Anyone know if the magic portal/wardrobe in The 35th of May, or Conrad's Ride to the South Seas, I'm not sure it was actually explained in the story?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_35th_of_May,_or_Conrad%27s_Ride_to_the_South_SeasActually I think the word for something important to a story but not fully explained is what they call a "MacGuffin".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacGuffin"In fact, the specific nature of the MacGuffin may be ambiguous, undefined, generic, left open to interpretation or otherwise completely unimportant to the plot. Common examples are money, victory, glory, survival, a source of power, or a potential threat, or it may simply be something entirely unexplained."
It's actually very common in fiction. The Magical Doorways would fit the definition of a MacGuffin.
The fact is I don't really have time to deal with speculation. If you enjoy that sort of thing good for you. I just find it tedius and ultimately pointless.
Roberta probably never would have explained the doors to your satisfaction even if she had continued to make the games... unfortunately. There are quite a few things like this... The Old Castle Keep of Daventry in MOE isn't explained (there are actually quite a few magical locations visited in MOE that really don't get explanations). The desert temple in KQV really isn't explained.
The Black Cloak Society probably would have never been explained. That just wasn't her way of doing things, there were many cooks stirring the pot so to speak (each had their own vision of what King's Quest world was about).
Yes, the King's Quest Companion is definitely a grey area...
On one hand some designers treated it as canon enough to actually reference from it. Sierra's own 15th Anniversery of King's Quest Collection actually referenced multiple parts of it, and even included a chapter from it... Ken Williams is acknowledged as apparently helped Peter Spear design it. He and his co-author, eluki bes shahar apparently worked directly with Jane Jensen on the KQ6 sections of the book (you know Jane Jensen didn't invent Derek Karlavaegen for the Guidebook, she took the character form the Companion). Several of the questions in Sierra's King's Questions were based off it (the world map in King's Questions was based off of it as well). I believe its said that he and his co-writer Jeremy Spear worked with Lorelei Shannon the real person behind KQ7's story for the Authorized Guide (she was one of the people that took the Companion as canon). It's actually one of the reasons why the Authorized Guide/Companion, 4th Edition, is filled with information concerning material that got cut from KQ7 due to funding, time, and other limitations (hugely important if you wanting to understand the design process for the game), and references to some things that you'd only discover if you were looking through the game files (i.e. Rosella's encounter with Attis, Graham's appearance, etc).
Roberta apparently enjoyed reading it (at least 1st and 3rd edition), although there is no evidence she was ever consulted for it (as far as I know). Someone needs to find out what the Acknowledgement pages say.
"The King's Quest Companion is an interesting blend of fiction and helpful information for playing my games. Anyone interested in reading the story behind King's Quest or who just needs to be "unstuck" while playing the game will find this book invaluable"-Roberta Williams, 1st Edition
"...a wonderful blend of fact and fiction that brings my games to life in an exciting, new way. It adds another fascinating dimension to the entire King's Quest experience. It truly is a pleasure read and a must-have for anyone hoping to explore the series in greater depth and detail."-Roberta Williams, 3rd Edition
If you read enough of Roberta's quotes and comments and published material, you learn she's actually self contradicting to herself... So she wasn't even "following her own canon" so to speak... Do you realize that in KQ2 we are told that Graham and Valanice returned to Kolyma to get married, and then returned to Daventry? But Roberta later claimed that they got married in Daventry? She later went on to say that Alexander returned to Daventry when he was 18 (rather than seventeen?). In KQ1 we shown that magic shield can be destroyed by dragon fire, but Roberta claims several times that it was invincible and could protect from "all harm". She has told versions of KQ2 story where Graham discovers the door while traveling to Kolyma, rather than learning of it from the mirror. Of course earlier game telling us twins were born 2 years after KQ2, but Roberta later stating that they were born 1 year after KQ1. Edgar is said to be human in KQ4, but described as a fairy in KQ7. The nature of Edgar's description of appearance in KQ4 and his description in KQ7 do not match up exactly either. In as such that Genesta implies that his corrupt appearance is natural (she just turns him into something mirroring his "heart", inner appearance), whereas in KQ7 we learn he was magical changed into the deformed form. Roberta Williams wrote a prologue story for KQ6 (which was printed in the InterAction), in which the crew of his ship died, Alexander didn't help them into lifeboats (as said in the game), they all got pulled under and drowned...
Its really tough to "state" one strict canon, because everyone involved didn't follow any strict canon (if there actually was even a true "King's Quest canon" for those involved)... if they had one it was rather vague loose form of canon. They were always reinventing aspects of the stories...
Take for example KQ6's definition of genies, and compare to genies in KQ2 and KQ5....
A genie is an even greater temptation for the aspiring soul than ever a Daventry fairy, for a genie does not simply turn a one-time favour; however great, and then be done with it. No, a genie, like a faithful dog, belongs to its owner for life - or, that is, for however long the fortunate "master" might keep hold of the creatures lamp.
According to the stated "rules", each genie is immortal and each is permanently attached to a given lamp in which they might or might not be trapped for long centuries depending on the whims of their owner or fate. Once the lamp comes into the possession of a man or woman that person becomes the genie`s master and must be obeyed, Genies are very valuable creatures and can do a variety of tricks including transporting a man anywhere on earth, taking any shape the master might wish, and, of course, the ever-popular gathering of great treasures and wealth. A genie does have some limitations, however: it cannot cure ills, change the weather or bring back the dead. And a genie always has a weakness
A genie is also bound to its master in other ways. It is said that a genie is like a mirror; it only reflects its master`s will. If a master is evil minded and cruel, the genie will be also. If a master is generous and kind, so will be the genie.
The other genies we have seen, one does not serve Graham for life (generic three wish genie), and the other one doesn't serve anyone but itself (and locks its victims in a bottle for 500 years).
About the only thing helpful about Roberta's comments is that from time to time she offered insight into intent of certain things at the time of the release of certain games (for example her stating specifically that the "wizened gnome" in KQ3 is the same "wizened gnome" in KQ1, they are both the "wizened gnome"). But the further she got from a game, the less likely she was to accurately give an account of the game, or follow it exactly it seems. This may have to do with the fact that as she has stated in interviews, she "always looked forward, and never back", anything she wrote had more to do with the "now", than the past... A good example of her "looking forward" would be that she considered Connor her favorite King's Quest character at the time she created MOE. She claims this is because he is the 'latest and greatest', and she always likes her newest ideas the best.