Adventure Rant

[Rui 'Trovatore' Pires]

Hmm, I read something about Tony Tough. Didn't it add new verbs as the game went along?

Actually, I disagree, I think adventure games are striving towards new gameplay. They're just still looking for a good one, because the old one was so damn good. The Full Throttle verb coin was good, the Broken Sword 3 was DAMN good for 3D, and so was Gabe Knight 3... Even Larry 7 - now THAT was really the mother of all desperate attempts to bring on new stuff, and they didn't LOOK desperate, which is quite, quite good. We had the whole shift towards both simpler one-cursor interface and lot's of stuff... You had Midnight Nowehere's HORRIBLE attempt at something new, but still an attempt to create... Grim Fandango, as you said yourself...

Now, whether or not these are based on previous games hardly counts, does it? I mean, it kinda sounds as though the Grim Fandango engine is lesser because it's not completely original (sorry if this wasn't what you'd meant). The thing is rather how you implement it, because honestly, how can there be anything truly new under the sun at this point? The only way to be truly innovative would be to have an adventure game become the first VR game ever, with helmets and gloves and everything.

Which would be poetic justice, considering how adventure was always the pioneer in new technology (first IBM game, first FMV game, first everything when concerns new technology...) and now is arguably (very arguably, I myself do NOT subscribe to that opinion) dead...

[Snarky]

Now that you mention it, it did add new things like many's head turning around looking at an instersting object or person (Later implemented in Zelda: The Wind Waker, where Link's eyes would look at interesting things to hint you. I wonder if they got the idea from Grim Fandango?)

Grim Fandango didn't invent that mechanic. It was used in some earlier game... Shadow of the Comet, I think.

[BerserkerTails]

Okay... Here's my two cents. The third Tex Murphy game (Under a Killing Moon) was EXTREMELEY innovative at the time, and one of the rare examples on how FMV can be used correctly. It was a fully 3d (IE: you moved around in a 3d environment, with the game world being rendered in real-time) adventure game that ran on a 386 and had FMV! It also had in-game hints for people who were stuck. The game was excellent, and was truly a revolutionary game.

Now the sequel (The Pandora Directive) is one of my favorite games of all time. I love it much more than Under a Killing Moon. The thing is, Pandora Directive runs on the EXACT SAME ENGINE as Under a Killing Moon. Access, the company that made the games, decided instead of working on a new engine, that they would put all their time and resources into developing better plot and characters. The result is an adventure game with multiple endings (10, I think), that is so engaging that I play through it at least once every two or three months.

Not only are those two games examples of how adventure games DID differ from the "standard formula", but it's also an example on how NOT differing from the standard formula can give you an amazing game.