POStudios Forum

In total, five different designers/writers have tried their hand in designing KQ games. If Sierra was still around and Roberta had decided to retire from making KQ games (like she almost did after KQ5), who would want on board?

Josh Mandel designed and wrote the SCI remake of KQ1SCI with minimal to no oversight by Roberta, who was busy with KQ5 at the time. He was described by Roberta as the person who best understood KQ besides her.

Jane Jensen co-designed and co-wrote the story of KQ6, but was responsible for the dialogue and narration.

Lorelei Shannon co-designed KQ7 with Roberta, but wrote the game on her own with little help from Roberta outside of the basic story and characters.

Mark Seibert co-designed KQ8 and may have had more influence on the game than he is credited for.

QuoteMark Seibert co-designed KQ8 and may have had more influence on the game than he is credited for.

According to my interviews with Mark, Roberta pretty much called the shots in the end, and wrote the final version's story.

Quote from: Baggins on August 19, 2011, 08:35:16 PM

QuoteMark Seibert co-designed KQ8 and may have had more influence on the game than he is credited for.

According to my interviews with Mark, Roberta pretty much called the shots in the end, and wrote the final version's story.

So Mark Seibert didn't do anything for the production of KQ8? What all was done before Roberta intervened?

Josh. He's the only one left, in my opinion and observation, who would care enough to put the level of heart needed into it. Also, I loved KQ1SCI and approve of his game design style. Actually, I liked all the games he designed. Except for SQ6, but that's because it was so far removed from the style of the earlier SQ games.

Also, Roberta herself said that if there was one person she'd trust implicitly with King's Quest it'd be Josh Mandel because he knows everything there is to know about KQ. She passed on her KQ knowledge to him.

Quote
So Mark Seibert didn't do anything for the production of KQ8? What all was done before Roberta intervened?

He did some of the music, some of the documentation, and assisted Roberta with the voice recording. He was also co-designer.

He also is listed as the 'producer', but what how much work that entailed is still fairly unclear! Consider that Ken Williams was often listed as "executive producer" in early KQ games, such as KQ5, but his actual role in the game was next to nothing. Seibert did a bit more than that, but he answered to Roberta on most things apparently. Seibert had nothing to do with the story itself.

Quote from: Sir Perceval of Daventry on August 19, 2011, 07:26:37 PM
In total, five different designers/writers have tried their hand in designing KQ games. If Sierra was still around and Roberta had decided to retire from making KQ games (like she almost did after KQ5), who would want on board?

Josh Mandel designed and wrote the SCI remake of KQ1SCI with minimal to no oversight by Roberta, who was busy with KQ5 at the time. He was described by Roberta as the person who best understood KQ besides her.

Jane Jensen co-designed and co-wrote the story of KQ6, but was responsible for the dialogue and narration.

Lorelei Shannon co-designed KQ7 with Roberta, but wrote the game on her own with little help from Roberta outside of the basic story and characters.

Mark Seibert co-designed KQ8 and may have had more influence on the game than he is credited for.

It depends solely on what I would want out of the next King's Quest. If I would want King's Quest to remain a classical adventure, I'd pick Josh or only Roberta (doesn't matter in my opinion). If I'd want the game to go in a bold direction but still remain an adventure game without it turning into an action adventure or a Disney movie, I'd pick Jane Jensen. Lorelei Shannon and Mark Seibert are both underdogs in the series' history, and I don't think either one of them could revitalize the series to its former glory, much less both of them combined. Now, a combination between Roberta, Josh, and Jane? I can imagine there being a lot of friction and confrontation, but the best case scenario would be them making the best game ever made.  :P

I do think there is more to be seen from this series though. The final outcome of TSL and Telltale's reimagination of the series could easily tip the scales if it brings the series to a more modern age. Classic adventures are fun, but innovation can easily improve the series. I'd like to see if Telltale can try to not ruin the series. The Back to the Future episodes and the Jurassic Park project have left me rather blase for what's to come. But Telltale's announcement of a King's Quest title so soon after Phoenix' release of the episodes has piqued my curiosity. What will they do next?  ::)

(Posted on: August 20, 2011, 01:30:57 AM)

---

Quote from: Baggins on August 19, 2011, 11:19:22 PM

Quote
So Mark Seibert didn't do anything for the production of KQ8? What all was done before Roberta intervened?

He did some of the music, some of the documentation, and assisted Roberta with the voice recording. He was also co-designer.

He also is listed as the 'producer', but what how much work that entailed is still fairly unclear! Consider that Ken Williams was often listed as "executive producer" in early KQ games, such as KQ5, but his actual role in the game was next to nothing. Seibert did a bit more than that, but he answered to Roberta on most things apparently. Seibert had nothing to do with the story itself.

Ah, so Mark even being an option in this poll is strange considering that Roberta had more leeway than him. I was always interested in the history of KQ8's development, because I had always heard that it changed direction in the midst of development, but never knew what they were changing it from.

Dan and Sam Houser.

I want to rampage around a sandbox Daventry hijacking carts and doing drive-by pieing of local yeti colonies.

QuoteAh, so Mark even being an option in this poll is strange considering that Roberta had more leeway than him. I was always interested in the history of KQ8's development, because I had always heard that it changed direction in the midst of development, but never knew what they were changing it from

It didn't really change direction, there was always the idea to have combat and platforming elements as early 1996, possibly 1995  (even Ken Williams was promoting this before he left the company!).

QuoteMy 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

Chris Matthews quoting his dad's thoughts in spring 1997 on why King's Quest had to evolve in the market (Interaction, Spring 1997); http://kingsquest.wikia.com/wiki/Inquisition_2000_(Spring_1997)

Quote
"The traditional adventure game is dead."...it's time to change adventure games at least as much as the gamers themselves have changed over the last few years. It's time to make them "less pretentious. More open-ended, faster paced, and just more fun to play than they have been." After all..., "what's the use of creating these super-serious, overly literary, and downright studious games when the major audience that will play them played a Nintendo or a Sega last year? These folks are used to playing games where the correct answer to any problem might be jumping over something, hitting it with a hammer, or maybe even shooting it with a big bazooka. Why hassle through all the literary pretense when most of today's gamers just want to blow something up."

It just lost encounters and bosses, or boss encounters changed (different monster types, in the same boss location) over the course of development. It also lost a few levels. Connor's backstory was changed over the course of the game's development to reflect the removal of certain levels. he turned into a tanner instead of a fisherman (living inland rather than by the sea). Other elements of the story were modified to reflect the removed content, characters were moved to new areas or modified to fit in the finalized areas. The level and content removals were more due to time/financial restraints (mostly due to the engine not being finished early enough, a fault of Dynamix). They lost alot of money due to Dynamix taking too long to make the updated version of the 3Space engine, and then being forced to make their own modified engine instead (based on an earlier version of the engine). There was also a change in art style for some things, much based on upgrading the graphics to the 1997/98 standards (more polygons).

We know that Mark admitted to having originally been the one to making the suggestion of adding the enemies to the game (because the levels were largely empty between puzzles), and Roberta ultimately agreed that it was a good idea, and gave permission (again this was back in early 1996 when the main development started). imagine currently what the released levels would be like if there were no enemies (Mark might actually be right)!

It's a little more unclear if the game was going to include straight action combat elements in the game or was going to be an rpg game with action elements that early on. But there was definitely combat in the earliest builds.

This is kinda interesting, before KQ8 was released, there were some fans complaining about the series, claiming that it was "getting old", and they wondered if Roberta would create a new series instead. Roberta disagreed. But this is evidence that the 'direction change' from previous KQ was partially the fault of the 'fans', and not necessarily Roberta/Mark/Ken, etc, alone!

QuoteAfter eight games, don't you think the King's Quest series is getting a bit old? Will you ever consider starting a brand-new series from scratch with an entirely different and original plot and characters? If so, what technologies will this game use?

Let's wait to answer that question after King's Quest: Mask of Eternity has shipped. I think you will find that we were very successful in breathing new life into a series which could be construed as "getting a bit old." It is totally a breath of fresh air. It is like nothing else but yet feels very much like King's Quest. We may have accomplished the "impossible." I truly believe that this newest, latest iteration of King's Quest will be the best-selling yet! As far as starting a brand-new series from scratch with an entirely different and original plot and characters: I've done that many times in my career, and in the future ... who knows? -1997 interview.

I've been working on a development timeline based on the various interviews, magazine articles, and other details. Here is what I have so far;

Timeline:
1994 (or early 1995): Roberta decides that her next King's Quest project would go 3-D.

1995: Initial game development begins, notes, conceptart, stories start to form. she mentions that she is looking at 'Doom' for inspiration, and may focus primarily on first person perspective, with short elements of 3rd person. The playable character was originally thought to be a 'statue' that came to life.

1996: The initial version of the game world, and enemies, player character, and NPCS are created in an early version of the 3Space editor and engine (likely the version used in Earthsiege). 'King's Quest: The Mask of Eternity' briefly is mentioned in Summer 1996 issue of InterAction magazine, but no details are given (it promises a preview in a future issue). The first images from the game are shown around Fall. Roberta William's Anthology is released during the Holiday season with a promo video showcasing the early work on MOE.

1997: In July the King's Quest Collection 2 is released with an updated video showcasing gameplay with newly updated graphics, animation, and combat moments. The game misses its Holiday 1997 projected release date.

1998: In december the game is released.

Wishing for any of these people to be "in charge" of King's Quest is a moot point.  They've all moved on.


Bt

I'm disappointed there's no "other" option. my answer would be none of the people listed, but rather the person or company who is most willing to put in the time and heart into making KQ games in this modern age. as blackthorne said, everyone listed has pretty much moved on, not only from kq, but from the industry as a whole. the only apparent exception would be Jane jensen, and we have no idea if shes doing anything after gray matter or not. I can't name a specific person who I think should be in charge; I would just say that I would like someone in charge who is willing to give KQ the TLC it deserves. if anything, I think the KQ license should go open to everyone; there have been some fantastic fan games and remakes over the years. the fans appear to be the only ones left willing to do anything with the series. I'm pretty sure activision having telltale make a new one is more of an attempt to cash in on the fanbase more than anything else, but maybe that's just me.

Quote from: dark-daventry on August 20, 2011, 10:33:51 AM
I'm disappointed there's no "other" option. my answer would be none of the people listed, but rather the person or company who is most willing to put in the time and heart into making KQ games in this modern age. as blackthorne said, everyone listed has pretty much moved on, not only from kq, but from the industry as a whole. the only apparent exception would be Jane jensen, and we have no idea if shes doing anything after gray matter or not. I can't name a specific person who I think should be in charge; I would just say that I would like someone in charge who is willing to give KQ the TLC it deserves. if anything, I think the KQ license should go open to everyone; there have been some fantastic fan games and remakes over the years. the fans appear to be the only ones left willing to do anything with the series. I'm pretty sure activision having telltale make a new one is more of an attempt to cash in on the fanbase more than anything else, but maybe that's just me.

Agreed, although I would like to see Telltale pull a rabbit out of a hat. If they make an amazing installment to King's Quest, they would exceed my expectations and make a great title for a great series. I liked what they did with Monkey Island and Sam & Max, so maybe they can work their magic for King's Quest.  :-\

Though Jane Jensen is working today, I think she's more interested in developing her own IP and stories.   


Bt

agreed on both accounts, blackthorne and fierce deity. im hoping against hope that telltale can actually pull off kings quest. telltale is technically the only "mainstream" adventure company now a days, and I think they have the experience and knowledge to make a new KQ work, but it remains to be seen whether they'll succeed or not. ideally, I think a KQ reboot should have elements of the past games such as dead ends, deaths, etc, but introduce something new to the formula to make it more than just "another kq game". what those elements are, I dont know. I'm just hoping tell tale can pull it off.

I just hope they don't turn it into a comedic attraction like most of their games. Telltale has a helluva a sense of humor, but keep it out of my King's Quest.  >:(

Me, baby.  ME.

Quote from: Fierce Deity on August 20, 2011, 01:00:45 PM
I just hope they don't turn it into a comedic attraction like most of their games. Telltale has a helluva a sense of humor, but keep it out of my King's Quest.  >:(

I feel as if Telltale's sense of humor might fit in with Space Quest... Maybe... But yeah, I don't want King's Quest turning into something it's not.

It is indeed a moot question--none of these people are working on the IP (some not even in the industry at all), and it's unlikely any of them will work on the IP again.

Personally, I'd like to see ANYONE work on the KQ IP.  I just like seeing it back in action.  I'm really curious to see Tell-Tales take on it.  Whether or not it sucks is to be determined, but whatever they make - it'll never get rid of the previous games, which I already love.


Bt

Quote from: dark-daventry on August 20, 2011, 02:33:08 PM
But yeah, I don't want King's Quest turning into something it's not.

You mean like a soggy emo melodrama?

Lol...sorry, couldn't resist.

Quote from: Lambonius on August 21, 2011, 04:50:55 PM

Quote from: dark-daventry on August 20, 2011, 02:33:08 PM
But yeah, I don't want King's Quest turning into something it's not.

You mean like a soggy emo melodrama?

Lol...sorry, couldn't resist.

I thought about saying something along those lines, but I didn't want to reignite the old arguments.

I like periodically reigniting the old arguments.  We've been too much without drama around here lately.  lol

Quote from: Lambonius on August 21, 2011, 08:31:15 PM
I like periodically reigniting the old arguments.  We've been too much without drama around here lately.  lol

Some people just like to watch the world burn, Mr. Wayne.

Telltale's KQ is gonna suck..



No really though, I'm not looking forward to it. But we'll see. It's not like there's anything we can really debate, argue, or nitpick about because there's absolutely ZERO INFORMATION released on it at all so far.

I actually don't really have any special need to see King's Quest back in action. However good or bad it will be it'll be nothing like the originals, that's pretty much a done deal in any game reboot scenario. I'm happy with where the games are now and wouldn't care if they never got rebooted again. I certainly hope Space Quest stays that way, for instance. Fangames are nice, though.

Quote from: MusicallyInspired on August 21, 2011, 09:55:08 PM
Telltale's KQ is gonna suck..



No really though, I'm not looking forward to it. But we'll see. It's not like there's anything we can really debate, argue, or nitpick about because there's absolutely ZERO INFORMATION released on it at all so far.

I actually don't really have any special need to see King's Quest back in action. However good or bad it will be it'll be nothing like the originals, that's pretty much a done deal in any game reboot scenario. I'm happy with where the games are now and wouldn't care if they never got rebooted again. I certainly hope Space Quest stays that way, for instance. Fangames are nice, though.

Let's be honest though:
Would it be the same as the originals even if Roberta Williams herself was at the helm, with a revived Sierra backing her? Let's say Sierra never died and Roberta didn't retire as a result--I don't think things would be the same anyway. Regardless of what criticism KQ8 got, it's obvious she wanted to go more into that direction--even considering multiplayer for a future game.

Personally, I like having the KQ name around, alive, and in business. I believe that whille TT's game might not be quite as good as a Sierra KQ game, it'll still have the same spirit, the same feel, etc.

Fangames...Meh. Fangames offer fan service, which seems to consist of toying with the backstories or general stories set by the original designers; TSL is guilty of this, as is KQ2VGA and KQ3+ to a lesser extent. I don't want fan service; KQ was never about that. You can pretty much play any game in the KQ series without playing the previous ones; They're all standalone stories for the most part, even KQ4 and KQ6 which are the most "connected" games. You don't have to play KQ3 to understand KQ4; Same goes for 6 and 5. But look at games like TSL and KQ2VGA--Heavily depending on the existing universe to the point that a new player wouldn't care.

There's only ONE fan group I would trust with the KQ franchise, and they're going out of business, sadly (Hint: It isn't AGDI, or TSL). They're the only group out there that ever reminded me of Sierra both in spirit and in their products and in their whole atmosphere--and they're going to be gone--I wish it wasn't so.

Roberta's intent was indeed to hand off the series to new people, and with the exception of KQ8, that's pretty much what happened--KQ6 is mostly a Jane Jensen game; KQ7 is basically entirely a Lorelei Shannon game. Now it's TT's turn. And despite their history--they may just hit it out of the ball park. I'm an optimist until proven otherwise. I supported TSL until I was SHOWN what it was going to be, through trailers, demos, etc.

I don't simply hate a game before it's released due to who creates it, and the reverse is true. I love Sierra, but I also realize not every product of theirs was pure gold. Some--especially in the later days--were pure crap. Likewise, while TT has a history (to you) of poor products...It's possible they might be being very careful. They know as much as anyone how sensitive the KQ fanbase is.

Let's face it: We can't stick to the 1990 VGA Point and Click, etc model forever. It's a sad truth. I wish 2D games ala KQ5 were what's happening, but they're not. The adventure game genre has to evolve, or it will truly die. Ken and Roberta felt that way back in the 1990s and I agree.

Really, the whole "dumbed down" adventure game started with Sierra. Phantasmagoria is pretty much like a protoype for TT's games. It took me days, sometimes even up to a few weeks to solve KQ and SQ games. Phantasmagoria I finished in a little under 2 days--without a hint book or guide. It was easy. That's the direction Roberta was taking adventure games...So even if let's say KQ8 wasn't a "hack and slash" game--It probably would've been alternatively an interactive movie type game like Phantas, but in 3D--Not far removed from TT's own games.

With each evolution, the adventure genre has gotten more and more "dumbed down". The addition of graphics took away one's ability to imagine the landscape surrounding you, took away the "Interactive Novel" quality about the genre, took away much of the difficulty. The point and click interface further dumbed down the genre by very much limiting your level of interactivity with the game world. Finally, it came to KQ7--Even more dumbed down interface.

So...It's not like what TT's doing isn't without precedent, really. It'd have never been the same, even with Sierra still active, Roberta still writing, etc. It can't stay 1990 or 1992 forever, even if we want it to. I'd rather see KQ alive again, than watch it stay dead and fade away into obscurity.

QuoteKQ7 is basically entirely a Lorelei Shannon game.

I understand this was largely due to the fact she was focusing her work on Phantas at the time.

Quotetook away the "Interactive Novel" quality about the genre, took away much of the difficulty. The point and click interface further dumbed down the genre by very much limiting your level of interactivity with the game world.

Actually the 'Interactive Novels' are probably closer to the direction Adventure Games are going now. The 'choose your own adventure' style of gameplay, that originally inspired adventure game genre in the first place. Interactive Novels predate text-adventures, but survived through the years alongside Adventures, especially in Japan (with static 2d artwork and later 3d elements added).

One of my favorite Japanese Interactive Novels is Radical Dreamers a sequel/alternate universe to the Chrono series (Trigger/Cross).

Quote from: Sir Perceval of Daventry on August 21, 2011, 10:14:13 PMLots of stuff

You're assuming an awful lot here. All I said was that I have no special need to see KQ still going. I'm happy with the series as is and wouldn't complain if it stayed that way. That's all. I never said anything about having to "stay in 1990 or 1992" or that KQ would still be the same if Roberta were still making them the same way with a Ken Williams-owned Sierra backing her.

QuoteThere's only ONE fan group I would trust with the KQ franchise, and they're going out of business, sadly (Hint: It isn't AGDI, or TSL). They're the only group out there that ever reminded me of Sierra both in spirit and in their products and in their whole atmosphere--and they're going to be gone--I wish it wasn't so.

You got me. I have no idea who you're talking about.

QuoteSo...It's not like what TT's doing isn't without precedent, really. It'd have never been the same, even with Sierra still active,...

And I would treat Sierra the same way I'm treating Telltale.

QuoteRoberta still writing, etc. It can't stay 1990 or 1992 forever, even if we want it to. I'd rather see KQ alive again, than watch it stay dead and fade away into obscurity.

I'd rather have it stay dead. What good is a name if it's nothing like what it was. If Telltale's KQ ends up decent than awesome. But more than likely it'll end up being another KQ7 (except shorter and easier) and that would be disastrous.

Anyway, back to my original statement. I don't really have a special need to see KQ live again. It had a good run before it ran out of steam and lost what it was all about. I see no reason to bring it back. But like I said, fangames are fun to me because they're made to imitate the good KQ old games. It's nostalgia pure and simple, I admit. Telltale's KQ will not be. I'd just rather KQ remain nostalgia.

But again, we'll see.

Quote from: MusicallyInspired on August 22, 2011, 12:44:18 PM

Quote from: Sir Perceval of Daventry on August 21, 2011, 10:14:13 PMLots of stuff

You're assuming an awful lot here. All I said was that I have no special need to see KQ still going. I'm happy with the series as is and wouldn't complain if it stayed that way. That's all. I never said anything about having to "stay in 1990 or 1992" or that KQ would still be the same if Roberta were still making them the same way with a Ken Williams-owned Sierra backing her.

QuoteThere's only ONE fan group I would trust with the KQ franchise, and they're going out of business, sadly (Hint: It isn't AGDI, or TSL). They're the only group out there that ever reminded me of Sierra both in spirit and in their products and in their whole atmosphere--and they're going to be gone--I wish it wasn't so.

You got me. I have no idea who you're talking about.

QuoteSo...It's not like what TT's doing isn't without precedent, really. It'd have never been the same, even with Sierra still active,...

And I would treat Sierra the same way I'm treating Telltale.

QuoteRoberta still writing, etc. It can't stay 1990 or 1992 forever, even if we want it to. I'd rather see KQ alive again, than watch it stay dead and fade away into obscurity.

I'd rather have it stay dead. What good is a name if it's nothing like what it was. If Telltale's KQ ends up decent than awesome. But more than likely it'll end up being another KQ7 (except shorter and easier) and that would be disastrous.

Anyway, back to my original statement. I don't really have a special need to see KQ live again. It had a good run before it ran out of steam and lost what it was all about. I see no reason to bring it back. But like I said, fangames are fun to me because they're made to imitate the good KQ old games. It's nostalgia pure and simple, I admit. Telltale's KQ will not be. I'd just rather KQ remain nostalgia.

But again, we'll see.

Alright, first point taken; I apologize for the assumptions I made.
And I'm talking about IA. They're the only group I'd trust with an original KQ game. They remind me of the young Sierra in some ways. But I've heard they plan to go out of business after their current products, at least in terms of fan games. Hope that isn't so.
I never really got the big problem with KQ7, personally. The animation isn't the best, but then again this was Sierra's first try with cartoon-esque graphics; SQ5 and L7 were vast improvements. But IMO the story is simple but good, the worlds are beautiful, the characters are funny, exciting, and interesting, the quest is a good one, it's innovative for KQ and it just is a beautiful game. KQ never appealed to me on the basis of it's puzzles or difficulty...The more a KQ game can draw me in to a world, into the characters, into the setting and make me wish I was there, the more I like it; the more quirky and interesting the characters, the more it keeps me interested; the more enjoyable the villains, the happier I am. It was never really about the puzzles for me. They come second and just move along the game, really. That's how I look at puzzles--which I think is the key point of anger over TT, the easiness of their puzzles--as points to be overcome to move to the next point. It's nicer if they're harder, sure, it makes the game longer, more challenging--but it isn't a deal breaker for me.


KQ7 isn't my favorite KQ game; KQ5 is but I don't consider it the worst of the series. Then again I'm biased, I never felt there was any BAD KQ games. KQ1 and KQ2 could be considered "bad" by modern standards due to their very ill put together stories/worlds, but I understand they're a product of their times, of very limited technology compared to today, and the product of a designer who was just starting to build her world and it's rules and mythos.

I never felt KQ ran out of steam personally. I look at each game as an evolution, a next step, an experiment in the series. Some people liked them, some people didn't for one reason or another. I mean some people really don't like KQ5 because of the simplicity of the plot, the puzzles, Cedric, the voice acting, etc. Some hate KQ7 because it's perceived as being too simple, lacking a narrator, too Disney-like, etc. Roberta said every single one of her sequels got flak for one reason or another. I don't see one bad game in a series as a series running out of steam, just a mistake.