I do not know if this has been thoroughly discussed, I searched the forum and saw some posts regarding fighting in adventure games. The thread that really caught my attention was a thread on Dreamfall: The Longest Journey. Where in an interview a developer said that he would like adventure games to contain action/fighting, also calling them modern adventure games.

One of the last things I want to see is fighting in adventure games. I find it ridiculous. I have played RPG's and don't really like them, because of the fighting. Almost all you do is fight, in a sense. I feel that this modern adventure gaming could destroy adventure games if it were to actually take off. I am not fond of swinging a sword and killing another human being in life and in games. It gets to the point in games where it is like... oh well I just killed him, who cares. People that like all this killing and fighting are rather ridiculous inhumane people, I think.

I was wondering what you all thought about fighting in adventure games?

I know that I am new to the forum and I apologize if I am to forward.

I personally like the fighting, but then I like RPG and other games with some action in them. I thought Dreamfall was great re: the action parts, but thought it dragged to much through the cut scenes, more like watching a movie. Although I started in Adventure games, I have moved on because I finally the walked endlessly about looking for whatever I am supposed to be looking for rather tedious. I have lots of Adventure games unplayed on my shelf while I go and play stuff like The Polar Express, Bloodlines and Zanzarah.

I have a question... what turns you on about fighting, I am not really knocking you... I just don't understand?

I posted about fighting in an RPG forum once and some people said things like "I'm a man and I prefer blood and guts". I found that comment to be very inhumane. It really was a heart stopper.

I like action adventure games (e.g Fahrenheit-you didn't kill anyone but there were many action sequences) but i prefer pure adventure games. I don't know whether this modern adventure game thing would actually work as the producers undoubtedly would lose out on the masses of people who play pure adventure games. Some people might like the fighting but i think the majority will not so i wouldn't expect things to change dramatically, there already many games which have action and fighting and are called "adventure" games but those that stick to the pure adventure gamer is those which do not and follow the traditional point and click/3rd person/1st person adventure.

It depends on the individual, i cannot explain why i like Flight Sims, FPS or adventure games, most people who i talk about this say i am crazy and i couldn't possibly like 3 such completely different genres. I liked games like Splinter Cell but also love games like AC:And Then There Were None. I like fps games with tactics involved (Hidden And Dangerous, America's Army) and not games that involve whoever gets the most kills (CS, BF2 and so on). You can't really answer why do you like something? It's like discussing which fruit do you like more? An orange or an apple? Some will say an orange, some will say an apple and some will say neither. It doesn't mean one is right and the other is wrong or one is better than the other. Personally all these games give me pleasure and help me spend my time enjoying myself.

I don't mind some action in games either, but I am not fond of killing.

I think point and click is a good idea. You get to experience the art in simple way. I don't know what the future holds though, as far as adventure games go, regarding new techniques besides point and click. Maybe it will be better. Anyway, I do enjoy the simple point and click and just enjoying the graphics/art.

Yeah, point and click is my favourite adventure game type, especially 3rd person. More games are coming out now which do not use a pre-rendered background but are more 3D like Dead Reefs so yeah, there is evolvement in the adventure genre in that area as well.

I am not entirely new to adventure games but I do not understand all the technology. Would you tell me the difference between pre-rendered background and 3-D games, I would most appreciative?

I know that Galileo was a genius, that is probably why I don't understand your signature. Would you mind explaining what you feel it means. I am thinking of putting a Beethoven quote as my signature, which I am quite fond of.

Best Regards,
Preston

I like a little action as long as they don t make it to hard .I mean you cant really play some thing like a good horror or murder story with out a little blood spilt

I like some action toodon't like the killing but if you have todefend yourself against a monster trying to kill you guess it makes sense.

If the OP don't like fighting in RPG, he (or she) really should try out Fallout or Planescape Torment. In these games it is possoble to guide a character which have enough INT, WIS and CHAR through the game(s) without fighting at all, or do very little fighting.

Most RPGs have you fight as an opportunity to progress in the story, sometimes in RPGS, you can get out of the fighting, if you have enough INT(elligence) or CHAR(isma). As for the 'blood and guts' part, I would say that the person who said that probably hasn't played a game like Baldur's Gate in which you get out of many fights, but not all, of course.

As for fighting in adventure games, well, if you go back to the early text adventures like Zork 1, you have to fight trolls and grues to progress in the game. Colossal Cave (the first textadventure ever) also had you fighting a dwarf - to progress in the story.

I don't much mind action sequences or stealth sequences in adventure games, if they are done properly and help to further the story along. That was NOT the case in Dreamfall as it was much an interactive movie than anything else with stealth and action/combat sequences tacked on it, as some sort of afterthought, it seems.

There are (funny) action sequences in the Broken Sword games, in the King's Quest games and in Zork: Nemesis. And by action I don't mean fighting sequences, but I do mean that you have to hurry, or maybe push someone out the door, or into a room in a hurry, and then lock the door and throw away the key. But all of this have to fit into the story we're being told. If it makes to crawl away or movie stealthily for the guard not to see you, if you're trying to figure out something in a military complex etc. then even in an adventure game, you should be able to do this.

If small robotic spiders are in your way or are acting as sentinels in a compound, wouldn't it make sense to find a way to stealthily hide from these spiders. I think it does. But then, again, it requires that these stealth sequences are properly intervowen into the game's story. And that's where many (new) adventure games fail, I think.

As for the developer's comment that he would like to see more fighting in adventure games, I don't think this is a very good idea as this would make adventure games more like rpgs, or fps games or more like horror games (like Condemned, Hitman, and Manhunt). And adventure games should be played,imo, very slowly and with your thinking cap on and with a nice cup of tea or coffee at your side, thinking about your everymove.

That's what I like about adventure games, that there still are an area of life that hasn't succombed to the hurried ways of modern life. It feels as an refuge from all this and it feels good

/Karsten

I'm not very good with fighting in adventure games so I do hope it wont be the futur for adventure gaming.

CU

danyboy

I don't like fighting in my games. It usually implies twitch reflexes (fastest on the button wins) and timed sequences. I want challenges that I can take my time with and use my brain, not my reflexes. Also, I play adventures for a peaceful retreat into another world; aggressive conflict ruins it for me.

Agreed!

I can go for adventure and action, but not endless amounts of fighting, like in FPS and RPG's.

If there is to be fighting in Adventure Games I would rather not have to fight myself, but just watch the fight scenes.

Concerning my signature it means, that 1 million people might tell you something which they believe it's true and yet a single individual scientist can prove them wrong. A prerendered game would be where the background behind your character is not moving, it's like an image and you can't possibly reach the actual things you see. An example would be Syberia where you have your character who is moving and the background is an image with only a limited place of where you can move, your character only moves in 4 directions, left, right, forward and backwards. A fully 3D game would be where you can move 360 degrees around and go to every direction you can see. About the prerendering thing is when as you move the graphics are built by the graphics card as you play and not during loading. Prerendered graphics requires a faster processor whereas a real 3D requires GPU (Graphics Processing Unit-The graphics card processor) power. Also prerendered graphics cannot be improved any further whereas non-prerendered can be improved through the graphics card settings. I hope i am clear and not confused you further.

Hi Preston C. to Gameboomers.

I totally agree with you...Leave out the fighting scenes..
Adventure games ..should be just that adventure <period>

You made an excellant point.

No, that makes perfect sense. Thanks.

Don't get me wrong I can go for action/adventure but I would just not prefer fighting/adventure.

Thanks, Dar.

I'd dispute that. It depends a lot on the resolution of the graphics. Displaying 640x480 prerendered graphics is not going to put any stress on a modern processor, even in a game with panning, where the prerendered part extends beyond what you see on the computer screen.

I agree with you, i didn't mean that it solely depends on the CPU/GPU but as you change from prerendered to 3D the balance shifts towards the GPU. At lower resolutions it is CPU dependant unless you put AntiAliasing and Anisotropic Filtering or switch Shader Models which will be carried out by the GPU. As you increase the resolution the GPU will be doing more and more work as you said as the CPU starts struggling.

Hi Butcher,
Here is a real life example of the meaning of your signature.
Before the discovery of radium, ALL the scientists agreed that the world was composed of x-number of elements and no more. Then along came Madame Curie who discovered radium and proved them wrong since radium was a totally NEW element. After Madame Curie's discovery of radium, scientists changed their tune to say that there are x-number of KNOWN elements, leaving the door open for new discoveries, like plutonium, uranium, and more.

I don't care for either fighting or stealth in adventure games.
I don't like NOT being able to jump in a real time 3D game though.

My preference in real time 3D games is either follow cam, or being able to switch between 1st person and follow cam views.

They can keep the fighting. One of my favorite games "The Last Express" had a nasty fight scene in it but, there was a wonderful cheat, so I did not even try.
Marion

The reason I like adventure games is that I can pretty much make my own pace. If I haven't done what I need to do to get to the next part, I know I need to go and find and/or do the necessary things that I'm missing. I can wander around and maybe find a few hints, or mayhap talk to a handsome bloke. I will eventually figure it out.

I don't have to go back and forth in the same tunnels and fight evil trolls and monsters to build up my experience so I can buy the Heavenly Sword with 10000000 mana pockets for rubies that I have yet to collect so I can go to the next level. If I wanted to do that ( which I do NOT ) I'd play an RPG.

I don't have to use my Sig Sauer auto with 100 auto refills and sneak around the open field and kill 200 men before I can go to the next level either.

Give me a good, relaxing intelligent adventure game with some witty humor and challenging puzzles and I'm a happy woman.

( Okay throw in a Coors Light also ) NOW I'm a happy woman.

Hi All, I do my very best to avoid any games that have combat and I do think they should, rather like Dreamfall, have a way to avoid it by stealth!
Also, unfortunately I have rather bad arthritis in my hands, so I'm not very able to be 'quick on the draw' so combat and also very tight time situations are almost impossible, unless some very kind soul on GB's Forum can help with a 'save', for which I'm very grateful as it makes my gaming much more possible.
The other situation that is tricky, is the one I am experiencing at the moment with Paradise, which seems very 'buggy' and the cursor is less than willing to respond smoothly or quickly!
However, love the Genre and also love GB, and the ever helpful Moderators! Thanks MaG and all! Ann W-G

No fighting for me. I'm a pacifist. Also I cannot do the run/crouch/twirl/fire/hide thing. The only fighting I could ever do was the last Kings Quest on easy mode.
Anyway, if I wanted a fighting game I would buy one. I want to see beautiful graphics, find hidden objects, chat to unicorns & solve puzzles.

Hi JennyP, I also love the games you talk about, so it seems I should be looking for Everest and waiting for Delaware! It's good to have a recommendation from someone who enjoys the same sort of game. You're always in the dark a bit, before you actually start to play, don't you think?!
Cheers, Ann W-G

P.S...I've had a quick look through Reviews and WTs, and can find no reference to Everest!?! Ann

Hi

I only play two kinds of games .... Adventures and RPGs.

RPGs are mostly action orientated so of course there is plenty of fighting - but I don't find it to be the kind of fighting that appears in some of our adventure games. It is often "turn based" in some way so that a player can hit a "pause" button and have a think what to do next - without necessarily being forced to carry on through the fight to the bitter end, only to lose and have to go through it all over again

What we were presented with in the last two Broken Sword, Sherlock Silver Earing and Dreamfall "adventures" (examples which spring to mind at this moment) was the inclusion of a selection of timed action or sneak sequences - and it was usually the "timed" element that did ME in and not the actual fighting or sneaking

AND .... Having to use the ghastly to operate keyboard controls at the same time as being under a time constrait I found VERY difficult and my enjoyment ended right there

I feel these type of games should truthfully be classed as Action/Adventures and not Adventures.

And yes, I know older games - going back a long way - have included action bouts but they were generally short and simple sequences where "victory" could be achieved after just a couple of attempts.
The sequences we can be faced with today are often long and complicated and are also frequently preceded by a lengthy cut scene which has, annoyingly, to be viewed over and over with each new attempt

I fully accept that different people want different things from their game playing.
My own preference for Adventure games is that they be just that .... Adventure. And not an Action/Adventure hybrid

Cheers.

Mad

Hi Mad, How come you are still able to access the lovely familiar old 'gremlins'? I can only see the rather boring new ones that appear when I select 'Reply' and they don't say what I want to say!
Cheers to you,
Ann W-G

boring!
They're all on the graemlin box. Click on the smilie icon and see them.

Ouch....

Ana

Sorry MaG!!!
I clicked on the 'smilie box' and there are 3 rows of graemlins, but they are not waving or clapping as the older ones did! Also, I can't seem to add them to my text! Ihave tried a few times, but they just dont appear!

OK Ana, you seem to be able to smile, and wave at my 'boo boo'! How'd ya do it? Ann

You are looking at the 3 rows of smilies to choose for the reply (they appear to the right of your reply). You need to click on the big smiley on the right and you will get plenty to keep you entertained.

Sorry...didn't mean to laugh.

Ana

Hi Ana,
Thank you so much, I have found them now! My display when online is only 2thirds of the screen, as I have my favourites list down the LHSide, so as they used to appear in a little box to the left, I didn't look further right! Well even in my advanced years, I am still learning something every day, though the brain is slowing down!
Cheers, Ann

OK, so now I'm making up for it!!!

I don't like killing, would never play a "shooter" but I do like the jumping, sneaking, smashing (of objects) and fighting, like in Zanzarah. The fairies don't die anyway, they are just there to train you. Actually the only games I was killing in were the Vampire Masquarade Redemption and Bloodlines, Morrowind and Silent Hill 2. I don't recall killing anything that wasn't trying to get me first. I played Dreamfall and liked it but it really was too movielike for my taste. Anyway, it is not a blood and guts thing for me, I am an extremely non violent 63 year old female I just like what it does for my aging reflexes and I find it more interesting then trudging about looking for strange items to combine together to do something with.

I would never ask for fighting in an Adventure game but i like sometimes where the user has to perform some actions quickly, like Dead Reefs for example where you sometimes had limited time to do something or else it was end game. I prefer the pure Adventure where we explore and solve puzzles, go to different places and solve mysteries but i don't mind several action scenes included. And as noted before those games strictly speaking should be under Action/Adventure and not not Adventure.

Ann, Everest is a casual game, a hunt & seek one. You can get it from Big Fish for an hours free trail. Beware, you will be hooked...

Oh my butcher did you say there is some scene in dead reefs where you have to do the action s quickly oooops .Save me a save I am sure to need it lol

dragon,

The time to do those parts in Dead Reefs is not that quick. If I can do it - ANYONE can.

I've played a few that have a tussle or two. Like you Preston, I would rather avoid physical confrontation in games. So much more satisfying to outwit a nincompoop than to beat him to a pulp. I avoid what I call 'shoot-em-ups' like the plague. That's another breed of game. If an occasional adventure game has a brief fight, I'll try my best (although I won't care much for it).