Alright...

[Anakin Skywalker]

I've been defending this game a lot BUT:

I watched a BTTF playthrough (I haven't had much cash so not really able to afford games) and I have to say...If TT takes the BTTF route with KQ, then it will have been a very big mistake.

I'm a fan of interactive movies; I loved Phantasmagoria--but even Phantas didn't explicitly hold you by the hand and tell you exactly what to do and where. From what it seems, BTTF is truly an interactive movie--a movie which tons of cutscenes, no REAL puzzles and very little interaction with the surroundings. I'd take an interactive movie in the Phantas vein with a narrator added--that could be cool, because Phantas was pretty challenging in parts. But not BTTF style? No way!

Also, I hope they don't go for the Pixar/3D cartoon look of BTTF. I'd love an updated VGA sort of look, or even a KQ7 look. But not a 3D Pixar look. It just looks goofy.

I've been supporting this game because I want KQ to come back from the dead, and from a plot perspective, I fear the alternative to TT (TSL). I don't ever want POS going near KQ officially. I'd accept AGDI doing an official KQ game as they get the feel and the puzzles and the atmosphere down pat, but I'm not a big fan of them tying all the games together tightly and having GK style conspiracies just like TSL does.

If AGDI would do a KQ game with the sophistication of KQ2VGA but without the intricate plot and "epic" backstory, I'd 100% support them getting the license....

So, yeah right now it's a "lesser of two evils" situation.....

[Rather Dashing]

If anyone else hasn't played "Back to the Future: The Game" and doesn't understand the criticisms that stem from that title, the first episode can be played for free. Jurassic Park pre-release media has overall shown a continued dumbing down of the genre, by removing even more interactive objects per screen and taking out the exploration by gutting navigation(walking) and relegating it to a menu screen interface.

[Nintendo Boy1]

Originally Posted by Rather Dashing

The Jurassic Park pre-release media has overall shown a continued dumbing down of the genre, by removing even more interactive objects per screen and taking out the exploration by gutting navigation(walking) and relegating it to a menu screen interface.

At first I thought it would've been optional weather to walk or not, whith in all honesty wouldn't have been a bad to have both. Though the fact that it only includes pictures to move from place to place and a cmaera to look around is extremely pathetic for any sortive adventure game. To me, as of right now, it seems like a slighty better than average interactive movie of Jurassic Park, rather than an actual adventure game. Which is the reason why I'm not purchasing this game.

[zounds!]

I agree, Kings Quest needs to be treated differently, and I will be disappointed if it shares the same style/structure. Although I like the BttF series, and you know I don't see it as the ending of traditional games by TT. It may be dumbed down, but it is still enjoyable to me. But, yeah... Kings Quest needs to be something else.

[Cez]

Gameplay probably won't be as "interactive movie" as BTTF. But also don't expect an old Sierra game, you are not going to get it in terms of gameplay. But you'll get your atmosphere and the type of story you are looking for.

And stop worrying about us going for the KQ license. Even if I've said that we wanted it, we've been working on the damn thing for the past 10 years, you know. Some other people in the team wanted it more than I personally did, but I'm the voice of the team. I'm ready to move on --got too many other things I want to do, and right now, we got other big fishes to fry. Just playing our cards to see what that fish is going to be.

[Secret Fawful]

Originally Posted by Cez

Gameplay probably won't be as "interactive movie" as BTTF. But also don't expect an old Sierra game, you are not going to get it in terms of gameplay. But you'll get your atmosphere and the type of story you are looking for.

And stop worrying about us going for the KQ license. Even if I've said that we wanted it, we've been working on the damn thing for the past 10 years, you know. Some other people in the team wanted it more than I personally did, but I'm the voice of the team. I'm ready to move on --got too many other things I want to do, and right now, we got other big fishes to fry. Just playing our cards to see what that fish is going to be.

U mad, bro? I'll give you this. You reached out and said something, and you actually gave a blunt, honest answer. That's what I personally want the most, and want to keep seeing from you guys. It's felt far too absent lately.

[zounds!]

Originally Posted by Cez

don't expect an old Sierra game, you are not going to get it in terms of gameplay. But you'll get your atmosphere and the type of story you are looking for.

I dunno... I can't really say anything until I see it I guess.

[Cez]

Originally Posted by Secret Fawful

U mad, bro? I'll give you this. You reached out and said something, and you actually gave a blunt, honest answer. That's what I personally want the most, and want to keep seeing from you guys. It's felt far too absent lately.

Actually, not mad, just being honest. I love KQ to pieces, but 10 years of my life is enough --that's not how the whole team feels, however, I think some of them would die happy working on TSL forever haha.

For me it's too many other stories to write, too many other games to produce, too little time

[Secret Fawful]

Fair enough. Thanks again for the reply.

[ragdoll556]

To be fair, the easier difficulty level in BttF was to appeal to newcomers who don't really get the adventure genre. But with King's Quest the target audience is used to difficult puzzles and feels that they are integral to the experience. So I'm fairly certain that telltale will(or at least try to) make this game have the hard puzzles that one would expect from a KQ game.

[Valiento]

If BTTF played like King's Quest, it wouldn't be BTTF...

BTTF isn't based on MacGyverisms...

Marty didn't go about picking up random junk, to create devices to get by things. He solved his problems through running away, car/hoverboard chases, out talking his opponents, or just plain rocking out to Johnny B. Good.

[Irishmile]

Valiento makes a pretty solid argument.

[Anakin Skywalker]

Originally Posted by Valiento

If BTTF played like King's Quest, it wouldn't be BTTF...

BTTF isn't based on MacGyverisms...

Marty didn't go about picking up random junk, to create devices to get by things. He solved his problems through running away, car/hoverboard chases, out talking his opponents, or just plain rocking out to Johnny B. Good.

I'm not talking about MacGyverisms, though.

I'm talking about the WAY in which the puzzle is presented to you in BTTF. Not the puzzles themselves. In BTTF, you are literally told what to do/pick up/mess with by a little rtext box in the game.

I don't want to be told what to do in a KQ game, to have my proverbial hand held. The other KQ games didn't do this---and some puzzles were so damn hard they themselves could take hours to solve without any sort of hintbook. You were given no hint as to what to do and why to do it.

That can be refined and made a bit easier; you can have smart puzzles with less dream logic, or with less "WTF?" solutions--But they must be a puzzle, not just some two second interaction which is spoonfed to you that simply moves the movie along to the next cutscene as in BTTF.

[Valiento]

I seriously never paid attention to the hint systems while playing through BTTF, I avoided reading the text box.

[der_ketzer]

Originally Posted by Valiento

I seriously never paid attention to the hint systems while playing through BTTF, I avoided reading the text box.

how did you do that. Did you put a piuece of paper over the top 1/5 of your screen and turn off the sound + subtitles? The hints are worked in so much you cannot escape them at all.

[MusicallyInspired]

Lol @ thread. Oh the irony.

[Cez]

Originally Posted by MusicallyInspired

Lol @ thread. Oh the irony.

Yeah, right?

@Anakin: You should support a game on its own merits, not because you were happy that it went against PO's "wishes". You said a lot of stuff in these forums and defended a lot of points without doing any kind of research. And like I told you in a PM to you, your personal vendetta against me has led you to do stuff that you probably should be a lot more careful in doing.

But anyways, I don't even know why I keep trying with you.

[Anakin Skywalker]

Originally Posted by Cez

Yeah, right?

@Anakin: You should support a game on its own merits, not because you were happy that it went against PO's "wishes". You said a lot of stuff in these forums and defended a lot of points without doing any kind of research. And like I told you in a PM to you, your personal vendetta against me has led you to do stuff that you probably should be a lot more careful in doing.

But anyways, I don't even know why I keep trying with you.

Not sure what kind of "research" you're talking about.
Right now there are no merits to either support or be against it, the game, on. There are merits towards being optimistic or pessimistic about the CONCEPT of it--but right now the game has no merits to either be supported or rejected. I accept the premise, the concept of a TTG KQ. I am optimistic about such a concept coming to be. But the concept and the execution are two different things, and only time will tell how TT goes about making this game.

As to your last point, you are your game; You are the public face and head of your company, and as such the buck stops at your feet. I will never support your game, nor your vision for King's Quest. You had your chance, and when your game was a concept I supported it too--I supported it even beyond when it was just on paper, even when I had seen trailers and screenshots. And I was let down, big time.

AGDI, while flawed in their story arc (IMO) did capture the feel, tone and atmosphere of the originals--And that for me makes their games acceptable.

Now TT has a chance--just as you did, to make a KQ game. They could do well, or they could completely fail. I may be let down by TT's game, but for me as of now, the glass is half full rather than half empty. The blinding glow of "OMGZ A NEW OFFICIAL KQ GAME!!" has worn off to a more realistic stance.

I think it's a lot less excusable for a fan group to mess up than it is for the original creator to mess up, or in TT's case, a company that doesn't know KQ as well as the fans or Roberta or Josh might. Which is why I excuse, and even accept, the vision/direction which Sierra/Roberta presented us with KQ8. And I might be willing to let go of any foibles in TT's first episode, provided they improve.

Not to drift off point, but I'm not really a fan of the episodic format in general--Whether with this or TSL. I simply don't like it for a KQ game. Maybe for something like a Flash Gordan based game it would work or an Indiana Jones based game (since it was inspired by adventure serials), but I hate that this format seems to be THE formula of future adventure games. You don't buy a book one chapter at a time. But that's the selfish fan in me who wants all the game, the whole thing, at once.

On the other hand, objectively speaking, the episodic format is beneficial to both designers and fans. Reception to one episode can allow the designers to learn from the fans/customers where improvement is needed, as it did for your game, which in the end makes for a better game--And this is good is both for the fans and for the company.

Ultimately I am a KQ traditionalist, a purest in terms of the storyline. I can go for utterly different gameplay dynamics (ala KQ8, which is a direction I would've LOVED the series to go), so long as it's a simple fantasy story. It can be epic in tone, so long as it's not convoluted--And the convoluted storyline (along with the WTF backstory and utterly twisted characters of certain characters and the tying every game together) is where TSL failed the most in my eyes.

[Rather Dashing]

Originally Posted by Anakin Skywalker

Not sure what kind of "research" you're talking about.

...anything in the history of this company?

Right now there are no merits to either support or be against it, the game, on. There are merits towards being optimistic or pessimistic about the CONCEPT of it--but right now the game has no merits to either be supported or rejected. I accept the premise, the concept of a TTG KQ. I am optimistic about such a concept coming to be. But the concept and the execution are two different things, and only time will tell how TT goes about making this game.

Personally, I would have preferred hearing that Zynga had acquired the rights. It would imply more or less the same quality and difficulty curve, but at least nobody would take it seriously.

As to your last point, you are your game; You are the public face and head of your company, and as such the buck stops at your feet.

I don't think that's an excuse to go about harassing him no matter where he posts, putting words in his mouth. He's a member of the community just as much as anyone else, and like everyone else deserves a voice and respect in the public space. You may not agree with the direction of his fan works or his views on the game, but that's not an excuse for harassing the guy.

Now TT has a chance--just as you did, to make a KQ game. They could do well, or they could completely fail. I may be let down by TT's game, but for me as of now, the glass is half full rather than half empty. The blinding glow of "OMGZ A NEW OFFICIAL KQ GAME!!" has worn off to a more realistic stance.

If that's the case, could you please stop quoting my first reaction? It's somewhat embarrassing, my knee-jerk reaction just happened to be negative, and while my current reaction remains negative, I'm somewhat less explosive about it and would like to keep explosive responses in the past, where they belong. Just a request, thanks.

I think it's a lot less excusable for a fan group to mess up than it is for the original creator to mess up, or in TT's case, a company that doesn't know KQ as well as the fans or Roberta or Josh might. Which is why I excuse, and even accept, the vision/direction which Sierra/Roberta presented us with KQ8. And I might be willing to let go of any foibles in TT's first episode, provided they improve.

I think it's MORE excusable for a fan group to "mess up". I think fan art allows a person to make something highly personal, or for a group to experiment and play around. Because they're fans, they can kind of skew the product into a direction that they want and still see it through the eyes of a fan of the series. And because it's a fan work, it's provided free of charge, so it's not something that you can really put outside demands on. I also think that a work that doesn't have to worry about actually being in the "canon", as it is a fan work, doesn't have to worry about "messing anything up" because it's not going to have an adverse affect on the situation. And as Cez posted in this forum earlier, a commercial product has entirely different requirements to a non-commercial one, and he thinks that a commercial King's Quest shouldn't go the "big overarching story" route. As it is, TSL is not a "proper" sequel, but it is definitely a "shout out" to all the events of previous games. Maybe it's not something that should be tied together. Maybe it should be handled with less levity. Maybe a commercial game couldn't get away with this sort of thing. But this is just another fan theory given game form.

I think that, even if you really dislike a fan work, you have to respect the effort and love for the series that had to spawn that much work without promise of a paycheck at the end of the day. All they get is the enjoyment that some set of fans might gleam from it and the promise that Activision won't ruffle their feathers over the whole thing. With so much invested with so little in terms of any sort of actual profit, at the very least I don't think it's a thing that requires being heckled over. Yeah, it's more of an interpretation and creative work rather than a "proper sequel", per se. Maybe that's not what you wanted. But again, you're not in a position to be making demands.

You don't buy a book one chapter at a time.

Actually, a lot of the novels that are considered classics now were released in an era in which books were released serially. There are plenty of people who actually have bought their books one chapter at a time.

[Cez]

Thank you, RD.

I don't know how to put these ideas together without making me sound like a pompous ass, but I'll try.

I will never get tired of saying how thankful I am to have been working with the incredible team that made TSL. Those guys all worked without pay, and continue to do so to bring fans something they loved to make.

If anything, whether you can't support it, Anakin, you should at least be grateful at the idea that TSL had probably a lot to do with the fact that today Telltale is making KQ.

Considering te events with Vivendi and Activision helped TSL to put back the name of "King's Quest" in the headlines, and certain things that happened internally between PO and Telltale, I'm sure it all had a big role in all of this.

A lot of your threads against TSL lose validity quickly and fast, and people start calling you a troll, because the hate is very strong and unsupported. Why do I mean? You may dislike TSL's story, but I'm sure that if you'd look objectively into it, you could recognize many of its merits. Instead, you look for the very minute details to slash it, often coming up with roll eye inducing arguments. You'd make a stronger point and stand if you weren't going just about the hate towards it.

But anyways, my point is that won't lead you anywhere. There's a discussion going on right now in facebook with Sierra Chest and Scott Murphy. We are talking about Jane Jensen and how great Sierra was. And that's the sort of thing that we should be cherishing. I continued the conversation privately with Scott, and had a lot of fun talking to him. As I do talking to Jane, and Ken, and other Sierra people I've talked to over the past months. They know what I'm trying to do, and they support it. They've all seen and are amazed and glad at the work done in TSL. So, if these Sierra people are happy for what we fans are doing, and they've accepted and validated The Silver Lining, I don't understand if you respect these people so much, why do you want to bring down something they are quite happy with.

At the end of the day, TSL is a statement of what fan power can do. What passion can do. Everyone from Sierra that has ever seen it is happy for is existence. They've supported it and have checked it out. I do not get hate mail from any of them, but it's always a pleasure to talk to them, and I feel both honored and flattered by our conversations.

Because we cherish Sierra. This, at the end of the day is not only about the product itself, but about what the love for Sierra, and how that legacy has marked us. And that's what we cherish, and that's why PO has met with success. In a very heartfelt recommendation, the way you are approaching it, won't leave you with nothing good at the end of the road. The way you are making a stand against it is only painting yourself in a very bad position by doing it. If the Sierra people read what you've posted in all of these threads, especially the way you've posted things, it wouldn't do you any good.

So, express your opinion, but leave all the hate out. Because people with great energy (i.e. the people that made Sierra happen) didn't get where they got because they focused on the negativity. And so shouldn't you.

Cez