Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Future Of Adventure Games Discussed

Posted by simoniker on from the oft-trodden-path dept.

Thanks to AdventureGamers.com for the first part of their continuing feature article discussing what the future holds for the adventure game as a genre. The author shrewdly points out: "The death of adventure games is a topic that's been... well, done to death", and goes on to muse: "We can restlessly theorize about the genre's supposed 'death' forever, but it won't really get us anywhere. Instead, we need to take a closer look at the stuff (adventure) games are made of." He then points out: "Syberia or Jak & Daxter - ask anyone on the forums which one is the adventure game and everyone will reply the former. It's a no-brainer. However, things get difficult when you try to define exactly why Syberia is the adventure game." It's then claimed that "...the most visible characteristic of adventure games is that they offer a departure from action-and-reaction gameplay and manual dexterity" - but do games in this genre still appeal?

67 comments

  1. aha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Will of warrior! Primary! Yo!

  2. Sequel Mania by robbway · · Score: -1, Troll

    Final Fantasy is up to number XI, and they've gotten two tactics games out, and a sequel to X. Sounds dead to me! Can you smell the sarcasm? Genres never die, they just fade into hobbyists.

    1. Re:Sequel Mania by ElleyKitten · · Score: 1

      Final Fantasy isn't adventure, it's role-playing. Myst is adventure. Adventure just means that the primary focus of the game is exploring and puzzle solving. Role-playing is where storytelling is the main focus.

      --
      "What is Internet Explorer 7? Are you saying we can't access the normal internet?" - I love tech support. Really.
    2. Re:Sequel Mania by robbway · · Score: 4, Insightful

      RPGs are a sub-genre of Adventure games. The article, though well written, seems to be a "fluff" article to just generate a thesis and support it with points. And it does it well. It's still a good read, fluff or not. I think it presents us with a trip down nostalgia lane and points out that old game styles are often abandoned for newer "formulas" because a great game that doesn't sell well is still a commercial flop. It's a shame, really, since I spent a lot of time on King's Quest.

    3. Re:Sequel Mania by Ceyan · · Score: 1

      Ummmm... no. Adventure games were spawned from RPGs. RPGs have been around for a very long time.

    4. Re:Sequel Mania by FlipmodePlaya · · Score: 1

      The series has more games than that, too. Mystic Quest isn't usually considered an FF game, since its so much of a departure from the series, but it does share the name. There were three (?) GB FF 'Adventure' games, as well. They were, as I remember, much like Zelda 2. An adventure game with RPG elements like experience building. Pretty much an action-RPG.

    5. Re:Sequel Mania by The_Rift · · Score: 1

      Uhm no, adventure games were spawned from text adventures, which have been around almost as long as computers.

    6. Re:Sequel Mania by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 1

      There were three (?) GB FF 'Adventure' games, as well. They were, as I remember, much like Zelda 2. An adventure game with RPG elements like experience building. Pretty much an action-RPG.

      Those games were originally part of the SaGa line, renamed for US release to capitalize on the success of the NES/SNES FF games. The Mystic Quest game was originally going to be a North America-only release which was severely dumbed down from the rest of the line, but was eventually released in Japan anyway because the Japanese audience thought they were missing out on something.

      The primary difference between adventure and RPG games is that adventure games don't usually involve character building. Almost everything descends from text adventures simply because text adventures were among the first games developed. However, graphical adventures show a fairly obvious direct line back to text adventures, as they were originally little more than text adventures with pictures. Then along came Myst and the Lucas Arts and Sierra games. Next came a handful of 3D games that convinced everyone that the genre was no longer profitable, when in reality they simply moved to 3D before everyone was really ready to move on. Or maybe they simply spent too much money on their last few 2D games, too, and over-estimated the market in a time when FPS and RTS were taking over the market.

      I'm not sure how well the Myst series has done, but I'd imagine well enough, since they keep releasing sequels. RPGs and Adventure games, though, have only a small amount of crossover in their audiences, so the continued success of RPGs, especially on consoles, where they never really faltered, doesn't apply to adventure games. Then again, the RPG on computers was all but dead outside of MMO games until Baldur's Gate came along.

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
    7. Re:Sequel Mania by king-manic · · Score: 1

      RPG's have exsisted for as long as adventure games. RPG's are spawned fromt he table top RPG's. Adventure games decent from more a novel/story telling lineage.

      If your talking about purly genre, then RPG's shoudl be the super set because table top RPG's predate Adventure games and are currently a larger catagory.

      It's be more correct to say RPg's are a genre and Adventure is a genre.

      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
    8. Re:Sequel Mania by Ceyan · · Score: 1

      RPGs have been around for a LONG TIME. People have been playing various forms of RPGs for centuries. Those text adventure games were what? The first attempt at RPGs on a computer.

    9. Re:Sequel Mania by rpresser · · Score: 1

      Far from it. The first text adventure game arose as an homage to Mammoth Cave, KY. For years it was merely a description of the caves. There is only one character. There is damn near no dialogue. There is no "combat" as RPGs think of it. It's half about the puzzles, and half about the incredible descriptions.

      People may have been playing various forms of RPGs for centuries; but other people have been ignoring RPGs for centuries because they are boring.

    10. Re:Sequel Mania by king-manic · · Score: 1

      Thats very subjective. Adventure games are ussually endless tedious fetch quests. Or a few random one off puzzles. Hardly innovative. We remember the good ones but there were so many bad ones. For each Siberia or Space Quest 1-3 we get four lame onse like space quest 5+ or any of the series beyong 4. It seems 4 is the magic number in which a adventure games starts to suck.

      Adventure games were the FPS of the past, numerously cloned cash grabs.

      I don't miss them.

      --
      "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
    11. Re:Sequel Mania by Wildfire+Darkstar · · Score: 1

      Final Fantasy Mystic Quest was designed as an entry-level RPG, primarily for the American and European market, back in the days when console RPGs were an extremely small (almost insignificant) portion of the US market. The game reflects this, too, and, aside from a rather spectacular soundtrack, is little more than an RPG-lite.

      As for the Game Boy games, there were four titles released in the US under the Final Fantasy banner, but these were all seperate Japanese games/series, retitled to take advantage of the FF name. The Final Fantasy Legend series (there were three of them) were entitled SaGa in Japan, and later had iterations on the Super Famicom/SNES (the three Romancing SaGas, none of which were released outside of Japan), the Playstation (the two SaGa Frontier games), and one on the PS2 (Unlimited SaGa). These were blisteringly hard RPGs (especially for the console market at the time), and stylistically quite a bit different from the FF series proper.

      There was also Final Fantasy Adventure, another retitled US Game Boy game. This was originally Seiken Densetsu in Japan ("Legend of the Holy Sword"), and later entries in the series (on the SNES and Playstation) were released as part of the Mana series (Secret of Mana and Legend of Mana, specifically). This was your basic console adventure/action-RPG game in what was basically a Zelda mould, albeit with more RPG elements (experience-based levels, for instance). Actually, a complete overhaul/remake of this original game was just released for the Game Boy Advance, under the US title Sword of Mana.

      All things considered, and excusing the opportunism of Square's American branch in the early 1990s, the Final Fantasy series is fairly straightforward, particularly for a series that's been going on for so long. Compare it to, say, the Might and Magic series, with its multiple spin-offs and derivations, or the Mega Man games, which have spun wildly out of the control, with an almost obscene numbers of sub-series and so forth.

      --
      Sean Daugherty "I have walked in Eternity -- and Eternity weeps."
  3. Adventure is not a True Genre by illuminata · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In the 2D console days, most side-scrolling games could be considered an adventure game. Once the PC gained popularity, most of your point and click games, like Myst, were classified as adventure.

    Now, the adventure genre disintegrated into various other genres. Most titles could be considered adventurous, whether they be first-person, third-person, side-scrolling, RPG, point and click, etc. I don't think that the adventure genre should really be considered a genre in which you classify games at all, because the term adventure covers so much ground. In fact, I would even go as far to say that past games shouldn't have been called adventure games, either.

    --


    Until Slashdot fixes the funny modifier, use insightful or interesting. The poster knows your intentions.
    1. Re:Adventure is not a True Genre by scabb · · Score: 4, Informative

      Just because the genre has the word "adventure" in it, that doesn't mean that any game featuring some kind of adventure automatically joins the genre. In Super Mario World you play the role of Mario, but is that an RPG? 2D Side-scrolling console games were never considered adventures, unless they featured elements such as the ability to communicate with non-player characters, an inventory, some sort of story and puzzles to solve. More importantly, adventure games should not punish you for being a crappy gamer, as long as you can think you should be able to progress through them nicely. "Adventurous" games are not necessarily adventure games, nor do adventure games need to have huge elements of adventure in them.

    2. Re:Adventure is not a True Genre by illuminata · · Score: 1

      Super Mario World was not an RPG, but according to Moby Games (not to mention game magazines I've read in the past), it is considered an adventure game, despite not having the elements that you thought have to be in one.

      Perhaps you should go through some old game magazines or browse around the internetnet to see what the mainstream consider to be adventure games? Then, you might see what I'm talking about.

      --


      Until Slashdot fixes the funny modifier, use insightful or interesting. The poster knows your intentions.
    3. Re:Adventure is not a True Genre by illuminata · · Score: 1

      Internetnet... hmm, that's a new typo. Or is it? Ponder that!

      --


      Until Slashdot fixes the funny modifier, use insightful or interesting. The poster knows your intentions.
    4. Re:Adventure is not a True Genre by dk4 · · Score: 1

      Super Mario World is a 2D Platformer I would hazard a guess that most all 2D side scrollers are categorized as shooters or platformers.

    5. Re:Adventure is not a True Genre by slitfinger · · Score: 1

      The original Metroid was called an adventure by Nintendo. They originally labeled every game with a genre on the box.

      I can't find a working link to an image of the box but you can see it in google's thumbnails. Theres a picture of a guy swinging over something in the bottom left. Mario was in a different category though.

      http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&lr=&ie=ISO-8 859-1&q=metroid%20box&sa=N&tab=wi

    6. Re:Adventure is not a True Genre by Chasuk · · Score: 1

      I've played adventure games for over 20 years, and Super Mario World has NEVER been considered an adventure game by ANY fans of the genre, despite how Moby Games might mis-classify it.

      To seriously suggest otherwise is just (grossly misinformed) historical revisionism.

      For adventure game purists, only text adventure were originally considered adventure games, such as the games by Level 9 and Infocom. Graphic adventures (Sierra On-Line, Scott Adams, LucasArts) were later reluctantly admitted to the adventure game category, but the squawking was considerable.

      When Myst came out, the same argument started again. There were many who dismissed it just a slideshow with puzzles, sort of an adventure-game wannabe suitable only for soccer moms. The weight of public opinion and the slow death of the genre (as a popular form) contributed to its eventual acceptance.

      The debate over the inclusion of these then-latter-day adventure forms was as furious as the debate over the inclusion of Star Wars as a Science Fiction film (versus a fantasy film), for those who remember those loudly contentious Real Science Fiction Geeks versus Watered Down Fantasy Interlopers days.

      --
      Neopets - the best free game on the Int
    7. Re:Adventure is not a True Genre by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I know, this is Slashdot, but you didn't even read the first page or two of the article, did you? They go through a lot of hoops to try to come up with a coherent definition of the genre despite most fans of the genre being more capable of identifying the genre of the games by playing them than describing the genre.

      In the 2D console days, most side-scrolling games could be considered an adventure game.

      No, the Adventure genre actually takes it's name primarily from the console game Adventure, which is, of course, a text-based adventure game. Side-scrolling games tend to fall into either platformers or shooters. In the days of the NES, Nintendo liked to try to label the content of the games (Action, Adventure, etc), but they weren't very concerned with genre. The only time they really bowed to genre labels was when they couldn't easily use their descriptions.

      Once the PC gained popularity, most of your point and click games, like Myst, were classified as adventure.

      Myst wasn't classified as an adventure until quite a while after it's release, as it didn't fit the conventional genre label. It was considered a puzzle game when it was released.

      Now, the adventure genre disintegrated into various other genres.

      The adventure genre was (is) probably one of the stodgiest genres in terms of keeping out change. This has pretty much driven it to smaller publishers, as the larger publishers had a hard time selling titles that were either highly derivative or changed too much (3D especially). Other genres, as they've matured, have co-opted various features from adventure games, but this is inevitable as adventure games are more or less story-telling puzzle games, and most mature genres will eventually incorporate both strong stories and puzzles.

      Most titles could be considered adventurous, whether they be first-person, third-person, side-scrolling, RPG, point and click, etc. I don't think that the adventure genre should really be considered a genre in which you classify games at all, because the term adventure covers so much ground. In fact, I would even go as far to say that past games shouldn't have been called adventure games, either.

      Genres named after generic terms often have these kinds of problems, but frankly the problem is not with the genre, it is simply your lack of understanding of what the genre is. Adventure games don't even have to be adventurous at their core, and a game is not a part of the genre (or even incorporating genre elements) just because it contains adventure or is adventurous.

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
    8. Re:Adventure is not a True Genre by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      " "Adventurous" games are not necessarily adventure games, nor do adventure games need to have huge elements of adventure in them. "

      Do you even realize how stupid that sounds?

      Jax&Dex is an adventure game, its adventurous.

      Those damned rendered picture games where you play strange puzzles like Myst are (should be named) Puzzle/Exploration games.

      Come ON people....

  4. You can find them if you look by DrSkwid · · Score: 1

    My favourite Adventure game was 'Little Big Adventure' (or 'Relentless' as it was called in the US, such barbarism).

    An absolutely delightful game and Twinsen will always have a place in my heart. I bought the sequel but I'm stuck near the start!

    Twitch games will always be more popular because by the laws of the bell curve, the brutes will always outnumber the non-brutes.

    It is a genre where the small coding shop can still keep pace.

    Luckily they are games that can never die, Day of The Tentacle is still a class act.

    I can wait for the next gem, it will be worth it.

    --
    There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    1. Re:You can find them if you look by RaboKrabekian · · Score: 1

      Thank you! I remember playing a demo of this game ages ago. Over the last year or so I've been wracking my brain to figure out what it was called. Finally!

      Now if I can just figure out how to play it again...

      --
      "Moderate drinking can help prevent amputated limbs" -- Abigail Zuger, NYTimes, 12/31/02
    2. Re:You can find them if you look by tsa · · Score: 0

      That was a great game. I never finished it because I always died prematurely unfortunately.

      --

      -- Cheers!

  5. Kings Quest and Space Quest were the pinnacle! by SyncNine · · Score: 3, Informative

    Adventure games now have all become along the lines of Myst and such, there is very little interaction in them between multiple characters, and most of the games I've played lately that call themselves 'Adventure' games have less adventure in them than Grand Theft Auto! I'd say it's not that Adventure games don't exist or are dying, but that they've changed significantly from the older Adventure games. IMHO, the older games like Kings Quest and Space Quest, Bards Tale, Loom, Sam and Max, Day of the Tentacle, etc, are all substantially better games than the newer Adventure games like Ico (PS2), Syberia (XBOX), or Myst. The new games just seem to be lacking in story and interaction.. Space Quest and such had such great plots (even if they were tongue in cheek!) and at the very least were entertaining throughout, whereas Myst and such just don't seem gripping to me. But-- That's just my opinion, and I've been wrong before. sYn

    --
    To the darkened skies once more, and ever onward.
    1. Re:Kings Quest and Space Quest were the pinnacle! by ClioCJS · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Personally, I think *.quest were some of the worst games ever made in the history of the planet. I'd rather play Mary Kate & Ashley's Sweet 16 And Licensed To Drive!

      --
      -Clio
      Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
      Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
    2. Re:Kings Quest and Space Quest were the pinnacle! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I bet you would.

    3. Re:Kings Quest and Space Quest were the pinnacle! by Creepy · · Score: 1

      Interesting - that's probably why I liked The Longest Journey (sequel coming!) and disliked Syberia (also sequel coming). The Longest Journey wasn't perfect, but the game itself was by far the best adventure game I've played. My second favorite is probably Full Throttle (sequel shelved and probably cancelled, last I heard). All have lots of character interaction. I have yet to try Beyond Good and Evil, which is supposedly pretty good, so I don't have an opinion on that.

      I solved Myst so fast (like 11 hours including bathroom and food breaks) that I really didn't have enough time to form an opinion. Obsidian was my #2 quickest solve at about 12 hours (3 sittings of ~4 hours each), and everybody said the game was too hard - also myst-like without much interaction. Most other games like that I get too bored of to finish.

  6. Conclusion by acxr+is+wasted · · Score: 0, Redundant

    The adventure genre has dissipated... not that it's a bad thing. After all, it's not often that a whole genre grows so gigantic that it renders itself obsolete.

    --
    "Come on, let's go drink till we can't feel feelings anymore."
  7. This Line is why Adventure games are dead by *weasel · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But if you think I'm going to advocate the bastardization of adventure games through the inclusion of action elements, you are wrong.

    I nearly wrote a rant about how assinine a name 'Adventure' is for this genre that really means 'ass backwards dream logic'. But that's not the point.

    the point is, the absolute refusal of any genre, to accept a blend of good elements from other genres is the mark of death. If you refuse to accept new ideas - you will stagnate and die. It's that simple.

    The games that revitalize and create genres blur traditional boundaries. Diablo, Thief, Half-Life, Deus Ex, GTA -- they're great -games- regardless of what 'genre' you try to lump them into.

    Adventure games are dead because they weren't fun anymore: developers and purists refused to aknowledge that their genre -needs- a shot in the arm.

    The stories were no longer compelling, and the puzzles were overly ludicrous in the name of making them 'clever'.

    Most Adventure purists reviled at even the idea of 3d engines, with first person or chase cam views. I mean, a camera angle? Is your genre so incredibly fragile that changing the camera angle or rendering style is enough to destroy everything about it? christ.

    Adventure games as these people define them are better off dead. Any genre that refuses to aknowledge its own shortcomings does not merit anything more than a fringe, niche market.

    --
    // "Can't clowns and pirates just -try- to get along?"
    1. Re:This Line is why Adventure games are dead by NetDanzr · · Score: 1
      Any genre that refuses to aknowledge its own shortcomings does not merit anything more than a fringe, niche market.

      Not exactly true. I agree that adventure games are a niche genre, and that they most likely remain such in the near future. However, what you describe as shortcomings I see as features, and the main reason why I buy adventure games.

      Let's take your example, action in adventure games. There are already so many action games that if I want to play a nice, point-and-click game where it doesn't matter how bad my hand-eye coordination is (it is in fact so bad that I never finished games like Diablo), all I can get is adventure games. If they incorporated the "new ideas", the genre would be dead for me, and I'd end up replaying older titles and stop buying games altogether. As such, adventure publishers are doing the right thing by refusing to get their games tainted by outside influences: they are cattering to people like me and filling a void in the market. Maybe they'll never sell as many copies as big action games, adventures, in their pure form, are here to stay.

    2. Re:This Line is why Adventure games are dead by *weasel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm not saying they should incorporate running and gunning, or jump puzzles or any of that crap. The point was that 'action elements' are regarded as 'bastardization'. It's the mindset that anything that hasn't been done before in the 2d and text roots is anathema.

      And I only describe the shortcomings as being the -mass market acceptance- obstacles. If you dig that stuff, of course you see them as features. But the overwhelming majority of fans don't - and gaming isn't big enough for your fringe to garner attention from the mainstream developers, publishers, or press.

      As for the genre being dead for you... well I hate to break it to you - but it already is. Your threat to stop buying games altogether is fairly idle - as that is what most 'adventure' gamers already did.

      Being open to new ideas doesn't necessarily mean 'add twitch combat'. It means: be open to exploring new storytelling methods, new technology -- don't write off a game just because of a rendering engine or camera angle decision, and don't just stick to the conventions of the previous games.

      Aknowledging the genre's shortcomings doesn't mean 'add what currently popular games do'. it means: realize the 'puzzles' are ridiculous, the stories are repetitive, the character design is largely nonexistant, and the back-and-forth 'you can't do this now, you have to come back and do it later' 'design' is broken.

      Maybe adventure games as they were is all adventure gamers ever want -- and to that I say, good for you guys.

      But then don't keep wondering aloud where the new titles are, where the mainstream support is, where the new stories are, or where the fans all went. if you aren't doing that wondering, again, fine - i'm replying to the people that -are-. the people that regularly post articles like the one in question and make discussion threads asking 'why' adventure games went away.

      And i'm just letting them know -- when you close yourself off to new ideas, when you refuse to question tradition and convention, you -can't- innovate. and your old ideas in new clothing are just not continually appealing to the mass market.

      And the choices given the market reality is simply: innovate, or be comfortable in your niche.

      --
      // "Can't clowns and pirates just -try- to get along?"
    3. Re:This Line is why Adventure games are dead by NetDanzr · · Score: 1
      As for the genre being dead for you... well I hate to break it to you - but it already is. Your threat to stop buying games altogether is fairly idle - as that is what most 'adventure' gamers already did.

      Not true. First, adventure gaming is far from dead; in fact, it is becoming a second life. This year I played about a donez new adventure games. Some of the best included Dark Fall and Post Mortem, both of which were point-and-click puzzle orgies. The you have the traditional caqrtoonish 2D games, like Runaway: A Road Adventure. And for those who strive for some more classic entertainment, there's the excellent freeware Space Quest 0: Replicated and games from Tierra (a.k.a. AGD Interactive).

      As for "threatening" to not buy certain games, it was not a threat; I simply stated a fact. If there is a product I don't like, I won't buy it; fair and simple. Without commercial adventures out there, I'd actually save money, so in a sense I'm pretty neutral on whether adventures survive or not. However, I see absolutely no reason for me to change my tastes, only to be "progressive", or "go with the herd", as I like to call it.

    4. Re:This Line is why Adventure games are dead by *weasel · · Score: 1

      fine, 'threat' was a bad choice of words, and apparently there is a steady supply of adventure games that fit your preferences. and while adventure gaming isn't completely dead, the numbers of released and sold 'pure' adventure games is certainly a very small number compared to other genre's, and is down quite a bit from where it once was.

      similarly, i never suggested anyone change their tastes to fit with the mass market. I'm not saying you should change; I'm not saying any gamer should change.

      I am saying that what is considered 'feature' by the purists is not seen as a feature by the mass market. so while you should not change - if the fans of the genre want growth, want more attention, big-budget games, press, etc for the more 'pure' adventure games -- they will have to accept that changes are necessary.

      Not necessarily sweeping changes, but they need to be open to admitting there is room for improvement, to make the games more palatteable for a wider audience.

      Again if no-one wants to change again, that's great for you guys. But you just have to accept then, that you will not get more fans, press, developers, attention, etc. I'm not attacking, I'm answering.

      If growth is desired, then change is required. That's it. If you read anything more into it than that, then you're assuming things I never wrote.

      --
      // "Can't clowns and pirates just -try- to get along?"
    5. Re:This Line is why Adventure games are dead by Joe+Tie. · · Score: 1

      the point is, the absolute refusal of any genre, to accept a blend of good elements from other genres is the mark of death. If you refuse to accept new ideas - you will stagnate and die. It's that simple.

      While I do agree to some extent, I don't know if that applies to something which is in many ways defined by a lack of a certain element. Adding action elements to adventure games to make them better seems like trying to make someone a better vegitarian by adding meat to their salad.

      --
      Everything will be taken away from you.
    6. Re:This Line is why Adventure games are dead by scot4875 · · Score: 1

      Dunno. I challenge anyone to tell me that Quest for Glory/Hero's Quest wasn't an adventure game, despite all its swordplay and simple action elements. It was certainly one of my favorites in the genre.

      I'd say that the QG series was your vegetarian's 'salad' with croutons.

      --Jeremy

      --
      Jesus was a liberal
    7. Re:This Line is why Adventure games are dead by TRACK-YOUR-POSITION · · Score: 3, Insightful
      I nearly wrote a rant about how assinine a name 'Adventure' is for this genre that really means 'ass backwards dream logic'. But that's not the point.

      I'm disappointed--that's a pretty brilliant way to both define the category of games and exactly what's wrong with them. When an adventure game stops using Bizarro World logic and bases itself on clearly defined, predictable rules, it becomes a Puzzle game instead of an Adventure game. Which is why RPGs and action games with Adventure elements have taken a lot of the space that Adventure games once enjoyed--players want to explore new worlds with interesting stories, but they hate having the game designer's arbitrary whims inflicted upon them unpredictably at every turn.

    8. Re:This Line is why Adventure games are dead by TRACK-YOUR-POSITION · · Score: 1

      The question is, when computers become powerful enough that we can create non-arbitrary adventure games--the designer creates a world of characters controlled by realistic AIs and the story emerges from interaction between player and AI, will we still call such games Adventure games? Or will that genre be long dead by the time this happens?

  8. They are few and far apart by idvah · · Score: 1

    I know that "Beyond Good and Evil" is an adventure game, and a very good one at that.

    --
    -idvah-
  9. Adventures didn't die. They were killed. by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Monkey Island. A great point and click adventure series. Killed by the fourth installment wich added well a "different" way of doing things. Instead of moving your mouse around the screen hunting for pixels that would do something you now had to move a tiny character with the cursor keys to hunt for pixels that would do something. The reviewers loved it. Adventure reborn! An important thing to remember about reviewers is that they get PAID to play games. Where as buyers PAY to play. The game didn't sell and lucasarts adventures are no more.

    The Gabriel Knight series is another example. The first was a classic point and click and sold well. Sadly the developers caught the "full motion video" bug that was doing the rounds and number 2 was well not as good. By the time it was time for number 3 the FMV bug had died but a more virulent strain had sprung up called "3D". Even reviewers thought this Gabriel Knight 3 was not very good. The public avoided it like the plague.

    Broken Sword 1 & 2 were moderately succefull point & click adventures. Number 3 caught the 3D bug however and while it makes for a nice looking game you once again find yourselve controlling a character with sub-standard controls (no side stepping) in the hunt of pixels. Add some pointless Tombraider bits (pointless since there is no skill involved) and a bit of dragon lair and you got another adventure killer. Nice game but not an adventure as we know and love them.

    Is all hope lost? No. Funcom released a little gem called "The longest journey". In a great example that shows the value of reviews it was highly regarded by most game sites and mags and totally ignored by the buyers. Then something happened. Word of mouth got out that here was a classic point and click like in the olden days and slowly it started to sell becoming a moderate success.

    And here is the good bit. THEY ARE MAKING A SEQUEL. Oh yes. Working title "The longest journey. Static".

    Another new hopefull is syberia. Granted I thought it had a few to many empty screens but at least the interface worked. It is successfull enough for a sequel as well.

    Out of nowhere came also "Runaway a road adventure" not sure how this one did but it again is a classic point and click and a lot of fun to play even if the characters are horrible ripoffs from the broken sword series.

    So what of the future? Well it is hard to tell. With PC games becoming more of a niche the lure of consoles and a more arcade like adventure may proof unresistable. Broken sword has fallen to the unwashed hordes of the gamepad others may follow. However there will always be new and brave people who are willing to make the classic adventure. After all did not a group of volunteers make a classic "Space Quest" game? Even got the old ega graphics for that bit of nostalgia.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:Adventures didn't die. They were killed. by Joe+Tie. · · Score: 1

      Funcom released a little gem called "The longest journey".

      It's is a little off topic I know, but this post reminded me of something I've been wondering for a while. Has anyone played The Longest Journey in Linux with Wine or WineX? The demo seemed to work OK with a recent cvs build of WineX, but I'm a bit nervous about buying such a long game with no word as to whether I'll be able to finish it or not.

      --
      Everything will be taken away from you.
  10. Puzzle games by smothra · · Score: 1

    I have always thought that adventure games didn't die, they just got eaten up by other genres. There are plenty of games, especially in the console world, that involve solving complicated environment puzzles. It's just that puzzles by themselves can't support a whole game.

    I just finished Mysterious Journey II, a child of the Myth school, and found while the puzzles were generally interesting and about the right difficulty, they actually interfered with the story instead of complementing it. Puzzle games are always weirdly disjointed in that way in my opinion. Any tension (you must get off the exploding space station!) is destroyed after you spend 45 minutes manipulating a cryptic set of levers and buttons to open the airlock. I guess the danger wasn't so imminent after all. (Who the hell designed that system anyway? That's not OSHA compliant). The same thing can happen in FPS games, but it's less frequent. The fact that you also get to run around and shoot things in addition to finding the right sequence of buttons also helps mitigate the problem.

    I don't think adventure gaming is dead, I just think it doesn't stand on it's own as a genre anymore. Adventure game puzzles are all over the place, in RPG games, in Shooters, in Platformers. And they are still fun.

    --
    Look ma, no tpyos^H^H^H^H^H^H . . . oh crap.
    1. Re:Puzzle games by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Myst is of the school of "The 7th guest". This had a story but in order to progress you had to solve puzzles. These puzzles had little today with the story but were classic braintwisters. Simple things like moving pieces on chessboard or answering riddles.

      The other style of adventure is the Sierra or Lucasarts adventure. Here the puzzles are usually based in items you collected and combinging them with other items to move along. Think MacGuyver. For instance in the recent adventure "Runaway a road adventure" you have problem. You need to convince some killers that your love intrest is in another bed. How? Well there is a card with her name on it at the bottom of the bed and an empty bed next to it. So locate some cushions a dummy head a wig and a sheet and you got a nice target. Now to do the medical chart. You found a marker pen but it is dry. You also found some alcohol and a syringe. Hmmm, can you figure out what to do next? Probably. Do you like figuring it out or do you go, why don't I just shoot the killers?

      Some of use like adventures and puzzles like this. Some like myst style puzzels. You like patformers and rpgs en shooters with a few puzzles. Genre mixing doesn't work for everyone. Adventure gaming isn't dead but people sure keep trying to kill it.

      --

      MMO Quests are like orgasms:

      You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    2. Re:Puzzle games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Myst is not a puzzle game like 7th Guest. It has a very involved story and every puzzle is well integrated in the story line. There are 3 full length books on the subject all on the history of the D'ni. You will not find that in the 7th Guest. So don't confuse the two.

  11. PC vs Console by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1
    I think the difference here is between pc and console. I know mario world and as a pc player I can't see who would call it an adventure. I would classify it as a platform game.

    Of course consoles never had pc styled adventures.

    To make it clear when pc players talk of adventures they mean games like Monkey Island 1-3, Gabriel Knight Sins of the father, King Quest series, Sam & Max and so on.

    So the original post is true from a console perspective. The response is true from a pc perspective.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:PC vs Console by illuminata · · Score: 0

      Well, I would say that this confusion of what exactly makes a game an adventure game further proves that the adventure classification shouldn't be used.

      --


      Until Slashdot fixes the funny modifier, use insightful or interesting. The poster knows your intentions.
    2. Re:PC vs Console by scabb · · Score: 1
      This just seems to be a problem that you have in terms of the name not being the best indication of what the genre is all about. There is no real word to describe the types of games that I would call "adventure". I suppose you could invent the "Talk-em-up", but most people know what an adventure game is.

      Like I mentioned before, the same problem exists with Role Playing Games - you play a role in most games, however an RPG is generally a game where you can build up your characters abilities, upgrade your weapons etc.

      It's really not that big a deal.

    3. Re:PC vs Console by Haeleth · · Score: 2, Informative

      Of course consoles never had pc styled adventures.

      Except for, um, Maniac Mansion for the NES. And the PS1 versions of the Broken Sword series. And Clock Tower on the SNES and PS1. And scores of lesser-known titles.

    4. Re:PC vs Console by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      You forgot to mention the PS2 port of Escape from Monkey Island.

    5. Re:PC vs Console by illuminata · · Score: 1

      My point is that there isn't a good definition of what an adventure game is. As you can see by this thread, elsewhere on the internet, and in print, there are varying ideas as to what makes a game an adventure game.

      Also, I never said that it was a big deal, I just figured that I'd mention my thoughts about the adventure genre. This is a discussion, anyways.

      --


      Until Slashdot fixes the funny modifier, use insightful or interesting. The poster knows your intentions.
    6. Re:PC vs Console by Pluvius · · Score: 1

      In that case, we can't use classifications for anything, since there will always be someone who disputes the accuracy of said classification.

      It's not just the adventure genre that's difficult to classify. RPGs are quite difficult to categorize as well. And then you have games like GTA3 which fuse several genres together.

      Anyway, a good first-approximation definition for "adventure" (at least in the PC sense) was given in an earlier post: An RPG which has no character building. It's slightly more complicated than that (and of course begs the question, "What is an RPG?") but it's a good rule of thumb.

      Rob

    7. Re:PC vs Console by Pluvius · · Score: 1

      Computer adventures and console adventures are really parts of two different genres; why the moniker "adventure" was given to both types is hard to say. This is unlike RPGs, where the differences between console and PC are merely stylistic.

      A computer adventure is a game that has little to no reflex-intensive gameplay to speak of; instead, it relies on puzzles. However, computer adventures are not puzzle games, because the puzzles are suspended within a story that progresses as you play, and those puzzles make sense within the story. (This is why I think Myst ruined the computer adventure genre; it barely has any justification to be in that genre in the first place.) Another criterion is the presence of an inventory system, which makes the puzzles of a much different flavor from those found in traditional puzzle games.

      Console adventures are basically console RPGs without complex stats that can be upgraded in an undefined way. For instance, in Final Fantasy one can choose to go up to Level 99 at the beginning of the game (if he is really bored) or choose to beat the game at a very low level. In Zelda, on the other hand, stat gains (in the form of heart containers, in this case) come in a very rigid manner; you have to take the stat gain when the programmers decide to give it to you. The attack and defense stats in Zelda are also very coarse (get a certain sword and you get a 50% increase in attack, for example), while in Final Fantasy, they are much more subtle and in-depth. Console adventures also don't have experience systems, a very important difference between them and RPGs.

      Rob

    8. Re:PC vs Console by CFTM · · Score: 1

      You forgot one of the greatest adventure series of all time to be released by Sierra .... Leisure Suit Larry *sound*Bow-chica-wow-wow*sound*.

      Seriously, what about Quest for Glory/Hero's Quest and Space Quest? Those were some awesome adventure games.

    9. Re:PC vs Console by FunkSoulBrother · · Score: 1

      [Insert inevitable slashdot-bitch about "begs the question" here]

    10. Re:PC vs Console by FunkSoulBrother · · Score: 1

      A computer adventure is a game that has little to no reflex-intensive gameplay to speak of; instead, it relies on puzzles. However, computer adventures are not puzzle games, because the puzzles are suspended within a story that progresses as you play, and those puzzles make sense within the story.

      Heh, not in half the adventure games I used to play and love!

    11. Re:PC vs Console by Pluvius · · Score: 1

      Well, the idea is that there's supposed to be a reason you're doing the puzzles beyond "so I can go to the next level." In Leisure Suit Larry, for example, you're doing the puzzles in order to get money, condoms, etc. so you can have sex. In Sokoban, on the other hand, there's no real reason why you're putting the boxes into their places besides "the game told me to."

      Of course, this idea of what a computer adventure is has broken down since the blockbuster coming of Myst; now they're more like glorified puzzle games than ever.

      Rob

  12. Adventure game = hassle free RPG by BMonger · · Score: 3, Insightful

    An adventure game to me is pretty much the same as an RPG but without stats, armor, weapons, and fighting. A lot of the old school Sierra/Dynamix games would fall into this category for me. Kings Quest, Space Quest, Police Quest, Freddy Pharkas, Phantasmagoria, Gabriel Knight, Leisure Suit Larry, Quest for Glory, and Adventures of Willy Beamish. Most of these could be full RPG's if stats, weapons, and armor were added. These games usually require you to get item A bring it to person B to get item C. How you get item A can be a decently long puzzle.

    I guess adventure games could almost be considered to be puzzles which are brought to you in a non-straightforward sort of way...

  13. Easiest way to classify Adventure games... by Ceyan · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Take an action game. At it's base an action game is a game where a character goes around getting involved in some form of combat. These kinds of games include everything from Devil May Cry to Jak & Daxter, or even Beyond Good & Evil. These games may or may not have extra elements involved, such as puzzles, storylines, whatever. As long as it's third person and it has more than a few combat moments, it's an action game. A adventure game is pretty much the same thing, only you cut out the combat. Instead you play a character that runs around and mainly solve puzzles (with perhaps a few moments of combat involved) with the purpose to further the storyline. The only real problem defining an action game and an adventure game is when you get into the realm of games like Omikron. You've got what looks like an adventure game, but still has a fair amount of combat. Adventure games are not dead either, they simply aren't very popular. Look at Flight Simulators, no one is claiming they are dead, but they aren't popular either. Hell, just in the past few months there have been two new great adventure games, Uru and Broken Sword 3.

  14. I don't know what we expected by Dr.+Spork · · Score: 4, Insightful
    There were a few good adventure games early on, but as a genre, there is just far too much crap being released. This is because unless a story behind an adventure game is awesome, the game will make players yawn with boredom.

    And it takes a really immersive story to make a normal human care enough to "procure A, bring it to be in order to accomplish C" over and over.

    CRPG games also have some "fetch-bitch" tasks for the characters, but the designers have an easier time. If the back story is a bit stale, a heated fight with a few orcs will liven it up. That's a luxury adventure game authors don't have. If their stories are a bit stale, their game fails.

    I think this is enough to explain why adventure games must inevitably suck, on average. When it's done on a large scale and by the numbers, it always fails. It reminds me of romance novels: Seriously, how likely is a romance novel to be a good book? Vanishingly. And how many are you able to read before you declare the genre "dead" as far as you care? Even if romance novelists were good writers, there is a certain wall that the genre hits. Everything will read like something else. That's what's happening to adventure games. It gets progressively harder to write original ones, to the point where it starts requiring storywriting genius. And that genius is busy on other genres with more vitality (and money).

    So did I just describe the death of adventure games? Not really. I mean, they'll live on in exactly the same way that romance novels with bumpy covers live on.

  15. The Tierra Factor by etherlad · · Score: 1

    Roughly half a million downloads for King's Quest 1 VGA and King's Quest 2+ VGA can't be wrong.

    Above games were created by AGDInteractive, formerly Tierra Entertainment.

    They're currently working on a VGA version of Quest for Glory 2.

    --
    Soylens viridis homines es
  16. Fun for more than one weekend by EarwigTC · · Score: 4, Insightful


    Many people now only buy games with a high replayability or a strong multiplayer component. Pure adventure games almost never have either. That's a big factor in the declining financial success of these kinds of games.

    Pure adventures need some value added, like new monthly content or game editors. Imagine an easily mod-able Leisure Suit Larry...

    --
    Promote civility: mod down any post starting with 'ummm'.
  17. No recent titles ? by DrSkwid · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What about Pokemon?

    It's a classic adventure game, running round collecting bits you need to open the door to get more bits to open the door ....

    oh and we also loved the 'Tombi' series on PS1

    Whacky Japanese nonsense, run round collecting feathers and leaves and stupid stuff to take to the old man to get the magic mushroom to .....

    The genre isn't dead by a long stretch, we are out here playing and enjoying them games it's just a trip to the games shop will show you 500 fps/driving/sim X games for the brutes.

    --
    There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
  18. There have been changes in adventure games... by DavidTC · · Score: 1
    Sadly, most of them have been completely ignored by other companies who make said games.

    The 'Tex Murphy' games spring to mind. They combined full motion video and a first person 360 degree perspective, with everything you'd expect in an adventure game.

    --
    If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  19. Dead on... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think your points are dead on...

    System Shock, then Half Life, and then later Deus Ex were so successful--at least in the critical establishment, if not popularly--precisely because they integrated adventure gaming elements into FPS.

    Adventure gaming didn't die, it just got folded into other genres.

    I still play text IF, and love it. But I do think more could be done to improve the status of adventure gaming more generally.

    One thing I would like to see that would raise the status of adventure gaming is adventure-action games--as opposed to action-adventure games ala Half Life, NOLF, etc. That is, first-person games that include action as well as adventure gaming, but emphasize the puzzle-solving and environment exploration over action.

    Project Eden was an example of one such game. Admittedly, it had severe problems with the action element of the game, including massive problems with AI and combat-gameplay characteristics. But I loved the game, and if anything, it left me wondering why no one had made a similar game, but keeping the action elements of the game up to par with what is now standard.

    Among current games, Deus Ex 2 may fit this characterization somewhat. But even that game doesn't emphasize the puzzle-solving as much as it does RPG and nonlinearity of action gameplay. It's not really the same.

    I think you're right that the pure adventure game, with a few remarkable exceptions--e.g., The Longest Journey--is no longer tenable. However, I do think it's possible to create games that are easily identified as being more in the adventure genre than other genres. I just think few developers are taking this really seriously.

    1. Re:Dead on... by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 1

      System Shock, then Half Life, and then later Deus Ex were so successful--at least in the critical establishment, if not popularly--precisely because they integrated adventure gaming elements into FPS.

      The games System Shock and Deus Ex took their inspiration from RPGs, and especially in the case of Deus Ex the elements wouldn't even be recognizable as part of the Adventure genre (a full skill system with level gains). Half-Life took most of it's influence from later platform gaming, which is especially evident in the Xen levels. Puzzle elements exist in most genres, not just adventure games. Puzzles and strong story are just core parts of adventure games, they aren't elements unique to the genre. The fact that FPS games actually have strong story elements (the case of all 3 of these games) doesn't mean that they integrated adventure gaming, as eventually all genres (except the most basic, pure parts of a genre) need to tell a story.

      Adventure gaming didn't die, it just got folded into other genres.

      When something gets folded into other genres to the point that the original genre no longer exists, it's dead. That being said, there are many small developers and publishers still putting out adventure games in the more pure sense (even though the purity of various sub-genres, such as graphic adventures, was debated strongly at it's initial introduction).

      I still play text IF, and love it. But I do think more could be done to improve the status of adventure gaming more generally.

      One thing I would like to see that would raise the status of adventure gaming is adventure-action games--as opposed to action-adventure games ala Half Life, NOLF, etc. That is, first-person games that include action as well as adventure gaming, but emphasize the puzzle-solving and environment exploration over action.

      Why not simply an adventure game with full FPS exploration elements? Co-opt the FP of FPS into the adventure format rather than trying to make an action game with adventure elements. Adventure games in general shun the action elements to begin with, and there are plenty of action-adventure games, as you stated (but since action-adventure is more a description than a genre, who really cares?).

      Project Eden [eidosinteractive.com]

      I never played it, so I can't really comment on it. I tend to avoid anything published by Eidos unless I hear extremely good things about the game.

      Among current games, Deus Ex 2 may fit this characterization somewhat. But even that game doesn't emphasize the puzzle-solving as much as it does RPG and nonlinearity of action gameplay. It's not really the same.

      Exactly. Adventure games tend to shy away from action and especially from combat. That may be part of why they've become more limited in scope, but I tend to think the publishers and developers just painted themselves into a corner and took all the wrong ways out. They moved to 3D before 3D was really mature enough to handle their vision. 2D adventure games started to get more and more derivative, and overall they were spending far more money on the games than they could hope to make. Also, the inclusion of Myst as an adventure title and it's success lead to a deluge of similar games. Though there were earlier titles similar to Myst, none had done as well, and that one title inspired publishers to dump tons of cash on crappy titles (just as FPS and RTS games also did in the 90s).

      I think you're right that the pure adventure game, with a few remarkable exceptions--e.g., The Longest Journey--is no longer tenable. However, I do think it's possible to create games that are easily identified as being more in the adventure genre than other genres. I just think few developers are taking this really seriously.

      Big publishers are afraid to take risks, and it's as simple as that. If someone came forward with a nearly complete, beautifully real-time-rendered 3D adventure game with an FPS-like engine and freedom of movement similar to GTA3/VC, they probably still couldn't get it published because the genre is 'dead' and they don't think they can make money on it.

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
  20. I am hoping adventure games come back by DaveCBio · · Score: 1

    Like RPGs did with Baldur's Gate. Well, survival horror games are a form of adventure game so, it hasn't entirely died out.