Can Nintendo Save the Adventure Game Genre?

Gamasutra is running an editorial wondering whether the Wii can save the adventure game genre. With the intuitive nature of first-person control and interaction the Wiimote/nunchuck combination provides, it's been an open question since the console's concept was announced whether or not the Nintendo could revive a much-beloved but sadly absent game genre. Scott Nixon writes of the future for point-and-click titles, talking about their hearty success on the DS (with Hotel Dusk and Phoenix Wright) and the requirements of design such games would make of the Wii. With word that a Wii developer for the Sam and Max series is being sought, the question isn't if but when adventure titles begin appearing on the system. Here's hoping they get a warm reception, from an audience ready for their reintroduction. Update: 02/07 01:03 GMT by Z : Fixed the link. Sorry.

No brainer

[AKAImBatman]

Adventure games never really died. They just got lost in the massive push toward All Things 3D(TM). I'm happy to see that companies are starting to understand that these games are still popular, in the same way that RPGs are still popular both in 2D and 3D.

Translated to Marketeeringese: Good Adventure Games = $$$Ka Ching!$$$

While you're waiting, consider playing a little Stargate Adventure [bigbluecup.com]. It's short, but it will take you back. :)

Haven't they already appeared?

[caitsith01]

the question isn't if but when adventure titles begin appearing on the system

Ummm... Zelda?

I am starting to wonder if the whole 'adventure gaming is dead' notion comes from a failure to recognise that games like Zelda, Oblivion, Deus Ex and so on are, in effect, adventure games. You freely explore a large environment solving problems, frequently involving puzzles, the need to talk to characters in the world, or the need to acquire specific objects, all within the framework of a larger story. Just because it doesn't involve 2D sprites and some hand-painted backgrounds doesn't mean that what is often called an 'RPG' isn't a traditional adventure game.

However, it is a reasonable assertion that the Wiimote does offer the possibility that mouse-driven adventure games could finally work well on a console.

Definition

[ObiWanStevobi]

Depends on they definition of adventure game. If you include RPGs (which I certainly would), I say they are as strong as they every were. Zelda, Elder Scrolls, and Final Fantasy all have great new releases. All consoles have a great adventure game. BTW, the problem with them hasn't been with the controls, so no, the Wii will not fix the plot staleness of adventure games, developers willing to take a chance on an unproven concept will.

Why is it "Nintendo's" Job?

[HappySqurriel]

Honestly, why does it have to be Nintendo's job to save the adventure game?

Why did Sierra (Leisure Suit Larry, Kings Quest, Police Quest, Space Quest) and Lucasarts (The Dig) ever give up on the Adventure game in the first place, and why can't they save it?

oh Nintendo

[Itchyeyes]

I saw this article, and frankly I'm not convinced. There's so much hype surrounding the Wii right now and all the amazing innovative things people expect out of it. If adventure games succeed on the Wii, it won't be because there was some kind of pent up demand for adventure games that wasn't being served. There have been some excellent titles over the last couple of years like Dreamfall and Indigo Prophecy the people just flat out ignored. Rather, if Adventure titles succeed on the Wii, I think it will be because of the excitement that surrounds that machine. Nintendo has done such an amazing job marketing this thing that people are practically falling over themselves to just to play games like Mario Party 8. Pretty much any game that comes out for the system is viewed through rose colored glasses at the moment. I suppose in that sense, it certainly could bring back the genre.

Re:Why is it "Nintendo's" Job?

[AKAImBatman]

Honestly, why does it have to be Nintendo's job to save the adventure game?

Because it's Nintendo's job to save the industry from itself? The gaming industry has been on a headlong dive for extremely high mediocrity to high price ratios for a long time now. Only Nintendo has taken the time to step back and say, "Wait! Where are we going with this, again?" If Nintendo didn't take a stand, it's unlikely that anyone else in the industry would have.

It's like asking the question, "Why me?" The only good answer is, "If not you, then who else?"

Re:Haven't they already appeared?

[frederec]

When people say "adventure gaming is dead," what they're probably talking about is "point-and-click" adventure gaming is dead. The adventure games you're talking about are classified more as "action adventure" games.

I'm not terribly fond of pigeonholing everything into miniscule subgenres, but here I think it's relevant.

Action adventure games do involve a fair amount of item collecting and puzzle solving. But they also involve a lot of fighting, frequently repetitive fighting. The point-and-click style of adventure gaming (unless you want to go real old school and talk about text adventures, but it's a similar thing) is more cerebral. There is little to no direct violence. Virtually everything must be done by puzzle solving, and there is a much lower emphasis on things like reaction time. It's part of the reasons people have been referring to the new Phoenix Wright game as being almost a visual novel.

So the difference is not 3D vs. 2D (many adventure games went for at least pseudo-3D), nor is it sprites vs. rendered graphics. It's all about action with some puzzles vs. all puzzles, all the time. It drastically changes the tone and feel of the game. Zelda, Okami, and the like, while good games, do not have the "feel" of pure adventure games. Hence "action adventure."

Myst...

[quark101]

Granted, I'm not old enough to remember any of the adventure games from the 80s, but Myst essentially defined video games for me, and I've played through the 4 sequels and abolustely loved them. Point and Click will always have a fond place in my heart, and I've been really sad to see it go.

Games like Final Fantasy and Oblivion, while they are really, really nice, just aren't the same. The basic concept of the game is different. There are puzzles yes, but they are a secondary element, instead of being an integral part of the story and experience.

Re:Why is it "Nintendo's" Job?

[Grey Ninja]

Exactly. I think it's also worth noting though, that Nintendo has ALREADY DONE THIS once before, when it rescued the industry from the crash [wikipedia.org]. It's long been my belief that the industry is headed for another crash. But with the introduction of the Wii and the DS... I am starting to have my doubts. The PS3 and the Xbox 360 may well be headed to a crash. But I think Nintendo has a bright future ahead.

Re:Haven't they already appeared?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd agree on Zelda, but I think Oblivion is pushing it a little, unless you want to just fold almost all of RPG itself into a subset of Adventure. Maybe I'm just bitter, because I'm the only person in the world who likes RPGs (Western-style as opposed to Japanese-style RPGs) and Adventure games and found Oblivion to be incredibly boring, just as I found Morrowind.

Re:oh Nintendo

[Itchyeyes]

I did the same thing when I ditched my PSP for a DS. At first I thought it was the most amazing machine ever. It wasn't until several months later that I realized that there wasn't anything special about the system. I was playing the same Mario Kart, SMB, Animal Crossing, etc... that I had played on Nintendo systems for years. There wasn't something inherently special about the DS that made these games good. It was the games that made the DS good.

Re:Haven't they already appeared?

[Nasarius]

No, you're not the only person. Morrowind and Oblivion are garbage if you think of all the potential that Daggerfall hinted at. What's the point of an open-ended RPG if you can't do anything to affect the world?

Defining "adventure game" broadly isn't helpful

[ChaosDiscord]

Sure, Zelda, Deus Ex, and RPGs like Oblivion provide many of the same pleasures of a good adventure game. I like all of them. But you know what's meant by "adventure games" in this case. There is a strong emphasis on puzzles and a traditionally paced plot. These games are typically more slow paced with a strong focus on thinking. They have little to no emphasis on action, combat, or character skills and attributes. These are games like Zork, King's Quest, the Secret of Monkey Island, Myst, or Hotel Dusk.

Suggesting that Zelda, Deus Ex, or Oblivion are somehow replacements is as unhelpful. You might as well suggest that Oblivion is a first-person-shooter since you can shoot arrows or spells at people, or the Rainbow Six series of games is interchangable with real-time strategy games like Warcraft, since in both games your success relies on your ability to give AI controlled units commands. Sure, you can make reasonable definitions that blur those lines, but those lines are useful as they distinguish very different styles of play that different people like.

Re:Haven't they already appeared?

[TempeTerra]

'Adventure games' has a meaning more specific than just "a game in which you have an adventure". Look up "adventure games" on Wikipedia. 'Adventure games' are heavily story based, rarely have arcade-style game play and have non-trivial puzzles. Fetch quests in Oblivion don't count.

Re:Defining "adventure game" broadly isn't helpful

[Blakey Rat]

A better argument is one expressed a few posts ago which sums to:

If great modern adventure games like The Longest Journey, Dreamfall, Syberia, Syberia II and Indigo Prophecy were basically ignored by the gaming press, what makes him think anything can "save" the adventure genre? All of those games were well-done and very entertaining.

Frankly the adventure genre is only dead in the first place because the gaming press mostly ignores new adventure games that come out, for some reason. I think it's all just nostalgia-- what people want isn't "adventure games" but they want "my childhood as I was playing Kings Quest VI". You can't package that in a box and sell it in stores. Nostalgia is a powerful force.

Re:Definition

[Mr2001]

As others have pointed out, the subject here is "point-and-click adventures" in the style of Monkey Island, Maniac Mansion, Space Quest, etc. Those games don't rely on action scenes or leveling up, and in the LucasArts games, you can't die even if you try(*). They're all about solving puzzles, combining objects and working your way through conversations to achieve a goal. They share with RPGs an emphasis on story and some of the more superficial puzzle solving aspects, but they're really a different genre.

And yes, I think one of the problems with those games on consoles has been the controls. When the game is all about moving a pointer around on the screen to select verbs and items, a D-pad just doesn't work very well.. but the Wiimote certainly does.

(* OK, there are a couple places where you can die, but you have to try really hard. Dying is an easter egg.)

Re:Why is it "Nintendo's" Job?

[Omestes]

There is a term for this (borrowed shamelessly from polisci) "The tyranny of the masses". Even if the majority of consumers wants to digest pap, unoriginal games, and idiotic sequels, there should still be niches for gamers who want to play something unique and creative. Yes, the average consumer is an idiot, most of us agree when looking at Hollywood, or in your local Gamestop), since 90% of whats out there is crap, profitable crap, but still crap. For every Katamari or Elebits there is 900,000 WWII clones, and 10,000,000 stealth shooters. People don't play creative games, because they are rare and thus people don't get to experience difference. Creative games are rare because no one buys them. The only people who can short circuit this are the developers and publishers. (Just like the indie film market created exposure, which creative desire, which created a larger market, which created more indie films). Nintendo is, though, the last show in town with exposure, PCs comes second.

I'm sick of the "nintendo only pops out sequels" myth. Yes, there are shared characters, and series. BUT, how much gameplay do these share with other games with "Mario" or "Donkey Kong"? Not much. They at least shake things up, unlike other popular series, such as the much beloved Halo series, which is the exact same game, going on 3 iterations now.

The minigame thing for the Wii is scary though. I love Wii Sports, Rabbids, and Wario, but 3 is enough for so close after launch, and perhaps another year. Sure, it is nice to be able to play a game for 10 minutes, and still get a good experience, and have something to break out at parties. But still...

As for adventure (classic, hunt the hotspot type), I rather doubt they will be big ever again. The audience is aging, and has less time on their hands, the younger folks don't have the patience to stare at a static screen for an hour, trying to figure out you need to shove the fence post into the giant evil space pumpkin, to kill her.

Yes, I want a Wii version of Sanitarium.

Insolent meat! Your cells lack structure!"