..."the throng of generic point-and-click adventure games"?
Here, the last paragraph:
http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2011/04/gemini-rue-review/
Ouch, didn't know they meant it that way.
did everyone know that wired is just another generic tech magazine
Quote from: cosmicr on Tue 05/04/2011 05:44:48
did everyone know that wired is just another generic tech magazine
Ars Techncia has always been better.
Also, wtf is wrong with so many commentators on those particular reviews complaining about the graphical resolution, and how "terrible" 320x200 resolution games look? Hell, I still occasionally have adventure-game dreams from time to time. I've always thought that particular resolution looked great.
Kids these days...
They gave it an 8/10 rating, not too bad I guess, is it?
Also, if you look through the games database, doesn't "throng of generic point-and-click adventure games" pretty much hit the nail on the head? Sure, there are lots of gems buried in there, but the sheer amount of mediocre first games can't be ignored (and I'll happily include my own in that).
I had a look, and of the first half-dozen games I randomly clicked on, only one could by any stretch be called generic. There are a lot of terrible games, but they are each bad in their own special way.
When I think "generic adventure game," I think of all those Myst clones, especially the horror ones.
I've to admit I like "first- and short games" as long as they don't have any dead ends. Especially 1-roomers are awesome.
I agree with Khris.
Whilst I enjoy playing many, if not most of the games in the database, there are very very few that I would actually pay any sum of money for (this definitely includes my own attempt!). As AGS game developers (of varying levels of skill and if I can use that term to include myself?!) we enjoy playing a lot of games that the great unwashed masses simply won't, as they are comparing them to full commercial games, and we (mostly) to our own efforts. [/personal opinion]
With the greatest respect to everyone concerned, and from a non-AGS viewpoint, I would agree that there are only a handfull of games made with AGS that rise above "the throng of generic point-and-click adventure games".
This does not mean that "the throng" are bad or cannot be enjoyed, as I certainly enjoy most of them, but most do not reach the level that the few do, which will interest non-indie-game-dev-liking-people.
No argument that a few titles stand out in quality. I was just arguing that "generic" isn't the right term for the rest.
I wanted to qualify my post since it sounds a bit off-putting I guess, but yep, what Intense Degree said. The thing is, it really depends on what you mean by generic, and I'd say it's not necessarily a derogatory term.
In fact I'd say a lot of games I enjoy, AGS or commercial, are pretty generic. I also greatly enjoy generic Italian food.
Not sure whether it was the Wired writer's intention to drop a subtle insult at one of the most thriving and creative game creating communities ever, and we'll probably never know, but I don't really care either, to be honest. It does sound a bit like he regards us with contempt ("The slightest mention of King’s Quest or Monkey Island will always result in a lengthy diatribe about how the genre has died off since the golden age of point-and-click.") but it's one dude who probably likes stuff we'd find really ridiculous.
I take "generic" to mean pretty much interchangeable, and my immediate intuition is that crappy as they may be, a lot of AGS games are pretty distinctive. Say what you will about wife beaters anonymous or Bapu, you're probably not looking at the game page and going "another one?"
Though of course there are a bunch of games that are kind of same-y, too (which is sometimes nice if you like that style and want to play more of them). It's just, if they're not unusually good they don't make much of an impression, so I tend to forget about them. ::)
What Snarky said.
The term used by that writer is simply out of place and a lousy compliment to Gemini Rue. It's like saying the Mona Lisa stands out amongst the throng of generic works of art at Louvre. It stands out in the sense it is perhaps the best known piece of that collection, but this doesn't make the rest of Louvre generic in the slightest bit, nor explain what is so great about Mona Lisa. Similarly, if you're a writer referring to a niche you know next to nothing about, you don't present your ignorance as if you thoroughly tested the absolute dullness of that niche's creations. It's difficult to find a place with less generic, modern point and click adventure games, commercial or otherwise, than the AGS database. And even if there are still quite a few rather ordinary ones in there, it doesn't turn the sum of the community's efforts into something you can shrug off as a pile of of generic, meaningless knick-knacks.
I think anyone who reviews an adventure game has to make some kind of statement about how the genre is dying. It's part of the rules somewhere.
Hundreds of games made by the same game engine with a fairly narrow set of built-in game mechanics has produced a large number of games that are "generic" in the sense that they largely conform to those game mechanics (with of course, lots of exceptions). But the longevity and continued productivity of the community is evidence that these games are imbued with a great deal of creativity and uniqueness. If all the games were generic and samey in terms of storyline, atmosphere, graphics, puzzles, sound, etc., the community would never have lasted this long.
I'd say that the current crop of commercial adventure games is more of an example of a "throng of generic point-and-click adventure games."
Still, aside from that little backhanded comment at the end, nice review!
Quote from: Vince Twelve on Tue 05/04/2011 15:44:44
I'd say that the current crop of commercial adventure games is more of an example of a "throng of generic point-and-click adventure games."
You could say the same thing about the throng of generic shooters too. Further, if the adventure game genre were truly dying off, then I doubt there would be much of a throng. ::)
That reviewer is a doody head. I suggest we all point at laugh at him and not let him sit at our table when lunchtime comes. That'll show him!
I thought AGS stands for Adventure Game Studio ???
Quote from: Atelier on Tue 05/04/2011 16:26:29
I thought AGS stands for Adventure Game Studio ???
Now you know the terrible truth!
Having played a good portion of the database myself, I wouldn't disagree entirely with the opinion expressed in that article.
Although, I wouldn't lump the entire community together by linking to the front of the AGS site, either.
I think he meant "thong". As in the sexy resource of generic point and click adventures.
To be fair, having a look through the games page, you cant really argue with the guy. the trick is to not download the generic ones ;)
I don't think the guy took much more than 5 mins of research. So this might have been the impression he got. Of course there's some truth in there too. Most games here resemble sierra or lucas arts classic. But thats in a way like most RTS games resemble Dune or Herzog II or FPS games resemble Doom or Wolfenstein 3d, like 90s platformers resembled Super Mario Brothers. ...
In the end its content that counts - and I doubt they took a closer look at this here.
Quote from: Stee on Tue 05/04/2011 23:00:14
I think he meant "thong". As in the sexy resource of generic point and click adventures.
To be fair, having a look through the games page, you cant really argue with the guy. the trick is to not download the generic ones ;)
The trick is to not download the ones with too many katakana and hiragana in the titles. ;)
Quote from: Stee on Tue 05/04/2011 23:00:14
the trick is to not download the generic ones ;)
But then how will anyone discover all my games? ;)
That was a pretty generic review, in my opinion. I've seen all those words before, and the Latin alphabet is so 2500 years ago: does the author have no imagination? The syntax is mediocre at best, and his obsequious fawning over grammatical convention is nothing short of pedestrian. Does the world really need another white-bread-and-bologna-sandwich game review blog (http://www.wired.com/gamelife/)?
I think pretty much every game I've made (with the exception of Cryptic) was a generic point and click adventure game. Still, I'm proud of them. I know what I'm trying to do with them. Plus, they're free. They actually cost me money. Errrr back on topic. As was said, "generic" doesn't have to be a bad word, but it did feel a little smarmy in context.
Quote from: Ponch on Wed 06/04/2011 00:07:58
Quote from: Stee on Tue 05/04/2011 23:00:14
the trick is to not download the generic ones ;)
But then how will anyone discover all my games? ;)
I've played most of your Barn Runner Games ;)
Quote from: Stee on Wed 06/04/2011 02:15:06
I've played most of your Barn Runner Games ;)
Ah ha! So you
do play mediocre games! The truth is finally out! ;)
And as far as Wired calling our little corner of the web a throng of mediocrity, I'd argue that this place is more like a school for aspiring game makers. Thanks to the database, you can watch some real talent develop over time. Pick any of our current forum superstars and watch how they grow from those first awkward but earnest games to the later, more polished games that are the result of applying the lessons learned from their early struggles. We've got quite a course catalog here for newbies to study and find inspiration (and tips on what pitfalls to avoid) when they start to make their own games.
Mediocrity? Wired can suck it. 8)
Quote from: Ponch on Wed 06/04/2011 03:06:58
I'd argue that this place is more like a school for aspiring game makers.
I had to come out of lurking to add my agreement to this.
Just yesterday, I got a message out of the blue from someone who had played The Marionette, asking "what made you start making games?" I had to say that ultimately, the AGS community did.
The Wired guy completely misunderstood what AGS is all about. I don't see AGS as being here to provide stellar games. A game company/development team/publisher does that. I suppose in some ways AGS does a little bit of all that (except the company bit). But the main point of AGS is to provide aspiring game makers with a tool, and support for that tool. The community grew out of that. And the game database? That's the result of a popular tool.
So I'd say if that guy insists on calling AGS games "generic", let him. I for one am very proud of the so-called "generic" games that we produce. It's a sign that adventure games are flourishing. People are making games. And it's because of AGS.
To add to what I've already said, a substantial selection of the database could be classed as "generic" examples of the genre; they largely stick to established templates and well-worn (or even over-used) tropes - both creatively and mechanically.
Something I'm guilty of myself.
This isn't to say they are "bad" games, as such, or even badly made games.
As people have pointed out, it's the qualitative use of "generic" that seems to be the problem here. And the implication, by linking directly to the site, that the program and it's community, as a whole, are ultimately uninteresting.