King's Quest Spin-offs
The first 'KQ' game per se that you could ever say was released was Adventure in Serenia (Aka Wizard and the Princess). An adventure game released by Sierra in the early 1980s and designed/written by Roberta, it was set in Serenia, a land later revisited in KQ5. Roberta making the land in KQ5 be Serenia tied that game to KQ--Making it a game set in the same world, but not "KQ".
Would you ever support spin offs--in any genre, or different from KQ--that are set in the world of KQ, but don't concern The Royal Family or Daventry? Think sort of like Star Trek: The Next Generation, or spin offs of the series set in the same world--Expanding the universe of KQ and it's boundaries and mythos and perhaps even expanding the world KQ is set in into something truly large and interesting--Sort of making the "World of Daventry" into a setting like "The Forgotten Realms"--where the main KQ stories are just one of many stories in the same universe--Where the Royal Family are just one set of heroes in that world.
It'd take away a lot of the restrictions that the "rules" KQ has puts on stories and open up a lot of potential new ground but would allow you to also revisit beloved characters and lands that KQ first showed us, while offering up new ones as well. Perhaps in a story or two The Royal Family could even make a cameo appearance.
Would you ever support spin offs--in any genre, or different from KQ--that are set in the world of KQ, but don't concern The Royal Family or Daventry? Think sort of like Star Trek: The Next Generation, or spin offs of the series set in the same world--Expanding the universe of KQ and it's boundaries and mythos and perhaps even expanding the world KQ is set in into something truly large and interesting--Sort of making the "World of Daventry" into a setting like "The Forgotten Realms"--where the main KQ stories are just one of many stories in the same universe--Where the Royal Family are just one set of heroes in that world.
It'd take away a lot of the restrictions that the "rules" KQ has puts on stories and open up a lot of potential new ground but would allow you to also revisit beloved characters and lands that KQ first showed us, while offering up new ones as well. Perhaps in a story or two The Royal Family could even make a cameo appearance.
Sign in to comment in this discussion.
Comments
It is the former that is the superior version!
Shopkeeper's Quest I: The Search For Better Lard (and salt)
Bt
I mean stuff that would be official and not horrible.
It should be released on Nintendo 3DS and Iphone/Androids...
I always thought it'd be cool if there was a QFG style King's Quest game with a mix of RPG/adventure.
KQ8 was more like the earlier QFG games than QFG5 was like the previous games in the QFG series (QFG5 was nearly pure action, with no puzzles, the adventure aspects were intentionally stripped out)...
I never really played KQ8 so I wouldn't know, but yeah I was thinking like the first four qfg games.
So much for that PM you sent me last week, no?
I've always thought a remake of "Wizard and Princess" as a Pre-Graham KQ game would be a fun play.
Bt
The game Lorelei Shannon wanted;
IT'S A FUCKING FAIRY TALE LAND! ARRRRRRRRRRRGH.
Bt
Archaeologist's Quest
It could be an Indiana Jones or Laura Bow (needs murders lots of murders) or Laura Craft crossover!
http://www.telltalegames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=30271
An opinion based on falsity, is still false... You can validly consider it a bad KQ game based on your own opinions, but its still KQ8 regardless of it is a good or bad game.
I know I always I kept hoping he would wash up on Johnny Castaway's island.
Graham: "Pardon me, sir, but I am very near death. Might I trouble you for something to eat?"
Narrator: "That bottle of sunscreen looks very, very tempting. But the ragged old man seems disinclined to let Graham have it."
Johnny: "Pull up a rock, 'Yer Highness'! We's eatin' good tonight! And I betcha I could wear this vest if I just stretch it out a bit. Yessiree-Bob!"
Graham: "I am very pleased to meet you, Bob."
Rosella also appears in both of those games. She also has alot to say in Hoyle 1 when interacting with the other characters.
Lolotte and Mordack appear in Hoyle 3.
Then there is King Graham's Board Game Challenge.
...and the Quest for Daventry pinball game in Take-A-Break pinball.
and King's Questions (a quiz game that takes place in King's Quest universe starting the Captain, Alexander, and Cassima)
The Princeless Bride isn't KQ, because its split into chapters, and has two characters, and is far too cartoony and silly for my tastes...
...and I choose to believe 2+2 = 5 and that there are 5 lights...
Sarcasm...
Crap. It's not KQ8 to me. It's not. TO ME. It has combat, and combat is a very large part of the game. The other games merely have some puzzles where creatures/people may die when the puzzle is solved a certain way. You can't just wander around and kill random creatures in the old games without consequence--if you kill the goat in KQ1, the game becomes unwinnable. That's not combat, it's a fatally incorrect puzzle solution.
The games from KQ1 to KQ7 are a progression of technology. Mask of Eternity up and changes whole aspects of the gameplay in one fell swoop, causing the game to feel out of place with the others. And Sierra didn't make it heavily combat-based because the technology suddenly allowed it. They made it that way because a large part of the gaming market was interested in shooters.
It is not KQ8 to me. There are certain aspects that separate a graphic adventure game from an action adventure RPG, and MoE lept over that line. The franchise didn't ease into it like MoE should be the next logical step.
Now shut your trap telling me that I'm deluded just because I consider the graphic adventure games of the series to be the core titles and the only titles I care about. Graphic adventure is the core genre for the franchise. KQ1-7 are in that genre. MoE is an action adventure RPG, thus does not fit within the core genre. Therefore, to me, it is not a core title.
No it doesn't become unwinnable... You just have to be kindly generous and give away a treasure to the troll...
Roberta designed it that intentionally.
BTW, you are still wrong, its officially KQ8... Maybe not the best of the KQ games, but still KQ8. Don't tell me to shut up!
2+2=5 = you!
Also, Paw agrees with me.
Bt
erudite subject anymore.
There are even video game and computer archaeologists and anthropologists now, and historians. Infact, their are universities with courses, textbooks, and even museums on the subject!
These things are no longer considered 'just a game' but pieces of cultural heritage, like books, artwork, music, plays and movies, etc!
They are not just a 'childhood' hobby or a hobby for nerds and geeks (the fat kid that everyone tried to pick on back in gradeschool).
So any honest historian who would discuss KQ8 in an honest and encyclopedic way, would cite the fact that KQ8 or King's Quest 8 is one of the game's valid abbreviations and descriptions, continued to be used then, and now (as used by Sierra, as used by Activision, Ken Williams own website, on most sites that sell the game, gaming websites that categorize the game (based on quotes in Roberta's and other developers own interviews), etc). Both official sites and unofficial sites.
Saying its 'not KQ8' would be verifiably false opinion and 'statement', one that could not be cited in an encyclopaedic way.
Likewise interesting enough several attempts to make the ninth game in the series called King's Quest IX have failed to finish production!
Will telltale's currently unnamed game fail, before it's even released?
Btw perhaps you need a refresher on what Godwin's Law is, and what it actually applies to...;
I can assure I for one am not resorting to any Reductio ad Hitlerum...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_Hitlerum
And you're dancing real close to Godwin's as it is, Baggins. 1984 references? Thought-police? Seriously? Yes, by stating how KQ8 does not feel like a true KQ to him personally, he is clearly suppressing freedom of speech and truth all the world over! Seriously? Actually, you are the one intent on suppressing his opinion, not vice versa.
Free speech, which you probably don't understand, protects wrong and ignorant speech just as much as knowledgeable and correct speech. A person has the right be wrong, and believe false information. Just as much as another person has the right to point out their flawed belief. But it still makes them wrong when it comes down to the facts.
BTW, there is nothing wrong about saying KQ8 doesn't feel like a true KQ... That's different than saying KQ8 is not a King's Quest game or that its not KQ8, or not part of the KQ series. There is a distinction. One is a valid opinion, the other ignores facts.
But eh in this day and age, everyone is more concerned about gut opinions than caring about facts...
BTW, Katie him telling me to shut up is an actual form of 'suppressing speach'. I haven't once told him to 'shut up'.
Katie, the only people trying to bring up Godwin's law and imply invocation of nazis, would be other posters here including your latest post! Godwin's Law only applies when someone compares someone to Nazi Party specifically.
Again, if I say "KQ8", in a thread when abbrievating the game, and comparing it to something else in the series and related to someone's comment, that shouldn't be a reason for someone to come in and say, and say "it's not KQ8", blah blah blah!
Because my initial post was intended in this case as a reply to someone's comment about a type of game they want to play, but the latter comments in reference to my comment, really aren't. They are really just an attack on my initial post (which was just an observation on the person's idea).
I would like to describe a new law, I'll call it "KQ8 Law',
It doesn't matter what the topic is about KQ8 or even if the reference to KQ8 actually relates to something in another subject. Someone will come in and state how they believe the game is not a KQ game... Often times they may go as far to say, that the game should not be discussed at all (since they believe it is not part of the series)... or that people should just 'shut up' about KQ8...
The corollaries to this law is that it doesn't matter even if the discussion is neither about the quality or lack their of the game (but rather about something in the game and/or in relation to something else in the series), but someone will come into the thread and state that the game sucks, and in some cases going as far to state that the game shouldn't be discussed at all...
To a certain degree there may be a related KQ7 Law similar to this law as well.
"As an online discussion references or discusses KQ8 grows longer, the probability of Baggins jumping in to steamroll the conversation approaches 1."
There we go.
Actually, no, opinions aren't wrong--they are personal. You may or may not agree with them. You can try to point out that, perhaps, an opinion seems to be based on incorrect facts, but the opinion itself isn't wrong.
Now, Chyron has clearly started this is his opinion. He's not claimed that factually it is so. Given how you keep trying to drive in your point, however, you seem to be the one who has trouble understanding here.
It's others who steamrolled it, and envoked KQ8 Law... But eh not like anyone will admit to it...
BTW, in this case the more specific situation for the Law is;
"When Baggins references or discusses KQ8 within a thread, the probability of his post being steamrolled with comparisons involving it not being a KQ game or not part of the KQ series by another party approaches 1."
Actually Katie, "fallacious opinions" do exist. If wrong opinion didn't exist, 'fallacies' wouldn't exist!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy
http://nizkor.org/features/fallacies/
Infact the common idiom 'opinions are neither right nor wrong' is infact itself filled with paradoxal reasoning and can in itself be fallacious as well depending on the type of opinions! But most common idioms can be fallacious in some way. But in the end its basically a parodox, depending on the type of opinion, an opinion can be either right (one is right and one is wrong), wrong (one is wrong and one is right) or neither (neither are right or neither are wrong), or both (both are right or both are wrong)...
For example, hypothetically, if I had the opinion that you were a man, that would make my opinion 'wrong' and not 'factual'... I would be commiting a fallacy. It would make me rather ignorant or stupid! It might be argued that my opinion was no longer "personal" as well (not all opinions are 'personal'), as I had applied it to you (or another proper noun).
Yes. Good. You, Roberta, gaming in general and perhaps all works of fiction ever made are being oppressed by my persistence to never accept MoE as KQ8.
It is my goal in life to annoy you by stating my own opinions/perceptions (regardless of how valid they are or how many people agree with me) and further being unwilling to agree or compromise with your arguments which oppose my own.
That would be an 'argumentum ad populum' fallacy btw
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-popularity.html
...or appeal to belief;
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-belief.html
It can also touch on the 'bandwagon';
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/bandwagon.html
Also besides maybe its other people who are 'wired'/'born' to become annoyed whenever "KQ8" is even mentioned! Therefore if I say KQ8, that's enought drive people crazy! and even nausea!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_nauseam
There is a fallacy for believing one thing might be true for "you", but not true for "me"! I.E. It may be KQ8, but its not KQ8 to me!
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/relativist-fallacy.html
Claim KQ8 is presented.
Person A (Chyron) asserts that KQ8 may be true for others but is not true for him/her.
Therefore A (Chyron) is justified in rejecting KQ8.
No, where does this mean you have to like or enjoy the game though! So keep on 'hatin'.
I didn't see this post until Baggins quoted it in a thread today, but, no, not so much for my PM. My comment was supposed to be in jest or sardonic but that doesn't translate too well in text. What I said in that PM, I meant. I don't like certain story/tone elements of your game but I don't hate you or the game or the team or any of that crap and I'm not vehemently against it anymore. It's a fan effort and for the effort alone you and any person who takes a fan project on should be applauded. I may disagree with the result but the effort, love, and hard work put in is something that can't be denied, nor should it be diminished or mocked.
I admire your effort, and the fact that you can write (I can't get past a single page myself!), and there are certain facets of your game I do like. My feelings on your game have mellowed a lot--They're probably akin to what you might feel about KQ5 (as KQ5 isn't your favorite but you don't abhor it either--at least I don't think you do).
I'm going to be 22 soon. Hating a game and trying to trash it just because I disagree with certain story or tonal choices is childish. We're all fans of KQ at the end of the day, even if we like the series for different reasons, or prefer different approaches (I mean for example that KQ5 is my favorite while KQ6 is yours).
I agree that games are a form of Cultural Capital - but Historians do not view history like an encyclopedia, all history is up for revision. When Mask of Eternia was released major releases were never considered spin-offs and as such would have been defined as the next major installment in the series , while today in our market we understand how spins offs can be larger and potentially generate more income... Todays gaming historians would actually examine the series and break it down into sagas
KQ1+KQ2+KQ5 are Graham's Saga
KQ3+KQ6 are Alexander's Saga
KQ4+KQ7 are Rosella's Saga
with the exclussion of Mask of Eternia all of the series focuses on the Royal Family (hence its name of Kings Quest) - in Mask the main character is not part of the royal family - it would only work as part of the series thematicly if Connor became the new king as Graham was a knight in the first game... he doesn't so it clashes with the series on a thematic level...as such a gaming historian would actuyally argue that it should be renamed "Kings Quest : Mask of Eternia" and be recognised as a spin off.
on a side note, I enjoyed playing Mask of Eternia and im not saying it was horrible - just that it should be recognised with more modern lenses as a spin off.