I've been playing adventure games for more than 25 years now. Big fan here. I love to explore, solve pesky problems and puzzles, etc. I don't play Action games and RPGs, although I've played a few adventure games where I've had to shoot to survive a tough spot. It is OK in small doses if it is essential to the story but I don't go looking for it. I am even less of an Arcade or Platform gamer. Far less. I'm temperamentally unsuited for high-pressure, nerve-wracking timed sequences that must be played over and over again until you finally get the timing or the jumping or the juggling of cats just right. I'll leave that to those who love it.

What I've encountered in the past couple of years is more of both these elements (Action and Arcade) included in the standard Adventure genre. Being unable to get past an arcade-type sequence has forced me to bail on more than one game, and in one case, only part way into it. Disappointing, to say the least.

Is it a general trend to conflate these game genre or was I just unlucky enough to encounter the few Adventure games that did this? I'd sure like to avoid it in the future. Just curious.

Avoid Gemini Rue then.
Luckily, I played a demo before I plunked any money down on it.
The game threw a "better be fast or you'll have to do it again, and again, and again" sequence at you fairly early and since I was more or less bored with the story as far as it had gotten, that did it.
No sale.
Flotsam's review informed me later that there is a "giant cylinders pounding up and down room" which you have to scuttle through without getting stomped flat.
And you have to go through it more than once.
I was doubly glad I hadn't bought yet another one to leave unfinished and have to resort to YouTube to see how it ended.

And then there's that awful laser puzzle in Still Life which I have never gotten through on my own.
So, yeah, it is maddening when you run into something like that and there is really no call for it, which I wish game creators would get through their heads.

Er...by the way, which one had you juggling cats?
I am really going to steer clear of that one.

Gil.

Gil, you reminded me of that scene in the movie, "Galaxy Quest," when the two characters are racing through their starship in search of the cutoff switch to stop the self-destruct -- and they find their passage blocked by a corridor full of pounding cylinders that they must successfully navigate. One character shrieks in frustration, "Who puts this kind of [blip] into a starship!?" We laughed ourselves silly at that scene. (The film is a very funny spoof of the sci-fi genre, by the wa.y)

Seriously, I don't know what game designers are thinking when they mix genres. My hubby hates solving puzzles, and complains when he finds them in his RPG's, too. We like what we like. What is so hard to understand about that?

And I might have been exaggerating a teensy bit about the cats . . .

Some of the best adventure games, sadly, have action elements.

Indy Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, Gemini Rue, and Dreamfall all have them. Luckily, they have far more traditional elements than action ones in the games and have (all three) mostly stellar reviews.

Mixed genre games have been around for many years - the problem with them is which bucket do you put them in - adventure, action, RPG? I've even seen story and puzzle solving in FPS games!

I wish I'd read the review for Gemini Rue before I bought it but I thought it was a safe bet being from WadgetEye games. I got through the sequences that would have been in the demo but came to a standstill later on with a sequence practising shooting? which I just couldn't do! & haven't been back to the game since. I really liked the premise of the game up until that point & feel so disappointed that I couldn't continue without jumping through the gameplay hoops which were too high for me!

I found the Still Life puzzle infuriating & had to resort to a step-by-step in a walkthrough because I'd lost the will to play by then!

OMG, I remember that! I laughed myself silly, too.
And talk about an apt comparison: our intrepid space heroes even needed a 'walkthrough' from back on Earth to get through the corridor of doom!


They aren't thinking beyond their own agile fingers and the audience they have now, IMO.
It might have been okay once when most gamers were probably somewhere between 14 and 20, but the grey demographic is getting a lot larger and at the same time becoming more interested in games.
Adding the frustration of action elements to adventure games, the kind we are most likely to play, IMO, is just dumb.
I hate to think what my reaction would have been if my first game, at 40 or so, had been Still Life.
Something along the lines of "Is this what I can expect, a game I can't finish no matter how hard I try?" and "Who needs this?", most likely.

Ipad_Lover noted that Indy Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, Gemini Rue, and Dreamfall all have some action elements and all three have "mostly stellar" reviews.
That may be true, but look how far I got with Gemini Rue's demo before hanging it up.
Was there this sort of thing in Dreamfall?
I remember only that I hated the game though I did struggle through to the end, and if there is one thing Dreamfall taught me, it's that a game's reviews may be glowing and it may still be wrong for me.
Anyway, if I play an RPG, I know I may have to keep plugging at it to get through some boss battle, but I know that upfront before I buy it.
It just ain't right in an adventure game, says I.

Yeah, it is bad, chrissie, when you lose the will (or the desire) to play because you have to struggle to accomplish something your reflexes just don't allow anymore though your brain still works pretty darned well.

Gil.

I recall Machinarium having an absolutely foul arcade section near the end of the game that had me frustrated beyond belief. I gave up on it in the end and resorted to watching a YouTube video to see the grand finale.

The Nancy Drew games tend to be chock-a-block with arcade-type sequences and timed puzzles. Ah, happy memories. (Translation: )

Lol!
Love your translation, Rushes!

Gil.

I don't know what you mean by 'anymore' traveler - my reflexes are as good as they ever were & they were always [blip]!

Thanks, all. Nice to know it isn't just me. The point I am making is that there should be an opt-out choice, if non-genre elements are forced on you by a game. People who play so-called "Casual" games are offered a SKIP option when faced with a too-difficult mini-game. Those of us who enjoy a tough puzzle can wrestle with it to our heart's content; others can pass it up and still go on to enjoy the game. Hubby's RPG games often have a SKIP or even a CHEAT component he can employ if he doesn't want to wrestle with a puzzle.

Again, what is so difficult about including that little bit of game programming to let you skip an annoying scene in other genres? If you get stuck with plot or can't find an important piece of inventory, you can consult a WT or get a hint on the forums that can get you past a roadblock, but if you are faced with a timed sequence or action component that you cannot execute, a WT doesn't play through it for you.

We should not be treated like 8-year-olds faced with a plate of vegetables that Mom and Dad want to force us to eat for our own good. We are adults who have paid for a game and then find we can't finish it because some game designer feels he knows better than we do what we should like to play -- and if we don't like it we can just get stuffed. I am not receptive to the advice that we should just suck it up. We are the consumers. You'd think this would not good for the game industry if it means that we shy away from buying another game.

Yes, I now play trial versions of games after having been burned in the past. It doesn't always give you the full picture because the arcade or action sequences usually occur in portions of the game after the trial period. I played the trial version of Machinarium and loved it, bought the game, and then was hit with the first arcade sequence about half an hour past the trial portion. Could not get past it. I also could not enjoy or finish Dreamfall because of the required action components. That was the last time I shelled out $40 for a game.

I got stuck with it the same way -- I assumed a game from WadgetEye would be similar to the Blackwell games. I think I managed to get about halfway through the game with the difficulty set to the easiest setting. The shooting was more about timing and doing actions in a specific order than about speed -- at least on "easy" setting. Not that it required no dexterity at all, but it wasn't as bad as I at first thought. And of course being able to "get past" something doesn't mean you're enjoying it. But then I read about the stompers at the end in Flotsam's walkthrough and decided the game wasn't worth continuing. I watched YouTube videos from later in the game, and the story had an interesting construction. But it wasn't good enough to suffer through the shooting and then be completely blocked by stompers at the end.


I got stuck at that point too. After over an hour of trying, I exited the game, intending to try again later. But when I restarted the game, I found all my saves were gone. Apparently this is a BUG that happens when you clean Flash tracking cookies out of your web browser. The game didn't play in a web browser, so why would it put its saves in the browser's Flash cache along with the Flash-based tracking cookies? When I found out what had happened, I was so disgusted I didn't even bother watching the end on YouTube. I never wanted to see that game again.


Yup. Which is why it's important to find reviews that will tell you about difficult action elements if they are present. You can't trust a reviewer who has no problems with action and doesn't think it's worth mentioning.

Normally the Nancy Drew timed sequences aren't that hard -- except in the case of computer-speed-related bugs in their older games, like the one in "Stay Tuned for Danger." But there was one puzzle in "Phantom of Venice" that was completely destroyed by making it timed. It would have been enjoyable to figure out if it hadn't been timed, but because it was timed it was nearly impossible without a walkthrough to tell you exactly what to do. I don't know why HerInteractive doesn't give an option to remove the timer in their games. They should know by now that not all of their gaming audience are pre-teens -- not that all pre-teens would want the timer either.


At least with RPG's you can go build up your character's strength by practicing/grinding, so you can beat the difficult boss later. Or (often) you can use a cheat to beef up your character. There are a few adventure games that allow "puzzle skips," but not many. Most timed/arcade sequences are only skippable by using someone else's saved game -- which can cause problems of its own in games that aren't completely linear because you may have done things in a different order than the person who supplied the save.


I completely agree that timed/action elements should be skippable. However you can't call timed or action sequences "non-genre" elements when they've been present in adventure games since the 1980's in Sierra's "Quest Adventures."

that best game that had an arcade sequence was Simon the Sorcerer 3. I loved the game, but, had to get a saved game from someone to get past that part. And you definitely need the item that you win to get forward in the game. It sure would have been nice if they would have put a "skip puzzle" in there.

also, Feeble Files had an arcade sequence where you had to win a fish out of the grabber machine. or was it a cat? I can't remember. It was near impossible to get that. Thank goodness there are people who have saved games at these points and will send them to people so that we can finish the games. Both of these games are wonderful games, but, those arcade things are killers and for a while, the game wasn't enjoyable to me - I get sick of trying and trying, to no avail.

I agree that I would like an opt-out choice for certain puzzles.

I skipped buying Gemini Rue due to the action sequences I read about but for some reason I still have it on my "to buy" list and revisit it from time to time.

My sister and I played Machinarium together and loved it! There was one arcade puzzle though that may have stopped the game for me if I was playing alone. My sister was able to solve it.

There was a Nancy Drew game I needed a save for because I could not sew a dress. Irks me!

I remember something in Dreamfall giving me some trouble but not too bad.

(Don't hate) but I don't remember the Still Life laser puzzle giving me trouble. Loved the game!

All excellent comments, Jenny. And yes, I do remember having to do a sword fight with a skeleton in one of the mid-sequence King's Quest games. I got hubby to do that fight for me. Usually, though, the few action components were not game-stoppers and definitely not arcade style. In any case, they never caused me to give up on a game totally. Ever. Now, they are increasingly in your face, especially the arcade ones.

I also was put off the whole Nancy Drew series by the repeated timed elements. I think "Stay Tuned for Danger" was the last one I ever played. I just don't handle that sort of timed stress well. I set up my life to avoid stress (it is not good for your health!) and I don't seek it in my home entertainment. LOL Now that I am older, it is not just a matter of dislike but one of incapacity.

You make a good point about game reviews published by people who don't mind action or timed sequences and so they don't bother to mention their presence in an Adventure game. I know gamers who enjoy the full spectrum of gaming, from puzzles to mortal combat. Most reviewers will note if there is a maze or a music puzzle because they know how many people regard those as anathema, although both can be dealt with via a WT. Maybe it will become more common in the future to note also if there is a game-killing arcade sequence involved, since that cannot be dealt with via a WT.

I almost quit Dreamfall because of the timed "matching symbols" sequences you had to do to open door locks, locks on computers, and many other types of locks (I refuse to call them puzzles because there's no actual puzzling involved). One or two in particular were especially bad. The "fighting" was ridiculous, but you could usually get past it by clicking as fast as you could in the general direction of the target.


I'd argue that they were game-stoppers if you couldn't do them yourself. Not every adventure gamer has someone willing and able to do the sequences for them. I certainly had problems with the mummies in GK1 even on an old 486 computer.


"Stay Tuned" is impossible on newer operating systems due to speed. At one point they made a patch to handle speed on newer computers, but then computers kept getting faster so now the patch doesn't work. Same happened with the original "Safecracker" game from 1997. The inventory would scroll past too quickly to select anything. Someone made a patch so it could be played on newer computers, but then computers kept getting faster so the patch isn't sufficient any more. Time-based puzzles are just a bad idea in general -- especially if the timer is based on computer speed.

Didn't Atlantis Evolution have some ridiculous arcade games and some time sequences where you would get caught?

I can't speak for game designers, but my supposition would be that in mixing genres they are thinking the game may appeal to a broader range of gamers. But an action gamer may be annoyed by other elements of adventure games, and adventure gamers may be annoyed by action elements, so the idea may be misguided.

I didn't mind the laser sequence in Still Life (I actually got through that on my own), but I sure could have done without some of the action-y bits in Dreamfall.

GreyFuss, I never played Atlantis Evolution but I did read about it, and you are correct in your recollection.

"I can't speak for game designers, but my supposition would be that in mixing genres they are thinking the game may appeal to a broader range of gamers. But an action gamer may be annoyed by other elements of adventure games, and adventure gamers may be annoyed by action elements, so the idea may be misguided. "

That's my supposition too, Marian

Greyfuss, Halt Deviant!! I still have nightmares!

I confused at least a dozen people sending them the Rain Dance save from BoUT because I'd done things up till then in a completely different order and suddenly their inventories were seriously out of whack.

Talking about a game allowing you to skip a puzzle after a few tries, the first thing that leapt to mind was Black Mirror II.
If I didn't like the game, which I do, I'd still love it for letting you skip that blinking SLIDER.
Block sliders (usually locks) are fun, I really enjoy them, but those awful things where you have to assemble a picture should be banned forever!
Okay, they're not exactly timed sequences but considering how long it would take me to do one....
(grumble, grumble)

Gil.

I was unaware of the "speed" problem vis-a-vis older games. Thanks for that tip!

Yes, Gil, using someone else's Save Game is great for getting past a rough patch in a linear game; not so helpful for non-linear ones. I got stuck in Outcast (replaying it after many years, via GOG) where there was a pair of stone balls that I had to shoot at, alternately, in order to trigger an event. I couldn't get the rhythm after repeated attempts over a week's time, so I couldn't get past it and go on with the game. I had to abandon a game which I absolutely LOVED playing. I was so disappointed, so sad.

It seems to me that game designers may be shooting themselves in the foot by combining elements of genres that have strong proponents on both ends of the spectrum. A platform gamer won't appreciate getting blind-sided by a slider puzzle. An adventure gamer might not have the reflexes for jumping lily pads across boiling lava for three days. If you burn enough people, they are going to stop buying your product. Could it be one reason sales are falling and people are forever predicting the demise of Adventure gaming?

I've always ignored (and still do) predictions of Adventure games dying.

I've been playing them since the year dot and they're not dead yet.

Nor have I ever had to endure a time when I didn't have a "new" Adventure to play.

[But that could be partly due to the fact that I like to savour a game and play it slowly, I suppose ]

Yeah, it is funny for how many years people (usually web administrators and bloggers on Action/Arcade/RPG sites) have been predicting the demise of Adventure games, Mad. I am curious. I have never seen statistics on sales, have you? Has the market share for Adventure games held steady over the years? Or is it even possible to gauge such a thing, given how "blended" the genres have become?