dead-ends in king's quest
The thing I remember most about sierra games are the dead ends.
This usually happens when you got to a certain place in the game and you can't move on no matter what you do. Then, when you look at a walkthrough you see you forgot to pick up a certain item and you need to restore or restart to get to that point in the game.
This is something both lucasarts and telltale (till now) avoided.
But if they're remaking king's quest what will happen?
I prefer it if they will continue to avoid those dead ends. I didn't like them - they seemed so unfair, it was the main reason i preferred lucasarts games to sierra.
This usually happens when you got to a certain place in the game and you can't move on no matter what you do. Then, when you look at a walkthrough you see you forgot to pick up a certain item and you need to restore or restart to get to that point in the game.
This is something both lucasarts and telltale (till now) avoided.
But if they're remaking king's quest what will happen?
I prefer it if they will continue to avoid those dead ends. I didn't like them - they seemed so unfair, it was the main reason i preferred lucasarts games to sierra.
Sign in to comment in this discussion.
Comments
One thing is viable though is something similar to KQ 1 and 3, where there are alternate ways to solve puzzles if you forgot something.
Of course it wouldn't be a good game if you couldn't get stuck at the end of the game because you didn't make the 2 spells that you only use at the end. You can't undertake a quest unprepared without consequences and you should be punished for not stocking up on supplies.
It may have been cruel, but it is obvious that you made a mistake by not saving the mouse. If you keep playing, thats your fault.
The dead-ends should be dealt with carefully,so that if you got to one you really deserved it...
While back in the day games occasionally had inadvertent dead-ends (ie. bugs), most of the ones people complain about are those that were deserved when they happened.
I think it's all a moot point anyway -- it's exceedingly unlikely that Telltale will include dead-ends.
A dead-end in one episode... out of all the episodes of all the games they've made... I don't think a single counter-example would necessarily change my reasoning. But I didn't play BTTF except the free episode. Could you describe this dead-end?
What's the practical difference to someone playing the game that just wants to get to the end?
One has the possibility of being corrected through Tech Support or a future patch; the other does not.
One requires that you merely replay exactly as you did before except for deliberately avoiding the set of actions that triggers the bug; the other requires you to play differently, to figure out how to do better than you did the first time.
:rolleyes:
The person who just wants to get to the end could watch the ending on youtube and avoid painstaking task of playing a game, which they obviously don't really want to do if all they want to do is get to the ending. Perhaps a movie is a better investment for that person.
I support this post.
YES! Adventure games are all about being observant and trying different things. That was a major part of King's Quest. If that's not really your thing, then perhaps King's Quest wasn't really meant for you. I'm not a big fan of Call of Duty, but that doesn't mean they should change it up because it doesn't fit what I think is good game design. I just shouldn't play it. The same goes for you if you don't like the way the game is designed. Like I said, there are no dead ends in movies or books, either of which will provide as much or more story and take up much less of your precious time, while costing you less money.
And yes, players should totally be punished for not being observant in an adventure game. That's half the gameplay. No, that IS the gameplay. Even puzzle designs are all about being observant and figuring things out with some logical reasoning.
Take KQ5, your goal from the beginning is to make a trek through the mountains to the other side which is cold and perilous and also represents the next stage of the game and your journey. Common sense states that once you go that way eventually you won't be coming back (or at least, it should, especially considering how much work you have to do before getting past that snake), so you should double-check everything because it's a large game world and there must be SOMETHING you might have missed. And if you're observant enough you'll find it and move on, or at least make a save and come back later if need be. Now, if the game punishes you for not taking in the game world and exploring everything possible then I say it's not lazy programming, it's justifiable. I rather put the blame on myself the player for being too lazy to explore as much of the game as possible.
The whole point of adventure games is adventuring into a whole new world. Adventure. ADVENTURE! Why wouldn't you go exploring everything you could and taking in the game atmosphere! And if you don't then shame on you! You're missing out! You should absolutely be punished because, in the words of an amusing internet meme, you're not doing it right. Games that don't have many hotspots, give you all the items you need at all times, offer you hints for everything without letting you find them yourself (ie- thom's point of putting hints in the many interactions themselves), creating a safe pathway that's impossible to fail or go astray from, etc is lazy adventure game design. I should be rewarded for checking out as much of the world as possible and punished for not doing so. I don't want a quick an mildly amusing little stroll through BTTF, I want an adventure through the fantasy world of King's Quest that will wow me at every turn and reward my attempts to further my own gameplay by making it necessary.
That's me, anyway.
Let me tell you a little about my job. I get money to scour journals, letters, texts, etc., from centuries ago. In advance there are certain things I know that I'm looking for. I'm provided a context for what my end goal should be because reality dictates perameters. A game works differently. Let's say I come up with the solution to a puzzle, but it's not the solution thee designers wanted, so I'm given a dead end later. So now I'm actively punished for an open puzzle to which there were no perameters. Is easy to say "it should have been common sense not to use that" after the fact, but common sense is a false argument since we all arrive at conclusions differently. So now i have to play a portion or all of the game over because I derived a different solution. Even back to the original comment about observation, the notion being advocated is that because I didn't pass my cursor over a four by four pixel area, I should be punished.
What I'm advocating is this. If you're going to cut off one avenue of puzzle solution to a player, at least provide another. Rather than dead ends, provide multiple ways to handle a problem. If the player doesn't make the 'correct' choice, make the next solution more difficult to achieve, but don't cut the game off from him. I think flexible, multiple approaches to puzzle solution are far more intriguing than dead ends.
I agree with your second paragraph, though. That's a more interesting approach and much more realistic in this century of "adventure" gamers. Make the alternative more difficult AND score less points and/or result in a not-so-perfect ending somehow. Either way, I still think there should be punishment, though.
I'm only adverse to playing something again that I've already gone through to a degree. If it's a lengthy stretch, I'm likely to not finish the game, which is why dead ends are the most onerous thing to me. Deaths where done fairly, I'm fine with. And yeah I think that it's fine to have puzzles that are more difficult, score less points, and -occasionally- (where appropriate) affect the ending.
You say that you just want to solve puzzles, but a dead-end means that you failed to solve a puzzle. I don't buy the argument that because the result of a player having failed to solve a puzzle resembles the unintended result of a programming error the puzzle is therefore unfair or illegitimate or lazily designed.
How is a dead-end artificial or cheap? In video-gaming, it is generally the case that when you fail to meet the challenges presented in a game-world, the game takes longer to complete. A dead-end is well within the bounds of this concept, it's just an extreme example.
I have long since given up arguing that games "should" have dead-ends or are "better" with dead-ends. (One has to pick and choose one's battles.) I agree that they can be replaced with other kinds of puzzles and still have a fun and challenging game. It's fine if people don't want to accept dead-ends as "fair game" in their personal video-game choices. I understand they don't want their video-game time spent on repeating large sections. But I have to object when they make the jump from personal dislike to declaring dead-ends invalid or illegitimate or unfair or lazy puzzle design -- it just doesn't wash. chucklas' point is worth repeating:
For one thing, the vast majority of gamers will find it unacceptable, and also - even though it's something I've grown fond of, I still have to admit it's not good design.
Dead ends, on the other hand, are part of the reason why I never cared for Sierra too much (though I love Space Quest 4!). They were always vague, so you never knew if you were just not getting an obscure puzzle, or if you had actually found a dead end. They don't make the games more challenging, as let's face it, once you know what to do when playing an adventure game, there's NO challenge. It simply wastes your time. It's not like the deaths either, where you get a funny animation. There's nothing but frustration and bad game padding.
I think that for the general crowd of gamers, they would hate the dead ends, but the select group of die-hard adventure game fans (which unfortunately, I can't really class myself into) may get a nostalgic kick out of it. I think overall they'd put far more people off than draw people to the game.
You don't have to play most of CoD over if you lost in the final fight. It's not the only example of a genre that's had to drop a frustrating mechanic as the years have rolled, either. You couldn't save in Castlevania I and if you died right before the final boss, you'd still have to play from scratch. There are a few hardcore gamers who long for that day, but it's not one that's going to come back.
My my, how far we've fallen. Those were the DAYS.
By the way, if you want a real 'old-school challenge', you should try out the Shadow of the Beast games for the Amiga (the two first ones anyway).
Those games have some obscure puzzles (they're sidescrolling 'platformer' games but they have some puzzles, especially the second one), you have to restart from scratch when you die (and you only have one life), and they have plenty of dead ends (again, mostly the second game)
Shadow of the Beast was a pretty good game, with especially fantastic music, but it was cryptic as heck! Making you go left at the start instead of right (the usual for side-scrollers, of course) really did throw you off, and that was just the very start!
Ah, old school games are so sadistic. Isn't it kind of odd that often we like old school games for being so cruel though? Plus, a game that's an actual challenge is nice when you're sick of the difficulty of newer games. I just never really understood what some old-school games considered a "puzzle", though. I guess more than anything, that put me off a lot of really old point & clicks.
As for the needle, common sense says that a tailor would be a better location to use that. As a matter of fact, the majority of the KQV dead ends resulted form not using common sense.
The original mechanism makes me want to make a save-game after every item I collect
That doesn't mean that I'm against dead-ends, in fact, I think they contribute a great deal to the whore Sierra stylo 'n flav
I'm pretty sure the gold coin and the gold needle can be interchanged, although the points given might be less? Anyone know?
I'm pretty sure the only way to turn these two items into a dead-end, is simply forgetting to get the gold coin in the temple (which means you'll be one item short for trading).
Similarly you can also switch the shoe and the stick to get rid of the cat/dog. But I think the points remain the same. Obviously the stick makes more logical sense if used for the dog. If you miss the cat, you will activate another dead-end! But its kinda obvious that you need to save the rat.
Actually many of the 'dead-ends' in KQ5 are intentional, forcing the player towards death scenes they would not normally encounter. For example there are 2-3 different deaths in the Dark Forest alone, that are only accessible if you somehow forgot the genie bottle to defeat the witch, fail to cast the spell on the witch's hut on the floppy version, or later lose all the emeralds to the elf; these include being eaten by man-eating plants, killed by a giant spider, or endlessly lost (until you starve/die). Another infamous dead end, is the intentional failure to save Cedric after the Harpy incident, so that Mordack will zap you into non-existence shortly before the end game!
Forgetting other items may lead to death scenes that can normally be encountered no matter the circumstances, by simply progressing forward in the game. Like being killed by the statues on Mordack's island, or becoming stuck in the dungeon cell.
An amusing bit of trivia, but many of the early Apple II sierra games, had autosaves as well as regular saves. This was potentially bad on games like King's Quest and Space Quest, where there were a few 'dead-ends'!
I thought at that point Manannan was a cat. I think you meant Mordack. You are the expert though.
I KNEW those two deaths existed! I remember them as a small kid but I could never recreate them!! So most of the deaths don't really leave you in a stuck state then, they result in deaths you wouldn't normally get so that you can know you failed. Interesting. Also there's another one, if you get trapped in the basement of the Inn and you have saved the rat you will be freed but if you didn't get the hammer from the shoemaker then you can only walk around for a while and then a death message comes up after a random certain of time.
Traveling over to the Land of the Leprechauns without fiddle/clover or treasures/cheese/weapon will either lead you to death by leprechauns or mouse. But the worst won't even kill you! If you forget to get the mushroom, you cannot leave the island. There isn't even a timed death associated with it as far as I know?
Note: A bit of trivia, it is possible to reach the island in KQ1AGI, without the Condor's help with a strange glitch! Try walking along the bottom edge of the mushroom (IIRC).
Losing the goat, could potentially lead to dead end, if your lesser treasures were stolen by the dwarf, and you have no way to get past the troll. I don't think this leads to any timed death scenes though, and the troll just prevents you from crossing.
Of course you could eat the beans! Oops. No way to enter the Land of the Clouds. To bad this didn't lead to an extremely graphic death scene
...or even worse, having your three Great Treasures stolen by the Dwarf on the way back to Castle. I'm not sure the game even lets you back into the castle to see the king die (the remake might have added an extra death scene if you take too long to return to the castle?).
Am I missing any others?
In KQ2, you could potentially get stuck if you used up all your treasures, and intentional tradeable items. Like say you ate the chicken soup, or let the nightengale go free, and somehow spent all the Sapphire Jewels for other reasons (traveling to Dracula's Castle too many times). Of course crossing the bridge one too many times, is probably the biggest dead-end in the game. But hey you'll sure know you made a mistake in the end!
Generally speaking you would have an alternate solution to most puzzles, before you reached possible dead-ends. Like there is no way to get stuck with the lion, since you will have the sword (even if you forgot the meat)! You can never get stuck by killing the fish, as all you need to do is fish until you get another! In general you should have enough treasures if you somehow lost the nightengale to get the magic lamp (even if you spent a treasure to help the mermaid). The dwarf is not much of an issue, since the treasures he steals can be found inside of his house.
Of course there were some intentional dead-end death scenes, like if you made the mistake of giving the Mermaid the trident, and then came back and helped her out (treasure/flowers), Neptune kills you the moment you enter his domain, as he has no reason to trust you (one would have thought the mermaid could have told him about you).
There might be potential to prevent yourself from getting the silver cross (by being rude to the monk). This might cause you some troubles, if you also have no alternate way to get past the ghosts. Once you are in the castle, you can actually go through the castle without encountering Dracula if you are careful, and still get the magic key. Though having some fairy magic before you go to the castle might also be an alternate method to get past the obstacles (preventing even ghosts becoming a dead end).
I'd have to think about KQ3. I suppose the first main one is not keeping track of time, and running out of it before you can return/hide everything in the house. But this is obviously intentional, and your own fault if you weren't paying attention to the time. Secondly you could run out of the food, but that will just lead to Manannan killing you in time.
You could use up some of the spells with limited casting times (such as the fly/eagle spell), preventing you from being able to use it where you need to use it. But there are alternatives such as the teleport spell, that should prevent that from being a dead end in most cases (granted if you run out and never made the teleport spell, you might have a problem with the Abominable Snowman, if you got as far as the Great Mountains).
Using the storm spell in the wrong place, will kill you, so no problem having to worry about losing that. As far as I know you need to collect most if not all the spells in order to leave Llewdor (as they are required for later on). The talking to animals spell, and/or teleporting spells are optional as far as I know.
Granted if you take too long to leave Llewdor, you might miss the boat, and get one of the game's death scenes. The boat appears after speaking to the oracle. Is it possible to use up all your gold coins via buying drinks at the tavern, and prevent passage on the boat? Again if this is the case, it would lead to the 'trapped in Llewdor' death ending.
In KQ4, it is possible to let time go by, and lose your chance of getting the three treasures needed by Lollotte. Obviously, if you wait too long, and Genesta dies! This leads to a death notice (about being trapped in the land, and no way back to see your dieing dad). Other boneheaded things like eating the fruit/failing to find the fruit leads to an alternate sad ending. There is that third alternate bad ending, if you fail to escape Lolotte's castle, and kill Lolotte before morning.
You can also use up the arrows, or break the shovel, but this will likely ultimately lead to time running out, and getting one of the aformentioned dead end, 'secondary endings'!
Can the fuel of the lantern run out with extended use? This would potentially cause problems in several places.
KQ7, as far as I know has no intentional dead ends (except for possible bugs). There are alternative solutions for everything. If you miss an item, an alternative item shows up somewhere else to help you out.
I don't think there are any dead-ends in KQ8 either, other than getting into places that you aren't meant to be at by unconventional means (rather than puzzle solving/fighting). I suppose you could potentially screw the game up by losing those rocks you need to press down buttons, set off traps, break ice; by throwing them into lava, over cliffs, or into water. But in most cases you can alternatively solve those buttons by causing an enemy, to walk over, and die on the button (so if you are carefuly, you should have more than enough rocks by the end of the game for other puzzles such as the traps and frozen pool)!
But I can't think of any true dead-ends in KQ8 (other than bugs and those don't count).