The point and click adventure is going through a bit of a renaissance period at the minute. Monkey Island has gone episodic and is seeing regular releases along with all the other Teltale games, Zombie Cow recently hit the scene with 2 brilliant original games, Machinarium has just come out which has some of the best artwork I have ever seen in gaming, and Lucas Arts re-released a load of their old games on steam. So, it’s clearly a popular genre, and one that I’ve invested quite a lot of time in over the years. Just lately though I’ve come to the realisation that it’s not a genre I particularly enjoy. It’s a shame because it’s the one place you can look for solid story, interesting characters, and a decent helping of comedy, but when I try and actually play the games I don’t think I ever actually have any fun.
When I think of a Point and Click adventure, I’m instantly taken back to The Curse of Monkey Island. It’s one of the first games I can remember playing on the PC and I really enjoyed it. I’d play it for hours, just wandering around the town as Guybrush trying to figure out what to do. I was only young when I played it so real feelings of frustration and impatience hadn’t yet dug their dirty claws into me; looking at the interesting scenery, laughing at the funny talking skull and being part of a piratey world was enough. Eventually however I wanted to get somewhere and along with my lovely memories of Monkey Island and my halcyon days, I also recall running up a massive phone bill to the dismay of my parents from calling the Lucas arts helpline to tell me what to do.
As time passed and I mutated into this socially inept gamer, wandering around pretty towns and talking to funny characters stopped being as fulfilling as it once was. Sure, they are all welcome inclusions and something I suppose I actively look for in a game, but I craved narrative, progression, reward. While adventure games still gave me these things, and I still enjoyed the games as a whole, the puzzles always stopped me progressing – just like when I first went for that helpline. By this time though I was, and still am, too proud to use the more modern help of gamefaqs so instead spent hours staring at the screen trying to figure out just what the hell was expected of me. This is when I stopped having fun and my involvement in adventure gaming petered out.
The fundamental gameplay mechanic in point and click adventures – the puzzles – are what stop me playing them. When I get stuck the game effectively dries up. There is no new funny narrative for me to hear and no new pretty locations for me to see, but instead just me trying increasingly obscure things to allow me to progress. I don’t want to sit here getting more and more bored. I want to carry on with my adventure, see where the world is going to take me and do something interesting. Getting stuck just isn’t right for the player, it makes them frustrated, restless, and ultimately it makes them feel stupid.
I hate being made to feel stupid, especially when it’s just because I can’t see the internal logic of a game developer. It stops me enjoying the world they put in front of me and after ten minutes I’ll try anything just hoping that it works; clicking any random object that looks like it could possibly do anything, trying to walk to places I know I can’t, talking to the same people again and again. Inevitably this can only go on for so long and after I’ve tried combining everything in my inventory for the third time and resorted to clicking random places on the screen, what do I do? Exit to desktop. Sometimes it will be the last time I will ever play the game, sometimes it wont. It depends on how compelling the narrative is I suppose, but every time I get stuck like this, the game in question is running the risk of never being played again.
Point and Click adventures need to stop allowing me to get stuck. If I’m obviously struggling, help me along, because if I am struggling then I’m not having fun. What I want from an adventure game is, sensibly, an adventure. I want a breadcrumb trail that leads me through the story while still keeping me engaged through interaction, not making me hunt for items and not really giving me a clue what to do with them. It can be as simple as making something shine on the screen. Just casually draw my attention to what I need, especially if I’ve been staring at it for fifteen minutes. Or make the character say something, a hint like “hmm, I could push the key out of the lock but I would need to catch it on the other side” should be enough to set a player on the right track.
The key thing is that the puzzles have to be logical and fair. Too often puzzles are given to us with solutions so obtuse that it’s more a case of trial and error than actually figuring it out – the puzzles need to follow the logic of the world and have sensible (relatively) solutions. And by fair I mean not over complicating simple tasks – don’t make me get a key made for somewhere when I could just break down the door, or at least give me the option to do either with differing consequences. These are the two big pitfalls of adventure gaming, and both are immersion shattering to the extent of me often dropping out completely to check emails and the likes.
Some titles do get some or most of the puzzle handling right though. The recently released Machinarium has a lovely little feature where you can unlock a beautifully illustrated set of quick instructions for each ‘screen’ by playing through a short but slow side-scrolling shooter. Broken Sword 3, for all it’s faults, had fairly easy going puzzles that always seemed logical, it’s just that finding the items for the puzzles was a nightmare. Even the new Monkey Island games are apparently doing puzzles really nicely through overshadowing solutions early on. Most of the puzzles worked in these games because the player was handled right – given some way of actually finding a solution that didn’t boil down to guess work. The problem is that even these all had puzzles that seemed a touch too odd or random, not quite making enough sense.
When it comes down to it, puzzles in adventure games should be there to compliment the adventure. I’m not saying they should take a back seat, but instead should be a fun part of the story. And the story needs to be good – the big successes of adventure games haven’t happened because of the brilliant puzzles, but because of the excellent narrative they weave or the amazing characters they create. Any puzzles that are there need to be logical, and if the player can’t figure it out they need to be helped. Only then can Point and Click happily make a true comeback for me and stop being such a pain in the arse.
Here here! Dialogue trees give me the horn!
My stance is that I don’t want puzzles, I want problems. There’s a very distinct difference between the two things – with a puzzle, your task is to replicate the creator’s solution, with a problem, your task is to beat the creator’s challenge using the tools at your disposal.
Traditionally, the former has been the easiest to accomplish, but games like Deus Ex and Hitman have demonstrated that we don’t face those restrictions any more. The genre’s called ‘adventure’ – the clue is in the name. Puzzles were merely one way to structure them in the old days, not a template that must be followed on pain of death. There are better ways now, which can be hooked right into the genre’s unique charms.
Adventure games interest me for the story, for the characters, and for the narrative possibilities that go far beyond simply doing A to get B.
I get far more satisfaction from being able to influence the narrative, to spend time with cool characters, to explore interesting new worlds and subjects of interest. One of my favourite adventures, The Last Express, has almost no puzzles in it at all. Others, like the Gabriel Knight games, have abysmal puzzle design but amazing atmosphere and writing.
(There are definitely puzzle-based games I’ve enjoyed playing properly and methodically, like Zork: Grand Inquisitor or the more recent Machinarium, but for the most part I feel absolutely no shame at using a walkthrough if the mechanics are slowing down an experience to the point that I’m going to stop caring. Most of the time, if I’m frustrated, the puzzle is cack anyway – and frequently only Step 21 of some ridiculously long puzzle chain. Looking at you, German adventure games…)
At this point, the adventures I want to play are a new breed with the focus on narrative and character and player freedom. There are good ones out there – Tales of Monkey Island has been incredibly fun – but as long as traditional puzzles rather than problems are the design focus, there’s really only so far the genre can hope to advance.
Randomly, the true tragedy of adventure games is that in their heyday, they weren’t some big retro kick, but the genre that more than any other pushed things forwards – new technologies like digital sound, speech, CD, FMV, new genres, new directions, new ideas… Monkey Island for instance wasn’t brilliant because it used Three Trials structure, it was brilliant because it invented it. When it came out, Monkey Island 2 was a jawdropping beauty, not proof of graphics over gameplay. Games like the Police Quest series or Manhunter, love ‘em or hate ‘em, completely rewrote the rules on what games could do.
That’s what I want to see adventures do now. Nothing less is acceptable. Ditching the classic puzzles – not in their entirety, but as something that Adventure Games Have To Do – would be a great first step.
My comment just looks stupid now. I have many cleverthunks on this topic, I swear.
I almost feel that physics-based games like World of Goo or even Half Life 2 are kind of like the new adventure games. The fact that the world’s rules are modelled, rather than just the puzzle’s solution being modelled, means that you can come up with your own logical solution to progress.
I totally agree with the article. It’s often like the gameplay is at odds with the adventure… the gameplay is merely there to stop the adventure in it’s tracks. I’m on a hectic chase through a city, chased by nazis, trying to save someone’s life… and i spend 8 days trying to get past the waiter on the airship. In reality I’d just smack him with a chair when he wasn’t looking.
3d, physics-based, rules-based worlds, with problems not puzzles (great way to put it!), and with branching paths with different consequences. that would rock.
Also, if you’re going to use dozens of “verbs” and i happen to USE the bookcase, or PULL it, instead of PUSH it… just accept it!
It’s kind of telling that most adventure games are so incredibly short when played with a walkthrough… the games seem designed to make people stop and do nothing.
Hrm, I have to defend Gabriel Knight a bit. ;) I guess when you think of “abysmal puzzle design” you think of the cat hair mustache puzzle and the whole complex around it in the third part. You shouldn’t forget though that it also contains one of the most satisfying and well thought out puzzles ever, “Le Serpent Rouge”. Admittedly, it also blocked my progress sometimes, so I had to take a peak or two at a walkthrough. It’s a mixed bag I think.
Haha, german adventures as the main offenders. ;)
I remember having a discussion with you, Richard, about Perry Rhodan and its puzzle design on your blog. I never played it actually, but other german adventures like “Book of Unwritten Tales” or “Edna & Harvey” certainly are more better in terms of puzzles design. Nothing new, more status quo, on the LucasArts level. That’s maybe the problem: the best we get is the best we got, at least in terms of gameplay. Machinarium is slightly something new, and Heavy Rain might be also considered an adventure, but these are rare exceptions.
I feel that the adventure genre still holds lots of potential, but seemingly it refuses to open up. It holds on to old traditions, technology and design paradigms. Often enough new adventures copy more badly than authentically. How many Monkey Island wannabes fell short of the obvious inspiration? Too many to list.
When I think about it, my favorite adventures are the ones that give a lot of feedback about your actions and/or offered multiple solutions to the problems, y’know, like in reality.
So, in that regard, I would recommend the following adventures:
Tex Murphy: The Pandora Directive: Actually, I only played the predecessor, Under a Killing Moon, and as far as I understand Pandora is the same, but with a better story, multiple paths and endings. So, you’re a PI in a post-WWIII San Francisco. In dialogues you can choose between a…neutral, selfish or nice answer, I guess. You explore 3D environments, search for clues,…. The predecessor was lots of fun, but the story sucked. And the acting (yeah, it’s kinda a mix between a 3D and FMV game) is quite horrible too, it’s on the niveau of a trash movie. Has its own charm, but you have to be prepared for it. The acting in Pandora is much better, though!
Death Gate: This game offers only one strict linear path, but all the puzzles are so logical and all actions give you such helpful feedback that it doesn’t matter.
Azrael’s Tear: In 3D, has optional puzzles, multiple solutions, and it truly matters what you say to the characters.
Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis: You can choose between three different paths for the middle section, and in many situations there are multiple solutions. Sure, that doesn’t make it easy, and some puzzles are a bit out there. Some consider it one of the hardest adventures, others one of the most logical ones. I guess hard and logical aren’t mutually exclusive then…
Edna & Harvey: The Breakout: While it offers for the most part a non-linear structure, there is always only one way to solve a puzzle. But, just like Death Gate, you get lots of feedback for your actions. Actually every item combination and hotspot interaction offers a unique line. Quite awesome.
Now, most of these games don’t really tackle the issue you have with adventures, and I guess you have to peak at a walkthrough for most of them sooner or later anyway (though Tex Murphy offers an in-game hint system, so you don’t have to alt+tab out of it).
And I agree t_m: for some portions of Half Life: Episode 2 I had the impression that I was playing an adventure game. It offered some simplistic problem solving, exploration, character interaction (well, you just stand around and they just talk to you, but Alyx behaves differently depending on how you drive, at least), but the game never really stopped, like it happens in adventure games.
I hope there will be more of this in the future.
I forgot Conquests of the Longbow, didn’t I?
That rules, too.
..
Some amazing comments here. I like the idea of problems over puzzles, and the physic problems of hl2 are a great example. Maybe that will be the future of adventure gaming – it should be anyway. It’s far more involving that combining random objects together in order to progress.
One problem is that adventure gaming never feels like it has convenient points for you to stop playing and come back to, which is also makes it frustrating when you’ll so often get stuck figuring out moonlogic and backtracking. It’s quite shameful for a game to have you need a guide open at the same time to play.
Recent playthrough of “Ben There, Dan That” and “Time Gentlemen, Please!” for example. I loved the humour of the game and how it poked fun at itself or gave you clues in the wrong solution speeches. The item combination snippets were snigger worthy too. But soon after trying to rub everything on everything I just couldn’t appreciate the humour, as it was disguising outdated game design. Missing the one key item you need? Or already have that one key item but it needs to have its state changed and then only used in a specific spot at a specific time? Screw you game.
It just seems that Adventure Games have one or a combination of a lovely setting, a good story plus well developed humour. It seems a shame this becomes a crutch when let down by the mechanics to access it.
I just remembered the best example of problem solving over puzzle solving. Near the end of portal there is a vent you need to get into, but it’s too high and there is a turret just around the corner shooting at you. Apparently there is an elaborate way of getting into the vent by using the turret, but what me and loads of other people did was simply grab a chair and stand on that. Simple yet genius.
Most adventure games are developed to a niche audience, and if you can believe the forums, most adventure fans resist change.
There’s a discussion on AdventureGamers called “Do you think adventure games ever reached their potential?”. It’s here: http://www.adventuregamers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=25576
It went in a quite disappointing direction.
This comment section sucks!
All my comments get swallowed by the website, are sent into digital nirvana. :(
@ozzie it seems that link you were putting it was getting flagged as spam. Not sure why, and we use the same anti-spam and comments section as just about every wordpress site out there…
There was an interesting varient some years back (around 1995-1997) which attempted to combine a lot of new ideas with many classical ones. Damn if I remember the name- all I remember about the box is that it had heat-sensitive liquid crystals and a giant biological warning symbol on the front. If anyone knows the game, by the way, do let me know. Anyway, this was the era of the CD-ROM first really breaking through. The game combined point and click, rendered 3-D backgrounds, FMVs, and something of a choose-your-own-adventure style. That last part was a real kicker. This was another one of these games where you had a time limit- something about you had a bomb in your scull which would blow up in 60 minutes, though there were patches you could apply to buy a little more time. Traditional puzzles may or may not have a logic to them, but this game demanded that you knew where to go- wrong turns around corners would mean instant death at the hands of firing squads, and that would depend on how long you took in particular areas. You needed to find the clues to figure out who had put the bomb in your head and hwo to get it out, but rather than being a matter of finding one clue which lead to another, it was more literally clicking on everything on the landscape until something popped up. That was very ungood. I loved it at the time, but it was so ungodly frustrating that I finally gave it up in despair. A trail of breadcrumbs, as you say, would have been most welcome.
On the other hand, I still have fond memories of (don’t laugh) Rex Nebular and the Cosmic Gender Bender. Oddly, when I was a kid, I never got past a particular point which as an adult I figured out the solution to in minutes. Anyone else ever have that happen?
Maybe it’s Johnny Mnemonic? http://www.mobygames.com/game/johnny-mnemonic
No, wait, I’m sure it’s Burn:Cycle!
Have a look: http://www.mobygames.com/game/burncycle
Holy crap- yep, that’s it! Hey, thanks a lot! Burn:Cycle…
I agree with this article 100%. The LucasArts adventure games are great until you’re completely stuck, at which point the “game” aspect of the game is effectively killed. The player doesn’t wait as long to consult a walkthrough the next time he gets stuck, and so on. Once you’re old enough to have responsibilities, your gaming time is limited and precious, and you don’t want to be stuck for hours on puzzle after puzzle.
It really is a shame, because the writing in these games are so good, but at the same time not quite good enough to just experience in a linear movie-like fashion. Grim Fandango was one of the greatest games I played until I got stuck.
The simplest and most elegant solution would’ve been to have the player’s character vocalize hints as his thoughts, as more and more time goes by without progression. There is, of course, still the problem of replay value though.
Agree with Anonguy about LucasArts games. Don’t get me wrong, I really enjoyed many LucasArts games but when you reach the part in a level where you just don’t know what to do you feel like turning off the system and never attempting it again – which isn’t too good is it?