Piece of Silence *early spoiler*

[Duncan]

Off-topic slightly, but what do you think of Myst IV so far, Redwall? I'm finding the puzzle design a lot better than Myst III at least, which from what I've played of it was crap. That said, I'm not too enthused with the story and acting. Mainly I'm irritated that they undid the Sirrus/Achenar death from the end of Myst, which I thought was the best part of that game.

And Yeesha sucks.

[General Fuzzy McBitty]

I liked the Longest Journey, but the game that really pissed me off was Runaway: The road adventure. What a piece of shit. Objects were difficult to see because they blended in with the background, and the ending made me want to hit someone. The kid gives up his dreams to be with a girl that spent the whole game lying to him. It seemed really stupid to me, and as though it was fan service for teenage boys that were afraid to talk to girls. God that game was a fucking waste of my time.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

So guys, what you seem to be telling me is that, for the most part, you love adventure games but have moved on to other genres like FPSs, RPGs, and action/adventures because you got bored with the adventure game genre cranking out the same things over and over the past several years?

Is this because other games have given you new things to experience and enjoy? And it's not only in graphics and tech, but also in terms of such things like quality of writing and originality?

Another thing is that a lot of hardcore adventurers seem to stereotype you guys - or rather, the average console gamer or for the most part, non-adventure gamer - as intellectually inferior. They seem to think that those who don't like adventure games can't handle the cerebrally challenging puzzles. How do you feel about this?

[Duncan]

So guys, what you seem to be telling me is that, for the most part, you love adventure games but have moved on to other genres like FPSs, RPGs, and action/adventures because you got bored with the adventure game genre cranking out the same things over and over the past several years?

...Sort of. I think the problem with the genre is that it's burned out creatively, not that it's remained constant. I mean, if adventure games were the at the same level of quality that they were ten or even five years ago, I'd be playing a lot more of them. But none of the old Lucasarts or Sierra designers are working on adventure games anymore, and I think that's a huge problem. And that's the reason why I'm interested in, say, Psychonauts. Because I have more faith and trust in Tim Schafer than I do in the adventure game generally.

Is this because other games have given you new things to experience and enjoy? And it's not only in graphics and tech, but also in terms of such things like quality of writing and originality?[/Quote]

Like I said, it's more the latter. But, yeah, getting bored with adventure games and playing other genres has obviously given me a lot more to enjoy. The demo of Jedi Knight II was one of the first things I played when I got a new video card a few years ago and it absolutely kicked ass. Not so much because it was awesome (though it was) but because I realised that this was what I could have been doing instead of playing sub-par adventures all the time.

Another thing is that a lot of hardcore adventurers seem to stereotype you guys - or rather, the average console gamer or for the most part, non-adventure gamer - as intellectually inferior. They seem to think that those who don't like adventure games can't handle the cerebrally challenging puzzles. How do you feel about this?

Angry! Actually, not really. I read the Adventure Gamers boards too, and I know what you're talking about. There's always that argument about the average console gamer demanding instant satisfaction over patience and greater rewards. And that's crap. Also, I don't think I should have to regulate my gaming so I don't get any immediate satisfaction out of it. I mean, what is it going to do, make me fat and lazy? I'm playing Myst IV right now which requires a hell of a lot of patience. And once you solve a puzzle, honestly, there's not much reward. You feel kinda good, but that's it. I play games because they're fun, and I don't see why I should have to feel inferior about that.

[Chris]

So guys, what you seem to be telling me is that, for the most part, you love adventure games but have moved on to other genres like FPSs, RPGs, and action/adventures because you got bored with the adventure game genre cranking out the same things over and over the past several years?

Is this because other games have given you new things to experience and enjoy? And it's not only in graphics and tech, but also in terms of such things like quality of writing and originality?

My big problem is that while graphics technology has increased, just about every other aspect of adventure games has either stayed stagnant or gotten worse. Every once in a while a fairly well-written game comes along, but I find it WAY more difficult these days to find a game with compelling characters, interesting themes, well-constructed narrative, solid art direction, creative puzzles, etc. I find most of them to be so static it's absurd. I had a good time with The Longest Journey and Broken Sword 3, and I'm probably forgetting a couple others--those games actually felt like they had some life in them. I'd hesitate to call either really great games but it felt like they had a reason to exist rather than just to fill a market niche. These dime-a-dozen prerendered-in-Maya cookie-cutter so-called-atmospheric (note: a dark palette and lack of non-player characters is not "atmosphere", it's just cliche by this point) games simply don't do it for me. I've made my share of regrettable purchases at this point and I just won't buy an adventure game unless I have really good reason to think it won't bore my ass off. I'm REALLY looking forward to Dreamfall. Now there's a game that looks like the designers truly care about their game. I'm sure crappy game designers care too (it's a silly job to have if you don't care), but unfortunately the crappy games don't really show it. Dreamfall looks like it's been injected with humanity and thought, which are in short supply in the adventure genre today. Fahrenheit looks promising, too. I really want to give Myst IV a try despite not being a huge Myst fan, but I'm thinking I should maybe finish the other games in the series first. I'll get to it eventually though.

Another thing is that a lot of hardcore adventurers seem to stereotype you guys - or rather, the average console gamer or for the most part, non-adventure gamer - as intellectually inferior. They seem to think that those who don't like adventure games can't handle the cerebrally challenging puzzles. How do you feel about this?

I find it pretty ridiculous. It would be offensive, except that it's such an obviously defensive and kneejerk reaction that it's hard to actually get offended. I don't think it would speak very highly of my intelligence if I were to subject myself to a game full of vapid dialogue, second-rate art, and a plot that's been done eight thousand times just for the challenge of slogging through some puzzles that in all likelihood are going to end up being poorly constructed (Runaway, I'm looking at you) or ridiculously easy (hey, Syberia) or both or worse.

[Duncan]

I really want to give Myst IV a try despite not being a huge Myst fan, but I'm thinking I should maybe finish the other games in the series first. I'll get to it eventually though.

Why Myst IV, out of interest? About halfway through it, I don't actually see much to recommend it to a non-Myst fan.

I am really looking forward to Myst V, though. Entirely because it's by Cyan and because it's (allegedly) the last one. I like that Cyan's ending it on their own terms and that (I assume) they'll be going back to this grand story/history they were exploring in Myst and Riven and those novels.

That's part of my problem with Exile and Revelation, actually. They feel like Myst spin-offs. The puzzle design is okay, or at least in Revelation it is. But in the plots of both they feel completely off-track. They feel like The Further Adventures of Myst. There's some crisis with Atrus' family and you have to resolve it. There's none of the feeling the first two games - and Uru, even - had. To borrow a quote from you, the Cyan games feel like they had a reason to exist; that they had a story to tell. The Ubisoft ones feel like they needed to make a Myst game.

[Chris]

Why Myst IV, out of interest? About halfway through it, I don't actually see much to recommend it to a non-Myst fan.

I am really looking forward to Myst V, though. Entirely because it's by Cyan and because it's (allegedly) the last one. I like that Cyan's ending it on their own terms and that (I assume) they'll be going back to this grand story/history they were exploring in Myst and Riven and those novels.

That's part of my problem with Exile and Revelation, actually. They feel like Myst spin-offs. The puzzle design is okay, or at least in Revelation it is. But in the plots of both they feel completely off-track. They feel like The Further Adventures of Myst. There's some crisis with Atrus' family and you have to resolve it. There's none of the feeling the first two games - and Uru, even - had. To borrow a quote from you, the Cyan games feel like they had a reason to exist; that they had a story to tell. The Ubisoft ones feel like they needed to make a Myst game.

Fair enough. What I had heard about the game from others and the press led me to believe otherwise. We'll see, I guess. I'm not sure exactly why I want to try Myst IV. I mean, I do enjoy puzzle-solving to a certain extent, but not when I have to put up with a bunch of stupid crap. Myst has, to me, always been a puzzle game first and foremost (when it came out, it didn't even occur to me it was an adventure--that was not a negative judgment, I just never thought of it that way), and if I'm going to play some puzzles I'd rather play them in an environment suited to them rather than in the context of a shitty rest of the game that has no business taking my money. Who knows? Maybe I won't enjoy it. It just looks like a safer bet than most of the other adventures on the shelf right now.

[lailoken]

doesn't anybody else feel that there is a simple lack of dynamics to adventures? what really draws me away from them is the lack of atmosphere, of feeling as though i am in an actual world that responds to some of my actions. i can't be bothered anymore to look for the three or for items in a scenario that are interactive! how intuitive is that!? also the blatant linearity of all adventures, where are the choices? the different endings? the consequences? where is the reaction from the environment? yeah great, how hard is it to have a response if there is only one way.

everybody is always going on and on about how this game didn't have any response to the characters actions, how people behave the same all the time? well no single adventure has ever done that! but apparently if you offer a tuned down exterior with bad (though admittedly sometimes creative) grafix and no character development at all and whatever the acclaimed "RIGHT" mixture for classic adventures is right at this moment, i don't need to adhere to the standards applied to any other game! the classic adventure game is dead and it won't come back, and there is a reason for it.

classic adventures are strongly connected to the hardware they ran on and its limitations. they are a part of history, of the past. so if there was merrit to them at all one has to rethink and redefine the mix and try to incorporate that into the new generation, anything else is just stupid.

EDIT: Oh and of course it's ok to love adventures. But blaming the rest of the world for them not succeeding is just blindness. one should always think: If dumb people are inferior to smart ones it ought to be really easy for the smart to sell to the dumb. so if dumb people don't like adventures it should be terribly easy to change that, if one was so much smarter! and don't give me any crap about the challenge being an intrinsic part of adventures, sure it is, but there can be levels to enjoy things! like with good, i mean really good music!

[Duncan]

...if I'm going to play some puzzles I'd rather play them in an environment suited to them rather than in the context of a shitty rest of the game that has no business taking my money. Who knows? Maybe I won't enjoy it. It just looks like a safer bet than most of the other adventures on the shelf right now.

That's true. My disappointment with it comes from liking the early Cyan games, but ultimately it's the same puzzle-solving-type stuff, and it is well integrated into the game. I think that with Myst games you sort of already know if you're going to enjoy them or not.

Actually, the more I think about it, Revelation is very likely the best adventure game from 2004. Which does not say much.

[Chris]

doesn't anybody else feel that there is a simple lack of dynamics to adventures? what really draws me away from them is the lack of atmosphere, of feeling as though i am in an actual world that responds to some of my actions. i can't be bothered anymore to look for the three or for items in a scenario that are interactive! how intuitive is that!? also the blatant linearity of all adventures, where are the choices? the different endings? the consequences? where is the reaction from the environment? yeah great, how hard is it to have a response if there is only one way.

everybody is always going on and on about how this game didn't have any response to the characters actions, how people behave the same all the time? well no single adventure has ever done that! but apparently if you offer a tuned down exterior with bad (though admittedly sometimes creative) grafix and no character development at all and whatever the acclaimed "RIGHT" mixture for classic adventures is right at this moment, i don't need to adhere to the standards applied to any other game! the classic adventure game is dead and it won't come back, and there is a reason for it.

classic adventures are strongly connected to the hardware they ran on and its limitations. they are a part of history, of the past. so if there was merrit to them at all one has to rethink and redefine the mix and try to incorporate that into the new generation, anything else is just stupid.

Yes, this is true. I think one big problem with adventures these days is that while the rest of the gaming world has been striving for more and more interactivity, adventure games seem to just be getting less and less dynamic. Adventure games of old didn't have advanced AI algorithms or anything, but the good ones had well-written characters and situations that made the player feel like his character was actually part of a world. Today's adventure games still don't have any advanced AI algorithms, but they're not compensating in any way, there are just fewer and poorer characters as well as less attention to detail to enhance the environment and events. Adventure games have never been about reflexes or things moving across the screen at fast speeds or lots of action sequences, but a good adventure game should still manage to somehow be exciting or engaging or engrossing or other words beginning with e, rather than being exercises in drudgery.

[manny_c44]

I'm finding myself hating alot more games than I used to, in all genres. And perhaps the adventure genre is just small enough to not let through anything exciting these days.

Hoping for a break-through adventure at this point is like expecting to see grapes grow on a withered vine; all of the money and resources are invested in other genres. And while the fruit is often grotesque, it's the only place you'll ever find anything ripe.

Or something like that.

[Chris]

Leisure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Laude?

[Salka]

That game annoys me even to fucking look at it.

[Chris]

I was just trying to help out the synthetic gerbil.

[Redwall]

Off-topic slightly, but what do you think of Myst IV so far, Redwall? I'm finding the puzzle design a lot better than Myst III at least, which from what I've played of it was crap. That said, I'm not too enthused with the story and acting. Mainly I'm irritated that they undid the Sirrus/Achenar death from the end of Myst, which I thought was the best part of that game.

And Yeesha sucks.

Actually, I liked the puzzles in Exile better. But I've only gone through Spire so far, and it had a music puzzle (strike one, I'm tone deaf) that didn't make any sense to me at all (strike two). I've just started Haven, and it seems better, but I haven't really found any puzzles yet. I've just been walking around in the jungle... which, I must say, has a very strange predator-to-prey ratio. And yes, Yeesha is annoying as hell.

[Metalmickey]

To put my own spin on what everyone seems to be already agreeing with (sorry), I think that back in the 'olden days', adventure games were great because they offered something unique that couldn't be found in other genres at the time. A higher level of interactivity with the environment (E.g. multiple unique objects on almost every screen), characters with life-sized dialogues, changing and fitting background music, real involvement with a story, and puzzles of many different types, all in the same game. There's probably several more things I could list if I sat here and thought about it for a few more minutes, but I hope you get my point. The fighting, racing, shooting, role-playing games of the era simply didn't offer any of those things, or perhaps just 1 at the most.

However, in the last 10 years or so, all of those once-unique aspects have been taken on board in several other genres to the point which they are now expected. Half-Life 2 for example has every single one of the things in my earlier list, in addition to it's cracking FPS action. Modern role-playing games probably have even more unique interactive objects and characters than adventure games these days, Strategy games such as Warcraft 3 have great stories, cut-scenes and movies backing the different races and characters, and so on. It's not so much that other genres have come up with new ways to entertain, but that they've succesfully poached the fun out of adventures wherever possible, whereas adventures rarely manage to poach the fun out of the other genres. Thoughts?

Edit: I like nudity too

[Jake]

I really hope Psychonauts doesn't suck.

[Salka]

Yeah, me too.

[Chris]

I also hope that.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

WTF. You guys, Tim had better not see this thread now.

[SoccerDude28]

I liked the Longest Journey, but the game that really pissed me off was Runaway: The road adventure. What a piece of shit. Objects were difficult to see because they blended in with the background, and the ending made me want to hit someone. The kid gives up his dreams to be with a girl that spent the whole game lying to him. It seemed really stupid to me, and as though it was fan service for teenage boys that were afraid to talk to girls. God that game was a fucking waste of my time.

I agree . TLJ was a classic, and whoever wants story, it delivers in the shitload. I had the same problems you had with Runaway, and I was just clicking every pixel on my monitor to see what shines and what doesn't.

[SoccerDude28]

But none of the old Lucasarts or Sierra designers are working on adventure games anymore, and I think that's a huge problem.

Well there's Vampyre story, from the same team that did Curse of monkey Island. And Telltale games are working on their own adventure too So there ya go

[SoccerDude28]

Wow coming from an AG debate, I see the complete opposite here Very interesting to see two different sides of the story. I have a few comments and a few questions for you guys?

As far as adventure game quality goes I totally agree with all of you, but one can argue that a lot of the games of today are lacking. For each Half life 2, we had a gazillion WW 2 games, and for each Katamari Damaci we had a gazillion vietnam games. So there is a lack of creativity all aboard the gaming horizon. Now my question what can be done to revive the adventure genre? I mean quirky looking games like BG&E although captured our hearts barely sold anything. Even Prince of persia, the highly acclaimed game sold so poorly that it had to be bastardized. So is just introducing action gonna be enough? Are we sure that introducing stealth or brilliant graphics or a story gonna sell the game? Remember a more complex AI and a more complex graphics engine means a lot of $$$$$$$$$$$ and it means publishers will have to take a gamble on a big risk project compared to something like Lord of the Rings (fill in the blanks).

[SoccerDude28]

I really hope Psychonauts doesn't suck.

I think it won't I just hope it sells though

[Duncan]

Well there's Vampyre story, from the same team that did Curse of monkey Island. And Telltale games are working on their own adventure too

Yes, A Vampyre Story, about which is known... absolutely nothing. Except that it looks pretty and has vampires vampyres in it. My level of enthusiasm for that game is not outstandingly high.

I am interested in what Telltale comes up with, but I'm not too excited about a game which hasn't even been announced yet...