Articles

Did
Graphics Kill the Adventure Genre?

Last week’s State
of Adventure Gaming created a lot of controversy, discussion and dozens of email responses.
It has already been read by over 100,000 visitors and has taken on
a life of its own.

Two of our readers – Howard Sherman, CEO of Malinche
Entertainment and Scorpia known for her adventure game reviews in Computer Gaming World – felt
strongly enough to express their own opinions on Tim Schafer’s
comment that graphics killed the adventure genre.

Scorpia has this to say about Tim Schafer’s recent comments:

I read with interest Tim Schaefer’s remark that graphics
will be the end of adventure games. If that’s true, then the genre
has been on its last legs
for quite some time.

When many of today’s gamers
think of the “golden age” of
gaming, likely the first word that comes to mind is “text”,
followed by “Infocom”. Certainly, Infocom was the leader,
and had overall the best quality of games on the market. Then there
was Scott Adams, king of “no frills” adventuring, along
with a few other companies.

However, the majority of games in those early years, especially
for the Apple, Atari, and Commodore-64, were graphical ones. Every
product from Sierra – except Softporn – was a graphic game.

Smaller companies put out graphic adventures as well. Escape
from Rungistan. Secret Agent. Blade of Blackpoole. Coveted Mirror.
Transylvania.
Mask Of The Sun. Serpent’s Star. Sherwood Forest. The Quest. Gruds
in Space. Murder On The Zinderneuf. Sands Of Egypt. Crypt Of Medea.
Sundog. Alpine Adventure. Demon’s Forge. Mummy’s Curse.

That list could go on for some time, but you get the idea. Graphic
adventures have been with us since the dawn of home computing. Visuals
were a big feature in many other genres, as well. Infocom may have
overshadowed all others in people’s minds, but all-text was only
a part of the gaming scene and a minority part at that.

Yet Tim’s remarks are not without a certain validity. Those early
computers had a particular advantage: built-in graphic systems. There
was only so much a developer could do; limitations were inherent
in the design. On the other hand, programmers didn’t have to worry
about something new coming along every few months. They worked with
what they had and pushed it to the edge. Beyond that, there was nowhere
to go.

What changed everything was the coming of the IBM-PC and the myriad
clones that followed in its wake. Now computers had hard drives with
far more space. They had more system RAM. And most important, they
had *graphic cards*.

Once set free from built-in limits, graphic development exploded.
Third-party manufacturers jumped in immediately with product. The
incredibly ugly CGA rapidly gave way to VGA and SVGA and on to today’s
high-end cards.

We are now caught in a cycle where demand for ever-better graphics
pushes designers to the limits, and those limits are continually
expanded by more advanced technology. In particular, the genres of
shooters, racing, and sports create a very heavy demand for superior
graphics.

This trickles down to markets where cutting-edge visuals are not
that important, and puts a great burden on designers of, for instance,
adventure games. Hard-core players are usually more concerned with
gameplay, although, of course, pretty pictures are always nice to
have.

Unfortunately, dedicated
adventure gamers are a tiny market. With few exceptions, most companies
aren’t going to bother about it, given
the expense of game creation today. Even independent designers are
stuck. Unless they try selling their products over the ‘net, they
have to find a publisher, and that publisher is likely to demand
those “pretty pictures”. More effort concentrated on graphics
means less for the game itself, often leading to poor or mediocre
products. That, naturally, leads to less enthusiasm for adventures.

So it would seem that perhaps Tim is right. Yet, I have my doubts.
Every genre around today existed back in those early 80’s. You name
it, it was there: Adventure. Action-adventure. RPG. Strategy. War.
Arcade. Sports. Educational. Racing. Pure puzzle. Flight sim. Shooter.
And even, yes, online multi-player. All have survived into the 21st
century.

There was a time, not too long ago, when it did appear that adventure
games might be on the way out. Then came the astonishing – not to
mention, mind-boggling – success of Myst. Single-handed, this beautiful
but mediocre game revived the adventure industry.

Of course, that was fueled
by greed. Everyone wanted “the next
Myst” and no one pulled it off. Nonetheless, it gave a boost
to the genre, and while the momentum may be slowing down, the genre
is far from dead.

Therefore, I think that tolling funeral bells for adventure games
is premature. In the future, there may be less product, but my belief
is: as long as a market exists, there will be a supply. It may come
through broadband downloads of independent products and small releases
from European software houses, but as long as enough people want
them, there will be adventure games. Graphics or no graphics. ‘Nuff
said.

(c) 2005 Scorpia, all rights reserved.