The issue/problem with the adventure game genre in 2010

[bicilotti]

Just because he was a student of Aristotle doesn't mean he was greek does it? I could be a student of the work of Samuel Beckett and the man is long dead, the period of Horace was really about them digging up old material to understand how the world works in both a physical and metaphysical way, most notably people like aristotle and pythagoras, horace was roman. It was one of those "whats old is new again"  and we can learn from it type eras. Kind of like the english renaisanse, the age of re-enlightenment. so horace took Ari's words, translated and reinterpreted them for roman poets and playwrights, but really it was all pretty much the work of aristotle, he is really the creative force behind "Ars Poetica" horace was fundementally just a translator.

I hope that cleared things up for you.

I must have been misunderstood!

My question was: why are you referring to Aristotle's Poetics (a work written in greek, by a greek author) using a latin name?

[strangechicken]

Because Ars Poetica is not the same as Aristotles Poetics, different book, Horace brought his own politics to aristotles work, while most of his duty was as translator he did however change a few things (Aristotle liked a bit of comedy, horace despised comedy and actually started the comedy is inferior to tragedy thing).

Here see for yourself, this is a section on comedy from aristotles "Poetics"

As, in the serious style, Homer [supposed author of the Illiad and the Odyssey] is preeminent among poets, for he alone combined dramatic form with excellence of imitation, so he first laid down the main lines of Comedy, by dramatising the ludicrous instead of writing personal satire....But when Tragedy and Comedy came to light, the two classes of poets still followed their natural bent: the lampooners became writers of Comedy, and the epic poets were succeeded by Tragedians, since the drama was a larger and higher form or art.

... Comedy is, as we have said, and imitation of characters of a lower type-not, however, in the full sense of the word bad, the Ludicrous being merely a subdivision of the ugly. It consists in some defect of ugliness, which is not painful or destructive. To take an obvious example, the comic mask is ugly and distorted, but does not imply pain. The successive changes through which Tragedy passed, and the authors of these changes are well known, whereas Comedy has had no history, because if was not at first treated seriously ...

(Aristotle, ‘Poetics,’ (translated by SH Butcher) in Bernard F Dukore (ed.), Dramatic theory and criticism: Greeks to Grotowski, HBJ College Publishers, 1974, New York, pp. 34â€"5.)


However good old horace found it far too indecoruous to be considered true theatre, it wasn't tragedy and he therefore claimed that tragedy is by far insuperior to comedy, not exactly what aristotle himself said if ya get my drift. Old horace liked to change an odd passage here and there to fit his personal agenda.

So I am still talking about Ars Poetica as it is the most modern classical version of poetics, its still Ari's work so why not refer to the most moden version? after all Neoclassical france actually Use Ari's work thru horaces translation the most

[LUniqueDan]

Brad Newsom get out of this body.

[bicilotti]

Because Ars Poetica is not the same as Aristotles Poetics, different book

I am an academic, a dramaturg, writer, Historian etc: that is my study focus, and tho the plot changes, they're still following the same conventions set by Aristotle in the "Ars Poetica"

I think you were referring to a greek work by mistakenly using a latin title, an error many wannabe academics do.
The "I am talking about Aristotle's ideas as depicted in Horace's book" doesn't hold up:

a) the fellow took his damn time to express his views in a work he wrote himself, no need to go elsewhere
b) Horace would punch you repeatedly in the face for being called a "translator", and rightly so.


I apologise if I sound rude, but calling yourself "an academic, a dramaturg, writer, Historian etc", "professional comedian", "someone with a university training of the entertainment industy and who has worked and various facets of the entertainment industry professionally" sounds stilted and pathetic.


By the way, my favourite movie is Oceanus XI

[Dualnames]

Thumbs up if it took you long enough to see what movie is bicilotti's favorite and used quote to see it.

[Gabriel_Down]

Yes. Encourage him. Atta boy


Edit: ctrl+v at the adress bar

[Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens]

I kind of have to agree with the latter part of Bicilotti's statement (I don't pretend to have deep thoughts about Aristotle or Horace so I'm not even touching that argument).  This bandying about of qualifications you've been doing since you been posting lately comes off, I don't know, a touch attention-grabby?  LOOK AT ME, I AM SO QUALIFIED TO DISCUSS THESE ISSUES THAT I HAVE THESE DEGREES.  Step back and take an objective look at how you've approached several of your posts so far; might any of that seem a bit pretentious and off-putting/arrogant to people who don't yet know you?  I think so, and sadly you've opened yourself to this criticism in doing so, potentially derailing your topics from their intended purpose.

Just my opinion on this, and you're obviously entitled to dismiss it.

RE your topic, I also have to kind of agree with Ali in saying that I disagree with several of your points.  For one thing, we're actually seeing a sort of slow revival of the genre that just happens to be starting with remakes.  In my opinion, this is a clear example of companies like Lucasarts 'testing the waters' to see if there's a large enough market to justify them doing more.  With Telltale it's more of a matter of them taking advantage of a rather low-competition market where they can make a profit off of the current consumer base.  I'm not sure that 10 more companies would find enough adventure gamers to all profit at this time, but I could be wrong -- and I'd be happy to admit it if that were the case!  Let's not forget that the vintage adventure games were blessed (some would say plagued) with gameplay elements that were to varying levels:

1.  From challenging to outright unfair (and unapologetic).
2.  Confusing (in the sense that often no help or hints were provided about what to do or how to do it).
3.  Difficult to pick up and play for the average consumer (this is more true today than ever before).
4.  Slow-paced, requiring some patience in order to get involved in the story.

These are all elements some people love and others hate, but most agree do not suit the gaming demographic of today.  Gamers now want to pick up a game and have instant immersion, they want tight controls that don't require much explanation, and as we have seen with the increase of games with outright handholding gameplay, many of them have a low threshold for challenge compared to people gaming 20 years ago.  

As much as I'd like to see a game made with classic sensibilities, I have to be realistic and say I think it would be a total commercial failure.  The huge verb lists alone would piss off or confuse people who'd rather be able to left or right click everything.  Telltale seems to understand this based on the way they do their interfaces, and the fact that they've made a profit selling their games would seem to show that sleeker, simple interfaces, lowered difficulty and more 'interactive' elements get their games sold.  I found all the Sam and Max games I played, as well as Tales of Monkey Island, to be at least 5 times easier than the titles on which they were based.  Maybe it's partly because I'm older, but I also see a simplification of the system and how they've cut down on inventory sizes, and by limiting you to just a few actions based on what you are hovering the mouse over you've also eliminated the various attempts a player would naturally make trying to figure out what their limitations are.

[m0ds]

We're ALL a student of the great Samu Alisdair Beckett...

Anyway, this is verging on general discussion ranting now, please bring it back on topic or it'll be time to move it

And preferably not mention the words Ars Poetica again, I think we've met our annual quota now  :

[Gabriel_Down]

[strangechicken]

My intention is not to be arrogant, it is more so to explain where my view point comes from it is ones background that does explain his view point! I wrote what I do to explain my context in the argument, not to prove anything, Just so it makes it easier to clarify.

"Horace was a Roman poet and satirist whose works are again considered ‘classics’ in the canons of Western literature. He was a passionate writer of Odes which were often dedicated to issues of love, friendship and patriotism, while his Epistles documented his observations of Roman society, literature and philosophy. Of his later works, the most influential in the field of theatre theory is entitled the Ars Poetica (or The Art of Poetry) which was probably written around 20 BC. This piece of writing unashamedly extolls the writings of the Greeks â€"especially Aristotle â€" and Horace takes Ari’s ideas and interprets them for aspiring Roman poets. He is the FIRST to try and create a set of rules for the theatre by borrowing from and clarifying Aristotle’s often vague discussions of the tragic form."  Written by Dr Janet Mcdonald PHD...

and i'm sorry but the "Horace was a genius and some how just ingeniusly created these ideas outta thin air with no catalyst or cause" doesn't hold up

I am not  trying to sound at all pretencious, i'm a laid back happy go lucky dude. I was just simply explain the context in which my knowledge base exists, far from trying to grab attention, I realise it may have seemed that way, but it was far from my intentions. In fact in the world of stand up prtention is the kinda thing that can kill your career, because stand ups are intrinsic but straight forwards people and they see thru bullshit.

I haven't dismissed anything anyones said here, I've taken it all on board, i've found it an enlightening and intesting debate it would be totally arrogant to not listen when I started a topic to hear others oppinions on the matter.

thus it became about Horace for no apparent reason, so can we get back on topic please? I created this topic because I feel strongly about this stuff (adventure gaming), and i genuinely want to hear your oppinions on it.  if i wanted to simply state an authoritarian oppinion, i'd change my name to Ben Croshaw and start a blog.

Also this hasn't been the most hospitible welcoming from the community: it isn't hard to see why some of the view points are being expressed in here http://www.agdiforums.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=19=14626&start=0

[Gabriel_Down]

Well you said greek and horace but I never thought you bend that way

[Snarky]

Hah! People have said way worse stuff than that about AGS!

Anyway, going on about your qualifications to lend weight to your arguments (don't deny it) is a major faux pas on most internet forums--as well as in pretty much every other social setting. No one here is impressed by a university degree (in progress). Ultimately, you establish your authority by doing: if you can argue persuasively, write coherently, and most importantly: demonstrate your ideas in a kick-ass game, it doesn't matter if you're a game design PhD or a fry cook, or both. And if you can't, it definitely doesn't matter.

If you don't feel welcome, I'm sorry about that. Welcome! My impression is that like many people who join for the first time, you have some ideas and opinions about adventure games that you've never really had a chance to discuss with others and reflect on before, so they're not as nuanced or well informed as they'll get with more experience. That's only natural, but you might want to realize that most of what you say are things that we've heard several times before (those of us who've been around on this and similar forums for a few years), and probably views we held ourselves at one time or another. Not to say that that makes forum veterans more right--we disagree with each other just as much--just more savvy about the standard arguments.

Edit: Oh, and while I'm being patronizing (sorry about that, honestly!), what they teach you in university as an undergrad is usually greatly simplified. A lot of it is mainly to break you out of "common sense" and "common knowledge" and get you to think differently about a topic. So Shakespeare's plays didn't leap fully formed from his brain, he had sources and models and collaborators. And things that seem peculiar or unique to us were actually generic or fashionable elements at the time, or references we no longer pick up on. But to go from there to "I can actually acurately say tragedies are all the same" (because that's what my professor said) just shows that you've missed the point. Really? There's no difference between Oedipus Rex and King Lear and The Wild Duck and Death of a Salesman worth mentioning? If your argument is simply "all literary works that adhere to Aristotle's criteria for a tragedy have those characteristics in common," then congratulations, you've just proved a tautology!

Again, you truly are welcome here. People will disagree with you and criticize you, but that's the regular rough and tumble of online debate. People who have made much less auspicious debuts have gone on to become valued community members.

[Ali]

Agreed. And on a personal note, this thread has been worthwhile for me for two reasons:

We're ALL a student of the great Samu Alisdair Beckett...

Don't make me cut your arms and legs off and make you live in a dustbin!

But mainly:

RE your topic, I also have to kind of agree with Ali

Normally I disagree with ProgZ's stance in all political and philosophical matters (just not in matters of how to make excellent looking sprites, of course). So it's nice to kind of agree!

[Dualnames]

I find the point of this discussion to be utterly pointless. And everyone who has created or replied to a similar topic in the past, know it's pointless as well.

A) The adventure game genre isn't dead.
B) If we take into account the thought that it's not what it used to be:

1) This topic is an chance for everyone to go nostalgic about the great eras when windows had so many blue screens I thought it was the windows desktop theme. When CD was an item in a museum of ART.

2) What kind of answers are you expecting?

3) What kind of discussion do you think this would have brought up? Already few posts and I find the most important and interesting thing said that made me this topic a little less than boring-to-death, was about your behavior. A  COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT THEME.

4) The adventure game genre isn't dead at all. With all the discussions that its dead and all, its a constant topic.

If anyone doesn't like my tone/spelling, complain to the post-office.

[strangechicken]

People seem to have misconstrued my intentions here, my intentions where good. I came here to find out your views on why people said that adventure gaming is "Dead" I have never said it was "dead". Nothing can ever truly die!  I'm not trying to be condescending. Adventure gaming has a small but loyal fan base, and it wasn't to show my qualifications, it wasn't about qualifications, it was about to show you who I am, (someone based as a screen writer will view things differently than say, someone who works in I.T. ALA the guys who wrote the Longest Journey.  EG when i did courses and screen writing, they have a completely different philosophy and ideals from writing for the stage for instance.)

If you want my personal opinion I find a degree in theatre to be rediculous, because its an artform, and to have a piece of paper to say your an artist is ironic to the very foundation of art.

I'm new here, and tho you've probably seen this thing discusses many a time, I HAVE NOT! Be patient with me, I've been patient with you here, so please lets all respect each other this is a grown up forum, not a school yard discussion on whose weener is bigger.

Did i ever say Aristotle/Horace was the main tenants of everytihng, NO. I said they were resonant in shakespeare work and people of the time (they broke A LOT of rules, I wasn't saying it was solid, simply had resonance) I used the term "Tragedy" in context to "revenge tragedy" in the English Renaissanse -I shoud have clarified that- but by the time of death of a sales man the whle ideal had completely died out replaced by things like the well made play structure etc (Indecorous acts were shown on the stage etc.) In no way whats so ever does death of the salesman have anything to do with aristotle! Oedipus Rex was more strongly aristotelean, because it follows it very smoothly (indecorous acts like the queens suicide off stage as is the incest and oedipus' defies the gods prophecy, so he is part of his undoing: which would bring the moral point "Do not defy the gods or bad things will happen to you!" (It was written around the time more and more people were becoming athiest" But can we stop discussing theatre, this topic is not "the problem with Clasical theatre/litereature in 2010." But if i can say something, My degree is not "in progress as you say" I've actually completely finished my Major completely. (Tho I am considering doing another year of uni within  the education area to qualify me as a high school teacher, but thats another story).

I'd also like to point out the case of "OceanSpirit Dennis" parodies, sure the kid was an absolute tit, but is it fair to hate on him just because he is obviously a frustrated and somewhat confused kid!? All i'm saying is there is a reason why i've only publicly spoken on the boards now. I'm starting to feel more welcome as time wears on, but the welcome party was rather foreboding.

But enough, Horace has been dead for about 2000 years, I don't think he cares about people debating who did or did not write his book. I didn't come here to discuss such things, so can we move back to topic please!?

[Igor Hardy]

I came here to find out your views on why people said that adventure gaming is "Dead".

Studios and publishers started to say adventure games are dead because back in the 2nd half of the 90s most of the expensive ones were failing financially, some spectacularly so (e.g. The Last Express).

Also, sometime in 1998 (if I remember correctly) Ken Williams went into retirement selling Sierra to other companies. The new management decided to ignore all of Sierra's iconic adventure game IPs (and soon bankrupted the entire company), but at least they released the already started GK3.

The final blow that immortalized the "adventure games are dead" idea in people's minds was LucasArts canceling Sam & Max 2 when it was near completion.

[strangechicken]

I think for sierra, from what I see they tried to make their company something it wasn't, they tried to make million dollar projects like "Phantasmagoria," which were incredibly overhyped but fell short. Phantasmagoria is ok for what it is, the issue was it wasn't truly an interactive movie in the true sense of the term, and they Sierra were trying to make full scales movie, cinematic type games; so in a way some of their stuff was their own undoing.

Its a shame they sold sierra tho, beause when they closed down, they shut down so many projects, like a new space quest and Leisure suit larry game. But it may not have been the smartest thing for them just to ignore them, brings tears to my eyes when I see the "Sierra" logo on something like "Ice Age: The game" or such movie related cash in products.

Adventure games are never dead, while theres technology to make them, some people will still make great content "If you build it, they will come!" The issue is, I love the genre so much, I just wish there were more commercial releases so many more can come to share the same love for them, I just want to share the joy of adventure gaming, after all I find it is the best genre, because tho they have fundamental elements, there is really no limit to the genre of adventure gaming, it can be on any topic or subject matter with any story. Action games seem to just spew a script out as an after thought to their combat system (IE. Resident Evil: WOw a bunch of crazed scientists making a bunch of zombies for an underground government project to raise super soldiers, That plot hasn't been plot line of half of every zombie film released since Romero and Pre-romero"

[Iliya]

No need of so many words. For the sellers adventure game genre is dead. For the fans (us) the adventure game genre is not dead.

[strangechicken]

Yeah thats very true, and iI guess i'm speaking from the rose colored glasses of nostalgia, I remember being pissed off because Kings Quest 7 has too high specs for my  computer (Good memories), but still I am sure there are people out there who'd love the genre, but because of its low public status (I mean general joe average public here) Don't yet know the genre exists. For example I stuck my 8 year old niece on a few of the old "Humongous Entertainment" Games and they kept her entertained for hours.

I will continue to read this thread and learn more from your views, but for now I have an adventure game to make.

[Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens]

Normally I disagree with ProgZ's stance in all political and philosophical matters (just not in matters of how to make excellent looking sprites, of course).

Really?  I never noticed!  But that's because I love you .