Adventure Game Studio

Hey there Sam and Max fans,

As the title states, Telltale has released the Sam and Max trailer. It's purpose is to show off the graphics and voices, as none of it seems to belong to any gameplay environment. You can view it at the new S&M (::)) site here (http://www.telltalegames.com/samandmax). Sam talks about Gametap (Telltales collaborators) and Sam speaks about the series being episodic. The dialogue is hilarious and does not betray the franchise.

Though the voices are not the same as the game or cartoons, they are still true to the duo. I must say I am relieved now, and can't wait to start playing this "season"  :D.

Man it keeps on jerking it doesnt preload grrrrr no download yet either  :'(

Yeah, the first time I watched it it played in second-long bursts, but when it concluded I hit "Play agian!" and it went on uninterupted.

You can download it: http://files.telltalegames.com/samandmax/videos/samandmax_e3trailer.flv
Play it in VLC.

The voices...
They're alright, but I can hear where it could be better, most strikingly for me when Sam says, "Can't think of a reason not to."
Sounds as if he's reading.
EDIT: He should inflect up at the end, not down. At least, that would sound better to me.

And Max sounds like a girl...
EDIT: No he doesn't, but he lacks vitality.

Still, I have hopes for a good game. Although I'm afraid to say it doesn't quite match the LEC trailer of old....

Quote from: Mr Flibble on Thu 11/05/2006 18:59:54
The voices...
when Sam says, "Can't think of a reason not to."
Sounds as if he's reading.

He probably is reading  :D:

(http://lib.store.yahoo.net/lib/animenation/popjapan32.jpg)

But that doesn't mean it should sound like it.

ya. that's why its called voice ACTING not, "reading LINES" :o

Awesome!!! That was a really fun trailer! Heaps better than the new Indiana Jones e3 trailer I thought! :P I can't wait to play :D

You know, I have never seen the cartoon or played the game (except the demo) so Max sounded differant then I! imagined. I always thought he would sound like the some kind of hyper mexican-cliche. but thats just me.

Kill me now.

The voices, the lines, the measly polygons -- like it's all part of some bad dream, or perhaps it's just virtual reality from "Hit the Road".

I wish they could have Sam say something without giving a parody-like soliloquy.

I'm positive this is just a late April Fool's joke.

Keep it away from my hard drive.

It's just a trailer... Jeez. And besides, shouldn't people have learned not to take games personally anymore?

I'm surprised they got voice actors that closely matched those from the game when they didn't actively pursue the original actors for the roles.  Sam's delivery could be more deadpan though.  I don't mind the 3d but the episodic nature makes me doubt that it's a 'please the fans model' of game design they're after at 15-20 bucks a pop.  Seems like just another business model to me, especially if they are as short as Bone ep 1 was.  I'll try the first and if it feels rushed and short I won't bother with the rest.

they said they would tend to be about as long as Bone 2, not 1.

I was dissapointed with the voices, but perhaps I just want either the cartoons actors or the game actors, or one from each. I doubt its that much of a timing issue. Getting consistent work like this is a great job to get. I bet its a money issue, which I understand and wish TellTale the best. It'll take me awhile to get used to the voices but that won't stop me from getting the games.

The idea that in LucasArts version of Sam and Max 2, the voiced characters, being done by their original game voices, were going to meet parrallel universe versions of themselves, and those were going to be voiced by the cartoon counterparts...ohhhhÃ,  made me giddy! But now thats a dream... unless someone accidentally released some sound footage from that.

Yeah, and if they're as well-coded as Bone 1 and 2, they'll also crash at socially inappropriate moments.

I don't like the idea of "episodes". Wtf happened to just making games? With episodes, you run less risk of spending loads of money on a huge game, which bombs. Sure. I dig that. But will all the episodes be seperate stories? If so, fuck that. If they're one big story, in "episodes", then what happens if the first 2-3 don't sell well enough? Will they just stop and leave it hanging?

I don't like it either way.

Release a game or don't. Don't release a bunch of games, tie them together and pretend it's one thing, though every seperate game has 2-3 hours of gameplay, maybe even 5 if you're lucky.

Fuck, I don't even sit down anymore for games with less than 5 hours of gameplay. If I can finish the game faster than I can finish a bottle of coke (and that takes me awhile...) then it's too short!

With the original Sam & Max so deeply rooted in the nostalgia-happy part of my psyche, I can't look past the fact that the voices sound so wrong (and boringly acted). Sorry Telltale :(

Edit: Not that I don't feel terrible for writing the game off purely on the trailer, but it just doesn't seem to stimulate anything other than an 'oh' out of me. It feels like it's going to be a poor cliche of what they achived in the original game over a decade ago, and that makes me sad. I do hope to be proven wrong!

http://www.telltalegames.com/samandmax/comics/5219939  :P I did quite like the animation and the look of the thing though.

I am very very impressed with the trailer and it's making me look forward to the game a lot. I do agree that the voice acting is poorley done for such a highly rated game, but I still have high hopes.

Voh - I definatly agree I HATE the idea of episodic releases and it's about the only reason I haven't touched bone yet, *sigh*.

http://www.telltalegames.com/samandmax/comics/5229950

This (http://www.telltalegames.com/samandmax/comics/5233666) is what this trailer wanted to say.

LOL!1!! @ Krysis:  ;D That's hilarious man! You hit the nail on the head.
Hey, come to think of it, perhaps a certain forum member 'round here might secretly be working on this project?  :o

Judging from the trailer, I have to admit I like it. I originally played S&M:HTR on the disk with DOTT, and I loved it then, mainly for the random violence and the amazing minigames. The game it'self was excellent too.

And of course, it being in 3D is fine. I'd rather have a good looking 3D game than a 2D game most days anywhoo. If they screw up the interface however, it'll ruin the 3D aspect.

- Huw

Sam and Max resist their new masters!

http://www.telltalegames.com/samandmax/comics/5287091

I know what you mean about the voice acting but I still had a big grin on my face after watching that. More Sam and Max fun - yeah!

I agree, episodic sucks. For all those reasons you guys already mentioned.

Episodic releases works for Ben Jordan and Apprentice. I don't see why it couldn't work for Sam & Max.

The voice acting may be slightly lower quality than in Hit the Road, but I think you guys are wearing some seriously rose-colored glasses (or earbuds) when it comes to that old game, too. The writing and the jokes were very similar.

Frankly, I never really liked Sam & Max all that much. I never really found their characters that entertaining and, honestly, am surprised the dorky little cartoon in the LucasArts magazine actually turned into a game, then a cartoon and now a game again. I was looking forward to the LucasArts sequel, cause it looked fun and was excited about the chance to play another LA adventure game. But so much for that.

This one looks like it could be good, but yeah, the voice acting is a little subpar. There's absolutely no gameplay shown, so you really can't tell.

QuoteEpisodic releases works for Ben Jordan and Apprentice. I don't see why it couldn't work for Sam & Max.

Two are free and one is not.  You have greater expectations for gameplay length and quality when you actually have to pay for a game, which is of course completely reasonable.

Alot of people were so unimpressed by Bone ep 1 that I doubt they bothered to even try part 2, and I suspect the same will happen with S&M if the gameplay length, humor, etc don't measure up to a 20 dollar pricetag.

$20? The Bone games prices were lowered to $12 US and apparently the Sam & Max games will be even cheaper. Anyway I think we should stop judging and writing off this game before we get a chance to even see what it's really like.

There's an interesting article on here where one of the Telltale people states:

"Each two-hour episode will see Sam & Max solve a complete case, with an overarching storyline tying the episodes together and culminating in a season finale-like grand finish."

http://www.shacknews.com/extras/2006/051206_e3_day2_chris_1.x


Two hours?  Those kinds of numbers are usually given for the average joe, so I'm guessing it's more like 30-60 minutes?  I like that they tie together, but I certainly wouldn't pay more than say 5 bucks for something that only has about an hour worth of entertainment value (if that).

I think I can wait for the "season" to finish to get them all together on "dvd".

Heh, i thought the voice acting was great.

Did you see this?

GAMEPLAY from GS (http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/sammaxep1/news.html?sid=6157351ag=topslot;action;1)

Whatever you people think, I thought the trailer was brilliant. Reminded me exactly of Sam and Max of old. Maybe it was a little too verbose at times, but I think I'm really looking forward to this.

The gameplay sample looks a bit rough as far as the animation and lip synching goes, but I'm glad they left in dialog choices.

Again, all I can hear is Sam's lacklustre voice acting. Which is really quite disappointing.

It really makes me wonder how expensive would it really be to get either of the two past duos in to do their characters. (TV Series, or game). I understand that this wouldn't be a typical game, inwhich they plan on continuing this series for several games, which would cause for many recording sessions, but then again many TV voice actors go through this every year, and TellTale wants this to be like a TV series, and best of all, its a steady job, which every actor wants.

Oh no, not this again...

What I hate about these incoming S&M title is the fact that every chapter last only from 40minutes to 1hour of gameplay  >:(

I think that sucks.

Quote from: Krysis on Fri 12/05/2006 16:20:19
This (http://www.telltalegames.com/samandmax/comics/9260723) is what this trailer wanted to say.

That was the stupidest thing I ever saw.

*makes a joke about a mirror or something

Quote from: i k a r i on Mon 11/09/2006 02:40:32What I hate about these incoming S&M title is the fact that every chapter last only from 40minutes to 1hour of gameplay  >:(

I spent about 2½ hour on the first chapter. True, you can zip through it if you want, but half the fun is going down all the wrong twists and turns of the dialog trees and interacting with the environment.

Quote from: GarageGothic on Thu 05/10/2006 14:00:24
I spent about 2½ hour on the first chapter.

Damnit GG! := I thought Sam and Max was released! I presume, after frantically accessing the telltale website and finding the release date of November 1, you're talking about Bone.

No, I'm talking about Sam & Max, I had the honor of reviewing it for a couple of magazines and a newspaper. Sorry for giving you false hopes :)

So, what did you think?
Or can you not say?

Telltale have put an embargo on reviews until the 17th, so I might get in trouble if I say too much.
But personally I'm very happy that I got the chance to test it (and this is coming from someone who have been disappointed by pretty much every adventure released the last five years).

You tease.

When I had the honour of visiting TTG I played it for an hour or two (Or maybe less. Time flies when you're having fun) and I must say I totally loved it! There's lots of stuff to do, and the gameworld is rich and detailed. The music is great too! (Samples can be heard on the TTG website) I, for one, can't wait to play and finish it!

--Erwin

My name is in the credits. I have you all beat. ;D

I guess when it's released we'll see if those petitions and hate letters to LucasArts will translate into actual sales.

I'm looking foward to playing it, but then I was also looking foward to playing Bone and look how that turned out.

Telltale seem to make a lot out their connection with the canned Freelance Police, wearing it as some sort of badge of honour. Their output since forming has been less than spectacular, even downright banal, so maybe the canning of Freelance Police was no big loss.

My expectations are low.

Quote from: LimpingFish on Sat 14/10/2006 22:46:59Bone and look how that turned out.

Did you play both Bone games or only the first? Personally I consider The Great Cow Race one of the best comedy adventure games in recent years (well, THE best maybe since I can't come up with a single other game that has made me laugh, until Sam & Max that is). The only real difference between Bone and Sam & Max is an even bigger emphasis on dialog and a more surreal kind of humor - the interface, gameplay style and game engine are identical, so if you disliked those immensely, yes, you may be disappointed.

The Great Cow Race was indeed better then Out from Boneville, but that isn't saying much. The puzzles still lacked any cohesiveness. The characters, although faithful to Jeff Smith's original comicbooks, are badly defined to the point that most are little more than cyphers.

I hadn't any real problem with the interface, but, seeing as you mentioned it, the engine itself is fairly lacking. The Bone brothers lost that 'malleable' quality they possessed when rendered in ink, although this is understandle, but their modelling is slightly rougher than I would like. Animation-wise the Bones are fairly decent, but the other characters range from adequate to appalling, the dragon being the worst offender. Yes he's big, and yes he's fairly po-faced in the comic, but come on, surely a little expression in his lifeless eyes wouldn't go amiss.

Out from Boneville had the excuse of being the first of several proposed chapters, and yes, things did improve, but episodic content shouldn't mean that we have to endure sub-standard initial chapters because the developer "needs to hit its stride".

Telltale also need to hire a better dialog writer. Christ, some of Bones conversation trees were just appalling.

There seems to be this unhealthy sense of "forgiveness" on the part of adventure gamers
towards sub-standard product. Admitting to a games faults, but saying "Yeah, but apart from that (those) problems, its a good game" won't improve the situation and will only lead to developer apathy.

I will purchase Sam and Max, purely because it is Sam and Max. Telltale have yet to prove they can cut it outside the indie realm, where people seem to be a little more lax with their standards.

So, err, where's the review then GG? :=

Heh, I suppose I can say a few words about my impression of the game now - I've written two reviews of it already for different magazines and am supposed to turn in a third version tomorrow morning :).

First of all, the graphics are lovely. Sure, it's nothing compared to recent graphics engines, but I think it's a major accomplishment just to expand 2D comic book characters to three dimensions, and I think they've succeeded in that. Like in Bone, the faces don't show much emotion in the talking animations, and some of the supporting characters aren't that well modelled (shopkeeper in particular). But overall I think they captured the style of the comic book very well, and I totally love Max' idle animations.
The voices I really liked. I played the original Sam & Max in floppy version, so I have no idea if the new voices are similar, but they sound more or less like I imagined they would. Also, the dialog flows very naturally, which is rare in adventure games. Personally I think the writing is great, but LimpingFish may have issues with that since I also liked the dialog in Bone.

The majority of the puzzles (or so it feels) are dialog based. I find this to be a wise decision and fit very well with the comic book's sense of humor. I especially loved the puzzle where you have to (minor spoiler):

Spoiler

Convince the psychiatrist to give you the "right" diagnosis.

[close]

There's hardly any of the absurd inventory puzzles from Sam & Max: Hit the Road, which destroyed the pacing of that game for me. The few item based puzzles here are extremely straightforward. The only ones that require some kind of lateral thinking are to be found

Spoiler

in the very surreal dream sequence(s).

[close]

The driving game doesn't add much to the gameplay (in fact they're almost puzzles rather  than arcade sequences), but adds some variety. And although you can switch to Max during a few dialog scenes, I hope they'll make him a playable character in later episodes. I should add, by the way, that the episodes are self contained, just like the comic book stories, so you don't have to buy the rest of the series to follow the plot development.

Sam & Max is, along with the Bone games, one of the few comedy games that has actually managed to make me laugh in recent years (something neither Al Emmo or The Exchange Student did). If you're a fan of Steve Purcell's trademark nonsensical plots and absurd dialog, you're in for a real treat. I've given the game 8,5/10 in my reviews, and I think this could really be the title to kick off episodic game distribution.

Ok, I believe it's now released, for anyone who don't know. Go get 'em!

It's only out on GameTap so far (i.e. Americans only). For the rest of us, 1st of November is the magic date.

Oh. Right-o.

Quote from: GarageGothic on Wed 18/10/2006 11:43:20
It's only out on GameTap so far (i.e. Americans only).

Residents of the USA only, PLUS a subscription to the GameTap service. I hope GameTap are paying them well!
[EDIT] Thanks for the review!

Quote from: SteveMcCrea on Wed 18/10/2006 15:46:20
Presidents of the USA only

They get all the fun.

Quote from: SteveMcCrea on Wed 18/10/2006 15:46:20

Quote from: GarageGothic on Wed 18/10/2006 11:43:20
It's only out on GameTap so far (i.e. Americans only).

Residents of the USA only, PLUS a subscription to the GameTap service. I hope GameTap are paying them well!

From what I hear, it was GameTap who actually funded the game.

My fears are now valid, it seems...

(http://homepage.eircom.net/~limpingfish/scan003.jpg)

(http://homepage.eircom.net/~limpingfish/scan004.jpg)

(http://homepage.eircom.net/~limpingfish/scan005.jpg)

Of course, my own opinion has yet to be formulated.

http://www.telltalegames.com/samandmax
Down for maintenance right now.
But the game is FINISHED!!!

ETA Release Date is only 3 days away! I can't wait. The new trailer looks most excellent!

Sam and Max... what is this Sam and Max?

Interesting that telltale are selling Al Emmo and Samorost 2. I'm not sure that's a sound move, given how inconsistent the former is and how eclectic the latter.

...wha, another S&M thread? The older one, that's still fairly recent and still in the first page of this board, not good enough for you? You want a new thread? YOU CAN'T HANDLE A NEW THREAD!

Quote from: Rui "Trovatore" Pires on Mon 30/10/2006 08:29:43
...wha, another S&M thread?

S&M? Oh shi.. :o

There's a playable demo for it now, which is also the full content where you pay and unlock it. I saw it on Gamer's hell, so figured you lot would like to know. (If its been mentioned already ignore me)

Hey thanks!
I really enjoyed the demo - it was short (10 minutes or less of playtime) but sweet. The voices fit in just fine, I thought the dialog was good, and the two puzzles were at least original if not spectacularly difficult.
I think I'll buy the season pass.

I just bought the full season last night. At $35 that works out to less than $6 an episode, a huge improvement over Telltale's "Out From Boneville" which launched at $20 for just one episode.
Overall I thought the puzzles and dialogue were excellent. There is always plenty to look at and lots of dialogue options to try. The only complaint I really have would be a lack of locations. Other than your office and a few areas in the surrounding street there is only one other location you travel to. You spend 90% of the game being sent back and forth in the limited areas just outside your office. Hopefully future episodes will feature a few more interesting places to travel to in the DeSoto.
Anyway, it's Sam and Max, it's only $6 an episode, it's the best commercial adventure I've played in years. Everyone should just buy this already.

For once I actually used the unlock-game-right-after-trail option, and I must say it works great. I played the demo, loved it, and immediately ordered it from the launcher. Game was activated right away and I could continue playing.

They really did a good job on keeping it true to the franchise. The responses just crack me up sometimes. Controls work well and it just plays excellent. Only missing feature is a dialog skip button. Hardly missed it here though, much more so in Broken Sword AoD.

Also, recognition for my homeland!:
-Sam: My buddy here would like a tattoo
-Max: I want one of the Netherlands on my Netherlands.

Finally It's here what you all have been waiting for.

Quote from: largopredator on Fri 03/11/2006 10:54:26
Only missing feature is a dialog skip button. Hardly missed it here though, much more so in Broken Sword AoD.

There is a "turbo mode" or something along those lines in the options that enables using the right mouse button to skip dialog.

Quote from: largopredator on Fri 03/11/2006 10:54:26
Only missing feature is a dialog skip button.

Did you try using the right mouse button? It seemed to work okay for me.

[edit] oops, too late.

I must have played a different game because this was exceedingly easy and boring.  I finished it in 52 minutes, but I actually took a break to eat dinner because the game was just so unfunny.  If this is Telltale's idea of Sam and Max I can safely say I'm not really interested in more of it.  Bear in mind that I in no way used hints or tried to do a speed play through, I actually read all the dialog options and only skipped when they repeated.  Overhyped is my verdict, but feel free to fanboy me to death.

Okay so I've only played the demo, but it seemed very faithful to Sam n Max to me, and I only played that game for the first time this year so my memory is pretty fresh.

I enjoyed it, and I am tempted to get the full version.

I think ProgZmax just had exceedingly high hopes. Like when the Morrowind fans hated Oblivion. (But as i said, only played demo)

Completed it today, thought it was fine. Time was 2 - 3 hours, it was fun, but not overly funny (Same as the original then for me)

For those who raced through it, maybe you should check what you didn't see:

http://www.telltalegames.com/forums/showthread.php315

I haven't seen a fair few.

Actually I didn't have any expectations either way, I just found the humor falling flat more often than not and the puzzles easy to the point of me wondering why it wasn't just made into a free flash game.  I actually did not have to think about a single solution in this game for more than two seconds before knowing immediately what needed to be done.  In fact, the 'toughest' puzzle in the game, getting the certificate, has the solution literally spoon fed to you.  Bone had a similar effect on me, though I will admit that the great cow race was a decided improvement in all respects.  Knowing that Telltale is aware of the franchise they have with Sam and Max, and seeing such a weak first effort by them, I'm not interested in the rest of the episodes.

Wow, 52 minutes?
I just finished it, and it took over four hours.
Personally, I loved it.
Prog, did you like the first game? How about Sam and Max in general? I'm just curious.

I love the game and will buy the full set when it is release so I can have it on DVD.

Having only played the demo,  I can only speculate on the quailty of the complete product. I won't be buying it, so most of the following will probably remain speculation.

It's weak.

The writing is appalling. The voices sound tired, and uninterested. The graphics are decent, but seem to suffer from the same rough edges as the Bone games.

I can't comment on the rest of the puzzles, but those in the demo were fairly average.

I've said it before, but it seems adventure gamers are just too damn easy to please.

This is a decidely average game (based on an extrapolation of the demo) in all respects, and some of the review scores it's been getting, among the genre's most vocal, have been so full of "Yeah, but apart from those problems, it's fantastic!" apologetic nonsense, as to render them moot.

After two Bone episodes, Telltale can no longer rely on any "first night jitters"-based sympathy from me. They seem to be staffed by journeyman talent in dire need of some visionary leadership from somebody who actually knows how to conceive/write/design a comedy adventure game. Where, in all this mess, is Steve Purcell's hand?

Grossman, Purcell, et al, have seemingly pissed away their collective game designing talent.

Or maybe Tim Schafer took it with him when they all left LucasArts.

Or maybe not since the only game he's done since leaving is Psychonauts..

/me flees from LF

You better run, Puddin' ! >:(

I liked it a lot. Took me a couple of hours to finish it.
I'll pre-order the whole season based on this one.

Do you usually buy stuff wearing a blindfold?  :-\

You never buy games based on a demo? What do you base your game-buying decisions on? Do you wait for reviewers tell you what games to buy?

I buy a single game, based on a demo. If the Sam and Max demo had sparked such a desire in me, then I would have purchased it. The first episode. Singular.

Do you have a crystal ball that confirms the quality of future products?

Who told you about my crystal ball?

Anyways, what happened to "I will purchase Sam and Max, purely because it is Sam and Max"?

How dare I support a company that has not created the game your heart so desperately desired!

If you'll excuse me, I'm gonna go pay for future chunks of delicious Sam n Max goodness. Oh how he loves the juicy chunks... they are bitesized... and oh so spicey.

I knew that would come back to bite me in the ass! >:(

btw, why in God's name should I feel, or anyone for that matter, the need to support any company based on what they may produce in the future? When they make something I actually want, maybe...

I'm glad you enjoyed the game, and based on that you'll probably even enjoy future episodes.

Or you might have just bought into five more episodes of sub-standard twaddle. And, of course, you are entitled to do so.

Currently, they can swing for my money.

Hmm, I was expecting an insult of some type. Damn you for not being the typical e-peen wagging internet dweller!

I guess I should actually explain my position in this case.

Alright, so here's how I see it... the episodes are roughly 10$ each. I can get all six for 35$, which actually saves me 20$ over buying them individually. Now, I really did enjoy the first episode, so basically I'm taking a gamble that the rest of them will be similar in quality. They may not be, of course. If all the remaining episodes are complete trash, then I've thrown away about 29$, which sucks. However! Imagine not pre-ordering them and then they turn out to be the greatest adventure games of all time? Now I have to spend 20$ more to have them all! Meanwhile everyone who has pre-ordered them is basking in the glow of the blood on Max's face, and now has 20$ to spend on fine cigars and hookers.

What can I say? You got to know when to hold 'em, know when to fold 'em, know when to walk away, and know when to run.

I respect your decision, as every man is entitled to budget for fine smokeables and hookers.

Kudos, sir.

I say we give the sam and max business a miss and go straight for the cigars and hookers.

Quote from: LimpingFish on Sat 04/11/2006 23:02:49
The writing is appalling. The voices sound tired, and uninterested. The graphics are decent, but seem to suffer from the same rough edges as the Bone games.

I disagree. I think the writing is at least as good as that in, say, Psychonauts.

The voices are pretty good too. Sam is laconic, not tired. Max is suitably upbeat. The rat in the demo was a bit cliched but I liked the voice just fine.

As for the graphics, I didn't see anything weak. There are lots of nice little details in the backgrounds and the graphical style is perfectly suited to the characters. There is the occasional animation pop, and the loading times are disappointing (a couple of seconds to load a new room can really spoil the timing of a scene) but those are more technical issues.

Quote
I can't comment on the rest of the puzzles, but those in the demo were fairly average.

The puzzles are not the strongest point of the game. However, in context with the game they work pretty well.

Quote
After two Bone episodes, Telltale can no longer rely on any "first night jitters"-based sympathy from me.

I didn't think much of Bone episode 1, to the extent that I didn't bother with The Great Cow Race. This game redeems Telltale in my eyes.

Quote
Where, in all this mess, is Steve Purcell's hand?

Perhaps you've put SP on a pedestal? The dialog in this game had me laughing out loud just as much as any Sam and Max comic (certainly more than the current serialized strip on the telltale website).

Quote
Grossman, Purcell, et al, have seemingly pissed away their collective game designing talent.
Or maybe Tim Schafer took it with him when they all left LucasArts.

I got somewhat bored playing Psychonauts, and gave up after a couple of hours. I played this Sam and Max game in one sitting.

All in all, it exceeded my expectations.

QuoteProg, did you like the first game? How about Sam and Max in general? I'm just curious.

Yes, I enjoyed the first game, and I actually found some of the cartoon series episodes to be quite funny.  This game, however, has a different feel to it like they had no confidence in the material and none of the humor (aside from Sam knocking Max up into the air) really worked for me.  Bear in mind that I don't cut developers slack because they're trying to make a commercial adventure game, nor do I hug them for bringing back old favorites to make a buck.  If I like the game I like it, and I can't say I liked or greatly disliked this game.  It's in the lukewarm zone of forgettable.  On a side note, while I didn't like their voices in the trailer, I found that they were fine in the actual game and didn't make me want to compare them to the previous game.

Ok, thanks. :)

Quote from: ProgZmax on Sun 05/11/2006 06:25:44
none of the humor (aside from Sam knocking Max up into the air) really worked for me.

They clearly did it so that they didn't have to deal with the pathfinding issues of the two characters avoiding each other, so I laughed for the wrong reasons there.

Quote
Bear in mind that I don't cut developers slack because they're trying to make a commercial adventure game, nor do I hug them for bringing back old favorites to make a buck.

The implication being that anyone who claims to like the game is only saying so for those reasons? Wow. You old cynic, you. :=

Quote from: SteveMcCrea on Sun 05/11/2006 01:40:03
The puzzles are not the strongest point of the game. However, in context with the game they work pretty well.

There's that apologetic quality again. Surely if the puzzles in a point-and-click adventure game are weak, then the game has failed. If the "point" of a Sam and Max game is the humour, then why bother with the game at all. The cartoons will give you the same experience, without the repetitive strain injury of clicking through the dialog.

Quote
Perhaps you've put SP on a pedestal? The dialog in this game had me laughing out loud just as much as any Sam and Max comic (certainly more than the current serialized strip on the telltale website).

Not based on his solo work, but of what he accomplished during the heyday of the LucasArts adventure games. Which is where my Tim Schafer comment comes in...

Quote
All in all, it exceeded my expectations.

I don't have a problem with that. Just that you seem to have been a little forgiving.

EDIT: Actually, regarding that pedestal, should I expect less from Purcell because he's gone independent? Does it also allow him to produce inferior product, simply because he's not getting a steady paycheck? Anybody who charges for a game, regardless of being amatuer, independent, or studio based, is subject to the same criteria in my eyes.

And any independent creator who bemoans harsh reviews on the grounds that they deserve to be given some slack, isn't living in the real world.

QuoteThere's that apologetic quality again. Surely if the puzzles in a point-and-click adventure game are weak, then the game has failed. If the "point" of a Sam and Max game is the humour, then why bother with the game at all. The cartoons will give you the same experience, without the repetitive strain injury of clicking through the dialog.

Surely you don't actually believe this? You're just pretending to in order to knock S&M, right?

Given that in plenty (I would say most) of even good adventure games, the puzzles aren't the strongest point, I don't see this as an apologetic comment at all. And in fact, as far as I have played the puzzles haven't been bad at all. Just very easy. And I'm fine with that. It's nice to have some challenging games, but they don't all have to be fiendishly difficult. Also, Sam & Max has a wider appeal than just about any other adventure game license (when was the last time you saw an adventure game reviewed on Slashdot?), and a lot of the audience aren't as experienced puzzle solvers as the people around here.

Quote from: Snarky on Sun 05/11/2006 22:33:21
Also, Sam & Max has a wider appeal than just about any other adventure game license (when was the last time you saw an adventure game reviewed on Slashdot?), and a lot of the audience aren't as experienced puzzle solvers as the people around here.

You just apologized for it...AGAIN. >:(

If the audience isn't as experienced, do a Monkey Island 2 and give them the option of easier puzzles.

EDIT:

Quote
Given that in plenty (I would say most) of even good adventure games, the puzzles aren't the strongest point, I don't see this as an apologetic comment at all.

You're joking, right? :-\

EDIT: "But they don't have the resources or time."...Anybody about to throw that into the ring?

quick question LF, I found the Sponge Bob platform game for the GBA to be really easy and of no challenge. Am I apologizing for it by saying that the game was not ment for my demographic?

I'm sorry, was Sam and Max not meant for me? Oh, how silly I must look. >:(

Btw, for far too long companies have been getting away with peddling crap based on "oh, it's just for kids." But of course, you would already know this.

um... What?

*Limping Fish misses Mr Colossal's point*

Quote from: LimpingFish on Sun 05/11/2006 22:22:27
EDIT: Actually, regarding that pedestal, should I expect less from Purcell because he's gone independent? Does it also allow him to produce inferior product, simply because he's not getting a steady paycheck?

Purcell's name has been brought up here, but I don't see his name in the credits (at least, the truncated credits shown at the beginning, since I only have the demo) besides as being the creator of Sam & Max.  I was wondering, what exactly did he do for the new game?

Quote from: ManicMatt on Sun 05/11/2006 23:23:01
*Limping Fish misses Mr Colossal's point*

Actually, I didn't. He implied I found Sam and Max lacking because I am apparently not its target demographic.

He brought up SpongeBob, and it immediately made me remember "Didn't he have some sort of connection to some atrocious licensed thing produced by one of those journeyman studios that pump out that kind of gaming swill?"

Too harsh. Uncalled for. Withdrawn.

I asked a question to eventually lead to a discussion, but nevermind, you just want to insult. That's fine, not interested.

man, Limpingfish, that's low.

But it wasn't a very constructive question. And it brought out my hatred of such games. You just happened to be in the firing line.

Apologies.

EDIT: Yes it was, Helm. :-[

Glad if this was resolved.

How about, yes. new Telltale Sam and Max might not be ment for you. Maybe they are going for more causal gamers or something, and they don't really care if the hardcore adventure gamers drop them.

Quite possibly. But isn't that my "apologetic" point just repackaged?

"Easy" doesn't have mean "sub-standard". And that's mostly what licensed games, usually meant "for kids", are.

Does it also mean I can't enjoy a game that isn't for my demographic?

S&M screensaver by me
http://rapidshare.com/files/2161076/samandmax.zip

Quote from: LimpingFish on Sun 05/11/2006 22:22:27
If the "point" of a Sam and Max game is the humour, then why bother with the game at all. The cartoons will give you the same experience, without the repetitive strain injury of clicking through the dialog.

I'm honestly glad they made the puzzles so easy. Getting stumped in adventure games, running around and trying random item combinations - it just isn't that much fun for me. It's 2006 and there are too many other games out there that offer instant gratification, my attention span isn't that long. I'm not interested in spending days figuring out some obscure puzzle anymore. I just want to get to the exploration, the interactive dialogs, the mini-games and the general "having fun" bits.

Quote

Actually, I didn't. He implied I found Sam and Max lacking because I am apparently not its target demographic....

Quote

I took it as his point being that they weren't apologising for it, but nevermind. I don't think they were implying it wasn't meant for you. At least, that's how I took it.

Hmm hey, Bully/Canis Canem Edit is fairly easy, AND is based in a school, but is aimed towards 15 to 30 years olds. I'm just saying my thoughts out loud...

Quote from: LimpingFish on Sun 05/11/2006 23:45:17
Quite possibly. But isn't that my "apologetic" point just repackaged?

Your apologetic point is based on irrelevant assumptions (my intentions or anyone's intentions in discussing Sam and Max) whereas the issue at hand is not that.

Quote"Easy" doesn't have mean "sub-standard". And that's mostly what licensed games, usually meant "for kids", are.

That, is a point, however. You say that S&M is both easy and sub-standard. Others see it only as being easy. It's a personal call, then? It's just not 'substandard because it is easy'.

QuoteDoes it also mean I can't enjoy a game that isn't for my demographic?

It means that if you do, it's a happy accident, awesome. If you don't, not the developer's fault.

Quote from: modgeulator on Mon 06/11/2006 00:03:02
...and the general "having fun" bits.

I must have missed those :P

Quote from: Helm on Mon 06/11/2006 00:05:19
You say that S&M is both easy and sub-standard. Others see it only as being easy. It's a personal call, then? It's just not 'substandard because it is easy'.

Yes, that's what I said. Easy doesn't have to imply fault. I never said I didn't like it because it was "Easy", I said I didn't like it because it was weak. In almost all areas.

Man, I didn't like the first Sam and Max so I had no incentive to try this, but if people are torn on it I wonder if I'd like it. Probably not.

I'll admit I entered into it knowing that I was going to be disappointed. Not in some "Oh I love Sam and Max!" way, but simply as a game that could hold my interest (based on Telltale's previous output).

I feel it failed, but I do admit I approach a lot of these games in a very clinical and pesimistic manner.

[EDIT]
Christ, all this negative energy raised by a debate over a f*cking video game!
"AngryFish" needs to chill, methinks. If I'm not careful, he can get to be a real asshole.  ::)

Suuuure, in the demo I solved the cheese puzzle without even thinking about it, I couldn't even think what swiss cheese looked like at the time, and I solved it on my first guess hehe.

And some lines made me think "Was that supposed to be a joke?"

But for some reason the overall demo was fun for me. I'm seriosuly scraping up the pennies off the floor to maybe buy the season/episode.

Hmm what if they don't manage to make all of them for some reason, will one get their money back? They don't seem like a financially stable concrete company to me, that's all. Even if they have been around for years, haven't they? Just look at Acclaim. (I think it was)

EDIT: Yeah I was thinking of Traveller's tales. But my point is still valid.

Telltale was only formed a couple of years back, two I think.
I suppose that's another way to look at it, sure.

Quote from: ManicMatt on Mon 06/11/2006 00:37:33
Just look at Acclaim.

Well, the writing was on the wall for Acclaim for quite a while. Admittedly I have no idea what the finances of Telltale are like, but I haven't heard anything which is probably a good sign. Anyway I've risked my $35, which will go towards making them a more financially stable company. Either that or the CFO will take the money and run.

LimpingFish, I'm disappointed in you.

* Steve shuffles out the back, embarrassed

Telltale Games is a video game developer based in San Rafael, California and founded in June 2004. It was created by a group of former LucasArts employees who had been working on Sam & Max Freelance Police, a sequel to the 1993 game Sam & Max Hit the Road, prior to its cancellation on March 3, 2004. The company's CEO is Dan Connors who heads the company alongside cofounders Kevin Bruner and Troy Molander. The Telltale Games team have a large collective experience of working on notable adventure games, some of which include Grim Fandango, Monkey Island and Sam & Max.

On February 11, 2005 the company released their first game â€" Telltale Texas Hold'em, a poker card game simulator. The game was solely available through electronic distribution from Telltales' and other websites. Later that month on February 22, 2005 it was announced that the company would also be developing an adventure game based on the intellectual property of Jeff Smith and his Bone comic book series. Bone is to be released gradually through electronic distribution in episodic chapters. The first episode, Bone: Out from Boneville, was released in September 2005 while the second episode, The Great Cow Race, was released in April 2006.

Closely following the release of the first Bone episode, Telltale Games announced that they would be creating a new Sam & Max computer game, which would be released in the same episodic fashion. In May 2006, Telltale announced that the Sam & Max episodes would be shorter, more frequent, and self-contained than the episodes of Bone, and would also be made available via the GameTap game distribution service. Sam & Max: Season 1 - Culture Shock was released in October, 2006.

In November 2005, Ubisoft announced that Telltale was developing the next game for the popular CSI: Crime Scene Investigation television series. The game was released March 14, 2006.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telltale_Games

Quote from: ManicMatt on Mon 06/11/2006 00:37:33
Hmm what if they don't manage to make all of them for some reason, will one get their money back?

I'd think so yes. If they don't make the rest of them and don't offer refunds I'm pretty sure that would be fraud. Even if they went bankrupt refunds should be made from the sale of their assets, etc. I guess there's a miniscule chance they're planning on taking our pre-order money and running away with it, but it's a gamble I'm willing to take.  ;D

Quote from: LimpingFish on Sun 05/11/2006 22:35:07

Quote from: Snarky on Sun 05/11/2006 22:33:21
Also, Sam & Max has a wider appeal than just about any other adventure game license (when was the last time you saw an adventure game reviewed on Slashdot?), and a lot of the audience aren't as experienced puzzle solvers as the people around here.

You just apologized for it...AGAIN. >:(

The hell I did. I don't find the puzzles substandard, just easy. From what I've seen on non-adventure game sites and forums, they're about the right difficulty for inexperienced and rusty players. So that would mean there's nothing wrong with the puzzles.

Quote
If the audience isn't as experienced, do a Monkey Island 2 and give them the option of easier puzzles.

Yeah, how many games other than MI2 do that? Sure, it's a cool feature, but I don't see how you can blame a game for being one thing rather than everything for everyone. It makes just as much sense to complain that an adventure game doesn't have any action: "Well, if the audience doesn't want fight sequences, do an Indy:FOA and give them the option of different paths."

Quote
EDIT:

Quote
Given that in plenty (I would say most) of even good adventure games, the puzzles aren't the strongest point, I don't see this as an apologetic comment at all.

You're joking, right? :-\

Not at all. It's true for almost every game that some aspects hold up better than others. And in many adventure games, the story, setting, characters, dialogue, etc. are the main attraction, not the puzzles. And those games seem to be the most popular among adventure gamers. For instance, I don't think the puzzles were the strongest point of Sam & Max: Hit the Road.

Quote
Bear in mind that I don't cut developers slack because they're trying to make a commercial adventure game, nor do I hug them for bringing back old favorites to make a buck.

The implication being that anyone who claims to like the game is only saying so for those reasons? Wow. You old cynic, you.

Nah, I just know there are people out there who actually do that.  Also, I pretty much agree 100% with Limping Fish on the game being generally weak in just about every area.  I'm not as forgiving as some, granted, and I definitely think that after the negative feedback they got from Bone that Telltale's had time to get it together as far as providing something challenging and still fun.  I have to say that this was neither.  I will just restate that I did not start this game thinking 'this will be shit'.  In fact, the intro was rather cool and the tune was reminiscent enough of the original game to make me think 'this will be good'.

QuoteIn fact, the intro was rather cool and the tune was reminiscent enough of the original game to make me think 'this will be good'.

Interesting, this was one of the things I didn't like, There's a bit that's really similar and my brain kept thinking it was going to go into the normal tune then suddenly it goes off and does its own thing.

The weird thing is, I'm not a huge fan of Hit of Road. I enjoyed it, sure, but I don't believe it's the pinnacle of comedy adventure games.

The reasons am so annoyed at Culture Shock, or rather peoples reactions to it, is the apparent apathy towards, imo, it's quality. It's my dead-horse of a point about the forgiving nature of adventure fans, seemingly glad that anybody is still supporting the genre.

Frankly. if nobody bothers creating a game worth playing, then maybe the commercial end of the genre deserves to die. I wouldn't miss, or have missed, the last five or six years of commercial adventures.

EDIT: I admit my comment to Eric was childish and borne out of anger, and have PM'ed him as such. Apologies again.

QuoteFrankly. if nobody bothers creating a game worth playing, then maybe the commercial end of the genre deserves to die. I wouldn't miss, or have missed, the last five or six years of commercial adventures.

I feel the same way. Why try to keep this corpse alive? I'd still be interested in playing a wonderfully written and aesthetically pleasing oldschool adventure game, even if it was a puzzlefest like old games, but there hasn't been any of those for a decade or so. What we have is throwback adventure games, made by people who are adventure game fans, but lack vision, aesthetic coherency and the ability to write.

So, because I'm not expecting of the video game industry to produce good writers, at least I'm expecting it to produce good gameplay-creators. Thusly the whole shift towards examining how the adventure game can become fun to play again, not only interesting inspite of the gameplay because it is well-written.

I enjoyed it. It's not the best game I've played in a long time, but I wasn't disappointed either. It lacks in some aspects, but IMO was well worth it's really low price.

And now let's wait for A Vampyre Story before talking about the adventure game genre and it's death for the umpteenth time, ok? :=

We've talked about this for years and years and we've been through at least 5 titles which were hyped to revitalize the genre as well.

Quote from: KhrisMUC on Mon 06/11/2006 20:43:44
And now let's wait for A Vampyre Story before talking about the adventure game genre and it's death for the umpteenth time, ok? :=

That's the modern commercial adventure game scene summed up right there. We always hope that next one will be better. Or the one after that.:P

But what Helm would love in an adventure game, I'd probably hate, and vice versa, so they'll never please everyone.

And you've all gone off topic into this whole "adventure games should be this and that" conversation that creeps up everywhere. Argh it's almost as annoying as when I was on the Oblivion forum and everyone just moaned that it wasn't as good as Morrowind.

It's not like we do it to annoy you. There's a reason it's a recurring subject.

Yes you do! THE WORLD REVOLVES AROUND ME!!!!!

But seriously, you've got a point.

Quote from: Helm on Mon 06/11/2006 18:17:22
I'd still be interested in playing a wonderfully written and aesthetically pleasing oldschool adventure game, even if it was a puzzlefest like old games, but there hasn't been any of those for a decade or so.

You clearly have an idea of how an adventure game SHOULD be, so why not make it yourself? This is the place to do it. CJ even provides the tool for free! You couldn't ask for a better setup.

I'm going to pretend I didn't just see the Do Better Yourself!(tm) argument, which was cancelled two weeks after its release in 1974 when people realised how useless it is.

I very much agree with everything Helm said in this thread (and about adventure games in general in other threads). We seem to be tuned to the same frequency, give or take a few Hz.

I really don't like old-school puzzlefest adventure games anymore. I can't enjoy them as a game, though I CAN enjoy them on some other lever if they're well written. I played Grim Fandango for the first time recently. It had a nice story, lovely setting, great dialogue and voicework, and it was funny too... but I hated it as a game. I hated the gameplay. I would have enjoyed it much more if I had sat down and watched someone (who knows how to finish it) else play it for me.

I guess this is what it is about for most people. A story, a sense of progress as puzzles are solved. That alone doesn't do it for me anymore. I want to feel like I'm actually doing something in the game, I want to be able to learn and get BETTER at the game, and be rewarded for my improvement. You can't get better at playing a point-and-click adventure. Either you solve a puzzle, or... well, there is really no alternative. If you don't solve a puzzle, you don't finish the game. It's over. Deleted.

You may think I sound like I'm just another action gaming, adventure game hating person, and I guess you're right. What I liked about adventure games ten years ago have now found its way to other genres. Not only do I get to experience the story and interact with characters, I also get to physically interact with the game world (and blow stuff up! (which is fun in moderate doses))!

Of course, not all first-person shooters are good. The last FPS I enjoyed was Half-Life 2, which was released in 2004. But then again the last adventure game I enjoyed (and still did last time I played it a year or two ago) was Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, released 1994. If only action games would borrow a little bit more from adventure games, I think we would have a long overdue revival of the adventure game genre.


I'm sorry if I seem incoherent. It's just that even though I can name plenty of things I hate about traditional adventure games, I surprisingly DON'T have the recipe for a perfect adventure game! Imagine that.

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

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

I'd say the nearest thing to what some of you would like is in Deus Ex. Although there is (mostly optional) shooting and (mostly optional) stealth, there is also a lot of thinking about how to progress and what to say. Deus Ex and it's sequel are two of my fave games of all time.

I'm hoping this game: http://uk.gamespot.com/ps3/adventure/lanoire/news.html?sid=6158595

Will be some kind of evolved adventure game.

Yes. Deus Ex is easily one of my favourite games ever. It's got action, RPG elements and adventure game elements. A really nice game. Strangely enough I felt the action was the weakest part of the game, but I guess that cloud has a silver lining, if the combat is awkward it makes you want to sneak more instead!

Ooh.Ã,  I just remembered. Here, read the answer to question 8: http://www.elderscrolls.com/codex/team_teamprofile.htmÃ,  Ã, That game would be so much fun if executed well. And I would definitely call it an adventure game. It's concentrated, good adventure gaming. Maybe this idea is a little too optimistic, maybe not, but it is precisely the kind of game I want to play.

Quote from: Ghormak on Tue 07/11/2006 17:54:16
I'm going to pretend I didn't just see the Do Better Yourself!(tm) argument, which was cancelled two weeks after its release in 1974 when people realised how useless it is.

not really. i'd rather hear the do it yourself argument than listening to one guy's constant whining about how bad every game is i've ever heard of. either move on to something else, or do something about it.  ;D  ;)

Ghormak: *reads* Yeah that's sounds like it would be an amazing game! Really my kinda thing! Reminds me of Sentient on the PSone, where you had to prevent the space station from blowing up. It was really punishing hard and a bit crap, and you didn't rewind time really, you were just dead. It also reminds me of Shadow of memories, which is a basic version in a way of this game idea.

Yeah Helm, which adventure games did you find it hard to pick faults with? KGB?

Move on to something else? We're on a forum devoted to adventure games, what do you want Helm to talk about?

I don't know why people get all defensive over what Helm says since I know of at least 5 people that completely agree with 90% of what he says about adventure games. I'm one of them.

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.

also, to reply to manicmatt even though he asked Helm: There is no game I've ever played that I can't pick faults with. In my opinion, becoming a better game designer means picking apart every game you've ever loved or hated and finding out why.

Quote from: MrColossal on Tue 07/11/2006 21:03:21
also, to reply to manicmatt even though he asked Helm: There is no game I've ever played that I can't pick faults with.

I said "HARD" to pick faults with. Geeze!  ::)

I wasn't meaning to be confrontational about that Matt, sorry if I came off that way.

Oh, okay! I think 'cos the rest of the post sounded confrontational, I took the paragraph aimed directly at me in the same tone.

*handshake*

QuoteYou clearly have an idea of how an adventure game SHOULD be, so why not make it yourself? This is the place to do it. CJ even provides the tool for free! You couldn't ask for a better setup.

Because a) I can't code the type of stuff I think makes for good adventure games and therefore depend on other people to help me when I try to do something of the type, like at OROW time b) even then, making a good game -as I see it- is difficult business, and I don't have the time to devote to that, others do but I've chosen to be something else in my life than adventure game designer, and I've went ahead and did it (comics) and still I make games from time to time and c) because even in the lack of action, discussion is very useful because it might make people who do have the time and resources to put into making a game think it over. Do they really want to make another adventure game clone? This is why this forum is good see? We discuss game theory. Not every person who partakes in a discussion about game theory has to go out and make games for other people to take them seriously.

That for the OMG MAKE IT BETTER YOURSELF (tm) argument.


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?

Quotenot really. i'd rather hear the do it yourself argument than listening to one guy's constant whining about how bad every game is i've ever heard of. either move on to something else, or do something about it.  Grin  Wink

Whatever, Mordalles.


Manicmatt: KGB is full of faults, but it doesn't suffer from 'adventure-game-stupid' at least. FoA for me was the most successful application of the 'oldschool' model, and not to a small part because of the globetrotting atmosphere and the three paths to suit different needs. FT was a better movie than a game, but good movie it was. I find little to no faults in Quest for Glory 1 and 2 for they do these things I say above right: they have skill-based stuff to do, you can become better, the words 'I rocked quest for glory 1' actually mean something (a character that has perfect stats, all items, did all quests right (YES, you can do quests in suboptimal ways!) and gave flowers to the centaur girl) there's optional parts, all that stuff.

Quote from: MrColossal on Tue 07/11/2006 21:03:21


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.

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.

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. :(

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.  ;D 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.

Quote from: Mordalles on Wed 08/11/2006 02:27:32
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.

Quoteoh, 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.

QuoteI 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.  ;D 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?

Quotealmost 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?

Quote"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.

Quoteas 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.

QuoteHave 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.

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.

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

Quote from: Helm on Tue 07/11/2006 21:57:34
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?

Quote from: MrColossal on Wed 08/11/2006 16:25:50
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.

QuoteDid 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.

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!]

QuoteHelm: 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.

QuoteQuest 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!

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.

Quote from: LimpingFish on Wed 08/11/2006 22:50:39
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.

You'd imagine right. :P

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

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.

Episode 3 is available!

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