I think that KQ6 (and KQ5 for that matter) actually has been undeservedly forgotten over the years.
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.
Yeah, definitely. But this thread is about whether or not KQ6 is overrated in the context of the rest of the series. Which is another argument entirely.
In KQ5 the story parts were short and ignoreable. KQ6 beats you over the head with it again, again and again. I hate it.
This is interesting... I agree, but I think of that as a knock against KQ5. Here do you mean it as a positive? I find it annoying if I only get little quips from characters, and don't build up any feeling for them.
I think KQ5 was a drop in quality from KQ4, due to its random story and incoherent world.
I thought KQ6 made the series much more compelling for all the reasons people say. One thing I don't think was mentioned, was that I thought somehow had the most believable and coherent world to explore until that point (don't remember KQ7 as well, but I think it kept this up fairly well). KQ6's brief mentions of politics and interrelationships between characters and groups of people let me believe in the world a little more, and get lost better in my escapist fantasy. Other KQ games seemed to have many disparate, unrelated people living near to each other, which my brain just can't get into.
I think that KQ6 (and KQ5 for that matter) actually has been undeservedly forgotten over the years.
absolutely. I first heard of them a few years ago and wondered why I did not stumble across them before. Then a few months later the KQ & SQ collection was on sale on steam and I got them. I had played thew remakes of KQ1 + 2 by that time and really enjoyed the originals too.
The first and only Sierra adventure I played before that was LSL 7. And I really loved that. But I never saw the other games of the series anywhere.
I loved KQV's world but it's marred from the fact it isn't has limited narration. More than previous games but still limited. KQ6 had the most sophisticated narration in the series, probably the best aspect of the game to me, you can look at almost everything. But I'm not nearly as interested in the character of Alexander, compared to Graham.
KQ7 did away with all narration so there was nothing to describe what you saw, I truly dislike that. It makes the world seem less thought out even more so. It lost a lot without narration. It didn't even have a travel guide type manual to make things more interesting. I also wasn't impressed about how disneyfied they made it. The villain is to silly.
Yeah, definitely. But this thread is about whether or not KQ6 is overrated in the context of the rest of the series. Which is another argument entirely.
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 disagree. Sure, the first couple KQ weren't about story, but that was more to do with innovating a new type of game than anything else. As the series went on it became more and more about story. What I consider better series by them (Space Quest, Quest for Glory, Gabriel Knight) were always about story. They came later, and didn't have to worry so much about innovating (not that they didn't innovate in their own ways). I'm not saying that's everything they're about, but it is certainly a large part of what they were, and something I and many other fans loved about them. Really, that's why I didn't like the first two KQ games as much.
I am a bit uneasy about TT handling the series, but hopefully they adapt to the Sierra-style adventure more than trying to adapt the game to their style which, as others have pointed out, would ruin the KQ feeling of the game.
I disagree. Sure, the first couple KQ weren't about story, but that was more to do with innovating a new type of game than anything else. As the series went on it became more and more about story. What I consider better series by them (Space Quest, Quest for Glory, Gabriel Knight) were always about story. They came later, and didn't have to worry so much about innovating (not that they didn't innovate in their own ways). I'm not saying that's everything they're about, but it is certainly a large part of what they were, and something I and many other fans loved about them. Really, that's why I didn't like the first two KQ games as much.
I'm not just talking about the first two King's Quest games, though. KQ3, 4, 5, and even 6 still captured the sense of being free to explore and interact with the world at your leisure--this quality of the games stood out in front of any story elements, particularly in KQ3-5.
Even Gabriel Knight (especially the first game) was all about exploring the city and various areas available to you in depth. The story opened up new areas gradually, but only after you had thoroughly discovered just about everything there was to discover in the previous areas.
This sense of freedom is all but gone from Telltale's games. Recapturing this is essential to creating a game that is at all faithful to the King's Quest legacy.
I'm not just talking about the first two King's Quest games, though. KQ3, 4, 5, and even 6 still captured the sense of being free to explore and interact with the world at your leisure--this quality of the games stood out in front of any story elements, particularly in KQ3-5.
Even Gabriel Knight (especially the first game) was all about exploring the city and various areas available to you in depth. The story opened up new areas gradually, but only after you had thoroughly discovered just about everything there was to discover in the previous areas.
This sense of freedom is all but gone from Telltale's games. Recapturing this is essential to creating a game that is at all faithful to the King's Quest legacy.
Perhaps for you. For me, the exploration was part of telling the story. The story wasn't just the cutscenes, it was all the things you found out in between that really filled it out. The cutscenes were just more compressed story.
Still, I agree that Telltale will have to change a lot about how they make games to do this one properly. The LucasArts-style game they have almost universally made won't fly for a Sierra sequel/reboot/whatever.
I don't dislike Alex, I just happen to like Graham better.
IMO, the early KQ games told their stories, and explained the world, through how you interacted with the world. You had to manually use your senses to search, 'look', 'drink', 'touch', 'talk', etc. The backstories of the world and descriptions of the world were awarded through the player's direct involvement. The more creative the player was with use of verbs, the more details would be uncovered about the world. Each game after KQ1 started getting progressively more sophisticated descriptions.
In some games, you'd do the same thing but through reading books scattered throughout the world, see the Thief series for example. KQ and early Sierra games did it through the player's direct interaction. This is how you explored the world.
Later games starting with the mouse driven/icons lost alot of that direct interaction, but you still had some interactivity with the hand or eye icons. KQ7 did away with interactions entirely.
I would love for Telltale to mimic the older way somehow. It would be cool if they even tossed in a parser for anyone who might want to play it old school. But on top of that having a more sophisticated story of the later games (as long as the stories aren't convoluted).
Perhaps for you. For me, the exploration was part of telling the story. The story wasn't just the cutscenes, it was all the things you found out in between that really filled it out. The cutscenes were just more compressed story.
I think we are mostly on the same page, actually. I don't want to be led along from cutscene to cutscene--I want to discover bits of the story as I go, through interaction and exploration.
This is probably why I prefer Quest for Glory over King's Quest. In QFG, the story wasn't told to the player at all. It was the player's actions that MADE the story. Now that was an adventure game!
I think we are mostly on the same page, actually. I don't want to be led along from cutscene to cutscene--I want to discover bits of the story as I go, through interaction and exploration.
This is probably why I prefer Quest for Glory over King's Quest. In QFG, the story wasn't told to the player at all. It was the player's actions that MADE the story. Now that was an adventure game!
Well, sorta. In Quest for Glory, the story was still what structured everything, you just had different ways to play through it. In the first game you were always an untried adventurer who had to save the valley from brigand attacks. You could do different things to get from start to finish, but you were still following a story and for the most part faced the same challenges along the way. QfG added the role-playing aspect to an adventure game, which allowed you to define moreso who your character was within the story. Without the story, there wouldn't be any cohesion to all the things you are doing. The story ties everything together so your not just playing an elaborate puzzle game.
@der_ketzer
The earlier games in the KQ series focused primarily on exploration and not much on story, but why are you suggesting that good storytelling has to come at the expense of having bad exploration or vice versa? KQ6 was huge. You get to travel all over the place, in just about the most nonlinear fashion in the whole series.
If you think the characters talk too much, then turn off ingame speech, for God's sake. Then the gameplay is the same as the diskette version.
KQ5 had crappy voice acting, the puzzles were brutal and very unforgiving, the plot was truly forgettable and had holes in it (how did Daventry heal so fast after the dragon?) that only the fan-made KQ3 Redux tries to explain...
Just because the early games didn't have much in the way of story, that doesn't mean the later games are required to also go without. Also, KQ6 takes considerably longer to beat just considering gameplay alone than the first 4 games do, so it's not like the story takes so much time to get through that you have nothing much to do otherwise.
I tire of people playing games and having the attitude toward story of "shut up and just let me play." Back in the day, one of the things that limited games in gameplay and storytelling was the amount of available disk space. I recall Ron Gilbert saying the reason why the scene in the Governor's Mansion in SoMI was automated behind the wall is because they didn't have enough disk space to fit in a new area. But, by the time KQ5/6 came out, since games had progressed to a level where they can fit in what story they want without sacrificing gameplay, and include voice acting and everything, they should still keep it to themselves anyway?
I don't just want a game with only lighthearted fairy-tale fetch quests. I want to care about what's happening to the characters I'm controlling and interacting with. I want to know why. We no longer need novel-sized manuals in which to tell the story. Back then, disk space was at a premium so it was easier (and cheaper) to just print it on paper. Now, the game itself can tell the story on it's own. Sure, having a long backstory in print is fun to have and read on the side, but it's not absolutely necessary to understand the plot as once it was.
I like having a good story in my games. If you can't stand to take the time to appreciate the story because you're too impatient or shallow to care, then that's just too bad.
KQ5 had crappy voice acting, the puzzles were brutal and very unforgiving, the plot was truly forgettable and had holes in it (how did Daventry heal so fast after the dragon?) that only the fan-made KQ3 Redux tries to explain...
Given that the manual says there has been a year between KQ4 and KQ5, i'd think that would be plenty of time for things to get back to normal or repaired. Actually I think the manual, even explains that things were repaired over that year.
Also KQ3 Redux is about the third or fourth source, fan game or otherwise, to to try to explain how things were repaired, actually (counting other fan game, KQ3 by Infamous Adventures as well)...
Given that the manual says there has been a year between KQ4 and KQ5, i'd think that would be plenty of time for things to get back to normal or repaired.
I think the Companion even mentions the healing effort in the prelude to the events of KQ5.
I wish the KQ Companion and/or novels would get a reprint
The KQ3 Redux magic pinball healing was pretty horrible though. It would have been far better to keep it more simple and end it with a notation of Graham saying, that now it's time for rebuilding.
If you think the VA is horrible just play the version without VA. And I personally like the KQ5 VA more than the one in KQ6 to be honest. Yes even the talking wolf. His voice actor did a far better job than the one of let's say the pawn-shop-owner. Every time I hear his voice I just want to quit the game and go to bed. I really cannot stand his voice because...
His voice actor did a far better job than the one of let's say the pawn-shop-owner. Every time I hear his voice I just want to quit the game and go to bed.
Hey, now, what's wrong with Skull Island's King Andre?
Anyway, people can have their own opinions about KQ5's voice acting vs. KQ6's. I may think it's odd that you think the inexperienced Sierra employees did a better job than the professional actors, but hey, it's just different tastes.
Hey, now, what's wrong with Skull Island's King Andre?
Anyway, people can have their own opinions about KQ5's voice acting vs. KQ6's. I may think it's odd that you think the inexperienced Sierra employees did a better job than the professional actors, but hey, it's just different tastes.
I think for what they are supposed to be able to do the Sierra employees were doing a much better job than the professional actors.
I read someone from Sierra defending the KQ5 voice acting long ago, just wish I could remember where.
Anyway, the gist of what this person said is the voice acting could have been much better but they were instructed to voice it like that... always sounded weird to me though.
I always play the floppy version of KQ5 (and SQ4 for that matter even though Owens is great ).
It always really annoyed me those weren't included in their various CD collections of games... that was before I hunted down and bought the floppy versions seperately
Just because I feel strongly about it and I'm adamant about my position, you have to talk down to me?
Don't be stupid.
Oh, and also KQ6 is not overrated, you are just... inadequate... at being able to properly appreciate a great game. And just because I'm being obstinate doesn't mean you're not wrong.
Just because I feel strongly about it and I'm adamant about my position, you have to talk down to me?
Don't be stupid.
Oh, and also KQ6 is not overrated, you are just... inadequate... at being able to properly appreciate a great game. And just because I'm being obstinate doesn't mean you're not wrong.
Hey, you started the talking down. I'm just throwing it back at you.
KQ6 is a great game--I just think it's over-rated in the context of the rest of the series. It isn't the clear, hands-down best KQ game that everyone says it is. I understand why some people think so, but I disagree.
I saw no talking down in Chyron8472's post. It explained his or her point of view on the subject at hand and thereby contributed constructively to this discussion. Whereas your subsequent post, Lambonius, unfortunately consisted of just an ad-hominem slight...
I saw no talking down in Chyron8472's post. It explained his or her point of view on the subject at hand and thereby contributed constructively to this discussion. Whereas your subsequent post, Lambonius, unfortunately consisted of just an ad-hominem slight...
Now everyone shake hands and hug each other!
Right...and this is the second time you've posted only to say how you don't find any fault in the posts of those who agree with you directly. :rolleyes:
I suggest you carefully reread the last line of the post to which you refer, in which Chyron explicitly called those of us who consider KQ6 overrated "shallow."
Right...and this is the second time you've posted only to say how you don't find any fault in the posts of those who agree with you directly. :rolleyes:
I suggest you carefully reread the last line of the post to which you refer, in which Chyron explicitly called those of us who consider KQ6 overrated "shallow."
Considering you've been throwing out personal attacks on this board as well, you are not really one to cast stones.
Still, you are not wrong. KQ, or any other popular, nostalgia-inducing property is bound to inspire a lot of passion. I'm pretty sure everyone here is a fan though, to some degree, so it'd be nice if we could all just get along. Oh wait, this is the internet .
Still, you are not wrong. KQ, or any other popular, nostalgia-inducing property is bound to inspire a lot of passion.
Right, and I've said time and time again throughout this thread that I like KQ6 and think it's a great game. I even called it my second favorite in the series. I just don't think it's the best. And I don't think it's great because of Jane Jensen. In general, I think it gets placed on a pedestal that it doesn't necessarily deserve. I don't understand why people have a problem with that stance. I'm clearly not alone in my opinion--others have said the same things here and elsewhere.
Anyway, the gist of what this person said is the voice acting could have been much better but they were instructed to voice it like that... always sounded weird to me though.
I really like it though. (As I wrote before...). I think the strong point in the Voices in KQ5 is that they are memorable. I still quote Cedric and the wolf. Hey I even do their voices. But I could not remember most of the people in KQ6 Even though I last played it 4 months ago. When I started the game again last week I wondered if I just missed them all the last time around but no. I just completely forgot about them because I never cared for them. I do care for Cedric though. I could never get the death for leaving him to die on the island of the harpies (which had memorable dialogue as well).
The worst part of KQ6 was dieing by the gnomes. They had the most memorable voices in the game but this took forever. One mistake and you would get a long animation where they throw you in the water, then a much too long drowning sequence with dialogue we don't need over that (KQ5 was much more rewarding when Graham drowned) and then we go into the realm of death and we finally get our pun. This was painful and not nearly as rewarding as the other death sequences in the series.
this is almost a minute before you can restore. Far too long.
Another thing that is wrong with this scene is that the feather does not work. (because it is needed elsewhere). This player was playing the game for the first time and he made an extra save-game before this section just to make sure he does not lose something important to the gnomes. Good thinking.
I don't understand why people have a problem with that stance. I'm clearly not alone in my opinion--others have said the same things here and elsewhere.
...you've been throwing out personal attacks on this board...
So less the stance and more the way it is presented. :: shrug :: It's easy to get into silly fights on the internet when both sides feel strongly about something and start belittling each other.
First before any misunderstandings, I must say that I don't hate KQ5. In fact I like the game, but I think that some voice actors could have been better or at least they could have added subtitles. My issue is that when I played KQ5 I had to listen several times some dialogues (especially with animal characters) before I could figure out what they were trying to say. However I admit that it might be partially my fault, because I'm not native English speaker (although I didn't have such problems with later Sierra games which didn't have subtitles like KQ7, GK2 or Phantasmagoria games).
KQ5 is the better game in terms of what it should/could have been. KQ5 raised the bar exceptionally high on its release. And KQ6 improved on the fantastic innovations that KQ5 made. It's just too bad that those innovations weren't made on KQ5 when it came out because that would have made IT the better game in eyes of the fans. Imagine KQ5 with professional voice actors, for instance!
KQ5 is the better game in terms of what it should/could have been. KQ5 raised the bar exceptionally high on its release. And KQ6 improved on the fantastic innovations that KQ5 made. It's just too bad that those innovations weren't made on KQ5 when it came out because that would have made IT the better game in eyes of the fans. Imagine KQ5 with professional voice actors, for instance!
True. I always imagined Cedric with an intelligent, nerdy voice sort of like percepter in the transformers cartoons, cept with the robotic sound to his voice; sort of like Stewie's voice in Family Guy, but with a much higher pitch.
True. I always imagined Cedric with an intelligent, nerdy voice sort of like percepter in the transformers cartoons, cept with the robotic sound to his voice; sort of like Stewie's voice in Family Guy, but with a much higher pitch.
Haha interesting...I'm now picturing Stewie saying "Look out, Graham. A poooooooisonous snake!"
Earlier in this thread, I pointed out I had read somewhere that the voices in KQ5 were made that way on purpose, and not only because they were done by amateurs... but I could not remember where I had read it.
Well, I just found out where - a forum post by Josh Mandel on the Adventuregamers forums -
As the voice of King Graham for KQV, KQVI, and the Tierra remakes, I'd just like to say: although I was on staff at Sierra at the time, I'm a professionally trained actor and voiceover performer, and I did Graham the way I was directed to do it. I strongly sensed it was "not right" (cough cough) at the time, but the directors were absolutely insistent that it be done precisely the way I did it. The same goes for all the performers, some of whom had a decent theatrical background when they walked into the studio.
As proof that it was not the actors' fault, I would offer that the directors also clearly felt Cedric was done just the way they wanted it to be done. 'Nuff said.
Yeah, we all need to track the directors down, make them listen to "A POOOIIIIISONOUS SNAKE!" fifty thousand times, and THEN get their opinion on whether or not Cedric sounds good.
If I had to choose one reason why KQ6 is my fav in the series (and there are many), I'd go with the fact that it had an isle full of different locations (all vastly different in feeling to) that I could travel to in --mostly-- any order. I know all the other games have had a full map with many more screens, etc, or like with KQ5 you also visited very different areas, but, in KQ6, once you got that magic map, it was all mostly at your reach.
In a way, it felt like Megaman stage select to me, or like Demon's Souls where you could choose any of the levels at any time. And that, as a gameplay mechanic, is my fav thing. With these games, if I get bored of a level, I just choose a different one, which is what I felt with KQ6. If I didn't like an isle, I just went to a completely different place, just by pulling my map out.
I don't know if I get my point across, but that's reason number 1 why I love KQ6 so much.
Yeah, we all need to track the directors down, make them listen to "A POOOIIIIISONOUS SNAKE!" fifty thousand times, and THEN get their opinion on whether or not Cedric sounds good.
If I had a mobile phone "A Poisonous Snake" would be my ring-tone.
I often think about King's Quest 6 as the best of the series. The story is good with plenty of interesting locations and some really good voice actors. The interface is direct lifted from KQ5 with only the most minor of tweaks. But the game's true achievement (to me) was having multiple endings and more than one solution to a couple of their puzzles.
I didn't have too much trouble working out stuff, though I did get stuck for a while in the catacombs, and felt accomplished for beating it. The reason it is the best in the series is due to the others having much more glaring flaws. Only King's Quest 5 can really claim such a simple yet effective interface and all the others require Sierra Logic to avoid blind rubbing of everything in your inventory on every object in the game.
Was it perfect? Well no. It did pull the timed puzzle a few too many times and the cliffs of logic requiring the book does make the game much harder to play today. Plus Jollo was obnoxious and the plot was a little bit simple with very few twists. Nothing major though.
Comments
Yeah, definitely. But this thread is about whether or not KQ6 is overrated in the context of the rest of the series. Which is another argument entirely.
This is interesting... I agree, but I think of that as a knock against KQ5. Here do you mean it as a positive? I find it annoying if I only get little quips from characters, and don't build up any feeling for them.
I think KQ5 was a drop in quality from KQ4, due to its random story and incoherent world.
I thought KQ6 made the series much more compelling for all the reasons people say. One thing I don't think was mentioned, was that I thought somehow had the most believable and coherent world to explore until that point (don't remember KQ7 as well, but I think it kept this up fairly well). KQ6's brief mentions of politics and interrelationships between characters and groups of people let me believe in the world a little more, and get lost better in my escapist fantasy. Other KQ games seemed to have many disparate, unrelated people living near to each other, which my brain just can't get into.
absolutely. I first heard of them a few years ago and wondered why I did not stumble across them before. Then a few months later the KQ & SQ collection was on sale on steam and I got them. I had played thew remakes of KQ1 + 2 by that time and really enjoyed the originals too.
The first and only Sierra adventure I played before that was LSL 7. And I really loved that. But I never saw the other games of the series anywhere.
KQ7 did away with all narration so there was nothing to describe what you saw, I truly dislike that. It makes the world seem less thought out even more so. It lost a lot without narration. It didn't even have a travel guide type manual to make things more interesting. I also wasn't impressed about how disneyfied they made it. The villain is to silly.
I disagree. Sure, the first couple KQ weren't about story, but that was more to do with innovating a new type of game than anything else. As the series went on it became more and more about story. What I consider better series by them (Space Quest, Quest for Glory, Gabriel Knight) were always about story. They came later, and didn't have to worry so much about innovating (not that they didn't innovate in their own ways). I'm not saying that's everything they're about, but it is certainly a large part of what they were, and something I and many other fans loved about them. Really, that's why I didn't like the first two KQ games as much.
I am a bit uneasy about TT handling the series, but hopefully they adapt to the Sierra-style adventure more than trying to adapt the game to their style which, as others have pointed out, would ruin the KQ feeling of the game.
Huh, really? I always loved Alexander's games better than the others in the series. Ah well, to each their own.
I'm not just talking about the first two King's Quest games, though. KQ3, 4, 5, and even 6 still captured the sense of being free to explore and interact with the world at your leisure--this quality of the games stood out in front of any story elements, particularly in KQ3-5.
Even Gabriel Knight (especially the first game) was all about exploring the city and various areas available to you in depth. The story opened up new areas gradually, but only after you had thoroughly discovered just about everything there was to discover in the previous areas.
This sense of freedom is all but gone from Telltale's games. Recapturing this is essential to creating a game that is at all faithful to the King's Quest legacy.
Perhaps for you. For me, the exploration was part of telling the story. The story wasn't just the cutscenes, it was all the things you found out in between that really filled it out. The cutscenes were just more compressed story.
Still, I agree that Telltale will have to change a lot about how they make games to do this one properly. The LucasArts-style game they have almost universally made won't fly for a Sierra sequel/reboot/whatever.
IMO, the early KQ games told their stories, and explained the world, through how you interacted with the world. You had to manually use your senses to search, 'look', 'drink', 'touch', 'talk', etc. The backstories of the world and descriptions of the world were awarded through the player's direct involvement. The more creative the player was with use of verbs, the more details would be uncovered about the world. Each game after KQ1 started getting progressively more sophisticated descriptions.
In some games, you'd do the same thing but through reading books scattered throughout the world, see the Thief series for example. KQ and early Sierra games did it through the player's direct interaction. This is how you explored the world.
Later games starting with the mouse driven/icons lost alot of that direct interaction, but you still had some interactivity with the hand or eye icons. KQ7 did away with interactions entirely.
I would love for Telltale to mimic the older way somehow. It would be cool if they even tossed in a parser for anyone who might want to play it old school. But on top of that having a more sophisticated story of the later games (as long as the stories aren't convoluted).
I think we are mostly on the same page, actually. I don't want to be led along from cutscene to cutscene--I want to discover bits of the story as I go, through interaction and exploration.
This is probably why I prefer Quest for Glory over King's Quest. In QFG, the story wasn't told to the player at all. It was the player's actions that MADE the story. Now that was an adventure game!
Well, sorta. In Quest for Glory, the story was still what structured everything, you just had different ways to play through it. In the first game you were always an untried adventurer who had to save the valley from brigand attacks. You could do different things to get from start to finish, but you were still following a story and for the most part faced the same challenges along the way. QfG added the role-playing aspect to an adventure game, which allowed you to define moreso who your character was within the story. Without the story, there wouldn't be any cohesion to all the things you are doing. The story ties everything together so your not just playing an elaborate puzzle game.
@der_ketzer
The earlier games in the KQ series focused primarily on exploration and not much on story, but why are you suggesting that good storytelling has to come at the expense of having bad exploration or vice versa? KQ6 was huge. You get to travel all over the place, in just about the most nonlinear fashion in the whole series.
If you think the characters talk too much, then turn off ingame speech, for God's sake. Then the gameplay is the same as the diskette version.
KQ5 had crappy voice acting, the puzzles were brutal and very unforgiving, the plot was truly forgettable and had holes in it (how did Daventry heal so fast after the dragon?) that only the fan-made KQ3 Redux tries to explain...
Just because the early games didn't have much in the way of story, that doesn't mean the later games are required to also go without. Also, KQ6 takes considerably longer to beat just considering gameplay alone than the first 4 games do, so it's not like the story takes so much time to get through that you have nothing much to do otherwise.
I tire of people playing games and having the attitude toward story of "shut up and just let me play." Back in the day, one of the things that limited games in gameplay and storytelling was the amount of available disk space. I recall Ron Gilbert saying the reason why the scene in the Governor's Mansion in SoMI was automated behind the wall is because they didn't have enough disk space to fit in a new area. But, by the time KQ5/6 came out, since games had progressed to a level where they can fit in what story they want without sacrificing gameplay, and include voice acting and everything, they should still keep it to themselves anyway?
I don't just want a game with only lighthearted fairy-tale fetch quests. I want to care about what's happening to the characters I'm controlling and interacting with. I want to know why. We no longer need novel-sized manuals in which to tell the story. Back then, disk space was at a premium so it was easier (and cheaper) to just print it on paper. Now, the game itself can tell the story on it's own. Sure, having a long backstory in print is fun to have and read on the side, but it's not absolutely necessary to understand the plot as once it was.
I like having a good story in my games. If you can't stand to take the time to appreciate the story because you're too impatient or shallow to care, then that's just too bad.
Also KQ3 Redux is about the third or fourth source, fan game or otherwise, to to try to explain how things were repaired, actually (counting other fan game, KQ3 by Infamous Adventures as well)...
I think the Companion even mentions the healing effort in the prelude to the events of KQ5.
I wish the KQ Companion and/or novels would get a reprint
Everyone, please stop expressing opinions. We've personally insulted Chyron8472.
Thanks.
If you think the VA is horrible just play the version without VA. And I personally like the KQ5 VA more than the one in KQ6 to be honest. Yes even the talking wolf. His voice actor did a far better job than the one of let's say the pawn-shop-owner. Every time I hear his voice I just want to quit the game and go to bed. I really cannot stand his voice because... Oh. I will stop then.
Hey, now, what's wrong with Skull Island's King Andre?
Anyway, people can have their own opinions about KQ5's voice acting vs. KQ6's. I may think it's odd that you think the inexperienced Sierra employees did a better job than the professional actors, but hey, it's just different tastes.
I think for what they are supposed to be able to do the Sierra employees were doing a much better job than the professional actors.
Anyway, the gist of what this person said is the voice acting could have been much better but they were instructed to voice it like that... always sounded weird to me though.
I always play the floppy version of KQ5 (and SQ4 for that matter even though Owens is great
It always really annoyed me those weren't included in their various CD collections of games... that was before I hunted down and bought the floppy versions seperately
Just because I feel strongly about it and I'm adamant about my position, you have to talk down to me?
Don't be stupid.
Oh, and also KQ6 is not overrated, you are just... inadequate... at being able to properly appreciate a great game.
Hey, you started the talking down.
KQ6 is a great game--I just think it's over-rated in the context of the rest of the series. It isn't the clear, hands-down best KQ game that everyone says it is. I understand why some people think so, but I disagree.
Now everyone shake hands and hug each other!
Right...and this is the second time you've posted only to say how you don't find any fault in the posts of those who agree with you directly. :rolleyes:
I suggest you carefully reread the last line of the post to which you refer, in which Chyron explicitly called those of us who consider KQ6 overrated "shallow."
Considering you've been throwing out personal attacks on this board as well, you are not really one to cast stones.
Still, you are not wrong. KQ, or any other popular, nostalgia-inducing property is bound to inspire a lot of passion. I'm pretty sure everyone here is a fan though, to some degree, so it'd be nice if we could all just get along. Oh wait, this is the internet
Right, and I've said time and time again throughout this thread that I like KQ6 and think it's a great game. I even called it my second favorite in the series. I just don't think it's the best. And I don't think it's great because of Jane Jensen. In general, I think it gets placed on a pedestal that it doesn't necessarily deserve. I don't understand why people have a problem with that stance. I'm clearly not alone in my opinion--others have said the same things here and elsewhere.
I really like it though. (As I wrote before...). I think the strong point in the Voices in KQ5 is that they are memorable. I still quote Cedric and the wolf. Hey I even do their voices. But I could not remember most of the people in KQ6 Even though I last played it 4 months ago. When I started the game again last week I wondered if I just missed them all the last time around but no. I just completely forgot about them because I never cared for them. I do care for Cedric though. I could never get the death for leaving him to die on the island of the harpies (which had memorable dialogue as well).
The worst part of KQ6 was dieing by the gnomes. They had the most memorable voices in the game but this took forever. One mistake and you would get a long animation where they throw you in the water, then a much too long drowning sequence with dialogue we don't need over that (KQ5 was much more rewarding when Graham drowned) and then we go into the realm of death and we finally get our pun. This was painful and not nearly as rewarding as the other death sequences in the series.
a link that should show you what I mean:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wB7awOJrYlI#t=8m29s
this is almost a minute before you can restore. Far too long.
Another thing that is wrong with this scene is that the feather does not work. (because it is needed elsewhere). This player was playing the game for the first time and he made an extra save-game before this section just to make sure he does not lose something important to the gnomes. Good thinking.
So less the stance and more the way it is presented. :: shrug :: It's easy to get into silly fights on the internet when both sides feel strongly about something and start belittling each other.
True. I always imagined Cedric with an intelligent, nerdy voice sort of like percepter in the transformers cartoons, cept with the robotic sound to his voice; sort of like Stewie's voice in Family Guy, but with a much higher pitch.
Haha interesting...I'm now picturing Stewie saying "Look out, Graham. A poooooooisonous snake!"
Well, I just found out where - a forum post by Josh Mandel on the Adventuregamers forums -
In a way, it felt like Megaman stage select to me, or like Demon's Souls where you could choose any of the levels at any time. And that, as a gameplay mechanic, is my fav thing. With these games, if I get bored of a level, I just choose a different one, which is what I felt with KQ6. If I didn't like an isle, I just went to a completely different place, just by pulling my map out.
I don't know if I get my point across, but that's reason number 1 why I love KQ6 so much.
If I had a mobile phone "A Poisonous Snake" would be my ring-tone.
I didn't have too much trouble working out stuff, though I did get stuck for a while in the catacombs, and felt accomplished for beating it. The reason it is the best in the series is due to the others having much more glaring flaws. Only King's Quest 5 can really claim such a simple yet effective interface and all the others require Sierra Logic to avoid blind rubbing of everything in your inventory on every object in the game.
Was it perfect? Well no. It did pull the timed puzzle a few too many times and the cliffs of logic requiring the book does make the game much harder to play today. Plus Jollo was obnoxious and the plot was a little bit simple with very few twists. Nothing major though.