Yeah, I've always accepted the fact that Adventure games are now niche, and I actually like it that way - it does make it hard at times, financially, to make a go of it, but it can be done. I mean, Wadjet Eye is doing well enough for themselves to keep making games, so I have to remind myself of that as I slog through making the games I'm currently working on. In a perfect world, we'd make games, sell enough to pay bills and fund a new game, and keep going. That'd be fine for me, a little indie - larger companies that demand a large profit margin won't suffer the niche nature of Adventure Games, for sure. Which, as I said earlier, is fine - I think it tends to keep the Adventure Games made these days of a decently high quality. I mean, when I look at the indie Adv. game work in the past five years, there's some awesome damn games out there.
As for some gaming conventions, ranking, score, etc - with Quest for Infamy, for example, I thought the achievement system was a fun way to add that kind of value - in QFI, there were many different little achievements to win, discover and find, and some were class specific. From a design standpoint, I enjoyed that. We also had a totally optional cave side quest, in which you could explore and loot, collecting all kinds of items. In future games, I'd love to explore both of these mechanics more, making for a more fun experience and replay experience. These things are easier to implement, however, in a hybrid RPG/Adventure Game rather than a straight adv. game, for sure.
I think from the 2012 Adventure Game Kickstarter craze, in addition to the many, many lessons I learned as a designer and as a "leader" of a development company, I definitely agree with you that sometimes having a more stern, bean-counting producer to oversee creative types is beneficial to game development. In a perfect world, creative people would run naked, free and crazy, creating whatever their little hearts desired, but the truth is you need direction and structure in order to succeed.
Bt
