Yeah. People really shouldn't be praising it or damning it. They should be curious and just wait. But, if you're allowed to praise it you're allowed to damn it.
You should try to give the game a chance and not damn it even before a screenshot is released.
Some of us have been disappointed in the latest, unofficial, King's Quest game and disappointed in Telltale's latest games, and the last thing we want is to be disappointed in Telltale's take on King's Quest too. I'm sure you can understand that.
That's why we are voicing what we want and do not want to see in Telltale's King's Quest. It's called constructive criticism, and the best moment to voice constructive criticism is early on, when the game design and plot can still be changed, not when the game is out and it's too late to change anything.
Some of us have been disappointed in the latest, unofficial, King's Quest game and disappointed in Telltale's latest games, and the last thing we want is to be disappointed in Telltale's take on King's Quest too. I'm sure you can understand that.
That's why we are voicing what we want and do not want to see in Telltale's King's Quest. It's called constructive criticism, and the best moment to voice constructive criticism is early on, when the game design and plot can still be changed, not when the game is out and it's too late to change anything.
Constructive criticism and a desire to voice your wants early on is quite different from saying that Telltale has "no right" to make a KQ game, or that Telltale is going to "massacre" King's Quest and spreading negative word of mouth to kill the game without even seeing a screenshot or anything about the game.
Constructive criticism and a desire to voice your wants early on is quite different from saying that Telltale has "no right" to make a KQ game, or that Telltale is going to "massacre" King's Quest and spreading negative word of mouth to kill the game without even seeing a screenshot or anything about the game.
I don't really want to be constructive. I find it much more enjoyable to just piss and moan.
I don't really want to be constructive. I find it much more enjoyable to just piss and moan.
Tis a shame. I waited until TSL released trailers and the like to express my concerns...Can't you at least give this game the benefit of the doubt until we at least see a screenshot?
I just want to see some kind of news... what kind of direction they are moving in. But, I will say, if it's like "Dragon's Lair", I will piss and moan.
Tis a shame. I waited until TSL released trailers and the like to express my concerns...Can't you at least give this game the benefit of the doubt until we at least see a screenshot?
What's funny is, I love Dragon's Lair. I pumped quarters into that sucker like crazy in 1983-1984 when I was 5 and 6.... there was NOTHING LIKE THAT in the early 80's. That was, whoa, almost thirty years ago! You know what was 30 years before that? 1953! They didn't have video games, they poured salt on snails, burned ants with magnifying glasses and if they were lucky, shot soda cans with a Red Ryder!
Needless to say, Dragon's Lair's ganmeplay was directly correlated to the technology they had. They didn't have computer systems to combine theatrical quality animation with game-play. We have that now. Taking a step back like this now.... well, it just doesn't work.
Needless to say, Dragon's Lair's gameplay was directly correlated to the technology they had. They didn't have computer systems to combine theatrical quality animation with game-play. We have that now. Taking a step back like this now.... well, it just doesn't work.
Bt
EXACTLY.
The total bullshit part about Telltale's "new" adventure game genre, is that IT'S NOT FUCKING NEW! Jurassic Park has 30 year old gameplay mechanics being hailed (by Telltale only) as innovation. Ridiculous.
I think we can safely assume that Telltale's King's Quest won't be a non-walkable QTE fest. I think we can also say within (slightly shaky) marginal safety boundaries that it won't be as stupid and dumbed down as Back to the Future either. But anything even a fair amount better than either of those two isn't worthy of a King's Quest title. It will have to be pretty stinking darn good for me to accept it.
I think we can safely assume that Telltale's King's Quest won't be a non-walkable QTE fest. I think we can also say within (slightly shaky) marginal safety boundaries that it won't be as stupid and dumbed down as Back to the Future either. But anything even a fair amount better than either of those two isn't worthy of a King's Quest title. It will have to be pretty stinking darn good for me to accept it.
I sure hope so. If they can deliver Tales of Monkey Island quality or better (preferably better, as even ToMI doesn't compare to any of the originals) then I will probably be at least marginally happy with it.
Yeah, at this point though - it's all speculation because besides the IP ("King's Quest") we know dick about this title. We just know what we don't want, and that appears to be a QTE game and an overly dramatic plot.
I don't know about dumping down of Back to the Future, because I haven't played that. However TTG's games which I have played (Sam & Max 1-3, ToMI and W&G) are all good games despite the fact that none of them offers any real challenge. But then again that applies to all new adventure games. For example Gray Matter and Lost Horizon are both interesting games with great stories, but puzzles are much easier than in old Sierra or LucasArts adventures. So dumping down seems to be general tendency in modern adventure games as story has become even more important than before and apparently they don't want to disturb the flow of the story with difficult puzzles which take days to solve.
And I don't believe that we will see QTE in King's Quest. Fahrenheit (which I bought recently) seems to overuse it and probably Jurassic Park does the same (I haven't played it so I have to trust to your word), but both games seem to represent bit different genre than KQ and are action-adventures or adventure games with action sequences or something like that. I believe that TTG's KQ will be pure adventure and it won't have Jurassic Park's QTE's or MoE's fighting.
Gods damn am I tired of people bitching about how puzzles in new Adventure games are too easy. As someone who has been playing adventure games since the early 90's I really don't want to go back to the days where I would spend hours, nay, days stuck trying to solve a puzzle that made absolutely no sense logically because it involved sprinkling breadcrumbs on a rubber duck in order to loosen a clothesline, or whatever.
Ok, so I admit that part of the reason some of these puzzles may have seemed so hard was because I was 10 at the time, but even replaying some classic adventures today I find myself totally flabbergasted as to how some of the puzzles in them are just plain crazy.
Do you really want to go back to the days where the only way to progress through an adventure game was to either go to a walkthrough, which I did a lot and always made me feel stupid, or to take every item in your inventory and apply it methodically to every piece of scenery in the game in the hopes that some crazy combination might do something?
I don't miss that, nor do I miss getting halfway through a game only to realize that I didn't pick up some tiny item in the first area,( or accidentally ate the pie) and now have to start all over again.
I finished playing BTTF today and really enjoyed the fact that I could solve the puzzles without getting a brain hemorrhage, and that some of them, I will admit, still gave me pause.
A lot of people moan and groan over how the puzzles in Telltale's games are too easy, but I'm not seeing to many explaining what kind of puzzles they would like to see instead. Everyone says, be more complex, be more creative, but I don't think people remember how absolutely infuriating some of those "complex" and "creative" puzzles could be.
I think any puzzle in an adventure game should be a momentary stumbling block, that integrates well into the plot of the game, and gives you something to ponder over for a while, not an experience halting impenetrable barrier of Goldbergian logic, that's only solved when your friend tells you,
"oh you have to pull that lever behind the barrel under the waterfall, which rolls the cheese log down the conveyer belt and gets the old man to spit out his golden teeth which you take to the vet as payment in order to cure your pet cat." and you go, "wha?"
I for one am glad that Telltale has thusfar avoided conundrums like this, which classic 90's/ early 2000's adventure games are infamous for and stuck to puzzles which, some might call dumbed down, but I just call way more enjoyable. I've brought a lot of friends who have never played an adventure game in their lives, on board the gaming bandwagon by introducing them to TTG's product line, and I can tell you if puzzles were still what they were back in 1995 those people would be screaming at their computers, instead of having a great time with great games.
Thanks Telltale for not giving me an Adventure Gamers headache, and for keeping it fun yet at times still challenging. Please don't make me have to start all over again in the new KQ game if I accidentaly eat the pie.
Gods damn am I tired of people bitching about how puzzles in new Adventure games are too easy. As someone who has been playing adventure games since the early 90's I really don't want to go back to the days where I would spend hours, nay, days stuck trying to solve a puzzle that made absolutely no sense logically because it involved sprinkling breadcrumbs on a rubber duck in order to loosen a clothesline, or whatever.
But...but...that was the whole point! That was the whole fun! That's how games lasted! Spending weeks on a puzzle and then figuring it out was the most satisfying feeling you could get. And not all puzzles in adventures were that stupid.
Do you really want to go back to the days where the only way to progress through an adventure game was to either go to a walkthrough, which I did a lot and always made me feel stupid, or to take every item in your inventory and apply it methodically to every piece of scenery in the game in the hopes that some crazy combination might do something?
You're exaggerating. Some games were like that, yes. And that's bad game design. But some just had very clever puzzles that really forced you to THINK. Not be led straight to the conclusion immediately. That's the problem I have. If you had to use a methodical approach or look at a walkthrough for these puzzles then you're just not thinking outside the box enough.
I finished playing BTTF today and really enjoyed the fact that I could solve the puzzles without using my brain, and that some of them, I will admit, still gave me pause.
Fixed that for you.
A lot of people moan and groan over how the puzzles in Telltale's games are too easy, but I'm not seeing to many explaining what kind of puzzles they would like to see instead. Everyone says, be more complex, be more creative, but I don't think people remember how absolutely infuriating some of those "complex" and "creative" puzzles could be.
Basically, I don't want the answer handed to me with big thinly-veiled hints. Throw me in a universe and let me figure it out. That's why I loved adventures. Some games in the past were ridiculous (mustache puzzle in GK3), yes. But not all of them were like that. While some people may be remembering with rose-coloured glasses that all classic adventure games had good puzzles, others, like yourself, seem to remember them all being insanely difficult which is just not the case.
I think any puzzle in an adventure game should be a momentary stumbling block,...
Disagree.
...that integrates well into the plot of the game, and gives you something to ponder over for a while, not an experience halting impenetrable barrier of Goldbergian logic, that's only solved when your friend tells you,
"oh you have to pull that lever behind the barrel under the waterfall, which rolls the cheese log down the conveyer belt and gets the old man to spit out his golden teeth which you take to the vet as payment in order to cure your pet cat." and you go, "wha?"
Again with the exaggeration.
I for one am glad that Telltale has thusfar avoided conundrums like this, which classic 90's/ early 2000's adventure games are infamous for and stuck to puzzles which, some might call dumbed down, but I just call way more enjoyable.
I don't understand how. There's no enjoyment in going "oh the game wants me to do this, so I'll do it.......YEY! I GOT IT! I'M SO SMRT! This is so easy! I'm having so much fun!"
I don't want my games solved for me. Have you ever played puzzle games? (Jewel of the Oracle, Myst, Journeyman Project, etc) That's what an adventure game should consist of, plus plot and characters. A few easy puzzles (dare I say it, like the ones in Telltale games) but not much, but mostly more complex puzzles and even a couple great stumpers or mechanical puzzles here and there like in classic puzzle games that require logical outside-the-box thinking.
I picture Telltale's current trends the same as the popular FPS or MMO games that are out now. Diluted, watered down, and shallow. "Go here, then go here" puzzles. Clearly they focus on characters and story, something I think is a mistake. I don't play adventures ONLY for the story and characters. It's the same with most movies nowadays. Granted, some games are golden here and there. At some point you'll find the odd "Inception" title that really gets you thinking and stimulates your gray matter, but mostly it's just boring hand-holding drivel.
Telltale have never truly impressed me with their game design. Tales of Monkey Island came the closest but still never reached classic potential. It just wasn't good enough. I doubt they'll ever be, considering their business model, goals, and approach to game design.
I think any puzzle in an adventure game should be a momentary stumbling block...
If the puzzles are nothing but momentary stumbling blocks, then it's hardly a game and certainly not an adventure. If it's easy to see where you need to go and what you need to do, then it's not an adventure; it's just an excursion. I take enough excursions in RL, I don't want that in my video games. :rolleyes:
KQ is the most important pioneer in graphical adventures, the games have been played (and are still being bought!) for nearly 30 years -- it has a history, a fanbase, a tradition. If you want to complain about difficulty in games based on TV shows or comic books, fine. But turning a KQ sequel into a casual game would be the most abominable, contemptible act ever committed in the history of video-gaming.
I just hope they don't go the way of making KQ3 style puzzles, where most of the puzzles consist of 'find this spell ingredient' listed in the manual, and then you are told how to use it in the manual!
Treasure hunt-style and fetch quest puzzles are the lowest common denominator in Adventure game puzzle design (see Roberta's Mixed Up-Mother Goose)....
When games first came out they were a challenge to the mind. Even arcade games were challenging to the reflexes. It was all about upping the difficulty with every challenge you overcame to try and beat you because you were trying to beat it. The sense of accomplishment at overcoming what the game threw at you was far more satisfying. And you were looked at as far more impressive when you did.
Nowadays, games are not challenges. They are convenient escapes where you can go and relax. It's a completely different approach. Games barely have deaths anymore and if they do there's always a convenient checkpoint or autosave to catch you from failing outright. Games are now catering to players instead of treating them like gamers.
I'm not saying all games have to be this way. Indeed, some games that are designed to be entirely easygoing are great. Some. But right now almost EVERYTHING is designed this way and it drives me crazy. I find myself being drawn more towards indie games like Super Meat Boy, The Binding of Isaac (shut up, Dashing, I know what you're going to say), Bit. Trip. Beat, etc because they don't hold your hand. They're freaking relentless. They treat you like a MAN. If you can't handle it you don't win. Plain and simple. BRING IT ON!
Games barely have deaths anymore and if they do there's always a convenient checkpoint or autosave to catch you from failing outright. Games are now catering to players instead of treating them like gamers.
Um, most early PC games had 'save everywhere features', quite a few old games used the old 'passcode' system... Many early sierra games had 'autosave' on the apple versions!
Mario Bros, Zelda, Castlevania, and many old NES games often had 'midway checkpoints' since first games in the series! But they were hard as hell! Some games had unlimited continues, others didn't! Super Mario Bros 1 had unlimited continues, but you had to know the secret command!
If they really wanted a challenge, 'no save' feature would make things harder! Try playing old sierra games with no ability to save!
The 'save everywhere' feature made FPS much easier (you could carefully play and repeat sequences to conserve health and ammo). The earliest FPS usually had the ability to 'save at anytime' like in Adventure games. So many newer games did away with the 'save everywhere', to make it more challenging... Since you might be stuck having to repeat the same incredibly difficult sequence over and over again, until you finally survived the onslaught (in some cases this might be through luck). But then again, the save anywhere feature was nicer IMO, and I consider the loss of it, a downgrade forced on games from the console mentality... I don't care if it makes things more challenging, I just like having the feature, and PC gamers always had that feature...
But then they added things like the 'health regeneration', that just kinda counteracts any challenge to trying to reach checkpoints... since you were virtually invincible if you were careful...
If the puzzles are nothing but momentary stumbling blocks, then it's hardly a game and certainly not an adventure. If it's easy to see where you need to go and what you need to do, then it's not an adventure; it's just an excursion. I take enough excursions in RL, I don't want that in my video games. :rolleyes:
KQ is the most important pioneer in graphical adventures, the games have been played (and are still being bought!) for nearly 30 years -- it has a history, a fanbase, a tradition. If you want to complain about difficulty in games based on TV shows or comic books, fine. But turning a KQ sequel into a casual game would be the most abominable, contemptible act ever committed in the history of video-gaming.
Wow, obviously you guys approach adventure games from a completely different angle than I expected, for me adventure games were never primarily about the puzzles, (that's what puzzle games are for) for me it was always about the story, a story that I could participate in more directly than say, a film. The puzzles were challenges along the way that rewarded me by progressing the story forward. But you see the problem with most adventure games, and I do say most because there were brilliant exceptions was that being a person of some intelligence I always saw about 15 different ways to solve a given puzzle, none of which happen to be the way in which the designer thought it should be solved.
I outright crashed Kings Quest 6 in this way once, trying to combine two inventory items, when I got this error message that said, you have combined two items in a way that the designers of the game did not anticipate...and the game quit.
So given that most adventure games lock you into a fairly limited and sometimes convoluted path of puzzle solving you bet your butt I don't mind a hint every now and then telling me what it was that whoever thought up this puzzle had in mind. If you don't like it, turn the hints off or the difficulty up, no one is stopping you, and don't insult my intelligence just because I happen to not mind a lil pointer now and then. My adventurers cap is no less worn than yours friends.
for me it was always about the story, a story that I could participate in more directly than say, a film.
You aren't completely 'out there' with your belief, infact Roberta Williams nearly stated the same thing during early interviews! Check out I think the Making of KQ6 Video for an example of that (or it might have been in the 15th anniversary KQ interviews)! You can also find several interviews in the old Sierra magazines, and Interaction magazine where various people at Sierra state similar senitmates.
The Williamses even hired Bill Davis as Creative Director;
...for the sole purpose of trying to push Sierra games closer to the multimedia of the movies and television industry!
Basically that in some cases, the changes and evolution of 'puzzle types' introduced to 'adventures' was based on the technology that that they had at hand. Limits in graphics, required certain types of puzzles, and improved graphics allowed other types of puzzles. But ultimately Roberta saw Adventures as a way to tell a story, and if she had the technology, she dreamed of making them ever closer to movies/hollywood/film, but allowing the player to have the ability to 'interact' with the environment, in ways that movies would not allow!
I suppose Don Bluth beat her to it... kinda, with his Dragon's Lair laser disk games... Things are kinda circling back to that...
On the other hand, what she wanted, wasn't necessarily what other fans wanted, and the closer she got to 'movies' and added more physical 'interaction', the more older players started to criticize her games... Hmm...
It's partly why physics-type puzzles (and block/jumping/climbing, etc) and fighting became ways of 'interacting' in KQ8's environment, when she had the chance to build that game in new-fangled 3D technology... To the chagrin of many of the old sierra adventure gamers...
outright crashed Kings Quest 6 in this way once, trying to combine two inventory items, when I got this error message that said, you have combined two items in a way that the designers of the game did not anticipate...and the game quit.
That's strange, considering that in the game's text there is literally a response for every single inventory item in relation to other inventory items. Most are jokes!
Wow, obviously you guys approach adventure games from a completely different angle than I expected, for me adventure games were never primarily about the puzzles, (that's what puzzle games are for) for me it was always about the story, a story that I could participate in more directly than say, a film. The puzzles were challenges along the way that rewarded me by progressing the story forward.
Are you always so surprised to find that people have approaches/perspectives/opinions that are different from your own? Having participated in adventure game forums for well over 10 years, I've always understood that different people approach them differently, that many adventure gamers play primarily for the story, even known quite a few who print out a walkthrough before they ever launch the game! Why is it that those who think adventures are "about the story" have such difficulty understanding that other adventure gamers enjoy the gameplay as much as the story and relish taking on the kinds of challenges found in games like the original King's Quests?
You seriously misunderstand if you think anyone's saying adventure games are primarily about the puzzles. We are saying they are primarily about the adventure -- the exploration of the gameworld and the complexity involved in discovering and identifying the challenges built into the gameworld as well as determining their solutions are more important than the difficulty level of the puzzles taken individually. This is what distinguishes an adventure game from a puzzle game, not the existence of a story (which many puzzle games have anyway).
Moreover, just because I don't see the story as the only rewarding part of an adventure game doesn't mean I regard it as incidental either. The story gives meaning to the gameworld and provides structure and context for the actions that need to be taken and their results. This affords the opportunity for so much more than merely participating in a story. Like undertaking an adventure into unknown territory and having to meet strict criteria for success as in any other kind of game.
But you see the problem with most adventure games, and I do say most because there were brilliant exceptions was that being a person of some intelligence I always saw about 15 different ways to solve a given puzzle, none of which happen to be the way in which the designer thought it should be solved. So given that most adventure games lock you into a fairly limited and sometimes convoluted path of puzzle solving you bet your butt I don't mind a hint every now and then telling me what it was that whoever thought up this puzzle had in mind.
I don't see this as a "problem". If you thought of 15 ways to solve a puzzle, surely you can think of one more... This is kind of the way games work -- games have rules and the challenge is to play them successfully within those rules. In the class of video games to which adventures belong (the class that was pioneered by adventure games), you're given a set of character capabilities and a gameworld in which you must apply them to overcome the obstacles embedded in the gameworld. Whereas in shooters you have weapons and overcoming obstacles entails killing things, in adventure games you have hotspots and items that must be manipulated correctly to progress. (The best adventure games also give their characters multiple capabilities -- look/touch/talk/etc. -- but Telltale and other adventure-makers have sadly done away with that in favor of click-and-go.)
If you don't like it, turn the hints off or the difficulty up, no one is stopping you, and don't insult my intelligence just because I happen to not mind a lil pointer now and then. My adventurers cap is no less worn than yours friends.
If the game isn't designed with the possibility to turn hints off and difficulty up, then, yes, we are being stopped. :rolleyes: A difficult adventure game can always incorporate a hints system to make it less difficult for those who prefer to play that way. But you can't do it the other way around.
Adventure games range in the extent to which puzzle-solving is "limiting" and "convoluted" (as most games exist in a range of difficulty level). Some players need to avoid one end of the range, and some players will want to avoid the other end. I don't go onto forums associated with easier games and suggest the very definition of the game type requires that they all be hard; that would rightly be met with fierce protestations. Yet the "it's about the story" crowd thinks it's perfectly okay if all adventure games, even traditionally challenging franchises like King's Quest, get mangled into trivially interactive content-delivery systems and wonders why such is met with fierce protestations. :rolleyes:
When I want to turn off my brain several hours and enjoy being told a story, I watch a movie, I don't play games with lousy acting, pacing or filming. When I play a game it's because I want an extra something, I want to be challenged, I want to make decisions, to quote Sid Meier: "A game is a series of interesting choices."
A lot of people moan and groan over how the puzzles in Telltale's games are too easy, but I'm not seeing to many explaining what kind of puzzles they would like to see instead.
Off the top of my head, The Secret Of Monkey Island and Day Of The Tentacle both had brilliant, logical and creative puzzles, is it too much to ask that the people who designed and worked on these games bring back the same level of puzzle craftsmanship they showcased two decades ago?
If you don't like it, turn the hints off or the difficulty up, no one is stopping you
Do you realize that it's much easier for you to make a game easy, than it is for those of us who wants a real challenge to make the game harder for ourselves when a game spoils you the solutions to every puzzles outright and tells you what to do every two lines of conversation? Other than play with a blindfold I'm not sure how we can achieve that. If you don't want to solve tough puzzles, you can turn the hints on and the difficulty down, or play with a walkthrough.
I find myself being drawn more towards indie games like Super Meat Boy, The Binding of Isaac (shut up, Dashing, I know what you're going to say), Bit. Trip. Beat, etc because they don't hold your hand. They're freaking relentless. They treat you like a MAN. If you can't handle it you don't win. Plain and simple. BRING IT ON!
You may want to give Desktop Dungeons a try. It's kind of a mix between Minesweeper and roguelike, games last between ten to twenty minutes, the goal of the game is to defeat one or several bosses, and everything on the playfield, from gold, to potions, spells, monsters, unexplored dungeon tiles and deities, is a resource that need to be correctly managed to vanquish the bosses. The game is easy to learn, difficult to master, and consist of nothing but meaningful decisions. There's a free alpha version you can download for free or play online, the guys behind it are also working on a commercial version. I warn you however, when you get the hang of it, it's damn addictive.
Thom-22 is my favourite poster. He says things perfectly.
Hey, thanks for the support. I think I'll take this opportunity to disclose that I am actually a she and not a he and apologize for the misleading user-name. It wasn't intentional and doesn't really matter anyway. My first name is Lisa and you're welcome to call me that if you'd like, or stick with thom, or, hell, call me 22, no problem, LOL.
Comments
As am I. I just want some hint of what it's going to be like and when it's going to come out.
NOT.
You should try to give the game a chance and not damn it even before a screenshot is released.
He isn't damning the game. He's damning the philosophical approach to gaming manifested in the developer's recent games.
People who say they're looking forward to or even "excited" about the game haven't seen any screenshots either.
Some of us have been disappointed in the latest, unofficial, King's Quest game and disappointed in Telltale's latest games, and the last thing we want is to be disappointed in Telltale's take on King's Quest too. I'm sure you can understand that.
That's why we are voicing what we want and do not want to see in Telltale's King's Quest. It's called constructive criticism, and the best moment to voice constructive criticism is early on, when the game design and plot can still be changed, not when the game is out and it's too late to change anything.
Constructive criticism and a desire to voice your wants early on is quite different from saying that Telltale has "no right" to make a KQ game, or that Telltale is going to "massacre" King's Quest and spreading negative word of mouth to kill the game without even seeing a screenshot or anything about the game.
I don't really want to be constructive. I find it much more enjoyable to just piss and moan.
Tis a shame. I waited until TSL released trailers and the like to express my concerns...Can't you at least give this game the benefit of the doubt until we at least see a screenshot?
Before that it had be done with letters! But letters lack that public 'gang up' mentality that the internets allow!
Bt
Bt, I think the word you're looking for is "innovation." After all, Telltale "invented" this new genre of "cinematic adventure," right?
After their last two games? No. At least not yet.
Needless to say, Dragon's Lair's ganmeplay was directly correlated to the technology they had. They didn't have computer systems to combine theatrical quality animation with game-play. We have that now. Taking a step back like this now.... well, it just doesn't work.
Bt
EXACTLY.
The total bullshit part about Telltale's "new" adventure game genre, is that IT'S NOT FUCKING NEW! Jurassic Park has 30 year old gameplay mechanics being hailed (by Telltale only) as innovation. Ridiculous.
God, I hope KQ isn't done in this fashion.
I sure hope so. If they can deliver Tales of Monkey Island quality or better (preferably better, as even ToMI doesn't compare to any of the originals) then I will probably be at least marginally happy with it.
As long as its plot is nothing like TSL.
Bt
quoted for truth.
And I don't believe that we will see QTE in King's Quest. Fahrenheit (which I bought recently) seems to overuse it and probably Jurassic Park does the same (I haven't played it so I have to trust to your word), but both games seem to represent bit different genre than KQ and are action-adventures or adventure games with action sequences or something like that. I believe that TTG's KQ will be pure adventure and it won't have Jurassic Park's QTE's or MoE's fighting.
I think it's called Vivaldii
Ok, so I admit that part of the reason some of these puzzles may have seemed so hard was because I was 10 at the time, but even replaying some classic adventures today I find myself totally flabbergasted as to how some of the puzzles in them are just plain crazy.
Do you really want to go back to the days where the only way to progress through an adventure game was to either go to a walkthrough, which I did a lot and always made me feel stupid, or to take every item in your inventory and apply it methodically to every piece of scenery in the game in the hopes that some crazy combination might do something?
I don't miss that, nor do I miss getting halfway through a game only to realize that I didn't pick up some tiny item in the first area,( or accidentally ate the pie) and now have to start all over again.
I finished playing BTTF today and really enjoyed the fact that I could solve the puzzles without getting a brain hemorrhage, and that some of them, I will admit, still gave me pause.
A lot of people moan and groan over how the puzzles in Telltale's games are too easy, but I'm not seeing to many explaining what kind of puzzles they would like to see instead. Everyone says, be more complex, be more creative, but I don't think people remember how absolutely infuriating some of those "complex" and "creative" puzzles could be.
I think any puzzle in an adventure game should be a momentary stumbling block, that integrates well into the plot of the game, and gives you something to ponder over for a while, not an experience halting impenetrable barrier of Goldbergian logic, that's only solved when your friend tells you,
"oh you have to pull that lever behind the barrel under the waterfall, which rolls the cheese log down the conveyer belt and gets the old man to spit out his golden teeth which you take to the vet as payment in order to cure your pet cat." and you go, "wha?"
I for one am glad that Telltale has thusfar avoided conundrums like this, which classic 90's/ early 2000's adventure games are infamous for and stuck to puzzles which, some might call dumbed down, but I just call way more enjoyable. I've brought a lot of friends who have never played an adventure game in their lives, on board the gaming bandwagon by introducing them to TTG's product line, and I can tell you if puzzles were still what they were back in 1995 those people would be screaming at their computers, instead of having a great time with great games.
Thanks Telltale for not giving me an Adventure Gamers headache, and for keeping it fun yet at times still challenging. Please don't make me have to start all over again in the new KQ game if I accidentaly eat the pie.
But...but...that was the whole point! That was the whole fun! That's how games lasted! Spending weeks on a puzzle and then figuring it out was the most satisfying feeling you could get. And not all puzzles in adventures were that stupid.
You're exaggerating. Some games were like that, yes. And that's bad game design. But some just had very clever puzzles that really forced you to THINK. Not be led straight to the conclusion immediately. That's the problem I have. If you had to use a methodical approach or look at a walkthrough for these puzzles then you're just not thinking outside the box enough.
Fixed that for you.
Basically, I don't want the answer handed to me with big thinly-veiled hints. Throw me in a universe and let me figure it out. That's why I loved adventures. Some games in the past were ridiculous (mustache puzzle in GK3), yes. But not all of them were like that. While some people may be remembering with rose-coloured glasses that all classic adventure games had good puzzles, others, like yourself, seem to remember them all being insanely difficult which is just not the case.
Disagree.
Again with the exaggeration.
I don't understand how. There's no enjoyment in going "oh the game wants me to do this, so I'll do it.......YEY! I GOT IT! I'M SO SMRT! This is so easy! I'm having so much fun!"
I don't want my games solved for me. Have you ever played puzzle games? (Jewel of the Oracle, Myst, Journeyman Project, etc) That's what an adventure game should consist of, plus plot and characters. A few easy puzzles (dare I say it, like the ones in Telltale games) but not much, but mostly more complex puzzles and even a couple great stumpers or mechanical puzzles here and there like in classic puzzle games that require logical outside-the-box thinking.
I picture Telltale's current trends the same as the popular FPS or MMO games that are out now. Diluted, watered down, and shallow. "Go here, then go here" puzzles. Clearly they focus on characters and story, something I think is a mistake. I don't play adventures ONLY for the story and characters. It's the same with most movies nowadays. Granted, some games are golden here and there. At some point you'll find the odd "Inception" title that really gets you thinking and stimulates your gray matter, but mostly it's just boring hand-holding drivel.
Telltale have never truly impressed me with their game design. Tales of Monkey Island came the closest but still never reached classic potential. It just wasn't good enough. I doubt they'll ever be, considering their business model, goals, and approach to game design.
If the puzzles are nothing but momentary stumbling blocks, then it's hardly a game and certainly not an adventure. If it's easy to see where you need to go and what you need to do, then it's not an adventure; it's just an excursion. I take enough excursions in RL, I don't want that in my video games. :rolleyes:
KQ is the most important pioneer in graphical adventures, the games have been played (and are still being bought!) for nearly 30 years -- it has a history, a fanbase, a tradition. If you want to complain about difficulty in games based on TV shows or comic books, fine. But turning a KQ sequel into a casual game would be the most abominable, contemptible act ever committed in the history of video-gaming.
Treasure hunt-style and fetch quest puzzles are the lowest common denominator in Adventure game puzzle design (see Roberta's Mixed Up-Mother Goose)....
Nowadays, games are not challenges. They are convenient escapes where you can go and relax. It's a completely different approach. Games barely have deaths anymore and if they do there's always a convenient checkpoint or autosave to catch you from failing outright. Games are now catering to players instead of treating them like gamers.
I'm not saying all games have to be this way. Indeed, some games that are designed to be entirely easygoing are great. Some. But right now almost EVERYTHING is designed this way and it drives me crazy. I find myself being drawn more towards indie games like Super Meat Boy, The Binding of Isaac (shut up, Dashing, I know what you're going to say), Bit. Trip. Beat, etc because they don't hold your hand. They're freaking relentless. They treat you like a MAN. If you can't handle it you don't win. Plain and simple. BRING IT ON!
Um, most early PC games had 'save everywhere features', quite a few old games used the old 'passcode' system... Many early sierra games had 'autosave' on the apple versions!
Mario Bros, Zelda, Castlevania, and many old NES games often had 'midway checkpoints' since first games in the series! But they were hard as hell! Some games had unlimited continues, others didn't! Super Mario Bros 1 had unlimited continues, but you had to know the secret command!
If they really wanted a challenge, 'no save' feature would make things harder! Try playing old sierra games with no ability to save!
The 'save everywhere' feature made FPS much easier (you could carefully play and repeat sequences to conserve health and ammo). The earliest FPS usually had the ability to 'save at anytime' like in Adventure games. So many newer games did away with the 'save everywhere', to make it more challenging... Since you might be stuck having to repeat the same incredibly difficult sequence over and over again, until you finally survived the onslaught (in some cases this might be through luck). But then again, the save anywhere feature was nicer IMO, and I consider the loss of it, a downgrade forced on games from the console mentality... I don't care if it makes things more challenging, I just like having the feature, and PC gamers always had that feature...
But then they added things like the 'health regeneration', that just kinda counteracts any challenge to trying to reach checkpoints... since you were virtually invincible if you were careful...
Wow, obviously you guys approach adventure games from a completely different angle than I expected, for me adventure games were never primarily about the puzzles, (that's what puzzle games are for) for me it was always about the story, a story that I could participate in more directly than say, a film. The puzzles were challenges along the way that rewarded me by progressing the story forward. But you see the problem with most adventure games, and I do say most because there were brilliant exceptions was that being a person of some intelligence I always saw about 15 different ways to solve a given puzzle, none of which happen to be the way in which the designer thought it should be solved.
I outright crashed Kings Quest 6 in this way once, trying to combine two inventory items, when I got this error message that said, you have combined two items in a way that the designers of the game did not anticipate...and the game quit.
So given that most adventure games lock you into a fairly limited and sometimes convoluted path of puzzle solving you bet your butt I don't mind a hint every now and then telling me what it was that whoever thought up this puzzle had in mind. If you don't like it, turn the hints off or the difficulty up, no one is stopping you, and don't insult my intelligence just because I happen to not mind a lil pointer now and then. My adventurers cap is no less worn than yours friends.
You aren't completely 'out there' with your belief, infact Roberta Williams nearly stated the same thing during early interviews! Check out I think the Making of KQ6 Video for an example of that (or it might have been in the 15th anniversary KQ interviews)! You can also find several interviews in the old Sierra magazines, and Interaction magazine where various people at Sierra state similar senitmates.
The Williamses even hired Bill Davis as Creative Director;
http://sierra.wikia.com/wiki/Bill_Davis
...for the sole purpose of trying to push Sierra games closer to the multimedia of the movies and television industry!
Basically that in some cases, the changes and evolution of 'puzzle types' introduced to 'adventures' was based on the technology that that they had at hand. Limits in graphics, required certain types of puzzles, and improved graphics allowed other types of puzzles. But ultimately Roberta saw Adventures as a way to tell a story, and if she had the technology, she dreamed of making them ever closer to movies/hollywood/film, but allowing the player to have the ability to 'interact' with the environment, in ways that movies would not allow!
I suppose Don Bluth beat her to it... kinda, with his Dragon's Lair laser disk games... Things are kinda circling back to that...
On the other hand, what she wanted, wasn't necessarily what other fans wanted, and the closer she got to 'movies' and added more physical 'interaction', the more older players started to criticize her games... Hmm...
It's partly why physics-type puzzles (and block/jumping/climbing, etc) and fighting became ways of 'interacting' in KQ8's environment, when she had the chance to build that game in new-fangled 3D technology... To the chagrin of many of the old sierra adventure gamers...
That's strange, considering that in the game's text there is literally a response for every single inventory item in relation to other inventory items. Most are jokes!
Are you always so surprised to find that people have approaches/perspectives/opinions that are different from your own? Having participated in adventure game forums for well over 10 years, I've always understood that different people approach them differently, that many adventure gamers play primarily for the story, even known quite a few who print out a walkthrough before they ever launch the game! Why is it that those who think adventures are "about the story" have such difficulty understanding that other adventure gamers enjoy the gameplay as much as the story and relish taking on the kinds of challenges found in games like the original King's Quests?
You seriously misunderstand if you think anyone's saying adventure games are primarily about the puzzles. We are saying they are primarily about the adventure -- the exploration of the gameworld and the complexity involved in discovering and identifying the challenges built into the gameworld as well as determining their solutions are more important than the difficulty level of the puzzles taken individually. This is what distinguishes an adventure game from a puzzle game, not the existence of a story (which many puzzle games have anyway).
Moreover, just because I don't see the story as the only rewarding part of an adventure game doesn't mean I regard it as incidental either. The story gives meaning to the gameworld and provides structure and context for the actions that need to be taken and their results. This affords the opportunity for so much more than merely participating in a story. Like undertaking an adventure into unknown territory and having to meet strict criteria for success as in any other kind of game.
I don't see this as a "problem". If you thought of 15 ways to solve a puzzle, surely you can think of one more... This is kind of the way games work -- games have rules and the challenge is to play them successfully within those rules. In the class of video games to which adventures belong (the class that was pioneered by adventure games), you're given a set of character capabilities and a gameworld in which you must apply them to overcome the obstacles embedded in the gameworld. Whereas in shooters you have weapons and overcoming obstacles entails killing things, in adventure games you have hotspots and items that must be manipulated correctly to progress. (The best adventure games also give their characters multiple capabilities -- look/touch/talk/etc. -- but Telltale and other adventure-makers have sadly done away with that in favor of click-and-go.)
If the game isn't designed with the possibility to turn hints off and difficulty up, then, yes, we are being stopped. :rolleyes: A difficult adventure game can always incorporate a hints system to make it less difficult for those who prefer to play that way. But you can't do it the other way around.
Adventure games range in the extent to which puzzle-solving is "limiting" and "convoluted" (as most games exist in a range of difficulty level). Some players need to avoid one end of the range, and some players will want to avoid the other end. I don't go onto forums associated with easier games and suggest the very definition of the game type requires that they all be hard; that would rightly be met with fierce protestations. Yet the "it's about the story" crowd thinks it's perfectly okay if all adventure games, even traditionally challenging franchises like King's Quest, get mangled into trivially interactive content-delivery systems and wonders why such is met with fierce protestations. :rolleyes:
Ditto. Amazing.
Off the top of my head, The Secret Of Monkey Island and Day Of The Tentacle both had brilliant, logical and creative puzzles, is it too much to ask that the people who designed and worked on these games bring back the same level of puzzle craftsmanship they showcased two decades ago?
Do you realize that it's much easier for you to make a game easy, than it is for those of us who wants a real challenge to make the game harder for ourselves when a game spoils you the solutions to every puzzles outright and tells you what to do every two lines of conversation? Other than play with a blindfold I'm not sure how we can achieve that. If you don't want to solve tough puzzles, you can turn the hints on and the difficulty down, or play with a walkthrough.
You may want to give Desktop Dungeons a try. It's kind of a mix between Minesweeper and roguelike, games last between ten to twenty minutes, the goal of the game is to defeat one or several bosses, and everything on the playfield, from gold, to potions, spells, monsters, unexplored dungeon tiles and deities, is a resource that need to be correctly managed to vanquish the bosses. The game is easy to learn, difficult to master, and consist of nothing but meaningful decisions. There's a free alpha version you can download for free or play online, the guys behind it are also working on a commercial version. I warn you however, when you get the hang of it, it's damn addictive.
Hear, hear!