Talk:Adventure game
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Adventure game was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. Reviewed version: April 3, 2006 |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. | |
| Top | This article is on a subject of Top priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0. | |
|
VG To-do:
|
||
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Adventure games, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of adventure games. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale. |
| Top | This article has been rated as Top-importance on the importance scale. |
[edit] Japanese adventure games
Japanese adventure games are NOT the equivalent of visual novels, or at least, not visual novels as described in the Wikipedia article. I own several (categorized as adventure on Amazon.co.jp and their maker websites) for the PS2, and they are not just walls of text, with static backgrounds and pictures. There are a couple like this, but not all, and in several, there are significant portions of gameplay that resemble an RPG or other type of game with several minigames, fighting, or different activities to perform. I know the terminology of this 'type' of game is already really mixed up, but I'd like to at least remove the reference to visual novels because it's misleading.Lijakaca 20:40, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- It's true that not all Japanese adventure games are visual novels. However, there are literally hundreds of visual novel games available. The "Adventure" section of most Japanese game stores, in my experience anyway, tends to include "action adventure" games along with games that fit the description on this page. I think that removing the reference to visual novels is a bad idea, as it is a prevalent form of this genre and is mostly restricted to Japan, but it would be fair to add a comment mentioning that Japan does not produce such games exclusively. --waka 13:05, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
That sounds like a fair compromisse to me. I will try to do that tonight.Lijakaca 22:35, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Playstation?
...the release of the Sony PlayStation marked the end of the adventure era;...
That sentence doesn't make much sense, as the article states itself consoles never had much todo with the development of adventures, most of the console adventures where just ports from C64, Amiga or PC. So the Playstation can't really have had very much influence into the dawnfall of the adventure genre, since they never had (many) adventure games to begin with. -- Grumbel 16:41, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
- I wrote that line, but I didn't intend to suggest that the PS1 caused the fall of the Adventure genre (though I think a case could be made that public interest in games made a major transition to the Adventure-light console systems). Rather, I meant that the decline of the Adventure era coincided with the release of the PS1. I didn't mean to indicate any causality here, so if you find the line confusing go ahead and change it. --waka 20:02, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Clean up
Okay, somebody tagged it as clean up and I've edited the bulk of it but I think it still needs work. (The french stuff has already been merged BTW). DamienG 15:35, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
I've gone through and tidied up the language. I feel the clean-up tag could go now. Thoughts?
- AndyHolyer 16:09, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
I've further cleaned up the grammar and flow of the first two paragraphs. I'll try to apply the same treatment to the rest of the article in the near future.--waka 2 July 2005 22:45 (UTC)
[edit] Older stuff
Games which would be labelled Action Adventure on the console are oftenly labelled Action RPG or just CRPG on the computer. Is there a difference between Action Adventures and Action RPGs? Action RPGs seem to be identical to Action Adventures, just that they have RPG-elements (usually that means character stats and skills). However most modern CRPGs are action focussed (the vast majority of skills are about combat, most quests involve combat as single or primary solution), so most of them could easily be called Action RPGs. Where is the border between CRPGs and ARPGs, where the border between Action Adventures and Action RPGs? -Ashmodai
- As I see it, action RPGs are basically any any RPG with pronounced action and reflex-based elements, the most notable example being Diablo. The difference between an action-adventure game and an action-RPG can be vague, but basically boils down to "can I improve my character's statistics and abilities?" If the answer is no, then the game in question can't really be called an RPG. Just because the characters in a game are engaged in some kind of action doesn't mean the game can be called an action game; "action game" implies a requirement for dexterity and reflexes on the player's part, whereas in a non-action game the requirement is shifted onto the player's character(s). After all, there's more violent action implied in a game of Risk than in any CRPG, but Risk is clearly a strategy game because the player isn't required to simulate the action, only the strategizing. YMMV. -Sean 01:06, 30 May 2004 (UTC)
So by your definition a turn based CRPG cannot be an Action RPG, no matter if it focusses on action or not? Some kind of border case might be Baldur's Gate, which is clearly understood as a traditional CRPG by most people, but relies on twitch-action in its combat parts, although strategies and tactics can be applied by pausing during a combat. So technically, Baldur's Gate is partially an Action RPG because it can be played like one, or what? I think the seperation you suggested, although it might sometimes be unperfect, makes sense. -Ashmodai
- Baldur's Gate only has minimal "twitch action", and then only if you turn off the autopausing feature. Which is a decision not unlike giving all of your characters bows but none of them arrows. -Sean Curtin 06:13, 31 May 2004 (UTC)
I.e. the game is primarily a CRPG, but can be played like an ARPG by the l33t, aye? Thought so. I suppose I just prefer turn based combat over twitch-action-which-isn't-because-it's-got-a-pause-mode combat. Ah, well, tastes differ. Don't take any offense from my wording. -Ashmodai
- Action RPGs and Action/adventure games differ in that RPGs of any sort, whether turn based like JRPGs or direct action/real time combat based like CRPGs (a.k.a Western RPGs), the latter of which on consoles are primarily labeled Action/RPG, are all stat based. They live and die on stat building, stat distributing, etc. It's all stats of some sort. Enemies have hit points usually, and defeating them gives the player, you guessed it, more stats with which to distribute and build up their character.
- Action/adventure games aren't focused on stats at all. Sure, you can "build up" the character, like with Link and the heart containers, but that's hardly stat building. Action/adventure games, as the name implies, are focused on a mixture of action gameplay with elements of adventure gaming. Most of the time those adventure elements revolve around environmental puzzle solving and/or exploration. The action gameplay could be anything from swordplay (Zelda), shooting (Resident Evil..."Survival horror" games are action/adventure games), platforming and shooting (Metroid, Tomb Raider), etc.
- Again, all RPGs revolve around stats. If a game has stats, and the focus on is raising, building, distributing those stats, usually through beating enemies who have hit points, then it's most likely an RPG. If it doesn't have that, then it's most likely not an RPG at all.151.205.161.9 11:12, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] French-language material translated awaiting merge
- Article: fr:Jeu d'aventure
- Corresponding English-language article: Adventure game
- Worth doing because: More extensive than English-language article.
- Originally Requested by: FiP 15:49, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Status: Done by ShadowDragon. Currently residing at Talk:Adventure game/Translation from French. Still needs to be merged.
Does anyone want to take on the merge? -- Jmabel 22:32, Sep 9, 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Interactive Fiction
This article covers almost exactly the same territory as Interactive fiction----Isaac R 05:23, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
From the article:
"Adventure games can be single character control games or multiple character control games (such as Lemmings). Independent of this, there are many types of adventure games, depending on the criteria. Adventure games vary in their subject, interface, setting or plot. A possible grouping is:
- Puzzle adventure games
- Action adventure games
- Text based adventure games
- Graphical adventure games
- RPG-like adventure games
- other adventure games (see below)"
Of these, only Text-based adventure games are interactive fiction. Grue 19:34, 25 May 2005 (UTC)
- But there is still a HUGE amount of duplication of material. Surely something can be done about this? It seems absurd to have 1/3 of this article cover the ground covered by another article? Could it not start with something which just referred the reader to Interactive fiction for text based adventures? --Richard Clegg 18:57, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Please incorporate the following text
Common genres of TBGs, or Text-Based Games include:
- Interactive Fiction. Posessing a novelistic style, and primarily concerned with the literary sense of the work. Examples include Phototopia and Luminous Horizon.
- Dungeon. Typically these TBGs are combat and maze-based. Some are single player, some are online, such as multiplayer text-based games (MUDs) with a fantasy flavor. Examples include Three Kingdoms, BorderZone.
- Adventure. Marked by the original D&D-style exploration games with a puzzle theme. Examples include HLA Adventure, Zork.
- Slideshow Fiction. These are usually a story combined with still images. Some see these games as a natural evolution into the graphical medium. Examples include Myst and Space Quest.
- Interactive fiction is already in there, MUDs are not really adventure games (but they're included in the "see also" section), and Myst is not a text-based game at all. I don't think this needs to be incorporated at all. The demiurge 17:30, July 16, 2005 (UTC)
- Someone has tried to incorporate this text twice, verbatim, even though it's partially incorrect and partially redundant. I've had to revert the page twice. However, I'm hesitant to delete things from the talk page. Can any one else comment on this? The demiurge 02:08, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
-
- Don't delete it from here, but don't incorporate it either. It doesn't need to be in the article. The fact that the user posted it here on the Talk page asking someone else to do their work doesn't speak much for their initiative. The text isn't all that enlightening or informative (or correct). — Frecklefoot | Talk 17:59, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Monkey Island inaccuracies
The Lucas Arts section mentioning Monkey Island and the screen cap of the game all give the impression that MI originally used a more advanced version of SCUMM and was originally in 256 colors. This is not the case, it was originally in 16 colors and used a more primitive version of the SCUMM system. It wasn't until its re-release using version 5 of SCUMM that is saw the graphics and interface upgraded nor was it the first game to use SCUMM 5, MI2 was. The Wikipedia entries for SCUMM and Monkey Island both have more current information. The bits giving credit to MI1 as being the first could be altered to show that MI2 was the first, but I don't have the resources to pull this off. Also, being a newbie to all this I don't with to mess with such a large wiki entry.
[edit] First point-and-click game ≠ SCUMM
Deja Vu was released in 1985, two years before Maniac Mansion. By its release 1987 ICOM Simulations had rolled out three point-and-click games for the Mac, PC and Amiga platforms. The LucasArts games were very well received but in the light of Deja Vu, Uninvited and Shadowgate they did not break the ground for point-and-click adventures by any reasonable measure. I suggest then we change the applicable parts about p'n'c games and LucasArts, unless someone has some facts up their sleeve? Arru 01:15, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
- OK now I dunnit! Actually it would seem better to have a separate section on ICOM Simulations just before LucasArts. I mean, Shadowgate et. al are only four games but still well known and loved. And groundbreaking.
Arru 03:16, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
While Maniac Mansion and SCUMM were not the first, I think mentioning Maniac Mansion is still worthwhile in some capacity, since even though it wasn't the first point and click adventure, its use of point and click was what popularized that control method. Ja2ke 02:32, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Humongous Entertainment Titles
This article should mention the titles published by Humongous Entertainment, such as the Putt-Putt and Pajama Sam series, which I understand also use the Scumm engine (at least they're supported by ScummVM) and are certainly point-and-click adventure games, designed specifically for children.
[edit] Criticisms
I hope you don't mind a few criticisms made in the spirit of honest desire to approve this:
1) I think the overlap with Interactive Fiction is important.
2) I don't know why Loom is in "others" -- it's not that different from other games -- the spells serve as an inventory. Myst for example has less inventory.
3) The section on Myst descends into hyperbole. While I found it immersive, I found Zork much more immersive.
4) The history section hops around with graphic adventures coming before infocom.
5) Both Scott Adams and Infocom had graphical adventures (the S.A.G.A. --- Scott Adams graphical adventures) and a few graphics games from infocom including shogun and a few others (the interactive fiction page will have some).
6) Alone in the Dark seems a notable omission from Action-Adventure.
7) The types system seems confused since it implies that an adventure could be text, graphics, puzzle or action -- which I'm sure isn't the intent.
--Richard Clegg 22:20, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Failed GA
Inadequate references. savidan(talk) (e@) 04:03, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] 'Common features'
A new paragraph has recently been added to 'Common features' which needs reviewing. It states "Many graphic adventure games depicted or make reference to subject matter that would otherwise been censored or taboo in a video or computer game.". What is being referred to, and is it the majority or minority of adventure games? It also states "Adventure games that relied heavily on humor (i.e. Discworld, Blazing Dragons, Adventures of Willy Bemish, The Secret of Monkey Island and Simon the Sorcerer) were often influenced by Monthy Python satire and comedy." I disagree with this too - I would contend that Monkey Island is Pythonesque, and this appears subjective anyway. British humour is not the same as Pythonesque, and at least 3 out of the 5 games named are British (with one written by a former Python, so of course it's Pythonesque). Can we decide on what we want this paragraph to contain before we edit for typo's and grammar? Burns flipper 14:29, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Misc
Please remove the external link "What killed adventure games?". The guy who wrote it obviously has no sense of humor. And no logic (let alone lateral thinking).
- I see that it's already been removed, but I thought it was rather relevant commentary on the failures of the genre. I don't think it was out of place in the article, though it might have warranted a short link description. --waka 19:56, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
- I put it back.--Wormsie 06:00, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I think it should stay although he does rather miss the point sometimes -- you expect absurd solutions in a humourous game. The Gabriel Knight series always did have its moments of comedy like that. It's like complaining that Roadrunner cartoons don't have good physics. --Richard Clegg 09:21, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
- Still, his commentary is valid criticism. I think it gives the reader a better understanding of the genre as a whole. --waka 14:02, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
- I think it should stay although he does rather miss the point sometimes -- you expect absurd solutions in a humourous game. The Gabriel Knight series always did have its moments of comedy like that. It's like complaining that Roadrunner cartoons don't have good physics. --Richard Clegg 09:21, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] Adventure Game Interfaces
This is a paper which anyone devoted enough to want to improve this article might find interesting, a semi-technical analysis of some design choices in adventure game interfaces. I'm going to toss it under external links, it might work as a reference on some things although it's difficult to find sources on Adventure Games. The creator of Monkey Island, Ron Gilbert has a blog in which he talked about aspects of adventure gaming and finding funding, and Greg Costikyan, another game developer has had a few articles on the state of funding in the industry and the decline of genres like Adventure Gaming and war simulations for example.
I'll try to look through the article later, it might be helpful if we can agree on what sections of the article are most important, the lists might be able to be linked elsewhere for example, we're over 32k as it is.--BigCow 02:15, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Some Sources that might be useful
Why Adventure Games Suck -Ron Gilbert, Written in 1989 while Designing Secret of Monkey Island. [1] Article by Greg Costikyan on why Adventure Games ala Myst/Riven aren't dead --BigCow 06:14, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Games not in a series?
Most are Acurate however Sam and Max has recently been revealed to have a Sequal planned. It was going to have one before but then canceled, but now its back on. Should it be moved to a Series? --Swk2000 00:17, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
Not to mention Longest Journey and Syberia being here --Amaccormack 15:34, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] RPG-like adventures
Just wondering about RPG-like adventure games. To quote the article "Typical examples include Quest for Glory and Final Battle."
See I was always under the impression that few RPG-like adventures exsist. I only know of QFG, and the gameboy games Sword of Hope 1 and 2. This final battle game intrigues me, but I can't find any info about it on google.
Seriously, if there are many examples of RPG-like adventures, please elaborate. :)
- Beyond Zork had fighting and character gaining stats. Loom had character gaining spells as it progressed. Superhero league of hoboken was somewhere between RPG and adventure having fighting sections and text adventure sections. --Richard Clegg 06:51, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Regarding the merge with slide-show games
This is the first time ever that I've ever heard of slide-show computer games. Also, the definiton of adventure game in that article is worse than the definition in this article. Moreover, the definition of slide-show computer game in that particular article is also quite vague - besides, most of the time the article talks about slide-show computer games as adventure games, which is slightly off if there is something significantly different about those two genres.
And the article also clumsily talks about adventure computer games and action computer games instead of adventure games and action games.
I don't see much valuable information in that article, and I think the definition of a slide-show game is useless. And not commonly used.--Wormsie 05:57, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
- Agreed. I think it's an alternate phrase for point-and-click games like Shadowgate and Uninvited, but I've never heard of it before. Seems like we can "merge" the article into this page by just removing it. --waka 14:04, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
- Ageed too. But I'm not sure if a redirect is neccessary or if it should be completely deleted. I've also never heard of that term before and Google has only a few hits and even fewer refer to adventure games. -89.57.46.159 21:50, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
A merge or redirection would be pointless. The creation of a Slide-Show game category is even a stretch in itself. If anything, the games it refers to (mainly Myst) should be considered on of the first 1st person Adventures with QuickTime Capability. The fact that each venue was static should hvae no bearing on whether the game warrants a different category or not. Keep it Bare bones basics, I say. And to give an opinion, "Slide Show Games" is a ridiculous notion to begin with. To take it's meaning literally would be as if I were to create a game using Microsoft Power Point: The best I could do would be to create a "what's hidden in this picture game". Slideshow denotes static, and any adventure game is anything but.--JYHASH 02:37, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Quest games?
In which regions are adventure games called quest games? In a region outside the English speaking world? If so, mentioning that isn't necessary in the first paragraphs; after all, this is the English wikipedia, and we don't have to tell people that a cat is die Katze in German in an article about cats.--Wormsie 23:36, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- That all depends, apparently, on your definition of "the English-speaking world." The confusion I've seen over the issue, at any rate, generally issues from people who live in countries where English is not particularly widely spoken (Bulgaria, Russia, Israel, et al) but who happen to be fluent in English anyway. I unfortunately don't have independent research to back this up; I'm going to see if I can convince one or more of the aforementioned to fork over some more information. --Ozy 02:08, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- Non-natives are bound to have problems with a language. For them there's the Simple English Wikipedia...--Wormsie 11:55, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- This has nothing to do with fluency. It's a well-established term in gaming journalism in several countries. There is no word that is related to quest in Bulgarian, Russian or other languages, for example, so it's convenient an unambiguous to refer to them as "куест" games. I suspect that when a term had to be invented for other languages, "adventure" was either not yet an established term in English-language gaming classification, or a translation or transcription of the word "adventure" was deemed too ambiguous. (Actualy I recall an article in a Bulgarian gaming magazine in the 90's on the history of adventure games where they say it was the latter. I think there were people who argued for "приключенска игра" too, and it was generally agreed "адвенчър" is the poorest choice.) It might be worth a mention in the English wikipedia as it is an English word. :) Krum Stanoev 11:08, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- If it is important what an adventure game is called in different countries, why not make a whole section devoted to what an adventure game is called in different languages and countries? I wouldn't probably do that myself, as I don't think it is relevant information, but just listing a few countries seems unfair to me. ;-) And I don't think it is important enough information to be mentioned in the first paragraph...--Wormsie 20:32, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] Laura's Happy Adventures
There should be a mention of this kids' adventure game by Playmobil Interactive. For it was the very first video game to be designed specially for girls (though many boys played it, too), for before it, video games, although played by girls, were really marketed towards boys. 67.174.4.138 22:02, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Long introduction
Do others agree that the introduction is way too long?--Wormsie 11:51, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
- OK, so I trimmed it down. Basically the text I removed said everything that is said in the first sentence of the article, but in a more long-winded manner. (Do I smell an AG-purist? ;-) )--Wormsie 12:13, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] "Exploratory video game" merge
This article seems to me to be just a lot of stubby duplication under a term I've never heard applied to any game . . . "Exploratory video game" gets a whopping 70 Google hits, most of which are copies of the WP article. Tzaquiel 17:58, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
- I agree. The same goes for Isometric adventure game. They both sound like neologisms. — Frecklefoot | Talk 18:08, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
I disagree, Wikipedia should be for well-known and not well-known articles. I don't think it should be included with adventure games because they are not necessarily the same thing.
-
- There's a difference between "not well-known" and "something I made up myself a minute ago".--Wormsie 20:45, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Dreamfall
I would argue that Dreamfall is not an adventure game at all. If anything, it is an interactive movie. The puzzles are overly simplistic and there are several fighting-based action sequences. It is not a true sequel to The Longest Journey at all, but simply a game incorporating some of the same characters. I would argue that The Longest Journey should be classified as a stand-alone game. The definition in this article states that "[a]dventure is a genre of video game typified by exploration, puzzle-solving, interaction with game characters, and a focus on narrative rather than reflex-based challenges." Dreamfall incorporates no real puzzles and has too much of a focus on reflex-based challenges.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.230.51.130 (talk • contribs).
- I haven't played either of the games, but it sounds like you have a good argument. You can go ahead and make the change(s) yourself. This is a wiki. — Frecklefoot | Talk 21:18, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
no dont go ahead. "your argument" is meaningless in wikipedia - find a reliable 3rd party source that argues it and reference it.
p.s. you'll have to find more and better source than gamespot, which calls it an adventure game [2], adventuregamers, which calls it an adventure game [3], itweek, which calls it an adventure game [4], eurogamer, which calls it an adventure game [5], etc etc. get the picture?Nespresso 22:22, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Gamespot also classifies the following as adventure games: Barbie Fashion Show, Oregon Trail II, Survivor, and Leisure Suit Larry: Magna Cum Laude
Adventuregamers states in their review: "Dreamfall is a game that simply doesn't have much actual gameplay. Of the fifteen or so hours you'll spend playing, the vast majority of that time will consist solely of moving your character from place to place, person to person, and task to task, without any real challenge or even much of an interactive role." [6]
From the itweek review: "By and large this works reasonably well, but it also includes rudimentary combat and stealth systems, neither of which are particularly well executed or, indeed, fun. The biggest letdown is that the puzzling aspect has been greatly simplified, often reduced to little more than collecting a few items in order to progress." [7]
While lots of sites have no trouble classifying it as an adventure game, most of them also include reviews that show that it does not meet the definition, any more that the latest King's Quest game, the latest Leisure Suit Larry game, or the latest Broken Sword game do.
- The problem with the idea that Dreamfall isn't an adventure game because it has fighting sequences and few puzzles is that other games, like Shenmue and Indigo Prophecy, have action sequences and few puzzles as well. And those two are examples of the type of adventure game that Dreamfall is very much like (and which, unfortunately, haven't been classified with a catchy name). In fact, point and click adventure games like Snatcher and Policenauts, both of which are most assuredly adventure games (albeit Japanese adventure games) have a great deal of light gun shooting. Rise of the Dragon did as well, and that game even had a side scrolling shooting level. But they're all still adventure games. Why? Because the focus of the games are that of adventure gameplay. Same deal with Dreamfall. Basically what Dreamfall amounts to is The Longest Journey with a new control interface and a bit of action gameplay thrown in. Doesn't make it an entirely different genre though.
- Put it to you this way: If The Longest Journey had light gun sequences, would that make it a light gun game? Would it make it any less of an adventure game? IMHO, no it would not.
- BTW, adventure games really focus on investigation. Exploration, talking with NPCs (interviewing), puzzle solving, etc. are all aspects of that overall investigation. And puzzle solving can refer to putting two and two together from a prior interview. Doesn't necessarily mean putting this part here or taking this wire there or what have you. The games are focused on investigation, and it is the investigation that drives the story forward. Dreamfall has that very focus as well. 151.205.161.9 10:58, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Downfall of the adventure game
I think it should be mentioned somewhere that most traditional adventure games made today are made outside of North America, where they are still popular. In Europe for example, there wasn't a "huge crash" like what happened in the USA. ChocolateCookie01 14:52, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Multiplayer?
Is this line really appropriate?
""Nearly all adventure games are designed for a single player, since the heavy emphasis on story and character makes multi-player design difficult.""
I think the lack of multiplayer has more to do with multiplayer, as we understand it today, not even existing when this genre was in its golden age.Large scale, or even smaller scale, multiplayer of LAN's or the itnernet didin't really come about until after people had lost interest in the genre. Kittynboi
- Both reasons sound like original research to me... — Frecklefoot | Talk 18:11, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Kings Quest Tandy.png
Image:Kings Quest Tandy.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 18:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
