User Avatar Image

The Williams: Were they KQ fans, fans of technology, or fans of money (or a mix)?

posted by BagginsKQ on - last edited - Viewed by 461 users

So, in your opinion where did Roberta Williams and her husband sit on how they viewed the KQ series? What were they more interested in? Did their views change over time? If so when did the views change?

For was Roberta Williams more interested in technology than the KQ universe itself? Was Ken more interested in the monetary success? Was Roberta interested in the monetary success or not?

27 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • Well, she's been totally done for a long while now. Since long before the Kickstarters.

  • Realistic as in it looked like a real forest, down to the "gritty" sand and pine needles. Dirt paths, etc. Humans characters are less deformed and more natural looking. The old woodcutter and wife isn't just poor, the wife is sick and near death. There is more people living in the castle and not just the King. It had guards, a doctor, and lords and ladies.

    The witch's house in a dark and dirty forest. The house itself looks dark and filthy inside.

    Many of the deaths are a bit more violent than they originally were.

    Places in general where people or races live actually look more "lived-in".

    The forest seems far more dangerous and forbidding. Monsters & wizards can attack from almost anywhere.

    As for "gritty" it's a very simple term with simple definitions. It has ties back to old West in language.


    grit·ty *(grt)
    adj. grit·ti·er, grit·ti·est
    1. Containing, covered with, or resembling grit.
    2. Showing resolution and fortitude; plucky: a gritty decision.
    gritti·ly adv.

    Gritti·ness first has to do with sand/dust/dirt. Art style fits this compared to the first as nearly everything has a much more dirty, lived-in, decayed and eroded look.

    Second definition has to do with courage.

    To take from an old west term "true grit" or "he has grit" otherwise "he has sand" which meant "courage" or "balls".

    Graham in the original the stakes were not as defined. The kingdom didn't look like it was in decay to extent that remake portrays it. It's not nearly as under siege by bad guys. The remake ups the ante and increases the threat level and dangers. Graham's adventure seems to require more courage. He comes out portrayed more heroic because of it.

  • I like the KQ1 remake, but the original version of King's Quest is one of my favorites of all time, purely for my own nostalgic reasons. It was the first adventure game I ever played.

    The remake just had better graphics, and the updated writing was much better too. They're both fun to play in different ways - but since this is a talk of technology, even though KQ1 appears to be more like a cartoon-adventure-fairy-tale, it was merely a product of it's time and the technology used to produce it. At that time, that was the latest and most revolutionary example of home PC computer graphics. People knew no better graphics on computers. Roberta had a fun idea, and Ken made it work to the advantage of the technology. The SCI remake was also to take advantage of the new technology - updating a beloved classic with new technology seemed like a no brainer, but often times the user really doesn't care about the technology - they love things in spite of the technology.

    Bt

  • @Blackthorne519 said: SCI remake was also to take advantage of the new technology - updating a beloved classic with new technology seemed like a no brainer, but often times the user really doesn't care about the technology - they love things in spite of the technology.

    Bt

    I am not sure that KQ1 SCI suffered so much because players supposedly preferred the original, not caring about the technology. I actually think that KQ1 SC1 failed to impress technologically speaking. After all, wasn't it one of the last SCI releases? Everyone had seen similar graphics already in Codename: Ice Man, Colonel's Bequest, etc. Didn't it come out around the same time as KQ5, a game with breathtaking art and a whole new interface? Kind of hard to share the spotlight with a game like that. KQ1 just wasn't flashy enough and it didn't make an observer watching say WOW, and I also think people just preferred all-new games.

  • Well, it was one of the last EGA SCI games. The VGA, SVGA, and FMV games were all SCI as well.

  • I much prefer KQ1SCI and SQ1VGA to their original counterparts. In large part because those were the first versions of those games which I was exposed to, but I also really rather dislike AGI. SCI and VGA are the best.

  • @Anakin Skywalker said: I much prefer KQ1SCI and SQ1VGA to their original counterparts. In large part because those were the first versions of those games which I was exposed to, but I also really rather dislike AGI. SCI and VGA are the best.

    I agree. My favorite Sierra era was EGA SCI. I love those graphics with the Roland music.

  • It really depends on your age, and your exposure to the games. AGI Sierra games were all I knew for years. I mean, honestly, in my head - when I think "Sierra Games" I still see a plethora of all the games I played and loved, KQ1 and 2, SQ1 &2, Black Cauldron, Gold Rush!, Manhunter, Police Quest, Leisure Suit Larry 1.... the AGI games have a certain charm that really appeals to me, and though I love the later SCI 16 color and 256 color games, those original AGI games will always remind me of Sierra.


    Bt

  • I agree with Blackthorne's initial post, and also find enjoyment out of each version for different reasons.

    However, I'll admit that for me I played the remakes first in many cases, and went back to play the originals later on. I grew to like the originals over the remakes. Perhaps it was the simplicity. For others maybe it was a better "consistency" with other games in the series. For example PQ1 remake makes quite a few changes plot wise, and oversimplifies some of the puzzles. The plot changes actually make it contradict PQ2 and PQ3 in some ways. One issue of which is the chronological dating for each game.

    PQ1 EGA actually had more puzzles and a few more points, and the car chases were better handled. So gameplay was another reason to prefer it.

    KQ1 EGA fits better with KQ2 and KQ3 in layout of the land, and KQ3 directly references the landmarks of the original version, rather than the remake. The mountain stairs, and cloudland in KQ3 is based off of the mountain stairs and cloud lands in KQ1. There is a visual continuity there. The remake changed the cave and clouds for example.

    However, I really do enjoy the improved narrative and music in the remake of KQ1, and different atmosphere.

  • I grew up with AGI as well. You can really tell the difference in quality from KQ1 (awful artwork) and their later games (Gold Rush! WOW!). Even KQ2 was far better than KQ1. Probably because it had actual artists directing it? Who did the artwork for KQ1 anyway? Was it KQ2 when Mark Crowe came onboard? SQ1 and SQ2, however, have some of the best AGI graphics I've ever seen. That's partially because I love Mark Crowe's sci-fi style plus he really knows how to make a few large rectangular pixels look amazing. SQ3 was fantastic as well. I miss his artwork. Can't wait to see it again in SpaceVenture!

Add Comment