OK, let's see here: First of all, there was the novelty. At first it was pretty cool to be able to see your character on the screen.
Second, the animations. Even in their first game, KQ1, Sierra animated stuff like swimming. In later games, when you try to perform an action, you can actually see yourself doing it. Contrast this with seeing a picture of a snake in front of you and typing "kill snake with rock" and then the game responds with "The snake is dead", and it just disappears from the screen. >From a puzzle perspective this is fine, but from an entertainment perspective, I like being able to see what the character is doing. Third, the action sequences. OK, I didn't actually like this, but the addition of the 3D movement allowed Sierra to put in such "challenging" tasks as making sure you didn't fall off the bridge into the moat, or running away from the dwarf. Ultimately, you are right that "A decent story and flexible parser with multiple outcomes is what immerses you in a story, not moving a little blocky sprite around the screen." Luckily, games with sprites moving around the screen can also have good stories and flexible means of entering commands. I'd like to respond to some of your other criticism about "getting closer" and stuff like that. Imagine this scenario: >LOOK You see a grove of 10 trees. >EXAMINE TREE Which tree do you mean, the 1st tree, the 2nd tree, the 3rd tree, the 4th tree....etc. In a Quest game, you just walk to the tree you are interested in and poke around. OK, maybe not such a great example. But when I played Kings Quest 2 for the 1st time (the 1st Kings Quest I played), I was always typing "LOOK DOWN". This actually gave logical responses based upon where on the screen you were standing. So it might say "You see nothing of note" or "You see a hollow stump". I found that cool also. In general, I think they did a fairly good job with the system. I will admit though, that it's more fun to click on a spot on the screen with the mouse and have the character move there automatically (and start to interact with something), than to first have to move the character with the arrow keys and then type something in. Sierra eventually realized that too. So maybe its original AGI system was ahead of its time, waiting for mice to become popular. Stuart -----Original Message----- From: Jim Leonard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 11:26 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [SWCollect] King's Quest 1 Chris Newman wrote: > > The opinions about the answer to this question are probably subjective > but I think it's worth asking: > Was King's Quest 1 really the first quasi-3D adventure game released for > the IBM line? There If you are defining "quasi-3D adventure game" as the stereotypical "Sierra" game -- meaning, a visible protagonist who moves around the screen, and a limited text parser -- then yes, because it was the first game from Sierra using that system. In normal oldwarez or abandonware circles, my next comment would anger a lot of people, but in this crowd I think I'm amongst peers when I say: Sierra's adventure system simply didn't make any sense whatsoever. In a normal piece of interactive fiction, you type things like "use key to unlock door. open door, then enter." and a lot of niggly stuff was taken care of, like walking over to the door, using the key, opening the door, and walking through it. But in Sierra's "Quest" games, you have to physically maneuver an on-screen avatar over to the door, type "use key to unlock door" anyway, and then maneuver him through the door. I mean, why so complicated? What is the point of making the game much harder to play? Was it an attempt at compensating for the incredibly weak text parser? If you were nowhere near the door on the same screen but typed "use key to unlock door", the game would actually respond "You're not close enough." Excuse me? Why are my actions limited by distance? Hello? My theory is that these types of games survived because they were a novelty. Something pretty was onscreen, and sprites moved behind other sprites giving the illusion of depth, and on certain platforms you had decent music. But overall *any* piece of interactive fiction with graphics is better -- you get to see the graphics, but you don't have to do stupid crap just to "immerse" you in the game. A decent story and flexible parser with multiple outcomes is what immerses you in a story, not moving a little blocky sprite around the screen. Honestly, what is the appeal of Sierra's "Quest" games? Anyone who likes them, please shed some light on the subject. -- Jim Leonard ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://www.oldskool.org/ Want to help an ambitious games project? http://www.mobygames.com/ Or check out some trippy MindCandy at http://www.mindcandydvd.com/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent to you because you are currently subscribed to the swcollect mailing list. To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of 'unsubscribe swcollect' Archives are available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/swcollect@oldskool.org/ Information in this message reflects current market conditions and is subject to change without notice. It is believed to be reliable, but is not guaranteed for accuracy or completeness. Details provided do not supersede your normal trade confirmations or statements. Any product is subject to prior sale. CIBC World Markets Corp, its affiliated companies, and their officers or employees, may have a position in or make a market in any security described above, and may act as an investment banker or advisor to such. Although CIBC World Markets Corp. is an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce ("CIBC"), it is solely responsible for its contractual obligations. Any securities products recommended, purchased, or sold in any client accounts (i) will not be insured by the FDIC, (ii)will not be deposits or obligations of CIBC, (iii) will not be endorsed or guaranteed by CIBC, and (iv) will be subject to risks, including possible loss of principal in! vested. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- This message was sent to you because you are currently subscribed to the swcollect mailing list. To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of 'unsubscribe swcollect' Archives are available at: http://www.mail-archive.com/swcollect@oldskool.org/
