SHP Forums

AndreaDraco wrote:

Maxor127 wrote:Still, I guess it's better than nothing. I hope this leads to proper remakes for Sierra games on par with the Monkey Island special editions. I think King's Quest V and VI would look amazing in that style.

I'd prefer something new that moves the series forward than a carbon-copy remake like in the case of MI, though.

But if it's an uncertain thing; might be easier to use an existing element; see how it goes, then move forward? Rather than spend resources coming up with a brand new series of quests; they could "remake" in their vision one of the existing games.

I am curious to see how they go; either way, I won't get it till it's COMPLETE. None of this episodic stuff.

Special Editions in the style of the Monkey Island SE's are impossible as far as Sierra franchises are concerned because the source code is long gone. Dumped into a trash bin with a bunch of other valuable things when Sierra was first bought out (before Vivendi).

Hard to believe none of those programmers have copies of some of their code lying around. If I looked in some old storage boxes I could find paper copies of some old Cobol code I wrote 20 years ago. But then I'm a packrat.

Games with combat often have difficulty sliders so the user can control how challenging the combat is. It would be beneficial if TTG could develop a similar slider for adventure games that could affect frequency, complexity, and difficulty of puzzles. I don't mean a separate slider for each of those characteristics, but one that would affect one or all of them, depending on the puzzle.

I realise that it wouldn't be possible to do that for some puzzles, like dialogue puzzles. However, if they thought it out, I'm sure they could use it to decrease the complexity of (or even omit) certain puzzles for the more casual gamer. Sure, it would make their job more difficult, but it would give them a wider audience as well.

Maiandra wrote:Games with combat often have difficulty sliders so the user can control how challenging the combat is. It would be beneficial if TTG could develop a similar slider for adventure games that could affect frequency, complexity, and difficulty of puzzles. I don't mean a separate slider for each of those characteristics, but one that would affect one or all of them, depending on the puzzle.

I realise that it wouldn't be possible to do that for some puzzles, like dialogue puzzles. However, if they thought it out, I'm sure they could use it to decrease the complexity of (or even omit) certain puzzles for the more casual gamer. Sure, it would make their job more difficult, but it would give them a wider audience as well.

An easier way of doing that would be to take the KQ6 approach and have multiple paths, each with varying degrees of difficulty. If the point of divergence involved initial puzzles, one easy and the other a tough nut to crack, each leading to paths of like hardness it could act as a filter to prevent the "adventure lite" fans from taking the path that they would only bitch about. It would also make the game have a higher replayability value.

Or have different modes, like a "casual" mode that gives easier puzzles. Or better yet, a built-in hint system.

Maxor127 wrote:Or have different modes, like a "casual" mode that gives easier puzzles. Or better yet, a built-in hint system.

I was going to mention the built in hint system; doesn't Torin's Passage have something similar to that?

I'd rather have a clue system than a hint system - where proper exploration yields all the information you need to beat a puzzle. Not just have the game randomly blurt out what to do next.

Datadog wrote:I'd rather have a clue system than a hint system - where proper exploration yields all the information you need to beat a puzzle. Not just have the game randomly blurt out what to do next.

Agreed

So, let me get this straight. As I understand it, the manifold complaints about the news of TellTale's upcoming take on King's Quest are primarily four-fold, right?

1.) TellTale's style is way too cartoony for a photo-realistic series like King's Quest!!



2.) TellTale's series is going to be episodic! Gasp, horror of all horrors! Who could have come up with a stupid idea like a King's Quest game with chapter breaks?!



3.) TellTale's games have overly simplistic interfaces!! A non-complex GUI is completely incongruous with the established King's Quest ethos!!



4.) TellTale's games are too streamlined! There aren't any dead ends or game-ending death scenarios! Real King's Quest games need to be tortuously difficult and should have certain death crouching at every twist and turn!!



Just sayin'.

(BTW, Kq7 also throws a monkey wrench into the discussion currently ongoing at TellTale's forum wherein it is being purported that a real King's Quest game has a narrator...)

First, many found KQ7 very disappointing. The transition to cartoony graphics made it not feel very KQ like. 2nd, chapters are not the same thing as episodic releases. Not even close. It is not a matter of a break in the narrative, it is the loooong wait between releases. You can start the next chapter just as soon as you finish the previous chapter. Episodic releases can mean that by the time the next chapter is released you might lose all interest in the game or that you will have forgotten some of importance from the previous chapter. Episodic releases better fit games with a more casual narrative.

Just because Sierra released a KQ that fell short does not mean that future ones should make the same mistake. Using KQ7 is essentially a non sequitur. I am willing to wait for the final verdict on release and I do wish that it turns out well, but I do not have the highest hopes. In the end, we will see.

Lol it's funny how you used examples for every one of those points from one of if not the worst KQ game in the series (in my opinion).

It isn't a non-sequitur if your contention is that streamlined play, cartoony graphics, and a simplified GUI are incongruous with established King's Quest ethos. If that's your argument and you marginalize Kq7 since it didn't live up to your expectations of what a King's Quest game should be, then your argument has basically become about fanon rather than canon.

If you want to say "I don't like the way TellTale does their games, so I probably won't like this take on KQ," then that's fine. But you can't say that any of those three elements (I'll grant the episodic comparison may have been a bit of a stretch) are essentially incongruous with established King's Quest ethos without stripping Kq7 out of the timeline. And once that threshold is crossed, it becomes totally subjective. Maybe the only "real" King's Quest games are the ones that star King Graham, or the ones that have a text parser, or the ones that are AGI, etc.

Remember that Kq3 was initially deemed too radical a departure from the established series, too. But I don't hear anyone arguing that anymore...

Lol it's funny how you used examples for every one of those points from one of if not the worst KQ game in the series (in my opinion).

In other words, your measuring stick for whether or not a King's Quest game is King's Quest-y is "whether or not I like the game"? Mighty objective of ya. Personally, I find Kq7 far more engaging and enjoyable than Kq 1-2. But I'm not about to argue that those two games don't count as paradigmatic of the King's Quest series just because I subjectively find them to be rather dull. That would be a non-sequitur.

El Ravager wrote:...if your contention is that streamlined play, cartoony graphics, and a simplified GUI are incongruous with established King's Quest ethos. If that's your argument and you marginalize Kq7 since it didn't live up to your expectations of what a King's Quest game should be, then your argument has basically become about fanon rather than canon.

Not at all. I don't discount the story line of KQ7, just the things listed are the
very things that made it less enjoyable than the previous ones. If you had a favorite restaurant that once served you a bad meal and another restaurant was going to serve the same food, but gave every indication they were going to do it just like the bad meal, you might be a little reluctant to try it on blind faith.

El Ravager wrote:If you want to say "I don't like the way TellTale does their games, so I probably won't like this take on KQ," then that's fine.

I don't like the way TellTale does its games, so yeah, I don't have a great deal of hope. As I said, time will tell.

El Ravager wrote:But you can't say that any of those three elements (I'll grant the episodic comparison may have been a bit of a stretch) are essentially incongruous with established King's Quest ethos without stripping Kq7 out of the timeline. And once that threshold is crossed, it becomes totally subjective. Maybe the only "real" King's Quest games are the ones that star King Graham, or the ones that have a text parser, or the ones that are AGI, etc.

As I said, I don't discount the story line of KQ7, but it does not mean that I want one that tries to do the same things.

El Ravager wrote:Remember that Kq3 was initially deemed too radical a departure from the established series, too. But I don't hear anyone arguing that anymore...

But you do still hear many fans complain that KQ7 was a let down.

Collector wrote:many found KQ7 very disappointing. The transition to cartoony graphics made it not feel very KQ like...

Just because Sierra released a KQ that fell short does not mean that future ones should make the same mistake.

I am not trying to belittle your views, but understand why many have reservations.

El Ravager wrote:In other words, your measuring stick for whether or not a King's Quest game is King's Quest-y is "whether or not I like the game"? Mighty objective of ya.

Well of course it is. How else can I rate it but as a fan of what I like? Should I just not care about it? How is that being a fan? Or should I voice my opinion along with all the other KQ fans to try and direct this game into something that I want it to be? Obviously I'm not going to play a game I'm not interested in. I want to be interested in it so I'm going to measure how good this is based on whether I like it or not.

And it's not like I'm alone in that opinion. It's widely known and considered that KQ5/KQ6 is the epitome of what King's Quest could be and that it dropped that ball with KQ7 and ultimately MOE as well.

Personally, I find Kq7 far more engaging and enjoyable than Kq 1-2. But I'm not about to argue that those two games don't count as paradigmatic of the King's Quest series just because I subjectively find them to be rather dull. That would be a non-sequitur.

So you're saying you'd accept a new King's Quest no matter how it was designed? How'd MOE fare to you? Or even KQ1/2 like you just said. We're not going to enjoy games (least of all ones we've known and loved for years) without them containing elements we'd like to see.

You can't be objective with games. That's the whole point. Games are for entertainment and based solely on how one experiences them. So why is it wrong to hope and suggest that Telltale's KQ follow a certain design path because it's what we want to see? Like I said, I'd rather be interested in a new King's Quest game than not, so yes I'm absolutely going to voice my opinion on how it should be designed while we still have time.