Opinions on King's Quest V?

[Damar]

There's no almost about it.  She was a valley girl.  And that's probably the thing I like least about KQ7.  They really dropped the ball on Rosella.  Everything from her attitude to her voice to her bursting out in song was just wrong.

Being an everyman works only if you have flaws that the audience can relate to.  Graham doesn't qualify for me.  He's a bigger boyscout than Superman.  That's part of the appeal of Graham.  He's a stand up guy, he can do the impossible, but he's a bit too good to be true.  He's not flawed at all.  And that's not a criticism.  It works for the character.  But regardless of whether he's an everyman or not Mandel's delivery just didn't work for me in KQ5.  It sounded like community theater.  Not horrible community theater, but still.  It was like hearing your uncle voice Graham.  His delivery has gotten better and he has a better deliver in the AGDI and Infamous Adventures games, but even then he just doesn't sound like Graham to me.  He's not how I hear the king in my head.  For me, Josh Mandel = KQ's George Lazenby.  Not horrible but just not right for the part.

[Blackthorne]

At the time, they just didn't have the budget (or the insight) to hire professional actors.  They just used who they had around the office! 

QFGIV scored a major coup in it's professional voice cast.


Bt

[MusicallyInspired]

Strange. I always loved Mandel's performance in KQ5. I even enjoy it more than that of the remakes. Every time he introduces himself as King Graham I just think...perfect. To me the voice has always matched the face (at least the one from KQ5).

[Sir Perceval of Daventry]

Strange. I always loved Mandel's performance in KQ5. I even enjoy it more than that of the remakes. Every time he introduces himself as King Graham I just think...perfect. To me the voice has always matched the face (at least the one from KQ5).

Indeed. "I'm King Graham of Daventry, and this is my friend, Cedric."
The audio quality for Josh's voice is MUCH better in KQ6. He actually sounds a bit different.

KQ5: http://www.zshare.net/audio/938892678400c21b/

KQ6: http://www.zshare.net/audio/93889389e86d4a0f/

Consider too that in KQ5, Josh not only voiced Graham, but he also voiced one of the Harpies AND the innkeeper's thug (the one who says, 'Hey boss, dis guy looks like a real trouble maka, whaddaya want me to do with 'im?")

[Baggins]

Being an everyman works only if you have flaws that the audience can relate to.  Graham doesn't qualify for me.  He's a bigger boyscout than Superman.  That's part of the appeal of Graham.  He's a stand up guy, he can do the impossible, but he's a bit too good to be true.  He's not flawed at all.  And that's not a criticism.  It works for the character.

Other than sending maidens off to be sacrificed to the dragon, including his own daughter... Sure 'flawless'.

[Lambonius]

I find it interesting that people are saying that Josh Mandel didn't sound like the voice of Graham that they had in their heads.  If you think about it, Graham hardly speaks at all in any King's Quest game before KQ5.  It's not only the first time you hear Graham's voice, it's really the first time the character actually has a spoken part at all.  Before that, any text in the games was basically just narration.  I suppose if one played the floppy version of KQ5 first then it might be different, though.

[Fierce Deity]

Being an everyman works only if you have flaws that the audience can relate to.  Graham doesn't qualify for me.  He's a bigger boyscout than Superman.  That's part of the appeal of Graham.  He's a stand up guy, he can do the impossible, but he's a bit too good to be true.  He's not flawed at all.  And that's not a criticism.  It works for the character.

Other than sending maidens off to be sacrificed to the dragon, including his own daughter... Sure 'flawless'.

I literally laughed out loud. True story.

[Baggins]

I find it interesting that people are saying that Josh Mandel didn't sound like the voice of Graham that they had in their heads.  If you think about it, Graham hardly speaks at all in any King's Quest game before KQ5.  It's not only the first time you hear Graham's voice, it's really the first time the character actually has a spoken part at all.  Before that, any text in the games was basically just narration.  I suppose if one played the floppy version of KQ5 first then it might be different, though.

This is true of KQ1 and KQ2! The narrator also only did running monolog of what Graham was thinking in the early games.

Graham also has a few lines in KQ3, and lesser extent in KQ4, where he speaks to his son.

[Lambonius]

Key words, "a few lines."  KQ5 is his first major speaking role, though.  That's what I meant. 

[KatieHal]

Well, even if Graham had very few directly attributed lines (i.e., "Blah blah," said Graham), you do get a sense of his personality even in the older games.

Rosella does sound very valley girl in KQ7, yes. And it is a shame, and I think the fault for that falls on both the voice actress as well as the lines she was given....but we can get to that more when we discuss KQ7.

[Damar]

Being an everyman works only if you have flaws that the audience can relate to.  Graham doesn't qualify for me.  He's a bigger boyscout than Superman.  That's part of the appeal of Graham.  He's a stand up guy, he can do the impossible, but he's a bit too good to be true.  He's not flawed at all.  And that's not a criticism.  It works for the character.

Other than sending maidens off to be sacrificed to the dragon, including his own daughter... Sure 'flawless'.

How did I know that would get brought up?  I almost put a caveat in my post, but figured I ramble enough as it is.  Yeah, that's a flawed moment for Graham, but the difference is that we never see it.  We see Graham as the virile boyscout (that felt wrong to type) in KQ2 and then we see him as the rejuvenated virile boyscout (ok, that really felt wrong to type) in KQ3.  We never actually see a beaten down, flawed Graham.  We're told about him, we witness the decline of his kingdom, but we never actually see the flawed man.  And that makes a difference.  Everything we see is Graham not being flawed.  Graham is a bigger boyscout than Superman because his red kryptonite moment didn't occur on screen.  Also because he's never starred in crappy sequels.

And now a rambling caveat since it will no doubt be necessary.  Yes, in KQ1 and 2 you can make Graham be flawed.  You can bribe people with treasure and use brawn instead of brain.  You can even make Graham do very naughty things like kill a monk or do stupid things like talk to Hagatha in her cave.  But those don't count as flaws because they stop you from completing the game in the best possible way, or outright kill you.

And yeah, Lamb, I actually did play KQ5 first on disk.  I hadn't heard the voice until years later when I got the whole collection on CD-ROM.  But even if I hadn't, you still get a concept of Graham in your head and that includes voice.  KQ5 could have given us a jaundiced Graham with a unibrow and it wouldn't have gone against what little detail they've shown of Graham in previous games.  But it would have been against how people imagine Graham.  The voice is just an extension of that.  Josh Mandel sounds like someone's family member to me, not like Graham.  And in the world of King's Quest, that's what he was.  He was part of the family.  For me, he just didn't fit.

[Blackthorne]

You know, I often hear people complain about the puzzles and other problems with KQ5 - but I never hear any suggestions on how to change or fix them.

What would you do to change/improve KQ5?

Bt

[Fierce Deity]

I would prefer the usage of items to make more sense. It's hard to imagine how I would 'improve' the puzzles, because the puzzles don't make much sense as it stands. I would need to recreate the puzzles. I just don't get "emeralds+honey, cheese+mordack's wand+crispin's wand, pie+yeti's face, and snake+tambourine". King's Quest has been known for puzzles that are memorable and engaging. KQ5's puzzles were confusing at first. I don't even think they make sense to this day, but at least I know how to get through it without too much of a hassle. But once again, to make the puzzles better, I would start from scratch and have the items be related to their respective puzzle.

I don't think that all of the puzzles were nonsensical however. Coin to Madame Mushka makes sense. Fish in a barrel, needle in a haystack. Even the golden heart to the weeping willow. There were just a handful of puzzles that annoyed me because of how weird they were. Like I had said earlier, the only way they made sense was by process of elimination. The puzzles could have made more sense without having to go out on a limb.

[Lambonius]

Snake plus tambourine makes sense.  Loud noises drive away animals--what is Graham carrying that could make a loud noise?  Etc.  Now granted, if a tambourine could drive the snake away, certainly Graham probably could have done so with just his voice alone. 

I may be in the minority, but I never had trouble with the emeralds & honey puzzle.  The basic ingredients and inventory items make sense to me.  What it really needed was some better descriptions along the way, like the first time the elf grabs the emerald, the game could say, "if only Graham had a way to make the elf "stick" around a little longer."  Or something like that.  Some pun that alludes to the stickiness of honey.  The main problem I think people have with that puzzle is that it's a three-strikes-and-you're-out dead-end situation. 

The only truly illogical puzzle in that game is the moldy cheese powering the wand machine.  Everything else makes sense and has precedence in terms of "adventure game puzzle logic." 

[Fierce Deity]

Snake plus tambourine makes sense.  Loud noises drive away animals--what is Graham carrying that could make a loud noise?  Etc.  Now granted, if a tambourine could drive the snake away, certainly Graham probably could have done so with just his voice alone. 

I may be in the minority, but I never had trouble with the emeralds & honey puzzle.  The basic ingredients and inventory items make sense to me.  What it really needed was some better descriptions along the way, like the first time the elf grabs the emerald, the game could say, "if only Graham had a way to make the elf "stick" around a little longer."  Or something like that.  Some pun that alludes to the stickiness of honey.  The main problem I think people have with that puzzle is that it's a three-strikes-and-you're-out dead-end situation. 

The only truly illogical puzzle in that game is the moldy cheese powering the wand machine.  Everything else makes sense and has precedence in terms of "adventure game puzzle logic." 

Well, that's exactly what I would argue. The emeralds make sense, but I would prefer a contextual statement from the narrator on all accounts. Even the snake puzzle. I used the tambourine without a problem in my puzzle-solving skills, but even the "snakes are afraid of loud sounds" argument doesn't make sense when regarding a tambourine. Like you had said, Graham's voice is louder than any tambourine. I would even suggest that the harp could make a louder sound, and even a brighter sound than the tambourine. Tambourines (at least the ones I use for percussion) are not built for decibel-breaking records.

I'll accept the "loud sound" argument just because that was their intention, but there could have been a better instrument to use for that puzzle. Now, a tambourine would be perfect if the snake is annoyed by the tambourine's irritating redundancy. 

[Blackthorne]

With the Moldy Cheese, I'd put a book in Mordack's Library Graham could find, which mentions that through Alchemey, you can use moldy cheese to recharge a wand.

Something like that.  The Emeralds puzzle would be better too if it went down like Lambo described.


Bt

[Sir Perceval of Daventry]

I think the main issue is that it wasn't that the puzzles were put in with no thought or just thrown in for filler--it's just that you have to remember they were dealing with an entirely new engine in many ways, a new interface, a whole new way to design games. All of these factors probably were overwhelming and might've happened the development of puzzles and other things. I remember hearing for example that Cedric was actually originally supposed to be a wise, helpful Owl. But everytime he'd be put into certain scenes, the game would crash from a lack of space--Remember how weak computing technology was then compared to now--So Cedric became the cowardly Owl instead of the helpful Owl. Every scene that he stays out of is a scene he was probably supposed to be in and give advice in.

So a lot of these puzzles might've actually had Cedric's help, making them less illogical, but his role in the game was severely reduced due to technological restraints. And I'm sure with technological problems came budget and scheduling concerns. Sierra was already a public company when KQ5 went into production.

[Damar]

In the Dark Forest, I would have made it clear that the glowing eyes were elves.  Maybe have them scatter like cockroaches into the forest the moment Graham enters the screen.  Then the emeralds would make a bit more sense rather than just dropping them on the ground for random glowing eyes (which honestly could have just as easily been evil glowing eyes rather than friendly elves).  And after dropping three without the honey, I'd have the narrator say something like Lamb was talking about.  "Looks like Graham couldn't get the elves to stick around.  Too bad you're out of emeralds now."  That way it gives a hint and lets you know to restore the game.

I'd let you know that there's a hole in the boat by clicking the eye icon on it rather than let you die and then tell you there's a hole.

I would have also stopped the repeated puzzle answers.  For example, I'd have changed the puzzle with the harpies to, say, throwing a gem from the treasure temple off the cliff into the water to distract them rather than playing the harp again.  Not sure what I'd do for Dink, but it wouldn't be the tambourine again.

And I'd agree with Blackthorne about putting a message in Mordack's study about the wand charger.  Maybe have it mention that the machine uses dark powers and requires a living sacrifice to power up.  It sounds evil and technically cheese is "alive."  Yeah, it's a stretch, but an easier stretch than just guessing to toss some cheese in there.  The book would also tell you which tray gets which wand because it's pretty much just a 50-50 guess on where you put the wand.

Oh, and once you got the spells and the information on the wand, it would trigger Mordack to arrive and fall asleep.  No waiting around for no reason.

I also would have had Graham ask people whether they knew about Mordack in Serenia just to show that Graham does have focus on that ultimate goal.

[Lambonius]

In the Dark Forest, I would have made it clear that the glowing eyes were elves.  Maybe have them scatter like cockroaches into the forest the moment Graham enters the screen.  Then the emeralds would make a bit more sense rather than just dropping them on the ground for random glowing eyes (which honestly could have just as easily been evil glowing eyes rather than friendly elves).  And after dropping three without the honey, I'd have the narrator say something like Lamb was talking about.  "Looks like Graham couldn't get the elves to stick around.  Too bad you're out of emeralds now."  That way it gives a hint and lets you know to restore the game.

I'd let you know that there's a hole in the boat by clicking the eye icon on it rather than let you die and then tell you there's a hole.

I would have also stopped the repeated puzzle answers.  For example, I'd have changed the puzzle with the harpies to, say, throwing a gem from the treasure temple off the cliff into the water to distract them rather than playing the harp again.  Not sure what I'd do for Dink, but it wouldn't be the tambourine again.

And I'd agree with Blackthorne about putting a message in Mordack's study about the wand charger.  Maybe have it mention that the machine uses dark powers and requires a living sacrifice to power up.  It sounds evil and technically cheese is "alive."  Yeah, it's a stretch, but an easier stretch than just guessing to toss some cheese in there.  The book would also tell you which tray gets which wand because it's pretty much just a 50-50 guess on where you put the wand.

Oh, and once you got the spells and the information on the wand, it would trigger Mordack to arrive and fall asleep.  No waiting around for no reason.

I also would have had Graham ask people whether they knew about Mordack in Serenia just to show that Graham does have focus on that ultimate goal.

Those are all great ideas.  I especially like the idea of a clear cut trigger for Mordack appearing and falling asleep.

[MusicallyInspired]

You know what? I'm happy with the way KQ5 is now, but it was still be interesting if KQ5 were to be redesigned in a more "director's cut" way with Cedric's role being as fleshed out as it was supposed to be and with  proper hints and additional content to explain all the puzzles. Maybe even redesign or add to one or two.

That would be neat. Gearing that Cedric was originally supposed to be a completely different character makes me quite curious to play such a game with a wise helpful owl.