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

61–70 of 108 posts

Re: Why Adventure Games Suck (1989)

#61

Post by soneca »

rabidrat wrote: post #59
soneca wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Never saw a 'drag-to-hover' design, but guessing from the name, could be a very neat solution to the problem I mentioned.

Worth trying. Startup idea: buy the rights of a critically-praised-comercially-failed adventure game from the 90s, port it to iPad with this mechanic. :)

I would play.

Re: Why Adventure Games Suck (1989)

#62

Post by indigochill »

billfruit wrote: post #47
the_af wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I couldn't go past the first few scenes of Thimbleweed Park either. I think I would have loved it when I was a teenager, but the point-and-click genre is just not for me anymore. (Also, and I know this is heresy, I couldn't finish the much lauded Psychonauts back then either). I think I simply had more patience for this kind of games when I was younger. I'm more willing to give experimental Interactive Fiction a go t…

How does Thimbleweed Park compare with something like Stardew Valley, where the narrative is almost minimal, rather the gameplay is about understanding and manipulating complex interlocking systems. I find that a much more engaging game design that the point and click adventure games I have seen.

It's a totally different genre. Stardew Valley is essentially a "farming simulator". There might be one or two secrets I can think of that you can stumble upon, but they aren't essential to the game. There are also character stories you can discover, but they're again not essential to the core of the game.

Thimbleweed Park is an explicit tribute to LucasArts point and click adventure games like Day of the Tentacle and Monkey Island. It's all about solving silly puzzles with silly characters and some deliberately obscure puzzles for that nostalgic frustration.

Re: Why Adventure Games Suck (1989)

#63

Post by galonk »

indigochill wrote: post #58
soneca wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Since "pick up" should not be hyphenated, as a native English speaker I don't think I would have ever guessed it!

Re: Why Adventure Games Suck (1989)

#64

Post by leni536 »

soneca wrote: post #61
rabidrat wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Never saw a 'drag-to-hover' design, but guessing from the name, could be a very neat solution to the problem I mentioned. Worth trying. Startup idea: buy the rights of a critically-praised-comercially-failed adventure game from the 90s, port it to iPad with this mechanic. :) I would play.

No need, just install scummvm on any android device (I don't know if it's available on iOS) and play the many Lucasarts titles. It has 'drag-to-hover' and 'tap-to-click' as well.

Re: Why Adventure Games Suck (1989)

#65

Post by the_af »

indigochill wrote: post #58
soneca wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Back then, when there was no internet (or it wasn't widespread), Sierra On-Line games were vicious. Not only the wrong action meant instea-death, hope-you-have-a-savegame, but they were also sometimes impenetrable in an age where there weren't internet forums to ask for help. (There were hint books you had to buy, which in my mind were a scam).

For example, in Space Quest 2 there was a puzzle where some strange creatures tell you that in order for them to open a passage, you just had to "say the word". Keep in mind I was just learning English back then. The answer was you had to literally type "the word".

Re: Why Adventure Games Suck (1989)

#66

Post by rabidrat »

RootReducer wrote: post #35

Adventure games are still not dead! Amanita Designs is making some of the finest games around - in particular, their masterpiece Machinarium. Anyone who even has a passing interest in adventure/point and click games owes themselves the pleasure of playing it. Sublime music and art, a lovely wordless story, interesting setting and characters, and well-designed puzzles.

Yes, I love Machinarium and I wish I could upvote your comment multiple times.

Re: Why Adventure Games Suck (1989)

#67

Post by derekp7 »

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.

The original Kings Quest (on my PCjr, at least) had an interesting quirk that anything that was movable was drawn last. So you just had to spot that the rock appeared a second after you entered the screen, or the mushroom suddenly showed up, that it was something you could interact with.

The fun part was trying to figure out the magic phrase to affect an object, as not all of them were as obvious as "move rock" or "eat mushroom".

Re: Why Adventure Games Suck (1989)

#68

Post by jerf »

the_af wrote: post #9
egypturnash wrote: post #7

"If I could have my way, I'd design games that were meant to be played in four to five hours. The games would be of the same scope that I currently design, I'd just remove the silly time-wasting puzzles and take the player for an intense ride. The experience they would leave with would be much more entertaining and a lot less frustrating. The games would still be challenging, but not at the expense of the players pat…

I couldn't go past the first few scenes of Thimbleweed Park either. I think I would have loved it when I was a teenager, but the point-and-click genre is just not for me anymore. (Also, and I know this is heresy, I couldn't finish the much lauded Psychonauts back then either). I think I simply had more patience for this kind of games when I was younger. I'm more willing to give experimental Interactive Fiction a go t…

"(Also, and I know this is heresy, I couldn't finish the much lauded Psychonauts back then either)"

I really loved Psychonauts, but... I've tried several times to replay it and I have a really hard time with it, because even as someone who loved it, the first 5-10 hours is a slog. There's this incredible premise under the game, and if you get to the point they start using it, it's pretty good, but they really frontloaded a whole lot of levels that are basically "Yeah, I mean, sure, this is nominally taking place inside of someone's head and is all like psychic and freaky and psychological & shit but actually it's just a completely standard 3D platformer". And not that great of one. And those levels just go on forever, with hardly any fun elaborations or anything. I tend to get to the lungfish, right where at least the game gets interesting (though I don't think it truly lives up to its premise until the Milkman level, which IIRC is next), and gas out from all the slog.

I hope for the sequel they sat down in the early design session and had some serious discussions about what did and did not work in the first game.

Re: Why Adventure Games Suck (1989)

#69

Post by the_af »

jerf wrote: post #68
the_af wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I couldn't go past the first few scenes of Thimbleweed Park either. I think I would have loved it when I was a teenager, but the point-and-click genre is just not for me anymore. (Also, and I know this is heresy, I couldn't finish the much lauded Psychonauts back then either). I think I simply had more patience for this kind of games when I was younger. I'm more willing to give experimental Interactive Fiction a go t…

"(Also, and I know this is heresy, I couldn't finish the much lauded Psychonauts back then either)" I really loved Psychonauts, but... I've tried several times to replay it and I have a really hard time with it, because even as someone who loved it, the first 5-10 hours is a slog . There's this incredible premise under the game, and if you get to the point they start using it, it's pretty good, but they really frontl…

Yes, what you describe is exactly what happened to me. I simply couldn't go past those initial hours. It felt like a (cute) platformer to me. Everybody said there was something amazing once deep into the game, but honestly 5+ hours of jumping around was too much for me.

Re: Why Adventure Games Suck (1989)

#70

Post by vetinari »

RootReducer wrote: post #35

Adventure games are still not dead! Amanita Designs is making some of the finest games around - in particular, their masterpiece Machinarium. Anyone who even has a passing interest in adventure/point and click games owes themselves the pleasure of playing it. Sublime music and art, a lovely wordless story, interesting setting and characters, and well-designed puzzles.

There's a bad taste left by Machinarium developers.

It was originally sold for Android here:

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=air.net.machin...

That is now abandoned and left to bitrot. I don't know, whether they were expecting that people will purchase it again, but for me the effect was, that I won't touch anything made by them again.

Post reply on HN