"How to save adventure games" by Richard Cobbett

[Secret Fawful]

"How to save adventure games" by Secret Fawful.

Stop making watered down, wussy games I can play in my sleep, made for Dave Grossman's mommy in law. Give me so much challenge I have to take out a pencil and a pad and take notes. Grow a pair of balls and quit playing it safe or I'm going to come down to some of these studios, most likely Telltale, and kick every ass in the entire place until they make some real damn adventure games with real damn puzzles and real damn heart instead of cold studio-exec run robotically-made turds so I can feel like I'm playing a real damn game.

I don't play the classics because of nostalgia. My eyes don't glaze at 3D adventure games because of nostalgia. I play the classics and spit on the new stuff because the classics did things right and the new stuff is so bland and forgettable I could take a dump on the cover and forget which game it was. The Last Express should have been the next step in revolutionizing what adventure games can do, but that game tanked, so hooray, we're stuck with an unevolving genre that spits out the most mundane crap I've ever seen. Eat me, Back to the Future the Game.

Do I sound mad? Well, that's because I AM.

[Igor Hardy]

All that said, this rant isn't supposed to be an excuse for poorly designed (adventure) games (dead ends, illogical trial and error puzzles, no hints, poor story...), especially commerical ones. Those are inexcusable.

That was kind of Richard's point.  That's what mainstream commercial adventure games have become.

How can you say that was Richard's point?

In the first part of the article he says that what set apart the truly good adventure games of the 80s and 90s was not their great craftsmanship, but the constant innovations they introduced (including innovations in the graphics). The only time Richard praises puzzle design is in case of Day of The Tentacle.

In the second part a much more serious jab at the genre is made. The modern gamer is "too sophisticated" to get stuck on puzzles (whether in classic adventure games or new ones). Modern gamer needs his "flow", or he won't progress in a game at all.

Both are valid points, and I personally really like the call to designers to innovate, but begging for mass gamer's (or casual gamer's) attention has nothing to do with "saving the genre". The way it ends it's more of a condemning than inspiring article, especially for small indie designers.

[loontje]

I agree with the part that says you should build the game mechanics around the story and not the other way around. After all, adventure games are supposed to be "story driven". What if developers would put more effort into originality and gameplay instead of graphics?... And "the genere is stuck in the past isn't" the way I would phrase it, because it has a negative connotation. Nostalgia is an important reason why adventure games are still alive.

[Igor Hardy]

loontje, the recent Mata Hari is like that - game mechanics built around the story, cheap graphics and plenty of innovation. Almost no one liked it.

Insecticide was a fun mix of action and detective missions (perhaps somewhat like L.A. Noire, but with more action). Cheap 3D graphics. No one bought it either.

Innovation alone doesn't sell a game. Innovation + good, expensive marketing might, but these days it's less risky to rely just on nostalgia.

[Anian]

loontje, the recent Mata Hari is like that - game mechanics built around the story, cheap graphics and plenty of innovation. Almost no one liked it.

Insecticide was a fun mix of action and detective missions (perhaps somewhat like L.A. Noire, but with more action). Cheap 3D graphics. No one bought it either.

Innovation alone doesn't sell a game. Innovation + good, expensive marketing might, but these days it's less risky to rely just on nostalgia.

*cough*Minecraft*cough*   

[Igor Hardy]

I was talking exclusively about adventure games. There are innovative adventure games sometimes, but no one is particularly interested in that - neither the genre's fans, nor the press, nor the wider public.

But anyway, Minecraft and... what else comparable to Minecraft?

Minecraft has gone viral on an amazing, unprecedented, unexpected scale. The game that Minecraft was heavily inspired by (Infiniminer) didn't. But I'm not seeing Minecraft's success isn't meaningful for future games. Already seeing a Minecraft's blocky graphics on magazine covers was great.