The Silver Lining thread

[MusicallyInspired]

Oh, well ok then!

[Simo Sakari Aaltonen]

Originally Posted by Blackthorne519

I wasn't really trying to attack - I just felt sycophant was a more elaborate word than "yes man".

I do think it's good advice, though - avoid the sycophants. When you surround yourself with people who have no backbone and laud your every movement, it dilutes the quality of your output. I enjoy working with people who, if they disagree, are able to tell me and communicate it clearly.


Bt

Blackthorne, thank you for clarifying. I agree with what you wrote here.

I want to share a personal story concerning honesty and lack of pretence. It has nothing to do with King's Quest, though, so anyone not interested, please skip it...

I grew up in a small, backwards Finnish town between 1978 and 1998. I had a happy childhood up until the 7th grade. By that point the virtues I mentioned above (honesty and lack of pretence) had become so important to me that I took an open stand in support of gay people, against the views of my homophobic classmates.

I did this because I felt even then that it was important to stand up for truth and what you believe in, and I did it with the knowledge that it was social suicide in that time and place. Word got around and as a result of what I had said, I lived practically friendless between the ages of 12 and 18. I don't need to tell you they were long, lonely years. All I had done was make a stand for truth. It cost me plenty, but I'd do it again.

The point is that honesty is one of the most important things to me in this life. I've made a commitment to it since I was old enough to consider the subject abstractly. If I tell you that I like or support something, I'm telling you the truth. I simply don't have the time or energy in this life to waste in saying things that are not true. No one needs to agree. I'm here not to convert, I'm here to share.

A "yes-man" or "sycophant" is someone who lies hoping for personal gain. That's one of the worst, most deeply insulting things anyone could call me. If I was like that, I'd have taken the very easy (in the short run) way out back then by giving in to the prevailing gay-bashing attitudes.

As far as I'm concerned, screw personal gain. I need to be able to look at myself in the mirror and know that I've been truthful. I'll be damned before compromising on this. Besides, lying always ends up biting you in the ass sooner or later, if by no other means, then psychologically - and if you think that would not be so bad, you have another think coming. So even for selfish people, it's simply a bad idea. Everyone will learn this either the easy or the hard way.

So to reiterate, I admire a lot of what César and the rest of the TSL team have done. If anyone has a problem with that - me liking things - obviously that's not my problem. Another of my ideals dictates that I not always and routinely make everyone else suffer for it if I happen to dislike something I come across. I don't feel the need to bash everything just to prove how strong my views are or whatever. Anything I create myself will be imperfect. I know that. Why would I assume the same two points would not be true of everyone else?

We are all learning. And we all need to give ourselves and each other the space to enjoy what we have for what it is. We only have a limited amount of time left. A lot of people here are in their twenties or thirties (I'm 33 myself) and have already used up a quarter or third or more of our expected lifespans. So let's make the time we have together worthwhile by appreciating the good things. By all means, share the bad as well - be honest - but do it gently, not in a way that just makes us all unhappy. That is not what we are here for.

P.S. Thank you, Cez. You're right, it's their choice... It's just sad to think that even the most bitter "haters" (still can't think of a better word) out there were once wide-eyed children - bless them - captivated by the innocent magic of King's Quest, with their whole lives ahead of them, potentially full of wonder... only for it to come to this. I don't mean this as an insult, I feel genuinely sad for them. Something went wrong somewhere.

[Lambonius]

I was indeed captivated by the "innocent magic of King's Quest." I approached TSL with excitement and enthusiasm. Then that innocence and magic tried to throw herself off a balcony and shove ham-fisted Star Wars rip-offs down my throat.

[Simo Sakari Aaltonen]

But why do you keep doing this to yourself? You don't have to play and if you don't like what TSL does, the originals are still there. Like Raymond Chandler (I think it was) said when asked if he was troubled by what Hollywood had done to his books, he waved his hand at his bookshelf, with his books on it, and said that his books were fine, nothing had been done to them.

I understand it can be upsetting to see something you grew up loving treated in a way that simply doesn't work for you. I had a similar (but milder) reaction to what happened to the Star Trek sequel series after Gene Roddenberry's death. At some point I realised I had to let go and stop watching because it was so disappointing to me. I took a long break, but have since resumed watching, now better able to appreciate them for what they are rather than what I tried to find in them back then.

One thing that makes this an imperfect comparison is that I was reacting to official Star Trek, whereas TSL is not canon. I think it is not TSL that has harmed your perception of the magic of "your" King's Quest, but your own reactions and actions may have done that. But no permanent damage has been done in any case, I'm positive. I think that you may be seeing TSL as looming too large right now, but will come to see it in a more realistic perspective, as just one part among many in the KQ fandom.

Sorry if any of this sounds harsh. And of course all this is just my opinion and I may be wrong. But I believe works of entertainment don't really have the power to make or break what we love, even if what we love is other, earlier works of entertainment. Trust me, the originals retain all their charm and are appreciated by many people, and many more will "rediscover the magic" when The Art of Sierra comes out.

In any case, I wish you well. There are so many good things out there to enjoy and appreciate!

[der_ketzer]

Originally Posted by der_ketzer

I enjoy the new artsy style of the graphics.

Oh god this crap is reproduceable. Every time I go to this place my game gets screwed.

[Anakin Skywalker]

Originally Posted by Lambonius

I was indeed captivated by the "innocent magic of King's Quest." I approached TSL with excitement and enthusiasm. Then that innocence and magic tried to throw herself off a balcony and shove ham-fisted Star Wars rip-offs down my throat.

Amen. That's what people seem to forget, that many of the TSL "haters" started off as fans who were enthusiastic about a KQ sequel--even if it was a fan sequel. I can't speak for Lamb, but I know that I was a big time fan of TSL until the later trailers (nearing release) and first episode came out. I eagerly awaited it's release, and in the mean time, tried to promote the game to my friends and even family. I remember showing the trailer which came out during the 2005 Anniversary party to people I knew and being enthusiastic and excited.

Spending 7 years waiting for a game (I came upon TSL in 2003, don't know about Lamb) and then having it basically be horrible and basically violate everything KQ was about, while claiming to uphold and even revive the spirit of the originals, was a big time disappointment, and was insulting actually. It's one thing if the team said, "This is gonna be real different", but they didn't. They went into this saying it was going to be a return to the old days, the pre-Mask era. That it was a return to normalcy, basically.

Yeah, we always had a hint that it was going to be a bit more "mature"--But "more mature" in the context of KQ, at least to me, meant something like KQ6. That's not my favorite game in the series, but it's also not a horribly written teen fantasy story which rips off Star Wars and inserts tons of stuff which has nothing to do with, nor has any place in, King's Quest. Stuff that would have a much more fitting home in a Twilight or Kingdom Hearts sequel. And KQ6, while being more mature in many aspects, doesn't have a consistently melancholy, dark and soap opera-ish tone. And it's dialogue isn't nearly as bad, either.

So instead of a "return to normalcy" or even a slighter more mature game ala KQ6, instead we got a game which has an overwrought, badly written plot, J-RPG inspired fight scenes, and backstories and character connections that are just totally pulled out of the air. Fan service abounds. Everyone seems to be connected to someone else in a very Star Wars-prequel-esque fashion. Valanice tries to commit suicide. It's not what you expect when you think of a "KQ" game.

Yeah, sure, I'll have the original games. But fan project or not, they will feel pretty tarnished by what TSL presents. Given that Cesar will likely have some role or influence on TT's KQ, I doubt that TSL will ever fade into just being "one part among many" in the KQ fandom. The final episode won't be out until sometime next year, anyway, and in that time, it's going to be milked as much as they can milk it.

[Blackthorne519]

I think you're getting a touch paranoid there, man. I don't think Cesar will have any large impact on TT's KQ - if any at all.

If you let TSL "tarnish" the original games in any way, you're giving power to TSL, and that's your own fault. The original games stand on their own. If needs be, just look at it how I look at - Graham ate a bad burrito after MoE, and had a bad nightmare. That nightmare was the Silver Lining. The next day, he woke up, and went about frolicking in the Daventry Countryside, picking carrots and tempting goats, as usual.

All was well until that Goat decided to start talking, though....


Bt

[Anakin Skywalker]

Originally Posted by Blackthorne519

I think you're getting a touch paranoid there, man. I don't think Cesar will have any large impact on TT's KQ - if any at all.

If you let TSL "tarnish" the original games in any way, you're giving power to TSL, and that's your own fault. The original games stand on their own. If needs be, just look at it how I look at - Graham ate a bad burrito after MoE, and had a bad nightmare. That nightmare was the Silver Lining. The next day, he woke up, and went about frolicking in the Daventry Countryside, picking carrots and tempting goats, as usual.

All was well until that Goat decided to start talking, though....


Bt

Just seems given his ego, his arrogance and his connection to TT (he's a former employee there who seems to still have many friends there), I can't see how his game wouldn't influence TT's even in some small way, given how over-exposed and over-promoted TSL has been. He wouldn't let TSL fade and be just another KQ fan game like that. That's not grandiose enough for him. Hell, this is a guy who wants to work on an SQ7 even though he likely knows the SQ fan base wouldn't want him anywhere near it--It's all for his own glory. Of all the fan games, TSL will probably be the first one looked at by TT as a sign of "what KQ fans want" in a KQ sequel, moreso than the other fan projects, because it's gotten much more attention over the years. And again, his tie with them is worrying.

I suppose you could look at it that way, it's just given that as it stands it's the only 3D KQ game outside of Mask, and the fact that I spent seven years waiting for it, the memory of it is hard to just toss aside as being "Graham had some bad burritos from Taco Bell". I had very high hopes for TSL given how grandly it was promoted, and given the fact that in 2003, 2004, 2005, etc it seemed to be the only way we'd ever see an adventure game involving the Royal Family again. Those were some pretty exciting times--and I wasn't the only one who shared the awestruck enthusiasm over TSL. And those high hopes were burnt, badly. Perhaps I shouldn't have blindly supported them back when I did, but I was only 13.

If they had told us the extent of just how much it was going to differ in spirit, tone and atmosphere from the originals, I probably wouldn't dislike it as much, because I would've known what to expect, and tempered my expectations as such. I don't dislike KQ8 as much because we were never told it was going to be the same; In fact, we were told explicitly to expect something very different from the very outset. When you go in to a game (or even a movie sequel or a book sequel, etc) with certain expectations, that expectation colors your perception upon playing it. With TSL, I expected, given what we were told, a game akin to KQ6--Slightly more mature, with a more sophisticated plot. Which is not what TSL is. It goes way beyond what KQ6 did.

A good chunk of this disappointment is indeed my own fault. My own expectations were perhaps too high, but then, when you're promised some sort of epic, as a naive kid, can you expect anything less? I was a young kid who thought the idea of going back to the Green Isles would be amazing--like a return to an old, happy memory or a return to a bright beautiful place you once visited. I didn't understand the concepts of "fan service" or "cliches" at 13. I was just pumped up by blind nostalgia and by a sadness at the death of Sierra and here seemed to be the chance for that death to have not been in vain. I didn't understand the KQ series quite as well in 2003 as I do now. And given my understanding of what KQ is--and isn't--I can't support TSL.

[doggans]

Originally Posted by Anakin Skywalker

Spending 7 years waiting for a game (I came upon TSL in 2003, don't know about Lamb) and then having it basically be horrible and basically violate everything KQ was about, while claiming to uphold and even revive the spirit of the originals, was a big time disappointment, and was insulting actually.

Two questions:

1. Is it really so hard to accept that "the spirit of King's Quest" and "everything King's Quest is about" might mean something different to the TSL team than it does to you or me?

2. Is ANY piece of entertainment ever REALLY worth feeling insulted over?

[Blackthorne519]

Heh. Listen, I've been a King's Quest fan longer than you've been alive. The series will be just fine. Don't give yourself heartburn over all this.

Bt

[Anakin Skywalker]

Originally Posted by doggans

Two questions:

1. Is it really so hard to accept that "the spirit of King's Quest" and "everything King's Quest is about" might mean something different to the TSL team than it does to you or me?

2. Is ANY piece of entertainment ever REALLY worth feeling insulted over?

1. It's just I don't see how someone could see TSL after playing KQ1-7/8. I don't think it was so much care for the "spirit of KQ" on their part as much as it was putting ideas that wouldn't otherwise get attention into a beloved series. Nothing to do with love or care for KQ.

2. It's an insult in the context of being consistently lied to, being assured and made to expect one thing and getting something very different from what we were told to expect. Perhaps insult is the wrong word. Maybe incredibly disappointed.

[MusicallyInspired]

Love for KQ, but not care. POS has stated numerous times that they were doing what they wanted with KQ and not necesssarily what the fans wanted. I'm just surprised so many fans are still attached to it seeing as it's so far removed from anything KQ has been about. I guess they're just so KQ-satrved they'll accept anything that has a chance at life for the series. The fact of the matter is, the fans have poured their support into TSL and made it as popular as it is. That's not POS's work. They had a PR campaign of course, but if the fans weren't interested and didn't want to support it and didn't like what they saw (and are seeing) no amount of PR would have worked at all.

I was never a fan of TSL even before the initial release because I knew what was coming from what a few inside sources told me years ago.

[Lambonius]

Watching LPs of TSL (let alone actually playing it) makes my asshole hurt. Literally. I don't think I'm alone in taking offense to that kind of thing.

[doggans]

Originally Posted by Anakin Skywalker

1. It's just I don't see how someone could see TSL after playing KQ1-7/8.

Fair enough, but I wouldn't have necessarily seen KQ3 as the next logical step after KQ2, and I *certainly* wouldn't have seen KQ7 after KQ6, or KQ8 after KQ7.

My point here was that you're judging the game based on an intangible "spirit of King's Quest", but the essential elements that you or I include in the definition of "King's Quest" might be different than the essential elements that the POS team does. If one simply defines "King's Quest" as "a fantasy adventure where a hero goes on a high-stakes quest against evil and explores a dangerous and magical land filled with creatures from legends, myths, and fairy tales", then TSL fits, regardless of its quality.

Originally Posted by Anakin Skywalker

Perhaps insult is the wrong word. Maybe incredibly disappointed.

Good call. If you're really feeling insulted/betrayed/offended because a piece of entertainment goes in a different direction than you would like, you probably need to rethink your priorities in life. :P

[Cez]

Originally Posted by MusicallyInspired

I'm just surprised so many fans are still attached to it seeing as it's so far removed from anything KQ has been about. I guess they're just so KQ-satrved they'll accept anything that has a chance at life for the series.

Why does there has to be an "external" reason for fans to like TSL other than the game itself? To start with, that statement of TSL being so detached from anything that is KQ the biggest exaggeration possible. And people that are open to see a different take on it enjoy it for what it is.

That's like saying the same for The Wizard of Oz and Wicked, the book. Is the dark and gritty story of the book a best-seller because people were starving for anything Wizard of Oz related? and moreover, is the (much) lighter Broadway play such a major success, --when it turns the universe of Oz upside down, and changes all character's intentions-- just because people are starving for it? --because if that's so, that means that the very obscure Disney's Return to Oz would have been a major success. Do all the different takes on Batman over the many years of its life enjoy success because people are starving for it? Did Disney do something wrong by transforming all Grimm fairy tales and popular stories like Aladdin into something they were not, and thus, were people starved for them to the point that they took whatever Disney threw on them? No, if people don't find something to their liking, no matter how starved they are, they won't take it. Just because you don't find it to your liking, doesn't mean that other people don't genuinely do. Period.

And the biggest example is that at least 70% of us in the TSL team are all KQ fans, and we all like it. So, isn't it a better thing to say that the people that support TSL maybe just don't think like you do?

Originally Posted by Lambonius

I approached TSL with excitement and enthusiasm.

Ha! Lamb, you and I have a history of fun and hate, and I enjoy our little interactions, but c'mon man, that has got to be the biggest load of crap I've ever heard you say, and you know it. You were bashing TSL even before Ep1 was released (and after having loved the demo).

[Anakin Skywalker]

Originally Posted by Cez

Why does there has to be an "external" reason for fans to like TSL other than the game itself? To start with, that statement of TSL being so detached from anything that is KQ the biggest exaggeration possible. And people that are open to see a different take on it enjoy it for what it is.

That's like saying the same for The Wizard of Oz and Wicked, the book. Is the dark and gritty story of the book a best-seller because people were starving for anything Wizard of Oz related? Do all the different takes on Batman over the many years of its life enjoy success because people are starving for it? Did Disney do something wrong by transforming all Grimm fairy tales and popular stories like Aladdin into something they were not, and thus, were people starved for them to the point that they took whatever Disney threw on them? No, if people don't find something to their liking, no matter how starved they are, they won't take it. Just because you don't find it to your liking, doesn't mean that other people don't genuinely do. Period.

And the biggest example is that at least 70% of us in the TSL team are all KQ fans, and we all like it. So, isn't it a better thing to say that the people that support TSL maybe just don't think like you do?



Ha! Lamb, you and I have a history of fun and hate, and I enjoy our little interactions, but c'mon man, that has got to be the biggest load of crap I've ever heard you say, and you know it. You were bashing TSL even before Ep1 was released (and after having loved the demo).

All the works you mention were either reboots or adaptations. They were not self proclaimed sequels, extending an existing continuity. With the case of Batman, each Batman series does not rely on the continuity of the previous films, for example, Nolan's films are not in the same continuity as Tim Burton's. He does not rely on information provided in Burton's films for the backbone of his own. Disney didn't claim that Aladdin was a sequel to the Arabian nights; It's an adaptation, same for all their other literary and fairy tale inspired works.

And before you say, "Our game isn't called King's Quest 9", let's not forget that it WAS called King's Quest 9 for about 5 years, only until you told by Vivendi to change the title. You were claiming to be the sequel to the continuity of 8 previous games. You never claimed that TSL was to be a reboot, a restart, nothing of the sort. You claimed from the very beginning that it was a sequel founded firmly on the roots and in the continuity which the previous games had established.

And obviously if Lamb loved the demo (which was three or so scenes in the Green Isles), he had, at some point, enthusiasm for the project. Which was destroyed when the crapfest which was the full game came out or when the trailers which showed how dark and angsty the game really was going to be.

[Cez]

Originally Posted by Anakin Skywalker

All the works you mention were either reboots or adaptations. They were not self proclaimed sequels, extending an existing continuity. With the case of Batman, each Batman series does not rely on the continuity of the previous films, for example, Nolan's films are not in the same continuity as Tim Burton's. He does not rely on information provided in Burton's films for the backbone of his own. Disney didn't claim that Aladdin was a sequel to the Arabian nights; It's an adaptation, same for all their other literary and fairy tale inspired works.

And before you say, "Our game isn't called King's Quest 9", let's not forget that it WAS called King's Quest 9 for about 5 years, only until you told by Vivendi to change the title. You were claiming to be the sequel to the continuity of 8 previous games. You never claimed that TSL was to be a reboot, a restart, nothing of the sort. You claimed from the very beginning that it was a sequel founded firmly on the roots and in the continuity which the previous games had established.

And obviously if Lamb loved the demo (which was three or so scenes in the Green Isles), he had, at some point, enthusiasm for the project. Which was destroyed when the crapfest which was the full game came out or when the trailers which showed how dark and angsty the game really was going to be.

1) Heh, the demo and Episode 1 were basically the same game. Ep1 had 10 more minutes tagged to it than the demo did. So, loving the demo, hating Ep1, is a incredible head-scratching notion to me.
2) I always said that this game was going to be much darker than any previous KQ. I never sold it as anything else.
3) Wicked isn't a reboot of Wizard of Oz. It tells the story of what "really" happened to the Witches. It changed the whole perspective anyone could have had on The Wizard of Oz. Quite frankly, TSL has done something very similar to what Wicked has done.
4) To me, it's still a sequel. It's a continuation of the events that happened in the previous 8 games. I'm not selling it as a reboot because it's not a reboot. I'm glad we were forced to change the name to TSL from KQIX, but it is still a sequel, not a reboot.
5) You'd still be whining no matter what we had called it.
6) Oh, Roberta played it and liked it

[Anakin Skywalker]

Originally Posted by Cez

1) Heh, the demo and Episode 1 were basically the same game. Ep1 had 10 more minutes tagged to it than the demo did. So, loving the demo, hating Ep1, is a incredible head-scratching notion to me.
2) I always said that this game was going to be much darker than any previous KQ. I never sold it as anything else.
3) Wicked isn't a reboot of Wizard of Oz. It tells the story of what "really" happened to the Witches. It changed the whole perspective anyone could have had on The Wizard of Oz. Quite frankly, TSL has done something very similar to what Wicked has done.
4) To me, it's still a sequel. It's a continuation of the events that happened in the previous 8 games. I'm not selling it as a reboot because it's not a reboot. I'm glad we were forced to change the name to TSL from KQIX, but it is still a sequel, not a reboot.
5) You'd still be whining no matter what we had called it.
6) Oh, Roberta played it and liked it

1) I can't speak for Lamb. When he gets here, he'll clarify.
2) You said it was going to be more mature. You never said it was going to be the incredibly dark, twisted, retconny mess that it is.
3) Wicked is basically a reboot that doesn't call itself one. It's basically revisionism...
4) A sequel that basically invalidates or retcons everything in almost every previous game. It's not a continuation of the events because it goes back and retells those events very differently.
5) It'd still be crap no matter what you called it.
6) Wasn't her statement made when the first episode came out? You know it's funny. Jane Jensen--co-creator of the most mature real KQ game--said in your own chat with her (in which you announced Cognition) that it was dark for KQ, and that Roberta had a very specific vision for the series. I'd tend to agree with that as even after the fact Roberta mentioned how KQ6 sort of deviated from the usual style due to Jane's influence. I truly doubt if Roberta were in the game's business today that she would've turned KQ into a mopey soap opera on par in quality with Twilight.

[Cez]

Can you tell me how exactly is Wicked a reboot of Wizard of Oz? All Wicked tried to do is give an explanation to all the events that took place in Wizard of Oz that we were not seeing by following Dorothy's storyline, and in the process, retconned the hell out of it. It changed all the intentions of the Wicked Witch of the West portraying her as a good person that was forced to be seen as an evil witch. It never changed the actual events of The Wizard of Oz, it was fully based on them, it just did a retcon on its backstory, explaining things like why did Dorothy "kill" the witch with water, and so on. If that's a reboot, you may as well call TSL a reboot, if that's what you find convenient. Now, does that make you like it more?

As far as what Roberta thinks or doesn't think, she played Episode 1, which is as dark and gritty as everything else, and wrote a review. Roberta is an incredibly hard person to reach. It would have been the easiest thing to do to just ignore the email, not play the game, and not have made any comments. If she felt compelled to do so, and liked it, it's because whatever she saw in it, she was fine with it. You can say whatever you want, think whatever you want, but what Roberta wrote in that email to us is the only true statement there exists. Unless you want to call her a liar now, too, in order to defend your point of view.

[Anakin Skywalker]

Originally Posted by Cez

Can you tell me how exactly is Wicked a reboot of Wizard of Oz? All Wicked tried to do is give an explanation to all the events that took place in Wizard of Oz that we were not seeing by following Dorothy's storyline, and in the process, retconned the hell out of it. It changed all the intentions of the Wicked Witch of the West portraying her as a good person that was forced to be seen as an evil witch. It never changed the actual events of The Wizard of Oz, it was fully based on them, it just did a retcon on its backstory, explaining things like why did Dorothy "kill" the witch with water, and so on. If that's a reboot, you may as well call TSL a reboot, if that's what you find convenient. Now, does that make you like it more?

As far as what Roberta thinks or doesn't think, she played Episode 1, which is as dark and gritty as everything else, and wrote a review. Roberta is an incredibly hard person to reach. It would have been the easiest thing to do to just ignore the email, not play the game, and not have made any comments. If she felt compelled to do so, and liked it, it's because whatever she saw in it, she was fine with it. You can say whatever you want, think whatever you want, but what Roberta wrote in that email to us is the only true statement there exists. Unless you want to call her a liar now, too, in order to defend your point of view.

Why bother? You'll just pull the "Roberta liked Episode 1 which means she agreed 100% with our direction which means TSL is an official game, are you going to call Roberta a liar?" card again.