User Avatar Image

When can we expect to see SOMETHING about Telltale's KQ?

posted by Blackthorne519 on - last edited - Viewed by 2.9K users

I wonder when we'll see or hear something substantial about Tell-Tale's King's Quest game.


Bt

480 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • @MusicallyInspired said: I think we can say within relative safety margins that KQ won't have QTE, but that doesn't mean they're not going to fail to deliver a satisfying puzzle experience with the same lazy puzzle design mentality they've put into the past two titles (and looks like a third is upcoming).

    I would agree with this, at least I can't imagine Telltale would use QTEs as the predominant gameplay mechanism in KQ.

    @MusicallyInspired said: Presumably because they know their games are atrocious messes that no one would buy with any knowledge of what the game is actually like?

    The thing is, lots of people don't consider them atrocious messes. Whether we like it or not, there is a market for trivially interactive content-delivery systems masquerading as games.

    @MusicallyInspired said: Look at it this way, if it sucks it sucks. It'll die quickly and nobody will remember it. KQ will find a new home one day. It doesn't really matter in the end.

    See previous comment. There is a worst-case scenario for which you haven't accounted. BTTF might have sucked in all possible ways of assessing it as a game; nobody is going to remember it twenty-five years from now, unlike KQ and other Sierra titles that are still regarded fondly by so many gamers. But given the financial success of BTTF, it wouldn't surprise me a bit if TTG gets the rights and makes a second season.

  • We continued the 'items that would've been useful in previous KQ games' thing in the pawnshop in TSL, as well. If you look at the shelves directly behind Hakim, you'll get a few references. (Actually one of them, web-be-gone, we turned into an in-game item eventually!)

  • User Avatar Image
    exo

    I've played through kq6 over 10 times and never seen those descriptions. I suck at exploring apparently.

  • Gods, the more I read this thread, the less interested I think I am becoming in the game. Largely because of the way many people in here are reacting to ideas or simply stating how they feel about things in the previous games.

    Puzzles so difficult they take days to figure out? No thanks, I did that in the 80's and 90's. I'm all up for looking at things in a different way, but "Moon Logic" as a trope was created for a reason, and early adventure games had a lot of that. Don't get me started on many of the games which had seemingly unwinnable scenarios because you literally would have to call up for help before you even conceived of what might be the right solution.

    Games are too easy? Easy games aren't fun? It's easier to make games easy than it is hard? Wow, talking out your asses much? I'm not trying to be rude, but gods-damn, that sounds so freaking wrong. I've been playing games for going on 30 years, and if anything, pulling back the "difficulty" in general has been a blessing. Not because it allows more "casual" gamers to play, but because it means that people who don't have time to master a game are actually able to beat it. You know, those of us with lives, outside interests, and less-than-perfect reflexes. It's also ridiculously easy for games to be made hard, as many games these days have quite a lot of instances of unbalanced gameplay where you hit brick walls of difficulty, or the gameplay can't make up its mind, or developers thing Easy and Normal are just enemies with less HP.

    I'm sorry, but that really strikes a nerve with me when people bitch about how easy games are getting, when in many cases I think games are getting harder. Just not for the same reasons they were hard in the old days.


    Anyways, back to King's Quest. I see some of you guys condemn those who thought KQ7 was fun and enjoyable, and that honestly makes me sick. You praise a game for giving the player a hefty penalty upon making a mistake, when it's crap like that which was driving people away from the genre. I know some of you guys aren't gonna like this, but it was the lack of constant death hanging over your head that made a lot of people like the LucasArts style of adventure gaming.

    Sure, saving constantly is a good idea, but why should I have to have tons of save slots just cause every screen can potentially kill me? That's not only bothersome, but it breaks the illusion of actually being there. I don't know what kind of rose-tinted glasses some of you are wearing, but the fact is that many people did NOT enjoy unwinnable scenarios. Heck, I was very glad when we stopped having to constantly rely on the keyboard for everything. I did rather miss the typing and such, but I sure didn't miss dying cause I couldn't type fast enough.

    I'm sorry if I've stepped on some toes, it's just.. the topic of difficulty in modern gaming, and the way some people cling to the notion that everyone loves ridiculous challenges or inane logic puzzles kind of gets to me. It tends to make me kind of upset. Probably cause I lived through that era and didn't enjoy it much then, either. Sure, I enjoy older games far more than most modern ones and will replay NES, SNES, and Genesis games quite often. I wish I could enjoy more older PC games, though GOG is helping fix that.. but I don't miss how hair-pullingly frustrating a lot of older games could be. I don't miss scouring magazines for clues, wasting money on hints, relying on trial-and-error or pixel perfect precision to get the job done.


    As per the topic itself: What I want from TTG's King's Quest is for a fun and engrossing entry to the series that both makes me think back fondly to older games, while giving me a new story/adventure either with characters I love or set in a world I enjoyed living in for a while. I don't want something like KQ1-4, but I could do without KQ8. I sincerely doubt we'd get something like it, but if they wanted an actiony game, they could do worse than getting inspiration for the gameplay style of something like Soul Reaver. But what I enjoy most about TTG's entries is the gameplay they already provide, so I won't be complaining if we get something like Monkey Island or Sam & Max.

    Honestly, I think we should all just quit speculating and let them surprise us. The more we debate or hype ourselves up, the more we'll be disappointed if it isn't what we are imagining. It's one of the reasons I largely avoid learning about games I'm interested in. I'd certainly rather be pleasently surprised or nonplussed than let down.

  • @Hiroshi Mishima said: whole post

    I think you're very much missing the point of the "too easy" argument.

    First of all, there's a big difference between games in general getting easier (as in, taking less time to master a set of skills needed in order to beat certain enemies or bosses, etc.) and point-and-click adventure games getting so dumbed down that they might as well be movies where the player periodically has to click "unpause" to keep the story going.

    Did you play Back to the Future? Because that's pretty much all that game was. The amount of hotspots in a given area was usually countable on one hand. Did you play Jurassic Park? Watch an LP sometime if you haven't, because that's the same experience you'd get playing it. Telltale's last few games have been increasingly like extended cutscenes with small points of interaction in between.

    That's NOT what we want from King's Quest. Can you honestly say that's what you'd want out of a new KQ game? We want to be able to explore a world that feels interactive, where nearly everything in a given area is clickable. We want that world to be more than a few rooms strung together by cutscenes that outnumber gameplay sequences. And we want puzzles that make us think--that require us to consider all the items in our inventory and how they might be combined and used on various areas of the environment.

    In Telltale's last true point-and-click game (Back to the Future,) the player rarely had more than three things in his inventory at a given time, and rarely had to deal with any puzzles whose solutions weren't "click one of your three items on one of the three hotspots in the room" or "exhaust all dialog options." Seriously, those aren't even puzzles. What critical thought do they require AT ALL??

    Nobody really honestly expects Telltale to create a game with moon logic and dead-ends. Most of the arguments in this thread have been about whether or not certain notorious puzzles in the old games REALLY were illogical, or whether or not dead ends could be justified BACK THEN. Nobody is seriously saying "Please, Telltale, give us a game where I can miss something at the beginning, play the rest of the game, and then not be able to finish it because of that thing I missed at the beginning."

    What we are saying, is "Please, Telltale, give us a game that captures the feel of open-ended exploration, world interactivity, and satisfying puzzle-solving of the original games, with familiar, well-written characters that we know and love." We're even okay with them expanding on the story elements, as long as it doesn't come at the sacrifice of all the things that made the old King's Quest games great (see my previous sentence.)

    So please, get off your high horse. We've all been playing games just as long as you have, and have just as much a right to our opinions on things as you do. If you take the time to read our opinions carefully, you might even find that our ideas about what made a King's Quest game awesome aren't all that different in the first place.

  • User Avatar Image
    exo

    Hiroshi - you've just pulled a switcharoo and taken a debate about puzzle difficulty and switched that out into an attack on game difficulty overall.

    There is a huge difference between saying, 'I want this game to be harder than the current crop of Tell tale games" and "I want this game to be as hard as possible".

    As Lambonius pointed out, TT's latest games have been ridiculously easy. there is a huge difference between moon logic and having to actually think and not just clikc on one of 5 spots on the screen.

    The entire point of most of the threads here is that TT has gotten away from adventure games in general and started creating quicktime event movies. The thread over on the walking dead game is showing signs of the same issues that plagued BttF. Many of us have hoped for years for a new official entry in the series, and many of us would rather not have one at all then see a light weight cartoon fantasy slideshow that we just click through.

  • A simple question deserves a simple answer.
    @Hiroshi Mishima said: Wow, talking out your asses much?

    No, I'm not talking out of my ass, and I really don't see any justification for accusing me of doing so because I'm of the opinion that adventure games are getting too easy and that I find easy games boring.

    The gist of my posts and similar ones is a simple request that TTG's game be made so that it can be enjoyed by those of us who like challenging Sierra-style gameplay, and that it not cater solely to those who played Sierra games in spite of the difficult puzzles or new audiences unused to such gameplay.

    I might actually start to worry that this request is unreasonable if someone ever came and presented an argument that doesn't include...

    @Hiroshi Mishima said: ...because it means that people who don't have time to master a game are actually able to beat it. You know, those of us with lives, outside interests, and less-than-perfect reflexes.

    false dichotomies...

    @Hiroshi Mishima said: I see some of you guys condemn those who thought KQ7 was fun and enjoyable, and that honestly makes me sick.

    delusions of persecution...

    @Hiroshi Mishima said: You praise a game for giving the player a hefty penalty upon making a mistake, when it's crap like that which was driving people away from the genre. I know some of you guys aren't gonna like this, but it was the lack of constant death hanging over your head that made a lot of people like the LucasArts style of adventure gaming.

    single-cause hypotheses to explain complex phenomena...

    @Hiroshi Mishima said: ...some people cling to the notion that everyone loves ridiculous challenges or inane logic puzzles...

    and imaginary strawmen.

  • User Avatar Image
    exo

    In other news, over in the walking dead forum they released some info the other day in regards to the first episode that boils down to:
    "2 hours"
    "It doesn't have a lot of barriers"
    "We want you to finish it."

    Sounds a lot like a movie to me..... and makes me worry that TellTale is only going further down the rabbit hole.

  • That's part of my problem with the chapters in KQ7 they often took less than 2 hours... Most puzzles were pointed out to you in some fashion... Either characters that ask for a specific item (from a specific location), or flat out obvious solutions... Most characters only appear when they are related to a particular puzzle solution...

    Granted most of KQ games can be finished in less than few hours... But most had good puzzles (the main time sink)...

    KQ3 (probably the worst puzzle design in the entire series, or lack of true in inventory puzzles) takes place in real time (minus timer pausing during spell cast typing). I generally complete it with no more than two hours on the timer.... KQ4 (some of the best puzzle design of the series) also works in real time (with one event pushing time foreward after you complete certain conditions). I've never actually timed the timer but I suspect it takes no more than 3-4 hours for the 24 hour period to elapse... Typing pauses the timer I think.

    Although on he one hand that's an arguement that in some ways total play time for four or five episodes last longer than the actual total content of early games... But unfortunately including cases of dumbed down and/or overused/unoriginal rehashed/recycled puzzle design.

    Though also take into account the early games had less cutscenes/conversations/exposition and spent more of that time on puzzles... So in someways 'more actual gameplay' in the same amount of time. So a three hour game was more puzzle solving than the story itself. Whereas in modern games a single episode maybe 3 hours but contain more exposition than gameplay...

    Who knows how much total actual gameplay exists over the course of the entire 4-5 episodes... It might end up having a similar number of puzzles as early adventure games, but most of extra time (as in beyond he time it takes to solve the puzzles) taken up by exposition...

  • @exo said: In other news, over in the walking dead forum they released some info the other day in regards to the first episode that boils down to:
    "2 hours"
    "It doesn't have a lot of barriers"
    "We want you to finish it."

    Sounds a lot like a movie to me..... and makes me worry that TellTale is only going further down the rabbit hole.

    This isn't really unexpected, though, is it? I thought it became clear somewhere between the releases of BTTF and JP that Telltale's design philosophy calls for trivially interactive content-delivery systems. I don't see them ever making another adventure game except possibly with properties that have a history as adventure games, and even then I'm not sure what to expect.

Add Comment