Hello people out there.
Some conflicts in my life regarding the direction I want to take, in my studies, have led me lately to give a lot of serious thinking of the medium we call "computer games", and especially adventure games.
It's amazing how everyone who isn't into serious digging into the niche of adventure, is positive that adventure games have gone of this world - that's in the bad case. In the good case, they would reffer to Tomb Raider as a nowadays adventure game, not knowing that some actual, story-based, inverntory-based, logic-based games, with heavy production and requirements, are still getting released.
The market nowadays, in every aspect, is desperate for originality, creativity, constantly drawing out new ideas and constantly thinking how to further develop concepts and ideas we have gotten used to - the rate of which is growing rappidly.
It is not a brilliant diagnosis of me to mark that the adventure genre has been left, technologically, much behind other genres in the adventure gaming market. Comparing a game 10 years old to a contemporary game will hardely reveal any differences, but perhaps a change in graphics.
Yet, to seriously survive in the modern market, to succeed in getting budgets, contracts and deals with game companies, and to get to a large audience - something needs to be done.
I would never sattle for something less than a real adventure - a game that is surrounds itself on the plot and story, and on the intellect of the player, simply stands on a much higher level than any other way of gaming (which I still could enjoy, but I just cannot compare).
I'm a strong believer in the medium of computer games as a form of conveying ideas and beauty - much like books and movies.
But how do we (or they - "the makers") keep the genre alive, for real? Breathing, developing, surviving decates to come? Most people here are afraid of keyboard (I am *not* critisizing of course). Have you seen any games that seemed to have some real advancement in them? While the market is ever-growing, adventures seem to stand in place. One of my dreams is to be able to be a part of the force that will push the genre forwards - not on the account of the older audience that I know are a big part of the general audience, and not on the account of women, who begin more and more to "allow" themselves to be intersted in this genre. But giving the genre air again - so it can transform and grow and be brilliant, not mediocre. I haven't played a *really really good game* since GK3 (and it had it's flaws), and it's almost been 10 years since! I have played at least 30 games since.
I refuse to believe that this cannot change. If you happen to want a really really good book, you don't have to try to hard to get it. The choice is infinite - there are millions of books out there, consisting so many different ideas and concepts - you are sure to find one you like, every time you plunge yourself in there. The audience exists, and many people are thirsty for good works of art. They are unaware of the genre. I try my best to expand it in my circle of friends, but I usually fail, since what to me seems as an exciting potential, to them seems primitive or dead.

Ideas. Thoughts. Don't sell yourselves of course, but in general, I'd be interested to know how people respond to this issue. Do some disagree with the fact that the genre stands still? Are some afraid of advancment, seeing that this word somehow always seems to associate with "keyboard"?

Let the discussion begin! (hopefully, if someone bothered to read )

Very interesting ...Well we all like differant controls in an adventure and some times if it would nt cost the makers to much maybe they could do a good game point and click and so many using key board controls .I don t know if this idea would pay ..Just a thought .I dont think a lot of people want the controls to change ..Most seem to want point and click but also to be able to look around and move where ever they want to in a game .I do think there is a market for these games but they dont seem to get thehype that the shoot and kill ones do although some of these have good stories .What makes me mad is there must be a lot of people out there that never get the chance to play these games as they don t seem to get in our stores where I am .3 cheers for Dave at interact Via trading or the internet I would never get the chance to play these games.There are more games for us point and click fans than I have ever seen and I think it will get bigger .To me the story is the main thing and that the game runs smotherly .Grafics although nice to have not as inpotant but thinking of games like Mystt what can I say .The Sentinal what an imagination some one had .I think there is more choice than ever as long as you are on the internet .There are also some free games although grafics are nt always that brill .They have good little stories and although very slowly ...yes I think these games are getting more popular even with the young ones .Sorry to go on

i think tomer feels that adventures will die if they standing still.in the very earliest days they were forefront of compuer games but now there ist no difference at all between gk3 or texmurphy pandora or grim fandango and any single adventure in 21 century except some improvements in graphics with more strong computers.just the same old stuff sometimes very good sometimes bad but nothing whatsover actually *new*.
in fact exactly opposite.
hardly 1 single game has as good story as thosese 3 so things havent improved but maybe even moved backward.

i think tomer want to know - what can be done to make **original** ?

Advancing technicallly for adventures usually means changing the controls the player uses in the environment. Many times that means using the keyboard, often introducing action /stealth or puzzles that require dexterity.
I'm one of the type of gamers that like my fundementals of Adventures to stay the same, and that means controlling my way through the game in as easy and non distracting a manner as possible. You can't beat a mouse for that.
There are many other aspects of adventures that could be technically enhanced - better CGI characters, or finding a way to do FMV again. Expansive environments to explore, with diurnal and seasonal change. Engaging stories, different from the run of the mill mystery/horror/supernatural topics that are familiar.
Lastly, I don't actually think the genre is stagnating. I think that Adventures are not popular because many people who would like them don't know they exist (people who use a computer minimally, or not at all, but love to read). Part of the effort should be to get this potential market engaged, not trying to move Adventures into hybrid games in hopes of attracting the mainstream market. The latter always seems to be the hope of the 'technically enhanced' game.

Adventure games are not dead.

They are also not broke, so no need to fix them.

If someone requires them to be "changed" in order to hold their interest, perhaps adventure games are not their cup of tea and they should dabble in the hordes of action/adventure or other genres that are out there.

Ana

Well, I for example disagree that THE OTHER game genres don't stand still. To me all of the "advancements" are only on the surface. Bells and whistles do of course allow to call the attention of more gamers, but you don't need any particular creativity for them, just big budgets.

they are not dead but they are ailing
when i used to went into any of our local computer shops 10 years ago i see shelves and shelves full of dozens of adventres.
ive stopped visiting now.2/3 are console games and the PC rest not one single adventure seems no longer worth shelf space
i know lots are now sold download which not 10 years ago but this is not healthy and lots developers canot make ends meet

original doesnt *have* to mean kb-control or action nor going to othr genres and i will not ever do that.just not same sorts again and again and again no real change or improvement

I agree with that statement. For me it is not so much the technology but availability. Very rare to just walk into a store and find an adventure or casual game even on the shelf anymore!! If it weren't for this board, I wouldn't know anything about what was available or coming out at all. I think the one positive sign is there do seem to be a lot of really good games coming out/in development - so obviously there is enough of an interest in them out there. The adventure genre must just not appeal to most of the big name publishers and retailers target demographic the way "darker side" and console games do? Those other genres always seem to have the lions share of publicity and shelf space.

In Poland the shelves are brimming with adventure games (Kheops, Frogwares, Telltale, House of Tales, classic LucasArts etc.). OK, the other genres have even bigger sections, but mostly every commercial adventure game from the few last years can be found.

That is great to hear Ascoval!

Ana

I m going Poland next year

Have a good holiday in Poland, Dragon!
I started gaming on the PC with DOOM. I still really like action gaming, but found adventures more involving with the Tex Murphy games Pandora Directive and then Under A Killing Moon (yeah, played them backwards). I still will get out a shooter and go off killing everything that thinks of moving now, but adventures let me know the people and care about what is happening more than simple survival. Today, I have played waaaaay more adventure games than action games, platform and PC. Speaking of Poland, I find a lot of the games coming out of countries in that region are really livening up graphics and story lines a lot.

that is reely reely interesting.
i wander why not the case in some other countries
wether we like it or dont market forces rule or at any rate influence
many indies games sell only thousands and only if lucky tens of thousands.but to finance and justify the time and work they need to sell 100 thousand or better more

yes poland sounds wonderful i can't find even one proper adventure in shops or stores and can only order which has problems but much better than nothing.

question: why in 1998 did i walk into almost any computer syhop and have a choice of at least 2 or 3 dozen good adventures and now zero?

Where I am there as never been many adventure games in the shops just the odd one or two.I dont think people get the chance to find out about these games .If you can t buy them you cant play them but now we have the internet and thanks to that we can buy them from other countries and what gets me more than any thing is that when they do come out in the shops you are talking £20 -£30 to buy and I can go on the internet and they have to post it from god knows where and it still costs less .I think because of the internet there will always be adventure gamers and to trading from person to person and people helping you to understand stuff when its all writen in a differant language .Places like gameboomers .justadventure etc will keep the gene going on

Good RPGs will incorporate some adventure game elements by having more than one possible solution to quests and having a diverse range of characters for the player to interact with. Take for an example, Jade Empire. However, once a while the opposite happens when something like Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix or Dreamfall comes along which are adventure games that actually incoporate RPG elements!

I would consider Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix to be very worthwhile playing, despite its flaws, if just to experience how different it is. In my opinion Dreamfall having incorporated combat elements but not expanding further on them makes very risky design decision. It risks alientating adventure gamers which do not like action but the game expands its appeal to include action gamers and non-gamers who like movie elements in games.

I don't think advancing technically is important.
I think what is most important is advancing reliability and availability.
New gamers need to be able to find the games, and they also want some reassurance that the game will work -- or if it doesn't, that they can choose something else and won't have thrown their money away. Otherwise their first game may be their last.

I don't think action gamers are the best market to try to target.
Action gamers already know about games and what sort of games they like.

Instead, I think casual game outlets are the best hope of expanding the audience for adventure games. Games like Dream Chronicles may be very easy for current adventure gamers, but they could be a first step towards adventure games for casual gamers. There are already a few adventure games being sold by casual game companies like Big Fish -- for example Blackwell Legacy, Time Stand Still, and a few Nancy Drew games. Nancy Drew: Phantom of Venice is currently #16 at Big Fish while Time Stand Still is #13, so I think the audience is there.

Adventure games aren't a replacement for Casual games, but the same people might enjoy both types (more likely than with people who play action games) and Casual games already have a good distribution mechanism. Some casual game portals will even give you your money back if a game doesn't work on your system -- or at least give you credit on another game of your choice -- which is something you don't get at Gamestop or Best Buy.

lots truth and sense in that.

In the beginning there was the adventure game. But it was text only and you needed big imagination. So they moved to the PC, but back then, that platform was the price of a car. Then along came Doom and suddenly there was a different kind of player, young, aggressive. Need a cheaper platform to reach this young player - let's invent the console. The console took off - it was a new market. They shipped the consoles with platform games, for SuperMario was better technology than PacMan.

Adventure games didn't die, they just got usurped by new, more lucrative genres. Then came market forces. Are you going to make an adventure game - or would you prefer to sell millions of copies of a Doom derivative or an in-the-box platform game? Hmm, that's a hard one. So the big names departed the adventure platform in search of the big money they needed to survive and the publishers went with them.

So everything went quiet in the adventure genre for a couple of years. Meanwhile Messrs Boakes and Jensen and Sokal realised the potential of a niche with no serious competition and then a little while later, others (ahem) thought 'that's a good idea'. But the little guys haven't the staff for the big productions, so the look and feel of the Adventure game doesn't progress as fast as in the more excitement-driven genres.

Ultimately, the reason the Adventure genre is quiet and esoteric compared with the console-style games is because until now, the big publishers have not had the incentive to market the genre, so few people know of it, so it doesn't make so much money, so it doesn't attract the big publishers etc. But that doesn't matter any more, because now there's Lighthouse and Tri Synergy and GotGame and others. New producers, publishers with bottle and expertise. Our genre is about to get better known. You never know - maybe soon, somebody will offer Messrs Boakes and Jensen and Sokal a mil or two to port to the Wii. Meanwhile, our technology is getting more accessible. Cubase is less than 400 quid, Blender and Wintermute are donationware, there are dozens of books on game story design.

I'm encouraged by this genre. Never underestimate the indies in any industry. Indies eventually become the mainstream. Without them, we wouldn't have Oasis, chicken tikka masala, Google, Impressionist paintings or Pilates. The indies are coming.

Cheers

Noel

Advancing Technology is a oft repeated refrain in the criticism of Adventure games. The complaint usually is Adventures have not kept up with the times, they stagnate, lag behind and so on. So how do we employ technology to make Adventures better, graphics? I submit Adventures have employed better graphics. Compare GK1 to TLJ and then TLJ to Dreamfall. Better graphics become obvious, so perhaps ramping up graphics more will make them look better, but it seems that's not really an issue.

So then we examine tech advances to discover the keyboard replacing the mouse. What is the result? It becomes confusing to gamers who have spent years with the mouse. The answer of course is over time you will get used to it. But used to what? W-A-S-D and the arrow keys seem to be the favorite of these "innovators" When you compare the use of these keys to the mouse unless one has great dexterity the mouse actually has the capability to complete these tasks more quickly than the keyboard. Is that true?

I will borrow from MaGtRo excellent walkthrough of Broken Sword 3 posted on Gameboomers to illustrate the point, just so I did not miss anything.
"movement controls: run is left shift, next object is page up, previous object is page down, creep is left Ctrl key, pause is ESC, inventory is spacebar. Toggle or press the spacebar again to close inventory.The action map positions are: up is W, down is S, left is A and right is D. These keys are used together with the action console at bottom right of the screen. Additional action is a combination of the action with the arrows for direction of the action needed. To combine items in inventory use the left action (2 boxes with an arrow) panel after selecting the items to combine."

On your mouse RUN is generally double click. Movement is click on a spot on the screen, your character moves to that spot. Please explain to me how the above description moves your character to another section of the screen faster than a click of the mouse does it? Please explain how the convoluted use of keyboard described above is quicker and more efficient to mix inventory items than the old fashion way of dragging a desired object over another in inventory with your mouse? I propose the introduction of keyboard controls created a more convoluted operation that slowed game play and was wrapped up in a blanket of "advancement". I see no keyboard action that can't be done with a mouse more efficiently. Please spare me this tech "advance"

Another industry sweetheart is 3D graphics and the ability to freely explore. Yes 3D graphics are nice to look at, however, there appears to be many people who suffer motion sickness. Gladly I for one do not share that malady. It is not the 3D graphics that is the problem here. It is the free floating camera that spins you around in every direction creating confusion regarding your point of view. Left is no longer left and right is no longer right. We won't get into up and down. I will offer the abomination that is Broken Sword 3 as the poster child for evil changing camera angles. Remember trying to run to that elevator? As you fervently pound on the keys to run? You can't stop pushing the key or you are caught. So you keep pounding that key and suddenly the horrible camera angle changes and you are running toward your doom instead of away from it. There is no excuse for that when a simple fixed camera would have avoided an unnecessary annoying sequence of game control operation. Or better yet mouse controls.

What can you do? The industry insist on 3D. Ever hear of fixed camera angles, use of a mouse? Try that with 3D you might have something. Though many games have had excellent results with 2D and painted backgrounds. Yes 3D is a technical advance but until they get it right spare me.

So what technical changes should be or can be done? What about the gamble taken by Culpa Innata? Those advances with facial expressions, eye movements and lip movement during speech were stunning. A simple minor advance relatively speaking was more impressive and added more meaningful enhancements than 3D and keyboards ever had. What Adventure games need is more of that. Yes I heard whining about bad graphics, I did not notice bad graphics in that game sorry.

The naysayers forget what an Adventure game is. To remind them, they are about, story, character and puzzles. True I don't care all that much about puzzles but many do. However, both branches of Adventure, puzzle centered like Myst, story centered like TLJ are all built around story, character and puzzles. You need to focus on those items adding "advances" only when they truly advance the genre. Keyboard and spinning camera angles are not the advances we need. It will be interesting what Frogwares changes in their re-release of the Awakened, did they finally get it?

A trend that I have noticed of late is almost comical. All of the innovation and technological additions made to jazz up the shooters to disguise the latest entry of Shooter version 22, so nobody notices it is the same game as Shooter 21, seems to have fallen short. What do I mean? It seems many of these promoters are hyping that Shooter 22 has a more in depth story. Not to be out done the producers of Mayhem 98 are touting they have a more detailed story. What add a story? So true alas they seem to be adopting something the failing Adventure genre has known for years. You need a story and characters to carry the burden of glitz.

I disagree there have been no really good games since GK3. There have been many too many to cite here. To illustrate a few examples, TLJ, Syberia, Broken Sword 1 more recently Culpa Innata. I could go on but there are many with story that is as in depth as GK 3. Dreamfall's story was amazing it's failure was in trying faux technological advances that diminished the power the story had. Read the multitude of complaints that plague Dreamfall. It is not the story beyond its incomplete ending that was the problem with Dreamfall. The incomplete ending was designed to set up a sequel. I agree with the complaints over that decision. It was in my opinion a poor choice but it was not a product of bad writing. The complaints were, keyboard, stealth, fighting, free floating camera and of course too few puzzles. The story was as amazing and gripping as any before it.

My solution continue to tell in depth stories with strong character development while incorporating puzzles that make sense. Then follow Culpa Innata's lead by employing technological advances that truly are meaningful. Spare us the failed glitz that passes for advancement while succeeding in making game play more difficult.

noel - hooray for indy developrs they allseem to have darnd good original stories and many have much more.

nb - sorry mariner.i played dreamfall to the end and agree about every 1 of teknical atrocities.
but i thought that the whole story and not only end was one of complete mishmesh which had no meaning for me whatsoever- just meaningless pretentius airyfairy narative with no meaning.

sorry to those who loved it but i found the actuql dreamfall story mumbojumbo

What are you talking about? The requirements for adventure games keep going up. And frankly I think its absurd. Nothing wrong with hand drawn 2D images.

LindaMarion
I don't disagree with you in regard to the incomplete Dreamfall ending. What I said was in total it was an amazing story. Yes it was fantasy but well written.

GuybrushThreepwood
Who is it you directed your question to? I'm a bit confused.

Tomer.

Hi oldmariner

I agree with absolutely everything you said

Cheers.

Mad

thanks Mad, and GuybrushThreepwood I garee there is nothing wrong with hand drawn 2D it works fine for me.