I disagree about the AGI graphics being ugly. To me it is just another style. It was the result of technological limitations, but the same is true of all art. Films were made in black and white before technology became available to film in colour, yet many of us now find great value in the aesthetic that came about because of that limitation.
I think it is not valid to assume that a newcomer will automatically prefer the products of newer technology. I am an old hand at computer games, so cannot use that as an example, but whenever I start investigating a whole new thing in other areas, I still like to start at the very beginning, which in this case would be the Sierra originals. I am sure there are others like me out there.
Obviously it is a different story if the newcomer in question has in fact expressed a preference for later graphical (or aural or whatever) styles. But most importantly, apart from and in addition to the graphics and audio, I think the whole experience is different when playing the remakes. Or at least 90% different. Consider the huge difference in the very personality of the original and the ("faithful") remake version of Psycho.
This is not intended to disparage the KQ remakes - I think highly of them - but to point out that the experience of playing a remake actually bears very little resemblance to playing the original, because not only is the sensory data received even more different from one to the other than when interacting with any two human beings (with people, at least the visual focus and level of detail will be nearly identical, for example), but the very feel is different because both the engine and interface are different.
Obviously both experiences can be equally rewarding in their own right; none of this means that one or the other is any worse or better. But with respect to the remakes, none of them are the Sierra games, just like the remake of Psycho is not the Hitchcock film. They are more like cover versions of a song, perhaps.
|