Winter has come.

[GrahamRocks!]

The same can be said for Quest For Glory too.

[Blackthorne]

Yeah, if you want closure - know that the last King's Quest probably would end like the first King's Quest began.


Bt

[Bludshot]

It would be like asking for closure from the Indiana Jones series, you know he isn't going to be killed or valiantly sacrifice himself since it is basically and old school adventure serial, it is a safe bet he continued to be a professor/treasure hunter/Nazi foil...er.

The same can be said for Quest For Glory too.

I never finished it but I got the impression the fifth game tried to give the series a definitive end, but maybe you can tell me otherwise.  I stopped playing it a few hours in so I guess I didn't care about closure there either. 

[Sir Perceval of Daventry]

Ok, what about Space Quest? That really ended on an anticlimax....

[Bludshot]

Space quest is no different, the fact that there was a cliffhanger is irrelevant.  There is no arc to the games, they are each their own goofy "story."

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say Roger Wilco's next mission probably involved aliens, puns, and sci-fi references.

[Numbers]

Look on the bright side. Most of these franchises were halted before they could become any worse than their final entries already were. For instance, Mask of Eternity is what it is...but it definitely wasn't as bad as Leisure Suit Larry: Box Office Bust. If the King's Quest games went the same route that the LSL games did, who knows how low they could have sunk?

[Sir Perceval of Daventry]

Look on the bright side. Most of these franchises were halted before they could become any worse than their final entries already were. For instance, Mask of Eternity is what it is...but it definitely wasn't as bad as Leisure Suit Larry: Box Office Bust. If the King's Quest games went the same route that the LSL games did, who knows how low they could have sunk?

They could go better in other hands...Like the fans or another company. One bad entry doesn't mean the rest of the series will be bad. It's a stupid mindset. It's throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I know all of you have moved on so you'll disagree but I just don't think that KQ should end at Mask, SQ shouldn't end at SQ6...But maybe it is time for me to throw away all my old KQ stuff and just totally move on.

[snabbott]

.But maybe it is time for me to throw away all my old KQ stuff and just totally move on.

I don't think "moving on" requires throwing away the past. Whether or not KQ continues has no effect on what has already been created.

(Posted on: September 28, 2012, 09:28:02 AM)

Yeah, if you want closure - know that the last King's Quest probably would end like the first King's Quest began.


Bt

**Spoiler**
KQ Ending:
Graham travels into the past, changes his name to Edward, and becomes king of Daventry.

[Bludshot]

They could go better in other hands...Like the fans or another company. One bad entry doesn't mean the rest of the series will be bad. It's a stupid mindset. It's throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I know all of you have moved on so you'll disagree but I just don't think that KQ should end at Mask, SQ shouldn't end at SQ6...But maybe it is time for me to throw away all my old KQ stuff and just totally move on.

Who said you weren't allowed to keep enjoying King's Quest?  I love Star Wars, doesn't mean I want another movie though.  As for the fans/other companies, you have several remakes and TSL from fans. 

As for the other company idea, those rarely end well, in fact they usually make things worse.  There are exceptions, Bethesda and Fallout 3 comes to mind, but even in that example there will be fans who would passionately disagree with me including Fallout 3 with the first two.

Sounds like you are pretty bummed about the whole thing, you should go through KQ5 so you can have a good laugh at the King's expense.

[KatieHal]

Yeah--moving on doesn't mean you have to toss everything you have related to something and forget about it entirely. I've certainly still got old Sierra games in their boxes, even versions I can't play on any system I currently own. Heck, I've got an Adventurer's-esque Cap sitting right in front of me on my desk.

[Blackthorne]

Exactly.  Star Wars SHOULD have stop long, long ago.  All these peripheral things just dilute the quality pool to me.

Yet, I still own my original trilogy, love and cherish it.  That's good for me.


Bt

[Lambonius]

This thread sure looks familiar.

[Deloria]

May I just say that the Tiffany's catalogue is rife with hideousness and is clearly catering to a classless nouveau riche tier of society?

</snob>

EDIT: It's gone now. ALL THE HEARTS ARE GONE!!!!!!!!!!!

[Sir Perceval of Daventry]

May I just say that the Tiffany's catalogue is rife with hideousness and is clearly catering to a classless nouveau riche tier of society?

</snob>

EDIT: It's gone now. ALL THE HEARTS ARE GONE!!!!!!!!!!!

What....?

[GrahamRocks!]

^ What Sir Perceval said.

And, for the record bt, I happen to like both the original trilogy AND the prequel trilogy (INCLUDING The Phantom Menace)! Just sayin'. Don't try to change my mind 'bout it.

[Blackthorne]

The was a HUGE spam post in here, offering Tiffany products.  It was removed.  That's what Deloria was referring to.


I don't hate the Prequel Trilogy; I'm actually a supporter of it, but I don't like it more than the original trilogy.

What I don't like is just all the peripheral crap - the thousands of games, spin off books, series, etc.... it just got too convoluted.


Bt

[Lambonius]

The Heir to the Empire trilogy (plus 2 sequel books) are excellent.  Arguably better than the films themselves, even *GASP* the original trilogy.  It's not an exaggeration to say that Grand Admiral Thrawn is the single best character ever to exist in the Star Wars universe.  Those were some of the first officially licensed expanded universe books, and they are still among the best stories to bear the Star Wars moniker.  But yeah, the rest of it is pretty much crap.

[Deloria]

The was a HUGE spam post in here, offering Tiffany products.  It was removed.  That's what Deloria was referring to.

There was. I'm sorry for the confusion. I was told I needed to explain because I "look[ed] crazy".

I have a thing about hearts. They make me twitch.

(Posted on: 30 September 2012, 22:41:59)

Yeah--moving on doesn't mean you have to toss everything you have related to something and forget about it entirely. I've certainly still got old Sierra games in their boxes, even versions I can't play on any system I currently own. Heck, I've got an Adventurer's-esque Cap sitting right in front of me on my desk.

Actually, it was probably called a bycocket or Flemish beaver hat and was usually worn for hunting. Where did you get yours?

.But maybe it is time for me to throw away all my old KQ stuff and just totally move on.

I don't think "moving on" requires throwing away the past. Whether or not KQ continues has no effect on what has already been created.

(Posted on: September 28, 2012, 09:28:02 AM)

Yeah, if you want closure - know that the last King's Quest probably would end like the first King's Quest began.


Bt

**Spoiler**
KQ Ending:
Graham travels into the past, changes his name to Edward, and becomes king of Daventry.

This is a horrible way to pick a monarch. King's Quest isn't about who's going to be the next king or even who the current king is - the whole point is that the entire series is about a nuclear family (possibly, possibly dynasty, but only if you're really stretching it since that basically never comes up) and not about a kingdom. Graham is only ever a king when it serves him to be a king, otherwise he's just an adventurer. We've followed the family through two generations, everyone's happy and looked after and they can retire without anything bad happening. I think breaking out the characters to make three or four more games would just be prolonging the inevitable and kind of pointless; what more could they hope to do? It would just get stale and we'd start thinking of the supporting characters as hopeless or weak if they constantly needed rescuing. At the core of it, Ken and Roberta were trying to describe that people have lives and adventures and then they settle down and let the next generation have at it. This has all happened. I guess we could play as Alexander's children, but, again, this is not - and never was - about a dynasty. There's a very sensible reason Sierra stopped making KQ before someone inherited the kingdom; mostly so it didn't have to be dragged out ad nauseum, especially considering that they were getting consistently less popular among the fans (as evidenced by the fact that many seem to hate the last two games).

Note: This doesn't mean I'm not looking forward to Episode 5 or to whatever TellTale has planned, because I'm sure they'll be amazing. It just means I'm okay with it ending because I see that I'd just grow to dislike the characters and am ready to let go and enjoy the memories, even if I wasn't ready seven years ago when I first found TSL.

[darthkiwi]

Wait... darthkiwi, you actually like MoE?! Uhh... care to explain why? Because not many people can say that. That seems just as rare as someone saying "I don't hate Cedric the Owl."

Also, I don't hate Cedric... I think he's very poorly handled as a character, so his warnings (which are helpful) come across as cowardly (which is annoying), but I actually like him. I was sad when he got hurt.

As for MoE, I won't do a wall of text, but these are my thoughts:
1) Daventry is well-structured. The wizard, the introduction of combat, the graveyard being marked as a dangerous area (come back later), getting better and better weapons, getting potions, collecting items, the way the world unfolds as you explore the map so there's always something interesting to do, the rope and hook which opens new possibilities - I think it's a very compelling opening world.
2) I liked the combat. Not much, I'll grant you. There's better combat out there. But it was exciting and felt empowering. It also makes finding a magic sword feel properly useful because you can use it as intended.
3) The voices were stupid, yes, but I liked the fact that most characters spoke in a consistent dialect, which was basically simplified Shakespeare. Probably because I like Shakespeare.
4) When worlds were well-structured and full of fun stuff, it was pretty fun to explore. Granted, about half the worlds were not well-structured (Dimension of Death anyone?).
5) I liked the top-and-bottom-bar interface which basically blended adventure games (top) with action games like Diablo (bottom). The interface was weird and pretty unintuitive but I found it intriguing.

Not a perfect game by any means. But I enjoyed it! And for what it's worth I liked the formula of action + adventure. I love the sense of symbolic importance you get with certain items in adventure games, and the exploration of new worlds. But I also love the sense of power or righteousness you get when playing a noble character in an action game, and that sense of immediacy.

[Deloria]

A list of things you'd need for a new KQ game, stolen from Darthkiwi because my post count is dearer to me than my boyfriend's feelings on plagiarism :

1) Family values
2) Characters from other games used in new ways
3) A really simple plot which starts everything off
4) A loosely coherent world with lots of room for free expression
5) Nice people to talk to
6) Some sub-quests and perhaps sub-villains to beat
7) A finale in which the day is saved and evil is vanquished, but that's kind of irrelevant because (shocker!) the nice family is back together again.

The last point has been snarked by me and all ire should be directed at me.