Well... I'm a fan of Sierra games, but... not really of King's Quest series, mostly due to Roberta's ass approach to design (ironically, I like the third game in the series very much and it IS pretty well-designed, and AFAIK it was also designed by Roberta, so I'm not saying that she's a bad one). Not to mention that KQII+ by fans, made in their spare time, is better than any of the Sierra-made KQ games, so... Yeah. I can't imagine it being worse than Sierra's KQs quality-wise, whatever each company's design philosophies are/were.
PS. Yeah, I know, KQ has technological breakthroughs on it's side and such and such, but, frankly, it's the only of their advantages over other Sierra series.
They do not have the design philosophy of Sierra. They do not have the humor of Sierra. They do not have the art direction of Sierra. They have never made a Sierra-style game and they have proven time and time again that a game worthy of a license that is SO INGRAINED IN THE HISTORY OF THE ADVENTURE GENRE.
And no, CONTRARY TO WHAT SOME PEOPLE MAY BELIEVE, LucasArts and, by extension Telltale, is not a BETTER ALTERNATIVE to Sierra that "fixed" and "evolved" the genre by removing all the bad aspects of it left in by Sierra. Sierra was a powerfully distinct entity, with its own philosophy and approach that couldn't be more different from the LucasArts or modern Telltale way of doing things. Until now I've been disappointed in Telltale, but now I'm absolutely livid. How dare they. THEY DON'T F@#$%ING DESERVE IT. THEY HAVEN'T EARNED IT. THEY CAN'T DO IT.
This is a disheartening diatribe. I, for one, grew up with all the quest series. I have fantastic memories of playing through them with my best friend.
Now I have the chance to continue the series-- it's some sort of inadvertent dream job that I can't believe I landed in.
I want to do this series justice. But I also want to make it fun and accessible to a wide range of players- introduce a new generation to them.
Maybe that means incorporating puzzle complexity into the actual difficulty settings so that our hardcore Sierra ex-pats will have the option to play it old school. Maybe it means finding a new strategy to art and production so we can deliver huge environments like the original games. Maybe it means toggling fail events for the casual gamers.
Whatever the case, I wouldn't want to compromise the series. That said, I also have to play for the home team-- Telltale has vision, goals, and missions that I have to consider.
Ultimately, something I really fight for since being hired at Telltale is integrity of vision. And trust me, I am a demanding fan of this license.
I could never see myself getting angry over something like this. I mean, The Legend of Zelda is my favorite game series. The CDi Zelda games didn't make me angry. Why? Because I don't have to play them. All those crappy Spyro games didn't make me angry. I just stayed away from them. Escape from Monkey Island didn't make me angry. Perfect Dark Zero, Metal Gear Solid 2, Final Fantasy X-2, Knights of the Old Republic II. These are all examples of games that didn't quite live up to their predecessors. They don't make me angry. Why? Because there's only one thing I care about: Is it fun? If yes, buy, REGARDLESS of how it compares to earlier games. If it's not fun, then I don't have to buy it, and my cash can be spent elsewhere. No rage. I get to keep my bank balance high, and my blood pressure doesn't have to be.
In my honest opinion, I think a reboot to the series is a fantastic idea. Unlike the other adventure games, the King's Quest games aged horribly with a very inconsistent direction. The first three games felt like they were for kids, the next three fel like they were for older gamers, part 7 is back to children, and 8 back to mature gamers.
The games were good at the time, but with how games progress in story, I think a reboot is much needed.
I always imagined a reboot that is inspired by Shriek would work for the KG series. Not necessarily the direction like Shriek, but the way they incorperate fairy tales into a movie for the older demographics. What I mean is that in Shriek is treated like a fairy tale in its own right. It is aware that it is a fairy tales and h as isn't afraid to make fun of itself for being such.
The original KQ series does give hints of that, but each sequel that sense of playing a game in a fairy tale world gets lost.
I would like to see the reboot that sets the fairytale type of tone. Just that it would make it much easier to explain the plot (if TT decides to keep it intact) of the first game. Something with the narration like "once upon a time in the kingdom of Davenity.." and with an opening like Disney's Robin Hood or the 2nd Shriek movie with the book and moving pictures. That is what I like to see, though whatever TT does with the KQ would probably be good.
I wonder if Graham will get a makeover? I always pictured Graham with a grey or black sleve shirt and a cape under his iconic red shirt, much like Dirk from Dragon's Lair, the hero in Quest for Glory, Prince Charmming in Shriek, or the guy in Sleep Beauty. IT just gives qa knight vibe to the character without drastically changing his appearance.
I'm not sure if you are going to continue reading this thread, but I'm going to take a moment to respond to this post. Hopefully in a level-headed manner, with complete respect for you and the team as people.
First and foremost, I don't believe you can make this work. As a huge fan of Sierra and their games, I do not believe that this company wants to continue that legacy. I am not against being proven wrong, but from the get-go, my reaction to this is(to put it lightly) not good.
I, for one, grew up with all the quest series. I have fantastic memories of playing through them with my best friend.
Now I have the chance to continue the series-- it's some sort of inadvertent dream job that I can't believe I landed in.
I want to do this series justice. But I also want to make it fun and accessible to a wide range of players- introduce a new generation to them.
Maybe that means incorporating puzzle complexity into the actual difficulty settings so that our hardcore Sierra ex-pats will have the option to play it old school. Maybe it means finding a new strategy to art and production so we can deliver huge environments like the original games. Maybe it means toggling fail events for the casual gamers.
Whatever the case, I wouldn't want to compromise the series. That said, I also have to play for the home team-- Telltale has vision, goals, and missions that I have to consider.
And this is the clinching point, right here. I don't believe Telltale won't compromise anything. I don't believe that you won't compromise anything. I don't believe that none of the episode directors will compromise anything. I have played every game this company has put out, and I have become increasingly disheartened with the output, with the most recent project feeling like a slap in the face. When it comes to accessibility, Telltale projects have always taken the easy way out, by making a game accessible through a complete gutting of challenge, puzzle design, and anything that might make the path from start to finish something less than a straight line on an easy path.
This isn't what the King's Quest series is about, and never was what the King's Quest series is about. The games always had challenges that required a lot of exploration and experimentation before you even really knew exactly what you had to do, let alone how you were going to go through this. Telltale's products are, until now, very heavily directed, and "story games with puzzles rather than puzzle games with story", as Grossman so quaintly puts it.
As a fan, I am upset that the company and people put in charge of this project have yet to show a strong commitment to the format of exploration and puzzle-solving that made the original games fun. I don't expect the end product to blend accessibility into the game in an organic way. If it is treated the way it is in Back to the Future, the "accessibility" of any new King's Quest adaptation will come off as a ham-fisted appeal to the lowest-common-denominator, a means of accommodating those who don't want to solve or be engaged by puzzles rather than teaching them to play the game properly. I think that being a good teacher, that showing people how to play a game without patronizing or enabling them is a very difficult balance to strike, and I don't think everyone is up to the challenge. But to take the easy route to accessibility for one of the most iconic and classic adventure series, whose bread and butter lies within the Sierra puzzle era would be a travesty. As it stands, that's what I expect.
Ultimately, something I really fight for since being hired at Telltale is integrity of vision. And trust me, I am a demanding fan of this license.
To me, "Integrity of Vision" doesn't mean anything without a vision. I don't feel like I understand an intended direction.
I'm still entirely cynical, but if you're willing to level with me and other fans with my viewpoint intellectually, I'm willing to listen(and I'm certain many others are as well). What are the pertinent visions, goals, and overall missions? What constitutes integrity of the vision, or integrity of the series?
You have to understand, I'm a fan. I'm not an investor, a marketing guy, or even some person on the street who has never heard of these things before. To me, King's Quest is a thing with a real feel, weight, and value. "Vision", goals", "missions", and "integrity" come off as empty marketing-speak. I don't like marketing speak.
I'm cynical, doubtful, and eager to listen but not eager to be convinced. What is your design philosophy, what do you hope to do with this series, who do you want to play this game, and why I should trust you? I understand that, extremely early on, not all questions can be answered, but if you wanted to uplift my spirits and enliven my hopes for the continuation of the franchise, you haven't done that. You have impressed me by reaching out to the community, even in a small way, and that's definitely a step. But if you could dispense with the nonsense and say something with weight, meaning, and that makes a fan feel like somebody actually gets it, that would be indispensable, though it is probably asking far too much from a company that has long since lost its desire to reach out to people like me, with my interests. After all, at a certain point, a company has to "carefully evaluate current marketplace realities and underlying economic considerations."
You're completely missing the mark. Stop trolling us. Come up with some valid arguments rather than these meaningless one-liners with the sole purpose of angering us. There is reasonable conversation to be had here without the constant ridiculous references to dead ends or some other over-used Sierra-bashing comments.
So in other words Rather Dsahing, you are ticked off that Telltale Games will not include any dead ends in their reboot.
This is the definition of the Straw Man fallacy. Your remark is oft-used and oft-repeated, and it seems to exist only to incite anger rather than to open a discussion. I understand that, earlier in the thread, I showed anger, but that was an expression of it rather than an attempt to incite it, which is an entirely separate matter.
Sorry, first time poster. I just thought people here really need to take a chill pill and stop being so angry over a video game.
By what? Interrupting the first attempt at a real dialog with an overused LucasArts fanatic sticking point in a thread dedicated to a Sierra franchise? That's hardly the way to go about it.
Things that inspire nostalgia will inevitably also inspire passion. See: people raging over stuff like Transformers/action figures.
I think that some of the concerns being voiced are legitimate. Telltale has never demonstrated a willingness to step outside of a fairly strict design philosophy in their adventure games. I think it has been pretty successful, though of course everything can be improved. The issue here is that Sierra's design philosophy was essentially the polar opposite of the one Telltale follows, i.e. death and punishment for failure.
I personally am not stringently opposed to a fair bit of revision to that philosophy: I think dead-ends are piss-poor game design, and puzzles that are essentially impossible without a hint book are also lousy. However, hard puzzles and a challenge are *not* poor game design. I remember as a kid wracking my brain for hours -- by myself or with friends -- trying to find a solution to a particularly nasty puzzle, and when I finally did the sense of accomplishment was tremendous. Telltale's games, on the other hand, I've hardly ever needed to stop and think about. I hope that this sense of challenge and accomplishment can be maintained.
Also, as MI has mentioned in other threads, I hope that TTG can maintain some of the open-endedness and sense of exploration that is such an integral part of the KQ series. I'm not a huge fan of just being tossed into a huge world with no idea of what to do, but a sense of mystery and danger is essential to a KQ game, unlike the things TTG has done so far.
In summation, I think it will be a challenge, and some compromises will have to be made, but I will maintain a cautiously optimistic stance until I see something that shows clearly that it is being taken in a more 'casual game' direction.
Until now I've been disappointed in Telltale, but now I'm absolutely livid. How dare they. THEY DON'T F@#$%ING DESERVE IT. THEY HAVEN'T EARNED IT. THEY CAN'T DO IT.
While the sane people in my head agree with that 100% there is also one optimist that wants to give them a chance with this license. He wants to see them pull it off, make it happen and make it great.
And even if it sucks like the rest in here believes it might make one thing happen that makes me happy already. Kings Quest Series marathons by people on this forum.
Edit: They already had an episode with death scenes and it was the most enjoyable one in the whole series. I could imagine a King's Quest 7 approach where you can die but the game just rewinds a bit and will let you try again without starting over.
So in other words Rather Dashing, you are ticked off that Telltale Games will not include any dead ends in their reboot.
Uh-oh! That last step was a doozy
What is the problem with saving your game often and in different slots so you don't have to play it all over again. Did all this auto-save bull*** in the last years make you forget about it?
I really liked the KQ1 remake in that regard. They kept all the puzzles is but asked you at the beginning if you wanted to disable dead ends. A great idea.
I also liked the idea of having alternate solutions to puzzles. Like the defeating the dragon that guards one of the treasures. Either you kill it with the golden dagger or you use the dagger to cut down a bucket and splash water over the beat. Both solutions work just fine but you lose the dagger in one of them with the result that you will not get full points in the game.
Or the bridge-troll that has one completely random solution (to me) or you can just bribe him with one of the treasures you collected on your travels. Again both solutions work, you can finish the game in both ways but only one of those solutions rewards you with the most points.
And I really liked this idea since it increases the replayability for the game. I loved finding better solutions to the puzzles I encountered and I loved to find the many deaths and even the dead ends.
No, it's just the weight of the title you choosed to carry on.
And I LOVE to see Telltale doing King's Quest!
People is just scared, because - like you - they have sweet memories about these old games. And you have to take care about them.
For example, it's like Telltale let Sam&Max to Daedalic. They're very good, but would you trust?
I'm VERY happy you and all the Telltale keeping the graphic adventure's market alive.
I've faith you can do King's quest justice!
Hearing that Telltale was rebooting King's Quest brought out the same emotions that I exerienced when Die Hard 4.0 was made into a PG-13 movie.
It may well be a fun movie but it just ain't Die Hard. It is watered down and homogenized for a mass market audience, but it's not what I want as a fan of the series.
When I hear Telltale talk about making it "fun and accessible to a wide range of players" (i.e Easy as possible with no challenge) I know that I am no longer the audience for this stuff.
Sierra games used to be fun and accessible to a wide range of players back in the day. I was 14 when I played through King's Quest and had a blast playing it with my friends. We loved the challenge and the wide environments and the humour etc. After all the challenge was part of the reason we played these games.
Why do people assume these days that to appeal to kids and as many people as possible you have to boil everything down to PG-13 level and make things as easy and generic as possible?
I really hope they stay true to the King's Quest licence and make it for the real adventure gamers. It doesn't need to be as hard as the old games but it should at least be a challenge, like season 2. And it shouldn't follow the LucasArts adventure game model, even though I personally believe it is superior. Otherwise it'd be tantamount to punching Sierra fans right in the family jewels!
They need to make this one for the fans or they'll be missing the whole point.
I can forgive Telltale making a less hardcore licence game like BttF easy, even if they REALLY overdid it, but they can't do the same treatment to King's Quest, and I'm sure they know that.
If they don't want to exclude casuals they should at the very least give us multiple difficulty options. It'd take more time and of course there'd be bugs, there are always bugs, but they simply have to please the hardcore fans with this title.
When I hear Telltale talk about making it "fun and accessible to a wide range of players" (i.e Easy as possible with no challenge) I know that I am no longer the audience for this stuff.
The games always had challenges that required a lot of exploration and experimentation before you even really knew exactly what you had to do, let alone how you were going to go through this. Telltale's products are, until now, very heavily directed, and "story games with puzzles rather than puzzle games with story", as Grossman so quaintly puts it.
As a fan, I am upset that the company and people put in charge of this project have yet to show a strong commitment to the format of exploration and puzzle-solving that made the original games fun.
This is precisely what the games from Telltale are missing most - a strong commitment to the format of exploration and puzzle-solving that made the original Sierra and Lucasarts games so wonderful.
A big part of the beauty, wonder and joy of the old Sierra and Lucasarts games was the epic sense of adventure, that the next screen might introduce us to a whole new amazing, magical, beautiful and dangerous environment, full of mysteries, wonders, puzzles and astonishing things to discover. This has been almost completely lost in the Telltale games.
Yes, Telltale does a pretty good job with storytelling (The Devil's Playhouse and ToMI were by far their highpoint, with BTTF being the abysmal low point), but they almost completely lose the sense of epic, expansive adventure because there is minimal opportunity for real exploration (again, the new BTTF games are stunningly bad in this regard). Please, Telltale, bring this back. Remember the joy and wonder of discovering whole new realms in the classic Sierra and Lucasarts games. Compare this to the boredom and drudgery of revisiting the same four or five drab locations in BTTF. I know you can understand the difference here.
Also, please remember that there is a big difference between adventure game and interactive movie. The "interactive movie" idea had its moment some time ago and it failed because it was boring and because instead of adding to the movie element or the game element it diluted both of them, ending up with something not as good as a movie nor as an adventure game. Please be careful and remember to produce adventure games and not interactive movies. Again, BTTF is a perfect example of where Telltale has basically produced an interactive movie, which, on the basis of almost all reviews so far, satisfies neither those looking for an adventure game nor those looking for a movie. It's just a watered down, compromised mess.
Telltale, please, give us adventure, give us puzzles, give us exploration, give us discovery, give us wonder, give us astonishment, give us joy... give us adventure games!
This is a disheartening diatribe. I, for one, grew up with all the quest series. I have fantastic memories of playing through them with my best friend.
Now I have the chance to continue the series-- it's some sort of inadvertent dream job that I can't believe I landed in.
I want to do this series justice. But I also want to make it fun and accessible to a wide range of players- introduce a new generation to them.
Maybe that means incorporating puzzle complexity into the actual difficulty settings so that our hardcore Sierra ex-pats will have the option to play it old school. Maybe it means finding a new strategy to art and production so we can deliver huge environments like the original games. Maybe it means toggling fail events for the casual gamers.
Whatever the case, I wouldn't want to compromise the series. That said, I also have to play for the home team-- Telltale has vision, goals, and missions that I have to consider.
Ultimately, something I really fight for since being hired at Telltale is integrity of vision. And trust me, I am a demanding fan of this license.
Thanks for your comments. I think that almost all of your brainstorming in the 4th paragraph is on the right track. Large non-linear explorable environments were a staple of King's Quest, and it would be nice if you could somehow do that. As for difficulty - why are there like 4-5 different levels of hints in Telltale games? It should imply that the games are difficult with hints off, and the casual gamers can just play them on Easy (it could easily be conveyed to the player beforehand what the situation is and how it works).
Not excited for reasons I've already stated. I'm actually quite afraid.
And I hope to GOD they don't TOUCH Space Quest without giving Scott Murphy full creative control. And that's not gonna happen.
Eh, this isn't fair. First, I reject the idea that a series always has to stick with the same creator, especially video games. More importantly - Sierra had a system of really pushing their famous marketable designers. They would put the famous designers' names on products that they actually may have had very little to do with. Josh Mandel posted over at the Adventure Gamers forum that he once saw a quote saying that Freddy Pharkas was "Al Lowe at his purest" or something, and he just had to laugh. Josh strongly implied that he was the "real" designer of the game.
Mandel also worked on some of the Space Quest games, and so there might be similar situations with him or others working on that series.
Reading the OP, it seems I'm the only one still on topic.
Sierra's dead for a reason. Did you guys even play the last few entries of the Quest series? Even Telltale's worst titles beat it hands down.
I personally never liked the KQ series much after 3. I'd actually enjoy a complete different take on the series. (ie. a non Sierra one)
Don't get me wrong, I loved the Sierra games and still rate the SQ series as my favorite after Monkey Island, but there's a reason those games are gone. Heck, if it wasn't for Telltale, adventure games would probably be a LOT more niche than they currently are.
MusicallyInspired already covered why Sierra is dead, and it had nothing to do with declining sales. King's Quest 8 outsold Grim Fandango 2:1. Here is a link to a late '90s interview with Roberta Williams:
It is clear from what she says that Sierra would have continued to innovate - they may have had some missteps sure, but I would bet that if they were around, the genre would be healthier than it is now when the entire design philosophy is stuck in 1990.
I think a lot of the things Chris mentioned have to do with the episodic Format.
Yes you can put a fun story in an episode. But an epic story? Thats hard to do when the storytelling is always interupted because the episode ends.
Yes you can put interesting puzzles in an episode. But putting puzzles that build on each other where the the solutions of different tasks build to something bigger is also hard to do, when the episode itself is to small to feature several chans of tasks that are combined.
The biggest problem wth the episodic format ist the exploration factor. Because the game usually ends ust as you get a feel for the characters and the situation and start to get curious about the surroundings they live in.
Maybe it's time to try something that is not in episodes but a big game.
Although I have to admit, I remember KQ1 (the original) and that game wasn't that big either. It was more the deaths that drew it out.
I find myself agreeing with both of you. Ultimately I think it is not the episodic nature that limits opportunity for adventure, exploration, wonder, expansiveness and discovery, but rather the approach Telltale has taken to it. Just because a game is 2 or 3 hours long does not mean it is necessary to limit it to a small number of locations, as has been the case with too many of Telltale's games. Nor do I believe that the number of locations is the primary determinant in whether a game has that epic feeling, though it certainly does help to have more rather than less.
Think for a moment about the sense of adventure, wonder, discovery and exploration that has been fit into other "episodes" less than 2 or 3 hours long. This encapsulates pretty much every movie or episodic television show ever made. Think of Star Wars - epic! Think of Indiana Jones - epic! Heroes - epic! Lost - epic! Firefly - epic! The list goes on and on and on. Also, think seriously for a moment about classic Lucasarts games like Grim Fandango, Full Throttle, The Dig, etc. In many ways the structure of these games was episodic but all joined together into one amazing, wonderful story arc on a single disc. Nobody would even begin to argue that these stories weren't epic. Or imagine the first 3 hours of Knights of the Old Republic, King's Quest 6, Quest for Glory 2, Mass Effect, Jedi Knight, Tie Fighter, Gabriel Knight - these games are epic in the first 5 minutes!
An epic adventure CAN be done in a episodic format in 3 hour chapters, and each chapter can be epic in itself. The most recent Sam and Max series is the closest Telltale has come to this, but there's so much more that can be realized, and truly hope Telltale will realize this. Tremendously epic adventures, full of wonder, exploration and discovery have been told in episodic format, often in segments as short as 30 minutes. This can be done, Telltale, it can be done!
But let us return once again to the idea of discovery. When, in a Telltale game, can you remember discovering something and thinking to yourself "Wow! This is amazing! I can't wait to see what happens next?" We need more of this!
Give us adventure, exploration, wonder, mystery and discovery. Give us adventure!
But when we talk about epic stories in games, you must look at games like Red Dead Redemption and Mass Effect for example. Those are pretty epic due to the scale and the options provided to the player. Freedom to roam and explore different locations and storylines. On the other hand Telltale, makes episodes and due to that the player must follow the thread created by the developers so each episode begins and ends on a set place. Their games follow a very narrow path.
In reading the conclusion of my review I realized that pretty much everything I wrote then remains true. We saw major, major improvement in The Devil's Playhouse and ToMI, but BTTF represents a return to everything that made Bone an ultimately unsatisfying experience. I think Telltale would benefit from reading my original review of Bone, written way back in 2005, and ask themselves if they've really learned and developed since then.
........
- The mini-games -
This is the point I need to come down hard on. The mini-games are simply not fun. I know Telltale wanted to make the game accessable by not making puzzles that are too difficult or don't make sense within the story itself, but these puzzles are not only not fun at all, but are also not at all challenging and have zero replay value.The mini-games are a miss on all counts. A while back Heather Logas wrote a blog-entry about fun in games. I invite her, and Telltale, to reexamine that entry and take to heart what she said. The core of any game should be fun and if that fun is absent even the best story will leave the game player unfilfilled. So think about how the games can be truly fun, and consider also that because there is a built in hint system that a certain amount of real challenge and puzzle can be included, with the hint system available for those who don't want to deal with it. As for me, the two running and jumping sequences were just plain frustrating, as was the sequence trying to escape the rat creatures (all of which repeat from the beginning, ad nauseaum, exactly the same until they are completed, with no variety, change, replayability or option to skip them altogether). Remember... fun is number one!
......
- General playability - The game itself is very easily playable and works intuitively, unfortunately the entire world itself, with the possible exception of the dialogue (though there is room for improvement) is lacking in opportunities for fun. Most scene having almost no clickable objects, and even then the options for interacting with the objects are extremely limited. Please Telltale, let us PLAY in this beautiful world you and Jeff Smith have created. Make everything, or almost everything, a potential toy, with game and the world being a giant, wonderful, magical box full of the funnest toys around. The fact that almost nothing in the Out from Boneville world can be interacted with, and even less can be played with, is a huge mistake and seems diametrically opposed to what I thought was Telltale's philosophy. It also means that the game ends up having almost no replayability whatsoever. This is a serious problem, especially for a game that is so short. If the storyline of the game is going to be short, then there at least needs to be lots of toys to play with within it to extend it's enjoyability.
- Conclusions -
Telltale, a company I desperately want to love and see succeed.... has proved that they can create a magical world faithful to Jeff Smith's original vision, but they have also failed on a level that, if not addressed succesfully, could end unhappily. Telltale needs, first and foremost, to remember that games are meant to be FUN. If a game isn't fun then it isn't a game. Telltale has managed to convincingly recreate a world born in Jeff Smith's imagination, but they haven't been able to make it fun and the end result is, essentially, a clickable comic book. Unfortunately, for most adventure gamers, including myself, a clickable comic book, especially of this length and price, is simply not enough. I commend Telltale on their achievement in recreating the Bone world so beautifull, but I also strongly encourage them to spend some serious time thinking deeply about their game-creation philosophy and how they can make Bone the most FUN it can possibly be. If I see evidence that Telltale has made progress on fun and length of the game then I will most certainly buy the next Bone game, but if the next game follows the same model I'm sorry to say that, despite how desperately I want to see Telltale succeed, I will spend my $20 elsewhere.
You've got character, story, beauty and imagination already but remember Telltale - fun, replayability, choices, consequences, exploration, discovery, inventiveness, interaction, and options are the gems of gaming - without these things than even the most beautiful world will not be satisfying as a game.
Telltale, I know you can do this right. You've got the very best game designers in the world and some of the best creative material to work. I have faith in you.
In sincere appreciation, gratitude, respect and hopefulness,
But when we talk about epic stories in games, you must look at games like Red Dead Redemption and Mass Effect for example. Those are pretty epic due to the scale and the options provided to the player. Freedom to roam and explore different locations and storylines. On the other hand Telltale, makes episodes and due to that the player must follow the thread created by the developers so each episode begins and ends on a set place. Their games follow a very narrow path.
Yes, part of the epic nature Mass Effect and Red Dead Redemption is the scale and options provided to the player. You're absolutely right. At the same time, think back to the great Sierra and Lucasarts adventure games. Were they epic? Heck yeah! Were they fun? Amazingly so! Compelling? Utterly! Why, when Lucasarts and Sierra were able to make epic adventure games 15 years ago with 16 colors and floppy disks is Telltale unable to do so now? It's not about limitations of technology or budget or distribution method. What, then, is the limitation? I experienced epic adventures that I remember to this day playing text only games like Zyll and Zork as 16 color floppy disk classics such as Quest for Glory II and Kings Quest III and IV. These games, to a large extent, also followed a very narrow path but they were FUN and they still provided a sense of epic adventure and of choice, whether the choice was an illusion or not. Telltale CAN make epic adventure games, full of discovery, exploration and wonder, IF that's what they want to do. So far I think their style of games are reflective not of the limitations of the medium and episodic approach but rather of a choice that the company has made, for better or for worse. Again, Telltale has shown glimmers of greatness, such as with The Devil's Playhouse and ToMI, and has also shown pure lack of effort and creativity, such as with Poker Night at the Inventory and BTTF. The choice is theirs.
Ultimately, something I really fight for since being hired at Telltale is integrity of vision. And trust me, I am a demanding fan of this license.
I want, more than anything, to see you guys succeed at this. It will be a challenge, and it'll require doing things very different than what you're doing now (and I say this as someone who still enjoys what you're doing now), but I believe you can try to make it work. Just remember that the KQ series wouldn't exist if people didn't take a lot of risks.
I agree King's Quest needs a different approach than any of Telltale's games so far.
Perhaps the most important aspect of old Sierra that should be embraced and reintroduced here is letting us adventurers examine and otherwise interact with everything in the environments. If you draw something, please let the main character at least look at it and give us a reaction.
The richness of the Sierra game worlds is one of the main things that set them apart from the more "railroaded attention" style of Lucasfilm/LucasArts. I say this with respect for the latter approach. It was a viable alternative they had every right to go with.
perhaps the most important aspect of old sierra that should be embraced and reintroduced here is letting us adventurers examine and otherwise interact with everything in the environments. If you draw something, please let the main character at least look at it and give us a reaction.
The way I view any reboot of a popular series, whether it's video games or television, is by viewing it as a standalone product.
Take the new Spiderman film for example. Barely anything is known about it and already fans of the Sam Raimi versions are up in arms about it. A little soon for a reboot, granted, but because it's different doesn't necessarily mean it's going to be a disgrace to the franchise.
Batman is another prime example. Compare the Dark Knight to Adam West's fine work. I happen to love them both for very different reasons, but it's still Batman.
Even the evolution of video games changed the way in which we play some of our favourite series. Some would argue Mario is better in 2D but does that make Mario 64 crap?
I agree with the shared scepticism about whether Kings Quest is a series right for Telltale, being that their game design is usually very different from the original Sierra games, but it doesn't mean it won't be a great addition to the series if it doesn't follow the same old aged formula.
Heck, Monkey Island hasn't been the same for me since Lechuck's Revenge. Still hasn't stopped me enjoying the rest of the series though.
Most of sierra's games went down hill after their 6th title, space quest 6 was ok, space quest 7 was cancelled. Kings quests 7 just felt like a disney rip-off, Kings quest 8 went 3d for no apparent reason, and was rubbish. If this genre is to be relaunched it won't, and will never be, Sierra. Their glory days have sadly passed. For now, Telltale Games is the only glimmer of hope this genre has.
Ultimately I think it is not the episodic nature that limits opportunity for adventure, exploration, wonder, expansiveness and discovery, but rather the approach Telltale has taken to it. Just because a game is 2 or 3 hours long does not mean it is necessary to limit it to a small number of locations, as has been the case with too many of Telltale's games.
Telltale episodes aren't limited to a few locations because they need to get them to run a certain time, it's mostly due to space. These games are designed to be downloadable and not everyone has great internet, so they can't have the file-sizes too big.
The last episode of Tales of Monkey Island is probably the only Telltale Game that really nails the exploration aspect, as you can go to like all but three locations from the whole series.
You're talking merely about story here. Feeling like the original is not enough. The game mechanics as well as the story is what made these games so loved.
I wasn't merely talking about story at all. I'm talking about atmosphere, tone, humour, dialogue, music, locations....
Obviously its a little difficult to compare the game mechanics of BttF to the movies. The game mechanics on ToMI however were pretty faithful to the other games - as pointed out previously, the inclusion of item combination being a good example of this. Please note, I'm not talking about difficulty here.
Some of the game mechanics in the old Sierra games just wouldn't be commercially acceptable anymore but I beleive they can recreate the feel (Not just story, see above for my definition) very well whilst also making a modern, successful game.
Important to that feel is that the games should not be nearly as laugh-a-minute as Tales of Monkey Island etc. Sierra games had plenty of humour, of course, but it was always layered on top of solidly atmospheric mood-setting and the kind of charm that would be lost if everything was meant to be funny. So humour should be used only where it comes naturally, and never to such an extent that it detracts from the overall atmosphere.
Telltale episodes aren't limited to a few locations because they need to get them to run a certain time, it's mostly due to space. These games are designed to be downloadable and not everyone has great internet, so they can't have the file-sizes too big.
If that were the case none of the series would recycle environments in different episodes because you have to download them again anyways, so they might as well be brand new. There clearly are issues with how much time they can spend in development too, not just file size concerns.
Comments
PS. Yeah, I know, KQ has technological breakthroughs on it's side and such and such, but, frankly, it's the only of their advantages over other Sierra series.
This is a disheartening diatribe. I, for one, grew up with all the quest series. I have fantastic memories of playing through them with my best friend.
Now I have the chance to continue the series-- it's some sort of inadvertent dream job that I can't believe I landed in.
I want to do this series justice. But I also want to make it fun and accessible to a wide range of players- introduce a new generation to them.
Maybe that means incorporating puzzle complexity into the actual difficulty settings so that our hardcore Sierra ex-pats will have the option to play it old school. Maybe it means finding a new strategy to art and production so we can deliver huge environments like the original games. Maybe it means toggling fail events for the casual gamers.
Whatever the case, I wouldn't want to compromise the series. That said, I also have to play for the home team-- Telltale has vision, goals, and missions that I have to consider.
Ultimately, something I really fight for since being hired at Telltale is integrity of vision. And trust me, I am a demanding fan of this license.
At least we know for a fact they will not try to make it an action game or something...
The games were good at the time, but with how games progress in story, I think a reboot is much needed.
I always imagined a reboot that is inspired by Shriek would work for the KG series. Not necessarily the direction like Shriek, but the way they incorperate fairy tales into a movie for the older demographics. What I mean is that in Shriek is treated like a fairy tale in its own right. It is aware that it is a fairy tales and h as isn't afraid to make fun of itself for being such.
The original KQ series does give hints of that, but each sequel that sense of playing a game in a fairy tale world gets lost.
I would like to see the reboot that sets the fairytale type of tone. Just that it would make it much easier to explain the plot (if TT decides to keep it intact) of the first game. Something with the narration like "once upon a time in the kingdom of Davenity.." and with an opening like Disney's Robin Hood or the 2nd Shriek movie with the book and moving pictures. That is what I like to see, though whatever TT does with the KQ would probably be good.
I wonder if Graham will get a makeover? I always pictured Graham with a grey or black sleve shirt and a cape under his iconic red shirt, much like Dirk from Dragon's Lair, the hero in Quest for Glory, Prince Charmming in Shriek, or the guy in Sleep Beauty. IT just gives qa knight vibe to the character without drastically changing his appearance.
Chill man. It is a typo. G and Q looks similar to me.
First and foremost, I don't believe you can make this work. As a huge fan of Sierra and their games, I do not believe that this company wants to continue that legacy. I am not against being proven wrong, but from the get-go, my reaction to this is(to put it lightly) not good.
As the first concern, this is nice to see in comparison to(for example) Dave Grossman's disdain for Sierra's entire output.
And this is the clinching point, right here. I don't believe Telltale won't compromise anything. I don't believe that you won't compromise anything. I don't believe that none of the episode directors will compromise anything. I have played every game this company has put out, and I have become increasingly disheartened with the output, with the most recent project feeling like a slap in the face. When it comes to accessibility, Telltale projects have always taken the easy way out, by making a game accessible through a complete gutting of challenge, puzzle design, and anything that might make the path from start to finish something less than a straight line on an easy path.
This isn't what the King's Quest series is about, and never was what the King's Quest series is about. The games always had challenges that required a lot of exploration and experimentation before you even really knew exactly what you had to do, let alone how you were going to go through this. Telltale's products are, until now, very heavily directed, and "story games with puzzles rather than puzzle games with story", as Grossman so quaintly puts it.
As a fan, I am upset that the company and people put in charge of this project have yet to show a strong commitment to the format of exploration and puzzle-solving that made the original games fun. I don't expect the end product to blend accessibility into the game in an organic way. If it is treated the way it is in Back to the Future, the "accessibility" of any new King's Quest adaptation will come off as a ham-fisted appeal to the lowest-common-denominator, a means of accommodating those who don't want to solve or be engaged by puzzles rather than teaching them to play the game properly. I think that being a good teacher, that showing people how to play a game without patronizing or enabling them is a very difficult balance to strike, and I don't think everyone is up to the challenge. But to take the easy route to accessibility for one of the most iconic and classic adventure series, whose bread and butter lies within the Sierra puzzle era would be a travesty. As it stands, that's what I expect.
To me, "Integrity of Vision" doesn't mean anything without a vision. I don't feel like I understand an intended direction.
I'm still entirely cynical, but if you're willing to level with me and other fans with my viewpoint intellectually, I'm willing to listen(and I'm certain many others are as well). What are the pertinent visions, goals, and overall missions? What constitutes integrity of the vision, or integrity of the series?
You have to understand, I'm a fan. I'm not an investor, a marketing guy, or even some person on the street who has never heard of these things before. To me, King's Quest is a thing with a real feel, weight, and value. "Vision", goals", "missions", and "integrity" come off as empty marketing-speak. I don't like marketing speak.
I'm cynical, doubtful, and eager to listen but not eager to be convinced. What is your design philosophy, what do you hope to do with this series, who do you want to play this game, and why I should trust you? I understand that, extremely early on, not all questions can be answered, but if you wanted to uplift my spirits and enliven my hopes for the continuation of the franchise, you haven't done that. You have impressed me by reaching out to the community, even in a small way, and that's definitely a step. But if you could dispense with the nonsense and say something with weight, meaning, and that makes a fan feel like somebody actually gets it, that would be indispensable, though it is probably asking far too much from a company that has long since lost its desire to reach out to people like me, with my interests. After all, at a certain point, a company has to "carefully evaluate current marketplace realities and underlying economic considerations."
By what? Interrupting the first attempt at a real dialog with an overused LucasArts fanatic sticking point in a thread dedicated to a Sierra franchise? That's hardly the way to go about it.
...which is why you came in here with an antagonistic snarky one liner?
I think that some of the concerns being voiced are legitimate. Telltale has never demonstrated a willingness to step outside of a fairly strict design philosophy in their adventure games. I think it has been pretty successful, though of course everything can be improved. The issue here is that Sierra's design philosophy was essentially the polar opposite of the one Telltale follows, i.e. death and punishment for failure.
I personally am not stringently opposed to a fair bit of revision to that philosophy: I think dead-ends are piss-poor game design, and puzzles that are essentially impossible without a hint book are also lousy. However, hard puzzles and a challenge are *not* poor game design. I remember as a kid wracking my brain for hours -- by myself or with friends -- trying to find a solution to a particularly nasty puzzle, and when I finally did the sense of accomplishment was tremendous. Telltale's games, on the other hand, I've hardly ever needed to stop and think about. I hope that this sense of challenge and accomplishment can be maintained.
Also, as MI has mentioned in other threads, I hope that TTG can maintain some of the open-endedness and sense of exploration that is such an integral part of the KQ series. I'm not a huge fan of just being tossed into a huge world with no idea of what to do, but a sense of mystery and danger is essential to a KQ game, unlike the things TTG has done so far.
In summation, I think it will be a challenge, and some compromises will have to be made, but I will maintain a cautiously optimistic stance until I see something that shows clearly that it is being taken in a more 'casual game' direction.
While the sane people in my head agree with that 100% there is also one optimist that wants to give them a chance with this license. He wants to see them pull it off, make it happen and make it great.
And even if it sucks like the rest in here believes it might make one thing happen that makes me happy already. Kings Quest Series marathons by people on this forum.
Edit: They already had an episode with death scenes and it was the most enjoyable one in the whole series. I could imagine a King's Quest 7 approach where you can die but the game just rewinds a bit and will let you try again without starting over.
Uh-oh! That last step was a doozy
What is the problem with saving your game often and in different slots so you don't have to play it all over again. Did all this auto-save bull*** in the last years make you forget about it?
I really liked the KQ1 remake in that regard. They kept all the puzzles is but asked you at the beginning if you wanted to disable dead ends. A great idea.
I also liked the idea of having alternate solutions to puzzles. Like the defeating the dragon that guards one of the treasures. Either you kill it with the golden dagger or you use the dagger to cut down a bucket and splash water over the beat. Both solutions work just fine but you lose the dagger in one of them with the result that you will not get full points in the game.
Or the bridge-troll that has one completely random solution (to me) or you can just bribe him with one of the treasures you collected on your travels. Again both solutions work, you can finish the game in both ways but only one of those solutions rewards you with the most points.
And I really liked this idea since it increases the replayability for the game. I loved finding better solutions to the puzzles I encountered and I loved to find the many deaths and even the dead ends.
No, it's just the weight of the title you choosed to carry on.
And I LOVE to see Telltale doing King's Quest!
People is just scared, because - like you - they have sweet memories about these old games. And you have to take care about them.
For example, it's like Telltale let Sam&Max to Daedalic. They're very good, but would you trust?
I'm VERY happy you and all the Telltale keeping the graphic adventure's market alive.
I've faith you can do King's quest justice!
It may well be a fun movie but it just ain't Die Hard. It is watered down and homogenized for a mass market audience, but it's not what I want as a fan of the series.
When I hear Telltale talk about making it "fun and accessible to a wide range of players" (i.e Easy as possible with no challenge) I know that I am no longer the audience for this stuff.
Sierra games used to be fun and accessible to a wide range of players back in the day. I was 14 when I played through King's Quest and had a blast playing it with my friends. We loved the challenge and the wide environments and the humour etc. After all the challenge was part of the reason we played these games.
Why do people assume these days that to appeal to kids and as many people as possible you have to boil everything down to PG-13 level and make things as easy and generic as possible?
I think you under estimate your audience.
They need to make this one for the fans or they'll be missing the whole point.
I can forgive Telltale making a less hardcore licence game like BttF easy, even if they REALLY overdid it, but they can't do the same treatment to King's Quest, and I'm sure they know that.
If they don't want to exclude casuals they should at the very least give us multiple difficulty options. It'd take more time and of course there'd be bugs, there are always bugs, but they simply have to please the hardcore fans with this title.
Yeah I died a little inside when I read that.
This is precisely what the games from Telltale are missing most - a strong commitment to the format of exploration and puzzle-solving that made the original Sierra and Lucasarts games so wonderful.
A big part of the beauty, wonder and joy of the old Sierra and Lucasarts games was the epic sense of adventure, that the next screen might introduce us to a whole new amazing, magical, beautiful and dangerous environment, full of mysteries, wonders, puzzles and astonishing things to discover. This has been almost completely lost in the Telltale games.
Yes, Telltale does a pretty good job with storytelling (The Devil's Playhouse and ToMI were by far their highpoint, with BTTF being the abysmal low point), but they almost completely lose the sense of epic, expansive adventure because there is minimal opportunity for real exploration (again, the new BTTF games are stunningly bad in this regard). Please, Telltale, bring this back. Remember the joy and wonder of discovering whole new realms in the classic Sierra and Lucasarts games. Compare this to the boredom and drudgery of revisiting the same four or five drab locations in BTTF. I know you can understand the difference here.
Also, please remember that there is a big difference between adventure game and interactive movie. The "interactive movie" idea had its moment some time ago and it failed because it was boring and because instead of adding to the movie element or the game element it diluted both of them, ending up with something not as good as a movie nor as an adventure game. Please be careful and remember to produce adventure games and not interactive movies. Again, BTTF is a perfect example of where Telltale has basically produced an interactive movie, which, on the basis of almost all reviews so far, satisfies neither those looking for an adventure game nor those looking for a movie. It's just a watered down, compromised mess.
Telltale, please, give us adventure, give us puzzles, give us exploration, give us discovery, give us wonder, give us astonishment, give us joy... give us adventure games!
Sincerely,
Chris
Thanks for your comments. I think that almost all of your brainstorming in the 4th paragraph is on the right track. Large non-linear explorable environments were a staple of King's Quest, and it would be nice if you could somehow do that. As for difficulty - why are there like 4-5 different levels of hints in Telltale games? It should imply that the games are difficult with hints off, and the casual gamers can just play them on Easy (it could easily be conveyed to the player beforehand what the situation is and how it works).
Eh, this isn't fair. First, I reject the idea that a series always has to stick with the same creator, especially video games. More importantly - Sierra had a system of really pushing their famous marketable designers. They would put the famous designers' names on products that they actually may have had very little to do with. Josh Mandel posted over at the Adventure Gamers forum that he once saw a quote saying that Freddy Pharkas was "Al Lowe at his purest" or something, and he just had to laugh. Josh strongly implied that he was the "real" designer of the game.
Mandel also worked on some of the Space Quest games, and so there might be similar situations with him or others working on that series.
MusicallyInspired already covered why Sierra is dead, and it had nothing to do with declining sales. King's Quest 8 outsold Grim Fandango 2:1. Here is a link to a late '90s interview with Roberta Williams:
http://www.justadventure.com/Interviews/Roberta_Williams/Roberta_Williams_Interview_3.shtm
It is clear from what she says that Sierra would have continued to innovate - they may have had some missteps sure, but I would bet that if they were around, the genre would be healthier than it is now when the entire design philosophy is stuck in 1990.
Yes you can put a fun story in an episode. But an epic story? Thats hard to do when the storytelling is always interupted because the episode ends.
Yes you can put interesting puzzles in an episode. But putting puzzles that build on each other where the the solutions of different tasks build to something bigger is also hard to do, when the episode itself is to small to feature several chans of tasks that are combined.
The biggest problem wth the episodic format ist the exploration factor. Because the game usually ends ust as you get a feel for the characters and the situation and start to get curious about the surroundings they live in.
Maybe it's time to try something that is not in episodes but a big game.
Although I have to admit, I remember KQ1 (the original) and that game wasn't that big either. It was more the deaths that drew it out.
That's definatly not true. Most epic stories over the years have come in parts. Lord of Rings etc came as 3 novels.
Even in Adventure gaming. Grim Fandango could have easily been released as 4 episodes and still had the same overall story.
I find myself agreeing with both of you. Ultimately I think it is not the episodic nature that limits opportunity for adventure, exploration, wonder, expansiveness and discovery, but rather the approach Telltale has taken to it. Just because a game is 2 or 3 hours long does not mean it is necessary to limit it to a small number of locations, as has been the case with too many of Telltale's games. Nor do I believe that the number of locations is the primary determinant in whether a game has that epic feeling, though it certainly does help to have more rather than less.
Think for a moment about the sense of adventure, wonder, discovery and exploration that has been fit into other "episodes" less than 2 or 3 hours long. This encapsulates pretty much every movie or episodic television show ever made. Think of Star Wars - epic! Think of Indiana Jones - epic! Heroes - epic! Lost - epic! Firefly - epic! The list goes on and on and on. Also, think seriously for a moment about classic Lucasarts games like Grim Fandango, Full Throttle, The Dig, etc. In many ways the structure of these games was episodic but all joined together into one amazing, wonderful story arc on a single disc. Nobody would even begin to argue that these stories weren't epic. Or imagine the first 3 hours of Knights of the Old Republic, King's Quest 6, Quest for Glory 2, Mass Effect, Jedi Knight, Tie Fighter, Gabriel Knight - these games are epic in the first 5 minutes!
An epic adventure CAN be done in a episodic format in 3 hour chapters, and each chapter can be epic in itself. The most recent Sam and Max series is the closest Telltale has come to this, but there's so much more that can be realized, and truly hope Telltale will realize this. Tremendously epic adventures, full of wonder, exploration and discovery have been told in episodic format, often in segments as short as 30 minutes. This can be done, Telltale, it can be done!
But let us return once again to the idea of discovery. When, in a Telltale game, can you remember discovering something and thinking to yourself "Wow! This is amazing! I can't wait to see what happens next?" We need more of this!
Give us adventure, exploration, wonder, mystery and discovery. Give us adventure!
Sincerely,
Chris
In reading the conclusion of my review I realized that pretty much everything I wrote then remains true. We saw major, major improvement in The Devil's Playhouse and ToMI, but BTTF represents a return to everything that made Bone an ultimately unsatisfying experience. I think Telltale would benefit from reading my original review of Bone, written way back in 2005, and ask themselves if they've really learned and developed since then.
Yes, part of the epic nature Mass Effect and Red Dead Redemption is the scale and options provided to the player. You're absolutely right. At the same time, think back to the great Sierra and Lucasarts adventure games. Were they epic? Heck yeah! Were they fun? Amazingly so! Compelling? Utterly! Why, when Lucasarts and Sierra were able to make epic adventure games 15 years ago with 16 colors and floppy disks is Telltale unable to do so now? It's not about limitations of technology or budget or distribution method. What, then, is the limitation? I experienced epic adventures that I remember to this day playing text only games like Zyll and Zork as 16 color floppy disk classics such as Quest for Glory II and Kings Quest III and IV. These games, to a large extent, also followed a very narrow path but they were FUN and they still provided a sense of epic adventure and of choice, whether the choice was an illusion or not. Telltale CAN make epic adventure games, full of discovery, exploration and wonder, IF that's what they want to do. So far I think their style of games are reflective not of the limitations of the medium and episodic approach but rather of a choice that the company has made, for better or for worse. Again, Telltale has shown glimmers of greatness, such as with The Devil's Playhouse and ToMI, and has also shown pure lack of effort and creativity, such as with Poker Night at the Inventory and BTTF. The choice is theirs.
Best,
Chris
I've read that interview three times now, and I really don't see any disdain on Grossman's end. Clear distaste, certainly, but disdain is a stretch.
I want, more than anything, to see you guys succeed at this. It will be a challenge, and it'll require doing things very different than what you're doing now (and I say this as someone who still enjoys what you're doing now), but I believe you can try to make it work. Just remember that the KQ series wouldn't exist if people didn't take a lot of risks.
Perhaps the most important aspect of old Sierra that should be embraced and reintroduced here is letting us adventurers examine and otherwise interact with everything in the environments. If you draw something, please let the main character at least look at it and give us a reaction.
The richness of the Sierra game worlds is one of the main things that set them apart from the more "railroaded attention" style of Lucasfilm/LucasArts. I say this with respect for the latter approach. It was a viable alternative they had every right to go with.
But it would feel so wrong with King's Quest.
this!
Take the new Spiderman film for example. Barely anything is known about it and already fans of the Sam Raimi versions are up in arms about it. A little soon for a reboot, granted, but because it's different doesn't necessarily mean it's going to be a disgrace to the franchise.
Batman is another prime example. Compare the Dark Knight to Adam West's fine work. I happen to love them both for very different reasons, but it's still Batman.
Even the evolution of video games changed the way in which we play some of our favourite series. Some would argue Mario is better in 2D but does that make Mario 64 crap?
I agree with the shared scepticism about whether Kings Quest is a series right for Telltale, being that their game design is usually very different from the original Sierra games, but it doesn't mean it won't be a great addition to the series if it doesn't follow the same old aged formula.
Heck, Monkey Island hasn't been the same for me since Lechuck's Revenge. Still hasn't stopped me enjoying the rest of the series though.
Telltale episodes aren't limited to a few locations because they need to get them to run a certain time, it's mostly due to space. These games are designed to be downloadable and not everyone has great internet, so they can't have the file-sizes too big.
I wasn't merely talking about story at all. I'm talking about atmosphere, tone, humour, dialogue, music, locations....
Obviously its a little difficult to compare the game mechanics of BttF to the movies. The game mechanics on ToMI however were pretty faithful to the other games - as pointed out previously, the inclusion of item combination being a good example of this. Please note, I'm not talking about difficulty here.
Some of the game mechanics in the old Sierra games just wouldn't be commercially acceptable anymore but I beleive they can recreate the feel (Not just story, see above for my definition) very well whilst also making a modern, successful game.
If that were the case none of the series would recycle environments in different episodes because you have to download them again anyways, so they might as well be brand new. There clearly are issues with how much time they can spend in development too, not just file size concerns.