I just read AG's preview of Three Cards to Midnight. I am getting the distinctive feeling that the reviewer/previewer is trying hard not to label it as only a casual game but something more. I also find it odd that he was not particularly enthusiastic about it.

http://adventuregamers.com/article/id,944

It worries me a lot to hear this, especially given the announcement just made by the developer that the game has been delayed (again) for 2 months.

I hate to see Chris turning his back on adventure games and joining the casual market like Jane Jensen (though she is now returning to the genre).

Reading the preview didn't make me feel happy, but it's just a preview of a small part of the game! We'll just have to wait and see.

My take on all of this is that Chris Jones and Aaron Connors would like nothing more than to make another full-fledged adventure game in the Tex Murphy vein, but first they would need to convince a publisher that it would be commercially viable. I also think that they will do everything in their power to make Three Cards to Midnight more than "just" a casual game (and I like casual games!) such that it will attract the interest of many computer game players everywhere. If we support their efforts (and I certainly will), hopefully this will attract the interest of those who would support their production of a full-length, more traditional adventure game, as well.

I've been doing some work on casual titles and the one thing that's becoming clear is that the market is eveloving faster than any other sector of the games industry because of the shorter turnaround on game development. We're already seeing stories in many of these games come on in leaps and bounds. We're also seeing the hidden object games evolving and becoming more like adventures. My feeling is that this is where the future of adventure gaming lies.

I do like to play casual games every once in a while but I love playing AG's. I just want it to be my choice what game I'm going to play and not the game the market is dictating!

Steve,

Great point. It is nice to hear straight words from an industry professional like yourself.

I am sadden to hear recently that your game, So Blonde, will not be published in North America. Your fans (including myself) have to order now from oversea to get this game.

I entirely agree with you on your observation about the Hidden Object games. Just look at the new Nancy Drew games!

I certainly don't hope so. To me, casual games are extremely boring and if that's where the future of AG's lies, I'm not part of it.

I'm not aware of this, but then I'm not the publisher or developer and no one tells me anything.

As for casual games being boring - isn't that the kind of blanket statement that we all hate when the mainstream press talk about the adventure genre in a disparaging way. I recommend that you take a look at Mystery Case Files - Return to Ravenhearst. Yes, these games have still some way to go before matching some aspects of adventure games, but the production values are very high and many of these games are moving in the right direction. And they're point-and-click.

Of course, not all casual games are of this quality or style, but the market has broadened considerably in the last year.

Well, I said: to me casual games are extremely boring.
I tried a few demo's, though not the ones you mentioned, and they are definitely not for me.

As far as I know, the main discouraging aspect of casual games is relying on simple gameplay patterns for entire games. Yet I think that when there's enough creativity involved in the design, we should still find some interesting small games in the casual category. In regard to 3 cards I'm particularly interested in the way the story will be told primarily through voice-overs - might be quite a different experience.

Fair enough.

We should also bear in mind that "regular" adventures are being released in the casual marketplace with some success. This is also having an effect on how certain parts of the casual market are evolving. And this, for me, is exciting.

Steve, I do agree that the way the casual market is growing towards the AG's is interesting, but does it automatically imply that AG's should be more like casual games?
I don't mind action scenes in an AG, as long there's a way to bypass them, like in So Blonde. I don't think action sequences add to a game's story. There are better ways to raise the adrenaline, using music, background sounds or visual effects.

Sorry, I didn't make myself clear enough. I don't mean that adventures should become casual games, but that the casual marketplace is evolving so fast and incorporating so much from adventures (in some games, at least) that it will soon be a natural place for adventures to be released, if it isn't already so.

Glad to hear that, Steve. However, a question remains, the mini games in So Blonde, was it your, the developers' or a publisher's idea?

I played my first casual game (Mystery Case Files: Revenhearst) in late December last year and right now I'm almost finished playing MCF: Return to Ravenhearst. In the year between I have learned a lot about Casual Games and there are some I do not care for, but others are very good indeed. In fact, I have enjoyed more casual games than adventure games this past year, but my heart still belongs to adventure games with old style gameplay.(But not parsing or arrow keys, that's going too far back, ya know.)
I agree with you, Steve, about how things are evolving in the casual market and I think the changes are for the good. It is like they are growing up and adding more depth to each game without getting all tied up in technology or whatever. The coming year should be an interesting time watching to see just how things go.

Both Wizarbox and DTP wanted to add in something to give more variety so they came up with the idea of mini-games, which I don't think is a bad idea. Lots of games have mini-games, though not always in the style of the ones in So Blonde.


This is the real beauty of this market. One of the criticisms levelled at adventures in the "mainstream" market is that they don't innovate tecnically. It's not that the casual market isn't demanding, just that the demands concentrate on whether a game gives an enjoyable experience to the player, which is the most important thing after all.

I play a few casual games like 7 Wnders and Luxor but I don't like any of them that try to do adveture game things like Ravenhurst. I don't think they will ever change Ag's. They are a totaly seperate gern and like action games will remain this way.

Hmmm, I don't play action games but I read about them and I've read articles that say many of them are adding adventure to the classic action genre. Also adventure games have casual elements like arcade stuff, I think that classifies as casual. Sometimes they also have action sequences, aargh!
We, the people, are all persons with so many different viewpoints that the game makers try to juggle things in many ways to appeal to as many of us as they can. Who can actually blame them considering the cost of everything.