Tumblweed

christielouwho:

Why Adventure Games Deserved To Die:

Ultimately the reason why the adventure game is fundamentally flawed is that it is designed for an ideal player who never gets bored of hearing the same story sequences and is a brilliant intuitive thinker. They are, in short, designed for the developers themselves and not real players.

The argument that the average game-player is not interested in puzzles and riddles doesn’t seem sound to be when you look to the success of Portal 1 (and the continuation of 2). The legacy of adventure games though, seems critical to understanding why Portal did work so well.

Portal is a puzzle game, which is different than an adventure game. The gameplay doesn’t hinge on any one puzzle mechanic, but sometimes borrows from (usually several) puzzle mechanics to provide a challenge.
This article is based on a lot of anecdotal assertions. I think I agree with his explanation of how the adventure game was outclassed and eventually overshadowed. But his main argument is that adventure games are defined by their mistakes.
There’s nothing more frustrating than being stuck on a riddle that is not internally consistent - that’s arbitrary. He’s right about that. That’s bad game design. And lord knows most adventure games were plagued with them. And even the best are usually bogged down by a few. However there’s also nothing quite like the sense of accomplishment for solving a riddle that is internally consistent and does make sense. There’s a mental sense of ownership when you conquer a world’s logic on its own terms that no amount of bullet-ridden bodies can stack up to.
So to say that adventure games deserved to die because they included bad game design doesn’t make any sense to me. This is no more true of adventure games than any other genre. Sure he’s correct - I mean it’s obvious - they don’t have the commercial appeal that they once did. I doubt they’ll ever be as pervasive as they were 12 years ago. But I don’t think that makes them a dead genre. As is being proven to a greater degree every year, there’s room for small indie titles to survive, and sometimes even thrive.
Yes, the formula needs innovation. No, there’s nothing inherent in the genre making them obsolete.
edit: Mechaniarium, which I’ve still yet to play (but is supposed to be great) was an adventure game and part of the Humble Indie Bundle #2. Which grossed almost 2 million in sales. It was only 1/5 of the bundle, but however you slice it - that’s far from “dead.”

Why Adventure Games Deserved To Die:

Ultimately the reason why the adventure game is fundamentally flawed is that it is designed for an ideal player who never gets bored of hearing the same story sequences and is a brilliant intuitive thinker. They are, in short, designed for the developers themselves and not real players.

The argument that the average game-player is not interested in puzzles and riddles doesn’t seem sound to be when you look to the success of Portal 1 (and the continuation of 2). The legacy of adventure games though, seems critical to understanding why Portal did work so well.

Portal is a puzzle game, which is different than an adventure game. The gameplay doesn’t hinge on any one puzzle mechanic, but sometimes borrows from (usually several) puzzle mechanics to provide a challenge.

This article is based on a lot of anecdotal assertions. I think I agree with his explanation of how the adventure game was outclassed and eventually overshadowed. But his main argument is that adventure games are defined by their mistakes.

There’s nothing more frustrating than being stuck on a riddle that is not internally consistent - that’s arbitrary. He’s right about that. That’s bad game design. And lord knows most adventure games were plagued with them. And even the best are usually bogged down by a few. However there’s also nothing quite like the sense of accomplishment for solving a riddle that is internally consistent and does make sense. There’s a mental sense of ownership when you conquer a world’s logic on its own terms that no amount of bullet-ridden bodies can stack up to.

So to say that adventure games deserved to die because they included bad game design doesn’t make any sense to me. This is no more true of adventure games than any other genre. Sure he’s correct - I mean it’s obvious - they don’t have the commercial appeal that they once did. I doubt they’ll ever be as pervasive as they were 12 years ago. But I don’t think that makes them a dead genre. As is being proven to a greater degree every year, there’s room for small indie titles to survive, and sometimes even thrive.

Yes, the formula needs innovation. No, there’s nothing inherent in the genre making them obsolete.

edit: Mechaniarium, which I’ve still yet to play (but is supposed to be great) was an adventure game and part of the Humble Indie Bundle #2. Which grossed almost 2 million in sales. It was only 1/5 of the bundle, but however you slice it - that’s far from “dead.”