JimmyTwoBucks

That's true, but I also think it's because we actually went through a bunch of later "innovations" after that which didn't add anything and in some cases took away from the experience. Some seemed to simply be innovations for innovations sake rather than anything that improved the game. It's hard to simplify adventure game commands past a certain point, and point-and-click seems to be that point, for the most part. After that, any further innovations seem to involve changing the very nature of the game into a different genre. I think the peak in popularity and acclaim around the parser/point-and-click era (eg. KQ6 and SQ4, as well as Monkey Island 1+2, etc.) was for good reason... there are certain graphical styles and command systems that just suit the adventure game perfectly. I think if high resolution graphics are done really well (as Space Venture seems to be so far), then that's great, but I think there is more to go wrong with higher res graphics, they can come out really horribly. Not that I want to see everything in SQ4 or Monkey Island resolution, but that resolution is reasonably fool-proof and makes sure that everything is consistent (rather than in some higher-res games where the characters are in one style and the backgrounds in another, etc.). I'm not against updates and innovations, but if I were the developers, I'd be aiming to replicate most of what made the best games so good, rather than tinkering with the formula. I think unless you have something that clearly is going to potentially make the experience better for most people (eg. adding actual graphics to text adventures) then proceed with extreme caution with any big changes. I'd prefer them to just try to get a standard, straightforward, good adventure game made first, following the tried-and-tested formula, then maybe once they've totally mastered that, THEN try to tweak it here and there.

In that article the Odd Gentlemen say: "To clarify the game is very much an adventure game. It doesn't only use the mouse."

http://blog.theoddgentlemen.com/post/94565660054/the-odd-gentlemen-are-pleased-to-announce-their-next The Odd Gentlemen's art style seems pretty nice from what I've seen, though usually pretty "flat" rather than anything that looks like a KQ.

King's Quest is cool, but I kinda like the other quest thing they did more... the one with the guy in space and there's jokes and everything. Roger somebody. And he has a broom or a mop or whatever. You know the one I mean.

It's kinda like saying, "Steven Spielberg - best known for producing Terra Nova, Pinky and the Brain, and Under the Dome."

In that comic strip, shouldn't it be "Lara Croft" and not "Laura"? I hear that "Laura Croft" is the name of a nude model, apparently, according to some, allegedly. I mean I haven't been researching it for the past 45 mins or anything, that's just something I heard through the grapevine.

Little bit off topic, but you know how they redid 1+2 to make the graphics fit in with 3+4... I thought it would have been way better to do the opposite, redo 3+4 with the graphics of 1+2, would have made them seem far more Monkey Islandy.

Hmm, I don't like this way of criticizing the dismissing of criticism. If someone wants to dismiss criticism, I think we should let them. Then again, maybe you are within your rights to criticize any dismissal of criticism as you see fit. Maybe I am in the wrong, with my criticism of your criticism of criticism dismissal. Something to think about.

Awesome, will check it out! I hope AVGN eventually reviews/plays another adventure game, though I don't know how many made it onto consoles... Monkey Island for Sega CD would be cool, and would hopefully let him see how awesome adventure games can be, though I hear the load times aren't great from the Sega CD.

Sounds cool! Was it released anywhere? He did a games review where he reviewed some of the games that's he's in... I would have expected with his sense of humor that he would have loved stuff like Space Quest and Monkey Island, but I don't think he ever played them, as he was put off by Maniac Mansion and maybe by the nature of adventure games... I like adventure games because they're relaxing and you can do "real world" stuff like picking up regular objects, going to interesting places, using things, talking to people, etc. (rather than just shooting everyone you see), but I can see to some people they would seem odd because it's not really fast moving and you don't really "control" the character that much apart from regular walking around.

Different strokes.

Don't know how many here have heard of the Angry Video Game Nerd (James Rolfe), but he reviews old games, mainly NES and other consoles (and has a movie coming out later this year)... I enjoy a lot of his stuff and I actually prefer his "out of character" stuff where he's just himself and plays games with his friend Mike... they play NES, Atari, and all kinds of old consoles: http://cinemassacre.com/category/jamesandmike/ Anyway, I had never seen them play a point-and-click game before, but I assumed they knew about them and liked them because they like humorous things, and some of the funniest games are point-and-clicks... So in the most recent video they played Maniac Mansion for the NES (I wasn't even aware that it came out on the NES!) and they have their other friend, Bootsy, playing through it as it's his favorite NES game: http://cinemassacre.com/2014/06/30/maniac-mansion-nes-james-mike-mondays/ Though I was very surprised that James and Mike didn't really "get" adventure games... they seemed confused the whole way through and can't seem to grasp why anyone would like this kind of game. I was sort of under the impression that anyone who grew up playing games during that time period would know, and be pretty into, adventure games, but I guess not! I remember Maniac Mansion being particularly difficult even on a computer, so maybe that game put them off playing them in general...

True... though I think from the demo we don't have a broad enough sense of the game to really judge... We're only really discussing three little puzzles (maybe even just two, as the door one would take 5 seconds with fixed controls) and I think they took up way more of people's time than they normally would have, due to the controls and lack of instruction. Also, regular adventure game inventory puzzles tend to play out over a far larger area (eg. item on screen 3 is used on screen 24, etc.), and the demo is only a few screens, so it meant they couldn't showcase lots of inventory puzzles (especially as the demo is part of the game and not a stand-alone demo), and so it seemed more heavily weighted towards swiping. I think if the demo had one fewer swipe puzzle, then no one would have really made a big deal about it, and it would be seen as just a nice little variation to add variety to the overall types of puzzles. It's just people saw the crates AND the cart and are extrapolating that we're going to have to play a sliding puzzle (like below) every five seconds and that they will make up the majority of the puzzles in the game: Now, if that's true and it really is "Sliding Puzzle Venture" then sure, it'll probably get a lot of criticism for it, but I don't think there is necessarily any reason to assume that it will be loaded with those puzzles. And there is always the potential for hilarious uses of swipe functions too... I think that's pretty unfair... When people are making broad criticisms it's helpful to break it down to specifics and to provide some evidence for the claims, so we can see what we're dealing with and make a more informed judgement. If someone says every scene is empty and that won't make a good game, then let's look at equivalent screenshots from games we agree are good and see how many objects are in them. If someone hates all the swipe puzzles, let's actually break down how many there were and why people didn't actually like them and see if there is actually cause for concern.

Pretty sure Fronzel surreptitiously added that one in as a joke, as he credits it to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Sarkeesian

I went back through that demo thread... I think you're skewing the response to the swiping -- most people seem fine with the concept of swiping, as long as the controls for it are updated and there is dialogue added telling you to swipe: "I'm ok with the swipe controls so long as there's good visual feedback" - alhazan "I really like the earlier suggestion for the first screen or two to offer "gameplay tips" in the dialog...swipe in the direction you want it to go..." - audiodane "It's not clear that stuff can be swiped." - Thornado "...the airlock could probably be the perfect spot for a controls tutorial for the swiping." - MusicallyInspired "I think swipes have a potential to open up a load of new puzzle types and/or Easter Eggs if done correctly" - drdrslashvohaul These quotes you posted are in the same vein... people who are just critiquing the actual controls: "And also the wipes aren't very intutive“ - tomimt "Swipe controls are a pain“ - Uddasa "The swipe is unintuitive for a mouse on a desktop PC" - shdon "The swiping is realy awkward. [...] So I almost quit playing.“ - Thornado

They're also pretty self-explanatory... mea culpa refers to Jar Jar Binks talking about his culpa, and pro bono refers to people who are in agreement with the bulk of what U2's frontman has to say.

Well, it does mean you missed the Gary Owens narration, which is quite possibly the greatest audio that human civilization has ever produced, thus far.

I had never played the Simon the Sorcerer games before and had heard some mixed things about them, but I just played and completed the first one (and hooray, I did it without going to the hints even once :lol: ) This was easily one of my favorite games, I really, really enjoyed it... I'd put it above games that are usually put ahead of it -- I liked it better than Full Throttle, Sam and Max, and in some ways I liked it better than Grim Fandango (the best parts of GF are truly excellent, but I found it dragged a little in the beginning). To me it's in the same league as SQs 1,3,4,6 and Monkey Island 1+2, So I'm now looking forward to playing Simon the Sorcerer 2...

Thanks for all the info, that sounds great, as Deepship is one of my favorite SQ locations! I guess we'll just have to wait and see how it all turns out in the end, can't wait!

And finally, a few non-ship shots they've let us see... Desert planet: Equiv from SQ4: Inside something alien-looking: Equiv from SQ6: Landing place: Equiv from SQ6: Don't know if this is a cutscene or not, but space vehicle: One thing I noticed while doing this -- with a lot of the shots in SV, the perspective is closer to Ace than the SQ shots are to Roger, i.e. the "camera" is further away from Roger in SQ... that will most likely mean there are more rooms in SV, as you can't fit as much of an area in one screen. It looks like the first spaceship thing is going to be bigger than most SQ areas... there are already around 14 screens for it and we haven't seen every part of the ship yet (unless we're seeing inside multiple ships in some of the shots). I think another big thing to mention is that we haven't seen any of the other characters placed within the game yet, which will go a long way to making it feel populated and lived in as a world.

Let's see what else they've shown us from the ship that's not in the demo... Some kind of canteen, with seats, a drinks machine, a menu and shuttered serving thing: Equivalent with drinks machine and seats from SQ6: Some kind of elevator with water in it: SQ6 elevator thing: Some kinda missile-loading or maybe trash-ejecting things with lights, etc.: (Can't find a real equivalent to this in the SQ games at the moment...) Toilets! I remember this was released ages ago, so may have changed by now: (Again, can't find a direct equiv in the SQ games...) The infamous pipes room: (I guess any corridor from the SQ games would count as an equivalent...) Another ship scene (not sure if it's a cutscene though): I assume this is part of the sewer-system of the ship: Equivalent might be something like this location from SQ4 with steps/ladders, etc.:

Next: As a room it has quite a lot going on, there is the animation of the crate thing moving backwards with the lights, a washing line, the sleeping guy, the table full of stuff... bearing in mind it's a storage room rather than a regular room. The equivalent might be something like this from SQ4, simple room with a table, door thing, etc.: This is one of my favorite screens and it has a lot of detail in it: It's a more detailed version of something like this from SQ4: Next, a corridor joining screen thing: So something on a ship with different doors would be this from SQ1: This is another of my favorite screens, the lab: In which there are several animations going on, the lights in the center and left, the beasties in the tanks, the bubbles, and the tanks opening... There are some scenes in the SQ games with bits of labs, but they tend to be rooms with a lab, shuttle, all different things put into one room, rather than a specialist specimen lab like this seems to be.... And that's the demo... So to me, going like-for-like, SV is on track to being in the same vein as the SQ games, and surpasses them in some cases like with the lab and the close-up scene of the magazine/drill-bits/etc. I don't think they're particularly empty in comparison to the SQ games, which in some cases are emptier, partially due to graphic limitations if we're talking SQ1-2. I think you also have to bear in mind that the demo is set on a spaceship with corridors, so there aren't going to be many rugs, potted plants, etc. in corridors, just as there weren't in the SQ games.

Ok, let's go through the art and maybe I can allay some of your art-related fears... The main thing we've had to look at is the demo, as that's the thing that has been playable, but I'll go through some of the other screenshots we've seen as well. I think for comparison, it's fair to see what the Space Quest games looked like, in terms of emptiness/boringness (and if you didn't enjoy or like the SQ games, then SV probably isn't going to be your sort of game!), also bearing in mind the different graphic resolutions, etc. I also think it's important to compare locations as like-for-like... spaceships compared to spaceships, corridors to corridors, deserts compared to deserts, etc. Ok, so the demo... first location: The nearest thing I found in SQ was in SQ5 with some kind of door immediately in front of you: Next screen: An equivalent might be something like this from SQ4, where it's just a general corridor type of thing: (Bearing in mind that SV is also meant to have some kind of character in the ship that wasn't included in the demo who might be in one of these rooms...) Next: We've got a tunnel with a cart and a vent that can open and steam... compared to something like this, from SQ2: And we have the close-up of the cart too: Which is similar to close-ups in SQ4:

Aargrghhh, get it away from me, get it away from me!!

At the end of the day, I think the 2 Guys need to just do what they want to do with the game and make a game they think is really awesome. They're clever guys, so if they make something that's awesome to themselves, a lot of other people will also find it awesome. Once you start second guessing or trying to sift through opinions on message boards, you'll get into all sorts of trouble and be dragged in all sorts of directions. Some people love the art style, some people don't -- you can't please everyone. Some people thought the swiping was fine, some didn't. Even with the original SQs, some people think the first game is the best, some think the 3rd game is the best, etc. If something is actually broken and is buggy, that's different, but they're going to be testing it all before it comes out.