User Avatar Image

Adventure Gamers Interview

posted by Brainiac on - last edited - Viewed by 571 users

The Daves (Grossman and Felton) were interviewed by Adventure Gamers. Guess what came up?

[quote="Adventure Gamers"]What do you think makes a Sierra game different from a LucasArts game? Will the stylistic differences affect how you approach the King’s Quest license?[/quote]

[quote="Dave Grossman"]The danger in a Sierra game always seemed more palpable and immediate than in one from LucasArts. Partly this was because LucasArts games took great pains to reassure you that you wouldn’t die and couldn’t do anything wrong, while Sierra games took a certain delight in all of the ways that you might die or otherwise fail that was part of the fun. Lucas games were largely exploratory, while Sierra titles had more of an element of challenge, including a more distinctly puzzley focus, situations with time constraints, and so on.

A good trick for us will be to preserve those elements of peril, challenge, and yes, death, but also hopefully do something to address the frustration that unfortunately tended to come along with them all too often and alienate some of the players (maybe if the game just saves and hits “restore” for you automatically that will be enough).[/quote]

Thoughts?

37 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • I think self-confidence and not trying too hard to please everyone are admirable qualities in games as well as people. Not advocating arrogance or insensitivity - those are the mirror universe versions of the qualities I mean. Pretty much like Kirk and the mirror Kirk.

    To continue the analogy between games and people, the (possibly unfortunate) fact is that desperation tends to be unappealing. So a game that seems desperate to please may be off-putting for that reason...

    Throwing in psychology, meaningful relationships practically depend on requiring one to adjust something about oneself; they are forged when we willingly step out of our comfort zones into somewhat unknown territory in order to approach more closely something or someone that attracts us.

    But this cannot happen if the person or game pre-empts that personal investment by being too "user-friendly". I know the intentions are good and I am not for user-unfriendliness. Again, that is the mirror universe exaggeration. But I think we all know (or can imagine) how oppressive it is if someone is constantly checking that your every need is met - including imagined ones.

    "Are you sure you are perfectly comfortable even though you do not have a glass of water?" The chances are they would have been, had it not been for this question. Not making such offers is not inconsiderate - it is considerate because you are respecting the other individual's personal space and placing that before your own need to show overt consideration.

  • @Simo Sakari Aaltonen said: I think self-confidence and not trying too hard to please everyone are admirable qualities in games as well as people. Not advocating arrogance or insensitivity - those are the mirror universe versions of the qualities I mean. Pretty much like Kirk and the mirror Kirk.

    To continue the analogy between games and people, the (possibly unfortunate) fact is that desperation tends to be unappealing. So a game that seems desperate to please may be off-putting for that reason...

    Throwing in psychology, meaningful relationships practically depend on requiring one to adjust something about oneself; they are forged when we willingly step out of our comfort zones into somewhat unknown territory in order to approach more closely something or someone that attracts us.

    But this cannot happen if the person or game pre-empts that personal investment by being too "user-friendly". I know the intentions are good and I am not for user-unfriendliness. Again, that is the mirror universe exaggeration. But I think we all know (or can imagine) how oppressive it is if someone is constantly checking that your every need is met - including imagined ones.

    "Are you sure you are perfectly comfortable even though you do not have a glass of water?" The chances are they would have been, had it not been for this question. Not making such offers is not inconsiderate - it is considerate because you are respecting the other individual's personal space and placing that before your own need to show overt consideration.

    Love your post man

  • Thanks, doom saber! Unfortunately I have personal experience of not getting this right myself. (I think I was mainly rephrasing what other posters have said, though.)

  • It's great to hear they plan to stay true to the source material. I'd like to think that being based on a classic adventure game licence they will aim to make it harder than the average Telltale fare to appease the old fans who are used to more of a challenge but I guess only time will tell.

  • @Woodsyblue said: It's great to hear they plan to stay true to the source material.

    I have to wonder though, are there really any circumstances where Telltale would say, "Oh yeah, we're totally planning to change it COMPLETELY. Source material and longtime fans can SUCK IT!" ;)

  • @Lambonius said: I have to wonder though, are there really any circumstances where Telltale would say, "Oh yeah, we're totally planning to change it COMPLETELY. Source material and longtime fans can SUCK IT!" ;)

    A lot of people have been questioning if Telltale will stay true to the Sierra model of Adventure games or follow the LucasArts model which they've used for pretty much all their games so far. I should have said I'm glad they confirmed that they are following the Sierra model. That's one less factor fans have to worry about for this upcoming project.

  • @Woodsyblue said: A lot of people have been questioning if Telltale will stay true to the Sierra model of Adventure games or follow the LucasArts model which they've used for pretty much all their games so far. I should have said I'm glad they confirmed that they are following the Sierra model. That's one less factor fans have to worry about for this upcoming project.

    I don't think they've confirmed anything. All they've said is they are going to try and be "true to the source material," which of course, is completely subjective and could mean any number of things.

  • Yeah. "True to the source material" could mean they just want to get the world and characters right(which nobody really is doubting them on), but they could diverge as much as they want from there. Seriously, this isn't really an answer, just a platitude. There's nothing concrete in it, nothing with actual weight. Saying "Nah it's okay, we won't screw up" is different than making a solid promise of any real value. Not that they can't or won't, but the answers in this interview simply don't say anything.

  • I am optimistic.. I KNOW there are going to be some things in this I am not going to like.. and there are going to be things that I really like... I imagine I will feel like I did when I played ToMI... mixed nostalgia and trepidation... but the overall experience will be something enjoyable and something I will play over and over as the years go by.

    But I am a fan that is willing to accept some changes as long as they are not too great... I do not have a strict definition of what a KQ game HAS to be to be enjoyable and still a KQ game.

  • The difference for me with TMI is that a lot of the original creators and developers of Monkey Island worked on TMI. It was a "getting the band back together" kind of thing. All the people that work at Telltale are KQ fans. Not actual former developers. Hopefully they managed to get Josh and/or Roberta in to help actually DESIGN it and not just something like a "Professor of Monkey-ology".

Add Comment