My Love/Hate Relationship with Adventure Games
July 27th, 2007I came across a message board post today involving someone from a Greek casual game company looking to start working on their first adventure game. In a seeming attempt at gathering data as to what elements they would include in such a game, this individual decided to poll an audience of adventure game fans as to what they love and hate about the genre. Of course, people started to respond with things like “I love a good story and good puzzles” and “I hate puzzles that don’t make sense”, and while I agree with them for the most part, I have this strange niggling feeling that everyone’s missing the point.
This is how I responded:
The reason I like adventure games, and the reason I develop them myself, is because they are the closest things we have to interactive narratives. They are the only genre I know of in which the main point is to fit gameplay around a story, rather than fit a story around gameplay. As such, I find that they have great potential as a medium to convey ideas in a way that neither static stories nor pure gameplay-based games can.
The reason I don’t like adventure games is because the majority of people making them now aren’t doing so to convey their ideas, but in an attempt to nostalgically preserve a genre that they loved in the past without quite knowing why. Instead of the simple act of telling a story and allowing people to play inside it, they meticulously attempt to distill “the genre” into a set of its purest elements, and follow the rules they set out for themselves in an attempt to recapture the magic of ages past. “Story? Check. Puzzles? Check. Characters? Check. 2D point-and-click interface? Check.” And then you end up with a product that’s a pretty imitation of the classics, but lacks a soul. A beautiful surface, but a hollow, empty core.
Thus, from one game developer to another, I implore you to focus not on making an “Adventure Game”, but on making a good game, period. Think about the whole, not just about the individual parts. And put yourself (or yourselves, if there’s more than one of you designing this game) into it. Dare to be unique; don’t just imitate, and don’t just try and please the lowest common denominator. Create something that you find meaningful, and there will inevitably be others who feel the same way, and who will be touched all the more for it.
Hope that’s at least somewhat helpful.
July 27th, 2007 at 11:55 am
Deidra, I’d like to thank you for your reply to my post on the Adventure Gamers forums.
The reason I’m polling the audience is because I’d like to see what each fan thinks they like or not in adventure games, or what they think constitutes an adventure game.
For the moment our target group is the casual games audience which is very different from the hardcore players, so I’m interested to see the perspective of these players in an attempt to see what it would take to bring adventures in the casual scene.
I agree with what you said about finding a way to present an adventure differently than how it was done in the past and that’s the trick really.
Get the best from the games of the past and re-invent the genre, giving people something new which at the same time seems familiar enough to make them get into it instantly.
I’ll keep watching your articles. They’re interesting!
Be well and happy designing! ;o)
Argiris
July 27th, 2007 at 12:21 pm
I think I know your standpoint on this pretty well by now, and I believe that’s a healthy view for a game designer to hold.
July 27th, 2007 at 12:38 pm
Argiris: First of all, thanks for stopping by and checking out my site. Second of all, good luck with what you’re doing. I think what I’ve said applies to casual gamers as well, perhaps even moreso. Focus on telling a good story rather than adhering to game mechanics, and you’ll likely get a larger audience.
Rikard: I’m glad you think so.
August 20th, 2007 at 9:28 am
I would say polling is pretty dangerous when doing a game. Instead of asking what other people like, it’s best to analyze what you like and why.
August 20th, 2007 at 10:26 am
I agree.
August 31st, 2007 at 2:34 pm
I have a question, how important are the “classic elements”? By this I mean, sure, Cubert Badbone and TGTTPOACS had interesting, humorous stories, and I notice you stuck to “Story, Puzzles, Characters, and 2D Point and Click”. That’s fine, but what do you think of deep, involving adventures like “Indigo Prophecy”? That game had story and characters, all right, but puzzles were apparently simplistic/non-existent and it had () 3D graphics and COMBAT. Not to mention the “keyboard crashers” where you hit the arrows in a “Dance Dance Revoloution from Hell” sequence, where missing too many resulted in death. It was heralded by Just Adventure+ as a fantastic breakthrough in adventuring, while others screamed it was pure treason to the Adventure genre. What do you think of this sort of breakaway from “classic adventures”?
August 31st, 2007 at 5:04 pm
I couldn’t care less about adventure games as a genre, so I think people can and should make whatever the hell kinds of games they want, to put it bluntly. “Classic elements” are only important to the extent that they help you put your messages across clearly and effectively; if one feels that a story is better told using action sequences, then so be it. I won’t put down a game just for having non-standard gameplay, but I WILL feel rather indignant if I feel that there’s no reason for its existence other than the fact that it’s gimmicky in an attempt to be “innovative”. (And also if the controls are clunky, but that’s just bad game design. And for the record, I’m just as likely to slam a contrived inventory puzzle; just because it imitates a “classic” doesn’t make it any good!)
It’s worth mentioning that I haven’t played Indigo Prophecy, however. Though from what I’ve seen, the DDR sequences seem rather inappropriate. I hypothesize that the designers should have been able to implement a less stupid way of heightening tension.
September 9th, 2007 at 5:28 am
You make a very good point. The only adventure games still left with a sole are “Sam and Max” and “Ankh” You can download those games at http://www.telltalegames.com Thease are popssible the only “Real” adventure games left.
September 9th, 2007 at 9:42 am
Yeah, I know. I used to work there.
December 23rd, 2007 at 1:36 am
Yeah, I think some people may be underestimating the classic elements, and I completely agree with “Management” on their point that story should come first. I also agree that an adventure game with standard (or even exceptional) mechanics but with a poor story is not very fun.
I have no problem, in theory, with “adventure games” going against the conventional interface like Indigo Prophecy did, but more often than not they end up creating a game that is not fun to play through, even if the story is exceptional.
This wound up to be the case with Indigo Prophecy. The storyline is exceptional, as is the revolutionary amount of different ways things can be done and the way the story can change based on choices the player makes. But if the game becomes too diffiicult or cumbersome then its harmfulness can outway the fun of the story.
So really, I think if story does come first to a developer, unless they’re damn sure their system will be an improvement over the standards, it seems like they may as well stick with what has been proven to work, as clearly the standard interface does not get in the way of telling a good, interactive story.