Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why Adventure Games Suck (1989)

grumpygamer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 108 posts

Re: Why Adventure Games Suck (1989)

#51

Post by bzzzt »

TheBlight wrote: post #46
pixelperfect wrote: post #33

Sierra adventure games were my favorite single-player games from my childhood. I understand why a lot of people don't like them, e.g. many of the puzzles have nonsensical solutions, it's possible to get stuck because you didn't get an item in an area that you can't return to, etc. And the games haven't really aged well. But for the time they were my favorite.

It'd be interesting to me to play the KQ series but with the parser replaced with something more state-of-art.

The later games in the series used a 'point and click' interface, but are still filled with arbitrary or unfair puzzles, some badly written dialogue and cringe-worthy story moments.

Re: Why Adventure Games Suck (1989)

#52

Post by jtolmar »

derefr wrote: post #23

I haven’t seen a good analysis of it yet, but has anyone seen a list of “Guidelines for creating a good/entertaining ‘Troll’ Game” (e.g. IWTBTG, most Mario Maker levels, etc.)? It seems like such a guide would almost be an inversion of some of the principles in this guide: in troll games, you tend to learn only by dying; the puzzles always require things you forgot in the previous room, and you can’t go back, so you…

Defender, one of the Mario Maker trolls, wrote a big guide: https://docs.google.com/document/d/13ZoqeblLs45HuEfTtsOrq6X0...

I'm sure it's possible to make an original troll game (never bet on an artistic idea being impossible), but it certainly seems to make it harder. I've noticed that when the Mario Maker troll community tries to make Super Mario World trolls instead, it's just not as funny. The hacking tools for SMW allow vastly more freedom than MM's editor, since you can always patch the game's code. The decrease in quality might be from a lack of restraint, but I think the element of fair play that MM has is important as well. Everything in MM behaves the way it was programmed by non-trolls (more, Nintendo seems actively anti-troll), so every subversion comes from the level maker showing that they know something about how the game works that the player doesn't.

Re: Why Adventure Games Suck (1989)

#53

Post by jmilloy »

> There is nothing more frustrating than solving pointless puzzle after pointless puzzle. Each puzzle solved should bring the player closer to understanding the story and game.

A friend of mine was recently complaining about how adventure games and even rpgs (in both video and board game formats) lack significant character development, even the best ones with great worlds and stories. I don't personally have enough experience to have an opinion, but I thought it was interesting that the relevant guideline here shows exactly that: it mentions "story" but not "character". (I'm not sure what is meant here by "game"). Maybe my friend is not wrong.

Re: Why Adventure Games Suck (1989)

#54

Post by jemorya »

martijn_himself wrote: post #25

Tangential question, does anyone have any tips for someone who has lost all interest in video games? I used to like them as a teenager and whenever I pick up a game now (I'm in my early 40's) I am just completely bored. Part of it I think is because it requires some form of mental engagement after a day's hard work?

After a little more than a decade away from video games, I'm finding myself really enjoying 1st person horror games with no combat element: Soma, Amnesia: Dark Descent, and Outlast. This didn't really exist before, at least not games that were so immersive and terrifying.

Soma is especially great. It's utterly scary, it's beautiful to explore (per my taste), and the way the story unfolds really pulled me in.

SubNautica somewhat qualifies if you have a hint of thalassophobia. There is a very small combat element that you can entirely ignore.

Most other games bore my adult self as well, but the above are so compelling that I only play them in the right conditions so that I really enjoy them: alone at night with headphones.

Re: Why Adventure Games Suck (1989)

#55

Post by Chathamization »

santoshalper wrote: post #48
Chathamization wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember Doom in particular being considered the poster child for what some considered to be lowbrow gaming. Of course people dividing entertainment into highbrow and lowbrow groups is nothing new - it's common for people to think of someone who's entertained by Shakespeare to be more "cerebral" than someone who's entertained by Twilight.

Which is funny, because that would not have been true at the time. Shakespeare was pop culture.

In addition, my understanding is that while Shakespeare was well regarded during his life, he wasn't particularly held in much higher regard than many of his contemporaries. The excessive elevation of Shakespeare (Bardolatry) seems to have been a process that occurred over decades and centuries.

It's gotten to the point where it's hard to have a unbiased opinion. People aren't given a copy of King Lear and Tamburlaine and asked which one they prefer. People are usually told ahead of time that Shakespeare plays are wonderful works, that viewing them as wonderful is a sign of intelligence, and people are usually exposed to many plays by Shakespeare and none by his contemporaries.

Our society probably has a much larger impact on how we view these works than the works themselves.

Re: Why Adventure Games Suck (1989)

#56

Post by magduf »

martijn_himself wrote: post #25

Tangential question, does anyone have any tips for someone who has lost all interest in video games? I used to like them as a teenager and whenever I pick up a game now (I'm in my early 40's) I am just completely bored. Part of it I think is because it requires some form of mental engagement after a day's hard work?

Easy: you used to like games decades ago, so get an emulator, get the games you used to like back then (I'll leave the specifics out here), and play the games you used to enjoy. Then get some other games from that era that you never got a chance to enjoy, and try those.

Actually, I think archive.org has a lot of those old games, playable directly through a web browser, so it depending on the game it may be much easier than what I wrote above.

Re: Why Adventure Games Suck (1989)

#58

Post by indigochill »

soneca wrote: post #18
the_af wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I learned about this phenomenon (looking down I mean) from the forums of Home of the Underdogs, which gathered people from all over the world. This was 2004 I believe. But also from magazines we got from Spain. For some reason adventure and text adventures were really big in Spain, and along with it the notion (in their subcommunities) that action games were for the "dumber" crowd. It wasn't a vicious sentiment, like…

Me too, I learned a lot of English. I would play Monkey Island and Indiana Jones with a dictionary on the side. I remember taking hours in one of the first King Quests, that used typed text input, that the right verb was to "pick-up' a cup. Not take, not get, which were the only ones I knew at the time for picking up things.

Especially confusing since "get" to my knowledge has been the conventional keyword used for this action in the vast majority of parser games and MUDs (maybe "take" in some cases, but "pick-up"? Really?). I'm a native English-speaker and that still probably would have stumped me for a while.

Re: Why Adventure Games Suck (1989)

#59

Post by rabidrat »

soneca wrote: post #50
naravara wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I first got an iPad I was almost certain this was going to herald a great resurgence of point-and-click style adventure games. I still don't really understand why it didn't. Unwillingness to pay for software I suppose? The interaction is perfect for a touch screen, the display is amazing, and the casual demographic seems like the ideal one to pick it up. Even puzzle games, like Phoenix Wright, would have worked…

Hovering the mouse was an essential mechanic in all the best point-and-clicks. Games that don't give a hint that an object is interactable on hovering are impossible to play. Games that highlight all interactable objects from start are boring and cut all the fun of discovery. That could be a a reason.

What about 'drag-to-hover' and 'tap-to-interact'? I don't feel like this is an unsolvable UI problem, when some core apps have 3-finger-pinch-and-drag-while-swiping gestures.

Re: Why Adventure Games Suck (1989)

#60

Post by schwap »

UweSchmidt wrote: post #36
martijn_himself wrote: post #25

Tangential question, does anyone have any tips for someone who has lost all interest in video games? I used to like them as a teenager and whenever I pick up a game now (I'm in my early 40's) I am just completely bored. Part of it I think is because it requires some form of mental engagement after a day's hard work?

Same. My reasons: 1. I understand software better and can see that my in-game actions are mostly changing variables, or values in a database. 2. Games are 'balanced' and therefore limit the upside for a potential great strategy I might come up with. 3. Nothing new under the sun: How many more pseudo-scifi research trees or weapon mechanisms or unit capabilities am I supposed to learn in my lifetime? 4. They don't mak…

> 2. Games are 'balanced' and therefore limit the upside for a potential great strategy I might come up with.

Wouldn't a 'balanced' game make the impact of strategy even greater? Many of the most strategic games in the world like chess or go are balanced.

> 4. Less need to prove myself in competition with my peers through games and play (which is aparently a fundamental thing for children)

It's never been easier to find and compete against the best in the world at games. If you're good enough at an online game you can find yourself essentially playing pick-up basketball against LeBron James.

> 7. Computer work makes me want to get away from computers eventually.

Yeah agreed on this one for sure.

Post reply on HN