Kings Quest Reboot [Archive] - Page 2

blueskirt

02/21/2011, 11:25 am

Honestly, I think we should concentrate our efforts at asking for something feasible from TTG.

Respecting the worlds and styles of each series? That's feasible.

More difficult puzzles than what TTG offered us so far? Most certainly. Lechuck's Revenge and the Curse Of Monkey Island had that nice option to set the game difficulty to easy or hard, bring that back. Those who want to enjoy the story can play it on easy, those who want some extra challenge can play it on hard.

The possibility to die? Yes, both to maintain tension (the climaxes of Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade and Fate Of Atlantis wouldn't have been the same if you couldn't die in them) and because sometimes they can be outright hilarious when handled correctly, like anyone who played Space Quest can attest. Anyone here remember that scene in Leisure Suit Larry I, where you get killed and suddenly the sidewalk where your body is lying begins to lower, revealing a huge underground industrial complex, where your body is thrown in a blender, mashed, reshaped into human form, painted, clothed, given an electric shock then thrown on another elevator that lifts you back on the sidewalk? That scene was brilliant.

But dead ends? Be serious. Those that claims it wouldn't be faithful to Sierra's style forget that even Sierra got a clue that everyone but a minority of ultra hardcore players hated those and got rid of those in their later games. AGDI's King's Quest II+ had no dead ends.
Did that cause a ruckus?
-Nope.
Is it still considered by most to be their finest game and one of the best King's Quest game ever made?
-Yes.
Did anyone accuses AGDI of betraying Sierra's style and legacy because it didn't have dead ends?
It's probably as faithful to the good old Sierra as anyone ever got in recent time. When people accused them of betraying the style and legacy of Sierra it was because they modified the story in their remake, not because they removed the dead ends.

Honestly, there are better ways to make adventure games more difficult than bring back cruel mechanics that only a handful of ultra hardcore fans actually like, and that comes from someone who wants TTG to make more difficult games. What's next? Should they bring back mazes that took hours to map? Or pixel hunting? Or those stupid sequences where you have to walk on narrow ledges where one pixel in the wrong direction makes you plummet to your death, which were present in all early King's Quest games? Where do you draw the line between which stupid adventure games mechanics that we got rid of is part of Sierra's style and which isn't?

Let's concentrate our efforts on asking TTG for something that has good chances to happen. Respecting the style is feasible, they do have a mystery person on board who acts as consultant. Deaths have good chances to be implemented because you can be killed in Jurassic Park. As for more challenging puzzles, Dave Grossman worked on Lechuck's Revenge and Day Of The Tentacle in the past, two games featuring harder puzzles than what TTG got us used to thus far, the first giving you the choice between easy and hard puzzles, the second featuring some of the best puzzles ever designed in an adventure game: logical but not dead easy, creative but not "WTF WERE THEY THINKING??!" frustrating. But asking for the inclusion of dead ends, just to please a minority of ultra hardcore fans, to the detriment of the casual and hardcore-but-not-ultra-hardcore fans, not to mention the financial success of their endeavor and their chances to work on other Sierra IPs (let's not forget that Sierra had more than just King's Quest), is hardly feasible and ill-advised if you want my opinion.

Simo Sakari Aaltonen

02/21/2011, 12:01 pm

I second this once again, and realistically, I think the chances of Telltale including dead ends are vanishingly small...

Dead ends have never stopped me playing a good adventure game (playing Martian Memorandum right now) and I can appreciate the edginess their looming presence generates - but I still have no wish to see them in new releases.

Not advocating railroading, just the common-sense approach of always leaving the player the possibility to return to an earlier location to retrieve that crucial item, for example.

nikkko

02/21/2011, 02:26 pm

JJoyce

02/21/2011, 02:44 pm

One thing I haven't seen mentioned in the "dead ends" vs. "no dead ends" discussion:
- LucasArts adventures up to Indy3 in 1990 featured dead ends like Sierra adventures.
- KQV released in 1990 is also the last Sierra game to feature dead ends all over the place; in later games, they are either infrequent or absent completely.

Dead ends have nothing to do with the "style" of the company, and both companies got to the same design decision of getting rid of dead ends more or less at the same time (independently or not, it doesn't matter).
We simply see more dead ends in Sierra adventures because they released more titles in the 1980s!

All well and good, except that's not really true.

Take Space Quest 4, for instance. Released in 1991, I believe, and it was full of dead ends though for the most part they were rather mild as they became evident quickly for the most part. Still, if you hadn't been saving regularly, you could lose a lot of time.

I'd also point to Police Quest 3, one of my absolute favorite Sierra games of all-time and one that has a potential dead end within the first few minutes of the game that doesn't become evident until literally the very end of the game.

I seem to recall something similar with PQ4 as well, though I don't think it was quite as severe as PQ3's example.

So...Really, Sierra made pretty extensive use of dead ends up until the CUC buyout at the very least and of course I don't really think the CUC/Vivendi era Sierra can really be considered Sierra.

After all, I don't think they really had many (if any) typical Sierra games released from that point to Vivendi folding and selling to Activision.

Sslaxx

02/21/2011, 03:09 pm

They didn't "fold", they essentially brought Activision. Activision-Blizzard is basically Vivendi Games except with Kotick at the head.

JJoyce

02/21/2011, 03:35 pm

They didn't "fold", they essentially brought Activision. Activision-Blizzard is basically Vivendi Games except with Kotick at the head.

Fair enough.

I just recall Vivendi Universal Games was in some financial trouble as CUC/Cendant's "creative accounting" had been somewhat more severe than it had initially seemed.

KuroShiro

02/21/2011, 04:07 pm

All well and good, except that's not really true.

Take Space Quest 4, for instance. Released in 1991, I believe, and it was full of dead ends though for the most part they were rather mild as they became evident quickly for the most part. Still, if you hadn't been saving regularly, you could lose a lot of time.

I wouldn't call it 'full' of dead ends. I can only really think of two in the whole game, and one of those could still be solved if you knew a code already -- and was also really hard to miss.

nikkko

02/21/2011, 04:28 pm

Take Space Quest 4, for instance. Released in 1991, I believe, and it was full of dead ends though for the most part they were rather mild as they became evident quickly for the most part. Still, if you hadn't been saving regularly, you could lose a lot of time.

True, there are some minor dead ends also in SQIV. You can miss a few time travel codes. At least you don't need to replay the whole game in that case - just restore a previously saved game, get the code, then restore the latest game again.

I'd also point to Police Quest 3, one of my absolute favorite Sierra games of all-time and one that has a potential dead end within the first few minutes of the game that doesn't become evident until literally the very end of the game.

I seem to recall something similar with PQ4 as well, though I don't think it was quite as severe as PQ3's example.

I stand corrected then - I never played PQ3 or PQ4.

So...Really, Sierra made pretty extensive use of dead ends up until the CUC buyout at the very least

Sorry, this isn't really true. I still stand by my previous statement that most of the games released after KQV didn't rely extensively on dead ends.
KQVI has a few dead ends but they were mostly confined to the Labyrinth. KQVII, LSL5, Freddy Pharkas, SQV and SQ6 don't have any AFAIK. GK1 and GK2 also have few or none. All of these games were released before the CUC buyout in 1996.

JJoyce

02/21/2011, 04:41 pm

I wouldn't call it 'full' of dead ends. I can only really think of two in the whole game, and one of those could still be solved if you knew a code already -- and was also really hard to miss.

I don't know....There were quite a few dead ends as I recall....The thing is, there was also a ton of apparent dead ends that weren't really dead ends as well

What I mean by that is, unless you figured out you could return to the streets of Xenon in 'SQ XII', for instance, it was possible to "miss" a lot of items like the pocket pal, batteries, acid, etc and think you needed to restart.

But there were also plenty of real dead ends as well such as the one you mention which could be overcome with prior knowledge, or the item taken from a tank on the street that would end your game shortly thereafter (while giving you points for taking it).

Granted, with the time hopper allowing travel between times, it's not as bad as it could have been, but still....

JJoyce

02/21/2011, 04:54 pm

Sorry, this isn't really true. I still stand by my previous statement that most of the games released after KQV didn't rely extensively on dead ends.
KQVI has a few dead ends but they were mostly confined to the Labyrinth. KQVII, LSL5, Freddy Pharkas, SQV and SQ6 don't have any AFAIK. GK1 and GK2 also have few or none. All of these games were released before the CUC buyout in 1996.

I dunno.....I've never played KQ 7, so I can't speak as to how it was though I'd be surprised if it had many dead ends.

Freddy Pharkas, on the other hand, had its share that really irritated me. It was really bizarre too, because you'd have an act that had absolutely none which would leave you thinking 'cool...don't have to worry about it' and then you'd run in to the wall in the next act.

SQ6, I think you're right. I can't think of anything offhand that couldn't be solved by backtracking because I'm pretty sure you couldn't be rescued without taking what you needed from the apartment.

SQ5 has been a while, but I do recall a dead end or two, I want to say involving the ambassador later in the game and something or other on that planet with the "deserted" outpost.

nikkko

02/21/2011, 04:54 pm

the item taken from a tank on the street that would end your game shortly thereafter (while giving you points for taking it).

That isn't a dead end, you can put back the item in the tank. You even get +5 points in the process (+25 for picking it up -20 for putting it back).

JJoyce

02/21/2011, 05:02 pm

That isn't a dead end, you can put back the item in the tank. You even get +5 points in the process (+25 for picking it up -20 for putting it back).

It's arguable, I'd say. Certainly makes the game unwinnable if you don't know you're not supposed to keep it up. Especially since it take a while to figure out what happened as the delayed consequence doesn't make it immediately evident that the item was the cause.

Fortunately it's at the very beginning of the game so you don't lose too much time, but...

blueskirt

02/21/2011, 05:55 pm

LucasArts gave up on dead ends with Loom in 1990, made it an official policy with Secret Of Monkey Island, in the same year.

The earliest games without dead ends for Sierra were in their adventure line for kids (Mixed Up Fairy Tales, EcoQuest, Pepper's Adventure In Time...)
Although one accidental dead end managed to slip in Leisure Suit Larry V, starting with that game Al Lowe made an effort not to put any dead ends in his games, I know there are none in his last two Leisure Suit Larry games, I'm not sure for Torin's Passage.

There were still dead ends:
In all Police Quest games,
In King's Quest VI, I don't know if there were any in King's Quest VII,
In all Space Quest games until Space Quest VI (1995), although they were polite in Space Quest V, when you got in an unwinnable state the game would kill you and tells you why you screwed up, making finding where you screwed up less painful.
Lighthouse (1996) had one, which occurred 15 minutes into the game, it only became obvious you screwed up 20 hours of Myst like puzzles later.

I'm sure someone who played more Sierra's games than I did will be able to tell us more, but in the last batch of games that Sierra made, I got a strong impression that dead ends were on the way out from the ones I played.

Datadog

02/21/2011, 06:16 pm

KQ7 and Torin's Passage were dead-end free. I think all three Gabriel Knight games were also devoid of dead ends - but you'd still have to save in case of death.

StingingVelvet

02/21/2011, 06:31 pm

Dead ends are really a no go for me... the deaths are fine, but dead ends are soooooo 1992 and I don't want them making a return.

joek86

02/21/2011, 07:14 pm

I think dead ends should not be tolerated in modern gaming. Call it blasphemy or whatever, the dead ends weren't design choice, they were there because of limitations. These, oddly enough, could've been fixed quite simply by not allowing the player to leave an area without a the items necessary to win the game.

I think one thing that should be fixed were some of the insane "puzzles" in KQ. There's a difference between a logic puzzle and puzzles that are "lucky guess" scenarios. You need an example, how about killing a yeti with a pie, need i say more?

Pak-Man

02/21/2011, 11:22 pm

I think dead ends should not be tolerated in modern gaming. Call it blasphemy or whatever, the dead ends weren't design choice, they were there because of limitations.

But not ALWAYS. It's been a while, and I don't remember all the specifics, but I know that you could blow the first King's Quest by killing the goat, and I know there were lots of key items you could eat or use too early and prevent completion. It wasn't always not finding the items. Sometimes it was about wasting them.

Edit to add: Am I the only person who naturally went for the pie when trying to kill the Yeti the first time? And what does that say about me?

tomimt

02/22/2011, 12:04 am

Interesting discussion.

Personally, I'm all for it for TTG to try their hands on King's Quest and I don't even mind if it's a reboot. For me, personally, the first actually good KQ game is KQ3, as it has a proper plot and the puzzles are good, so I don't mind if they try to tell a more coherent story of how Graham becomes the king of Daventry, as the first game is mainly loosely together stitched puzzles.

As for dead ends and sudden deaths. I am for death scenes for sure, as they have always been a part of a bit dark humour of Sierra games. But dead ends are more of an annoyance really.

One possibility would be to use alternative solutions on those cases. When done correctly, the game would be smooth sailing, but if some thing were to be missed, the latter puzzles would be more difficult.

There's some alternative solutions on some of the puzzles in KQ1, like you could bribe the rat with gold instead of cheese, but giving it the gold cost you points as well.

der_ketzer

02/22/2011, 05:02 am

But not ALWAYS. It's been a while, and I don't remember all the specifics, but I know that you could blow the first King's Quest by killing the goat

I am not sure about the original but in the VGA remake you can bribe the troll with one of the treasures too. You don't need the goat.

Simo Sakari Aaltonen

02/22/2011, 05:22 am

Yes, the original AGI version lets you bribe both the troll and the rat with a treasure.

Chyron8472

02/22/2011, 08:20 am

NO. Not with this company. Not with this direction. Telltale IS NOT SIERRA.

Not even on their BEST DAY.

They do not have the design philosophy of Sierra. They do not have the humor of Sierra. They do not have the art direction of Sierra. They have never made a Sierra-style game and they have proven time and time again that a game worthy of a license that is SO INGRAINED IN THE HISTORY OF THE ADVENTURE GENRE.

And no, CONTRARY TO WHAT SOME PEOPLE MAY BELIEVE, LucasArts and, by extension Telltale, is not a BETTER ALTERNATIVE to Sierra that "fixed" and "evolved" the genre by removing all the bad aspects of it left in by Sierra. Sierra was a powerfully distinct entity, with its own philosophy and approach that couldn't be more different from the LucasArts or modern Telltale way of doing things.

I agree, and that quote from Dave Grossman doesn't help me feel better at all either.

SHODANFreeman

02/22/2011, 08:35 am

I agree, and that quote from Dave Grossman doesn't help me feel better at all either.

Dave Grossman never said they made bad games, he just said he basically just didn't agree that infinite amounts of random game-ending deaths and dead ends were very good design choices.

corruptbiggins

02/22/2011, 08:55 am

Plus that is just one person's view. You can't base the entire company on what one person thinks.

wefeelgroove

02/22/2011, 03:11 pm

KQ7 and Torin's Passage were dead-end free. I think all three Gabriel Knight games were also devoid of dead ends - but you'd still have to save in case of death.

And coincidentally the Gabriel Knight trilogy are the best games Sierra ever made. :cool:

I'm cool with deaths in adventure games and I think Gabriel Knight is an example of deaths done right (to continute my gushing over GK). In each game, there is no way to die or otherwise screw yourself over until the later chapters, which helped to build suspense and drive home the point that things were getting serious.

As opposed to the early King's Quest games that had really stupid deaths like clicking on the wrong pixel on a stairwell and having Rosella fall three feet and break her neck. Not to say that KQ was nothing but unreasonable deaths, because it wasn't- it's perfectly reasonable for Graham to keel over in the desert after wandering around aimlessly for several dozen screens. And that's what I would prefer to see: if you do something blazingly stupid, then yeah, death is a perfectly viable punishment.

Dead ends meanwhile just feel like poor design or oversights and are pretty much the one thing that kept KQ5 from being my favorite in the series (PIIIIIIIE). It was great that the KQ games were fairly non-linear, but it seemed kind of counterproductive to punish the player for taking advantage of it.

der_ketzer

02/22/2011, 08:40 pm

(PIIIIIIIE).

Why always the pie as an example? You ate it and got no points for that so you know that you must have done something incredibly stupid. Especially since money is rare in the game and you just spent your only silver coin on it.

Marty

02/22/2011, 10:25 pm

dead ends just resulted in frustration and 100 save games :P

Datadog

02/22/2011, 10:31 pm

Why always the pie as an example?

All right then. "Use cheese on machine." :D

der_ketzer

02/23/2011, 12:58 am

All right then. "Use cheese on machine." :D

Getting the cheese was cruel especially since you

° needed to get caught
° there was no hint what so ever you would need cheese
° even then it can easily be missed the only time you could get it and continue the game.

KuroShiro

02/23/2011, 01:07 am

Getting the cheese was cruel especially since you

° needed to get caught
° there was no hint what so ever you would need cheese
° even then it can easily be missed the only time you could get it and continue the game.

The whole ending sequence of KQ5 is the main reason that 6 is my favorite in the series and not vice-versa. It is a massive clusterf*ck of random deaths, potential dead-ends, and clue-less puzzles. The rest of the game is pretty fantastic.

Eduardo

02/23/2011, 02:09 am

Why always the pie as an example? You ate it and got no points for that so you know that you must have done something incredibly stupid. Especially since money is rare in the game and you just spent your only silver coin on it.

I think it is exactly because of what you said.

Seems there is no story reason, no ingame reason, the only indicator is something external (no getting points, so "the game told me I did wrong").

nikkko

02/23/2011, 02:17 am

Dead ends meanwhile just feel like poor design or oversights

Not necessarily - I liked how "dead ends" were tied into the design of Conquests of the Longbow. The game was structured as a series of missions, and had multiple endings based on your overall performance throughout the game.
I think it was almost always possible to reach one of the endings - but of course, if you screwed up too many missions you would be stuck with the bad ending.
Since it was quite obvious when you had screwed up, you could always go back and try to replay the same mission better.

tomimt

02/23/2011, 07:20 am

wefeelgroove

02/23/2011, 07:54 am

Why always the pie as an example? You ate it and got no points for that so you know that you must have done something incredibly stupid. Especially since money is rare in the game and you just spent your only silver coin on it.

You get it early in the game and you can lose it in several ways before you reach the point where you need it, which is near the end of the game. Personally, I fed it to the eagle. It would be one thing if the game provided another means of defeating the yeti, but to me it felt like I was being punished for not reading the game developer's mind, which is a big no-no in my book.

Maybe a better example would be having to know there's a horse bridle hidden on the deserted island in KQIV that you only have one chance to visit. It's been a while since I played it but I'm pretty sure the game offers absolutely no clue as to the bridle's existance at all.

chucklas

02/23/2011, 08:16 am

chucklas

02/23/2011, 09:08 am

I am not sure about the original but in the VGA remake you can bribe the troll with one of the treasures too. You don't need the goat.

But you could have one of the three main treasures stollen by the dwarf, drop into the pit without the mushroom...eat the mushroom without exiting the small door...etc. There were dead ends.

MusicallyInspired

02/23/2011, 09:27 am

Not necessarily - I liked how "dead ends" were tied into the design of Conquests of the Longbow. The game was structured as a series of missions, and had multiple endings based on your overall performance throughout the game.
I think it was almost always possible to reach one of the endings - but of course, if you screwed up too many missions you would be stuck with the bad ending.
Since it was quite obvious when you had screwed up, you could always go back and try to replay the same mission better.

That was more of a specific game design mechanic of the Conquests series, though. Conquests of Camelot was the same way. I wouldn't want to see this specific type of mechanic present in a King's Quest game, for instance, because it's a typical conquest mechanic, despite how great it is.

You get it early in the game and you can lose it in several ways before you reach the point where you need it, which is near the end of the game. Personally, I fed it to the eagle. It would be one thing if the game provided another means of defeating the yeti, but to me it felt like I was being punished for not reading the game developer's mind, which is a big no-no in my book.

You didn't feed the eagle the meat? You can eat half the meat yourself and then give the other half to the eagle, even though you're still hungry.

Maybe a better example would be having to know there's a horse bridle hidden on the deserted island in KQIV that you only have one chance to visit. It's been a while since I played it but I'm pretty sure the game offers absolutely no clue as to the bridle's existance at all.

Totally. But that was the nature of adventure games back then. You had to discover everything. Nothing was simply given to you or mentioned. The idea was that if you didn't seem to have what you needed than there was something else that you haven't found yet. Even if it's not documented or explained. I agree this type of game mechanic doesn't work nowadays, but it was commonplace back then. It was a whole world to explore and try to figure out. Is it difficult? Sure. But that's why it was fun. The bigger the challenge and the harder the obstacle to overcome the greater the feeling of accomplishment when you finally beat it. That's why Sierra games were so popular despite being so "cruel."

chucklas

02/23/2011, 09:40 am

Maybe a better example would be having to know there's a horse bridle hidden on the deserted island in KQIV that you only have one chance to visit. It's been a while since I played it but I'm pretty sure the game offers absolutely no clue as to the bridle's existance at all.

You didn't just have one chance to find it. Anyone who played these games back then knew to save and all of the time (and not over old saves). When playing this, you would have a save game in the whale because you would have known you were never making it back in there once you were out. When you realized you were missing something you could go explore there quite easily. You can't go back in the traditional sense, but you would have known to have saved all over the place.

Akril15

02/23/2011, 10:25 am

I know I'm pretty late to this thread, but I figured I might as well toss in my 2 cents.

My first reaction to this news was a knee-jerk "No way, Telltale's not the kind of company that should be rebooting a series like KQ! I mean, I wouldn't trust a team of ex-Sierra people to do a reboot of Maniac Mansion!" However, after I sat down and thought about this, I began to feel a bit less negative about it.

While I didn't exactly grow up with Sierra's games, I started following the activities of both it and its online fanbase back when I discovered the Internet more than a decade ago, shortly after "Chainsaw Monday". It's interesting how much things have changed since then. When AGD Interactive (then known as Tierra Entertainment) began creating a remake of KQ1 around 2000, as I recall, there was a bit of an uproar. Fans were complaining that what they were doing was illegal and they were ripping Sierra off. I remember a little cartoon created around that time with this little bear wearing a shirt that said "Sierra Fan" on it, standing next to a huge elephant wearing a blanket that says "Sierra" on it. There's tiny mouse with the words "Tierra Entertainment" on it eating the elephant's droppings, and the bear is furiously pointing at the mouse, screaming "KILL!", while the elephant looks completely oblivious to everything and is asking the bear to be quiet.

However, as time went by, people became more and more accepting of fan remakes, and now nearly every Sierra fangame-in-progress is a remake. Back when AGDI's KQ1 remake came out, most of us were desperate for a King's Quest IX or a Space Quest 7 or a Larry 8. A few fan teams tried to make these sequels realities, but for the most part, these ended in failure. In the years that followed, there were times when the news of a possible franchise revival hit the Net, and the first couple of times this happened, we got all excited, hoping that this was what we'd been waiting for. However, as time dragged on and titles such as Leisure Suit Larry: Magnum Cum Laude and the KQ and SQ games that Escape Factory was planning before they were both canceled, a lot of us became increasingly wary of official games and began to look to fangames more and more.

It's actually a little ironic -- ten years ago, I suspect the majority of us would have been bouncing off the walls with excitement if a company like Telltale Games had announced a KQ reboot. We were pretty desperate back then and would have taken a sequel in any form, as long as it was a pure adventure game. Now that an official KQ game has been announced, however, many people are treating it almost as negatively as fangames were treated back in 2000.

Though I may have warmed to the idea of a KQ reboot, I'm still pretty apprehensive. Though I have enjoyed the few games from Telltale that I've played so far, I'm still not completely sold on the idea of them doing a KQ reboot. I really don't like the episodic format, but I'm willing to set my feelings toward it aside. If this reboot at least attempts to be as challenging as the original games, I'd probably be satisfied. A easy/medium/hard difficulty setting would be a fair compromise. Also, Telltale's games are almost the complete opposite of what the classic KQ games are like (big story, few puzzles vs. minimal story, many puzzles), so I'm not sure what sort of approach they're going to take.

Still, when it comes to adventure games, beggars can't be choosers. And look at it this way: Not only do we have the promise of a new KQ game after more than ten years since the last official release, but it's being developed by a relatively well-off company that actually specializes in adventure games. How many companies today can make that kind of claim?

wefeelgroove

02/23/2011, 10:56 am

You didn't feed the eagle the meat? You can eat half the meat yourself and then give the other half to the eagle, even though you're still hungry.

I actually don't remember if I even had the meat at that point. I mainly remember that I used the pie only because it came back to bite me in the butt several hours later when I had to reload an old save replay a large chunk of the game. (yeah, yeah, I mad)

Totally. But that was the nature of adventure games back then. You had to discover everything. Nothing was simply given to you or mentioned. The idea was that if you didn't seem to have what you needed than there was something else that you haven't found yet. Even if it's not documented or explained. I agree this type of game mechanic doesn't work nowadays, but it was commonplace back then. It was a whole world to explore and try to figure out. Is it difficult? Sure. But that's why it was fun. The bigger the challenge and the harder the obstacle to overcome the greater the feeling of accomplishment when you finally beat it. That's why Sierra games were so popular despite being so "cruel."

The only reason I knew about the bridle was because my parents warned me about it beforehand, and even as a kid I thought it seemed like a very strange place to put such an important item. But honestly, I would be okay with it being hidden and easy to miss if it weren't for the fact that you get one chance to visit that island and then you're screwed unless you feel like reloading and redoing everything. That's the point where it goes from being challenging to being frustrating, IMO. That's my beef with the dead ends in KQ- more than anything, it feels like the developers tried to make them non-linear but not account for the fact that this would mean some players would go wildly off into other directions. I feel like it defeats the purpose of exploration if you're just going to punish the player for not going in an intended order. Does that make any sense?

All in all I think this is an 'agree to disagree' thing here. Challenge is fun, but when I feel like a game is punishing me for not doing what the developer intended me to do, I don't find that challenging or fun.

You didn't just have one chance to find it. Anyone who played these games back then knew to save and all of the time (and not over old saves). When playing this, you would have a save game in the whale because you would have known you were never making it back in there once you were out. When you realized you were missing something you could go explore there quite easily. You can't go back in the traditional sense, but you would have known to have saved all over the place.

But it's incredibly frustrating to miss something like that, continue playing, and find out much later that you can't progress without it. Yeah, you can reload an older save, but then you have to work your way back to where you got stuck instead of solving new puzzles. Having that location available would alleviate all of that.

MusicallyInspired

02/23/2011, 11:04 am

Still, when it comes to adventure games, beggars can't be choosers. And look at it this way: Not only do we have the promise of a new KQ game after more than ten years since the last official release, but it's being developed by a relatively well-off company that actually specializes in adventure games. How many companies today can make that kind of claim?

I actually don't consider Telltale to be a developer of adventure games anymore. Rather a developer of "cinematic story games" instead.

But honestly, I would be okay with it being hidden and easy to miss if it weren't for the fact that you get one chance to visit that island and then you're screwed unless you feel like reloading and redoing everything. That's the point where it goes from being challenging to being frustrating, IMO.

Yeah, I don't see why they couldn't have had you be able to be sucked by the whale more than one time and be able to go to the island again that way.

All in all I think this is an 'agree to disagree' thing here. Challenge is fun, but when I feel like a game is punishing me for not doing what the developer intended me to do, I don't find that challenging or fun.

I certainly don't disagree with that.

der_ketzer

02/23/2011, 11:30 am

I actually don't remember if I even had the meat at that point.
If you still had the pie and madfe it to the eagle you must have had the meat (or you would have starved already). You might have eaten it all though (eat meat twice instead of once).

but when I feel like a game is punishing me for not doing what the developer intended me to do, I don't find that challenging or fun.
Every single game punishes you if you don't do what the creators intended you to do. For example Marty giving you the same boring hint-line about Trixie every time you enter a certain place. Really that was cruel and unusual punishment.

chucklas

02/23/2011, 11:54 am

But it's incredibly frustrating to miss something like that, continue playing, and find out much later that you can't progress without it. Yeah, you can reload an older save, but then you have to work your way back to where you got stuck instead of solving new puzzles. Having that location available would alleviate all of that.

You have to so far back? Seriously? I can play through the whole game with all of the points in about 30-40 minutes.

The problem with this in current games is that with the amount of video/dialog it takes way longer to play through things that you have already done. I would go insane playing through something that I already did in any of the current telltale games. The time you play is about 1/4 of the time you are "playing."

doggans

02/23/2011, 12:44 pm

chucklas

02/23/2011, 02:45 pm

Most of the "dead ends" you mentioned either only affect the long ending of the game (ie, you can still complete the short ending even if you miss those things), or happen very soon before the point that it affects, so you should be able to restore a game and not have to replay too far.

Not befriending Jollo, getting the wrong lamp, not getting the gold coins, and not giving the knife to Cassima are all way before you find out. Thats 4 MAJOR dead ends. As for you can still play the short version, not really true once you get past the deciding point. You could say choosing the wrong path is a dead end if you messed up previously.

My point is that dead ends can exist in a great game. I don't see why people would defend dead ends in one game and not another. Perhaps there are more in KQV, but none of them are so awful that you have to replay the whole game, and even if you did, it really doesn't take long to play through it again when you know what to do.

ATMachine

02/23/2011, 03:32 pm

Not befriending Jollo, getting the wrong lamp, not getting the gold coins, and not giving the knife to Cassima are all way before you find out. Thats 4 MAJOR dead ends. As for you can still play the short version, not really true once you get past the deciding point. You could say choosing the wrong path is a dead end if you messed up previously.

My point is that dead ends can exist in a great game. I don't see why people would defend dead ends in one game and not another. Perhaps there are more in KQV, but none of them are so awful that you have to replay the whole game, and even if you did, it really doesn't take long to play through it again when you know what to do.
I think KQ6 is a great game in spite of its dead ends. Just because it had them doesn't make them inherently okay. King's Quest V simply had more of them, as well as generally less intuitive puzzles. (And sometimes, as with the lamp/genie/witch puzzle, the only way to figure out the solution was to die... which is a big no-no in my book.)

Daventry

02/23/2011, 04:19 pm

I am a little late jumping in on this, but I just have to. Everyone complains about the dead ends in KQV but think that KQVI is the best game in the series. KQVI had plenty of dead ends. Some of which you had to go back far to fix some where you did not. No one remembers the dead ends in KQVI because the game was brilliant. If you make a great game, even with dead ends, at the end of the day, no one cares.

In case you don't remember them, here are a few...

If you do not befriend Jollo early in the game then he doesn't help you switch the lamp. Dead end (for sure in the short path, I can't recall in the long one). This one you have to go way back to fix (and you don't find out until the end).

If you trade for the wrong lamp. Dead end.

You don't get the gold coins in the catacombs...no way to cross the river styx. Dead end.

You don't take the hole in the wall or the brick to the catacombs...dead end.

You don't get the shield from the catacombs...dead end.

You don't play the bones to get the key in the realm of the dead...dead end.

You don't pick up the gauntlet to challenge death in the realm of the dead...dead end.

You don't bring the tinderbox to the catacombs. Dead end.

You don't send the dagger to cassima...dead end.

I think you get the point. They exist, even in the best of games (according to the fans). Tell Tale just needs to make a good game and it doesn't matter if it has them.

Hi Chucklas, for accuracy's sake I just wanted to mention that many of the examples you listed are not true dead-ends:

If you do not befriend Jollo early in the game then he doesn't help you switch the lamp. Dead end (for sure in the short path, I can't recall in the long one). This one you have to go way back to fix (and you don't find out until the end).
You do NOT have to befriend Jollo in either the short path OR the long path. As you correctly stated, Jollo helps you acquire Shamir's lamp. But you do not need the lamp in order to beat the game, as you can use the mint leaves (from the cave on the Sacred Mountain) to dispatch of the genie. Of course you have to do either one of the two (befriend Jollo or get the mint leaves), but the mint leaves are obtainable at any point in the game prior to entering the castle.

If you trade for the wrong lamp. Dead end.
See above: the lamp isn't needed to beat the game.

You don't get the gold coins in the catacombs...no way to cross the river styx. Dead end.
This is 100% true, but I just wanted to say that you CAN re-enter the catacombs after rescuing Lady Celeste in case you missed anything the first time through (the coins or the shield). Plus the catacombs are completely safe after the minotaur is defeated, which makes re-exploration much less painful.

You don't take the hole in the wall or the brick to the catacombs...dead end.
This is also true, but if Alexander is not prepared for the catacombs he says so when first talking to Lord Azure and Lady Ariel (and then the player's given the opportunity to get whatever else he may need). Theoretically you can re-do the scene with additonal inventory items until Alex says he's ready to go, upon which you're taken directly to the catacombs.

You don't get the shield from the catacombs...dead end.
See above: you are allowed to re-enter and re-explore the catacombs at your leisure after dispatching the minotaur. Unlike the coins on the Isle of the Dead, this is not a dead-end since you can get the shield at any time for the puzzle on the Isle of the Beast (i.e. you're never trapped on the Isle of the Beast like you are in the Realm of the Dead).

You don't play the bones to get the key in the realm of the dead...dead end.
This is true, although I think playing the bones and picking up the key is an obvious thing to do. :)

You don't pick up the gauntlet to challenge death in the realm of the dead...dead end.
This is also true, but the gauntlet scene is just a few screens before, so I don't think it's that big of a setback.

You don't bring the tinderbox to the catacombs. Dead end.
Also true, but see above regarding Alex's intuition as to whether he's prepared.

You don't send the dagger to cassima...dead end.
Also true, but she mentions wanting a weapon to defend herself so many times hehe.

In my opinion King's Quest VI is an awesome, LOGICAL masterpiece of a game, real dead-ends and all. I just wanted to clear up some misinformation, especially regarding Jollo, the genie, and the catacombs.

chucklas

02/23/2011, 04:31 pm

Hi Chucklas, for accuracy's sake I just wanted to mention that many of the examples you listed are not true dead-ends:

If you do not befriend Jollo early in the game then he doesn't help you switch the lamp. Dead end (for sure in the short path, I can't recall in the long one). This one you have to go way back to fix (and you don't find out until the end).
You do NOT have to befriend Jollo in either the short path OR the long path. As you correctly stated, Jollo helps you acquire Shamir's lamp. But you do not need the lamp in order to beat the game, as you can use the mint leaves (from the cave on the Sacred Mountain) to dispatch of the genie. Of course you have to do either one of the two (befriend Jollo or get the mint leaves), but the mint leaves are obtainable at any point in the game prior to entering the castle.

If you trade for the wrong lamp. Dead end.
See above: the lamp isn't needed to beat the game.

You don't get the gold coins in the catacombs...no way to cross the river styx. Dead end.
This is 100% true, but I just wanted to say that you CAN re-enter the catacombs after rescuing Lady Celeste in case you missed anything the first time through (the coins or the shield). Plus the catacombs are completely safe after the minotaur is defeated, which makes the re-exploration much less painful.

You don't take the hole in the wall or the brick to the catacombs...dead end.
This is also true, but if Alexander is not prepared for the catacombs he says so when first talking to Lord Azure and Lady Ariel (and then the player's given the opportunity to get whatever else he may need). Theoretically you can re-do the scene with additonal inventory items until Alex says he's ready to go, upon which you're taken directly to the catacombs.

You don't get the shield from the catacombs...dead end.
See above: you are allowed to re-enter and re-explore the catacombs at your leisure after dispatching the minotaur. Unlike the coins on the Isle of the Dead, this is not a dead-end since you can get the shield at any time to use on the stone archer on the Isle of the Beast.

You don't play the bones to get the key in the realm of the dead...dead end.
This is true, although I think playing the bones and picking up the key is an obvious thing to do. :)

You don't pick up the gauntlet to challenge death in the realm of the dead...dead end.
This is also true, but the gauntlet scene is just a few screens before, so I don't think it's that big of a setback.

You don't bring the tinderbox to the catacombs. Dead end.
Also true, but see above regarding Alex's intuition as to whether he's prepared.

You don't send the dagger to cassima...dead end.
Also true, but she mentions wanting a weapon to defend herself so many times hehe.

Fair enough. I have not played the game in years, I was going off memory. The point is, they exist. The game is still good. As for giving hints as to what to do, thats all fine, but that doesn't mean you can
t get caught in that situation. When you suggest to save and do it again and again until he says that he is ready, someone playing the game for the first time has no way of knowing that he will say anything different if he had all of the items. Also isn't this the same problem as a dead end...if you don't have what you need you have to restore and try again. ;)

Daventry

02/23/2011, 04:45 pm

Fair enough. I have not played the game in years, I was going off memory. The point is, they exist. The game is still good. As for giving hints as to what to do, thats all fine, but that doesn't mean you can
t get caught in that situation. When you suggest to save and do it again and again until he says that he is ready, someone playing the game for the first time has no way of knowing that he will say anything different if he had all of the items. Also isn't this the same problem as a dead end...if you don't have what you need you have to restore and try again. ;)

I agree with you regarding the catacombs. I apologize if my post came off as a bit harsh. It's just that I think King's Quest VI is quite possibly the most perfect adventure game ever made, so I get a little defensive regarding the dead-ends haha. Justadventure.com's review of KQVI criticized the "dead-end" with Jollo and the lamp, and I actually wrote into the editor years ago to point out the error. The editor wrote back saying that the review would be fixed, but sadly I don't think it was ever done.

I also get really heated about King's Quest V, as it's my favorite game of all time. People always seem to bring up all the dead-ends (and I must admit there are quite a few), but to tell you the truth never did I once get stuck (you don't get any points for eating the pie for crying out loud -- isn't that a dead give-away?). And I played it when I was seven years old without any hints of any kind.

Datadog

02/23/2011, 06:54 pm

I'd agree that the dead-ends in KQ6 were actually pretty fair. Certain things that you missed weren't always required to beat the game, but anything that was required could be found through a little basic exploring. It's easy to avoid a dead-end in that game as long as you have a little common sense and save a new game before entering a dangerous area.

"Gold Rush" was another adventure that was also fair in the sense that when you leave Brooklyn, the game will let you know if you forgot something important. It won't tell you what, of course, and it certainly won't tell you that something random is hidden in some random floorboards. And of course, you're on a timer so you don't have a lot of time to explore. But the game still watches out for you.

Megaboz

02/23/2011, 07:34 pm

Just to address the ranty bits in this thread - I know this IP is near and dear to a lot of people (me included), but let Telltale actually put the game out before you go nuclear on it. This is the same thread 3 times now - I read it when they announced Back to the Future, and when they announced Tales. Its like

"I LOVE [the IP]!!! ITS ALL I LIVE FOR!!! TELLTALE UR GOING TO SCREW THIS UP I'LL CUT U!!!!!"

That doesn't help anyone. Constructive suggestions are good, especially with Telltale, because they really do listen (as they've demonstrated time and time again), but being CAPTAIN RAGE about things doesn't.

And jumping to the other topic - for the people who are FOR dead-ends. Not Sierra, but all I can think of is the damn bonding plant in Return to Zork. It would die in the beginning of the game, and you'd be all life-is-good and happy and singing for joy as you progressed through the game, until you realized you needed to save it 3 WEEKS AGO. THAT is an excuse to go captain rage. I personally don't want that in a game.

MusicallyInspired

02/23/2011, 08:09 pm

Lol I remember the bonding plant. I remember my dad freaking out over that puzzle and trying to rush before the plant died. Never beat the game myself. Still have it, though. I have so many old adventure games I need to actually play.

Megaboz

02/23/2011, 09:15 pm

LOL yeah - I have a stack of them myself. And then I discovered the Adventure Shop online store and made the problem even worse. Stupid job/real life getting in the way of gaming time. ;)

Chyron8472

02/23/2011, 09:18 pm

My problems with KQV were: animal voice actors (eg. ants, bees, Cedric); the catacombs under Mordack's castle where every room looks the same; the ease of missing the cat-chases-rat puzzle.

chucklas

02/24/2011, 03:13 am

the catacombs under Mordack's castle where every room looks the same;

This one was just a basic maze. If you only turn say right everytime, you will easily get out. It works everytime, even in almost any maze. Always turn the same direction and you will have no trouble.

ATMachine

02/27/2011, 12:30 pm

I have to say, I think Telltale is going to have a VERY hard time pleasing bothnew fans and old with this game.

I've been following the AGDI KQ3 Redux release. A few people have occasionally asked for a walkthrough to be posted. The team's response has been, basically, "if you're having trouble solving the puzzles, you're not the intended audience for this game."

Or, to quote MusicallyInspired, responding to one rather... vocal... petitioner:
IF THE PUZZLE IS TOO HARD FOR YOU THAN DON'T PLAY THE FREAKING GAME.

GOD

How DARE you say anybody has been rude to you when you have been nothing but a whiny little kid screaming to have his way in everything? Honestly I'd rather just sit here and enjoy you not being able to beat it just to spite you. You'll get no help from me.

You don't NEED help to enjoy the game. If you can get it through your head that these games are not about cheating but about challenging your mind maybe you might actually get somewhere! If you want an easy game go buy a Telltale game.

I don't know how Telltale will deal with this "I love a challenge, so I don't want a KQ game to cater to less experienced adventure gamers" mentality. But it means that you guys are going to have one hell of a job cut out for you.

MusicallyInspired

02/27/2011, 01:28 pm

I should say that we didn't use that response to everybody, we merely encouraged people to try and figure it out themselves, settle for hints at the moment, or wait for the walkthrough to come out later on. Usually that suffices for everybody.

That particular person was being incredibly rude and was demanding answers to nearly every single puzzle because he couldn't figure them out after sitting on them for about a maximum of 2 minutes. He was eventually banned from the forums for badmouthing the designers for making such a "stupid hard game." The reason he was so upset was that he used a walkthrough for the original game and he thought he already knew all the puzzles. When he discovered all the changes we'd made he was furious that he couldn't figure them out from his past cheating experiences.

He's since been unbanned and become a lot more civil, though.

doom saber

02/27/2011, 01:48 pm

I have to say, I think Telltale is going to have a VERY hard time pleasing bothnew fans and old with this game.

I've been following the AGDI KQ3 Redux release. A few people have occasionally asked for a walkthrough to be posted. The team's response has been, basically, "if you're having trouble solving the puzzles, you're not the intended audience for this game."

Or, to quote MusicallyInspired, responding to one rather... vocal... petitioner:

I don't know how Telltale will deal with this "I love a challenge, so I don't want a KQ game to cater to less experienced adventure gamers" mentality. But it means that you guys are going to have one hell of a job cut out for you.

That is quite a bold statement. While it is true that the older KQ games were a lot harder than the later ones, part of the reason for that is the parser system in the game, as well as being made in the early '80s, an time where games were simple, yet hard as hell.

I think TT has to find a solid ground here to try and cater to both old and new gamers. From a business standpoint, it is unrealistic to make a game as hard as the older King's Quest w/o any hint system or difficulty meter to please the older gamers.

Irishmile

02/27/2011, 01:54 pm

Hey ATMachine that ugly brown site withe awesome content is yours? I love that site... Ilove that sort of content well done.
edit
I'm on a cellphone.. Excuse the typos.

Lambonius

02/27/2011, 02:30 pm

I have to say, I think Telltale is going to have a VERY hard time pleasing bothnew fans and old with this game.

I've been following the AGDI KQ3 Redux release. A few people have occasionally asked for a walkthrough to be posted. The team's response has been, basically, "if you're having trouble solving the puzzles, you're not the intended audience for this game."

Or, to quote MusicallyInspired, responding to one rather... vocal... petitioner:

I don't know how Telltale will deal with this "I love a challenge, so I don't want a KQ game to cater to less experienced adventure gamers" mentality. But it means that you guys are going to have one hell of a job cut out for you.

Um...context???

You've blatantly taken that quote from MusicallyInspired out of context to try and paint this picture of AGDI as pretentious assholes out to screw over the more "casual" fans.

As MI just said above, that particular poster was blatantly trolling the AGDI team on their website. He got banned, and then brought his shitty attitude over to the Infamous Adventures forums where he really started to piss people off. MI's quote came after a barrage of posts from the guy rudely demanding solutions and bashing AGDI for making such hard, unsolvable puzzle changes to their Redux version of the game.

ATMachine

02/27/2011, 02:50 pm

Um...context???

You've blatantly taken that quote from MusicallyInspired out of context to try and paint this picture of AGDI as pretentious assholes out to screw over the more "casual" fans.

As MI just said above, that particular poster was blatantly trolling the AGDI team on their website. He got banned, and then brought his shitty attitude over to the Infamous Adventures forums where he really started to piss people off. MI's quote came after a barrage of posts from the guy rudely demanding solutions and bashing AGDI for making such hard, unsolvable puzzle changes to their Redux version of the game.
Yes, I understand that MI's outburst came at the end of a long and heated debate with an annoying, demanding forumgoer. But I think the hostility evident in his post toward "casual" gamers like that person, people who can play "easy" Telltale games but not Sierra games that "challenge the mind," perfectly encapsulates the mindset of the diehard Sierra fans. Sometimes in anger we speak words that are truer than what we say with sober tongue.

ATMachine

02/27/2011, 03:00 pm

Also, it's pretty clear that AGDI is trying to get what Telltale has now: a license from Activision to create all-new KQ content, for which they could charge customers money.

I do wonder how many KQ fans, given the choice, wouldn't have opted to grant the KQ rights to AGDI, who clearly DO make games for the old-school Sierra fan, instead of Telltale.

I hear you, but there are two hurdles:

1) Our licensing agreements with Activision only allowed us to remake the Sierra games we have created. We can't legally create any more unless a new license is issued to us.

2) We can't afford to make free games any longer.

So here's the deal: we'll make King's Quest IV if you can convince Activision to do something about the above 2 criteria. We got a deal?

It's a shame neither Vivendi nor Activision saw the potential in making our Sierra remakes available commercially years ago. We have the download stats to prove that if even only 10% of people who downloaded these games paid $10 for them, they'd still be generating millions in sales. It just doesn't make sense for a company to pass on that much potential when they'd have to do no work. It's no exaggeration to say that free games have severely set us back and thinking about the amount of time and money spent on them is depressing if nothing beneficial comes out of it for us, while TellTale capitalizes on the series revival we started and have actively kept alive for the past decade. But if we can make something commercial happen with Activision, it'll all be worth it.

ATMachine

02/27/2011, 04:32 pm

I want to apologize for the overly hostile tone of my earlier posts. It was bad form to quote MI out of context. I also shouldn't have assumed that his view expressed in one frustrated post represented the entirety of the AGDI team.

Cheers, guys! :)

thom-22

02/27/2011, 05:55 pm

I don't know how Telltale will deal with this "I love a challenge, so I don't want a KQ game to cater to less experienced adventure gamers" mentality. But it means that you guys are going to have one hell of a job cut out for you.
They could go a long way (not necessarily all the way) toward the "please both" ideal, with this or any other game, if they would just use their existing hint system in the way a hint system was intended to be used.

I do wonder how many KQ fans, given the choice, wouldn't have opted to grant the KQ rights to AGDI, who clearly DO make games for the old-school Sierra fan, instead of Telltale.
Took me less than a nano-second to conclude my choice would be AGDI over Telltale. And I'm not even as much of an old-school KQ fan as the rest of you here are.

TTG's experience in bringing in casual gamers (ie. more sales) and possibly their experience in doing console and iOS versions (ie. more sales) is probably exactly what appealed to Activision, moreso than AGDI's track record on pleasing the fans and maintaining the integrity of the IP. :(

doom saber

02/27/2011, 06:55 pm

Also, it's pretty clear that AGDI is trying to get what Telltale has now: a license from Activision to create all-new KQ content, for which they could charge customers money.

I do wonder how many KQ fans, given the choice, wouldn't have opted to grant the KQ rights to AGDI, who clearly DO make games for the old-school Sierra fan, instead of Telltale.

I agree that AGDI seems stunned that TT gotten the license over them. I think Activision went with TT over them because TT has more games out. Honestly, I am not certain if AGDI can handle a KQ game from scratch. Making a fan remake of some sort is one thing, but hiring writers, producers, and graphic artist to make a KQ game with the same quality of a professional game would be difficult. I understand a lot of ppl like the AGDI games. I like their games too. Like all fan-made stuff, the quality is good, but has to be better for a retail title.

I would choose TT over AGDI and no, I am not a TT fanboy. The reason being is that I have seen a lot of fan projects -whether it is action figures or fanfiction - get praised and ending up doing things commerically. The end product tends to be in the same quality as the fanwork and not a commercial product.

Chyron8472

02/27/2011, 10:59 pm

I think that AGDI would make really good new KQ games, but I believe that TTG may have a superior marketing department. AGDI's KQ games might be better, but I think Activision's movation for picking TTG was that if more people hear about TTG's KQ games, more people may buy them.

I'm sorry Telltale. I love ToMI and Sam & Max very much, but they're not Sierra games- and I'm not sure that you won't succumb to appeasing the nooby masses at the expense of sacrificing respect for source material.

SHODANFreeman

02/28/2011, 02:11 am

I am pretty sure Activision isn't interested in making VGA sequels to their games.

Sslaxx

02/28/2011, 03:25 am

I am pretty sure Activision isn't interested in making VGA sequels to their games.
Indeed. As Activision has repeatedly - and rather brutally - shown the only thing they have any interest in is making as much money as possible. They're a "great for investors, crap for gamers" company (to paraphrase a quote I saw somewhere else).

At least if the Sierra franchises had gone to an openly hostile towards fangames company like Square Enix you'd know where you stand. I'm pretty sure Himalaya are not the first or last small company to get burnt dealing with Activision - I rather suspect at least one more small going concern is going to find out that trying to work with them isn't likely to be to their benefit...

MusicallyInspired

02/28/2011, 06:49 am

SHODANFreeman

02/28/2011, 08:04 am

You guys aren't being entirely fair. These games were made for free. If they were fully funded and financially backed the graphics would be a heck of a lot better and the overall quality would be even better than the current remakes are now. There's a huge difference in quality that occurs when the same team does something for money rather than for free and out of the goodness of their hearts and I don't think some of you are really considering that at all. Look at the quality of the artwork in the KQ remakes (and how they've been revamped and improved over the years to this point) and then think how much better that would be if everyone was getting paid. Look at Himalaya's new Mage's Initiation project. Granted, the screenshots available aren't that big right now (just wait for that), but the graphics are twice as good as the KQ remakes, trust me.

There's also a huge difference between pixel art and fully hand drawn art a la Curse of Monkey Island etc. Just because someone can do one well doesn't automatically mean they can do the other. Not to mention that 2D to 3D is an entirely different beast altogether, and I am fairly certain Activision is of the opinion that 3D > 2D. It makes sense that they would choose a developer who primarily deals in 3D original stories that are sold for profit vs. one who makes 2D remakes for free, regardless of the perceived difference in quality or ability to remain true to the franchise (which is something that Telltale has also done very well with in the past).

tl;dr: Marketplace realities, etc.

MusicallyInspired

02/28/2011, 11:17 am

Actually, all the backgrounds were hand painted. You should see them at their full resolutions. In fact, here's some recently released full resolution screenshots featuring artwork by the same background artist on Himalaya's new project Mage's Initiation.

http://adventuregamers.com/gallery.php?id=1895

And 3D isn't necessarily the better choice. 2D is a lot more portable, for instance, than 3D. I mean, the gap is closing with the increase in technological advancements on portable devices, but still...

Lambonius

02/28/2011, 12:50 pm

Wow, those look great, MI. :)

I definitely think you have some issues when you scale down artwork into 320x200. It almost always tends to get fuzzy and usually requires touching up to correct those issues. I noticed a fair amount of fuzziness in KQ3 Redux, despite the great quality of the paintings. We've avoided this on KOS by working natively in 320x200 during the painting process of each screen.

MusicallyInspired

02/28/2011, 02:36 pm

KOS does look a lot more crisp to your credit.

Belano

02/28/2011, 06:53 pm

I’m not a fan of any kind of design per se. I like both: Sierra and Lucas Arts. I think that both companies have made excellent, good, ok and even some bad games (well, maybe Lucas Arts hadn’t any bad games, but that is only because Sierra not only had more titles but also was more “experimental” with their designs and, if one experiments more, it is easier to make some bad things). If I have to choose the best adventure game I have played, I can’t do it. I would at least have to choose one of Sierra and one of Lucas Arts (I think that I would choose Gabriel Knight and Sam & Max, Hit the Road; no, wait, maybe Grim Fandango and Quest for Glory 4; no… well, you get the idea).

I’m saying this because many times I see people that try to defend one design over the other, but don’t value each game for what it tries to achieve. Obviously, if I don’t like western movies, even if I watch The Wild Bunch or Once Upon a Time in the West, two of the best western movies ever made, I’m not going to like them. But this is a problem of the spectator and not of the movies themselves. I think it’s the same here: if you don’t like dying in adventure games, then you aren’t going to like Sierra design. And this goes for the other side too: if you like to feel that you have some risky situations where you can die, then you aren’t going to like the Lucas Arts games. But this is a problem of the player and not of the game. So if the discussion don’t part from the agreement that both design have their pros and cons then the discussion isn’t relevant anymore.

Now let’s get to the topic. I’m also not sure if Telltale can make a good King’s Quest game. In my opinion, like various posters have said, this is due first and foremost to Telltale following the design rules of Lucas Arts, which are opposite to Sierra games’. If, for example, there aren’t any deaths in the game, well, it isn’t going to feel as a King’s Quest game. So, I can understand all the worries about this. But saying that Telltale only makes mediocre games, like some people have said, well, I think that isn’t true. I will try to explain this.

I can’t talk about all of Telltale games. I can only talk about Season One and Two of Sam and Max, because those are the only games I have played. I will focus only on season two because I have played it recently and I was greatly surprised by it. I’m not going to talk about the story, the graphics, the music, the writing, etc., because, from what I have read in various posts the problem that some people has with Telltale games lies in the easiness of the puzzles. And I think that Second Season as a whole is very good in that department and it’s on par with some of the oldies, and sometimes better. It’s true that it has easier and more “straight” puzzles than creative and difficult ones, but the ones presents are very good. For example, how you have to deal with the piranhas and what you have to do to get Stinky’s special in the second episode are really creative puzzles. You really have to use “lateral thinking” to solve those puzzles, or, in episode five, dealing with the diorama of Santa and the little elf. And various of the temporal puzzles of the fourth episode are also very good. Yes, they could have more of this kind and less of the really easy ones. And they definitely should allow the player to combine items in the inventory. And they could benefit from using and interface with various icons and not only one, like in the old Lucas Arts games. But saying that “Telltale games are mediocre in the puzzle department” isn’t true. Maybe some people have overgeneralized from some of their games, but I think that is a simplification.

Of all the recent games I have played in the last few years, including some indies, Sam and Max Season Two is one of the few where some of the puzzles were really good. Perry Rhodan, Gray Matter, The Black Mirror, even the loved The Longest Journey were easier than Sam and Max and the puzzles were not as creative as some found in Season Two. And of the indies, the only one where I remember being stuck sometimes was the remake of King’s Quest 2, by AGDInteractive (which, after playing all their remakes, including their last, King’s Quest 3, I think is their best game). I like, for example, the Dave Gilbert games, but they are really easy. I have played the AGS games nominated this year and all of them are easy too. Right now, I’m playing Gemini Rue and The Whispered World. I hope they will pose some challenge. And I have the Season Three of Sam and Max waiting.

Rather Dashing

02/28/2011, 07:12 pm

I can’t talk about all of Telltale games. I can only talk about Season One and Two of Sam and Max, because those are the only games I have played. I will focus only on season two because I have played it recently and I was greatly surprised by it. I’m not going to talk about the story, the graphics, the music, the writing, etc., because, from what I have read in various posts the problem that some people has with Telltale games lies in the easiness of the puzzles. And I think that Second Season as a whole is very good in that department and it’s on par with some of the oldies, and sometimes better. It’s true that it has easier and more “straight” puzzles than creative and difficult ones, but the ones presents are very good. For example, how you have to deal with the piranhas and what you have to do to get Stinky’s special in the second episode are really creative puzzles. You really have to use “lateral thinking” to solve those puzzles, or, in episode five, dealing with the diorama of Santa and the little elf. And various of the temporal puzzles of the fourth episode are also very good. Yes, they could have more of this kind and less of the really easy ones. And they definitely should allow the player to combine items in the inventory. And they could benefit from using and interface with various icons and not only one, like in the old Lucas Arts games. But saying that “Telltale games are mediocre in the puzzle department” isn’t true. Maybe some people have overgeneralized from some of their games, but I think that is a simplification.

Of all the recent games I have played in the last few years, including some indies, Sam and Max Season Two is one of the few where some of the puzzles were really good.
Sam and Max Seasons One and Two are excellent games that I happen to love dearly. But Telltale's staff has changed a lot since those two seasons, and a lot of aspects of their design have changed since then. When people express strong and measured concern over Telltale's treatment of King's Quest, they aren't thinking of Sam and Max Season Two, or at least, I don't think they are. Season Two is still not a Sierra game, and I wouldn't want a King's Quest game to be like it. But it is Telltale at their very best as far as I'm concerned.

And I have the Season Three of Sam and Max waiting.
....ouch.

See, I can't speak for anyone else, but when I worry about King's Quest? I think about Season Three of Sam and Max(and the Back to the Future game). Not even the entire season, but just play episode 1. I dunno, someone looking for clever and inventive puzzles may want to look elsewhere. The core design idea of the powers was very good, but it was applied to some really simplistic puzzle design that left the avid adventurer out in the cold.

doom saber

02/28/2011, 07:12 pm

Chyron8472

02/28/2011, 07:25 pm

Marketplace realities, etc.

ugh. Don't say that. It makes me sad for Sam & Max:Freelance Police.

...maybe Lucas Arts hadn’t any bad games...

Don't let Rather Dashing hear you say that.

[edit:] Too late.

@RD, I so thought that would have been the perfect cue for a rant on CMI and such. I'm surprised at you. :D

Lambonius

02/28/2011, 07:33 pm

The mage game does look better, but I am more concern about storyline if they make an official KQ game. I want to see them create a KQ game that doesn't have a plot that feels like their KQ2+ or TSL aka fanfiction

I don't think AGDI's games and TSL should be ever mentioned in the same breath. At least AGDI's plot additions, though fan fiction-y, are fairly well-written. There's a HUGE difference if you start comparing the dialogue between the two.

Chyron8472

02/28/2011, 07:39 pm

You guys aren't being entirely fair. These games were made for free. If they were fully funded and financially backed the graphics would be a heck of a lot better and the overall quality would be even better than the current remakes are now.

What? I thought the whole point of making the games look the way they do is to match the graphics of KQ 5 and 6.
Besides, you can't make the music any better for KQ3R. I want the soundtrack (plzoplzyesiknowyou'reworkingonithurryupalreadylol .)

I have to admit, I'm still sort of bugged about Al Emmo. I really don't like that game. And yet, Himalaya is selling it for real money.

Now, since I see this Mage's Initiation stuff, I feel a lot better. It looks really good.

Rather Dashing

02/28/2011, 07:43 pm

Don't let Rather Dashing hear you say that.

[edit:] Too late.

@RD, I so thought that would have been the perfect cue for a rant on CMI and such. I'm surprised at you. :D
LucasArts made bad SEQUELS(Curse of Monkey Island, Day of the Tentacle), and games with badly designed ELEMENTS and SECTIONS to them. All the same, overall I can't think of a LucasArts adventure that is bad enough to be considered a BAD GAME if it's taken apart and analyzed on a gameplay level separate from everything else. The two games that I absolutely despise from them are sequels that are generations apart that don't feel like they belong together, making them the worst titles in their respective series(and, for differences in design, design philosophy, tone and story from their predecessors, they get my ire and I don't care to think about them very much, but they're still mostly solidly designed games).

Also that rant would be off-topic. As is this one.

...Dammit.

doom saber

02/28/2011, 07:44 pm

I don't think AGDI's games and TSL should be ever mentioned in the same breath. At least AGDI's plot additions, though fan fiction-y, are fairly well-written. There's a HUGE difference if you start comparing the dialogue between the two.

While true, both games has an element of fanfic in them. AGDI less so than TSL. I completely agree about the writing in the AGDI games is better than the ones seen in TSL

A good example is Alexander. His dialoge feels so similar to KQ6 whereas in TSL, the ferryman's personality is different than how he is protrayed in KQ6.

Chyron8472

02/28/2011, 07:51 pm

I want to see [AGDI] create a KQ game that doesn't have a plot that feels like their KQ2+ or TSL aka fanfiction

I don't think AGDI's games and TSL should be ever mentioned in the same breath. At least AGDI's plot additions, though fan fiction-y, are fairly well-written. There's a HUGE difference if you start comparing the dialogue between the two.

First, AGDI is head and shoulders (knees and toes) better in game design than POS is. Sorry Phoenix. TSL really just doesn't fit the feel of the canon games.

Second... Fan-fiction? You're saying that KQ2+ is like FAN-FICTION? What the.... KQ2+ is one of the best adventure games out there, retail or otherwise. I'd agree with maybe "expanded universe" or "Special Edition" (eww, no. not SE. George Lucas is a retard) but not fan-fiction.

You make it sound like substandard work. As though because it is both free and a remake that makes it contrived and unnecessary.

I beg to differ. I really do.

Lambonius

02/28/2011, 07:55 pm

First, AGDI is head and shoulders (knees and toes) better in game design than POS is. Sorry Phoenix. TSL really just doesn't fit the feel of the canon games.

Second... Fan-fiction? You're saying that KQ2+ is like FAN-FICTION? What the.... KQ2+ is one of the best adventure games out there, retail or otherwise. I'd agree with maybe "expanded universe" or "Special Edition" (eww, no. not SE. George Lucas is a retard) but not fan-fiction.

You make it sound like substandard work. As though because it is both free and a remake that makes it contrived and unnecessary.

I beg to differ. I really do.

Oh, I agree with you. :) I just meant fan-fiction-y in the sense that KQ2+ does attempt to weave in backstory that ties the series together in a way that is probably distinctly different than what the original series' designers ever intended. I love the additions they made, for the most part.

And believe me, I would never say that the concept of a game being both free and a remake makes it contrived or unnecessary. I'd be damn hypocritical if I did. ;)

Chyron8472

02/28/2011, 08:11 pm

Oh, I agree with you. :) I just meant fan-fiction-y in the sense that KQ2+ does attempt to weave in backstory that ties the series together in a way that is probably distinctly different than what the original series' designers ever intended. I love the additions they made, for the most part.

... perhaps they hadn't thought of or planned such a backstory because of budget constraints, disk size limitations or publishing deadlines, but I would bet real money that if AGDI's three KQ games were released under the Sierra Online banner back in the day when KQ6 was released (meaning when Sierra Online still existed and adventure games looked like this and not cartoony yet) and sold at retail prices, no one would have been able to tell the difference.

With this in mind, they rank much higher than fan-fiction for me. They only just so happen to be made by fans and are released as freeware.

doom saber

02/28/2011, 08:16 pm

First, AGDI is head and shoulders (knees and toes) better in game design than POS is. Sorry Phoenix. TSL really just doesn't fit the feel of the canon games.

Second... Fan-fiction? You're saying that KQ2+ is like FAN-FICTION? What the.... KQ2+ is one of the best adventure games out there, retail or otherwise. I'd agree with maybe "expanded universe" or "Special Edition" (eww, no. not SE. George Lucas is a retard) but not fan-fiction.

You make it sound like substandard work. As though because it is both free and a remake that makes it contrived and unnecessary.

I beg to differ. I really do.

This is the problem with opinions. I understand my opinion is different from yours and I respect that. If you like KQ2+, then more power to you. I don't. I am sorry for having a different opinion than yours.

Lambonius

02/28/2011, 08:34 pm

... perhaps they hadn't thought of or planned such a backstory because of budget constraints, disk size limitations or publishing deadlines, but I would bet real money that if AGDI's three KQ games were released under the Sierra Online banner back in the day when KQ6 was released (meaning when Sierra Online still existed and adventure games looked like this and not cartoony yet) and sold at retail prices, no one would have been able to tell the difference.

With this in mind, they rank much higher than fan-fiction for me. They only just so happen to be made by fans and are released as freeware.

Again we agree--mostly. ;)

I don't think the original KQ designers ever had any kind of deep all-connecting backstory in mind for the entire series. Any kind of all-connecting backstory, even a well-written one, feels somewhat contrived in the context of the original games. The only game that really suggested any kind of connection like that was KQ6, and that was just the result of classic Jane Jensen over-complication. ;)

That said, I agree that if KQ2+ and KQ3 Redux had been released in the early 90s, nobody would have been able to tell them from any other KQ game. They fit the TONE of the series perfectly, which is the most important part.

der_ketzer

02/28/2011, 09:26 pm

LucasArts made bad SEQUELS(Curse of Monkey Island, Day of the Tentacle)

Escape was horrible but Curse was okay. And DOTT is one of their best games ever.

Lambonius

02/28/2011, 09:29 pm

You know what Lucasarts game I hate? Zak McKracken. I used to dig it back when I was younger, but recently I played it and realized that wow...it is indeed a steaming pile of shit. I love the absurdity of the story, but god, the game is just terribly designed.

Rather Dashing

02/28/2011, 09:53 pm

Escape was horrible but Curse was okay. And DOTT is one of their best games ever.
Again, let's just presume the idea that they're good and/or great is entirely accurate. Even if Curse of Monkey Island and Day of the Tentacle are the greatest games ever created(and in the case of DotT, many people think so), it doesn't change the fact of them being bad sequels. Guybrush's character, and that of various characters throughout the Monkey Island universe, changed drastically between LeChuck's Revenge and Curse. Curse carries with it a completely different art style from LeChuck's Revenge. Again, you can point to the few cartoony animations all you want, but for general idling around, the world generally kept realistic proportions. Puzzles followed a cartoon sort of logic in Curse, which wasn't really the way it went in the original games. And the original games borrowed a lot from pirate films(of the Errol Flynn tradition most specifically) and from Pirates of the Caribbean(the original ride). Curse does not ever elicit any of these feelings. Finally, LeChuck's Revenge had an ending that...you couldn't follow up satisfactorily. And they dedicated a whole segment to explaining it, which doesn't really work.(This is the most subjective of my points, and probably shouldn't have been my last one, but it's a train of thought thing)

Day of the Tentacle is an even "worse" sequel, in that it's very far divorced from what the original game was. There are kids with different skills and you use those skills to solve puzzles. One of the kids is the same, and some elements are carried over(the mansion, tentacles, and the Edisons). However, this is pretty superficial. The first game was a spoof of B horror films, the second is a cartoon. This extends as an issue(in terms of faithfulness of a sequel, not whether or not the game is "good) in the style of story being told, the style of world the games take place in, the type of logic used to beat puzzles, and the general ambiance of the game as a whole. Many innovative and special features from the original game are ripped out rather than expanded upon or given a distinct twist: You can't pick your team, there is only one solution to every puzzle, there is only one ending, and the world doesn't make an attempt to "live". On that last point, scripts were used in the original game to make non-player characters move about and have routines. By contrast, Day of the Tentacle just kind of sits there, waiting for you to do something. Another thing that Day of the Tentacle removed relative to its predecessor is even the most minor attempt at horror in terms of gameplay, that is, nothing makes you feel like you have to be "careful" or "look out".

They're not bad sequels because they're bad games. Look above, and you'l see that I'm not even getting into that. They're bad at being sequels because they differ drastically from their predecessors in style, basic design philosophy, art direction, and various other areas that change both the immediate impression and the overall feel of the universe irrevocably.

SHODANFreeman

02/28/2011, 10:10 pm

Blah blah blah

http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/6418/cutitout.jpg

Chyron8472

03/01/2011, 12:02 am

post

You know... I understand what you mean.

I disagree with the feelings you have for those specific games, but I totally do understand why you feel the way you do.

Also just so you know, I wasn't trying to be rude in my earlier comment (about not letting you hear), I just was enjoying the thought of poking a sleeping bear. :)

doggans

03/01/2011, 02:21 am

Second... Fan-fiction? You're saying that KQ2+ is like FAN-FICTION? What the.... KQ2+ is one of the best adventure games out there, retail or otherwise. I'd agree with maybe "expanded universe" or "Special Edition" (eww, no. not SE. George Lucas is a retard) but not fan-fiction.

It IS fanfiction. It's additional fiction written by fans. That's not an insult, that's a category. I love KQ2+ more than some games in the original series, just like I love some Star Wars fanfilms more than canon Star Wars entries. Doesn't stop them from being fanfiction.

Belano

03/01/2011, 06:40 am

Sam and Max Seasons One and Two are excellent games that I happen to love dearly. But Telltale's staff has changed a lot since those two seasons, and a lot of aspects of their design have changed since then. When people express strong and measured concern over Telltale's treatment of King's Quest, they aren't thinking of Sam and Max Season Two, or at least, I don't think they are. Season Two is still not a Sierra game, and I wouldn't want a King's Quest game to be like it. But it is Telltale at their very best as far as I'm concerned.

I understand you better now, Rather Dashing. I’m not really a follower of companies and their staffs (well, not now; in the old times, I was a follower of Origin, Sierra and Lucas Arts), so I don’t know who were the staff of Sam and Max for the first two seasons and who are Telltale’s staff now. And, as I said, I have only played the first two Sam and Max games, so, when I think of Telltale, I think of those two games. And yes, Season Two is still not a Sierra game, and I also think that, even if Season Two is great, I’m not sure the design of Telltale is “compatible” with the old Sierra games.

My critics were more on the side that I have recently seen various posts at some sites bashing ALL Telltale games, including thefirst two seasons of Sam and Max, because of their puzzles. And I think that bashing those games is exaggerated and doesn’t correspond with the reality, especially if one compares those two games with other recent adventures.

....ouch.

See, I can't speak for anyone else, but when I worry about King's Quest? I think about Season Three of Sam and Max(and the Back to the Future game). Not even the entire season, but just play episode 1. I dunno, someone looking for clever and inventive puzzles may want to look elsewhere. The core design idea of the powers was very good, but it was applied to some really simplistic puzzle design that left the avid adventurer out in the cold.

Well, I have Season 3 waiting since the beginning of the year. I haven´t played it yet because, even if I like Season 2 a lot, my main problem with this season was the structure of the episodes. Having a puzzle at the beginning, three more later and then one puzzle at the end in all the episodes (except 5, I think, where they have 1-3-3-1, if I remember correctly) could be a little tiresome. And to me this is one of the weak points of the new Sam and Max. So I can understand if someone that has played all games from Telltale is tired if they have followed that structure (I don’t know this. RD, please, confirm) But after finishing Gemini Rue and The Whispered World, I will definitely play it.

About Lucas Arts games and sequels.

I understand your complaints and share them, in part. I really think that Curse of Monkey Island is an inferior sequel to their predecessors in all respects: art design, story, humor, characters and puzzles. I like Curse, and I think it is a good game, but only if you forget about the two originals. As you said, it has good gameplay, even if it is sometimes a little too easy, and the other aspects were good, but they don’t live up to the expectations. One thing, for example, where you note that Curse is only “recreating” the first two games instead of “creating” a new good sequel is how they follow some conventions there which are in the originals too: rescue Elaine, recrew three members, Lechuk is now a Demon, the sword fight… What I really like of Monkey Island 2 is that it feels like a real sequel without repeating the same things of the first game. You have the same characters, the same tone, the same humor, but the story is totally different. And the puzzles too. They weren't afraid of eliminating things as the sword fighting. For curse it was as if Lucas Arts had thought: “Well, let’s redo Monkey Island” instead of “Well, let’s do a sequel”. Maybe I’m being a little unfair with the game, because, in its own, is a good one. But not great.

Now, regarding DOTT, I don’t feel the same. First, because I have never really seen as a sequel of the original game. I saw it more like some kind of “spin of”, so I wasn’t bothered by it not being a “true sequel” of Maniac Mansion.The game even has a title that doesn’t resemble the original one. But I can understand that if you look at it as a sequel, yes, it turns out not to be faithful to the original, because of the different reasons you have mentioned. Second, I am one of the people that thinks that DOTT is one of the greatest adventure games ever made. Even if I judge it as a sequel and believe it isn’t true to the original, the game is so good in its own that I take my hat off. DOTT shines not only in the gameplay department, but also in art direction, characters, humor, etc. In this respect, it is different to Curse: Curse isn’t a great game even if one haven’t played the originals. It’s good, but not great. However, one can only bash Day of the Tentacle if one expects a faithful sequel to Maniac Mansion. And I prefer a sequel which is not true to the original but excellent that a sequel which, being true to the original, is nothing more than only ok or good. Obviously, I prefer a true excellent sequel, as Monkey 2.

You know what Lucasarts game I hate? Zak McKracken. I used to dig it back when I was younger, but recently I played it and realized that wow...it is indeed a steaming pile of shit. I love the absurdity of the story, but god, the game is just terribly designed.

I haven’t played Zak Mckracken. It’s the only Lucas Arts game I haven’t played. Maybe in the future. I have it in my game collection so…

LucasArts made bad SEQUELS(Curse of Monkey Island, Day of the Tentacle), and games with badly designed ELEMENTS and SECTIONS to them. All the same, overall I can't think of a LucasArts adventure that is bad enough to be considered a BAD GAME if it's taken apart and analyzed on a gameplay level separate from everything else.

After reading your post and rereading what I have written, I have to rectify myself. Escape from Monkey Island is a mediocre-bad game. I continually forget about that title. I only played it because it was a Monkey Island game. And I have never replayed it. It’s the only Lucas Arts game that I have never have replayed it. , I have even replayed Full Throttle and The Dig, which I consider only ok games, for different reasons. And, again, I agree with you, RD, that Lucas Arts has some badly designed elements and sections in some of their games, but I think this could be said of all companies.

DAISHI

03/01/2011, 07:44 am

I understand you better now, Rather Dashing. I’m not really a follower of companies and their staffs (well, not now; in the old times, I was a follower of Origin, Sierra and Lucas Arts), so I don’t know who were the staff of Sam and Max for the first two seasons and who are Telltale’s staff now. And, as I said, I have only played the first two Sam and Max games, so, when I think of Telltale, I think of those two games. And yes, Season Two is still not a Sierra game, and I also think that, even if Season Two is great, I’m not sure the design of Telltale is “compatible” with the old Sierra games.

My critics were more on the side that I have recently seen various posts at some sites bashing ALL Telltale games, including thefirst two seasons of Sam and Max, because of their puzzles. And I think that bashing those games is exaggerated and doesn’t correspond with the reality, especially if one compares those two games with other recent adventures.

Well, I have Season 3 waiting since the beginning of the year. I haven´t played it yet because, even if I like Season 2 a lot, my main problem with this season was the structure of the episodes. Having a puzzle at the beginning, three more later and then one puzzle at the end in all the episodes (except 5, I think, where they have 1-3-3-1, if I remember correctly) could be a little tiresome. And to me this is one of the weak points of the new Sam and Max. So I can understand if someone that has played all games from Telltale is tired if they have followed that structure (I don’t know this. RD, please, confirm) But after finishing Gemini Rue and The Whispered World, I will definitely play it.

I understand your complaints and share them, in part. I really think that Curse of Monkey Island is an inferior sequel to their predecessors in all respects: art design, story, humor, characters and puzzles. I like Curse, and I think it is a good game, but only if you forget about the two originals. As you said, it has good gameplay, even if it is sometimes a little too easy, and the other aspects were good, but they don’t live up to the expectations. One thing, for example, where you note that Curse is only “recreating” the first two games instead of “creating” a new good sequel is how they follow some conventions there which are in the originals too: rescue Elaine, recrew three members, Lechuk is now a Demon, the sword fight… What I really like of Monkey Island 2 is that it feels like a real sequel without repeating the same things of the first game. You have the same characters, the same tone, the same humor, but the story is totally different. And the puzzles too. They weren't afraid of eliminating things as the sword fighting. For curse it was as if Lucas Arts had thought: “Well, let’s redo Monkey Island” instead of “Well, let’s do a sequel”. Maybe I’m being a little unfair with the game, because, in its own, is a good one. But not great.

Now, regarding DOTT, I don’t feel the same. First, because I have never really seen as a sequel of the original game. I saw it more like some kind of “spin of”, so I wasn’t bothered by it not being a “true sequel” of Maniac Mansion.The game even has a title that doesn’t resemble the original one. But I can understand that if you look at it as a sequel, yes, it turns out not to be faithful to the original, because of the different reasons you have mentioned. Second, I am one of the people that thinks that DOTT is one of the greatest adventure games ever made. Even if I judge it as a sequel and believe it isn’t true to the original, the game is so good in its own that I take my hat off. DOTT shines not only in the gameplay department, but also in art direction, characters, humor, etc. In this respect, it is different to Curse: Curse isn’t a great game even if one haven’t played the originals. It’s good, but not great. However, one can only bash Day of the Tentacle if one expects a faithful sequel to Maniac Mansion. And I prefer a sequel which is not true to the original but excellent that a sequel which, being true to the original, is nothing more than only ok or good. Obviously, I prefer a true excellent sequel, as Monkey 2.

I haven’t played Zak Mckracken. It’s the only Lucas Arts game I haven’t played. Maybe in the future. I have it in my game collection so…

After reading your post and rereading what I have written, I have to rectify myself. Escape from Monkey Island is a mediocre-bad game. I continually forget about that title. I only played it because it was a Monkey Island game. And I have never replayed it. It’s the only Lucas Arts game that I have never have replayed it. , I have even replayed Full Throttle and The Dig, which I consider only ok games, for different reasons. And, again, I agree with you, RD, that Lucas Arts has some badly designed elements and sections in some of their games, but I think this could be said of all companies.

I think the difficulties with Curse of Monkey Island was that it was a transition point for the series to a multimedia experience. Though I think the art in it is lightyears better than its predecessors, from basic background designs to actual implementation in terms of technology. The waterpainted look and the kooky designed characters were superbly entertaining.

JuntMonkey

03/01/2011, 01:34 pm

It's interesting that I agree with a lot of what Rather Dashing has to say against Telltale and Lucasarts and in favor of Sierra, yet in many ways we're at opposite ends at the spectrum. I've played all of S&M1, 201-203, and 301-304 (seasons 2 & 3 are currently being played), and I think S3 is wayyy better than 1-2.

Part of it is the Twilight Zone presentation (which I've been a real sucker for after a recent ride on the Tower of Terror), and much better presentation in general. Part of it is probably the console thing...I prefer consoles, and since S3 really seems designed with consoles in mind, that could be a major knock on it if you played it on the PC. The extended dialogue sequences in Telltale/modern adventure games are a huge problem in my opinion, and that becomes much more tolerable when you're relaxing on the couch.

The biggest factor though is that it finally does something a little different with the genre. I loved episode 2 with the movie reels, Max's powers add a new gameplay mechanic while still completely following the "rules" of the genre, and the flashbacks spice things up a bit as well.

thom-22

03/01/2011, 02:30 pm

My critics were more on the side that I have recently seen various posts at some sites bashing ALL Telltale games, including thefirst two seasons of Sam and Max, because of their puzzles. And I think that bashing those games is exaggerated and doesn’t correspond with the reality, especially if one compares those two games with other recent adventures.

There's a lot of variation among critics of Telltale. Even among those who are concerned mostly with gameplay, there are differences of opinion as to when it started going "downhill" or if it was ever "uphill" in the first place. I agree with Dashing that the first two S&M seasons were terrific. I even enjoyed playing Wallace and Gromit: though the puzzles were less difficult they were paced well and integrated with the unfolding of the stories. My disappointment really started with S&M Season 3, when gameplay took a backseat to "cinematic presentation".

Well, I have Season 3 waiting since the beginning of the year.

Just so you don't go into season 3 totally discouraged ;) there are some good puzzles in there. Telltale deserves credit for some innovations in puzzle-solving mechanics, even though they didn't quite add up to a satisfying adventure game as solutions became more and more obvious. I thought episode 2 was rather good, actually, and gave the best sense that I was discovering the story while working to solve the puzzles.

Incidentally I will take any of those old puzzle formulae you mentioned over what seems to be the formula for BTTF, which is more like: go through the motions to "solve" what barely passes for a puzzle, have some story thrown at you, go through the motions to "solve" what barely passes for a puzzle, have some story thrown at you, etc. :D

doom saber

03/01/2011, 06:16 pm

It IS fanfiction. It's additional fiction written by fans. That's not an insult, that's a category. I love KQ2+ more than some games in the original series, just like I love some Star Wars fanfilms more than canon Star Wars entries. Doesn't stop them from being fanfiction.

So true.

odovoro

03/02/2011, 08:25 pm

I can't wait to see what KQ telltale will show the fans
also i hope it will be with old characters

GaMEChld

05/28/2011, 10:17 pm

Does anyone actually think a new adventure game can be as challenging as the "good old days" anymore and still be commercially successful?

All they'd have to do is implement a progressive Hint system built into the game, akin to what this website has done for the old KQ games:

http://www.uhs-hints.com/uhsweb/hints/kq1/1.php

With modern technology, the games can be every bit as hard as the old games puzzle wise, but still be more forgiving by implementing an accessible built-in progressive hint system, as well as AUTOMATICALLY making save checkpoints as you progress, so there is a guaranteed way to restore your game only as far back as is needed, to minimize back pedaling.

The thing that made King's quest interesting and fun was not just the raw challenge, but cultivating the player's need to inspect EVERYTHING using multiple senses, like sight, touch, and voice. Items needed to sometimes be manipulated and changed, or used in unexpected ways, and sometimes there were multiple solutions to a common problem.

And before anyone argues that this is just old nostalgia talking, I only RECENTLY played most of the Kings Quest games. The only one I played long ago was KQ5. I just played through the whole collection with a friend of mine (my friend has never played any of them before at all). And we both found the games very challenging, but very fun in a new way. At times we cursed the difficulty, but ultimately, it was all that more enjoyable when you solved something.

However, we were forced to seek outside help on a few occasions, hence my idea for the updated saving system and the built-in hint system.

Chyron8472

05/29/2011, 07:59 pm

The way Telltale has been going though, their ingame hint systems give hints even when the Hint Level is turned all the way down. I hate that.

Valiento

05/30/2011, 06:11 am

Chyron do you have bugged games? I've been able to turn off the hints on my system, none of those suggestions of what to do, given by the player characters.

MusicallyInspired

05/30/2011, 10:27 am

There is a 5 bar selection on Telltale's latest hint options. You can have full bars or no bars. You don't have to stick to one bar as that's not the lowest setting.

Chyron8472

05/31/2011, 08:37 pm

Chyron do you have bugged games? I've been able to turn off the hints on my system, none of those suggestions of what to do, given by the player characters.

You're telling me that you haven't played Tales of Monkey Island with the hints all the way down and still had Guybrush give you subtle hints when you take too long to solve a puzzle?

It has happened to me. I specifically remember checking the Hint level setting more than once on both ToMI and S&M3 because I was getting subtle hints even when I had the blasted meter turned all the way down. If it's a bug then it shows laziness; if it's not a bug then it shows incompetence.

Lambonius

05/31/2011, 10:36 pm

You're telling me that you haven't played Tales of Monkey Island with the hints all the way down and still had Guybrush give you subtle hints when you take too long to solve a puzzle?

It has happened to me. I specifically remember checking the Hint level setting more than once on both ToMI and S&M3 because I was getting subtle hints even when I had the blasted meter turned all the way down. If it's a bug then it shows laziness; if it's not a bug then it shows incompetence.

And let's not forget the first episode of BttF, when regardless of hint meter or goals selection, the game plays itself for the first 10 minutes, with GIANT FUCKING TEXT popping up on the screen explaining what it's doing as it does it. Well, really, the whole series plays itself, but that's another complaint.

chucklas

06/01/2011, 03:13 am

It seems to me as though the hint slider only effects pop up hints whereas in game hints still occur from dialog from the characters regardless of the hint setting.

MusicallyInspired

06/01/2011, 08:47 am

I've never had a dialog-based hint given me in BTTF. Not that I'd need it. But you can turn the dialog hints completely off. Like I said, there's 5 bars. 1 bar is not the lowest setting. No bars is.

Or maybe I just beat each puzzle too quickly to notice any dialog hints.

Chyron8472

06/01/2011, 10:49 am

1 bar is not the lowest setting. No bars is.

I know that. I've always known that.

It still happens, though. I distinctly remember the first time I played ToMI ep. 1 and wandering through the jungle. When I got distracted by the wind idol thingys instead of doing whatever else it was I came there for, Guybrush started telling me what I should be doing next.

thom-22

06/01/2011, 11:53 am

I think most people can play TOMI and TDP without seeing what Chyron is talking about. But there was at least one reproducible example noted when this was discussed on the S&M forum during TDP production -- Sam would give a hint at a particular time/location even for those playing with hints set to no bars. So there is an issue with the existing hint system, but whether it's a bug or intentional, I don't know.

I think the original point by GaMEChld stands -- adventure games can (and should, in many cases, especially KQ) be made difficult for experienced players; they can be made less difficult for other players by implementing a proper, working hint system. By proper, I mean one that experienced players are able to turn off completely. That the current hint system is either not proper or not working is just another reason why some of us long-time adventure fans have lost confidence in Telltale. But it shouldn't call into question the legitimacy of hint systems in general for making games accessible.

JuntMonkey

06/01/2011, 01:13 pm

I noticed a couple of little "hints" given with 0 bars in ToMI and/or S&M3. I didn't think it was egregious, and just considered it normal for adventure games. For example, in older games sometimes you'd try something twice and it would say "that doesn't seem to be working...I might have to somehow do x first". Things that were too confusing in playtesting maybe.

Games like Portal add elements to the game world in playtesting when it's not clear what a goal should be...visuals to attract your attention to the ceiling for example. Those are not "hints" though in the sense that you mean it, it's just part of the overall design.

thom-22

06/01/2011, 01:27 pm

I didn't think it was egregious, and just considered it normal for adventure games. ... Those are not "hints" though in the sense that you mean it, it's just part of the overall design.

It's certainly normal to provide clues in adventure games, as in the examples you give. But clues are usually things to be discovered through exploration/interaction, they shouldn't come via the main character just blurting stuff out randomly. Those are usually considered hints in TT games, so it is not at all clear whether it's part of the overall design or a bug in the hint system. And frankly, it doesn't matter -- it's either crappy design or crappy programming, take your pick.

Valiento

06/04/2011, 09:25 am

LucasArts made bad SEQUELS(Curse of Monkey Island, Day of the Tentacle), and games with badly designed ELEMENTS and SECTIONS to them. All the same, overall I can't think of a LucasArts adventure that is bad enough to be considered a BAD GAME if it's taken apart and analyzed on a gameplay level separate from everything else.

If you think Day of the Tentacle is a 'bad sequel'? Then I can't take you seriously... Its leaps and abounds better than the original... I don't think I've ever really completed the original (I never understood huge cast of playable characters in it, and which groups to choose)...

And I absolutely loved the hilarious time travel elements in DoTT!

As for Curse, its well, I do agree its not as good as the first two. But its seriously great game on its own... Only the last chapter was a bit anticlimactic...

MusicallyInspired

06/04/2011, 11:06 am

Hero1

06/04/2011, 06:44 pm

SHODANFreeman

06/04/2011, 08:18 pm

thesporkman

06/04/2011, 09:09 pm

The only person we know for sure who's working on the game is JD Straw (Sinaz20). And we know that Josh Mandel has at least been contacted about the game, but we don't know what kind of a role he might have.

MusicallyInspired

06/05/2011, 03:44 am

There's also another Chuck Jones that worked at 3D Realms on Duke Nukem 3D art. I was really confused when I read that in the credits lol. "That doesn't look like his style!"

thom-22

06/05/2011, 12:18 pm

I agree with what Rather Dashing is saying.. I think Season 2 of Sam & Max was Telltale reaching their peak..but that was mainly due to Brendan Ferguson & Chuck Jones & both are no longer at Telltale.. I wonder who will be working on the King's Quest games.. I thought Mike Stemmle's puzzle design in episode 1 & 4 of Tales of Monkey Island was great so he may be the best person to handle King's Quest.

I have to wonder if who works on the game really matters. My interpretation of the available evidence is that the "downhill slide" from Season 2 of Sam & Max is a function of Telltale's policies, not its personnel, or of management rather than bench-level designers. I mean, I don't think the flaws we find in BTTF can be attributed to a failure of execution -- they made the product they set out to make; its lack of interactivity/gameplay/difficulty stems from overall intent, not deficiencies in the capabilities of the individual puzzle designers. I wish it were a matter of just finding the right people to work on KQ, but I fear that it isn't that simple.

Valiento

06/05/2011, 05:39 pm

DOTT is not "leaps and bounds better than the original." That's a subjective opinion on taste. The correct statement is that it's leaps and bounds nothing like the original. So it isn't a good sequel. The only thing it has in common with the original is that you control 3 kids. Both games are fun and DOTT is a great game, but it's horrible from a sequel point of view. It might as well have been a reboot.

I have to say, I don't quite understand your 'opinion', or what you are trying to get at.

Considering that the game does have several reoccuring characters from the first game including the Tentacles, the Edisons. One of the three playable characters reprised his role from the previous game, Bernard (one of the more useful characters to choose in the first game actually).

It does make a few references to the previous game... It takes place in the same setting, Edison's mansion. Course of the references would make more sense only if you had chosen to use Bernard in the first game...

The interface is more or less the same as the previous game (verb/noun), but better graphics.

The story itself is said to be set five years after the first game.

Using your logic, KQ3 is not a very good sequel to KQ2, since it has you playing a character other than Graham, and the story doesn't tie itself directly into the plot of the previous game to any extreme degree. The feel of the game is different for various reasons, including the fact you aren't playing as a "king". Granted there are elements of the King's Quest series as a whole that makes each game seem fairly disconnected from any other game (due to each one taking place in a new land, with a new threat), except for a few superficial references to various characters from previous games.

If you wanna talk bad 'sequels' I'd suggest looking at Final Fantasy, or Far Cry! The so-called 'sequels' had nothing to do with any previous game (intentionally made to be separate universes)! Only Final Fantasy X and X-2 or Final Fantasy IV-After Years could be called true sequels!

Conquests of the Longbow though it was advertised as a 'sequel' to its series, is not a true sequel, and makes no references to the previous game (no reoccuring characters)! Police Quest IV (or even the first two SWAT games) though advertised as sequels to the previous games, had little in common with the original games, following a completely different cast of characters (and in latter games different genres even)!

In comparison, I'd place DoTT as offering better continuation to its universe, or game style!

Feazy

06/06/2011, 08:47 am

At this point, I would be perfectly content to have a King's Quest game that is not a direct sequel to the eighth game. Or the seventh game, if Mask of Eternity rubs you the wrong way. And didn't I read that the setting is going to prior to MoE?

chucklas

06/06/2011, 09:44 am

I have to say, I don't quite understand your 'opinion', or what you are trying to get at.

You should have left it at that. Your entire argument after was based on your understanding which, you pointed out in your first sentence, wasn't right.

It isn't about the different character use, or references to the original that makes it a bad sequel. It is the fact that it is NOTHING like the original in gameplay/design. DOTT is a GREAT game. It is not a great SEQUEL. Thats really it. The games do not mesh well asa series.

As for KQ3 being in different places, with different characters, it has the same style as the original. It feels like you are playing a game that was meant to go with the other games. It is when you hit KQ7, and MoE that it starts to get different. And those games are considered the worst sequels in the KQ collection.

Valiento

06/06/2011, 08:10 pm

I do agree that DOTT is different for a sequel. It seems you think that's a bad thing. Previous reviewers thought it was a good thing, and a better game!
Day of the Tentacle was critically acclaimed. Charles Ardai of Computer Gaming World wrote, "Calling Day of the Tentacle a sequel to Maniac Mansion [...] is a little like calling the space shuttle a sequel to the slingshot".[17] The reviewer enjoyed the game's humor and interface, and praised the designers for removing "dead end" scenarios and player character death. He lauded its voice acting with the statement that it "would have done the late Mel Blanc proud", and compared the game extensively to "Looney Toons gems from the 40's and 50's"—particularly with regard to its humor, animation and camera angles. The review ended with the statement that "I expect that this game will keep entertaining people for quite some time to come".[17] Sandy Petersen of Dragon stated that its graphics "are in a stupendous cartoony style", while praising its humor and describing its sound and music as "excellent". Although the reviewer considered it "one of the best" graphic adventure games, he noted that, like LucasArts' earlier Loom, it was extremely short; he wrote that he "felt cheated somehow when I finished the game". He ended the review,

"Go, Lucasfilm! Do this again, but do make the next game longer!".[18]
Phil LaRose of The Advocate called it "light-years ahead of the original", and believed that its "improved controls, sound and graphics are an evolutionary leap to a more enjoyable gaming experience". He praised the interface, and summarized the game as "another of the excellent LucasArts programs that place a higher premium on the quality of entertainment and less on the technical knowledge needed to make it run".[19] The Boston Herald's Geoff Smith noted that "the animation of the cartoonlike characters is of TV quality", and praised the removal of dead ends and character death. He ended, "It's full of lunacy, but for anyone who likes light-hearted adventure games, it's well worth trying".[20] Vox Day of The Blade called its visuals "well done" and compared them to those of The Ren & Stimpy Show. The writer praised the game's humor, and stated that "both the music and sound effects are hilarious"; he cited the voice performance of Richard Sanders as a high point. He summarized the game as "both a good adventure and a funny cartoon".[21]

Interestingly enough though KQ3 actually while lauded for being a great game according to Sierra apparently many reviewers criticized it for not having a playable king Graham, apparently some didn't figure out Gwydion's connection before they took the time to start complaining about that fact! Still others complained that it was too easy, the magic map made it too easy to move around, and kind have removed the exploratory feel. Still others complained about the use of the magic spells, since most puzzles involved those spells, and he book pretty much explained what you needed for those spells, and how to use them. So it limited the number of puzzles he player had to think of for themselves.

Interestingly enough there were those who complained about KQ5 as well for removing the parser, as another 'dumming' down of the games!

AidanTheGreat

06/06/2011, 09:21 pm

NO.

Not with this company.
Not with this direction.

Telltale
IS NOT
SIERRA.

Not even on their BEST DAY.

They do not have the design philosophy of Sierra. They do not have the humor of Sierra. They do not have the art direction of Sierra. They have never made a Sierra-style game and they have proven time and time again that a game worthy of a license that is SO INGRAINED IN THE HISTORY OF THE ADVENTURE GENRE.

And no, CONTRARY TO WHAT SOME PEOPLE MAY BELIEVE, LucasArts and, by extension Telltale, is not a BETTER ALTERNATIVE to Sierra that "fixed" and "evolved" the genre by removing all the bad aspects of it left in by Sierra. Sierra was a powerfully distinct entity, with its own philosophy and approach that couldn't be more different from the LucasArts or modern Telltale way of doing things. Until now I've been disappointed in Telltale, but now I'm absolutely livid. How dare they. THEY DON'T F@#$%ING DESERVE IT. THEY HAVEN'T EARNED IT. THEY CAN'T DO IT.

You crack me up little buddy.

larryboy

09/06/2011, 01:45 am

This is hilarious. So much backlash, when honestly, I have never played a Telltale game I didn't love completely. It's the next generation of adventure gaming, and its these pioneers who are the exact right people who should be remaking Monkey Island and King's Quest. Even their Sam and Max was good. The originals will always be golden, but I grew up with those games, and I am so pumped to see what Telltale does with the series. I place my faith entirely in their hands.
I wonder whether the nay-sayers have even played through an entire series of Telltale games recently. It boggles the mind how anybody could NOT like Tales of Monkey Island. :)

thom-22

09/06/2011, 10:33 am

Really? It boggles your mind that people have different opinions, tastes, preferences, likes and dislikes than you do? I'm sure it's comforting for one to find hilarity in people who think differently than they do, but most people eventually realize that there are many, many things they always thought of as self-obvious that actually aren't.

Anakin Skywalker

09/06/2011, 11:13 am

BagginsKQ

09/06/2011, 11:21 am

Whats boggling is there is often little tolerance for anyone that might actually like Telltale's style... Few people are tolerant of those opinions, and often insulting.

der_ketzer

09/06/2011, 11:41 am

DOTT is not "leaps and bounds better than the original." That's a subjective opinion on taste. The correct statement is that it's leaps and bounds nothing like the original.

It includes the original.

Whats boggling is there is often little tolerance for anyone that might actually like Telltale's style... Few people are tolerant of those opinions, and often insulting.
A lot of people liked TTGs style back when it was good and feel that it got a lot worse over time.

Anakin Skywalker

09/06/2011, 11:51 am

It includes the original.

A lot of people liked TTGs style back when it was good and feel that it got a lot worse over time.

There is a simple solution: Since you've made up your mind about TT, why post here? And don't even bother playing KQ when it comes out.

larryboy

09/06/2011, 12:35 pm

There is a simple solution: Since you've made up your mind about TT, why post here? And don't even bother playing KQ when it comes out.

Agreed! (And if Darth Vader says it, we should probably listen) ;)

If you hate Telltale, start your own forum.

thom-22

09/06/2011, 05:37 pm

What's boggling is that people could hate a game before they even see a single screenshot of it.

Except that hasn't happened -- that's your incorrect, self-serving interpretation. No one I know has made up their mind to "hate" a game that hasn't come out yet. I and many others dislike certain aspects of Telltale's recent games and don't want to seem them carried over into the King's Quest game, where they would be even more inappropriate given KQ's history.

Whats boggling is there is often little tolerance for anyone that might actually like Telltale's style... Few people are tolerant of those opinions, and often insulting.

If you take a look at the entire board, in particular the JP and BTTF forums -- not to mention larryboy's latest remark -- you will find the intolerance comes from people who think Telltale can do no wrong and no one should be allowed to say otherwise. I defy you to find one post from someone critical of Telltale that implies anyone who isn't should get off the forum or "start their own". Yet we're told that all the time. As for insulting, I'm pretty sure it's against the rules for one forum participant to insult another; you have recourse -- report any insults to the mods.

Anakin Skywalker

09/06/2011, 06:10 pm

Except that hasn't happened -- that's your incorrect, self-serving interpretation. No one I know has made up their mind to "hate" a game that hasn't come out yet. I and many others dislike certain aspects of Telltale's recent games and don't want to seem them carried over into the King's Quest game, where they would be even more inappropriate given KQ's history.

If you take a look at the entire board, in particular the JP and BTTF forums -- not to mention larryboy's latest remark -- you will find the intolerance comes from people who think Telltale can do no wrong and no one should be allowed to say otherwise. I defy you to find one post from someone critical of Telltale that implies anyone who isn't should get off the forum or "start their own". Yet we're told that all the time. As for insulting, I'm pretty sure it's against the rules for one forum participant to insult another; you have recourse -- report any insults to the mods.

So you'd prefer KQ stay dead and buried and not even give TT a SHOT at trying to revive it?

thom-22

09/06/2011, 06:42 pm

So you'd prefer KQ stay dead and buried and not even give TT a SHOT at trying to revive it?

I've never said that (though I believe others might have). I meant exactly what I said on the matter, nothing more, nothing less: "I ... dislike certain aspects of Telltale's recent games and don't want to seem them carried over into the King's Quest game, where they would be even more inappropriate given KQ's history."

BagginsKQ

09/06/2011, 06:53 pm

I personally found BTTF to be perfectly what I expect out of a BTTF style story and game. Anymore closer to older adventures and it might have not felt like BTTF...

Will they transfer that style onto KQ? I doubt it... Telltale has been pretty good sticking to the style of the series they are adapting to.

Tales of Monkey Island in my opinion copied the MI style very closely. If the game had been released on one cd, with just a 'chapter title splash screen' between chapters, I would have thought it was just another chapter based MI game like all the previous ones.

It is imo, probably my third favorite game in the series after MI2 really.

I think they will successfully pull off emulating the previous KQ style. I just hope that KQ7 isn't the style of game from the series that they choose to emulate... I'd rather see something between KQ5 and KQ6 in style and interface (but better graphics). But if they pulled off mimicing the older KQ1-3/Simpsons style (with modern graphics) it might be interesting.

thom-22

09/06/2011, 07:35 pm

I have a different opinion as to how good Telltale is at "sticking to the style of the series they are adapting to", so naturally, I come to a different conclusion about how likely it is they "will successfully pull off emulating the previous KQ style". My opinions and conclusions are just as valid as yours, they are not proscribed by the rules of this forum, and they do not constitute "hate" in any way, shape or form.

MusicallyInspired

09/06/2011, 08:01 pm

TMI was only in the spirit of the originals because its development team consisted mostly of people WHO HAD WORKED ON THE ORIGINALS. Nobody seems to get this.

RogerXY

09/07/2011, 03:09 am

So if the development team doesn't consist of people who have worked on the originals it's not possible to create the game in the spirit of the originals, is that what you're saying?

Anakin Skywalker

09/07/2011, 05:13 am

So if the development team doesn't consist of people who have worked on the originals it's not possible to create the game in the spirit of the originals, is that what you're saying?

Which would therefore mean that a fan group given the license wouldn't be able to create a game in the spirit of the originals either...

MusicallyInspired

09/07/2011, 05:50 am

Anakin Skywalker

09/07/2011, 06:06 am

I'm not saying that. In fact I'm saying there's no way to prove one way or the other (BUT, KQ2+ split the KQ community down the center and it was a fangame, a lot of people loved it and a lot of people hated it, then there's TSL...). What I'm saying is you can't use TMI as an example of how KQ can be as much like the original as TMI was to MI because most of the same people were designing it. And it's much more closer to Telltale's style.

You have to consider that in KQ's case, most of the people who were responsible for making KQ what it was are either happily retired, have moved on, are working on other projects, or simply have no interest.

It's a sticky situation. While TT might not be ideal for some, it is FAR, FAR better than if Activision had farmed out KQ to some third party who knew or cared nothing about adventure games or Sierra--Like Sierra did with the last two LSL games.

I mean Sierra had gotten so far away from it's roots that it ordered the Escape Factory people (who were working on the second aborted SQ7) not to even play the originals.

While I love the fan groups, I do notice with a lot of them there is a trend of putting lots of fan service in their games and tying all the original stories up together in some contrived way, and an overly strong interest in the Black Cloak Society--a group that was only mentioned ONCE briefly and only really as a plot point to prove Alhazred's guilt. Or an interest in turning the series into some sort of psychological soap opera like a certain fan sequel....

I don't want any of that in an official sequel, and I worry that fan groups would still insist on this sort of stuff if they were given the license--Because they're hardcore, diehard fans and thus only seeing it through that lens--That very narrow niche of a lens.

Most of the KQ games are standalone entities; You don't need to know any backstory or play any of the previous games to understand what's going on currently. And that's the way it should be. I loved KQ2VGA as a work of fan fiction and yes, AGDI did capture the TONE and FEEL of KQ magnificently (as did IA) but it's the storyline elements which are worrisome.

Myself, I'm fine with toying with gameplay elements, with graphics and the like. I'm fine with experimentation, which is why I love KQ7 and KQ8. Just don't give me an overly complex plot with twists, turns and 1,000 year old prophecies. Don't tie every villain together or pull a "No, I am your father" moment.

BagginsKQ

09/07/2011, 06:13 am

Like Sierra did with the last two LSL games.

Well actually Codemasters bought LSL license from Activision, as far as I uderstand it? So the last game in the series, was purely CodeMasters fault, and any future games will be their fault.

Anakin Skywalker

09/07/2011, 06:17 am

Well actually Codemasters bought LSL license from Activision, as far as I uderstand it? So the last game in the series, was purely CodeMasters fault, and any future games will be their fault.

No--Codemasters bought the License from Activision as work on the game was ending. Sierra had been working on it for about a year or so and then the Activision/Vivendi merger came and with it Sierra's end. They basically took what Sierra had been working on and released it. The screenshots and trailers for the game predate the merger and thus were Sierra's doing.
http://web.archive.org/web/20080916114427/http://www.sierra.com/en/home/news/product_news/011708_-_lsl_bob_announcement.html

Btw, did you know Codemasters also bought the original Sierra headquarters at Oakhurst when Sierra closed it in 1999? And when Sierra gave up the Realm Online, Codemasters bought that too (but later sold it)

MusicallyInspired

09/07/2011, 07:39 am

You have to consider that in KQ's case, most of the people who were responsible for making KQ what it was are either happily retired, have moved on, are working on other projects, or simply have no interest.

I do realise that. All I'm saying is...

...you can't use TMI as an example of how KQ can be as much like the original as TMI was to MI...

It's a completely different scenario and an unfair and over-optimistic comparison.

No--Codemasters bought the License from Activision as work on the game was ending. Sierra had been working on it for about a year or so and then the Activision/Vivendi merger came and with it Sierra's end.

Sierra was long dead even before Vivendi bought them out. It was during the Vivendi reign that Sierra's offices closed up shop and they became merely a brand name publisher. Then shortly afterwards they abolished the label completely. All before the ActiVision merger. You can't really say "Sierra" did anything during the Vivendi years because they didn't exist in any tangible form.

Anakin Skywalker

09/07/2011, 11:11 am

I do realise that. All I'm saying is...

It's a completely different scenario and an unfair and over-optimistic comparison.

Sierra was long dead even before Vivendi bought them out. It was during the Vivendi reign that Sierra's offices closed up shop and they became merely a brand name publisher. Then shortly afterwards they abolished the label completely. All before the ActiVision merger. You can't really say "Sierra" did anything during the Vivendi years because they didn't exist in any tangible form.

Yes, I'm well aware that Bellevue closed down in 2004 and that marked the end of Sierra as any tangible company; It did exist as a brand name used on most of VU's products. Vivendi got rid of their "Vivendi Games" name for the most part and "Sierra" de facto became "VU Games." Sierra was said to have 4 studios (which were Vivendi's) up to 2009, when the Sierra name was absorbed into Vivendi. Go look at the press releases from 2004-2009: Sierra is even said to have a President, Martin Tremblay.

Sierra was bought by Vivendi in 1998 and the Bellevue HQ existed until 2004. So yeah--Stuff like the Escape Factory SQ and the first LSL butchery were indeed done by Sierra. Because the guys running it had no clue about what these games were or what Sierra was supposed to be.

So yeah:
Ken Williams (CEO, 1979-1997; President 1979-1981, 1983-1995; Chairman 1988-1996)
Michael Brochu (CFO 1994-1995; President and COO, 1995-1997)
David Grenewetzki (President and CEO, 1998-2001)
Thomas K. Hernquist (President and CEO, 2001)
Mike Ryder (COO and VP of Productment Development, 2001; President and CEO, 2001-2004)* (He was the last true President of Sierra. He was the last one to operate the company from the Bellevue offices and he met with Ken in 2003 to talk about reviving Sierra's adventure game series)

Post Bellevue closure:
Martin Tremblay (President of Worldwide Studios, Sierra, 2005-2009)

Read this from 2007, after Bellevue was closed. It does seem that VU was trying to revive Sierra.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/sierra-keen-to-risk-new-ip

thom-22

09/07/2011, 11:31 am

While I love the fan groups, I do notice with a lot of them there is a trend of putting lots of fan service in their games and tying all the original stories up together in some contrived way... Or an interest in turning the series into some sort of psychological soap opera...

Most of the KQ games are standalone entities; You don't need to know any backstory or play any of the previous games to understand what's going on currently. And that's the way it should be.

Just don't give me an overly complex plot with twists, turns and 1,000 year old prophecies. Don't tie every villain together or pull a "No, I am your father" moment.

I find this really ironic. I agree with all of it, by the way, but the irony is that these are exactly the kinds of things Telltale is prone to do. The Devil's Playhouse has an overly complex plot with lots of twists and turns. Every episode ends with a cliffhanger of sorts (well, except the last one). I enjoyed this and many other aspects of TDP, but the final episode, save for one brilliant scene that wrapped up the main plot, just kind of collapsed under its own weight, sloppily brushing off details about things previous episodes suggested were important. The story in Puzzle Agent 2 has similar problems.

And talk about psychological soap opera... Have you met Morgan leFlay? Telltale has said this character was introduced to give players an emotional connection, which I happen to think is the last thing a cartoon comedy needs, at least not as a blatant effort. Not surprisingly, her whiny, self-absorbed ass came across as nothing but cheap sentiment to me, as did the whole shred-of-life (strand-of-life? whatever the hell it was) business. Don't get me wrong -- I enjoyed Tales very much, and one of the most entertaining side-characters in the entire MI series, The Marquis De Singe, is Telltale at its best.

Backstory, you say. Think about the appearances of the Voodoo Lady in the LucasArts MI games and what she represented. Did you ever say to yourself, Gee I'd really like to meet one of her former lovers. I don't see Telltale's build-up of a deep and longstanding rivalry between Le Chuck and the Voodoo Lady as any different than what the fan games have done with the KQ villains.

Simply put, I do not believe that Telltale is as good at storytelling as they think they are, as the importance of subtlety seems to be totally lost on them. (Anyone who goes around talking about emotional investment in characters as much as they do probably doesn't know how to do it very well.) I'm not saying their stories aren't compelling; they often are but they just go overboard sometimes.

Many of Telltale's fans eat up exactly the kinds of things you say you don't want to see (in fact I'm pretty sure I'd be roasted alive if I tried to diss Morgan in the ToMI forum); Telltale knows it and caters to it, to the point that BTTF is not so much a game as it is a content delivery system. Do you really think a company that describes its game engine as an "interactive storytelling technology" is going to resist the urge to develop the characters far more than anything we've seen in past KQ games and put them into a detailed, complex, emotional plot? I'll be shocked if they don't expand on existing backstory and/or invent new related backstory of their own.

Myself, I'm fine with toying with gameplay elements, with graphics and the like. I'm fine with experimentation, which is why I love KQ7 and KQ8.

Everything I said above would be inconsequential -- inconsequential! -- to me were it not for the fact that, starting after Tales, gameplay has suffered as story and presentation have become paramount. The irony here is that video games have the unique ability to promote character identification through gameplay -- the fusion of the player and the character to face substantive challenges should constitute a great deal of the story in ways that are simply not possible in other media. Yet Telltale seems now to be focusing more on cinematic devices for consumption rather than taking advantage of the opportunities provided by an interactive medium. Compare Chariots of the Dogs to any episode of BTTF.

So I don't mind "toying" with gameplay elements either; Telltale did some wonderful things with gameplay in their earlier works. But interactivity made meaningless and trivial for the sake of ensuring I get the cinematic experience the designers intended is unacceptable to me, especially in a KQ game. Telltale's recent titles and many, many things they have said in recent interviews lead to my conclusion that they are not the right company to revive KQ. (And DO NOT interpret that to mean I am unwilling to give them a shot or that I already hate the game.)

I've never considered whether it would be better for the KQ license to go to one of the fan groups, because I don't see how that was ever a realistic possibility. But there are any number of proven indie game developers who are doing all kinds of interesting things with gameplay, mixing genres, including adventure-like elements, innovative puzzle mechanics, etc. That seems to me a more natural progression from KQ8's evolutionary design than giving the license to a company known for reviving a different style of adventure game.

flitchard

10/30/2011, 06:50 am

I just hope they include death scenes, maybe with an "oops" button...

BagginsKQ

10/30/2011, 02:37 pm

And talk about psychological soap opera... Have you met Morgan leFlay? Telltale has said this character was introduced to give players an emotional connection, which I happen to think is the last thing a cartoon comedy needs, at least not as a blatant effort. Not surprisingly, her whiny, self-absorbed ass came across as nothing but cheap sentiment to me, as did the whole shred-of-life (strand-of-life? whatever the hell it was) business. Don't get me wrong -- I enjoyed Tales very much, and one of the most entertaining side-characters in the entire MI series, The Marquis De Singe, is Telltale at its best.

Backstory, you say. Think about the appearances of the Voodoo Lady in the LucasArts MI games and what she represented. Did you ever say to yourself, Gee I'd really like to meet one of her former lovers. I don't see Telltale's build-up of a deep and longstanding rivalry between Le Chuck and the Voodoo Lady as any different than what the fan games have done with the KQ villains.

Simply put, I do not believe that Telltale is as good at storytelling as they think they are, as the importance of subtlety seems to be totally lost on them. (Anyone who goes around talking about emotional investment in characters as much as they do probably doesn't know how to do it very well.) I'm not saying their stories aren't compelling; they often are but they just go overboard sometimes.

Many of Telltale's fans eat up exactly the kinds of things you say you don't want to see (in fact I'm pretty sure I'd be roasted alive if I tried to diss Morgan in the ToMI forum); Telltale knows it and caters to it, to the point that BTTF is not so much a game as it is a content delivery system. Do you really think a company that describes its game engine as an "interactive storytelling technology" is going to resist the urge to develop the characters far more than anything we've seen in past KQ games and put them into a detailed, complex, emotional plot? I'll be shocked if they don't expand on existing backstory and/or invent new related backstory of their own.

What do Monkey Island, On Stranger Tides , Davy Jones, Tia Dalma, LeChuck, De Cava and Voodoo Lady all have in common?

Well, I suppose that Monkey Island is inspired by the novel On Stranger Tides and Pirates of the Caribbean...

On Stranger Tides also was inspired by Pirates of the Caribbean, IIRC.

The whole Voodoo Lady/De Cava background is very similar to the Tia Dalma/Davy Jones backstory in the Pirates movies... though De Cava is not nearly as supernatural and/or evil (just an old guy)!

Pirates 4, went back and adapted On Stranger Tides story into the Pirates mythos...

I've never read On Stranger Tides, nor have I seen the movie adaptation, but I wonder if it has a Voodoo Lady/Priestess type character, and/or supernatural villain like the LeChuck/Davy Jones characters, and a pirate lover for the priestess...

Ron Gilbert once compared LeChuck and Davey Jones;

So, I'm looking through my neighbor's window with a pair of binoculars, trying to see the TV to figure out if they have HBO that I can steal when the latest trailer for the new Pirates of the Caribbean movie comes on and I'm thinking to myself, "Hey, I've seen this before... no... I've played this before... no... I've designed this before!" I'm thinking "This is the Monkey Island Movie!" Yeah, they kind of screwed up his beard, but that's LeChuck, and let's be honest, if I'd thought of the squid tentacles for a beard, I would have done that.

I'd find it ironic, and wouldn't be surprised, if in a future game it turns out that Voodoo Lady once dated LeChuck herself... One of the reasons she's always trying to help Guybrush destroy him, is take take revenge on him, ala the Tia Dalma angle :p...

Chyron8472

10/31/2011, 10:12 pm

What does any of that have to do with King's Quest?

Lambonius

11/01/2011, 06:18 am

Everything I said above would be inconsequential -- inconsequential! -- to me were it not for the fact that, starting after Tales, gameplay has suffered as story and presentation have become paramount. The irony here is that video games have the unique ability to promote character identification through gameplay -- the fusion of the player and the character to face substantive challenges should constitute a great deal of the story in ways that are simply not possible in other media. Yet Telltale seems now to be focusing more on cinematic devices for consumption rather than taking advantage of the opportunities provided by an interactive medium. Compare Chariots of the Dogs to any episode of BTTF.

So I don't mind "toying" with gameplay elements either; Telltale did some wonderful things with gameplay in their earlier works. But interactivity made meaningless and trivial for the sake of ensuring I get the cinematic experience the designers intended is unacceptable to me, especially in a KQ game. Telltale's recent titles and many, many things they have said in recent interviews lead to my conclusion that they are not the right company to revive KQ. (And DO NOT interpret that to mean I am unwilling to give them a shot or that I already hate the game.)

I've never considered whether it would be better for the KQ license to go to one of the fan groups, because I don't see how that was ever a realistic possibility. But there are any number of proven indie game developers who are doing all kinds of interesting things with gameplay, mixing genres, including adventure-like elements, innovative puzzle mechanics, etc. That seems to me a more natural progression from KQ8's evolutionary design than giving the license to a company known for reviving a different style of adventure game.

Couldn't agree more. Great post!!