King's Quest (1) - On Master SEGA System?

[Tawmis]

Sega Master System
The Sega Master System 1989 port uses its own engine, with a verb/noun interface similar to early LucasArts titles. It has original tile and sprite-based graphics and was published by Parker Brothers. The game is based on the original King's Quest, and shares the puzzles and points-list of that game. Some of the puzzles and rooms have been modified a bit (for example, the boulder covering the dagger rolls a different direction than in PC). An extra item exists — it is now possible to pick up the three-leaf clovers. There are some extra places to die (including a dangerous staircase added to exit of the Leprechauns' realm). It is non-linear, and the three treasures can be collected in any order, like in the original PC version. Game saves were done through passwords.

Wish I were kidding. Here's three screen shots I just took...

[MusicallyInspired]

Yep. There's a couple spots that render the game incomplete-able from what I remember too. It's nice to see a different interpretation, though. And it's more colourful than KQ5NES if you can believe it.

Also, interesting bit of trivia, Graham on the cover art for the KQ SMS box art was used as a base for AGDI's (then Tierra) initial KQ2VGA+ "cover" art.

[Tawmis]

It's hilarious that the cover shows all three items Graham needs to get.

[MusicallyInspired]

Why is that hilarious?

[Tawmis]

Why is that hilarious?

Well, you can pretty much easily figure who / where the shield is, for example...

At least they show a wizard with the mirror and not the dragon. And the chest is shown with a witch, which fair enough, isn't the giant. But I remembered there was something to do with a witch and the chest. (But don't remember if I got that info from some fan game or if it's legit somewhere in King's Quest)...

I've never been a fan when a game shows your quest things like that... least of all, not all three main ones. Like Graham standing in front of a glowing chest of gold would have been cool. Or Graham looking in a mirror and seeing distant lands. Or Graham holding a shield as some monster attacks him. Those are all fine. But all three items, scattered - and not a part of the main picture? Not a fan. Just seems... silly.

[adeyke]

Those images are all from the backstory: a sorcerer took the mirror in exchange for solving the queen's infertility (but didn't actually help), a dwarf took the shield in exchange for curing the queen of the plague (but didn't actually help), and a witch disguised herself as a princess to woo the king and then steal the chest. This story is only present in the game's manual, and it doesn't really deepen the player's understanding or appreciation of the game. However, if it's in the manual, it also seems appropriate to have it as cover art.

The suggestions you make would be less appropriate, since the game is about retrieving those treasures for your king, not about actually using them.

[Tawmis]

The suggestions you make would be less appropriate, since the game is about retrieving those treasures for your king, not about actually using them.

Interesting. See - to me, this cover has always made sense. Because, the mirror and shield are very subtle. They're not ... for lack of word - out of place - on the cover.

[adeyke]

That art also makes sense. It's showing the end result of the quest, where Graham presents the treasures. So it passes the "is consistent with the game" test. The three figures with the treasures in the other art also pass the test (if you count the manual as part of the game), though I'd argue Graham himself in the Sega Master System version doesn't. The Graham in the game doesn't have a sword or a cape, but he does have an iconic hat, so that isn't a good depiction of him.

If we're instead just talking the artistic or aesthetic merits of only composition vs the other, I'm not qualified to comment.

[Tawmis]

That art also makes sense. It's showing the end result of the quest, where Graham presents the treasures. So it passes the "is consistent with the game" test. The three figures with the treasures in the other art also pass the test (if you count the manual as part of the game), though I'd argue Graham himself in the Sega Master System version doesn't. The Graham in the game doesn't have a sword or a cape, but he does have an iconic hat, so that isn't a good depiction of him.

Well, you could always go with - the sword, the flowing cape, and what not - are Graham in his Knightly attire. Because (I'd need to look at the manual to double check), but isn't Graham one of the King's Knights? So his outfit in said picture might make sense, the same way the wizard standing by the mirror makes sense. It's reference to the story.

That said, we can probably agree - Knight or not - it's a better cover than this:

[adeyke]

The question to me is whether it accurately represents the game. So positing the possibility of a knightly outfit that he just happens not to be wearing while going on a knightly quest for his king doesn't make sense. If you're going to show an adventuring Graham on your cover, he'd better have his feathered cap. And even though he is a knight in KQ1, he doesn't have a sword there, so showing him with one gives a false impression of the type of game KQ1 is.

And yes, that shiny armor art is much worse. It completely misrepresents the game.

[Rath Darkblade]

I'm surprised that the Sega port says "Copyright Parker Brothers". Isn't King's Quest ultimately copyright to Sierra?

[Tawmis]

I'm surprised that the Sega port says "Copyright Parker Brothers". Isn't King's Quest ultimately copyright to Sierra?

The port over was probably contracted by Parker Brothers, from Sierra, to import to SEGA.