User Avatar Image

KQ6: Overrated?

posted by Anakin Skywalker on - last edited - Viewed by 6.2K users

I know I'm committing blasphemy in the eyes of many KQ die hards by saying this, but am I alone in feeling that KQ6 is overrated? KQ6 kind of reminds me of TSL--It's a little too dark, it's dialogue is a little too formal and clinical (it's a bit too wordy and not to the point as the previous games), it strives--and goes overboard--in trying to get a mature, "epic" feel. It loses that fun, bright, mindless, lighthearted fairy tale feel which characterized the previous games, especially KQV (which is IMO the pinnacle of the series in many ways).

It's kind of like KQ meets GK (a series I've personally never cared for) in some ways with it's story of political intrigue, a dark murderous plot, and a secret society. It takes things into an adult sort of direction--As in, more catered to adults rather than the whole family as the previous games were.

That's not to say it doesn't have it's light moments--of course it does. But the lighthearted moments don't feel nearly as innocent or as natural as in KQV or KQVII--They feel almost kind of forced.

I actually find KQVII to be a better KQ sequel than VI. KQ7 to me is like Roberta meets Don Bluth--which IMO is a good mix.

I'll put it this way: KQVI opened the door to TSL. That makes it bad enough:p

268 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • @Anakin Skywalker said: Lamb, I'd love if you went into detail about the drawbacks you find in her writing style.

    Well, I pretty much agree in full with your initial assessment of it in the first post of this thread.

    But further than that, I think it's usually over-wrought, badly cliched, and always tries too hard to be "dark," "edgy," or "psychological." It's just so blatantly overdone, and it's exactly the same in every single one of her games. I have no problem with horror themes or psychological themes, but I have yet to see a Jane Jensen game that doesn't deal with one or both of those notions. After a while the unoriginality of it all is just tiresome. Don't get me wrong, I really like King's Quest 6--I do. I just think it's inane to say that Jane Jensen is the be-all, end-all reason why it's a good game. If anything, she's the one who makes it feel out of place with the rest of the series, which in my opinion, is not a good thing.

    Honestly, I even like Gabriel Knight (Sins of the Fathers,) but I think that the dialog is hands down the worst part of the game. It's so long and over-written. It is an absolute chore to sit through it all, and you really have to listen to every conversation if you want to complete the game.

  • I'm afraid if he went into detail about the drawbacks of Jane Jensen's writing, I would die of dysentery.

    Jane Jensen is highly over-rated. Her "dark" and "mature" themes are cliched at best, and self-indulgent at worst.


    Bt

  • Its my favorite... it seemed the most "real" out of all of them.

  • @Blackthorne519 said: I'm afraid if he went into detail about the drawbacks of Jane Jensen's writing, I would die of dysentery.

    Jane Jensen is highly over-rated. Her "dark" and "mature" themes are cliched at best, and self-indulgent at worst.


    Bt

    Proto-Twilight.

  • I like dark plots in my games, which is prb why QFG4 is my fav out of the HEro Quest games.

  • @doom saber said: I like dark plots in my games, which is prb why QFG4 is my fav out of the HEro Quest games.

    For some reason, I really feel like it works well in the context of Quest For Glory in a way that it couldn't (and doesn't) work in King's Quest. Maybe it's because you are supposed to be fighting monsters and killing things as part of the experience. I think another part of it has to do with the fact that all the Quest for Glory games had a distinctly dark element to them that was balanced perfectly by the silly humor, colorful style, and adventurous gameplay. Also, the "dark" in Quest for Glory, even Quest for Glory 4, is not the angsty, emo, cliche psychological thriller "dark" of Jane Jensen games, it's more specifically related to a kind of classic horror genre concept (vampires, werewolves, mad-scientists, frankenstein monsters, etc.) Those are two VERY different things.

  • KQ6 has:

    [LIST]
    [*]reasonably long gameplay;
    [*]a good interface;
    [*]multiple endings promoting fair amounts of replay value;
    [*]superb voice acting;
    [*]enjoyable (and realistic) character interaction;
    [*]appropriate amounts of humor;
    [*]superior graphics to the earlier canon;
    [*]superior sound and music to the earlier canon;
    [*]a compelling villain;
    [*]and an interesting plot twist.
    [/LIST]


    What's not to like?

  • @Chyron8472 said: KQ6 has:

    [LIST]
    [*]reasonably long gameplay;
    [*]a good interface;
    [*]multiple endings promoting fair amounts of replay value;
    [*]superb voice acting;
    [*]enjoyable (and realistic) character interaction;
    [*]appropriate amounts of humor;
    [*]superior graphics to the earlier canon;
    [*]superior sound and music to the earlier canon;
    [*]a compelling villain;
    [*]and an interesting plot twist.
    [/LIST]


    What's not to like?


    [LIST]
    [*]Realism--This is a fairy tale, a lighthearted one at that. KQ isn't dark fantasy, it isn't QFG or GK;
    [*]KQ5 has the same interface and graphics, and still retains the lightheartedness of KQ1-4, and KQ7;
    [*]Why does the villain have to be compelling, in an intellectual sense? This is King's Quest, not Murder She Wrote or whatever. Mordack and Lolotte were badass villains, fearsome and mysterious, without being intellectually compelling.;
    [*]KQ5 and KQ7 also have music on the same quality, or higher, than that of KQ6;
    [*]So did 5 and 7 in terms of the length of gameplay;
    [*]The KQ games are generally replayable even without multiple endings.
    [/LIST]
    As stated before, the game introduced too much maturity, darkness, complexity and a level of depth that really was not needed in the KQ series. It deviated from the formula a bit too much.

  • @Anakin Skywalker said: [LIST]
    [*]Realism--This is a fairy tale, a lighthearted one at that. KQ isn't dark fantasy, it isn't QFG or GK;
    [*]KQ5 has the same interface and graphics, and still retains the lightheartedness of KQ1-4, and KQ7;
    [*]Why does the villain have to be compelling, in an intellectual sense? This is King's Quest, not Murder She Wrote or whatever. Mordack and Lolotte were badass villains, fearsome and mysterious, without being intellectually compelling.;
    [*]KQ5 and KQ7 also have music on the same quality, or higher, than that of KQ6;
    [*]So did 5 and 7 in terms of the length of gameplay;
    [*]The KQ games are generally replayable even without multiple endings.
    [/LIST]
    As stated before, the game introduced too much maturity, darkness, complexity and a level of depth that really was not needed in the KQ series. It deviated from the formula a bit too much.

    Wellllll, now I think you might be overstating things just a bit. KQ6 is definitely different than the rest of the series, and not always in a good way. But overall, I wouldn't call it dark fantasy. It hasn't gone that far yet. And Alhazared may be an intellectual, but he's still very archetypal as a villain. The scheming vizier is classic fairy tale--right out of Aladdin. And what's wrong with multiple paths and endings?

    The main problem as I see it with KQ6 is the WAY its story is told. It's SO serious. The characters take themselves too seriously--there is too much pathos in the whole thing--too much gravitas. Not to mention all the drawn out dialog. Not as bad in a Gabriel Knight game though, thankfully, but it definitely loses the great fairy tale feel of the first five games in the series.

  • While I do agree Jenses style was out of place in a King's Quest game, writing in Gabriel Knight games is still far better than most games can offer.

Add Comment