Traditional animation vs. 3D animation...

[Leplaya]

I am not that big of King's quest, but I have seen bits of pieces of the games. The only game of King's quest that I remember playing was the 7th one, and that one was the Princeless Bride. I'm not that big into the animation of that one(Since I dislike it when people mimic the Disney style) but my sister likes it and it reminds her of Don Bluth's style. I know the game is likely to be done in 3D but will there be certain parts of the game that will use 2D? Or even better, used for the cutscenes of the game? It would be sweet if that would happen.

[Nintendo Boy1]

Hmm, maybe.. It would give the game that little pazzaz! (or however you spell it. :p)

[Woodsyblue]

I'm sure the game will use the Telltale Tool, like all the other Telltale games. So no, I don't think the game will incorporate any 2D.

[Nintendo Boy1]

I'm sure the game will use the Telltale Tool, like all the other Telltale games. So no, I don't think the game will incorporate any 2D.

SBCG4AP had some 2D effects and it was made with the Telltale Tool, too. And all of Puzzle Agent is in 2D.

[Simo Sakari Aaltonen]

I just sincerely hope Telltale do not go with the same caricaturish cartoon look as with Tales of Monkey Island et al. That would be so disheartening. King's Quest deserves a look all its own.

[Woodsyblue]

SBCG4AP had some 2D effects and it was made with the Telltale Tool, too. And all of Puzzle Agent is in 2D.

This is true. I guess I just don't imagine that's the direction they'll take KQ, but I guess only time will tell.

[thesporkman]

The graphics should look like this:

http://kyucon.com/qblock/#/16396

[Darkblader]

It would be nice, as long as it doesn't look like Disney or bluth.

[joek86]

King's Quest was always a bit cartoony to me (especially V with all the talking animals), so the move to the full animation style in VII seemed a logical step. And saying in can't look too much like disney or bluth is almost like saying it shouldn't be an animated style at all.

A realistic look would make for a jarring change of tone in the series. You can't get away with some of the things in KQ in an Elder Scrolls like hyper real game. Just TRY to imagine cedric flying in Oblivion (it is not recommended to do this more than three times in one day as it can cause insanity).

It would be interesting though for Telltale to try a new artistic style with this one, but I would much rather have it be somewhat cartoony and have them focus more on making the gameplay more like a Sierra game and less like Lucas Arts. (i.e. the heavy exploration and open world feel Sierra game tended to have)

[der_ketzer]

Just TRY to imagine cedric flying in Oblivion (it is not recommended to do this more than three times in one day as it can cause insanity).
Somebody should make a mod like this. And when you enter a cave Cedric will say Hoo- I will wait for you here graham. A rabbit almost killed me once in one of these caves.

[joek86]

Somebody should make a mod like this. And when you enter a cave Cedric will say Hoo- I will wait for you here graham. A rabbit almost killed me once in one of these caves.

No just a rabbit, a POISONOUS rabbit!

[philthethrill]

No just a rabbit, a POISONOUS rabbit!

You mean like this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcxKIJTb3Hg

[der_ketzer]

You mean like this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XcxKIJTb3Hg

exactely.

[Marty]

The graphics should look like this:

http://kyucon.com/qblock/#/16396

that would be cool

[LuigiHann]

They should make it all in the style of the Peasant's Quest sequence in SBCG4AP

[G.byrne]

Am I the only person who would love to see the game done in traditional artwork with a point and click interface rather than 3D graphics? Puzzle Agent has shown that the Telltale Engine can be adapted to hand drawn animated games

When I say traditional artwork I'm not directly referring to King's Quest VII... It wouldn't necessarily have to be cartoony, it could look visually realistic but hand drawn rather than CG'ish.

Opinions? They'll have to be just that, because Telltale will likely opt for CGI rather than animation rather than hire different animators.

[Radogol]

Am I the only person who would love to see the game done in traditional artwork with a point and click interface rather than 3D graphics?

Yes, you are. In my entire life, I have never seen an adventure game fan preferring 2d artwork to 3d. Ever. What a weird individual you are.

[G.byrne]

My parents always told me I was weird. I used to ask them why they would say such things...

They never explained... Now I understand why.

[Rather Dashing]

Puzzle Agent has shown that the Telltale Engine can be adapted to hand drawn animated games
No it didn't. That's a 3D game in a 3D engine right there, made to look very similar to a 2-dimensional cartoon style. It's no more 2D than Strong Bad's Cool Game.

[Falanca]

It's no more 2D than Strong Bad's Cool Game.

Well... first of, the main player character isn't modeled and rendered in 3D... And there is no cruising, and it does not make use of 3D camera angles. True, there are some 3D animations in the background sometimes but it's done to make fluent animations (which is funny since Grickle was never known for its fluent animations). Overall it's a 2D game.

[Giant Tope]

But it's still done in 3D. Everything but the characters and user interface are in 3D. Not to say that the Telltale Tool is incapable of doing Puzzle Agent using only illustrations (on a 3D axis). The difference is that whereas Puzzle Agent is generally fixed camera, I can't imagine King's Quest, with the cinematic notion that Telltale has taken to, staying fixed all the time. That would complicate things for the 2D backgrounds.

[G.byrne]

But it's still done in 3D. Everything but the characters and user interface are in 3D. Not to say that the Telltale Tool is incapable of doing Puzzle Agent using only illustrations (on a 3D axis). The difference is that whereas Puzzle Agent is generally fixed camera, I can't imagine King's Quest, with the cinematic notion that Telltale has taken to, staying fixed all the time. That would complicate things for the 2D backgrounds.

If I was mistaken about the game being 3D I apologize, but my intention was to point out that the game appears to be more hand drawn than 3D CGI. There aren't lots of 3D camera angles, there isn't a lot of wide open environments with CG animations... The game looks like it was drawn by hand where the other games look like they were sculpted on a computer.

[DAISHI]

I'd be thrilled if it looked like The Whispered World.

[thom-22]

If I was mistaken about the game being 3D I apologize, but my intention was to point out that the game appears to be more hand drawn than 3D CGI.

I got that your real question was more about the look, rather than the technology behind it. So, no, you're not the only one -- I would like KQ to have more of a hand-drawn look. But it's not a huge issue for me, not nearly as important as getting the gameplay right.

[GuybrushWilco]

I don't really care as long as it looks nice. I'd much rather see good 2D than bad 3D.

[icedan]

I have downloaded and played both Monkey Island and BTTF games from TT, both I ended up stopping half way through the first episode because the 3D engine is simply not suitable for adventure games. Adventure games are best designed with a 2D background and preferably a 2D character animation.

I just pretended Monkey Island Tales weren't part of the real franchise and left it alone, just like I did with Monkey Island 4 for mostly the same reason. Then you came out with BTTF, I was excited to hear the news, but that 3D engine kept nagging at the back of my head, I played BTTF and I was right, it's frustrating as hell.

Now TT, you are stepping into fierce territory, you can't just pick up Kings Quest and make it the way you think it's best to. You will be up against the most hardcore of adventure game fans of all time. Kings Quest is meant to be in 2D, it's best in 2D and not only that but you should consider a hard-option by where players have to type in everything, these two should save your arse, if you use your silly 3D engine to make this game, I will have lost any hope for TT. It IS important, it sets the mood, the scene, the users connection with the game. Your puzzles are OK, your stories are fairly good but your engine doesn't work.

I'm not the biggest Kings Quest fan out there, but I am one of the biggest Space Quest and Leisure Suit Larry fans out there and I fear if you take Kings Quest down the path of BTTF or MI Tales, then I'll be pissed if you ever take on the likes of LSL and Space Quest. Please do it right.

[MusicallyInspired]

Lol. No way they're ever going to work in 2D, dude. Ever.

[icedan]

Lol. No way they're ever going to work in 2D, dude. Ever.

If we don't speak out, then there's no hope for change. I don't think they are even aware how bad their engine is compared to a simple 2D adventure game.

[Woodsyblue]

Pretty much all video game genres have had to move into 3D to survive, some were more successful at this than others. It was called the '90s. I see no reason why an adventure games aren't suitable for 3D.

Grim Fandango is one of the greatest adventure games of all time and it was 3D with pre-rendered backgrounds. I'd like to hear some of your reasons why you believe 'Adventure games are best designed with a flat 2D background.' I can't think of single thing a 2D adventure game can do that a 3D one can't.

[icedan]

Pretty much all video game genres have had to move into 3D to survive, some were more successful at this than others. It was called the '90s. I see no reason why an adventure games aren't suitable for 3D.

Grim Fandango is one of the greatest adventure games of all time and it was 3D with pre-rendered backgrounds. I'd like to hear some of your reasons why you believe 'Adventure games are best designed with a flat 2D background.' I can't think of single thing a 2D adventure game can do that a 3D one can't.

Grim Fandango, as you said, has pre-rendered 2D Backgrounds, it never got frustrating. Same goes for The Longest Journey. It's ok if its pre-rendered.

Maybe others here can help me, but off the top of my head:

1. A LOT of detail can be put into the scenes.
2. Detail adds to the gameplay value, there's a sense of adventure and exploration.
3. It looks better.
4. It's easier to navigate when you can see where everything is at once and know where all your exits are, I found in TT games, it wasn't always clear where the other rooms are or where exactly you are standing in a particular room (the Doc's house in BTTF comes to mind).
5. Moving the character around in 3D space can get very frustrating, I can't imagine how frustrating it would be for those who are not experienced with moving in 3D, it would totally alienate them.

[icedan]

Let's compare some scenes:

Flat World:
http://img.listal.com/image/151891/600full-the-longest-journey-screenshot.jpg

3D World:
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4008/4491019549_bdd516c3f0.jpg

Flat World:
http://i2.ambrybox.com/260910/1285533265480.jpeg

3D World:
http://pcmedia.ign.com/pc/image/article/550/550086/wanted-a-wild-western-adventure-20040921022643077_640w.jpg
Can you see where all the exits are in this screen?

[tomimt]

Modern realtime 3D can be just as detailed, or even more so, than old pre-rendered graphics. It's just the qustion of the style and what the engine used can do. The comparision shots you've chosen aren't really fair, as the art style in them is very different. The pre-rendered ones try to approach realism, in where the realtime ones are more cartoony.

[icedan]

You need to convince me with some evidence tomimt. I know adventure games well, I like to make adventure games and as an artist focus on background and character art as well as the overall design. If there are adventure games out there that play in real-time 3D world with more detail than a 2D game, I'd REALLY like to see it, not because I think it would be better (because you still have to contend with the navigation problems).

[Radogol]

The Longest Journey is every bit as 3D as Escape from Monkey Island. What were you thinking?

[Lambonius]

The Longest Journey is every bit as 3D as Escape from Monkey Island. What were you thinking?

Yeah, that was a really bad comparison. I was just thinking the same thing. They both use 3D characters on 2D backgrounds.

It seems to me what you dislike more than 3D vs. 2D is a cartoon aesthetic vs. a realistic one. The only difference in "detail" in the examples you've shown has to do with the art direction, not the engine.

Granted, I'd love to see a KQ game with hand-painted 2D backgrounds in 1080p. That would be a dream come true. But no one will ever do it, unfortunately. It just doesn't fit the current model for what a video game is supposed to be.

[icedan]

The Longest Journey's background are pre-rendered, not real-time. There is a huge difference in the way the viewing angle is presented, the navigation controls of the main character and you can touch up still images in photoshop.

I don't care if it's cartooned (although I prefer it not to be), but you've missed the point if you think that's why I dislike 3D.

[Radogol]

The Longest Journey's background are pre-rendered, not real-time.

So are Escape's.

There is a huge difference in the way the viewing angle is presented, the navigation controls of the main character.

All right, but that's a design choice, not something that results from using real-time graphics over pre-baked ones.

[icedan]

So are Escape's.

Are you serious? *mind blown*.

[Olaus Petrus]

This brings back memories as I had the discussion if 3D is suitable for adventure games back in the 90s. And I actually preferred 3D compared to FMV (which was hot back then), because for example in GK3 it gave much greater feeling of exploring and direct control than FMV of GK2.

It's true that 3D of 90's hasn't aged particularly well, although it looked nice back then. However many more recent adventures which use 3D graphics don't look that badly aged, I still think that, for example, Syberia II (2004) has pretty graphics.

Besides these days most adventure games are either 3D or use 3D graphics which are disguised to look like 2D and real 2D is rarity. So I don't see why KQ should use real 2D.

Also I would find it suitable that new game would use similar style as first four KQ games, which were advertised as 3D games, although this time with real 3D graphics.

[icedan]

Being popular doesn't make it right. I've dealt with both 3D and 2D engines for different genres, in the beginning I was fighting for 3D because back in the 90's it seemed like the next thing. But I have come to the strong conclusion that in some cases, 2D is just better. 3D is good if you want to move around the world quickly. It's not good if you are going from one scene to another that contains many puzzles using many objects lying around.


btw, 3D graphics these days are still as terrible as they have been for a long time. I have a strong feeling most graphic designers do not want to use 3D to make their games because they know it downgrades the overall quality, in other words, it has no feeling, no character, art requires finer touches than modeled shapes and rendered textures.

[Olaus Petrus]

Being popular doesn't make it right. I've dealt with both 3D and 2D engines for different genres, in the beginning I was fighting for 3D because back in the 90's it seemed like the next thing. But I have come to the strong conclusion that in some cases, 2D is just better. 3D is good if you want to move around the world quickly. It's not good if you are going from one scene to another that contains many puzzles using many objects lying around.


btw, 3D graphics these days are still as terrible as they have been for a long time. I have a strong feeling most graphic designers do not want to use 3D to make their games because they know it downgrades the overall quality, in other words, it has no feeling, no character, art requires finer touches than modeled shapes and rendered textures.

Modern 3D looks fine to me and IMO works well in the adventure games. I think that if you're trying to create illusion of three dimensional space (which most adventures try to do, no matter if those games are 2D or 3D games) you might as well use real 3D environment. Only problems which come to my mind are that sometimes when game uses 3D characters and 2D backgrounds those characters don't quite fit, but luckily there are plenty of games which have solved that problem. And sometimes games with full 3D graphics are rather heavy and need lot of resources.

[Lambonius]

btw, 3D graphics these days are still as terrible as they have been for a long time. I have a strong feeling most graphic designers do not want to use 3D to make their games because they know it downgrades the overall quality, in other words, it has no feeling, no character, art requires finer touches than modeled shapes and rendered textures.

Now see...I agree with you about 2D adventure game graphics having a certain unmatched charm, but this statement just reeks of baseless bias. There are some absolutely STUNNING games out there that use full 3D graphics. Red Dead Redemption, Mass Effect 2, Skyrim (can't wait for that one), etc.

The main problem as I see it with adventure games and 3D graphics is the matter of character control.

Telltale's engine sucks balls when it comes to controlling the character. Seriously, it's just about the worst thing ever designed. The click-drag-move control scheme is absolutely broken any way you look at it. An abomination of video gaming control schemes.

I understand the logic behind it--that traditional point and click doesn't work well in 3D environments with cinematic camera angles like Telltale uses in most of their games, but seriously...someone needs to be slapped for coming up with this control scheme as the solution. Words can't describe how terrible it is. And believe me, I'm trying.

The problem with the recent games is that the alternative sucks, too. The keyboard movement is also shitty--it's the same reason console companies started using analog sticks when they made the transition to 3D. It is unbearably clunky to only be able to move in four (or 8 with the num pad) directions in a full 3D environment.

Until computers start coming standard with analog sticks attached to their mice (or something lol), 3D adventure games in the Telltale style will always be something of a chore to play. Better to wait for the console releases. ;)

A lot of this problem with control comes from adventure games' strict adherence to fixed camera angles for each scene. Just once, I'd like to see an adventure game attempt a full-roaming 3D environment like Red Dead Redemption or something. Keep all the traditional adventure gameplay mechanics--cut to cinematic closeups for conversations a la Mass Effect, have a traditional inventory with item combining and puzzle solving. Just put it in a full-roaming 3D environment. No fixed camera. And just see how it works. I can't think of any games that have done this yet--are there any?

[Radogol]

I can't think of any games that have done this yet--are there any?

Simon 3 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWK3-NAfa3U&feature=related) fits the bill, I suppose?

[GuybrushWilco]

I feel sorry for you if you abandoned TMI, because you missed out on a great game. I don't think adventure games are 'meant' to be in 2D or 3D. The 3D graphics are just another evolutionary step in gaming, just like from text adventures to graphic adventures, or the arrow keys and text parser to point and click. There is nothing inherently wrong with the use of 3D itself, it's just all in the execution. Admittedly, TMI had some control issues, but other games like Sam & Max worked wonderfully. However, there are many modern 2D adventure games that are also good.

[Olaus Petrus]

Telltale's engine sucks balls when it comes to controlling the character. Seriously, it's just about the worst thing ever designed. The click-drag-move control scheme is absolutely broken any way you look at it. An abomination of video gaming control schemes.

Really? It took about 2 minutes to learn it and using it felt natural really fast. I really like the system, but this just shows that things which are easy to some are difficult to others.

Simon 3 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWK3-NAfa3U&feature=related) fits the bill, I suppose?

Hah. Simon 3D is one of the ugliest games I have ever seen, which is pity because the puzzles and story are decent.

[joek86]

Actually, the fixed angles serve many purposes. The time constraint the TT games are made under is a major factor in most of them. If the camera angle is fix, then there's no need to render the fourth wall. Also, as they are made with PC in mind as well as consoles, a free camera would mean more controls to add as well, which would require more development time. Let's not forget that any good free camera system also requires its own A.I. to keep it from getting stuck behind walls and objects.

As far as the control thing goes, plug in a console style controller. You'd be surprised at how much simpler this is than the click and drag (which is a style I never cared for).

Also, to icedan, just because there's no precedent doesn't make something impossible. All the other genre that made the transition to 3d had someone just like you who at some point said that it would never work. Heck, I remember back in the N64 days when people were ranting that "Mario will never work in 3D." People even said the same thing about Fallout 3. While I agree that it would be nice to see some 2D based games, that doesn't mean that 3D has no place. Even the creator of King's Quest believed that it needed to move into 3D to remain viable.

2D world
http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSzrAP0db34UK7PUkTOgGVW-9PrT2cGnHEXyI_LEY1wjo7pAz72

3D world
http://wiimedia.ign.com/wii/image/article/817/817981/super-mario-galaxy-20070905112740834.jpg

2D world
http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT5TBTnQ_7_MR1WvSF-sdBt6tNh3h2pmacE7D7ipuHZlhchADBH

3D world
http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcREwpgYiL3CwTHn7naVIr27l7ntdK210 Iau4fWVqLCbzGG89Cs4

2D world
http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSQAb5NzU-B2j2P3wsP3KJr286Fc_bqHPtczMfOl9lE-8luWTGn

3D world
http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSCkz4JTSdrCNFZJmmCcQYABAIBUxhrn IjLHehcvn4vyEmS_opQ

Do you need more examples?

[doggans]

Kings Quest is not meant to be in 3D

There was probably a time when people were saying "King's Quest is not meant to have voices", "King's Quest is not meant to be controlled with a mouse", "King's Quest is not meant to have graphics better than AGI", etc.

Telltale's engine sucks balls when it comes to controlling the character. Seriously, it's just about the worst thing ever designed. The click-drag-move control scheme is absolutely broken any way you look at it. An abomination of video gaming control schemes.

I wouldn't click-and-drag is THAT bad, but I do far prefer using the arrow keys in Telltale games. The arrow keys never give me any trouble.

And no 3D game will EVER have controls nearly as frustrating as "Escape from Monkey Island", although most of that had to do with the camera placement.

[Lambonius]

There was probably a time when people were saying "King's Quest is not meant to have voices", "King's Quest is not meant to be controlled with a mouse", "King's Quest is not meant to have graphics better than AGI", etc.



I wouldn't click-and-drag is THAT bad, but I do far prefer using the arrow keys in Telltale games. The arrow keys never give me any trouble.

And no 3D game will EVER have controls nearly as frustrating as "Escape from Monkey Island", although most of that had to do with the camera placement.

Lol...yeah, of course I'm exaggerating. ;)

Actually, I find Telltale's games to be just as hard to control as Escape ever was. The fixed camera angles essentially mean that the keyboard controls work exactly the same way as in that game, but at least you can use the mouse to click on stuff, which was a mistake to take out of Escape (though it worked much better in Grim Fandango for some reason--or maybe it didn't, and I just think that because Grim was such a better game in every other way.) ;)

[Anakin Skywalker]

2D all the way:
http://www.skyrender.net/lp/part6_28pc.png
http://www.justadventure.com/reviews/KQ5/kq54.jpg
http://www.justadventure.com/reviews/KQ5/kq55.jpg

[Radogol]

There was probably a time when people were saying "King's Quest is not meant to have voices", "King's Quest is not meant to be controlled with a mouse", "King's Quest is not meant to have graphics better than AGI", etc.

To be fair, Icedan mentions wanting to have parser in his original post ;)

Really? It took about 2 minutes to learn it and using it felt natural really fast. I really like the system, but this just shows that things which are easy to some are difficult to others.

I also like click and drag, plus there's always WSAD. Neither solution can touch the elegance of the mouse, but they work all right.

Hah. Simon 3D is one of the ugliest games I have ever seen, which is pity because the puzzles and story are decent.

No doubt it's ugly, but it also seems to be exactly what Lambonius was interested to see - adventure game mechanics grafted onto a skeleton of 3d platformer. Except without all the platforming ;)

[Lambonius]

No doubt it's ugly, but it also seems to be exactly what Lambonius was interested to see - adventure game mechanics grafted onto a skeleton of 3d platformer. Except without all the platforming ;)

Lol...yeah, no platforming definitely. :)

I haven't played Simon 3D, so that's why I didn't think of it. I'd love to see an adventure game with current graphical technology that takes the free roam approach though. It could be amazing.

[der_ketzer]

Do you need more examples?

no. You clearly proofed that 2D is better.

[doggans]

To be fair, Icedan mentions wanting to have parser in his original post ;)

Fair enough. :P My point is, the KQ series has NEVER been about nostalgia; it has always been about pushing forward with art and technology. If anything, Telltale's game will be a break from tradition by not being cutting-edge ENOUGH, what with Telltale's limited budget and all.

[icedan]

It's a badly thought out title - it's more of a shout to TTG to stop with the 3D all the time.

The point about consoles is a good one, I am not aware if TTG make for consoles or not, if TTG do make for consoles then there is little choice but 3D and for me, and I think many others - an unfortunate one. I know I would never get the adventure/exploration feel out of it as I have with so many famous 2D adventure games.

Anakin's screenshots point out that when an artist creates 2D backgrounds they pay special attention to just about every pixel that goes into it, even the most detailed 3D scene can not practically achieve that - or rather, no sane artist would attempt to do that, and because of this the scenes become less mysterious and less interesting, which can often lead to less challenging as well.

[Majus]

3D is not supposed to be as detailed as a handdrawn background of course, it serves other purposes. The best thing is that its a virtual movie-studio, you can move in three dimensions, you are a lot more flexible, and you can work with the tricks that are used in the film-industry. You can create a whole palette moments that are a lot more difficult to do in 2D.
So, 3D is best when its in motion, so its a bit unfair proving a point with static screenshots.

I am not saying that 2D cant trigger the same emotions that 3D can do. Of course you can create space with multiple 2D-layers, and there are dozent of tricks to that. But that takes a lot more work to do, since you are busy with faking a third dimension, while you only have two.
Same thing that its a huge amount of work trying to create a beautiful handdrawn-background in 3D. Its not the same, and 2D would be the easier way indeed.

3D has a different approach than 2D, they both have pros and cons. I am not saying that one is better or worse than the other.

Everyone has a different opinion on that, but still its only fair to respect someones choice, since this is no right/wrong-argument.

[MusicallyInspired]

I'd like to see those KQ5 backgrounds professsionally rendered in real-time 3D with all the glorious Myst-like details that the 2D artwork attempted to garner with incredible dynamic lighting and real time shadows. No way that wouldn't look far greater than the original artwork. And I love KQ5's artwork.

3D can look far better than 2D ever can if people have the right hardware and the designers go all out. Skyrim looks absolutely phenomenal. Even Oblivion and Fallout 3 are fantastic. Better than anything 2D could ever throw at you because there are incredible fine details in the art AND in the animation. There's subtle movements and nuances to the gaming world in 3D that are just unmatched and unavailable in 2D. And then there's the fixed static camera angles in 2D. 3D blows this out of the water by being able to look at and examine everything in a gaming world from every angle. There's movement, animation, detail. A 3D gaming world is alive! 2D backgrounds, no matter how pretty they are, are static motionless, restricting, and boring.

I will agree that many 2D games look better than a lot of 3D games, but that was something that was true a few years ago. Not so much anymore. Oblivion is a 2004 game and it looks glorious! You can't tell me games like Portal 2, Half-Life 2 Episode 2, Left 4 Dead 2, Skyrim, and a lot of newer games don't look as good or don't have a better atmosphere than any 2D game. But no adventure game has done this properly yet because there aren't really that many triple-AAA adventure game studios (actually, there are none). And the ones that do exist do everything in a cartoony detail-less way. Jurassic Park looks fantastic, however, so hopefully Telltale will put the extra effort into detail for King's Quest as well. Not to the point of realism, however, so much as that incredible fantasy story-book artwork style. But not a straight disproportionate cartoon either.

3D is not supposed to be as detailed as a handdrawn background of course, it serves other purposes.

Wow. I don't agree with that at all.

Lol...yeah, no platforming definitely. :)

I haven't played Simon 3D, so that's why I didn't think of it. I'd love to see an adventure game with current graphical technology that takes the free roam approach though. It could be amazing.

Anyone remember that SQ1 remake that one guy was making with the Doom 3 engine? I abandoned it for other projects, but it look fantastic. First person, but still. It was to have all the elements of adventure gaming; inventory, puzzles, etc. It would have been great.

Fair enough. :P My point is, the KQ series has NEVER been about nostalgia; it has always been about pushing forward with art and technology. If anything, Telltale's game will be a break from tradition by not being cutting-edge ENOUGH, what with Telltale's limited budget and all.

THIS. King's Quest was always about innovating new technology and, failing that, pushing the boundaries of technologies that already existed.

[Radogol]

Dead Cyborg (http://deadcyborg.com/) is an interesting example of a fully 3D adventure game.

[Lambonius]

I just love the idea behind a KQ5 art direction going into 1080p 2-dimensional animated backgrounds. Like the Monkey Island Special Editions but with the beauty of the KQ5-style artwork. Why can't Telltale make THAT game??!

[Chyron8472]

I'd like to see those KQ5 backgrounds professsionally rendered in real-time 3D with all the glorious Myst-like details that the 2D artwork attempted to garner with incredible dynamic lighting and real time shadows. No way that wouldn't look far greater than the original artwork. And I love KQ5's artwork.

3D can look far better than 2D ever can if people have the right hardware and the designers go all out. Skyrim looks absolutely phenomenal. Even Oblivion and Fallout 3 are fantastic. Better than anything 2D could ever throw at you because there are incredible fine details in the art AND in the animation. There's subtle movements and nuances to the gaming world in 3D that are just unmatched and unavailable in 2D. And then there's the fixed static camera angles in 2D. 3D blows this out of the water by being able to look at and examine everything in a gaming world from every angle. There's movement, animation, detail. A 3D gaming world is alive! 2D backgrounds, no matter how pretty they are, are static motionless, restricting, and boring.

I will agree that many 2D games look better than a lot of 3D games, but that was something that was true a few years ago. Not so much anymore. Oblivion is a 2004 game and it looks glorious! You can't tell me games like Portal 2, Half-Life 2 Episode 2, Left 4 Dead 2, Skyrim, and a lot of newer games don't look as good or don't have a better atmosphere than any 2D game. But no adventure game has done this properly yet because there aren't really that many triple-AAA adventure game studios (actually, there are none). And the ones that do exist do everything in a cartoony detail-less way. Jurassic Park looks fantastic, however, so hopefully Telltale will put the extra effort into detail for King's Quest as well. Not to the point of realism, however, so much as that incredible fantasy story-book artwork style. But not a straight disproportionate cartoon either.

The KQ series has NEVER been about nostalgia; it has always been about pushing forward with art and technology. If anything, Telltale's game will be a break from tradition by not being cutting-edge ENOUGH, what with Telltale's limited budget and all.

THIS. King's Quest was always about innovating new technology and, failing that, pushing the boundaries of technologies that already existed.

I agree with all of this. And you know, I hadn't thought of the fact that King's Quest was well known for pushing the boundaries of current technology in video games. With that in mind, I have to concede that 3D should work for KQ, so long as it's done well.


...and I can't believe people are using Escape from Monkey Island as an example of why 3D video games are crap.

EMI is eleven years old; it was created when 3D adventure games were only in their infancy; it used pre-rendered backgrounds whose camera angles did not dynamically change as the character moved; and the control scheme for the game was developed specifically (and however poorly) so that it would easily port to consoles of the time (ie. PS1), meaning that everything ingame- even navigating the Menu- required the use of WASD. Zero mouse control in EMI. At all.

Why would you use EMI as an example of 3D not working? That game is terrible, yes, but it's terrible for many more reasons than just having 3D sprites.

[Irishmile]

I like both.... There are some real advantages from either...

also this thread is really suffering from the "My opinion is fact" epidemic...

[Kolgax]

Telltale's engine sucks balls when it comes to controlling the character. Seriously, it's just about the worst thing ever designed. The click-drag-move control scheme is absolutely broken any way you look at it. An abomination of video gaming control schemes.

I agree, which is why I play with WASD keys one hand on the keyboard, the other on the mouse.

I think the art style with the lavish paintings is cool and all and I agree a bit about the 3D thing in this case at least. Monkey Island I think can get away with it a bit more just because it was cartoony.

I don't think 3D can't ever be done, but rather I think Telltale should update the bejeesus out of their engine to pull it off as well. I think it should look a bit like Oblivion but slightly more whimsical/fantasy. I doubt that Telltale is gonna get all the people to make the graphics on par with Skyrim or anything, but I'm just saying I think it would look better like this of course. :) It shouldn't look as cartoony as Sam n Max or Monkey Island ideally...

But heck, who am I kidding, we have come a long way since -

http://www.dribin.org/dave/blog/images/kq2-small.png

I still think Telltale will probably do a better job than Sierra did as far as the actual game experience, but that's just my opinion and feel free to call me a worthless sack for having it if you like. :)

And how can we ever forget the classic:

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20080110190802/spacequest/images/thumb/1/1c/KingsQuestXXXXVIII.png/180px-KingsQuestXXXXVIII.png

[Irishmile]

I do not understand the people who hate the click and drag but STILL use it... TTG gave us other options of control, WASD, and or a gamepad...

[MusicallyInspired]

Not to mention that WASD came first. Click&Drag was added as an afterthought when people complained about not being able to play the game with one hand on the mouse. I always thought it was horrible and couldn't understand why people would strive for it so much.

[icedan]

Fair enough. :P My point is, the KQ series has NEVER been about nostalgia; it has always been about pushing forward with art and technology. If anything, Telltale's game will be a break from tradition by not being cutting-edge ENOUGH, what with Telltale's limited budget and all.

If that's true, it has fallen short. Monkey Island progressed much faster and better than KQ did. My favourite episode is number 2, and number 3 appears to be the most favourite of all for most others and the reasons you will hear is because..... of the 2D artwork and animations!

[Radogol]

In 20 years, there will be a thread full of whining about voice control. "Click and drag is the way to go" the purists will scream at the top of their lungs.

My favourite episode is number 2, and number 3 appears to be the most favourite of all for most others and the reasons you will hear is because..... of the 2D artwork and animations!

Don't forget the enchanting PC speaker rendition of Greensleeves. Those Amiga peasants with their unsophisticated tastes ruined it for all of us with their 32 colors :(

[icedan]

3D is not supposed to be as detailed as a handdrawn background of course, it serves other purposes. The best thing is that its a virtual movie-studio, you can move in three dimensions, you are a lot more flexible, and you can work with the tricks that are used in the film-industry. You can create a whole palette moments that are a lot more difficult to do in 2D.
So, 3D is best when its in motion, so its a bit unfair proving a point with static screenshots.

I am not saying that 2D cant trigger the same emotions that 3D can do. Of course you can create space with multiple 2D-layers, and there are dozent of tricks to that. But that takes a lot more work to do, since you are busy with faking a third dimension, while you only have two.
Same thing that its a huge amount of work trying to create a beautiful handdrawn-background in 3D. Its not the same, and 2D would be the easier way indeed.

3D has a different approach than 2D, they both have pros and cons. I am not saying that one is better or worse than the other.

Everyone has a different opinion on that, but still its only fair to respect someones choice, since this is no right/wrong-argument.

As I stated earlier, 3D is best when in motion, so there we can agree, but in adventure games, motion is NOT important, it's hardly even needed. 3D's pro's don't fully work well in an adventure game, but 2D's does and I can't think of many 2D con's, maybe more difficult to do? I don't know if I would agree with that either.

[icedan]

I'd like to see those KQ5 backgrounds professsionally rendered in real-time 3D with all the glorious Myst-like details that the 2D artwork attempted to garner with incredible dynamic lighting and real time shadows. No way that wouldn't look far greater than the original artwork. And I love KQ5's artwork.

3D can look far better than 2D ever can if people have the right hardware and the designers go all out. Skyrim looks absolutely phenomenal. Even Oblivion and Fallout 3 are fantastic. Better than anything 2D could ever throw at you because there are incredible fine details in the art AND in the animation. There's subtle movements and nuances to the gaming world in 3D that are just unmatched and unavailable in 2D. And then there's the fixed static camera angles in 2D. 3D blows this out of the water by being able to look at and examine everything in a gaming world from every angle. There's movement, animation, detail. A 3D gaming world is alive! 2D backgrounds, no matter how pretty they are, are static motionless, restricting, and boring.

I will agree that many 2D games look better than a lot of 3D games, but that was something that was true a few years ago. Not so much anymore. Oblivion is a 2004 game and it looks glorious! You can't tell me games like Portal 2, Half-Life 2 Episode 2, Left 4 Dead 2, Skyrim, and a lot of newer games don't look as good or don't have a better atmosphere than any 2D game. But no adventure game has done this properly yet because there aren't really that many triple-AAA adventure game studios (actually, there are none). And the ones that do exist do everything in a cartoony detail-less way. Jurassic Park looks fantastic, however, so hopefully Telltale will put the extra effort into detail for King's Quest as well. Not to the point of realism, however, so much as that incredible fantasy story-book artwork style. But not a straight disproportionate cartoon either.

Wow. I don't agree with that at all.

Anyone remember that SQ1 remake that one guy was making with the Doom 3 engine? I abandoned it for other projects, but it look fantastic. First person, but still. It was to have all the elements of adventure gaming; inventory, puzzles, etc. It would have been great.

THIS. King's Quest was always about innovating new technology and, failing that, pushing the boundaries of technologies that already existed.

Do you know what i'm reading when I read this? "3D is cool, so it's better". But here you have missed the point. I did not say that 3D was bad, I said adventure games operating under a 3D environment is bad. It's okay if the artists have to make their worlds in pre-rendered 3D, sometimes that realistic look works, like it did for Syberia. But as you can see TTG don't go for real, they go for a cartooned art style. I guarantee the vast majority of those who play TTG's version of KQ will still prefer the original titles in the end and my argument is because the original KQ has a better "feel" to it - that is the important word here. I'd love to see KQ in full 3D too - as long as it's pre-rendered.

[doggans]

If that's true, it has fallen short. Monkey Island progressed much faster and better than KQ did.

King's Quest V came out the same year as Secret of Monkey Island. You really think SMI is a bigger technological achievement than KQ5?

(I *do* think SMI is a better game, but that's not what this discussion is really about. :P )

[MusicallyInspired]

As I stated earlier, 3D is best when in motion, so there we can agree, but in adventure games, motion is NOT important, it's hardly even needed. 3D's pro's don't fully work well in an adventure game, but 2D's does and I can't think of many 2D con's, maybe more difficult to do? I don't know if I would agree with that either.

I can't agree with that. Why is motion unimportant for adventures? Why can't we move around free roaming in adventure environments and TRULY explore the game world? That's real immersion in my book, and immersion is what adventure games are all about.

Do you know what i'm reading when I read this? "3D is cool, so it's better". But here you have missed the point.

If that's all you got out of my post you completely missed my point.

I did not say that 3D was bad, I said adventure games operating under a 3D environment is bad.

I don't agree. You can have the exact same fixed camera scene reproduced from KQ5 or any other game but the added natural animations of objects in those scenes would make them very much more alive. I think you're underestimating the power of 3D. The camera doesn't have to be in motion, though I don't see why it shouldn't.

It's okay if the artists have to make their worlds in pre-rendered 3D, sometimes that realistic look works, like it did for Syberia.

Syberia has got to be one of the most boring adventure games I've ever played. The backgrounds so dead and dry and without colour or movement. I hated those games, though the graphics were the least of my qualms.

But as you can see TTG don't go for real, they go for a cartooned art style. I guarantee the vast majority of those who play TTG's version of KQ will still prefer the original titles in the end and my argument is because the original KQ has a better "feel" to it - that is the important word here. I'd love to see KQ in full 3D too - as long as it's pre-rendered.

TTG do go for a more cartoony look most of the time, hopefully that's not where they take King's Quest. But we can't make any judgments at this point on the "feel" because it doesn't even exist yet.

I don't really understand your hardcore defense of pre-rendered graphics. Or static graphics in general. I have nothing against 2D or 3D but I definitely see 3D as the way to go from here. Like I said before, no adventure company has truly done adventures correctly with a AAA production quality. Pre-rendered is just so incredibly lifeless looking. Even compared to hand painted art. There's just so much more possibilities with 3D. Nobody has really approached it properly yet, however, except for a few FPS's. And The Elder Scrolls.

[joek86]

Really makes you wonder that, if some of these people were born a generation earlier, if they would have been the ones ranting about the original King's Quest because "adventure games are supposed be in text form. They're dumbing it down for people who can't read." Believe it or not, people did actually make this argument. Also it's ironic that the original King's Quest was touted as having a "3D graphical engine" because it could layer graphics.

[zounds!]

Really makes you wonder that, if some of these people were born a generation earlier, if they would have been the ones ranting about the original King's Quest because "adventure games are supposed be in text form. They're dumbing it down for people who can't read." Believe it or not, people did actually make this argument. Also it's ironic that the original King's Quest was touted as having a "3D graphical engine" because it could layer graphics.

I hear you. The point and click thing was a huge deal for some people. I've heard people say that the mouse driven games killed adventure gaming and that no one could afford to own a system that would even play them. People (including myself) used to say that DOS was never going to be replaced by Windows too. It's not all bad and I think KQ could do well with a 3D environment.... Or bad, it really all depends on TT.

[Simo Sakari Aaltonen]

I think 2D and 3D are both perfectly fine and valid. However, at least right now I am much more intrigued by the prospect of a great King's Quest in 3D. But getting the art style right is very important.

[icedan]

Really makes you wonder that, if some of these people were born a generation earlier, if they would have been the ones ranting about the original King's Quest because "adventure games are supposed be in text form. They're dumbing it down for people who can't read." Believe it or not, people did actually make this argument. Also it's ironic that the original King's Quest was touted as having a "3D graphical engine" because it could layer graphics.

There's nothing wrong with text-only adventure games, it's more like an interactive story. I personally don't enjoy it because as an artist I like to see art.

I think I've stated my point thoroughly enough to get it across, I have to assume that MusicallyInspired simply prefers adventure games in a 3D world and that's cool too. I'm just fighting for what I think is best for KQ.

[tomimt]

I think I've stated my point thoroughly enough to get it across, I have to assume that MusicallyInspired simply prefers adventure games in a 3D world and that's cool too. I'm just fighting for what I think is best for KQ.

I think you are more of fighing for nostalgia. The technological advancements that KQ brought included much more than just graphics. Though they did that too, when IBM asked Sierra to develope a graphical game for their new PC system. Sierra was developing better musics and sound with Adlib and MT-32, then they brought full voice acting with CD version of KQ5 when CD wasn't yet that common yet. When came the time, they went in 3D.

If Sierra was up and about today, and making the new KQ game, they'd do it full 3D environment.

[Radogol]

I have to assume that MusicallyInspired simply prefers adventure games in a 3D world and that's cool too. I'm just fighting for what I think is best for KQ.

I don't always agree with Musically - in fact I rarely do - but are you aware of who he is and what projects he's been involved in? Does AGDI ring a bell? I believe he does not *prefer* 3D, he simply defends it as a valid form of presentation for adventure games.

[Olaus Petrus]

Really makes you wonder that, if some of these people were born a generation earlier, if they would have been the ones ranting about the original King's Quest because "adventure games are supposed be in text form. They're dumbing it down for people who can't read." Believe it or not, people did actually make this argument. Also it's ironic that the original King's Quest was touted as having a "3D graphical engine" because it could layer graphics.

Then the same people protested in the early 90's that Sierra is ruining it's beloved franchises when they made remakes of KQ1 and other AGI games. Those protests were quite succesful and Sierra abandoned completely it's plans to update their AGI games, because the remakes sold badly.

[Radogol]

Then the same people protested in the early 90's that Sierra is ruining it's beloved franchises when they made remakes of KQ1 and other AGI games. Those protests were quite succesful and Sierra abandoned completely it's plans to update their AGI games, because the remakes sold badly.

Is that a fact? The word I've heard is that they abandoned their plans for an SCI KQ2, but PQ1, LSL1 and SQ1 still came out, despite the outrage over KQ1. I left out QfG1 since it wasn't AGI ;)

Come to think of it, your version of the story does make sense, as there weren't any remade sequels. However, I would appreciate if you could share your source. Not because I don't believe you, only because I'm curious ;)

[Olaus Petrus]

Is that a fact? The word I've heard is that they abandoned their plans for an SCI KQ2, but PQ1, LSL1 and SQ1 still came out, despite the outrage over KQ1. I left out QfG1 since it wasn't AGI ;)

Come to think of it, your version of the story does make sense, as there weren't any remade sequels. However, I would appreciate if you could share your source. Not because I don't believe you, only because I'm curious ;)

I said practically the same thing and I don't make sense? I guess I was bit vague, what I meant was that they updated first entires of the series (="remakes of KQ1 and other AGI games" in my previous post), but AFAIK those remakes generated hostility and sold badly and they abandoned the project to update also the sequels. I'm working at the moment, but after work I'll check if I remember the sources which told me that remakes were badly received and didn't sell enough, so they focused to new games instead.

[icedan]

I don't always agree with Musically - in fact I rarely do - but are you aware of who he is and what projects he's been involved in? Does AGDI ring a bell? I believe he does not *prefer* 3D, he simply defends it as a valid form of presentation for adventure games.

I'm not very aware of AGDI, only stumbled upon on it once upon a time. I don't recall him stating that he's likes 2D backgrounds, so I ended up presuming he's not for them as much as he is for 3D worlds.

[icedan]

I think you are more of fighing for nostalgia. The technological advancements that KQ brought included much more than just graphics. Though they did that too, when IBM asked Sierra to develope a graphical game for their new PC system. Sierra was developing better musics and sound with Adlib and MT-32, then they brought full voice acting with CD version of KQ5 when CD wasn't yet that common yet. When came the time, they went in 3D.

If Sierra was up and about today, and making the new KQ game, they'd do it full 3D environment.

It's not about the technology. There are a bunch of adventure games that use new technology that I enjoy, and especially the upcoming L.A. Noir looks very interesting. When I say 2D backgrounds are more mysterious in nature - I mean it.

[Radogol]

I said practically the same thing and I don't make sense?

I said you DO make sense ;)

I'm not very aware of AGDI, only stumbled upon on it once upon a time.

You can find games made by AGDI at http://www.agdinteractive.com/games/games.html

[Olaus Petrus]

I said you DO make sense ;)

Sorry, I misread your post. Apparently not even full pot of coffee can keep me focused anymore and I have million and one thing to do. Similar thing happened to me last Friday, so the logical conclusions are that either I shouldn't try to write into forums in hurry when I'm tired and have huge amount of work to do or I shouldn't work on Fridays.

[joek86]

There was an adventure series that made the shift to full 3D and actually didn't lose detail or gameplay, but rather gained some, that was the MYST series. The last two games were 3D and still felt like they belonged to the series. If you haven't tried them yet give them a shot, especially if you're a MYST fan, good luck trying to get Uru to run on vista or 7 though.

[icedan]

There was an adventure series that made the shift to full 3D and actually didn't lose detail or gameplay, but rather gained some, that was the MYST series. The last two games were 3D and still felt like they belonged to the series. If you haven't tried them yet give them a shot, especially if you're a MYST fan, good luck trying to get Uru to run on vista or 7 though.

Myst was pre-rendered 3D and you "walked" from scene to scene. Again, not what I am complaining about.

[icedan]

I said you DO make sense ;)



You can find games made by AGDI at http://www.agdinteractive.com/games/games.html

I remember when these were in production. They look brilliant. Downloading asap. Thanks.

[Hituro]

I think what's even more important about the game is the overall story. Graphics don't come first regardless of if they're 3D or 2D. if the Story sucks, I'm not going to even want to play it. As far as 2D and 3D go, I like both. Honestly, it's more of an artistic and gameplay choice. For example, I've played 3D adventure games with fixed camera angles. And I've played adventure games without fixed camera angles. The fixed camera angles act just like the old 2D games. I think it sounds more like you whining that you don't like 3D adventure games without fixed camera angles. I mean, when you posted that picture with the comment "Can you find the exits!?" I mean... really? The door was pretty obvious unless you're just plain blind. if you don't like a new challenge added to your games, then you must not be a true adventure player. I'm sorry if the exits in games have become more complex than just simply clicking on the edge of the screen.

[Irishmile]

I think what's even more important about the game is the overall story. Graphics don't come first regardless of if they're 3D or 2D. if the Story sucks, I'm not going to even want to play it. As far as 2D and 3D go, I like both. Honestly, it's more of an artistic and gameplay choice. For example, I've played 3D adventure games with fixed camera angles. And I've played adventure games without fixed camera angles. The fixed camera angles act just like the old 2D games. I think it sounds more like you whining that you don't like 3D adventure games without fixed camera angles. I mean, when you posted that picture with the comment "Can you find the exits!?" I mean... really? The door was pretty obvious unless you're just plain blind. if you don't like a new challenge added to your games, then you must not be a true adventure player. I'm sorry if the exits in games have become more complex than just simply clicking on the edge of the screen.

That is exactly how I feel... Some of those 3D games are pretty awesome when you get to control the camera and really explore your surroundings ... Being able to turn completely around in 2D is a very difficult task.

[MusicallyInspired]

I think I've stated my point thoroughly enough to get it across, I have to assume that MusicallyInspired simply prefers adventure games in a 3D world and that's cool too. I'm just fighting for what I think is best for KQ.

Radogol summed it up nicely:

I don't always agree with Musically - in fact I rarely do - but are you aware of who he is and what projects he's been involved in? Does AGDI ring a bell? I believe he does not *prefer* 3D, he simply defends it as a valid form of presentation for adventure games.

I have nothing against 2D. I love it. But I think 3D is just as capable if not more capable of delivering a great adventure experience. It's all in the way it's handled, however. There's no adventure games that I prefer in 3D over 2D because no adventure game company has done it properly yet. The potential is great. The results are few.

Is that a fact? The word I've heard is that they abandoned their plans for an SCI KQ2, but PQ1, LSL1 and SQ1 still came out, despite the outrage over KQ1. I left out QfG1 since it wasn't AGI ;)

Come to think of it, your version of the story does make sense, as there weren't any remade sequels. However, I would appreciate if you could share your source. Not because I don't believe you, only because I'm curious ;)

Yeah, this is the story as I remember it as well when I was wondering why Sierra didn't remake the rest of the games. They probably didn't cancel the other game remakes because they were already in production.

I'm not very aware of AGDI, only stumbled upon on it once upon a time. I don't recall him stating that he's likes 2D backgrounds, so I ended up presuming he's not for them as much as he is for 3D worlds.

Again, I have nothing against 2D. KQ5 is my favourite Sierra game half because of the graphics alone. They're fantastic. And like I said above, I'm fighting for the potential of 3D adventuring. Nobody has managed to do it properly and phenomenally yet. We either have pre-rendered static museum-like beauty or cartoony low-quality real-time 3D with restricted camera angles. I dislike both.

Myst was pre-rendered 3D and you "walked" from scene to scene. Again, not what I am complaining about.

You missed his point. That last two Myst games (Myst 5: End of Ages and Uru) were full real-time 3D and not pre-rendered at all. There was also "realMyst" which was an official full 3D remake of the original which looks FAR better. Actually it's a great example of my point earlier about how 3D can look more alive and has more potential than static pre-rendered or hand drawn backgrounds (even with animation). The Stoneship Age in the game was altered to have stormy windy, lightning, and rainy whether and every age had a clock cycle from day to night which really added to the atmosphere. Granted this is early millennium and the graphics are a bit dated now but you can't deny that it looks better than the original at any rate. Imagine what they could do now with today's technology.

Some examples of what I mean:

Myst (original)
http://www.hardcoregaming101.net/myst/2-%20MystImages/Myst%2803%29.png
http://www.mystjourney.com/img/screenshots/myst-46.jpg
http://zalthor.sitesled.com/channelwood_01.jpg

realMyst (3D remake)
http://www.hardcoregaming101.net/myst/2-%20MystImages/realMyst%2803%29.png
http://www.hardcoregaming101.net/myst/2-%20MystImages/realMyst%2815%29.png
http://fc04.deviantart.net/images2/i/2004/01/7/f/Wooded_Realm___RealMyst.jpg
http://mystolgia.angelfire.com/Images/realmyst.png

But let me ask you something, why is pre-rendered ok and real-time not ok? What's the difference? Years ago there was a vast difference as pre-rendered look much better than real-time because of hardware deficiencies at the time, but today you can get basically the same quality (and better!) as all those pre-rendered games with today's hardware and all in real-time.

I'm not a 3D fanboy, I love 2D. But you're really not giving 3D the credit it deserves. It was true in the early 2000's and thereabouts that 3D wasn't that spectacular but it has really grown and has a lot of potential. Look at Heavy Rain, for instance. Now granted, these games make 3D look realistic and that's not necessarily how King's Quest should be portrayed I agree. But just because it's 3D doesn't mean it has to look like Tales of Monkey Island either. 3D is certainly capable of portraying the correct art style in 3D and the right interface as long as the design direction is in the right mindset.

[zounds!]

I don't think many have seen a good example of the kind of storybook art style used in the 2d games. The hand painted background does have it's charm, and that sort of crude look makes it seem more fantastical. Not expaining this well... :P

[MusicallyInspired]

You're basically saying what I'm saying. Nobody has done it right in 3D yet. Doesn't mean it isn't possible. You just need the right art direction.

[icedan]

I think what's even more important about the game is the overall story. Graphics don't come first regardless of if they're 3D or 2D. if the Story sucks, I'm not going to even want to play it. As far as 2D and 3D go, I like both. Honestly, it's more of an artistic and gameplay choice. For example, I've played 3D adventure games with fixed camera angles. And I've played adventure games without fixed camera angles. The fixed camera angles act just like the old 2D games. I think it sounds more like you whining that you don't like 3D adventure games without fixed camera angles. I mean, when you posted that picture with the comment "Can you find the exits!?" I mean... really? The door was pretty obvious unless you're just plain blind. if you don't like a new challenge added to your games, then you must not be a true adventure player. I'm sorry if the exits in games have become more complex than just simply clicking on the edge of the screen.

That screenshot I posted where I asked can you find all the exits, yes there is clearly a door, but you can't see the wall on the left side, so you're not sure immediately if there is another door there or if you can even walk that way.

Also, you're mistaken if you think I dislike 3D games. Are you sure you have read all my posts before posting yourself?

[icedan]

But let me ask you something, why is pre-rendered ok and real-time not ok? What's the difference? Years ago there was a vast difference as pre-rendered look much better than real-time because of hardware deficiencies at the time, but today you can get basically the same quality (and better!) as all those pre-rendered games with today's hardware and all in real-time.


The point of this thread was to stir TTG enough to consider doing this in 2D instead of using their 3D engine which I find thoroughly frustrating and I don't believe they will exit their cartooned art style accompanying the bad navigation controls - that's my main fear concerning their upcoming KQ.

I certainly agree with you that 3D worlds do have potential, it's all in the art style. When I look at those Myst titles (btw I never played Myst beyond it's 2nd version), I can't help but notice how life-less and character-less the screens are, is it because I know how the artists made the worlds? Is it because I can see the polygons before the object? Is it just the textures or the lighting? Whatever the reason, it's not working for me. As Zounds noted, 2D has a charm and fantastical feel to it.

[SHODANFreeman]

That screenshot I posted where I asked can you find all the exits, yes there is clearly a door, but you can't see the wall on the left side, so you're not sure immediately if there is another door there or if you can even walk that way.

Also, you're mistaken if you think I dislike 3D games. Are you sure you have read all my posts before posting yourself?

How is knowing where all the exits are the moment you enter a screen the most important part of a game?

[icedan]

Type: Look Around

[SHODANFreeman]

Type: Look Around

Obvious exits are NORTH, SOUTH, and DENNIS.

[wilco64256]

Type: Look Around

Any decent game requires that you make some effort other than just "look around" to find all of the exits from any room.

Just like any decent 3D game would require a bit of exploration on the player's part to visibly spot every possible exit from every area.

[icedan]

Any decent game requires that you make some effort other than just "look around" to find all of the exits from any room.

Just like any decent 3D game would require a bit of exploration on the player's part to visibly spot every possible exit from every area.

Yes, effort is required, I never said it doesn't. But I can tell you a vast majority of players will never think to walk to the right of the screen, they will just assume what you see is what you get and I just call this bad game design because they've effectively disabled the game to a large portion of their supposed market.

You and I would know to move around to all possible locations, it's not obvious to everyone.

[MusicallyInspired]

So you don't dislike 3D for adventures you just dislike Telltale's approach to it. To that end I'd have to agree wholeheartedly.

Yes, effort is required, I never said it doesn't. But I can tell you a vast majority of players will never think to walk to the right of the screen, they will just assume what you see is what you get and I just call this bad game design because they've effectively disabled the game to a large portion of their supposed market.

You and I would know to move around to all possible locations, it's not obvious to everyone.

Are you serious? If anything gamers today know to look around everywhere more than ever before. They're used to full 3D worlds like RPG's and FPS's. In fact, most of the frustrations and criticisms by outside players seem to be that they can't explore certain areas and they feel too restricted with the minimal exits in a screen. This is regarding Telltale's games.

[marirosa]

I have downloaded and played both Monkey Island and BTTF games from TT, both I ended up stopping half way through the first episode because the 3D engine is simply not suitable for adventure games. Adventure games are best designed with a 2D background and preferably a 2D character animation.

I just pretended Monkey Island Tales weren't part of the real franchise and left it alone, just like I did with Monkey Island 4 for mostly the same reason. Then you came out with BTTF, I was excited to hear the news, but that 3D engine kept nagging at the back of my head, I played BTTF and I was right, it's frustrating as hell.

Now TT, you are stepping into fierce territory, you can't just pick up Kings Quest and make it the way you think it's best to. You will be up against the most hardcore of adventure game fans of all time. Kings Quest is meant to be in 2D, it's best in 2D and not only that but you should consider a hard-option by where players have to type in everything, these two should save your arse, if you use your silly 3D engine to make this game, I will have lost any hope for TT. It IS important, it sets the mood, the scene, the users connection with the game. Your puzzles are OK, your stories are fairly good but your engine doesn't work.

I'm not the biggest Kings Quest fan out there, but I am one of the biggest Space Quest and Leisure Suit Larry fans out there and I fear if you take Kings Quest down the path of BTTF or MI Tales, then I'll be pissed if you ever take on the likes of LSL and Space Quest. Please do it right.

Look man, I'm not here to burst your bubble, but maybe you're just one of those people who is particular, not everyone is going to agree with you. Tell Tale did a fabulous job with the Monkey Island series, but I'm a hardcore fan of adventures games since they first came out and were text back in the 80's. To step up graphics is a plus and innovative to me. I've played many many adventure games, to name my most favorite: Monkey Island (I've played all of them, never been disappointed.), Kings Quest, Space Quest, Legend of Kyrandia (a huge favorite), Quest for Glory, Indiana Jones, Grim Fandango, and even some games no one's ever heard of. I'm probably the biggest adventure game geek there is and I'd be delighted to see what they can do in 3D, the artwork is fabulous, and I'm saying this from an artist's perspective.
I've never had a problem with 2-D or 3-D adventure games, I'm simply happy that they actually remake such a great story line and adventure that the game is. Bring it on, I just want my games.

[der_ketzer]

You cannot really compare Myst & realMyst the original game was released at a time where effects like in realMyst would have caused even NASA computers to explode instantly. But if I start at Myst 3 and compare that to realMyst... well Exile wins. Fatality. And Myst 4 is and stays to this day the best looking Myst-game. Myst 5 was a huge step backwards. In gameplay and graphics.

Amateria from Exile is still one of my favourite game-locations of all time.
http://images.wikia.com/dni/images/c/c3/Amateria.jpg

[MusicallyInspired]

That's true. However, I was trying to show the advancements in graphics. However you look at it realMyst was an improvement over the original. I'd venture to say that graphics hardware today is more than capable of churning out Exile or Myst 4 quality graphics in real time. Again, have you seen the screenshots and gameplay clips of Skyrim?

Again, my point in all of this is that there's a lot of untapped potential. Myst touched on it but didn't go all the way. Yeah, the look of Myst 5 was not as great as Myst 4 or Exile but it offered one huge advantage and that was that you could go anywhere and look at anything from almost any angle. Can't do that in either 3 or 4.

[icedan]

Look man, I'm not here to burst your bubble, but maybe you're just one of those people who is particular, not everyone is going to agree with you. Tell Tale did a fabulous job with the Monkey Island series, but I'm a hardcore fan of adventures games since they first came out and were text back in the 80's. To step up graphics is a plus and innovative to me. I've played many many adventure games, to name my most favorite: Monkey Island (I've played all of them, never been disappointed.), Kings Quest, Space Quest, Legend of Kyrandia (a huge favorite), Quest for Glory, Indiana Jones, Grim Fandango, and even some games no one's ever heard of. I'm probably the biggest adventure game geek there is and I'd be delighted to see what they can do in 3D, the artwork is fabulous, and I'm saying this from an artist's perspective.
I've never had a problem with 2-D or 3-D adventure games, I'm simply happy that they actually remake such a great story line and adventure that the game is. Bring it on, I just want my games.

I'd respond to your opinions, but you obviously read my post and decided to reply without reading the entire thread, either that or you just completely misunderstood what I have been saying. This is like the 3rd time! At least protect yourself by saying "I didn't read the entire thread because I'm lazy but...".

[icedan]

So you don't dislike 3D for adventures you just dislike Telltale's approach to it. To that end I'd have to agree wholeheartedly.

Yup.

Are you serious? If anything gamers today know to look around everywhere more than ever before. They're used to full 3D worlds like RPG's and FPS's. In fact, most of the frustrations and criticisms by outside players seem to be that they can't explore certain areas and they feel too restricted with the minimal exits in a screen. This is regarding Telltale's games.

Have you ever watched an amateur player play a game that you and I would be familiar with? Holy shit it can get frustrating. Common phrases are: "What do I do, what do I do?", "Where do I go now? I've been everywhere!", "I can't control it, he won't go where I want him to!", "This is too hard" and so on. and as for myself, I have the urge to help, but I want them to solve the problems on their own - that is the point of the game really. Other threads have pointed out that perhaps TTG don't want to alienate a more beginners market, but I firmly believe their engine has actually added problems, not solved them, which I think you agree.

I know 3D has potential, but lets face it, are TTG going to be the first to reach that potential? This is why I'd rather they did KQ in 2D (though to be honest there are SO MANY 2D KQ's now I'm starting to think avid KQ fans would like to see it in 3D, this might be why I'm having a hard time getting my point across).

[Olaus Petrus]

I did find my source, it's King's Quest collection manual. It says that remake was widely viewed as a critical failure and many reviewers and gamers took offense, because they thought that Sierra was destroying the classics. And the reception stopped future attempts to modernise rest of the King's Quest games.

Unfortunately it doesn't say anything about the other remakes, but IIRC they got similar reception. I remember that I read about that topic somewhere years ago, but can't remember where I saw it. I'll post about it, if I remember.

EDIT: Also Space Quest collection manual mentions briefly that Sierra fans don't want them to modernise the old classics.

[der_ketzer]

Again, have you seen the screenshots and gameplay clips of Skyrim?

No interest in it at all if they stuff it with even more effects than Oblivion that are just annoying and look actually horrible.

[GuybrushWilco]

No interest in it at all if they stuff it with even more effects than Oblivion that are just annoying and look actually horrible.

I think Skyrim looks great. Exploring Daventry in 3D would be cool, if Daventry is featured :).

[wilco64256]

I've actually been replaying Dreamfall the last couple of days and I think it does a fabulous job of doing the full 3D thing in an adventure setting. The battle system is totally unnecessary in the game and the control scheme is a bit wonky at times, but other than those issues I think the game is fabulous.

[Javi-Wan Kenobi]

I can't think of any games that have done this yet--are there any?Gabriel Knight 3?

[SHODANFreeman]

Telltale's engine sucks balls when it comes to controlling the character. Seriously, it's just about the worst thing ever designed. The click-drag-move control scheme is absolutely broken any way you look at it. An abomination of video gaming control schemes.

I understand the logic behind it--that traditional point and click doesn't work well in 3D environments with cinematic camera angles like Telltale uses in most of their games, but seriously...someone needs to be slapped for coming up with this control scheme as the solution. Words can't describe how terrible it is. And believe me, I'm trying.

I find Wallace and Gromit, TMI, The Devil's Playhouse, and BttF all excessively easy to control (and I actually find it preferable to point and click), whether I'm using WASD and mouse, gamepad, or click and drag, so I guess what I'm trying to say is that I completely disagree with everything you've said there in every way possible.

[Rather Dashing]

Come on, you have to admit that Marty's run is entirely broken in Back to the Future. That's not a run button, that's an awkward animation and no real noticeable speed change button! It doesn't make sense either, because no other character in any previous game has had their running be so broken.

[SHODANFreeman]

Come on, you have to admit that Marty's run is entirely broken in Back to the Future. That's not a run button, that's an awkward animation and no real noticeable speed change button! It doesn't make sense either, because no other character in any previous game has had their running be so broken.

Honestly, I haven't even played the game enough yet to really notice. I haven't even started the second episode yet.

[Lambonius]

The main thing that bugs me about BttF's visuals is Marty's perpetually slack-jawed facial expression. I just want him to close his damn mouth!!! ;)

[Woodsyblue]

I don't think the issue of not being able to find all the exits is exclusive to 3D adventure games. For example, I got stuck for ages in Monkey Island 2 because I didn't know there was an exit leading to the fisherman on Phatt Island and I didn't know there was a path leading up above the waterfall, also on Phatt Island (the path leading up there should make it obvious I know but I remember trying to go up there and failing so I assumed there was nothing up there. Poor adventure gaming form, I admit, but I was young :o).

Off the top of my head I can't think of a single 3D adventure game where I got stuck from not being able to find an exit, though I'm not the best example because by the time adventure games were coming out in 3D I was quite experienced.

Point is just because a game is 2D doesn't mean it's void of navigational issues.

[Big Ted]

Well I'm looking forward to a reinterpretation; hopefully not cartoon disney style like kq7, but something that walks the line between realism and story book style wise. Kq5 and kq6 backgrounds and environment were great but would be much better in 3d if it is done well as an example.

i.e. bad 3d graphics = clipping,textures stand out as being blocky and or seeing the seams in objects, no visual pop, environments and characters don't go together and object placement has trees hovering above ground etc

[Armakuni]

I don't agree. You can have the exact same fixed camera scene reproduced from KQ5 or any other game but the added natural animations of objects in those scenes would make them very much more alive.
Sorry I only reply to this little part of your post, I'm not trying to make a point here one way or the other, but I was reminded of Myst 4... that game actually had quite nicely animated scenery despite being pre-rendered.

I think it's a bit hard to compare 2D and 3D when it comes to modern games as there haven't been many really high-budget 2D games that push modern machines much at all... I wonder how good a 2D game could look if it was given the same budget as some of the really high budget 3D titles these days.

There are lots of effects and various things they can do to make 2D environments very immersive, I think.

I do agree though that 3D has reached a point now where it really can look gorgeous. My issue with it is that I'm probably more close minded than you are - I feel a first person adventure game controlled just like an FPS game would differ too much from adventure games in the traditional sense.
And traditional adventure games (Sierra mainly) is what I really fell in love with, and still love to this day.

I did enjoy the Myst games though, and many of those are first person with a 360 degree view... so not that far from how you explore in a fully 3D game.
But it kept the simplicity of point & click adventure games with its node based system, point & click controls in other words... that might be part of why I still really like these games, strange as it sounds.

Come to think of it, realMyst was a nice novelty but I have to say I prefer the original Myst game. And Myst 5 (and Uru, if you count that) are probably my least favourite games in the series.

So I have to admit I'm somewhat close-minded regarding this.

EDIT - just thought of one thing I've always loved about hand-painted/drawn graphics that you don't find in 3D games - every background is unique, and every part of every background as well.
As opposed to 3D games where you have textures that repeat.

[LuigiHann]

As much fun as it is to discuss the same stuff that we've been going back and forth about for years, I think it'll be more fun if we get our hopes up about a 2D game and then watch our hopes get crushed. I think the best way to raise hopes is to look at the Hector: Badge of Carnage game, which is a 2D game being adapted to the Telltale Tool. In particular, check out these quotes from Dave Felton and Dave Grossman about the conversion (from an Adventure Gamers interview (http://www.adventuregamers.com/article/id,1286/)):

DF: Episode 1 is being remade in the Telltale Tool now. The process has not been too difficult. Straandlooper’s game engine does not have any functionality beyond what the Telltale Tool can do. It’s going to be very hard to tell the difference between the original version and the remake.

DG: Fortunately, there are some magicians over there in the southern corner of our production floor, who are using some sort of perpendicular horizontal two-and-a-half-D craziness to make it work (I don’t know how many other studios use magicians to accomplish production miracles, but I recommend it).

So that's pretty promising. They really could do some cool 2D stuff if they wanted to. The real difficulty though is that their staff is primarily experienced with 3D design and animation, and they also don't necessarily have the time and the budget for elaborate 2D art. Still, I'm sure they'll at least put some consideration toward the possibility of doing this particular license in 2D, do a cost-benefit analysis and whatnot.

[Darkblader]

Just whats with 2D anyways? It doesn't seem much of a harm in video games. I mean, look at the animation in Discworld 2 or even Wario land shake it.

[Leplaya]

I really dont see a whole debate throughout the whole "2D/3D" thing. Besides there are other video games that have used actual hand-drawn animation for video games, to cel shaded video games. Most of the time its done in just CG.

[icedan]

Not sure which way you're swinging there mate

[Leplaya]

Icedan, what I am saying regardless if this king's quest title is being done in either 2D or 3D it would probably good anyways. Besides I could name a whole bunch of video games that are 2D as well as cel-shaded video games(if your counting those games). Besides, am I the only one who dislikes how the 7th King's quest game had animation similar to likeness of Disney as well as Don Bluth? I always imagined if they were going to do a 2D game of King's quest they do their own style for it.

Who knows, maybe if the first episode does well enough Telltale might consider the idea for it.

[MusicallyInspired]

You are definintely not the only one. I can't stand it. And there are others.

[Darkblader]

I hate KQ7's art style. Is there any workers who worked on it will admit that they hated it as well? I know the game critics have given it a poor grade with the art.

[icedan]

Icedan, what I am saying regardless if this king's quest title is being done in either 2D or 3D it would probably good anyways. Besides I could name a whole bunch of video games that are 2D as well as cel-shaded video games(if your counting those games). Besides, am I the only one who dislikes how the 7th King's quest game had animation similar to likeness of Disney as well as Don Bluth? I always imagined if they were going to do a 2D game of King's quest they do their own style for it.

Who knows, maybe if the first episode does well enough Telltale might consider the idea for it.

Cel-shaded still looks 3D.

[OMA]

THIS. King's Quest was always about innovating new technology and, failing that, pushing the boundaries of technologies that already existed.

Most people who talks about retro games always say that graphics doesn't matter and all, but back in the time most people cared a lot about the graphics in games, since great looking games weren't as common as today, and even sometimes (wrongly) equated good graphics = good game.

In fact, I think point and click adventure games in the 90s were so popular mainly because of their graphics. Adventure games were the ones with the best graphics of all genres (unlike now), so that was one of the most important factors as to why they sold so much at that time. Of course good stories also helped a lot, but I think it wasn't the most important factor.

[MusicallyInspired]

Yeah. Adventures were the better looking AAA blockbuster games in those days. Even over FPS's.

[JuntMonkey]

Most people who talks about retro games always say that graphics doesn't matter and all, but back in the time most people cared a lot about the graphics in games, since great looking games weren't as common as today, and even sometimes (wrongly) equated good graphics = good game.

In fact, I think point and click adventure games in the 90s were so popular mainly because of their graphics. Adventure games were the ones with the best graphics of all genres (unlike now), so that was one of the most important factors as to why they sold so much at that time. Of course good stories also helped a lot, but I think it wasn't the most important factor.

Yeah. Adventures were the better looking AAA blockbuster games in those days. Even over FPS's.

Yep, absolutely right. Great post OMA. I've been planning for a while now to write a blog post going into more detail about basically what you guys said here. Sierra and other adventure games were THE games you used to show off your new 86/286/486/Pentium. The people who insist that "characters" and "story" were all the genre ever had and needed to be successful have no idea what they're talking about.

You would never accept a new FPS with Halo 1 graphics, or a new GTA game with the PS2 graphics engine. So why can adventure games get away with it?

As for 2D - other genres do still use 2D, and in fact there's been a resurgence of 2D sidescrollers this generation. However, this does not mean that you can keep making games with 1991 King's Quest graphics and gameplay and expect to be relevant. The better 2D games generally have innovative new mechanics. Braid, Limbo, Trine, the Nintendo sidescrollers, etc., all bring something new to the table. We're not playing dozens of new clones of Super Mario World.

[thom-22]

You would never accept a new FPS with Halo 1 graphics, or a new GTA game with the PS2 graphics engine. So why can adventure games get away with it?

Because the market for adventure games is smaller than for FPS games, and adventure game makers don't want to further reduce their potential customer base by cutting out those with older hardware.

While I, too, would love to play adventure games with state-of-the-art 3D graphics, I just can't get worked up about the fact that doesn't happen because I think adventure games work with any number of graphics styles. I'm glad there are still small companies that make 2D adventure games. And I'm glad there are game companies, like Telltale, who are making adventure games with 3D graphics.

What I appreciate more than the technical aspects of graphics is how artistic they are, whether 2D, 3D, or something in between. I hope that Telltale comes up with an artistic style that is both unique and fitting of KQ. I fully expect it to be 3D (but I wouldn't complain if it was 2D or 2D-looking ;) ). I believe they're more than capable of this, if they choose to devote their creative time and attention to it.

[der_ketzer]

You would never accept a new FPS with Halo 1 graphics, or a new GTA game with the PS2 graphics engine. So why can adventure games get away with it?

I would. That's when 3D-graphics finally got good enough to no longer hurt my eyes (I did not like 3D for years because the graphics really did hurt my eyes). And I am not a graphic whore. The important thing is that the game is good. Have you ever turned everything off in Oblivion that is eyecandy? I have. I have seen how ugly this game can get underneath all the effects and without grass and trees. And it was still a really good game. Even for the 70 hours I played it like that.

But that doesn't mean that everyone would accept that nowadays.

[Armakuni]

Because the market for adventure games is smaller than for FPS games, and adventure game makers don't want to further reduce their potential customer base by cutting out those with older hardware.

That, and also adventure games being somewhat of a niche genre, meaning their budgets are smaller than big, mainstream titles.

But whatever the reasons are, adventure games using 3D graphics these days always tend to look much less impressive than mainstream titles, and as such - I'm not a big fan of it.

Maybe if they could have 3D graphics rivalling those of really nice looking, modern games in other genres... then I'd be more accepting of it.

But the way things are, I really don't think 3D graphics in adventure games can rival really nice looking 2D backgrounds.

Of course this doesn't mean the game in question can't be highly enjoyable if it's great in other aspects, but I do think I'd enjoy many games more if they had richly detailed 2D backgrounds rather than mediocre 3D.
Not because I'm a graphics whore, but because I think the way an adventure game looks can greatly affect how immersive it feels.
And of course I'm not talking about 'technically' impressive graphics, I mean the artistic direction in general... and I feel 2D allows for more artistic and expressive graphics than mediocre 3D does, generally speaking.

The one thing about 3D graphics, which applies to mediocre 3D as well, is that it does allow for more freedom when it comes to framing shots, and makes it easier to create a somewhat dynamic world.
But personally I don't feel this is necessary at all to create a great atmosphere, and I certainly don't think it's worth the cost of having mediocre 3D instead of great looking 2D backdrops.
But this is of course highly subjective, depending on how important you feel these things are.
Though I do think these are valid points and I can see how for many people, this might very well be important enough to prefer 3D graphics, even when they're quite mediocre.

[Olaus Petrus]

But whatever the reasons are, adventure games using 3D graphics these days always tend to look much less impressive than mainstream titles, and as such - I'm not a big fan of it.

Maybe if they could have 3D graphics rivalling those of really nice looking, modern games in other genres... then I'd be more accepting of it.

I have heard similar argument often and it always surprises me. Several times it has happened that I play some adventure game and I really like it's graphics and animation, and then I read from reviews and forums that this game is so ugly and outdated that watching it makes your eyes bleed. But like they say the beauty is in the eye of the beholder and there are plenty of mainstream games which I dislike because of their graphic style.

[JuntMonkey]

Because the market for adventure games is smaller than for FPS games, and adventure game makers don't want to further reduce their potential customer base by cutting out those with older hardware.

Yea this is one of the arguments people make to defend mediocre graphics in adventure games, but I don't think it's accurate. The adventure game market is small because the games are mediocre with bad graphics, not the other way around. Sierra spent a ton on Phantasmagoria and it was their biggest selling adventure game ever because of the graphics, at a time when the genre was fading. Console RPGs in the U.S. had been a small market, until the expensive-to-make FF7 came around with its gorgeous (at the time) graphics and changed everything. Heavy Rain sold like hot cakes. Do you think the quick-time events are what makes that game popular? No. If they beefed up the adventure game elements such as the investigations and toned down QTEs, I doubt there would have been much less sales, if at all. So there you'd have a successful mainstream adventure game.

As I've said, if somebody makes a new Leisure Suit Larry game as a pure adventure with graphics on par with Heavy Rain, it will be a massive seller. I'm sure new IPs would sell as well if they were any good.

[thom-22]

Yea this is one of the arguments people make to defend mediocre graphics in adventure games, but I don't think it's accurate. The adventure game market is small because the games are mediocre with bad graphics, not the other way around.

Sorry, but that just doesn't square with economic logic. If there was a sufficient market for big-budget adventure games with state-of-the-art graphics, the game industry would have moved to fill that demand by now. But it was not better graphics alone that led to shooters and other genres eclipsing the popularity of adventures among video gamers.

Incidentally, how is it you see an explanation, which is what I offered whether accurate and not, as somehow a "defense of mediocre graphics"? (If someone explains the political and economic reasons for why the healthcare system sucks, do you conclude that they are defending poor healthcare?)

I believe that adventure gamers in general are very much in favor of high-quality graphics, but some define that differently than you do (and each other for that matter). It's not really fair to equate those views as "defending mediocrity".

[wilco64256]

Sorry, but that just doesn't square with economic logic. If there was a sufficient market for big-budget adventure games with state-of-the-art graphics, the game industry would have moved to fill that demand by now. But it was not better graphics alone that led to shooters and other genres eclipsing the popularity of adventures among video gamers.

Incidentally, how is it you see an explanation, which is what I offered whether accurate and not, as somehow a "defense of mediocre graphics"? (If someone explains the political and economic reasons for why the healthcare system sucks, do you conclude that they are defending poor healthcare?)

I believe that adventure gamers in general are very much in favor of high-quality graphics, but some define that differently than you do (and each other for that matter). It's not really fair to equate those views as "defending mediocrity".

Every played Heavy Rain? Solid straight adventure game with excellent graphics. Sold extremely well.

[Olaus Petrus]

Every played Heavy Rain? Solid straight adventure game with excellent graphics. Sold extremely well.

I can say that I haven't because I don't think there's PC version. And I'm not certain if I would buy it even if there was PC version, because based on my experience PC versions of console games are bit clumsy and awkward. For example Resident Evil 2 wasn't a bad action-adventure, but it suffered from limited saves (which makes sense with consoles, but not on PC) and clumsy keyboard controls. Console adventures are their own genre and not the same as PC's adventure games.

[MusicallyInspired]

If console adventures are their own genre than how do you explain Telltale's games? Almost all of them are available on consoles.

Personally, I think the Heavy Rain style is what Telltale should be doing (Jurassic Park doesn't count, you can't even walk).

[Olaus Petrus]

If console adventures are their own genre than how do you explain Telltale's games? Almost all of them are available on consoles.

Personally, I think the Heavy Rain style is what Telltale should be doing (Jurassic Park doesn't count, you can't even walk).

Some PC games are ported also to the consoles and vice versa, it's nothing new, even some of the older adventures were available on consoles (IIRC even some King's Quest games were ported). However console adventure games seem to have their own tradition, which has very little to do with the PC's adventure games.

[MusicallyInspired]

Telltale's games are conformed to console standards. They aren't just "ported." They're developed with consoles in mind and that changes the way they are developed than if they were developing only for the PC. That makes them console games. Like directional controls. That's a console scheme. Jurassic Park seems to be even more heavily influenced by console game design (despite the fact that you can't walk).

[wilco64256]

Yeah my point wasn't so much aimed at consoles specifically, just that there is still plenty of market interest in a good adventure game with good graphics.

[thom-22]

Every played Heavy Rain? Solid straight adventure game with excellent graphics. Sold extremely well.

The success of one platform-exclusive game hardly refutes my point (which covers more than a decade). Besides, given that traditional adventure game mechanics are heavily supplanted with something borrowed from the action genre makes it a weak counter-example.

I do think Heavy Rain is an example of something else for which there is a growing market -- the "interactive entertainment experience". I would not be surprised to see an avalanche of Heavy Rain clones; time will tell whether it's a fad or something sustainable. I think many adventure fans will see these games as meeting their adventure-gaming desires and be pleased to see more of them and with top-notch graphics; others, like myself who have a different idea about what's important in an adventure game, might not.

[Olaus Petrus]

Telltale's games are conformed to console standards. They aren't just "ported." They're developed with consoles in mind and that changes the way they are developed than if they were developing only for the PC. That makes them console games. Like directional controls. That's a console scheme. Jurassic Park seems to be even more heavily influenced by console game design (despite the fact that you can't walk).

Yes, but most of TTG's games follow PC adventure game traditions. I'm not very familiar with console gaming as whole, but to me it seems that consoles have their own traditions which are different than PC's traditions. It doesn't just apply to adventures, but also to console RPGs etc. What I have read about Heavy Rain gives me impression that it's more a console game than traditonal computer adventure game.

[wilco64256]

Yes, but most of TTG's games follow PC adventure game traditions.

Not remotely. That's actually the main complaint that people who are concerned about what Telltale's KQ game will look like have. PC adventure games let you walk around and explore and stumble into deaths and get stuck. Telltale is against all of those things.

[JuntMonkey]

Sorry, but that just doesn't square with economic logic. If there was a sufficient market for big-budget adventure games with state-of-the-art graphics, the game industry would have moved to fill that demand by now. But it was not better graphics alone that led to shooters and other genres eclipsing the popularity of adventures among video gamers.

We're not talking about widgets here, we're talking about works of art. There was a sufficient market for more seasons of Sopranos and Seinfeld, why didn't that happen?

Nobody in a position to do so has any strong desire to make a AAA adventure game at the moment (that we know of), economics is not the only factor. There is also a bit of chicken and egg here, as there has never been a 3D AAA adventure game failure to base anything on, at least in the last 11 years.

You can pooh-pooh the Heavy Rain example all you want, but it's valid. Is your position that there would have been a precipitous drop in sales had there been less QTEs and more traditional adventure game elements?

Incidentally, how is it you see an explanation, which is what I offered whether accurate and not, as somehow a "defense of mediocre graphics"? (If someone explains the political and economic reasons for why the healthcare system sucks, do you conclude that they are defending poor healthcare?)

I believe that adventure gamers in general are very much in favor of high-quality graphics, but some define that differently than you do (and each other for that matter). It's not really fair to equate those views as "defending mediocrity".

Semantics? Obviously I don't believe that you are a huge fan of sub-par graphics.

[Olaus Petrus]

Not remotely. That's actually the main complaint that people who are concerned about what Telltale's KQ game will look like have. PC adventure games let you walk around and explore and stumble into deaths and get stuck. Telltale is against all of those things.

:confused:

I have more than 50 adventure games and with the exception of early Sierra adventures constant dying is rare. Most adventure games either don't have deaths or those can happen only in specific places in the game (for example fist fighting in Fate of Atlantis or end sequence of Gabriel Knight 3). Also TTG's seasons have offered at least as many game hours and places to explore as many recent full adventure games have offered. Individual episode naturally offers less to explore, but lately they have linked the episodes better with each other and they feel more like one game than collection of minigames (I compare here first two seasons of Sam & Max and Wallace & Gromit to Tales and Devil's Playhouse).

While it's true that their previous games aren't like Sierra games of 80's and early 90's, their games aren't very different from rest of the adventures of 2000's. While it's true that TTG's games have been easier than early Sierra games, I have played several recent adventures and IMO many of those weren't more difficult than TTG's games, but had much worse story and jokes than what TTG's games had. TTG has made enjoyable games, so I will give them chance to prove themselves with KQ.

[MusicallyInspired]

Yes, but most of TTG's games follow PC adventure game traditions. I'm not very familiar with console gaming as whole, but to me it seems that consoles have their own traditions which are different than PC's traditions. It doesn't just apply to adventures, but also to console RPGs etc. What I have read about Heavy Rain gives me impression that it's more a console game than traditonal computer adventure game.

You can't make an opinion about a game just by reading about it. And what about Indigo Prophecy/Fahrenheit? (Quantic's first game) That had a non-ported PC release as well as console (just like Telltale's games) and it has just as many if not more QTE's which are actually a lot more comprehensive and complex than Heavy Rain's. I don't think the differences you're pointing out here are "PC vs Console" based but rather "developer vs developer."

:confused:

I have more than 50 adventure games and with the exception of early Sierra adventures constant dying is rare. Most adventure games either don't have deaths...

That is not true. Maybe half. But not "most." And he said more than just 'deaths.' He listed quite a few things that Telltale have no intention of improving on, based on official statements.

Also TTG's seasons have offered at least as many game hours and places to explore as many recent full adventure games have offered.

:rolleyes: I'm sorry but I can't agree with that. Not even close. Yes, even with all 5 episodes of a season together. There's no way they can match up to a full-length Sierra or LucasArts adventure. They concentrate too much on a 'cinematic experience' and as a result the actual gameplay suffers enormously.

While it's true that their previous games aren't like Sierra games of 80's and early 90's, their games aren't very different from rest of the adventures of 2000's. While it's true that TTG's games have been easier than early Sierra games, I have played several recent adventures and IMO many of those weren't more difficult than TTG's games, but had much worse story and jokes than what TTG's games had.

Any adventure game created since 2000 (with the exception of the Myst games) has all been absolute garbage. I won't even give those Adventure Company games the time of day. I bought a couple recent ones because I was hopeful, they were on sale, and they looked good. But as soon as I started the game frustration ensued. Adventure Company games are utter trash and completely miss the mark of what and adventure is supposed to be. Telltale have come the closest since the golden age itself, but that's not saying much, especially with how their latest games are/have been turning out.

TTG has made enjoyable games, so I will give them chance to prove themselves with KQ.

As am I. But if they screw it up that's the last straw for me.

[thom-22]

You can pooh-pooh the Heavy Rain example all you want, but it's valid. Is your position that there would have been a precipitous drop in sales had there been less QTEs and more traditional adventure game elements?

Yes. I see Heavy Rain's sales as a product of growth in the market for casual games, not a resurgence of interest in adventure games. That is absolutely not intended as an insult to Heavy Rain, btw -- you can't argue with success and they've clearly found an exemplary combination of strong story, stellar graphics, and accessible gameplay. (I think TTG's BTTF represents the same phenomenon, except there you have strong story, accessible gameplay, and not-so-stellar graphics, though they're much better than the crap cranked out by casual game publishers.) Nor am I saying that it only appeals to casual players; it clearly draws fans from segments of the adventure gaming community as well as video-gamers in general. But I just don't see how Heavy Rain's success tells us much about the market for adventure games as they're more traditionally defined, or the impact better graphics might have on its size.

[Olaus Petrus]

You can't make an opinion about a game just by reading about it. And what about Indigo Prophecy/Fahrenheit? (Quantic's first game) That had a non-ported PC release as well as console (just like Telltale's games) and it has just as many if not more QTE's which are actually a lot more comprehensive and complex than Heavy Rain's. I don't think the differences you're pointing out here are "PC vs Console" based but rather "developer vs developer."

Then I can't really comment Fahrenheit either as I haven't played it, but it doesn't really sound traditional adventure game. It sounds more like action-adventure.

That is not true. Maybe half. But not "most." And he said more than just 'deaths.' He listed quite a few things that Telltale have no intention of improving on, based on official statements.

Dying in adventures has became more and more rare since mid-90's.

And we know almost nothing yet about the future KQ as they haven't revealed much. Based on my understanding they try to get old Sierra stuff to help them, so at least they are trying to do something to keep the game loyal to the franchise.

:rolleyes: I'm sorry but I can't agree with that. Not even close. Yes, even with all 5 episodes of a season together. There's no way they can match up to a full-length Sierra or LucasArts adventure. They concentrate too much on a 'cinematic experience' and as a result the actual gameplay suffers enormously.

It seems that we define word recent differently. I compared TTG's season to recent adventures. By that I meant games published in last few years, not to games which were published over decade ago. Only recent Sierra :) or LucasArts adventures I have played were Monkey Island Special Editions, which didn't last more than few hours, because I already knew every puzzle and I spent that time listening dialogue and watching new graphics. It's rare than solving new adventure game takes more than a week (with casual playing, max two or three hours per evening)

Any adventure game created since 2000 (with the exception of the Myst games) has all been absolute garbage. I won't even give those Adventure Company games the time of day. I bought a couple recent ones because I was hopeful, they were on sale, and they looked good. But as soon as I started the game frustration ensued. Adventure Company games are utter trash and completely miss the mark of what and adventure is supposed to be. Telltale have come the closest since the golden age itself, but that's not saying much, especially with how their latest games are/have been turning out.

I don't think that modern games are absolute garbage, but I think that games could have little more difficulty. Many games have good stories, but puzzles are bit on the easy side. For example, Gray Matter (most recent game which I have bought) offered a nice story and characters, but unfortunately this time Jane Jensen failed to make game as challenging as GK1 & GK3 (Personally I find GK2 easier than the other two). I still enjoy new games, but I miss difficulty of old classics.

I believe the games are easier because designers make puzzles more logical and you don't have to use Sierra logic à la use weird doohickey to random thingamabob without any specific reason. And if you forgot to pick up doohickey two hours ago you're dead.

As am I. But if they screw it up that's the last straw for me.

Then let's hope that it will be a good game.

[Brainiac]

Any adventure game created since 2000 (with the exception of the Myst games) has all been absolute garbage.

... ... ...

<checks Wikipedia>

<finds The Longest Journey was first published in 1999>

Okay, you dodged a bullet there, MI.

[wilco64256]

Yes. I see Heavy Rain's sales as a product of growth in the market for casual games, not a resurgence of interest in adventure games. That is absolutely not intended as an insult to Heavy Rain, btw -- you can't argue with success and they've clearly found an exemplary combination of strong story, stellar graphics, and accessible gameplay. (I think TTG's BTTF represents the same phenomenon, except there you have strong story, accessible gameplay, and not-so-stellar graphics, though they're much better than the crap cranked out by casual game publishers.) Nor am I saying that it only appeals to casual players; it clearly draws fans from segments of the adventure gaming community as well as video-gamers in general. But I just don't see how Heavy Rain's success tells us much about the market for adventure games as they're more traditionally defined, or the impact better graphics might have on its size.

Heavy Rain is both not a casual game and not anything like Telltale's products. I don't understand the comparison there at all. Comparing Heavy Rain to BttF is like saying that a 747 and a paper airplane are the same thing.

[MusicallyInspired]

... ... ...

<checks Wikipedia>

<finds The Longest Journey was first published in 1999>

Okay, you dodged a bullet there, MI.

;)

Heavy Rain is both not a casual game and not anything like Telltale's products. I don't understand the comparison there at all. Comparing Heavy Rain to BttF is like saying that a 747 and a paper airplane are the same thing.

Wilco is right. Heavy Rain is a full-length AAA game title. It is no casual game! Unless you somehow consider all console games to be "casual?" Which I can't see anything being further from the truth...

[thom-22]

Heavy Rain is both not a casual game and not anything like Telltale's products. I don't understand the comparison there at all. Comparing Heavy Rain to BttF is like saying that a 747 and a paper airplane are the same thing.

Call it whatever you'd like. Heavy Rain was not targeted solely at the hardcore of any particular genre. I believe its success was due in part to the changing demographics and demand patterns of the video game market that the industry has been talking about for several years now. (That's how it relates to BTTF; I did not compare the two games in any other way -- and in fact I totally understand the negative reaction to even mentioning the two in the same paragraph :D ) The pertinent point is that I don't believe Heavy Rain's success can be taken as an indicator of a strong relationship between better 3D graphics and sales of traditional adventure games. But time will tell, as I doubt the success of HR has gone unnoticed in the industry.

At the same time, I would be thrilled if the new KQ game tested JuntMonkey's original hypothesis to which I was responding ("The adventure game market is small because the games are mediocre with bad graphics, not the other way around."). That is, make a kickass KQ-style adventure game with a state-of-the-art graphics engine and see how many players it attracts from beyond the current adventure game market. I could certainly see it attracting enough to offset the loss of that segment of the current market who either dislike 3D or don't have the hardware to run it. But would it attract enough to offset the additional development costs? History suggests the game industry doesn't think so. I'd be interested to find out, though, and wouldn't complain if it turns out JuntMonkey is right.

[Armakuni]

I haven't played Heavy Rain, so I can't comment on that game in particular, but when it comes to casual games... they usually are small, simplistic games... not the impression I've gotten from what I know about Heavy Rain.

But I suspect what the poster calling Heavy Rain a casual game intended to say might have been that Heavy Rain is an example of a full blown, large retail game only with gameplay inspired by casual games.

I know I've played a few of those, big games that don't qualify as casual games in the traditional sense as they're just as big as any normal retail game, but where the gameplay itself seems to resemble casual games more than what I'd expect from games generally.

Again, I have no idea if this applies to Heavy Rain at all, just got the impression that might have been what the poster intended to say.

[fade2night]

To get back on topic, I've been disappointed that Telltale hasn't cell-shaded more of their games. It's a relatively inexpensive way to add style to a game and there are quite a few games in their catalog it would fit well with.

Tales of Monkey Island lost a bit of its feel when it went into 3D. A large part of the games charm came from the water colored art in the second and third games. When Telltale moved it to 3D, the art got sanitized and we lost that dirty wet feel that added so much to the 2D MI games. For the second season I'd like to see ToMI cell shaded with water colored textures (especially in the environment).

Same for Kings Quest. No reason Telltale can't stylistically cell shade the game to give it a "Disney hand drawn feel." Many modern games like Street Fighter IV and the new Zelda game use creative shading to give their games a drawn or painted style.

I understand Telltale has to do these games on the cheap, but I'd like to see Telltale do a bit of art R&D and add some variety to the style of their games. 3D "shiny" models work for games like Wallace and Grommit, BttF, and Jurassic Park, but ToMI, KQ, and even Sam and Max could benefit from some more creative styling.

[Chyron8472]

Actually, LEC move Monkey Island into 3D (sort of) with Escape. Truth be told, I think of ToMI as TTG's best game to date, however easy it is.

[MusicallyInspired]

I hate 3D cel-shading. Except for Strong Bad because it actually works there as that's the original style. Telltale's 3D is fine, though. I enjoy the details. I don't like the absence of details in cel-shading. They're more than fine now. During the TMI days they hadn't added real-time shadows or normals yet. When they started that with S&M3 the quality took a jump. And now Jurassic Park looks absolutely fantastic. No cel-shading.

[Darkblader]

If telltale was able to make this as a 2D game, I'd home they'd aim for either the concept artwork of the game or Steve Purcell's style.

[wilco64256]

If telltale was able to make this as a 2D game, I'd home they'd aim for either the concept artwork of the game or Steve Purcell's style.

The concept artwork of what game?

[Darkblader]

The concept artwork of what game?King's quest of course.

[wilco64256]

I still have no idea what concept artwork you're referring to. Telltale hasn't released any concept art for their KQ game so I'd assume you're referring to one of the others.

[Leplaya]

Did king's quest even have concept artwork to begin with?

[Feazy]

Did king's quest even have concept artwork to begin with?

Of course it did. Any visual medium, be it graphic novels, video or computer games, movies...they all have concept art.

[Simo Sakari Aaltonen]

Not necessarily with the very first games, though - that is, "to begin with" (like Leplaya said). In those days there were so few pixels to play around with that many game makers drew straight on the screen. Not sure if this was the case with early KQ, though.

[MusicallyInspired]

I'm not sure about King's Quest, but Space Quest certainly didn't have any concept art. Scott Murphy talked at length about his "flying by the seat of your pants" design philosophy. He just made stuff up as he went along. And for SQ1 particularly, he and Mark put together some rooms in a space ship with a space character and showed it to Ken who then immediately approved the game. But they didn't even have a game at the time, just a few rooms. The space ship turned out to be the Arcada sequence at the beginning of SQ1.

I doubt there was any real concept artwork going on at Sierra until the SCI0 (EGA w/mouse & sound card support) days.

[Leplaya]

They haven't confrimed its going to be 2D over 3D have they?

[MusicallyInspired]

There's no way it's going to be 2D.

[RogerXY]

I'm not a big fan of the Telltale tool so I would really prefer to see something different. A 2D game would be beyond awesome but unfort. not gonna happen I think