The immorality of the new KQ game (spoilers)

[Rock Knight]

Something's been gnawing at me lately and I feel the need to talk about it.
While I really like the new KQ game, something troubles me:
I think the game gives off a bad message. We see this as Graham's beginning, his rise to the Knighthood etc, and that's supposed to be a triumphant sort of underdog to hero journey. But, the thing is, Graham never really succeeds on his own. He never really wins.

Think about it. You can go three paths to get an eye.

You can either:
1) Make a false eye out of the candle and pumpkin (wisdom path)
2) Get the dragon's eye from Achaka when he dies. (bravery)
3) Get Olfie to scare the guards (compassion)

The first path involves outright cheating or at the very least, lying. You're supposed to bring back the eye of a hideous beast, and instead you hoodwink the guards by bringing back a fake eye. That's not being a real sport - especially when you see the other hopefuls have actually brought back eyes.

The second involves Graham helping Achaka, but Achaka's the one doing the 'heavy lifting', Achaka's the one who shoots out the dragon's eye. Not really Graham's doing, but he takes the credit for it and gets the glory.

The third path doesn't even make sense. You need to bring back an eye of a hideous beast. Not a hideous beast itself!

Then we get to the Duels. Graham doesn't win a single duel without cheating.
In the Duel of Speed, he doesn't win by outwitting Whisper, not really. He wins by manipulating Whisper to hurt himself and playing on Whisper's ego. He wins not by himself, but with the help of Kyle and Larry, when he really should've been disqualified. And if Whisper wins, you automatically are allowed another lap. There is no way to lose, and thus nothing is at stake.

In the duel of strength, you win by embarrassing the hell out of Acorn in public and you can't lose here either. If you fall, Olfie will just grab you. No one's helping Acorn win the race, but Graham succeeds by both humiliating the competition and by cheating.

In the Duel of Wits, you can't lose again. Even if Manny wins fair and square, Kyle and Larry come and smash up the board before the guards can tally his victory.

What moral is there to be taken from this story? How can the 'victories' Graham 'earns' feel anything but cheap? Graham's story never feels noble, or triumphant. I don't feel like I, as Graham, overcame the odds to win by my skills alone. I feel like Graham, and a whole cast of people, rigged the game so to speak, so Graham CAN'T lose. His only "skill" is "making friends and influencing other people" - Not quick wit. Even the bits where we're supposed to be being compassionate, I can't help but see it as manipulative. IE Cheer up Whisper by asking for his autograph...Only to be followed by you asking Whisper for help right after you've done so. In the original games, Graham (or any other protagonist) never cheated anyone to be victorious; Graham never asked for anything in return for his acts of compassion - you have no idea that your compassionate or kind choice will help you, but it does.

There's, IMO, a very subtle meanspirited undertone to this game. When I finished it, I wasn't saying "YES, I WON, AGAINST ALL ODDS, I WON. WOOT!" I actually felt Graham was a jerk, a golden-boy jerk ala Harry Potter who wins because plot says he has to.

The moral of the old games basically was "Do good to others and good will come back to you". A simple, and very moral message.

This game's moral seems to be: "If you can't win on your own, manipulative others so you can rig the game."

[Jack Stryker]

To be fair though...

Graham is reluctant to take the credit for Achaka's work, or to even continue competing after his death.

If anything, Whisper is the one who should've been disqualified for knocking Graham into the water wheel and making him lose Triumph.

And Manny's fate serves him right, both for manipulating Graham and for cheating in the first round by making him drink hypnotic powder; which is impossible to avoid on the first round.

Edit:  Forgot to mention... there is that time in KQ5, where he gives the gnome his spinning wheel and then says, "Say, that kid's puppet looks like a nice reward.  Can I have it?"  A little out of character for someone who never asks for anything in return, wouldn't you say?

[GrahamRocks!]

And, as I said earlier to you, it's not like the Eye HAS to be separated from said hideous beast. Look at Acorn, who brought a live Wedzel wolf to the theater, and it still counted.

Also, the Wisdom path is meant to have Graham as a trickster prankster sort of character, just like the Alchemist said. It's kind of the point.

[Numbers]

Thank you, Rock Knight. This is something that annoyed the hell out of me and which I pointed out in my review of the game. Yahtzee from Zero Punctuation also had the same complaint. Graham only wins because the plot says he has to. Glad to see someone else who hates that aspect of the game.

If anything, Whisper is the one who should've been disqualified for knocking Graham into the water wheel and making him lose Triumph.

And Manny's fate serves him right, both for manipulating Graham and for cheating in the first round by making him drink hypnotic powder; which is impossible to avoid on the first round.

Where were the rules that said that knocking your opponent off their steed disqualified you? There weren't any rules, other than "Graham needs to win no matter what."

As for Manny deserving to lose...so what if he did? Graham still did the wrong thing by cheating right back at him instead of taking the higher ground, and was ready to chase after him when he took off and continue their petty feud before being restrained by the other knights.

[GrahamRocks!]

Thanks a lot, Numbers. Because of you, he's now against this game. Thanks, man.  You must be so proud.

[Jack Stryker]

Yeah, way to spoil other people's fun, just because something they like isn't fun for YOU.  Why don't you tell us all about what a great guy Osama Bin Laden was, while you're at it?

[GrahamRocks!]

Uhhh... >.> Lets not get into politics, JS.

[Numbers]

Don't try to guilt-trip me, GrahamRocks. I didn't make Rock Knight do anything. He chose how to feel about the game. Also, Jack Stryker, congratulations for violating Godwin's Law. You have shown your immaturity by bringing up a comparison involving Osama Bin Laden, forfeiting your argument and any trace of respect you may have once had, and proving that you've run out of better arguments. Comparing me to an unambiguously evil mass murderer is simply bad debating and is insensitive to actual victims of Bin Laden. Less than a page in, and this thread already needs to die.

[GrahamRocks!]

Because of YOU!

Until he read your review, he was fine!

[Numbers]

What did I just say about trying to guilt-trip me? Once again, I didn't make anyone do anything. If this conversation keeps going, nothing good will come of it. Will a moderator please lock this thread before it gets any worse?

[Jack Stryker]

Okay, I'm sorry.   That was going too far.  Going to leave this thread now.

[Numbers]

Let's all leave this thread and pretend like it never happened.

[Rock Knight]

My feelings on the game did not change on the game due to Numbers, though Numbers' review opened my eyes to the cheating aspect.
I've also found some other things I don't like:

1) How zany Graham is. I get that he's only supposed to be 15, but I have a feeling they're going to keep the zany personality going even as Graham ages. Graham, in KQ5 and 6, was not at all zany; he was stoic, wise, resourceful, if snarky. He was a wise king. I just can't imagine him as a youth being a teenager who liked "pop-corn flavored jellybeans" and wanting to have sleepovers. I always imagined a young Graham as the classic young Knight; a little bumbling, a little unsure of himself, but possessing a hidden inner strength and courage and kingly wisdom and compassion - traits Edward saw and which made him favor Graham.

2) The use of slang. The original games, while spoken in modern English, didn't devolve into modern slang. You would never have heard "pissed off" in one of the original games. That's just totally out of place for a medieval fairy tale world.

3) The fact that the game has little to do with fairy tales or mythology. The game basically eschews all fairy tales, literary references and mythology and instead relies on its own sort of mythology, similar to what Disney does to fairy tales. In the original games, puzzles and even whole plot points were lifted liberally from fairy tales and mixed around together in a way which made the series unique; many members of the games' cast of NPCs were either fairy tale characters, figures from mythology or literature or fantasy beasts. You could have The Grey Sisters, The Seven Dwarfs, a Troll, an Ogre, Winged Monkeys, a Unicorn, Pandora's Box, Zombies, and Pan all in the same game (KQIV). In this game, there are no fairy tale figures to be found, no fabled beasts (outside of the dragon), no nods to mythology or folklore of any sort. Instead you just have Wedzel Wolves (invented for the game - Why not just call the Dire Wolves?), and a Snarling Snarlax (sounds like something of a Pixar movie)

4) The Bridge trolls. Not only does this totally go against set canon (In KQ1, the Bridge trolls are bad guys. And they're just trolls). These guys are played as purposely dumb, Pixar-esque comic relief characters, and the whole idea of them being literal bridge trolls just seems silly to me. It doesn't come off as clever or inventive.

The game itself is a good game...If you look at it as a new, exciting adventure game. But as a King's Quest game? If it's King's Quest, it's King's Quest for the Harry Potter generation. It has more in common with that series than with the old games.

[GrahamRocks!]

You just... have done a complete 180, haven't you?

*sigh* -_-

[KatieHal]

People change their minds for their own reasons, folks. Don't go playing blame game on it. If you want to have a civil discussion about the morality in the game, however, feel free to continue discussing that here.

[GrahamRocks!]

I disagree with pretty much everything both Rock Knight and Numbers have said. I know, not surprising at all.

Save for RK's third point in his latest post. I'll give him that one, yeah, there could be more fairy tale and mythology references. But does it bother me that there aren't? No.

But regardless, shall I elaborate?