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.
| 24 DEC 2003 at 4:02am |
| Deleted User | Because the addition of story, characters and intelligent puzzling makes all those other genres better while having to master complex keyboard controls, combat, and tests of timing and dexterity make adventure games into exactly the thing that a lot of us were trying to escape when we started playing adventure games in the first place.
If I LIKED that crap, I'd be sitting parked in my parents' basement playing Madden with my PS2 controller clutched in my nacho cheese Dorito-stained fingers.
Duh.
|
| 24 DEC 2003 at 4:05am |
Bob_the_BuilderJourneyman
Posts : 956
Joined: 25 APR 2003
Status : Online | "Adventurers the most stubborn gamers?"
Yes
A lot of adventure gamers have been playing games with little or no action scenes for over 10 years which makes it hard for them to consider games like Beyond Good and Evil or Morrowind to be adventure games even if they have more exploration in them than most of today's adventure games. Plus, a lot of today's games in other genres have far better stories and characters than recent adventure games.
And as you can see from Bacardi's post...
"If I LIKED that nuts, I'd be sitting parked in my parents' basement playing Madden with my PS2 controller clutched in my nacho cheese Dorito-stained fingers."
They seem to think they're better than other gamers because for a long time a long time ago (with certain exception recently), adventure games were the only games that provoked thought and had good stories.
NO SOUP FOR YOU!
|
| 24 DEC 2003 at 4:23am |
| Deleted User | ... and did not require any speed or dexterity.
|
| 24 DEC 2003 at 4:38am |
SymphonicEchoIntergalactic Janitor
Posts : 24
Joined: 17 DEC 2003
Status : Online | I would agree that most 'devout' adventure gamers are stubborn when it comes to the games. we've grown up on some classic, funny, intriguing, inspiring, thought-provoking, educating, frightening, awe-inspiring games (and that's just to keep it brief) I like a challange for my head, not for my hand-eye coordination.
Most of us can jump over barrels and flick switches and shoot *insert aminal, vegtable or mineral* but when it comes to a nitty gritty, hard ass puzzle, I finally feel I have achieved something (in the game playing world)
Well, that's my 5 mins of waffle
if this is reality, let me lose my sanity
|
| 24 DEC 2003 at 6:52am |
Jenny100Guild Master
Posts : 3510
Joined: 12 OCT 2002
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By jujigatame (24 DEC 2003 3:52am)
You didn't hear strategy gamers gripe over the rise of RTS games.
Sure you do. At least I have. Some strategy gamers like their games to be entirely about thinking and planning and want the action paused so they can do a thorough job. I remember overhearing a couple of these guys in Gamestop, bemoaning the fact that nearly every strategy game on the shelf was an RTS nowadays.
You didn't hear action gamers complain when their games received strategic or role-playing elements.
Actually I have. Some action gamers like their gameplay kept relatively simple, without having to worry about stats or anything more strategic than their current battle. They say they want to relax and get rid of their pent up aggressions and not have to think too hard about what they're doing.
|
| 24 DEC 2003 at 12:01pm |
| Deleted User | Gamers are generally moaners in general. But, that said, I myself (like Gayle and a few others here) don't stick to one genre... I'm not obsessive like that.
I'm also fortunate enough to have the dexterity to cope with pointing a mouse with one hand and pressing a couple of buttons with another.
|
| 24 DEC 2003 at 1:33pm |
AyaGrand Inquisitor
Posts : 7277
Joined: 16 OCT 2002
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By MonkeyDude (24 DEC 2003 12:01pm)
Gamers are generally moaners in general. But, that said, I myself (like Gayle and a few others here) don't stick to one genre... I'm not obsessive like that
i don't stick to one genre either... but that fact does NOT mean that all games have to become one hybrid-genre... when i want to play an adventure i want to play an ADVENTURE... if i wanna wiggle around joypads and bang keyboards i'll play smth else
and yes strategy gamers bitch about real time, and yes action gamers bitch about rpg and strategy elements, and yes rpg gamers bitch about action etc... adventurers just do it more (and rightly so too)
You have gotten the attention of the mysterious lady. She turns to face you. Her face is devoid of any flesh. You are frozen with horror as she begins ripping your body into a bloody mess.
|
| 24 DEC 2003 at 1:57pm |
| Deleted User | Er... why is it right exactly? Run me through that.
Anyway, "hybrid" games are here to say. Why we have to pigeonhole everything is beyond me. Sometimes a game can be great through innovative design that smoothly interlaces into a cohesive whole. A badly made "hybrid" is something I don't like, and rightly so. If a game is a good game, then who cares!
As for the adventure genre, its still stuck in convention. Thats why people play less of them... it's a seen it all before atmosphere we're all used to. This needs to change - even in the storylines, of which we saw more innovative ideas (Loom, for example) years ago than we do now.
Less templars, sphinxes and all that crap, I say. Newer, more interesting storylines like we've seen in the Final Fantasy series and the recent Beyond Good and Evil.
More innovation like Runaway's graphics and style, (although perhaps not its gameplay, from what I've heard and read), BS3's use of 3D (although better camera and less crates), the initial stages of a useful interface in GK3 (with a smoother icon system and transitions), the character models of Silent Hill 3 (one day it may happen).
Perhaps Sam n Max will iron all this out? I doubt it. People will moan about it's action sequences (of which there were in the original).
Thinking about it, all this moaning is good for discussion though.
|
| 24 DEC 2003 at 2:19pm |
AyaGrand Inquisitor
Posts : 7277
Joined: 16 OCT 2002
Status : Offline | well if you take a closer look to the hot spot you'll probably won't see more than 5 posts from me... why? cause i'm really tired of arguements that lead nowhere
and that's what i'm gonna do here too... you're of the opinion adventures should become action hybrids (as well as probably action games becoming adventure hybrids and everyone live happily ever after) and that 3d and all that crap is important... i'm of the opinion adventures should stay adventures, the kind of game you can sit back and relax and play with your brain, not with your reflexes, and that a good adventure can have the crappiest gfx (larry 1, maniac mansion) or no gfx at all (ingrid's back, the guild of thieves)
oh and 2 notes before i finish:
1) silent hill is not an adventure (and i love both 1 (more) & 2 (less) and can't wait to play 3)
2) sam 'n' max had an action sequence, but you didn't have to go thru it
You have gotten the attention of the mysterious lady. She turns to face you. Her face is devoid of any flesh. You are frozen with horror as she begins ripping your body into a bloody mess.
|
| 24 DEC 2003 at 3:04pm |
| Deleted User | Originally Posted By jujigatame (24 DEC 2003 3:52am)
I wish to pose a question here. How come ours is the only genre whose fans complain when their games get influences from another genre? You didn't hear strategy gamers gripe over the rise of RTS games. You didn't hear action gamers complain when their games received strategic or role-playing elements. Do you see what I'm getting at here? Why is the action-adventure so much maligned whereas other hybrid styles have been embraced?
Am I wrong? Why is this?
Because there are a large proportion of adventure games who dislike violence or don't have the manual dexterity to get through action sequences. The adventure audience is NOT the general gaming audience.
Besides, adding action elements to an adventure game is a much bigger change than adding an interesting plot to an action game. The adventure gamers have to learn a whole new set of manual dexterity skills, while the action gamers only have to learn to watch nice cutscenes and dialogue.
|
| 24 DEC 2003 at 3:51pm |
Agustín CordesGuild Master
Posts : 5696
Joined: 23 OCT 2002
Location: AR, Buenos Aires
Status : Offline | BJ's response (if only a bit elitist ) is on spot. Plus, I wouldn't say hybrids have been generally succesful. How many RPGs have you seen bashed to death because of arcade-ish combat systems? Ultima anyone?
It seems the only truly effective "marriage" has been RPG/shooter, and not even those hybrids are fully embraced by hard-core RPG players.
As to why adventurers are the most stubborn gamers, the answer is simple: there aren't many adventures. So it's perfectly understandable that adventurers moan when they don't get "pure" adventures.
|
| 24 DEC 2003 at 4:15pm |
| Deleted User | Originally Posted By Dark Aya (24 DEC 2003 2:19pm)
well if you take a closer look to the hot spot you'll probably won't see more than 5 posts from me... why? cause i'm really tired of arguements that lead nowhere
and that's what i'm gonna do here too... you're of the opinion adventures should become action hybrids (as well as probably action games becoming adventure hybrids and everyone live happily ever after) and that 3d and all that crap is important... i'm of the opinion adventures should stay adventures, the kind of game you can sit back and relax and play with your brain, not with your reflexes, and that a good adventure can have the crappiest gfx (larry 1, maniac mansion) or no gfx at all (ingrid's back, the guild of thieves)
oh and 2 notes before i finish:
1) silent hill is not an adventure (and i love both 1 (more) & 2 (less) and can't wait to play 3)
2) sam 'n' max had an action sequence, but you didn't have to go thru it
1) I wasn't using it as an example of an adventure, but character modelling.
2) Sam 'n' Max had more than one action sequence. Even so, they were there.
I believe in going forwards, not going back. I love "pure" adventures as much as the next person. It's just I don't want to play the same game over... and over... and over... again... and recently, thats the way I've been feeling with this genre.
I'm not of the opinion that adventures should become hybrids - far from it. It's just they're far more interesting in content and innovation than the stuff coming from the purer side of the fence. (For me, maybe not for others)
Besides, there's not a lot to offer lately for either adventure gamer type. Action or no! :-/
|
| 24 DEC 2003 at 4:17pm |
| Deleted User | *falls down in a dead faint in shock at having TPFKAR agree with him about something*
|
| 24 DEC 2003 at 5:54pm |
KsandraSchattenjger
Posts : 2459
Joined: 2 APR 2003
Status : Online | Originally Posted By jujigatame (24 DEC 2003 3:52am)
I wish to pose a question here. How come ours is the only genre whose fans complain when their games get influences from another genre? You didn't hear strategy gamers gripe over the rise of RTS games. You didn't hear action gamers complain when their games received strategic or role-playing elements. Do you see what I'm getting at here? Why is the action-adventure so much maligned whereas other hybrid styles have been embraced?
Try sticking a couple of Myst-type puzzles into a game like Doom and watch the sh*t hit the fan. The reason many adventurers don't like combat in adventure games is because it fundamentally changes the gameplay mechanics; adding a good story or a few strategic elements to an action game does not. As for action-adventures, some people like them and others don't - it's as simple as that. Most pure adventure fans have no problem with action-adventures in themselves, but resent the fact that almost all adventure games seem to be adding combat in a (usually unsucessful) attempt to attract action gamers.
By the way, this does happen in other genres as well. A lot of strategy gamers - me included - are disappointed to see that turn-based strategy games are almost dying out, to be replaced by real-time strategy. I do not want to see the same thing happen to adventure games.
|
| 24 DEC 2003 at 6:11pm |
AyaGrand Inquisitor
Posts : 7277
Joined: 16 OCT 2002
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By MonkeyDude (24 DEC 2003 4:15pm)
1) I wasn't using it as an example of an adventure, but character modelling.
ok then, my mistake, sorry
2) Sam 'n' Max had more than one action sequence. Even so, they were there.
i don't remember any other, apart the one with the car... and skippable arcade sequences are more ok (cause you don't have to do it in order to progress in the game)
I believe in going forwards, not going back. I love "pure" adventures as much as the next person. It's just I don't want to play the same game over... and over... and over... again... and recently, thats the way I've been feeling with this genre.
actionizing the genre is not moving forwards... and btw i get tired playing the same thing over and over again... that's why every now and then i turn to (mainly) rpgs (action-rpgs especially), action adventures (parasite eve ), even action games sometimes (alice)... this doesn't mean though when i want to play an adventure i want all those elements in it... and like ksandra said (for those thinking only adventurers are against hybrids), try sticking some myst puzzles in doom 3 or half life 2, and watch the flames rise in each and every action forum out there! the fact that companies are trying to slowly create one genre that can sell to everyone doesn't mean the gamers (of all kinds - and especially older (in gaming years) gamers) are in favor of that
Besides, there's not a lot to offer lately for either adventure gamer type. Action or no! :-/
unfortunately no... that's the reason adventurers get whatever is thrown to them... just imagine about 30 good pure adventures having been released from oct-dec and tell me how many of those who bought bs3 would have done so...
You have gotten the attention of the mysterious lady. She turns to face you. Her face is devoid of any flesh. You are frozen with horror as she begins ripping your body into a bloody mess.
|
| 24 DEC 2003 at 8:21pm |
SirDaveGuild Master
Posts : 4953
Joined: 17 OCT 2002
Location: US
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By Ksandra (24 DEC 2003 5:54pm)
Try sticking a couple of Myst-type puzzles into a game like Doom and watch the sh*t hit the fan. The reason many adventurers don't like combat in adventure games is because it fundamentally changes the gameplay mechanics; adding a good story or a few strategic elements to an action game does not.
I don't disagree with your point above, but one thing I would point out for those who never played Doom is that it had some adventure game 'puzzle-solving' characteristics in that you had to find certain levers etc. in order to progress through the levels. Some levels were like a large non-linear AG in that if you pull a lever in one place, it would cause a major change in a place that was far away from where the lever was. And also, there would be points where you could see that you had to get to a certain place but there was no obvious way to get there- eventually you found a secret passage or some-such that got you there. So, contrary to what some people think, Doom was far more than just a 'shoot & kill baddies' game.
The future ain't what it used to be!
|
| 24 DEC 2003 at 8:34pm |
Agustín CordesGuild Master
Posts : 5696
Joined: 23 OCT 2002
Location: AR, Buenos Aires
Status : Offline | Very true. In a way, Doom played like Myst - push a lever and something happens somewhere.
OK, sorry
On with the thread...
|
| 24 DEC 2003 at 8:42pm |
AyaGrand Inquisitor
Posts : 7277
Joined: 16 OCT 2002
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By Agustin (24 DEC 2003 8:34pm)
Very true. In a way, Doom played like Myst - push a lever and something happens somewhere
[img]http://community.the-underdogs.org/smiley/happy/lol.gif[/img] [img]http://community.the-underdogs.org/smiley/happy/lol.gif[/img] [img]http://community.the-underdogs.org/smiley/happy/lol.gif[/img] [img]http://community.the-underdogs.org/smiley/happy/lol.gif[/img] [img]http://community.the-underdogs.org/smiley/happy/lol.gif[/img]
yes yes on with the thread.... ([img]http://community.the-underdogs.org/smiley/happy/lol.gif[/img])
You have gotten the attention of the mysterious lady. She turns to face you. Her face is devoid of any flesh. You are frozen with horror as she begins ripping your body into a bloody mess.
|
| 24 DEC 2003 at 9:26pm |
jujigatameSchattenjger
Posts : 1976
Joined: 14 FEB 2003
Status : Online | Y'know, I've thought about it, and it's possible that the reason I tought this is just because I don't visit any other genre-specific sites or message boards. It's entirely possible that there's an site out there where gamers are saying "the only puzzle I want to solve in my games is which zombie to kill first ... and what's with all these well thought-out plots I've been seeing in my FPSs lately?"
|
| 24 DEC 2003 at 9:51pm |
Bob_the_BuilderJourneyman
Posts : 956
Joined: 25 APR 2003
Status : Online | Originally Posted By SirDave (24 DEC 2003 8:21pm)
I don't disagree with your point above, but one thing I would point out for those who never played Doom is that it had some adventure game 'puzzle-solving' characteristics in that you had to find certain levers etc. in order to progress through the levels. Some levels were like a large non-linear AG in that if you pull a lever in one place, it would cause a major change in a place that was far away from where the lever was. And also, there would be points where you could see that you had to get to a certain place but there was no obvious way to get there- eventually you found a secret passage or some-such that got you there. So, contrary to what some people think, Doom was far more than just a 'shoot & kill baddies' game.
Meh, I think there's some better examples of puzzles in FPS. In Halflife, there was that tentacle monster that you had to kill. Bullets wouldn't kill it so you would have to turn on the fuel and ignition switches and stuff to kill it, but to get by the monster to the other rooms, you had to sneak quietly to get by it because it could only hear things and not see them. So you could throw grenades that would provide a sound distraction.
I don't think anyone really minds puzzles in fps. They add more variety. Just look at Deus Ex and Thief, those are some of the most popular FPS.
NO SOUP FOR YOU!
|
| 24 DEC 2003 at 11:48pm |
adventuredogGuild Master
Posts : 3255
Joined: 14 JAN 2003
Status : Offline | Originally Posted By jujigatame (24 DEC 2003 3:52am)
I wish to pose a question here. How come ours is the only genre whose fans complain when their games get influences from another genre? You didn't hear strategy gamers gripe over the rise of RTS games. You didn't hear action gamers complain when their games received strategic or role-playing elements. Do you see what I'm getting at here? Why is the action-adventure so much maligned whereas other hybrid styles have been embraced?
Am I wrong? Why is this? Possibly you are wrong juji, as others have mentioned, there are complaints about many of the hybrids that are happening. There will always be fans of the "purer" genres.
I do not like action scenes in my adventures (unless they are in cut scenes). I play adventures to relax, explore, interact with other characters if a dialog game, and have fun pondering the puzzles.
It has NOTHING to do with my reflexes which are excellent or my keyboard skills. I do not like having split-second reaction gameplay. It spoils my gaming experience. I do not like to kill anything in gameplay if I can help it.
As mentioned MANY times before by many posters, developers are making a big mistake if they think they can appeal to and pull in more action gamers by adding more action sequences to adventure games. They end up upsetting fans of both genres and not pleasing too many that like both.
Still adventuring after all these years!
Patiently awaiting The Last Crown: Haunting of Hallowed Isle, and Bracken Tor...
... and Asylum if it's not tooooo scary...
|
| 24 DEC 2003 at 11:55pm |
Bob_the_BuilderJourneyman
Posts : 956
Joined: 25 APR 2003
Status : Online | Or they may end up getting more fans...
Thief
Deus Ex
System Shock
Undying
Realms of the Haunting (alright Undying and ROTH didn't sell well, but everyone who played them loved the games)
I'm not saying that it's wrong to not like hybrids, but hybrids are very successful. A lot of hybrids between action and adventure games are bad, but the ones done right end up becoming excellent games that everyone loves.
NO SOUP FOR YOU!
|
| 25 DEC 2003 at 4:26pm |
KsandraSchattenjger
Posts : 2459
Joined: 2 APR 2003
Status : Online | Originally Posted By Agustin (24 DEC 2003 8:34pm)
Very true. In a way, Doom played like Myst - push a lever and something happens somewhere.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and choose to believe that you were being sarcastic there.
Originally Posted By Bob_the_Builder (24 DEC 2003 9:50pm)
Meh, I think there's some better examples of puzzles in FPS. In Halflife, there was that tentacle monster that you had to kill. Bullets wouldn't kill it so you would have to turn on the fuel and ignition switches and stuff to kill it, but to get by the monster to the other rooms, you had to sneak quietly to get by it because it could only hear things and not see them. So you could throw grenades that would provide a sound distraction.
I don't think anyone really minds puzzles in fps. They add more variety. Just look at Deus Ex and Thief, those are some of the most popular FPS.
I'm well aware of this, but the truth is that almost none of these puzzles are remotely like what you would get in a pure adventure game. Puzzles in action games tend to involve finding a way to sneak past guards rather than fighting them, or finding a more innovative way to kill them. Which is all fine in its own way, but it means that pretty much all successful action-adventure hybrids (such as Half-Life and Deus Ex) are still heavily biased towards action. Sticking a few action sequences into a puzzle-based game doesn't tend to work, because it's not enough to attract action fans, yet still too much for those who don't like action at all.
|
| 25 DEC 2003 at 4:50pm |
LonelyMindSpace Cadet
Posts : 176
Joined: 26 AUG 2003
Location: SE
Status : Offline | I'm still a member of an Operation Flashpoint clan (since 1 1/2 years). I have absolutely no problem with coordination and quick reactions, in fact I'm very good at it.
BUT, I prefer the classic kind of adventure game where I have to use my brain, don't have to have my finger on the trigger all time. Like Myst and others.
I don't want to have any action-sequences in an adventure game. BS3 was terrible, lousy controls and a camera which had constant epileptic seizures. In OFP, which is one of the most realistic war-sims ever made, I have perfect control over my character.
Why should I have to settle for sub-par action sequences in adventure games just because the developers want to make the game cross-platform? To make the game appeal to everyone? I think that is just wrong. One size DOES NOT fit all.
Some people are saying it's the future of adventure gaming. I just think it's the death of it. We can CALL it an adventure game, but it will not be it any more.
LM
|
