SHP Forums

Yes there is some unrealistically cartoony art in KQ6, but not exclusively. Until KQ7 a definite cartoon style was reserved for the more fanciful aspects of the games, not the entirety. I used to be more open to cartoony graphics in games, but this has changed over the past few years. My distaste for cartoony graphics of late is mostly because of TellTale. So the prospect of TellTale doing the games is a bit disconcerting to me.

As far as dead ends, there are two kinds. The unintentional ones were programming mistakes that are rightfully hated by all and should never be allowed to happen. These are a lot more common in the earlier games. This is a aspect that Sierra improved in the later games. The intentional dead ends are another matter, unless it allows you to play a long time before it is evident that you can't win. A recent quote by Josh Mandel on another board is fitting.

Josho wrote:I think there's a difference between a dead end (which usually comes about because the designer neglected to realize that you could get to a point where you couldn't progress) and an ending that's less than optimal because you made one or more decisions that had consequences down the line. CONQUESTS OF CAMELOT, for instance, has NO dead ends of the former sort.

The SCI games have always allowed you change directories when the current directory can hold no more save games, even the SCI0 games: Even the AGI games allowed you to change directories for extra save games by typing the path There was never a reason to delete existing save games for the AGI/SCI games.

Ultimately, as has already been stated, it is a matter of taste, but on several boards anyone that has stated having the same reservations as MI or I have had some pretty negative responses as if we have said something blasphemous. In spite of this, most of us have stated that we are going to reserve judgment until we find out what is delivered, but please allow us to state our reservations. They are legitimate concerns.

Tawmis wrote:

DeadPoolX wrote: I know Maia got really ticked off at KQ5 for this sort of !!!!!!!!!. She didn't realize you had to throw a pie at the yeti.

Go to the 9:05 mark of this video. Maia may appreciate it (if she's passed the Yeti for some time now! If the wound is still fresh, don't show her!)

Haha! Yeah. That *%$@ing pie! I gave it to the eagle (it made sense to me at the time!), so I didn't even have the damn pie when I had to deal with the yeti! Why did the stupid game allow me to give it to the eagle if I needed it for something else? If it had made any logical sense at all to use it on the yet, I may have realised my mistake and gone back. But NOOOOOO.

I recall writing a letter to the Sierra hint department for that one.

As for the other KQ games, I actually didn't mind KQ7. I didn't care for the graphics at all, but the rest of it was fun. I didn't like KQ5 that much and I'd have to agree with Tawmis on KQ4 being my second favourite after 6.

I would actually prefer if TellTale doesn't make the KQ reboot too cartoony, but it won't necessarily be a deal-breaker for me. I'm more concerned with the general personality of the game.

Maiandra wrote:I'm more concerned with the general personality of the game.

Agreed.

Collector wrote: The SCI games have always allowed you change directories when the current directory can hold no more save games, even the SCI0 games.

[..]

There was never a reason to delete existing save games for the AGI/SCI games.

Yes, but HOW many people back then knew to do that? I sure didn't. I can't imagine very many gamers knew, either.

So for all intents and purposes (as far as the "average" gamer is concerned), there was a limit on saved games. Sure, there was a way around that, but it wasn't immediately obvious and a method which shouldn't have been necessary to make new saved games.

DeadPoolX wrote:

Collector wrote: The SCI games have always allowed you change directories when the current directory can hold no more save games, even the SCI0 games.
[..]
There was never a reason to delete existing save games for the AGI/SCI games.

Yes, but HOW many people back then knew to do that? I sure didn't. I can't imagine very many gamers knew, either.
So for all intents and purposes (as far as the "average" gamer is concerned), there was a limit on saved games. Sure, there was a way around that, but it wasn't immediately obvious and a method which shouldn't have been necessary to make new saved games.

I hardly consider myself anything above an average gamer - especially these days. (Mostly because I feel since I no longer go to school, and have a job I find incredibly easy, that my brain is no longer truly stimulated, and I feel like I am getting dumber, if that's possible! I am not kidding - like when I tried to learn 3rd Edition D&D after knowing 2nd Edition D&D for YEARS and knowing it by memory - learning 3rd Edition D&D was like trying to learn Russian!)

Ahem, anyway -

The later Sierra games with the "Change Directory" made it obvious. But even in the older ones, I remember changing the directory when I didn't want to save over my save games. I usually (back then) broke my save games into different directories, depending on what "land" I was on in the game (like KQ4, I had save game directory for the main land, then another directory for the fairy island, one for the castle, etc). But then I was a save game junkie. I was a Sierra junkie really. I am pretty sure, somewhere on a floppy disk or thirty, I have all my save games, still broken into their directories.

DeadPoolX wrote:Yes, but HOW many people back then knew to do that? I sure didn't. I can't imagine very many gamers knew, either.

I was 7 years old and I did. Although, these alternate directories had to already exist first before launching the game. The game wouldn't create directories.

So for all intents and purposes (as far as the "average" gamer is concerned), there was a limit on saved games. Sure, there was a way around that, but it wasn't immediately obvious and a method which shouldn't have been necessary to make new saved games.

That's true. But it was probably technologically limiting at the time to have more than a certain number of save games at a time. At least they offered the ability to change directories for those that knew how. I'm sure it was documented in the manuals as well.

I guess I didn't pay attention to the "change directory" option. Either that or I tried it once and it didn't work, probably because I expected the game to make a new directory for me. Like MI said, you needed the directory beforehand, which I probably didn't have in place.

Maiandra wrote:
I would actually prefer if TellTale doesn't make the KQ reboot too cartoony, but it won't necessarily be a deal-breaker for me. I'm more concerned with the general personality of the game.

Perfectly put.

If it feels like King's Quest, if it has the right atmosphere, the right story, the right musical score, I won't mind the graphics, even if they're too cartoony. I want them bright and colorful, maybe just a bit zany, but not too exaggerated. But graphics are never the important part of a game for me.

I wouldn't say it's the graphics I care about more than the visual style. I don't mind the graphics for TSL at all, for instance. They're quite good even though they're old and the style is great.

MusicallyInspired wrote:I don't mind the graphics for TSL at all, for instance. They're quite good even though they're old and the style is great.

Except for Alexander's spiky hair and Cassima's goth overdone eye makeup. [sarcasm] So fitting for the era [/sarcasm] .

I'm pretty late to this thread, but while I'm fairly open to whatever style Telltale might decide on using (and like Datadog said, not all of their games have a cartoony look to them), I thought I'd throw in something else about the artistic style of the KQ games that I don't think has been brought up yet:

The earlier KQ games actually have several undeniably cartoony elements scattered here and there. When Gwydion and Graham fall, they roll end over end in a comical manner, and if they're not killed by their fall, their heads spin or wobble around while stars appear around them. If Graham falls off the beanstalk in KQ1SCI, he leaves a Graham-shaped hole in the ground, and there are also the typical cartoon-style dust clouds whenever he gets caught by the wolf in KQ2 and in either KQ1 version.

KQ4 seemed to be the first game that started to make its animations somewhat less cartoony -- Rosella falls much like a real person would, and most of the deaths rely on verbal rather than visual humor (e.g., the tree puns).

Quite right, Akril.

Collector wrote:

MusicallyInspired wrote:I don't mind the graphics for TSL at all, for instance. They're quite good even though they're old and the style is great.

Except for Alexander's spiky hair and Cassima's goth overdone eye makeup. [sarcasm] So fitting for the era [/sarcasm] .

Oh yeah.....ughh....

There has been some brilliant humour going around regarding Telltale's announced King's Quest but lets talk about what we do know.

So far as I've seen, they haven't specifically said whether it will be a complete reboot of the franchise or a continuation of the existing canon.

Speculation - Which do people think it is going to be?
Also - which would you prefer?

I'm not usually squeamish about reboots, but I must admit I feel a little hesitant about rebooting King's Quest. Maybe it's because there are so many good re-makes and fan sequels like 'The Silver Lining' and the remakes from ADGI and Infamous Adventures, that just makes it feel like bad timing. I'm not sure. I think that a reboot certainly has the potential to be very good, and maybe add a little depth to the story. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

EDIT: Merged this with an existing Telltale King's Quest news thread. - Tawmis

I have it on good authority that they're doing sequel(s) not a straight reboot. I think by reboot they just mean relaunch.

I must apologise for creating the duplicate thread. I did look for an existing one back three or four pages, but obviously not far enough.