What Does The Future Hold For 3D Myst-ery Games?

projection asks: "The media has started its feeding frenzy over RealMyst. However, a few people have pioneered this type of game and one company (Looking Glass) has shut its doors. Maybe now is the time to remember their lessons before we all get lost in marketing hype. That way, we'll get better games in this new genre instead of the same thing over again. (n.b. I'm vaguely classifying this genre as RT3D, non or minimum violence, where gameplay is primarily puzzles/exploration). What would make a real time 3D mystery game that's a big advance on what's out there (avoiding the classic better graphics is all we need trap)? What would make games like these more fun?" I've always been a fan of such games, but have been disheartedned because most of the current crop of 3D games are either strategy-based or shooters. With Looking Glass gone, who will be the company to come along and fill this void in the gaming industry?

" Thief (Looking Glass)
Pioneered stealth. Hiding. Avoiding enemies. The sound you and others make becomes really important. Unbearable tension. Really brought the first person shooter into the realm of mystery.

Nightfall (Altor)
Pioneered RT3D with the point and click cursor interface that 2D puzzle gamers were used to. Also, allowed construction in the environment (e.g. build a barricade or staircase using the hand). Physically modeled workaraounds to puzzles (if you can't figure out how a puzzle works, find a physical way around it). Pure RT3D puzzle/exploration game, with no combat (it IS possible!).

Trespasser (Dreamworks)
Robot arm like interface. OK, so the interface sucked, but you have to learn from the bad as well as the good, and with innovation comes risk.

What other games were significant?

Why do all this? Imagine taking the best parts of these games and using them to build the next generation. At a roundtable I once attended at GDC, a whole lot of us got round a table and griped about puzzle games (including some neat people, like the Monkey Island guys and the author of Leisure Suit Larry). The issues that came up were DETERMINISM (you replay the game, you get the same results), lack of IMPROVISATION (you solve the puzzle the way the designer said, or no way) and lack of FREEDOM (you can only go where a picture was rendered).

RT3D solves the freedom issue. You can now go anywhere if you can reach it (run, swim, climb..). Having true physics and AI solves the determinism problem - even slight changes in the way you play + rnd numbers affect the AI etc. Having a point and click physically modeled hand (one that can click a button or jam a wedge in a door) solves improvisation, because if a you don't get the designers puzzle strategy, you can work around it using anything you can think of. In addition, having real physics and AI that reacts to your presence (like the importance of being quiet in some places) would really help the immersiveness.

Am I missing anything?"

Comments

Adventure and Action games ARE different!

[Drakino]

One thing here, Adventure and Action games are 2 different and very distinct generas. Theif 1 and 2 were action games. So was System Shock 1 and 2. But Myst, Riven, Journeyman Project 1, 2, 3, Zork 1-9, and the Monkey Island series were all adventure games. There is a big difference, and have different followers.

Looking Glass went under due to reasons that could happen to anyone. It wasn't because of the type of game they made, it was due to their business troubles.

don't forget Zork, dungeon, etc.

[jetson123]

With all the hoopla over the glitzy commercial games, most people forget that many of those games are functionally derivatives of much older games: Rogue, Zork, dungeon, xconquest, etc. I can't think of a single commercial genre that didn't start that way. Furthermore, having played both, I think the gameplay on the older, less glitzy games is still better than on most of the current graphics-rich commercial stuff.

And I think that may be a clue as to where to start developing more interesting games. If you are going to spend a lot of time on fancy graphics, you aren't going to be able to experiment with good gameplay; at best, you can tinker around the edges. Those older games also got tuned because lots of people were using them and lots of people had access to the source.

So, keep the graphics minimal, experiment, and share. You can still dumb it down and make it look pretty for the mass market later.

A bit excessive...

[laborit]

Having a point and click physically modeled hand (one that can click a button or jam a wedge in a door) solves improvisation, because if a you don't get the designers puzzle strategy, you can work around it using anything you can think of.

Sounds to me like real-time 3-D is the least of your problems there. Even producing an accurate physics model is only a small step towards the goal of complete freedom of action. What this describes is nothing less than a world where the consequences of any action can be reasonably predicted, where NPCs have not just preprogrammed responses but full personalities and convincing AIs, and where the game knows the properties and uses of each and every item in the environment. RT3D games could give a better illusion of allowing free improvisation, if the creators are clever and the players are willing to stay within certain boundaries. But thinking these games cab offer the same kind of freedom as real life (where I could, this moment, stop reading /., take the case off my computer and wear it like a hat, and get on a plane for Chicago) is not reasonable.

Ironically, such goals migh cause games to look substantially worse... designers would have to do away with background scenery, costumes, complex weapons, and anything else they couldn't describe completely down to a nuts-and-bolts level (what does the wiring inside a BFG look like? Is the fuel for the flamethrower poisonous?). They'd have to limit characters' abilities severely, in order to stave off unforseen consequences.

- Michael Cohn

News at 11: Game Designer cracks...

[sprayNwipe]

It seems you are only focusing on two genres, and then saying "hey! I like myst! all the other games I know are genre a's and genre b's"

While the adventure genre is a lot quieter than it used to be, there have still been some good games out, and still some coming (Grim Fandango and Monkey Island 4, respectively).

On a side tangent, saying "There are too many FPS's and RTS's, lets make more Adventure games" *isn't* the way to go! That'll just lead us to a point where we'll say "There are too many adventure games, we need more (neglected genre no 17)".

What game designers (and to a greater extent, publishers) should do is make games that *don't* fit into genres, that are unique and aren't following a game model already paved out by id/blizzard/lucasarts. As someone working in the gaming industry, the most frustrating thing for me is seeing publishers sticking to genre games and not taking risks making *new* games. Will Wright with "The Sims" is a great example - he had to literally fight all the way for *seven years* just to get the game made!

Before the mid-90's, a first-person gun game would be called "a doom clone", and would be marked down for that in a review. Now, thanks to the lack of innovation being allowed by publishers (and to a degree developers), the same game is called a game in the "FPS genre", and usually boosted thanks to the not-so-subtle pushing of games on reviewers by publishers.

The main publisher/developer that doesn't do this is surprisingly Sega, and they are reaping the rewards because of it! Innovative non-genre games like Crazy Taxi, Seaman, and Jet Set Radio have made gamers wake up to the life outside FPS's and RTS's

Hopefully, genre domination will change - Things like the LithTech/Real networks deal ( http://www.lithtech.com ) and Auran Jet ( http://www.auranjet.com (disclaimer - I'm a designer at Auran Games) ) should allow the unjaded garage developer with the cool game concept to come out with genre-breaking ideas, and get them out to a large audience. Hopefully then, publishers will let developers make risky games.

And that's the end of my rant. ;p

sprayNwipe
-=-=-=-=-=-

And just to get this off my chest - *never* use Trespasser as an example of a good game. Even Daikatana is better than that abysmal slide-show, interface-deficient, crate-stacking-with-real-physics game. See http://www.oldmanmurray.com/longreviews/trespasser .shtml

3D Graphics no substitute for 3D Characters

[jacks0n]

It ought to go w/o saying that 3D Graphics is no substitute for 3D Characters. I'd be happy to play 2D games for the rest of my life if all characters are well developed. Give me Sam and Max any day over Duke Nukem. With this 'build it bigger and better' attitute, a game of (2D) Monopoly (which is still sold in an analog form) would weigh more than a tank and occupy a floor of your house.

Better RT3D

[meckardt]

The biggest problem I see with even the best of such games is the lack of alternatives. Yes, Myst and Riven and others are great alternatives to the Quake style shoot-em-ups, but invariably the player has to solve ALL of the puzzles more or less sequentially to complete the game.

What I would like to see is a game where there were multiple, mutually exclusive paths that might be taken to successfully to a conclusion. And if there was a certain randomness in the game that would make one path or another easier to find each time the game is played, so much the better.

Gonzo

Why do we WANT these kinds of games?

[vertical-limit]

Face it -- Myst sucked! Who wants to run around a island and click on random stuff to try to solve its so-called "puzzles"? There wasn't a plot or any guns or anything! And where was the multiplayer mode?

This growing trend of "puzzle" and "adventure" games is really starting to disturb me. What's happened to all the first-person shooters -- classic games like DOOM, Quake, or Unreal? First-person shooters are real games; they're the only ones that are actually training our kids to become valiant soldiers. I don't see anyone practicing their aim by playing Monkey Island.

What happens when Janet Reno decides to take all our guns away? Are we going to let her get away with, because our kids were too busy playing garbage like Riven? No! We need to fight back. We need to give our children the training they need to fight in the real world. If kids can't learn to solve their problems with violence, how will be able to defend our rights?

Enough with this "mystery game" crap. Bring back the first-person shooter!

The ultimate RT3D experience

[b1t r0t]

Coming soon to a mega-store near you: Real Life!

DRIVE! to work every day!
WORK! at a boring job five days a week!
SHOP! for food and other useful items!
COMBAT! a house full of roaches!
HAVE SEX! with your .PNG collection!

"The frame rate on this game kicks total ass! But I can't find the railgun anywhere!" - Geta Halflifer
"Wow, look at those shading effects! If only Lara Croft's butt could be rendered with this kind of technology!" - D. Ruling Fanboy
"Unlike Daikatana, the AI kicks ass in this game! If you get pulled over for speeding too many times, the cops really take you to jail! - S. Racer
"Ook! Ook, ook, oooooook!" - The Librarian

Real Life The Ultimate Real Time 3D Experience! And it's cheat-proof, too!