Do adventure games have to be whimsical?

[ShadowMan]

Hi everyone,

I am writing the script of a new adventure game, and I am hoping to create this game one day. But I am a bit concerned. Most adventure lovers love fun and whimsical games. But my script is sad and somber, with lots of tension. Should I lighten up the mood a bit, or continue the story as is? What is your opinion?

[Mandle]

Make the game you want to make without giving a rat's ass what's "popular" (even though I think that your assumption there may be flawed to begin with)...

[Adeel]

Personally, I love morbid themes.

[ShadowMan]

Make the game you want to make without giving a rat's ass what's "popular" (even though I think that your assumption there may be flawed to begin with)...

I am also scared that if I go serious people might compare it to other games. For example every major adventure game had its own kind own tone, and theme. But the tone of my game is a cross between Erica Reed, Broken Sword and the Gabriel Knight. I am not sure if that is a good thing or a bad thing.

[Blondbraid]

I think one of the biggest misconceptions about games is that a game has to be fun.

"Well, who wants to play a game that isn't fun to play?" some might ask.

But just imagine if we held any other medium to that standard.
There are so, so many books, plays and movies that isn't fun, but it haven't stopped them from being loved by millions of people.

Now don't get me wrong, I do love humor and whimsical adventures, but a fun game should be fun because the writer wanted to create something funny, not because they feel that they must include it just for the sake of it.

[Radiant]

Most adventure lovers love fun and whimsical games.

Why do you think that, have you done any market research on that? Have you looked at the most popular adventure games (including oh say Police Quest) and considered how whimsical these are?

[Danvzare]

Most adventure lovers love fun and whimsical games.

With how few fun and whimsical adventure games that are being released nowadays, I think you might be wrong. I mean, I prefer fun and whimsical adventure games, but from as far as I can tell, most people prefer more serious adventure games.

I am also scared that if I go serious people might compare it to other games.

Funnily enough, if you go fun and whimiscal, people will STILL compare it to other games, such as Day of the Tentacle and Monkey Island.
If you make a great game, it's only natural that people will compare it to other great games. Don't look at that as a bad thing. Embrace it!

I think one of the biggest misconceptions about games is that a game has to be fun.

A game does have to be fun. Although I think we have different opinions of the word fun here.
Fun to me, means "not boring". It means it captures my interest and keeps me wanting to play it. It means I'm enjoying myself. A game can be depressing, and still be fun.
I mean, just look at Dwarf Fortress! On that game, "fun" means to lose your fortress in the most horrific and spectacular way imaginable!
So yes, a game does have to be fun. It doesn't have to be funny though. Although I suppose it would probably be better to say that a game should be entertaining, since that's what I think most people mean when they say that a game has to be fun.

[Blondbraid]

I think one of the biggest misconceptions about games is that a game has to be fun.

A game does have to be fun. Although I think we have different opinions of the word fun here.
Fun to me, means "not boring". It means it captures my interest and keeps me wanting to play it. It means I'm enjoying myself. A game can be depressing, and still be fun.
I mean, just look at Dwarf Fortress! On that game, "fun" means to lose your fortress in the most horrific and spectacular way imaginable!
So yes, a game does have to be fun. It doesn't have to be funny though. Although I suppose it would probably be better to say that a game should be entertaining, since that's what I think most people mean when they say that a game has to be fun.

Perhaps "fun" is the wrong word to describe it?
I greatly enjoyed Dear Esther, even though it barely had any gameplay and a very sad story. I wouldn't call it fun, but it was interesting.
To use another example, playing Papers please wasn't fun to me, but it made me think about things and even if I found the gameplay boring, I'm glad to have played it.

Maybe instead of fun, we should perhaps use the word interesting?
Games can be interesting without having fun gameplay.

[Monsieur OUXX]

...But my script is sad and somber, with lots of tension. Should I lighten up the mood a bit, or continue the story as is? What is your opinion?

What you must do is not necessarily make an adventure game funny, but make it ADVENTUROUS. Or at least make the player feel like he's DOING something. Combining stuff. Finding clues. Make the story progress by the sheer force of his intellect.
Whimsical games achieve that by making the badly-designed puzzles feel less frustrating (precisely because of the overall silliness), and by putting gags here and there to keep the player's interest up, at an almost scientific pace (the pace of gags).
You must also keep that pace up. If your story is sad, then DON'T fall into the trap of most "sad" adventure games : no real progression, no real player interaction, no "pace", only a slow sliding down until the sad finale. Building the universe and mood around the player is not enough. Discovering a piece of paper or a personal journal revealing a new part of the backstory is NOT a "puzzle". He must PLAY. All the time. He must be entertained. All the time. He must be surprised. All the time.

[Mandle]

Discovering a piece of paper or a personal journal revealing a new part of the backstory is NOT a "puzzle".

You just described 90% of recent games...Paced Padded out with stealth/combat sequences, cutscenes, and action set-pieces...

Sorry: off topic...

[Crimson Wizard]

Well, whimsical episode won't always hurt the otherwise morbid game. (Especially when it is followed by sudden monster appearance )

[Blondbraid]

He must PLAY. All the time. He must be entertained. All the time. He must be surprised. All the time.

This is just my opinion, but I think that a lot of bad puzzles in adventure games are created when the developers
do not have a good idea for a puzzle, but felt compelled to to put something, anything in there to add gameplay.

One of the most powerful moments I ever seen in an adventure game was in Paradise by Benoit Sokal.

Spoiler

The heroine, Anne Smith, travels around an African dictatorship on the brink of revolution, and in one scene she finds all the workers of a mine massacred, and because of her actions no less. All you can do is ask the sole survivor about what happened, and then you have to walk out of the area, past all the dead bodies and contemplate on what has been done...

[close]

This sequence had virtually no puzzles, and hardly any game-play, yet it have stuck with me for years.

You just described 90% of recent games...Paced Padded out with stealth/combat sequences, cutscenes, and action set-pieces...
Sorry: off topic...

I think mini-games can be pretty hit and miss, some are good while others just ruin the pace and/or are badly constructed.
It's especially jarring when a game with otherwise realistic art-style and story suddenly switches to something that looks like an 80's arcade game...

Well, whimsical episode won't always hurt the otherwise morbid game. (Especially when it is followed by sudden monster appearance )

I agree, I immediately came to think of the ending of this song in Mulan, a great example of it.

[Frodo]

I love the darker games with serious stories.  PLEASE continue as is. 
Don't lighten it just for the sake of it - stay true to the story in your head. 

[ShadowMan]

...But my script is sad and somber, with lots of tension. Should I lighten up the mood a bit, or continue the story as is? What is your opinion?

What you must do is not necessarily make an adventure game funny, but make it ADVENTUROUS. Or at least make the player feel like he's DOING something. Combining stuff. Finding clues. Make the story progress by the sheer force of his intellect.
Whimsical games achieve that by making the badly-designed puzzles feel less frustrating (precisely because of the overall silliness), and by putting gags here and there to keep the player's interest up, at an almost scientific pace (the pace of gags).
You must also keep that pace up. If your story is sad, then DON'T fall into the trap of most "sad" adventure games : no real progression, no real player interaction, no "pace", only a slow sliding down until the sad finale. Building the universe and mood around the player is not enough. Discovering a piece of paper or a personal journal revealing a new part of the backstory is NOT a "puzzle". He must PLAY. All the time. He must be entertained. All the time. He must be surprised. All the time.

This was a very helpful reply. Thanks. I think I know which game you are talking about. I haven't played that many sad adventure games. Even the serious ones that I have played were slightly upbeat.

I agree discovering a journal is not a puzzle in itself. I guess I am a bit guilty of this at the moment. Although my plot is solid, my puzzles are not as strong at the moment. I guess I'll have to fix that in time. There is no guide to good puzzles.

Luckily I guess I don't fall into the earlier pitfall you have mentioned. "Sliding into the sad finale" bit.

I love the darker games with serious stories.  PLEASE continue as is. 
Don't lighten it just for the sake of it - stay true to the story in your head. 

I am glad to hear that there is still market for serious games.


I also agree with the argument about fun. Horror stories can be fun, even though they are quite tense and morbid. As long as I move the audience there is no problem I guess.