SHP Forums

Posted: **Sat Apr 04, 2026 6:26 pm**

Weird choice to be that negative about someone they’ve both never met and hope to still work with

Posted: **Sat Apr 04, 2026 10:25 pm**

JasefWisener wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2026 6:26 pm Weird choice to be that negative about someone they’ve both never met and hope to still work with

Well, I think they sort of explain it.

The new person is considerably younger. Has no familiarity (probably) to adventure games.

So would have no interest in sparking that up.

I feel like, for them, it'd already been a very, very, very long uphill battle, so far.

So this, doesn't bode well.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2026 12:32 am**

It was always going to be difficult to get them to secure the IP rights. That said, I believe they discussed reworking it to remove her name from the game. That seems to be the path of least resistance. Maybe have the player give the character her name so you can call her Laura Bow if you want to. Then it will just be about a woman reporter in New York in the 1920s who investigates a mystery. No references to previous games are needed. I don't believe "The Dagger of Amon Ra" references the events of "The Colonel's Bequest" much if at all. Then it can be a "spiritual successor" to the Laura Bow games.

Posted: **Sun Apr 05, 2026 8:02 pm**

JasefWisener wrote: ↑Sat Apr 04, 2026 6:26 pm Weird choice to be that negative about someone they’ve both never met and hope to still work with

I don't know if they're even still hoping to work with Asha. Perhaps they are, but realistically (as they point out), the chances of working with her seem to be quite low. So I guess they're feeling they have nothing to lose. <KLAXON> Speculation! </KLAXON>

But I'm not getting the feeling that they're being negative about Asha herself. As their newsletter says: "This is really starting to feel like a glass cliff scenario, and we're afraid that Asha might be getting thrown under the bus" etc. In other words, she's being brought in to 'steady the ship' during a crisis, but might not be provided with the same security or resources as a male counterpart. Still, a glass cliff position can be difficult to turn down due to the scarcity of leadership opportunities offered to women.

notbobsmith wrote: ↑Sun Apr 05, 2026 12:32 am It was always going to be difficult to get them to secure the IP rights. That said, I believe they discussed reworking it to remove her name from the game. That seems to be the path of least resistance. Maybe have the player give the character her name so you can call her Laura Bow if you want to. Then it will just be about a woman reporter in New York in the 1920s who investigates a mystery. No references to previous games are needed. I don't believe "The Dagger of Amon Ra" references the events of "The Colonel's Bequest" much if at all. Then it can be a "spiritual successor" to the Laura Bow games.

This might be the right way forward. *thumbs up* If they choose to do this, they don't lose anything. People who know that this game is a Laura Bow game ... know. Like this (from 2022):

Tawmis wrote: ↑Sun Jan 30, 2022 10:06 pm Lassie Low and the Mechanical Codex.

Good to go.

"The Dagger of Amon Ra" only references the events of "The Colonel's Bequest" obliquely, and only during the starting cinematic, where Laura's dad tells her how much he's proud of her for solving the case of TCB.

Posted: **Sun May 03, 2026 5:18 pm**

May Day, May Day!
Ok, ok... we've probably used that title before. But hey, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Amiright?

Anywho, we're back for another monthly newsletter! Last month's was a long one and covered a lot of topics, so we're going to keep it lean and mean this time. If you missed it last month, you can head on over to our website and check out the Newsletter Archives link at the bottom of the landing page. There you will find all of our past hits and misses. Which ones are which? We'll leave that for you to decide.

Partner Woes & Wins
It has been a long long time since we first started engaging with Xbox on our project(s). And, if you can believe it or not, we've only just now finally gotten all our ducks in a row regarding our developer accounts with them. There have been so many little hiccups along the way, and delays for one reason or another, that it has taken way longer than it should. Some of the delay was on our part, for sure... mostly out of frustration.

Admittedly, however, we think it's probably the most 'challenging' of the various setup experiences compared with the other big names out there (Apple, Google, Nintendo, PlayStation, etc). Granted, it does appear to be 'done' for the time being - so that's a step in the right direction. Anyway, we hope that the new powers-that-be at Xbox can help streamline this process for future developers - cause it could use some help, for sure.

Now that we're official... over the next month, we hope to finally get into a few of their upcoming events and promotional programs. And please let that be a more friendly process!

Project Horizons
A lot of the past month was focused on our 'Games for Science' project, in partnership with Trinity College Dublin. We've added some new challenges and games intended for researching neurological disorders. It's a very meaningful project to be involved with, and we're very happy that we get the chance to help in any way we can.

However, we did also manage to get some work in on Laura Bow 3 as well. The mysterious object that we showed off in last month's newsletter is now functional in the game - which was a significant missing piece in regard to getting the demo polished up. So that's great news! Things are still progressing - albeit a bit slower than we'd all prefer, I'm sure.

We didn't get any time on Tile Tales, unfortunately. But, we've got some ideas brewing and we're hoping to get back to working on Chapter 7 for that soon - and there are also some promising tips and tricks that we plan to roll out for getting the game in front of some more players out there. So we're looking forward to that too!

All-in-all, things are happening! It's a bit rough out there in the game industry these days, but we're still making strides where we can. Wish us luck, advice, or send us snacks to keep going! It's all helpful and appreciated.

Posted: **Sun May 03, 2026 5:35 pm**

Wishing Ninezyme lots of luck!

Unfortunately, I can't offer them any more advice, and if I send them snacks (what, from Australia to Slovenia?), they'll arrive stale.

I was hoping there would be more about Laura Bow, but oh well. In the meantime, the 'Games for Science' they're developing sound very worthwhile.

Posted: **Mon May 04, 2026 6:17 pm**

Rath Darkblade wrote: ↑Sun May 03, 2026 5:35 pm Wishing Ninezyme lots of luck! Unfortunately, I can't offer them any more advice, and if I send them snacks (what, from Australia to Slovenia?), they'll arrive stale.

I was hoping there would be more about Laura Bow, but oh well. In the meantime, the 'Games for Science' they're developing sound very worthwhile.

Yes, there's less and less and less Laura Bow type news.

Posted: **Tue May 05, 2026 3:16 am**

Hmm. Why do you think this might be - because of the lack of progress on funding?

There's still some progress at least: The mysterious object that we showed off in last month's newsletter is now functional in the game - which was a significant missing piece in regard to getting the demo polished up. So that's great news! Things are still progressing - albeit a bit slower than we'd all prefer, I'm sure.

So, that's something.

Posted: **Tue May 05, 2026 2:20 pm**

Rath Darkblade wrote: ↑Tue May 05, 2026 3:16 am Hmm. Why do you think this might be - because of the lack of progress on funding?

Well I think because it's easier to advertise their own game(s) they've actually released that are their own IP. And less, "Yeah, still same $#!+ different day for Laura Bow news"

Posted: **Tue May 05, 2026 5:38 pm**

Tawmis wrote: ↑Tue May 05, 2026 2:20 pm
Rath Darkblade wrote: ↑Tue May 05, 2026 3:16 am Hmm. Why do you think this might be - because of the lack of progress on funding?
Well I think because it's easier to advertise their own game(s) they've actually released that are their own IP. And less, "Yeah, still same $#!+ different day for Laura Bow news"

I wish I didn't suspect you were right. But it does sound right: self-interest. They didn't start making Laura Bow because they love it so much (although that may be part of it), they did it because they thought it might make them pots of money.

Then it didn't, so they started making other games that made them smaller pots of money. Sounds like a fair enough summary?

Posted: **Wed May 06, 2026 1:04 am**

Rath Darkblade wrote: ↑Tue May 05, 2026 5:38 pm
Tawmis wrote: ↑Tue May 05, 2026 2:20 pm
Rath Darkblade wrote: ↑Tue May 05, 2026 3:16 am Hmm. Why do you think this might be - because of the lack of progress on funding?
Well I think because it's easier to advertise their own game(s) they've actually released that are their own IP. And less, "Yeah, still same $#!+ different day for Laura Bow news"
I wish I didn't suspect you were right. But it does sound right: self-interest. They didn't start making Laura Bow because they love it so much (although that may be part of it), they did it because they thought it might make them pots of money.

Then it didn't, so they started making other games that made them smaller pots of money. Sounds like a fair enough summary?

Actually, I don't think they would have pursued making a Laura Bow game this long and hard if they didn't love the game. Adventure titles are a very niche market. While reviving an existing franchise from a revered developer like Sierra helps, it's been 34 years since The Dagger of Amon Ra and Laura Bow is not as well known as some of the other franchises. This is still a pretty big risk. I doubt even a successful game (however you want to define that) will make them tons of money. In the meantime, they need to put out something to keep the lights on.

Posted: **Wed May 06, 2026 3:44 am**

notbobsmith wrote: ↑Wed May 06, 2026 1:04 am
Rath Darkblade wrote: ↑Tue May 05, 2026 5:38 pm
Tawmis wrote: ↑Tue May 05, 2026 2:20 pm
Rath Darkblade wrote: ↑Tue May 05, 2026 3:16 am Hmm. Why do you think this might be - because of the lack of progress on funding?
Well I think because it's easier to advertise their own game(s) they've actually released that are their own IP. And less, "Yeah, still same $#!+ different day for Laura Bow news"
I wish I didn't suspect you were right. But it does sound right: self-interest. They didn't start making Laura Bow because they love it so much (although that may be part of it), they did it because they thought it might make them pots of money.

Then it didn't, so they started making other games that made them smaller pots of money. Sounds like a fair enough summary?
Actually, I don't think they would have pursued making a Laura Bow game this long and hard if they didn't love the game. Adventure titles are a very niche market. While reviving an existing franchise from a revered developer like Sierra helps, it's been 34 years since The Dagger of Amon Ra and Laura Bow is not as well known as some of the other franchises. This is still a pretty big risk. I doubt even a successful game (however you want to define that) will make them tons of money. In the meantime, they need to put out something to keep the lights on.

Well, that's true - but then, Tawm's reply (below) is also true:

Tawmis wrote: ↑Tue May 05, 2026 2:20 pm Well I think because it's easier to advertise their own game(s) they've actually released that are their own IP. And less, "Yeah, still same $#!+ different day for Laura Bow news"

And yes, a game released these days - perhaps even an A-list game, never mind an adventure game - won't sell the amount of units that something like Leisure Suit Larry, or KQ, or Maniac Mansion sold in the old days. People's tastes and expectations have changed, even if old-timers like us remember what it was like in the 'good old days'.

I mean, would you play a game released now if it had EGA graphics and PC speaker sound effects? I think I'd consider it, as long as the story itself was good and the characters were interesting. But I don't think anyone on Steam or GOG would give it a second glance.

Posted: **Wed May 06, 2026 10:47 am**

I don’t think it’s accurate to say that games won’t sell as much as adventures did in the day based on sales numbers: https://kingsquest.fandom.com/wiki/Sales_data

Games released then may have had more of a percentage dominance, but the actual sales numbers aren’t there.

Posted: **Wed May 06, 2026 11:57 pm**

JasefWisener wrote: ↑Wed May 06, 2026 10:47 am I don’t think it’s accurate to say that games won’t sell as much as adventures did in the day based on sales numbers: https://kingsquest.fandom.com/wiki/Sales_data

Games released then may have had more of a percentage dominance, but the actual sales numbers aren’t there.

You also have to remember how much bigger the game market is now compared to the 80s. The original KQ1 selling 500k units was huge at the time. The 2015 King's Quest seemed to have done comparably, but then there's the question of profitability. Development teams are much larger and take more time than before. And the 2015 King's Quest had to pay for an A-list voice cast. Ninezyme is facing that same problem. How many copies do they need to sell?

Posted: **Thu May 07, 2026 5:15 am**

notbobsmith wrote: ↑Wed May 06, 2026 11:57 pm
JasefWisener wrote: ↑Wed May 06, 2026 10:47 am I don’t think it’s accurate to say that games won’t sell as much as adventures did in the day based on sales numbers: https://kingsquest.fandom.com/wiki/Sales_data

Games released then may have had more of a percentage dominance, but the actual sales numbers aren’t there.
You also have to remember how much bigger the game market is now compared to the 80s. The original KQ1 selling 500k units was huge at the time. The 2015 King's Quest seemed to have done comparably, but then there's the question of profitability. Development teams are much larger and take more time than before. And the 2015 King's Quest had to pay for an A-list voice cast. Ninezyme is facing that same problem. How many copies do they need to sell?

**WARNING: LONGISH, SORRY**

It's true that the games market is much bigger now than it was then, but it's like comparing apples and oranges.

In the 80s, the adventure games market was dominated by A-listers like Sierra and LucasArts. There are more people and studios making adventure games now, but how much of them are A-listers comparable to Sierra and LucasArts in their heyday? How many of these games actually selling comparably to Sierra and LucasArts back then?

There's also the fact that if you're an A-lister studio, you can afford to charge more. For instance, Microsoft is a significant and consistent profit out of the Age of Empires series that's created by their dedicated internal studio, World's Edge. To quote from Gemini (who I asked "is the real-time strategy market as niche as the adventure game market?"

The real-time strategy market is not quite as niche as the adventure game market, but both of them exist as specialized, dedicated genres rather than mainstream dominant ones. Both of them have seen their "golden ages" pass, but RTS maintains a higher profile due to a deeply engaged, competitive community, while adventure games have fragmented into indie-focused narratives or action-heavy, hybrid titles...

"Pure" (i.e. point-and-click) adventure games are niche, but the broader "adventure" genre is a top performer. This is often because "Action-Adventure" is frequently categorized as a mainstream, high-selling genre (22.7% of sales in Q1 2026)...

Both markets are seeing, or are projected to see, growth, with the action-adventure space booming through 2034, while RTS is experiencing a targeted resurgence.

In summary, RTS has a smaller but more intensely loyal audience, while the traditional adventure market is smaller still, and has largely been absorbed into the massive "action-adventure" genre.

Lastly, although Age of Empires doesn't generate the same billions that massive IP like Minecraft or Call of Duty do, it's still highly profitable, sustainable, and well-managed, and frequently tops its niche genre charts.

To come back to Ninezyme: I can't see them making Laura Bow 3 without backing from a 'bigger brother' like Ken and Roberta or Microsoft. Since Microsoft is focusing lots of energy and money on the Age of Empires series (and its little brother, Age of Mythology) -- and since both of them have a dedicated fan base who will consistently buy, pay for, and support both the games and their expansions (which make it a reliable niche market) ... I can't see Microsoft taking a risk on LB3, especially since the market is smaller than for an RTS game, LB3 is stand-alone, and they can't sell us 'expansion-packs' to boost sales. *shrug* Maybe if they could count on us buying dubious "extras" like bobble-head figures and the like, they'd consider it -- but I'm sure if they'd try that, everyone on Steam would be yelling "Cash grab!" and so on.

SHP Forums

Laura Bow 3 (was Laura Bow and the Mechanical Codex)

Re: Laura Bow 3 (was Laura Bow and the Mechanical Codex)

Re: Laura Bow 3 (was Laura Bow and the Mechanical Codex)

Re: Laura Bow 3 (was Laura Bow and the Mechanical Codex)

Re: Laura Bow 3 (was Laura Bow and the Mechanical Codex)

Re: Laura Bow 3 (was Laura Bow and the Mechanical Codex)

Re: Laura Bow 3 (was Laura Bow and the Mechanical Codex)

Re: Laura Bow 3 (was Laura Bow and the Mechanical Codex)

Re: Laura Bow 3 (was Laura Bow and the Mechanical Codex)

Re: Laura Bow 3 (was Laura Bow and the Mechanical Codex)

Re: Laura Bow 3 (was Laura Bow and the Mechanical Codex)

Re: Laura Bow 3 (was Laura Bow and the Mechanical Codex)

Re: Laura Bow 3 (was Laura Bow and the Mechanical Codex)

Re: Laura Bow 3 (was Laura Bow and the Mechanical Codex)

Re: Laura Bow 3 (was Laura Bow and the Mechanical Codex)

Re: Laura Bow 3 (was Laura Bow and the Mechanical Codex)