It's also the only good Amiga port out of all their VGA games.
All the other VGA games had absolutely rubbish Amiga ports, some of the worst I've ever seen... but unlike the rest, KQ6 was outsourced to Revolution instead of being done in-house.
It's also the only good Amiga port out of all their VGA games.
All the other VGA games had absolutely rubbish Amiga ports, some of the worst I've ever seen... but unlike the rest, KQ6 was outsourced to Revolution instead of being done in-house.
Which gave rise to Briticisms like the hyphen in Alex's line "no-one's ever heard of the Land of the Green Isles" in the intro.
Let me preface this by saying I haven't played KQ6 since it was new, so I can't say for sure what I did or didn't like about it.
What I CAN say is that I don't really have any particular fond memories of it, whereas I still fondly recall many of the details of KQ5, QFG4, SQ5, Freddy Pharkas... the other games of that era. So I will assume that means I think it's overrated.
Clearly this is a sign of the end times that my opinion on old computer games is not in line with yours. All I really remember vividly about KQ6 is that you're Prince Alexander and you wear a green shirt. But I totally fondly remember The Ballad of Freddy Pharkas.
It is remarkably different fro the older games, but that's OK.
Sometimes I feel like we want every game to be an expansion pack to the last in a franchise. We want more of our favorite, and even if something is good, it isn't what we were hoping for so it's bad in that respect.
KQ6 is different than the older games but it's different in a really good way. I can understand the viewpoint though as I only really like 6 and 7 and dislike the predecessors, so I obviously have a reverse opinion.
Phreddy Pharkus was the one that I sort of neglected for a long time, but It actually got pretty good and I'm glad I stuck with it. Now I wouldn't say I liked it as much as KQ6 but thats my opinion. I would still recommend it to people, but with the warning that it takes awhile to get interesting.
VII is my favorite. I think I liked the many different realms you got to explore in that one. VI was okay, but many of the cut-scenes overstayed their welcome, especially since most the time you were staring at a still image with just a mouth moving (if that). And the thing I liked most about seven was the dual playable characters, especially when you would retread one another footsteps. Also, it had some of the best looking death animations ever.
Also, it had some of the best looking death animations ever.
Nothing against KQVII, but I always have to scratch my head when people praise the animations in that game. They are just about the choppiest slide-show speed cartoon animations in any game ever. Sierra upped the game's resolution, but they didn't up the number of animation frames for their sprites. As a result, most of the animations look really stilted and choppy.
Nothing against KQVII, but I always have to scratch my head when people praise the animations in that game. They are just about the choppiest slide-show speed cartoon animations in any game ever. Sierra upped the game's resolution, but they didn't up the number of animation frames for their sprites. As a result, most of the animations look really stilted and choppy.
Not to mention the slooooooooooooooooooooooooooooow walking >_>
Personally, I am not fond of KQ6. I prefer KQ1, 3, 4 & 5 myself. With 5 Being my favorite.
Nothing against KQVII, but I always have to scratch my head when people praise the animations in that game. They are just about the choppiest slide-show speed cartoon animations in any game ever. Sierra upped the game's resolution, but they didn't up the number of animation frames for their sprites. As a result, most of the animations look really stilted and choppy.
I never had that issue, but then again I played it on a top of the line computer for that time, which it required. Also, it has the same problem as many old games (especially fmv ones) in that they don't run quite right on modern systems.
Not to mention the slooooooooooooooooooooooooooooow walking >_>
Personally, I am not fond of KQ6. I prefer KQ1, 3, 4 & 5 myself. With 5 Being my favorite.
All the KQ games had slow walking. Even with walking speed at max they walked slow.
I never had that issue, but then again I played it on a top of the line computer for that time, which it required. Also, it has the same problem as many old games (especially fmv ones) in that they don't run quite right on modern systems.
Ah. That explains it. You haven't played it recently. Rose colored glasses, my friend. Yeah, it looked alright for its time, but it was quickly surpassed by other cartoon games like Curse of Monkey Island (MUCH better in terms of animation.) I just mean its animation doesn't hold up well today because it was one of the first games made in 640x480 resolution, and they treated the sprite animation as though it was a 320x200 game (which requires far fewer frames to look smooth.) It had nothing to do with processor speed.
BTW, if you're looking to get it running, you might try the various patches at Sierra Help Pages. You can patch the old Windows 3.1 version of the game to turn it into a DOS version, which can then be run using DosBox like any other old Dos game. It worked perfectly for me.
Actually, I have played it recently, but it's on an old computer setup I use for old games. It run's a lot smoother than playing it through dos box. Also, I have the later released version that was optimized for Windows 95. It looks and runs a lot better than the 3.1 version did.
I just mean its animation doesn't hold up well today because it was one of the first games made in 640x480 resolution, and they treated the sprite animation as though it was a 320x200 game (which requires far fewer frames to look smooth.)
Looks smooth enough for me. Rosella's walkcycle is only three frames shorter than Guybrush's in CMI.
Looks smooth enough for me. Rosella's walkcycle is only three frames shorter than Guybrush's in CMI.
The walk cycles are probably the best animations of the bunch though. Others are terrible. Look at Valanice turning to look at the beast in that clip. It's like 3 frames and super slow.
Actually, I have played it recently, but it's on an old computer setup I use for old games. It run's a lot smoother than playing it through dos box. Also, I have the later released version that was optimized for Windows 95. It looks and runs a lot better than the 3.1 version did.
Actually, the later version included the DOS version while the initial release was Windows only. In my opinion and experience the DOS versions of Sierra games are always superior to the shoddy Windows ports.
Actually, the later version included the DOS version while the initial release was Windows only. In my opinion and experience the DOS versions of Sierra games are always superior to the shoddy Windows ports.
You do realize you contradicted yourself there, right? It couldn't be a shoddy widows port if it was released initially on windows then released on DOS. The DOS version would then be the port. Coincidentally, you also missed the point. I was comparing the 95 version to a 3.1 version that had been patched to run on DOS then hacked to run with DOS Box and not the actual release DOS version.
But that's not true. They merely released the Windows version first. All SCI games are DOS games by nature (except the ones that weren't released in DOS at all, like Torin's Passage). The DOS versions are always better because they run smoother and are more customizable. You can choose which music drivers you want in DOS, for instance, while you can't in Windows. You're stuck with General MIDI.
I always wondered about that. When I bought KQ7 it was only playable in Windows, so when people talked about "the DOS version" of KQ7 it always confused me where that version came from.
Personally Kq6 is my favorite in the series with it's story. Some of the puzzles were tricky and required a few tries to get it, but I never thought it got as ridiculous as Kq5 did (ex:wasn't quick enough to save the rat, die don't save the eagle, die later) . Plus the two different endings (short and long), loved that in KQ6. Kq5 has some of the worst character voices I've ever understand in a Sierra game and there was no way to change to text (the cd version). In KQ6 you could and I remember the narrator being alot better. Kq7 felt like a little kiddie game with some of the character script. I know Roberta liked mixing up fairy tales into these games but I thought she took this one a little too far. I still feel I should play Gabriel Knight cause I know Jane Jensen made that and helped make KQ6.
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
Hey you may think it's "overrated" what ever the hell that means, it's King's Quest...the adventure game genre is a niche in itself. Perhaps it just wasn't your favorite. I loved KQ6, I found many of the story elements hilarious. KQ7 was beautiful in that it was cartoony fun, but like many older games...the dialog is rather corny now. They can stick with the time period the games took place in, but updating it would be nice. Keeping with the humor that these games had. The humor was my favorite element in these games and it would be a treasure to re-live that. I'd definitely purchase future games of my favorite series.
but am I alone in feeling that KQ6 is overrated? KQ6 kind of reminds me of TSL
No. TSL is a big meetup with the characters of KQ6 on the green isles and I think that is intentional. Of course that is one big thing that annoys me about TSL. I don't want to be on the green isles. The dark tower area in Episode 3 was great. Finally somewhere else to go.
I didn't like the short/long ending approach of KQ VI, mostly because there was no real indication that you were "choosing" one path or the other -- in fact, solving the critical puzzle in what seemed to me the more interesting way was the key to choosing the SHORT version. It wasn't until I came back to replay the game years later and consulted a walkthrough that I even knew there was a long ending! So I missed out on a bunch of content when I first played the game.
KQ VI also felt overblown to me in a lot of ways -- technically it was an improvement over KQ V, especially regarding the voice acting, but the sprawling map seemed to be large just to be large, and the motivation (rescue the princess) wasn't any more compelling than it was in KQ II. I did like the Isle of Wonder and its many puns, because Isle of Wonder.
This may be heretical, but I liked the cartoonish, episodic feel of KQ VII better. (And the fact that, finally, we had protagonists with a little bit of attitude and personality -- Graham and Alexander are so unfailingly polite and calm that with voice acting they always seemed stiff and inhuman to me.)
And the fact that, finally, we had protagonists with a little bit of attitude and personality -- Graham and Alexander are so unfailingly polite and calm that with voice acting they always seemed stiff and inhuman to me.
Yet the cost of "personality" was horrible animation.
Actually, the later version included the DOS version while the initial release was Windows only. In my opinion and experience the DOS versions of Sierra games are always superior to the shoddy Windows ports.
Well KQ7 version 2.0 made an already poor game, worse, in my opinion. There were a couple of good decisions, like the ability to save at any time.
But there were several things cut, like 2-3 death scenes (the dragon tail, variants on the volcano eruption). So the version is incomplete. So the game actually lost the alternate 'bad ending' cutscene, where volcano erupts and destroys the world. This also means several voiceovers for the 'retry' deaths were cut as well. So a good number of material was removed.
Cut material is never a good thing imo.
I wonder if version 1.x will be playable in ScummVM in the future? Because if it works, I'd rather play that version over 2.0 (even if 2.0 offers better saving options). Granted someone will have to do something so ScummVM gets around the timer bugs.
I'd also love it, if someone came out with a unofficial patch, that would unlock the missing content, but keep the extra saving features. That would be the best option.
I didn't like the short/long ending approach of KQ VI, mostly because there was no real indication that you were "choosing" one path or the other -- in fact, solving the critical puzzle in what seemed to me the more interesting way was the key to choosing the SHORT version. It wasn't until I came back to replay the game years later and consulted a walkthrough that I even knew there was a long ending! So I missed out on a bunch of content when I first played the game.
Actually when you beat the game, the game tells you how well you did (your total score), and then tells you you should try, the other path, if you haven't already. So if you complete the long path, the game tells you to load a save before the rain ceremony, to try out the short path. Alternatively, if you beat the short path, it tells you to go through the rain ceremony to reach the long path. I can't remember if this shows up before or after the credits though.
KQ VI also felt overblown to me in a lot of ways -- technically it was an improvement over KQ V, especially regarding the voice acting, but the sprawling map seemed to be large just to be large, and the motivation (rescue the princess) wasn't any more compelling than it was in KQ II. I did like the Isle of Wonder and its many puns, because Isle of Wonder
Is it really all that sprawling? Each island is only made up of 3-4 screens. KQ5 was split into areas of 3-6 screens as well (with a couple of vast areas, like the desert, Serenia itself, the Ocean,and the labyrinth). As far as # of screens (barring reused backgrounds), they probably are about the same.
KQ7 is probably quite a bit more 'sprawling'. Each main area is pretty large, made up of a dozen screens or so.
Yet the cost of "personality" was horrible animation.
Actually on a technical standpoint, the animation in KQ7 is technically superior to the animation in any previous KQ game. Way more frames per animation.
But if you meant, having 'cartoon animation' was horrible idea, I have to agree with you! I prefer more realistic style of the previous three games in the series (KQ 1 and 2 are actually fairly cartoony).
Actually, the later version included the DOS version while the initial release was Windows only. In my opinion and experience the DOS versions of Sierra games are always superior to the shoddy Windows ports.
You can say that again!
I'll add that floppy versions of old Sierra games are always superior to CD versions... with only a very few exceptions, such as Gabriel Knight 1.
Actually on a technical standpoint, the animation in KQ7 is technically superior to the animation in any previous KQ game. Way more frames per animation.
That doesn't mean it was done well, which it wasn't.
But if you meant, having 'cartoon animation' was horrible idea, I have to agree with you! I prefer more realistic style of the previous three games in the series (KQ 1 and 2 are actually fairly cartoony).
I don't mean that, though I believe that. It just wasn't done well at all. Many times the animation is just odd looking, clumsy, and lifeless. As far as cartoon animation goes, LucasArts was far better at it.
Your all wrong, KQ8 is where its had. Who the heck wants to play a crappy 2D game when you can revel in glorious 3d worlds! Plus 8 had an amazing storyline where.... ahahaha, i can't do it anymore.
I just thought it was funny that basically every other game in the serious has someone speaking up for it, but everyone skips 8 (think i saw one comment mention MoE) and goes right to talking about TSL....hahahaha.
poor kq8 - why dost thou suck so bad.
The initial question is loaded though. You could ask if ANY popular game is over rated, and all you are doing is saying that anyone who likes the game more than you somehow has no basis for liking it that much.
The most enlightening thing that came from reading this thread was seeing the number of KQ5 fans there are who claim it is the best in the series. That truly surprises me as, other than 8, I find it to be my least favorite. Maybe i dislike it though because I see it having potential that was wasted on (imho) childish dialogue and obtuse puzzles.
Looks smooth enough for me. Rosella's walkcycle is only three frames shorter than Guybrush's in CMI.
You do realize you are comparing a game with 1994 computer/animation technology, with a game from 1997? By then the technology was quite a bit more advanced. Sure CMI is going to look alot better!
When KQ7 came out it was ahead of its time (for 1994), most systems couldn't handle it. What it had technologically was two things, professional animation from actual animation houses (though the quality each of those houses varies), and one of the first adventure games with SVGA graphics. What they did with the limitations they had, is actually pretty impressive (it earned accolades for it as well at the time).
Still the style is not my cup of tea.
Seriously its almost like comparing apples to oranges. Context is important.
Like most things KQ, the graphics don't really hold up to later technology, or even modern technology. But they were pushing the technology when they were first released. Sierra was kinda like the iD software of its time.
It's interesting that at least twice as many people liked KQ8 over KQ7... I wonder why?
It was relatively liked by the critics. There were far more positive reviews than negative (most were above 70% with many going above 90%)... The reviews were more positive than the reviews for KQ7 (which had an aggrigate score of 40% or so). One reviewing magazine even gave it a 'game of the year' award (though I think that magazine is now defunct). As far as true adventure game critics it was either loved or hated! Some thought it was an excellent 'evolution' of the genre, others thought it broke out of the genre! Many reviewers thought it was an excellent continuation of the KQ universe, and an excellent KQ game, others thought it was nothing like the KQ world, and thought it was unlike KQ games! There has never been mutual agreement on the game by all KQ fans.
It also was twice as successful than KQ7 as far as sells (although sells alone is not necessarily indication people 'liked it'). But put in context of the reviews, it can give an idea. It even turned out to be twice as successful than Grim Fandango was that year!
KQ7 in general was hated by the critics, although it sold more than KQ6, was reviled by nearly everyone. Roberta once claimed after the release of MOE, she probably received more complaints over KQ7 than she did for KQ8! That's not to say that she didn't receive complaints, and most of those probably came from long time KQ fans (obviously not all KQ fans hated KQ8).
One of the causes for complaints for KQ7 might be that when it came out, few had the system to play it, so it looked very slow and choppy. Obviously others dislike it because it looked cartoony and childish.
But its definitely interesting how KQ8 is loved or hated, praised or scorned. There is very little 'middle ground'!
Fans have been complainig or praising KQ8 since around 1996 when it was first announced! People have been praising it or complaining about it since they saw the first screen shots, or video recordings, mid 1996 or so. When it was first shown to the public, it already had enemies and combat, and people were argueing over if that was a good or bad thing!
Comments
All the other VGA games had absolutely rubbish Amiga ports, some of the worst I've ever seen... but unlike the rest, KQ6 was outsourced to Revolution instead of being done in-house.
What I CAN say is that I don't really have any particular fond memories of it, whereas I still fondly recall many of the details of KQ5, QFG4, SQ5, Freddy Pharkas... the other games of that era. So I will assume that means I think it's overrated.
Dear God, what is this world coming to...?
Clearly this is a sign of the end times that my opinion on old computer games is not in line with yours. All I really remember vividly about KQ6 is that you're Prince Alexander and you wear a green shirt. But I totally fondly remember The Ballad of Freddy Pharkas.
I just find Freddy Pharkas to be incredibly boring.
Sometimes I feel like we want every game to be an expansion pack to the last in a franchise. We want more of our favorite, and even if something is good, it isn't what we were hoping for so it's bad in that respect.
KQ6 is different than the older games but it's different in a really good way. I can understand the viewpoint though as I only really like 6 and 7 and dislike the predecessors, so I obviously have a reverse opinion.
"Dear God, what is this world coming to...?" would seem to indicate that there is something terribly wrong with my opinion.
Come on now, I wasn't being that serious. I don't like the game, sure, but you're not stupid for liking it better. I was just giving you a hard time.
I do kinda like that they made the copy protection a part of the game, something that actually makes sense for you to do, though.
Nothing against KQVII, but I always have to scratch my head when people praise the animations in that game. They are just about the choppiest slide-show speed cartoon animations in any game ever. Sierra upped the game's resolution, but they didn't up the number of animation frames for their sprites. As a result, most of the animations look really stilted and choppy.
Not to mention the slooooooooooooooooooooooooooooow walking >_>
Personally, I am not fond of KQ6. I prefer KQ1, 3, 4 & 5 myself. With 5 Being my favorite.
I never had that issue, but then again I played it on a top of the line computer for that time, which it required. Also, it has the same problem as many old games (especially fmv ones) in that they don't run quite right on modern systems.
All the KQ games had slow walking. Even with walking speed at max they walked slow.
Ah. That explains it. You haven't played it recently.
BTW, if you're looking to get it running, you might try the various patches at Sierra Help Pages. You can patch the old Windows 3.1 version of the game to turn it into a DOS version, which can then be run using DosBox like any other old Dos game. It worked perfectly for me.
Look here: http://www.sierrahelp.com/Patches-Updates/Patches-Updates-Games/KingsQuestUpdates.html
Looks smooth enough for me. Rosella's walkcycle is only three frames shorter than Guybrush's in CMI.
The walk cycles are probably the best animations of the bunch though. Others are terrible. Look at Valanice turning to look at the beast in that clip. It's like 3 frames and super slow.
Actually, the later version included the DOS version while the initial release was Windows only. In my opinion and experience the DOS versions of Sierra games are always superior to the shoddy Windows ports.
You do realize you contradicted yourself there, right? It couldn't be a shoddy widows port if it was released initially on windows then released on DOS. The DOS version would then be the port. Coincidentally, you also missed the point. I was comparing the 95 version to a 3.1 version that had been patched to run on DOS then hacked to run with DOS Box and not the actual release DOS version.
Hey you may think it's "overrated" what ever the hell that means, it's King's Quest...the adventure game genre is a niche in itself. Perhaps it just wasn't your favorite. I loved KQ6, I found many of the story elements hilarious. KQ7 was beautiful in that it was cartoony fun, but like many older games...the dialog is rather corny now. They can stick with the time period the games took place in, but updating it would be nice. Keeping with the humor that these games had. The humor was my favorite element in these games and it would be a treasure to re-live that. I'd definitely purchase future games of my favorite series.
I don't agree. If I have to hear "alexander pulls out his magic map" once more I will strangle a kitten.
No. TSL is a big meetup with the characters of KQ6 on the green isles and I think that is intentional. Of course that is one big thing that annoys me about TSL. I don't want to be on the green isles. The dark tower area in Episode 3 was great. Finally somewhere else to go.
That's fine, that just how i felt about the audio compared to kq5. Although after awhile of hearing that one line, I was like "yeah i know.":)
KQ VI also felt overblown to me in a lot of ways -- technically it was an improvement over KQ V, especially regarding the voice acting, but the sprawling map seemed to be large just to be large, and the motivation (rescue the princess) wasn't any more compelling than it was in KQ II. I did like the Isle of Wonder and its many puns, because Isle of Wonder.
This may be heretical, but I liked the cartoonish, episodic feel of KQ VII better. (And the fact that, finally, we had protagonists with a little bit of attitude and personality -- Graham and Alexander are so unfailingly polite and calm that with voice acting they always seemed stiff and inhuman to me.)
Yet the cost of "personality" was horrible animation.
Well KQ7 version 2.0 made an already poor game, worse, in my opinion. There were a couple of good decisions, like the ability to save at any time.
But there were several things cut, like 2-3 death scenes (the dragon tail, variants on the volcano eruption). So the version is incomplete. So the game actually lost the alternate 'bad ending' cutscene, where volcano erupts and destroys the world. This also means several voiceovers for the 'retry' deaths were cut as well. So a good number of material was removed.
Cut material is never a good thing imo.
I wonder if version 1.x will be playable in ScummVM in the future? Because if it works, I'd rather play that version over 2.0 (even if 2.0 offers better saving options). Granted someone will have to do something so ScummVM gets around the timer bugs.
I'd also love it, if someone came out with a unofficial patch, that would unlock the missing content, but keep the extra saving features. That would be the best option.
Actually when you beat the game, the game tells you how well you did (your total score), and then tells you you should try, the other path, if you haven't already. So if you complete the long path, the game tells you to load a save before the rain ceremony, to try out the short path. Alternatively, if you beat the short path, it tells you to go through the rain ceremony to reach the long path. I can't remember if this shows up before or after the credits though.
Is it really all that sprawling? Each island is only made up of 3-4 screens. KQ5 was split into areas of 3-6 screens as well (with a couple of vast areas, like the desert, Serenia itself, the Ocean,and the labyrinth). As far as # of screens (barring reused backgrounds), they probably are about the same.
KQ7 is probably quite a bit more 'sprawling'. Each main area is pretty large, made up of a dozen screens or so.
Actually on a technical standpoint, the animation in KQ7 is technically superior to the animation in any previous KQ game. Way more frames per animation.
But if you meant, having 'cartoon animation' was horrible idea, I have to agree with you! I prefer more realistic style of the previous three games in the series (KQ 1 and 2 are actually fairly cartoony).
I'll add that floppy versions of old Sierra games are always superior to CD versions... with only a very few exceptions, such as Gabriel Knight 1.
That doesn't mean it was done well, which it wasn't.
I don't mean that, though I believe that. It just wasn't done well at all. Many times the animation is just odd looking, clumsy, and lifeless. As far as cartoon animation goes, LucasArts was far better at it.
I just thought it was funny that basically every other game in the serious has someone speaking up for it, but everyone skips 8 (think i saw one comment mention MoE) and goes right to talking about TSL....hahahaha.
poor kq8 - why dost thou suck so bad.
The initial question is loaded though. You could ask if ANY popular game is over rated, and all you are doing is saying that anyone who likes the game more than you somehow has no basis for liking it that much.
The most enlightening thing that came from reading this thread was seeing the number of KQ5 fans there are who claim it is the best in the series. That truly surprises me as, other than 8, I find it to be my least favorite. Maybe i dislike it though because I see it having potential that was wasted on (imho) childish dialogue and obtuse puzzles.
You do realize you are comparing a game with 1994 computer/animation technology, with a game from 1997? By then the technology was quite a bit more advanced. Sure CMI is going to look alot better!
When KQ7 came out it was ahead of its time (for 1994), most systems couldn't handle it. What it had technologically was two things, professional animation from actual animation houses (though the quality each of those houses varies), and one of the first adventure games with SVGA graphics. What they did with the limitations they had, is actually pretty impressive (it earned accolades for it as well at the time).
Still the style is not my cup of tea.
Seriously its almost like comparing apples to oranges. Context is important.
Like most things KQ, the graphics don't really hold up to later technology, or even modern technology. But they were pushing the technology when they were first released. Sierra was kinda like the iD software of its time.
It was relatively liked by the critics. There were far more positive reviews than negative (most were above 70% with many going above 90%)... The reviews were more positive than the reviews for KQ7 (which had an aggrigate score of 40% or so). One reviewing magazine even gave it a 'game of the year' award (though I think that magazine is now defunct). As far as true adventure game critics it was either loved or hated! Some thought it was an excellent 'evolution' of the genre, others thought it broke out of the genre! Many reviewers thought it was an excellent continuation of the KQ universe, and an excellent KQ game, others thought it was nothing like the KQ world, and thought it was unlike KQ games! There has never been mutual agreement on the game by all KQ fans.
It also was twice as successful than KQ7 as far as sells (although sells alone is not necessarily indication people 'liked it'). But put in context of the reviews, it can give an idea. It even turned out to be twice as successful than Grim Fandango was that year!
KQ7 in general was hated by the critics, although it sold more than KQ6, was reviled by nearly everyone. Roberta once claimed after the release of MOE, she probably received more complaints over KQ7 than she did for KQ8! That's not to say that she didn't receive complaints, and most of those probably came from long time KQ fans (obviously not all KQ fans hated KQ8).
One of the causes for complaints for KQ7 might be that when it came out, few had the system to play it, so it looked very slow and choppy. Obviously others dislike it because it looked cartoony and childish.
But its definitely interesting how KQ8 is loved or hated, praised or scorned. There is very little 'middle ground'!
Fans have been complainig or praising KQ8 since around 1996 when it was first announced! People have been praising it or complaining about it since they saw the first screen shots, or video recordings, mid 1996 or so. When it was first shown to the public, it already had enemies and combat, and people were argueing over if that was a good or bad thing!