Messages

"With great power comes great responsibility"

I'll see what I can come up with. It'll probably take me a few days, I'm kinda busy at the time. Monday at the earliest, maybe Tuesday.

I'm not sure why we are disussing layer effects. Is it because that is how it's done technically? When I imagine the tint function, I see it more as similar to the RGB adjust in Photoshop (except without the possibility of only adjusting dark, light or mid-tones). where you just raise (or lower!) the RGB values of each pixel all over the image with a certain figure.

terranRICH: Maybe I didn't make myself clear, I'm not against partial nudity - and I do agree, full frontal is usually far less erotic. What I'm  against is nudity obviously framed for rating reasons. Like a medium closeup of a woman which just frames the picture just above the pubic hair, or a shot of a naked man turning around, which cuts away just a split second before you would see his willy. Or those L-shaped sheets they always have in movies, which cover the breasts of the woman sitting in the bed, while the guy sitting next to her is bare-chested.

These thing detract from the story because they make us aware that we are watching a movie, and that there is such a thing as censorship. I was merely warning against using conventions of commercial cinema in amateur adventure games.

Damn hell shit yes, I like offensive games!

But seriously. Let me ask this: What makes something offensive in a game but not in a movie? Why can't games have mature themes without getting into a world of trouble (it took a long while to find an American publisher for TLJ because of the language and the gay character). Nobody cares about sex in movies or on tv - but in games it's suddenly very naughty, the same thing about bad language. Where are the adventure game equivalents of Dennis Hopper in Blue Velvet or Joe Pesci in just about anything except Home Alone? It's as if game designers still belive that games are just for kids. We can't have ANYTHING offensive on the shelves, even though you have to be 15 or 18 to buy the games.

But then there are the games TRYING to be offensive. And most often that's their only selling point. I'm talking about games like Postal 2, where you can piss on people till they puke (!) or pour gasoline on civilians and throw matches at them. They may be offensive, but they're certainly not mature!

To a certain degree, that was the case with Phantasmagoria 1 and 2 as well. There was little need for all that gore - few GOOD horror films have so much graphic violence. And the sex scenes in P2 were just there to sell the game - seriously, did anyone find them remotely erotic? They were more Playboy channel than Hellraiser and never felt anywhere near as kinky as they were supposed to be (but then again, not even Kubrick managed to convey kinkyness in the Eyes Wide Shut orgy).

The only games I've played that had mature themes - and needed them to work - are probably Gabriel Knight 2 and Blade Runner. Gabe used them to give the characters depth, in Blade Runner it was part of the dark atmosphere. And, oh yes, I nearly forgot, Dreamweb - probably the most underrated adventure game ever. The way it used sex, and the way it contrasted it with violence - amazing. The assassination of the rock star, I'll never forget that scene. One of the darkest games I've ever played. And one of the most interesting.

Does a game containing sex, violence and bad language need to be offensive? Not necessarily, if handled tastefully, but it can also be used as a strong artistic effect. Just see the films of David Lynch or Martin Scorsese.

By the way, the content ratings for Shadowplay will probably be:

Bad Language - Strong (possibly frequent)
Sex - Sex scenes
Violence - Strong

I think it's important to ask yourself: "Does the game really need this? Would removing it detract in any way from the game?" but it's also important not to "dumb it down", so to speak. If you're making a serious game and you have people fucking (sorry, making love), then either show it (not necessarily explicitly) or cut away. Don't show me a damn fireplace or the curtains blowing in the wind. The same thing with nudity in general - show it or don't show it, just don't do the Hollywood thing - Austin Powers style - and show everything except the naughty parts. I'd much rather NOT see somebody naked than be painfully aware of the censorship. And please don't replace four letter words with less offensive ones. If the character would use those words, use them, otherwise rewrite the character.

I like some games that may be considered. Often I don't find them very offensive though. But I am aware, and I do appreciate that they use mature themes and speak to me as an adult, not as an American adolescent (you know, European teens, except Brits , are allowed to see nearly anything).

I suggest that we create a seperate, possibly sticky, thread similiar to the Background Blitz suggestion list: http://www.agsforums.com/yabb/index.php?board=9;action=display;threadid=4466

Anybody who wants to can post a topic suggestion, and, if they feel like it, volunteer to host that discussion. Or you can volunteer to host a discussion suggested by others.
Topics that nobody care enough about to host will just be dropped. As for how to choose next week's topic, I think democracy is the easy but boring way - I'm afraid that it'll just lead to uncontroversial subjects. I'd much rather see whoever hosts that weeks discussion choose the topic - a topic they really care about - and then write a short, preferably provocative, essay on it to get the debate started.

So instead of choosing next week's topic, we should choose (or rather, let people sign up to be) next week's host.

Bionic Bill: I'm glad to hear that. Maybe we should compile a list of possible topics though, just like they do for the Background Blitz competition?

GinnyW: An example from Police Quest 1:

Spoiler

After following a car containing a possibly armed suspect for a while with the sirens turned on, he finally pulls over. You radio for backup (otherwise you'll be shot while trying to arrest him). While waiting, you look at his licence plates and contact dispatch for an ID. You backup arrives. You load your gun (or check that it's loaded), exit the car and draw the gun. You command the suspect (by text parser) to "get out". As he starts walking towards you, you tell him "lie down". You walk up to him, cuff him and search him, finding, among other possessions, a firearm. You read him his rights. You ask him to "stand", and put him in the back seat of the car. Before leaving the scene, you open the trunk of his car using his keys, finding some drugs. You also check the interior of the car and discover a number of fake IDs along with a little black book in his glove compartment. Your backup says he'll take care of the evidence while you drive the suspect to jail.

[close]

As you see, there's not a single puzzle in the whole scene. You just follow proper police procedure.

Can it be done outside the realm of job simulation? Certainly. I think The Dig is an excellent example (ok, so the ARE astronauts, but they're not doing typical astronaut things). It's all about being in a situation and doing whatever would be natural under those conditions. You're stuck on a planet. What are the natural things to do? Explore, try to interact with the strange alien machines you find. Try to help your comrades when they get in trouble. See?
The exact opposite of this are those games where you're just bumbling your way through, only knowing that you did something right because an animation plays or because new locations are opened up. Larry 2 is probably the worst example of such a game (I know, lots of people love it, I don't).

First of all, it's great to see the game theory discussion thread started. I've been looking forward to this since before Mittens.

Secondly, some feedback to Bionic Bill, which, I hope, will influence next weeks topic: We need to get WAY more specific. This weeks thread might be a good way to find topics for future discussions, but as a debate it's not very rewarding. I've nearly given up on replying to it, since so many sub-topics have been brought up. Everything from bad voice acting to whether we should bring back the text parser (imho, the latter would be a good example of a well defined and limited subject for a discussion). What's wrong with adventure games and what should be done about it might as well be the title of a years worth of game theory discussions.

However, let me add my two cents to the "puzzles - do we need them?" discussion:

Two of my favorite games, mostly for sentimental reasons,  are the first two Police Quests. But for now, let's focus on PQ1. Is there a single puzzle in the game? Well, that depends on your definition of "puzzle". For most of the game you just do what you are told, and do your job following proper police procedure (not too difficult when you actually have the manual ). I can only recall two situations in the game that demanded any kind of thought process - finding enough proof to get a no bail warrant and reporting back to your boss from the hotel. But did any of this make the game too easy or detract from the immersion? Hell no, I really felt like I was a cop peforming my duties, doing things by the book. I always knew what to do next, and usually how to do it, BECAUSE IT MADE PERFECT, LOGICAL SENSE WITHIN THE SITUATION!

The major problem with adventure game plots and settings seems to be the lack of natural gameplay potential - interation that flows from within the plot, the characters and the setting. PQ is a game about a cop - what do cops do? Wouldn't it be cool to play a cop? Sure it would! Space Quest is a game about a janitor on a space ship - what do janitors do? Nah, that's too boring, let's throw him into some wild adventures. See where I'm going?

Another example, from the designer of Police Quest nonetheless, is Codename: Iceman. The player character is a spy - sounds cool, right? - what do spies do? Well, for one they don't travel across the Atlantic in a nuclear submarine, torpedoing enemy ships along the way, risking international conflict, just to infiltrate a country where - get this - a fellow spy, who you met in the Caribbean just before you mission - has been all along! What's that you're saying? The guy is a submarine captain too? Oh, I see. What do submarine captains do? They certainly DON'T do metal shop work at the lathe, trying to repair diving equipment. Nor do they play dice with one of their crew people for a piece of advanced technology essential for the mission a world peace. These are absurd tasks, that have little to do with the actual scope of the man's mission.

Instead of coming up with weird puzzles and trying to fit them into your narrative, try to come up with with game concepts that are full of cool tasks which lends themselves to interaction. Even a cleaning lady game where you have to find the right product to get the blood stains off the bathroom floor is more fun than rubber duckies

Great topic, but unfortunately I only have a few minutes to reply.

I prefer playing female characters - in adventures as well as in any other genre. If you can choose your (or rather, your character's ) gender, I always choose female. Usually because I find it easier to relate to females than to the weird macho representations of men in computer games. Maybe that's just my gay side talking.

But I'm not sure there have been any really memorable female player characters in adventure games - April Ryan didn't do much for me, nor did Laura Bow. I hope to create an original female player character myself with Dinah in Shadowplay. She's certainly very different from any classical female stereotype.

Oh yes, the cat hair puzzle once again. Jane is probably going to hell for that one Thanks for the link, for some reason I hadn't read that very amusing article before.

And thanks for elaborating on the Grace vs. Gabriel question. I see now how my main character Dinah Burroughs is very different from Grace - it's just that the tasks she performs are more similar to Grace's than Gabe's. But she certainly isn't the voice of reason as Grace was. Maybe because she's more personally involved in the mystery, just like Gabe was in GK1. I think it'll work out fine after all.

Once again, thanks for your input!

Thank you so much for all your replies. Your response showed me that I'm heading in the right direction with Shadowplay.

I was quite surprised that GK1 turned out to be so popular. I suppose the voodoo plot just didn't do a lot for me. But I see how the combination of an external mystery and Gabriel's family history made the drama stronger than the other games. Shadowplay will have a quite dark atmosphere and visual style, much more similar to GK1 than GK3 (and parts of GK2). Maybe even a touch darker - parts of the plot made me really depressed when I wrote them, others are just very unsettling.

I'm glad that I'm not the only one who hated the action ending of GK3. I guarantee that there won't be a single action sequence in Shadowplay (saves me a lot of scripting as well ). although there are a couple of timed puzzles.

Could somebody please elaborate on the Gabriel/Grace question? Is it their personalities or the tasks they perform that make you prefer Gabe? Do you think Grace should be more developed? I'm asking because my player character is a female and more like Grace than Gabriel in many ways.

I loved the Le Serpent Rouge puzzle as well, and I'm really trying to implement something similar in Shadowplay, mainly a number of puzzles where you scrutinize film clips on the editing table and with computer aid. But it will be a series of puzzles rather than a single big one. The interface and the tasks you perform are rather similar to Sidney though.

Read Eric's article on Adventure Games commiting suicide.

I've probably read the article, but I'm not sure. Where could I find it?

Thanks for all your feedback! I hope I won't disappoint you.

As you might know, I'm currently working on Shadowplay, a mystery game in the Gabriel Knight tradition (in my opinion the series is a genre of it's own, nobody else have even come close, although they've tried). And my target audience, aside from myself, is everyone else who loved the GK games.
This is a market survey of sorts, and I hope it won't be seen as an attempt to find the lowest common denominator. Shadowplay will always be a very personal and distinctive game, based on my own tastes and philosophies. I'm merely trying to tell if I'm on the right track as far as the GK audience goes, and maybe hoping to find some inspiration to improve on the game format.

EDIT: I should probably add that comments on the different technologies of the games aren't very interesting in this context. Shadowplay will be more or less similar to GK1 in interface and style of graphics.

1) Why do you like this series of games? What, in your opinion, sets it apart from other adventure games?

2) Which, if any, of the three games do you prefer? Why? What set it apart from the others?

3) Which, if any, of the three games did you least like? Why?

4) Did you prefer playing as Gabriel or Grace in the last two games? Or maybe you liked it better when it was just Gabe?

5) Which parts of the games did you like/dislike? The conversations, the detective work (finding clues, comparing hairs/scales/fingerprints), museum visits, reading books or database entries, sneaking around where you're not supposed to, action sequences (ending of GK2 and 3, the African tomb in GK1), spying on people? Anything I forgot?

6) What were some of your favorite puzzles/tasks in the games? Why were they special?

7) What did you think of the atmosphere in the three games? Not scary enough, too scary, too silly, not enough humor? What about the violence, gore and sex? Too much, too little?

8) Any favorite characters in the games? Anyone you really hated? Were some characters too stereotypical or did you feel they were well developed? Too many or too few characters in any of the games? Or would you like to see more character interaction, beyond the interviews?

That's about all I can think of for now. If you have any other thoughts one what you would like or absolutely not like to see in a GK style game, feel free to express them. I hope you're up to providing some input - every single word will make Shadowplay a better game.

Love the character, but... To match the background you should give her some black contours. As it is now, she somewhat disappears because the background has those thick black lines while her details are very subtle.

But the style is great. I especially like the coat and the hair.

Another option for good quality sounds is to buy sound effect cds. The really good ones are often quite pricy, but their might be other ways to get them. My local library have lots of sound effect cds in their music collection, the same kind professional sound editors on movies and television use. They're especially good for ambient sounds (rain and thunder, a carnival, a sports arena, an indoor basketball game) as those are very difficult to record properly yourself because of microphone placement and equipment limitations.

As long as the character refuses to say it then it won't damage his image, on the contrary, but it might make a very brave macho player (no offence to anyone hehe) feel distant from the character. Then again, maybe not, or maybe he was already distant.

Or maybe he would learn the frustration of bottling up emotions because of shyness, lack of courage or whatever. I think interactive environments, where the intereaction is restricted by the limitations of the character, is a great medium for gaining insight into and respect for people different from yourself.

about your example from your game, I don't see much of a problem, since it's excuses, but it was unclear to me why the example limited the player. The only matter wa that the male sidekick found a good counter-reason each time. It's a humourous situation if the protagonist isn't gay, an if she is it might be interesting emotionally, if it's something that's hard for her to admit.

Yes, that was what I was trying to convey. She is indeed gay, but always comes up with some way to avoid the topic. It's sort-of inspired by personal experience, but I think it works really well dramatically as well, because her admitting it changes the dynamics of their relationship and deepens their friendship.

I'm interested in the example you thought of from MI, care to share it?

I don't remember it exactly. But it was quite similar to the fictitious example. If nobody else remembers it, maybe it was from some other game. I'm pretty sure it was a LucasArts game though.

Wow, this thread really took off.

Too much to comment on, really, so I won't. And it shows me how we must narrow down the topics when we do the game theory discussions - although I agree that both are important, I think the two separate discussions about music and writing are confusing things - so maybe topics should be more specific. Anyway, we'll get into that after Mittens.

One thing that was brought up, which I think would make an interesting game theory discussion, is the gap between player and character - how the player character's personality might differ from the actual players. And how to deal with this within an interactive environment without compromising the characters or the story.

One case that comes to mind is, I think, from one of the Monkey Island games. But I'm not sure, so I'll write a fictitious example:

The main character is a coward, totally non-confrontational. He has to get past a bouncer at a club, and after some attempts at persuasion, the Bouncer says: "You want trouble?", and the player has a number of options, one being "Yeah, just come on, you big goon. I'm gonna kick your ass". But when you choose that option, the player character just says: "...uh, no."
Situations like this, limiting the player to replies suiting the character, are, in my opinion, important character defining moment. Especially in this example, as we see what could be interpreted as the characters real feelings, what he actually would say if he dared, as well as what actually comes out.

In my game, Shadowplay, I do something similar in a conversation, to reflect the issues of the player character:

Spoiler

Your male sidekick, who you've met during the game, asks the player character if she wants to go on a date with him. You get all kinds of excuses as options: You're too old for him, you don't think it's a good idea because you're working together, etc., and each time he counters with a good reason why it isn't a problem. Only when there are no excuses left, you are allowed to choose the final option, admitting to him, that you're actually gay.

[close]

I think limiting the interactivity, not for techinical reasons, but on purpose, is a major storytelling tool. But so is multiple paths, or at least multiple endings. Somebody mentioned the single ending of Syberia, and I agree, it would have been nice if the player actually made the choice for Kate. But seeing how much Kate had changed during the game, there really was no option for the character, she has nothing to return to. I actually think GK2 was more flawed in that respect, since it was a story about duality and following your animal nature. Gabe should at least have had the choice of running away with von Glower - like he had the choice of helping Malia, killing her, or doing nothing in GK1 (all of which led to "real" endings, not restart/restore/quit-screens) even though Jane Jensen marked out the "right" one by awarding more points.

Woohoo, I got Poser 5 yesterday. Played around with it some, and it's incredible, you can do almost anything with the new face morph room and the morph putty tool. You can even build custom face geometry (along with new textures) from photos of your friends. Can't wait to get this baby up and running and churn out some new walking views - although it means I'll have to redo my Shadowplay characters completely with the new models.

If you want passion, play Gabriel Knight 2. Gay melodrama at it's best. But seriously though, I agree completely that emotion is an underdeveloped part of games.
I think the major difference from books and movies to games is the interactivity. Although the player is still "the audience", she is also, in some strange way, the main character. So crying over the character's tragedy would be some sort of weird self-pity. I think tears in games must be connected to something or somebody else than the player character, the loss of a friend, or - if it is related to the character - it must be in a non-interactive context, usually the end cut-scene of the game. The endings of Gabriel Knight 3, Blade Runner and Syberia certainly brought tears to my eyes.

As for other emotions such as hate (and love?), I think this lack stems from weak writing. Characters in games tend to be stereotypes, and it's difficult to hate the "supervillain of the week" (after all, it's just his job ) when you feel no personal attachment to him or to whoever he kidnapped in the game intro, be it your girlfriend who you never actually met or somebody else.

In general: Unique, well defined characters, as well as daring to be more mature and emotional instead of turning everything into a joke, is probably the solution.

Spoiler

You're right, the front gate is well guarded. Maybe you should find another way in? Have you been in the lower left part of the underwater world? Isn't there something strange about the swimming patterns of that fish?

[close]

My closest friends are girls. But then again, I tend to fall in love with my friends after a while It usually wears off though. Seems to be part of the process.

I just played Dada an hour or so ago, and it inspired me immensely. I didn't have too much trouble with the puzzles, except "The Boatman's Call" (sorry, just had to make that Nick Cave reference), but I think it would work better without them, logical thinking seems to be the exact opposite of what the game is about. Although I see interesting perspectives in puzzles of association - solving puzzles by letting your mind wander, the monkey wrench puzzle of MI2 taken to it's extreme.

Anyhow, I'm not sure that I'm ready to add my two cents yet. I really just wanted to quote, and link to, Tristan Tzara's Dada manifesto. I think these paragraphs capture the game really well:

"Dada is a state of mind. That is why it transforms itself according to races and events. Dada applies itself to everything, and yet it is nothing, it is the point where the yes and the no and all the opposites meet, not solemnly in the castles of human philosophies, but very simply at street corners, like dogs and grasshoppers.

Like everything in life, Dada is useless.

Dada is without pretension, as life should be."

You can find the whole manifesto at http://www.english.upenn.edu/~jenglish/English104/tzara.html