Checklist of adventure game ideals

[Radiant]

I don't necessarily buy the argument that excessively long cut-scenes or in-game documents are OK as long as they can be skipped.

Not exactly - I'm arguing that they're worse if they can't be skipped.

Long conversations tend to be nice, especially if the characters are interesting. But hiding a crucial clue in a lengthy in-game document is essentially a pixel hunt.

[Jared]

Aside from that, I don't think anybody is seriously suggesting "interactive movie" gameplay without puzzles;

Not consciously, sure. But when you read suggestions like

Thing is, those 'enjoyable' parts, don't really need a puzzle at all, and may even be more enjoyable for the lack of that kind of puzzle.

What other possible end-result is there for the game?

So then we fall back to

what is bothering people is primarily puzzles disjoint from gameplay - puzzles that don't fit in the scene, that disrupt the flow of the game, or that have a solution that doesn't make sense.

Puzzle design. A subject on which an exhaustive amount has already been written.

So... what goes onto the checklist? "Don't write bad puzzles"?

[TerranRich]

I really don't see the problem with adventure-esque puzzles, even those that seem out of place. That's what adventure games are. Sure, fitting into the plot somehow would be nice, but don't do away with them altogether. Because what you're left with is, indeed, an interactive movie.

[Radiant]

So... what goes onto the checklist? "Don't write bad puzzles"?

What should go on the checklist is that "it's much easier to be a critic than to be a game designer".

Most people that say "this game has bad puzzles" actually mean "this game had a puzzle that I, personally, didn't like or couldn't figure out as quickly as I'd like to". What we put on the checklist should be based on what the adventure gaming genre is, not on what some people think it should aspire to - and the adventuring genre has been established to contain, among other things, puzzles. I've seen people criticize some adventure game because it doesn't contain feature X, even though no other adventure game contains that feature either; if you think about it, that is rather silly.

[Babar]

...maybe it would be a good idea to take the less controversial recommendations and make a page on the AGS Wiki?

"The neutrality of this page is disputed"

It'd be hilarious to see that on the agswiki...

[TerranRich]

"This wiki page contains original research."

Sometimes Wikipedia can be retarded.

[Stupot]

"This wiki page contains original research."

Sometimes Wikipedia can be retarded. ^{[citation needed]}

[Radiant]

[TerranRich]

XKCD!!!

[RickJ]

I am in agreement with Babar about the puzzle thing.  Optimal interest is generated by immersing  the player in the game world and in the game plot.  Adding Rube Goldberg type puzzles only frustrates the masses and only disrupts the players' experience of the game world IMHO.   

A possible compromise is to include easter egg puzzles that aren't necessary to solve in order complete the game or to access any of the plot elements but will instead give bonus points, reveal secret non-critical information, or other reward.   According to the "hard core" puzzle solvers here it would seem that solving difficult, non-plot related puzzles is a reward in and of itself.   I do, however, harbor a suspicion that the enjoyment of solving overly difficult and/or convoluted puzzles, for some folks, is derived from other peoples inability or difficulty in solving said puzzles. 

[TheJBurger]

A possible compromise is to include easter egg puzzles that aren't necessary to solve in order complete the game or to access any of the plot elements but will instead give bonus points, reveal secret non-critical information, or other reward.   According to the "hard core" puzzle solvers here it would seem that solving difficult, non-plot related puzzles is a reward in and of itself.   I do, however, harbor a suspicion that the enjoyment of solving overly difficult and/or convoluted puzzles, for some folks, is derived from other peoples inability or difficulty in solving said puzzles. 

That was one thing Duty & Beyond did, and I thought it pulled it off very well. I believe every (if not, some) 'world' in that game had an optional side-quest(s) that allowed you to go for the extra gem in each world. This meant you could solve the main quest, or you could spend time solving optional puzzles, which was fun in its own right. However, you weren't required to complete them in order to move on to the next world. This allowed players who couldn't immediately solve these puzzles move on without getting too frustrated, while still allowing more "experienced" adventure gamers to play around with them.

[Jared]

Adding Rube Goldberg type puzzles only frustrates the masses and only disrupts the players' experience of the game world IMHO.

With every statement there's a big fat of course that in some games a Rude Goldberg device can fit the in-game universe perfectly. After all, isn't adventure gaming's single most famous puzzle a Rude Goldberg?

Also, this feels like we're verging towards strawman territory. I haven't said that I WANT Rude Goldbergs in every game and I sure as hell haven't read that argument anywhere else. In fact, I have had a terrible time with the Runaway games because there is simply no way to describe the puzzle design other than 'retarded' when you're taping together wine bottles filled with sand, perching the resultant hour glass on a fork and trading the package for a blank piece of paper, apparently impossible to acquire in any other way.

I think it may be games like that, that simply have shoddy, horrifically programmed and devised puzzles that are causing this push in the amateur community for a lack or radical reduction of traditional puzzles out of a fear of making the same mistakes. I think if people sit down and think long, hard and sensibly about puzzle design it shouldn't be that hard to get it right.

(Of course, people on this thread could have been thinking of Runaway-style design from the beginning, in which case I suppose I'd be in agreement.)

I do, however, harbor a suspicion that the enjoyment of solving overly difficult and/or convoluted puzzles, for some folks, is derived from other peoples inability or difficulty in solving said puzzles.

That.. erm, sounds slightly paranoid to me. There seems to be a real 'us' and 'them' mentality forming over the fault line here..

[TerranRich]

I agree that that Runaway 2 hourglass puzzle was, in fact, retarded. I got stuck at that point, and when I read the solution in a walkthrough somewhere, I just slapped my forehead and shook my head.

I had tried several things on my own that I thought for sure would get me the blank piece of paper from the inventor guy.

I mean, in a way it fit in with the story line (creating a prototype invention for the guy: a "watch fork"), but it wasn't logical and was defintely NOT something the average player would have figured out on his/her own.

I think that's all that adventure game puzzles need: (1) fitting in with the story line, and (2) a logical solution -- or solutions -- that aren't far-fetched.

And I think you should have put spoiler tags around that, Jared.

[RickJ]

With every statement there's a big fat of course that in some games a Rude Goldberg device can fit the in-game universe perfectly. After all, isn't adventure gaming's single most famous puzzle a Rude Goldberg?

First of all the man's name is Rbue Goldberg not Rude Goldberg.   
Secondly there is a huge difference between humorous/silly and obtuse/obnoxious...

Quote from: RickJ
I do, however, harbor a suspicion that the enjoyment of solving overly difficult and/or convoluted puzzles, for some folks, is derived from other peoples inability or difficulty in solving said puzzles.

That.. erm, sounds slightly paranoid to me. There seems to be a real 'us' and 'them' mentality forming over the fault line here..

Hmmm,  So you're saying that people don't get any enjoyment in being the first person in their adventure gaming peer group to solve a difficult or seemingly impossible puzzle?   That's not been my observation of human nature.   

Now consider what it's like playing a game with such puzzles in isolation (i.e. no peer group to impress or to get help from).  Also imagine not having much spare time  to devote to games (i.e. work, life, etc have priority).  I personally can't imagine many self supporting people being able to derive enjoyment from such a situation. 

My point is that there is a social aspect to the issue of difficult/illogical adventure game puzzles that is seldom mentioned or acknowledged.   I don't think it's at all paranoid to opine on the subject, suggesting  that at least some of the enjoyment say they get from difficult puzzles is due to the social aspect..

[Mantra of Doom]

Maybe he meant this Rude Goldberg ?

Sorry, don't mind me, I'm just a silly wrestling fan. But back to games...

I think that puzzles should fit the game... make at least a little bit of sense and not feel forced. I remember playing Monkey Island and wondering what the heck I was supposed to do with the "chicken pulley". I like being challenged, but I don't want to give up on the game because I can't figure out what to do.

Though it does make one want to seek out a hint/walkthrough if the story is good enough to want to continue. Though if the story is cliche or slow, it might not even be worth it.

[Jared]

And I think you should have put spoiler tags around that, Jared.

At worst, I have saved somebody 3 years worth of frustration they didn't know they were going to have. And that's assuming they can work out HOW to get the empty wine bottles in the first place.

Now consider what it's like playing a game with such puzzles in isolation (i.e. no peer group to impress or to get help from).

That's how I played ALL my classic adventure games save for Sam & Max which one of my mates thought was cool. I didn't have the internet back then until well after Grim Fandango, and even then I never used message boards - the only people who even KNEW about adventure games in the rural Australian community I grew up in were people who I introduced them to, and none of them were at all impressed. (save the Sam & Max guy)

BUT this all depends on what you mean by 'such puzzles' - this thread, afterall, started off talking about the straightforward puzzles in MI2 Part 1 with didn't involve any Rube Goldberg things at all that I noticed. (Putting a bucket on top of an ajar door surely does not count?) I'm having trouble keeping up with the goalposts constantly shifting depending on who's doing the talking..

My point is that there is a social aspect to the issue of difficult/illogical adventure game puzzles that is seldom mentioned or acknowledged.   I don't think it's at all paranoid to opine on the subject, suggesting  that at least some of the enjoyment say they get from difficult puzzles is due to the social aspect..

Opining is fine.. but really it seemed to me that you were making an assumption that a foreign viewpoint to your own (liking puzzles) had to stem from a negative root (smug elitism). Probably not quite the right word for it, but that's what I meant by 'paranoid' there - they couldn't enjoy it unless they was something wrong with them!

I think that puzzles should fit the game...

You know what? So do I. And I think everybody else thinks that too, even though we've been kinda arguing over nebulous, barely-defined terms. But this thread is meant to be about the checklist so here's my new suggestion..

* Puzzles reflect the world Firstly, is your game in a complete cartoon world? (eg Discworld, Toonstruck) If so, knock yourself out. If not, think about what kind of world you are creating -  what sort of people inhabit it, what brand of logic does it work under? If things work differently from the real world is the player made aware of this? If it IS set in the real world why is the main character improvising hand grenades from Diet Coke and an old rubber duck? He's meant to be a former FBI agent - can't he just use contacts to get explosives? Which leads to...

* The player IS the character That means that the player shouldn't need to try anything that the character they're meant to be wouldn't. How many schoolgirls try and fashion gliders from an old cardigan and some straws? Would a schoolteacher really dress up like a policeman to search his neighbour's house? And at the same time, use the character's potential. A cat burglar should steal stuff and pick locks. A soldier should shoot people. A scientist should be able to make some cool stuff. If your jock wing commander talks and acts like Guybrush Threepwood the player will be terribly disappointed.* This doesn't mean that the player should have to go and research how this person would act - use player character dialogue to let the player into their mind and how it works.

Any amendments to those, people?


*Like I was when I played the Project Joe demo. He was meant to be a short-tempered thug!

[Mantra of Doom]

Another one that I don't see too often, but I think it should be mentioned because it relates to what Jared just said...

• The Main Character speak in character. As in... if the character is a typical high school girl then she should talk like a high school girl. A high school girl will speak differently than a ten year old boy who will speak much differently than a scientist or a military dude. That being said, if a high school girl is talking to a military dude, they will both have different speech patterns and personalities.



• Try to cut down on the obscure slang unless it is to set up a specific atmosphere. If I have to try to decipher what a character says because I'm not from where the author is from, then there's a problem. I'm not talking about "y'all", I'm talking about regional slang... things that only people from a certain area say. I don't expect everyone to know what a "steak salad*" is, so I'm not going to have a game where the character assembles one. The only reasonable way I can see having regional slang is if the character is lost in a different place.. but there should be a bit of confusion when coming across those words or phrases.

*The steak salad is a normal salad with bits of grilled steak, two kinds of cheese, tomatoes, hard boiled egg, red onion, and most importantly hot french fries. Served with either French or Ranch dressing. It only exists in Western Pennsylvania.

[TerranRich]

At worst, I have saved somebody 3 years worth of frustration they didn't know they were going to have. And that's assuming they can work out HOW to get the empty wine bottles in the first place.

That made me shudder. You could empty the wine bottles by drinking the wine... but not by using on yourself... by using them on AN EXIT. What the f*** was that all about? I take back my suggestion to use hide tags.

[blueskirt]

A subpoint to long backstory: If it's not OK to put X pages of backstory in a video game introduction, it's not OK to stuff X pages of backstory in a video game manual either. If I read a game manual, it's because I am in the mood to play a game and I first want to see if there's anything I should know before I launch the game, it's not because I want to read a manual. It doesn't mean you can't slip a paragraph of info about the story in your manual, but keep the manual short and keep in mind that not everyone read manuals before you slip puzzle clues or important plot details in there.

I also don't see how a chicken with a pulley can be inconsistent in a game featuring a Grog machine, a circus, a giant Q-tip, Captain Crunch cereals and many references to Star Wars and Indiana Jones.

I second what Jared said regarding Rube Goldberg example, it is hardly representative of puzzles as a whole.

So you're saying that people don't get any enjoyment in being the first person in their adventure gaming peer group to solve a difficult or seemingly impossible puzzle?   That's not been my observation of human nature.

If adventure gaming peer groups are anything like the groups I have had in my life (2 persons playing adventure games hotseat, throwing each others ideas before the internet became popular and 4 persons who have and will only have in common 6 LucasArts titles, some Sierra titles and Yahtzee's Chzo games after the internet became popular) bragging right enjoyment is irrelevant for most adventure gamers out there.

[Dualnames]

Put in a funny narrator(a funny not too funny or boring):

It can be the player(but just try not to play the talk animation), how many people talk to themselves, besides Threepwood.