If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the
FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to
register or
login before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
| 9 JUN 2008 at 4:16pm |
IviniaGuild Master
Posts : 4459
Joined: 7 JUN 2003
Location: US
Status : Offline | I agree with you to a certain extent. Much of this is still being done in several games where you click on something and get icons for what you can do to the spot (look, use an item, etc.) Unfortunately most newer games that have used this have been pretty weak in other areas.
Just to play devil's advocate for a minute, instead of bemoaning the disappearance of said interactivity, ask yourself why that seems to have disappeared.
|
| 9 JUN 2008 at 5:14pm |
JKingSchattenjger
Posts : 2349
Joined: 4 MAY 2008
Location: 0
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By avatar_58 (9 JUN 2008 3:56pm)
Another forum member mentioned the 25th Anniversary Star Trek game. Another fine example.
Are you kidding? The only thing 25th Anniversary was a good example of was inadequate playtesting. Well, that and amazing voice acting, of course. Fortunately Judgement Rites was better, if still not perfect.
Otherwise, though, I generally agree with your argument.
You can't kill someone in a studio.
|
| 9 JUN 2008 at 5:24pm |
avatar_58Private Detective
Posts : 403
Joined: 27 MAY 2008
Status : Online | Originally Posted By JKing (9 JUN 2008 5:13pm)
Originally Posted By avatar_58 (9 JUN 2008 3:56pm)
Another forum member mentioned the 25th Anniversary Star Trek game. Another fine example.
Are you kidding? The only thing 25th Anniversary was a good example of was inadequate playtesting. Well, that and amazing voice acting, of course. Fortunately Judgement Rites was better, if still not perfect.
Otherwise, though, I generally agree with your argument.
25th Anniversary may not have the greatest story, but thats not what I'm talking about here. I'm referring to the way it allows you to go far deeper than just solving the task at hand. Of course Rites is the better game, because it's far more polished and actually has a decent plot throughout the missions (I especially love the mission involving Trelane, very nice).
However both games share the same interactivity level. Puzzles have multiple solutions but not to the point of frustration (useless items, etc). I've always wanted to see a non-star trek game use the same UI and basic ideals but mixed with a fresh story and characters. Could be some great stuff.
I agree with you to a certain extent. Much of this is still being done in several games where you click on something and get icons for what you can do to the spot (look, use an item, etc.) Unfortunately most newer games that have used this have been pretty weak in other areas.
Just to play devil's advocate for a minute, instead of bemoaning the disappearance of said interactivity, ask yourself why that seems to have disappeared.
Budget, lack of creativity. If it's a gameplay choice it's one I will never agree with. The hotspot system is not one I like. If you must have them, why not go overboard and include optional hotspots to examine and toy with? It makes the game too hard or what? If you ask me adventure games are sterile without this mechanic and it's sad that it's the norm.
|
| 9 JUN 2008 at 5:51pm |
| Deleted User | Avatar_58
I'm hardly a sentimental person, but your pic brought a lump to my throat !!
I'm not a specialist on the matter you brought up and my memory is very hazy .... but :-
Nowadays with all the additions you get in recent games, to return to the interface where you got [size=12]8 different actions to perform on every hotspot would be a bit clunky IMO.
I vaguely remember when I first played the games where you didn't need to choose ANYTHING... when you clicked on an appropriate hot spot, the prearranged action took place automatically whether it be push, pull, take, open, whatever !
I remember being somewhat startled by this system when I played King Quest-7 over a dozen years ago and maybe (???) Phantasmagoria a year or so later.
Many new games use this system (or minor variations on it) even today.
What I thought was a very good ‘compromise’ was where clicking on a hotspot produced an object from which the player easily obtained at least 3 possible actions …which in one way or another you could scroll through… usually :- eye ---> look ; hand or fist ---> take, do, push, pull, etc. ; mouth ---> talk, blow, suck, lick, etc.
I remember using this system in Monkey Island-3 (1997) using a gold doubloon, and later in Gilbert Goodmate several years later using a mushroom… and several others in-between.
|
| 9 JUN 2008 at 5:55pm |
Terry PenrodGrand Inquisitor
Posts : 6693
Joined: 16 OCT 2004
Location: US, Texas
Status : Offline | .
I'll hazard to guess that it's not just lack of budget and/or lazy developers but also a disturbing trend amongst most consumers these days who want quick and easy above all else. Thousands of non-essential in-game descriptors and optional actions take a very long time to create / test and they can be confusing or frustrating for players that just want fast, straight-forward gameplay.
As a RPG fan, I love having many thousands of items and hundreds of NPCs with lots of optional side quests in large, sprawling game worlds that can be explored numerous ways. However, I admit that games like that sometimes take hundreds of hours to complete and most people simply don't have that kind of patience. Perhaps this (to a degree) has affected the way modern commercial game designers are viewing complexity / depth / scope / difficulty.
In a nutshell, we may not like living in a severely dumb-downed world, but that seems to be what the majority wants.
Cheers, Terry
|
| 9 JUN 2008 at 5:59pm |
avatar_58Private Detective
Posts : 403
Joined: 27 MAY 2008
Status : Online | Originally Posted By Terry Penrod (9 JUN 2008 5:55pm)
.
I'll hazard to guess that it's not just lack of budget and/or lazy developers but also a disturbing trend amongst most consumers these days who want quick and easy above all else. Thousands of non-essential in-game descriptors and optional actions take a very long time to create / test and they can be confusing or frustrating for players that just want fast, straight-forward gameplay.
As a RPG fan, I love having many thousands of items and hundreds of NPCs with lots of optional side quests in large, sprawling game worlds that can be explored numerous ways. However, I admit that games like that sometimes take hundreds of hours to complete and most people simply don't have that kind of patience. Perhaps this (to a degree) has affected the way modern commercial game designers are viewing complexity / depth / scope / difficulty.
In a nutshell, we may not like living in a severely dumb-downed world, but that seems to be what the majority wants.
Cheers, Terry
RPGs share the same problem these days. It really bothers me that Fallout 3 will be visual, rather than descriptive. I cannot be the only Fallout fan who examined (right click - binoculars) on everything I could find. It felt like an oldschool adventure the way it described things. Fallout 3 isn't going to be like this because bethesda feels it's pointless and should be described in a visual method.
Of course they then use prefab models and don't add any unique traits. Wheras Fallout 1/2 had identical cars/houses that gave many different responses. I fail to see how this is going to be superior.
|
| 9 JUN 2008 at 6:28pm |
InlandAZGuild Master
Posts : 5586
Joined: 4 MAY 2007
Status : Offline | Basically my arguement is that adventure games today have lost a great deal of what made them amazing. One of the big reasons? Interactivity. In many older adventure games you could examine, touch, push or talk to everything around you. If you couldn't, you'd get a specific reason why tailed to that item.
I for one, agree - here's another good example (Rex Nebular - in the cockpit) - and there are even more items to examine.
[img]http://s118.photobucket.com/albums/o92/InlandAZ/mainmenu_003.png[/img]
[img]http://s118.photobucket.com/albums/o92/InlandAZ/mainmenu_004.png[/img]
[img]http://s118.photobucket.com/albums/o92/InlandAZ/mainmenu_005.png[/img]
[img]http://s118.photobucket.com/albums/o92/InlandAZ/mainmenu_006.png[/img]
[img]http://s118.photobucket.com/albums/o92/InlandAZ/mainmenu_007.png[/img]
[img]http://s118.photobucket.com/albums/o92/InlandAZ/mainmenu_008.png[/img]
[img]http://s118.photobucket.com/albums/o92/InlandAZ/mainmenu_009.png[/img]
[img]http://s118.photobucket.com/albums/o92/InlandAZ/mainmenu_010.png[/img]
[img]http://s118.photobucket.com/albums/o92/InlandAZ/mainmenu_011.png[/img]
[img]http://s118.photobucket.com/albums/o92/InlandAZ/mainmenu_012.png[/img]
[img]http://s118.photobucket.com/albums/o92/InlandAZ/mainmenu_013.png[/img]
|
| 9 JUN 2008 at 6:59pm |
Lady KestrelGuild Master
Posts : 4038
Joined: 27 SEP 2004
Location: US, NJ
Status : Offline | Look at fuzzy what, Inland?
"Where is the fountain that throws up these flowers in a ceaseless outbreak of ecstasy?"
-Rabindranath Tagore
|
| 9 JUN 2008 at 7:10pm |
InlandAZGuild Master
Posts : 5586
Joined: 4 MAY 2007
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By Lady Kestrel (9 JUN 2008 6:59pm)
Look at fuzzy what, Inland?
Are you sure that's not just our eyes these days LadyK? :
Yes, the quality was nowhere near what today’s games offer - but, heck those new fangled Super VGA games were quit a leap in their day over the old archaic Interactive Fiction titles.
edit -
*groan* Ohhhh you mean the dice n stuff :
|
| 9 JUN 2008 at 7:27pm |
colpetSchattenjger
Posts : 1630
Joined: 12 APR 2003
Status : Offline | I'm probably odd man out, but overwhelming activity choice is exactly what I hate about older games. Chronomaster was another one like GK1. Look, walk, push, pull, open, close - just too many verbs. I find it boring to cycle through the choices.
Occasionally visiting Uru Live (KI 0063722 .&&
|
| 9 JUN 2008 at 7:48pm |
Terry PenrodGrand Inquisitor
Posts : 6693
Joined: 16 OCT 2004
Location: US, Texas
Status : Offline | .
Originally Posted By avatar_58 (9 JUN 2008 5:59pm)
RPGs share the same problem these days. It really bothers me that Fallout 3 will be visual, rather than descriptive. I cannot be the only Fallout fan who examined (right click - binoculars) on everything I could find. It felt like an oldschool adventure the way it described things. Fallout 3 isn't going to be like this because bethesda feels it's pointless and should be described in a visual method.
Of course they then use prefab models and don't add any unique traits. Wheras Fallout 1/2 had identical cars/houses that gave many different responses. I fail to see how this is going to be superior.
Ah yes but did you read the exciting announcement that Bethsoft just made about the extra, added, super-duper bonus item they will be inlcuding in the special, limited, premiun-priced "Survivor's Edition" of Fallout 3? It will not just include a DVD called "The Making of Fallout 3" but also... are you ready?
That's right, a faithful, life-size, plastic replica of the wearable Pip-Boy 3000 that's actually... a clock!
http://ps3.ign.com/objects/142/14258745.html
This should easily make up for anything that may be lacking in the game, don't you think?
Cheers, Terry
|
| 9 JUN 2008 at 8:00pm |
IviniaGuild Master
Posts : 4459
Joined: 7 JUN 2003
Location: US
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By colpet (9 JUN 2008 7:27pm)
I'm probably odd man out, but overwhelming activity choice is exactly what I hate about older games. Chronomaster was another one like GK1. Look, walk, push, pull, open, close - just too many verbs. I find it boring to cycle through the choices.
You are not alone Colpet. I feel the same way. Too much information on things that have nothing to do with the game itself. Most of the resulting feedback is nothing more than the developers poor shot at humor. The miscellaneous comments were cute and funny in the early games, but it got old really fast. :-/
|
| 9 JUN 2008 at 8:02pm |
Lucien21Guild Master
Posts : 4876
Joined: 9 JUL 2003
Location: 0
Status : Offline | Dumbing down or streamlining of the interface? If you look at any product you see the ones that sell have simple to pick up interfaces. (User Friendly is an art) Apple are masters with the click wheel and the multitouch screen. Simple interfaces that resonate with buyers where other phones and MP3 players might be technically better, but not as user friendly.
You essentially went from Text Adventures with theoretical infinite input possibilities (in reality it's defined by developer and parser) to the Scumm verb system to the verb coin (Full Throttle etc) to left click action/right click look to left click does everything mentality.
Streamlining the interface is fine as long as there are a good variety of hotspots to interact with.
Just look at Syberia. Lots of pretty screens with bugger all to do but walk through them. However look at Martin Mystere which had about 50 hotspots per screen that was a tad overkill. Personal preference of course, but there most be a happy medium and only if there is something interesting to say about whatever you click on.
Of course budget and time play a part where you need to script all the alternate dialogue and interaction, but I do miss the days where there was more thought involved when you knew the action was right and you pulled the lever because you asked it to, not because you left clicked to see what happened.
Dear Diary, My teenage angst bullsh*t now has a bodycount.
|
| 9 JUN 2008 at 8:37pm |
InlandAZGuild Master
Posts : 5586
Joined: 4 MAY 2007
Status : Offline | You are not alone Colpet. I feel the same way. Too much information on things that have nothing to do with the game itself. Most of the resulting feedback is nothing more than the developers poor shot at humor.
Unfortunately true - although Al Lowe did a pretty good job of it. I tell ya though - it sure beats a stock reply like -
a.) It's stucccck
b.) no need to go down there
|
| 9 JUN 2008 at 8:50pm |
pavel4444Space Cadet
Posts : 124
Joined: 2 MAY 2008
Status : Online | yeah, most newer games could use more interactivity.
|
| 10 JUN 2008 at 6:30pm |
Steve VSorcerer Apprentice
Posts : 265
Joined: 16 MAR 2008
Status : Online | I know this is an AG thread, but if you thought Gabriel Knight1 had too many options just be happy you never tried to play Falcon 4.0, the 'ultimate' warplane simulator. I got pretty good at Gunship (a fairly basic helicopter sim for those of you who never wanted to be Maverick from Top Gun). So I tried to step up to Falcon 4.0 and was a tad intimidated by the 350 page manual for starters! It's unbelievable, the amount of time you spend just on the training modules you could actually learn to become a fighter pilot in real life. They put everything that a real F-16 had in there and made you use all of it, then threw in the best ever real time campaign game set in Korea for you to test your hard-earned skills.
Incredible game, especially as its ten years old now, but for the purposes of this discussion really far too 'interactive' for even quite hard core players. There has to be a happy medium somewhere...
|
| 10 JUN 2008 at 7:44pm |
Lucien21Guild Master
Posts : 4876
Joined: 9 JUL 2003
Location: 0
Status : Offline | Compare that with the Flight Sims that come out today.
Ace Combat etc are all very simple.
Dear Diary, My teenage angst bullsh*t now has a bodycount.
|
| 11 JUN 2008 at 3:53am |
avatar_58Private Detective
Posts : 403
Joined: 27 MAY 2008
Status : Online | Originally Posted By Lucien21 (10 JUN 2008 7:44pm)
Compare that with the Flight Sims that come out today.
Ace Combat etc are all very simple.
Which, like adventure games, makes no sense. It's a niche genre, why mess with the niche gamers? I hear mainstream appeal as an excuse for over simplification, but adventure games are NOT mainstream. Nor will they ever have that level of appeal. So why have hardcore adventures suddenly disappeared?
|
| 11 JUN 2008 at 3:56am |
JKingSchattenjger
Posts : 2349
Joined: 4 MAY 2008
Location: 0
Status : Offline | Have they? And even if they have, was it sudden?
No matter. I can't imagine why one would want to simplify a flight simulator. It's a flight simulator! Aeroplanes are supposed to be ridiculously complex!
You can't kill someone in a studio.
|
| 11 JUN 2008 at 4:13am |
SAMSpace Cadet
Posts : 148
Joined: 13 FEB 2004
Status : Online | Instant entertainment, instant success!
That's the world today, no patience.
I see it in my line of work, the customer wants to purchase
the most expensive shooting outfit and then he equates that
with instant success.
He doesn't think (gasp) practice is neccessary, because he
reached level 10 in Half life in 3 evenings...
Adventure games require patience
|
| 11 JUN 2008 at 10:46pm |
AkrilSpace Cadet
Posts : 139
Joined: 31 OCT 2002
Status : Offline | One adventure game interface that offered a great amount of game interactivity without overwhelming the player with too many options was Callahan's Crosstime Saloon.
When you click on a hotspot, you get a menu listing how you can interact with it ("Look at", "Talk to", "Take", "Open", etc.). There can be literally dozens of hotspots on each screen, but there are only a certain number of things you can do with each one -- you can't talk to most inanimate objects, take people or open things that obviously can't be opened. There are even atypical actions that occasionally appear and add even more variety (when you click on the moon in one screen, you have the option of "Bay at".
[url=http://akril15.com]Home[/url] * [url=http://akril15.com/wssquid]WSSQID[/url] * [url=http://www.sierramusiccentral.com/]SMC - Sierra Music Central[/url] [img]http://akril15.com/misc/SmallWolfyScratch.gif[/img]&&[url=http://akril15.com/kq9]The Quest Lives...[/url]
|
| 11 JUN 2008 at 10:52pm |
JKingSchattenjger
Posts : 2349
Joined: 4 MAY 2008
Location: 0
Status : Offline | Indeed, Akril, Return to Zork implemented such a system as well. I found it worked extremely well, although I'm still wary of hotspots in general, frankly.
You can't kill someone in a studio.
|
| 12 JUN 2008 at 3:30pm |
TechnoSpikePrivate Detective
Posts : 581
Joined: 26 APR 2005
Location: PT
Status : Offline | This is one of the reasons why I like GTA... the ability to let me go out and go where I want just, feeling what is like to live in that particular world... I like interactivity, give-me that... if just wanted to look at things without the ability to interact with them I would watch a movie!
|
