Story really important?

[MMMorshew]

First, I am german and my english could sound a little sloppy, so let me warn you.  

My dream is to make an adventure game with AGS. I have already made a lot of games with that program in 2004/2005/2006, but none of them ever got finished, mostly because of my unorganised approach. So I am thinking about plans for a new one where I won`t do all my old mistakes. But there seems to be a problem I encountered during my thoughts about the story line...

I seem to DISLIKE adventure games with complex stories.
The King`s Quest and Quest for Glory series were the games I enjoyed the most, but I could never really become interested in games like Gabriel Knight or other ones that got praised for their complex storylines.
I actually never needed a complex story while playing. The things that most appealed to me in my favorite games were actually the simple stories (explore the lands, solve the three tasks blablabla...) and the interesting and mystic places you could explore everywhere and that offered you lots of interaction. Even the deaths were something I loved, it made the games more unpredictable and interesting. I guess it was also the overal athmosphere that those games could create that kept me playing. The graphics didn`t even need to look good, even Kings Quest 3 and 4 could create that athmosphere.

But I heard countless times that the Sierra adventures are very disliked among many adventure fans.
Which is a problem for me, because those games were always my main inspiration for my own games and of course I want to make a game that people like to play.
Am I just strange or are there other people who think the same?
What would you expect from a game that uses the same ingridients as the early Sierra adventures?

[Khris]

I didn't like that they were so unforgiving. In Goldrush, in the very beginning of the game if you didn't get something very easy to overlook, you'd get stuck once you were at the west coast, at the very end of the game. Also, killing the player off every two minutes, effectively converting him from player to save&restorer (and disk juggler) isn't something I'd recommend including in your tribute.

A game is about fun, so it doesn't need a complex storyline as long as it is entertaining. A few twists won't hurt though. But having said that, focus on getting stuff done

[blueskirt]

Personally, my biggest problem with Sierra games is not the lack of complex plots but dead ends. If you can steer clear from that I'll probably end up playing your game.

I don't think you should worry too much about simple plot. You don't need to have a super complex story to make a fun game. Sure, complex plots are always a plus but games with  simple plot and bucketloads of humor, or an interesting, original setting are fun too.

Regarding death, personally I don't mind dying, and if the animation and death message are funny, I'll go out of my way to find cool ways to kill the main character, but that's just me. Most people tend to gravitate between "I don't mind dying as long it was fairly obvious I was in a dangerous situation" and "I don't like dying". If you keep the number of death to a minimum, or if you implement a "Try Again" button or an autosave feature, you should be fine.

[Ali]

To me the Sierra philosophy seems to be like sexual perversity. If (like me) you weren't introduced to it at a young age, you don't get it.

I wouldn't say that Gabriel Knight, Full Throttle or Riven have particularly complex plots. It's just that King's Quest and Quest for Glory (the orginals being the only ones I've completed) have almost no story. They're a series of colourful challenges linked together by exploration. It's fun, overlooking the bad design and cruelty to players. I suppose their spiritual successors are sandbox games like Morrowind / Fallout 3.

[Charity]

I wouldn't worry too much.  Make a game you would want to play, and unless you are the world's more singularly unique person, you will probably be able to find an audience.  I would actually consider a sierra style game to be a pretty safe move, when it comes to getting an audience, because while it is true that a fair number of people dislike some aspects of the Sierra playstyle, it is also true that a huge subset of amateur adventure gamers grew up on King's Quest and other Sierra series, and still have a strong sense of nostalgia/loyalty for them.  I'd say the only aspect of Sierra games that would really risk alienating your player base are the dead ends.  It's still a design choice, but unless you market your game as an intentionally cruel and unforgiving game, people will probably get frustrated and complain.

Some adventure games are story games, and a handful of those manage to be genuinely compelling works of fiction, but having a fantastic and complex story is another thing that you don't really need to make an enjoyable game.  In fact, there are a lot of people who hate it when their games get bogged down in cut-scenes and dialogue and backstories, so if you do something straightforward and unobtrusive, there are people who will like you for that.