A place to chat about adventure puzzles and games! Awesome 
So, I will start the ball rolling - discussing puzzles and what is good, especially in relation to classic <> new game adventure and how I personally make puzzles for games.
Firstly some obviousness; Classic adventures - Shadow of the Comet, Monkey Island series et al, their puzzles were a combination of hidden item / combinination use of collected items on the right item. This worked because of the nature of the format - we were trying to unlock another room, another area. Areas in games were, by necessity expensive for developers - not in financial terms although that matters - but in terms of resources on the computer as well. A lot of what we deem classic games had very few actual screens - Sam and Max hit the highway for example once you go back and look at it had suprisingly few screens, but we were doubling back a lot and some of the screens had modified versions which gave the same effect as the finding of a new screen.
So puzzles would come to;
The reason this works is the classic skinner box. We are also anticipating more of what we are allready enjoying. We get our buzz from solving the clue if there was one, pointing out where an object is. Our reward is what we expect, more of the game.
So using this we can see what the issues for the game developer of the classic adventure had. Now this is a gross simplification, however if we treat dialigue choices the same was as objects - with dialogue unlocked for finding a specific other dialogue or item and also we look at combinations of items (use item on item) then we can see how the classic adventure grew.
Now, this carries well into our modern adventures. Rusty Lake for example uses just this system mixed with animations and so forth to give us the classic unlock an area and move on experience. For modern game engines however this poses significant problems and we can look at ways it goes right and wrong shortly. First though lets look at translating adventure into modern 3d engine.
Adventure is not fighting and killing things / being killed all the time. Some people enjoy that, however adventure works well when you, the protagonist, are relatively impotent against things. This is in particular the case with horror. Shooting our way out of things makes the adventure weaker through losing the reward of discovery and replacing it with simple combat. There is a place for combat - if you look at the Uncharted games for example, they would balance it by having adventure / exploration (find a new section) and then a combat section. They were seperate, and sometimes (Uncharted 2 boss fight) spoiled the experience and sometimes improved it.
The biggest problem there though is that adventures need to have some gating in place. We cannot give you an open city where you can explore everything and then expect you to work out everything. Not because players are stupid but because you have other things to do. Imagine there are 5 houses. In one house is hidden a key. To get that key you need to;
So what modern game developers have to do a lot of the time is bracket players in using classic adventure recipes. So for this I use a puzzle I created, which is still too damn hard for a lot of playtesters. I'll give you the simple rundown;
Player is in a new area. it is an automated cargo loading dock. They need to get past it to get into the old hospital, all entrances are locked.
So the first route - the player has to explore, find written notes that point out that someone was breaking into the orchard that links to the hospital supplying them with food. This leads to a clue that someone dropped their key need a maintenence hatch, this locates a key, shows the hatch is open. This in turn unlocks an office where there are a few more clues that eventually lead to the player discovering they can move the automated cargo loader, make a bridge to the greenhouse area and then cross via the dropdown into the maintenence hatch.
Cool - playtesters got that about 20% of the time because they didnt think like adventure players and because its a fairly large area though. some got frustrated, others tried to brute force. This led to making;
Route 2.
Pharmacy loading bay. There are 5 buttons. Operating them in the right order loads a conveyor with pharmacy supplies, puts it in the right place, opens the automated locking gate to the pharmacy mini train and starts the conveyor.
Awesome - people that love levers and switches used that and more people got through to the hospital. There are still some left though.
Route 3.
Theres a big old hole under the deck someone kicked out. Explore and find it then explore under the deck til you find the greehouse that way.
So now anyone can work out how to get there but there are different rewards. The animations and puzzle solving of solution 1 are the endorphins you want. solution 2 is also good - levers and sequences, no story. Finally there is the brute force exploration - which STILL gives what you want as you are rewarded with the new area.
But, making that area took about a month if not longer as the area had to be repeatedly fine tuned and worked on. As a solo developer therefore I have to constantly request feedback and track how people use it. And that is just one of the puzzles - to get to that you have to have solved about 4 prior puzzles with various clues - including just telling you how to do one of them on a poster.
My next thing will be to explain about using NPC "enemies" I think as that is rather facinating and a massive rabbit hole. Powerlessness over the "Bad guy" is an effective tool in the adventure game, acting as a gate in itself to progress!
Cris Olblue Robson
So, I will start the ball rolling - discussing puzzles and what is good, especially in relation to classic <> new game adventure and how I personally make puzzles for games.Firstly some obviousness; Classic adventures - Shadow of the Comet, Monkey Island series et al, their puzzles were a combination of hidden item / combinination use of collected items on the right item. This worked because of the nature of the format - we were trying to unlock another room, another area. Areas in games were, by necessity expensive for developers - not in financial terms although that matters - but in terms of resources on the computer as well. A lot of what we deem classic games had very few actual screens - Sam and Max hit the highway for example once you go back and look at it had suprisingly few screens, but we were doubling back a lot and some of the screens had modified versions which gave the same effect as the finding of a new screen.
So puzzles would come to;
- Enter room containing things. Possible dialogue and story happens.
- Locate object that can be interacted with. Object is gated and needs item X.
- Explore room for item X. If it is not there, search previous rooms. Check inventory.
- Use item X on object.
- New room opens.
The reason this works is the classic skinner box. We are also anticipating more of what we are allready enjoying. We get our buzz from solving the clue if there was one, pointing out where an object is. Our reward is what we expect, more of the game.
So using this we can see what the issues for the game developer of the classic adventure had. Now this is a gross simplification, however if we treat dialigue choices the same was as objects - with dialogue unlocked for finding a specific other dialogue or item and also we look at combinations of items (use item on item) then we can see how the classic adventure grew.
Now, this carries well into our modern adventures. Rusty Lake for example uses just this system mixed with animations and so forth to give us the classic unlock an area and move on experience. For modern game engines however this poses significant problems and we can look at ways it goes right and wrong shortly. First though lets look at translating adventure into modern 3d engine.
Adventure is not fighting and killing things / being killed all the time. Some people enjoy that, however adventure works well when you, the protagonist, are relatively impotent against things. This is in particular the case with horror. Shooting our way out of things makes the adventure weaker through losing the reward of discovery and replacing it with simple combat. There is a place for combat - if you look at the Uncharted games for example, they would balance it by having adventure / exploration (find a new section) and then a combat section. They were seperate, and sometimes (Uncharted 2 boss fight) spoiled the experience and sometimes improved it.
The biggest problem there though is that adventures need to have some gating in place. We cannot give you an open city where you can explore everything and then expect you to work out everything. Not because players are stupid but because you have other things to do. Imagine there are 5 houses. In one house is hidden a key. To get that key you need to;
- Explore house 1, discover it needs a key to open mystery basement.
- Explore all of house 1 carefully to find key ... fail.
- Explore all of house 2...
- ...etc
- Then explore the street
So what modern game developers have to do a lot of the time is bracket players in using classic adventure recipes. So for this I use a puzzle I created, which is still too damn hard for a lot of playtesters. I'll give you the simple rundown;
Player is in a new area. it is an automated cargo loading dock. They need to get past it to get into the old hospital, all entrances are locked.
So the first route - the player has to explore, find written notes that point out that someone was breaking into the orchard that links to the hospital supplying them with food. This leads to a clue that someone dropped their key need a maintenence hatch, this locates a key, shows the hatch is open. This in turn unlocks an office where there are a few more clues that eventually lead to the player discovering they can move the automated cargo loader, make a bridge to the greenhouse area and then cross via the dropdown into the maintenence hatch.
Cool - playtesters got that about 20% of the time because they didnt think like adventure players and because its a fairly large area though. some got frustrated, others tried to brute force. This led to making;
Route 2.
Pharmacy loading bay. There are 5 buttons. Operating them in the right order loads a conveyor with pharmacy supplies, puts it in the right place, opens the automated locking gate to the pharmacy mini train and starts the conveyor.
Awesome - people that love levers and switches used that and more people got through to the hospital. There are still some left though.
Route 3.
Theres a big old hole under the deck someone kicked out. Explore and find it then explore under the deck til you find the greehouse that way.
So now anyone can work out how to get there but there are different rewards. The animations and puzzle solving of solution 1 are the endorphins you want. solution 2 is also good - levers and sequences, no story. Finally there is the brute force exploration - which STILL gives what you want as you are rewarded with the new area.
But, making that area took about a month if not longer as the area had to be repeatedly fine tuned and worked on. As a solo developer therefore I have to constantly request feedback and track how people use it. And that is just one of the puzzles - to get to that you have to have solved about 4 prior puzzles with various clues - including just telling you how to do one of them on a poster.
My next thing will be to explain about using NPC "enemies" I think as that is rather facinating and a massive rabbit hole. Powerlessness over the "Bad guy" is an effective tool in the adventure game, acting as a gate in itself to progress!
Cris Olblue Robson
You make very interesting points regarding the Map area,resources,repeatable scenes etc. It seems your are a seasoned adventurer. The 'hidden object' mechanic has fallen out of favor the last 2 decades (except of its dedicated subgenre). I liked it in Blobber/RPG/adventure games like Eye of the Beholder and it made sense mechanically alongside exploration mechanics in those games. Wide shots mainly in third person games made the discovery of items,exits and interactable areas difficult, thus the term pixel hunting was common in the 90s and 2000s.In older Sierra titles with verb-based keyboard commands the discovery of interesting areas,items and even exits was a more intrinsic part of the gameplay and added a nice touch because you had to use your imagination to compliment the low pixel graphics. Example in Larry 3 early on, Look then, Look rocks, you discover the rocks are made from granite so you use your knife there to sharpen. Nowdays in mainstream adventures a dedicated button usually highlights all areas. Though I have seen modern games using the mechanic effectively without being a sore.
I like the multy layered pathed world you are trying to create. I can see 2 huge advantages
a) the puzzles feel more natural and an internal part of the world without feeling forced. Its ok if you play a puzzle oriented game for the puzzles but in story oriented games it feels silly and takes from the immersion. For example in the last game i played "the ark of time" i was stuck because i couldnt find a piece of glass to progress in a specific building in a specific part of the world or I had to manipulate a whole lighthouse to illuminate a cave and scare some bats. Makes you think why your character with unlimited airtickets couldnt buy a flashilight or obtain a piece of mirror elsewhere. Whereas when you open a specific large portion of the map and offer multible solutions there is not so much disbelief and the game feels more immersive like the multiple paths in your example
b) You cant get stuck permanently or halt your progress for a long time. Seeing a walkthrough in an adventure game is like a tombstone for some adventure gamers and i understand that. Also halting the progress in a story oriented game for a long time ruins the tempo in critical stages of the plot. Offering multible ways to go through mitigates this. Legend of Kyrandia 3 for example used this approach sometimes. Another 2 games I liked that used variable solutions for the same approach was "The magic circle" with nealy infinite solutions and "Internull" a really interesting meta game that offers 3 approaches to the end goal
Of course other advantages is replayability (a common problem with the genre) and an easy way for multible endings. I also really appreciate the approach you have to exploration mechanics. I love metrodvania and zelda games and exploration was a pillar of gameplay in earliers adventures like Quest for Glory, King's Quest and puzzle explolation adventures like Myst. New adventures I believe generally have become really sterile in this aspect. Anyway Thanks for reading all my thoughts. Good luck with your game, I like your way of thinking and look forward of playing it whenever (no pressure).
I like the multy layered pathed world you are trying to create. I can see 2 huge advantages
a) the puzzles feel more natural and an internal part of the world without feeling forced. Its ok if you play a puzzle oriented game for the puzzles but in story oriented games it feels silly and takes from the immersion. For example in the last game i played "the ark of time" i was stuck because i couldnt find a piece of glass to progress in a specific building in a specific part of the world or I had to manipulate a whole lighthouse to illuminate a cave and scare some bats. Makes you think why your character with unlimited airtickets couldnt buy a flashilight or obtain a piece of mirror elsewhere. Whereas when you open a specific large portion of the map and offer multible solutions there is not so much disbelief and the game feels more immersive like the multiple paths in your example
b) You cant get stuck permanently or halt your progress for a long time. Seeing a walkthrough in an adventure game is like a tombstone for some adventure gamers and i understand that. Also halting the progress in a story oriented game for a long time ruins the tempo in critical stages of the plot. Offering multible ways to go through mitigates this. Legend of Kyrandia 3 for example used this approach sometimes. Another 2 games I liked that used variable solutions for the same approach was "The magic circle" with nealy infinite solutions and "Internull" a really interesting meta game that offers 3 approaches to the end goal
Of course other advantages is replayability (a common problem with the genre) and an easy way for multible endings. I also really appreciate the approach you have to exploration mechanics. I love metrodvania and zelda games and exploration was a pillar of gameplay in earliers adventures like Quest for Glory, King's Quest and puzzle explolation adventures like Myst. New adventures I believe generally have become really sterile in this aspect. Anyway Thanks for reading all my thoughts. Good luck with your game, I like your way of thinking and look forward of playing it whenever (no pressure).