🚀 go-pugleaf

On Tue, 3 Mar 1998, Raymond  Phathanavirangoon wrote:

> 2.  That's why the puzzle explicitly says aftwerwards that it was by
> random chance that you have the right lamp.  It made sense to me.  IT's
> not the designer's fault if you somehow feel irked by that particular
> puzzle.  No one else seem bothered by it.  I'm more bothered with some
> obscure puzzles in Monkey Island II than in KQ6 (like giving monocle to
> dread as a replacement for the eye that sees the world....geez!  That is S
> obtuse!)

	Oh please!  You have GOT to be kidding me!  The lamp puzzle was
unfair and pathetic.  ALEXANDER COULD NEVER SOLVE THAT PUZZLE!!!
Alexander could >never< have more than a 20% chance of getting the lamp
right.  The only way the puzzle can be correctly solved beyond random
chance is the omniscence of the game player, and puzzles that rely on
tricks like that have >always< rubbed me the wrong way.  The player SHOULD
NOT EXIST.  Only the character should exist.  If the only way the PLAYER
can solve a puzzle is to have the CHARACTER perform an action that
requires information only the PLAYER possesses, there is a big, huge
problem with the design of the puzzle.

> 3. You don't need the lamp to finish the game.  So what was it about
> needing something in order to finish the game?  Huh?  Did you even PLAY
> KQ6? (sorry, Ed, not addressed to you!) :>

	That's not the point.  Whether or not you need it to finish the
game, the puzzle itself is unfair.

> > 	KQ V was a totally different story.  I thought that game was bad.  The
> > worst being the damn throw the pie in the face of the yeti puzzle.
> 
> Agreed.  KQ5 may have been a technological breaktrhough but game-wise it
> was a dud.

	You're deriding King's Quest V for having a bad story in the same
message you are talking about King's Quest VI?!?  Pray tell, have you ever
played King's Quest II?  If not, I would really recommend it.  The story
in King's Quest V was more thoughtful.  Better executed?  Open to debate.
But it's the package of King's Quest VI that makes it so unpalatable--the
puzzles are inane and the "characters" (such as they are) silly.  At least
in King's Quest V, there was something >at stake<.  Let's face it--the
stakes in King's Quest VI just weren't that high.  Why the authors really
expected us to care so much about Cassima based on the very small
amount of time spent with her near the end of King's Quest V is beyond me.
Why they decided to have Alexander behave in the manner he did--which is
tremendously uncharacteristic of Alexander, if you ask me--is merely one
more problem.  No, King's Quest V wasn't perfect, but it was much better
than King's Quest VI.

> > > And I found the whole game very sub-par, starting with the childish
> > > save-the-princess story.
> 
> Yes.

	You just described King's Quest VI.  Yes, it was very sub-par.
What I can't figure out is where you switched topics--you WERE talking
about King's Quest V, but there really isn't a "save-the-princess" story
in King's Quest V.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew A. Murray	    | The script calls for fusing and using our smarts,
			    | And greatness can come from the sum of our parts,
mmu...@cc.wwu.edu	    | From now on I'm with you--
			    | And with you is where I belong!
http://www.wwu.edu/~mmurray |		-David Zippel, City of Angels
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------