They were cancelled because Sony put pressure on Quantic Dream to make Heavy Rain have Move support. David Cage didn't sound too pleased about it.

I think we're on the same page, too. There were certainly a lot of 'maybes' in my post. I don't know if point and clicks are truly dead, though. On life support, at present, but supported nonetheless. I think the genre is stronger overseas.

I'm a big fan of adventure games, but I think that if the genre is ever going to make a comeback, it'll have to change in certain ways. Telltale's business model of episodic games seems adapted to an environment where adventure games have only the fraction of the budget of a major release. So far, I've enjoyed most of their games, and they seem to be doing alright.

Their standard adventure formula, however, isn't changed very much, only refined in some ways. Refinement may or may not be the solution. The other solution, as I hinted to, is something akin to what L.A. Noir might be like, which is to incorporate the stronger elements of the adventure genre in a format more...palatable to a mass audience.

I think another reason that adventure games may have died is summed up well in this article:

http://www.oldmanmurray.com/features/77.html

Essentially, he argues that too many difficult, absurd puzzles turned gamers off of the genre. I'm not wholly convinced, but he makes a good point.

On the other hand, Jane Jensen, who gets crucified in that article, actually has a game coming out soon (out in Europe already) whose demo intrigued me enough to buy it if it gets released here.

I didn't know that Heavy Rain didn't do too well, so that kind of deflates my theory. I worry that L.A. Noir, the first Rockstar game in a while that I'm looking forward to, will suffer the same fate. Sure, it may sell OK and have some people who really love it (again, that's assuming that the game reasonably meets expectations), but it may not put up the numbers they'd need to justify a sequel, or even another game in the same style. I guess we'll see.

The game sold a million, million and a half copies, something like that. The game did well.

Apparently not well enough to merit a sequel, or so I've been told.

That's something that has to stop too. The thought that a well-done, financially successful story or game requires a sequel should not be a default method to measure that game or movie or whatever by.

I can understand why it's done, however. The financial costs and risks of large games are significant, and sequels are an attempt to minimize risks. If a game flops, which is always a higher risk with a new title, your whole company could run the risk of layoffs, maybe even bankruptcy. The stakes are very high, and I can understand why there are so many sequels.

Of course, it's also us, the gamers, and not just 'greedy publishers' who are responsible for this. The consumer demand for ever better graphics has considerably pushed up the price tag of major releases. We all say we like change and innovation, but whenever popular franchises make big changes, so many gamers always get up in arms over what's different. It our demand for sequels that props up the current practice.

Despite this, though, there are new IPs all the time. Of course, they're usually developed with the intent to spawn sequels if successful. Then of course, there are games like the Final Fantasy series, which- minus a chocobo or two- are basically independent RPGs united by a brand name.

And besides, if a game was good enough, I don't see why it shouldn't get a sequel. Presuming, of course, that the sequel is needed, and can actually improve on the first game.

Holy crap. That reminds me, I recently saw that Robert Zemckis directed Northpole Express, or what ever it was, mocap animation, that is often stated to be the first fullscale mocap CGI animation. Anyways, while wathcing those small segments of LA Noir i just thought, that mocap in the game blew away not only Northpole Express, but Beowulf as well.

Seems to be another big leap for CGI in games and in movies right here. I have never seen this convincing facial movement including eyebrows and eye lids. Those are often the two, which look very artificial in CGI and break the illusion.