The new Sam and Max thread

[Privateer Puddin']

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'.

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.

[LimpingFish]

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.

[Helm]

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.

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.

[Khris]

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?

[Helm]

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.

[LimpingFish]

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.

[ManicMatt]

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.

[Helm]

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

[ManicMatt]

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

But seriously, you've got a point.

[big brother]

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.

[Ghormak]

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.

[ManicMatt]

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.

[Ghormak]

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.

[Mordalles]

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.   

[ManicMatt]

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?

[MrColossal]

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.

[ManicMatt]

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!  :

[MrColossal]

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

[ManicMatt]

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*

[Helm]

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.

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?

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.  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.