Adv. Genre Dead? - Who still thinks that?

[DCillusion]

I just saw another interview in GameSpy talking to an upstart company about being able to revitalize the adventure genre even though "most" people consider it dead.  They gave the, expected, response about "love of the genre" & German markets as being a way to make money.

I don't understand how these conversations are still taking place?

A couple of years ago, I would've stood by the Adventure Army taking a stand against the mainstream of "FPS-Action" & the purity of gaming, but this idea is so antiquated I wonder what hole-in-the-ground these Worldwide sites come from?

There are 11 Nancy Drew adventure games.  The series is based on one of the longest-running characters ever.  It has been featured in Time Magazine, & is a multi-million seller.  All electronic stores within driving distance of me has adventure sections. 

I was at Fry's the other day - The #1 store in the richest city, in the richest state of the richest & most powerful nation on Earth - Gaming sales here, occasionally, outpace the sales of the entire country of Japan.  Anyway, their Top-Ten list was headed by......
1 - Grand Theft Auto 4
2 - CSI: Dark Motives
3 - Sims 2
4 - Doom 3
5 - Half Life 2

Take-it-or-Leave-it, GTA IS an adventure game, & it tops the list.  CSI is a "point & click" adventure title based on the #1 show in America & it's number 2!!!  First-Person shooters don't appear until #4

CSI has even outsold PC copies of Doom 3, so how exactly are adventure games dead?  How, even, are they trailing their action-shooter cousins?  Most importantly, what will it take before the genre is considered "alive" again?

[scotch]

Exactly, it's based on a #1 TV show watched by millions and millions of people, that's the reason it is popular, and GTA is so not an adventure game It has a few basic elements of adventure games like most games, but is missing even more... it's primarily an action/driving/shooting game.
However I wouldn't say adventures are dead, there are still a lot of adventure titles released each year, some of them make a profit, they're just not in competition with the blockbuster games.

[Helm]

GTA is not an adventure game. And yeah, adventure games are still mostly dead. A few sub-par games being put out each year do not exactly constitute a glorious comeback.

[Rui 'Trovatore' Pires]

Well... dead? No, not in the least. But, people tend to compare nowadays to yesterdays, and yesterdays was the golden era of adventures. Who can compete with THAT? It's kinda like saying "Doom is dead". The original doom is dead, many more have risen - the genre is not dead, the actual original Doom, mostly, is. There are still buyers - but then, people also still buy Lec and Sierra classics.

That said, there's been a steady flow of adventures - since Syberia, passing from Longest Journey and Post Mortem, then Moment of Silence and soon Still Life plus Alida and Aura and Sentinel and A Quiet Weekend in Capri and Myst 4 and even independent games as Tony Tough... well, hardly dead, or dying. Just... not thriving anymore.

[Ubel]

If adventure genre was all dead, would this forum or AGS exist? Nope. Maybe it was dead for a time, but then Chris Jones came and revived it!

[Ghormak]

There hasn't been a (commercial) adventure game that has intrigued me since... I dunno, mid-late nineties or so. I wouldn't mind seeing adventure games as we know them stay dead. Yes, dead, after having killed themselves.

Technology has finally come far enough that the elements I like about adventure games (story, dialogue, interaction) are finally starting to appear in games that aren't all about puzzle solving.

Deus Ex, for instance.

[Rui 'Trovatore' Pires]

*groan* Not GK3's cat puzzle again. Come on, MANY games have a flaw, sometimes a KILLING flaw. This is a leap in logic, granted, but there are much worse - Black Dahlia's gratuitous puzzles, Sanitarium's many flaws, even Quest for Glory 4's bugginess. Nevertheless, the last game I mentioned is still (I think) thought to be among the best games Sierra produced under the QfG title (and maybe byeond it, and QfG is already a name with a lot of positive reaction), Sanitarium has a wonderful story (though lacked a bit in gameplay and storytelling) and Black Dahlia has too many puzzles which kill a probable classic.

Hey, what about Syberia? Longest Journey? Broken Sword 3? Ok, so BS3's controls suck - does that mean BS3 has killed action/adventures? Because otherwise, it's one HELL of a game.

Technology has finally come far enough that the elements I like about adventure games (story, dialogue, interaction) are finally starting to appear in games that aren't all about puzzle solving.

Agreed. I was never a FPS fan, but after having played System Shock 2 and having read reviews of Unreal and Half-Life, and having played Tomb Raider 6, I'm becoming more and more interested by the "non-pure adventure games". Nevertheless we still are fed pure adventure games, and I'm sure we'd all feel the gaping hole their absence would leave.

[Ghormak]

The cat-puzzle is just an extreme example, but that article summarizes pretty much what I feel about point and click games nowadays. The things you have to do to advance through the plot in many adventure games seem to be there just to lengthen the game and give you a "challenge", it doesn't feel natural (fetch quests, anyone?). I just want to step into the role of the character I play, and live his life for the duration of the game. Live the story. Not solve arbitrary puzzles.

As a side note, I used to laugh at the comments Warren Spector made about adventure games (balancing three biscuits on your head while whistling a tune in order to open a door, you remember), but I sympathize with him completely now. Solving adventure games is simply not fun for me anymore. I want... something new. Something not point and click. I want to play games that are adventures, but I'm tired of "adventure games".

If I'm not making any sense, then please say so, so I can confirm the feeling I have that I'm unable to explain to people what I mean.

Edit: Oh yeah:

Hey, what about Syberia? Longest Journey? Broken Sword 3? Ok, so BS3's controls suck - does that mean BS3 has killed action/adventures? Because otherwise, it's one HELL of a game.

Of these games I've only played BS3, and I couldn't be bothered to finish it because I found the crate pushing and sneaking extremely tedious and unintuitive. The game is a step in the right direction I think, but unfortunately it didn't succeed well enough in anything it tried to do. In my opinion.

[m0ds]

I believe it's because these games don't get the marketting they deserve anymore, which is a shame because they should - they may not be more fun than other best-sellers nowadays, but point&clicks are often aimed at a specifically intellectual/intelligent audience which in these days of brain-dead reality tv are often lost and rarely targetted. I think people rely on innovation too. It's been a long time since once company (or two) has created several innovative adventure games. As Ghormak says I agree and believe BS3 is heading things in a good direction, a few modifications are needed certainly (would BASS 3D work?) - but it isn't often an adventure game sticks out in the crowd - unless of course it's some form of highly awaited sequel. And that even appears to apply to the independent world too.

[2ma2]

The nostalgia effect of lower technology is a helluva feat. but the stylization effect of the same is often set aside. The interfaces of "the golden days of adventuring" was a child of it's time, and did wonders with what it had to work with. The AGI-games are still kick ass, the LEC-games are still gorgeous and the first rotoscoping experiements has the impact on me as they had 10 years ago. The technology has increased graphics, reaching towards photorealism and/or skilled stylization, without realizing that each step makes the details even more important. What did I care that the LEC-characters walks in ways forbid by nature, but when I see a highdetail-polygon character turn around on a dime, waggling it's legs in ludicrous ways, I protest and shout.

The essence of a good adventure game was the illusion of freedom. With more detail, you need incredible amounts of thought-out-possible-actions without making the game tedious in it's spare feedback. There can only be a certain amount of witty remarks until you get bored on that too.

I myself never play commercial adventures nowadays. Lack of time, and a lack of a computer may have something to do with it, but I seek my fixes in other genres, and as Ghormak mentioned, they have developed into a nice hybrid of every other game genre out there.

The puzzles are to blaim. No, not really. But where as the adventure games served as a sport for brainy computer owners, making them all fuzzy inside over beating that puzzle of doom, the essence of the adventures was in the storylines, or, in pursuiting some goal, making each trial and error opening a new set of oppurtunities. Easy gaming, easy set-up. But whilst the puzzles were the core of progress, the progress was put to an abrupt halt when you got stuck. In the same way that mega boss with thermonuclear miniguns simply blew you to oblivion each time in that action game, the frustration builds up until you exit, delete and take some soda to cool your nerves. It's not that they need to be easy or simple, no, good action games lie in the fast paced trial. It's all in design and execution. I agree with everything Ghormaks says (in this post mind you) but it is not ALL puzzle design.

The real revolution came with high-end consoles. And adventures are not that simple played with a joypad. Like child of their times, we got tons of more or less crappy 3d games in every genre, including adventures. In my eyes, Resident Evil is very much an adventure game, even though the actual puzzles were reduced to use this on that and get your hands on it before you're eaten. Either way, the game is fairly slowpaced, with lots of atmospherical storytelling within the gameplay (not the hilarious cutscenes.. yuugh..) But the puzzles are pitiful, and it is a child of its time. This is not the fact for PC's though. But the consoles were the no. 1 choice for gamers.. or rather, became the no. 1 choice..

Now, the commercial efforts are still the good ol recipies found out at mid nineties. Mouse support being your first option, the point and click-interface never cease to fade unless there's an action-adventure hybrid out there. So instead of exploring the gameplay posseibilities, you hang on to 10 year old gameplay techniques. That is probably what makes the genre commercially dead. God knows what you can do, because the essence of the adventure game is still the story right. That and a slower pace, or rather, lack of action elements.. or?

Story. And a challenge. That's all you need. Because the game is the challenge, and what makes it adventurous?

[dgunpluggered]

As a side note, I used to laugh at the comments Warren Spector made about adventure games (balancing three biscuits on your head while whistling a tune in order to open a door, you remember)

I thought Ian Livingstone said that.

I pretty much agree with most of what's been said. 'Adventure' as a commercial genre is pretty much dead, but it has influenced elements in other genres like Deus Ex, etc. Will adventures come back to life like only flesh-eating zombies can? I doubt it.

[Ghormak]

I thought Ian Livingstone said that.

Ah, you're probably right. I just remembered that Warren has expressed his negative opinions on adventure games in the past, and made the connection to that quote immediately.

[Barbarian]

In case anyone here was interested, some of us adventure-gaming fans were having a similar discussion over at the Quandaryland.com fourms, over at:
http://www.quandaryland.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/5146/an/0/page/0#5146 
Might be worth a read.

[Helm]

straight puzzlesolving in most cases is highly artificial and forced. The time to accept the 'conventions of the genre' with a resigned sigh is past, it seems. I'd like to see more physical and organic ways to get past obstacles ( like actually breaking a door down, for freakin' once) more conversation and influence-based puzzles ( which opens up nicely towards rpg-ish crossovers with charisma stats, by-person influence etc) alternative actions that influence the story in secondary ways (like if you break the door down isntead of pick it's lock, someone might hear), that sort of stuff.

[MillsJROSS]

This is especially a good debate to me, as I went through my yearly playing of Space Quest games (so far I've played to five...and waiting till finals are over to play the sixth one). I bring this up, because it's struck me that Space Quest is definately one of the adventure games that stand out. I also say this because if you look at the SQ games there are a lot of elements added that aren't "puzzley."

I honestly think commercial adventure games started going down hill after the adventure gaming industry all wanted to pander the users by stopping deaths within adventure games. To me this seems so strange, when many other games seem to flourish because you can die, and it gets  your blood pumping.

Yet, as I was playing SQ, even having played it several times, my heart got pumping as the spider droid landed on SQ1, as I was on the skimmer in SQ1, while traveling in Vohuals asteroid in SQ2, and literally tons of examples within these games. And as I got past these obstacles I felt good...it's one of the reasons I've been able to play the games as many times as I have.

These elements above, though, don't strictly fall into what most consider an adventure game element. I'd argue that they strenghthen the game. They make the game more tangible. You're in a situation where death is possible, and you begin to really start caring for your character. And I think adventure games have gotten far from those elements, and I can't understand why. Why we're afraid to use soltuions that don't involve three biscuits anymore. I'm reminded of The Longest Journey, where some mutant thing come thrashing at you, and you just stand there, and nothing happens. Completely ruined the mood for me, and I laughed when I'm fairly certain the game designers wanted me to feel fear.

I have work in a few, though, so I won't ramble on any more.

-MillsJROSS

[Grundislav]

I was just watching X-Play on G4, (don't ask me why), and they reviewed The Moment of Silence.  They gave it a 2 out of 5, then went on to say adventures are dead, and that "daddy left the genre" in reference to Tim Schafer making Psychonauts.

For the record, this IS X-Play we're talking about, a less than credible source.  Especially since they credited Tim Schafer with making Monkey Island. 

[edmundito]

Not only that, but G4 credits Tim Schafer with making Escape from Monkey Island sometimes. or was that Techtv? same difference, now days.

[Snarky]

Hey, are you dissing Tim Schafer? You shouldn't be going around making unfounded accusations like saying he didn't make Monkey Island! How do YOU know? I mean, for sure?

[edmundito]

I wasn't sure if you were kidding or not, but for the record:

Tim Schafer was indeed part of The Secret of Monkey Island and Monkey Island 2's development. It was his first job at LucasArts. Ron Gilbert had the concept and all figured out, and he needed some people to write good stuff for the game. So, Tim Schafer and Dave Grossman wrote a lot of the comedic dialog and learned about making games by helping with the design. In the end, the vision of the game is given by Ron Gilbert, who should be credited as the mastermind behind it, but the character personalities and situations is mostly thanks to Tim and Dave, so they should get equal recognition for making it enjoyable. They did not come up with the idea, though; that was all Ron Gilbert!

Here's the fabled video I was talking about:
http://scummbar.com/resources/downloads/movies/IconsLucasarts.WMV
"Tim Schafer works his magic again with The Curse of Monkey Island and Grim Fandango..." - Curse? lies!

There is so many wrong facts with that video... I won't  even point them all out. Just listen to what Dave Grossman says.

[theYak]

As a side note, I used to laugh at the comments Warren Spector made about adventure games

I agree with your statements in part. I've enjoyed more hybrids recently. While I used to consider an adventure game as the last Great  Game (TM) I'd played, my current title for that status is Half-Life 2. It had puzzles, drama, plot, beauty and humor.  While the plot was certainly secondary to the enjoyment I received from the physics engine, it was certainly a great gaming experience. 

I've become a bit burnt on adventures, mostly because of lack of innovation (3D engines that hamper interactivity rather than boost it are hardly innovative).  However, citing Warren Spector seems counter-productive.  This is the same person who justified the abysmal console-ization of DE:IW and seems to think gamers should toe-the-line of current trends rather than catering to the will of the gamers themselves.