Long time KQ fan, first time poster here on the TSL forums.
Got a little story for you guys:
After years of nothing but shooters, RPGs, and the occasional strategy game, I finally decided to revisit my old favorites earlier this week. Those favorites? The King's Quest series, of course. Finding too much hassle getting my old cds to work, I swung by Steam and repurchased the whole run for $20. The whole run except for MoE, that is. I found this odd, but it was no problem since I was able to get it elsewhere. (Yes, I pirated it, but it was also the first game I ever bought with my own money back in 1998 before I lost the disc. I figure I already paid for it once and nobody's selling anymore, so you do what you've got to do.)
Anyway, my love of the series came flooding back to me in a rush as soon as I launched KQ1 and began typing in commands. As seems to be the case with many people on the interwebs, I quickly remembered that KQV and VI were my favorites, but nonetheless each one holds a special place in my heart.
I run a Vista 64 system as my gaming machine and had a real hard time getting MoE to work. I eventually got it by setting up a virtual machine, but in the process of searching forums and teaching myself how to do this, I came across a startling, mind-blowing fact. It seemed Mask Of Eternity, not only one of my favorite KQ games, but one of my favorite games of ALL TIME was almost universally despised!
Now, I can understand a LITTLE bit of griping about how Connor is not a member of the royal family and, more importantly, how the story is pretty weak. (Personally I would like to point out that the story is WAY stronger than the original KQ2 story, supersweet fan remakes notwithstanding). I too was disappointed by the ending and wished that it had tied back into the stories of the previous games a little more solidly. Even a token appearance of Graham and Valanice knighting Connor or something instead of just... ending.
I will even say that I too did not want to see the series end with MoE. For one thing, it didn't really HAVE an ending, and for another thing, we never got to see any more of what happened to King Graham and family after KQ7. But believing as I did at the time (and as I still hope), that MoE was simply another entry in a series that had many installments of life left in it, none of those things bothered me too much. What did hit me hard about the game was how much freaking FUN it was, and still is today. I mean, I know this is a silly question but when I see all these haters out here I feel inclined to ask... have any of you actually PLAYED the game?
Let's also remember that this was 1998. The type of gameplay introduced by MoE was revolutionary at the time. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe it was the first game to ever successfully integrate traditional point-and-click adventure gaming into a 3d world, combining it with RPG and action game elements. Even then I was a hard core fan of all three genres and I absolutely jumped out of my skin when I saw them blended together to create one of the most awesome adventures I'd ever played. Nowadays, genre-spanning epics are everywhere, but at the time this was a brand new idea. If it wasn't the first, it was certainly one of the first.
Once more I bring your attention back to the most important fact: it was FUN. It was unbelievably fun to play. It's still fun to play. In a world of Half-Lifes, Oblivions and Fallout 3's, I am still having a blast replaying Mask Of Eternity. There's never been a rerelease and I have to hack the living crap out of my system to get it to run, but nonetheless it holds up eleven years later.
So why all the complaining? Why all the hating? Maybe some people didn't want to see their adventure gaming blended with combat elements. I did. But if you didn't. well, that's what the easy mode is for.
So here's really what I don't get. The fan community seems to be okay with the flaws in the other KQ games, to the extent that we embrace fan remakes to help smooth out inconsistencies, weak story points, or simply update graphics. With MoE, however, nobody seems to want to do these things. I came across a remake project elsewhere on the web and got pretty excited until I realized it was a downgrade to a KQV-style point and click interface. I mean, WTF is that?
It got me thinking how much I would love to see an "upgrade" remake of MoE, using modern hi-res 3d models, and smoothing out some of the bad story issues. Specifically, it needs a more well-written ending and Connor's story needs to tie into that of the royal family, both of which could be solved by simply putting a new ending on. I would even be okay with eliminating most of the combat if necessary.
So seriously guys, I'd like to know. Is ANYBODY else on my side here? For those of you who aren't, how would you feel about a remake like the one I described? I'm not offering to make it, I have no skills. I just curious what you would think if someone did.
In conclusion, lighten up on MoE. Let the game stand on its own merits. Think of it as a spinoff instead of a sequel if you like, but STOP dissing one of my favorite games of all time. It's really making me sad.
(BTW, I posted here because TSL looks totally awesome and I can't wait until it is finished. Hopefully it does very well and inspires Vivendi to officially adopt it as KQ9 and/or to start work on some further sequels.)
I never played Mask of Eternity. My reasons pretty much echo all the reasons that you mentioned, but since you asked, here's why:
It didn't follow the traditions of the original KQ games. The whole mode of gameplay was entirely different from what the fans were used to, and it was a bit of a shock to see a King's Quest game portrayed this way.
-There was combat, as you mentioned, which was never accepted in the other games. It simply was not the way of King's Quest.
-The whole idea for the game, the plot itself, just seemed weak. It felt like Sierra was just yearning to realease that type of game, and quickly thought up a story in order to produce one.
-Connor was not a member of the royal family!!! :dead: This is a biggie. Each and every KQ game ever made was controlled by a Daventry royal, even the ever-obscure third game. It was just so unfair the the game called itself a King's Quest game and barely involved the royals.
Since I never actually played, I can't make judgements on the scriptwriting or characters or any of that, but those are my personal reasons for not giving the game a chance.
Other than all that........welcome to the forum, Captain! It's always cool to see a new name around the boards. You'll learn to love it here. :yes:
Thanks for the response and the welcome, Haids!
I understand what you're saying about the combat, but honestly I was glad to finally have some combat in a KQ game. I always found it kind of silly that I couldn't stab the troll when I had found a perfectly good dagger under a rock. As for a royal family member not being involved, I think it's still valid as long as it centers around the kingdom of Daventry. I mean, Alexander and Rosella have married and taken lordship of other lands. Graham and Valanice are old. New blood's got to come in sometime. Why not let one of the faithful peasants that has loved and served Graham all these years have the spotlight for a game? I mean, that's basically how Graham started. He was only Sir Graham when KQ1 began, and earned his kingship through his deeds. Alexander broke what were the rules at the time by being the first person other than Graham himself to be a playable character.
If nothing else, I recommend you play this game and judge it on its own merits instead of refusing to play it out of loyalty to what you expected the story to be based on previous games. People felt the same way when King's Quest III came out, and now it's considered a major part of the canon. Granted, that game ended with a discovery that Gwydion is really Alexander, but I'm sure that didn't satisfy purists at the time who felt that "King's Quest" meant Graham and only Graham. Plus, I feel that if Connor had been allowed to grow in future games, he would have become equally bound to the mythology of Daventry. Plus, the game is just good. Like I said, give it a shot, consider it a spinoff instead of a sequel. Maybe that's why it didn't get a number.
Here's an old review that pretty much sums up my feelings about it:
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/adventure/kingsquestmaskofeternity/review.html?om_act=convert&om_clk=gssummary&tag=summary;read-review
Once again I ask the world: Is anyone on my side?
Quote from: CaptainNeatoman on August 27, 2009, 06:39:09 PM
Once again I ask the world: Is anyone on my side?
Welcome to the forum firstly. Secondly, though it was before my time on the forum, I believe there used to be at least two groups in the forum community: defenders of Connor and defenders of all things against or from Connor... so, IF I am remembering correctly, there used to be a group of people on this very forum who agreed with you somewhat... personally, I never did very well at MoE... I think I spent most of my time getting killed by things and being incapable of turning to see them to hit them or something like that... it has been ages though so I might just be remembering some other frustrating game. *shrugs*
(Ok, I promised myself I'll stop replying to MOE debates, especially not when they involve REALLY REALLY long posts... but what the hell.)
First of all - Welcome aboard, CaptainNeatoman! ;D
As long-time MOE basher, I'll try to answer some of the points you made:
Quote from: CaptainNeatoman on August 27, 2009, 03:29:41 PMI mean, I know this is a silly question but when I see all these haters out here I feel inclined to ask... have any of you actually PLAYED the game?
Yep, I've played and even finished MOE. However, I don't think people have to play the game to earn their right to dislike it - it's enough that they know it's an action/adventure game that has very little to do with King's Quest other than its name. Similarly, as someone who doesn't like First-Person Shooters, I don't have to play DOOM in order to know I won't like it.
Quote from: CaptainNeatoman on August 27, 2009, 03:29:41 PMLet's also remember that this was 1998. The type of gameplay introduced by MoE was revolutionary at the time. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe it was the first game to ever successfully integrate traditional point-and-click adventure gaming into a 3d world, combining it with RPG and action game elements. Even then I was a hard core fan of all three genres and I absolutely jumped out of my skin when I saw them blended together to create one of the most awesome adventures I'd ever played. Nowadays, genre-spanning epics are everywhere, but at the time this was a brand new idea. If it wasn't the first, it was certainly one of the first.
I guess by 'genre-spanning epics' you mean 'action/adventure games' - well, those do seem to be everywhere, whoo-hoo. It's the adventures that are getting harder to find :-\
Quote from: CaptainNeatoman on August 27, 2009, 03:29:41 PMOnce more I bring your attention back to the most important fact: it was FUN. It was unbelievably fun to play. It's still fun to play.
Ok, you liked the game, we get it. So what? does that make it any more fun for the rest of us, who, unlike you, don't particularly enjoy their adventure games served with a hefty siding of hack-n'-slash?
Quote from: CaptainNeatoman on August 27, 2009, 03:29:41 PMSo why all the complaining? Why all the hating? Maybe some people didn't want to see their adventure gaming blended with combat elements. I did. But if you didn't. well, that's what the easy mode is for.
Sorry, no sale. Putting the game on easy mode (which I did, otherwise I probably wouldn't have gotten through the first level) still doesn't make the 'action' part of the game go away. Even if, by some miraculous hack, it was possible to eliminate combat completely, it would still leave us with a crappy adventure game.
Quote from: CaptainNeatoman on August 27, 2009, 03:29:41 PMSo here's really what I don't get. The fan community seems to be okay with the flaws in the other KQ games, to the extent that we embrace fan remakes to help smooth out inconsistencies, weak story points, or simply update graphics.
I wouldn't say the fans are OK with all other KQ games. For example, many disliked KQ7 for being 'too cartoonish', since its style strays pretty far from the previous KQ games. At least, that was until MOE came along and showed us all how far you can REALLY stray :P
As for people remaking games to 'smooth out' their flaws, that's not a fair comparison you're making here - maybe by today's standards the earlier games have weak plots, bad graphics etc., but back then they were about as good as it got.
Quote from: CaptainNeatoman on August 27, 2009, 03:29:41 PMWith MoE, however, nobody seems to want to do these things. I came across a remake project elsewhere on the web and got pretty excited until I realized it was a downgrade to a KQV-style point and click interface. I mean, WTF is that?
It got me thinking how much I would love to see an "upgrade" remake of MoE, using modern hi-res 3d models, and smoothing out some of the bad story issues.
I think the general consensus nowdays is not to remake any game that uses the SCIV engine and beyond, that means KQ5 and up won't be getting a remake any time soon. You have to remember that remakes take a huge amount of effort. Most people probably wouldn't waste their time on remaking the most technologically advanced game in the series, whether they liked it or not.
Quote from: CaptainNeatoman on August 27, 2009, 03:29:41 PMIn conclusion, lighten up on MoE. Let the game stand on its own merits. Think of it as a spinoff instead of a sequel if you like, but STOP dissing one of my favorite games of all time. It's really making me sad.
I would lighten up if the game did stand on its own merit, instead of being shamelessly attached to one of my favorite game series of all times. It's making me sad, and worse - it's making me write long-winded posts like this one ;P
Oh, and this review pretty much sums up my opinion about MOE:
http://www.metzomagic.com/showArticle.php?index=237
Wow. I couldn't possibly disagree more on most those points. Maybe I'm on the wrong forum to be looking for compadres, but I was really hoping to find SOME supporters.
Out of curiosity, Storm, what are some other games you enjoy? Do you dislike the action genre in general or just when it encroaches on King's Quest? Is it possible that a lot of adventure gamers don't enjoy a lot of other games? I myself enjoyed MoE BECAUSE it blended several of my favorite gaming styles, but you hated for the same reason. Just wondering what your gaming history is outside of KQ.
LOL nice sig :D
Don't get the wrong impression, there have been quite a few MOE supporters on this forum over the years. Some of them are still around, like atec123 (http://www.postudios.com/blog/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=2610) (that's the guy who was working on a MOE remake).
I mostly play adventures, puzzles and RPGs. I don't play action games at all, which is probably why I dislike MOE more than others, but I know there are plenty of KQ fans who do enjoy them, and still don't like MOE because they prefer to keep King's Quest as the pure adventure series they know and love, instead of having it turn into yet another mediocre action/adventure.
Quote from: Storm on August 28, 2009, 08:31:34 AM
...they prefer to keep King's Quest as the pure adventure series they know and love, instead of having it turn into yet another mediocre action/adventure.
Very well said, Storm. I couldn't agree more.
I think our problem with MoE here on the forum is because we're very protective of the King's Quest series. Most of us have been playing for most--if not all--our lives, and consider KQ to be as much of an untouchable classic as
The Princess Bride. For Sierra to change the dynamics and to challenge the traditions of the series that way...it just seems wrong, like the games are being defiled.
But then again, that's just my humble viewpoint. I've been playing King's Quest since 1990, and I know how riled up I get when it comes to defending the best games ever made.
Whatever our disagreements here, however, we're all glad you're here, Captain. Like I said, it's always nice to have a new member around here. :)
Yeah, I hear what you're saying. I too have been playing King's Quest since about 1990, but I still consider MOE part of the canon. I've said enough regarding my feelings on the issue, but I still wish more people agreed with me. Nonetheless, I think we can all agree that the world needs more King's Quest and that TSL cannot come out soon enough. I haven't finished playing through the demo yet, but so far I love it. Any word on whether it's been presented to VU for approval yet? I'm sure that information is available elsewhere on the forums, but there are a lot of threads to search through here.:)
Thanks for making me feel like one of the gang, guys.
I have to say I love the sig too. XD
Personally, I've never played MoE (though am looking into trying to find a copy), but one of the reasons I'm upset with it is that, when I heard about a new KQ game, I was thrilled and practically off the walls. Somehow, I was in 3th grade when I heard about this (the game was released when I was in 1st, so I'm not sure what happened there), but I forced my parents to drag me to the nearest video game store to buy it. I looked at it, read the box, put it back, looked at it again, and decided that I really had no desire to play it. It kind of broke my little 8-year-old heart. :P
That may not be the best of reasons, but it's still THERE. :P
Also, Haids, I love your assumption that Princess Bride is the ultimate example of an untouchable classic, because it's true. <3
So welcome to the forum Captain Neatoman! It's great to have people who are passionate on the forums. Enjoy your stay, and don't be put off by the ones who don't agree with you. There are lots of those in this world. ;)
WOW! You were in first grade in 1998 and you loved King's Quest? I didn't think adventure game fans came as young as you. Learning this gives me hope for the future of the genre.
On review, I was actually just starting second grade (since it was released December 1998), but I was still just BARELY 6 years old. :P The KQ series shaped most of my childhood, and clearly still affects it, since I've been following this game since I was....11? I think? XD
Rosella, what's your favorite KQ game? I am suddenly very interested in this.
Quote from: Rosella on August 28, 2009, 07:46:49 PM
Also, Haids, I love your assumption that Princess Bride is the ultimate example of an untouchable classic, because it's true. <3
Thanks. ;D I figured most of us here are from the Princess Bride era and would understand.
Oh yeah, Princess Bride is in my list of top four movies that define me as a human being. The other three being UHF, Unbreakable and Jesus Christ Superstar. The truth of Neatoman lies somewhere in the grid formed by those four movies.
I'm not sure when the Princess Bride era was, but I'm pretty sure I just saw it because it was my geometry teacher's favorite movie (and with good reason XD).
My favorite KQ game is probably KQ5, but that's probably just because of the "wonderful" voice acting. :P It was the first KQ game I played, and there is nothing that brings back more nostalgia. XD
Hey. I have not read the entire thread, basically just scanned most of the posts.....
Before I start.....
Quote from: Haids1987 on August 28, 2009, 09:08:09 PM
Quote from: Rosella on August 28, 2009, 07:46:49 PM
Also, Haids, I love your assumption that Princess Bride is the ultimate example of an untouchable classic, because it's true. <3
Thanks. ;D I figured most of us here are from the Princess Bride era and would understand.
According to the box.... it came out 1987. I saw it when I was like 10. I've seen it a lot since then too. It's a good movie.
In reading the first post......
I am the one who was behind the remake. I am not working on it right now. I'm really busy, and I don't exactly have a team or much publicity. I wanted to see the game in the classic KQV feel with a more refined story line. If you search around you can find that Roberta's original plans for K
Q8/MoE were a lot more of a "KQ"
game. If(I hate that word)/when I can manage to get going with the remake again, I may want to attempt 3d gameplay. I think it's a good idea, actually. Basically, I was wrong to announce it... it was an "idea" at the time. It's still mostly an idea. Even though it's been about a year.
About your feeling about MoE.... Thinking about it, I can't agree more. I LOVED that game. It's not KQ in exactly the way the old ones were, but I remember playing it and LOVING it. I think it was my favorite.
I'm not one for making elaborate posts and replies, I'm also not one for debating, so.... I think that sums it up for now.
Hey atec-
Finally! A supporter. The fact that someone mentioned you by name when I asked for supporters does not speak well of our numbers. I hear you about announcing things too early. I made a similar mistake years ago when I tried to create a Christmas-themed DOOM mod. It was too much work so I quit. :)
If you do get going again on an MOE remake and need a team, keep me in mind. I have mad Photoshop skills and some 3d skills. It would be really interesting to see what we could do with it. I like the idea of blending a basic KQ gameplay style with a 3d world. Sort of like TSL, but maybe continuous instead of screen-by screen. I think that would be the best of both worlds...
Well, all just talk at this point. Nice hearing from you.
(Posted on: August 30, 2009, 08:49:17 PM)
You know, I just noticed something... Not to beat a dead horse here, but I'd like to point this out.
Since I started this thread, four people have replied to disagree with me. Of these four, two have never played MoE, one admits to not enjoying action games in general, and the fourth can't recall if he's thinking of the right game, yet all four disparage MoE. I would like to suggest that perhaps this is actually making my point for me about the game being unfairly prejudged.
I know people's minds won't be changed by words, but hear me out anyway. If you don't enjoy the gameplay style, then that's one thing, but for those of you who've never played it (or can't remember anything about it) - I strongly recommend taking a cue from Rosella and giving it a shot. I promise that coming to terms with MoE will not make you less of a King's Quest fan. You can still love the other games while giving Roberta Williams' last masterpiece a fair shake as well.
Not trying to start fights. Just wanted to add that thought.
Hey, I never said I disparaged MoE, I just said it caused me childhood trauma. :P
But you HAVE a point. People judge things far too often without experiencing them, and without the intention of giving it a try. However, experiencing something isn't the only way to gain knowledge about it, so it's not as if their opinion is unfounded or unjustified. Different strokes for different folks and all. People have the right to an opinion.
I actually have played it, and I'm on the fence about it. While it was a huge departure from the KQ series as a whole, it was a good game in it's own right, in some ways. It did integrate a control scheme that I never though would work. But the thing is, the history of the game's development speaks a tale by itself. The product you played was so far from Roberta William's initial idea. During the development, she had lost creative control, so the eighth game turned out differently than was intended. There is some concept art scattered around the net, and also some plot snippets of what the game was supposed to be about. The fan remake you mentioned, although downgrading the graphics, also intends to improve the plot significantly and make it closer to Roberta's intended product. One of the main reasons it's being done in the KQV style, to my knowledge at least, is because making a 3D game just isn't that easy, especially for a group of fans. TSL has taken about nine years to make, and through out that time they've had team members come and go, they've had legal hurdles to overcome. Making a MoE remake in the style you envisioned, while indeed possible, isn't all that easy, and it would take a long time. I would love to see a remake of it in any form.
I admit that I also thoroughly enjoyed MoE, but it's made even more fun by the various cheats that can be used with it. God mode, Fire sword, Connor in Birthday Suit (love that one lol). I must know how to to play MoE though. I have the windows 7 RC 64 bit, and MoE won't run at all for me. I would love to be able to enjoy it again. I will say this of it though: They actually had a good voice cast. They got olde english down pretty well. "Thou art the champion eternal? Me thought thou wouldst be more... regal." that was a quote from Lord Azrial, Lord of the Dimension of Death (I HATED that level!)
Quote from: dark-daventry on August 30, 2009, 08:47:09 PM
...Connor in Birthday Suit (love that one lol).
:o Did he have nothing to cover his shame?!
Rosella, I stand corrected. I still think you see my point though.
dd, I have Vista 64 as well. The only solution I've been able to get working is to set up a virtual PC with XP and install MoE in the virtual environment. You can get MS Virtual PC here: http://www.microsoft.com/windows/virtual-pc/
Hopefully you've still got an XP disc somewhere to install. It's a lot to go through just to play a game, but it was worth it in the end. Only problem is no d3d support, but it's better than nothing.
Quote from: dark-daventry on August 30, 2009, 08:47:09 PM
The fan remake you mentioned, although downgrading the graphics, also intends to improve the plot significantly and make it closer to Roberta's intended product. One of the main reasons it's being done in the KQV style, to my knowledge at least, is because making a 3D game just isn't that easy, especially for a group of fans. TSL has taken about nine years to make, and through out that time they've had team members come and go, they've had legal hurdles to overcome. Making a MoE remake in the style you envisioned, while indeed possible, isn't all that easy, and it would take a long time. I would love to see a remake of it in any form.
Yeah. Those were pretty much the reasons I thought KQV style would be the best. I am good at AGS and could get even better. I can't exactly make the graphics. But I think it's easier to get a team of 2D artists than 3d artists, especially once you have something to show (like a written out plot or something that I could make without graphics.)
As for Moe. I am actually trying to get it working right now and play it again. I have not played it in a while.
I have no idea if I have a copy of XP lying around anywhere. I still have my old laptop which had xp on it, but I don't know if I have the discs for it. Either way, I don't want to lug two computers to school to play MoE at lunch on one, and do everything else on the other. Perhaps a fan should take it upon themselves to make a new patch for moe that includes all previous patches and compatibility with vista. I've tried running it in xp compatibility mode, and it's not come close to working. Or, we could wait until sarien.net gets advanced enough to play moe. But I will say that moe is a decent game even with all it's kinks. It sure could use a lot of improvement, particularly a better ending, but it could stand on its own two feet if we all pitch in to give it a makeover, kings quest style. One thing that's big right now with N64 emulation is retexturing. Perhaps someday retexturing will come to moe. If anyone knows how to retexture a game, that'd be great lol. But either way, I'd take a remake of moe in any form it takes. As long as it is closer to robertas intended vision then I'm happy.
Quote from: CaptainNeatoman on August 30, 2009, 07:50:55 PMSince I started this thread, four people have replied to disagree with me. Of these four, two have never played MoE, one admits to not enjoying action games in general, and the fourth can't recall if he's thinking of the right game, yet all four disparage MoE. I would like to suggest that perhaps this is actually making my point for me about the game being unfairly prejudged.
I don't think this means people are prejudging MOE unfairly. If people don't play MOE because because they don't enjoy fighting, I'd say that's a pretty fair prejudgement. If people don't bother playing MOE because what they've seen/heard about it leads them to believe the game is a very far cry from the KQ series, I don't see why they should feel compelled to play it over any other fantasy action/adventure game that doesn't have "King's Quest" in its title.
As for me, it isn't really fair to say I prejudged MOE just because I don't enjoy action games. I mean, I enjoy RPGs just fine, but I still don't think I'd appriciate having RPG-style battles in a King's Quest game :-\
I'd like to think I tried to give MOE a fair shake back when I played it. Before I started I even thought, "Ok, so there'll be a little obligatory fighting to go through... but heck, it's still King's Quest! it was made by Roberta! it couldn't be THAT bad, right?" (Wrong. Dead wrong :-[)
It was a risk to try and make adventure games more popular which clearly didn't work out. Still I think MOE is better or at least on par with some of the KQ games. Especially 2 and 5, and to a lesser extent 4.
Hey Storm-
I think you misunderstood me a little bit. I was not saying that you prejudged the game, because you obviously played it. I just think that since you don't like action games, you might not have really enjoyed it even if it were the greatest action game ever made. For that reason, I was kind of exempting you from everything else I said in that post. I simply want to encourage those people who haven't played it because they've heard that it was terrible to give it a shot for themselves, like you did.
Anyway, at least a few other people have posted that they enjoyed the game. That's really all I was looking for. Some validation. :)
Sorry, it looked to me like you were saying my opinion of MOE is somehow invalid or carries less weight because I don't like action games :-\
You're right, I probably wouldn't enjoy an action game even if it were greatest one ever made. But I might have enjoyed MOE more, despite the combats, if it made the slightest effort to make you feel like you're playing a KQ game and not some random action game with a couple of puzzles and King Graham dropped into it so they can put 'King's Quest' on the box :(
I'm not saying MOE is such a bad game in itself - I didn't exactly suffer horribly every minute while playing it, and I can understand why some people like it. I'm just saying that if you're buying it because you expect it to by anything like King's Quest, you'll probably be very disappointed.
I know I'm not contributing much to this topic, but I'd just like to say -- MoE was a thoroughly enjoyable game, and I don't think there's anything wrong with it being a huge departure. The bottom line is that what adventure gaming needed was something, and something fast, to preserve and extend it's mainstream appeal. Crossing over into the action and RPG genres was a really smart move, but forsaking the series was far from necessary. This could have easily been a standalone game, or even a spin-off, but I knew I was playing a whole different kind of game when one of the puzzles involved climbing on a roof top and dropping down on an unsuspecting baddie, slashing his throat while blood spurted everywhere. I'm no prude, and I love violent video games like anybody does but... why King's Quest? Fantasy violence is one thing, but the blood spurting was just absurd and kind of uncalled for.
"Crossing over into the action and RPG genres was a really smart move"
Not really, unless you're talking about Quest for Glory.
Just to be clear, as far as my knowledge serves me, the RPG genre is an offshoot of the adventure genre, meaning it was created from it. So it's not really crossing over, considering it's technically within the same family... Also, MoE was more of an action adventure game than an RPG, at least to me. I did enjoy MoE in some respects (I played it when I was younger, with my dad, and somehow never got nightmares... Quite the opposite actually...), but the fact remains that I can't consider it a true King's Quest game because Roberta Williams lost creative freedom while making it. She had a radically different version in her mind than the final product. The game that you played was not the one that the creator of the King's Quest series had intended. It is a good game in it's own right, and I found it quite enjoyable at some parts (particularly with the cheats; Connor in his birthday suit is hilarious!), but we may never see how the game was supposed to have been. There is currently a "remake" of MoE out there that intends to make the game as close to Roberta's intended vision as possible, while also downsizing the graphics to VGA. It's an ambitious project, and I suggest you check it out. Sadly, I lack the web address for it, and I've no idea whether the project is still in development, but it's an intriguing idea nonetheless.
Quote from: dark-daventry on January 05, 2010, 07:01:49 AM
Just to be clear, as far as my knowledge serves me, the RPG genre is an offshoot of the adventure genre, meaning it was created from it.
You're wrong about that, the video-game RPG genre is an offshoot to the tabletop RPGs, the first computer RPG and Adventure game was inspired by Dungeons and Dragons, it was simply called Adventure, so you could say that the Adventure game genre is an off-shoot to the RPG genre and not the other way around, and text-RPGs and text-Adventures very clearly branched off at one point. They were, in their early text-only days harder to distinguish from traditional Adventure games than they are now though, but there was nevertheless a clear distinction in their heavy focus on role-playing elements and combat compared to traditional puzzle-solving Adventure games. :)
Quote from: Suzie on January 05, 2010, 07:22:33 AM
Quote from: dark-daventry on January 05, 2010, 07:01:49 AM
Just to be clear, as far as my knowledge serves me, the RPG genre is an offshoot of the adventure genre, meaning it was created from it.
You're wrong about that, the video-game RPG genre is an offshoot to the tabletop RPGs, the first text-RPGs existed around the same time as the first text Adventure games as far as I remember but were not created from them. They were, in their early text-only days harder to distinguish from traditional Adventure games than they are now, but there was nevertheless a clear distinction in their heavy focus on role-playing elements and combat. :)
Thank you for correcting me. I was not entirely positive on that, but now I know. RPGs are, in my eyes, a form of modern day adventure games. Fable to me seems like it's an evolved form of an adventure game, but that's just me. But I guess it makes sense that tabletop RPGs evolved into RPG video games.