I've seen some state that King's Quest should remain dead if a group like TT is doing it, or that KQ should stay dead no matter who gets a crack at it, that the series had it's time and it was meant to end and that in essence no matter who gets a shot at it, it'll never be as good as it was. I think that the latter is a very defeatist and negative and cynical point of view.
As I've said elsewhere, King's Quest is not rocket science. It is not Shakespeare. It does not belong--nor did it ever, really--to any one author. It's not like Leisure Suit Larry, which was Al's baby alone...KQ did fine in the hands of people other than Roberta, like Josh Mandel, Jane Jensen and Lorelei Shannon. It's not an incredibly deep or brilliantly written series...I think a game on par with KQ6 can be made even now if the person making it has a creative mind, a knowledge of fairy tales, fables, and mythology, and a love and understanding for what KQ is about.
To say that KQ should just stay dead and buried is so cynical and defeatist..and really is the kind of mindset that helped kill the franchise in the first place. In 1996, people proclaimed the adventure genre to be dead, and thus KQ8 turned out the way it did, and we never got a KQ game after...Flash forward 17 years and the adventure genre is in an upswing and has evolved beyond what anyone in 1996 could've thought it would.