Death/DeadEnd/Retry/Save/Restore? (Was: KQ5,6,7 Remake?)

[calvinfoo]

KQ4 I am pretty sure it will be remade for the same reasons like KQ3. I am looking for that.

However, what about KQ5 and KQ6?

The system and quality are already in VGA, I don't see any how the graphics requires to be updated.

However, I do wish to it is "deadend"less. Like in KQ5, as far as I can remember when you encounter the cat chasing a rat, you are supposed to use a boot (or something like that) to throw at the cat in order to save the rat. Which later the rat will come to rescue you later part in the game. If you didn't save the rat, basically you are screwed and stucked in a deadend even without knowning it. This is one reason why I prefer Lucas Arts' style, you won't hit a deadend.

I really like this KQ3R where it abolished the deadend.

and for KQ7,

The video quality is good, but the style is off track from KQ5 and 6, and it was made into too cartoonish, not very KQ-ish, too Loney Tunes-ish.

[Erpy]

I personally think KQ5 might be a fairly interesting project...while its soundtrack is pretty much perfect, there'd be room for improvement in most other areas. The backgrounds in the game are 256 color, so while they wouldn't require a great deal of finetuning, they could still benefit from the treatment we gave KQ1VGA and KQ2+. Dialogue pics were rather primitive. Voice acting was very hit and miss. (since most voices in the game were done by Sierra employees with no experience doing voiceovers) Dialogues was fairly unremarkable. And some of the puzzles were somewhat out-there.

KQ6...I really don't think we can redo that one. I doubt we'd get much support for that kind of thing.

[Radogol]

Wait a minute, so in one thread you're saying that people wouldn't buy higher resolution versions of your remakes just for "slightly better graphics", but consider adding color to KQ5, an already beautiful game? And just to do that, you'd give thought to recreating the entire logic in AGS? Guys, come on... Same with Quest for Glory III.

Besides, while KQ 1-3 were written the way they were because of memory limitations, KQV was made in a much more modern environment. Don't you think going back to rewrite it could be interpreted as a sign of arrogance, especially when the original designers are still around? I remember there being a lot of disappointed fans when Charles Cecil rewrote HIS OWN intro to Broken Sword for a recent re-release.

Anyway, my point is: Guys, I'm behind whatever you do 100%, but please, try not to go overboard with micromanagement.

[Gronagor]

Uhm. Radogol. Did you notice he used the word: 'I'?

Erpy was making a statement saying he'd love to do that. He never made a proclamation on behalf of the team. If you asked him directly, like with QfG3, he'll most probably give you the same answer as with that game.

On that subject... wonder how many of KQ5's handpainted pics can be found. Would be interesting to see how the same background would compare when in SVGA, rather than VGA.

[Radogol]

Uhm. Radogol. Did you notice he used the word: 'I'?

But it was Erpy himself who said slightly better graphics wouldn't be worth the effort

I wonder how many of KQ5's handpainted pics can be found. Would be interesting to see how the same background would compare when in SVGA, rather than VGA.

That I could get behind. Rescanned backgrounds along with high resolution sprites along the lines of Mage's Initiation would make a world of difference.

[Gronagor]

But it was Erpy himself who said slightly better graphics wouldn't be worth the effort

*sigh* *Won't get into a silly argument.* *Won't get into a silly argument.* *Won't get into silly argument.*

[Klytos]

A lot of conversations about Sierra games tend to end up in the whole "dead ends are bad" thing. I don't get it. I played the vast majority of these games as an early teenager and I never thought of dead ends as a bad thing. I still don't. If you screw up, restore to an earlier spot. Can it be frustrating? Sure. That's the point. You need to do the right thing to win the game, not be handed out second chances at every available opportunity.

If you want to play a game without these so-called dead ends, go grab Monkey Island or any of the other lesser LucasArts games. There's a reason Sierra was number 1 in this genre.

[calvinfoo]

A lot of conversations about Sierra games tend to end up in the whole "dead ends are bad" thing. I don't get it. I played the vast majority of these games as an early teenager and I never thought of dead ends as a bad thing. I still don't. If you screw up, restore to an earlier spot. Can it be frustrating? Sure. That's the point. You need to do the right thing to win the game, not be handed out second chances at every available opportunity.

If you want to play a game without these so-called dead ends, go grab Monkey Island or any of the other lesser LucasArts games. There's a reason Sierra was number 1 in this genre.

I am not saying deadend is bad, but saying dead end is hit even without knowing it is bad. isn't that it is bad if you wasted two days on the game itself without realising that you actually in a dead end?

[Radogol]

A lot of conversations about Sierra games tend to end up in the whole "dead ends are bad" thing. I don't get it.

What's your definition of a dead end?

[calvinfoo]

A lot of conversations about Sierra games tend to end up in the whole "dead ends are bad" thing. I don't get it.

What's your definition of a dead end?

Dead end means you can never finish the game no matter what, because of something you did or something you didn't do at the wrong place or wrong time.

[Radogol]

Dead end means you can never finish the game no matter what, because of something you did or something you didn't do at the wrong place or wrong time.

Just wanted to make sure we're talking about the same thing.

I can't agree with you, since things like the cat & mouse puzzle mentioned in this thread give the player no indication that he screwed up and should restart. It's not something that could be fixed with a simple restore since you don't even know what you're missing.

On the other hand, optional items and actions which offer alternate solutions worth more points are a fun mechanic in my opinion and can dramatically increase replayability.

[Anonymous Game Creator 2]

I would agree. I remember what a pain in the ass it was the first time I played King's Quest IV and missed picking up the lantern in the dwarves' mine. After a certain point in the game, the lantern won't be there anymore (it just disappears!) and you don't realize you need it until the game is nearly over. I think it's awful game design if the player feels frustrated to the point that they want to quit because they lost so much progress due to no logical fault of their own. If you want players to quit the game, it should be because they've reached a challenging puzzle that requires some "time away" to think about the solution. But so that they know they can always continue from exactly where they left off without being snagged.

This doesn't just apply to adventure games either. Imagine you were playing Doom 2 and you realized, at the very last level, that it was impossible to defeat the mega-demon-in-the-wall because you forgot to enter one obscure room in level 2 and press a button on the wall. How infuriating it would be to be forced to play through all those levels again!

As for a King's Quest V remake, I don't think anything would need to be drastically altered in that game. Just a few tweaks here and there, the removal of dead-ends, and things that would enhance the existing gameplay. I'm a little confused about your statement that some people might think it's arrogant to tweak dialogues from King's Quest V in particular, since we've already done way more than that to the other King's Quest remakes we've worked on, and the game developers who worked on them are still around too.

(In most cases, it'd actually be nice to get the original writers to do the rewriting, if they'd be willing).

[Eventide]

I think just based on the deeper storyline that was created for the remakes (i.e. The Father is behind all the bad things that happen to this family.) I would love to see them remade to fulfill that story thread.

Of course, for me, my hope is really for KQIV first. I know that another developer is already working on it, but I have no idea if they are going to/have permission to use the connecting story thread. I will play it regardless when they release it, for it is my favorite game of the series. But still, I would very much love to see AGDI's version of that remake.

Though that is entirely dependent on the staff as well. It's their time, effort and energy to use.

[calvinfoo]

Dead end means you can never finish the game no matter what, because of something you did or something you didn't do at the wrong place or wrong time.

Just wanted to make sure we're talking about the same thing.

I can't agree with you, since things like the cat & mouse puzzle mentioned in this thread give the player no indication that he screwed up and should restart. It's not something that could be fixed with a simple restore since you don't even know what you're missing.

On the other hand, optional items and actions which offer alternate solutions worth more points are a fun mechanic in my opinion and can dramatically increase replayability.

Yes. Like Lucas Arts Adventure Games, it has no dead end. Technically you can start from begining until the end without save/restore without worry about the game cannot be finished, or die. Which is much more player-friendly, with minimum pressure or fustration. On the other hand, Sierra's game requires you to save/restore, as you can die easily, also you might did something wrong, or didn't do something, or did something at the wrong time, or didn't do something at the right time, resulting you can never end the game. Example the Classic KQ3, if you eat the porridge or used it without the cookie, you can never complete the game no matter how.


At one point that in one of the Monkey Island jokes that Guybrush where "dead" and asked for "restore" or "restart" with interface like Sierra. LOL... obviously that is just to tease Sierra.

Optional/alternate tasks or items are different from "deadend". Optional tasks/items will not lead you to deadend, you will still complete the game, but not with perfect score. Like in KQ6, it has more than 2 endings if I recalled correctly.

[Blackthorne519]

I think people today are just really big babies who are used to being handed everything. I've never seen so much whining in my life as I've seen in discussions over dead-ends in adventure games.


Bt

[calvinfoo]

I think people today are just really big babies who are used to being handed everything. I've never seen so much whining in my life as I've seen in discussions over dead-ends in adventure games.

You just don't get it, do you?

I don't mind and ENJOY spending the TWO WEEKS trying to figure out a puzzle, if the game can be carried on without problem.

but I really HATE to spend TWO DAYS playing the game but at the end I will be darn FUSTRATED to realise that I actually wasted two whole day because of a small thing that I didn't do at the beginning resulting I couldn't complete the game no matter what and the only option is to roll back and restart from there.

See the difference?

[Radogol]

I'm a little confused about your statement that some people might think it's arrogant to tweak dialogues from King's Quest V in particular, since we've already done way more than that to the other King's Quest remakes we've worked on, and the game developers who worked on them are still around too.

I know and I enjoyed your versions more than the originals However, from what I understood, the game would be pretty much the same, but with new voices, text and some extra color. When you're taking an archaic thing like KQ2 - and I don't mean that in a bad way, it's actually the only AGI King's Quest I've completed back in the day - and remake everything from scratch, changes to the text are expected. It's a brand new interpretation after all.

On the other hand, taking a large part of existing assets - or dare I say, ripping it - but changing the text somehow feels wrong to me, personally. I understand there would be incredible amount of reprogramming involved, but that's invisible to the end user. It's difficult for me to make a strong argument for this distinction since it comes from my gut rather than my head, but maybe you'll be able to see my point anyway.

I think people today are just really big babies who are used to being handed everything.

We're talking about entertainment. Sure, art can and perhaps should be challenging, but it's one thing to struggle with a novel because its meaning is elusive, and another not to understand the point because the pages are missing

[Blackthorne519]

The novel isn't missing pages; you're just skipping over them.


Bt

[Radogol]

The novel isn't missing pages; you're just skipping over them.

Silly me! I'll just go back to read them! Oh, wait...

[MusicallyInspired]

Well, if you kept a few BOOKMARKS it would be easy to go back and read them.

[Erpy]

I agree that dead ends tend to mar a game. The reason why I'm okay with deaths is that when you encounter them, you immediately know you screwed up. With a dead end, you don't. You could be playing for hours on end and never realize you had to pick up some random item twenty rooms back...you'll essentially need a walkthrough to tell you that. And when the player finds out, he often loses motivation to play over, because that's how humans tend to be wired...they're tempted to give up if they find out they've wasted their time on something...I have that sometimes. If I lose an hour of work due to a crash, it can take days before I regain the motivation to pick things up again.

[MusicallyInspired]

There are ways around that, though. Like the game telling the player they missed something. Or straight up that they missed the item required.

[Brainiac]

Well, some lengthy dead ends can make sense. I personally think the dead end from leaving Cedric on the harpies' island is appropriate as a form of player punishment for acting so out of (Graham's) character. Quick dead-ends like not getting the orium in Space Quest II are also fine simply because the death is quite swift after the mistake - though admittedly, there's nothing to really point the player towards the orium in the first place other than blindly finding the cave entrance, but that's another discussion. I think the real problem is in non-sensible long-term dead-ends, things along the lines of missing a small object at the start with absolutely no indication of its necessity and then dying 6 hours later in the game (or, even worse, never officially dying/losing, just wandering aimlessly forever, unable to proceed past a certain point).

[MusicallyInspired]

I did think it was completely unnecessary to remove the dead end initially in KQ2+ where if you don't pick up the lion's fur before entering the tower room where Valanice is being held you can't defeat Hagatha or exit the room to pick it up again after Hagatha arrives. It was RIGHT THERE. But people complained and that dead end was removed. Seems silly to me. I just really dislike the LucasArts viewpoint of game design where you "CANNOT fail" or it's bad game design. It's just a little too easy and neat. At least having deaths ups the challenge a little bit. But I even detest the "Retry" button.

[Brainiac]

But I even detest the "Retry" button.

See, that right there can be part of the problem. All too often I hear the hardcore vs. casual complaint. I'm reminded of the people who claimed Mega Man 10 was utterly worthless before it even came out simply because of the inclusion of an Easy Mode. Seriously? The mere presence of something designed to give players who are having trouble or just want to avoid major hassle and have fun an option makes the entire experience worthless? If you don't want the OPTIONAL easy stuff, you don't use it; how does that destroy your personal experience? This sense of "difficulty = better" that exists for certain genres is rather worrisome to me; it smacks of elitism and it may likely keep said genres from ever getting wider appeal (or losing it if it already has a decently-large fanbase).