What SHOULD be changed for the new KQ?

[gamingafter40]

There has been a lot of good discussion here about what makes King's Quest King's Quest, and what old-school styles and design elements we'd like to see retained. With that in mind, what are some things we feel SHOULD be changed for a new King's Quest? And what are some risks the new designers should be willing to take?

These are strictly my own opinions:

I for one would like to see more personality -- I never felt like I knew who Sir/King Graham really was as a person. Who is this man who apologizes for disturbing insects, yet pushes old women into ovens without thinking twice about it? Is he a wise and effective ruler, or in over his head?

I'd like to see a few conversation puzzles, along with traditional give-the-right-thing-to-the-right-character KQ interactions. There are always colorful characters in the KQ universe, and monologues don't tell us very much about them.

I'm also happy to let navigation challenges fade away -- spending twenty minutes gingerly edging around the poisonous thorns in KQ II (because I didn't find the better alternate solution, I know!) was not an experience I'm anxious to repeat. If we must have physical movement puzzles, let them be like climbing the aerie cliff in KQ VI, where it's more a matter of timing and planning a route than pixel-level maneuvering.

I'd like to see "background" elements that are transformable conceal themselves better -- this shouldn't be a problem now, but the VGA palette subdivision provided unintended hints in a few of the old games.

And I'd like to get rid of the absolute dead-ends the old games were prone to -- I realize this may be seen as dumbing-down by many, but I would argue that forced backtracking does not create play value either. I'm very happy to realize I must have missed something after beating my head against a puzzle -- but I'd like an opportunity to find my way back to where I can correct it, without having to replay what I've already done!

[RAnthonyMahan]

No unwinnable situations. That's one thing from the old days of adventure gaming I won't miss.

Also, while those scenes may have been a pain in the ass, I want this game to have at least one long twisty pathway where a single bad step is instant death. It's tradition.

[puzzlebox]

Originally Posted by gamingafter40

spending twenty minutes gingerly edging around the poisonous thorns in KQ II (because I didn't find the better alternate solution, I know!) was not an experience I'm anxious to repeat.

Haha, I did exactly the same thing in KQIV to get across the plank in the cave because I didn't find the lantern. Key tap, save... key tap, save...

[thom-22]

Originally Posted by gamingafter40

I for one would like to see more personality -- I never felt like I knew who Sir/King Graham really was as a person. Who is this man who apologizes for disturbing insects, yet pushes old women into ovens without thinking twice about it? Is he a wise and effective ruler, or in over his head?

Funny, the Graham I played with always had lots of personality. The insect-witch thing is simple good vs. evil, fairy-tale style. What further explanation is needed?

Originally Posted by gamingafter40

I'd like to see a few conversation puzzles, along with traditional give-the-right-thing-to-the-right-character KQ interactions. There are always colorful characters in the KQ universe, and monologues don't tell us very much about them.

The last thing Telltale needs is encouragement to keep pretending that dialogs are puzzles or an adequate substitute for meaningful gameplay.

Originally Posted by gamingafter40

I'm also happy to let navigation challenges fade away -- spending twenty minutes gingerly edging around the poisonous thorns in KQ II (because I didn't find the better alternate solution, I know!) was not an experience I'm anxious to repeat. If we must have physical movement puzzles, let them be like climbing the aerie cliff in KQ VI, where it's more a matter of timing and planning a route than pixel-level maneuvering.

I suspect this won't come into play because hot spots are not exact enough in 3D. But I hope there is some kind of pseudo-ambulatory challenges in the game -- that's exactly the kind of gameplay variety that distinguishes the Sierra-style.

The worst possible answer to the question "What should be changed for the new KQ" is "strip it of everything that isn't standard in today's generic adventures". Do you really not have enough of those to play?

[Rather Dashing]

Originally Posted by thom-22

The worst possible answer to the question "What should be changed for the new KQ" is "strip it of everything that isn't standard in today's generic adventures". Do you really not have enough of those to play?

It should also be noted that the correct answer also isn't "strip it of everything that would make it a Sierra game". I see a lot of LucasArts fans(distinguished from Adventure Game fans by their disdain for everything that does not emulate the LucasArts adventure style) celebrating the production of Kings Quest by Telltale, because it will finally lead to a King's Quest that "[they] can play".

...if you never wanted to play King's Quest, if you hated King's Quest before, what's with the sudden desire to play a game that is no different from others you may have played but with the skin of a series you never appreciated in the first place?!

[Jennifer]

They should definitely stick to Sierra rules (with an auto-replay feature via prompt after deaths [preferably with an option to restore a saved game in the prompt as well] - that should please both modern adventure gamers and Sierra loyalists, because the fans in the latter category can easily restore a game from that point instead of auto-continuing). They've already mentioned they're going to have deaths, so I'm not too worried about that point.

The only thing I think they should avoid with this new King's Quest is dead ends and arbitrary deaths (by that I mean stick to tense situation deaths like in Gabriel Knight or the first two Broken Sword games and deaths that are foreshadowed like going out in dangerous places are OK too [when you're warned how dangerous it is either by a character, the narrator, or even just by sight and/or sound]), but stay away from deaths that aren't obvious or foreshadowed). Sierra was already phasing those things out, and those are definitely two things that Telltale shouldn't bring back.

[techie775]

Originally Posted by gamingafter40

I for one would like to see more personality -- I never felt like I knew who Sir/King Graham really was as a person. Who is this man who apologizes for disturbing insects, yet pushes old women into ovens without thinking twice about it? Is he a wise and effective ruler, or in over his head?

The one time graham pushed a women into an oven, she was a witch who kept turning kids into gingerbread, so I don't think graham needs a psych eval for that. They mention in KQ2 Graham has ruled fine, although you could argue about Daventry's condition in KQ3.

[BagginsKQ]

Really the only morally questionable thing Graham has done, was agreeing to send maidens to be sacrificed to dark Dragons...

It is strange, that the man most have come to admire so much during his early adventures could be the same person who sent innocent girls off to be sacrificed to the fire-breathing dragon. Perhaps his good judgment and wisdom hadn't recovered from the shock of Alexander's kidnapping, or perhaps it was just poor advice on the part of his prime minister, Gerwain. KQC, 2nd Edition, 472 Not all the acts and decisions he has made over the years have been good ones, but he has always done what he felt was best for Daventry, even to the sacrifice of his only daughter. Rosella has forgiven him for taking her to the dragon, but the memory of Graham tying her to the stake, awaiting death with her eyes open and dry, still sometimes disturbs his dreams. That she was rescued and survived only eases the horror a little. KQC2E, 244

The last thing Telltale needs is encouragement to keep pretending that dialogs are puzzles or an adequate substitute for meaningful gameplay.

They are a traditional kind of Adventure puzzle actually, but mainly for companies like Lucasarts and Revolutiohn Software (see Broken Sword for an example) and others...

Largely left out of Sierra games, until Quest For Glory and Gabriel Knight (maybe a few others)...

[thom-22]

Originally Posted by BagginsKQ

They are a traditional kind of Adventure puzzle actually, but mainly for companies like Lucasarts and Revolutiohn Software (see Broken Sword for an example) and others...

When they're puzzles, ie. there is more than one possible outcome. The point is TT's dialogs never have any stakes; you just keep clicking until you hear everything.

[thom-22]

Originally Posted by BagginsKQ

...even to the sacrifice of his only daughter. Rosella has forgiven him for taking her to the dragon, but the memory of Graham tying her to the stake, awaiting death with her eyes open and dry, still sometimes disturbs his dreams. That she was rescued and survived only eases the horror a little. KQC2E, 244

Hey, that gives me a great idea for a fan game! Valanice (assuming she survives her suicide attempts in TSL) plots to murder Graham for what he did to Rosella, paralleling the Clytemnestra-Agamemnon-Iphigenia myths. LOL

[Blackthorne519]

DRAMA!

Sophocles would be pleased.

Bt

[Jennifer]

Originally Posted by thom-22

When they're puzzles, ie. there is more than one possible outcome. The point is TT's dialogs never have any stakes; you just keep clicking until you hear everything.

That's true for most of Telltale's games, but not The Walking Dead. The dialog choices lead to multiple paths with multiple outcomes. I'm definitely all for it if they implement this in King's Quest.

[thom-22]

Originally Posted by Jennifer

That's true for most of Telltale's games, but not The Walking Dead. The dialog choices lead to multiple paths with multiple outcomes. I'm definitely all for it if they implement this in King's Quest.

Yes, I forgot about it in The Walking Dead because it just came out and I have no interest in playing it. Does it come anywhere close to the deep branching gameplay of KQ6, or is it just another half-ass novelty for Telltale to overhype?

[BagginsKQ]

When they're puzzles, ie. there is more than one possible outcome. The point is TT's dialogs never have any stakes; you just keep clicking until you hear everything.

Nah, even in Sierra games, when they were conversation 'puzzles' they weren't always part of more than one outcome, there was usually only one path. In Quest for Glory and Gabriel Knight for example. The 'puzzle' was simply to find a certain specific bit of information, that would give you a point. Learning that information then would allow you to ask about it from someone else, which is required to learn something important so you can move on in the game (I.E. you might not be able to pick up a certain item or evidence until you learn about it first from a conversation). Without the 'information' you can't go further. It's fairly linear. There were no 'multiple choice' questions/answers in general.

Actually, KQ6 has a diaologue puzzles, but its rather linear, no choice version of a dialogue puzzle. That is to say you need to talk to someone, and learn a certain detail before you can push the game forward. I.E. the magic map dialogue puzzle (learn about Ali being friends with the Ferryman, and then learning about the Magic Map from the Ferryman, which then gives you the option to get the magic map from the Pawn Dealer and trade for it in the pawn shop). There are no choices in dialogue but its clearly a puzzle that has to be solved to get the map, and its pretty linear solution.

Actually most of the telltale 'conversation puzzles' work this way... Learn information from dialogue, that then leads you to someone else, or an item. Very simplified dialogue puzzles. The only difference is that they give the player different comments to go about getting that information. From nice to more snarky choices. But all lead to the same outcome, just like in the old Sierra dialogue puzzles.

Another example of a fetch quest/treasure hunt puzzles mixed with simple dialogue puzzle is the simple puzzles in Roberta William's Mixed-Up Mother Goose adventure game. Which basically involved talking to someone to learn what item you need to pick up, and then pickign up that item, and then bringing it back to the character who wanted it! It's probably one of the most simplified adventure games ever...

Hey, that gives me a great idea for a fan game! Valanice (assuming she survives her suicide attempts in TSL) plots to murder Graham for what he did to Rosella, paralleling the Clytemnestra-Agamemnon-Iphigenia myths. LOL

Eh, TSL isn't even the official continuation of KQ (and its not part of Telltale's continuation either), and even contradicts some details from the games or official spinoff material... You could take your fanfic anyway you want to...

[gamingafter40]

Originally Posted by techie775

The one time graham pushed a women into an oven, she was a witch who kept turning kids into gingerbread, so I don't think graham needs a psych eval for that.

I misspoke in my earlier post, he actually pushes her into a bubbling cauldron (at least in Sierra's EGA remake of KQ 1, which my memory was trying to summon up!) I'm being tongue-in-cheek about all of this, but I think what bothered me in this scene was Roberta Williams' insensitive prose: Sir Graham "courageously" pushes the woman to her gruesome death by sneaking up on her from behind, and the popup ends with "Congratulations!" No trial, no investigation about whether she could just change the children back; it just made me feel icky.

At any rate, if Graham feels any moral ambivalence about his action here, or his killing of the Yeti and Dracula at other times, it's never really presented in-game. He seems much more upset that "Drat! My sled is broken!" in KQ V.

[thom-22]

Originally Posted by BagginsKQ

Nah, even in Sierra games, blah blah

Baggins, I know all that. I said "when", as in "in those cases" -- I didn't assert that those cases weren't few and far between. My point was that Telltale overuses such dialog "puzzles", relative to other kinds of non-dialog puzzles and gameplay, in comparison to most adventure games (or most well-regarded classic adventure games with a few exceptions of course) whether Sierra, Lucasarts, Revolution, whatever. Yes, there were a lot of single-outcome dialogs in Gabriel Knight, but they were balanced with much more exploration and puzzle-solving so the dialogs never felt like filler.

Originally Posted by BagginsKQ

Eh, TSL isn't even the official continuation of KQ (and its not part of Telltale's continuation either), and even contradicts some details from the games or official spinoff material... You could take your fanfic anyway you want to...

Jesus Christ, it was a joke!

[gamingafter40]

I always think conversation "puzzles" are included more for entertainment value than for challenge -- they're great for setting up jokes, and they can also be valuable for optional character development, explored at the player's discretion. The times when we WANT to pick the impulsive, inappropriate response are a great way to explore the character's personality (and inner life), and the responses when we actually do so are usually fun.

Playing "The Secret of Monkey Island" with a college buddy of mine in the pre-talkie days was terrific, because we could not resist voicing all of the characters out loud as we played. It would SO not have been the same experience if it were limited to puzzles and pop-up, non-interactive dialogues. The writing and characters made that game -- the gameplay was solid, too, but the reason I go back to it every now and then is for the interactive dialogue. "I'm Guybrush Threepwood, and I mean to kill you all!"

[Jennifer]

Originally Posted by thom-22

Yes, I forgot about it in The Walking Dead because it just came out and I have no interest in playing it. Does it come anywhere close to the deep branching gameplay of KQ6, or is it just another half-ass novelty for Telltale to overhype?

It's best to watch Telltale's new projects because whatever is in them is a good indicator of whether Telltale is listening to fan concerns and implementing things fans want in their games. The Walking Dead is a good sign for things to come.

This feature is definitely not a novelty. They definitely do make for a deep branching gameplay because decisions you make affect the outcome of the episode you play, and they also carry over to the next episodes too (episode one already shows this as the episode two preview in episode one changes based on the decisions you make). In episode one, there's already at least four different outcomes, and when you figure in the branching based on your decisions in the next four episodes, the possible outcomes factor into the dozens.

I hope Telltale continues using it in Fables and King's Quest and beyond, because I feel it's actually the best thing to happen to Telltale's episodic gaming structure since they switched to monthly episodes with Sam & Max Season One. It helps give the entire season a feeling of cohesiveness as a complete game in a way that was never there before.

[MusicallyInspired]

Originally Posted by Jennifer

This feature is definitely not a novelty. They definitely do make for a deep branching gameplay because decisions you make affect the outcome of the episode you play, and they also carry over to the next episodes too (episode one already shows this as the episode two preview in episode one changes based on the decisions you make). In episode one, there's already at least four different outcomes, and when you figure in the branching based on your decisions in the next four episodes, the possible outcomes factor into the dozens.

Maybe. That's if they don't just have 4 alternate pathways that simply don't deviate much through the entire season. We'll have to see.

I think the main point thom was trying to get across is that conversation puzzles shouldn't be the ONLY puzzles.

[thom-22]

Originally Posted by gamingafter40

I always think conversation "puzzles" are included more for entertainment value than for challenge

Of course. But include too many at the expense of other kinds of gameplay and you don't really have a game anymore; you have a trivially interactive content-delivery system. If Telltale wants to do that to its TV/movie properties, fine, but it is the antithesis of what King's Quest is.

Originally Posted by Jennifer

It's best to watch Telltale's new projects because whatever is in them is a good indicator of whether Telltale is listening to fan concerns and implementing things fans want in their games. The Walking Dead is a good sign for things to come.

The Walking Dead is simply a very good fit for Telltale's existing game design philosophy and the kinds of things they've been saying they want to do wrt storytelling. It's an evolution of a design they tried to graft, Frankenstein-like, onto Jurassic Park for which it was NOT an appropriate fit, and for which many fans said -- way in advance! -- that it wasn't an appropriate fit.

Moreover, Telltale has consistently portrayed their trivially interactive content-delivery system game-style not merely as something different, to be used only where appropriate, but as some kind of "wave of the future", an "improvement" or "correction" or "modernization" of the basic structure and elements of classic adventure gaming for which they have, on various occasions, expressed utter disdain.

So I cannot rationally regard TWD as evidence that Telltale responds to fans or take it on faith that they're going to do a 180° on game design, which is the only possible way to do KQ right.

Originally Posted by Jennifer

I hope Telltale continues using it in Fables and King's Quest and beyond

I hope they don't, only because there's only so much they can fit into those teeny tiny episodes and they need to focus on more important aspects of getting KQ right. Dialog "puzzles" -- whether single or multiple outcome -- do NOT make a game in and of themselves.