Kings Quest Reboot

[thom-22]

Originally Posted by Anakin Skywalker

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

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

[BagginsKQ]

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

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

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

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

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

[thom-22]

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

[MusicallyInspired]

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

[RogerXY]

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

[Anakin Skywalker]

Originally Posted by RogerXY

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

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

[MusicallyInspired]

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

[Anakin Skywalker]

Originally Posted by MusicallyInspired

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[BagginsKQ]

Like Sierra did with the last two LSL games.

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

[Anakin Skywalker]

Originally Posted by BagginsKQ

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

No--Codemasters bought the License from Activision as work on the game was ending. Sierra had been working on it for about a year or so and then the Activision/Vivendi merger came and with it Sierra's end. They basically took what Sierra had been working on and released it. The screenshots and trailers for the game predate the merger and thus were Sierra's doing.
http://web.archive.org/web/200809161...ouncement.html

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

[MusicallyInspired]

Originally Posted by Anakin Skywalker

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

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

Originally Posted by MusicallyInspired

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

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

Originally Posted by Anakin Skywalker

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

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

[Anakin Skywalker]

Originally Posted by MusicallyInspired

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



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



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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[thom-22]

Originally Posted by Anakin Skywalker

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Originally Posted by Anakin Skywalker

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

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

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

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

[flitchard]

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

[BagginsKQ]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ron Gilbert once compared LeChuck and Davey Jones;

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

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

[Chyron8472]

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

[Lambonius]

Originally Posted by thom-22

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

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

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

Couldn't agree more. Great post!!

[Chyron8472]

I also agree.