KQ6: Overrated?
I know I'm committing blasphemy in the eyes of many KQ die hards by saying this, but am I alone in feeling that KQ6 is overrated? KQ6 kind of reminds me of TSL--It's a little too dark, it's dialogue is a little too formal and clinical (it's a bit too wordy and not to the point as the previous games), it strives--and goes overboard--in trying to get a mature, "epic" feel. It loses that fun, bright, mindless, lighthearted fairy tale feel which characterized the previous games, especially KQV (which is IMO the pinnacle of the series in many ways).
It's kind of like KQ meets GK (a series I've personally never cared for) in some ways with it's story of political intrigue, a dark murderous plot, and a secret society. It takes things into an adult sort of direction--As in, more catered to adults rather than the whole family as the previous games were.
That's not to say it doesn't have it's light moments--of course it does. But the lighthearted moments don't feel nearly as innocent or as natural as in KQV or KQVII--They feel almost kind of forced.
I actually find KQVII to be a better KQ sequel than VI. KQ7 to me is like Roberta meets Don Bluth--which IMO is a good mix.
I'll put it this way: KQVI opened the door to TSL. That makes it bad enough:p
It's kind of like KQ meets GK (a series I've personally never cared for) in some ways with it's story of political intrigue, a dark murderous plot, and a secret society. It takes things into an adult sort of direction--As in, more catered to adults rather than the whole family as the previous games were.
That's not to say it doesn't have it's light moments--of course it does. But the lighthearted moments don't feel nearly as innocent or as natural as in KQV or KQVII--They feel almost kind of forced.
I actually find KQVII to be a better KQ sequel than VI. KQ7 to me is like Roberta meets Don Bluth--which IMO is a good mix.
I'll put it this way: KQVI opened the door to TSL. That makes it bad enough:p
Sign in to comment in this discussion.
Comments
But anyway, for me personally, the best KQ games are 3, 4 and 5 (depending on do you play with CD version or not) and I would like to see Telltale take more elements on those games than any others.
Personally I think KQ 6 walks constantly between naive and serious and exaggarates on them a bit too much. KQ4 did it much better. It has serious elements in it, but it doesn't turn in ultra naive or serious in any point. 5 and 3 are just good tie ins, because of the Manannan/Mordack story arch and do handle their fairytale elements pretty well IMO. Plus KQ5 is damn pretty looking game.
Personally I think that MoE is only KQ game with darker atmosphere and I always thought that Green Isles were rather lighthearted place with bit of Lewis Carroll style craziness.
IMHO biggest strenght of KQ6 are it's puzzles, which are probably the best the series have to offer. Although storywise my favourite game is probably KQ4. KQ7, which you mentioned, is a nice game, but it doesn't offer any challenge at all.
Her games make me cry too, but they're not tears of joy, but tears of boredom at the overly cliched, uber-dark and ''edgy'' plots, and regret that time and money were wasted in creating them.
I like horror, so I don't mind dark themes of many Jensen's games. I think she did better job in Gabriel Knight games than Roberta did with Phantasmagoria (story is somewhat decent, but there is no puzzles) or Lorelei Shannon did with Puzzle of Flesh (where main character is the most uncharismatic pervert I have ever seen in adventure games).
But I agree that not everyone will find her themes suitable to games like KQ6 or PQ3 (although KQ6 isn't very dark in my opinion). I haven't played EcoQuest, so I don't know how dark it's themes are.
I agree with that.
Back on topic, I think KQVI is a fantastic game and a unique achievement that only Jane could have pulled off. But it was, out of necessity, a standalone in the sense that Jane as a writer and that particular style would have been an almost impossible act for anyone else to follow without a dramatic drop in genuine quality. It takes a very specific set of writing and storytelling skills to do what Jane did with KQVI.
This is not to say that the other writers for Sierra were not equally good, only that they did not have that particular set of skills and approaches that Jane brought to it. What the others could do was often equally impressive, but in a totally different way.
Blah blah blah, UNIQUE ACHIEVEMENT...
Blah blah blah, NOBODY BUT JANE...
Blah blah blah, not without a DRAMATIC DROP IN QUALITY!
Blah blah blah, VERY specific set of writing skills...
Please. She's not God. You are only proving my point about Jensen fanboyism.
Lamb, I'd love if you went into detail about the drawbacks you find in her writing style.
Well, I pretty much agree in full with your initial assessment of it in the first post of this thread.
But further than that, I think it's usually over-wrought, badly cliched, and always tries too hard to be "dark," "edgy," or "psychological." It's just so blatantly overdone, and it's exactly the same in every single one of her games. I have no problem with horror themes or psychological themes, but I have yet to see a Jane Jensen game that doesn't deal with one or both of those notions. After a while the unoriginality of it all is just tiresome. Don't get me wrong, I really like King's Quest 6--I do. I just think it's inane to say that Jane Jensen is the be-all, end-all reason why it's a good game. If anything, she's the one who makes it feel out of place with the rest of the series, which in my opinion, is not a good thing.
Honestly, I even like Gabriel Knight (Sins of the Fathers,) but I think that the dialog is hands down the worst part of the game. It's so long and over-written. It is an absolute chore to sit through it all, and you really have to listen to every conversation if you want to complete the game.
Jane Jensen is highly over-rated. Her "dark" and "mature" themes are cliched at best, and self-indulgent at worst.
Bt
Proto-Twilight.
For some reason, I really feel like it works well in the context of Quest For Glory in a way that it couldn't (and doesn't) work in King's Quest. Maybe it's because you are supposed to be fighting monsters and killing things as part of the experience. I think another part of it has to do with the fact that all the Quest for Glory games had a distinctly dark element to them that was balanced perfectly by the silly humor, colorful style, and adventurous gameplay. Also, the "dark" in Quest for Glory, even Quest for Glory 4, is not the angsty, emo, cliche psychological thriller "dark" of Jane Jensen games, it's more specifically related to a kind of classic horror genre concept (vampires, werewolves, mad-scientists, frankenstein monsters, etc.) Those are two VERY different things.
What's not to like?
- Realism--This is a fairy tale, a lighthearted one at that. KQ isn't dark fantasy, it isn't QFG or GK;
- KQ5 has the same interface and graphics, and still retains the lightheartedness of KQ1-4, and KQ7;
- Why does the villain have to be compelling, in an intellectual sense? This is King's Quest, not Murder She Wrote or whatever. Mordack and Lolotte were badass villains, fearsome and mysterious, without being intellectually compelling.;
- KQ5 and KQ7 also have music on the same quality, or higher, than that of KQ6;
- So did 5 and 7 in terms of the length of gameplay;
- The KQ games are generally replayable even without multiple endings.
As stated before, the game introduced too much maturity, darkness, complexity and a level of depth that really was not needed in the KQ series. It deviated from the formula a bit too much.Wellllll, now I think you might be overstating things just a bit. KQ6 is definitely different than the rest of the series, and not always in a good way. But overall, I wouldn't call it dark fantasy. It hasn't gone that far yet. And Alhazared may be an intellectual, but he's still very archetypal as a villain. The scheming vizier is classic fairy tale--right out of Aladdin. And what's wrong with multiple paths and endings?
The main problem as I see it with KQ6 is the WAY its story is told. It's SO serious. The characters take themselves too seriously--there is too much pathos in the whole thing--too much gravitas. Not to mention all the drawn out dialog. Not as bad in a Gabriel Knight game though, thankfully, but it definitely loses the great fairy tale feel of the first five games in the series.
Why does a King's Quest game have to be a shallow series of lighthearted fetch quests? Why can't it be serious? What's wrong with serious?
Mordack was not interesting at all. Graham has very little interaction with Mordack except for the very very end of the game, and not much is known about him from KQ5 itself except that he is Manannan's brother.
Cedric is annoying and unhelpful. The ants and bees (and various other animals) voice acting is childish sounding. The plot is uninterestingly simple. I care little or nothing for the other minor characters in the story. Yes, KQ5's and 6's interfaces are extremely similar, but that doesn't make up for KQ5's other flaws.
IMO, KQ7 is very good. It tells a good story, it has interesting characters, and it finally allows a playable Valanice with her own believable motivations. However KQ7's primary problem is its interface, which reduces the player's ability to freely examine/interact with the environment in the same way that KQ6 (and 5) allows. People do also complain about the way death is handled, but I think this is only a very minor issue if the player is in the habit of saving early and often otherwise anyway.
In KQ6, Alexander takes the time to build relationships with other people on the islands. You come to care about them. It evokes some level of feeling to watch the shopkeeper panic as he watches Alexander give up and die. It's somehow comforting to know that there is someone (in the person of Jollo) that is in the castle who can help Alexander. I could go on with more specific examples, but my point is that the player comes to know and have an interest in the lives of other people on the islands. The same applies in KQ7.
I don't give a rat's fart about the Ice Queen, Crispin or anyone from the town in KQ5. They're all just a means to an end; an end which is laid out plain and simple right from the very beginning, without any significant variation along the way.
I've played both EcoQuest games, and I never thought of them as being dark. They were mostly about environmental issues like polluting the ocean and saving the rainforest. I don't want to spoil the games for those who haven't played them so here are the trailers instead. This is the trailer for EcoQuest: Search for Cetus. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irDLChacEjQ And here is the trailer for Lost Secrets of the Rainforest. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u1fNsAdk1Fg&playnext=1&list=PL6DB508BDB3E469EA
Still she handled adult themes better than most of the Sierra writers. What I always liked in Gabriel Knight games was the fact that she managed to include huge amounts of real historical stuff into those game and also the puzzles offered a good challenge. However it might affect to my judgement, that I like the stuff to which she based her stories, like Wagner, mystery surrounding king Ludwig II of Bavaria and his death, Grail myths, Templars etc. While I like GK series, I don't see her as goddess and I think that for example PQ3's story would have worked without all that cult stuff, which felt IMO bit out of place.
I understand if some people find her stories boring because in GK games you have to explore the myths and stuff in great detail, but compared to other Sierra's dark mature games she triumphed. For example Roberta added rape scene to Phantasmagoria, but five minutes later protagonist is like nothing happened and there is no further references to that event in the game. So I think it was added for shock value, which isn't very good way to explore mature themes. Also I don't understand why the character didn't react in any way when she saw ectoplasm in the nursery, normal people would have moved out from the house at that point. Despite it's flaws, story was somewhat amusing, but the game lacked puzzles.
And Shannon's Puzzle of Flesh was just ridicilous in the way it handled it's horror and sexual themes, often it felt more like cheap fetish film than horror game.
As for the rest, I already shared my views on the actual topic and am happy to leave it at that.
Uh, Lambo, have you actually played the second or third GK game?
Heh...yeah I know that they have vampires and werewolves. But there is a difference between the camp of the 1930s horror movies (which is more the direction that QFG4 goes, in my opinion) than the way Jensen treats those subjects.
I don't know how someone can seriously say that KQ6 was darker than the rest of the series. Personally, I felt the darkest game in the series was KQ4... though I'm not saying that's a bad thing.
But have you played them? As it sounds you judge them just because of what you've read, not what you've experienced.
As far as Jane Jensen's writing goes, I can understand liking or disliking it. Personally, I like it for the interesting historical and mythological undertones that are present in both KQ6 and the first two GK games. I don't really care one way or another about "dark and gritty" which many people seem to get their panties in a bunch over.
And Lamb, I know you are a cool guy from participating in the IA forums, but please lay off the ad hominem attacks. They're uncalled for and paint you in a bad light.
And the game is still very light-hearted. Just look at the Isle of Wonders, or the more colorful characters strewn throughout the land. There's a very good balance of light vs. dark in the game, so it's never too colorful or too dreary.
Most of her games are supposed to be dark. I wouldn't expect anything else if games are about voodoo or werewolves, in fact I would be disapointed if such game was bright and happy. Many writers usually write only certain genres of fiction and it's not necessarily a bad thing. I couldn't imagine Leisure Suit Larry written by Jane Jensen or Gabriel Knight written by Al Lowe.
That said, that doesn't make KQ6 my favourite. KQ5 will always be my favourite. Personally, I don't hold the whole simple-story/light-hearted/"anti-contrived"/"non-convoluted" standpoint of what KQ should be at all. I don't mind backstories, tying things together, and having a bit of drama in it (a la KQ6). Honestly, this kind of stuff just makes things more interesting to me. That doesn't mean I have to consider stuff like the Father or TSL storylines canon but it is fun to experience and see unfold. I enjoy it for what it is. I don't really understand why you guys are so against that, honestly. Maybe it's just your style I guess. Like how some people love horror flicks and I just cannot sit through one. Not my scene. All this doesn't mean they are automatically cliche, bad, and contrived though.
Except about cursors. You and I already want to smack each other around over that.
<notices confused looks all around>
Oh, sorry everybody, that's a reference from other forums.
The first Kings Quest game was obviously amazing both technically for the times and in how it invented the 'modern' adventure genre that is still used in adventure games today (well, the basics).
And being Sierras flagship series, new improvements were often put in KQ titles first, such as Kings Quest 4 being the first game utilizing a sound card (or one of the first in any case?).
But the gameplay isn't all that great... the storylines are banal and often not very imaginative, and just not terribly interesting.
It's my one of my least favourite Sierra series. I still enjoy the games but probably mostly because of nostagia in some of the cases.
However, in my opinion, Kings Quest 6 really stands out in a good way... nice story, a bit of a serious feel, good writing... I think it's the best Kings Quest game by far.
But then came Kings Quest 7...
In KQ5 the story parts were short and ignoreable. KQ6 beats you over the head with it again, again and again. I hate it.
Well that's just the thing--what people (even fans) so often don't "get" about the Sierra classics. They aren't about story. They are about exploration and discovery. Story provides a framework for the exploration and discovery, but it should not intrude on or overshadow it, as it does in KQ6 (and most certainly does in TSL.) This is why King's Quest games started going downhill after King's Quest 5.
This is why so many of us are so uneasy about Telltale trying to handle a Sierra franchise.
I think people are much kinder to the Lucasarts adventure games and they forget just how much Sierra and Lucasarts MADE each other better.. Much to the benefit of we the gamers. 5 and 6 are really important in terms of what we expect a great adventure game to be like... so I think that if anything they deserve more reverence and surely not less.