POStudios Forum

The Royal Archives => Fan Feedback => Topic started by: TheReturnofDMD on August 17, 2010, 01:21:46 AM

Title: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 17, 2010, 01:21:46 AM
From what I've seen and heard about what the next episodes of TSL have in store (including quotes from Cesar and the rest of the team, about taking TSL in the ''teen fantasy'' direction and exploring the traumas left on Alexander and Rosella, making the characters more like ''real life'') the team's goal is to put a new spin on the KQ series, giving it a darker, more mature quality to appeal to older audiences.
 
But does the KQ series really NEED reinventing (aside from the addition of updated graphics, sound, etc.)? After all, MOE was an attempt to revitalize the series as well, and a lot of KQ fans didn't like it. This wasn't just because of the action-adventure element, but because of how much of a departure from the typically light-hearted tone of the previous games it was.

The first seven KQ games were certainly dark at times, but never as dark as they were in MOE. They were also family-oriented games, so that everyone of all ages could enjoy them. However, members of the TSL team argue that "the story should mature along with the audience", and so have written a story targeted towards older audiences.  However, there are many here who entered King's Quest at a young age--Some even younger than the teenage years--And that was always the intent of King's Quest, to be a family series which people ages 5 to 95 could enjoy.

Wouldn't it be a much safer course of action to follow in the footsteps of the official games and appeal to a much broader range of gamers instead of risking putting off younger ones who might have otherwise become interested in the series as a whole (and even possible future sequels)?

The intended audience was always said to be ''the fans'', yet I've seen quite a few interviews where the team talks about updating the tone of the game and getting rid of some stuff (such as dead ends) to sate modern audiences. So it's also a question of who is the team attempting to please?  You can't please everyone--That's what MoE tried to do and failed (Not enough adventure for adventure game fans; not enough action for action gamers; not enough RPG elements for RPGers--all because of attempt to try and please everyone).

If the project's intended audience is ''the fans''--Those who enjoyed the series, were dissapointed with Mask and wanted something ''closer to home'', than why any need for re-invention, or updating the tone of the game? If anything, the whole reason for this project's existence was the fans' desire for ''more of the same'', rather than a bold new re-invention--Something more traditional as a result of the shock of Mask of Eternity.

The point being: Re-invention is still re-invention. Roberta attempted to re-invent King's Quest by changing the game-play mechanics; TSL seems to be trying re-invent the wheel by changing the tone. Sure, there'll be some light spots as we've been told, but overall, as we've also been told the goal is to create a darker, more mature King's Quest--Both re-inventions of the wheel, albeit with different new designs in mind.

The question is: Why re-invent the wheel?
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 17, 2010, 01:34:19 AM
Actually it can be said that each of the games in the KQ series were innovated in some way, and reinvented some aspect of the Adventure game genre as a whole. There were usually a vocal group of "KQ fans" that complained each time in some way (accusing the games of not being "King's Quest" enough).

Point of note MOE wasn't a "failure" as such. It was the best selling KQ game ever actually. Sold more than each previous game in the series. It sold more than Grim Fandango as well. It also had mostly decent ratings at the time. Most were over 70%. Like previous game in the series there were "KQ fans" that loved it, other "KQ fans" that criticized it.

If it had remained like the original games it probably still would have sold well, but still wouldn't have been enough for the bean counters at Sierra though (who weren't looking for a successful adventure game, but something that could compete with more popular genres of the time).

The truth is that adventure games in general just weren't successful anymore, compared to other games out there.

Speaking of 'KQ fans' they are a varied group, there are those that are purists, hate remakes (the reason why Sierra stopped making remakes). Those that dislike the originals for being "too simplistic". Those that prefer the purity of the parser interface over the icon based systems, those that prefer the multi-icon based system over the parser system, those who dislike the single cursor in latter games. Those that only like one or two games out of the series (not the entire series as a whole), etc. Roberta could never please 100% of the people, 100% of the time... KQ6 is probably the only one that came close...
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 17, 2010, 01:58:58 AM
Actually it can be said that each of the games in the KQ series were innovated in some way, and reinvented some aspect of the Adventure game genre as a whole. There were usually a vocal group of "KQ fans" that complained each time in some way (accusing the games of not being "King's Quest" enough).

Point of note MOE wasn't a "failure" as such. It was the best selling KQ game ever actually. Sold more than each previous game in the series. It sold more than Grim Fandango as well. It also had mostly decent ratings at the time. Most were over 70%.

If it had remained like the original games it probably still would have sold well, but still wouldn't have been enough for the bean counters at Sierra though (who weren't looking for a successful adventure game, but something that could compete with more popular genres of the time).

The truth is that adventure games in general just weren't successful anymore, compared to other games out there.

They innovated technologically, yes, but there was a stylistic formula, or tone within the games themselves, within the series, that was kept to until Mask of Eternity. The games all had a pretty well defined sense of style, tone, etc--There were certain things which defined King's Quest. Cesar himself has said he deliberately wants to move the game away from fairy tales to making it a "Teen fantasy" story--More like Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings than previous King's Quest games. He has also said he deliberately adopted a style apart from Roberta's.

Look at the latest Indiana Jones movie. It drifted very far away from the previous movies in terms of tone, storyline, etc--Was it successful commercially? Yes. But it's come to be regarded as one of the poorer sequels of all time. When you go in with a brand, or under a brand name, or operate in a world created by others, are there not certain expectations?

The only reason this game still isn't called King's Quest IX like it was from 2001 to 2005 is because Vivendi/Activision said it couldn't be called that; The game proclaimed itself to be so until they told they couldn't.

I'm not talking about commercial success--This isn't even an issue at stake here with TSL. I'm talking about success with the fans.

Was MoE the strongest selling? Yes. Yet from a commercial standpoint it still wasn't enough for the ''bean counters'' at Sierra to warrant another King's Quest. And more importantly, what was it's reaction with the fans? What is it's legacy today? Wasn't the whole reason for this project--amongst the fans anyway--to go back to the roots, so to speak? To have something closer to the original games than Mask?

Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 17, 2010, 02:11:47 AM
We can't judge the entire KQ fandom from one small niche that inhabit a few forums around the web, such as this one. Phoenix is a small dedicated group with their own personal view of what they think King's Quest is or should be. They aren't necessarily the voice of "every fan out there". Its seriously not a scientific statistical analysis, of all the types of fans out there.

I don't think a scientific poll has ever been taken for MOE. By now it would be colored by hindsight, and not necessarily what people's opinion was back when the game original came out.

While its anecdotal, and therefore not scientific, we have evidence from Roberta herself that said that for every "KQ fan" that criticized MOE, she received just as much or more praise from other "KQ fans". Plus she received new praise from "new players". If you want a better idea how it was accepted at the time you truly can only go by the interviews of the time, and the reviews. If your lucky, with the use of Wayback machine you might be able to get into forums of that time, and read posts by players as well. But there is no way to find out scientifically what the ratio to KQ fan who liked MOE to critics were... You'd only be able to get a rough sense through the research.

What people think of the game in hindsight now adays? There are new KQ players tend to really critical of most of the series of King's Quest games, there are old players that lost there sense of "nostalgia" and no longer like earliest games in the series, etc. How much they are in relation to other "fans" who knows. You come across people that refuse to play KQ7 because they don't like its overly childish style. How much of the fans side with each individual game compared to others that dislike each individual game? There hasn't been a scientific poll on the subject... so who really knows.

As for MOE's "tone" that's going to be a matter of individual opinion, although it created a much more developed "mythological" and attempted to portray an "epic", it did maintain quite a few whimsical & fairy tale elements throughout the game as well, each nods back to the kind of material in previous games in the series. Wizard, King Mudge, the Unicorn, the Swamp Wisps, several of the Gnome characters, the Weirdling Tradesmen to a degree, Queen Freesa to a degree, etc. Connor cracked several puns based on the situation he was in during the story, and there is humor (though perhaps darker than usual, and not to everyone's tastes) in pretty much every area of the game including the DoD. I personally imo don't consider it to be too far off King's Quest themes (but in many cases an extension of those themes), in the same way that KQ6 attempted to take various fairy tale elements and make them more serious.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Cez on August 17, 2010, 05:26:45 AM
And then again, you have many fans who say TSL is very true to the King's Quest series, including its creator Roberta Williams herself. Let me say that I was very nervous of what her comments would be given the bleakness of Ep1. But she, as many others, found it to be very true to King's Quest.

We did play it safe by placing the story in the Land of the Green Isles. This story hasn't even started and there are a couple of twists down the line that I have no idea how most fans will take, but we are proud of where we took King's Quest. To us, King's Quest needed some reinventing, whether we did or did not do the correct thing, everyone will judge differently, but at the end of the day, we are very happy and pleased with what we put together. And again, if we got Roberta's approval on it, and many fans approval on it, that's more than we could have ever asked for.

I personally consider "Harry Potter" the fairytale of today's audience. I'm not the biggest fans, but I've appreciated its story. I call it "teen fantasy" but the truth is that it has captivated beyond its intended audience, and that's because that's what today audiences like. We basically decided to take the material of King's Quest VI and figured out what would happen if the story played closer to a "real" story. We wanted to develop these characters, to see them going through these trials and to see them affected by then. That was the choice we made. Personally, it's not that I deliberately chose a style other than Roberta's. If I had, TSL would be something else entirely. I took Roberta's world and gave it my touch in the writing style, because otherwise I wouldn't be honest, and I don't believe in things I do without being honest. I must have that thing that makes me push day after day to get it done, and that thing for me lies in the way the center themes are written. The magic/fantastical/whimsical side of King's Quest is in our game, and it plays as an absolute as the dark story does. But to me, the story, the center story, that which carries the game is the most important aspect of the two, and the fantastical side compliments this story, much like, again, Harry Potter, or in another perfect example, Kingdom Hearts.

Did KQ need to be reinvented? Some will think not. We thought that it needed it. And we went ahead and spent these many years holding true to that vision. Even Josh Mandel, who holds your same position congratulated me in staying true to my vision, and going through all the trouble to make it happen. So, I apologize if you don't like the story, you've made that extremely clear once and again, but TSL is here the way it is and it's not going to change its tone. It'll become brighter, the rest of the episodes are not as bleak in nature as the first one, which set the mood for what's to come, but it does hold its whimsical and goofy tone and balances it with the tone we introduced in Ep1. So there's a bit for everyone.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 17, 2010, 05:45:20 AM
The thing is its a work of fan fiction if you don't like it you can ignore it, you could create your own sequel if that's what you wanted to do... There are several fans that have written what they interpeted what they felt a sequel would be, or wanted in a sequel. Not everyone is going to agree.

Continuously flogging a "dead" horse by bringing up how much you think this game "doesn't fit" king's quest tone isn't going to change what the game actually is, or what these writers view as "king's quet vision". Seriously though I'm not sure how you can judge the the tone of the game from a 30 minute to hour long episode though...
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Fierce Deity on August 17, 2010, 07:55:36 AM

But to me, the story, the center story, that which carries the game is the most important aspect of the two, and the fantastical side compliments this story, much like, again, Harry Potter, or in another perfect example, Kingdom Hearts.

I think Kingdom Hearts is a very good example. I for one can say with honesty that I doubted Kingdom Hearts' formula. I couldn't comprehend how Square Enix (Final Fantasy) could meld with Disney. But after playing the first Kingdom Hearts game, I knew I'd be a Kingdom Hearts fan for life (I'm really psyched for Birth by Sleep). Kingdom Hearts had a "teensy fantasy" tone, but it worked, so anything similar (like TSL's new tone) should not be an oversight.  In fact, Kingdom Hearts has been the only series that has successfully tugged at my heartstrings. The emotional overhaul was overwhelming and caught me off-guard, but I don't regret it by any means. Much like my experience with Kingdom Hearts, TSL should be given a fair shot before being knocked.

So, I apologize if you don't like the story, you've made that extremely clear once and again, but TSL is here the way it is and it's not going to change its tone.

Please, don't apologize to anyone who may be disappointed. There has been so much hard work behind this project, not to mention the obstacles the project has overcome. There's no need to apologize for that hard work. If someone can't share in the same experience, then it'd be there loss.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: KQ5Fan on August 17, 2010, 08:47:00 AM
Just gonna say, KQ2 VGA took a much darker approach than the original KQ2, and that was an excellent game.

KQ5 also dealt with some heavy stuff. Mordack capturing and planning to kill Graham's entire family in revenge for his brother isn't exactly a campy theme. They just dealt with it in a campy sort of spirit, which made it seem less dire than it really was.... which is probably what is being done with this game.

It may not be completely necessary, but it has proven to be an effective method of approaching the series. I know that I would feel a bit childish playing a happy-go-lucky sort of game with no real serious problems. Not to say I wouldn't enjoy it as much (I probably would), but I think the way they're approaching it is just fine.

Even Josh Mandel, who holds your same position congratulated me in staying true to my vision, and going through all the trouble to make it happen.


Josh Mandel played TSL? What'd he think?
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Lambonius on August 17, 2010, 09:42:09 AM

Josh Mandel played TSL? What'd he think?

Anyone, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this was early in the development, and that his commentary didn't stem from actually having played a build of the game.  Actually, though I was not around to experience it personally, I have heard from others that he butted heads a bit with the team over some things--not sure if it was about the directions the story was taking or not, though.  I'm actually really curious to hear what exactly happened with Josh.  Anyone on the team able to fill us in on that?
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: snabbott on August 17, 2010, 10:00:42 AM
Also, you really can't judge the story from Episode 1. It's MUCH bigger than that. Yes, it is deeper (and arguably darker), but, having played through the game, I feel that it is very true to the KQ world.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: jackinthebox1138 on August 17, 2010, 10:39:28 AM
Ripping off the characters and settings from someone else's IP does not make your game "true" to that world.  If you wanted to do something so original and "true to your vision," you should try creating some original characters, not just riding on the shoulders of someone else's success.  
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Fierce Deity on August 17, 2010, 11:02:16 AM
Ripping off the characters and settings from someone else's IP does not make your game "true" to that world.

Yes, it does.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: snabbott on August 17, 2010, 11:06:54 AM
But that was never the intent of TSL. The intent is to bring closure to the series - it would be impossible to do that without using the existing characters. Nobody is claiming that this is entirely original. As Cez said, the story is set in the Land of the Green Isles - the setting for what is generally recognized as the favorite KQ game. While the settings and characters come mainly from existing material, the storyline IS original.

There were original characters and locations in the original plan, but unfortunately most of that had to be cut.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: wilco64256 on August 17, 2010, 11:09:46 AM
Ripping off the characters and settings from someone else's IP does not make your game "true" to that world.  If you wanted to do something so original and "true to your vision," you should try creating some original characters, not just riding on the shoulders of someone else's success.  

So you should create all new characters and settings in order to remain "true" to an existing series?  That doesn't really make any sense.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: KatieHal on August 17, 2010, 11:12:48 AM
Try not to feed the trolls, folks. :)

"Ripping off", also, is usually used to mean taking someone else's idea, barely covering up what the source material was, and calling it your own. We haven't done that. We've based this game on King's Quest, been quite upfront about it, gotten the permission of the IP holder to do so, are making no money from it, and additionally have worked hard to both maintain what made the old games great while adding something new to it.

Will everyone love it? No. But that's the way of things. We hope people will enjoy it, and we're proud of the work we've done to make it a quality product.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: wilco64256 on August 17, 2010, 11:14:04 AM
Try not to feed the trolls, folks.

But they're so CUTE!
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 17, 2010, 11:14:54 AM
Quote
new...settings in order to remain "true" to an existing series?  That doesn't really make any sense.
The irony of that perspective being that I suppose the official King's Quest games never remained "true" to "existing series" since it always included new settings and new characters in each game. Other than Daventry, and the Royal Family, Cassima, Manannan, and the Old Gnome, the series more or less always created new characters and settings.

I wouldn't even want to try to understand what remaining "true" to the Final Fantasy series happens to be, LOL.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Fierce Deity on August 17, 2010, 11:16:37 AM
Try not to feed the trolls, folks. :)


But they have to eat eventually.  :P
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 17, 2010, 11:42:51 AM
Trolls on Parade;
(http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100817174134/kingsquest/images/a/ae/TrollsKQ.jpg)
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 17, 2010, 12:39:00 PM
Trolls on Parade;
(http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100817174134/kingsquest/images/a/ae/TrollsKQ.jpg)

How did you get the image/outline of the Cave troll? I haven't played KQ4 in a while but all I remember was being able to see the green eyes in the dark and seeing the "GRRRR" text.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: spinz on August 17, 2010, 12:58:45 PM
i guess my issue is -- im not really interested in a cinematic experience. Character development is nice, but for it to take center stage over gameplay, doesnt appeal to me, and its not really kings quest in my mind. If there was a kingsquest movie in theaters, would i go see it? i dont think so. Exploration is what made those games fun for me, the story was never particularly great. So, i see alot of the direction in this project geared towards making it "cinematic", and focused on character development. Meanwhile, episode 1 didnt really have gameplay OR story. So if being cinematic means theres alot more of "go to the sacred mountain for a cutscene, now go to isles of mist for a cutscene, now go to chess land for a cutscene, now go to the pawnshop for a cutscene" then im going to despise this in ways i didnt think were possible.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: KatieHal on August 17, 2010, 01:05:00 PM
Spinz: in that particular case, all I can do is again stress 'wait for Episode 2'.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Fierce Deity on August 17, 2010, 01:12:35 PM
Spinz: in that particular case, all I can do is again stress 'wait for Episode 2'.

It's been said so many times. Maybe people will recognize it if we all put it in our sigs. 
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: spinz on August 17, 2010, 01:23:18 PM
yes i know iv heard it, all of your wildest dreams will be fixed in episode 2, and they knew about all the problems before releasing it. But why they would wait until episode 2 for "the real game" is deeply puzzling to me (though i have my own theories). Unfortunately i can only base my ramblings on what ive seen so far. And what iv seen is alot of talk about the silver lining being a cinematic experience, and in episode 1 it is mostly watching.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 17, 2010, 01:31:16 PM
Sci Viewer. Ya you can barely see the outline in the game, only it comes near the cave entrance, or passes near Rosella's lamp.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Cez on August 17, 2010, 02:10:34 PM
yes i know iv heard it, all of your wildest dreams will be fixed in episode 2, and they knew about all the problems before releasing it. But why they would wait until episode 2 for "the real game" is deeply puzzling to me (though i have my own theories). Unfortunately i can only base my ramblings on what ive seen so far. And what iv seen is alot of talk about the silver lining being a cinematic experience, and in episode 1 it is mostly watching.

We actually didn't want to wait. If Activision hadn't shut us down, we would have proceeded with the plan of getting ep 1-3 done before releasing 1, and then releasing 1 and 2 within the same month, two weeks apart. That's what happened.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Cez on August 17, 2010, 02:18:03 PM



Josh Mandel played TSL? What'd he think?

I'm not sure if he's played the game. He did certainly received a copy and did email me some nice words after receiving the copy, but I'm not certain he played the game.

Josh was aware of the original plot seeds way back in the day. He opposed to the story and that eventually led to we not being in very good terms.

Everything's cleared up now, however, and we've buried old hatches. He sent us some really nice words around release time --he's really just awesome :)
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: jackinthebox1138 on August 17, 2010, 04:26:30 PM
And then again, you have many fans who say TSL is very true to the King's Quest series, including its creator Roberta Williams herself. Let me say that I was very nervous of what her comments would be given the bleakness of Ep1. But she, as many others, found it to be very true to King's Quest.

Here.  You have many fans here that say that.  You could crap on the floor and they would say it was true to King's Quest.  Oh yes, I really see Roberta receiving a fanmade game that was 10 years in development, and then sending you a bunch of negatives about it.  This is a woman who made nursery rhyme games for children.  She's not going to be overly critical.

there are a couple of twists down the line that I have no idea how most fans will take.

*shudders*

I personally consider "Harry Potter" the fairytale of today's audience. I'm not the biggest fans, but I've appreciated its story. I call it "teen fantasy" but the truth is that it has captivated beyond its intended audience, and that's because that's what today audiences like.

No, it's because J.K. Rowling is a hell of a writer.  She writes creative characters and dialog that sounds extremely natural and is easily relatable to just about anyone at any age.  She does NOT write overly wordy sappy romance novel bulls*** dialogue and turn stoic heroes into spineless wimps.

Josh was aware of the original plot seeds way back in the day. He opposed to the story and that eventually led to we not being in very good terms.

And this didn't strike you as a problem?  That someone who was intimately involved with the creation of the previous games in the series thought your story was totally inappropriate?  That didn't clue you in??  God you're arrogant.

So there's a bit for everyone.

Except fans of King's Quest.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: koko_99_2001 on August 17, 2010, 04:29:30 PM
Jack, you may not agree with the direction of TSL nor the decisions the team made. I do ask, however, that you be civil towards everyone here.

Oh, and I've been a fan of King's Quest for years (played my first one back in 92 or 93), and I love TSL. I think it really captures the essence of the series.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Cez on August 17, 2010, 04:43:44 PM
Not only fans here say that. Go and read some reviews. There's two things you can get from the reviews overall: 1) It's a very short game 2) It's very true to the King's Quest series. --Roberta didn't have to play the game and give comments either, since I'm sure you know she's never played any other fangame or given comments about any other fangame. Why did she decide to play ours and give comments? I don't know, but she did. And they were extremely good comments. She did say that the game was too short.

We are not arrogant. We just decided to do our take on King's Quest. If you don't like it, that's fine. Like you there are many that don't like it, probably. We don't expect everyone to like it. I welcome you to go and do your own game where you hold your vision of what King's Quest should be. This is our vision, we stand by it, and we are very proud of it --and that's not going to change.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 17, 2010, 05:10:33 PM
Quote
since I'm sure you know she's never played any other fangame or given comments about any other fangame.


Well actually she has commented on other "fan games".

I don't know if she played KQ1 remake or not, but she did comment on it;
http://www.justadventure.com/articles/Royal_Quest/Part_1/RQ1.shtm
Quote
I suppose if I were Sierra I would not be happy, as Sierra owns the copyrights to these games; I don't. This is a question which should be posed to the people at Sierra. I don't receive royalties anymore from King's Quest as Sierra doesn't really go out of its way to sell it. Therefore, these sort of "fan" games aren't affecting me as far as my pocketbook goes. In fact, it could be said that by "fans" producing these games that they are, in a way, keeping them alive. I kind of feel that, if Sierra isn't going to do it, then somebody should! I just hope they do a good job and portray these games in a good light so that people who have never experienced them will understand what they were all about. You never know, these "fan" games could be keeping the plate "warm" if I ever return with another game!

Apparently she would have played Royal Quest had it be completed;
http://www.justadventure.com/Interviews/Royal_Quest/RQ.shtm
Quote
Roberta Williams

In my experience, parodies have never been particularly compassionate toward their subject--though hilarious, I would certainly not like my hard work to be the butt of all the jokes this game will no doubt contain. How do you feel about Royal Quest in terms of your own work on the classic series?

I have never seen Royal Quest and do not know exactly what it is like; I suppose if there were direct insults toward me personally, then I would not be happy. However, one could also take parodies and/or spoofs of one's products as a compliment, because why would someone bother to parody a product that nobody ever heard of or cared about? Therefore, I guess I am torn on the issue of a parody being done on King's Quest. I will have to wait and see how it turns out before I can have an absolute opinion of it. Hopefully, I will eventually be able to play it and see for myself; is it a "mockery" or a "parody"? A parody is probably fine; a mockery is probably not.

Royal Quest is reputed to be a vulgar and violent comedic spoof--does this not, to some extent, belittle the original King's Quest series, even though the RQ team affirms otherwise? Or do you find it tolerable and take it as a compliment? Do you think you will play Royal Quest?

Sure, I would play Royal Quest. Why not? Also, how would I know whether I should be upset by it if I don't play it? As to whether it is vulgar and violent: again, since I haven't played it I can't really comment on it. You said it is "reputed" to be vulgar and violent. Has anyone really played it yet? Is this the opinion of many people who have played it or of a few? I would expect that with a parody of King's Quest--since King's Quest has more of a sweet, nonviolent reputation--there would be some sort of "opposite" of what King's Quest really is; otherwise, it wouldn't really be a parody. If it were the "same" as King's Quest, then it would be King's Quest. A parody would, as parodies do, poke fun at what it is, and, that would probably include adding in some violence since King's Quest was not about violence. I think that I, and everybody else, probably need to understand that and not take too much offense.

Did you know that Josh Mandel has agreed to provide voices for the KQ1 remake that the Royal Quest team is also creating? What do you think of that?

Well, I think that Josh will do a good job; after all, who besides me would know King's Quest so well? More power to him.

How has the "fan game" situation affected you personally? Are you opposed to fans creating games based upon commercial series? How do you feel about potential copyright violations these games pose?


Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: KatieHal on August 17, 2010, 05:23:09 PM
What Cesar means is that she commented directly on the game itself, rather than just the concept of it.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 17, 2010, 05:26:28 PM
Would be interesting if Erpy knows if she ever looked into the finished games or not.

Edit (at least as of this interview they had never played the games):
http://www.adventure-treff.de/artikel/interviews/ken_williams_e.php
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 17, 2010, 06:04:10 PM
Not only fans here say that. Go and read some reviews. There's two things you can get from the reviews overall: 1) It's a very short game 2) It's very true to the King's Quest series. --Roberta didn't have to play the game and give comments either, since I'm sure you know she's never played any other fangame or given comments about any other fangame. Why did she decide to play ours and give comments? I don't know, but she did. And they were extremely good comments. She did say that the game was too short.

We are not arrogant. We just decided to do our take on King's Quest. If you don't like it, that's fine. Like you there are many that don't like it, probably. We don't expect everyone to like it. I welcome you to go and do your own game where you hold your vision of what King's Quest should be. This is our vision, we stand by it, and we are very proud of it --and that's not going to change.

Cesar, the problem isn't so much the direction as the fact that you've stated a goal of yours is to get a commercial license for all of Sierra's franchises. That's going beyond a subjective fan project where it's your vision, and making your ''take'' into an official sequel. As someone who grew up with these games, who has loved these games since I was 4 years old, I find that a bit insulting to myself and other fans.

To me, the only ''official'' version of King's Quest would be one written by Roberta, Josh, or Jane; the only official SQ would be one written by Scott, Mark or Josh, etc. No fan game is the official continuation of the story, nor should it attempt to be--It's insulting to other fans, and to the worlds the original creators created. Regardless of how many people support TSL, that still does not make it King's Quest IX. As you said, it's your take--It's in essence as much a reboot as it is a 'sequel.' My problem is with your plan to try and become the official sequel designers. That's where fan-game freedom ends and something else begins.

You want to have your own vision of KQ? That's fine, everyone is entitled to their own dreams, and visions of the future of the series. But don't call it or attempt to make legally the official KQIX, thereby making other's views something inferior.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Fierce Deity on August 17, 2010, 06:28:46 PM
Here.  You have many fans here that say that.  You could crap on the floor and they would say it was true to King's Quest.  Oh yes, I really see Roberta receiving a fanmade game that was 10 years in development, and then sending you a bunch of negatives about it.  This is a woman who made nursery rhyme games for children.  She's not going to be overly critical.

u mad?

No, it's because J.K. Rowling is a hell of a writer.  She writes creative characters and dialog that sounds extremely natural and is easily relatable to just about anyone at any age.  She does NOT write overly wordy sappy romance novel bulls*** dialogue and turn stoic heroes into spineless wimps.

I'd beg to differ. J.K. Rowling wasn't creative or original. She struck gold by composing an idea that was redundantly cliched but was in dire need of a rehash. Also, the Harry Potter series was directed towards a specific demographic. I would hardly say that the series was "relatable" (not a real word by the way) to any age range, as you said. Another side note; near the end of the series, the books were chock full of "overly wordy sappy romance novel bulls*** dialogue and turn stoic heroes into spineless wimps". Read all seven books again if you want to clarify so. There was a definitive reason why I boycotted the franchise.

So there's a bit for everyone.

Except fans of King's Quest.

That's strange. I could swear there was an abundance of "Save TSL", "Down with the C&D", and "&@$# off, Activision" movements all around the web when this project was facing its darker days. If this game doesn't appeal to King's Quest fans, then why did King's Quest fans go out of their way to preserve the project? Normally, I would go along with what you say and play the Devil's Advocate, but in this case, you are ill-informed.

(Posted on: August 17, 2010, 08:15:45 PM)


Not only fans here say that. Go and read some reviews. There's two things you can get from the reviews overall: 1) It's a very short game 2) It's very true to the King's Quest series. --Roberta didn't have to play the game and give comments either, since I'm sure you know she's never played any other fangame or given comments about any other fangame. Why did she decide to play ours and give comments? I don't know, but she did. And they were extremely good comments. She did say that the game was too short.

We are not arrogant. We just decided to do our take on King's Quest. If you don't like it, that's fine. Like you there are many that don't like it, probably. We don't expect everyone to like it. I welcome you to go and do your own game where you hold your vision of what King's Quest should be. This is our vision, we stand by it, and we are very proud of it --and that's not going to change.

Cesar, the problem isn't so much the direction as the fact that you've stated a goal of yours is to get a commercial license for all of Sierra's franchises. That's going beyond a subjective fan project where it's your vision, and making your ''take'' into an official sequel. As someone who grew up with these games, who has loved these games since I was 4 years old, I find that a bit insulting to myself and other fans.

To me, the only ''official'' version of King's Quest would be one written by Roberta, Josh, or Jane; the only official SQ would be one written by Scott, Mark or Josh, etc. No fan game is the official continuation of the story, nor should it attempt to be--It's insulting to other fans, and to the worlds the original creators created. Regardless of how many people support TSL, that still does not make it King's Quest IX. As you said, it's your take--It's in essence as much a reboot as it is a 'sequel.' My problem is with your plan to try and become the official sequel designers. That's where fan-game freedom ends and something else begins.

You want to have your own vision of KQ? That's fine, everyone is entitled to their own dreams, and visions of the future of the series. But don't call it or attempt to make legally the official KQIX, thereby making other's views something inferior.

I may be missing something (I tend to do that), but I personally have never witnessed anybody from Phoenix Online declare The Silver Lining to be an official sequel to the King's Quest series, nor consider it a canonical installment. All I've ever seen is them explaining how The Silver Lining is their "take", "vision", "fan-fiction", etc. Once again, I may have missed a comment that might have leaned in favor of what you're saying, but as far as I've seen, they've been nothing but professional when discussing their positions in this project. Also, when they are saying that TSL is "true to the series", I think they are referring to the content being integral to the King's Quest story. They aren't insinuating that it is a "true King's Quest". Clearly, that would be up for debate, as it is right now.     
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 17, 2010, 06:35:38 PM
Here.  You have many fans here that say that.  You could crap on the floor and they would say it was true to King's Quest.  Oh yes, I really see Roberta receiving a fanmade game that was 10 years in development, and then sending you a bunch of negatives about it.  This is a woman who made nursery rhyme games for children.  She's not going to be overly critical.

u mad?

No, it's because J.K. Rowling is a hell of a writer.  She writes creative characters and dialog that sounds extremely natural and is easily relatable to just about anyone at any age.  She does NOT write overly wordy sappy romance novel bulls*** dialogue and turn stoic heroes into spineless wimps.

I'd beg to differ. J.K. Rowling wasn't creative or original. She struck gold by composing an idea that was redundantly cliched but was in dire need of a rehash. Also, the Harry Potter series was directed towards a specific demographic. I would hardly say that the series was "relatable" (not a real word by the way) to any age range, as you said. Another side note; near the end of the series, the books were chock full of "overly wordy sappy romance novel bulls*** dialogue and turn stoic heroes into spineless wimps". Read all seven books again if you want to clarify so. There was a definitive reason why I boycotted the franchise.

So there's a bit for everyone.

Except fans of King's Quest.

That's strange. I could swear there was an abundance of "Save TSL", "Down with the C&D", and "&@$# off, Activision" movements all around the web when this project was facing its darker days. If this game doesn't appeal to King's Quest fans, then why did King's Quest fans go out of their way to preserve the project? Normally, I would go along with what you say and play the Devil's Advocate, but in this case, you are ill-informed.

(Posted on: August 17, 2010, 08:15:45 PM)


Not only fans here say that. Go and read some reviews. There's two things you can get from the reviews overall: 1) It's a very short game 2) It's very true to the King's Quest series. --Roberta didn't have to play the game and give comments either, since I'm sure you know she's never played any other fangame or given comments about any other fangame. Why did she decide to play ours and give comments? I don't know, but she did. And they were extremely good comments. She did say that the game was too short.

We are not arrogant. We just decided to do our take on King's Quest. If you don't like it, that's fine. Like you there are many that don't like it, probably. We don't expect everyone to like it. I welcome you to go and do your own game where you hold your vision of what King's Quest should be. This is our vision, we stand by it, and we are very proud of it --and that's not going to change.

Cesar, the problem isn't so much the direction as the fact that you've stated a goal of yours is to get a commercial license for all of Sierra's franchises. That's going beyond a subjective fan project where it's your vision, and making your ''take'' into an official sequel. As someone who grew up with these games, who has loved these games since I was 4 years old, I find that a bit insulting to myself and other fans.

To me, the only ''official'' version of King's Quest would be one written by Roberta, Josh, or Jane; the only official SQ would be one written by Scott, Mark or Josh, etc. No fan game is the official continuation of the story, nor should it attempt to be--It's insulting to other fans, and to the worlds the original creators created. Regardless of how many people support TSL, that still does not make it King's Quest IX. As you said, it's your take--It's in essence as much a reboot as it is a 'sequel.' My problem is with your plan to try and become the official sequel designers. That's where fan-game freedom ends and something else begins.

You want to have your own vision of KQ? That's fine, everyone is entitled to their own dreams, and visions of the future of the series. But don't call it or attempt to make legally the official KQIX, thereby making other's views something inferior.

I may be missing something (I tend to do that), but I personally have never witnessed anybody from Phoenix Online declare The Silver Lining to be an official sequel to the King's Quest series, nor consider it a canonical installment. All I've ever seen is them explaining how The Silver Lining is their "take", "vision", "fan-fiction", etc. Once again, I may have missed a comment that might have leaned in favor of what you're saying, but as far as I've seen, they've been nothing but professional when discussing their positions in this project. Also, when they are saying that TSL is "true to the series", I think they are referring to the content being integral to the King's Quest story. They aren't insinuating that it is a "true King's Quest". Clearly, that would be up for debate, as it is right now.    

As to your last point: Cesar in quite a few interviews during the release of Episode I stated his intention was, probably after Corridor 9, to negotiate with Activision to get a commercial license to develop commercial sequels to Sierra franchises. He even hinted at making another King's Quest game if they got a commercial license:

http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/games/blogs/screenplay/fit-for-a-king/20100713-10858.html

"Did you want to be able to charge for it? (TSL)

CB: Like Katie said, not for this one. However, we would like to be able to produce games from the rest of the Sierra catalogue in a commercial way. If we were able to pull this off without a dime, imagine what this team could pull off with a commercial license! And so, we are looking forward to speaking with Activision in the future and see if we can make a deal so that we can bring back series like Space Quest, Gabriel Knight, and, why not, another entry in the King’s Quest series."

http://www.digitalspy.com/gaming/levelup/a235841/kings-quest-silver-lining-off-cuts.html

Should The Silver Lining prove popular, would you consider developing a fan-made sequel to any of the other Sierra franchises, such as Space Quest?

[CB]: "Corridor 9 is our next big project and although is not a Sierra franchise but a completely original one, we at Phoenix Online Studios want to be able to bring the glory days of Sierra back. Our games will always carry with them the Sierra philosophy of making games, because Sierra On-Line and its team of amazing people shaped us into who we are today. So, like Katie said, no, we would not do another fan sequel, but we would definitely do a commercial sequel to any of those games, and it would be a dream come true (I'd personally give anything to help Jane Jensen create a new Gabriel Knight). Hopefully, the world will see what we've done with King's Quest in The Silver Lining, and see that those other franchises would be in great hands if developed by Phoenix Online."

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/29291/Interview_Phoenix_Online_Studios_Talks_Kings_Quest_Sequel_Whats_Next.php

And the fan project has become part of bigger goals for Phoenix Online Studios: "In the same way Telltale has been bringing back the LucasArts magic, we want to do the same with the Sierra magic," says Bittar. "We would love to work on the Sierra franchises -- all those great games from the past that have been forgotten. There's so much history."


http://www.honestgamers.com/news/5765/article.html

HG: It seems that a lot of your team had worked on The Silver Lining around other careers. Based on the experience that you had working on this project, is game design something that most or all of your team would like to do full-time if gamers or publishers like what they see and ask for more?

Of course! That's our goal at Phoenix Online Studios. We spent all this time creating great relations among the team members, and we now feel as a family ready to take a bigger challenge, and to start creating our own original IP and, also, hopefully, being able to work out something with Activision, the owners of the Sierra IP, to bring some of those franchises back into the market. We are very interested in doing something with IP such as Gabriel Knight, Space Quest, Quest for Glory, and all the other great Sierra franchises.

On the other hand, we also have an upcoming commercial project that is now on pre-production stage. It's a fully original story and it's called Corridor 9, and it revolves around the story of a scientist, a woman called Faith, who is looking for the cure to death in an post-apocalyptic world. It's a story that poses questions of religion vs science, and man vs machine. We have taken all that we have learned about what worked on The Silver Lining, and we are currently constructing our production plans based on that. It will be a very atmospheric game, a sci-fi story with hints of horror, and everyone in the team is very excited about it!"
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: waltzdancing on August 17, 2010, 06:37:30 PM
One must accept all kinds of criticism because it is the only way to grow and learn as we have done with all the fan feedback we have been receiving, however you are basing all this negativity on only a small part of the game.

You as the game player have only touched the tip of the iceberg and have only seen a small part of the story. This game is brilliantly written and give a wonderful touch on the game with a sense of urgency that seemed to lack in the previous games. This game is not geared toward just and older audience as my 10 year old sister loves to play the game as I test. Today's audiences want blood, gore and how many times you can shoot somebody before they die. Kings Quest is about family love and how one man has spent his life fighting to keep his family safe. That is what makes a true Kings Quest game.

As a long time Kings Quest fan, I don't mind the transition to a darker game because you have an adversary who is more powerful than anything Graham has ever had to face. It would be a sort of a let down if Shadrack was a guy who shot rainbows and daisy while his minions were kidnapping, threatening bodily harm, and trying to kill you. Personally I hope Shadrack comes at me with everything he can must because this is the moment everyone has been waiting for since KQ6.

 All I can say is to not knock the game until you have played episode 2. You have seen the cover of the book, so to speak, and read the quick summary on the back. Play episode 2 learn a bit about what is going on and then judge whether or not you truly like it. Don't judge a game based on other reviews but on your own personal game experience and if you don't like it then don't play it, but at least give it a chance and keep an open mind.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: wilco64256 on August 17, 2010, 06:48:35 PM
Cesar, the problem isn't so much the direction as the fact that you've stated a goal of yours is to get a commercial license for all of Sierra's franchises. That's going beyond a subjective fan project where it's your vision, and making your ''take'' into an official sequel. As someone who grew up with these games, who has loved these games since I was 4 years old, I find that a bit insulting to myself and other fans.

So you would prefer it if Activision just continued to sit on the IP and there was never any actual official work every done on the old Sierra series of adventure games ever again?

How exactly would it be insulting for a group that's able to obtain the permission of both the current owner of the Sierra IP and the blessing of the original creators of these games to pick up where they left off?  I don't see anybody else actually putting forth serious effort to do that.  We're all huge fans of the series too or we wouldnt' be doing what we're doing - and there are quite a few other fans who would likely love to see some of the Sierra franchises expanded after all these years.  We all love remakes of the originals, that's all kinds of fun, but people also love to see new stuff come out, and I hate to break it to you but the original creators are done - they're not going to continue any of those series, and Activision probably isn't going to start making new "x Quest" games on their own.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Lambonius on August 17, 2010, 06:58:36 PM
Actually, relatable IS the proper adjective form of relate--for some reason the spell check just doesn't accept it.  ;)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/relatable

While I'm not crazy about the darker tone of TSL (or the overly negative tone of jackinthebox's posts lol), I'm willing to give the rest of the game the benefit of the doubt and at least play it before I put all my marbles in the "down with TSL" camp.   :P

Incidentally, it's funny that the Harry Potter series should come up as an example--I actually thought the books got progressively worse as they got darker--and it was that darker tone that ultimately ruined the series for me, especially the God-awful last book, which removed everything I loved about the earlier books entirely, and focused on one dreary death-ridden slog to the final battle--which itself was the icing on the crap-cake--particularly when
Rowling kills off like half the supporting characters that we had grown to love throughout the course of the series.  Just terrible.  Blech.
 The first two books were amazingly witty and charming, and the way the school was portrayed and the creative silliness of the classes and lessons were a real joy to read about.  Going down the dark emo path in book three (and then getting even worse from there) was about the worst decision Rowling could have made, in my opinion.  There are points in the later books where I just wanted to punch Harry in the face, he was so whiny.

I just don't understand why people automatically think that for a series to mature, it needs to "go darker."  I don't get it.  Dark does not equal deep.  I just don't understand why people seem to always equate the two.  KQ6 was easily the deepest game in the series, and it really wasn't "dark" at all--at least not in the way the later Harry Potter books were.  The impression KQ6 leaves on most people is that of a beautiful love story, with the hero overcoming impossible odds to save and be with the one he loves.  My wife even teared up during parts of it when I had her first play through it with me (which was an awesome experience BTW, and highly recommended if your wife/girlfriend is at all into games.  :))
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 17, 2010, 07:02:11 PM
Actually, relatable IS the proper adjective form of relate--for some reason the spell check just doesn't accept it.  ;)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/relatable

While I'm not crazy about the darker tone of TSL (or the overly negative tone of jackinthebox's posts lol), I'm willing to give the rest of the game the benefit of the doubt and at least play it before I put all my marbles in the "down with TSL" camp.   :P

Incidentally, it's funny that the Harry Potter series should come up as an example--I actually thought the books got progressively worse as they got darker--and it was that darker tone that ultimately ruined the series for me, especially the God-awful last book, which removed everything I loved about the earlier books entirely, and focused on one dreary death-ridden slog to the final battle--which itself was the icing on the crap-cake--particularly when
Rowling kills off like half the supporting characters that we had grown to love throughout the course of the series.  Just terrible.  Blech.
 The first two books were amazingly witty and charming, and the way the school was portrayed and the creative silliness of the classes and lessons were a real joy to read about.  Going down the dark emo path in book three (and then getting even worse from there) was about the worst decision Rowling could have made, in my opinion.  There are points in the later books where I just wanted to punch Harry in the face, he was so whiny.

I just don't understand why people automatically think that for a series to mature, it needs to "go darker."  I don't get it.  Dark does not equal deep.  I just don't understand why people seem to always equate the two.  KQ6 was easily the deepest game in the series, and it really wasn't "dark" at all--at least not in the way the later Harry Potter books were.  The impression KQ6 leaves on most people is that of a beautiful love story, with the hero overcoming impossible odds to save and be with the one he loves.  My wife even teared up during parts of it when I had her first play through it with me (which was an awesome experience BTW, and highly recommended if your wife/girlfriend is at all into games.  :))

Exactly. I mean MoE, for all it's faults, made the story deeper (though it also made it darker sadly)--It was a very Arthurian, Medieval Romance epic tale that had it been done right could have surpassed KQ6 in terms of depth. Mature =/= dark and emotional.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Lambonius on August 17, 2010, 07:06:52 PM
So you would prefer it if Activision just continued to sit on the IP and there was never any actual official work every done on the old Sierra series of adventure games ever again?

How exactly would it be insulting for a group that's able to obtain the permission of both the current owner of the Sierra IP and the blessing of the original creators of these games to pick up where they left off?  I don't see anybody else actually putting forth serious effort to do that.  We're all huge fans of the series too or we wouldnt' be doing what we're doing - and there are quite a few other fans who would likely love to see some of the Sierra franchises expanded after all these years.  We all love remakes of the originals, that's all kinds of fun, but people also love to see new stuff come out, and I hate to break it to you but the original creators are done - they're not going to continue any of those series, and Activision probably isn't going to start making new "x Quest" games on their own.

With all due respect, I don't think he's saying he doesn't want ANYONE to make more Quest games--he just doesn't want to see them re-imagined into something they were never meant to be.   Which is something I can understand, personally.  :-\
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: wilco64256 on August 17, 2010, 07:10:40 PM
The impression KQ6 leaves on most people is that of a beautiful love story, with the hero overcoming impossible odds to save and be with the one he loves.

Only if you get the "good" ending though.  Get the bad ending and have no idea how to get the good ending, and KQ6 didn't leave you feeling particularly happy.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: wilco64256 on August 17, 2010, 07:12:20 PM
To me, the only ''official'' version of King's Quest would be one written by Roberta, Josh, or Jane; the only official SQ would be one written by Scott, Mark or Josh, etc. No fan game is the official continuation of the story, nor should it attempt to be--It's insulting to other fans, and to the worlds the original creators created. Regardless of how many people support TSL, that still does not make it King's Quest IX. As you said, it's your take--It's in essence as much a reboot as it is a 'sequel.' My problem is with your plan to try and become the official sequel designers. That's where fan-game freedom ends and something else begins.

It certainly comes across that way.  Maybe he could clarify what he actually does mean if that wasn't what he meant.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: waltzdancing on August 17, 2010, 07:15:30 PM
Who's to say whether or not it's not to be until it is given a chance. This is an adventure game with a deeper story and more twists rather than something that is straight forward. The games of today will never be like those of the past because if you get stuck in the past, you are unable to move forward, it becomes old. A story has to change in order to survive. People resist change, and that is understandable. The safety of something familiar but then you are missing out on all the wonderful things that could be. When something new happens it sparks interest and people what to see it come to it's full potential, bringing old fans and new ones together to enjoy something that is new to everyone.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 17, 2010, 07:37:27 PM
Cesar, the problem isn't so much the direction as the fact that you've stated a goal of yours is to get a commercial license for all of Sierra's franchises. That's going beyond a subjective fan project where it's your vision, and making your ''take'' into an official sequel. As someone who grew up with these games, who has loved these games since I was 4 years old, I find that a bit insulting to myself and other fans.

So you would prefer it if Activision just continued to sit on the IP and there was never any actual official work every done on the old Sierra series of adventure games ever again?

How exactly would it be insulting for a group that's able to obtain the permission of both the current owner of the Sierra IP and the blessing of the original creators of these games to pick up where they left off?  I don't see anybody else actually putting forth serious effort to do that.  We're all huge fans of the series too or we wouldnt' be doing what we're doing - and there are quite a few other fans who would likely love to see some of the Sierra franchises expanded after all these years.  We all love remakes of the originals, that's all kinds of fun, but people also love to see new stuff come out, and I hate to break it to you but the original creators are done - they're not going to continue any of those series, and Activision probably isn't going to start making new "x Quest" games on their own.

To be honest, yes. As long as Activision ''sits'' on it, it's fair game for any fan group to make whatever they want really. Why should YOUR game be the official King's Quest X, or Space Quest 7? Why should I want another ''official'' game? What's wrong with a group of fan games--All different visions? Why does it have to be solely YOUR vision as the ''official one"? And let's be honest, they're not exactly ''sitting'' on it-Did they not allow GOG and Steam to re-release quite a few of Sierra's old properties?

As far as the 'blessing of the original creators' Roberta saying she liked Chapter I wasn't exactly her saying, "You guys are my heirs, this is what I wanted, your game is official in my book and is the way I envisioned a KQ9 would be" Why do you solely have to be the ones to create new sequels? And why do you feel the need to put the stamp of ''official'' on any future games in the Sierra franchises you make? There are other people, with other visions and ideas other than Cesar Bittar, but--Screw them, right? You're Phoenix Online, so your games come before all. Yeah, right.

As far as the original creators being done, outside of Roberta, I never saw Josh, or Scott, or Mark come out and say, "I'd never do another X or Y Quest game if I had the chance."

Like I said, without them, to me, it's not official, and I don't see why you need it to be. Why not create fan games? Again, Why does your group have to be the sole creators of sequels? Why not focus on your own games?

Seeing the pretentious attitude here--"Since no one else has made a original fan game yet, we're going to take the license and ensure we'll be the only ones to"-- I would bet good money on you guys stopping other fan groups from creating games if you did get the license.

You are not the heirs of Sierra as much as you want to be. All the hype I think has gone to your heads.



Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Fierce Deity on August 17, 2010, 07:43:39 PM
Actually, relatable IS the proper adjective form of relate--for some reason the spell check just doesn't accept it.  ;)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/relatable

Truly fascinating. Even with my years and experience with creative writing, the very formation of the letters makes it look like it would be misspelled. Regardless, nice find. I feel a little smarter now.  :P
 
While I'm not crazy about the darker tone of TSL (or the overly negative tone of jackinthebox's posts lol), I'm willing to give the rest of the game the benefit of the doubt and at least play it before I put all my marbles in the "down with TSL" camp.   :P

Cheers. That's what I'm doing. I'm refraining from jumping to either side of the debate until Episode 2. Logically, I can understand why the team needed to release something to show good favor in Activision's decision to drop the C&D. However, this is causing a bit of a stir with the debates and arguments that are arising as of late. I'm with you. I will gladly give them the benefit of the doubt and wait for Episode 2. Then I will state how I really feel. Even with my "fanboyish" antics that I may have portrayed in the past, I promise my real opinion will come out when Episode 2's credits roll.

Incidentally, it's funny that the Harry Potter series should come up as an example--I actually thought the books got progressively worse as they got darker--and it was that darker tone that ultimately ruined the series for me, especially the God-awful last book, which removed everything I loved about the earlier books entirely, and focused on one dreary death-ridden slog to the final battle--which itself was the icing on the crap-cake--particularly when
Rowling kills off like half the supporting characters that we had grown to love throughout the course of the series.  Just terrible.  Blech.
 The first two books were amazingly witty and charming, and the way the school was portrayed and the creative silliness of the classes and lessons were a real joy to read about.  Going down the dark emo path in book three (and then getting even worse from there) was about the worst decision Rowling could have made, in my opinion.  There are points in the later books where I just wanted to punch Harry in the face, he was so whiny.

I felt like the first two books were the only good entries too. If they really needed to
kill off Harry Potter,
I just wished she would have
fed him to the basilisk in the second book.
Doesn't get more epic than that.  ::)

I just don't understand why people automatically think that for a series to mature, it needs to "go darker."  I don't get it.  Dark does not equal deep.  I just don't understand why people seem to always equate the two.  KQ6 was easily the deepest game in the series, and it really wasn't "dark" at all--at least not in the way the later Harry Potter books were.  The impression KQ6 leaves on most people is that of a beautiful love story, with the hero overcoming impossible odds to save and be with the one he loves.  My wife even teared up during parts of it when I had her first play through it with me (which was an awesome experience BTW, and highly recommended if your wife/girlfriend is at all into games.  :))

The dark theme in a game can create a deep atmosphere, if it's done right. Though, most storytellers end up drowning themselves in a ridiculous, pessimistic cliche. For instance, (I promise I won't elaborate on the topic) Twilight is a Romeo and Juliet with vampires. Nothing more needs to be said. I don't understand how teenagers can fall asleep in class when reading Shakespeare, but then soak up all of these hormone-infested cliches like its tomorrow's news. Not all stories can pull of a dark/deep atmosphere, but seeing as how Phoenix Online has stated that they want to provide closure to the entire series, a climax involving an ultimate evil and an impending fate can benefit from the dark aura. I think they can pull it off (as long as the dark tone is not upheld throughout the entire game with no lighthearted subplots).    
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: waltzdancing on August 17, 2010, 07:48:57 PM
TIME OUT!

I will remind everyone here too that this discussion needs to kept clean and NO straight attacks must be made by any party. We are a family here and we need to treat each everyone with respect.

Who said this was official? I view it as the official one but I'm not speaking of everyone. I read those comments made by Cez and I never saw him as trying to resurrect Sierra but the vision that they had. Good family quality games and he never said that POS should only be the ones making sequels. Remember the The Silver Lining was once a much larger game and that those other chapters could be made if a commercial license was granted. Why not strive for the best you can be. You are allowed to your vision but remember to respect others as well.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Lambonius on August 17, 2010, 07:55:35 PM
TIME OUT!

I will remind everyone here too that this discussion needs to kept clean and NO straight attacks must be made by any party. We are a family here and we need to treat each everyone with respect.

Who said this was official? I view it as the official one but I'm not speaking of everyone. I read those comments made by Cez and I never saw him as trying to resurrect Sierra but the vision that they had. Good family quality games and he never said that POS should only be the ones making sequels. Remember the The Silver Lining was once a much larger game and that those other chapters could be made if a commercial license was granted. Why not strive for the best you can be. You are allowed to your vision but remember to respect others as well.

To be fair, he did explicitly say in those interviews that the eventual desire was to get official license to produce games based on Sierra IPs commercially.  I really don't see what's so ambiguous about direct quotes.   :P
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: wilco64256 on August 17, 2010, 08:01:15 PM
Yeah let's try and remain civil here - we're not saying that we're the only group that's doing anything right - we're just absolutely working our butts off and if the opportunity to go commercial with Sierra games became a possibility for us sure we'd go for it (we'd be idiots not to).  And we've never once even hinted at this idea that other groups' work is in any way inferior - personally I would have been more than happy to pay for several of the fan games that I've played.

I'd assume that any group that was doing fan work based on an old game series that was given the opportunity to continue doing that and actually get paid for it would jump all over that opportunity.  Fan games by their very nature take a long time (typically not as long as ours has but we've had some gnarly hoops to jump through) because they're being made for free.  Imagine what a group of fans could accomplish if they could just stick to that full time.  And we're not a closed group of fans at all - we're extremely open to feedback and have already put a huge amount of effort into tweaking some of the gameplay for future episodes based specifically on feedback that we've gotten from other people and groups.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: wilco64256 on August 17, 2010, 08:02:29 PM
TIME OUT!

I will remind everyone here too that this discussion needs to kept clean and NO straight attacks must be made by any party. We are a family here and we need to treat each everyone with respect.

Who said this was official? I view it as the official one but I'm not speaking of everyone. I read those comments made by Cez and I never saw him as trying to resurrect Sierra but the vision that they had. Good family quality games and he never said that POS should only be the ones making sequels. Remember the The Silver Lining was once a much larger game and that those other chapters could be made if a commercial license was granted. Why not strive for the best you can be. You are allowed to your vision but remember to respect others as well.

To be fair, he did explicitly say in those interviews that the eventual desire was to get official license to produce games based on Sierra IPs commercially.  I really don't see what's so ambiguous about direct quotes.   :P

Right, that is something we'd definitely be interested in doing eventually, but it doesn't change the fact that this game is still just an unofficial fan game.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 17, 2010, 08:06:52 PM
TIME OUT!

I will remind everyone here too that this discussion needs to kept clean and NO straight attacks must be made by any party. We are a family here and we need to treat each everyone with respect.

Who said this was official? I view it as the official one but I'm not speaking of everyone. I read those comments made by Cez and I never saw him as trying to resurrect Sierra but the vision that they had. Good family quality games and he never said that POS should only be the ones making sequels. Remember the The Silver Lining was once a much larger game and that those other chapters could be made if a commercial license was granted. Why not strive for the best you can be. You are allowed to your vision but remember to respect others as well.

To be fair, he did explicitly say in those interviews that the eventual desire was to get official license to produce games based on Sierra IPs commercially.  I really don't see what's so ambiguous about direct quotes.   :P

Right. And my issue with that is for a few reasons:

1) If someone came along and let's say made a commercial sequel to the Lord of the Rings, based on his own take--Not anything JRR Tolkien wanted since he's ''retired'' (dead), would that not be a disservice to the fans of the original, for one, and to his original work? Also, let's say you guys develop a Space Quest 7 which examines the traumas that time traveling has left on Roger, and it's released as 'Space Quest (inset number or sub-title here)' in stores--Kids who never played the original games but see a pretty and interesting box cover on a store shelf and buy it will  think THIS is what Space Quest is; In essence, it's trying to re-invent a series in your vision. For a fan game, that's one thing. For a commercial product proclaiming itself to be THE Space Quest 7, that's another, and in my opinion, that's wrong.

Cesar has said openly he INTENTIONALLY decided to do his own version of King's Quest, because his writing style is different; He intentionally made it different then Roberta's style, and instead of it being a fairy tale decided to make it a ''teen fantasy'' story--Why should I have any faith he wouldn't do something more drastic or just as drastic to other Sierra games given money and the ''official'' sequel tag? I don't want to see a cyberpunk Space Quest, or a Diablo-esque version of Quest for Glory. Sorry.

2) I don't see why one needs a commercial license. You guys are giving us your vision of KQ now--You don't need a commercial license to do so. Also, as far as the "other chapters coming out"--Cesar has said that idea was overly ambitious, and that we're being told the whole story anyway.

3) If you guys get the license and become the "official" SQ7, the "official" KQ10, etc, how would that make prospective fans feel about developing their own sequels? ''Well...I wanted to make my vision, but why should I? Phoenix is putting out the 'official' games after all. My game will never be official like theirs.''

Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: waltzdancing on August 17, 2010, 08:22:54 PM
The times have changed. The world has changed. Cesar's version of King's Quest takes the story of the past and merged it with what the world is today. You cannot live in the past and neither can King's Quest. I don't see it as a teen fantasy story like Harry Potter or Twilight or any other love story. This  is a family struggling to survive for it's right to live and it tells a wonderful story about people coming together to fight for what is right. It shows us how powerful people should be, caring, thoughtful, and considerate people.

Who would care if it held the official sequel or not? I don't. If someone wrote their own version of Lord of the Rings, I'd expect it to be different because it was by someone else. They aren't doing a disservice to anyone or insulting the memory. We had to fight tooth and nail for this game to come out and if we had a commercial license would have made it so much easier and faster for this game to come out to you.

If other people stop making their own fan games because someone else made an official one then they are doing a discredit to themselves and the community. Look at how many books were written about Star Wars. They are all different from what George Lucas wrote but they have a completing story to tell.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Lambonius on August 17, 2010, 08:28:25 PM
The times have changed. The world has changed. Cesar's version of King's Quest takes the story of the past and merged it with what the world is today.


No offense, but what does that even mean?  We don't need a King's Quest for the post 9/11 world or anything like that.  :P  Seriously--what an odd statement.   ???

If someone wrote their own version of Lord of the Rings, I'd expect it to be different because it was by someone else. They aren't doing a disservice to anyone or insulting the memory.

I couldn't disagree more.  You'd be taking the popularity of the LOTR franchise, something you had no right to and didn't earn for yourself, and then using it to hype up YOUR work--which is absolutely dishonest--ESPECIALLY if you plan on doing something that is completely different than the vision of the original creator.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: KatieHal on August 17, 2010, 08:31:01 PM
Maybe I can clarify some things...

Officialness: As it stands right now, no, we are not an official sequel, and we haven't claimed to be. It's a fan-game, unofficial, and that's that.

Future IP-related remarks: This is all stuff that's up in the air. The idea that we've talked about and would like to pursue if it's an option would be to do for Sierra games what TellTale has done for LucasArts games. As for the why us and not someone else....well, honestly, that question simply comes down to a question of ownership and permissions. If we, as opposed to any other group, were the ones to get either ownership of said IPs or permission to create official commercial games, then that's pretty much why us. But that could just as well be anyone else who had the interest, time, capability, and money to make such a thing come to pass. Blunt and un-romantic as it is, the question of "why you/him/her/them" comes down pretty much to money, drive, and opportunity. Why TellTale over anyone else? Because they're the ones who found a way to make it happen.

As for darkness/tone/etc: Personally, for the record, I loved the latter Harry Potter books. :) I love that the series matured along with Harry and his friends, that they grew up and made hard choices, that they loved and lost and had to fight damn hard to win. Fairy tales that are simple and straight forward are nice, and they have their place too, but personally, I like something where it's not quite so easy.

But that's me, not everyone else. We liked the idea of taking the series to a somewhat darker and more mature place, instead of simply doing what had been done before. We wanted to take it that step further, to a place it hadn't really been before, and so we did. You may like it, you may not, and either opinion is fine. "Why?" in this case is, well, because that's we wanted to do.

I find the subject line of this thread interesting, and to me easy to answer. Why reinvent the wheel? The wheel gets you from one place to another, and it's basic design has been the same since it was indeed invented. But those first wheels? Wouldn't really be so good today. They'd be hell to use on cars, bikes, and other machines. They'd be uneven, rough-hewn, and made from very rudimentary materials. The wheel has been reinvented thousands of times over, if you think about it. All manner of revisions, improvements, adjustments to whatever it was specifically needed for, it's constantly being refined even today and it will continue to happen that way.

There are only so many stories out there, and they've all been told a thousand times. What's different is the way in which you tell the story, and this is, simply, how we chose to tell ours.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Lambonius on August 17, 2010, 08:39:25 PM
Again though--why does mature have to equal dark??  It takes a lot more skill as a writer to create a mature story without having to resort to dark melodrama and contrived tragedy.  Seriously--it's a lot more of a tired cliche than sticking with the fairytale atmosphere would be.  That's all anyone's saying.  Personally, I get more and more worried about how this game is going to turn out with every comment that I see posted by one of the creators.  "Plot twists that fans might be really unhappy with?"  "Josh Mandel disagreed with the direction of the story?"  Good lord--what are you guys planning??   :o   I'm literally terrified to see what you guys have in store for our beloved royal family.   :P
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Fierce Deity on August 17, 2010, 08:40:57 PM
I think people are really blowing this out of proportion. Just because Cesar said one thing that illustrated his passion for Sierra adventure games, people will think this is some kind of mutiny against the classics. If a kid bought Space Quest 7 thinking it is a classic Space Quest game, he'll need to go back to school to learn the numeric system. It'd be like playing Final Fantasy XIII and thinking that the older games are going to be exactly like XIII.

Now, where is the harm in Phoenix Online getting the commercial license for Sierra's adventure games? Phoenix Online is attempting to actually become a successful developer in an industry that is reaching its bounds. If Activision gives Phoenix Online the rights to Sierra's IPs, how are they any different from the hundreds of developers that walk in on another team's original series to create a sequel. Harmonix walked away from Activision and joined with EA to make Rock Band. Yet, Activision was able to find other teams (Neversoft and Vicarious Visions) to carry on the Guitar Hero legacy. Activision had a falling out with Infinity Ward who was known for the Modern Warfare installments in the Call of Duty series. Now Treyarch (known for the rather inferior installments of Call of Duty) will be taking the lead with the Call of Duty franchise and will no longer be sharing the IP with Infinity Ward (although there are rumors that Bungie will be working on Call of Duty since their recent signing with Activision).

What I'm getting at is, this would be a normal transition for any developer and publisher (especially in Activision's case) if it were to happen. You don't need to approve of Phoenix Online's games if they were to make official sequels to Sierra's games, but in the end, not much could be done. If it happens, then their official ("fan-fic" in DMD's opinion) Space Quest 7 will be a legit sequel in the series. Then again, it was Cesar expressing his wishful thinking, so I don't know why people are trying to start a war over it.  :-\
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Lambonius on August 17, 2010, 08:46:49 PM
No one's starting a war here.  This thread (with a few exceptions) actually has a pretty intelligent and thoughtful debate going, in my opinion.  Where's the harm in discussing differing views on the future of the series?
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: wilco64256 on August 17, 2010, 08:50:24 PM
Nobody's saying that mature automatically results in dark, but that is sort of the natural direction the King's Quest games would take - as they moved on we continued to see more and more direct attacks on the royal family from evil witches and wizards.  More mature game design generally means a more complex story - the story isn't going to be all that complex if it's all kicks and giggles.  There's definitely some fun stuff that will take place as the episodes continue and plenty of jokes and laughs will be had, but without conflict it wouldn't be a good story at all.  We just very heavily introduced that conflict during the first episode.

I really have to agree with Katie (and not just because I work with her) that it's just a matter of time and opportunity and determination.  Sure, we'd love to make the transition into a full-blown commercial production studio.  I think we're doing an excellent job of showing what we're capable of when we can finally really get down to business, and hopefully we'll see some rewards from that in one way or another as time goes on.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: waltzdancing on August 17, 2010, 08:53:29 PM
Nobody's saying that mature automatically results in dark, but that is sort of the natural direction the King's Quest games would take - as they moved on we continued to see more and more direct attacks on the royal family from evil witches and wizards.  More mature game design generally means a more complex story - the story isn't going to be all that complex if it's all kicks and giggles.  There's definitely some fun stuff that will take place as the episodes continue and plenty of jokes and laughs will be had, but without conflict it wouldn't be a good story at all.  We just very heavily introduced that conflict during the first episode.

I really have to agree with Katie (and not just because I work with her) that it's just a matter of time and opportunity and determination.  Sure, we'd love to make the transition into a full-blown commercial production studio.  I think we're doing an excellent job of showing what we're capable of when we can finally really get down to business, and hopefully we'll see some rewards from that in one way or another as time goes on.

Well said.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Fierce Deity on August 17, 2010, 09:23:02 PM
No one's starting a war here.  This thread (with a few exceptions) actually has a pretty intelligent and thoughtful debate going, in my opinion.  Where's the harm in discussing differing views on the future of the series?

I wasn't referring to the debate. The debate is going swimmingly to be honest. I was directing my post more towards the users who are taking offense towards the team's rebuttal. Specifically, jackinthebox, DMD, and spinz. I can understand being a fan of a series and then seeing it go down an unfamiliar (or rather unwanted) path. It just seems like many of the users are taking this debate personally. I was just trying to establish that what Cesar said in the interview was just talk. Nothing has been decided, nothing is official, yet many are acting bitter towards the team and the entire project just because Cesar expressed his feelings about the future of Phoenix Online and their intentions. I see no reason why they should really be offended unless they actually have something to lose by Phoenix Online gaining a commercial license.

Please, debate away. I was just sidetracked by the "tone" I was getting from peoples' posts. I may be off-base, but some other users were sensing it too.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Lambonius on August 17, 2010, 09:41:24 PM
Well, despite getting a bit worked up once or twice--I think DMD makes some valid points worth considering.  Also, it's hard not to feel personally attached to something you grew up with that means a lot to you--so I can see why people feel so strongly about it changing directions (though I don't necessarily think it warrants flame a war or anything like that--but I don't really think he's crossed into that territory yet...much.  ;))

Personally--and this is coming from someone in another fan development group--I DO think it's a little presumptuous to take someone else's original creations and characters, create a story and atmosphere that deviates significantly from the established formula/vision, and then use the fans' love of those original classics to hype yourself up with the hope of eventual commercial gain.  I'm not trying to be offensive here--just calling it as I see it.   :-\

It's one thing if it's just fan fiction and stays that way--it's another entirely if you hope to eventually profit from it (even if it's with new games under an acquired commercial license.)
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: waltzdancing on August 17, 2010, 09:52:38 PM
I see where you are coming from and can understand how you feel about the situation and am willing to listen to any suggestions you might have.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 17, 2010, 10:01:44 PM
This is the thing: Doesn't it seem just a LITTLE lofty that you haven't even released a full game yet as a team, and yet are already (perhaps even seriously?) contemplating getting a commercial license to produce 'official' sequels to OTHER franchises which thousands of people love?
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: KatieHal on August 17, 2010, 10:21:59 PM
I don't think so, personally. It's one possible idea of many, which may or may not even happen. We're making plans, and we're making many of them--some are for original IPs, some are what we might do if we could option or purchase Sierra IPs, so forth and so on. Some of these ideas are bigger than others (the Sierra IP one, for example), but we're keeping our eyes and options as open as we can.

It's a big goal to aim for, sure, but why not at least try?
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: wilco64256 on August 17, 2010, 10:23:02 PM
Certainly not, lofty goals keep us motivated.  In general, the reviews for what we have released have primarily said one thing - "The other episodes need to be longer and more adventure game-ish."  We know for a fact that the other episodes are going to meet that expectation, so why shouldn't we start looking beyond the end of this project?  And we are all HUGE fans of the old Sierra franchises, so it's only natural that we'd be thinking, "Hey, how cool would it be if people really liked this King's Quest project that we've put together and then we got a chance to do something similar with other old games that we know and love?"
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Fierce Deity on August 17, 2010, 10:32:10 PM
This is the thing: Doesn't it seem just a LITTLE lofty that you haven't even released a full game yet as a team, and yet are already (perhaps even seriously?) contemplating getting a commercial license to produce 'official' sequels to OTHER franchises which thousands of people love?

Is it wrong to have goals? I'm not sure how anybody else is viewing what Cesar said, but I saw it as a simple, "This is what we hope to achieve." "Point-and-click" Adventure games recently have been few and far between. It may very well be why so many have decided to commit to making remakes and fan-fictions based around the famed series of old. Phoenix Online have only stated that they wish to do for Sierra's games what Telltale did for the LucasArts titles. I would actually like to see another company claim the franchises we have all grown up with. You're principle argument is sound, but it seems like you are only stating that Phoenix Online shouldn't have the rights to the games. We could bicker all day about which team deserves the right, but in the end it has to be somebody. As of right now, Phoenix Online is the only team that seems interested in taking up the mantle. Besides, they've already formed a bit of a relationship with Activision (not a solid bond, but for an Adventure company, pretty damn close).

I already stated that I understand how disappointment can lead to a lack of faith, but I'll give a personal example. I had played through Tales of Monkey Island which was an original adventure game (split into episodic downloads) that was made by Telltale Games. Monkey Island was originally done by LucasArts. So in a way, it's similar to what we are debating right now (if hypothetically Phoenix Online were to get the rights to Sierra's games). I liked the new environment and the different atmosphere that Monkey Island was known for. Telltale games brought back an old cast as well as introduce new faces. However, I was overall disappointed with the ending (not going to spoil anything). So Telltale Games took a series that wasn't theirs and tried to establish themselves as a game developer by putting their spin on it. Would it be wise to completely disregard any other game that they attempt to make? Hardly. If anything, it'd be wise to pay close attention to them. Cause while I can sit back and point out the flaws, I can easily sit back and ponder the advantages that the game had.

Yes, Phoenix Online hasn't officially released an entire game, but the entire game may surprise you. I liked Tales of Monkey Island until the very last episode, is it hard to believe that an experience could just as easily be affected by vice versa? Episode 1 probably didn't blow anyone away, but the last episode could make up for any faults. I may be too forgiving, but like I said in response to Lambonius' comment, I'm going to give Phoenix Online the benefit of the doubt. Once Episode 2 is released, then my true colors will be shown. I just have experienced similar scenarios, and I wouldn't want to jump the gun until I get a fair experience. Now back to what Cesar said about the future of Phoenix Online, he is only expressing how he feels about the project and where he'd like to see the company go. Till the fans, Activision, and Phoenix Online themselves see how reactions pertain to The Silver Lining, the commercial license talk will just be talk, and nothing more.  
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Lambonius on August 17, 2010, 10:33:00 PM
I don't have the level of knowledge about the series and characters that Baggins does, and I've never worked on another fan project like some others in the community.  But I do know the games - I was practically raised by Graham.  KQI was the first video game I ever played, and then in awe I discovered that video games could have sequels when I found a copy of KQII on a store shelf and swored myself to a life of servitude to my parents to convince them to buy it for me.  I learned how to program a DOS Boot disk when I was only 9 years old so that I could play KQIII, and then taught myself how to install a sound card and upgrade a power supply for KQIV's music.  My parents made me save up and buy my own computer for KQV (so I'd stop messing around with theirs) which I later had to learn to install a CD-ROM in to play the version of KQVI I picked up.  I can literally trace a number of major decisions in my life back to those early experiences I had thanks to the King's Quest games.  This project brings me back to those days, and I hope it'll do the same for others as well.

Well now--I think we understand each other.  My childhood growth experiences with KQ (and Lucasarts games) is practically a mirror image of that paragraph.  :)  When all my friends in school were playing Megaman and Mario on the NES--I was swinging and punching my way through Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, learning to type with KQ4, and dying over and over and OVER again in KQ5.  lol.

Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Fierce Deity on August 17, 2010, 10:38:19 PM
This project brings me back to those days, and I hope it'll do the same for others as well.

That's the very feeling I want to experience. If nostalgia sets in when I'm playing TSL, then in my eyes, you guys have accomplished what you have set out for.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Lambonius on August 17, 2010, 10:42:38 PM
This project brings me back to those days, and I hope it'll do the same for others as well.

That's the very feeling I want to experience. If nostalgia sets in when I'm playing TSL, then in my eyes, you guys have accomplished what you have set out for.


I'd love to experience that childlike joy again, too.  But more than that, I'd hate to have it tarnished.  So, I have to stay wary and keep my expectations at a reasonable level.  Looking on the bright side, at least Episode 1 has set me up to be pleasantly surprised by the rest of the game.   :P
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: waltzdancing on August 17, 2010, 10:44:05 PM
When I played the beta build of episode 1, I cried when I saw the opening movie. I can't stop smiling as I play the others, (unless I have run into a bug and need to try to replicate.) I can only say, trust me and give the game a chance. You might be surprised.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: wilco64256 on August 17, 2010, 10:55:15 PM
Seriously, my first gaming memory is of getting killed by that stupid rock in KQ1, thinking (as a 7-year-old) that Graham was a moron for pulling the rock toward him, and then being completely and totally fascinated by the game knowing that if you pushed from the other side the rock wouldn't kill you.

I can honestly say that after playing through all five episodes, I really do care about the royal family more than I did before.  I think that most people who play through to the end will appreciate the story we're weaving here.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: waltzdancing on August 17, 2010, 10:57:15 PM
LOL. That's my first memory of KQ1 as well! Stupid rock.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Fierce Deity on August 17, 2010, 11:42:50 PM
Seriously, my first gaming memory is of getting killed by that stupid rock in KQ1, thinking (as a 7-year-old) that Graham was a moron for pulling the rock toward him, and then being completely and totally fascinated by the game knowing that if you pushed from the other side the rock wouldn't kill you.

I can honestly say that after playing through all five episodes, I really do care about the royal family more than I did before.  I think that most people who play through to the end will appreciate the story we're weaving here.

I'm holding you to it, Weldon.  :P

If I am impressed by Episode 2, I'll give you one Interwebz Cookie.  ::)

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_53oMB4-fxXM/SVZZdJntnPI/AAAAAAAAAAM/vXEtrdBFtqI/s1600-R/cookie.gif)

EDIT: And incidentally, that was my 250th post. I'm now a Royal Heir.  ;D
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: wilco64256 on August 17, 2010, 11:46:50 PM
Only if that's actual size.  If it's enlarged to show detail I'm going to replace a critical inventory item with a suffer smiley in just your download.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: KQ5Fan on August 18, 2010, 12:23:52 AM
You know what would stop all this bickering and end most of the arguments here?

A release of episode 2! :D

*wink wink*
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 18, 2010, 01:51:46 AM
Quote
Monkey Island was originally done by LucasArts. So in a way, it's similar to what we are debating right now (if hypothetically Phoenix Online were to get the rights to Sierra's games). I liked the new environment and the different atmosphere that Monkey Island was known for. Telltale games brought back an old cast as well as introduce new faces. However, I was overall disappointed with the ending (not going to spoil anything). So Telltale Games took a series that wasn't theirs and tried to establish themselves as a game developer by putting their spin on it. Would it be wise to completely disregard any other game that they attempt to make? Hardly. If anything, it'd be wise to pay close attention to them. Cause while I can sit back and point out the flaws, I can easily sit back and ponder the advantages that the game had.
Actually to be fair, this is not a good analogy btw. You are looking in the wrong direction.

Tales of Monkey Island was a game jointly produced by Lucasarts and Tell Tale games (its not the first time Lucasarts has worked with 3rd party companies in the past, BTW). Don't believe this, I suggest you look at the logo screen again. Telltale didn't buy the franchise from Lucasarts. I don't think Lucasarts would ever would sell it as it is one of there most popular IPs.

Also many of the people involved with that game were the original people behind earlier Lucasarts and Monkey Island games (they even consulted Ron Gilbert who hadn't been involved with the series since MI2, and by later episodes he was directly involved). You might not know this but many of the designers of Tell Tale originally worked at Lucasarts on the Lucasarts adventures. So its essentially what became of Lucasarts adventure division. Its not exactly "another unrelated company taking over the IP". Its people with experience with those IPs, and should have the right to continue those IPs. For that matter, they even were able to get many of the same actors from CMI to reprise there roles.

Now me personally I think I kinda agree with DMD on this particular issue, I don't so much care if a third party creates an official continuation of an adventure game series, but I think its important that some of the original designers behind the IP is involved with making the games. Even games that stayed with the company such as last 2-3 Leisure Suit Larry games aren't as good as the originals, mainly due in part because they didn't have Al Lowe's involvement. He really is the only one that knows that franchise. As I understand it another company now has the right to that series, their first game using the IP was just as abysmal as the first non Al Lowe version, if not worse. Although personally its not really my cup of tea as far as the Sierraventures. Or the Dr. Brain series, the later games which lacked Lori and Corey Cole's involvement, pale in comparison to the two original games in the series.

There are MI fans that argue that Curse of Monkey Island and Escape of Monkey Island are not essentially authentic games in the series because they lacked Ron Gilbert's hand. Thus for many it was important that he returned for Tales of Monkey Island.

With Space Quest, I'd want Scott Murphy, Mark Crow, or at least Josh Mandel behind the game and its story. Jane Jensen would have to be behind a new Gabriel Knight, etc. I mean more than a just a "blessing" (however congratulations would have to be in order for that honor).

Without the direct involvement of the original writers and designers the game has the potential of being only poorly conceived derivitive work (the crappy LSL come to mind) at best a "spiritual successor". Another case in point look at the latter Simon the Sorcerers, a German company bought the IP from Adventuresoft, they destroyed several aspects of the series, for example they made Simon, American, when he was originally British... I've heard that there are actually other continuity issues between the classic series and the later sequels.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Fierce Deity on August 18, 2010, 02:15:37 AM
Quote
Monkey Island was originally done by LucasArts. So in a way, it's similar to what we are debating right now (if hypothetically Phoenix Online were to get the rights to Sierra's games). I liked the new environment and the different atmosphere that Monkey Island was known for. Telltale games brought back an old cast as well as introduce new faces. However, I was overall disappointed with the ending (not going to spoil anything). So Telltale Games took a series that wasn't theirs and tried to establish themselves as a game developer by putting their spin on it. Would it be wise to completely disregard any other game that they attempt to make? Hardly. If anything, it'd be wise to pay close attention to them. Cause while I can sit back and point out the flaws, I can easily sit back and ponder the advantages that the game had.
Actually to be fair, this is not a good analogy btw. You are looking in the wrong direction.

Tales of Monkey Island was a game jointly produced by Lucasarts and Tell Tale games (its not the first time Lucasarts has worked with 3rd party companies in the past, BTW). Don't believe this, I suggest you look at the logo screen again. Telltale didn't buy the franchise from Lucasarts. I don't think Lucasarts would ever would sell it as it is one of there most popular IPs.

Also many of the people involved with that game were the original people behind earlier Lucasarts and Monkey Island games (they even consulted Ron Gilbert who hadn't been involved with the series since MI2, and by later episodes he was directly involved). You might not know this but many of the designers of Tell Tale originally worked at Lucasarts on the Lucasarts adventures. So its essentially what became of Lucasarts adventure division. Its not exactly "another unrelated company taking over the IP". Its people with experience with those IPs, and should have the right to continue those IPs. For that matter, they even were able to get many of the same actors from CMI to reprise there roles.


I'm well aware. I wasn't actually trying to compare Phoenix Online and Telltale Games, I was trying to compare an experience that I had with Telltale Games and an experience that I'm going to have with Phoenix Online. I loosely connected the two companies for the sake of argument, but I'm not going to bother arguing the fine details. I know the fine details, I just chose to ignore them so I can reiterate my point: "Wait for the other episodes to come out."
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 18, 2010, 02:18:24 AM
I agree, I think its too early to judge TSL on its own merits, or against the official games in the series. Especially from such a short non-game episode.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Fierce Deity on August 18, 2010, 02:21:45 AM
I agree, I think its too early to judge TSL on its own merits, or against the official games in the series. Especially from such a short non-game episode.

Indeed. That's why I can't wait for Episode 2. I'll finally be able to form an opinion based off of an actual game experience.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Big C from Cauney island on August 18, 2010, 08:11:02 AM
I agree with a lot of whats being said. I DID play nintendo, usually metroid. I would sneak into my brothers room before he got up for school and play it with the volume down. He was like 2 feet from the screen and still asleep. True navy seal stealth mode.  I was also huge on Commodore 64, and zillions of hours on Pitfall 2 and ghostbusters.  Great memories.  But Kings quest, and the sierra games in general, was another great chapter in my life.  The KQ1 rock yea, but KQ3 was absolutely insanely hard. This is the first one I really got into. But, to stick to the thread, and reinventing the wheel, I believe that the story REALLY left off at KQ6.  So, having the same characters, same islands, but revamped plus with extra is cool and it makes sense to me.  I always wanted that story to really get resolved. And I respect peoples passion for the game and how it should be, but keep in mind its the creator's game and their take on it.  At this point, they have the generally idea of whatsa going on and its really cool that they are trying to fix the critiques issues.  As a fan to more fans, let them do what they are doing and in the general direction they want to go. Critiques are fine, but not at this point to tell them to "change direction".  With all respect.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Lambonius on August 18, 2010, 08:19:19 AM
Just wanted to point out that nobody is demanding anything--rather, we've just been debating whether the change in direction was a wise move, and if it would ultimately be good for the series if it continued in this direction in hypothetical future commercial outings.  :)  Some people have rather vehemently expressed their distaste--but I don't think anyone seriously expects major story changes to be made.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Cez on August 18, 2010, 11:29:47 AM
Quote
Monkey Island was originally done by LucasArts. So in a way, it's similar to what we are debating right now (if hypothetically Phoenix Online were to get the rights to Sierra's games). I liked the new environment and the different atmosphere that Monkey Island was known for. Telltale games brought back an old cast as well as introduce new faces. However, I was overall disappointed with the ending (not going to spoil anything). So Telltale Games took a series that wasn't theirs and tried to establish themselves as a game developer by putting their spin on it. Would it be wise to completely disregard any other game that they attempt to make? Hardly. If anything, it'd be wise to pay close attention to them. Cause while I can sit back and point out the flaws, I can easily sit back and ponder the advantages that the game had.
Actually to be fair, this is not a good analogy btw. You are looking in the wrong direction.

Tales of Monkey Island was a game jointly produced by Lucasarts and Tell Tale games (its not the first time Lucasarts has worked with 3rd party companies in the past, BTW). Don't believe this, I suggest you look at the logo screen again. Telltale didn't buy the franchise from Lucasarts. I don't think Lucasarts would ever would sell it as it is one of there most popular IPs.

Also many of the people involved with that game were the original people behind earlier Lucasarts and Monkey Island games (they even consulted Ron Gilbert who hadn't been involved with the series since MI2, and by later episodes he was directly involved). You might not know this but many of the designers of Tell Tale originally worked at Lucasarts on the Lucasarts adventures. So its essentially what became of Lucasarts adventure division. Its not exactly "another unrelated company taking over the IP". Its people with experience with those IPs, and should have the right to continue those IPs. For that matter, they even were able to get many of the same actors from CMI to reprise there roles.

Now me personally I think I kinda agree with DMD on this particular issue, I don't so much care if a third party creates an official continuation of an adventure game series, but I think its important that some of the original designers behind the IP is involved with making the games. Even games that stayed with the company such as last 2-3 Leisure Suit Larry games aren't as good as the originals, mainly due in part because they didn't have Al Lowe's involvement. He really is the only one that knows that franchise. As I understand it another company now has the right to that series, their first game using the IP was just as abysmal as the first non Al Lowe version, if not worse. Although personally its not really my cup of tea as far as the Sierraventures. Or the Dr. Brain series, the later games which lacked Lori and Corey Cole's involvement, pale in comparison to the two original games in the series.

There are MI fans that argue that Curse of Monkey Island and Escape of Monkey Island are not essentially authentic games in the series because they lacked Ron Gilbert's hand. Thus for many it was important that he returned for Tales of Monkey Island.

With Space Quest, I'd want Scott Murphy, Mark Crow, or at least Josh Mandel behind the game and its story. Jane Jensen would have to be behind a new Gabriel Knight, etc. I mean more than a just a "blessing" (however congratulations would have to be in order for that honor).

Without the direct involvement of the original writers and designers the game has the potential of being only poorly conceived derivitive work (the crappy LSL come to mind) at best a "spiritual successor". Another case in point look at the latter Simon the Sorcerers, a German company bought the IP from Adventuresoft, they destroyed several aspects of the series, for example they made Simon, American, when he was originally British... I've heard that there are actually other continuity issues between the classic series and the later sequels.

Heh. Ron Gilbert came one day to the studio and talked about Monkey Island. That was his involvement.

The only thing Lucas Arts did was approve the concept art for the main characters. It wasn't really a join effort more than an approval process.

So it was definitely more of a Telltale game than anything else, season written by Mark Darin and Mike Stemmle, and episodes written by a bunch of other different people. Not Ron Gilbert.  

The one person that was involved was Dave Grossman.

And by the way, if we were to get licenses, which is a very hypothetical thing, we would like to get the involvement of people like Scott Murphy, Jane Jensen, etc.

Quote from: TheReturnofDMD
As far as the 'blessing of the original creators' Roberta saying she liked Chapter I wasn't exactly her saying, "You guys are my heirs, this is what I wanted, your game is official in my book and is the way I envisioned a KQ9 would be"

Actually, those were almost her words: "it is almost certain that King’s Quest would have been relegated to a forgotten obscurity – its story left untold. Now, there is a chance that many can truly find out what happens to the royal family of the Kingdom of Daventry."

Her choice of words. Not ours.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Big C from Cauney island on August 18, 2010, 11:34:56 AM
I can understand that in terms of the future of Kings quest. But I thought that after this they were done with Kings quest? I remember reading that in some thread.  Anyways though, my main point was that even with AGDs and IAs remakes, I'm fortunate to have played them, they're good.  I would never ask the creators to change the direction of a game I'm getting for free towards the end of it's development.  I'm just saying for the sake of the creators to work in peace, because its already been stated that they want the game to continue its general direction.  And I know not everybody demands, but even going over the same thing multiple times when answers have been given is a little much for anybody.  But again, I say this with respect to everybody on this forum.  And I think critiques make the game better for everyone and help the creators with this and future projects.  But to keep going over the same thing is redundant, demanding or not. I think that they should be given some breathing space while they finish.  
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: KatieHal on August 18, 2010, 11:43:18 AM
We're done with fangames after this, to be more specific. Which, again barring getting something going with the licenses officially and commercially, would mean done with King's Quest as well.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 18, 2010, 11:46:03 AM
Quote
Heh. Ron Gilbert came one day to the studio and talked about Monkey Island. That was his involvement.

Actually he helped with the brainstorming of the story, and was the co-writer for episode 4 and 5 of the series. At least he's listed as such in the credits for those episodes.

http://www.adventuregamers.com/article/id,1024
This is the claim back before episode 1 was released;
Quote
Telltale even brought Ron Gilbert himself into the office for a few days to help brainstorm, and the team claims “his thumbprints are all over” the series.

That is certianly more than they did with CMI and EMI, in which he had no involvement, and was not involved with any brainstorming for those games.

Seriously as I pointed out before, its not hte first time Lucasarts has worked with 3rd party companies. They have worked with Factor5 in the past for example. The other team does all the work, Lucasarts just dealt with the concept art and "approval process". This is simply how 3rd party efforts work :p...
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Cez on August 18, 2010, 11:54:30 AM
Quote
Heh. Ron Gilbert came one day to the studio and talked about Monkey Island. That was his involvement.

Actually he helped basic story idea, and was the writer for episode 4 and 5 of the series. At least he's listed as such in the credits.

Seriously as I pointed out before, its not hte first time Lucasarts has worked with 3rd party companies. They have worked with Factor5 in the past for example. The other team does all the work, Lucasarts just dealt with the concept art and "approval process". This is simply how 3rd party efforts work :p...

Where exactly is he listed as writer of Episodes 4 and 5? Cause, you know, I worked on that game and I don't exactly remember his involvement. Now you may know better, I guess.

Yes, but their involvement was very minimal. It was mostly on the legal side, and almost nothing on the creative side. The game is truly a Telltale game. They didn't play the games or gave feedback on them beyond episode 1.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Lambonius on August 18, 2010, 12:06:14 PM
Quote from: TheReturnofDMD
As far as the 'blessing of the original creators' Roberta saying she liked Chapter I wasn't exactly her saying, "You guys are my heirs, this is what I wanted, your game is official in my book and is the way I envisioned a KQ9 would be"

Actually, those were almost her words: "it is almost certain that King’s Quest would have been relegated to a forgotten obscurity – its story left untold. Now, there is a chance that many can truly find out what happens to the royal family of the Kingdom of Daventry."

Her choice of words. Not ours.

Playing devil's advocate for a moment--I must say that those statements by no means mean the same thing.  Nowhere in her words does she say anything akin to "this is what I envisioned for the series; I'd like to see you continue the Sierra legacy in the future."  It really seems to be more of a "you guys did an admirable job--you should be proud of all your hard work" kind of statement, especially when put into the context of the rest of her remarks.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Cez on August 18, 2010, 12:14:09 PM
Quote from: TheReturnofDMD
As far as the 'blessing of the original creators' Roberta saying she liked Chapter I wasn't exactly her saying, "You guys are my heirs, this is what I wanted, your game is official in my book and is the way I envisioned a KQ9 would be"

Actually, those were almost her words: "it is almost certain that King’s Quest would have been relegated to a forgotten obscurity – its story left untold. Now, there is a chance that many can truly find out what happens to the royal family of the Kingdom of Daventry."

Her choice of words. Not ours.

Playing devil's advocate for a moment--I must say that those statements by no means mean the same thing.  Nowhere in her words does she say anything akin to "this is what I envisioned for the series; I'd like to see you continue the Sierra legacy in the future."  It really seems to be more of a "you guys did an admirable job--you should be proud of all your hard work" kind of statement, especially when put into the context of the rest of her remarks.

No, of course she's not going to say that this is her vision for continuation of the series --because that would be impossible as we don't live in her head--, but she is saying that people can "truly find out what happens next" which means she's completely sanctioning the story, whatever that is. She could have just said, "this is an admirable work" without having to say "now people can truly find out what happens to the Royal Family of the Kingdom of Daventry". Truly finds out being the key words meaning she's passing down the ball and putting it in our hands to continue the story she started.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: wilco64256 on August 18, 2010, 12:20:42 PM
I don't think we're saying at all that we're doing what Roberta would have done if she had remained in charge of the series, just that she likes the story we've put together and is interested in seeing where it goes.  And we are thrilled about that fact that she's saying that our story is continuing the story of Graham's family for people.

And yes, we're done with free stuff after this project - one way or another we're moving into commercial projects.  So if we don't get a license to do Sierra stuff for profit, then we won't be doing anything with Sierra stuff at all.

I'm definitely going to take Cez's word about the level of Ron's involvement over anything in the credits seeing as how Cez was actually there when it happened.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 18, 2010, 12:23:11 PM
It really wouldn't have made sense to Lucasarts to be directly involved on the "creative" side, considering that most who were ever involved in the creative side of the series were working for other companies such as Telltale games. Including Grossman, Michael Land, Stemmle, etc. Personally I don't care what the Ron purists, say, I'm absolutely fine with Grossman, and handful of other people who had been previously involved in previous games being involved with Tales, since its not just Ron who was involved with making "authentic" MI games imo. Grossman was equally involved back in the day. Plus it most of the actors form Curse reprising there roles, which is good for consistentcy in the series as a whole. As far as I'm personally concerned, CMI and EMI are authentic. I was never a "Ron purist" myself.

This is generally what happens in the 3rd party creations that Lucasarts are "involved" with, such as their work with Factor 5. Lucasarts generally does little with the creative process, but rather just works on approval/publishing rights.

Perhaps its your company just hyped up and exagerrated the involvement of Ron Gilbert, because they made it an advertising point in several interviews. At E3 and elsewhere, and they put him in the main credits in either episode 4 and/or 5.

http://www.destructoid.com/e3-09-ron-gilbert-contributing-to-tales-of-monkey-island-134843.phtml
Quote
Once the ink was on the contracts and we didn't have to keep the thing a complete secret from everyone in the industry, I called Ron and said, 'I'm doing another Monkey Island game.' Ron said that he was going to be in town in a couple of weeks and he'd cancel all of the things he had scheduled to do and just hang out in our offices. So, we had him for three days. He helped out with the story and designed a few puzzles for us
.

http://gonintendo.com/viewstory.php?id=86821
Quote
Tales of Monkey Island interview - Ron Gilbert involved but no Tim Shaffer, still not set release for WiiWare version
June 23, 2009 by RawmeatCowboy Filed Under: Wii, WiiWare
A portion of a Eurogamer interview with Telltale's Dave Grossman...

Eurogamer: You mentioned Ron Gilbert there who, along with Tim Schafer, played a key role in the Monkey Island series. What have they had to say about Tales of Monkey Island? Are they helping?

Dave Grossman: Ron did. As soon as I was allowed to tell anyone I called Ron on the phone, because I know the series does mean a lot to him, and he was the original guiding force behind the first games. He looked around and said, "Could I come down there and brainstorm with you?" And I was like, "Great! That is absolutely the best thing you could do."

So he came down and spent the better part of a week with us, just tossing around ideas. We bounced the broad-story stuff off of him; he had some comments about how we were handling Elaine in our first draft that got us to make some changes; and probably a few of his bubbles are in there as well. He had to go back to his regular job as the creative director at Hothead where he's doing his own game Deathspank, which also looks pretty cool. But he did get his chance to put his two-cents in.

I didn't wind up calling Tim because getting Ron involved turned out to be so much trouble - there's a lot of legal wrangling around that. I figured if I'm just going to be able to pick one of them, then it's going to be Ron.

Go figure, companies and there marketing practices :p... Always "bending the truth" typical I suppose.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Lambonius on August 18, 2010, 12:24:25 PM
Quote from: Cez
No, of course she's not going to say that this is her vision for continuation of the series --because that would be impossible as we don't live in her head--, but she is saying that people can "truly find out what happens next" which means she's completely sanctioning the story, whatever that is. She could have just said, "this is an admirable work" without having to say "now people can truly find out what happens to the Royal Family of the Kingdom of Daventry". Truly finds out being the key words meaning she's passing down the ball and putting it in our hands to continue the story she started.

Wow.  :o  That's a pretty bold interpretation of that statement--especially given the fact that she doesn't even KNOW the whole story of the game yet, seeing as she's only played the introduction.  You keep telling US to reserve judgment til we play the whole thing, but you assume since Roberta spoke favorably of the introduction to the story that she not only approves of the whole thing but is "passing the ball" and wants you to take up her mantle?  Am I alone in seeing the discrepancy there?

Seriously, it's statements like that that are giving you guys the reputation for arrogance and egotism.  If you want to come across as good-natured game developers willing to humbly talk to fans and graciously accept constructive criticisms, you really need to watch that kind of talk.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: wilco64256 on August 18, 2010, 12:29:31 PM
Well (unless I misunderstand) Cez was actually there in person talking to Roberta when she played the game, so I think he probably has a pretty good idea of what she meant.  Roberta said that our game is showing people what happens to the royal family, that's not ambiguous or open to much interpretation at all.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Cez on August 18, 2010, 12:31:11 PM
I don't think we're saying at all that we're doing what Roberta would have done if she had remained in charge of the series, just that she likes the story we've put together and is interested in seeing where it goes.  And we are thrilled about that fact that she's saying that our story is continuing the story of Graham's family for people.


Exactly. As much as you guys may think this has gone over to our heads, to us it's really an amazing thing, and we are very thankful for that, to the point where we have started to explore the possibilities of doing the same with other Sierra series. This is truly an honor for us that Roberta has said such kind words about our game, and rather than taking them for granted, we continue to work as hard as we can to make it something she'll continue to be proud of.

If we get the blessing to be able to work with other series, we'll do the same, and under a legal full approval, we'll seek the involvement of the original people as well, and hope that they are willing to work with us. We did seek Roberta's involvement early when we started, but she decided that she didn't want to be part of it, legal issues aside, she feels that if she steps in as a consultant, she'll try to control the game and get very involved --which is not where she is in her life anymore.

We continue to seek their involvement. Ken passed down an offer we made to them recently, again, because they want to enjoy their life as it is. We don't believe that we are the ones to hold the rights to continue these series, but, if we can get the opportunity to do so, why not? There are many people out there who would really enjoy to see more games in the series, as proven by what we've done with TSL, and what other teams such as AGDI and IA have done.

If we can bring the Sierra golden era back, why not? It'll open many possibilities to many people to rejoy in the Sierra golden age.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Lambonius on August 18, 2010, 12:33:19 PM
Well (unless I misunderstand) Cez was actually there in person talking to Roberta when she played the game, so I think he probably has a pretty good idea of what she meant.  Roberta said that our game is showing people what happens to the royal family, that's not ambiguous or open to much interpretation at all.

Huh--I was under the impression that she was sent a copy, which she played with Ken.  I'm sure someone will clarify.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 18, 2010, 12:35:48 PM
Missed oppertunity, they could have recorded the interview, and put it online.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Cez on August 18, 2010, 12:36:06 PM

Perhaps its your company just hyped up and exagerrated the involvement of Ron Gilbert, because they made it an advertising point in several interviews. At E3 and elsewhere, and they put him in the main credits in either episode 4 and/or 5.


I already told you, he came for one day and worked on the seeds of the ideas. That much is true.

But you said he's listed on the credits of episodes 4 and 5 as a writer. Now where is your precious source material. Because he was listed as something else in all episodes, and that's definitely not a writer :)

http://www.mobygames.com/game/windows/tales-of-monkey-island-chapter-5-rise-of-the-pirate-god/credits

http://www.mobygames.com/game/windows/tales-of-monkey-island-chapter-4-the-trial-and-execution-of-guyb/credits

Visiting Professor of Monkeyology   Ron Gilbert

He's listed as that in all episodes. Because he came one day to the studio and worked on the seeds idea. He didn't write anything.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: wilco64256 on August 18, 2010, 12:36:42 PM
See I wasn't there so I don't know, but either way she said very clearly that TSL continues the series storyline.  She'll definitely get to play the other episodes as well, and hopefully she'll continue to like where the story goes - I don't know how much of the rest of the story she's aware of at this point.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Cez on August 18, 2010, 12:38:18 PM
Well (unless I misunderstand) Cez was actually there in person talking to Roberta when she played the game, so I think he probably has a pretty good idea of what she meant.  Roberta said that our game is showing people what happens to the royal family, that's not ambiguous or open to much interpretation at all.

Huh--I was under the impression that she was sent a copy, which she played with Ken.  I'm sure someone will clarify.


No, that's not true. I wasn't there. I would have peed my pants :P

But seriously, I read that again and yes, it sounded a bit arrogant to say the least, which is why I posted again down below.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 18, 2010, 12:38:53 PM
Quote
I already told you, he came for one day and worked on the seeds of the ideas. That much is true.

So it was one day? Then in interviews they claimed he visited for a "few days", "three days",  to a "better part of a week"?

Quote
So he came down and spent the better part of a week with us, just tossing around ideas.

Seriously, people can't keep there stories straight, LOL. Ahh the fun in marketing and "hyping".

In anycase, guess your right about the credits, I must have misread. Sorry for hte confusion.

In anycase its still cool if the interviews are telling hte truth that he had his say in bits of the story, and even got to add a few puzzles into the game, and whatever he added to Elain's story.
 
Quote
So, we had him for three days. He helped out with the story and designed a few puzzles for us

But I suppose Grossman or whoever the interview was with could be lieing? Cez seem to be the expert on this.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: wilco64256 on August 18, 2010, 12:41:49 PM
Aw bummer I did think that somebody from the team got to be there for that, too bad!  Oh well, maybe for one of the other episodes or something...  Though I can't really blame them for wanting to stay out - they're probably enjoying retirement and whatever it is they're up to these days.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Cez on August 18, 2010, 12:44:17 PM
Quote
I already told you, he came for one day and worked on the seeds of the ideas. That much is true.

So it was one day? Then in interviews they claimed he visited for a few days, to a better part of a week?

Quote
So he came down and spent the better part of a week with us, just tossing around ideas.

Seriously, people can't keep there stories straight, LOL. Ahh the fun in marketing and "hyping".

He may have worked with Grossman for 2 or 3 days, but I remember him being one day in the studio --I could be wrong on that one--. But he was definitely not involved in writing episodes 4 and 5. At that point he had absolutely no involvement in the game, which is what I was mostly taken aback by your comments of how sure you were of how he wrote those episodes.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Cez on August 18, 2010, 12:51:25 PM
The other thing to take in consideration here is that while it's fun to do fangames and such, you would have to consider that TSL could have been done in the better part of 1 to 1 and half years instead of 8.

What's also important to consider is that a project such as SQ7.org would have probably seen the light of day instead of going nowhere --same with Hero6.

What's also most important is that you can see these games on different consoles, with better graphics, and better technology.

In my opinion, there's a lot to be gained from it.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 18, 2010, 12:57:00 PM
I never claimed to be an expert in Monkey Island. Unfortunately it seems there was alot of hyping going on, and misinformed previewers, etc, which I got the faulty information from. It doesn't seem though that you were all that impressed that thrilled by Ron's "visit" (or visits) all that much. Whereas for some of the previewers it was something they kept on talking about, hyping and stressing, as did Grossman in several interviews :p... as if it was something impressive.

Oh well guess its just a matter of opinions.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Cez on August 18, 2010, 01:01:23 PM
Quote from: Cez
No, of course she's not going to say that this is her vision for continuation of the series --because that would be impossible as we don't live in her head--, but she is saying that people can "truly find out what happens next" which means she's completely sanctioning the story, whatever that is. She could have just said, "this is an admirable work" without having to say "now people can truly find out what happens to the Royal Family of the Kingdom of Daventry". Truly finds out being the key words meaning she's passing down the ball and putting it in our hands to continue the story she started.

Wow.  :o  That's a pretty bold interpretation of that statement--especially given the fact that she doesn't even KNOW the whole story of the game yet, seeing as she's only played the introduction.  You keep telling US to reserve judgment til we play the whole thing, but you assume since Roberta spoke favorably of the introduction to the story that she not only approves of the whole thing but is "passing the ball" and wants you to take up her mantle?  Am I alone in seeing the discrepancy there?

Seriously, it's statements like that that are giving you guys the reputation for arrogance and egotism.  If you want to come across as good-natured game developers willing to humbly talk to fans and graciously accept constructive criticisms, you really need to watch that kind of talk.

She is passing the ball, Lambonius, but that's the type of person she is. I'm sure that if AGDI or IA had done the same, with a project that was set on fire and got so much attention from the media because of its turbulent history, she would have said the same. When I said "us" I meant postudios, of course, but in general I'm talking about the fact that she passed down the ball to whoever wants to continue the story of Daventry.

In a different way that people like MDM, Roberta is a pioneer in innovation, and as such, she wants to see things moving forward, always did. That's what makes her so smart and special.  She could be doing a Disney game and a Horror game all at the same time (KQ7 and Phantasmagoria); She always pushed forward, and I'm guessing that, to her, if she can't continue the story, she's more than glad to let others do it.

That's admirable in any writer. That they don't keep their world to themselves but open it to others to come and do something with it. Ken once said that he would hire us on the spot if he had those rights --and that's why they are so special. Not because it is us, you guys are missing the point --it's because it shows how open to change and to innovation they are. And that's one thing that will keep us moving forward. Everyone has their own ideas of what Space Quest, King's Quest, Gabriel Knight should become (or not) in this day and age. We have our own ideas. Some other people will have different ideas. And that's all fine.

But killing the franchises because the original people don't want to get involved? That's a little extreme. If that was the case, we may as well shut down Disney World and all that's related to it to put an example.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: wilco64256 on August 18, 2010, 01:02:17 PM
The other thing to take in consideration here is that while it's fun to do fangames and such, you would have to consider that TSL could have been done in the better part of 1 to 1 and half years instead of 8.

What's also important to consider is that a project such as SQ7.org would have probably seen the light of day instead of going nowhere --same with Hero6.

What's also most important is that you can see these games on different consoles, with better graphics, and better technology.

In my opinion, there's a lot to be gained from it.
There'd be a ton of great things that could come from something like this.  No matter how good things get, a group doing work for free is always going to be limited in some way just by that one simple fact.  Go commercial and start paying people, and you find that you can work way faster (seriously, if everybody working on Episode 2 was paid and working on it full-time it would easily have been done by now) and you can work better.  And the multi-platforms thing wasn't even a possibility before like it is now - it would be relatively easy to port the work we're doing to console systems and Macs, but not particularly so when we're just trying to figure that stuff out in our free time.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 18, 2010, 01:03:23 PM
The other thing to take in consideration here is that while it's fun to do fangames and such, you would have to consider that TSL could have been done in the better part of 1 to 1 and half years instead of 8.

What's also important to consider is that a project such as SQ7.org would have probably seen the light of day instead of going nowhere --same with Hero6.

What's also most important is that you can see these games on different consoles, with better graphics, and better technology.

In my opinion, there's a lot to be gained from it.

If I recall correctly, SQ7 stopped because they refused to turn over the rights to their work to Vivendi. If a commercial license had been gotten, would not Vivendi (and now, Activision) have the rights to what they made anyway? Vivendi/Activision at the end of the day still owns the rights.

As to Hero6--I never really followed that project, so I can't comment.

And as far as time wise, haven't you said a big part of that was you guys being overly ambitious with the original size of the story? I mean even if you had a commercial license, I truly doubt Activison would give you a million dollar budget to work on a long dead series in a just as dead (commercially) genre.

As far as consoles and better graphics--You're dealing with a group of people who were happy with VGA games. I really doubt playing a sequel with the latest 3D graphics would matter, because when it comes to 3D, what looks really nice now will look blocky and crappy to whatever comes out in a few years anyway.

I think there's more to be gained for the series to unofficially in the hands of all than ''officially'' in the hands one. Since Roberta isn't ever coming back on board--She and Ken are happily enjoying retirement, and she's made this statement many times, and you youself have said you had bad blood with Josh (I believe over the direction of the project or story ideas), I doubt he would jump on board, and according to Roberta, Josh is the only other person besides her that ''knows KQ'' as much as her. People say what they will about Jane or Lorelei Shannon, but both worked on only one game and inserted a lot of their own ideas--some even possibly without Roberta's knowledge (for example Roberta having no idea that the Black Cloak Society made into KQ6), but Josh was on board from KQV onward until MOE (Which according to Ken, she didn't even want her name associated with but grudgingly put her name on)
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 18, 2010, 01:06:22 PM
I don't think Hero6 had anything directly to do with Quest for Glory other than making a new game with the same type of gameplay. They never released much info about it, but what they did release seemed to imply that it would have followed its own Hero. Completely different story with no connection with the rest.

So I don't know if it could have been "shut down".

Quote
Jane or Lorelei Shannon, but both worked on only one game and inserted a lot of their own ideas--some even possibly without Roberta's knowledge (for example Roberta having no idea that the Black Cloak Society made into KQ6), but Josh was on board from KQV onward until MOE (Which according to Ken, she didn't even want her name associated with but grudgingly put her name on)
Well Jane as far as I know only had involvement with one game?

Lorelei was involved with both KQ6 and KQ7, IIRC to some degree. She wasn't a producer of KQ6, but she was involved bits of it including the KQ6 hintbook. Its also claimed she helped write a hintbook for KQ1 (remake I'm guessing), it was these reasons, why she was chosen for KQ7.

Mark Seibert also was involved with quite a few games in the series (albeit as the musician), but that's one of the reasons why he was picked to help out with KQ VIII. KQ was only about its writers, but the artists, the musicians and everyone who made the games what they were. It was a team effort.

Josh Mandel's involvement with KQ was limited as a producer to KQ1 Sci, and wrote most of the text and diologue in that game ("inserting his own ideas" as you put it). He was a voice actor in KQV and VI but that has little to do with the actual game design (the games had already been out by the time he added his voice to them). Which makes him pretty much no more or no less different than Lorelei, Mark, or even Jane.

Quote
I worked on King's Quest I -SCI, the remake done in 1990. It was my very first project when I came to Sierra; the game had been languishing for awhile because Roberta was so heavily involved with King's Quest V, which was in progress at the same time. While I was officially titled "Producer," Roberta let me get more hands-on: I rewrote most of the actual game text, added a lot of new responses, and slightly altered some of the puzzles. The original game, groundbreaking as it was, was somewhat terse and brief. I tried to make it more fairy tale-ish in its prose, so it would fit in better with the much more detailed King's Quest IV and King's Quest V.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 18, 2010, 01:10:44 PM
I don't think Hero6 had anything directly to do with Quest for Glory other than making a new game with the same type of gameplay. They never released much info about it, but what they did release seemed to imply that it would have followed its own Hero. Completely different story with no connection with the rest.

So I don't know if it could have been "shut down".

Well in that case, it was simply a game ''inspired'' by the style of QFG--Not a direct sequel or anything using anything owned by Vivendi/Activision, so they never would've have factored into it anyway. A lot of games are inspired by others but are their own unique works, without using the content or the characters of the original.
So I doubt than a commercial license would needed to have been obtained; They might have simply given up or canned the project for their own reasons--That happens a lot even with commercial games

(For example, Roberta wrote a game around 1991 or 1992 with a character called Allison--this story I think was supposed to be called 'Scary Tales' [though that might've been a working title for Phantas], which she cancelled for her own reasons. We know, though that the ''Allison'' story was NOT Phantas as on the design documents from it Ken put up she made a notation ''cancelled game'' and that Phantasmagoria was already known by the name Phantasmagoria as early as February 1992.)
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Cez on August 18, 2010, 01:17:14 PM
The other thing to take in consideration here is that while it's fun to do fangames and such, you would have to consider that TSL could have been done in the better part of 1 to 1 and half years instead of 8.

What's also important to consider is that a project such as SQ7.org would have probably seen the light of day instead of going nowhere --same with Hero6.

What's also most important is that you can see these games on different consoles, with better graphics, and better technology.

In my opinion, there's a lot to be gained from it.



If I recall correctly, SQ7 stopped because they refused to turn over the rights to their work to Vivendi. If a commercial license had been gotten, would not Vivendi (and now, Activision) have the rights to what they made anyway? Vivendi/Activision at the end of the day still owns the rights.

As to Hero6--I never really followed that project, so I can't comment.

And as far as time wise, haven't you said a big part of that was you guys being overly ambitious with the original size of the story? I mean even if you had a commercial license, I truly doubt Activison would give you a million dollar budget to work on a long dead series in a just as dead (commercially) genre.

As far as consoles and better graphics--You're dealing with a group of people who were happy with VGA games. I really doubt playing a sequel with the latest 3D graphics would matter, because when it comes to 3D, what looks really nice now will look blocky and crappy to whatever comes out in a few years anyway.

I think there's more to be gained for the series to unofficially in the hands of all than ''officially'' in the hands one. Since Roberta isn't ever coming back on board--She and Ken are happily enjoying retirement, and she's made this statement many times, and you youself have said you had bad blood with Josh (I believe over the direction of the project or story ideas), I doubt he would jump on board, and according to Roberta, Josh is the only other person besides her that ''knows KQ'' as much as her. People say what they will about Jane or Lorelei Shannon, but both worked on only one game and inserted a lot of their own ideas--some even possibly without Roberta's knowledge (for example Roberta having no idea that the Black Cloak Society made into KQ6), but Josh was on board from KQV onward until MOE (Which according to Ken, she didn't even want her name associated with but grudgingly put her name on)

We'll have to agree to disagree.

I can spend 3 more hours here debating with you over these points, but the matter is that we are not going to stop in our pursue of getting to those licenses, and if you have such a big problem with that, don't buy the games. As simple as that.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Cez on August 18, 2010, 01:22:44 PM
In any case, I get too riled up in these discussions. I keep telling myself to step away from the forums, so that's what I'm going to do now :)

I apologize if I offended anyone in the process. That's certainly not my intention. We just want to make games :)
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: wilco64256 on August 18, 2010, 01:31:29 PM
I'd disagree that the genre is commercially dead.  There's definitely an interest in adventure games being done following the old format, as we've drawn fans, comments, reviews, news articles, and requests for language translations from all over the world in the last few weeks.  So there's still a market out there for this type of game.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 18, 2010, 01:44:51 PM
I'd disagree that the genre is commercially dead.  There's definitely an interest in adventure games being done following the old format, as we've drawn fans, comments, reviews, news articles, and requests for language translations from all over the world in the last few weeks.  So there's still a market out there for this type of game.

I'd disagree on that. A form of adventure game lives on--In RPGs, in Action/Adventures--but pure adventure games aren't commercially viable. An adventure might move, say, 50,000 copies, hell, maybe even 500,000 overall, but compared to a game in the ''big leagues''--which is where KQ was in 1990, let's say, you'd have to have figures like Starcraft II: It moved 1.5 million just in the first 48 hours, and is expected to sell 7 million through the fiscal year. That's what's big now. Sadly, adventure games are a niche market, at least in America, and market share has gone against the genre since around 1996 or so. There's a reason why even Sierra began to do fewer and fewer adventure games even while Ken still ran them (and he intended to slowly phase out adventure games, declaring the genre dead in 1996)--They were a dying genre by 1994-1995.

The last big adventure game hit in terms of commercial success (which, at the end of the day is what rightfully matters to a corporation) was probably Riven and that was 1997--over a decade ago. Big corporations like Activison don't live by wasting money on stuff that isn't going to make much money for them when compared to costs put out; it's why the Sierra brand was retired by Activision; It's why Sierra stopped developing interactive movies after Phantas II. It's sad but true--That's the world of business.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: wilco64256 on August 18, 2010, 01:52:19 PM
Well there's a difference between not being in the "Big Leagues" and being commercially dead.  Moving 500,000 copies of a game would be a total commercial success if it was put together with a relatively small team.  If you had a five episode game and moved each episode for $10 each you'd pull in $25 million.  A smaller team could work with that quite well.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 18, 2010, 02:07:32 PM
Well there's a difference between not being in the "Big Leagues" and being commercially dead.  Moving 500,000 copies of a game would be a total commercial success if it was put together with a relatively small team.  If you had a five episode game and moved each episode for $10 each you'd pull in $25 million.  A smaller team could work with that quite well.

Well, for one, if you want to see how the genre is doing, let's see two things:

1) How much Tales of Monkey Island and other recent adventure games have sold
2) And more personally to your team, how many downloads Episode 1 (and then after all is said and done the other episodes of course) have had.

And $25 million, under a commercial license, would be divided amongst a 3rd party team and Activision--Which might not break even depending on the budget given. If 25 million is just for 500,000 sold, imagine how much Activision (which fully owns the copyrights and developer of Starcraft and thus doesn't share the profits with anyone) has made with Starcraft which is expected to sell 7 million. 500,000 to a company like them is spare change. And that's a maximum amount--I don't think any adventure game since the genre's peak has sold more than 1 or 2 million.

I mean, why do you think most major studios ceased to make adventure games by 2000, even though Myst was at the time the highest selling computer game of all time? Because compared to something like Starcraft, or Quake then, adventure games--Quality adventure games, with all of the fancy things like a 1,500 page script  (the original size of TSL if I'm not mistaken), hand painted graphics and backgrounds, quality animations cost a lot more than a game like Starcraft. Hell, it's why Blizzard abandoned their own adventure game.

Even If you go 3D, the point of having a commercial budget would be to have the best, or near the best 3D, right?--Not subpar or crappy 3D (in comparison to today's games)--If you're going to aim for lesser 3D or other high end tech stuff, there's really no practical need for a commercial license. I mean, if it isn't to have the best or near best that money can buy, than why have a commercial contract to develop 'official' games outside of simply having bragging rights or ego?

That's another thing: If you're going to get a commercial license in general, why does it have to be for dead franchises? Why not get a commercial license or even just go professional to showcase you own, original creations first? It would sound to me then like you're using beloved brand names to sell your own vision.

Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Cez on August 18, 2010, 02:35:01 PM
Ok, I said I'd stay away... but I just wanted to add one thing, because you are clearly misinformed about what deals Activision has gone into:

Tales of Monkey Island was a complete success and the best selling game of Telltale Games to date. The game did not have Mass Effect 2 3D graphics yet that did not stop it from being hailed all around.
Did you know that Activision published Tales of Monkey Island in Germany?
Did you know that Activision published "Drawn - The Painted Tower". You can go to Wal-mart and find it. ( a very small casual adventure game by BigFishGames)

As to how it works for Activision, well, I'm not going to go into details, but let's just say Activision doesn't really need to put a dime into development. There are many ways to cut deals.

I rest my case.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: waltzdancing on August 18, 2010, 02:39:11 PM
Who's to say we aren't going to make our own games based on our own IP? We have on in the pre-production stages. Everyone here is arguing over something that hasn't even happened yet, so why keep beating a dead horse? This topic started as why would an adventure game needed to be reevaluated to an argument about how people don't or do like this, when 'this' hasn't happened yet. Let's bring it back to the topic and stop predicting the future about people who just have high dreams.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 18, 2010, 02:44:46 PM
Who's to say we aren't going to make our own games based on our own IP? We have on in the pre-production stages. Everyone here is arguing over something that hasn't even happened yet, so why keep beating a dead horse? This topic started as why would an adventure game needed to be reevaluated to an argument about how people don't or do like this, when 'this' hasn't happened yet. Let's bring it back to the topic and stop predicting the future about people who just have high dreams.

I'm arguing over something that, you're right, hasn't happened yet, but it's also something which certain people are devoted--as Cesar basically said , you guys are not going to stop pursuing the rights no matter what--to having happen. Thus it is a possibility; One can discuss a possibility, especially if one feels that possibility shouldn't happen, or would be wrong. If it was an idea I simply pulled out of nowhere and made up, you might have a point, but when I see something that has a genuine possibility of happening and I don't agree with it, I'm not going to sit back and say, "Well..eh..maybe it'll happen, I'll just wait till it does happen to talk about my misgivings of it" Not my style.

Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Fierce Deity on August 18, 2010, 04:57:22 PM
Tales of Monkey Island was a complete success and the best selling game of Telltale Games to date. The game did not have Mass Effect 2 3D graphics yet that did not stop it from being hailed all around.
Did you know that Activision published Tales of Monkey Island in Germany?
Did you know that Activision published "Drawn - The Painted Tower". You can go to Wal-mart and find it. ( a very small casual adventure game by BigFishGames)

I've missed quite a bit of this discussion since my last post, but I'll jump back in right here. I too have to say that "Point-and-click" Adventure games are still successful in their own right. Telltale Games is doing marginally well for being an Adventure developer. Tales of Monkey Island was hands down their best selling game, yet they also had the Sam and Max franchise (I believe they just finished their third season of Sam and Max games) and they also had the surprisingly popular title, "Strong Bad's Cool Game for Attractive People". It's amazing to see a developer do so well when working with a "commercially dead" genre (DMD's words, not mine). I'd like to see more developers get into the development of this genre, and in my opinion (more because of the attention they got from the media), Phoenix Online has a fine opportunity.

Also, I played Drawn - The Painted Tower, and it was such an amazing experience. BigFishGames did a great job. That ending really left me hanging though. I wonder if they'll make a sequel.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 18, 2010, 04:58:51 PM
Well there is still one more episode of the 3rd season of S&M, I think. Unless its been released in the last few days without my knowledge. I can't wait to see how this ends. Its the best S&M season, imo.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Fierce Deity on August 18, 2010, 05:09:50 PM
Well there is still one more episode of the 3rd season of S&M, I think. Unless its been released in the last few days without my knowledge. I can't wait to see how this ends. Its the best S&M season, imo.

I actually haven't bought the third season yet, but I did get the chance to play a demo for the first episode (I believe it was the first episode at least). Seriously the funniest experience I've had with a Sam and Max game thus far. Also, as it turns out, you're right (again  :P); the third season has one more episode that is coming out sometime in September.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: bugle_truffle1 on August 18, 2010, 05:13:05 PM
Quote
I'd assume that any group that was doing fan work based on an old game series that was given the opportunity to continue doing that and actually get paid for it would jump all over that opportunity.

Certainly. The difference is if I was given this opportunity, the first thing I would do is add the original creators to my payroll and give them absolute freedom over the writing and designing of the game, and the rest of the team would only be there for the graphics, music, coding, PR and making the original creator's vision a reality. I'd use this opportunity to let the people who created these series to continue the tales they began two decades ago or conclude them on a high note, I wouldn't use this opportunity to re-engineer a series to reshape it in my own vision.

I completely second Baggins when he says he expects Jensen to be directly involved in GK4, Lowe in LSL8, the Coles in QFG6 and Josh* in SQ7, and not just as consultant like Telltales apparently did with Ron. And I think a lot of people would be reassured to know if that would be the first thing you'd do if you were given that opportunity.

* He did leave SQ6 on a cliff hanger, it's only normal that he finishes it. Plus Scott is done with the series, he has a vision of SQ1-4 and doesn't want it tainted with fan games and sequels it seems, and Mark and Scott hate each others guts.

Quote
Hell, it's why Blizzard abandoned their own adventure game.

No, they abandoned it because it was always behind in term of technology. By the time it would have been on the shelves, it would have looked dated compared to other games. That's why they canned it.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 18, 2010, 05:22:47 PM
Quote
Scott is done with the series, he has a vision of SQ1-4 and doesn't want it tainted with fan games and sequels it seems
Scott Murphy was  the one who finished SQ6 actually. Made something like "half" the game after Josh Mandel left.

http://www.spacequest.net/sq6/funfacts/

Apparently if the quote in that link is real or serious, he didn't like the material that he created however, and apparently didn't really like SQ4 either, wishing he had quite after 3. Although I think he's saying that partially in tongue in cheek, since obviously wasn't looking to commit suicide over making the games...
Quote
Mark and Scott hate each others guts.
???
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 18, 2010, 05:42:31 PM
Quote
Scott is done with the series, he has a vision of SQ1-4 and doesn't want it tainted with fan games and sequels it seems
Scott Murphy was  the one who finished SQ6 actually. Made something like "half" the game after Josh Mandel left.

http://www.spacequest.net/sq6/funfacts/
Quote
Mark and Scott hate each others guts.
???

Josh left Sierra around 1994 or so, seeing how corporate bureaucracy was suffocating and changing the company he remembered (I believe that's why he left--I am not sure though), and Scott took over the rest of development--I think it was either 50-50 in terms of who contributed how much, or 70-30. I remember hearing that Josh designed most of the game and Scott only designed the ending parts. Sierra however had a policy of not crediting a designer or publicizing their work on a game if they left the project  before it was completed, and if you look at the InterAction, for example, after Josh left, the game is treated as if it was Scott's baby all along and Josh didn't have any major part in it. I remember hearing that Scott apologized to Josh some years back for going along with Sierra's charade of making it appear that he had mostly made SQ6.

And I believe the original SQ7--the one in development in 1997 was Scott's baby with help from Leslie Balfour as Co-Designer/Writer.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 18, 2010, 05:47:38 PM
Hmm came accross an interesting fact on the SQ7 trailer that came with the SQ collection. http://wiw.org/~jess/scott112900.html;

Quote
JM: Fans who purchased the most recent version of the Space Quest Collection were treated to the promotional movie for Space Quest 7. Many of these fans, however, are not aware of the story behind the game's eventual cancellation. Could you give us the full scoop on what happened to Roger's seventh adventure?   
 
    SM: The deal with the demo is that it had nothing to do with what Space Quest 7 was supposed to be. It was merely eye candy for management (ugh) and for the Collection.
    It never stood a chance. With the unrealistic expectations of the dumb-asses running the Sierra division in Oakhurst and Bellevue at the time, it was doomed from the start. I know that they'd pretty much jerked my heart out of the process. The only good thing about that time was the people I got to work for a while who would have made up the SQ7 team, and they were some great people. Just don't tell the bastards I said that. Nobody reads this crap anyway. Right?
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 18, 2010, 05:50:50 PM
Hmm came accross an interesting fact on the SQ7 trailer that came with the SQ collection. http://wiw.org/~jess/scott112900.html;

Quote
JM: Fans who purchased the most recent version of the Space Quest Collection were treated to the promotional movie for Space Quest 7. Many of these fans, however, are not aware of the story behind the game's eventual cancellation. Could you give us the full scoop on what happened to Roger's seventh adventure?   
 
    SM: The deal with the demo is that it had nothing to do with what Space Quest 7 was supposed to be. It was merely eye candy for management (ugh) and for the Collection.
    It never stood a chance. With the unrealistic expectations of the dumb-asses running the Sierra division in Oakhurst and Bellevue at the time, it was doomed from the start. I know that they'd pretty much jerked my heart out of the process. The only good thing about that time was the people I got to work for a while who would have made up the SQ7 team, and they were some great people. Just don't tell the b******s I said that. Nobody reads this crap anyway. Right?


I heard they (Sierra's management/Oakhurst management) tried forcing the idea of making SQ7 multiplayer, in order to make it more modern, down the team's throat, and the team tried this and wasn't able to and Scott (or someone) tried to explain to Sierra's management that Sierra had attempted this idea of a multiplayer adventure game when LSL4 was in development, and it didn't work then (which is why we never got a formal LSL4), but the new guys who were concerned purely with the bottom line didn't want to listen.

The game was definitely in development, from around early '97 to sometime in 1998 maybe?
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 18, 2010, 05:53:46 PM
There as apparently a relaunch, attempt in 1999. Didn't go very far.

http://spacequest.wikia.com/wiki/Space_Quest_7_(Sierra)
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: bugle_truffle1 on August 18, 2010, 05:57:40 PM
Quote
Mark and Scott hate each others guts.
???

http://www.adventureclassicgaming.com/index.php/site/interviews/234/

It's all in this interview.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 18, 2010, 06:04:08 PM
Wow, sounds like he didn't much like Ken either, or at least "workplace Ken" (sounds like Barbie doll line). The fact that SQ4 had point and click when they wanted to keep parser, would explain why he said he wished he had quite at the third game...

There is another interview out there where he doesn't criticize Mark, and even complements the work that was done on SQ5. At least he was happy it maintained the cartoony style they began with, but said he wasn't into the whole star trek stuff as much as Mark was. But its interesting to see that otherwise he was very distrustful of Mark.

Quote
JM: After the Two Guys from Andromeda split up, Mark Crowe went on to fly solo for SQ5. What was your take on the somewhat different direction in which Mark took the series in this sequel?
 
    SM: It was interesting. It occurred to me that Mark had been into Star Trek much more than I had, not that that's a bad thing by any means. I didn't really start watching those until the last five or six years (weird, eh?), and I've been digging it. Mark is also a big fan of comic books, as are virtually all the artists I have ever known. The Dynamix development system in those days leant itself well to the comic style, and it did end up with a kind of "Roger Beamish" look, if you will. I was glad that he kept the cartoon look. That was how we'd wanted the games to look from the start and I never wanted that to change.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 18, 2010, 06:06:01 PM
There as apparently a relaunch, attempt in 1999. Didn't go very far.

http://spacequest.wikia.com/wiki/Space_Quest_7_(Sierra)

I remember hearing discussions about a SQ7 (by a supporter of the project) were launched just prior to Black Monday. It was around January or so of 1999 more than likely. It couldn't have been after Black Monday since pretty much all of the adventure game department was sacked. I think it was a member who was either a fan of the series, or who had been at Sierra for a long time and felt it would be the right thing to do.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: bugle_truffle1 on August 18, 2010, 06:35:54 PM
http://www.adventureclassicgaming.com/index.php/site/interviews/196/

The SQ6 ending was apparently not Josh's idea. But he does seem to have lot of ideas for SQ sequels, there's no other person I'd trust to continue that series.

Quote
Josh: The ending was another disappointment. I know that Scott didn't like my original concept, which was a Planet of the Apes riff with a statue of Leisure Suit Larry. So, when I left, I'd been working on ideas for new endings that we both liked. The ending in the final product was a total surprise to me, and not my idea of what an SQ ending should be. Maybe the budget ran out.

The development of Space Quest VII: Return to Roman Numerals had started as early as 1997 but was eventually canceled by Sierra On-Line years later. Had you been in any way contacted or involved in this attempt to revive the franchise? If you had the opportunity to develop the sequel, what would the new Space Quest be like and how would it be tied to the previous games in the series?

Josh: I wasn't connected with the aborted SQ7 at all, nor was I asked to be. I actually have a lot of ideas for another SQ, some of which I used in writing the story for the SQ7.org fangame. Other ideas, I'm holding onto since people keep popping up with ways to approach Vivendi with a true sequel, and I wouldn't want to tip my hand just in case one of them actually pans out.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: kenwilliams on August 18, 2010, 07:11:24 PM
Roberta and I have enjoyed reading through the postings here. We didn't read them all, so my apologies if I'm repeating some of what has already been said, or am off the subject.

But...

As was pointed out, MOE had a very different flavor from the earlier Kings Quest games. The 'rest of the story' is that it was developed after I left Sierra, and that there were multiple opinions as to what the game should be. When I was running the company, these differences were not an issue, because everyone knew my position on the matter. I always felt that a game is like a book, and that there should only be one author, or one creative vision, for the product, and that the game needs to sink or swim with a single vision. It was Roberta's game, and needed to be her vision. Typically, on a game, there are 100s of people, and most of them are 'wanna be’ game designers. They look for every opportunity to show off their creativity, and prove to the world that they should be the next hot designer. I understand and respect this, but it really just screws up the product. I would argue that if you were to publish a book, with the top 200 authors who ever lived each writing one page, it might have good press value, but would be an unreadable book.

With me gone from Sierra, Roberta's ability to force the project to be her vision, alone, was compromised. It suddenly became a group effort, with lots of smart people each having their own ideas. Sierra hired only the best, so they weren't bad ideas, but they weren't Roberta's ideas. The game became a mish mash of lots of people's good ideas, but clearly not a Roberta game. There was even a period where Sierra wanted to release the game, and Roberta wouldn’t allow her name on it. After a bunch of negotiation, and changes to the product, to mosey it back towards what she designed, it did finally release.

As to the Phoenix game, I think the same rules apply.  I have no idea who Phoenix’s designer was on their game. The important thing was that it wasn’t Roberta. I don’t think that the greatest writer in the world could write Steven King better than Steven King. Everyone has a style. The Phoenix people should do what the Phoenix people do, and then people will like it or they won’t, but it should be their vision, and considered by players as the Phoenix vision. Even better, there should be one person at Phoenix, who has a clear vision for the product, and it should be that person’s vision.

Lots of people have done Batman, including Tim Burton. He gave it his flavor, and it was a cool direction. It was very different than what had been done before, and even targeted a different demographic, but was an interesting new direction, that found an audience. I always say that ‘customers vote at the box office’. Phoenix should design their game their way, and people should NOT consider its success attributable to Roberta, whether it sells 10s of millions of copies, or if it bombs. Roberta and I think it is cool that they chose her ‘universe’ to base their world on, but believe that their best chance for success is to not worry too much about Roberta, and instead worry about creating a fun game. Roberta’s vision for the series was ‘Disney and fairy tales.’ However, if Phoenix’s designer wants to go dark directions, and that’s what their vision for the game is, then so be it. Phoenix’s designer will do hers, or his, best work if they do what they do best, and not worry too much about what has gone before.

Ultimately, customers get a vote, and that’s what really counts. If whatever Phoenix builds is cool and fun, it will find an audience, and if it isn’t, it won’t. Obviously, we’d prefer Phoenix does something awesome, and given the constraints under which they’ve developed the game (no budget, fragmented staff, unclear rights to even do the game), they’ve overcome some amazing odds to get something to market. What could these guys do with a real budget, and a full-time commitment? I think they’ve exhibited enormous talent and hope they continue their effort.

As to someone’s comment, that Roberta has passed the Kings Quest torch to Phoenix… That’s kind of a silly notion. Roberta and I don’t own the rights to Kings Quest anymore, and can’t bestow the rights to anyone, or even use them ourselves. Activision has allowed Phoenix to do this game. I have no idea whether or not Phoenix can do future games based around Kings Quest. I think it’s pretty awesome of Activision to have allowed this game, and love anything that keeps the Kings Quest name alive. In my dream scenario, this game would do well enough that Activision will have a renewed interest in doing something with the intellectual property, and perhaps Phoenix could get involved in a well funded game with real market potential. Whether or not that is practical, whether this game will do well, or working together is something Activision or Phoenix would ever consider, I have no idea. I’d just like to see the brand live on…

 Ken Williams

Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Cez on August 18, 2010, 07:45:59 PM
Welcome to our forums, Ken!

This is really surprising to see you posting here. Again, you and Roberta never cease to amaze us in your support.

Like I've mentioned to you before, I am who I am today because of the amazing company that Sierra was when it was under your command. We made the promise that we will continue to do our best as we go to make sure that those great gems continue to see the light of day.

As for Roberta passing down the torch, I made the comment in the sense of what you are saying. I'm sure that you guys would love to see those games back in the spotlight, and whether it's Phoenix Online or any other group making them and paying great tribute to what you did, you would approve of it. Just like Roberta approved of our game, even if it takes a different direction to what she would have originally done. I've said it time and again, the worse and most dishonest thing I could do is copying what Roberta has done and trying to do a Roberta game. I find that I can only give my best by using my own style and paying tribute to Roberta's universe through my own words and feelings. And I'm glad that you understand, and approve of that. That's mostly what I meant by saying "Roberta is passing down the ball". Not from the legal standpoint, but more from a spiritual standpoint. And by doing that, understanding that this will be a different vision to hers, but still true, because, at the end, we are doing this because of how much we love Sierra and the legacy you guys left.

Again, thank you for your kind words. And again, we'll continue to do our best so that we can give Sierra back the spot it truly deserves.

Thank you
Cesar
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: KatieHal on August 18, 2010, 08:01:00 PM
As Cesar said, thank you and welcome to the forums!  ;D
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: wilco64256 on August 18, 2010, 08:05:07 PM
Another welcome and another thank you, it's both a total shock and a tremendous honor to have you post in our community.  I think you've definitively clarified everything that was being speculated about in this thread.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Oldbushie on August 18, 2010, 08:16:23 PM
Thank you for your kind words, Ken. We're too stubborn to let the Sierra legacy die. ;) I sincerely hope that Phoenix Online Studios can one day be as great as Sierra was.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 18, 2010, 09:22:33 PM
I have to say, as the OP of this thread, I was wrong on quite a few counts. For one, when Cesar had said ''teen fantasy''--I kind of associate teen fantasy with Twilight, Hannah Montana, that sort of silly stuff. But I didn't realize he meant Harry Potter & The Lord of the Rings. If the game's tone is inspired by the Lord of the Rings, than count me as on board.

As to Ken's post--Welcome to the forum! And he's right--Just like Batman, there can be all different visions of KQ. Each can be equally good. I mean all the different teams and fans have their vision; AGDI, IA, Phoenix, MMG, etc--And all, in my opinion, are equally valid. This isn't science where everything is generally set in stone; All have their own takes, and everyone is entitled to them.

And again--If the game's spiritual father is Lord of the Rings, Kingdom Hearts, Harry Potter, etc, than I withdraw my previous statements.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: kenwilliams on August 18, 2010, 09:59:30 PM
Thank you everyone! I'm happy to have joined the forum, although, don't expect many postings from Roberta or I.

We've dropped out of the game business, and haven't played a game in a decade. Roberta did play Chapter 1 of the Silver Lining, but that was really the only game I can remember her playing since the Sierra days. Since becoming deadbeats we spend most of our time traveling. I've written three books about boating (kensblog.com) and Roberta is hard at work on a non-fiction book about the Irish Immigration. We would both love to be doing games, but that would mean sitting still, and we're in a phase of our lives where seeing the world is our #1 priority. Writing gives us a creative outlet, and is something that can be done when we have free time. Developing games is serious hard work, and we're past the point in our lives where we want to work that hard.

We're thrilled and amazed that people still remember us now that we've been retired for so long, and really do miss 'the good old days.'

-Ken Williams
 
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 18, 2010, 10:12:16 PM
Thank you everyone! I'm happy to have joined the forum, although, don't expect many postings from Roberta or I.

We've dropped out of the game business, and haven't played a game in a decade. Roberta did play Chapter 1 of the Silver Lining, but that was really the only game I can remember her playing since the Sierra days. Since becoming deadbeats we spend most of our time traveling. I've written three books about boating (kensblog.com) and Roberta is hard at work on a non-fiction book about the Irish Immigration. We would both love to be doing games, but that would mean sitting still, and we're in a phase of our lives where seeing the world is our #1 priority. Writing gives us a creative outlet, and is something that can be done when we have free time. Developing games is serious hard work, and we're past the point in our lives where we want to work that hard.

We're thrilled and amazed that people still remember us now that we've been retired for so long, and really do miss 'the good old days.'

-Ken Williams
 

Of course people would remember you guys! You and Roberta were among the founders of the computer game industry, and more than that, the company you built is still legendary today and the games you, your wife and many other talented people are beloved by millions.

Sierra will always be one of the pioneers of the industry, and the founder of the adventure game genre as most know it. You guys always pushed the envelope and innovated and were the market share leader in gaming in the days when you ran the company. Someday, the Sierra brand will live again, as it once was, and the dream you've often spoke of--of there being a Sierra your grandchildren could enjoy--will come true.

By the way, does Roberta's book have a title, or working title yet?
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Lambonius on August 18, 2010, 10:33:18 PM
Wow--I go away for the day and look what happens!  :)

To Ken (actually, I feel like Mr. Williams is more in order--such is the amount of respect I have for you, Roberta, and the Sierra legacy)--thank you for taking the time to post, and to give such a fair, objective, and thoughtful response to this conversation.  I've read a lot of quotes from Roberta and yourself over the years, and its clear how much Sierra meant to you guys, and how disappointing the loss of control and creative influence in the company must have been.  

I hope that you both realize just how beloved your creations were and continue to be by people the world over, and how special a place King's Quest and Sierra in general holds in so many peoples' hearts, including mine and everyone else here.  So I thank you from the bottom of my heart for doing what you guys did back then, putting out those beautiful games that were clearly labors of love and devotion, and for sticking true to your principles even when the going got tough later on.  (Incidentally, for what it's worth, I want to say that I quite liked Mask of Eternity, even if it was fairly different from the previous King's Quest formula--I only wish I could get it to run on my computer nowadays; I'd love to revisit it and give it a good replay.  :))

I hope you also know that your creations have inspired hundreds of fans from all over the world to create loving, high quality tributes to those series, not just here at Pheonix Online, but elsewhere like Anonymous Game Developers Interactive and Infamous Adventures (to name the only two groups to have actually finished such tributes...;))

Anyway, long story short, your legacy definitely lives on, and will continue to do so.  And I think I speak for all of us when I say that we'd love to see the King's Quest series (and the other great Sierra series) revived commercially in capable hands.  (We just happen to disagree as to what exactly that constitutes--such is the nature of hardcore fan communities, I suppose.  ;))

Thank you again, for creating those games which had such an influence on me growing up (I learned to type as a kid playing the parser King's Quest games, in fact.)  And thank you for extending your support and encouragement to the fan community at large.  As one who has spent a significant chunk of his free time over the past few years working on such tribute games (I am one of the lead artists at Infamous Adventures,) I have nothing but the utmost respect for you, Roberta, and all the other talented folks of the late great Sierra Online.

You are a gentleman and a scholar, and I wish you and Roberta all the best.

--Jason Lamb
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Big C from Cauney island on August 18, 2010, 10:59:18 PM
Ken and Roberta Williams, you guys are pretty famous.  Sierra is synonymous with the old-school, and hopefully some form of sierra "likeness" can continue on.  Sure, its video games, but they were a big deal to me.  I'm  a grown man saying thanks for the countless hours of gaming I had as a kid and the stories I followed religiously.  Enjoy your retirement, you deserve it. Its an honor to have you guys here.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Fierce Deity on August 18, 2010, 11:35:38 PM
While I was introduced to games in many different forms (Super Mario, Sonic, Doom, and anything I could play on a Game Boy), King's Quest 6 was primarily the game that got me interested in games for the story (Mario and Sonic can't deliver a story quite as well as a good adventure game). Now that I primarily buy games for the story, I've actually seen myself buying less games as the years go on. Most games now profit from online multiplayer modes, as well as sex, drugs, and rock n' roll. It's crucial that developers take heart in their stories, cause that's all that matters (to me at least).

So in Ken's wise words, I would only expect Phoenix to follow their own lead and uphold their own vision. To be honest, it's not even relevant to try and label their vision with metaphors pertaining to other stories (Harry Potter, Twilight, Kingdom Hearts, etc). There's already a Harry Potter, and there's already a Kingdom Hearts. Don't try to relate two stories together that are separate. Who knows, from this time next year, we may end saying  that Telltale Games could learn a thing or two from The Silver Lining. While being true to the King's Quest universe may be important (because obviously, the game is in the King's Quest universe), it's much more important for them to be true to themselves.

I've been faithful to this project, cause I truly think something grand can come from it. It's unfortunate that the majority of developers in the industry take a storyline for granted, when there's an ample amount of developers out there that have a good story to tell. Time will tell if The Silver Lining has a place with the likes of King's Quest and Gabriel Knight, but then again, so would Episode 2.  :P
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 18, 2010, 11:39:31 PM
While I was introduced to games in many different forms (Super Mario, Sonic, Doom, and anything I could play on a Game Boy), King's Quest 6 was primarily the game that got me interested in games for the story (Mario and Sonic can't deliver a story quite as well as a good adventure game). Now that I primarily buy games for the story, I've actually seen myself buying less games as the years go on. Most games now profit from online multiplayer modes, as well as sex, drugs, and rock n' roll. It's crucial that developers take heart in their stories, cause that's all that matters (to me at least).

So in Ken's wise words, I would only expect Phoenix to follow their own lead and uphold their own vision. To be honest, it's not even relevant to try and label their vision with metaphors pertaining to other stories (Harry Potter, Twilight, Kingdom Hearts, etc). There's already a Harry Potter, and there's already a Kingdom Hearts. Don't try to relate two stories together that are separate. Who knows, from this time next year, we may end saying  that Telltale Games could learn a thing or two from The Silver Lining. While being true to the King's Quest universe may be important (because obviously, the game is in the King's Quest universe), it's much more important for them to be true to themselves.

I've been faithful to this project, cause I truly think something grand can come from it. It's unfortunate that the majority of developers in the industry take a storyline for granted, when there's an ample amount of developers out there that have a good story to tell. Time will tell if The Silver Lining has a place with the likes of King's Quest and Gabriel Knight, but then again, so would Episode 2.  :P

One question--Why would TellTale have to learn a thing or two from TSL?  I mean it's two different companies' IPs, two different cultures and fanbases and TellTale has their business model/way of doing things, so does Phoenix---And that's what makes both companies unique and special.

TellTale's games seem to have been received rather well with the fans of the old LucasArts franchises anyway, so they seem to have achieved their goal(s). Phoenix so far the reaction has been pretty positive.

I mean Blizzard is Blizzard, Bioware is Bioware--Both are different in their style and excel at what they do. And what makes them equally special is that they're different. If all companies acted the same, or took the same style or approach, the playing field would kind of boring.

That's what made Sierra special--They didn't act like Broderbund, or EA or Davidson & Associates or Atari, or try to--They acted like Sierra.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Fierce Deity on August 18, 2010, 11:46:48 PM
One question--Why would TellTale have to learn a thing or two from TSL?  I mean it's two different companies' IPs, two different cultures and fanbases and TellTale has their business model/way of doing things, so does Phoenix---And that's what makes both companies unique and special.

TellTale's games seem to have been received rather well with the fans of the old LucasArts franchises anyway, so they seem to have achieved their goal(s). Phoenix so far the reaction has been pretty positive.

I mean Blizzard is Blizzard, Bioware is Bioware--Both are different in their style and excel at what they do. And what makes them equally special is that they're different. If all companies acted the same, or took the same style or approach, the playing field would kind of boring.

That's what made Sierra special--They didn't act like Broderbund, or EA or Davidson & Associates or Atari, or try to--They acted like Sierra.

It was a joke.  ::)
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Lambonius on August 18, 2010, 11:48:09 PM

One question--Why would TellTale have to learn a thing or two from TSL?  I mean it's two different companies' IPs, two different cultures and fanbases and TellTale has their business model/way of doing things, so does Phoenix---And that's what makes both companies unique and special.

TellTale's games seem to have been received rather well with the fans of the old LucasArts franchises anyway, so they seem to have achieved their goal(s).

Heh--also Telltale was founded by ex-Lucasarts employees, so many of the people that worked on the Telltale games, including Tales of Monkey Island, actually worked on the old Lucasarts adventures as well.  They succeeded because they already knew darn well what they were doing to begin with!  ;)  They knew what would work and what wouldn't, for the most part, and stuck to what made those old games so great.  That's the thing, I honestly don't think that Telltale has deviated at all from the spirit of the old Lucasarts games.  They've changed things like the interface, the method of distribution (episodic), and good 3D graphics, but the spirit of those games feels JUST LIKE the spirit of the old Lucasarts games.

I dunno, I just don't really think a comparison between Telltale and Pheonix Online is at all valid.  On the one hand you have a group of experienced adventure game developers who worked on the old classics and decided to start their own company after leaving Lucasarts--and then put out series after series of high quality adventure games, and on the other, you have a group of fan-developers, just like any other, that have managed to garner an inordinate amount of mainstream press while only releasing the smallest amount of actual material.   :-\

*In fairness, I suppose I should add the qualifier "yet" to that last sentence.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 18, 2010, 11:52:58 PM

One question--Why would TellTale have to learn a thing or two from TSL?  I mean it's two different companies' IPs, two different cultures and fanbases and TellTale has their business model/way of doing things, so does Phoenix---And that's what makes both companies unique and special.

TellTale's games seem to have been received rather well with the fans of the old LucasArts franchises anyway, so they seem to have achieved their goal(s).

Heh--also Telltale was founded by ex-Lucasarts employees, so many of the people that worked on the Telltale games, including Tales of Monkey Island, actually worked on the old Lucasarts adventures as well.  They succeeded because they already knew darn well what they were doing to begin with!  ;)  They knew what would work and what wouldn't, for the most part, and stuck to what made those old games so great.  That's the thing, I honestly don't think that Telltale has deviated at all from the spirit of the old Lucasarts games.  They've changed things like the interface, the method of distribution (episodic), and good 3D graphics, but the spirit of those games feels JUST LIKE the spirit of the old Lucasarts games.

I dunno, I just don't really think a comparison between Telltale and Pheonix Online is at all valid.  On the one hand you have a group of experienced adventure game developers who worked on the old classics and decided to start their own company after leaving Lucasarts--and then put out series after series of high quality adventure games, and on the other, you have a group of fan-developers, just like any other, that have managed to garner an inordinate amount of mainstream press while only releasing the smallest amount of actual material.   :-\

I have to be honest--I was never a fan of the LucasArts games. I've tried them, but I could never like their interface. There was something a little overly complicated about it to me. Even the Sierra Parser which some claim is hard, was to me easy because it's relatively straight forward.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Lambonius on August 19, 2010, 12:01:47 AM

I have to be honest--I was never a fan of the LucasArts games. I've tried them, but I could never like their interface. There was something a little overly complicated about it to me. Even the Sierra Parser which some claim is hard, was to me easy because it's relatively straight forward.

Heh...well, that's a debate for another thread, my friend.   ;)  The very first graphic adventure game I ever played as a kid was Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, and it changed my life in two ways: 1) I became a lifelong Indyfan, and 2) I became a lifelong adventure game fan.  My introduction to KQ was slightly later, but no less inspirational.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 19, 2010, 12:20:32 AM

I have to be honest--I was never a fan of the LucasArts games. I've tried them, but I could never like their interface. There was something a little overly complicated about it to me. Even the Sierra Parser which some claim is hard, was to me easy because it's relatively straight forward.

Heh...well, that's a debate for another thread, my friend.   ;)  The very first graphic adventure game I ever played as a kid was Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, and it changed my life in two ways: 1) I became a lifelong Indyfan, and 2) I became a lifelong adventure game fan.  My introduction to KQ was slightly later, but no less inspirational.

Well, it's not that I didn't like the content--the whole concept of Monkey Island is awesome, it's just the interface. It's why I like Curse a lot--different interface. I do like Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, but it's Indy--I can't dislike it  ;D
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 19, 2010, 01:56:41 AM
Thanks Ken for your insight.

BTW, tell Roberta thanks for all the games she made. Let her know I enjoyed KQ VIII as well. Despite its flaws it was still a quality game IMO. While my favorites in the series change depending on my mood (and which I have hankering to play), it occasionally falls into the the near top spot in the series.

BTW, if you have feel to have some free time, check out the the King's Quest Wiki, and other assorted Sierra wikis :). We at the wikis welcome you.
http://kingsquest.wikia.com/wiki/King%27s_Quest_Omnipedia
Links to the other wikis are down at the bottom of the main page.

Quote
I've written three books about boating (kensblog.com) and Roberta is hard at work on a non-fiction book about the Irish Immigration. We would both love to be doing games, but that would mean sitting still, and we're in a phase of our lives where seeing the world is our #1 priority. Writing gives us a creative outlet, and is something that can be done when we have free time. Developing games is serious hard work, and we're past the point in our lives where we want to work that hard.
Just saying, both of those topics could be great ideas for computer games, wink wink, nudge nudge, ;). As an anthropologist and archaeologist I'm quite interested in the roles of computer simulation for reconstructing past and present. Giving people ways to "seeing the world", or seeing the world of the past. I'm currently working on a paper looking at military war games and there cultural role.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Allronix on August 19, 2010, 03:09:56 AM
Correct. I started retro-gaming because I wanted to finally solve the games that frustrated me as a kid. I stayed retro-gaming because there's precious little on the market that I want to play. Darker and Edgier has lost a lot of its appeal as it's become trendy. Cheap deaths have become the norm to solve story arcs (I'm looking at YOU, Joss...). Genuinely heroic or good characters are thrown under the bus in favor of folks I'd rather not support, or considered antiquated (Marvel, Civil War). There's also a proliferation of games that, while very entertaining and well-constructed, make me feel worse after playing.

Crapsack worlds and anti-heroes have their place. Sometimes, they are very necessary. But an endless diet of dreary cyberpunk and dark fantasy won't do us any more favors than an endless feast of glurge. I'd argue that the cynical nature of these really hurt our ability to hope and work for better. It gets us to accept the hopelessness and jaded outlook of things as "That's the way it is. I can't change it," and stops us from fighting when we NEED to fight.

Phoenix already has a very distinct style from AGD and IA, even when working in the same universe. That's the fun in fanfic. Give fifty fans the same material, ask them "Now, what happened after the credits rolled?" and you'll get fifty-one different answers.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: KatieHal on August 19, 2010, 05:56:12 AM
Fear not, DMD--personally, if I ever make a game like Twilight, it'll be for mocking purposes and doing a WAY better job only!
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: wilco64256 on August 19, 2010, 06:09:28 PM
I moved what basically became a whole new topic about a variety of fantasies (adult, high, and teen) into the Off-topic board.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: MangoMercury on August 19, 2010, 06:39:53 PM
I'm very glad to see that Ken was able to take the time to post on the forum and to provide some insider information on the development through Mask of Eternity.  It's great to know that two lovely people have had such a huge impact on the lives of so many people, to the point that we've all been united because of them.  So thank you, Ken and Roberta, for giving us the gift of friendship and a wonderful gaming series for the ages.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Enchantermon on August 20, 2010, 11:16:52 PM
Thank you for stopping by, Ken! It's a great pleasure to hear directly from one of the founders of the awesome company that was Sierra. :)
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 21, 2010, 03:27:26 AM
I was going back from InterAction magazines and other sources, and it seems Roberta may have not has had as big impact on King's Quest VI either compared to previous games (infact she at first didn't want to have much part in it at all, instead she wanted to take on the role of "Creative Consultant").

http://kingsquest.wikia.com/wiki/Heir_Today,_Gone_Tomorrow_Development#Roberta.27s_Involvment

Apparently in KQ7, Lorelei Shannon has most of the main credits in that game. She was designer, writer, director, writer, voice director. Roberta was billed second after Shannon as a designer, and billed third after Shannon as Director. Trying to confirm it but apparently the credits state that the "game based on characters created by Roberta Williams",  thus further distancing itself from Roberta's direct involvement.

Apparently she also had only a reduced role in the KQ1 remake, as she was busy working on King's Quest V at the time. So Josh Mandel took on most of the production duties on that game, and rewrote and extended the script. Roberta came back along and played his finished game, to give her opinion. She didn't like an extended scene he had included, with Edward pointing at the wall as the location for the mirror, before passing away. So he removed it.

http://kingsquest.wikia.com/wiki/Quest_for_the_Crown_Sci_Development

It seems with each additional game she took an ever diminishing role. Not sure you can call most games from King's Quest VI on, "purely" Roberta games.

Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 21, 2010, 01:24:45 PM
I was going back from InterAction magazines and other sources, and it seems Roberta may have not has had as big impact on King's Quest VI either compared to previous games (infact she at first didn't want to have much part in it at all, instead she wanted to take on the role of "Creative Consultant").

http://kingsquest.wikia.com/wiki/Heir_Today,_Gone_Tomorrow_Development#Roberta.27s_Involvment

Apparently in KQ7, Lorelei Shannon has most of the main credits in that game. She was designer, writer, director, writer, voice director. Roberta was billed second after Shannon as a designer, and billed third after Shannon as Director. Trying to confirm it but apparently the credits state that the "game based on characters created by Roberta Williams",  thus further distancing itself from Roberta's direct involvement.

Apparently she also had only a reduced role in the KQ1 remake, as she was busy working on King's Quest V at the time. So Josh Mandel took on most of the production duties on that game, and rewrote and extended the script. Roberta came back along and played his finished game, to give her opinion. She didn't like an extended scene he had included, with Edward pointing at the wall as the location for the mirror, before passing away. So he removed it.

http://kingsquest.wikia.com/wiki/Quest_for_the_Crown_Sci_Development

It seems with each additional game she took an ever diminishing role. Not sure you can call most games from King's Quest VI on, "purely" Roberta games.



The ''game based on characters created by Roberta Williams'' bit is in the ending credits I  believe. I remember seeing something like that and being shocked and when I watched the end credits, because before that it says "Written by Lorelei Shannon" and then the next ''credits'' scene after that says the ''game based..."

I think KQ8 was at first her attempt to once again make KQ hers, sort of like she had a great idea (whereas after KQV she felt she had spent all her good ideas already)--And she was succeeding at first but then the CUC merger happened and things went belly up not long after. Ken has said on his forum whereas when he was CEO, he made sure all the designers were to have as much or as little creative control as they wanted, after he left he became the ''reasonably nice guy who used to work here'' and thus didn't have any say, and thus Roberta's importance declined as he said.
I mean, while KQVI and VII may have had (intentional) diminished imput from her, they were still fit enough to be branded with her name, especially KQVII which is "Roberta Williams' King's Quest VII" on the box--Whereas as Ken said, there was a period where she didn't even want her name associated with Mask of Eternity, that's how much it deviated from her intentions.

I'd say her role in KQVI and KQVII was like George Lucas' role in the Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi--All the basic characters, design of the game, lands, and general events and storyline were crafted by her, but the meat of the story and the dialogue and little details was crafted by Jane in KQ6 and Lorelei in KQ7. Roberta than, like Lucas with the Star Wars prequels, wanted to have full creative control once again as she had had with the originals (just as Lucas wrote and directed A New Hope) but unlike Lucas her control got gradually ebbed away from her by the sale of the company to people who didn't give a crap.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 21, 2010, 02:09:07 PM
Quote
mean, while KQVI and VII may have had (intentional) diminished imput from her, they were still fit enough to be branded with her name, especially KQVII which is "Roberta Williams' King's Quest VII" on the box--Whereas as Ken said, there was a period where she didn't even want her name associated with Mask of Eternity, that's how much it deviated from her intentions.

In the end it looks like it went back on track enough for her, so that she was fine with taking top billing on several credits in the game. The writer and the main designer. As well as allowing them to put her name and photograph on the box. Ken even says as such, in the end, that they pulled it back in line to her vision. Which would explain her willingness to have her name on the box, etc.

She was jointly with voice casting (with Mark Seibert), and voice director (with Mark Seibert). This isn't uncommon as I think she did things jointly on the sound and voice stuff in previous games.

You can hear more about her thoughts on the game at the time in Talkspot stuff.

My guess the period where she probably most upset was probably somewhere near phase 2 or so, mentioned in the Talkspot interview. That's where everything was falling apart, they weren't getting engine from Dynamix on time, and other huge problems.

That being said there was a period where she didn't want her name associated with KQ6, and not on the box either, but got pulled back into it, LOL
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 22, 2010, 04:00:14 AM
Quote
mean, while KQVI and VII may have had (intentional) diminished imput from her, they were still fit enough to be branded with her name, especially KQVII which is "Roberta Williams' King's Quest VII" on the box--Whereas as Ken said, there was a period where she didn't even want her name associated with Mask of Eternity, that's how much it deviated from her intentions.

In the end it looks like it went back on track enough for her, so that she was fine with taking top billing on several credits in the game. The writer and the main designer. As well as allowing them to put her name and photograph on the box. Ken even says as such, in the end, that they pulled it back in line to her vision. Which would explain her willingness to have her name on the box, etc.

She was jointly with voice casting (with Mark Seibert), and voice director (with Mark Seibert). This isn't uncommon as I think she did things jointly on the sound and voice stuff in previous games.

You can hear more about her thoughts on the game at the time in Talkspot stuff.

My guess the period where she probably most upset was probably somewhere near phase 2 or so, mentioned in the Talkspot interview. That's where everything was falling apart, they weren't getting engine from Dynamix on time, and other huge problems.

That being said there was a period where she didn't want her name associated with KQ6, and not on the box either, but got pulled back into it, LOL

The KQ6 thing was UTTERLY different. She wanted to hand the series to someone else thinking she had run of ideas, probably even before it's conception, and then decided she wanted to co-design the game. It's different than having the rug pulled out from under you and wanting your name not associated out of disgust or being upset. I don't know that it had to do with Dynamix as Ken has said (on his forum) she lost all CREATIVE control over MoE:

''KQ8 is a wild story.

KQ8 was in development at the same time that the company was sold. Basically, Sierra went through changes during the development of the game, and those changes are reflected in the game. During the first half of the game, I was the CEO - during the last half of the game my status shifted to "reasonably nice guy who used to work here". My way of doing things was different than the new way of doing things.

My #1 issue was always to maintain the "clarity of vision" of the game designer. A Sierra project, like KQ8, has nearly a hundred highly creative people on it. Many of these people were working at Sierra because they wanted their shot to be a game designer. It was not uncommon for everyone on a project to seek opportunities to "put their mark" on the game. This is a delicate issue. I recruited people who could be designers, and I was a huge supporter of creativity. Roberta wanted ideas from the team, but at some point, if you accept too many ideas, the product can become a muddy mess. There were dozens of people on KQ8 who could have been the designer, any of which would have made a great designer. But, unfortunately, if this tendency, on the part of developers, to add their creativity to a product, isn't carefully controlled, the product starts to veer into "design by committee". Roberta had her vision for the product, as did almost every person on the project.

When I lost control of Sierra, Roberta's ability to maintain her control over KQ8 was also eroded. The product that shipped is very different than what would have shipped had the company not been sold.

There was another issue at work on KQ8. Roberta is a perfectionist (I'm guilty of the same sin). Whenever she would play the game, she would turn in lists of hundreds of "bugs". Perfectionist can be a pseudonym for nit-picker. When a development team gets a long list, the natural tendency can be to look at some bugs as nit-picky. I always supported my designers. I wouldn't let a game go until the designer was happy (with a couple of exceptions that I regretted later), even when it seemed like we were spending lots of money to fix stuff no one cared about. It was critical to me that the game our customers played represented the game our designer wanted produced. When I left Sierra, Roberta's ability to get bugs fixed diminished.

Ultimately, the last year of KQ8 development was a tough one for Roberta. For a long time, she refused to let the game ship and there was threatened litigation floating around.

This is not to say that the game that shipped isn't a good game. Roberta was reasonably happy with it at the end - but, it reflected a much wider product vision, than Robertas alone. People other than Roberta influenced its development, in a greater capacity than in her previous products. There will be some gamers who see the change as positive, and some who wanted a Roberta product more consistent with her prior products.

There is an example I used to use on this point. One of my favorite authors is: Steven King. I also like Peter Straub. Each alone is a bestselling (mega-selling in Kings case) author. They cowrote a book; the Talisman, which bombed. Either alone could have sold plenty of copies, but together, the whole becomes less than the parts. KQ8 had wonderful people on it. This message should not be construed as being derogatory to anyone (other than that I am definitely critical of the management changes that took place.) My belief is that if the new owners had taken a couple of days to ask about "what made Sierra special" in the days after acquiring it (they could have asked me, or better yet, its customers) before dramatically changing things, things would have gone a lot smoother in the transition.

-Ken W''

And even still to this day, as Ken says, it's ''not a Roberta game.'' And evidently I'd say the fact that he still contends this, and the fact that she was simply ''reasonably happy'' as well as the fact that ''The product that shipped is very different than what would have shipped had the company not been sold.'' I'd say doesn't indicate that it came really that close to what she originally intended--Just some token changes to satisfy her.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 22, 2010, 04:13:21 AM
There is apparently another quote from Ken where he said she moseyed it back into the Roberta's direction btw.
Quote
"...After a bunch of negotiation and changes to the product, to mosey it back towards what she designed, it finally did release."

You can also get Roberta's own personal thoughts on the game mentioned in the Talkspot interviews. I've quoted many of those in the King's Quest Development page. That page probably has more details about the development than that one post from Ken. Which can be interpreted in several different ways, and suffers from "hindsight"... and you know what they say about hindsight right ("hindsight is 20/20")? Of course they also have a saying about "opinions", ..."everyone has one but thinks everyone else's stinks..."? There seems to be descrepent opinions on the project between what Roberta has said, and Ken's personal opinion on the issue :p...

http://kingsquest.wikia.com/wiki/Mask_of_Eternity_Development

I for one won't accuse Roberta of lying, in any of those interviews, as well as the other ones she made for various websites. It just seems that she and her husband have different viewpoints on how they view the game.

Frankly, anyone who does accuse or imply that she was lying is a jerk, if not an ass.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 22, 2010, 05:34:00 AM
There is apparently another quote from Ken where he said she moseyed it back into the Roberta's direction btw.
Quote
"...After a bunch of negotiation and changes to the product, to mosey it back towards what she designed, it finally did release."

You can also get Roberta's own personal thoughts on the game mentioned in the Talkspot interviews. I've quoted many of those in the King's Quest Development page. That page probably has more details about the development than that one post from Ken. Which can be interpreted in several different ways, and suffers from "hindsight"... and you know what they say about hindsight right ("hindsight is 20/20")? Of course they also have a saying about "opinions", ..."everyone has one but thinks everyone else's stinks..."? There seems to be descrepent opinions on the project between what Roberta has said, and Ken's personal opinion on the issue :p...

http://kingsquest.wikia.com/wiki/Mask_of_Eternity_Development

I for one won't accuse Roberta of lying, in any of those interviews, as well as the other ones she made for various websites. It just seems that she and her husband have different viewpoints on how they view the game.

Frankly, anyone who does accuse or imply that she was lying is a jerk, if not an ass.

Not lying exactly, but are you going to say right as a product that bears your name is out of the gate that it's crap and nothing like what you wanted it to be? It's tactulness, not exactly dishonesty. Everyone who works on a product is going to push the product at the time or shortly after it's out. Look at Indy 4--Harrison and Shia LaBeouf, the film's main stars were praising it while it was out. Now that the hype is over, not so much and have admitted it's faults. But you don't go and bash a thing while it's out, or while it's ''happening''--It's business tact.

I mean for example, crazy and horrible things were happening at Sierra in 1996 and 1997 but you wouldn't read a post or interview from Ken at the time talking about how bad things really were behind the scenes. In fact, even after leaving the games division due to CUC's mismanagement of Sierra, he still penned an article for InterAction's Summer issue in 1997 talking specifically about CUC and even assuring fans that it was a move for the best and wasn't the ''end of Sierra as we know it.''
Similarily, you wouldn't find Michael Brochu (President of Sierra, 1995-1997) talking about what CUC was doing to the company he ran while he was running it, even if he had grave disagreements. It's not dishonesty, it's tactfulness.

That happens across the field of business, in every industry. See flop films--The stars and even the directors will crow about how good it is while it's out and then later if it's really badly received step back and say, "Yeah...It wasn't so good." At the end of the day, every product released, especially by a major company like Sierra was, is business. None of the players are going to slam it as it's coming out, especially if you're billed as the director. What does that say about you? That you're A) Unsure about you own work B) Trying to kill your own product after releasing it.

There's not very good strategy if you want even your basic vision to succeed. Mask did hold to the basics of Roberta's vision: A 3D King's Quest with a non-Royal Family character that included action; The difference was in the details. She wasn't going to slam it just as it was out of the gate--There goes any chance of working with Sierra on a King's Quest IX in the future right there, and any chance with it of making another game which might hold truer to her design. If the creator him or herself is downing it as it's out, what's that going to do to the sales of the game?

Roberta's comments made in 1998 and early 1999 I would say are akin to George Lucas and Steven Spielberg being enthusiastic about Temple of Doom in 1984 and saying how great it is, and by 1989 saying it was a bad idea and a lesser film and even making a third film as an apology for it. Opinions can change, especially after ten years or eleven years.

"Clearly not a Roberta game."

Is that to say it's BAD game? No, I like it, it ranks within I'd say my top 5 of 8 games now. It's an awesome game, and I think was the right direction for King's Quest--It needed a lot of refining, however. That's another example of how opinions change--Five years ago I'd have told you it was a terrible game--a piece of garbage. But, my opinion changed.


Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 22, 2010, 06:49:13 AM
As I said before "hindsight is 20/20", it always changes people's opinions compared to what they might have originally thought of it. People's opinions change, that I can accept. But completely ignoring insight into the design process so you can take an alternative perspective is hardly fair to Roberta herself. She was as far as I'm concerned pretty honest about the troubles they had during the development process in the Talkspot interviews and others. She never claimed it was a "perfect", and she did admit several regrets she had about development (those have all been posted in the development page, as I recall). Infact she didn't claim King's Quest VII: Princeless Bride was perfect in those same interviews either. Infact I would say that they were pretty unbiased on the issue giving both what they thought were strengths and what they thought were weaknesses in the game. They even had a third episode where they broke it down pretty detailed fashion, including much of the stuff Ken was alluding to. Unfortunately no one seems to have that episode anymore...

As for if its a "Roberta" game or not that comes down to personal opinions. In my opinion the fact that she wrote the script and dialogue in the game is enough for me.

There is more to making KQ games than just the story, true (and some say that wasn't necessarily Roberta's strong point). Such as art design, and music design. But in general starting with KQ5, those duties were handed off to other people, rather than Roberta herself.

It seems most of the stuff KQ5 on up are a team effort and not just Roberta herself. There are a handful of names that can essentially be put on the games for having left their own influences on the series. Mark Seibert left his mark (no pun intended) on the games since KQ5. Hudgins, Hoyos, etc, left their mark on the games, etc. Andy Hoyos left his mark on artwork in  KQ5 (0, but as far as I remember he pretty much had full control on that (of course Roberta would have been able to give her opinion on what she did and didn't like). William D. Skirvin left his mark on several games.

Roberta's strong point was actually more in the realm of inovating the the industry, adding new technological ideas that couldn't be found elsewhere in the market. She put those into the various games she was involved in.

As for Temple of Doom, it's one of my favorite movies ever. They had no reason to apologize for it... I think all three have their own strengths and weaknesses.

Now if they would apologize for Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, I would accept that... Seriously I can't take there comments seriously if they consider Crystal Skull to be superior to Temple of Doom... That's just crazy talk.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 22, 2010, 07:25:14 AM
Your a jerk, if not an ass, I rest my case.

As I said before "hindsight is 20/20", it always changes people's opinions compared to what they might have originally thought of it. People's opinions change, that I can accept. But completely ignoring insight into the design process so you can take an alternative perspective is hardly fair to Roberta herself. She was as far as I'm concerned pretty honest about the troubles they had during the development process in the Talkspot interviews and others. She never claimed it was a "perfect", and she did admit several regrets she had about development (those have all been posted in the development page, as I recall). Infact she didn't claim King's Quest VII: Princeless Bride was perfect in those same interviews either. Infact I would say that they were pretty unbiased on the issue giving both what they thought were strenghts and what they thought were weaknesses in the game. They even had a third episode where they broke it down pretty detailed fashion, including much of the stuff Ken was alluding to. Unfortunately no one seems to have that episode anymore...

As for if its a "Roberta" game or not that comes down to opinions. In my opinion the fact that she wrote the script and dialogue in the game is enough for me.

There is more to making KQ games than just the story, true (and some say that wasn't necessarily Roberta's strong point). Such as art design, and music design. But in general starting with KQ5, those duties were handed off to other people, rather than Roberta herself.

It seems most of the stuff KQ5 on up are a team effort and not just Roberta herself. There are a handful of names that can essentially be put on the games for having left their own influences on the series. Mark Seibert left his mark on the games since KQ5. Hudgins, Hoyos, etc, left there mark on the games, etc.

As for Temple of Doom, it's one of my favorite movies ever. They had no reason to apologize for it... I think all three have their own strengths and weaknesses.

Now if they would apologize for Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, I would accept that... Seriously I can't take there comments seriously if they consider Crystal Skull to be superior to Temple of Doom... That's just crazy talk.

I don't know what Roberta thinks of KQ8 now in 2010; She hasn't as far as I'm aware done a formal interview since 2006. But like I said, she and Ken (via Ken's words) seem kind of ambivalent on it--They don't hate it, but they don't seem to love it either. I mean if Roberta ever comes out with an interview and discusses the game and her current perspective on it, we'll know for sure. As far KQVII, well, wasn't her comments on KQVII, if you're referring to Talkspot interviews, 4-5 years after it was released? It was kind of dead issue by then.

As far as whether it's a Roberta game or not, I'll take the source closest to her that we have on that, her husband. We don't know how much of the final game 'script' was written by her--Sure, she's credited for it in the final credits, but as we know from other KQ games, the credits can be kind of misleading.

And as for the dishonesty part: I don't consider corporate tactfulness to be the same as dishonesty. Misleading? Perhaps. Dishonesty? No. Like I said with the Ken thing, in '97 he was assuring us that the move to CUC was great, after having transfered out of the games division because the way CUC was doing things upset him so. It's why he said he was the CEO long after he later says he was in fact. It's corporate tact--He wasn't going to tell us, "Yes, Sierra fans, you're all screwed."

That's not a tactful comment. It'd be like talking crap about someone at their funeral, even if the stuff you're saying it's true. That's why at funerals you always hear people talking about how great this or that person was--Even if when they were alive the same people said what a moron he or she was.

It's not just Ken Williams who does this; Everyone in the field of business, both entertainment and not, does it. And often times it's the right thing to do at the time. You wouldn't  get very far in business by selling pessimism unless pessimism is your product.

As for Temple of Doom, the official line as was stated by Spielberg many times was that Last Crusade was made as an apology for ToD; It's why it's so similar to Raiders in terms of plot elements (Christian artifact, Nazis as villains, tough 'heroine', design chase and landscape, scenes at Indy's college, Marcus Brody, Sallah, etc.) Spielberg and Lucas still kind of 'disown' ToD to this day.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 22, 2010, 07:32:31 AM
Well you can find interviews where Roberta developed a kind of ambivalence to each previous game in the series. Her view point was usually always, "look towards the present and future", and ignore the past. Her opinions of each game in the series changed as each new game was released. She actually mentions this in the Talkspot interviews as well.

That is actually a problem if you really want to know her original opinion when the game was released. You really have to go with primary sources, that were created at the time the game was released, since her opinions changed dramatically the further she moved from each previous games.

As for the script, she claims she wrote the final script for it in the Talkspot interviews. Unless you are accusing her of lieing?

Seriously there is a reason why I don't take Lucas and Spielburg seriously. Just look at Crystal Skull... if you want a good example why... Frankly, I don't take anything Lucas says about the prequel trilogy seriously either... Its a bunch of crap, and what he did to the special edition dvd releases are crap as well... So no to Hayden is what I say... As far as I'm concerned Lucas has lost alot of who he was in his younger years, he is not the same person.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: TheReturnofDMD on August 22, 2010, 07:48:07 AM
Well you can find interviews where Roberta developed a kind of ambivalence to each previous game in the series. Her view point was usually always, "look towards the present and future", and ignore the past. Her opinions of each game in the series changed as each new game was released. She actually mentions this in the Talkspot interviews as well.

That is actually a problem if you really want to know her original opinion when the game was released. You really have to go with primary sources, that were created at the time the game was released, since her opinions changed dramatically the further she moved from each previous games.

As for the script, she claims she wrote the final script for it in the Talkspot interviews. Unless you are accusing her of lieing? Which case, I rest my case, you are a jerk, and an ass :p...


Seriously there is a reason why I don't take Lucas and Spielburg seriously. Just look at Crystal Skull... if you want a good example why... Frankly, I don't take anything Lucas says about the prequel trilogy seriously either... Its a bunch of crap, and what he did to the special edition dvd releases are crap as well... So no to Hayden is what I say... As far as I'm concerned Lucas has lost alot of who he was in his younger years, he is not the same person.

I never really lead every single line of the Talkspot interviews. The MoE development page is huge as it is.
 But if she said she wrote the script, I'm willing to take that as the truth. I wasn't there though. I was eagerly awaiting it.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: KatieHal on August 22, 2010, 08:41:13 AM
Your a jerk, if not an ass, I rest my case.

Baggins, be civil. Name-calling and insulting others on this forum is not okay. This is a warning, if it happens again, there will be repercussions.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: liggy002 on August 27, 2010, 04:56:39 PM
Ripping off the characters and settings from someone else's IP does not make your game "true" to that world.  If you wanted to do something so original and "true to your vision," you should try creating some original characters, not just riding on the shoulders of someone else's success.  

Jack, they are creating original characters.  The name of the project is "Corridor 9."
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Fierce Deity on August 27, 2010, 05:22:48 PM
Ripping off the characters and settings from someone else's IP does not make your game "true" to that world.  If you wanted to do something so original and "true to your vision," you should try creating some original characters, not just riding on the shoulders of someone else's success.  

Jack, they are creating original characters.  The name of the project is "Corridor 9."

He was mainly referring to the "originality" of The Silver Lining, not any other projects. Still, I fail to see how ignoring the characters and settings of another company's IP would make the game "true" to that world. Without a cast of relative characters and a similar setting, the game wouldn't be "true" to the IP's world at all. It would in fact be a "fan-fiction" that is in no way related to the original IP. It'd be like dividing by zero . . .

MIND BLOWN!!!  :stars:
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Baggins on August 29, 2010, 03:33:10 AM
Fierce Diety, while I think use of previous characters (I.E. use of the members of the Royal Family, and occasional character like Manannan, the wizened Gnome, Edgar & Cassima) is something that made earlier King's Quest games King's Quest games.

However, the settings were original with each game, as in there was a creation of an entire new kingdom to explore (with lots of new characters to interact with), with the exception of Daventry which was always fit into the game somewhere as either the starting point, or ending point, or in some cases both the starting and ending point in a single game.

This game has deviated from that formula a bit, by returning to a setting/land from a previous game, other than Daventry. That's not to say that Daventry might not show up in a cutscene or something later on, but this game has deviated because it returned one of the previous non-Daventry kingdoms (although it will be adding new areas to explore within than kingdom).

There were ideas to have completely new lands in the game back when it was three games, one for Graham, one for Rosella, and one for Alexander. But most of those ideas were cut as far as we know. We still don't know if the game will go outside of the Green Isles or not.

If this probably minor deviation from previous games formula is good or bad really depends on each person's opinion :p...
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Fierce Deity on August 29, 2010, 04:36:46 AM
Fierce Diety, while I think use of previous characters (I.E. use of the members of the Royal Family, and occasional character like Manannan, the wizened Gnome, Edgar & Cassima) is something that made earlier King's Quest games King's Quest games.

However, the settings were original with each game, as in there was a creation of an entire new kingdom to explore (with lots of new characters to interact with), with the exception of Daventry which was always fit into the game somewhere as either the starting point, or ending point, or in some cases both the starting and ending point in a single game.

This game has deviated from that formula a bit, by returning to a setting/land from a previous game, other than Daventry. That's not to say that Daventry might not show up in a cutscene or something later on, but this game has deviated because it returned one of the previous non-Daventry kingdoms (although it will be adding new areas to explore within than kingdom).

There were ideas to have completely new lands in the game back when it was three games, one for Graham, one for Rosella, and one for Alexander. But most of those ideas were cut as far as we know. We still don't know if the game will go outside of the Green Isles or not.

If this probably minor deviation from previous games formula is good or bad really depends on each person's opinion :p...

I realize all of that. I guess it was really how I was viewing the entire project. This game is being advertised as a "fan-fiction" game, is being made by a new team that nobody has heard of before, and is being given out for free. This may just be me, but my expectations were limited prior to playing the game. I understand that King's Quest had trends that progressed with each passing sequel, but the series was created and developed by Sierra. If Sierra broke the chain in the series, I could understand peoples' disappointment. However, this is not the case, so I honestly don't know what people were expecting from this game. I understand the logic of their disappointment, but the circumstances of the project change everything.     
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: liggy002 on August 29, 2010, 01:25:38 PM
Fierce Diety, while I think use of previous characters (I.E. use of the members of the Royal Family, and occasional character like Manannan, the wizened Gnome, Edgar & Cassima) is something that made earlier King's Quest games King's Quest games.

However, the settings were original with each game, as in there was a creation of an entire new kingdom to explore (with lots of new characters to interact with), with the exception of Daventry which was always fit into the game somewhere as either the starting point, or ending point, or in some cases both the starting and ending point in a single game.

This game has deviated from that formula a bit, by returning to a setting/land from a previous game, other than Daventry. That's not to say that Daventry might not show up in a cutscene or something later on, but this game has deviated because it returned one of the previous non-Daventry kingdoms (although it will be adding new areas to explore within than kingdom).

There were ideas to have completely new lands in the game back when it was three games, one for Graham, one for Rosella, and one for Alexander. But most of those ideas were cut as far as we know. We still don't know if the game will go outside of the Green Isles or not.

If this probably minor deviation from previous games formula is good or bad really depends on each person's opinion :p...

I realize all of that. I guess it was really how I was viewing the entire project. This game is being advertised as a "fan-fiction" game, is being made by a new team that nobody has heard of before, and is being given out for free. This may just be me, but my expectations were limited prior to playing the game. I understand that King's Quest had trends that progressed with each passing sequel, but the series was created and developed by Sierra. If Sierra broke the chain in the series, I could understand peoples' disappointment. However, this is not the case, so I honestly don't know what people were expecting from this game. I understand the logic of their disappointment, but the circumstances of the project change everything.     

I really don't understand the logic of their disappointment as the first episode is only a small portion of the entire game.  It is akin to reading the cover and introduction of a book and saying "I don't like this book!"
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: kindofdoon on August 29, 2010, 01:29:54 PM
Very good analogy. I agree.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: B'rrr on August 29, 2010, 05:11:38 PM
I really don't understand the logic of their disappointment as the first episode is only a small portion of the entire game.  It is akin to reading the cover and introduction of a book and saying "I don't like this book!"

Maybe you do understand it then, seeing as the cover and introduction is meant to capture ones intrest. I have put many books away after the first few chapters, stopped watching movies after 10-20 mins. if it doesn't intrest the reader/viewer/etc then they are reluctant to continue.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: kindofdoon on August 29, 2010, 05:23:50 PM
I would argue that your analogy is faulty because Episode 1 essentially functions like the opening movie in KQV or KQVI - it only sets up the game. You wouldn't judge all of KQV or KQVI from the opening cutscene, and by analogy, you shouldn't judge TSL based entirely on Episode 1. Episode 1 was basically a drawn-out opening cutscene with interactivity. The actual game part of TSL begins with Episode 2.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Lambonius on August 29, 2010, 05:43:33 PM
I would argue that your analogy is faulty because Episode 1 essentially functions like the opening movie in KQV or KQVI - it only sets up the game. You wouldn't judge all of KQV or KQVI from the opening cutscene, and by analogy, you shouldn't judge TSL based entirely on Episode 1. Episode 1 was basically a drawn-out opening cutscene with interactivity. The actual game part of TSL begins with Episode 2.

Still though, Sierra would never in a million years have released only the opening movie of KQV or VI and called it Chapter 1 of the full game.  ;)
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: kindofdoon on August 29, 2010, 05:48:48 PM
Yes, but Sierra also never released games episodically...

But if they did, I'm sure you'd be correct.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Fierce Deity on August 29, 2010, 07:10:31 PM
I really don't understand the logic of their disappointment as the first episode is only a small portion of the entire game.  It is akin to reading the cover and introduction of a book and saying "I don't like this book!"

The ones who are disappointed with the game are basing their opinion off of actual factors in the game. The game is bringing the cast into a setting that is not original nor required. When people ask, "Why is Rosella getting married in the Green Isles?", the argument is valid. It makes sense that KQVI was "the most popular title in the series" and that the Green Isles is a setting worth implementing into a fan-fiction title, but that doesn't mean those who are disappointed are wrong. Also, when people are arguing that this game is not following the trends that Sierra had upheld for the series, it's a sound accusation. However, not justified, simply because Phoenix and Sierra are not one and the same. Like I said before, there's is logic behind their arguments, but they refuse to look at the title as anything less than a "King's Quest sequel", with no consideration of who is making it and under what circumstances the game is being made.

I'm not really arguing one way or the other. I actually want to see this game through to the end, but at the same time, those who are disappointed are not wrong about their accusations. You can't please everyone.  :-\ 
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: kindofdoon on August 29, 2010, 07:16:58 PM
I'm not saying they're wrong, necessarily - just that they are judging the whole prematurely.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Fierce Deity on August 29, 2010, 09:03:14 PM
I'm not saying they're wrong, necessarily - just that they are judging the whole prematurely.

Definitely. The whole, "Don't judge a book by it's cover" mantra works great in this situation, but I feel like everyone is entitled to their opinion. I understand Episode 1 is a prologue of sorts, and the game will (pretty much) start when Episode 2 is released, but it seems like there are some who are disappointed more in the direction the game has taken more or less, and not so much the longevity of the first episode. Like you, I would recommend everybody to play Episode 2 before making rash arguments against the entire project and going off the deep end with their ranting and raving. However, I have a feeling that those who are sorely disappointed with the project as it stands, will not be miraculously convinced otherwise unless Episode 2 really delivers an outstanding experience. Like many have said already, "Time will tell."
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Allronix on August 30, 2010, 03:04:36 AM
I'm reserving full judgement of the game until I see the whole thing. So far, it looks like you all have a solid grasp of the history and style, while making some nifty upgrades to the eye candy. It was very much like the first time the twin and I loaded up KQ6 and had our jaws drop at the rich art style.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: snabbott on August 30, 2010, 10:50:35 AM
I think no matter how much we tell people that Episode 1 was really just a prologue, they're not going to change their minds until they see more - and I can't really blame them. Looking from the outside, I can see how people would say, "They spent 8 years, and this is all there is?"

If I hadn't seen the rest of the game, I might think the same thing. But I have. :D
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: wilco64256 on August 30, 2010, 11:04:32 AM
Yes it's important to keep in mind that all that time wasn't just spent on getting Episode 1 done - the others are all nearly finished as well.  If Episode 1 was really everything we had after 8 years most of us would probably just sit in the corner and cry as we thought about 8 more years for the next episode.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: snabbott on August 30, 2010, 04:17:08 PM
...or more likely, there would be no more episodes. :(
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: kindofdoon on August 30, 2010, 06:53:59 PM
Looking from the outside, I can see how people would say, "They spent 8 years, and this is all there is?"

The sad thing is that this is a very common misconception among people who do not follow the project but read about it on gaming websites. People just grab phrases like "after 8 years of development" and "download here" and then draw their own conclusions.

Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: snabbott on August 30, 2010, 07:26:58 PM
Yeah - hopefully, they'll give the other episodes a try and redraw their conclusions. :P
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: kindofdoon on August 30, 2010, 07:44:57 PM
Ideally, yes. But in reality...
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Fierce Deity on August 30, 2010, 09:51:27 PM
Ideally, yes. But in reality...

And what a reality it is. I wish everyone could look before they step, but apparently there's not enough time in a day to do so. I was quite bitter towards those who were quick to judge this game on Episode 1 alone, but after many debates and arguments, I have begun to see how people are viewing this project. In regard to many of their rebuttals, I have to sincerely reject their perspective for its lack of detail. When one argues that all of Episode 1 was a "waste of 8 years", it almost feels unfair to direct them to the Episode page to show them that there are five episodes in the making. C'est la vie.  :-\ 
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: wilco64256 on August 30, 2010, 11:14:00 PM
I think that the vast majority of people who disliked Episode 1 will at least give us a second chance with Episode 2 since we have been very vocal about it being a much lengthier (is that proper grammar? I'm no writer) and more adventure-game-type experience.  We're putting a tremendous amount of effort into really hitting things out of the park with Episode 2 and hope to regain a lot of interest from those who weren't impressed with the first episode.  We haven't really seen that many people say, "Episode 1 totally bombs and I'm never going to play any of the others."  What we have seen is, "Episode 1 wasn't quite what we were hoping for, Episode 2 better really seriously deliver."
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: Lambonius on August 31, 2010, 12:31:25 AM
"Episode 1 wasn't quite what we were hoping for, Episode 2 better really seriously deliver."

This seems to be the general consensus, yes.  :)

I love to criticize, but you know what?  I KNOW I'm going to like Episode 2 a lot better.  If for no other reason than a number of the issues that seriously irked me with the first episode simply aren't going to be present.  So for what that's worth...;)
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: kindofdoon on August 31, 2010, 07:59:59 AM
Once Episode 2 comes out and we can see the download figures, we will see how many people of the original 24K came back.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: KatieHal on August 31, 2010, 08:14:19 AM
The downloads are actually over 30K by now. (That was the last number I knew, and it was a little while ago.)
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: wilco64256 on August 31, 2010, 08:41:05 AM
We're at about 33,000.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: kindofdoon on August 31, 2010, 08:54:41 AM
Thanks for the update. I didn't think that so many people would download the game after July 10th, but I was wrong.
Title: Re: Re-inventing the Wheel
Post by: liggy002 on September 01, 2010, 03:18:50 PM
Yes, people are indeed not necessarily wrong in their opinions.  As was said by kindofdoon, people should just give the project a chance.  That is all I am saying.  People are entitled to their opinions and the team as well as others can only make the whole "wait for episode 2" point so many times.  There is no point in trying to make a pig sing.  Opinions will abound wildly in this creative business but what is most important here, in my own opinion, is that the game would experience enough success to maintain and even fuel interest in the adventure gaming genre.  From what i've seen, I love the game so far.  This is only a small fraction of what Phoenix Online Studios is capable of, but that's just my thought on the matter.