I don't know if anybody else is in the same position, but I've spent a long long time now sketching out little rooms and concepts, trying to think of a plot that will hold and good puzzles, and it just isn't working. After some consideration, I thought maybe it's best to ask what you want to play for some inspiration. What I'm looking for is just some idea of what sort of adventure game you like. Lots of people liked the DeFoe quadrilogy - what scares you about horror games? If you like fantasy or medieval or anything, why? What do you hope to gain when you download an AGS game? Any help is greatly appreciated, my ideas really are running dry.
I would like you to make something that YOU wanted to make, not I.
What do you want to see in an AGS game? Don't worry if it's all been done before. My current WIP isnt anything new, and it doesn't pretend to be.
I want to see a story about a troupe of juggling wolves set in the System Shock universe.
It seems to me that if your ideas are running dry, perhaps you shouldn't make a game.
Or perhaps you should team up with someone who has ideas but no implementor skills.
Maybe you could start us off with a summary of the game you have so far?
I can come up with some ideas and scenes, but I can't flesh it out into a proper story. For example, one game I wanted to make was a horror game set in the future where a virus infects computers very rapidly. Since much of the environment is made of machinery, the virus causes havoc, and the machinery starts killing everything in its path. It all seemed fine to me so far, but after sketching out several scenes in a research building, where the game starts, I couldn't find much to build on. The basic plot was to get out of the building and stop the virus from corrupting every machine in the country, but I couldn't think of what the player can actually do besides the boring 'escape from building' and 'sneak into building and beat bad guy' routine with generic obstacle puzzles in the middle. Sorry if what I'm asking sounds really vague, maybe you're right about finding someone else with ideas.
Quote from: ManicMatt on Sat 31/03/2007 23:43:54
I would like you to make something that YOU wanted to make, not I.
Agreed.
Quote from: SimB on Sun 01/04/2007 00:28:52
I can come up with some ideas and scenes, but I can't flesh it out into a proper story.
Start with something small. Make a one room game. Look at some of the past entries into the OROW competition and see how they fit a small concept, a small story, and a few challenges into a short, easy to produce, and, in some cases, quality game.
Otherwise, using whatever other talents like art and coding to help someone else bring their game idea to life can help you learn about writing your own game. Writing good adventure stories and designs takes just as much practice as graphics and code. Good luck.
Quote from: SimB on Sat 31/03/2007 23:13:37
What I'm looking for is just some idea of what sort of adventure game you like.
I just posted the magical recipe in another thread:
http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/yabb/index.php?topic=30771.0
But if you ask me, I look for are adventures that:
- Are not for children. For example, you know this Emily Enough puzzle where you help one to make a dress? I love these politically incorrect details in amateur adventures.
- Are visually appealing. We are in 2007! If you are not good at painting a trick is to use photos like in Soviet Unterzögersdorf.
- Have an intriguing story behind. I usually explain to people that don't play adventures that it's like an interactive comic. You need this "need to know" to keep playing when you are stuck, otherwise it can get very boring in these moments. You achieve a lot of this with good writing, see Trilby's Notes for example. In this sense, if you are really out of ideas I would recommend you to (re-)read Edgar Alan Poe's short stories. He always leaves the best for the end and you can't stop reading.
Edited to add:
If you look for inspiration somewhere (books, other adventures...) you don't need to copy the story exactly, a good story will still work well if you change the context. For example, investigator's stories are usually about discovering a murder, but you could adapt the story and make one about somebody whose partner is cheating her/him and needs to know the truth. That would make it new and different.
Well...
I look for keyboard support. In fact I categorically refuse to play games that lack this. It's really easy to put in, so there's really not an excuse for not doing so.
I like humor. By which I mean the kind which is actually funny, but of course that is a matter of taste. However, I held a poll once about which kind of humor adventure games liked best, and among a list of e.g. the Coles and Al Lowe, the obvious winner was Ron Gilbert, of Monkey Island fame.
To hold my interest, I'd like a game to have either an intriguing story, or good puzzle design. Preferably both, of course, but I'm not that picky :) Big perks include (1) multiple story paths or different endings; (2) puzzles with multiple solutions; and (3) non-linearity.
Quote from: Radiant on Tue 03/04/2007 13:00:59
To hold my interest, I'd like a game to have either an intriguing story, or good puzzle design. Preferably both, of course, but I'm not that picky :) Big perks include (1) multiple story paths or different endings; (2) puzzles with multiple solutions; and (3) non-linearity.
The problem with (1) and (3) is that they often result in a weakened plot. Usually the writer has one idea for the story, and different branches added onto that for various ending or non-linearity are usually just lame. But the game gets to add two attractive-looking bullet points to the features list so the developer is happy.
Major points goes to the game designer who manages to weave non-linearity and multiple story paths into a game that don't compromise the integrity of the strong story. I don't think that I've seen it adequately done, nor do I profess to know how to do it, but I'd love to play that game.
Quote from: Vince Twelve on Tue 03/04/2007 14:03:27
The problem with (1) and (3) is that they often result in a weakened plot.
Hey, I never said it was going to be easy :)
Quote from: Radiant on Tue 03/04/2007 13:00:59
Big perks include (1) multiple story paths or different endings; (2) puzzles with multiple solutions; and (3) non-linearity.
I haven't played yet an adventure with multiple endings and feel that as an added value. I usually end with the sensation that I missed something important but playing the whole adventure again to look for the alternative endings gets very boring for me. Matter of taste.
Big YES to multiple solutions. It's essential when it's of common sense, if you need to reach something high and the steel bar will work but not the umbrella and the answer you get is a plain "It won't work" it's disappointing. I also like when you have different paths without changing the big story, when you have alternative small puzzles you can solve to advance in a bigger puzzle, this is really an added value because sometimes you simply don't get what was in the author's mind.
Another big YES to non-linearity, but try to do it without spoiling the story. In some cases discovering things in the "incorrect" order will advance facts and hints that make the game less interesting. Is Monkey Island a good example of non-linearity? If I remember well you permanently have 3 big problems to solve simultaneously that are almost independent.
Hm, while it is true that you should make the games you'd like to make, I can't say collecting some tips will hurt, so here's my few cents:
I really like puzzles that are not inventory based. Puzzles that require thought and not just using the magnet on the glove and on the ruler to make a tool for fishing a key out of something. A great resource for those kind of puzzles are old text adventures- where you could only read an inscription on a red/green amulet by reading it though a bottle of white wine, or were you had to figure out ways to navigate a castle in knight moves. Or something like that, it's all there.
Which brings me to interfaces- I actually like to have my inventory on-screen all the time, and I can bear with more than look/use/talk buttons. Offering additional actions is a plus to me.
I value story over puzzles, and interesting, fleshed out characters slightly over the plot. Humour is a good thing to have, but it shouldn't be inserted for the sake of it.
Aye, and whatever type of setting you use, always include a platypus. You'll increase your downloads by a factor of ten for just one platypus, as scientists around the globe will happily confirm. ;D
Quote from: Ghost on Tue 03/04/2007 21:05:46
Which brings me to interfaces- I actually like to have my inventory on-screen all the time, and I can bear with more than look/use/talk buttons. Offering additional actions is a plus to me.
(shameless plug) The MegaVerb GUI (http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/games.php?action=detail&id=737), the closest thing to a text parser that isn't actually a text parser. (/shameless plug)
Quote from: Radiant on Tue 03/04/2007 21:38:51
(shameless plug) The MegaVerb GUI (http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/games.php?action=detail&id=737), the closest thing to a text parser that isn't actually a text parser. (/shameless plug)
Aye, true. And a good plug it is, too.
Quote from: Ghost on Tue 03/04/2007 21:05:46
always include a platypus. You'll increase your downloads by a factor of ten for just one platypus, as scientists around the globe will happily confirm. ;D
That's true only if the platypus is naked.
One thing that I like a whole lot more than a good plot is the universe where the events take place. May it be a dark, grim and gritty city, filled with crime and corruption like Pleurghburg, Gotham City or Basin City, or a weird and hilarious universe like the Galaxy of Fantabulous Wonderment, or an unique post apocalyptic setting like Superhero League of Hoboken or Full Throttle... I like it when the place itself is interesting, complex and manage to catch my attention and make my imagination run loose, imagining stories or making me regret even more when no sequels are released to expand on these universes. I'd like to see more of those.
Another thing I'd like to see is less adventure games that I define like "good boy scout adventure games", those adventure games that try to have great graphics, great music, great plot, and nothing more, similar to all these FPS/RTS that fell into oblivion because they didn't introduced anything new to the genre. The formula "LucasArts/Sierra quality graphics/music + amazing story = instant success" was something to hope for back in the days, but since 2005, I can say there is an insane amount of games that managed to reach the same or higher level of quality than adventure games released back in the golden age. What I'd personally like to see, in a not so distant future, is having this formula changed to "LucasArts/Sierra quality graphics/music + amazing story + something rarely seen/unseen in AGS/completly new = instant success". More games like Linus Bruckman or GFW, more games that include elements from other genres, like platformer or RPG...
QuoteI haven't played yet an adventure with multiple endings and feel that as an added value.
Err... not even Reactor 09?
QuoteI value story over puzzles, and interesting, fleshed out characters slightly over the plot.
While story is important, puzzles are important too. There is a thin line between a game and an interactive movie. Games where it is obvious that all the emphasis was put into the plot instead of the puzzles and where all I do is walking around, talking with people to trigger events and solve puzzles that require absolutly no thinking at all are not what I would call adventure games.
Quote from: BlueSkirt on Wed 04/04/2007 21:33:52More games like Linus Bruckman or GFW, more games that include elements from other genres, like platformer or RPG...
I was playing Linus today (I thought I had completed it, and I had done just half of the puzzle he he). It's difficult to say where a genre ends and another one starts, but I would put Linus in the Logic games category, the best logic game I have played in ages.
When the limits of a genre are explored gems like this can appear, games where you can see which fountains they are drinking from but can't classify easily, and sometimes they mean the start a whole new category, a reference to describe the games that come afterwards: "It's like Rogue, Manic Miner, Maniac Mansion, Doom, Myst, Tomb Raider..."
But some other times the experiment is an uncooked mix of genres, and very few games have done it in a way that satisfies the fans of at least one of the reference genres.
Quote
QuoteI haven't played yet an adventure with multiple endings and feel that as an added value.
Err... not even Reactor 09?
Not even Maniac Mansion, I have the feeling that I have missed an important part of the authors work but if I replay an adventure before I have forgotten the solutions I get bored, It's like reading a book for second time, I will discover things I didn't see the first time, sure, but I need to forget the details to enjoy really the second reading. And I have seen only a few films two times in a row, films like Memento or Mulholand Drive were it's impossible to get it all with only one viewing. (Ah, and Sim City, because I was already in love with Frank Miller's comic). But don't feel bad about me, I can live with this.
Quote from: BlueSkirt on Wed 04/04/2007 21:33:52
QuoteI haven't played yet an adventure with multiple endings and feel that as an added value.
Err... not even Reactor 09?
This is interesting to me because I just played Reactor 09 all the way through for the first time yesterday. Previously, I had played only a short bit, but I was told that the game that I'm currently designing has a few thematic similarities so I went through and finished it. It was an excellent game with great art, story, and gameplay (and dialogue thanks to ProgZ's revisions!) but to answer your question even though it wasn't directed at me, no, I didn't feel that the multiple endings were an added value.
I saw three different endings in my attempts to get the best one (turns out I had to replay the whole game because I had said some wrong things near the beginning) and the first two didn't feel like true endings to the game. If I had gotten either of those endings and not known from having been told that there are multiple endings I would have been very disappointed in the game. However, after seeing the true ending, I was quite satisfied.
So for multiple endings to really impress me or add "value" to the game, each one would have to be something that I could walk away from satisfied. That would give the true feeling of me, as a player, having an effect on the outcome of a story. If and ending is "Oh no, the bad guy gets away and all hope is lost because you didn't pick up that inventory item a few hours ago" I don't feel like the game is over. Instead, I have to go back and repeat the challenge.
If only one ending is a true ending or what I would describe as a "satisfying" ending, then the other endings aren't really endings, they have more in common with death scenes. "You've failed, hope you saved! Try again to get the real one!"
If a game had multiple satisfying endings, where I could make meaningful non-arbitrary choices during the game that would end the game in a way that rewarded me for my play style,
that would be of added value to me as a player.
Oh, and thanks for the Linus shout out! (Which had multiple endings but only one true ending... :-X But then again, as Tartalo mentioned, it's more of a logic/puzzle game at heart!)
I easily found 2 endings (other than the good ending) that were filled with emotions and were worth being seen in Reactor 09. But yes, for multiple endings to succeed, more than one must be satisfying to see, and more importantly, while the normal ending might not be the best ending, it must at least satisfy you enough to make you say "Phew, I finished that game.".
QuoteNot even Maniac Mansion, I have the feeling that I have missed an important part of the authors work but if I replay an adventure before I have forgotten the solutions I get bored, It's like reading a book for second time, I will discover things I didn't see the first time, sure, but I need to forget the details to enjoy really the second reading. And I have seen only a few films two times in a row, films like Memento or Mulholand Drive were it's impossible to get it all with only one viewing. (Ah, and Sim City, because I was already in love with Frank Miller's comic). But don't feel bad about me, I can live with this.
No judging. It's a matter of taste I guess. While I can't watch a movie twice in a row, for games I prefer to search for the multiple endings and not miss an important part of the authors work while I'm still in the zone and while the story is still fresh in my mind so I can skip long dialogues and go straight to the point.
QuoteOh, and thanks for the Linus shout out! (Which had multiple endings but only one true ending... :-X But then again, as Tartalo mentioned, it's more of a logic/puzzle game at heart!)
Still, it had this "something rarely seen/unseen in AGS/completly new" element that I'd like to see more often. It's like the gravity gun of HL2 or the bullet time of Max Payne. Remove both of these elements to their respective games and what you get? Just another first/third person shooter.
QuoteBut some other times the experiment is an uncooked mix of genres, and very few games have done it in a way that satisfies the fans of at least one of the reference genres.
I'd rather see someone fails miserably at implementing something new than someone releasing dozens of games with interchangable graphics, stories, characters and puzzles. You can always say that at least they tried.
Quote from: BlueSkirt on Fri 06/04/2007 02:33:49
I'd rather see someone fails miserably at implementing something new than someone releasing dozens of games with interchangable graphics, stories, characters and puzzles. You can always say that at least they tried.
You are right. I should have said something like "but it's not easy" instead.
QuoteIf only one ending is a true ending or what I would describe as a "satisfying" ending, then the other endings aren't really endings, they have more in common with death scenes. "You've failed, hope you saved! Try again to get the real one!"
I don't really agree with this, Vince, for a couple of reasons:
1. The game author decides how the story will pan out out, not the player. By giving the player a few different options that will impact the result the author is in effect saying 'here, you can alter the game'. It's more of a gift than anything.
2. Negative endings should have just as much impact as positive ones if handled properly. It's like with movies, every once in awhile you'll see one that will have a depressing ending to it (the hero dies, etc) and some people will be disappointed. Others will walk away from it being affected by the result and it will make them think. That, in my opinion, is a great reason to include sweet and sour endings in a game.
I'm not sure whether you played Mind's Eye or got both endings but I put considerable effort into making both make sense for the level of information you were able to get up to that point, so whether or not you got the happy ending you at least got a result based on what you were supposed to have learned.
For example:
Spoiler
If you just walk blindly through solving the few physical puzzles you never have the opportunity to learn who you really are, and at the end the evidence leads you to think Dr. Knox murdered Dr. Mitchell - when in fact you are Dr. Mitchell. The ending is a bit of a downer, granted, but it's really impossible to make a negative ending fully satisfying. The trick is just to go with what is logical and makes sense.
There have been a few games I've played with predominantly negative endings that I thought were good. A recent one I played with such an ending was called Missing, and it's a first person adventure game that you can find free if you look. I walked away a bit disturbed at the end, and I think that's a good thing!
Progz, while it's true that it's ultimately the author's choice on what the end of the game would be like, I kinda agree with Vince, and could easily use the game you mentioned as an example. I finished your game with the lesser ending, and for the longest time, thought that it was the only ending, and it was one of "those" type of games. I mean...
Spoiler
basically you die, and I was surprised, because the death wasn't much different from other deaths in the game. It was only later that I found out that there was a "proper" ending, and it took a long time before I felt like repeating the game (because I had saved too far ahead to restore)
I think that the problem with multiple endings in adventure games is that unless the fork is very early on (or maybe with some warning or autosave feature before you go down one path), the rest of the game is pretty much the same. Unless you've forgotten most of it, it could get boring very fast. And if the fork wasn't chosen by the player (like Indiana Jones), and has no warning at all (like in KQ6, where it's generated by an almost random action), it could be very irritating.
About the original topic, I'd create the story, and then as it pans out, create some puzzles. I think Rodekill had an interesting doc on a nice way of doing it. I've not really succeeded in this, though. All stories I come up with end up being very resistant to puzzlifying, and seem likely to have been better if I made them interactive movies. I suppose you can't really make the story as you would fora book, but instead have the idea of interactiveness and exploration in it from before.
Actually, your response reinforces my point. You thought that the ending you got was the proper ending to the game, which means that the information you collected up to that point worked to convince you that that was the way things should be -- and guess what -- it was the proper ending for that game. People need to look outside the box sometimes and realize that sometimes there is no 'right' ending, just different ones. For you, the ending you received (based on what you discovered) was the right one. For someone else playing that learned a few different things the ending they received was right for them.
That's how endings should be handled, really, so great!
Re multiple endings - Blade Runner had about, what, 6 of them? Maybe a couple more. They were all grand, they were all satisfying.
Just wanted to point that out. Maybe *that* should be what we should aim for when making multiple endings.
QuoteThey were all grand, they were all satisfying.
To you, and that's part of the problem. Satisfying is very subjective, so who can say how one ending will impact 'everyone'? You can't, really, so all you can do is create the game you envisioned and accept that not everyone will like it or 'get it'.
Well, have you seen all/most endings? If so, then you can talk. If not, you can't understand how it felt like, no matter what the outcome was, it was a satisfying experience.
Multiple endings can sometimes be hit and miss, detracting from the story and the core of the game itself.
I really liked Shadows of Memories/Destiny (http://www.mobygames.com/game/windows/shadow-of-destiny), which has five radically different endings which are dictated by a large number of variables within the game.
There aren't any sign-posted clues to guide you along the correct story arc to get the ending you desire, and something a simple as scaring 16th century locals with your cellphone rather than your lighter can have an impact.
The game itself has a really mindbending plot and, to be honest, it's very clever how it's all tied together. The player can experience an entirely different series of events within the game itself, based on how they play it.
But here's the problem.
Once you have played through to one of the five endings, you really have no desire to go through it again, regardless of the other endings. It was just too much work.
And the fact that the story itself has to be purposely vague to allow for the differing elements needed to alter the plot arc over the course of the game, you're left unsatisfied by the lack of a concrete denouement.
In my experience, anyway.
QuoteActually, your response reinforces my point. You thought that the ending you got was the proper ending to the game, which means that the information you collected up to that point worked to convince you that that was the way things should be -- and guess what -- it was the proper ending for that game. People need to look outside the box sometimes and realize that sometimes there is no 'right' ending, just different ones. For you, the ending you received (based on what you discovered) was the right one. For someone else playing that learned a few different things the ending they received was right for them.
If by "that game" you mean Babar's game, where he did not discover the entire truth and ended screwed up at the end, then yes, I guess it was the proper ending for that game, however I do not think it was the proper ending for the entire Mind's Eye game.
QuoteOnce you have played through to one of the five endings, you really have no desire to go through it again, regardless of the other endings. It was just too much work.
I guess at some point they had to choose between making the game shorter, easier and less exhausting to replay (and people who are not interested in replaying it would have thought they got less for their bucks), and making the game long enough so people wouldn't feel cheated by the short lenght (and exhausting the people who wanted to replay the game). Maybe they should have opted for the first option. I guess it all come down to what we said on the first page: "We never said it would be easy to implement." But it sound like an interesting game, I'll have to try it.
-edit-
Removed a big chunk that was possibly off topic, or out of place or something.
Off of the 'multiple endings' subject, I'd really like to see more games that simply do their own thing without worrying about pleasing anyone. In commercial game development I can see why people feel they have to use tried and true formulas. But if an amateur developer isn't going to make any money anyway, they have all kinds of freedom. I love games that pick a goal, even if only three people in the world are going to like the end product, and then earnestly try to reach it.
Quote from: ProgZmax on Sun 08/04/2007 17:01:11You thought that the ending you got was the proper ending to the game, which means that the information you collected up to that point worked to convince you that that was the way things should be -- and guess what -- it was the proper ending for that game. People need to look outside the box sometimes and realize that sometimes there is no 'right' ending, just different ones. For you, the ending you received (based on what you discovered) was the right one. For someone else playing that learned a few different things the ending they received was right for them.
That's how endings should be handled, really, so great!
I definitely agree with this, Progz. When I talked about multiple-endings not adding to the overall value of the game I was talking about the kind of endings that do just the opposite of what you're describing.
If a game has multiple endings where a
meaningful choice leads the characters to a new ending that is "satisfying" and feels like I played a significant role in guiding the characters to that ending, then nice job, creator! By "meaningful," I mean not randomly picking up an inventory item halfway through the game, for example. I mean choices involving the player consciously making a choice about a major plot point and then guiding the characters' actions towards that end. And by satisfying, I mean it adequately wraps up the story -- could be happy, could be sad, could be somewhere in between. That kind of an ending would definitely excite me and lend added value to the game.
I would love to see some games that posed moral or philosophical dilemmas and the player would have to decide how to direct the story by guiding the characters' actions. Maybe you want to stop those bad guys because they're breaking the word of the law, or maybe the cause that they are fighting for is just and you want to join them... The story would change greatly depending on the player's decisions. Unfortunately, this kind of thing adds a great deal more work for the developer.
Easier to do are endings that keep the same basic ending, but change the specific fates of certain characters. Maybe two characters will end up with a romantic kiss. Maybe someone dies. The major story arc is the same but the characters' stories can change slightly. These can be nice, too, and I don't have to bother going back and replaying the game because I've seen the satisfying end to the main story and I feel that the characters ended up in the fates towards which I directed them.
Splinter Cell: Double Agent was a step in the right direction regarding multiple endings and moral choice, but it left something to be desired in the end. There was very obviously a "right" ending, with an extra mission tying the story up. If you chose one of the other endings, then you got a much, much shorter ending with little to no closure. These endings were one of the major selling points of SC:DA, but they felt like an afterthought.
Myself, I don't want a "led-by-the-hand experience." I want my personal choices and actions to be reflected by the game as I progress, and to not feel like I'm just going from A to B to C...
Some games work very well as "playable movies" (BG&E, FT) I'd just sure like to see a game that pulls off this freedom.
What I would really like to see in AGS or any other adventure game, is infinity action. Something fun you could do in the game that doesn't necessarily progress the story, but is just fun. And guess what, you could do this any time once the certain level is passed. Sort of like minigames in the first Sam & Max series, but more implemented into the story, so the action could be part of certain room or situation.
QuoteIf by "that game" you mean Babar's game, where he did not discover the entire truth and ended screwed up at the end, then yes, I guess it was the proper ending for that game, however I do not think it was the proper ending for the entire Mind's Eye game.
It was the proper ending based on the information gathered up to that point. Game endings don't need to be wonderfully positive, and as I said before, it is often the negative endings (even the unsatisfying ones) which make you actually think and impact you the most. Tragic heroes, defeat just when you thought you'd won, these sorts of things stick with you because we're not used to losing and we don't like it.
Let's talk about Deus Ex in this thread too!
The choices often had consequences, but the end sequence all came down to what you chose to do in the last half an hour or so. Anything else you did before that didn't matter. You could have killed everyone you could kill throughout the entire game, and then be a nice hero and save the day. (I'm speaking of the PS2 version, but I imagine the same applies to the PC version)
QuoteGame endings don't need to be wonderfully positive, and as I said before, it is often the negative endings (even the unsatisfying ones) which make you actually think and impact you the most. Tragic heroes, defeat just when you thought you'd won, these sorts of things stick with you because we're not used to losing and we don't like it.
Yes, but usually they lose just after they stopped the bad guys, or after they got their vengeance, or while/after saving the loved ones. Or they lose as soon as all their problems are solved and karma simply came back to bite them in the butt or because they were simply themself. Or they lose heroically, knowing their exploits will be told until the rest of time, knowing their ideals will survive, knowing they were fighting a just cause, knowing the bad guys might take their life, but they will never take their pride.
And if they die, it's with a smile on the lips, kinda happy that all their troubles, all their torments are now over. Or they die but not before they told everything they had to tell to their loved ones. If their friends or loved one die, it's to make them realise how foolish the main characters were, and make them progress in their life.
There is always a redeeming note in bad endings, to make them easier to swallow, may it be one of those I listed above, or may it be a cool or funny bad ending.
QuoteThe choices often had consequences, but the end sequence all came down to what you chose to do in the last half an hour or so. Anything else you did before that didn't matter. You could have killed everyone you could kill throughout the entire game, and then be a nice hero and save the day. (I'm speaking of the PS2 version, but I imagine the same applies to the PC version)
I think they aimed more on giving us non-linear gameplay, not non-linear plot with tons of story affecting moral dilemmas. If they really wanted to give us moral dilemmas, it would have been possible to work for the bad guys, and important NPC wouldn't be immune to damage.
In this particuliar case of knocking/killing everyone, civilians and allies could be very well killed in cross fire, accidentally, in cold blood, or could often be in the wrong place, wrong time, being witnesses of morally questionable action you could do. So there's no way to tell for what reason you could have killed or knocked them. Also not every tiny minor moral choices must have an impact on the final ending or the story.
The point about Deus Ex is interesting.
It also raises the question;
Should the player be rewarded with an ending based on their actions over the entire game?
Or, in the case of Deus Ex, should the player be allowed a presto-chango A, B, or C type deal just before the final curtain?
Would we, in the case of the former, continue playing if we found our character following a path, moral or otherwise, that we weren't happy with?
Would we, in the case of the latter, feel cheated by the ability to negate our actions during the game with a simply multiple-choice ending?
Hmm... :-\
Quote from: ManicMatt on Mon 09/04/2007 16:42:04
Let's talk about Deus Ex in this thread too!
The choices often had consequences, but the end sequence all came down to what you chose to do in the last half an hour or so. Anything else you did before that didn't matter. You could have killed everyone you could kill throughout the entire game, and then be a nice hero and save the day. (I'm speaking of the PS2 version, but I imagine the same applies to the PC version)
Hah, this reminds me of some Hitman game that was so hard that it was easier to go on a rampage killing spree than sneak and steal. But the main thing that still kept me motivated to go with sneak and steal, was that the atmosphere and theme of the game was really good, I just didn't want another shooter...
So the looks of the game, what creates the mood, is quite important for gameplay style. Game should always provide enough motivation. Unfortunately, I haven't seen much player motivation (besides the motivation that it is AGS and actually "there") in AGS games that tend to have multiple endings, even reactor 9 was somehow failure in that point.
Quote from: BlueSkirt on Mon 09/04/2007 18:47:54
So there's no way to tell for what reason you could have killed or knocked them. Also not every tiny minor moral choices must have an impact on the final ending or the story.
Good point, this reminds me of when I was playing Morrowind. I was helping a band of people defend their homes against werewolves. It was a messy fight, and as I thrusted my sword at the beast in front of me, an ally ran in front of me and found himself on the end of my sword. This caused every ally to turn on me and hunt me down to kill me. They ignored the beasts still trying to kill them and focused on me. I just stood on a house so they couldnt get me, and they just let the werewolves wipe them out.
Stupid AI aside, one way you could identify the actions of the player could be...
Two men are in front of you. You fire a shot off at one of them and kill them. The other man can assess that there was no enemies nearby, therefore the PC must have had bad intentions.
Alternatively, you shoot one of the two men, and there are enemies attacking everyone. The other man becomes suspicious of you and keeps his eyes on you whilst attacking the enemies. Once the enemies are dead he asks you if you did that on purpose or by accident.
What do you think? Bit messy though maybe, but it's a start...
EDIT: Or perhaps the computer can calculate the trajectory of the shot, how many shots were fired etc to assess the likelyhood it was a mistake. Like when I told my man in morrowind to attack I'd already pressed the attack button when I was facing the beast, but by the time I'd struck the man got in my way.
Limping fish: The ultimate moral game could let you change your mind about joining the evil people (for example) and defect at any time. This sort of thing could probably only be done with incredibly advanced AI that can communicate with almost lifelike conversations on the fly. In doing this however, you can't really have a story or an end of game occurance.
Radiowaves: Heh, that couldn't be the latest one though, they made it harder to shoot everyone up! It usually results in death now!
This discussion reminds me of Knights Of The Old Republic. I loved doing evil things, and thus going dark side. Had quite a satisfying ending as well if I remember correctly.
QuoteThere is always a redeeming note in bad endings, to make them easier to swallow, may it be one of those I listed above, or may it be a cool or funny bad ending.
Not always, and there doesn't need to be. Life isn't all happy endings and I don't see why games should be all happy endings either. A game is the sum of its parts, a beginning, middle AND end, and I see no reason why an ending that doesn't make you feel all warm and sloppy should nullify the journey. This is why people need to look outside the box at the bigger picture, the game as a whole, and not just pan a game because the ending wasn't an immensely satisfying sequence of heroic victory or 'at least I killed the bad guy'. There's no reaching being made on the part of the storyteller with such concepts because they're giving in to this idea that everything has to work out in the end, and as a result, we are overwhelmed by media that supports this notion -- which has led many people to call the works trite and overdone.
We really need more bleak (or at least neutral) outcomes to bring up a balance and an appreciation for the positive outcomes in games, etc, imo.
QuoteWe really need more bleak (or at least neutral) outcomes to bring up a balance and an appreciation for the positive outcomes in games, etc, imo.
I guess you're right. Good ending, bad ending, as long they are cool or great, well done and not rushed, I guess it will be ok. Unless if this too is subjective.
Well said, Progzmax. Today's society in large equals happy with good. If the ending isn't cheerful, people seem to feel fleeced of their money, as if they paid for the happiness.
It's called CLOSURE!
I'm not ashamed to admit I want a happy ending of some kind with most games! Because not only do I want to feel like all my hard work was rewarded with a good ending, but because to end on a sad note makes me feel annoyed! If I had got a sad ending because during the game I had made awful decisions I can live with that, and play the game again. But if it's like that PSone game Apocolypse with Bruce Willis where at the end he gets taken over by the devil and becomes evil and it ends like that, and it's the ONLY ending, well that just takes the piss.
C'est la vie, man. But I'm sorry games treat you so poorly sometimes. :'(
Happy ending or not doesn't really enter into the equation for me. I simply want an ending. Period.
Too many games leave the door open for a sequel, which is fine if the sequel actually gets made. Beyond Good and Evil, I'm looking in your direction!
Too many games simply have a "Player crawls out of the hole/temple/mansion into the glory of the morning sun!" type deal, followed by the credits. That's an ending, sure, but it's not very satisfying after all the effort it took to get there.
With episodic gaming, endings have mostly become vague cliffhangers. Which, again, is fine if they get the chance to be resolved.
I too like closure. For this reason all Resident Evil endings suck, being as they are a mix of cliffhanger and "morning sun" rehashes.
MGS 2 doesn't so much end as just stop. MGS 3 does a better job, although since the upcoming Portable Ops seems to continue past this ending, it's slightly undermined.
Some games have a "Here we go again!" last minute double ending. The story ends, but, oh no, they missed some dude from the first level and here he comes! Credits!
Most games seem to just run out of story.
CREDITS!
I tend to value cheerful endings just a tiny little bit more than negative ones because I'm from a culture that lost all its wars, failed most of its revolutions and tend to produce castrating stories with a big dose of despair and defeatism in them, sometimes I'm tired of watching movies made here where the heroes end up executed and the innocents turned into martyr.
However a mediocre good ending can be as much of a failure as a mediocre bad ending. Good or bad outcome, endings are better if they are funny or emotionnal, if they make you think, if they fit, if they are well narrated and well told, if they are not rushed, if they have a twist or something you did not expect, or simply if there is something that make you say "cooooOOOOOOooool.". I guess that's why I personally prefered the good ending of Mind's Eye over the bad ending.
I don't think I said that I wanted a happy ending, but as ManicMatt, it's about closure. A sad, bittersweet, whatever ending is great, as long as it's an ENDING. I'm not too sure about the "Type of ending=How much effort you put into the game" theory. I admit, I'm not all that great at solving most adventure game puzzles, but I'd rather be given the chance to achieve the complete ending than to unknowingly be put down the lesser path. That's like some sort of purposely designed walking dead. In my eyes, a more preferrable "punishment" (because that's what it seems to me) for lack of effort on the part of the player would be to kill of the player directly (or a few scenes ahead).
*Ali sidesteps the 'happy endings' debate and cuts in*
Quote from: SimB on Sat 31/03/2007 23:13:37
What I'm looking for is just some idea of what sort of adventure game you like.
I'd be careful asking this question. If I'd asked the forums, "Do you want yet ANOTHER pirate game, this time about my girlfriend" I would have got a resounding, "No, do something more original, you hairy moron."
I made Nelly Cootalot (see signature) because I knew that the person I made it for would like it, and some AGSers have enjoyed it too. If I asked the forums now what my next game should be, I reckon at least a few people would suggest another Nelly game, when I might be saying to myself, "No, do something more original, you hairy moron."
As someone who's only made one short game, I'm by no means an authority on this sort of thing. I just felt it was worth underlining the argument that you should make a game that you want, inspired by your influences.
But, to answer your question, I like the kind where you have to combine hundreds of zany items in your inventory, and you have to solve puzzles without knowing why.
Quoteyou have to combine hundreds of zany items in your inventory, and you have to solve puzzles without knowing why.
Sounds like my experience with Myst :P
Happy endings sell & will always be the favoured majority, and hopefully so, too! It'd be a pretty depressing world if all the media focussed on defeat & gloom. But the fact happy-endings saturate it all means when a good game or movie with a negative ending comes out, it really has an impact. Plus it just makes sense in most cases. A dark ending to Nelly Cootalot would have been incredibly head-fudging! It has closure too, which I think is great for any game or film because it allows a sequel to take a completely new direction if necessary ;) I do though want to know if Noctropolis has a happy ending or a bad/dark ending, because it's a pretty weird dark game!
Play Noctropolis and find out!
Also:
Quotebut I'd rather be given the chance to achieve the complete ending than to unknowingly be put down the lesser path.
Who is to say the negative ending is the 'lesser' path, though?
If the negative ending leaves the player worse off than the positive ending, then won't the player feel as though he has failed in some way? The player might feel as though he lost. What Babar appears to me to be saying is that the positive ending is better for the player (or player character), not necessarily better in terms of artistic quality.
QuoteWhat do you want to see in an AGS game?
Quality.
Scratch those 100 quick-mspaint-horror-backgrounds and make 10 seriously-tried-hard ones.
Delay with fame another week/month and beta test it through and through.
If you can't get some people to make professional speech, skip it.
And so on. The worst thing about AGS games - especially if you're making some yourself - is to see how someone half-assed a game, and wasted really good idea, puzzles and story.
I just found this article about multilinearity by Emily Short:
http://emshort.wordpress.com/writing-if/my-articles/multilinear-if-older/
I think you will find most of the blog quite interesting.
If you don't know Emily's work and want to, I recommend the game City of Secrets (http://www.wurb.com/if/game/2106)
Edit:
Another interesting article about adventure creation, by Graham Nelson:
http://www.ifarchive.org/if-archive/info/Craft.Of.Adventure.txt
Graham Nelson is the author of Inform (http://www.inform-fiction.org/) (So to say, THE text adventure making tool) and games like Curses! (http://www.wurb.com/if/game/55) and Jigsaw (http://www.wurb.com/if/game/117)