LucasForums

LucasForums (http://www.lucasforums.com/index.php)
-   Off-Topic Mayhem (http://www.lucasforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=182)
-   -   Adventure games from other media (http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?t=131936)

daltysmilth 07-16-2004 08:08 PM

Adventure games from other media
 
What are some movies, TV shows, books, comic books, etc. that you think would make good adventure games? I think you could make a great Batman adventure game. Ditto for SpiderMan, Sluggy Freelance, the Simpsons, and James Bond. What do you think?

cappuchok 07-17-2004 04:00 AM

Well, James Bond has already had an adventure game, though it was only labelled "James Bond: The Stealth Affair" in some countries. It's better known as "Operation Stealth" and I believe it was made by Delphine.

Alien426 07-17-2004 04:17 AM

I totally agree with Sluggy and The Simpsons. Maybe because they are also animated, Family Guy and Futurama come to mind. I think Futurama would rule, because you'd have a lot of locales to go to and the different planets might make good chapters. I liked the Star Trek adventures 25th Anniversary and Judgment Rites and think it could work like them.

Batman Returns adventure
Spider-Man adventure
James Bond adventure

Joshi 07-17-2004 10:27 AM

Stuff like futurama and Family Guy are too silly to make into an adventure game. Sure, there are great games like MM, DOTT and the MI series, but they work on a different level. The Simpsons and Futurama and so on wouldn't work as an adventure game (as they haven't worked as games before)simpley because, despite the animation aspect of it, there is very little alont time. All are very much dialogue oriented and even though adventure games are more dialogue oriented than other types of games, there are still huge periods where you're simply walking around doing nothing. plus fry isn't smart enough to do the stuff that people do in adventure games, and neitgher are the rest. All in all, I don't think any TV shows qualify, they'd have to be movies, and even then, I'd be a little skeptical.

The best thing would be comics or books. Now Batman or spiderman, i don't think so, marvel comics are widely based on action, and people like to think that when they're buying a game based on them, they're gonna get a little action. Dilbert would be good. i know it was a short lived TV series, but the character seems to fit. Garfield maybe (the movie looks crap) and other well known comic book characters (of tht type Sam and Max).

Books that could be done, well, half hearted attempts have been done with the Discworld series (although I did very much enjoy them, especially Noir) but I think "Good Omens" if only because it would be a great oppertunity to play as 3 seperate charachters, the demon, the angel and the antichrist (and maybe even that other bloke, you know, the one who meets that woman who has that book...) and it's funny as hell.

Alien426 07-17-2004 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Joshi
Stuff like futurama and Family Guy are too silly to make into an adventure game... [lotta crap here] ... plus fry isn't smart enough to do the stuff that people do in adventure games, and neitgher are the rest...
WTF? Are you on drugs? They would work perfectly! Who says there has to be a lot of dialogue? And who says there can't be in an adventure? Have you read a Sam & Max comic lately? Very much text. Ain't no problem with that in the game.

Besides, you're watching too much of the sucky past-season-2 episodes of Futurama.

Good Omens as a game? Oh please.

Bobo Donkey™ 07-17-2004 02:23 PM

What about Homestar Runner in a 2d adventure game? That'd be kinda cool dontcha think?

jimmycracker 07-17-2004 04:20 PM

I like jake's idea of Dilbert. Office puzzles could get very, very crazy.

Joshi 07-18-2004 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Alien426
WTF? Are you on drugs? They would work perfectly! Who says there has to be a lot of dialogue? And who says there can't be in an adventure? Have you read a Sam & Max comic lately? Very much text. Ain't no problem with that in the game.

Besides, you're watching too much of the sucky past-season-2 episodes of Futurama.

Good Omens as a game? Oh please.

Basically, there isn't any insentive for these people (futurama, the simpsons, family guy) to actually do anything worthwhile like go on an adventure or become pirates. Most of them have adventures againat there on wishes, and in truth, they're telivision programs, there's no threat of important people dying (main characters or otherwise) and, to me, no sense of adventure in them. Sam n Max worked because, well, it's sam n max, the duo together works on so many levels. With these TV shows, well, they work as TV shows mostly because it's fast and usually never without a gag or two. Fans of the show will get extremely bored when they have about two minutes of funny dialogue in the game, followed by twenty minutes of walking around with nothing funny happening (even sight gag will get old after a while).

Secondly, I own every single episode of futurama on DVD, i know where it went downhill and I know which were the good episodes, but seriously, what is elft for them to do, space is the final frontier, and they've saved the earth god knows how many times, nothing's new for them, nor the simpsons, not family guy (which I also own the first 3 seasons on DVD).

Thirdly, my last post had actual reasons why i didn't think these would do well as adventure games and reasons why I though Good Omens would do well. All you did was say "Good Omens as a game? Oh please. " which hardly constitutes as an explanation as to why you don't think it would make a good game, and unless you do, I would actually be under the impression that you've never actually read the book and you're just saying that out of spite.

daltysmilth 07-18-2004 05:35 PM

Joshi, by your logic, nobody would play an Indiana Jones adventure game because, after all, the Indiana Jones films are filled with action and there's not a lot of opportunity for action in an adventure game.

Ideally, a good Batman story would naturally involve a lot of detective work and snooping around. At least as much detective stuff as action. Remember, Batman is as much a detective as a crimefighter. He's as smart as he is tough. Probably even smarter. Batman's beaten Superman pretty much every time they've fought. Not because of physical prowess, but because Batman is much smarter than Superman. Batman has escaped every deathtrap he's been trapped in. It's because of these things that I think you could make a great adventure game based on Batman.

Alien426 07-19-2004 06:15 AM

Joshi, your arguments for and against the adventures are so ridiculous, how should I counter them?

> there isn't any incentive for these people to actually do anything worthwhile
They deliver goods to strange planets in Futurama. How could that not be adventurous?

> there's no threat of important people dying
Ever played a LucasArts adventure?

> Sam n Max worked because, well, it's sam n max
Sure, great argument you got there. :¬:
Sam & Max is a comic with lots of dialogue. It's an animated series with lots of action. The protagonists don't die. Sam & Max aren't smart enough to do the stuff that people do in adventure games...

Dalty has a point. Batman has no super powers. He relies on gadgets (just like adventurers do on their inventory).

Yes, I've read Good Omens. Works as a book. Could NEVER work as a game. Where's the puzzle solving? Where's the interaction with objects? How could it be entertaining for people who've read the book?



It takes em revy long to gifure uot yuor tosps. Hwo abuot yuo splel ckech befero yuo tosp?

scabb 07-19-2004 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by daltysmilth
Not because of physical prowess, but because Batman is much smarter than Superman.
Doesn't Superman have super-intelligence? Superman is boring anyway. He's got it all! Almost every superpower in the book, and only one crappy weakness! How could anyone even dream of beating this guy without a lump of the green stuff?

Batman only wins because it "surprises" the readers, and because he's infinitely cooler.

And speaking of Superman, you should all go watch The Adventures of Seinfeld & Superman immediatly.

Joshi 07-19-2004 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by daltysmilth
Joshi, by your logic, nobody would play an Indiana Jones adventure game because, after all, the Indiana Jones films are filled with action and there's not a lot of opportunity for action in an adventure game.

Ideally, a good Batman story would naturally involve a lot of detective work and snooping around. At least as much detective stuff as action. Remember, Batman is as much a detective as a crimefighter. He's as smart as he is tough. Probably even smarter. Batman's beaten Superman pretty much every time they've fought. Not because of physical prowess, but because Batman is much smarter than Superman. Batman has escaped every deathtrap he's been trapped in. It's because of these things that I think you could make a great adventure game based on Batman.

Umm, Batman and Superman aren't real, you know, Batman wins because the writer says he does and he says that mostly because more people liked Batman than Superman and would prefer him to win.

Now I'll have to admit, maybe Batman could work, and I do know he is the smartest of most of the action heroes and so on and so forth, but at the end of the day, fans of the genre would be expecting an action game, adventure wouldn't appeal to the masses.

And in using this same logic, this is exactly why people would play the old Indie games, he had action as well as brains, and this is exactly why LA decided to go for an action as appose to an adventure in the newer games, it appeals to the masses.

Now alien. First of all, Fry and the rest are all in dead end jobs, if they needed something to drive an adventure, it would have to be something a little be stronger that "because the boss said so". Yes, you may be able to come up with that, but as I said before there are so many other factors which you didn't actually address, you only addressed the ones that you thought you could argue over, which doesn't constitute you calling my argument ridiculous, just flawed.

And yes, I do know that in LA adventures you can't dye, but amazingly, you're not the only important person in the game. In Monkey Island, there was always the threat that in the story, someone like Elaine may die. Yes, it didn't happen, but that's always a factor that could have been address, and not being grounded by actor’s contacts or anything, this could happen and you could still have further episodes of the game, or whatever. You can't have Leela die in a Futurama game now can you, you know she's alive in the show and despite the show being cancelled, it's still too definite for a TV show, and people wouldn't react to well to the fact that they see a major character die in a game rather than their roots in the show.

The whole Sam n Max thing, well basically, it was already in so many mediums, and was a comic way before it was a TV show and was a TV show after the game. It was only logical to bring out the game and plus Steve Purcell and co made it work. I highly doubt Matt Groening and David Coen and the rest sitting down with a game production team and creating the game from design to implementation.

I agree about Batman, (which is why he's actually my fave DC comic character, no superpowers, he actually worked to become Batman, it wasn't just some radioactive bat or explosion or something) and yes, it could actually be a good adventure game, if it wasn't for profits, more people expect an action rather than adventure from batman (which is why I personally think the new movie may well flop, too much action, truly the only true screen adaptation is the cartoon series).

Finally, not all good adventure games have to be object oriented. Discworld Noir was done surprisingly well as an adventure game with very few items taken. In fact, the chosen items were nicely done, lots of time we simply pick up everything in a game in the hope that later on it will help and sure enough it does, but it's not evident why at the time of picking it up, it's simply just another item in our inventory. Most of the items in Noir actually had some relevance when you picked it up, even if it was vague. Adventure games don't rely on inventory alone; it's mostly about story and dialogue, something which is evident in the book. And exactly when was Indie object oriented in the movies, it was mostly about Indie using actions and his brain. The fact that Good Omens revolves around multiple people, all looking for separate goals, but then all being thrust into each others world, would make a great game. Not all adventures need to have actual puzzles for it to work like Broken Sword 3, BS1 worked fine without little puzzles like that, as did MI and a whole host of other successful adventure games.

Adn jstu fro yuo, a prefcetyl sepll chkede psot.

cappuchok 07-20-2004 09:14 AM

How about B5 (that's "Babylon 5" for those who've been away from Earth for the last ten or so years)? That universe could acommodate a whole host of different adventure games, detective games, RPGs, action games and flight games. It's full of interesting stories, sideplots that would benefit from being explored in more detail and all the other stuff that makes a good foundation for all sorts of computer games.

Also it'd be interesting to see how a Marvel / DC character or group (who are mostly action heroes) would translate into adventure games. DC tried it with Batman, but I'd like to see some Marvel hero in an adventure game too.

Dr Edison 007 07-20-2004 09:30 AM

There is an adventure based on The Simpsons, it's called Virtual Springfield and you play as a tourist in first-person view.

Basically you just go around and see the sites of Springfield.

Alegis 07-20-2004 10:10 AM

an adventure game based on catwoman...those would be some nice gamemodels....wonder if they'd make up for the sad storyline

what the gaming world doesn't need however, are more rpgs with wizards, druids, elfs etc..

scabb 07-20-2004 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Joshi
Now alien. First of all, Fry and the rest are all in dead end jobs, if they needed something to drive an adventure, it would have to be something a little be stronger that "because the boss said so". Yes, you may be able to come up with that, but as I said before there are so many other factors which you didn't actually address, you only addressed the ones that you thought you could argue over, which doesn't constitute you calling my argument ridiculous, just flawed.

And yes, I do know that in LA adventures you can't dye, but amazingly, you're not the only important person in the game. In Monkey Island, there was always the threat that in the story, someone like Elaine may die. Yes, it didn't happen, but that's always a factor that could have been address, and not being grounded by actor’s contacts or anything, this could happen and you could still have further episodes of the game, or whatever. You can't have Leela die in a Futurama game now can you, you know she's alive in the show and despite the show being cancelled, it's still too definite for a TV show, and people wouldn't react to well to the fact that they see a major character die in a game rather than their roots in the show.



There is a Futurama game. It has a plot, and it involves some sort of hilarious hair-brained adventure, just like an episode of the show does. Just because we know that none of the main characters are going to die, that doesn't detract from the 'fun' at all. Fry, Leela and Bender are constantly thrown into life or death situations all the time, and there's never a question whether or not they'll get out of them. Nobody needs to be killed off to make a Futurama adventure game possible, this is a completely worthless point.

There are actually quite a lot of similarities between the characters in Monkey Island and Futurama. Fry & Guybrush are the dull-witted protagonist, Elaine & Leela are both the strong female types in charge, and Bender is akin to.. Murray (Max would be a better match)? So there's no real reason why a Futurama adventure game wouldn't work.


Quote:

Originally posted by Joshi
The whole Sam n Max thing, well basically, it was already in so many mediums, and was a comic way before it was a TV show and was a TV show after the game. It was only logical to bring out the game and plus Steve Purcell and co made it work.



It was logical to bring out a game because Sam & Max had a TV show after the game came out and a comic before? It's also worth noting that The Simpsons: Hit & Run was actually written by scriptwriters who worked on the show. The characters make various witty comments, and they're definitely the same Simpsons you see on TV.

Joshi 07-20-2004 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by scabb
There is a Futurama game. It has a plot, and it involves some sort of hilarious hair-brained adventure, just like an episode of the show does. Just because we know that none of the main characters are going to die, that doesn't detract from the 'fun' at all. Fry, Leela and Bender are constantly thrown into life or death situations all the time, and there's never a question whether or not they'll get out of them. Nobody needs to be killed off to make a Futurama adventure game possible, this is a completely worthless point.



Please note, that game was crap. I played it for about five minutes in a Game store and saw no point in it. this may or may not have been for the storyline, or whatever. Fine, so my point may not have been the best argument, but honestly, I really can't see how it could make a good adventure game. Possibly because Monkey island was original was one factor for it's success (but then that contradicts the entire thread here anyway).
Basically, as soon as I heard someone say Futurama, I felt something wasn't quite right about it, and nothing anyone's said has really changed my mind about that, despite going at this with an open mind. I can't explain why I don't think it would work I just don't think it would, despite it's similarities with Monkey island. Sometimes, things don't work just because you follow the formula.


Quote:

Originally posted by scabb
It was logical to bring out a game because Sam & Max had a TV show after the game came out and a comic before? It's also worth noting that The Simpsons: Hit & Run was actually written by scriptwriters who worked on the show. The characters make various witty comments, and they're definitely the same Simpsons you see on TV.


I didn't say that was logical, I just said that it seemed to follow a nice path the game came out after the comic, a good funny comic with only pictures, words and humour to drive it, so the game provided everything else that a would be TV series would need for it to work (which, unfortunately, it didn't).

And the Simpsons thing depends on which Simpsons you're talking about on TV, the newer episodes, or the classic season 4 Simpsons? although the whole Idea behind Hit and run is the vehicle angle, which means I suppose no one was actually expecting too much of the Simpsons humour to show up, just the world they live in, and I don't just mean the city (is it a city or town?)

Then again, hey, I'm just one guy, with one opinion, it might be right, it might be wrong, that's the point of this discussion.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:07 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.