The World of King's Quest

[Cez]

Perhaps the turn off is the fact that myth was not an afterthought in the game, and Roberts went out of her way to connect everything together instead of a series of random stories tossed into the world. Maybe that makes it too serious and much too crafted for what people were used to.

My take is that if they had made an actual adventure game with Connor at the center, and a more royal story based (save Graham directly, for example), with the members of the Royal family showing here and there, it would have been better received.
I remember the X-files game, where you didn't play as Mulder or Scully, but they were present and the whole thing felt as X-files.

OR

They could have done the game as it was with Alexander as main character, and with some lands that balanced out the overall darkness that took over MoE as a whole. It needed some magic and charm in general, some lush beautiful forest filled with magic, some wacky characters, etc.

But the problem was the drastic change of direction in every aspect. It was too sudden and too much.

[Baggins]

I still argue that it filled with wacky characters and amusing characters... the gnomes were amusing, many of the skeletons were, the sprites, king mudge, thork, etc. But that't my and Roberta's personal opinion (according to interviews).

The problem is it wouldn't have worked for Alexander as the story explains the magic effected the entire world. The unicorn explains that graham's entire family was turned to stone. That being said KQ6 pretty much brought closure to Alex's story in a meaningful way.

As I mentioned in another thread;

I do think when you are dealing with a storyline where the entire premise to the story is that evil forces have turned all humans to stone including the royal family, there isn't much you can do with the characters that have been turned to stone. The game did it in the only way possible by having Connor visit the castle and discover the fact that they have turned to stone, and then learn a little more about his for through the magic mirror, before the mirror goes dark from black magic like in KQ3. There isn't many ways to interact with a a rock.

Other than that the game starts with Graham and ends with Graham. It shows him being turned to stone, it has unicorn and other characters talking about he king and asking you to rescue him, and has Conner go in and discover the King, and finally rescue him in the end. It also utilizes the magic mirror which was a major story element in most of the series. Connor also comments on Valanice and  vows to rescue her as well.

The idea for all the family turned to stone existed all the back to the early story that  the main character was a nameless and emotionless statue brought to life by the magic, while everyone else was turned to stone.

[Cez]

I do think when you are dealing with a storyline where the entire premise to the story is that evil forces have turned all humans to stone including the royal family, there isn't much you can do with the characters that have been turned to stone. The game did it in the only way possible by having Connor visit the castle and discover the fact that they have turned to stone, and then learn a little more about his for through the magic mirror, before the mirror goes dark from black magic like in KQ3. There isn't many ways to interact with a a rock.

No, that's true, but maybe that wasn't exactly the right way to set up the storyline in this case. They could have as well set up cases where for whatever reason Alexander and Rosella weren't affected either, and they somehow helped Connor along the way, or, like the wizard that doesn't turn completely. Connor could have been following up on the footsteps of King Graham as he tried to find a way to prevent this and failed. Or maybe it was something that had to do with one of the magic treasures that Graham was forced to give away and part of what Connor was investigating was the lore of these. Who knows, what I'm trying to say is that there are ways to definitely have set up the story to include the royal family a bit more, to keep that connection always true, especially since so many things were already changing.

I personally enjoyed the game a lot, and I would even dare to say that, as a game, it was better than some of the other King's Quest titles, but I enjoyed it in the same way I enjoyed Tomb Raider. It was an awesome action game, and I loved the hints of Sierra's famous combining inventory items in it, but I never felt I was in Daventry, even when I was in Daventry And that's how I remember MoE: a great game that had nothing to do with King's Quest other that a few passing references at the beginning.

[Baggins]

Like I said;

The idea for all the family turned to stone existed all the back to the early story that  the main character was a nameless and emotionless statue brought to life by the magic, while everyone else was turned to stone.

Actually the only reason the wizard isn't completely stone is because in his own word be cast a counter spell when he sensed the tempest coming. Otherwise he would have been completely stone as well.

I actually liked the Daventry in KQ8 because both KQ1 and KQ2 mentioned the town of Daventry, but we never saw it before. KQ8 was the first time it appeared in a game.

[Cez]

Like I said;

The idea for all the family turned to stone existed all the back to the early story that  the main character was a nameless and emotionless statue brought to life by the magic, while everyone else was turned to stone.

Actually the only reason the wizard isn't completely stone is because in his own word be cast a counter spell when he sensed the tempest coming. Otherwise he would have been completely stone as well.

Yes, but my point is that the story could have been penned differently to include more of the Royal Family, especially considering how abrupt was the overall change to the series. Reasons for some characters to not have been turned to stone, a writer can find easily, the same way that Connor's story was changed. It's not like it was based on a scientific explanation or historic events.

[Baggins]

Roberta doesn't think in that way. Infact she rarely connected events of one game back to another. Most are stand alone. Few Characters ever reoccured. She was quite adamant in 1994 that she wanted some hero rescue stonified family! Who knows why she thought it was a good idea...

Mark Seibert said for example at one point they thought of having that wizard be Crispin. But apparently Roberta didn't go for the idea. So it changed.

[Cez]

But the one thing she did connect through the whole series, the Royal Family AND their story, is the one thing that she should have kept. And I think fans would have received the game better if she had done so. That's all I'm saying.

[Baggins]

IMO KQ8 does connect the Royal Family into the story... The story is how they were saved from hard rock!

Btw at one point there were plans for Connor to be able to explore the most of the castle and discover Valanice, Rosella and possibly a visiting Alexander  in stone as well. But to save time they had much of the castle danger by the storm so you couldn't leave the throne room.

[Cez]

But it's not enough. And it's not enough because you are not playing any of them. So because of that lacking element, they should have been more present in general. Not to mention that you never ever see them again or know of their fate once you leave the castle. Not another mention of them in the rest of the many levels all the way through the end.

[Baggins]

Actually watch the game ending, Graham is rescued and shown to be cured, and even sees the one who rescued him in the mirror.  Also throughout the game Connor tells others he's on a journey to save Daventry and rescue his King!

The ending could have been longer, and there were plans to have Conner be knighted by Graham but due to lack of time and budget they had to make do with the Graham sees his savior in the mirror scene.

[Cez]

Ok you are right. I still feel that it was not enough. Problem is I'm definitely not the only one either. Just trying to point out how what fans say over and over again could have been solved.

[Blackthorne]

Why does this kind of stuff always descend into a discussion/argument about King's Quest 8.  Personally, I don't give a for unlawful carnal knowledge about that game.  It really is more of a King's Quest spin-off, despite what Roberta's INTENTIONS were.  What she planned, and what got released are two different things.

I think a King's Quest game should really refer to the Royal Family...... do they even have a last name?


Bt

[Baggins]

It really is more of a King's Quest spin-off, despite what Roberta's INTENTIONS were. What she planned, and what got released are two different things.

what she planned, is what got released more or less. What she planned was never going to be what fans saw as a KQ game.

It was always going to be 3D, it was always going not have the royal family as playable characters (they were always going to be turned to stone and rescued by a statue or peasant), it was always going to have combat. It was always going to have the super mario/tomb raider jumping/action elements.

What was going to be released, was going to have even more combat and more bosses! Which means as planned from the start, it was going to unlikely be KQ like (by certain fans viewpoints).

As early as 1994/1995 just as she was finishing Phantasmagoria, and starting on KQ8, she was comparing the game to Doom, Duke Nukem and quite a few other assorted, non-KQ games. So ya, what she planned, is more or less what it became...

Of the many things we know that were cut from the earliest version, most of those were to be bosses! The leprechaun/red cap goblin was a boss in the Castlekeep Ruins. Those iterations of the boss became the Spriggan leader! The hydra was another boss, the three-headed dragon, another boss, etc.

There was to be an introductory cutscene for the Swamp Witch, where she tricked you into coming into her castle, before you had to fight her! They moved the boss fight outside of the castle instead.

In fact Roberta admits back in 1997 that they were pretty much were designing combat sequences and storyline first. In her words, because she had never done that type of game play before, and she wanted to get it right, puzzles were something she knew she could finish much faster (as she had experience with them)... They were going to do puzzles later on (this was in 1997), in 1997 they hadn't even gotten to the puzzles! So almost everything we know about that era or previous years is purely the combat or action sequences only!

They wouldn't even get to the puzzles (at least not in the game for screenshot purposes) until late 1997, or 1998!

Do NOT gain any preconceived ideas which may be wrong about this game from some preliminary screen shots which you will see at this early date. As time goes on we will supply you with more screen shots which will show other aspects of this game which are not "fighting" oriented. The reason it appears that this game is all about that is because we have not ever done a game which has that element so we're concentrating on that element right now. The other elements; the story elements, the character elements, the animation elements, the inventory object elements, the puzzle elements...are all stuff we've done before and will be much easier for us to put in place....we just haven't done those yet.....therefore, you're getting a skewed view of this game which is WRONG.-Roberta, July 1997

Meanwhile, Bob Davidson and his wife only saw the action/violence being designed in the game (and satanic characters), and wanted it all removed! They were sending in their manager goons to try to push their more sanitized non-violent version of KQ8 without Roberta's input, with its own puzzles ideas. Making Roberta feel as if she had lost all control...

[Sir Perceval of Daventry]

What she planned, and what got released are two different things.

what she planned, is what got released more or less. What she planned was never going to be what fans saw as a KQ game.

It was always going to be 3D, it was always going not have the royal family as playable character (they were always going to be turned to stone and rescued by a statue or peasant), it was always going to have combat. It was always going to have the super mario/tomb raider jumping/action elements.

What was going to be released, was going to have even more combat and more bosses! Which means as planned from the start, it was going to unlikely be KQ like (by certain fans viewpoints).

As early as 1994/1995 just as she was finishing Phantasmagoria, and starting on KQ8, she was comparing the game to Doom, Duke Nukem and quite a few other assorted, non-KQ games. So ya, what she planned, is more or less what it became...

Of the many things we know that were cut from the earliest version, most of those were to be bosses! The leprechaun/red cap goblin was a boss in the Castlekeep Ruins. Those iterations of the boss became the Spriggan leader! The hydra was another boss, the three-headed dragon, another boss, etc.

There was to be an introductory cutscene for the Swamp Witch, where she tricked you into coming into her castle, before you had to fight her! They moved the boss fight outside of the castle instead.

There's a preview from May '96 where Roberta talks about KQ8, about the action and she says, with regard ot the Royal Family, that it was time to "unload them":

"Even game designer Roberta Williams agrees that the King's Quest thing, as gamers have come to understand it, has been done - perhaps done to death. It's time for a change, and her new foray into the chronicles of Daventry, King's Quest: The Mask of Eternity, is definitely gonna be different. Gone is the cutesy, Disney-esque animation, gone is the heavy plot-driven story line - we won't even be meeting King Graham and his kin ("It was just time to unload them," Williams told us in her office last month, unknowingly expressing the secret sentiments of the entire press entourage therein). The biggest change, however, is in the essential mechanics: Williams wants to get back to her pure game-playing roots, and The Mask of Eternity features a number of radical departures from the King's Quest formula...starting with a fully navigable 3-D world.

The backstory: Twenty years before the time of the game, a magic mask analogous to the Holy Grail exploded into seven pieces which - surprise - were scattered hither and yon on the cosmic winds. In this newest King's Quest installment, we meet Conner, the son of a poor fisherman, born at the instant of the momentous explosion and marked, figuratively and literally, by a piece of the enchanted shrapnel.

Well, hell.

In the present-day of Conner's 20th year, a horrible chaotic spell sweeps across the land - never mind why, it just does - turning all mortals to stone except the auspicious Conner. His only hope to restore the pebbled populace of Daventry is to locate the seven fragments of the mask, and, verily, thou can see where this one is going from a league away. But the big news here is that The Mask of Eternity brings much edgier, action-oriented, navigable-environment gameplay to Williams' high-fantasy universe, and promises to appeal to an even wider range of gamers.

Populated by polygonal characters, the 3-D world of King's Quest allows the player complete freedom of movement (in, behind, around buildings) and exploration in a game experience almost completely devoid of plot-driven limitations. The world here, even at this stage of development, is big - really big, staggeringly huge in fact - in its detail, interconnectedness, and sheer physical size. Williams waves off comparison to the environments of Doom, Duke Nukem, and Mario 64. "We need to change the approach of adventure games. We need a revolution here," proclaims Williams, her slight form looking even smaller next to the 3-foot-wide sheet of engineering paper spread before her, crammed from end to end with gameflow charts and blocks of cryptic, four-point, handwritten notes of neutron-star density.

In The Mask of Eternity, players can travel everywhere in an open-ended world, entering rooms within rooms, interacting and fighting with polygonal friends and foes in a third-person perspective (with the option of a first-person toggle) featuring camera motion a la Mario 64. "I want the world," jokes Williams, about the raw amounts of enhancements planned for this newest King's Quest - and after seeing the basic navigation engine and puzzle elements, I don't think she's joking even a little bit."

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/adventure/kingsquestmaskofeternity/news/2558836/kings-quest-the-mask-of-eternity-preview?sid=2558836&mode=previews

[Baggins]

Yep, Roberta warned from the start, that it would be a departure from regular KQ-style game, that she was trying to push it in a new direction. Evolve the series...

Add to the fact that there were fans that were already saying the series was getting stale, that KQ7 wasn't very good, and that they thought Roberta had lost her knack for originality... Many were saying that KQ6 was the highlight of the series, and probably should have ended there... So many weren't looking forward to KQ8 thinking it would just be just as tired and cliched as the rest of the series...!

[Cez]

Yes, but even Roberta has admitted that the Mask of Eternity direction was probably not the way to have done it. I'm an adamant defendant of evolution, and I'm always trying to push the package in many ways, but things could have been done a little different to cater a bit more to the fans.

Here's what Roberta had to in an interview post MoE:

"I do want to let everyone know, though, that nobody loves adventure games more than I, and it has always been my goal to have as many people as possible experience this wonderful genre. However, it's important that people understand, Josh Mandel included, that things change and tastes change. The adventure game has to change also, albeit perhaps not exactly in the same way that I changed it in Mask of Eternity. If experiments are not done to find how to mainstream the genre or to make it more "commercial" for today's audience, it will die ... and then everybody loses. Those "purists" may have gotten their way to keep adventure games from evolving, but all they would have really succeeded in is helping to kill it."

So, regardless of what she wanted to do and what was released, she later agreed that it was possibly not the best idea.

[Baggins]

Hindsight is 20/20... Its kinda pointless to go back to coulda/woulda/shoulda, when history has already passed, and cannot be changed in hindsight...

Roberta thought it was a good idea when she created the game, and it had its impact on the game, and its not something that can be changed now.

Infact, I can get you a quote, where she even says, that in hindsight she should have left out combat, and designed more puzzles utilizing 3D. But she admits that 20/20 hindsight is silly.

    When discussing the transition from 2D to 3D for King's Quest VIII: Mask of Eternity, I can only say that we were on to the right idea of switching to 3D. However, the implementation was not exactly correct. In 20/20 hindsight, I would have omitted the RPG (role-playing) aspects and would have stuck with more traditional adventure game elements. I would have thought more in terms of physical puzzles that could be done better in 3D than in 2D, but, still, I wouldn't have changed the game so dramatically just because I was switching from 2D to 3D. But, what do they say about 20/20 hindsight?

-Roberta Williams, 2006

[Sir Perceval of Daventry]

Yes, but even Roberta has admitted that the Mask of Eternity direction was probably not the way to have done it. I'm an adamant defendant of evolution, and I'm always trying to push the package in many ways, but things could have been done a little different to cater a bit more to the fans.

Here's what Roberta had to in an interview post MoE:

"I do want to let everyone know, though, that nobody loves adventure games more than I, and it has always been my goal to have as many people as possible experience this wonderful genre. However, it's important that people understand, Josh Mandel included, that things change and tastes change. The adventure game has to change also, albeit perhaps not exactly in the same way that I changed it in Mask of Eternity. If experiments are not done to find how to mainstream the genre or to make it more "commercial" for today's audience, it will die ... and then everybody loses. Those "purists" may have gotten their way to keep adventure games from evolving, but all they would have really succeeded in is helping to kill it."

So, regardless of what she wanted to do and what was released, she later agreed that it was possibly not the best idea.

That's kind of common for creators whose product is either received poorly or with mixed reviews. Case in point Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom...When it came out, Spielberg and Lucas trumpeted it up like there was no tomorrow. But when the bad reviews and controversy started piling on, they backpedalled, to the point that Spielberg felt he had to make a third Indy film to "apologize" for Temple of Doom.

A lot of creators backpedal when things don't go their way. It doesn't mean they weren't into it to begin with. It's simply PR.

[Baggins]

Here is an example of some of the questions fan community was giving her back in 1996-1997 over the aging adventure game genre, and 'outdated' KQ series... Adventure games were failing in the marketplace, and many of old adventure fans had moved onto new games and genres. Roberta was trying to change that, and draw them back.

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

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

Those "purists" may have gotten their way to keep adventure games from evolving, but all they would have really succeeded in is helping to kill it."

She is more or less correct! Adventure game fans killed the Adventure genre! By trying to keep it stuck in the early 1990's formats, the genre was failing commercially! Until they almost completely disappeared as a mainstream product... Remember Grim Fandango one of the more 'traditional' (if that term even applies) adventure games in 1998 (except for maybe its interface), and it was almost a complete failure as far as its commercial value... These failures (not enough fans were buying them), lead to the death of the genre.

After that the genre more or less stayed underground, or had a cult following through low budget adventure game developers... It didn't have a large comeback until Telltale games made them commercially popular again (but their adventures are quite diluted by 1990's standards)...

[KatieHal]

I'm starting to think the topic of MoE needs to have a moratorium put on it!