General Discussion: Action in adventure games

[Dimitris Manos]

Since so many developers of adventure games and so many fans of adventure games are going to be gathered in the same place tonight and tomorrow, it could be a good idea to discuss a very hot topic inside the adventure community. Action elements in adventure games. What do you think? Do they help the adventure genre? Would you like adventure games to include more action elements in general or less?

What is the developers' opinions? Are action elements beneficial for adventure games or is it just a way to attract a different audience to the genre? And is it really working or does it maybe alienate adventurers from their own genre?

[Disco]

I am mostly pleased by some of the lower-key action elements in adventures. While I would not like an adventure to turn into a hack and slash or shooter game at some point, I do like some good action that fits in the context of the game. A specific example is fighting on the Mine Road in Full Throttle, I cannot imagine this fantastic adventure without these action sequences! Another is the combat in Quest for Glory, which is a very integral part of the gameplay and sense of non-linear adventure.

To make a short answer long: Some bits of action that complement the game can amp up the fun.

[imported_Aya]

no action whatsoever! ppl play adventures to lay back, relax and enjoy... not to test their reflexes and trigger fingers... if there has to be action, make it optional... either as sidegames, or as smth that can be dealed with in another way too

[MichaelS]

Right, make the action optional and let the players choose, if they want to play the action sequence or just watch it as some sort of cutscene. At least if completing the action sequence is essential for continuing or finishing the game.

[Disco]

Right, I didn't mention that but I believe action should be skipable as well. For instance in Full Throttle if you see a fight coming you can press a key and they go away .

[dtp Chris]

Personally, I don't like action parts in adventure games, because I never played one that didn't annoy me, didn't make me reluctant to play on... most of them simply weren't realized so that they are fun.

As representant of an Adventure-Publisher, I must state that adventures always get bashed by the editors when it comes to the ratings. Therefore I would recommend to all adventure developers: If you are not dead sure that the action part is necessary and fun, just leave it out. It won't hurt, in there will be a point less the editors can criticise.

[imported_wedge]

yeah I agree with the fact that it can be cool, but to add a skip button or something like that would be great when there is. It was the case on the old Lucas Arts game Full Throttle and even Indiana Jones FoA where you could when knowing the cheat win in one hit SHIFT+V on FT and Insert on Indy

[Valdventurer]

I'm still mad about Revistronic's Wanted. It was crazy! I couldn't $#@!%^&* finish the game!! Any FPS would be easier to pass!! San Andreas missions are a piece of cake compared to the damn action sequence of Wanted (aka. The Westerner)!! Shame!! So really I can't stand ppl asking me about action in adventures

[elchrys]

Action in "Blade Runner" made the whole game more interesting, while in "Fahrenheit" it was too much for an adventure. With the correct difficulty level and gameplay, action in adventures can be fun and add more realism.

[artwking4]

I like some action sometimes, although I don't think that every adventure game should have action in it. But people who complain when one does have action elements are party poopers. There are adventure gamers (like me) who occasionally like some action in their adventure games, like Quest for Glory (and the upcoming Dreamfall). This kind of implementation can draw in audiences from other genres, like RPG players, which might introduce them to other adventure games. Just accept that sometimes there are games that won't be entirely to your liking. I don't like Myst, but I'm not demanding that no one makes games with those kind of puzzles. I don't want to ruin anyone else's fun.

[uk_john]

You have to be very careful with action in adventure gaming. The one thing that everyone says is bad in Fahrenheit is the fact that you have to watch the "simon says" colours and cannot actually look at the fights. It has made me think that to do the simon says thing, or indeed button mash or whatever and then based on that bashing show a fight that shows how you do. As indeed Fahrenheit managed with the boxing fight between the two detectives. Another way would be to gain action points by your advenutre actions and those points are then compared against enemy, the winner is decided and by how much and you simply watch the action take place. I also do not see why an adventure cannot be first person and deal with object manipulation and conversation. Much like Vampire Bloodlines without the third person fighting. And even where action is needed it can be somewhat automated. I.e. if you are a detective you know how to shoot but knowing where to move to to get the shot would be what you would have to do "on the hoof". So for me, I wouldn't mind if I had to work to find a good position, hit a button to shoot my colt 45, have the computer take the shot and if I have found a good shooting postion my "computer" shot would always hit the target. I could maybe choose "shoot to wound", "shoot to kill", etc and have the computer allocate a percentage of my chance of doing that based on my positioning.

In other words, if companies took a chance and looked outside the box they could come up with some very special titles indeed.

[Terramax]

I think the conclusion to this is what it was yesterday and the day before. It has to be FUN. This is, of course tricky seeing that some people don't like action events at all (because they can't handle them etc). I enjoyed the mechanic spider game in 'Still Life' but I'm aware I'm the minority.

But why not intergrate them into the game better? e.g. when 'Phone bone' is caught during the chase sequence, why not make it change the next cutscene etc. a kind of, no matter what happens, we win rule. Would add replay value too.

[Jalex]

I don't like action in adventure games. Most adventure game interfaces don't work well with action anyway. Action requires game engine that doesn't work for adventure games and the oposite is true as well. So the two don't mix well at all.

[ematoma!]

I agree with Disco when he says that the action should fit on the context of the game. I have to say that I had a wonderful time playing URU, and although many complained about the (little) action required to solve some puzzles, I found that it was rather refreshing to see the avatar performing actions, as swimming and sitting on a bench, for instance.