Adventure vs. Secret Quest

[accousticguitar]

the combat is minimal. If I recall, there are only 3 dragons and all can be defeated when they touch the sword.

 

Unless they have hit points as they do in MissAdventure.

 

That's my take. Obviously games are subjective and if you like something you like. To me, Secret Quest just doesn't follow one of the recipes for a good game.

And every room looks the same so it's hard to tell where you are. That is not a problem in Adventure.

[AtariWarlord]

I have to admit I respect Adventure more than I enjoy it. Don't know much about Secret Quest, but I do know as far as adventure games on the 2600 are concerned, I'll choose Pitfall II over Adventure most of the time.

[4ever2600]

Secret Quest just doesn't have the magic that Adventure does... Period.

Edited June 27, 2017 by 4ever2600

[+KaeruYojimbo]

Secret Quest fails because it's neither zippy and fun like Adventure, nor does it have the depth and variety of Legend of Zelda (which it clearly wants very much to be).

[gauauu]

I concur. In secret quest, the combat is boring, and the maze exploration is boring.

 

In adventure, the combat is simplistic but actually exciting and tense.

[BassGuitari]

My problem with Adventure is that the object randomization isn't random enough as far as item placement. There are so many rooms, corners of mazes, and other areas of the game world that you never have any reason to go to, effectively shrinking what is already a pretty small game. Once you learn your way around the game world, you can blow through Game 3 in a matter of minutes, provided the bat doesn't f@#$ with you at an abnormally high level and the dragon placement isn't complete bullshit. Setting the difficulty switches to A really helps squeeze more challenge out of this game, and is kind of a necessity IMO.

The first time I played Adventure (in, like, 2001), I was disappointed by how small the game world is after reading so much about what an amazing and iconic game it was. I've since come to appreciate it for what it is, especially weighed against other games from the 1978-1981 timeframe (and the game is iconic), but I think Adventure too often is seen through rose-colored glasses.

I'm surprised to see so much hate for Secret Quest. I thought it was an impressive title for the 2600. Certainly not a perfect game--flaws include only being able to attack in four directions, larger levels become difficult to navigate, convoluted password system--but a solid effort. It plays smoothly, the controls are fluid and responsive, the graphics are nice, the sounds are effective, it has more depth than most 2600 games, and--convoluted though it may be--it has a password system. Like Radar Lock, though, it should have been a 7800 game instead.

I'll give my usual cop-out summation and say they're both good games in different ways.

[bradhig1]

Has anyone beaten Secret Quest. I can make it to the second or third level and then I run out of oxygen and energy.

[accousticguitar]

My problem with Adventure is that the object randomization isn't random enough as far as item placement. There are so many rooms, corners of mazes, and other areas of the game world that you never have any reason to go to, effectively shrinking what is already a pretty small game. Once you learn your way around the game world, you can blow through Game 3 in a matter of minutes, provided the bat doesn't f@#$ with you at an abnormally high level and the dragon placement

 

I'm surprised to see so much hate for Secret Quest. I thought it was an impressive title for the 2600. Certainly not a perfect game--flaws include only being able to attack in four directions, larger levels become difficult to navigate, convoluted password system--but a solid effort. It plays smoothly, the controls are fluid and responsive, the graphics are nice, the sounds are effective, it has more depth than most 2600 games, and--convoluted though it may be--it has a password system.

 

That's why I play MissAdventure most of the time. It has over 100 rooms, 5 dragons, and 6 castles. I've played games that lasted over an hour.

 

Secret Quest really needs to be hacked to change the rooms that all look alike into something recognizable with different designs and colors. Adventure did that with only 4k, so I know it's possible.

[Torr]

My problem with Adventure is that the object randomization isn't random enough as far as item placement. There are so many rooms, corners of mazes, and other areas of the game world that you never have any reason to go to, effectively shrinking what is already a pretty small game.

 

So is there actually a limit to how "random" the placement is? because I often feel the same way... I've played MANY games of adventure... but the items are damn near always in the mazes and castles. Those dead ends whatever they are... just a blank room with a colored board and one entrance/exit... yeah... if I find something in there I jaw probably drops a little... I know it's happened... but not too damn often... yet I still always check in my routine hunt!

[BassGuitari]

 

So is there actually a limit to how "random" the placement is? because I often feel the same way... I've played MANY games of adventure... but the items are damn near always in the mazes and castles. Those dead ends whatever they are... just a blank room with a colored board and one entrance/exit... yeah... if I find something in there I jaw probably drops a little... I know it's happened... but not too damn often... yet I still always check in my routine hunt!

Right? I feel like for an object to appear in one of those rooms or out-of-the-way dead ends in the mazes, you have to kill a dragon there and let the bat swap an item for its corpse. That's pretty much the only way an item will ever appear in one of those places.

 

EDIT: Sometimes I actually like to play Game 2, just because it puts things in places they would never appear in Game 3.

Edited June 28, 2017 by BassGuitari

[accousticguitar]

When I hacked MissAdventure I used a different randomizing routine because the original one just wasn't working very well (at least not for 100+ rooms).

[Flojomojo]

What did you make of the "designed by Nolan Bushnell, founder of Atari!" tag on Secret Quest? It sold me on it -- though the fact that it was a new 2600 game is what really did it.

[zzip]

The game "Adventure" frequently scores very well as one of the "best Atari 2600 games". In fact, the latest "Top 100 2600 Games of all Time" list ranks it as number 2. In contrast, "Secret Quest" does not even make it into the top 100. My first exposure to either of these games was through their inclusion in the Flashback 2 Adventure Games section.

 

I can't help but wonder if the popularity that Adventure enjoys over Secret Quest has its basis in the chronology of the two games. It seems to me that Adventure was ground-breaking in its appearance, as one of the first video games that combined the puzzle-solving nature of role-playing games such as those available for TRS-80 and Apple II computers of that era, with the graphic nature of the then current crop of coin-op arcade games. Playing Adventure was certainly a far different experience from the typical reflex-action games of the time, such as Pong, Air-Sea-Battle, and Combat; games that if not direct ports of coin-op games, were certainly in the same spirit of "try to stay alive and get a higher score".

 

 

Adventure was early and a very prominent game that lots of people played. Secret Quest was released in 1989 when most had moved on to newer systems. So I'd guess it doesn't make the list because relatively few people know about it.