The Ultimate Clash

Music Head · **Posted:** Wed Feb 09, 2005 8:27 am

Sierra or Lucas Arts. There can only be one winner

Radiant · **Posted:** Wed Feb 09, 2005 8:57 am

Infocom!!!!!

Jafar · **Posted:** Wed Feb 09, 2005 5:17 pm

SIERRAAAAAAA![/Sega]

ThreeHeadedMonkey · **Posted:** Wed Feb 09, 2005 10:40 pm

Now don't boo me away, but I'm picking LucasArts... Because I played these games long before playing ANYTHING from Sierra. Secret of Monkey Island was my first adventure-experience (and I adored it).

Charlemagne · **Posted:** Fri Feb 11, 2005 9:04 pm

Radiant wrote:

Infocom!!!!!

Totally, dude. One of these days I'm gonna complete Planetfall....

Amayirot Akago · **Posted:** Mon Feb 14, 2005 10:25 am

I voted for the third option. Sierra made the adventure genre, LucasArts helped it evolve further.

Swift · **Joined:** Sat Apr 12, 2003 5:44 pm **Posts:** 1332

Voted for the third option too.

Gronagor · **Posted:** Tue Feb 15, 2005 6:46 am

Ok. What if the question was:
"If you COULD have bought Sierra or Lucasarts (only the game developing departments) 15 years ago, which one would you have chosen?"

Radiant · **Posted:** Tue Feb 15, 2005 8:02 am

Well, seeing that Sierra is now defunct, wouldn't it make obvious sense to have bought LucasFilm?

Broomie · **Posted:** Tue Feb 15, 2005 11:57 am

Both Sierra and Lucasarts were excellent companies 15 years ago, he's not talking about now he's saying what company would you buy if it was 1990.

And don't say Lucasarts obviously because Sierra stops making adventures in 1998. You don't know that, and if you bought Sierra you could have the chance to put a stop to that.

I'd have chosen Sierra over Lucasarts.

Radiant · **Posted:** Tue Feb 15, 2005 1:21 pm

Hm. I suppose I should then take Sierra and sell it to Vivendi for lots of $$$

(on second thought, if I took LucasFilm I'd get to meet celebs like Brian Moriarty, Ron Gilbert, and Orson Scott Card... tempting!)

Gronagor · **Posted:** Wed Feb 16, 2005 1:24 pm

Hmmm... I think Ken's very pleased with himself for selling Sierra when he did. LucasArts' gaming department won't get half as much at this stage.

Jawbone · **Joined:** Tue Jan 18, 2005 9:46 am **Posts:** 38

To me, it's basically The King's Quest series, The Leisure Suit Larry Series, and Heart of China vs. The Monkey Island series and Grim Fandango. Due supierior numbers, my vote goes with Sierra.

FrostFlameFlare · **Posted:** Sat Aug 16, 2008 9:29 pm

Sierra, sentimental and nostalgic reasons. I grew up with it. Lucasarts kicks major tail, but my heart lies with the "quests."

CrazyStalker · **Joined:** Tue Mar 18, 2008 7:19 pm **Posts:** 35

LucasArts. Don't kill me, but of Sierra I only loved Space Quest and Quest for Glory.

JustLuke32 · **Joined:** Mon Aug 11, 2008 8:29 am **Posts:** 77

On the whole, Lucasarts' adventure games felt more "crafted" than Sierra's games. The only Sierra adventure games that I liked were the first four Quest for Glory games, but I adore Monkey Island, Monkey Island 2, The Curse of Monkey Island, Day of the Tentacle, and Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis. So, just by strength of numbers, I've voted for Lucasarts. But, boy, the period of time when all of the above were released really was a golden age for graphic adventures. Great gaming times.

MusicallyInspired · **Posted:** Wed Aug 20, 2008 11:16 pm

That's an unanswerable question. I think, personally, that Sierra adventures were for the hardcore adventure players. While LucasArts adventures, while not specifically selling out for sake of audience, appealed to a much broader range of people. Several differences between the two confirm this theory; the dead ends and deaths (or lack thereof), puzzles, interface, humour, etc. LucasArts really had a good marketing structure. Right from the beginning they were always point & click which appeals to more people. Sierra had the parser interface for a quite a while before switching solely to P&C. It's impossible to die in almost every LucasArts games and the ones where it's not it's easy to avoid or at least very obvious to see coming and plan ahead.

Basically, they're two different animals. One's not greater than the other. They're just different.

Gronagor · **Posted:** Thu Aug 21, 2008 9:22 am

You know, the reason I always played LucasArt games (and enjoyed it), but won't choose it over Sierra is just one simple reason:

LucasArts' games has a very good plot, wonderful backgrounds (scenery) and wonderfully animated characters (which develops wonderfully during the game)

Why is that negative then, you ask?

Well, you have to follow the pre-determined path. Even the walking areas are very limited to the path they want you to follow. The plot has no possibility of following a different route. Everyone's experience of the game will be exactly the same. (Other than a little bit of luck to find some of those silly solutions they usually have to every puzzle)

That negative point weighs quite a bit in my opinion.

But, like I said, I'll still play the games to see how the story ends.

oughtobe · **Joined:** Mon Aug 04, 2008 7:09 pm **Posts:** 113

its not even a contest.... LucasArts only had maybe 7 undeniably great games... 2 great monkey islands, 2 great indiana jones's, 2 maniac mansions and a BASS... those are their best games... compare those to the best Sierra 6 which are hard to decide, but lets say you got, 2 QFG'S, 2 Space Quests, 2 King's Quest, and then you can choose 2 LSL's 2 Police Quests and a Freddy Pharkas for good measure, to just make sure LucasArt can't compete.... And then you got the two Conquest games, the two Laura Bow's, GOLD RUSH!... Damn you can't even compare... SIERRA DESTROYS LUCASARTS!!! If you even tried to make this argument in 1994, I would've smacked you...

Brainiac · **Posted:** Thu Aug 21, 2008 3:57 pm

oughtobe wrote:

its not even a contest.... LucasArts only had maybe 7 undeniably great games... 2 great monkey islands, 2 great indiana jones's, 2 maniac mansions and a BASS...

Do you mean Beneath A Steel Sky? That wasn't LucasArts.

And what about Zak McCracken? Loom? Sam & Max? The Dig? I disagree about only two great Monkey Islands; I like all of the first three, even if Curse was missing a certain something without Gilbert.

Personally, I can't really make an assertion of superiority. In all honesty, the two styles of game design are different enough to go with the old "apples and oranges" line.

Gronagor · **Posted:** Thu Aug 21, 2008 4:34 pm

hmmm.... that would be an interesting poll... apples and oranges....

Brainiac · **Posted:** Thu Aug 21, 2008 4:45 pm

You make the "comparing apples and oranges" poll, I'll vote in it. Presuming there's a "what's the point?" option, of course.

Angelus3K · **Posted:** Thu Aug 21, 2008 5:53 pm

Yea BASS was made by british developer Revolution, who also created Lure of the Temptress and the more known Broken Sword 1,2,3 and 4.

Gronagor · **Posted:** Thu Aug 21, 2008 7:11 pm

Brainiac wrote:

You make the "comparing apples and oranges" poll, I'll vote in it. Presuming there's a "what's the point?" option, of course.

My answer would be 'neither'.. :rolleyes

MusicallyInspired · **Posted:** Thu Aug 21, 2008 8:46 pm

I have a feeling it should be mentioned that just because ScummVM supports games other than Monkey Island, Maniac Mansion, etc that doesn't mean that all games supported by ScummVM were made by LucasArts.

Especially not anymore...

The Ultimate Clash

Who is online