Why SIERRA GAMES Failed (And How They Could Have Succeeded)

[Collector]

Troels take on it.

[Tawmis]

Troels take on it.

1. Be warned, since it is Troels - just about every other word is the F word.
2. On his point 3 about King's Quest - it's called "testing the waters." Had King's Quest taken off, I would assume (and I could be wrong, of course - as I often am), they would have looked at their second most popular game from "back in the day" and relaunched that. See if that's successful. If so, continue the formula of looking at the most popular back then, and relaunching it.

Honestly, while cussing doesn't bother me, the excessive of it, made it impossible to finish for me, watching this. I got a few minutes into his third point and was done.

3. I want that looping video he had going from NintendoComplete.

[MusicallyInspired]

Just a note about Troels'...verbosity, let's say lol. In his own words, he's from a country that doesn't really have a concept of offensive language. That is, words that aren't intended to offend that are simply supposed to be offensive just by saying them is entirely foreign to him. And he kind of thinks it's silly to treat words with such "fear", I guess is the best way to put it. And being that he's not a man to hold himself back because of anybody else's beliefs, he just goes full steam ahead and doesn't care. But he's not trying to be offensive. I say this just so people know where he's coming from.

In fact, when we were all working on the free short adventure/thriller game "Serena" a few years back (that appeared as if by magic in everybody's Steam game libraries - I did music for it, by the way!), Troels and Frederik (another fan and semi-local friend of his) were writing the script and dialogue and the topic of using profanity a lot became forefront. Their argument was that it felt like they were pulling themselves back by not using words they felt would have more impact for the story. I pointed out that while that may be true and that stronger language might be more effective to convey the emotion they wanted to get across, regardless of that fact they'd be limiting their audience. Troels said that was something he never considered. So it's probably a similar situation here. He's just not thinking about it because to him it's not an issue. To him he's simply speaking and he's not trying to be edgy or controversial at all. It's not like he's doing terribly, though. He's got quite a following on YouTube now. Not a huge one, but a big and loyal one.

I do share a similar level of tolerance threshold for so much profanity, but Troels is a really good guy regardless and is a great friend too. Just want to put that out there (I'm not saying anybody thinks otherwise). And all that said, I thought it was a good video otherwise and he made some great points with the fact that this new Sierra was rather faceless and unidentifiable. That was a far cry from what the original Sierra was. You never really think about it that much, but we knew who all the people working at Sierra were and they were more relatable because of that somehow. Even LucasArts had their creators' names plastered all over their games, which is probably why they were equally as successful (if not more to some people).

[Tawmis]

Just a note about Troels'...verbosity, let's say lol. But he's not trying to be offensive.

Oh, I don't (and having seen several of his videos!) think he's trying to be offensive. There are simply some people who cuss frequently, say - as often as I say "like" ("Like we were totally not offended!"). It's a part of how they speak.
So I get he wasn't trying to be offensive.

I do share a similar level of tolerance threshold for so much profanity, but Troels is a really good guy regardless and is a great friend too. Just want to put that out there (I'm not saying anybody thinks otherwise).

Rest assured, never thought otherwise.
The ol' bloke even apologized when I replied to the voice over thing (I was even making fun of myself!), where he complained about my voice work and that of my wife. And I said, "Rest assured, I wasn't offended! Everyone is always entitled to their opinions and I won't knock you for it!"

And all that said, I thought it was a good video otherwise and he made some great points with the fact that this new Sierra was rather faceless and unidentifiable. That was a far cry from what the original Sierra was. You never really think about it that much, but we knew who all the people working at Sierra were and they were more relatable because of that somehow. Even LucasArts had their creators' names plastered all over their games, which is probably why they were equally as successful (if not more to some people).

To that degree, though - while Sierra was "successful" back in the day - and considered a pretty "big company" in the gaming world (By early 1984 InfoWorld estimated that Sierra was the world's 12th-largest microcomputer-software company, with $12.5 million in 1983 sales - Source of Truth? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sierra_Entertainment ). A big company then compared to a big company now is not the same thing. From what I found, Sierra employeed a little over 600 employees. (Source of truth? http://www.company-histories.com/Sierra ... story.html )To put that in perspective - the company I work at has about 1,000 on the campus I work at. And that does not include the buildings off our main campus, or in other states, let alone other countries (we employ like 35,000 people). I think it was much, much easier to have a face back then.

[MusicallyInspired]

That's definitely true and a good point. Perhaps what we know and feel as "Sierra" can never "come back" for that reason.

[Collector]

While it does not bother me too much I will note that profanity losses any impact if over used. A show stopper usage of profanity is when a person that never uses it drops the F bomb. The case for "impact" is meaningless if over used and it becomes merely vapid noise.

[MusicallyInspired]

Indeed. I don't understand people who think that profanity shouldn't be offensive. The whole point is that it is offensive. Otherwise people wouldn't use it when looking to make that impact.

[Tawmis]

That's definitely true and a good point. Perhaps what we know and feel as "Sierra" can never "come back" for that reason.

Yeah, these days it's the indie companies that you can meet that have a face. Trying to see who is the face of the new Sierra is a loop through endless lawyers, rather than a customer service rep forwarding your inquiry to the owner.

While it does not bother me too much I will note that profanity losses any impact if over used. A show stopper usage of profanity is when a person that never uses it drops the F bomb. The case for "impact" is meaningless if over used and it becomes merely vapid noise.

To be fair, in Troels case, I don't even think he's using the word for impact. It's just a part of his vocabulary. He might as well be saying the color "blue" as far as he's concerned.

[notbobsmith]

2. On his point 3 about King's Quest - it's called "testing the waters." Had King's Quest taken off, I would assume (and I could be wrong, of course - as I often am), they would have looked at their second most popular game from "back in the day" and relaunched that. See if that's successful. If so, continue the formula of looking at the most popular back then, and relaunching it.

As unfortunate as it is, no one wants to commit money to something that isn't a sure thing. That's why Hollywood inundates us with sequels and remakes and comic book movies. It's less risky to sell an established property than creating a new one and hoping for the best. Sound business sense, but it also robs us of what might be the next Star Wars. (Games are a bit different. King's Quest is an established property, yes, but adventure games are a niche genre now). Activision committing to reviving more than one property just would not have made any sense. King's Quest is Sierra's flagship. Anyone who knows Sierra, knows King's Quest even if they prefer some of the other Quest titles. So reviving King's Quest makes the most sense. That said, as he mentioned, there were problems with their roll out. I can't speak to their social media efforts, but when their own webpage doesn't even update the status of the game, you've got a problem. I also wonder if they should have embraced GOG for sales. I get the impression that people there are more interested in legacy titles. I also wonder if the episodic format turned people off.

[Tawmis]

I also wonder if the episodic format turned people off.

You can count me in for that. My problem with "episodic" games is that there's no promise you will get the complete tale, before a company goes under.

I prefer the complete tale, then DLCs after that, that expand on it.

[MusicallyInspired]

It didn't help their case that each and every one of their chapters were extremely late. I think we're kind of past the episodic gaming thing now. Or if not, it's on its way out. It's been tried. It doesn't work. Even Telltale who sort of started a semi-successful model has gone under.

[Rath Darkblade]

It's too bad. I liked the "episodic" gaming model - MI, why do you say that it doesn't work? I'm curious.

As for Troels' video ... interesting, but like Tawm, the overuse of profanity put me off (and I'm not the kind to be put off by an F-bomb or two - heck, I'm sure I dropped an S-bomb or a P-bomb around here (in the "Got a neck to wring?" thread), and BBP asked me to calm down). But yes, as Collector pointed out, too much of it can quickly become tiresome.

[MusicallyInspired]

It doesn't work because nobody can keep to a guaranteed schedule. There's too much work. It's not like a TV show where there will always be a new episode exactly on time and that's what it needed to be. Telltalle's original plan was to have an episode EVERY MONTH. Yeah, that didn't work out. Also, as evidenced by people right here, not everyone has an interest in playing part of a game and then waiting weeks and sometimes months for another slice of the game that will last all of 2 hours. Even Valve who basically started the practice discovered it was a foolhardy endeavour. Episode 1 was late, and then Episode 2 was very very very very late. And then they didn't do anymore episodes after that. SIN Episodes failed after 1 episode. Telltale is the only one who the majority basically let get away with it. I believe even their Jurassic Park game was originally meant to release episodically but then something happened and they chose to hold off the entire experience until all the chapters were done and they released it all at once. Unless I'm misremembering something, it was the only game they didn't actually release episodically.

People want to play the whole story now, which causes sales to go down because not enough people are funding development before it's all finished, and the final product suffers. I'm sure King's Quest 2015 wouldn't have existed unless it was episodic (and the budget was slashed after just the first chapter to boot due to poor reception, or at least what ActiVision perceived as such), but yeah. I'd say with a fair amount of certainty that it was a fairly lengthy experiment that ultimately failed seeing as not many are doing it anymore. These days, most developers just release Early Access on Steam (or Under Development on GOG) and continually add to the game as time goes on. That doesn't really work for story-based games, but I'm ok with that. I think cutting up story games into bite-sized chunks and spread out over the course of a couple years ultimately hurts the overall experience of the adventure. You forget what you were doing two, three months ago and you forget key details of the story etc. And then the puzzles are so mind-numbingly easy and the experience is over just when you were getting into it....ok I'm ripping on Telltale a bit here too, but it still applies. A lot of people simply aren't willing to go through that. That'd rather have a complete experience up front. And so would I.

[Tawmis]

It doesn't work because nobody can keep to a guaranteed schedule. There's too much work. It's not like a TV show where there will always be a new episode exactly on time and that's what it needed to be. [Snip] Not everyone has an interest in playing part of a game and then waiting weeks and sometimes months for another slice of the game that will last all of 2 hours. You forget what you were doing two, three months ago and you forget key details of the story etc. A lot of people simply aren't willing to go through that. That'd rather have a complete experience up front. And so would I.

Sums up exactly everything I feel.

I hate the idea that I am only paying for part of the game. And then have to wait. And that would be infinitely worse, if for example, the game was so good that I get really into it - and then get to the end of the chapter - and now have to wait and unknown amount of time? That's certainly going to kill my interest in the game further. (Especially if there's a concern that the company might go under before the game's completed).

Can you imagine purchasing a book that did this? You pay for the whole book. Get the first three chapters. You power through it. And now you're waiting 6 months to a year, for the next three chapters. Rinse and repeat until the book is done.

For me, when I am typically into something - I am fully invested. Breaking that immersion is going to break my interest in the product.

[MusicallyInspired]

When KQ2015 came out, I dropped money on the first chapter instead of the whole collection prior. I normally wouldn't have, but I wanted to show my support because if you pay for each chapter separately you end up paying more than if you got the bundle price. I guess it turned out to not matter that much, though. Despite the episodic nature, I enjoyed KQ2015. The first chapter is very well polished. The other chapters, not so much. But I wanted to support it anyway just to do my part in reviving interest in Sierra's old properties in ActiVision.