Review: Samorost 2 (Amanita Design, 2005)

Platform: Linux, Windows, Mac (digital distribution), Flash (web browser) 

Website: http://amanita-design.net/samorost-2/

Not long ago, and guided by general consensus among friends and critics, I decided to acquire Machinarium, the then recent work by Amanita Design. To my surprise, when buying the game I was given their previous one, Samorost 2 (its first part is free), and both game's soundtracks. Shortly after I refused to keep playing Machinarium (another story) and mostly forgot about Amanita.

Fast forward to a boring evening, when I discovered Samorost 2's installer in my PC. "Let's try this," I told myself (metaphorically; I don't usually talk to myself), "a free game can't be worst than most you pay for."

Amanita Design is a studio specialized, judging by their main games, in Flash development and extremely detailed graphics. Gray, complex landscapes play an important part in their games, as do their beautiful musical scores. These two elements have earned the studio repetead and completely deserved awards.
Amanita's designs are, in essence, point and click graphic adventures with a very simple inventory system, if any, minimal stories, pretty backgrounds and limited interaction.

In Samorost 2, the main character -let's call him/her Pyjama- wakes up to find a couple of space thieves stealing fruits from the garden's tree, and taking the guardian dog as a bonus. As a result, Pyjama embarks on an mission to rescue Dog and return to the home asteroid safe. And the player, not to be confused with the star, goes along for the ride.
Pyjama's adventure is a nice one, full of funny moments, detailed drawings, charming characters and some curious puzzles. So there are good things regarding this game. From time to time my efforts were rewarded with something more than "you managed to cross the door", which felt good, but not good enough. I always had this sour taste of frustration reminding me that I wasn't that much enjoyed.
But critics and players loved this game, so I am outnumbered. Am I wrong or do I have the right to call my Graphic Adventure Demise Culprit #3 to scene?

Graphic adventures demise rant

Before I start posting reviewes of graphic adventures, I find myself forced to write a state of the art, plus my opinion on the genre's slow death. Please, indulge me.

As you should know, in the 80s and early 90s, adventure games reigned supreme in the world of videogames. Their narrative had no equal, as did their ability to treat serious subjects and make people ponder about them. But, as the century approached its end, the genre lost its following and energy.
It is a recognized sport among adventure fans to look for culprits of this decline, and everyone has their favourite. I like to blame:

1. The lack of evolution in the genre.
2. The inability to properly embrace the new technologies and platforms (partially related to #1).
3. The resignation of players and critics, who in the end welcomed almost any new graphic adventure, without regards to actual quality, sinking the standard for the genre and scaring new players away.

Graphic adventures were built from three basic tasks: pick object (or person), use object (or person) and talk to person (or object), all of them poorly executed for decades. Pixel hunting, objects indistinguisible from the scenary, endless conversations of no interest to game progression, cumbersome inventory systems and outdated movement mechanisms were the rule.
From time to time, a developer would discover a way to improve one of these (Alone in the Dark hybridation, Myst's lack of inventory, Gabriel Knight 3's navigation), and implement it in a succesful game. But other designers would rarely include other's ideas into their new game. Copying was not well regarded and, if it were, modifying the engine a studio had used for several titles was not that easy and/or economically viable.

But this blaming is of little relevance in the real world. What is important is not answering "why did graphic adventures dissappear", but "why did most gamers not care at all". You see, people still bought games, even bad ones, by the millions, but adventures only got a waning portion of that cake, no matter how good or praised they were. How can you explain that?
What had made graphic adventures shine over other genres was a mix of their depth in story, characters and humour. Another feature was their relative simplicity, when compared to space shooters, platformers, etc. Anyone with minimum computer expertise could pick up a graphic adventure and click around the screen, select verbs, objects, people and laugh for a while. Puzzles also were part of the magic formula: solving them felt great, and telling your friends when they were stuck was even better.