Do you wish that there will never be a new KQ game?

[KatieHal]

A bigger company doesn't necessarily mean bigger funding. In fact, more likely it would be a much rougher situation financially because you've got more people to try and pay now with whatever funding you DO have. Plus, particularly when starting out, you don't NEED all those people on top of not being able to pay all of those people. If we've got a game we can do with 3 animators, what are we going to do with 9 extras?

And those former Sierra employees are a 'safer bet', as it were, because they've proven themselves already. People know their names, they can check out their previous works.

And I'll echo much of what everyone else said. It's very impractical on top of being nigh-impossible to oragnize, even if everyone was interested in doing so. So, like you said, enjoy the products we're all coming out with on our own and how each company is going to have its own unique style, story, flair, and so forth, to add more variety to the gaming world, and to adventure games in particular.

[Lambonius]

Originally Posted by Anakin Skywalker

I'll definitely be buying Cognition and Infamous Quests and SpaceVenture and whatever else the Sierra alumni and Sierra fan groups cook up on their own.

I think that's the best any of us can do at this point.

It is worth pointing out though, that through this whole "successful" fan-game process, real-world connections have been made between the original Sierra developers and the fan groups, and those certainly have the potential to coalesce into something cool in the future. Jane Jensen working with POS on Cognition is a prime example.

[BagginsKQ]

I'll definitley be buying SpaceVenture... I probably won't get Cognition, and I'll have to see more about Quest for Infamy before I decide...

[Lambonius]

Just to clarify, Infamous Quests is the name of our company--Quest For Infamy is our flagship game.

[exo]

A "bigger company" is exactly what killed Sierra. They started taking chances on 8 CD long games full of bad acting. They started trying to diversify their releases by just cranking out tons of subpar games (yes, they published HalfLife and some of their sports titles did well - but compared to the many many games that were shovelware, it doesn't out a dent in their shitty game release record from that time period). They stopped focusing on what made them big in the first place. It doesn't help that Ken went into the delusional world of thinking he could be the founder of a "forever" company. Seriously, what a friggin retarded fantasy... one that could only be held by someone who simply doesn't understand business.

A "bigger company" is the difference between the early Telltale Games (which I found refreshing), and the current ones (which I find formulaic)

Freedom to design a game as a designer actually desires becomes less possible as a company gets bigger. Freedom to explore ideas, developing for niche genres (newsflash, p&c adventure games are a niche genre right now), creativity in general... these are all hallmarks of smaller companies.

A wish for a large, "well funded", super-company that is cranking out adventure games is an ignorant and/or naive request with no eye towards previous companies that have been in that position, or current ones. When a company becomes big, they either crank out yearly sequels to the 2-3 IP's with wide variations in quality, or they find a specific formula and repeat it until the industry moves on without them. Ironically, depending on if your a fan of the later KQ games or not, you could blame Sierra of falling in either trap.

[Debbie82]

The OP has got a few errors! It's supposed to be "Do you wish there WOULD never be a new KQ game?", NOT "WILL", and "Do you wish a KQ game WAS never made?", NOT "IS"! English = FAIL!

[Lambonius]

Originally Posted by Debbie82

The OP has got a few errors! It's supposed to be "Do you wish there WOULD never be a new KQ game?", NOT "WILL", and "Do you wish a KQ game WAS never made?", NOT "IS"! English = FAIL!

Posting solely for the purpose of pointing out spotty grammar in a post made two weeks ago is a much, MUCH larger fail than the grammar issue you're pointing out.

[Murray the Chao]

Perhaps Debbie82 needs to find out just how easy it really is to be green.

Spirits of Mist
And Creatures of Bog:
Transform Debbie82
To the shape of a Frog.

[MtnPeak]

Originally Posted by Anakin Skywalker

Does anyone else here actively hope and wish that another KQ game--whether by TT or any group that is not the fans--is never, ever made?

The new Telltale games are like the QTE-filled "Dragon's Lair" game, but much easier and with more dialogue. In other words, they are like interactive movies and the game worlds offer the player almost no opportunity for exploration.

They are NOT adventure games. Telltale may have improved upon previous interactive movies, but their games lack a lot of what makes adventure games so special. Yet Telltale wants us to believe that we should all be jumping for joy because they have agreed to step in and save the day by serving up some of this interactive movie stuff while calling it King's Quest as a way to make a few bucks? As Judge Judy once said, "Don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining."

As for the idea that only dumbed down, interactive movie–style games will find success with a wide audience, come back to me when Telltale stops relying on existing, immensely popular intellectual property and releases something original. Also, I think this year will see at least a couple more traditional adventure games (not based on already-popular comics or books, mind you) become notable successes.

I want to see a new KQ made by a team that actually loves traditional adventure games. Given what Telltale's Dave Grossman has had to say about King's Quest and classic adventure gaming, that would rule out Telltale.

[MtnPeak]

Originally Posted by Anakin Skywalker:
I'll definitely be buying Cognition and Infamous Quests and SpaceVenture and whatever else the Sierra alumni and Sierra fan groups cook up on their own.

Me too, though I have been underwhelmed by the Hero-U previews and don't feel too enthused about getting that one.

The one to really watch is the new Larry game, IMO. I think that's going to be one of the bigger success stories of the bunch. For all his alleged, questionable online drama antics, it's worth noting that Paul Trowe did impressively manage to get the LSL rights, Al Lowe, Josh Mandel, a Grammy-nominated composer, a great development team in NFusion, etc., and it looks like he may just pull off a hit. The previews look solid.

[exo]

Why would a game with a simple reskinning and some tweaked dialogue be one of the bigger success stories, when the other games you are comparing it to are actually new and creative?

I think it is ludicrous that it is costing them this much money and taking this long to simply redraw the various levels in LSL1.

Yea yea, I get that it is a bit more complex then that, but in that same time period - completely unique games with completely unique stories have made huge progress, and are on track to release around the same time (if not before).

Companies like Tierra/AGDI and Infamous re-released older games, kept the same nostalgic styles, and improved upon them - all for the low low cost of free.

[BagginsKQ]

I suppose its the third version of LSL1... the VGA remake was like the rest of the Sierra remake line a failure. Cost Sierra alot of money.

One can only hope this new HD remake doesn't have the same problem.

[Chyron8472]

Originally Posted by MtnPeak

The new Telltale games are like the QTE-filled "Dragon's Lair" game, but much easier and with more dialogue. In other words, they are like interactive movies and the game worlds offer the player almost no opportunity for exploration.

They are NOT adventure games. Telltale may have improved upon previous interactive movies, but their games lack a lot of what makes adventure games so special. Yet Telltale wants us to believe that we should all be jumping for joy because they have agreed to step in and save the day by serving up some of this interactive movie stuff while calling it King's Quest as a way to make a few bucks? As Judge Judy once said, "Don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining."

As for the idea that only dumbed down, interactive movie–style games will find success with a wide audience, come back to me when Telltale stops relying on existing, immensely popular intellectual property and releases something original. Also, I think this year will see at least a couple more traditional adventure games (not based on already-popular comics or books, mind you) become notable successes.

I want to see a new KQ made by a team that actually loves traditional adventure games. Given what Telltale's Dave Grossman has had to say about King's Quest and classic adventure gaming, that would rule out Telltale.

I both agree and disagree with this.

Telltale's only "interactive movie game" seems to be Jurassic Park. Granted, Back to the Future is very easy, and quite buggy, but I wouldn't compare it, Sam & Max, nor Tales of Monkey Island directly with QTE games such as Dragon's Lair, Star Trek: Borg or A Fork in the Tale. I haven't played a whole lot of The Walking Dead, but it is very good from what I've played, and its QTE moments have changing impact on the story which gives them meaning rather than feeling like forcibly scripted button presses. To be honest, I prefer them over the arcade sequences in the AGDI KQ games (the escape on seahorse in KQ2+ comes to mind).

On the other hand, Telltale is not widely well known for their old-school style (quite the contrary, in fact); we know nothing of their KQ dev team's personal interest in Sierra games; nor do we know if they're planning to cater to nostalgic KQ5/6 fans or else to have in mind that the KQ games endeavored to change as technology improved. So, there's no evidence to support that their KQ game would be loved at all by the existing KQ fanbase.