User Avatar Image

When can we expect to see SOMETHING about Telltale's KQ?

posted by Blackthorne519 on - last edited - Viewed by 8.6K users
I wonder when we'll see or hear something substantial about Tell-Tale's King's Quest game.


Bt
480 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • I think the way that SOMI got around no deaths in some ways, but still allow exploration was to offer a few alternate routes and secret endings... Destroy your ship with a canon, or don't.

    Quite a few adventures without deaths have you stuck on a rail. With no detours.
  • Pretty much all of them. Multiple endings and pathways is the only way to deal with it to provide decent exploration (Fate of Atlantis!), but most companies don't want to put in the work to do that at all. That's why I appreciated Heavy Rain so much. You can fail, you can take multiple pathways, and you can STILL get to the end of the game. Genius really.

    Also, it's a fair point about the hand-holding being that people who own computers aren't geeks anymore. And adventure-type games are being developed on game consoles as well, thanks to Telltale. It's worth nothing, however, that statistics say that in a 5 to 10 years the majority won't be using computers or laptops anymore, but instead tablets and other palm touch devices. When that happens, the people who still use computers may be special again and get more challenging titles. Then again, maybe they'll stop developing games on the PC altogether at that point. At least the big devs. But that wouldn't be so bad. We'd still have Indie devs.
  • And Fate still had deaths! It was balanced.

    Another adventure that pulled it off well was Shadows of Destiny. Many paths many endings.
  • And now we're having two different conversations here. Actually, three.

    1) Are dead ends a bad design choice?

    2) Are deaths a bad design choice?

    and 3) Is KQ5 badly designed because it has both deaths and dead ends?

    For me, deaths and dead ends are part of a certain STYLE of adventure game, one that I happen to very much enjoy. Others may not. That's okay though, it just means they are wrong.

    I just have a hard time with the supposed "fans" who say "I'm a HUGE fan of Sierra adventure games, except for those parts of the games that differentiated them from the other adventure games on the market--deaths and dead ends."

    That's sort of like saying "I'm a huge fan of the King's Quest series, except for games 1 through 6."
  • You can enjoy a game and still dislike a particular aspect of it. I really like GK1 but I can't stand listening to the narrator, for example.

    SHODAN, I hear what you're saying--parts of those game designs were very frustrating. Even if it was part of the style at the time, and you're by no means "wrong" for not liking that particular aspect of it.
  • Lambonius;576089 said:

    For me, deaths and dead ends are part of a certain STYLE of adventure game, one that I happen to very much enjoy. Others may not. That's okay though, it just means they are wrong.

    I just have a hard time with the supposed "fans" who say "I'm a HUGE fan of Sierra adventure games, except for those parts of the games that differentiated them from the other adventure games on the market--deaths and dead ends."

    That's sort of like saying "I'm a huge fan of the King's Quest series, except for games 1 through 6."
    False equivalency, reductio ad absurdem, etc. etc. You don't have to enjoy deaths and dead ends to enjoy Sierra adventure games. I enjoy them because of the challenging puzzles (dead-ends are a part of that, but certainly not the best or only) charming art and story telling, nostalgia, and because they're just plain fun. Deaths were part of the Sierra style, but hardly the defining feature of their games.
  • KuroShiro;576125 said:
    False equivalency, reductio ad absurdem, etc. etc. You don't have to enjoy deaths and dead ends to enjoy Sierra adventure games. I enjoy them because of the challenging puzzles (dead-ends are a part of that, but certainly not the best or only) charming art and story telling, nostalgia, and because they're just plain fun. Deaths were part of the Sierra style, but hardly the defining feature of their games.
    Lucasarts games also had charming art and storytelling, are nostalgic for most of us, and were pretty darn fun, too. And they had challenging puzzles, especially the earlier ones.

    Most of them didn't have deaths though. But that didn't make them any worse--just different, because they were designed from the ground up NOT to have deaths. Sierra games made deaths a core part of the gameplay, and dead ends to a lesser extent--they were more than just roadblocks--they revealed danger areas, helped point the player in the direction of puzzle solutions, etc. It was part of the style and part of the charm of a Sierra game.
  • MusicallyInspired;575830 said:
    The only difference with KQ5 was it had the balls to make it a dead end penalty if you don't get it.
    This is my point.

    If you were to reach the machine without the required item, nothing would ever bring you to realize you needed cheese for it. Moon logic + dead end = bad. Usually we see one or the other, but encountering both in the same puzzle reeks of poor design.

    Examine the other possible dead ends in King's Quest games. Which ones of them also include moon logic?
    MusicallyInspired;575937 said:
    It's not so much enjoyment out of going through it but the satisfaction of solving it afterward.
    I did not get satisfaction out of realizing I needed cheese for the machine.

    Also, as a music enthusiast, you should be well aware that the two most important parts of any experience are the first impression and the last impression. To give the last significant puzzle a moon logic solution as well as to make it dead-endable is a bad design choice.
  • I'm not defending the cheese puzzle. Although, there is a shred of logic to it....."moon logic"? Moon is made of cheese? Intended correlation?

    Probably not.

    I'm defending the fact that you really should have looked into the mouse hole upon entry of the dungeon as everything was pointing towards it being important upon your arrival. But really, though. There should have been some kind of indication that the cheese was meant to start the machine either by accident or by intent. Like one of the books in Mordack's library alludes to it or something. Maybe they just ran out of development time.
  • MusicallyInspired;576159 said:
    There should have been some kind of indication that the cheese was meant to start the machine either by accident or by intent. Like one of the books in Mordack's library alludes to it or something.
    I remember having this exact same idea once. The library is full of potential hotspots, and even requires you to stay in there for some time, yet the only object of note is the one open spellbook whose pages don't turn.
Add Comment