Messages

Actually, your response reinforces my point.  You thought that the ending you got was the proper ending to the game, which means that the information you collected up to that point worked to convince you that that was the way things should be -- and guess what -- it was the proper ending for that game. People need to look outside the box sometimes and realize that sometimes there is no 'right' ending, just different ones.  For you, the ending you received (based on what you discovered) was the right one.  For someone else playing that learned a few different things the ending they received was right for them.

If by "that game" you mean Babar's game, where he did not discover the entire truth and ended screwed up at the end, then yes, I guess it was the proper ending for that game, however I do not think it was the proper ending for the entire Mind's Eye game.

Once you have played through to one of the five endings, you really have no desire to go through it again, regardless of the other endings. It was just too much work.

I guess at some point they had to choose between making the game shorter, easier and less exhausting to replay (and people who are not interested in replaying it would have thought they got less for their bucks), and making the game long enough so people wouldn't feel cheated by the short lenght (and exhausting the people who wanted to replay the game). Maybe they should have opted for the first option. I guess it all come down to what we said on the first page: "We never said it would be easy to implement." But it sound like an interesting game, I'll have to try it.

-edit-
Removed a big chunk that was possibly off topic, or out of place or something.

Here's a bit of an interview with Warren Spector about Deus Ex's title.

Haskins: Tell us about the name Deus Ex. What is its origin and why is it an appropriate name for your game?

Warren: Okay, at risk of opening myself up to major ridicule from grammarians everywhere, I'll tell you where Deus Ex comes from. I wanted to play off the literary term "Deus Ex Machina," which is Latin for "God From a Machine." And, yes, I know that means the name of my game translates to "God From," and, yes, I know I'm ending the game name with a preposition, and yes, I know that's not grammatical so sue me!

Anyway, Deus Ex Machina goes back to ancient Greek and Roman Theatre where an actor portraying one of the gods would be lowered to the stage by means of machinery pulleys and ropes and such to provide resolution to the plot and to solve the problems of mere mortals. In literary criticism, it's come to mean a person or event in a work of fiction that comes out of nowhere other than the writer's fevered imagination to solve seemingly unsolvable plot problems. It's a device typically used by bad writers who've written themselves into corners.

If fits Deus Ex for a couple of reasons. First of all, there are several forces in the game who aspire to God-like powers or actually end up having them. But it also refers to the fact that so many computer game plots are so hopelessly lame. We're all still trying to figure out how to tell stories in this relatively new medium we're no more sophisticated in the use of the tools of our medium than the Greeks and Romans were in theirs.

We always seem to resort to brute force, Deus Ex Machina storytelling and I liked the kind of self-referential, we're-doing-the-best-we-can-even-when-we-suck aspect of the title.

Finally, isn't the computer you're playing the game on just a God-in-the-Machine, in a sense? Deus Ex just worked for me on every level except pronouncability. And, by the way, it's pronounced "Day-us-Ex," not "Do Sex!"

Plus the game had a bunch of references with the Ancient Greek mythology, and one of the ending was a Deus Ex Machina, litteraly.

Personally I thought it fitted perfectly to the game. My only complain is the tricky pronounciation. As for the "Machina", it wouldn't have made it any easier to pronounce for one, and "Deus Ex" sound better for a game's name than "Deus Ex Machina". Deus Ex Machina has simply too many syllables for an action game.

If you're looking for an excellent and free anti-virus, Avast! is for you. The only problem I can find it is the scanning speed which is insanely slow.

However if you are willing pay for the best anti-virus out there, Kaspersky, with its updates every 3-4 hours and its incredibly fast scanning speed is simply the best anti-virus there is.

I easily found 2 endings (other than the good ending) that were filled with emotions and were worth being seen in Reactor 09. But yes, for multiple endings to succeed, more than one must be satisfying to see, and more importantly, while the normal ending might not be the best ending, it must at least satisfy you enough to make you say "Phew, I finished that game.".

Not even Maniac Mansion, I have the feeling that I have missed an important part of the authors work but if I replay an adventure before I have forgotten the solutions I get bored, It's like reading a book for second time, I will discover things I didn't see the first time, sure, but I need to forget the details to enjoy really the second reading. And I have seen only a few films two times in a row, films like Memento or Mulholand Drive were it's impossible to get it all with only one viewing. (Ah, and Sim City, because I was already in love with Frank Miller's comic). But don't feel bad about me, I can live with this.

No judging. It's a matter of taste I guess. While I can't watch a movie twice in a row, for games I prefer to search for the multiple endings and not miss an important part of the authors work while I'm still in the zone and while the story is still fresh in my mind so I can skip long dialogues and go straight to the point.

Oh, and thanks for the Linus shout out!  (Which had multiple endings but only one true ending... But then again, as Tartalo mentioned, it's more of a logic/puzzle game at heart!)

Still, it had this "something rarely seen/unseen in AGS/completly new" element that I'd like to see more often. It's like the gravity gun of HL2 or the bullet time of Max Payne. Remove both of these elements to their respective games and what you get? Just another first/third person shooter.

But some other times the experiment is an uncooked mix of genres, and very few games have done it in a way that satisfies the fans of at least one of the reference genres.

I'd rather see someone fails miserably at implementing something new than someone releasing dozens of games with interchangable graphics, stories, characters and puzzles. You can always say that at least they tried.

One thing that I like a whole lot more than a good plot is the universe where the events take place. May it be a dark, grim and gritty city, filled with crime and corruption like Pleurghburg, Gotham City or Basin City, or a weird and hilarious universe like the Galaxy of Fantabulous Wonderment, or an unique post apocalyptic setting like Superhero League of Hoboken or Full Throttle... I like it when the place itself is interesting, complex and manage to catch my attention and make my imagination run loose, imagining stories or making me regret even more when no sequels are released to expand on these universes. I'd like to see more of those.

Another thing I'd like to see is less adventure games that I define like "good boy scout adventure games", those adventure games that try to have great graphics, great music, great plot, and nothing more, similar to all these FPS/RTS that fell into oblivion because they didn't introduced anything new to the genre. The formula "LucasArts/Sierra quality graphics/music + amazing story = instant success" was something to hope for back in the days, but since 2005, I can say there is an insane amount of games that managed to reach the same or higher level of quality than adventure games released back in the golden age. What I'd personally like to see, in a not so distant future, is having this formula changed to "LucasArts/Sierra quality graphics/music + amazing story + something rarely seen/unseen in AGS/completly new = instant success". More games like Linus Bruckman or GFW, more games that include elements from other genres, like platformer or RPG...

I haven't played yet an adventure with multiple endings and feel that as an added value.

Err... not even Reactor 09?

I value story over puzzles, and interesting, fleshed out characters slightly over the plot.

While story is important, puzzles are important too. There is a thin line between a game and an interactive movie. Games where it is obvious that all the emphasis was put into the plot instead of the puzzles and where all I do is walking around, talking with people to trigger events and solve puzzles that require absolutly no thinking at all are not what I would call adventure games.

Woo! I just received my copy!

*Puts on top of precariously long pile of games to play and comic books to read*

The most overused setting are definitivly fantasy, present days, space/scifi, and "The Simpsons Monkey Island did it!" piratey settings. Still, I'm quite pleased to see it's still possible to create great and often unique games in these settings. Pleurghburg, Cedric, Nelly Cootalot and AitGoFW come to my mind here.

For the most unique setting I too would say Grim Fandango and Full Throttle, but I'd also say Bad Mojo, Out Of Order and Superhero League of Hoboken.

M:I2 LeChuck's Revenge, by Chris Ushko.

One of the finest experiences ever commited to binary. Essentially a parody and remake of MI2, it was also a vehicle for movie references, musical monatges and gallons of hilarious.

The site is currently down, I'll see if I can find a mirror.

http://www.boxofmystery.com/games/mi2complete.html

The majority of good review magazines and sites select the reviewer for a game based on their preference for the genre at hand. So they don't end up with the 'I don't like this kind of game, but I'm gonna review it anyway!' situation.

That doesn't really help the situation at all. If they ask FPS gamers to review FPS, that simply make the reviews worth nothing for every persons who aren't fan of FPS. What gamers need to find is a game reviewer with the same tastes as them, who loved the same games for the same reasons, who hated the same games for the same reasons. At the extreme, a reviewer who have the same movies tastes and gaming background as them.

Or a magazine/website that ask several reviewers of different genres to review a single game. This way you get several opinions, more chance to have the game's flaw pointed by a reviewer who isn't caught in the hype, and more chance to have a reviewer with the same taste as you. Nobody need a bunch of so called expert who will all label the same games as "game of the year" and tell you it's your problem if you don't like the game.

A good reviewer, for yourself, must have the same opinion as you on a game, but before you bought and spend 30 hours on the game to find out. And who need unbiased reviewers who'll make you waste money and time playing games you won't like and missing games you'd like?

The thing is gamers have different tastes, and different way to judge and rate games, it is simply impossible to have an universal rating system for games on a scale from 1 to 100. Some may like good graphics and a big part of their score is to rate the graphics, while, for others, graphics do not count for anything in the balance, a complex scenario does. For some open ended gameplay is an awesome feature, there can't never have enough freedom and liberty in games and they judge badly games that are linear, for other people, open ended gameplay is a flaw...

What they'd need instead is long list of negative and positive aspect of the game, and simply let people make up their own opinion rather than force feed people a generic number and a bunch of "Game of the year!" award that can mean absolutly anything to everyone. Additionally that if all bad aspects are listed, you simply know what to expect and whether you should lower or increase your expectation when you will play the game.

Secondly, most of the time you have no idea who the heck is the guy who write the review. You have no idea if he's a fan of a specific genre and judge the game critically, if he's simply caught in the hype and miss a lot of the game's flaw, or if he's not a fan of it and judge it by his own experience. You also have no idea if the reviewers played the games that are must play in some genre, or what aspects interest the reviewer and what are their weight in the balance.

I simply find it better to have friends which I know the tastes, who know my taste, friends with which we discussed the good aspects and, mostly, the flaws of the games we loved or hated, and suggest each other games according to the aspects we loved in games. "If you loved/hated X in that game, then you'll probably love/hate this game.", it's simply better than people who just say "You must play this game it's the game of the year!", and get all fanboy on your butt when you think the game is average at best or when you point the flaws of the game.

I generally avoid these kinds of threads because listing your favorite games is so subjective and you always miss some, so I will list only a few of the many I have enjoyed (and the reasons why!).Ã,  Excuse me while I avoid some of the more obvious ones!

That's the problem, either you only list a few and miss some good games, either everyone goes overboard and list every games that are just on the limit of barely worth being played and it quickly turn into a never ending list of mediocre games.

Back before 2004 it wasn't really a problem, with 5 nominations and 1 winners in every AGS awards categories, you could easily download every award winners and give a look  at some of the most the nominated games, and you knew you would miss absolutly no games for that year. Pretty much in the same way you can visit Newgrounds once a year, and catch up with all the movies you missed by only checking the Top 50.

But since 2004, and particuliary last year, games reached an unprecedent level of quality, not only every nominated games are must play, but I get the feeling that only 5 nominations is not being enough because last year there were so many great games in competition.

If the maximum number of nomination for every categories isn't increased for the next AGS awards, maybe there should have a "recommended" kind of award for the next year, to nominate the games that did well in some categories, but couldn't make it to the nominations because these are limited to 5.

No Action Jackson - possibly the first complete ags game I ever played, this has stuck with me as one of the most positive experiences I've had with an amateur game.Ã,  It oozes 80's nostalgia like week-old Gouda, and that's a good thing!

Someone will have to remake that game one of those days. Of the 4 or 5 times I gave this game a try, on every try I fell on at least 4 different game crashing bugs that ruined the puzzle solving until finally I gave up trying this game.

Back on the issue, if everyone are to list every games they think are must play, why not also make a little effort to stay on topic and list your personal Top 5 AGS games? Your 5 favorites AGS games and how they marked you as a gamer and/or game creator?

This game goes straight in the folder of games I will cherish for the rest of my life.

Ohhhh, interesting idea, magintz.

My 5 favorites would be:
Pleurghburg Dark Ages. It's a game that made me say "Wow!" upon completion and that completly blew my mind away with its soundtrack, length and plot. While I had just gotten into AGS, Pleurghburg convinced me to stay.

KQ2VGA+. Even if it's Pleurghburg that made me stay, I wouldn't be here if I hadn't played and loved that game back in 2002. It's the game that made me come here and download every AGS games ever released back in those days.

Adventures in the Galaxy of Fantabulous Wonderment. There are games which don't leave already established trails but you remember them because their story, graphics and atmosphere are awe inspiring. There are games which blow your mind away because they introduce something you haven't experienced in a game or an adventure game before. And finally there are games whose story, graphics and atmosphere are awe inspiring and that introduce something new. AitGoFW is that kind of game.

Cedric and the Revolution. It's cute, fun and hilarious, like joy in a bottle. It's also a game that greatly inspired me as D&D player and scribbler of drawings full of cliché, unserious, black or white, big or small characters.

The 5th one is hard to pick as it seems like the next dozen of games are all equal and could fit the 5th one. But I think Trilby's Notes stand in front of the others just enough to be the 5th one.

As for the games I replayed, if I exclude the games I replayed because of multiple endings or deluxe editions, the only AGS games I replayed were Pleurghburg, KQ1VGA and Cedric and the Revolution just for sheer fun, 5 Days a Stranger and 7 Days a Skeptic for story recap and also sheer fun.

While I'd like to see this more often, I don't think multiple solutions for every puzzles can be done as it is hardly feasible. Most likely there will have multiple solutions for some puzzles, sometimes a chapter in the game won't be traditionnal puzzle solving but walking in and out of boxes and cages at your own pace, your own order and your own way, kinda like Indy and the Last Crusade or Hitman, but it is rather hard to do this for all puzzles, and eventually you will end on a puzzle that will leave you stumped. Plus it cannot be done with every games as it mostly rely on the type of story, atmosphere and gameplay the author aim for.

The best way I found to play an adventure game is with someone who passed through the game, or someone who is ready to play the game at the same time as me. This way if I get stuck, I can ask for subtle hints, ask if the puzzle make sense, ask if there is walking deads or pixel hunt, and my friend can do the same.

I wonder if this might actually be an argument in favor of in-game hint systems? Although I'm generally opposed to in-game hint systems, it seems like a well-designed system can monitor the player's progress and provide only information related to the tasks the player is trying to accomplish without spoiling too much of the rest of the game. Thoughts?

One possibility would be to include a Cousin Ted kind of character in game, like in Day of the Tentacle. If you are stumped and don't know what to do next, you can talk with Cousin Ted, tell him your problems and receive subtle guidance on what you should do next. But it would probably be a pain to implement correctly and test if it work.

Yes, but if it was supposed to made for text, maybe that was for a reason.

Because it was made in 1979-80?

Of course, like m0ds said, maybe you are just looking at the wrong place. If I were you I would also ask at the Adventure Gamers, Mix N Mojo forums, and possibly a few Zak communities. Maybe there you will find people interested in such project. And if you still can't find anyone, and since writing seems to be what you like, nothing prevent you from novelizing the entire game, for the experience, for yourself and for those who would be interested in a Zak novel.

Helm: Yes, my bad. Real bad choice for word here with "thus" and "weren't from Sierra or LucasArts" because it took both of these companies a few if not a lot of attempts until they started to follow the golden rules. It's what I should have said instead. Remaking adventure games which do not follow the golden rules. The golden rules which are still followed by most of us nowaday, and by this I mean those established by Ron Gilbert in his Why Adventure Games Suck article.

I guess it's a matter of case by case, there are a lot of games that followed those rules, Coktel Visions games, BASS, Simon the Sorceror, Discworld... all these are must play and rare are those who never heard of these. But there is also a lot of games, sometimes a lot of great games, with amazing plot, games that are little gems on their own, games which bring something new to the genre, games that are witty and which are either overlooked, less played or less appreciated because they are buried under a bunch of "Warning, walking deads" signs, or because they got uneasy or outright clumsy interface.

I've seen so many remakes or fangames projects attempts, successful or not, for Sierra games or LucasArts games: King's quest, Maniac Mansion, Space Quest, Quest For Glory, Police Quest, Loom, Monkey Island, Indy... you name it, I've seen it. And I wonder why nobody ever thought of remaking Rise of the Dragon? Seriously. To remove that annoying "one movement/one precious minute wasted" feature. I keep hearing great things about that game and its story, but I've never got real far in it because there's always that pesky bouncer at the bar that keep stealing my pistol.

Or Superhero League of Hoboken. This is easily the best adventure game I played last year. I was missing the awesomeness of SLH so much after I played it, that I had to stop playing AGS games for a little while, because anything else I played in the following days looked pale in comparison and I didn't want to spoil myself a few AGS games. How come there is no fan sequel for it?

Or Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. I heard about it countless of time, it seems to have some of the most, if not the most, witty, original and creative puzzles I ever heard of in an adventure game, the Babelfish puzzle, no tea, ">Go South -Are you sure?", yet I'd like to do a little bit more than make 8 steps after I get out of my house before the Vogons nuke the crap out of everything. What can you do with IF, which you couldn't do with a SCI interface, text parser and absolutly every line of text from the game? Would it be a sacrilege to remove a few gratuitous walking deads from that game, like that "Whoopsie, you forgot to pick the screwdriver in your house at the very begining of the game. Too bad. Sound like you will have to restart from the very begining."?

I'd be interested to know what about it you consider extremely flawed

I think he meant 2 things: For one, unlike any LucasArts games released after Zak, it was completly impossible to examine your surrounding, which ruin a bit of the humorous and parodic atmosphere you usually find in other LA games. And for two, this overall feel that you have absolutly no idea about what you need to do at the begining.

The game is separated into 2 phases. The first one being trials and errors and exploration: you think this is a traditionnal LA game, where you can't die or get stuck anywhere, and you mindlessly roam around, explore the various cities, think how to solve the puzzles, map the labyrinths, figure out how to win money, or escape the aliens' laboratory, but you accomplish nothing. You only examine how things work in Zak's universe. Once you figured how to overcome a few of the problems that will give you a lot of troubles later on, the second phase begins: traditionnal adventuring and puzzle solving, where most of us restart from scratch and where you finally solve puzzles and progress into the game and the story, without running out of money, dying, or forgetting to take a few additionnal tokens for the tram.

Personally I thought it was challenging without being frustrating. But if there are more flaws, I'd be interested to hear them too.

I like remakes, even if personally I'd rather if people remade less Sierra and LucasArts games to remake more underdogs adventures games, games with great story and introducing awesome concept, yet games that nobody ever played because weren't from Sierra or LucasArts, thus were filled with timed events, walking-deads, bad interfaces or illogical puzzles.

But Zak is perfect as it is, at the right dosage between playability and reward upon completing the game, between logical puzzle and good puzzle difficulty, between fun and challenge. Remaking a perfectly playable and enjoyable LucasArts game, just to add only this seems rather overkill to me.

But, I can understand the desire to hear less of my annoying voice as possible.  So I'll think about it.

Nah, it's just that I can at reading english but I'm not that good at listening at it.