I used to be real stubborn about trying any non-pure "adventure" games (MYST being my reference point). I know that there are lots of you still stuck with that notion on this side of the forum. Well, you need to look outside that old constraint. The new action/adventure games are EVERYTHING that you want in a game. Great Stories, Unparalleled Graphics and Environments, and (and this is a big AND) Great Voice Acting. They are like watching a movie, and then climbing in to the screen yourself.

You usually need a pretty good computer to run these games, but if you have one, then please do yourself a favor and jump in with both feet. You will not regret it (actually you will regret that you have been so stubborn for so long). These games are what MYST wanted to be, but technology hadn't caught up yet.

Here I opine about some recent games, should you still be interested:
Link

Hi BaldBob --

I fixed the link so it would be easier for people to click on it.

A lot of adventure gamers do play various genres. If some of us don't find that action games are particularly interesting, that's just because everyone is different, not because we're stubborn.

I've encountered examples of action and stealth in adventure games, and these are always my least favorite parts when they do occur. (Well, along with pixel hunting.)

I've watched my son playing some of the Prince of Persia games, and they are beautiful. They are also (cough, cough) extremely repetitive.

I don't think that Cyan was really trying to create Prince of Persia when they made Myst (though I don't know for sure, of course). I suspect they wanted to create a fully explorable environment (as they eventually did in realMYST,) but they wanted adventurers to be thinking and solving puzzles, not jumping around walls and platforms and fighting monsters (not that there's anything wrong with jumping and fighting, just that Myst is different than that).

BaldBob I must say I love Adventure games but I also love the Tomb Raider series! So much to see an explore with Lara!

I'm a long time Adventure player who has also managed (and very much enjoyed) some RPG games but "Action/Adventure" is a separate area and definitely not for me !!

I've tried several - including a couple of Tomb Raiders - so I'm hardly stubborn. I just really disliked them

It's simply a matter of personal preference

Couldn't have said it better, Mad. Except to note that A/A hybrids are not at all kind to aging reflexes.

Gil.

What's interesting is, all games are fundamentally repetitive. The real difference, as y'all have said, is whether the style of gameplay interests you enough that you don't really realize it it doesn't really bother you.

Also, agree with Becky on Myst, although some Darkside levels are so deviously designed that they're, in effect, puzzles in themselves!

Agree with much that has been said-we are all different when it comes to game choices-
I am a "tri-polar" player: in that I switch back and forth between the adventures, actions and RPGs. I like the adventure games because they are more relaxed, require brain usage to solve puzzles, the action/RPGs because of the freedom of movement and challenge of getting characters through a dangerous or imaginative game world.When I get tired of struggling with a tough battle or move, I switch to an adventure game for awhile-It's taken me 3 months so far to finish Psychonauts-great game BTW-a definite platformer, but has elements of adventure-well it's wildly imaginative and different.Love the Thief series for the same reason. Sands of Time also has fantastic environments to explore-had to resort to a couple of saved games to get past some impossible places.
Agree with Bald bob that if you play only adventure games you are missing out on some great game experiences.

"The real difference, as y'all have said, is whether the style of gameplay interests you enough that you don't really realize it."

Who said we don't realise it ??
Of course we realise it !!

But if we are playing something we like, it's not a problem

Which was sort of my point, more or less.
All I meant was that if you're constantly conscious of a game's repetitiveness, in a negative way, you're likely bored. The best games suck you into the world so well that you forget about gameplay mechanics altogether.

If I can get just one person to venture outside the different-strokes-for-different-folks barrier.............my work here is done. I risked it, and the quality of the stuff out there makes my jaw hit the floor.

Kaki's Sister: seriously consider the new Prince of Persia and Batman (yes yes I know, Batman, yawn, but it ropes you in over time) Arkham Asylum. Both kinda expensive now. But when the price comes down...mehinks you will like.

Those MYST books in the Library would have made a seriously excellent action/adventure component addition to the game's eye candy and atmosphere ... had they had the technology to do it in the 90's.

Thanks BaldBob. I will keep an eye on the price of the new Prince of Persia and Batman.

I would love to have bigger game worlds to explore and new stories to follow, but the very thing I love about Myst is the solitary and peaceful nature of the game. I don't want to meet anyone in my travels, and I definitely don't want to fight or have to confront physical challenges. It's not a matter of being stubborn, it's just a matter of what's available.

I would guess that nearly everyone who plays adventure games has played other genres at some point or other. Finding someone who's never tried one before is going to be difficult. Gameboomers members who enjoy them are already using the Darkside forum. Others have problems not only with their reflexes being too slow but with the idea of fighting.


Just be aware that Prince of Persia has restrictive DRM that requires you to stay connected to the Internet all the while you play it.

And Batman has a single save -- an autosave. It won't let you save where you want and saves automatically in certain locations. Batman also uses Windows Live, which is controversial with some gamers and has caused some not to be able to play. Check out the reviews at Amazon, especially the ***one-star reviews*** from people who were not able to play it after buying it. One of them says:

Just be aware of what you may be getting into. I am definitely not in favor of a DRM that cripples the game if it "thinks" you are a pirate. And check Brian W.'s review for a possible workaround -- how you may be able to avoid the Windows Live (though not the SecuROM).

"I used to be real stubborn about trying any non-pure "adventure" games (MYST being my reference point). I know that there are lots of you still stuck with that notion on this side of the forum. Well, you need to look outside that old constraint."

Well I never even viewed Myst type game as the pure form of the genre and Ive never considered Adventure gaming as a "constraint". I play them cos I like them. Ive played all sorts of genres over the years yet it's the adventures I keep coming back to. The problem with action adventures is they are just not that good. They may be better eye candy as you say they are low down the pecking order of genre types in my opinion.

"I used to be real stubborn about trying any non-pure "adventure" games (MYST being my reference point). I know that there are lots of you still stuck with that notion on this side of the forum."

I kind of resent the notion that I am "stuck" in any way! I've chosen what I like and enjoy.

"The new action/adventure games are EVERYTHING that you want in a game."

No, they're not.

"You usually need a pretty good computer to run these games, but if you have one, then please do yourself a favor and jump in with both feet. You will not regret it (actually you will regret that you have been so stubborn for so long)."

I have a brand new, fairly high-end computer but have no inclination to play action/adventures.

I'm even more adventurous than BaldBob. I'm also playing casual games and hey, if Jane Jensen can, why can't I? Over the more than 2 years that I have been playing HOGs, more and more are getting to be Interactive, more like adventure games. I would rate them closer to adventure than action games with fighting and role-playing getting in the way of the adventure. As for Myst, forget it, that's a puzzle game no matter what it is called.

Mary, I know what you mean. No matter how good these games may be, I just do not like combat/action in my games. I don't enjoy that type of game play.

With games like Still Life and Next Life/Reprobates, I keep saved games after the more action oriented sections so that I never have to play them again once I've completed them the first time. That way, I can play through the rest of those otherwise enjoyable games without having to deal with spiders or spinning lights.

Dreamfall is okay because luckily, it's action sections aren't that difficult. Even so, those sections were the least enjoyable part of an otherwise excellent game from my point of view. I didn't mind the fetch quest for the spices as others did, but I didn't like the troll cave at all. I wanted the opportunity to look around and enjoy the scenery/puzzles at my leisure, and instead, I was ducking trolls.

I don't think it has anything to do with being less adventurous than other players. I like going on "adventures" in games, after all. I think it just has to do with having different preferences, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Stuck??!! No way.. uh-uh. The very reason I prefer Adventure games (sans 'action') is that I've 'been there' and decided it wasn't for me. "The Simpsons Hit & Run" gave me hours of enjoyment & laughs, even though it took a while to --nearly-- master the keyboard controls. I tried another one, and the action & storyline were centered around picking things up & running, jumping &/or climbing to another place to pick up more things.

To be fair (for this discussion) I checked out some of the "Prince of Persia" action on youtube. You're right about the attractive environment. But I tend to become distracted by the keyboard-driven action... and frankly, much of that distraction is from me giggling at the funny behavior as the character tries to jump or scramble up a wall or leap over a precipice. And the characters in the action games I've tried, always seem to be fixed, mid-screen, while the environment spins around them. You remember the Journeyman games. In them, you travelled around the world and through different time periods. Extraordinary environments which I still remember to this day. Same for many, many other Adventure games which did not contain 'action-action-action'. Rarely did I have to run, leap, or jump for extended lengths of time, either.

We all understand your enthusiasm, 'cause we all have it, no matter what kind of gaming we prefer. That's why we're here. I get what you're saying about Action games being similar to movies, but I really don't want to be the director... making the 'actors' do what I want. When I'm the actor and looking around the environment from my own point-of-view... that's when I feel like I've "climbed in the (movie) screen" myself.

As far as "being so stubborn for so long"... ah, c'mon. I thought I'd given that stuff a good enough try already Bob... and it's not for me. I've no regrets.

I only play straight adv games. Any reports of action elements that aren't in simple cutscenes automatically turns me off to the game. It would require too many requests for saved games as I just don't have the reflexes for action games, and continuously get killed. Too bad as would really like to be able to play some of them (ex. Silent Hill, Hitman and Max Payne series). Would love to see remakes of the Maxpayne, Silent Hill and Hitman series as straight adventure with the action elements as cutscenes.

Regards,

Barry

Check for cheats like "God Mode" or "Invincibility" or "Infinite Health" for the games you are interested in. For example at ***Gamefaqs***.

Cheats may or may not work with reissue versions of the games. But if you can find an original issue game, the cheats should work.

Unfortunately the Prince of Persia: Forgotten Sands game that Baldbob likes doesn't have any decent cheats, so the closest I'll ever get to playing it is watching a video of someone else playing it. I'm too slow for ***this kind of thing*** without an invincibility (god mode) cheat.

Yep. This kind of thing, well, I'm too slow for that kind of thing.

I've watched my son play action games before and some of them are great, but I just don't have the reflexes to handle maneuvers like this gracefully--while I'm still trying to remember what the controls are, I'm dead meat.

Zanzarah is probably the closest I've come to playing an "action" game (i.e. the fairy fights) and being able to play successfully on through to the end. I do better with a lot of RPGs, too, which have plenty of action, but some of them also have a pause feature during combat such that the action scenes can be played as turn-based strategy instead, which makes all the difference.

I have several "dark side" games, some of which I purchased when I first bought a computer and didn't know there were different genres and some that I've purchased since:

American McGee's Alice before
Clive Barker's Undying before
Black and White before
Zanzarah somewhere in between
Silent Hill 2,3, & 4 since
Pitfall Harry (2 games) since
BloodRayne 2 (my brother found in a cereal box)
Alice In Wonderland waiting for delivery

and probably some others. They're all waiting to be played but there are so many good adventure games to play.

I think I agree with Venus about Dreamfall. The action parts, while doable, were probably my least favorite part.

But my motto is: someday, someday, someday!