I pose before the masses a simple question: What are adventure games?
Mood for discussion: serious, thoughtful, contemplative.
I'm trying to suss out a community definition of "Adventure Game" and what better community to do it than this one.
`TygerWulf~
An Adventure Game is a game of critical thinking, exploring the possibilities and using you brain more than your reflexes.
An Adventure Game tells a history, a tale. It's an interactive book, where we can read the pages while discovering more and more, to the point that we must think to get more text to read more to think more. It's a brain exercise and a infinite pond of satisfaction to see the puzzles solved, the doors unlocked, the credits.
An Adventure Game is an experience. A voyage to outer worlds, times and realities, where all odds are considered and where fantasy meets ou conscient and make us think about it.
To me an adventure game is all about the story, almost like an interactive fiction. The challenge lies in the puzzles rather than in mouse dexterity or how many Nazi/alien/terrorist type characters you can kill per second. The story should be a journey and an adventure; relying little on action but on the thrill of the experiences and the exploration. The puzzles should not rely on skill but thought, a true adventure game puzzle should not, for example, require you to complete a jigsaw but instead, for example, require you to open a locked door without a key using the items in your pocket McGuyver style.
As much as I think an adventure game is about the story and puzzles it is also as important to be focused on the protagonist
To sum up briefly: story, puzzles, characters.
This is where I happily disagree with most people.
I find many conventional adventure games thoroughly boring because they offer very little aside from cliched puzzles stacked on top of each other to compensate for a lack of real depth. I quite like action in adventure games, and I think it's ideally suited to the genre when well implemented. Action doesn't necessarily mean killing something, though, and could be a bit of platforming/evasion as well. I consider Flashback to be one of the most successful action-adventure games and a great example of how to balance puzzles with a narrative and action to keep the pace going, but Flashback definitely takes a more reflexes approach. Adventure games like Fate of Atlantis understand a player's need for variety and offer combat, puzzle solving, or both, and the way the story changes based on your choices really enhances the experience.
I would definitely say that games like FoA are a step in the right direction if you want something memorable and fun.
Games like Myst make me fall asleep at my computer.
I associate adventure games mainly with the collection of items and the use of those items in imaginative ways to navigate obstacles. That isn't some kind of ideal paradigm, this is just how I remember games I have played. In games which didn't have inventory based puzzles, like Loom, it was the interaction with the environment in a thoughtful way which made it feel adventurey.
Yeah, I agreemuch with Progz. Puzzles don't make the adventure game, and a game can be an adventure game even without puzzles.
Personally, I go further than Progz, and find most puzzles to either be so obvious that they don't realisitically make a gameplay element, or they are so convoluted and frustrating, that it isn't fun anymore. Problem is, as of now, I can't really think of any good alternative (where people won't be complaining about having action in their adventure game).
I think stealth sequences are a good way of bringing a kind of pseudo-action element to an adventure game. I mean, it's still a puzzle really... but feels a bit more Hollywood.
Quote from: Babar on Sat 09/05/2009 22:03:55
Personally, I go further than Progz, and find most puzzles to either be so obvious that they don't realisitically make a gameplay element, or they are so convoluted and frustrating, that it isn't fun anymore. Problem is, as of now, I can't really think of any good alternative (where people won't be complaining about having action in their adventure game).
I... Babar, that sentence makes me frantic. I'm currently in the "design-a-puzzle" part of my game, and it is so difficult to think of
clever, credible, consistent puzzle.
Don't tell me they don't exist. Don't!
edit: Bab's dilemma is expecially true in "serious" adventure gaming. Whacky/cartoony games are well suited for backward logic, jokes, cliché puzzles.
A game that makes me say "wow, this is fun, this is exiting, this is so cool, I wish I was really there!!!" is an adventure game. That's why they are called adventure games, not puzzle games. By that definition, Beyond Good And Evil is a perfect adventure game, though it wouldn't pass as one by the technical definition.
If I can explore, interact, be taken away by the plot, it's an adventure game*. If there are traditional puzzles in there, I'll happily accept them as a juicy bonus (if they are well done) or as a "must" (if they are badly implemented, unnecessary, or plain boring/illogical), but that's about it.
Myst, and many of its kind (with 7th Guest probably being the first example), are walking a very thin line: I get to explore a cool world, I can unveil a rich and interesting (if cliched) story. The bad thing is that I need to solve boring, boring logical puzzles to get to the juicy bit.
I like it when "puzzle" means a way to find something out by whatever means, not by combining the saucer with the liquiroce to get the McGuffin.
*One could argue that some of the more recent (hybrid) FPS would also qualify then. I keep an open mind.
It's really hard for me to pinpoint what an adventure game is. I want to say it's an interactive story, but you could argue that every game is like that.
Hmm... maybe it's an interactive story that focuses on plot and characters and does not require the player to use quick reflexes or develop character skills through fighting (as in QFG). I agree that puzzles aren't a necessary part of what makes an adventure game. Heck, being able to "win" an adventure game shouldn't be required. Some text adventures were a lot more experimental than modern graphic adventures in this way. A Mind Forever Voyaging, for example, has only one puzzle near the end; the player spends most of the time exploring the world.
Here's an article by David Tanguay that does a good job of defining adventure games: http://www.adventureclassicgaming.com/index.php/site/features/105/
Agreed to ProgZmax, I also consider most of the adventures as boring and I only play a few. They need to have a certain 'something': clever puzzles, some action, an original story, interesting sequences.. whatever.. at best a bit of everything. The standard use-tool-with-object thing is rather boring. Well, it's okay and a main part of the adventure-genre, but it just doesn't make a game interesting.
By the way, I'd prefer 'Another World' or 'Heart of Darkness' over Flashback to illustrate an example for a great mix of action and adventure.. and even a movielike feeling. They were great, all thanks to one french guy: Éric Chahi.
An adventure game is all about the story. Full Throttle is one of my all time favorites (except the bit in the Demolition Derby). Great story, good puzzles, and the occasional ass kicking. The more traditional games only hold my interest if they're very funny (Monkey Island) or have a gimmick that really hooks me in (the time travel inventory puzzles in Day of The Tentacle).
Heck, one of my all-time favorite games is Cinemaware's Rocket Ranger. I love that game. Collecting the Lunarium, assembling the moon rocket, slowing the advance of the Nazis, and saving Bettie Page from time to time are all I need in a game. Fist fights, shootouts, and aerial combat are just icing on the cake.
- Ponch
Rocket Ranger?
We are brothers, obviously! I hated doing takeoffs with my Amiga controller, though.
Also, It Came From the Desert.
Quote from: ProgZmax on Tue 12/05/2009 09:43:47
Rocket Ranger?
We are brothers, obviously! I hated doing takeoffs with my Amiga controller, though.
Also, It Came From the Desert.
Yeah, the only downside to the Amiga was the controller. It Came From The Desert (and the sequel) were great games. Talking to folks, putting together clues, flying the crop duster, and playing chicken with the local greasers. God, what a game.
It's that kind of Cinemaware experience that I'm trying to accomplish in Barn Runner -- especially as the series progresses.
- Ponch
Thanks everyone for taking the time to provide thoughtful answers to my question. I'll let you all know that I also found a post from back in 2004 about the same topic: http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/yabb/index.php?topic=13599.0 The reason behind my question was that I was writing a paper for a class on videogame rhetoric, and I wanted to make a good definition for adventure games, synthesized from what people have written about (eg. articles and books) and what the actual community thinks. I wanted a definition so that I could properly talk about adventure games, while also being able to have something at hand to make into a transformative definition, that is, a definition of where adventure games can go to grow.
To possibly spark debate, I'm going to post what I came up with for these two definitions.
Synthesized definition:
QuoteAdventure games are heavily-scripted games in which a player assumes the role of a character immersed in a narrative, in which the gameplay centers around non-linear space navigation, and solving narrative-based problems by means of object manipulation, dialogue and logical thinking.
Transformative definition (describing a direction in which adventure games can grow):
QuoteAdventure games can be games in which the player takes control of a character who lives in a living, breathing environment, set against a narrative, in which the gameplay revolves around the player helping to form the narrative by changing the way in which he or she tackles problems, be it by means of object manipulation, dialogue, logical thinking and ingenuity.
In no way do I assume that these are "correct" or "desirable" or "closed." They are certainly open for shredding. :)
Again thank you for taking the time to answer. I hope that discussion about this will continue (as that's how things get better).
You might also want to check out the Adventure Gamers forums (http://www.adventuregamers.com/forums/), where this question comes up every so often.
I think the synthesized definition is good.
The point about "heavily scripted" is an important one that is often overlooked: It is characteristic of adventures that instead of offering a general "mechanic" of actions (run, jump, shoot, punch,...) which more or less work the same way every time, adventure games respond in a different, context-specific way every time you perform an important action, and this is usually accomplished by manually scripting each individual event. (I think this ties into the concept of "puzzles", which you might define as "intellectual challenges with pre-defined solutions".)
When you say "a character immersed in a narrative", it's important to remember that in many adventure games (e.g. the Zork and Myst series) the player's avatar is completely transparent and anonymous, with no personal characteristics. I'm not sure I'd call that kind of invisible, featureless avatar a "character".
It's interesting to consider what a synthesized/community definition even means. I'd bet that 90% of people who play adventure games have no conscious, articulated definition of the term; they just "know it when they see it". Many who could put it into words would probably offer a fairly naive definition that would misclassify or fail to account for whole groups of games. And even people who have given the question thought have been unable to come to a consensus because they fundamentally disagree on what games should be included and excluded, and what aspects should be emphasized in the definition. So should you synthesize the community's own attempts at explicit definitions, or analyze the community's consensus about which games are/are not adventures to come up with your own explanatory definition (which may contain factors that few people were consciously aware of, like your point about "heavily-scripted")?
As for the transformative definition... sure, whatever. That's just an expression of your own vision for the future of the genre, right? Did you read Vince Twelve's idea (http://xiigames.com/2009/03/11/xii-game-pitch-aventine-noir/) for a futuristic not-really-adventure game?
Quote from: Snarky on Wed 13/05/2009 00:33:41
When you say "a character immersed in a narrative", it's important to remember that in many adventure games (e.g. the Zork and Myst series) the player's avatar is completely transparent and anonymous, with no personal characteristics. I'm not sure I'd call that kind of invisible, featureless avatar a "character".
The issue with this is that I don't consider
Myst an adventure game. It and games that take after it, are elaborate puzzle games. You can take all of the story out of
Myst (what there is of it) and still have a playable game. But I know this is a highly debatable topic that I will likely receive flak for mentioning.
Quote from: Snarky on Wed 13/05/2009 00:33:41
So should you synthesize the community's own attempts at explicit definitions, or analyze the community's consensus about which games are/are not adventures to come up with your own explanatory definition (which may contain factors that few people were consciously aware of, like your point about "heavily-scripted")?
Heavily-scripted is just a fancy way of saying that the game is static. I chose the term because it sounded good when GarageGothic said it in his post on the other post I mentioned. All I mean by it is the player must play a game in a particular way that the designer has dreamed up and cannot play it another way. Yahtzee and Marek Bronstring both agree to this. The definition is meant to expose not only the merits, which is what most posters mentioned, and the flaws. Just to clarify, the definition is a synthesis of both the community (people here on the forums throwing out what they think an adventure game is) and the industry (people who are not necessarily part of the community who talk about games). Of course, I'm not saying that its perfect, but it fits with what I have read, which I am finding more and more is not very much :). Oh well, I can still defend and change :)
I'll admit right now that the definitions didn't come together through any statistical process. I looked at what people said and lumped together what it seemed to me to be like what people were mostly talking about. I'm sure to have missed something, or have misinterpreted something. Personally, I'm not sure that a definition needed to be made (definitions are problematic), but I didn't realize this until I was done looking at the whole thing.
Quote from: Snarky on Wed 13/05/2009 00:33:41
As for the transformative definition... sure, whatever. That's just an expression of your own vision for the future of the genre, right? Did you read Vince Twelve's idea (http://xiigames.com/2009/03/11/xii-game-pitch-aventine-noir/) for a futuristic not-really-adventure game?
I hadn't read that (and given the recent timestamp, there's a good reason why). Definitely an interesting idea! :) Everytime I turn around there seems to be something else I should have read. I drew from games and from the issues that are discussed in AdventureGamer article "The Future of Videogames:" http://adventuregamers.com/article/id,318 . But, yes, the transformative definition (I need to find something better to call this, it's not a definition at all, it just stems from the previous definition) is mostly my expression for the future of adventure games.
Really, it's just a paper for a class, and I don't think that there's enough time in the world for me to have done all the things I had wanted to make it a better paper :)
Quote from: TygerWulf on Wed 13/05/2009 03:22:39
The issue with this is that I don't consider Myst an adventure game. It and games that take after it, are elaborate puzzle games. You can take all of the story out of Myst (what there is of it) and still have a playable game. But I know this is a highly debatable topic that I will likely receive flak for mentioning.
OK. You're wrong, but it doesn't really matter, because the
Zork games are definitely adventures, and they use the same mode of immersion.
I don't really consider Myst-clones to be adventure games in the truest sense, either, because they are basically slideshows with puzzles in between, lacking any proper application of the word 'adventure' (from my perspective). Perhaps if they had a really engaging narrative with plenty of dialog to branch the fierce monotony they suffer from or a sense of risk, danger and reward I'd re-assess that opinion, but as it stands they really are just puzzlefests.
Oh no, I'm in danger of Snarky telling me that I'm wrong! :=
TOAD ELEVATING MOMENT IMMINENT.
Well, I'll tell you that I think you're a little careless in distinguishing between games you like and "adventure games". ;)
Myst isn't my favorite game either; I find the environments sterile and the puzzles arbitrary. I don't think that's really relevant, though. Careful attention and consideration of details in the game reveal that it does have a story which is gradually revealed by playing the game, and Myst fans tend to get very absorbed in this narrative. The story provides context for the environments and at least some of the puzzles. So the play experience isn't just a combination of vacation slides and puzzlefest, but more like the "non-linear space navigation and solving narrative-based problems by means of object manipulation" that (perhaps) defines adventure games.
Among Myst clones there may very well be some that dispense with story and history altogether, while others (including, I believe, several of the sequels to the original) put increased emphasis on the narrative and character-interaction elements.
Historically, adventure games are named after the game Adventure, also known as Colossal Cave (so we should really be calling them Adventure-games). And that original adventure game features the classic "Ageless, Faceless, Gender-Neutral, Culturally-Ambiguous (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zork_Grand_Inquisitor#Plot)" adventure game protagonist.
I just have to throw out a dark secret: I love the first three Myst games (four and five didn't do it for me), especially Riven which is easily in my top 5 games. I even like a bunch of Myst clones, including games like Safecracker which are purely puzzles from a Myst perspective without even a pretense of story beyond the introduction: "You are going into this mansion to crack a bunch of safes, ready, go!"
My game Anna is really just a mini Myst game with a character thrown in front of the camera...
To me, adventure games are characterized mostly by non-emergent (heavily-scripted) gameplay that relies more on thought than reflexes, though clearly some adventures mix in emergence and twitch gameplay to varying degrees of success. I used the word "characterized" rather than "defined" because I think the adventure genre can reach beyond those limits (plus it's hard to draw a line where enough emergent behavior makes it no longer an adventure) and I prefer not to get hung up too much on definitions and semantics.
The future game concept that Snarky linked to wouldn't be an adventure game by that definition, since it would be largely emergent, but I would still think of it as an adventure game, because on the surface the player would still see what he would see if it were a pre-programmed game, it's just that the computer, rather than the designer/programmer directly, is deciding the outcome of the player's decisions. The player simply has more options (an infinite number actually) than a game relying on the scripting of each outcome due to the procedural nature of the game. But the interaction still is more cerebral than physical and more resembles the interaction found in today's adventure games than it does any other genre.
How could you, Vince? A Myst lover?!
I remember playing Myst when it first came out for about 2 hours or so and thinking to myself 'why am I wasting my time on this thing?' That's when I knew it was time to uninstall and find something else to do with my time, and I tend to apply that same approach to most games: I'll give just about any so-called 'adventure' game a try, but when I start asking myself why I'm even playing it or I fall asleep (this has happened on several occasions), that's my cue to rapidly erase it from my computer and move on. A vast majority of text adventures have not had this effect on me, so it's clearly not an issue of needing interesting visual stimuli. It's ultimately the story and how it affects me (what personal stake I have in it) that decides whether or not I'm going to enjoy a game, so visual/aural immersion are just additional motivators. This is why I don't really like Myst or Myst-inspired games, because if they have any story at all it's so paper-thin and stretched over a long series of complicated and seemingly unconnected puzzles and rendered images that I begin to feel as though my time is wasted and move on to something that captures my imagination.
Do I think you can make a Myst clone that succeeds in being a real adventure game, with an engaging story and lots of fun, while keeping true to the general design? I honestly don't think you can, at least not one that I would consider to be anything more than a puzzle game. I don't really see Anna as similar to Myst because the protagonist can interact in many ways with his environment instead of being limited to solving strange puzzles. He is also not alone and develops the story with the help of the computer, who keeps him informed on what it is he needs to do. Myst is far more abstract, and at the same time more obviously linear, and by obviously linear I mean that the more choices available in Anna, whether implemented or not, give the player a greater sense of freedom.
Quote from: ProgZmax on Thu 14/05/2009 10:08:41
Myst is far more abstract, and at the same time more obviously linear, and by obviously linear I mean that the more choices available in Anna, whether implemented or not, give the player a greater sense of freedom.
I think this is a key point. Central to an adventure game being immersive is the notion that the protagonist has free will, as well as individual thoughts and feelings towards his environment. For the most part, you're not being asked to BE the character, but instead to understand and care about him similar to how you would if you were reading a book or watching a film.
Quote from: ProgZmax on Thu 14/05/2009 10:08:41
a real adventure game, with an engaging story and lots of fun
Right. So I guess we have another definition, then:
"Adventure games are heavily-scripted games in which a player assumes the role of a character immersed in a narrative, in which the gameplay centers around non-linear space navigation, and solving narrative-based problems by means of object manipulation, dialogue and logical thinking. Also, ProgZmax has to like it."
Sounds like a plan. I have no problem with this definition!
Now that we've cleared that up, how much of the games database now need to be moved to the "Non-Adventure" category? :)
Quote from: ProgZmax on Thu 14/05/2009 10:08:41
I don't really see Anna as similar to Myst because the protagonist can interact in many ways with his environment instead of being limited to solving strange puzzles.
I would disagree with that. Even though I'm arguing my own game down... The protagonist only had one interaction button, the space bar, and it was only used to interact with six screens, each of which (or at least four of which) were strange (or cliche) puzzles which must be solved in a specific order which the player must discover.
In Myst, you have only one interaction button, the left mouse button, and it's used to to navigate through and interact with countless screens, filled with strange puzzles which must sometimes be solved in a specific order, and may sometimes be solved in any order (giving more of a feeling of non-linearity), which the player must discover.
Anna's story is more direct and laid out for the player. The main character, Hero, actually talks back to Anna. While, in Myst you have to piece together the story from fragments -- notes, journals, recordings, and people talking directly to you, rather than through your proxy on-screen character -- scattered around several worlds. But neither game really tells you what to do, you just have to explore and discover for yourself. The difference is really in scale.
Adventure games- games scripted with the sole perpose of exploring, solving puzzles, thinking criticly, ect..... diferenciating from other games in that it usually has no elements of other games. Eg. RPG's or Arcade. Time consuming and enjoyable
I'm really enjoying that people are continuing to talk about this :) Of course, I've been thinking about what I've written and decided that I don't agree quite with it and it may need to be completely remade. It's a pretty bad paper when you read it and you don't agree with yourself :-\ I'm coming around to the camp of why bother defining "adventure game?" Why not just leave it at "game?" The reason I wanted to define "adventure game" was to break the definition, or point out where the genre is lacking (trying to pinpoint why adventure games are commercially dying out). Of course this comes from my deep love for adventure games, and my disdain at the usual crap that I see on the shelf at the store, and a desire to not see this wonderful style of game just die out because it doesn't sell.
Of course, commercial isn't everything, and I enjoy many games that come up on AGS. Every year I even try to make a game with AGS and fail for one reason or another, usually art-related (although I did make a "game" with AGS for a class, which I don't think is very good). But I don't know.
By the way. I really enjoyed Anna (and voted for it in a few categories, iirc). Anna had a deep story, really made you think about your own life, had fleshed out characters. I don't think that Anna would have been enjoyable without the story that was in it. Myst, on the other hand, is very enjoyable without the story (And I say this as you practically don't get any story until the very end of the game). Don't get me wrong, I actually like Myst (though I liked Exile the most). It's just when I play Myst it feels like a bunch of puzzles thrown together. When I played Anna, (or Return to Zork/Zork Nemesis, since it was mentioned), I felt at all times that there was a reason why I was doing all of the puzzles. It wasn't just to get to the next part of the game or get back to the main part of the game, but it was to repair the ship. I was doing the puzzles in Anna because of narrative-based motive. In Myst, you're just plopped down into the world and you start playing around with machines without any notion as to why you're doing this.