Can adventure games be succesful without having any kind of a combat engine. Can people explore a fantasy world without having to kill things?? What do you think?

I thought there was a discussion about this a while back...

I for one would like to see if it is possible.

Moe''s Site

Violence is actually a very new addition to adventure games, and I''d have to say that the majority of adventure games still have no combat engine (otherwise they''re action/adventure hybrids). Take all of the King''s Quest games before 8, the monkey island games, the space quest series, the police quest series, Myst, Riven, etc. I''m not sure what exactly you consider an "adventure game," but those are some of the true "pure" adventure games that I can think of. and IMO, they''re still the best.

--------------------
Matthew Calabrese
Realtime 3D Orchestra:
Programmer, Composer,
and 3D Artist/Animator
"I can see the music..."

I love those games, thats my point those games are for the most part not being made anymore, the genre seems dead. Such great games barely are made anymore. Can u have a top selling adventure without violence now?

There is an adventure game comming out with no violence (I dont think) on GameCube called "Animal Forest" It looks kinda boring though.

-=Lohrno

Zork 2... On of the best games of all time (solid text, real fun!). There is no combat, but there is some violence... IE. You have 3 buttons in front of you. You push the left or right one you get electrified. But you don''t really need a combat engine.

The market nowadays is saturated with "twitch" gamers. If you want an adventure to sell, then aside from Pixar quality graphics, you''ve got to include some combat to encourage the bulk of the market to at least take a look at the back of the box.

Also, I firmly believe in the "simulationization" of modern games, ie the world has a far greater detail level, objects can do more things, and you can do more to them, allowing more emergent gameplay and not just linear object puzzles with one pre programmed solution.

One of the first ways to give the player more freedom is to give them the option of combat as well as puzzle solving, with a trade off. Puzzle solving is more brain-intensive, but gives a smoother, safer ride through the game. Violence is an easy alternative to particularly difficult puzzles, but use it too much and the odds are you''ll get yourself killed.

In my adventure game (realtime by the way, it''s high time RTA was added to the game dictionary), there is going to be some combat, but limited.

There will be antique firearms (muzzle loaders that will take about 20s to load, very unreliable) and swordfighting (REAL swordfighting, like AITD1, where you''ve got to swing, block, and lunge), so that the player may take the occasional pot shot or get into a duel with one enemy, but if outnumbered they''d better lie low and rely on stealth, or find another way around.

Does anyone remember the bit in DeusEx, where you can release toxic gas into the MJ12 base in Hong Kong and so avoid any combat for the entire level? THAT''S the way these things should be done. Always leave an alternative path.

quote:
Also, I firmly believe in the "simulationization" of modern games, ie the world has a far greater detail level, objects can do more things, and you can do more to them, allowing more emergent gameplay and not just linear object puzzles with one pre programmed solution.

Altho I do think alternative pathways is a great idea when done right. However, "simulationization" can be just as bad (if not worse) then haveing only one game path. This is because all the added detail and interactions can cause the game to lose focus...Take a game like Duke Nukem...allow the player to hop into cars and other vehicals to use in combat...nice and simple, right?...but if you up the detail/simulation level...Duke would have to deal with starting the car up...putting it in gear...and trying to drive around useing a different set of controls (control scheme) then he normaly needs walking/running around...you can even go farthur by adding controls for wiperblades, AC/heat controls, radio, power windows and seats, and useing a hand simulator to ajust the rear view mirror...this can get extreamly destracting, and can quickly cause the game to lose focus...

You could try going the route of a puzzle game, and have combat, or "conflict sessions" work where an AI opponent is trying to undo your puzzle work and to get past him, you need to do something to trap him, or preoccupy him. Like, if it''s a block moving game, use blocks to get him trapped between a few boxes. Its an idea to play with, were you can keep antagonism in the game, but resolve it through friendlier means.

-> Will Bubel
-> Machine wash cold, tumble dry.