According to Chris Crawford, in
the Art of Computer Game Design,
"Adventures are closer to puzzles than to games. As discussed in Chapter One, puzzles are distinguished from games by the static nature of the obstacles they present to the player. Adventures present intricate obstacles that, once cracked, no longer provide challenge to the player. It is true that some adventures push closer to being games by incorporating obstacles such as hungry dragons that in some way react to the player. Nevertheless, they remain primarily puzzles."
This relates to our discussion about games and narrative... there were two interesting, and opposing, responsed to my questions about this topic.
Kyrun looked at Day of the Tentacle, and felt that, although it has a highly linear structure, it is still engaging and allows for a certain amount of interactivity.
A highly unstable psychopath, on the other hand, felt, based on her frustration playing Escape from Monkey Island, that adventure games are "like a storybook, very linear, and the only way to flip to the next page and move the story forward is to do what is required in the game".
What do you all think? Swift, I'm sure you have an opinion about this... :P
And here's some more food for thought on adventure games, from
Ernest Adams and
Greg Costikyan.