[James]

Players need to approach Morrowind as if travelling into a country unknown - while the safe thing to do is look for signposts, notices, and directions - the fun part is to go off on your own in your own direction and do your own thing. morrowind is one of the few games that doesn't hold your hand - as soon as the five minute training is over, you're on your own - players respond to that in different ways - some will stick tightly to a trodden path, narrative or otherwise, and some like myself, will suit up and walk in whatever direction takes their fancy. the story behind morrowing was ok, but it was a poor directed and delivered narrative - the problem being the scale of the game meant that the narrative would never be as developed - morrowind is HUGE, and is one of the few games on current generation specs to have such a scale, for which i believe it should be commended.

[Ninth]

Originally Posted by BuffYoda

You obviously detest adventure games. Why come to this site?

In any case, I never claimed adventure games allow freedom to change the story. They do not (usually). Typically, there is one story, and your actions within the game are the realization of that story.

Read the Gabriel Knight novelizations if you care to see what I mean.

Were you talking to me? If yes, that's quite hilarious.

[BuffYoda]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

Are you sure? Again, I bring up Half-Life. And there are the RPGs, like Deus Ex, where the exploration and character interactions during the gameplay itself help to steer you through the story.

You didn't read me carefully enough. I said strip out all the cutscenes, and put whatever remains into narrative form. The game is an adventure game *if and only if* the resulting narrative is *worthy* of being called a story.

The narrative of HL 2 would consist of:

"Gordon Freeman then shot baddie #10029 with a rail gun, and it died."
"Gordon Freeman then shot baddie #10030 five times with a pistol, and it died."
....

punctuated by brief interludes of,

"So and so said, 'Hurry up Gordon, get in the [truck/boat/building].'"

Even including the so-called 'story' bits, the narrative would *not* be worthy of being called a story. That is, no one in the world, who is interested in reading stories, would be interested in reading such a narrative.

Contrast this with Gabriel Knight 2 or Sherlock Holmes and the Secret of the Silver Earing (for example). The difference is manifestly obvious. Half Life 2 is not an adventure game, in any shape or form.

There are a great many games that fall into the 'puzzle game' category (such as Myst), which are not adventure games, but tend to be lumped into the same category. Indeed, I would even say that because creating a genuine adventure game is hard work, many of the poorer quality 'adventure games' tend to lean toward the 'puzzle game' category.

My passion is for adventure games.

[Ninth]

Originally Posted by BuffYoda

There are a great many games that fall into the 'puzzle game' category (such as Myst), which are not adventure games

...but which everyone but you calls Adventure Games.

And yes, by "everyone", I mean "everyone but a few fanatics".

[squarejawhero]

Originally Posted by BuffYoda

You didn't read me carefully enough. I said strip out all the cutscenes, and put whatever remains into narrative form. The game is an adventure game *if and only if* the resulting narrative is *worthy* of being called a story.

The narrative of HL 2 would consist of:

"Gordon Freeman then shot baddie #10029 with a rail gun, and it died."
"Gordon Freeman then shot baddie #10030 five times with a pistol, and it died."
....

punctuated by brief interludes of,

"So and so said, 'Hurry up Gordon, get in the [truck/boat/building].'"

Even including the so-called 'story' bits, the narrative would *not* be worthy of being called a story. That is, no one in the world, who is interested in reading stories, would be interested in reading such a narrative.

Contrast this with Gabriel Knight 2 or Sherlock Holmes and the Secret of the Silver Earing (for example). The difference is manifestly obvious. Half Life 2 is not an adventure game, in any shape or form.

There are a great many games that fall into the 'puzzle game' category (such as Myst), which are not adventure games, but tend to be lumped into the same category. Indeed, I would even say that because creating a genuine adventure game is hard work, many of the poorer quality 'adventure games' tend to lean toward the 'puzzle game' category.

My passion is for adventure games.

You're missing the fact that you can have a bad central story, but great use of narrative through audio/visuals. If you tell the story badly, it doesn't matter how great the concept is behind it - it doesn't work.

HL2 tells a simple, War Of The Worlds-esque story. But it does it in an involving manner with a reasonably sparky script and well-voiced and acted characters. It's not worth discounting because the general story is basic sci-fi, as the story is told well, even if it does sometimes overly rely on player observation to uncover plotpoints.

HL2 is equally as linear in narrative terms as Sherlock. That's not the best comparative, because despite my own liking of Sherlock, it's linear to the point where the story is solved for you - you just discover the clues. You don't uncover the murderer or have any choice in much of the deduction. Within HL2 you're executing everything yourself. It's the difference between the story being told TO you and being involved IN the story.

Naturally, you're judging things based on your own beliefs. Something like Riven, maybe not Myst, is still an adventure. You discover the story and world around you, but there's still a narrative and world history there. That makes it an adventure game. The emphasis may still be on puzzling, but even in Myst there's a definitive thread and choices to be made based on even that simple story. Which is, to be frank, in terms of player control is more than to be said of some recent adventure games!

As for adventure games being close to novels - the danger is in some cases that they can come too close to being interactive movies or novels, which is not where they're meant to be. They're supposed to be games with as much interaction as possible within the world, characters and story.

[BuffYoda]

A statement such as, "[Adventure games are] supposed to be games with as much interaction as possible within the world, characters and story," is false (indeed, more than false---meaningless), since adventure games were not created by a single person, but by a multitude of people, and therefore there is no single purpose for all adventure games. Rather, the purpose of these adventure games are as varied as the developers of them.

As for HL2, I stand by my comments. No one would read a narrative of a playthrough of the game. It would be tedious and boring. Therefore, HL2 is not an adventure game. In fact, when I played the game, I had *no idea* what was going on, and just blew away everything in site. Half my friends agreed with me and played the game exactly as I did. So I wouldn't even say HL2 has a well-integrated story for its genre.

It is no coincidence that the higher the rating an adventure game receives (from critics of the genre), the more compelling is a narrative of its playthrough. That's because story defines the genre, being created (or revealed, if you prefer) through the actions of the player. It always has been so (with varying degrees of success), and always will be so.

[mag]

Originally Posted by BuffYoda

As for HL2, I stand by my comments. No one would read a narrative of a playthrough of the game. It would be tedious and boring. Therefore, HL2 is not an adventure game.

Would you read a narrative of a playthrough of Monkey Island? Or Gabriel Knight? THAT would be tedious and boring.

mag

[squarejawhero]

Originally Posted by BuffYoda

A statement such as, "[Adventure games are] supposed to be games with as much interaction as possible within the world, characters and story," is false (indeed, more than false---meaningless), since adventure games were not created by a single person, but by a multitude of people, and therefore there is no single purpose for all adventure games. Rather, the purpose of these adventure games are as varied as the developers of them.

That may be, but try arguing that with some people for a while and you'll see where you get. AG's do have a definition which you'll find some people strictly adhere to. Adventure games SHOULD be games - that is, a linear narrative structure with linear interaction whereupon you solve preset obstacles. In fact, the majority are. The content differs, naturally, but in general AG's are created this way. That's not to say they couldn't be created any other way, I agree, but if you look back along the genre's history, that's how it is in the main.

As for HL2, I stand by my comments. No one would read a narrative of a playthrough of the game. It would be tedious and boring. Therefore, HL2 is not an adventure game. In fact, when I played the game, I had *no idea* what was going on, and just blew away everything in site. Half my friends agreed with me and played the game exactly as I did. So I wouldn't even say HL2 has a well-integrated story for its genre.

As mag says, you wouldn't read the majority of AG's either. HL2 put its perogative on experience, removing as many obstacles between the player and the world as possible (simple GUI, simple story) in order to immerse them. You'll find many people here may disagree with you - I played at a moderate pace, discovered things within the game that described how the Combine rose to power, the sterilisation and struggle of the humans... it's all there.

But HL2 wasn't there to deliver an incredible story. It put you in a well designed sci-fi universe and made you feel "there". It was first and foremost about immersion, and you don't necessarily need to have a strong story to do that.

It is no coincidence that the higher the rating an adventure game receives (from critics of the genre), the more compelling is a narrative of its playthrough. That's because story defines the genre, being created (or revealed, if you prefer) through the actions of the player. It always has been so (with varying degrees of success), and always will be so.

I agree, which is why adventures have so many more opportunities to go horrendously wrong. They require good presentation in many areas in order to succeed, and the obstacles need to make you feel like you're taking part, not jumping over them for the sake of a cutscene.

[samIamsad]

That's what I and some others were trying to say: It's not necessarily the story itself, but how it is being told. A a lot of game designers in this genre seem to believe that the most complex and most detailed and best way to do this is in having every single NPC telling the story of its life in full-blown-detail. Even if a particular NPC is nowhere near vital to the plot and twice as boring as Joe and Jane Everyday. That's not so bad, if the dialouge is optional and the game lets you choose if you're really interested in the backstory of a character. It might give you interesting insights to the game world you're in and all. But come on. Is this necessarily good storytelling? *Warning: Loooooooooooooooooooooooooong attention span required.* There's more things than just good dialogue, no matter how good and NO MATTER WHAT STUPID GENRE. The Longest Journey and quite some others: I'm looking at you.

[gillyruless]

Originally Posted by samIamsad

That's what I and some others were trying to say: It's not necessarily the story itself, but how it is being told. A a lot of game designers in this genre seem to believe that the most complex and most detailed and best way to do this is in having every single NPC telling the story of it's life in full-blown-detail. Even if a particular NPC is nowhere near vital to the plot. That's not so bad, if the dialouge is optional and lets you choose if you're really interested in the backstory of a character. It might give you interesting insights to the game world you're in and all. But come on. Is this necessarily good storytelling? *Warning: Loooooooooooooooooooooooooong attention span required.* There's more things than just good dialogue, no matter how good and NO MATTER WHAT STUPID GENRE. The Longest Journey and quite some others: I'm looking at you.

But then again, one can argue that dialogues are the foundation of good storytelling. Have you read Isaac Asimov's Foundation trilogy? Although the events taking place in the universe is epic, declining galactic empire and a secret society called the Foundation that's established to store the sum of human knowledge and culture so that they can be preserved during the chaotic time during the collapse of the empire, Isaac Asimov tells this epic story not by describing the actions and events directly but largely by describing people talking about these actions and events. Even the emergence of Mule, a mutant warlord with psychic powers who gains a great power and threatens the safety of the Foundation, is described in the book through dialogue as in two people talking about him.

[samIamsad]

Sounds like an interesting book, gilly But remember: (Video) Games and books are two entirely different mediums.

[gillyruless]

Originally Posted by squarejawhero

But HL2 wasn't there to deliver an incredible story. It put you in a well designed sci-fi universe and made you feel "there". It was first and foremost about immersion, and you don't necessarily need to have a strong story to do that.

Squaresie, I think I agree with you on a lot of points you have been making on this thread but on this one I beg to differ. To me, I can't feel the sense of immersion in the game universe unless there is a good reason why my avatar needs to be there and needs to perform certain tasks. That to me requires a good story. The original Half Life was known as one of the first FPSes that get this right so I tried to give it a go. I was sorely disappointed. It was better than games like Doom or Duke Nukem 3D but still the story told in Half Life was weak and nothing more than a flimsy excuse for a background to tack the gameplay on. There are action-based games that do this better like System Shock 2 and The Silent Hill series but many of the games in the genre still fail in this regard when they are compared to AGs.

[samIamsad]

While I think the original Half Life was a bit overrated, it did something very interesting: It got rid of non-interactive cutscenes. You're "playing" the story from start to finish.

http://www.cpandfriends.com/writing/first-person.html
http://www.class.uidaho.edu/narrativ..._the_story.htm

[squarejawhero]

Originally Posted by gillyruless

Squaresie, I think I agree with you on a lot of points you have been making on this thread but on this one I beg to differ. To me, I can't feel the sense of immersion in the game universe unless there is a good reason why my avatar needs to be there and needs to perform certain tasks. That to me requires a good story. The original Half Life was known as one of the first FPSes that get this right so I tried to give it a go. I was sorely disappointed. It was better than games like Doom or Duke Nukem 3D but still the story told in Half Life was weak and nothing more than a flimsy excuse for a background to tack the gameplay on. There are action-based games that do this better like System Shock 2 and The Silent Hill series but many of the games in the genre still fail in this regard when they are compared to AGs.

Sure, but we're getting personal opinion in the way that, for a fact, the majority of HL2 and HL players they were immersed in that game.

Why not because of the gameworld and characterisation? You don't always need a sturdy plot if you come to care for well-realised characters, for example. Sometimes you can have a weakness in one area only for it to be bolstered in another. Some people find Black Mirror to be an excellent game bolstered by its storyline, whilst for someone like me the basic presentation and atrocious voiceacting ruin it. HL2's plot might not be as dense, but it makes up for it by having believable characters, amongst other things.

Chaser is an FPS with a terrific, if derivative, storyline. The game itself as an FPS has some major hiccups, but there's an example of narrative drive in an FPS which propels you more than the game.

[sethsez]

The Great Gatsby: Chapter Four

Jay woke up in his room, a bit dazed but otherwise alright. He checked to see what items he had on his person: a locket, and a letter. Checking the locket, he said aloud "I can't get it open." Reading the letter, he said aloud "This reminds me of Daisy." Then he decided to walk around his room for a bit. First he walked over to the bed, but there was nothing there aside from a newspaper lying on the floor next to it. Then he walked over to the fireplace, where he found a fire poker. He took it and stuck it in his pocket.

Walking over to the door, he tried to open it but noticed it was locked. "It's locked" he said. Looking through the keyhole, he noticed that a key was left in it. He walked back over to the newspaper, picked it up, and set it under the door. Then he tried to poke the key out with the firepoker, but when it didn't work, he exclaimed "I can't use this here." Trying again, he repeated "I can't use this here." Trying one more time, thinking perhaps he had approached it from the wrong angle, he repeated "I can't use this here." Frustrated, he put the firepoker back in his pocket and searched the room again. Checking the letter one more time, he said aloud "This reminds me of Daisy," after which he walked over to the dresser and noticed something shining. It was a hairpin! He put it in his pocket, walked over to the door, and took it out of his pocket again. Sticking it through the keyhold, he heard a dull thud on the other side of the door onto the newspaper. Exclaiming "that did it," he pulled the newspaper back to his side, used the key to unlock the door, and then stuck both the key and the newspaper back in his pocket.

Truly, the gameplay in adventure games is the stuff of literature.

Come on. If something interesting happens story-wise in an adventure, it's likely happening either in a cut-scene or a conversation. The gameplay itself is nothing anybody would want to read, ever.

[samIamsad]

What gameplay? Jus' kiddin'.

I always thought the phrase “adventure game” limited the genre. The key concept for me was to create a realistic world, and make the player a character within that world. The problem is that most game companies don’t like to “go out on a limb.” They like to produce product in proven categories. Game development sometimes is nothing more than “How about doing a Doom-type game? With a space theme? With a cop theme? Would it look better Command and Conquer style?”

There is a HUGE market for storytelling on a computer. There is NOT a huge market for games that look like games currently on the market.


Ken Williams, Dec 2003

[AFGNCAAP]

BuffYoda, I find your attempt at definition pretty weak not only for the reasons which sethsez explained so hilariously two posts ago. You also try to put the qualitative factor into the equation - I think it's inherently wrong. It's hardly debatable that there are terrible adventure games, or even adventure games with terrible storylines if you prefer - and noone would question their genre just because of their poor quality. Not to mention that whether the story is "worhy" would always be a very subjective matter.