The new Sam and Max thread

[Mordalles]

A discussion over what are the good things and bad things about adventure games isn't whining and it's kind of depressing to read someone dismiss arguements because it takes the games and casts a critical eye on them.

i have no problem with that. but i don't think just saying every adventure game of the last decade were bad or saying the classics were flawed period, is really casting a crytical eye or "discussing" them.
i'm not dismissing arguements here.  i'm just saying helm seems to have a problem with every adventure game i've ever heard of, and therefore dismisses them as bad game design. which makes me wonder why he is on an adventure game forum in the first place. i probably haven't played as many adventure games as you guys, so i'm not bored with the genre yet, nor do i think modern adventure games are broken. there are a lot of rpg and action games with adventure elements, that really seems to be what helm is looking for. though, i can't be sure, since helm seems to be a bit vaque on what he really wants, other than just pointing out flaws.
it seems you really get "depressed" or "saddened" rather quickly. 
it seems you were trying to be confrontational with me, so sorry if i said something you didn't like, or i sorry for my different opinion. this is a discussion, afterall.

"whining" might have been too strong, so sorry if you were offended, helm, which i assume you were, judging by your response.

disclaimer: i'm not trying to offend anyone, but if i did in this message in some sort of way, then i'm sorry.

[Helm]

I am not vague, I've posted lots and lots of times what exactly I find wrong with most puzzling in adventure games, I've agreed with many things other people have said on the subject, so on. Seriously, read 3-4 threads on Game theory and Puzzle discussion on this forum. There's lots that I find right in adventure games too. So on.

I posted right there about games I feel do things right more than wrong in the genre.

I am not strongly offended by what you said before, I dismissed it because it didn't warrant a reply. If you want a discussion, participate with rebuttals and arguments, not character assassination.

I'll let you know this: I've made ags games you've probably never played back in the day, when I was 15-17 years old and I didn't know exactly what I was doing, which suffered by the things I am critizising here TO THE MAX. Derivative, bad-puzzle gameplay, 'what am I doing?' motivation, click-everywhere inane pixelhunts, make-it-up-as-you-go-along storylines, padding filler puzzles,  you name it. I am not just shooting the shit idly here. I am condemning my own old stuff as much as anything else. I am not 16 anymore, time is limited, I've looked at adventure games with a critical eye and I am constantly in discussion with like-minded and/or open-minded people about them. You'll realize what I'm talking about probably years from now when the novelty of 'it's graphical! and it's an adventure!' wears off for you too. This doesn't mean I hate adventure games and I'm waiting for you to hate them too so we can join in awesome misery loves company condemnation of all that we used to enjoy as kids. This means I love what adventure games show promise that they could eventually be.

[LimpingFish]

Maybe it's just that we get less tolerable as time goes on. Or maybe not. It's too complex to sum up.

I can have fun with what would be regarded as an "inferior" game, but I can't explain why. On the other hand, I might dismiss a "classic" on any number of reasons that I, subconciously maybe, chose not to apply to the "inferior" one.

It's a multi-layered, mulit-faceted phenomenon. And It hurts my brain when I try to decypher it.

[Mordalles]

years from now? i'm older than you.  i've probably played adventure games before you. not nice assuming why i play adventure games.
oh, and i've read everything you posted about game theory. you've never been vaque in pointing out flaws, only when it comes to how to improve them. without the game turning into an island simulation, or rpg, etc. you seem to be heading to mixing of genre's.
i have actually played gladiator quest (i don't consider this an adventure game), snail quest 1-3 and crown of gold.  sol still illudes me.  i just don't have a clear picture in my mind what you think a good adventure would be like, and i've read everything you said on the subject. throwing around terms like innovation, good puzzle design, good story, etc, doesn't really help in evaporating the vaqueness. i've played many modern adventure games i consider to have good story, good puzzle design, no pixelhunting, etc.

almost everytime a game is mentioned in the forums you just state it's bad. again, making me wonder why think you like adventure games. "crytical" is putting it mildly. you don't like clones? but then you say you are looking forward to certain clone ags games. and your excuse? "they do it right"? you attack games like apprentice? which really does it more right than any other "clones".

"love what adventure games show promise  that they could eventually be", again, sounding like you don't really like adventure games, only once they become something else.

as for "character assassination", treat people with respect, and you will be treated with respect. 

i agree with limpingfish, though. you get less tolerable as time goes on.

[Helm]

years from now? i'm older than you.  i've probably played adventure games before you. not nice assuming why i play adventure games.

Dunno how old you are. I'm 22 and I've played all the well-known graphical adventure games there are, most of the obscure ones, generally besides say, Radiant or a few other people here I don't know anyone else that has suffered through the genre as much as I have.

I played them all early, I learned english with them and for them, they're a big part of my aesthetic and psychological development from a child to young adult. And I remember a time where I was just floored if an adventure game looked good and had nice characters. This doesn't happen anymore.

oh, and i've read everything you posted about game theory. you've never been vaque in pointing out flaws, only when it comes to how to improve them. without the game turning into an island simulation, or rpg, etc. you seem to be heading to mixing of genre's.

Yes. I am no purist. I think storydriven plot and characterization has migrated to other genres, it's only fair for adventure games to take the good bits from other gameplay systems. Challenge in a game, reward for getting better. This is not vague, this is very simple. If you want, don't call this an adventure game. I call it the type of adventure game I'm predominantly interested in.

I have actually played gladiator quest (i don't consider this an adventure game), snail quest 1-3 and crown of gold.  sol still illudes me.  i just don't have a clear picture in my mind what you think a good adventure would be like, and i've read everything you said on the subject.

What can I say man, read again. Don't push your confusion as my flaw. If some people understand me and build on what I've said and there's meaningful dialogue occuring, then I'm probably not being very vague, am I?

almost everytime a game is mentioned in the forums you just state it's bad. again, making me wonder why think you like adventure games. "crytical" is putting it mildly. you don't like clones? but then you say you are looking forward to certain clone ags games. and your excuse? "they do it right"? you attack games like apprentice? which really does it more right than any other "clones".

Since I've been around for a few years more than you on the AGS scene: There was a time when things around here were so bad that even a functional AGS game was cause for celebration. Then after that things got better. Then there was a time when a game that even mildly looked like a LEC game came out, that was a cause of celebration. Then things started to get better... HOPEFULLY in my opinion, then there will be a time when a game comes out that innovates on the genre, it will be celebrated. Apprentice and any other game like that played an important part, there's lots of people that like them, but they are stepping stones in my opinion. After nostalgia, after emulation, there should come challenging innovation. Dislike this mode of thinking?

"love what adventure games show promise  that they could eventually be", again, sounding like you don't really like adventure games, only once they become something else.

Bingo.

as for "character assassination", treat people with respect, and you will be treated with respect. 

Have I ever not treated you with respect, Mordalles? For me to even address a person there must be at least a modicum of respect for them, otherwise I ignore them.

Let's say I didn't treat you respect somewhere down the line, though I don't remember when, I don't remember exactly ever adressing you to be frank, what you say seems to suggest that since I did that, now it's open season for you to be an asshole to me. Is that how your ethics work?

For future reference, if my request carries any weight with you, if you're unable to adress me with respect, I'd rather you didn't adress me at all. You can ignore my request, and that will lead to you talking to thin air, as I will not reply to you.

[Shane 'ProgZmax' Stevens]

Have I ever not treated you with respect, Mordalles? For me to even address a person there must be at least a modicum of respect for them, otherwise I ignore them.

Wow.


Anyway, can you two take this to private messages if you can't resolve it quickly (this seems to be happening often lately).  Let's keep this topic about Sam and Max and what people think of it rather than what some of us think of some forum members.

[MrColossal]

I believe you misunderstood Helm's point in that quote, Progz. I don't think it's fair to quote and comment on something and then call for no more discussion on that.

"Well hey! Shoot 'em ups evolved into FPS, and the gameplay difference was a huge improvement!"

By shoot-em-ups do you mean like top down shooters? I don't know if I can compare the two.

"But clickers didn't improve in 3D, they mostly got worse."

Did point and click improve in 2d over the years? It's all so subjective to the type of game to. Some people feel graphics killed adventure games, some people feel verb lists killed adventure games, some people feel verb coins killed adventure games, some people feel Lucasarts killed adventure games, some people feel adventure games committed suicide.

"Deus Ex."

I tried Deus Ex 3 times... The third time I got pretty far but I just couldn't care. Everything felt so clunky. Shooting felt like no other FPS [not in a good way], sneaking felt clunky and the AI, I didn't understand what it was doing most times. Personally I want Hitman without the main focus being killing. There is a lot of puzzle solving in some missions of the various Hitman games and usually all of them have to do with the staple of adventure gaming: Getting past a locked door.

[Babar]

Definitely nothing at all about Sam 'n Max here. Hope it's not a crime.

I strongly echo Ghormak's 'getting better at a game' sentiment. You don't get awesome at adventure games. When you finish the story book you don't win it. You just close it and get on with your business. I think adventure games would stand to gain a lot from gameplay devices where you can win, lose, and various shades in between. Not just game-stuckage when you can't solve a puzzle. In an rpg you might have to kill 100 orcs to get to some place, and it might be a daunting task, but hey you killed the first. You're on your way. In adventure games, there's no feedback most of the time. The game doesn't tell you if you're getting closer, if you're sort of making it, if you're on the right track. How often do you go back to an older npc conversation and replay it just so you're sure you understood the hint right and therefore know what you're doing? Seriously, modern adventure games are broken all kinds of ways and you're telling me discussion over these issues leads to nothing?

This is actually quite interesting. Although for me, the interest in the adventure game was not only of story progression. It was also of exploration: The thrill of overcoming some obstacle to find somewhere new where you can go around and explore everything, look at everything, etc. While technically there is exploration in most games, I haven't really felt the effect of it as I have in adventure games. I remember in Diablo 2 that after completing the 1st act I was really happy with having come to a new city, but after a few minutes of checking out the new merchandise and scenery, I noticed that it's exactly the same as the 1st act, only yellow.

Helm, you (and someone else here) mentioned a deserted island sim, but that seems like it has a propensity for getting boring. Reminds me of "Pirates" for some reason.

Heh...anyway, the point wasn't about exploration.

How exactly would you make a game where you would could progress in shades, learn, etc. to proceed? You could add action elements, but then why not just make an action game with a solid story? Sure, you could make a Quest for Glory, or a Fate of Atlantis, but that's been done already. I'm assuming that there must be something new or different to add to the adventure game.

As said, puzzles can't exactly be in all that many shades of "did you do it right". I suppose there is always the way of making paths, then making paths of paths, then making more paths, but realistically, no one is ever going to do that. I suppose that you could make the game structure such that it supports such things (like the so called "open-endedness of RPGs), but once again, it would start getting boring. Besides, I've always hated games that took adventure puzzle elements. Having to actually run halfway across the world to give the Shaman lady the orb from the cave is very tiring.

If not puzzles, if not action, then what? Is the adventure game genre truely dead?

[ManicMatt]

By shoot-em-ups do you mean like top down shooters? I don't know if I can compare the two.

yeah like Alien Breed. A game that eventually changed in a FPS. A decent one too. It was "Doom - but on the Amiga"! and then they made a crap sequel. But I've always felt that it's the same principles, you shoot things. I still love a game of metal slug though.

Did point and click improve in 2d over the years?

Hmm I think the point I was trying to make (if there was indeed one to begin with) is that the advancement of 3D worked in shooting game's favour as the ability to shoot in all directions helped it without having to do much. Whereas the move to 3D for adventure games seemed to harper it somewhat. I blame this mostly on the designers though. In this case, naturally moving to 3D wasn't enough to make a leap in the gameplay, unlike the shooting games. Or rather it seems a lot of these games moved to 3D but were stubborn about it, and kept the fixed camera perspective, but now you had to deal with clumsy resident evil style controls. One of the good thing about adventure games I've always liked, is examining things. So in 3D, why not let me get a closer look, and let me physically pick up objects myself, like in half life 2 but less clumsily done. That homemade 3D game had a good idea of what I mean.. what was it called? Pendora or something? Where you could swing locker doors open and shut by moving the mouse.

"Deus Ex."

Hmm was this the PC version? I had the PS2 version, so I know the graphics were slightly  improved, I don't know if anything else was. (it also had some things cut from it)

It's sequel is shorter, but the combat works a LOT better, and the graphics are sublime. AI is still a bit dumb sometimes, but better. And the sneaking was okay, no qualms here.

The puzzles in the latest hitman would be trying to kill someone by making it look like an accident! They're usually things that the designers put in there themselves though. The best one is..

Spoiler

When you replace the theatre actors fake gun witha real one and he shoots his acting partner in the head. Actually that's kinda cliche now I think about it, but it was cool knowing I did it!

[close]

Helm: Yeah, FoA's approach also meant replayability! I've never played quest for glory... is it too late? Will my "modern" mind find it ancient in gameplay? (and does it have C64 graphics or early Amiga graphics or what?)

EDIT: Babar: "How exactly would you make a game where you would could progress in shades, learn, etc. to proceed?"

Hmm I think Helm touched on this once, with his desert island thing. I'm not sure. Well anyway your character could learn skills, that open up the game. For example he'll learn another language by finding a book, or a translation device, and be able to talk to more people in the game world. Or he'll (She'll, whatever, not improtant now) will learn the correct method to climb ropes without hurting his hands and falling off. Thus gaining access to climb them and explore more.

[MrColossal]

I see your point now Matt, and I totally agree. The best part in a 3d adventure game never happened for me. You could crouch and look up and down in Under a Killing Moon but I never had to look UNDER anything. I never HAD to crouch. My brother and I looked under every desk in an office building looking for a key in that game thinking it might be under a desk or taped up under the desk. I think you just broke the door or something.

One doesn't always have to use 3d to its fullest in order to justify 3d but man, in a genre about exploration, make me explore more than waving a magnifying glass over the screen. Also Penumbra is the game you mean, it had neat ideas but mostly in interaction with environment. I didn't care for the puzzles [and deleted it before finishing it] but I agree, "physically" opening a door feels good. Physics based gameplay should really revitalize adventure gaming.

I played the PC version of Deus Ex but the graphics didn't turn me off. The gameplay did. It just felt mediocre like a FPS Creator game, just my opinion. Also, saving the world stories are hard to get into for me.

I actually think the major puzzles of Hitman are learning what the world does and then navigating the world in a variety of ways. Sure you have to kill someone at the end but getting to that end is a multipathed wonderland! [some of the missions, at least!]

[Helm]

Helm: Yeah, FoA's approach also meant replayability! I've never played quest for glory... is it too late? Will my "modern" mind find it ancient in gameplay? (and does it have C64 graphics or early Amiga graphics or what?)

Sorry, man. Quest for Glory 1 and 2 are in EGA, therefore your eyes will probably explode. I think the games look great, but if you have no tolerance for oldschool, probably not for you. Just play them a bit for game development discussion purposes perhaps.

Quest for Glory, or a Fate of Atlantis, but that's been done already.

Aspects of it have been done, others not enough, others not at all. It's like saying HL2 was just a rehash of HL1, yes it was, but it was done better and more. I think we need more hybrid adventure games with physics, action, rpg elements and challenge. Can never have too many good games. But it's been too few, really!

[LimpingFish]

The desert island sim has been done, to a point, with the Stranded Kids series, from Konami (on the Gameboy Color), the last of which was the excellent Lost in Blue on the Nintendo DS.

The player washes up on a beach and has 90 days in which to survive until rescue arrives. This involves gathering fuel, food, a nice cave, building weapons to hunt, traps, and furniture.

It plays out more or less in semi-realtime, as the players physical, mental, and hunger deteriorates based on how much you try to squeeze into a day. It's linear only in so much as parts of the island only become accessable as you learn new abilities.Other than that it's totally open ended.

[Helm]

The desert island sim has been done, to a point, with the Stranded Kids series, from Konami (on the Gameboy Color), the last of which was the excellent Lost in Blue on the Nintendo DS.

The player washes up on a beach and has 90 days in which to survive until rescue arrives. This involves gathering fuel, food, a nice cave, building weapons to hunt, traps, and furniture.

It plays out more or less in semi-realtime, as the players physical, mental, and hunger deteriorates based on how much you try to squeeze into a day. It's linear only in so much as parts of the island only become accessable as you learn new abilities.Other than that it's totally open ended.

Scotch was playing this and he told me it could be a lot better. Haven't tried it myself, but I can surely imagine a good design being marred by various Japanisms in gameplay.

[LimpingFish]

You'd imagine right.

I did enjoy it, though. And it is a step in the right direction.

[Kweepa]

To drag this back on topic, the second episode was released on Jan 5th. Whee!
If you bought the season pass, check your spam folder. According to the web site, you'll probably find the download link in there. I did.

[Kweepa]

Episode 3 is available!

[blueskirt]

A new episode in less than a month, it's good to see that some companies understood how episodic format works.