Writer Aaron Conners joined Access Software in the early 90s. When he partnered with series creator Chris Jones to reinvent the Tex Murphy series shortly thereafter, no one would have imagined that they would create perhaps the defining 3D adventure with 1994's Under a Killing Moon, thanks in no small part to Aaron's brilliant storytelling. Aaron and Chris continued the series with the classic Pandora Directive and heartbreaking cliffhanger that was Tex Murphy: Overseer. During this time Aaron also wrote some excellent novelizations of Killing Moon and Pandora. When Microsoft purchased Access, it seemed like the end for the commercially declining series, and during this time Aaron and Chris expressed a great deal of frustration as the studio cranked out sports titles like Amped and Top Spin, as well as continuing Access long-gunning Links golf series. Not long ago, Microsoft sold the studio Salt Lake City-based developer (now Indie Built Games) to Take Two Interactive, and I was happy to find a more optimistic and creatively satisfied Aaron Conners, who had recently wrapped up his contribution to Amped 3.
What do you think happened to adventure gaming? Why did it slip out of the mainstream so fast?
AC: Personally, I think the genre was poisoned by the overall poor quality of most adventure games during the mid-1990s. With the advent of CD-ROMs in 1992-93, voice acting and/or FMV replaced text almost overnight and suddenly everyone was talking about the merging of Hollywood with Silicon Valley. The hype about "Interactive Movies" was all so exciting and sexy, the mainstream media jumped all over it. The problem was (and is), games aren't movies; even the best stories in computer games don't compare to movies – not because they're not good, but because the mediums are so different. Being intrinsically interactive, game stories have to be easier to follow and understand, incorporate gameplay and success/failure, and (ideally) lead the user forward to prevent aimlessness and frustration; movies, on the other hand, aren't dependent on the user.
Having done both, I believe it's at least as difficult to weave a compelling game story as it is to write a solid movie screenplay. Obviously, the narrative and characters must be good, but you also have to integrate the story as seamlessly as possible with the gameplay, and then find that elusive balance of keeping the player on the story path and without him/her feeling forced into it. Problem is, doing this well is a skill and can only be done by someone with both natural talent and experience...and back in the early 90's, no one had that kind of experience. Some talented people tried to come over from Hollywood, but didn't understand the gaming side of things, which led to games that were essentially low-tech B movies with mostly crappy, unrelated gameplay. Then there were tons of people who came from the computer side and simply didn't have the talent needed to write, direct, act, etc. The result was a whole slew of games with bad acting, weak stories poorly told, and often, gameplay sacrificed for bad story.
Sadly, there were a few high quality products that got lumped in with everything else and flushed. In the end, FMV...blue screen...acting...even story became synonymous with BAD. And when the media realized that the fad had been over-hyped, adventure games were deader than disco. The final death knell was when Grim Fandango (one of the best adventure games ever, in my opinion) failed to revive the genre.
From a business standpoint, do you think the publishers were "right"? That is to say, do you think the genre is less appealing to the mass audience than it was, and that it really isn't commercially viable in its purest form?
AC: I suspect there is a huge market for pure adventure games. While at Microsoft, I learned – through a variety of multi-million dollar research studies – of a fundamental conundrum regarding computer games sales. Most computer games (both PC and console) are bought by a small percentage of computer users – typically young, avid gamers. Meanwhile, the vast majority of PC users are interested in playing games, but not the types of games generally considered "best-sellers". The Holy Grail in our industry is to reach those millions and millions of "casual gamers" (as classified by MS). I think it would take just one true adventure game to hit it big and the entire genre could be immediately revitalized. But until someone creates that hit game, publishers won't take the risk on a large scale.
