In or Join Now to post.

You are here: HomeForum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread

Post Marker Legend:

  • New Topic New posts
  • Old Topic No new posts

Currently online

hightreasonLittleRosertrooney

Support us, by purchasing through these affiliate links

   

Most improved game companies

Avatar

Total Posts: 278

Joined 2008-07-11

PM

Zifnab - 27 June 2013 11:30 PM

You’re missing my point. Here, I’ll try and make it simpler:

Wow, condescend much?

Zifnab - 27 June 2013 11:30 PM

I’m fine with you telling me the characters in TWD is a step forward for gaming, but when having movie-like characters entails replacing puzzles with QTEs you can’t tell me it’s a step forward for adventure games specifically, a genre centered around puzzles in a story context.

Yes I can. A game “centred around puzzles in a story context” is only one definition of an adventure game, and it’s not the only definition. Even if there was one holy definition that everybody in the world agreed upon, I just don’t care about genre classification. Referring to a game by its genre is becoming less and less meaningful as games start to branch out. Genres are reductive and create laziness. I’m so sick of the “what makes an adventure game” conversation. Who gives a shit.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 1368

Joined 2012-09-28

PM

Yes well, if I’m an avid mountain climber seeking recommendations for mountains to climb and someone recommends me a river, something tells me I’m not going to say oh well, genres aren’t meaningful.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 1368

Joined 2005-12-06

PM

Zifnab - 28 June 2013 01:11 AM

Yes well, if I’m an avid mountain climber seeking recommendations for mountains to climb and someone recommends me a river, something tells me I’m not going to say oh well, genres aren’t meaningful.

Rivers and mountains are genres now? See, someone else can be literal too.

I think it is already established that you think Wadjet Eye sucks, the new kind of adventures such as L.A. Noire or The Walking Dead aren’t even adventures and a publishing company is not a game company (and DS games aren’t any good). Could we now move on and perhaps let other people voice their opinions without thwarting everything they say?

     

Currently playing: Requiescence, Divinity II
Recently finished: The Silent Age, Overland, Before We Leave, Demonheart, SoulSet, Quantum Consciense, Amnesia: Memories
My game reviews and other stuff: Lux Atarnia

Avatar

Total Posts: 1368

Joined 2012-09-28

PM

millenia - 28 June 2013 05:54 AM

I think it is already established that you think Wadjet Eye sucks, the new kind of adventures such as L.A. Noire or The Walking Dead aren’t even adventures and a publishing company is not a game company (and DS games aren’t any good). Could we now move on and perhaps let other people voice their opinions without thwarting everything they say?

If that is what is established then it’s because you think the opposite of what was imputed to me, not because I said it. I never said any of those things, they don’t have anything to do with this thread and if you must know I don’t agree with them. But I get it, you want simple opinions from everyone without having to discuss anything. Argument is bad and AdventureGamers forum must be an anaemic site for exchange of agreeable platitudes.

Bad zifnab!  Pan

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 1171

Joined 2009-04-28

PM

Zifnab - 27 June 2013 11:30 PM

You can’t see anything wrong with that? Characters aren’t what is distinctive about adventure games. I’m fine with you telling me the characters in TWD is a step forward for gaming, but when having movie-like characters entails replacing puzzles with QTEs you can’t tell me it’s a step forward for adventure games specifically, a genre centered around puzzles in a story context.

The fallacy in your argument is that if characters in one particular genre improve then it is a step forward for that genre. The fact that characters are in other games means nothing more than it is also a step forward for gaming generally.

The question of distinctive elements for adventure gaming is a separate one. You emphasize “puzzles in a story context” but many others would emphasize story, characters and writing. Neither is “correct” in itself but I would argue that no other genre has produced the quality and depth of characters that AG’s have. I would suggest that Larry, Gabriel Knight, Guybrush, George Stobbart and others do not have equals, in terms of developed personalities, in other genres and certainly not in my opinion.

 

     

3.5 time winner of the “Really Annoying Caption Contest Saboteur” Award!

Avatar

Total Posts: 619

Joined 2012-06-06

PM

Most improved?  LucasArts, definitely.  All the time I spent playing Monkey Island, Full Throttle, Sam and Max, Grim Fandango, Indiana Jones, Loom, and Grim Fandango and all I could think was “WHAT IS THIS SHIT?  I NEED MORE STAR WARS GAMES.  MANY, MANY, MANY MORE.”


Bt

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 1368

Joined 2012-09-28

PM

Intense Degree - 28 June 2013 07:14 AM
Zifnab - 27 June 2013 11:30 PM

You can’t see anything wrong with that? Characters aren’t what is distinctive about adventure games. I’m fine with you telling me the characters in TWD is a step forward for gaming, but when having movie-like characters entails replacing puzzles with QTEs you can’t tell me it’s a step forward for adventure games specifically, a genre centered around puzzles in a story context.

The fallacy in your argument is that if characters in one particular genre improve then it is a step forward for that genre. The fact that characters are in other games means nothing more than it is also a step forward for gaming generally.

The question of distinctive elements for adventure gaming is a separate one. You emphasize “puzzles in a story context” but many others would emphasize story, characters and writing. Neither is “correct” in itself but I would argue that no other genre has produced the quality and depth of characters that AG’s have. I would suggest that Larry, Gabriel Knight, Guybrush, George Stobbart and others do not have equals, in terms of developed personalities, in other genres and certainly not in my opinion.

Well, I think…

...actually, no. I don’t have the permission of Miss Millenia so better not. Pity, because it was an interesting discussion. I do hope the forum will be a better, more subdued place without users like me and the recently banned Quest1 raising controversy and blood pressures.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 1368

Joined 2005-12-06

PM

Zifnab - 28 June 2013 06:58 AM

If that is what is established then it’s because you think the opposite of what was imputed to me, not because I said it. I never said any of those things, they don’t have anything to do with this thread and if you must know I don’t agree with them. But I get it, you want simple opinions from everyone without having to discuss anything. Argument is bad and AdventureGamers forum must be an anaemic site for exchange of agreeable platitudes.

Bad zifnab!  Pan

No, I definitely want people to express criticism too but in a way that you don’t undermine other people’s opinions. You answer with attitude “they don’t even count as an adventure games/company” etc. And while sometimes you have a point in your criticism, it is starting to feel that you just disagree with everyone, whether you actually have any reason to do so in the first place. (Not even trying those DS games that you were so eager to kick from #100 list and telling that a series you briefly tried and really disliked couldn’t have improved even though pretty much everyone that ever played it says so. Just for example.)

And I agree with Orient that I don’t want this thread to turn into yet another “what counts as an adventure game” debate. We could just accept that the person suggesting the company/game thinks it is an adventure game and an improvement to the company or the whole genre. You don’t have to agree but you can respect the person behind the opinion.

     

Currently playing: Requiescence, Divinity II
Recently finished: The Silent Age, Overland, Before We Leave, Demonheart, SoulSet, Quantum Consciense, Amnesia: Memories
My game reviews and other stuff: Lux Atarnia

Avatar

Total Posts: 1368

Joined 2005-12-06

PM

Zifnab - 28 June 2013 07:53 AM

Well, I think…

...actually, no. I don’t have the permission of Miss Millenia so better not. Pity, because it was an interesting discussion. I do hope the forum will be a better, more subdued place without users like me and the recently banned Quest1 raising controversy and blood pressures.

I find this quite funny as you certainly have not needed my permission for anything. It rather seems that it has bothered you much more that people here are not following your perceptions of adventure genre and game company. I do find some of your posts interesting, then rather soon again you start to throw around condescending crap like that.

     

Currently playing: Requiescence, Divinity II
Recently finished: The Silent Age, Overland, Before We Leave, Demonheart, SoulSet, Quantum Consciense, Amnesia: Memories
My game reviews and other stuff: Lux Atarnia

Avatar

Total Posts: 1368

Joined 2012-09-28

PM

millenia - 28 June 2013 08:22 AM
Zifnab - 28 June 2013 06:58 AM

If that is what is established then it’s because you think the opposite of what was imputed to me, not because I said it. I never said any of those things, they don’t have anything to do with this thread and if you must know I don’t agree with them. But I get it, you want simple opinions from everyone without having to discuss anything. Argument is bad and AdventureGamers forum must be an anaemic site for exchange of agreeable platitudes.

Bad zifnab!  Pan

No, I definitely want people to express criticism too but in a way that you don’t undermine other people’s opinions. You answer with attitude “they don’t even count as an adventure games/company” etc. And while sometimes you have a point in your criticism, it is starting to feel that you just disagree with everyone, whether you actually have any reason to do so in the first place. (Not even trying those DS games that you were so eager to kick from #100 list and telling that a series you briefly tried and really disliked couldn’t have improved even though pretty much everyone that ever played it says so. Just for example.)

 

Have you considered the problem lies with you, if only in part? You see, what you take as condescension or arrogance is your own negative view of what I say. I have no gripes with anyone, no bad feelings or resentment. To me it’s just a friendly argument, which intrigues me. I love taking up an issue with someone and love the person with whom I am arguing and their words. To you, it seems that argument cannot be friendly, so as soon as disagree I must be raging with hatred inside. To me it is not so. Even with this post itself I harbor no ill-feeling with you, although I have no doubt it seems that way to you.

You should read some Plato. Socrates embodies the ideal I am talking about. But he disagreed with everyone. He didn’t enter conversations just to say “I agree” - what’s the point?

And I agree with Orient that I don’t want this thread to turn into yet another “what counts as an adventure game” debate. We could just accept that the person suggesting the company/game thinks it is an adventure game and an improvement to the company or the whole genre. You don’t have to agree but you can respect the person behind the opinion.

If you look back at the posts you’ll find I didn’t raise this topic at all. It was orient who mentioned it first. What is an adventure game is specified very clearly here: http://www.adventuregamers.com/articles/view/17547 and I assumed that anyone talking here understood that. Obviously TWD is an adventure game otherwise it wouldn’t be covered on the site.

 

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 1368

Joined 2005-12-06

PM

Zifnab - 28 June 2013 08:54 AM

Have you considered the problem lies with you, if only in part? You see, what you take as condescension or arrogance is your own negative view of what I say. I have no gripes with anyone, no bad feelings or resentment. To me it’s just a friendly argument, which intrigues me. I love taking up an issue with someone and love the person with whom I am arguing and their words. To you, it seems that argument cannot be friendly, so as soon as disagree I must be raging with hatred inside. To me it is not so. Even with this post itself I harbor no ill-feeling with you, although I have no doubt it seems that way to you.

You should read some Plato. Socrates embodies the ideal I am talking about. But he disagreed with everyone. He didn’t enter conversations just to say “I agree” - what’s the point?

 

I don’t think you’re steaming with rage, I rather think you like to push people’s buttons. Having very strict views and blurting them out less than friendly ways, also (intentionally?) misinterpreting people’s words. Orient talked about the characters of TWD in a praising manner and then you lashed back saying that did he mean that all the oldfashioned great characters would have been crap, when seriously pretty much no one could have read it that way. There is a certain level of hostility in that and in many other remarks you have made.

Though I am certain there is some fault on my end too, because this is exactly the kind of behavior that really rubs me the wrong way, while I know loads of other people don’t give it another thought. I just honestly think you had no argument on that Wadjet Eye issue, you didn’t really even explain very well why Blackwell games were bad and certainly didn’t have anything to say against the improvement on the series. After this you basically said that the other Wadjet Eye games don’t even count because they’re from different developers. The whole argument on your end seemed very redundant. “I didn’t like Blackwell Games” would have sufficed as someone else already pointed out Wadjet Eye’s role with the games (without saying that they don’t count).

But I’ll try not to grip on to your remarks so much from now on.

     

Currently playing: Requiescence, Divinity II
Recently finished: The Silent Age, Overland, Before We Leave, Demonheart, SoulSet, Quantum Consciense, Amnesia: Memories
My game reviews and other stuff: Lux Atarnia

Avatar

Total Posts: 7880

Joined 2011-10-21

PM

I agree with millenia on this matter.
A lot of your statements really do seem like they’re intended to push people’s buttons rather than spark an interesting discussion. Millenia feels that way, I feel that way, and orient likely feels the same if we can go off of this statement:

orient - 28 June 2013 12:22 AM

Wow, condescend much?


No amount of:

Zifnab - 28 June 2013 08:54 AM

Have you considered the problem lies with you, if only in part? You see, what you take as condescension or arrogance is your own negative view of what I say. I have no gripes with anyone, no bad feelings or resentment. To me it’s just a friendly argument, which intrigues me. I love taking up an issue with someone and love the person with whom I am arguing and their words. To you, it seems that argument cannot be friendly, so as soon as disagree I must be raging with hatred inside. To me it is not so. Even with this post itself I harbor no ill-feeling with you, although I have no doubt it seems that way to you.

is going to take away the feeling that some of your “friendly argument” is condescending of the other person in said argument.
I absolutely believe you have no gripes with anyone, but you really need to think about how your statements can sound to other people that are reading them. The internet lacks all the non-verbal communication aspects, so a lot can and will get lost in translation. What you think of as “friendly argument” may not seem that way to other people.

But when that gets pointed out, that doesn’t mean that you should immediately turn to this:

Zifnab - 28 June 2013 06:58 AM

But I get it, you want simple opinions from everyone without having to discuss anything. Argument is bad and AdventureGamers forum must be an anaemic site for exchange of agreeable platitudes.

Bad zifnab!  Pan

Zifnab - 28 June 2013 07:53 AM

Well, I think…

...actually, no. I don’t have the permission of Miss Millenia so better not. Pity, because it was an interesting discussion. I do hope the forum will be a better, more subdued place without users like me and the recently banned Quest1 raising controversy and blood pressures.

Your “argument is discouraged, and everyone gets censored” approach is getting tiresome. It’s not about censorship in any way, but it’s about the attitude with which statements are represented. There is absolutely no reason why you can’t have an argument with mutual respect. It’s only when it starts to turn less-than-friendly that we’d intervene, and again: that’s not about censoring, but about keeping the argument friendly without it turning into condescending remarks and personal attacks…

Also: sometimes it’s ok to just agree to disagree, especially when it’s about purely subjective matters like taste, and especially within a genre that’s as broad as ours is… Wink

     

Last played: Anna’s Quest (CPT) - 4.5/5 | Simon the Sorcerer II: The Lion, the Wizard and the Wardrobe - 4/5 | Florence - 4/5 | Alice Trapped in Wonderland - 1/5 | The Hunt for the Lost Ship - 1.5/5 | The Talos Principle - 4/5 | Tex Murphy: Martian Memorandum - 3/5 | Danganronpa: Trigger Happy Havoc - 3/5 | Simon the Sorcerer (replay) - 4/5 | Portal 2 - 4/5 | Murder By Numbers - 3.5/5 | Heavy Rain - 3.5/5 | Disco Elysium - 4.5/5 | Freddi Fish 2: The Case of the Haunted Schoolhouse - 3/5 | Freddi Fish and the Case of the Missing Kelp Seeds - 3/5 | Whispers of a Machine (CPT) - 4/5 | Beneath a Steel Sky (CPT) - 3/5 | 3 in Three - 3.5/5 | Puzzle Gallery: At the Carnival - 2.5/5 | The Fool’s Errand (replay) - 3/5 | The Dig (replay) - 4.5/5

Avatar

Total Posts: 3933

Joined 2011-03-14

PM

Without getting into the discussion of how Zifnab presents his views, then i have to say that i agree with Zifnab on his view on Telltale and TWD. One thing i think we can all agree on is that TWD is a controversial game, some love it and others like Zifnab and myself, hate don’t like it at all.

This thread is however not about TWD but about the “most improved game companies”, and even if i was on the other side on the TWD discussion, i still wouldn’t consider Telltale among the “most improved game companies”, as far as i’m concerned Telltale pretty much started at the top, and haven’t shown as much improvement as eg. Wadjet Eye Games have.

In my own personally opinion Telltale would be a candidate for the “most worsened game companies”, but that isn’t my point, my point is that i can’t understand why anyone should consider them among the “most improved game companies”, at least not unless they think the previous games made by Telltale was outright terrible.

     

You have to play the game, to find out why you are playing the game! - eXistenZ

Avatar

Total Posts: 1368

Joined 2005-12-06

PM

Iznogood - 29 June 2013 06:38 PM

Without getting into the discussion of how Zifnab presents his views, then i have to say that i agree with Zifnab on his view on Telltale and TWD. One thing i think we can all agree on is that TWD is a controversial game, some love it and others like Zifnab and myself, hate don’t like it at all.

This thread is however not about TWD but about the “most improved game companies”, and even if i was on the other side on the TWD discussion, i still wouldn’t consider Telltale among the “most improved game companies”, as far as i’m concerned Telltale pretty much started at the top, and haven’t shown as much improvement as eg. Wadjet Eye Games have.

In my own personally opinion Telltale would be a candidate for the “most worsened game companies”, but that isn’t my point, my point is that i can’t understand why anyone should consider them among the “most improved game companies”, at least not unless they think the previous games made by Telltale was outright terrible.

I somewhat agree, I don’t think TellTale has exactly improved - at least not that much. Though I haven’t played nearly all of those games yet, so I’m mostly basing this on other people’s reviews.

I can understand though that some people perhaps found the new Sam & Max episodes etc. mediocre and then fell in love with TWD, in which case it could be justifiable to say that the company has improved (a lot). And if one thinks the most important aspect is innovation (I pretty much hate the word) then TWD can be seen as quite a big leap. One more thing is the adventure games being a niche, so some people think it is a huge advancement every time an adventure gets attention outside the small, regular fanbase.

Personally I still think that “a huge improvement” would be an overstatement but to someone else these things can be that big.

     

Currently playing: Requiescence, Divinity II
Recently finished: The Silent Age, Overland, Before We Leave, Demonheart, SoulSet, Quantum Consciense, Amnesia: Memories
My game reviews and other stuff: Lux Atarnia

You are here: HomeForum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread

Welcome to the Adventure Gamers forums!