MOE in TSL

[Cez]

What Katie said.

And yes, we recognized it as part of the King's Quest cannon. But yeah, it's the dark sheep.

[wilco64256]

<<<<<<  That's the real dark sheep of the King's Quest family - the game that never was, and just by looking at that image I'm glad that it wasn't.

[Haids1987]

If you look close in the wedding, you will notice a blond maid of honor

Ohhhhhhhh.  I wondered!  I never actually played MoE, so I wouldn't have known her.

[dark-daventry]

<<<<<<  That's the real dark sheep of the King's Quest family - the game that never was, and just by looking at that image I'm glad that it wasn't.

I saw those screen shots a while ago, and just shuddered. MoE would likely have been a game of the year candidate compared to those screenshots... And besides, Mask WAS a good game in it's own respect. I do in fact like MoE (at least with cheats on. What can I say? I'm a sucker for infinite health...), but in terms of KQ continuity, it just didn't live up to the KQ legacy like I had hoped it would. Now, with that being said, I would be very interested in seeing a KQ RPG down the line. I can see it working if the right people are behind it...

[Enchantermon]

It IS a King's Quest game. What Cez meant was that, beyond the name, it really doesn't feel like one. No one's saying it wasn't one, obviously it has the title, but the rest of the correlations seem fairly incidental in the game itself.

What Katie said.

Okay.

(Now if only Telltale and LucasArts would do the same thing for Sam and Max Hit the Road and Sam and Max: Freelance Police instead of pretending they don't exist...)

I don't know about the cartoon, but Telltale included a couple of different nods to Sam and Max Hit the Road in Seasons 1 and 2, nods that place Hit the Road in the same reality as the episodic adventures.

[duke]

Regardless of your opinions of MoE, the fact is that TSL is a continuation of the story of the Royal Family, a story which really was only touched on for about 10 seconds in MoE, which makes it fairly irrelevant. We've already seen a couple of little references in Chapter 1, and I'm sure we'll see more, but I doubt there'll be any more than little references, as there's really not much from MoE that can be used story-wise.

[MusicallyInspired]

Oh my, look what I've started lol. Also, MOE was marketed as King's Quest 8 right on the box in different countries. I remember seeing a scan of the box with a great big 8 on it, to my immense surprise. But besides that, basically the biggest reason why TSL was original named King's Quest XI. I mean, they wouldn't have done that if they didn't at least acknowledge MOE. People still call TSL "KQ9" to this day.

MOE was a fine game. Not as good as it could have been, no doubt, but it sure was fine. And no, maybe not as magical or impacting as the other games (and the royal family was painfully missed), but it was a great game with a great atmosphere. Actually, I haven't beaten it yet....I must do that someday, if I can ever get it working on my modern computer.

But anyway, I didn't really want to get into an MOE debate so much as I was truly wondering if elements of MOE would show themselves in the plot of TSL. Cez answered my question perfectly. Thanks.

[crayauchtin]

Even if MoE is a KQ, which I think every side of this can be argued til kingdom come, it's relevance to the story we've been given seems questionable.

TSL, like many of the King's Quests before it (short of KQ1), has more to do with Graham's personal life/Graham's family than it does with the fate of the world. Where does Connor and his quest that saved the world fit into the current situation -- a curse on Alexander and Rosella that effects Alexander and Rosella.

Mentioning it makes some sense, sure, but it hardly seems worthy of being featured in the same way that the rest of the series should be. After all, the character we're working with here was encased in stone for the duration of the game.

[Rockabore]

I'm a sucker for cameos and while I never actually played MoE (I played the first 7 because they came with the collection) but I think since it takes place in the same universe and included King Graham it would be nice to here a little mention of it. I think that just seeing Connor and his girlfriend and maybe having Graham acknowledge him being a good knight would be enough. It makes the most sense to me that way. It doesn't really need to be mentioned but I'd like it mainly to set TSL chronologically after MoE since I didn't really like it would take place so many years later.

[MusicallyInspired]

Even if MoE is a KQ, which I think every side of this can be argued til kingdom come, it's relevance to the story we've been given seems questionable.

TSL, like many of the King's Quests before it (short of KQ1), has more to do with Graham's personal life/Graham's family than it does with the fate of the world. Where does Connor and his quest that saved the world fit into the current situation -- a curse on Alexander and Rosella that effects Alexander and Rosella.

Mentioning it makes some sense, sure, but it hardly seems worthy of being featured in the same way that the rest of the series should be. After all, the character we're working with here was encased in stone for the duration of the game.

So? Any writer can write any element into a game. There's definitely a way that you could incorporate elements from MOE or even Connor himself into the storyline of TSL if you were creative enough (he was Daventry's saviour, I think that counts for something). And judging by what Cez himself just said earlier, it was written into the plot but was cut to shrink the game size.

[crayauchtin]

Sure, any creative writer could absolutely work it into the plot. But the question becomes why? Why force  a story that has little to do with the current story into it? Mentioning it is one thing, and we already know it will be mentioned as we've already seen Sarah Burke in the intro, so "mentioning" MoE is not the question. The question is if it's storyline will be featured as a part of the plot. And that brings in the question of why, which as of yet no one has been able to answer other than "but I liked it!" or "It doesn't matter what anyone says, it was a King's Quest!"
Both of those may be reasons, but they aren't particularly good storytelling.

[daventry]

Here is an Image someone Posted, so Connor and his Girlfriend does make an Appearence.

[KatieHal]

That's not Connor, Daventry. And the blonde woman next to him is Beauty (the Beast-turned-Beast is next to her, in the white wig), not Sarah.

[MusicallyInspired]

Sure, any creative writer could absolutely work it into the plot. But the question becomes why? Why force  a story that has little to do with the current story into it? Mentioning it is one thing, and we already know it will be mentioned as we've already seen Sarah Burke in the intro, so "mentioning" MoE is not the question. The question is if it's storyline will be featured as a part of the plot. And that brings in the question of why, which as of yet no one has been able to answer other than "but I liked it!" or "It doesn't matter what anyone says, it was a King's Quest!"
Both of those may be reasons, but they aren't particularly good storytelling.

Why are you making such a big deal out of it? I wasn't saying they should I was just asking if they did. Don't get so debate-prone. My goodness everybody is on edge around here since the release of the game...

[B'rrr]

Unless Shadrak is Connor, or maybe just his lover *ponders*

[Spikey2]

Oh my, look what I've started lol. Also, MOE was marketed as King's Quest 8 right on the box in different countries.

Yup, definately KQ8=MoE.

[Baggins]

As I understand it, that was only in certain rerelease editions that were published through third-party bargain publishers.

The original first edition release published by Sierra were similar to the US, and just had the King's Quest: Mask of Eternity translated into german or spanish, etc.

However, it was called the "eighth installment of the King's Quest series", on a sticker Sierra put on the package of english release. I think it was even considered the "eighth game of tghe series" in the manual (and even had one of those "what came before" summaries of the previous games)  that came in the box, and possibly on the back of hte box, or in the flap on the cover. It was also called KQ 8 in menus of Roberta Williams Anthology, i.e. something like in the installation folders for the collections "c:/sierra/RW Anth/KQ 8 (no space, and yes the autotranslation on this site is a bit rediculous because it screws up "quotes" where KQ 8 is actually used), and King's Quest Collection 2, where the making of videos were kept. It was also called the eighth game in the series in several interaction magazines, and I think Roberta even called it the eighth game of the series in several interviews, including the Talkspot interviews (or variations of "King's Quest 8"). She definitely considered it a real king's quest game, in her perspective. She even showed annoyance whenever anyone criticized it during interviews, giving arguements why her decisions actually represented a natural evolution for the series.

"I have to admit I was a little nervous about it and I never questioned it, I always felt it was the right thing, and I feel time will tell as to how that eventually works out, only I must say by the sales of King's Quest, and by the fact so many people seem to be enjoying it, it must have been the right thing to do. I think combat, got quite a bit of attention and controversy, because they say that's not part of King's Quest, but it certainly can be part of King's Quest, if its a knightly quest, and its good vs. evil, and if it fits into the story, which I think it does very well in this game."
-Roberta Williams, Talkspot Part 1, December 1998.

The reason why combat was added, and first of all, I don't think people should take it negatively because combat is definitely can be part of a story, lot of people think combat, that is just an action game, just action. But if you think about some of the great movies that have been out there, some of the great books where combat has been part of it, if you think in terms of adding it to the story, and if it fits very well with the story, then I think it's very appropriate. My idea was I wanted to do a story that was more in like the tradition of the epic games, where you had your true hero that would go out, and think about some of the old legendary figures of King Arthur or Sir Launcelot or Jason and the Golden Fleece. I mean they were all super heroes that would go out and they would fight the monsters and they were working for good. ...and really also if you sorta think about the quest, the quest for faith, or even your inner self. It can be said fighting the monsters, is the same as fighting your own inner demons. But when you think in terms of putting it into the story, fighting chaos, and your trying to set order right, and your fighting evil, I think its very appropriate. How would Star Wars be without Luke Skywalker out there fighting the bad guys.
-Roberta Williams, Talkspot part 2, December 1998

The question you asked above is the reason King's Quest: Mask of Eternity was different. The adventure game as we all know and love it is a dead animal, except for those of us who love and revere them. The problem is that those of us who love and revere them are becoming a smaller and smaller audience. If I had created King's Quest 8 exactly the same as the other prior seven, it might have gotten great reviews and kudos from its biggest fans, but it wouldn't have sold as many copies as it has ... I'm sure of that. The people who seem to hate Mask of Eternity are, ironically, King's Quest's biggest fans, and the people who seem to love it are those people who have never played an adventure game before, but who have played lots of other types of games ... especially more action games.

The idea was to bring a brand new audience into adventure game playing--those who would never even consider playing an adventure game. The idea was to show all of these "new" gamers that there is another type of game out there--the adventure game--and that it, too, can be cool. Rather than the hard-core adventure gamers out there being mad at me for "tinkering" with the adventure game, they should understand that, rather than just sitting around and doing the same old thing, I was trying to bring new blood into the genre ... thereby trying to keep it from dying. Times change, and tastes change ... they just do, and you've gotta do what you've gotta do to try and reach the biggest possible audience to keep a genre alive.

One final comment on this: Even though in reviews of "pure" adventure games--places where an adventure game is an adventure game, and never the twain shall meet with other types of genres--Grim Fandango seems to garner great reviews while Mask of Eternity is a dud, a traitor, and a terrible game ... Mask of Eternity has outsold Grim Fandango two to one. What does that prove? It proves that I was successful in bringing in new people to the adventure game marketplace, which is good for all concerned, but ... it also means that there will probably be some changes in the adventure game that today's big fans of adventure games will have to accept. The old-style adventure game that we all know and love will just not cut it in today's world.

Josh is right in that it is "different." No doubt about that. As far as the term "commercial" is concerned, that really has no meaning for me. All of my games have been "commercial." They've never not been commercial. What does the word commercial mean? It means "having to do with commerce," and also, "designed for profit or mass appeal." Now, I ask you, what's wrong with that?! If a game doesn't sell, it's not going to stick around and there's certainly not going to be another one! When you design a computer game which takes a couple of years and a lot of money, you obviously want as many people as possible to see it. I have always approached each and every one of my games with the idea that I wanted as many people as possible to play them. Maybe some people see that as offensive; I don't.

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.
-just adventures interview

I've been putting together quite a few of these quotes and references up here, as I find them (I've started working on design pages for the rest of the games, you might be interested to learn things were cut from many of the games, including KQ5, 6, & 7);
http://kingsquest.wikia.com/wiki/Mask_of_Eternity_Development

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

http://kingsquest.wikia.com/wiki/Heir_Today,_Gone_Tomorrow_Development

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

Also did you ever notice that Ken Williams calls it King's Quest 8 on his website?

[Enchantermon]

Well. That pretty much settles it.
I'm playing MoE for the first time, and I think it's great. Doesn't feel exactly like the other King's Quest games, but I wouldn't have expected it to, since it's playing with new elements. So far, however, I think it's a worthy continuation of the series.

[Baggins]

I think the game actually has about as many classic inventory based puzzles and inventory items items as the early KQ1-4... (granted a few of these were "keys", which gets kinda of repetive, in the light that "keys" are the limits of puzzles in Doom and most fps :p) Then again, what was the main puzzle line in KQ2.

Then it mixed it up by creating a few puzzles based on the weapon your wielding. For example using the axe to cut down a tree. As well as Roberta's attempts at 3-d style puzzles that involve using the environment to solve a puzzle (the tree to stop the water wheel is one such puzzle).

I've always been curious how many "puzzles" and classic inventory style puzzles, and how many inventory items it has in relation to previous games in the series. But I never got around to finishing inventory pages in the omnipedia.

[Lambonius]

I think Roberta was right in a lot of ways, particularly about evolving the genre, just that she got the balance wrong in MOE.  It wasn't just a KQ game with combat, it was a combat game that used KQ names and a few faces.  Combat was SUCH a large part of the game, and on top of that, it wasn't done very well--just endless clicking, no real rhyme or reason to the combat system.  The negative reviews of the game didn't necessarily focus on the fact that it had combat, it was that it had combat that was done very badly.  It also had a few very subpar platforming sections, which were totally out of left field.  In fact, the traditional adventure elements were downplayed SO much, that it didn't seem like an adventure game at all, or at least, not one that even vaguely resembled anything else in the genre.  It also had some glaring technical faults, like atrociously long load times, for one.  The best part of the game was really just exploring each area, and it was a game that looked darn good for its time, especially if you had all the right hardware to run it at full settings.

It's worth noting that I really liked MOE when I first got it and played through it when it came out.  But I could tell how different it was, and looking back, I recognize why a lot of people don't like it.  Personally, I wish I could play it again, but unfortunately, it just doesn't want to work on modern computers.  Also, you lose a LOT of the visual flair if you run it in Direct3D, which is the only option nowadays.