http://www.omghomeblend.com/details.php?cid=101 hey all here is an article I wrote for a friend's video game site about what adventure gaming used to mean. It features Outcast heavily as I talk about the great sense of exploration (and adventure) you get from it.

Please let me know what you think!

I think the term "adventure" is too generic to label a single genre. The full genre title of games like money island is "point 'n click adventure". These games are basically puzzle games with added narrative.

Adventures like outcast are very rare. As Outcast wasn't a huge success back then (unfortunately) there was not much follow up. The sequel was canned before release and that's the end of it.
What I see though, is that some rpg's become more and more like outcast. In contrast to dry stats, you get a more streamlined adventure. You give these examples yourself: The Elder Scrolls, Fallout 3/New Vegas. (You might even put Just Cause (2) and GTA4 under the same umbrella, but I personally think they are a bit too arcade).
The fusion of many genres cause some games to become more like the Outcast that you and I like if you look at it this way.
It's true that many things are simplified, but many games start to give us hardcore modes that remove all the extra help (like the recent Deus Ex), games like Dark Souls even take it to extremes.
If you take a closer look at the indie games market, there is even more!

I don't think a genre is lost. I think there is more adventure to be had than ever.

I disagree that major RPGs like Fallout3 and Skyrim count as "adventure" games. That blurs the line between "adventure" and "rpg" too much for me. This might just be me but the dynamics of those types of games, most notably the (essentially) turn-based combat of Fallout made me lose immersion and no longer feel as though it were an "adventure".

Deus Ex, sure, but there are too few games like it (and it and its kin have some serious consolitis these days). I've been getting my fix from games like the modern Tomb Raider games, though they put platforming above "adventuring". Not sure if I'd call games like that "adventure" games, but they're closer than most IMO.

I do wish we had more games like this, preferably games that aren't constrained in playability today by their decrepit tech that was hailed as being advanced in years past (eg:Outcast).

Indeed, and this is why I said the term "adventure" is often too generic. Adventure is to be had in many rpg's, but as a genre "adventure" on itself is not very useful. It doesn't say much about the game, as many games contain adventurous elements. That's why you have Point 'n click adventures, action adventures and many games crossing genres like Deus Ex and tomb raider.

I wouldn't describe Fallout and Skyrim's genre as "adventure", as it doesn't say anything. RPG is also pretty generic, but (I hope) most people know what the distinction is when one game is described as an RPG and another as an Action Adventure.

What the OP was writing about, was games like outcast being so rare and my argument was that genres have been gradually changing to a point where there are many similarities to be found in a game like Outcast and for example Skyrim. Making it less rare than described in the article.

What are these similarities of which you post between Skyrim and Outcast? I'm curious as I saw nothing of Outcast in Skyrim, nothing fine enough to matter, to bring the enjoyable sense of adventure that was in Outcast to the painfully (IMO) generic Skyrim sandbox.

IMO an adventure game has to tell a story with defined characters, not present the user with a bland protagonist that they are expected to shape into a simulacrum of themselves and project themselves into. To me, throwing players into a giant sandbox isn't the hallmark of an adventure game, but rather a life simulator.

I didn't say they were the same.
The differences are still there, but it's not Daggerfall VS Outcast. If you look at the evolution of the Elder Scrolls, you see it becoming a more streamlined and enjoyable experience.
If you don't like Skyrim, that's okay, but I like it very much, especially the freedom you have.

I get a similar feeling playing Skyrim (or Gothic 1/2/3, Risen etc) that I get feeling outcast.
We probably just enjoy a few different aspects of these games more.
I do like Cutter, but I also enjoy a "bland protagonist that I am expected to shape into a simulacrum of myself", with the difference that I try to roleplay different characters instead of the same one every time.

Sometimes these type of rpgs fail indeed when they don't know what they are anymore: Arcania for example, which was a dull and linear action adventure; the worst of the open world rpg and action adventure series put together. The lineair aspect of Outcast is much better in this case, as the story and characters are way better.

It's indeed different fruit we're comparing here, but instead of apple's and oranges it's becoming more like grapefruit and oranges :P

What about Risen 2 and Fable series?