What makes you enjoy a game ?
If a game does a few things really well, but not everything, can you still enjoy it or do the not so well done (or badly done) parts spoil the whole thing for you? Are there certain things you can overlook and focus on the good things? What makes a minor annoyance and what makes a game-spoiler?

For example, a game like Kheops' Safecracker has some fun puzzles, but doesn't have much story to speak of. But then it even says on the box/can that it's "The Ultimate Puzzle Adventure." So do you really expect a rousing story and intriguing characters when you buy that kind of a game?

Or a game like Dreamfall... It had pretty 3D graphics and above average story and characters, but the lock puzzles were repetitive, the controls were iffy, there were some badly implemented fight sequences, there weren't nearly as many puzzles as in its predecessor TLJ, and the ending was unsatisfying. So were the story, characters and graphics alone enough to make it enjoyable?

Or Keepsake -- a game with fun puzzles, an optional Hint feature, and a beautiful castle to explore. But the voice acting was not what it should have been, and unwanted conversations would periodically start up and interrupt what you were doing.

Which is worse? Really really bad voice acting from a character you have to speak with only once or twice in a game, or moderately bad voice acting from a character you have to speak with often?

Say you have a game that does nothing really wrong, but is formulaic and predictable. Is it more enjoyable or less enjoyable for you than a game that has some really outstanding aspects, but which also includes some well known and potentially avoidable annoyances (for example, bad inventory design where it takes 6 clicks to use a single item -- or non-skippable arcade "challenges" which take 12 hours, a nimble-fingered friend or family member, or a saved game to get past).

The worst on your list, in my opinion, is a challenge (like an arcade challenge) that a lot of people need a saved game to get by. That's a far more significant failure than iffy voice acting or a game that's formulaic.

I like a variety in adventure games -- I enjoyed both Safecracker and Dreamfall, though for different reasons. No game is perfect. Sometimes very ambitous games can fail more spectacularly than less ambitious games because they are reaching for the stars -- huge locations or cutting-edge graphics or innovative puzzles. Still, I like to see the ambition.

What makes a game enjoyable for me is an engaging character and storyline that draws you into them and makes you care about the character and what happens. I really enjoy good graphics. A really tedious puzzle that takes hours or days and alot of hairpulling to solve lowers my enjoyability to some extent. I enjoy a game that throws something unexpected at you. I enjoy a game that I want it to keep going instead of ending. Everything else is just a minor annoyance.

I can forgive a multitude of small 'sins' in a game (I even liked The Mystery of the Druids)
But the show stoppers for me are those annoying arcade challenges that you and Becky mentioned, and also those awful timed sequences that are very stingy with the time, I still have nightmares about chasing candy with 8 second intervals between in Simon 3D, and the Shooting Gallery in Wanted a Wild West Adventure

Whether it's a game that's puzzle-heavy with little or next to no story, or one that's heavy on plot and dialogue and skimpy on the puzzles, I really don't mind - all I ask is that it's of a high quality. Which means, essentially, in addition to the aforementioned: good graphics, good voice acting, and a user-friendly interface.

Bad voice acting can kill a game stone-dead for me. Keepsake was gorgeous to look at. Sure, the puzzles were difficult, but there was a hint system, I muddled through them. Oh, but the voice acting for almost every character... it made me want to throw myself off the nearest available virtual balcony. Dreadful with a 6ft high capital D. I may never replay Keepsake because of this.

Timed sequences, as Tyke says, can also quite completely ruin a game if they are stingy and unforgiving. I do not wish to race around an underwater maze/exploding laboratory/deep dark ooky forest, squealing like a stuck pig; I wish to play my adventure game in peace, at my own pace, with nice scenery and fun puzzles, thank you very much. But that is my preference, and others may like the added tension of timed sequences. (Having said that, I can perhaps forgive games their timed puzzles if the rest of the game is fun and includes all of the positive elements I burbled about earlier.)

Absolutely its the story. I hate time pressure puzzles too, but can tolerate some if the story is good enough. Better graphics are better. Better sound is better. But nothing will ever make up for the story.

Albert

My first adventure games were "puzzle" adventures, and although they were good, I had much more fun playing something with more...coherence.

On the other hand, my favorite adventure game of all time is about a tentacle that grew arms and took over the planet, where we used chornojohns (portapotties) to transport inventory items, and the plot twists are more humourous and non-sensical than earth-shattering.

My list:
Good puzzles
Funny (tongue in cheek)
coherent storyline
Good voice acting
(I'm a fan of Tim Schafer)

with all that, I'm willing to:
- sit through FPS control schemes
- do timed mazes
- turn off the sound if some of the acting is horrid
- play a game from 1995.

Case in point: Day of the Tentacle (3 times), Grim Fandango (twice), Discworld Noir (twice), Zork Grand Inquisitor (twice), Return to Zork, The entire Monkey Island series...

They don't make them like they used to. :/

Comedy games are really more about the characters than the plot. It's usually the same way in comedy movies or plays. The plot is not generally what people remember about them. It's the characters and their idiosyncracies that are memorable.

For me it's gameplay all the way..... I'm not much into story driven games or games with a lot of reading and talking. I find that I just don't listen and rely on a walkthrough for those types of games. I still play them though but don't get as much fun from them as I do with games that have quests or things to find. I guess I would say that I'm more of an inventory type game lover. Keepsake was awesome and I didn't even pay attention to whether or not the voice acting was good or not. I would be more likely to enjoy a game with crappy voice acting and so-so graphics if it was a game that lasted more than 10 hours. Guess that means I'm a quantity kind of gal rather than quality.

I don't like timed sequences and I think that game makers should always include a "pass" for the arcade type puzzles. I myself love them but was taxed at the shooting game in Wanted a Wild West Adventure. I'm one of the few that really enjoy the arcade type puzzles in Nancy Drew like making breakfast, lunch and dinner etc.

What I hate the most are the arcade type games where you have to think 3 or 4 moves ahead in order to do them like that fox and geese game in Nancy Drew or the othello type puzzles in other games.

Good story .Runs well on the computor and the voices matter to .Story more tan any thing and you have to like the charactors I guess .Keep repeating a scene over and over again puts me of espesily when I know what to do but just arnt fast enough

I am greedy and want a bit of everything. If a game has a good storyline and gameplay but lacks on the visual part I might not even install it. Voice acting on the other hand is not very important to me as long as it's noy completely bad. If the voice acting is good then it adds to it but i won't reject a game due to bad voice acting.

A really good game for me has to have -
1 a good story - humour is a bonous
2 good graphics
3 good acting
4 subtitles
5 logical puzzles

A bad game would
1 have timed puzzles
2 any technical problems
3 dead ends when you have to go back to a save
4 miles of walking because my athritic knees can't take it!

Good story, although I do enjoy good graphics, they really add to the atmosphere and feeling of the game. I like easier puzzles, and not a lot of challenging things in the game. Good characters are great, good atmosphere, good voice acting, good character interaction, really really good directing, etc.

I really want to see things in real time in Adventure Games. Like trees blowing, rain on and off, etc. I would really enjoy that. It would definitely add to the atmosphere of the game.

Great graphics are a big plus for me, because they give the game such a good feel, and story is highly important.

Good story, and good puzzles that support it (and not themselves alone)

I love great atmosphere, story, graphics, sound, character development and ease of navigation! Maps would have been helpful in some games! Also it makes a difference when the developer takes the extra time for testing (even though pressure to get the game out quickly )and will also answer their own email!!