(Not) Playing the Game
Part 3

By Randy Sluganski

We Are Eaten by a Grue

It is often said that our leaders are reflective of our culture. So it is also with the gaming community. It is an industry that not so much eats its young as it sodomizes them. It is hard enough to watch adults grovel at the feet of CEOs in the business world, but it is downright disgusting to see 18- and 19-year-olds at the E3 chase after the video and computer game marketing people like dogs in heat. Their blind devotion permits them to provide four-page rabid previews of future releases that have been paid for, not with cash (for that would be unethical), but with press junkets, free games, computer hardware, and the unspoken promise of a future position with the company. It is an unregulated community where journalists write game guides and then review the same game for a major magazine. It is a community of gaming pimps. And we are all--every single one of us--the whores.

So how does the adventure gamer fit into this community? We don't. We have been relegated to a niche. Pushed out by the action bullies. If you find this hard to believe, you won't by the time you have reached the end of this article.

What do the following nine names have in common? Bruno Bonnell, Alexander Seropian, Bill Gardner, Greg Fischbach, Brian Farrell, Rob Dyer, Trip Hawkins, Tom Dusenberry, David Grenewetski. If you guessed that they are all men, give yourself a star. Did you also know that they are all CEOs or presidents of one of the world's major game publishers (in order, Infogrames, Bungie, Capcom, Acclaim, THQ, Eidos, 3DO, Hasbro, and Sierra). We could easily list another 15 companies that are also similarly represented. When you are the decisive voice for your company and it comes time to make that final decision between green-lighting a second-rate action game that you know will sell well or a top-quality adventure game that will only sell half as many copies, which side do you think the axe will fall on? Do you appeal to the audience you already have, or do you try to open new market areas? Mass market or niche? Two hundred percent return on your investment or 50 percent? When you have only one mindset to choose from, the answers are obvious. Now let's look at the flip side of the coin.

According to a recent article in Game Business written by Marc Saltzman, statistics compiled by the Interactive Digital Software Association (ISDA) show that 43 percent of today's PC gamers are women. The ISDA also estimates that 50 percent of all videogames and computer games sold in 1999 were purchased by women. According to PC Data, the top three sellers of the year were Roller Coaster Tycoon, SimCity 3000, and Who Wants to Be a Millionaire. All three titles, even though they were not created specifically for women, are considered to be "female-friendly" in that they encourage interaction and creativity. If you are a company like Acclaim that has only previously produced games for a predominately male audience, what kind of product would you choose to attract the untapped female gamer? Why, Mary Kate and Ashley Dance Party of the Century, of course, because, as we know, girls just want to have fun. And if you are Mattel, how do you appeal to this untapped audience? Who else but Barbie? Was Barbie Fashion Designer a huge best-seller? You betcha. But it also had major marketing muscle behind it. Now if you are Her Interactive and your CEO is a woman and you want to capture the female market, what kind of game do you release? A Quake clone? There are women who play first-person shooters, and it would be a guaranteed profit. A cooking game? After all, girls like to cook after they are done dancing and playing with their dolls. How about a series of Nancy Drew adventure games that are meant to entertain and educate? Games that appeal to the cerebral gamer and not to a stereotype? Games that have yet to find a major distributor but were on Amazon's software bestseller list? Is Her Interactive filling a void? Yes, but it is a void that should never have existed. And what will the future bring? Store shelves stocked with games that male-dominated companies "think" women want, or games created by women for women that suffer the stigma of being an adventure game? There is room, and there should be, for both products, but once again the adventure game is being pushed aside.

The E3 is the premiere event of the industry. It is a celebration of games and the creative professionals who bring them to life. This year, over 400 exhibitors will occupy over 48,000 feet of floor space. It will be attended by people of every nationality from every corner of the world. Just as the Oscar winners are voted on by members of the movie industry and their awards presented at a huge televised gala, so also does the E3 present awards for the best of show. Last year, a voting committee comprised of editors and journalists from the major webzines and magazines (I'll not belabor the point of who all comprised the voting committee--if you read parts 1 and 2 of this article, then you already know) voted for the best game in almost every category you can think of: action, action/adventure, role-playing, sports, et al. There was no category for best adventure game. Thinking this only an oversight, I wrote the following to the E3 voting committee:

"I noticed with dismay that awards are being given for every category imaginable--with the exception of the granddaddy of the industry, the adventure game. Sure, there is an action/adventure category, but that is a bastardization of the genre to true adventure aficionados.

"I am sure my readers would love to see a category added for best adventure game of the show. Please consider adding this category.

"As you are aware, the adventure is temporarily in a slump; the addition and recognition of this genre with a separate award would do a lot to revitalize the genre."

I received the following official response:

"Because the adventure genre is swiftly morphing into the action/adventure genre, we place traditional adventure games in the same category. Don't worry, it's actually good for them. Last year, Grim Fandango won against Drakan, Outcast and Tomb Raider III in the same category, reminding the industry that traditional adventure games are often greater games than any other."

If the traditional adventure genre is often greater than any other, then why does it not rate its own award category? Maybe the committee could not find any "traditional" adventure games at the exposition to represent the genre; after all, adventure games are dead. As for me, I found the following games at the E3: The Longest Journey, Gabriel Knight 3, The Real Neverending Story, and Faust--all traditional adventure games. Oh, and let's not forget Tender Loving Care, Lightbringer, 20,000 Leagues: The Journey Continues, Alone in the Dark 4, and Echo Night. Oops, I almost forgot: Clocktower 2, Atlantis 2, Aztec, The Time Machine, and Devil Inside. And there were even more. I wonder what show the voting committee attended?

Finally, we will let an industry insider who wishes to remain anonymous for reasons that will become obvious conclude part 3:

"As a member of the gaming press, I was part of a game developer's roundtable during Gamestock, Microsoft's annual 'product roll-out' event. I'm not sure if any members or contributors from Just Adventure were represented, but I thought you might be interested in the discussion which took place about the way games in general are going, and specifically why the panelists believed the adventure game genre will eventually die out.

"Ed Fries, the general manager of the Microsoft Games Group, had introduced the day's events by identifying five elements he believed were crucial to the production of a good game: characters, narrative, investment, choice and emotion. He believes the next step for the gaming industry is to elevate the genre to the level of an art form, similar to motion pictures. He pointed out that traditional adventure games do not contain all these elements--particularly not the element of choice. If today's gamer wants to be in control at all times, that means no linear storylines.

"Chris Taylor of Gas Powered Games agreed, pointing out that if he wanted to tell the crowd his (apparently infamous) story about his trip to New York, he didn't want someone to come up to him and say 'Well, what if you hadn't gotten into that cab?' and begin to change the storyline on the fly. Adventure games, he argued, are basically storytelling, and storytelling is inherently linear. The new crop of gamers, he believes, don't want to have where they can go and what they can do dictated to them at all times; they want freedom to act and move any way they want.

"A member of the audience asked a question about LucasArts' recent (and, if the rumors are true, last) adventure game, Grim Fandango. It was an interesting story, stylistically beautiful, and fun to play, he argued, so why didn't it do well? Bruce Shelley of Ensemble Studios answered by comparing the complete pool of gamers to a pie; whenever you make certain decisions about a game, you decide whether to include or exclude portions of that pie. He believed that by making Grim Fandango a dark, film noir-style game that takes place in the Land of the Dead, LucasArts ended up with only the tiniest sliver of the gaming pool. 'There's a reason why the sun shines in Age games,' he declared. 'We want to include as many gamers as possible.'

"I can understand why all these people said what they did, and many made some valid arguments, but I was still left with some questions:

"How can any of these men claim to speak for the 'new crop' of gamers when they all appear to be over 30? Do gamers really detest adventure games, or are they reacting to some of the poorly planned and even more poorly programmed pieces of schlock which pass for adventures? Even if the panelists' summations are accurate (which I doubt, having seen the reactions of even small children to adventure games), is it fair to exclude the 'old crop' of gamers in favor of children and teenagers? Older gamers continue to play, are often devoted to adventure games, and have enough disposable income to be a really lucrative market, so why shut them out? If characters, narrative and emotion are important to a game, why not use the ultimate narrative form to advantage? Doesn't the motion picture, the art form Ed Fries most wants to emulate, offer an inherently linear and narrative form of communication? Why does it do so well, then? If choice is important to gamers, why not offer them an array of interactive, well-written adventures as one of many choices? Does anyone really believe the world needs yet another first-person shooter?

"Perhaps adventure games will not appeal to every segment of the gaming public--but then, if games are approaching an 'art form,' perhaps it's worth it to ask whether appealing to the status quo always produces the greatest or most lasting artwork. As a long-time and ardent adventure gamer, I happen to believe that if designers really want to create games that move and involve gamers, they would best be served by choosing the adventure genre."

Next week we conclude (Not) Playing the Game on a positive note as we suggest possibilities for the resurgence of the genre.