New Direction is Best

edited July 2012 in Discuss
First time poster here!

I'm now 31 and I've played almost all of Sierra's games since I was a kid (yes even Larry... we were cool back then... and how else do you think I learned how to play Blackjack!)

I loved every moment of these games and they really challenged the mind. They hold a special place in my heart.

However, we should get with the times.

King's Quest is a controversial series due to the loyal fanbase; I know it will be hard to please everyone. But I don't think going for a 2D classic game will cut it this time.

I think going for a 3D (please don't kill me) Mask of Eternity style'd game is the way to go, and adding more classic elements from the older games into it.

Think about it; a POLISHED free roam 3D game with classic item hunt and use mechanics with MINOR or REDUCED action sequences with a little more mature themes/humor would be pretty good if pulled off.

I don't want to feel nostalgic; if I want to I'll just replay the games. I want a new direction.

As far as puzzles, they should be challenging but fair. No dead-ends, but death sequences are ok (to provide a sense of urgency).

The best games this new generation for me were Demon's Souls & Dark Souls, simply because the mechanics of minimal plot, addictive combat, and challenge created a great formula. Every mistake you made was yours and you learned from it.

So putting this philosophy into the new game would surely be helpful.

Sorry for the long post!
«13

Comments

  • edited June 2012
    Amen.
  • edited June 2012
    Be prepared to be jumped on by certain faction of long term board members...
  • edited June 2012
    I'd like to see Telltale's new King's Quest as a first-person-shooter.
  • edited June 2012
    I'm torn. I liked MOE's approach. And I know I'm in the minority with that. I liked it's move into a new direction. I wish it would have incorporated more adventure-like puzzles and inventory. But I really liked the action element to it. I definitely thought it was a better game overall than KQ7 for sure. All evidence points to the fact that Telltale is trying to continue the "classic" King's Quest, though. And I just don't think that's possible, because of everyone's nostalgia. Will it continue from classic King's Quest, while trying to invoke Telltale's latest "cinematic" nonsense or will it actually move the franchise forward? Either can be bad case scenarios. We'll see.
  • edited June 2012
    In all seriousness though, Telltale is never in a million years going to make King's Quest: The 3D Action RPG. It's just not going to happen. Telltale doesn't make those kinds of games. Even Telltale's most crappy Dragon's Lair clone wouldn't qualify as an action game of any sort. They are all still technically point and click games. Now, I wouldn't call them adventure games, either, but that's another argument. And then of course, there's the other reason, which is that it's a truly terrible idea. You've named two examples (Demon's and Dark Souls--two of my favorite games this generation, too, by the way) that have absolutely no resemblance at all to King's Quest, not even to Mask of Eternity. Completely different types of games with completely different play mechanics, barring the fact that they are all in 3D. And then of course, you've got the fact that Telltale doesn't make original concept games. They revive well-known licenses and suck as much money as they can out of them by playing on fans' nostalgia before dropping them. That's their whole business model.
  • edited June 2012
    To clarify I don't mean the game should be a clone of DeS/DkS, rather just take the concept of urgency and challenge but being fair about it (no cheap shots yet no hand holding).

    I would not be interested to play a 2D game; that is too old school and is basically fan service to please the few hardcore KQ fans.

    The classic KQ games have not aged well either; I replayed KQ 2-6 in the last few months and there's so much cheese. MoE is not a perfect game yet the mature themes resonate more with me now than seeing Red Riding Hood or the 3 bears (again, call it blasphemy if you want but I'm not interested in children's fairy tales anymore).

    I'm not gonna speculate what they will do as that's another topic... but I personally feel it would do more harm to recreate a classic... that's why they are classics in the first place. Leave them be the jewels they are and make a new game with the elements of the series as a guide.

    A good recent example would be Castlevania: Lords of Shadow. Again, not a perfect game (it had some pacing issues and some annoying sequences), yet I really did enjoy it and I think Mercury Steam did a fine job. It's the best selling Castlevania and they are now doing TWO sequels (Mirrors of Fate and LoS 2).

    I hope TTG can take this in consideration... make a reboot that is worthy enough to capture the hearts of the fans.
  • edited June 2012
    Also, if you think about it Graham is a knight; I don't see why it can't be a gritty adventure and he slays enemies with a sword. Why only with wits (or pies?!)
  • edited June 2012
    Sleeq wrote: »
    Also, if you think about it Graham is a knight; I don't see why it can't be a gritty adventure and he slays enemies with a sword. Why only with wits (or pies?!)

    Oy...there's that word again. "Gritty."

    Sigh...I'll leave that one alone for now. I know Anakin likes dark and gritty stories--he can probably field that one.

    Let me ask you this--would you also never go see a 2D animated movie? Is 2D animation also "too old school" for you?

    And some food for thought: I would argue that any new gameplay direction would mean jack shit if Telltale couldn't first capture the tone that the series is known for. This is actually the one area where I have pretty solid confidence in them though--by far the least of my worries.
  • edited June 2012
    Yeah, there's enough grit. I'm sick of it.
  • edited June 2012
    The big challenge in my opinion is that there isn't really a defining KQ game.. They are all different in some way or another... So you really can not make a game and say "YEP, NAILED IT!"

    As for a you're suggestions I think one thing we CAN agree on when KQ was done right it was an adventure game... KQ doesnt need to be MoE turned Skyrim.. Its ok for it to be nostalgic and "outdated" the fans that want this game love the old games as they are.. otherwise you wouldn't have people making fan games in the same decades old style... It isn't broke in my opinion.. why fix it?

    Will TTG make a great KQ game? I dunno.. I think they certainly have it in them, I think they will, but time will tell... I am looking forward to it.
  • edited June 2012
    "Gritty" makes me think of angsty melodrama like sandpaper on skin or fingers on a chalkboard...

    I don't want another TSL, especially an official one...
  • edited June 2012
    I just think the very idea that it has to be in 3D to be worth playing is utterly ridiculous. I've seen some stunningly beautiful 2D games and movies in HD. I would absolutely relish a beautiful hand-painted HD King's Quest game in two dimensions. It would be fucking incredible.

    Now, I'm fairly certain Telltale won't do the game in 2D, mainly because it's expensive and somewhat less efficient than skinning 3D characters and environments, and part of their episodic model is low costs and fast production times.
  • edited June 2012
    However this ends, I won't be considering Telltale's KQ "official".
  • edited June 2012
    If you want something new, why do you want an old name like King's Quest on it?

    Next effin' question.


    Bt
  • edited June 2012
    I thought The Whispered World was a beautiful game, and it was 2D.
  • edited June 2012
    Oy...there's that word again. "Gritty."

    Oh I'm sorry... I didn't know it was such a hated word around here. I guess I have no choice but to accept that the next KQ will have you save Pocahontas and play pick the flowers with Snow White.
    Is 2D animation also "too old school" for you?

    It's not an interactive medium, therefore there is little that can be done to actually progress it other than visual technology.
    If you want something new, why do you want an old name like King's Quest on it?

    Why can't a series evolve with the times? You have some good results, GTA, Metal Gear, Castlevania... in fact, it's games that never try something new that I don't play anymore (JRPGs, Mario games, etc).

    Why do you want to stay locked in the past? We might as well stick to the steam locomotive... it ran fine and it got you where you needed!
  • edited June 2012
    The problem is that you're not talking about the evolution of King's Quest as an adventure game series. You're talking about a fundamental transformation and calling it evolution. Frankly, Roberta was wrong when she tried it with MOE, which is why so many view it as more of a KQ spin-off than a core game that fits with the others.
  • edited June 2012
    I really don't see how you can evolve a series without taking some bold steps. This is why JRPGs are criticized and sales have dwindled; they rely on tired and cliche design with little to no evolution.

    MoE was a bold step forward, however flawed it is.
  • edited June 2012
    Yes, but it was the wrong step for the franchise. Different doesn't always mean good. Virtual reality used to be thought of as the next big thing, but we all know how that turned out. No one cares about VR anymore.

    Again, I point out that there are 2D adventure games which came out recently that are beautiful and are very good games. If people complain about The Whispered World, they complain about the fake choice at the end or else the melancholy attitude of the protagonist, not the fact that it's 2D.


    If you try to say that 3D games sell better, I would counter by saying that games that are marketed well sell better and that that is more important than being forced to use 3D.

    I'm not saying KQ should or shouldn't use 3D (although 3D a la Sam & Max is better than 3D a la MoE). I'm saying it's not required to create a good game that people love and that sells well.


    The reason why Mario and Zelda games are still popular, despite using a similar formula for all their respective games, is that while each game has changes to the gameplay, they don't make too many changes too quickly and keep to a familiar tone for the franchise. Mask of Eternity made a whole lot of changes to the gameplay all at once (eg. protagonist not in Royal Family; 3D; over-the-shoulder camera; emphasis on combat; etc.) to its detriment. If these changes were to be made successfully, they should have been more gradual in the franchise rather than changing a bunch of things all at once.
  • edited June 2012
    Mario and Zelda suffer from a nostalgic fanbase even moreso than KQ I believe.

    No one complained when Metal Gear moved to 3D with MGS for example. Now playing MG1 or 2 is nostalgia factor only.

    MoE was not a polished game... if it was then I'm sure things wouldn't have been the way they are now.

    Gradual change has also to do with the available technology. In the 80's, there were technical limitations. Now, we have almost infinite choices... it's all about how competent of a developer you are.
  • edited June 2012
    Actually 'polished' wasn't really a complaint for KQ8 back in the day... Most reviewers actually admitted it was polished (trying to compare it to newer games of today is like comparing apples to oranges), and it compared favorable more so than other polished games at the time such as Tomb Raider 3. It got overall better reviews than KQ7 (which most were saying was 'outdated', and that sierra should have let KQ quite when it was ahead (KQ6)). KQ8 was largely praised by the professionals. It even generally received higher ratings than Grim Fangdango received at the time...

    You can blame the audience, most gamers were moving away from adventure games at the time, wanted more... Adventure Game community itself had become a niche. That niche wasn't enough to make the games worth making for the companies. Companies were about profit margin.

    It also didn't help that Sierra was on its last fumes at the time... In its final years of collapse... and KQ8 was actually pretty much their best selling game, after Half-life (very little could touch Halflife) :p...

    For comparison Gabriel Knight 3 only sold about a third of KQ8. QFG5 was pretty much just described 'failure' in sales (I haven't read if they released the number it sold or not)... As far as Sierra was concerned that wasn't a success... From an adventure game developers perspective that didn't see the kind of sales that other genres were receicing, 300,000 only seemed like a lot to Jane Jensen. But Tomb Raider (for example, as a popular franchise back them) was easily selling around a million copies per game back then!

    Doom and Halflife? FPS shooters probably easily much more than that. Companies were about the bottom line, and public demand... They wanted to make what the public wanted... Niches were not the direction to look. That's why companies left adventures in the dust, and genre basically 'died'. It's still alive in the niche market, and somewhat in the 'casual' gamer market now, but its nowhere near as successful as any Call of Duty or Deus Ex type franchises!
  • edited June 2012
    Perhaps some of the creative decisions in KQ8 left a bad taste in people's mouths. Generally it was the fan base, not the general public, who were upset.

    I'm not going to enter a debate about KQ8 though since that's not the point of my original message.

    If developers don't take bold steps then of course the game could suck.

    I refer again to Demons/Dark Souls; the dev From Software basically made a niche game but the formula was so successful they are some the highest rated games this gen that are not designed for the mass public; yet both sold over a million copies each, and won high acclaims and many devs such as Epic Games are now trying to go in that direction.

    TTG should strive to not be mediocre with this title; there is way too much potrntial to just take the simple way out and make a 2D game.
  • edited June 2012
    I'll be interested in whatever Telltale's team decides to do. I've yet to see them completely abandon a property's fanbase -- that is really not what they do. At the same time, I'm pretty sure everything will be in 3-D to keep animation costs down and quality reasonable.

    Personally, I'd like to see King Graham operating in a KQ 7 mode, with humor and personality. And I'd like to see some nods and references to the series' history. But I don't want the new series to have too much unquestioning respect for what has gone before, either. Let the new King's Quest take some chances -- it's not like the old games are going to disappear if the new one takes risks that don't ultimately work out. I'm expecting a traditional adventure game, but I hope the tone and look surprises me.
  • edited June 2012
    Generally it was the fan base, not the general public, who were upset.
    Ya, one of Roberta's problems (or virtues depending on the opinion) is she was often designing what she wanted to see (and what she wanted to play), and/or what the largest audience would want to see.

    The trick wasn't just to stick to a single group of fans, but draw in 'new fans'.

    You read most of the reviews for each game in the series, it was often the long time fans who were the most criticle with each additional release!

    They were also the biggest to complaint about the KQ1SCI remake, and one of the main reasonsy why it failed (it didn't really see outside fandom at all)! The old fans didn't like her tampering with the games, and wanted new ones instead.

    There is a nich of newer fans that like the KQ1SCI remake now, but it wasn't like that back in the day. It can be seen as one of the 'failures' that lead to the rise and fall of the KQ in popularity over time.
  • edited June 2012
    I have no doubt that Telltale will capture the tone of the KQ series that is important to its most ardent fans--light-hearted fairy-tale, storybook narrative style, nods to classic fantasy tropes, some humor, etc. Capturing the right tone for the various licenses is what Telltale is best at.

    The real question is whether or not the gameplay itself will have any substance to it, given Telltale's recent insistence that interactive movies are the wave of the future. :rolleyes:
  • edited June 2012
    I actually never played the original versions of Space Quest I, King's Quest I, Police Quest I or Mixed-Up Mother Goose -- I have only played the SCI remakes of those titles. The only games I played in AGI format were the original Leisure Suit Larry, Gold Rush and King's Quest II, and I jumped into most of the other series in the SCI era with Police Quest II, Space Quest III and The Colonel's Bequest.
  • edited June 2012
    Lambonius wrote: »
    The real question is whether or not the gameplay itself will have any substance to it, given Telltale's recent insistence that interactive movies are the wave of the future. :rolleyes:

    I think the "interactive movie" genre has been proven not to work very well, many times over at this point. :) At least, examples to date indicate that when canned video footage is involved, there isn't enough flexibility to provide much player control.

    But I am intrigued by recent efforts at interactive storytelling with more subtle kinds of branching and longer-term impacts. While Mass Effect didn't ultimately pull it off in the end, and most of The Walking Dead remains to be seen, I think THAT can still be a legitimate goal. I'd like to see player choices have consequences beyond the "now I can't finish the game" sort.

    Most of the old-school games were ultimately linear plotwise, aside from natural variations introduced by the player's own approach (which for me usually consists of backtracking after realizing I should have been more persistent about some earlier puzzle, or in the case of King's Quest III, missing key bits of dialogue altogether!)
  • edited June 2012
    Gritty™ & Realistic™ and Reboot™ have become over-inflated parodies of the concepts. I'm sick of everything being turned into this gray, depressing, over-wrought, shallow-pretending-to-be-deep crap.

    Bt
  • edited June 2012
    Gritty™ & Realistic™ and Reboot™ have become over-inflated parodies of the concepts. I'm sick of everything being turned into this gray, depressing, over-wrought, shallow-pretending-to-be-deep crap.

    Bt

    king_graham_epic_pie_in_the_eye_by_irishmile-d5509f2.jpg
  • edited June 2012
    HAHA!!

    Fucking AMAZING.

    I take it all back.
  • edited June 2012
    Ok, I'd play a King of Quest (God of War) type game, LOL! Graham could carry around the Magic Shield, Magic Mirror and Chest of Gold as the various weapons! Bash monsters over the head with the Chest for example!
  • edited June 2012
    Screw the Mirror, Shield, and Chest! Give me the custard pie of death! Sweetened with the fluff of a thousand children's souls!!!
  • edited June 2012
    Itotter a KQ game with a more pixar/dreamworks direction than a gritty direction.
  • edited June 2012
    That picture is amazing.
  • edited June 2012
    Well, Irishmile just smashed everything I believe in!!


    Bt
  • edited June 2012
    The pie of chaos. Bringing destruction to Yetis since the dawn of bakery.
  • edited June 2012
    Sleeq wrote: »
    Also, if you think about it Graham is a knight; I don't see why it can't be a gritty adventure and he slays enemies with a sword. Why only with wits (or pies?!)

    Well if I remember right, in KQ2 you can kill the lion (for less points) with sword at the end. Also I want to print that pic out and hang it on my wall
  • edited June 2012
    You can also kill a whole bunch of things in KQ1.
  • edited June 2012
    You could also kill stuff in Wizard and the Princess.
  • edited June 2012
    Why do people keep insisting that using an inventory item on a monster to solve a puzzle in a graphic adventure is the same thing as combat in an action game?

    Graham using a sword on a snake is a solution to a puzzle.

    Solid Snake shooting a single guard in the face is not.
Sign in to comment in this discussion.