User Avatar Image

Exclusivity over the license.

posted by Sslaxx on - last edited - Viewed by 1.5K users

Just because I'd like to see (one of) the AGDI guys stop their whining, even though it's very unlikely to be answered here...

Is Telltale's license to use the various Sierra-related IP exclusive?

165 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • @doggans said: While I do still love Telltale, each and every amateur group, even the mediocre ones, makes games that feel a lot more like Sierra than anything Telltale's ever made.

    I think we all have to wait and see in what TTG has in store for King's Quest. Maybe they'll hire ppl who worked on sierra games or will try their best to make the games like Sierra of old.

    AGDI games are impressive especially Quest for Glory 2, but they are remakes. I wonder if they or TTG can make a King's Quest game that is true to the series.

  • King's Quest II+ is more than just a remake. It has a completely overhauled story and set of game puzzles. It's practically a brand new game compared to the original! Though the skeletal plot outline is the same: save girl in tower.

  • @MusicallyInspired said: King's Quest II+ is more than just a remake. It has a completely overhauled story and set of game puzzles. It's practically a brand new game compared to the original! Though the skeletal plot outline is the same: save girl in tower.

    True. I didn't mention KQ2 since honestly, the overhauled story seemed too convoluted. Having it as a fangame is okay, but having it as a retail game might alienate those who wanted to see something more polished in a retail game.

  • @Lambonius said: Quoted for truth. And I'm not just saying that because I'm in one of those groups.

    Seriously though, anyone who isn't impressed by AGDI's just-released KQIII Redux is no fan of King's Quest. The game is fucking fantastic. Probably the best fan product out there.

    And no, I'm not on the AGDI team. ;)

    It's bit harsh thing to say that people who aren't impressed by it aren't true fans of King's Quest. Personally I'm not friend of fan games (or any other fan fiction), but I don't mind if other people love those games. However when people start claiming that people who love the original King's Quest games and don't want to see anything changed aren't true fans, then I'm starting to get bit annoyed.

  • I've always felt like the whole idea behind the fan remakes was kind of weird. These '80s games are being updated to look and play like '90s games. I understand that the remakes are inspired by Sierra's own VGA remakes, and that a lot of people (myself included) consider that mid-nineties era to have been the pinnacle of the adventure gaming Golden Age, but it's still odd. Why stick to the archaic 320x200 resolution when you could show off your new beautiful hand-painted artwork in high-definition? Why make the remakes point-and-click instead of being truer to the original games and developing a more sophisticated parser? If it's just for nostalgia's sake, then it's weird that you feel more nostalgic for the style of the later games when you're putting forth all this effort to recreate these earlier games. Is it just that low-res sprites are easier to animate and point-and-click interaction is easier to program?

  • @doom saber said: True. I didn't mention KQ2 since honestly, the overhauled story seemed too convoluted. Having it as a fangame is okay, but having it as a retail game might alienate those who wanted to see something more polished in a retail game.

    I was just pointing out the fact that they're not all just silly remakes that don't deserve attention. My point was that KQ2+ is like a brand new game rather than a simple remake.

    @doom saber said: I've always felt like the whole idea behind the fan remakes was kind of weird. These '80s games are being updated to look and play like '90s games. I understand that the remakes are inspired by Sierra's own VGA remakes, and that a lot of people (myself included) consider that mid-nineties era to have been the pinnacle of the adventure gaming Golden Age, but it's still odd. Why stick to the archaic 320x200 resolution when you could show off your new beautiful hand-painted artwork in high-definition? Why make the remakes point-and-click instead of being truer to the original games and developing a more sophisticated parser? If it's just for nostalgia's sake, then it's weird that you feel more nostalgic for the style of the later games when you're putting forth all this effort to recreate these earlier games. Is it just that low-res sprites are easier to animate and point-and-click interaction is easier to program?

    Yes, it's definitely faster and easier to make low-res sprites and animation (a BIG detriment to higher-res games!) and background art. Generally, the higher the resolution you got the more animation frames you have to have to make things look smooth and natural. KQ3Redux would have taken us 16 years instead of 8 if we were working in hi res! ;)

  • @thesporkman said: Why stick to the archaic 320x200 resolution when you could show off your new beautiful hand-painted artwork in high-definition?

    Have you checked the setup program? With the right options you can get the resolution up to 1280x800. High enough?

  • That won't change the resolution of the in-game graphics. It just scales it up and doubles the pixel sizes.

  • it still looks nice though. And it helps on bigger monitors.

  • @thesporkman said: Why stick to the archaic 320x200 resolution when you could show off your new beautiful hand-painted artwork in high-definition? Why make the remakes point-and-click instead of being truer to the original games and developing a more sophisticated parser? If it's just for nostalgia's sake, then it's weird that you feel more nostalgic for the style of the later games when you're putting forth all this effort to recreate these earlier games.

    I wouldn't say it's JUST for nostalgia's sake. :)

    There is a real beauty, in my opinion, to those so-called "archaic" 320x200 screens. Not only is it an interesting artistic challenge to make the most with the low resolution (there are techniques you develop as an artist that you simply wouldn't use in higher res) but the whole pixelated look is really an aesthetic choice. We choose that resolution because yeah, that's what the golden age games looked like, but also because we still think it looks great even today. People don't make games like that anymore, so if we want a game in that particular style, and we have the abilities, we may as well try to make it ourselves. ;)

    The games by AGDI and IA in particular are labors of love, intended to stick as close to the feel of the originals as possible, while slightly updating them visually or with a few new puzzles/fleshed out characters to make them feel fresh again. Compared to TSL, which threw the feel of the originals out the window, but updated the LOOK to something more contemporary, I'd choose those "archaic" 320x200 games any day of the week. ;)

Add Comment