I knew someone would mention GOG's KQ sets, but, legally, GOG could combine Descent 3 and Syberia into one installation pack - which is easy enough to do - and sell them together. That doesn't make it an Official Collection. Therefore, although having bought that set myself, I omitted mentioning that set. Hence, MoE is not included in any Collection.
Actually GOG set is still an official set, they had to get permission by Activision to release it. The set has a copyright and date to Activision as well. Look for set copyright at the bottom of the GOG's webpage;
"1994-1998 Activision Publishing, Inc. Activision and King’s Quest are registered trademarks of Activision Publishing, Inc. All rights reserved. All other trademarks and trade names are the properties of their respective owners."
Rumor has it that Activision suggested that particular set combination to bilk as much money from it as possible! It was apparently one of the ways Vivendi used to test the viability of commissioning a new King's Quest game through Telltale (thanks are to made to the fan games resurrecting the series as well)!
Still the set is an official authorized rerelease of the game, currently the only official authorized rerelease.
Still there is a good reason why MOE never showed up in the truely Sierra-released collections (which there are only four that were released before Sierra closed down), and that is because those collections came out before MOE came out. The last two of those collections advertise KQ8, even calling it that in the developer's preview, and directory files! One of these is the completely awesome Roberta William's Anthology (which is cool because it has a KQ8.AVI video in a KQ8 directory that shows some of the earliest versions of MOE, called the game KQ8).
The first two official Sierra KQ collections were released before KQ7 (or just after), and contain advertisements/demos for KQ7. Although there might be a nod towards a future KQ8 made in the second, just no promotional material.
The 2006 collection, technically released by Vivendi games, not the real Sierra (so technically more like the Activision collection mentioned above) left out most of the contents that were hard to emulate, or to save space (all previous KQ collections were on 2 to 4 disks). It's purely a technical issue, and space issue. This was a problem with most of those 2006 series for all the series!
They also butchered the Police Quest, Space Quest, and Leisure Suit Larry collections by forcing them onto one disk each, leaving out the CD versions of titles, and/or leaving out classic versions of titles. LSL collection left out the LSL6 Hires CD version, LSL1AGI, and LSL7. Believe me Al Lowe does not consider that the 'official' or 'complete' collection! Nor does he consider any of the Vivendi or Codemasters LSL games 'official' Larry games!
http://www.allowe.com/Larry/collections.htmNo one argues that the original AGI LSL1, the Talkie LSL6 or LSL7 are not 'official' Larry games despite the fact they got cut from the Vivendi collection!
For that matter no sane person would argue that KQ1 original version is not an 'official' KQ game despite the fact that it got cut from its respective Vivendi collection. Nor for that matter would people argue that the original Police Quest, or the original Space Quest are not 'official' PQ or SQ games despite the fact that they cut from from there respective Vivendi collections.
In fact, on many lists of Sierra's games, MoE isn't called King's Quest 8, but rather Mask of Eternity as if it were a separate game.
First off, most game lists should be calling it King's Quest: Mask of Eternity, as that is the the game's official title, just like how Quest for Glory: Shadows of Darkness, should be called that in the game lists (it has nothing to do 'being a separate game', it has to do with what the game's physical title is).
While it may be true of fan sites and gaming sites with no affiliation with Sierra calling it just "Mask of Eternity", this is an appeal to authority on your part will not work as they are not official authorities on the series.
From the words of Roberta Williams' herself;
By the way, I feel to the need to stress that this game is “King’s Quest” first and foremost. “Mask of Eternity” is the subtitle. Basically, it’s “King’s Quest 8.” I noticed that you keep referring to the game as “Mask of Eternity” - but not really referencing “King’s Quest.” I need to make sure that people who read this understand that this is DEFINITELY a “King’s Quest” game.
-Roberta Williams, 1998
As I have discovered after much research that most Sierra related magazines, designer sites, etc, that Sierra often called it King's Quest 8. There was even a gold seal on some of the boxes of the first release that called it King's Quest 8, and Sierra's official German release even called it King's Quest 8 (largely because there was a large audience for Adventure games there apparently, and most had played previous KQs). Several magazine advertisements published for Sierra also list it as King's Quest VIII.
If you go to Ken William's own website, SierraGamers, not Activision affiliated, so not an 'official' Sierra site (though he was a former Sierra CEO), he also calls the game King's Quest 8. So the numbering and authority is on Sierra's and the William's side, not the fans.
http://www.sierragamers.com/aspx/m/637445Also Roberta called her own hypothetical ninth game in the series KQ9 (i.e. a KQ8 had to have come before!), and Vivendi was also developing a 'KQ9' of its own, but it was cancelled. She was calling the previous game King's Quest VII as late as one of her last public interviews in 2006 (long after the release of the game).
The only reason Roberta chose to leave off KQ8 off the main box title was as I recall in her own words, so that it would draw in a larger audience. She didnt' want to scare any newcomers to the series, who might think that lack of knowledge of previous games, might get in the way of enjoying the game (had the number been given). It's the same arguement given for when producers choose to leave off numerals on movie sequels! There was no secret conspiracy on the Williams' part, it was purely a marketing decision.
It's the same reason that Quest for Glory: Shadows of Darkness wasn't numbered in the game, or the reason why Police Quest: Open Season wasn't numbered in the title screen, or the reason why The Beast Within isn't numbered, The Lost Secret of the Rainforest isn't numbered, or even The Dagger of Amon Ra. Mind you there are quite a few other examples from Sierra where new games created as part of a series left off the numerals (some even in other 'quest' series)! You'd never argue those weren't part of the series! There is much fallacy in your arguement, and poor logic (that can easily be remedied through proper research of first hand material).






No, you would not argue that these games are somehow part of a separate series!
That being said, there actually was apparently a point extremely early on in the game's development (at some point during the first, or early second phase), in which Roberta Williams was starting to lose control, too many people involved, two many teams. There was her main team in California, I think, another team at Dynamix in Eugene, Oregon (making the game engine very slowly), and the suits in Bellevue, Washington were complaining about budgets and development time. Roberta was so upset during this period she apparently wanted to pull her name from the game, and she even pretty much took "King's Quest" out of the title, calling it; "Mask of Eternity: From from the world of King's Quest" in promotional material. But in later stages of development she reasserted her control until the final release. During the early period, they were still calling it KQ8 though (just not on the title) in interviews and what not.

This was during the phase of the game's during the 1996 development when Connor was named ''Connor mac Lyrr", he was a fisherman, living near the sea. Quite a few story details were quite different than in the finalized released game. Even the Mask had a different appearance back then. They even had more ideas for extra bosses and combat that got cut in the final game. Even an idea to turn the game into an MMO. Even some arcady action-adventure stuff with swimming and water currents, that turned out to be technologically impossible in the engine they were working with (and Dynamix failed to complete the advanced version of the system for them in time, before they had to start putting it all together).
The more I learn, the more I wonder if the earliest ideas for the game made further detours from adventure games than even the final release! Maybe so much so, that Roberta didn't even want to put King's Quest or her name in the title. She wanted to distance herself from it.
The combat, and action shouldn't have have come at a surprise, as they were advertising that aspect in spring 1996 (when they were showing off pictures of the 'Connor mac Lyrr' version of the game), in all the gaming and computer magazines at the time. They went out of there way to point out that it would be a very different KQ game experience. Perhaps there was alot of denial in fanbase at the time?
Roberta Williams gave plenty of warning, well ahead of time. Even Ken Williams knew about it then, was giving it his blessing, talking about it (and the need to change the market), and he was still CEO in many of those discussions. Despite any changes in opinion he may have now in 20/20 hindsight, I still think at least part of the fault lies at his feet. He was one of those 'suits' he now tries to distance himself from.
My wife, Roberta, is working on the newest King's Quest game, Mask of Eternity. It's an enormous project and has the largest team we've ever assembled. Roberta's feeling is that adventure games are starting to "all look the same." She wants to try to completely redefine the genre. For about six months all she did was study games. She studied in detail every successful game on the market, even non-adventure games like Duke Nuke'm, Warcraft II, and Super Mario for the Ultra 64. She is well into Mask now and expects it to complete in time for Christmas '97. It is impossible to describe because there really aren't any games like it. When I asked Roberta how to describe it, she said, "Imagine a King's Quest game which takes place in a true 3-D world, with true 3-D lifelike characters. I borrowed Dynamix's flight simulator technology and pushed it in a new direction. The result is still King's Quest but it's much more immersive, and the 3-D makes the game more interactive. It also changed how I design. The 3-D allowed me create challenges for the player which never could have been done in a 2-D environment, including many that use physics."
-Ken Williams, CEO of Sierra-Online, InterAction, Fall 1996, pg 10
I mean seriously if Ken Williams was comparing the game to Super Mario 64, and saying Roberta was taking inspiration from Warcraft II & Duke Nukem ( I think he even says Ultima in one discussion), people should have known long beforehand it was going to be something new and different!
This puts much of the fault of what happened with the game at Roberta's feet! I mean she admits early on to taking inspiration from Doom (back in 1995) when she first gave initial concept for the game's story, later she does mention Quake and Diablo, and the then 'upcoming' Zelda for the Ultra 64! She chose to look at those games for inspiration on her own, and Ken was praising her for it!
That's not to say she took 'much' inspiration from it, because the game is not an FPS, it is not anything like Duke Nukem, Doom, or Quake. It's not really anything like Diablo either (its much less gory and much slower paced, you don't have hundreds of enemies tossed at you at one time), just the potion interface, the single cursor clicking style of fighting, and the changing armor graphics seem to be derived from that game. It also really has nothing in common with Warcraft II, other than it has orcs! It's not really anything like Super Mario 64, other than well Connor can jump (well so could Graham back in the day)!
But ya if those were the assorted games Roberta chose to look at for inspiration, you just know things are going to be different! She gave plenty of warning.
There might even be a few more comments about adding action elements as early as late 1995 in some interviews.
Also there is some indication from Interaction Magazine, that even Chris Williams (Roberta's son) might have influenced the game through the games he liked to play at the time. He apparently had a prototype of the Ultra 64 and was playing it before was named a Nintendo 64 and released to American market. He mentions his mother enjoyed watching him play the games on the system, and he and she discussed how they might incorporate some of those ideas into KQ8!
For those old enough to remember, when did the adventure genre begin to markedly decline in popularity--decline enough for people to ponder whether or not the genre was "dying"?
I'm reminded of an old advertisment for KQ8;

LucasArts just used those ideas and abilities and mixed them with a new style, e.g. "Look At," "Pick Up," etc, instead of Sierra's icons. But Sierra was first to implement a GUI for text parser adventures. So... when the Master dies, as do the followers. LucasArts got away with a couple games after Sierra died, but everything changed during that time period.
Wrong. Maniac Mansion and SCUMM, and its robust Verb point and click system came out before any of Sierra's icons. In 1987 to be exact.
Infact the new interface was praised int he industry for simplifying things over the traditional parsers used by most graphic adventure games at the time!
The 1989 version of KQ1 for the Sega Master System by Sierra/Milton Bradley more or less used a verb/noun point and click system much like the one in Maniac Mansion.
Sierra didn't unveil its icon system until late 1990, in King's Quest V.
Now do you want to revise who copied who? I personally think both versions are different enough that neither copied each other.
For the record the Sierra's icon interface actually combines multiple parser or verb commands from earlier games into single commands. So a single icon for push, pull, turn on, turn off, open, close etc. A single icon for look at, read, etc. A single icon for movement, so on and so forth. So to some it was considered too simplified, it is definitely more simple than the Maniac Mansion's robust verb system which had many assorted actions.