🚀 go-pugleaf

thya...@sol.com.br wrote:



:   Phantasmagoria was mildly entertaining, but not a game at all. Besides being
: ridiculously easy, the woman robbed all puzzles from previous games - like the
: get-key-with-nail-and-newspaper... it was an original puzzle... IN ALONE IN
: THE DARK 2 !!!

Um.. no.  AFAIK, the first computer game to include that puzzle was Zork 2.
It's a fairly well-known trick, anyway; I've read about it in many different
places.  I think it was in an Usborne book that I first encountered it.

sjoh...@sable.ox.ac.uk (Robin Adams) writes:

>thya...@sol.com.br wrote:



>: Phantasmagoria was mildly entertaining, but not a game at all. Besides being
>:ridiculously easy, the woman robbed all puzzles from previous games - like the
>: get-key-with-nail-and-newspaper... it was an original puzzle... IN ALONE IN
>: THE DARK 2 !!!

>Um.. no.  AFAIK, the first computer game to include that puzzle was Zork 2.
>It's a fairly well-known trick, anyway; I've read about it in many different
>places.  I think it was in an Usborne book that I first encountered it.


This also appeared (first?) in an Agatha Christie novel. I forget which one,
but it might've been "The Secret of Chimneys"

On Sun, 01 Mar 1998 02:45:53 -0600, thya...@sol.com.br wrote:

>
>  For God's sake, Sierra, get rid of the imbecile - the design in her games
>are the ultimate proof of what you can achieve with a careful combination of
>laziness and complete lack of any visible talents.
>  I'm sure I'm not alone here. What do you guys think?
>
>-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
>http://www.dejanews.com/   Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading


Although I agree that the games are medeocre at best, it is going to
be hard to get rid of her... since she and her husband own the
company.

David

David Morris wrote in message <34f9c14a...@news.earthlink.net>...
>On Sun, 01 Mar 1998 02:45:53 -0600, thya...@sol.com.br wrote:
>
>>
>>  For God's sake, Sierra, get rid of the imbecile - the design in her
games
>>are the ultimate proof of what you can achieve with a careful combination
of
>>laziness and complete lack of any visible talents.
>>  I'm sure I'm not alone here. What do you guys think?

I see I'm in the minority here by disagreeing with you.  I have loved all
the King's Quest games (the first one was the first PC computer game I ever
played), The Colonel's Bequest, and thought Phantasmagoria was just fine -
although I agree it was not as much of a game as it was an interactive
movie.  The only problem I have had with Sierra adventure games - which they
have recently begun to get away from - is the single curor interface where
you just click away.   Roberta Williams' games have driven the adventure
gaming genre since the 80s.  True, Lucasarts stepped in and are often
regarded as the masters of this genre now (and after Curse of Monkey Island,
they probably are), but Williams was the one who attempted to push the
technology with each new game.  I used to upgrade my old computers around
the time of each new King's Quest release.

And is noone really excited about Mask of Eternity?  Come on!   If it comes
together as well as they are hoping it will, it will be to adventure games
what Mario 64 was to console platform games.

>
>
>
> And is noone really excited about Mask of Eternity?  Come on!   If it comes
> together as well as they are hoping it will, it will be to adventure games
> what Mario 64 was to console platform games.
>
>

 Not really. It'll take some serious recommendation from friends before I
contemplate buying it. Especially if I won't be able to finish it because I
failed to get a tiny coin in a maze room I didn't even had to visit to
proceed. Or if I have to choose a lamp from five being offered by a merchant
and if I get the wrong one... well, you can always start over.

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/   Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading

I downloaded the .avi trailer for this, and I really hope it's an OLD trailer,
because if the game even looks remotely like the one in the trailer, I'll never
respect Sierra again... as if I do now.   The character animation in it is
absolutely horrible, the graphics are horrible, hell, everything I saw in it was
horrible.
I just hope Sierra doesnt fuck up Half-Life or any of Papyrus' games, or next
time I'm in Seattle, I'm gonna blow up the Sierra HQ... hey, I met a Navy SEAL on
IRC, he could help me...

Brian Short
bds...@hotmail.com

> >
> >
> >
> > And is noone really excited about Mask of Eternity?  Come on!   If it comes
> > together as well as they are hoping it will, it will be to adventure games
> > what Mario 64 was to console platform games.
> >
> >
>

>
> Although I agree that the games are medeocre at best, it is going to
> be hard to get rid of her... since she and her husband own the
> company.
>
> David
>

 Thanks for the information, David. That sure explains a lot.

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/   Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading

In article <6db79d$gks$1...@nnrp2.dejanews.com>, thya...@sol.com.br writes
>  Phantasmagoria was mildly entertaining, but not a game at all. Besides being
>ridiculously easy, the woman robbed all puzzles from previous games - like the
>get-key-with-nail-and-newspaper... it was an original puzzle... IN ALONE IN
>THE DARK 2 !!!
>  For God's sake, Sierra, get rid of the imbecile - the design in her games
>are the ultimate proof of what you can achieve with a careful combination of
>laziness and complete lack of any visible talents.
>  I'm sure I'm not alone here. What do you guys think?
>
Speaking as an experienced adventure writer myself (text adventures on
the Spectrum, published under the FSF Adventures banner), I must say a
few words.

There is no such thing as an "original" puzzle in any adventure game, be
it text or graphic. Any puzzle has appeared in some form or another in
virtually every adventure game ever released. The get-key-with-nail-and-
newspaper puzzle is just a variation of the classic how-to-open-a-
locked-door puzzle. There are actually very few "basic" puzzles any
adventure author can do variations on.

IMHO, the people you want to have a go at are Sierra, for publishing the
game in the first place. If it is as bad as you say it is, surely they
should`ve recognised this and not released it. As it is, all they seem
to be interested in is profit.

Larry

thya...@sol.com.br writes:
[snip]
>  I'm sure I'm not alone here. What do you guys think?

Well, on the whole, I haven't liked Roberta William's games, but I did like
Colonel's Bequest and Mixed-Up Mother-Goose is nice for it's simplicity.
For the most part I dislike the KQ games though.  

I'm with you!  I have had similar experiences.  One where I didn't throw a
shoe at some cat so later I couldn't escape because the mouse the cat was
chasing couldn't help me because it was dead (?)!!  Now who would have
thought to do such inane actions?????  Secondly, with Sierra games they
have limited save games so you normally end up writing over the game you
needed so you could recover.  Your point is valid and well made!!

thya...@sol.com.br wrote in article <6db79d$gks$1...@nnrp2.dejanews.com>...
> 
> 
>  <snip snip>
>   I'm sure I'm not alone here. What do you guys think?
> 
> -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
> http://www.dejanews.com/   Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
> 

I'm with you too.....  I never have liked any of the King's Quest games....


I think lately, Sierra has been loosing it's original perspective.  They
aren't the computer company that made those zany adventure games and was in
touch with their fans.  They're turning into a lazy money-hungry company
trying to loose it's old ways.

The Space Quest series has been put on "indefinite hold"....  It'll Larry
Laffer and King Graham who will be killed along with Roger Wilco in their
fight to destroy their adventure game series....

If you would like to help save Space Quest 7 go here:

http://www.cpuweb.com/space/


-Neil Schuh



lorel wrote in message <01bd4549$1ab153c0$dfa060d1@landofoz>...
>I'm with you!  I have had similar experiences.  One where I didn't throw a
>shoe at some cat so later I couldn't escape because the mouse the cat was
>chasing couldn't help me because it was dead (?)!!  Now who would have
>thought to do such inane actions?????  Secondly, with Sierra games they
>have limited save games so you normally end up writing over the game you
>needed so you could recover.  Your point is valid and well made!!
>
>thya...@sol.com.br wrote in article <6db79d$gks$1...@nnrp2.dejanews.com>...
>>
>>
>>  <snip snip>
>>   I'm sure I'm not alone here. What do you guys think?
>>
>> -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
>> http://www.dejanews.com/   Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
>>

On Sun, 1 Mar 1998, Neil Schuh wrote:

> I'm with you too.....  I never have liked any of the King's Quest games....
> 
> I think lately, Sierra has been loosing it's original perspective.  They
> aren't the computer company that made those zany adventure games and was in
> touch with their fans.  They're turning into a lazy money-hungry company
> trying to loose it's old ways.

	It's been heading downhill for a little over seven years now, but
it's gotten really bad in the past three or so.  I'm just considering
Sierra a total loss now.  A shame--they used to do some good stuff.  We
haven't seen any games like Hero's Quest or King's Quest IV or Leisure
Suit Larry II in a long time.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A Phony. she's a phony. I can't believe Phantsamagoria is anygood. What the point.
Roberta is a woman who create a "SHALLOW" chacaters. Some stuip Woman open up a box
and gets her Husband possed by a Demon and he Rapes her. That sounds like a HACK
writen all over it. Our feelings, she NEVER made any good games that we like. I get
this feeling SHE IS GOING TO KILL THE ADVENTURE GAME with "Her so called adventure
game" (King's Quest 8) That's the reason I never like King's Quest. I get this
feeling King's Quest 8 is going to FLOP and Sierra is going to STOP making
Adventure games. She says things are getting better. she doesn't even listen to us.
The industry is a techology driven. People says she always pushes them. HA, like
right. Only King Quest 1 and 4 were the ones that changed the industry. She says
King quest 8 is going to be the first Real time 3D a adventure game when we got got
Under a Killing Moon, The Pandora Directive, Dark Earth, Realms of the haunting,
Blade Runner, Tomb Raider 1 and 2 and Gee Whiz. (I could tell you more, but, the
other games are from other genres.) I think Sierra doesn't consider little
companies like this Important. Sierra games got bad when I bought they Myst clones.
But I never knew they better games out there besides sierra. Maybe they changed
after all there adventure game become 3D. What would happen if the industry stiop
being techology driven and people like US demand a good story. Would she be able to
adapt or not. I can't believe she las this long. What does everyone think of this?

Robert
tip9...@pacbell.net

On Mon, 2 Mar 1998, David Monaghan wrote:

> On Sun, 1 Mar 1998 12:11:54 -0800, Matthew Murray <mmu...@cc.wwu.edu>
> wrote:
> 
> >On Sun, 1 Mar 1998, Neil Schuh wrote:
> 
> > I'm just considering Sierra a total loss now.  A shame--they used to do 
> >some good stuff.  We haven't seen any games like Hero's Quest or 
> >King's Quest IV or Leisure Suit Larry II in a long time.
> 
> I used to be a text adventure game devotee ( Infocom, of course ) and
> have just started playing again after getting the Zork Legacy
> Collection and ZGI. If you can place yourself in that mindset are the
> early KQ/other Sierra games worth playing ? And if so which would be
> the best to try first and how should I get it?

	Of >course< the earlier Sierra games are worth playing.  They were
much better in terms of gameplay and writing (you know, the IMPORTANT
things) than the crap that passes for computer games today.  Start at the
beginning with the original King's Quest, and move on forward from there.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Matthew Murray wrote:
> 
>         Of >course< the earlier Sierra games are worth playing.  They were
> much better in terms of gameplay and writing (you know, the IMPORTANT
> things) than the crap that passes for computer games today.  Start at the
> beginning with the original King's Quest, and move on forward from there.
> 
> 

I fail to see what was good about >writing< in earlier Sierra
games.. Games like Quest for Glory 2 or Space Quest 3 or
Police Quest 2 were good because they were interesting games
with better puzzles... Writing was not their strength...

I don't think all of the Sierra adentures (and all of the Zork
games, text or graphics) combined, can match Gabriel
Knight 1, in plot, writing and story.... In gameplay,
believe it or not, GK1 gave me >more< freedom to try things
out than any text parser ever did, IMHO...

I agree that Sierra adventures have gone down... and I'll
think a 100 times before buying GK3 or QG5. I found GK2, an
extremely pointless game, and QG4 was so-so.
--
Noman, who thinks that KQ6 was the best Kings' Quest by a
       BIG margin...

On Sun, 1 Mar 1998, Noman wrote:

> Matthew Murray wrote:
> > 
> >         Of >course< the earlier Sierra games are worth playing.  They were
> > much better in terms of gameplay and writing (you know, the IMPORTANT
> > things) than the crap that passes for computer games today.  Start at the
> > beginning with the original King's Quest, and move on forward from there.
> 
> I fail to see what was good about >writing< in earlier Sierra
> games.. Games like Quest for Glory 2 or Space Quest 3 or
> Police Quest 2 were good because they were interesting games
> with better puzzles... Writing was not their strength...

	I disagree.  Quest for Glory II had a >very< interesting story,
and the story of Space Quest III: The Pirates of Pestulon, while no great
work of literary art, was more than sufficient for the purpose it needed
to serve, and better than most of the crap we put up with today.  Besides
which, the game was >entertaining<.

> I don't think all of the Sierra adentures (and all of the Zork
> games, text or graphics) combined, can match Gabriel
> Knight 1, in plot, writing and story.... In gameplay,

	The first Gabriel Knight game had its moments, but I don't think
it was quite as great as you do--Sierra has had some other good games
storywise, and there were parts of The Sins of the Fathers that were so
formulaic and predictable that they weren't very evocative.  At least not
to me...

> believe it or not, GK1 gave me >more< freedom to try things
> out than any text parser ever did, IMHO...

	It depends on the games, of course...

> I agree that Sierra adventures have gone down... and I'll
> think a 100 times before buying GK3 or QG5. I found GK2, an
> extremely pointless game, and QG4 was so-so.

	I rather liked The Beast Within, though it was not without its
problems.  Quest for Glory IV was drop dead boring.  Better than Quest for
Glory III by a country mile.

> --
> Noman, who thinks that KQ6 was the best Kings' Quest by a
>        BIG margin...

	Hooboy...  Sorry, that statement invalidates the rest of your
message.  ;)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thomas Perrett or Robert Perrett <tip9...@pacbell.net> wrote in article
<34F9FD2A...@pacbell.net>...
>I get this feeling SHE IS GOING TO KILL THE ADVENTURE GAME with "Her so
>called adventure game" (King's Quest 8) That's the reason I never like
King's Quest.
????????????????? What's that got to do with it.
> I get this
> feeling King's Quest 8 is going to FLOP and Sierra is going to STOP
making
> Adventure games.
I agree with you there. I have just seen a short preview of it in Ultimate
PC, and it looks more like a Lara Croft game than an adventure. There are
RPG and adventure elements in it as well, but it looks mostly action
orientated. It looks like my worst fears about it are coming true.
 
> But I never knew they better games out there besides sierra. Maybe they
changed
> after all there adventure game become 3D. What would happen if the
industry stiop
> being techology driven and people like US demand a good story. Would she
be able to
> adapt or not. I can't believe she las this long. What does everyone think
of this?
> 
I think you need to improve your spelling and grammar.

On Sun, 1 Mar 1998 12:11:54 -0800, Matthew Murray <mmu...@cc.wwu.edu>
wrote:

>On Sun, 1 Mar 1998, Neil Schuh wrote:

> I'm just considering Sierra a total loss now.  A shame--they used to do 
>some good stuff.  We haven't seen any games like Hero's Quest or 
>King's Quest IV or Leisure Suit Larry II in a long time.

I used to be a text adventure game devotee ( Infocom, of course ) and
have just started playing again after getting the Zork Legacy
Collection and ZGI. If you can place yourself in that mindset are the
early KQ/other Sierra games worth playing ? And if so which would be
the best to try first and how should I get it?

DaveM

>
> > I don't think all of the Sierra adentures (and all of the Zork
> > games, text or graphics) combined, can match Gabriel
> > Knight 1, in plot, writing and story.... In gameplay,
>
> 	The first Gabriel Knight game had its moments, but I don't think
> it was quite as great as you do--Sierra has had some other good games
> storywise, and there were parts of The Sins of the Fathers that were so
> formulaic and predictable that they weren't very evocative.  At least not
> to me...
>
> > believe it or not, GK1 gave me >more< freedom to try things
> > out than any text parser ever did, IMHO...
>
> 	It depends on the games, of course...
>
> > I agree that Sierra adventures have gone down... and I'll
> > think a 100 times before buying GK3 or QG5. I found GK2, an
> > extremely pointless game, and QG4 was so-so.
>
> 	I rather liked The Beast Within, though it was not without its
> problems.  Quest for Glory IV was drop dead boring.  Better than Quest for
> Glory III by a country mile.
>

   The original Gabriel Knight is one of my favorite games ever. Greta
writing, long, tough and involving. The Beast Within had a questionable
interface that took a lot of the interactive away, but I loved it: probably
the best writing in an adult adventure ever - much unlike the childish
Phantasmagoria, a game that had a nice start but was developed badly. And I
can't wait for Gabriel Knight 3... almost as much as I'm waiting for a new
Indy game.

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/   Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading

Matthew Murray wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 1 Mar 1998, Noman wrote:
> > [snip]
> > I agree that Sierra adventures have gone down... and I'll
> > think a 100 times before buying GK3 or QG5. I found GK2, an
> > extremely pointless game, and QG4 was so-so.
> 
> > --
> > Noman, who thinks that KQ6 was the best Kings' Quest by a
> >        BIG margin...
> 
>         Hooboy...  Sorry, that statement invalidates the rest of your
> message.  ;)
> 

Yes, kind of ... heh.. But I didn't like KQ5 at all. (KQ4 was
good).. I think the post-90 Sierra games went through a
downward path.. But for some reason, I liked Kq6, SQ5
(yes, I don't know why, but I found SQ5 very entertaining)...
and PQ3 (only 'cuz of Jan Hammer's soundtrack).

And of course Gabriel Knight, is one of the best adventures,
I have ever played.
--
Noman

On Mon, 2 Mar 1998, Noman wrote:

> downward path.. But for some reason, I liked Kq6, SQ5
> (yes, I don't know why, but I found SQ5 very entertaining)...

	Space Quest V was decent.  >Not< as good as Space Quest III, but a
heck of a lot better than the crap that preceded and followed it.

> and PQ3 (only 'cuz of Jan Hammer's soundtrack).

	A bad game, but miles better than Police Quest IV.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Noman wrote:

> I fail to see what was good about >writing< in earlier Sierra
> games.. Games like Quest for Glory 2 or Space Quest 3 or
> Police Quest 2 were good because they were interesting games
> with better puzzles... Writing was not their strength...

In some ways, I agree.  I think Sq3 was just very clever though, from the Astro
Chicken mini-game (boy, do I miss that!), the outer-space McDonald's (I forgot
what it  was called...it's been a LONG time), etc.  That was the best SQ.  Too
bad everything after was junk.

I like the QFG series as a whole, but too many bugs, from QFG2 (fire elemental
bug), QFG3 bugs (too many to list) toQFG4 disaster (ugh) hamper the whole
series.  I still think QFG 1 was the best.

> I don't think all of the Sierra adentures (and all of the Zork
> games, text or graphics) combined, can match Gabriel
> Knight 1, in plot, writing and story.... In gameplay,
> believe it or not, GK1 gave me >more< freedom to try things
> out than any text parser ever did, IMHO...

I agree.  I think  ANY games compared to GK1 is irrelevant.  It is the
high-water mark for gaming, as a whole.
Well, I think two other really high-standard Sierra games were Gold Rush!  and
The Colonel's Bequest.  Truly great games ignored by time.


> I agree that Sierra adventures have gone down... and I'll
> think a 100 times before buying GK3 or QG5. I found GK2, an
> extremely pointless game, and QG4 was so-so.

Really?  I very much enjoyed GK2, although I did have gripes about it.  I'm
excited about QFG5 because it looks like the game is returning to its roots.
Same as GK3.  I hope the recent fiascos at Sierra (ie., Lords of Magic, Red
Baron II, Sierra Pro Pilot, Football Pro '98, ad nauseum) won't affect the
quality of those games (but I somehow think it's wishful thinking).  It's really
too bad that Sierra is now like a chicken without its head.  It tries to be in
too many places at the same time.

> --
> Noman, who thinks that KQ6 was the best Kings' Quest by a
>        BIG margin...

I agree......marginally.  I also really liked KQ3.

On Wed, 4 Mar 1998 billand...@hotmail.com wrote:

> I'm more worried - they seem to be pushing the 3D technology pretty
> heavy, and it might be more of a hack and slash game - but we'll see -
> Sierra has been pretty good about putting out demos.

	You >should< be worried.  The game I have read about isn't King's
Quest.  Mask of Eternity, near as I can figure, is King's Quest in >name<
only.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In article <Pine.SOL.3.96.98030...@titan.cc.wwu.edu>,
Matthew Murray  <mmu...@cc.wwu.edu> wrote:
>On Mon, 2 Mar 1998, Noman wrote:
>
>> downward path.. But for some reason, I liked Kq6, SQ5
>> (yes, I don't know why, but I found SQ5 very entertaining)...
>
>	Space Quest V was decent.  >Not< as good as Space Quest III, but a
>heck of a lot better than the crap that preceded and followed it.
>

I agree.. 100%


>> and PQ3 (only 'cuz of Jan Hammer's soundtrack).
>
>	A bad game, but miles better than Police Quest IV.
>

I know it was bad, but the soundtrack was great :-) I bought
a Soundblaster V2.0 just before buying PQ3..

And Police Quest 4 had some of the most dull and uninteresting
characters I have seen. The central guy, had as much personality
as a brick wall (one that doesn't have any graffiti)
--
Noman

On 3 Mar 1998, Syed Noman Ahmad wrote:

> And Police Quest 4 had some of the most dull and uninteresting
> characters I have seen. The central guy, had as much personality
> as a brick wall (one that doesn't have any graffiti)

	There WERE no characters.  It just had talking mannequins running
around doing things.  Probably so much the better that there were no
characters, since there was practically no story.  That is in the top five
worst games I have ever played, and I've played a >lot<.  I will never in
my life understand what the point of that "game" was.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Raymond Pat <rpha...@polymail.calpoly.edu> wrote:

>Really?  I very much enjoyed GK2, although I did have gripes about it.  I'm
>excited about QFG5 because it looks like the game is returning to its roots.
>Same as GK3.  I hope the recent fiascos at Sierra (ie., Lords of Magic, Red
>Baron II, Sierra Pro Pilot, Football Pro '98, ad nauseum) won't affect the
>quality of those games (but I somehow think it's wishful thinking).  It's really
>too bad that Sierra is now like a chicken without its head.  It tries to be in
>too many places at the same time.

I'm also excited about QG5, being a faithful follower of the series
since the beginning and all. But frankly, I'm worried. Multiplayer QfG?!
What were they thinking?


--
"It's a magical world, Hobbes, 'ol buddy... Let's go exploring!"
     -Calvin, "Calvin and Hobbes"

On Tue, 3 Mar 1998, Nick Jong wrote:

> Raymond Pat <rpha...@polymail.calpoly.edu> wrote:
> 
> >Really?  I very much enjoyed GK2, although I did have gripes about it.  I'm
> >excited about QFG5 because it looks like the game is returning to its roots.
> >Same as GK3.  I hope the recent fiascos at Sierra (ie., Lords of Magic, Red
> >Baron II, Sierra Pro Pilot, Football Pro '98, ad nauseum) won't affect the
> >quality of those games (but I somehow think it's wishful thinking).  It's really
> >too bad that Sierra is now like a chicken without its head.  It tries to be in
> >too many places at the same time.
> 
> I'm also excited about QG5, being a faithful follower of the series
> since the beginning and all. But frankly, I'm worried. Multiplayer QfG?!
> What were they thinking?

	THEY WEREN'T.  If they had been, they may have realized that they
are throwing out the entire premise that the previous four games in the
series was built on.  They are basically throwing away everything they've
already done in the series (and with the first two games, that was >a
lot<) merely so they can bill it as multiplayer game.  It's stupid, it's a
mistake, and it >won't< work.  It makes me angry just thinking about it.
Sierra has sold out with every other series, but I honestly thought that
Quest for Glory might be spared.  Silly me.  As long as it makes them
money, why should Sierra care?  Let them do what they want.  I have better
things to waste my money on than their massive egos.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Wed, 4 Mar 1998 billand...@hotmail.com wrote:

> Matthew Murray <mmu...@cc.wwu.edu> wrote:
> 
> >	Of >course< the earlier Sierra games are worth playing.  They were
> >much better in terms of gameplay and writing (you know, the IMPORTANT
> >things) than the crap that passes for computer games today.  Start at the
> >beginning with the original King's Quest, and move on forward from there.
> 
> If I had to choose a Sierra game to start with, it would be either of
> the Gabriel Knight games - really great.
	
	I would never advise anyone to start with them, but they are both
pretty good games.

> If you like hybrid
> rpg/adventure games, try Betrayal at Krondor (free download from
> Sierra), and the Quest for Glory series.

	The first two Quest for Glory games yes (only if QFG1 is played in
its original and correct incarnation, not the bastardization with the
no-typing interface), Betrayal at Krondor NO.  Awful, pointless game.
Avoid avoid avoid!

> Both the Kings Quest and the Space Quest games can be picked up in a
> collection quite inexpensively.  Sierra advertises them as "digital
> antiques", and they are - the earlier ones don't have sound (except
> from the speaker).  Personally, I liked the later Kings Quest games -
> 5, 6, and 7, rather than the earlier.  Possibly because I played them
> before playing the earlier games, so there was no nostalgia factor.

	I feel very sorry for you for two reasons.  First of all, that you
actually consider that King's Quests V, VI, and VII (ESPECIALLY VII) are
better than the earlier games in the series, and second that you didn't
get the opportunity to play them the first time around.  When those games
first came out, they had a very special magic to them that games today
just don't have.  Sierra has forgotten how to put magic and love into
their computer games, and it really shows.  Maybe it's hard for you to
see because you didn't play them the first time around, but the
collections serve to show more than anything else what Sierra once did
right but is now doing wrong.

> The early ones have CGA graphics - quite blocky.

	So?

> The story line is
> OK, but there are some annoyances.

	Some annoyances?  Sorry, the plots of the first two King's Quest
games aren't great, but the games as a whole are more fun than King's
Quest VI or King's Quest VII.  As for the writing of KQ3 and KQ4, don't
even say there are some annoyances.  Maybe, but at least their annoyances
aren't the entire stories!  King's Quest VII is exceptionally bad in this
regard.  Can you HONESTLY compare the story of King's Quest VII with the
story of King's Quest III and tell me that the former is better written?

> Some of the puzzles are based on
> the difficulty you have maneovering with the keyboard.  

	Like...?
	Once again, I feel very sorry for you.  There is more to life than
moving a mouse.  At least with the original Sierra games, you didn't have
a group of icons that you had to click on to perform actions or (even
worse) merely ONE icon that does everything.  Even if I did have trouble
maneuvering with the keyboard (which I can never recall), I still much
preferred that method of movement and puzzle interaction to the way it is
now.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

>I see I'm in the minority here by disagreeing with you.  I have loved all
>the King's Quest games (the first one was the first PC computer game I ever
>played), The Colonel's Bequest, and thought Phantasmagoria was just fine -
>although I agree it was not as much of a game as it was an interactive
>movie.  The only problem I have had with Sierra adventure games - which they
>have recently begun to get away from - is the single curor interface where
>you just click away.   Roberta Williams' games have driven the adventure
>gaming genre since the 80s.  True, Lucasarts stepped in and are often
>regarded as the masters of this genre now (and after Curse of Monkey Island,
>they probably are), but Williams was the one who attempted to push the
>technology with each new game.  I used to upgrade my old computers around
>the time of each new King's Quest release.
>
>And is noone really excited about Mask of Eternity?  Come on!   If it comes
>together as well as they are hoping it will, it will be to adventure games
>what Mario 64 was to console platform games.
>
I'm more worried - they seem to be pushing the 3D technology pretty
heavy, and it might be more of a hack and slash game - but we'll see -
Sierra has been pretty good about putting out demos.

David Morris wrote in message <34f9c14a...@news.earthlink.net>...
>On Sun, 01 Mar 1998 02:45:53 -0600, thya...@sol.com.br wrote:
>
>>
>>  For God's sake, Sierra, get rid of the imbecile - the design in her
games
>>are the ultimate proof of what you can achieve with a careful combination
of
>>laziness and complete lack of any visible talents.
>>  I'm sure I'm not alone here. What do you guys think?
>>
>>-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
>>http://www.dejanews.com/   Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
>
>
>Although I agree that the games are medeocre at best, it is going to
>be hard to get rid of her... since she and her husband own the
>company.
>
>David

Not anymore, Ken got the boot, and I doubt she'll be around after KQ8 bombs.
They have their millions, let them go off and die somewhere.

CJD

On Wed, 4 Mar 1998, Carlos DaSilva wrote:

> >Although I agree that the games are medeocre at best, it is going to
> >be hard to get rid of her... since she and her husband own the
> >company.
> >
> >David
> 
> Not anymore, Ken got the boot, and I doubt she'll be around after KQ8 bombs.
> They have their millions, let them go off and die somewhere.

	Come now!  That's pretty harsh.  True and funny, but harsh
nonetheless.
	<snicker>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Matthew Murray wrote in message ...
>On Wed, 4 Mar 1998, Carlos DaSilva wrote:
>
>> >Although I agree that the games are medeocre at best, it is going to
>> >be hard to get rid of her... since she and her husband own the
>> >company.
>> >
>> >David
>>
>> Not anymore, Ken got the boot, and I doubt she'll be around after KQ8
bombs.
>> They have their millions, let them go off and die somewhere.
>
> Come now!  That's pretty harsh.  True and funny, but harsh
>nonetheless.
> <snicker>


Ok, maybe it was harsh. I was just getting into it. But Ken has no control
over Sierra after it was bought SUC International (oh, I mean CUC
International... Oh no, wait, now it's Cendant...)

And Roberta will probably have to keep her job based on her game design
merit, rather than the iron fist of her hubby/president/enforcer. :)

CJD

>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
>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
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
>

Matthew Murray <mmu...@cc.wwu.edu> wrote:

>On Mon, 2 Mar 1998, David Monaghan wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 1 Mar 1998 12:11:54 -0800, Matthew Murray <mmu...@cc.wwu.edu>
>> wrote:
>> 
>> >On Sun, 1 Mar 1998, Neil Schuh wrote:
>> 
>> > I'm just considering Sierra a total loss now.  A shame--they used to do 
>> >some good stuff.  We haven't seen any games like Hero's Quest or 
>> >King's Quest IV or Leisure Suit Larry II in a long time.
>> 
>> I used to be a text adventure game devotee ( Infocom, of course ) and
>> have just started playing again after getting the Zork Legacy
>> Collection and ZGI. If you can place yourself in that mindset are the
>> early KQ/other Sierra games worth playing ? And if so which would be
>> the best to try first and how should I get it?
>
>	Of >course< the earlier Sierra games are worth playing.  They were
>much better in terms of gameplay and writing (you know, the IMPORTANT
>things) than the crap that passes for computer games today.  Start at the
>beginning with the original King's Quest, and move on forward from there.
>


If I had to choose a Sierra game to start with, it would be either of
the Gabriel Knight games - really great.  If you like hybrid
rpg/adventure games, try Betrayal at Krondor (free download from
Sierra), and the Quest for Glory series.

Both the Kings Quest and the Space Quest games can be picked up in a
collection quite inexpensively.  Sierra advertises them as "digital
antiques", and they are - the earlier ones don't have sound (except
from the speaker).  Personally, I liked the later Kings Quest games -
5, 6, and 7, rather than the earlier.  Possibly because I played them
before playing the earlier games, so there was no nostalgia factor.
The early ones have CGA graphics - quite blocky.  The story line is
OK, but there are some annoyances.  Some of the puzzles are based on
the difficulty you have maneovering with the keyboard.  

Bottom line: I would get the Gabriel Knight games, and Betrayal at
Krondor.  Then I would make sure I played all of the great Lucas Arts
games - Sam and Max, Day of the Tentacle, the Monkey Island trilogy,
etc.  I also think that the earlier Lucas Arts games had a better
story line than the Kings Quest series - games like Zak McKraken, etc.

Matthew Murray wrote:

> On Wed, 4 Mar 1998 billand...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > Matthew Murray <mmu...@cc.wwu.edu> wrote:
> >
> > >     Of >course< the earlier Sierra games are worth playing.  They were
> > >much better in terms of gameplay and writing (you know, the IMPORTANT
> > >things) than the crap that passes for computer games today.  Start at the
> > >beginning with the original King's Quest, and move on forward from there.
> >
> > If I had to choose a Sierra game to start with, it would be either of
> > the Gabriel Knight games - really great.
>
>         I would never advise anyone to start with them, but they are both
> pretty good games.
>
> > If you like hybrid
> > rpg/adventure games, try Betrayal at Krondor (free download from
> > Sierra), and the Quest for Glory series.
>
>         The first two Quest for Glory games yes (only if QFG1 is played in
> its original and correct incarnation, not the bastardization with the
> no-typing interface), Betrayal at Krondor NO.  Awful, pointless game.
> Avoid avoid avoid!

HAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!

And this is the guy who said that there people like me playing games nowadays (a
put down).  And here he is, Mr. Matthew Murray, dissing one of the greatest RPGs of
all time!!!!  My god!!!!!
And I thought you lost it before!!!!

Betrayal at Krondor is one of THE best games EVER.  There's a LEGION of people who
will back me up on this (if I have to, I'll bring in the whole wrath of
comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg!).  Not liking this game gives you NO right to critique
other people's tastes, as you have done with mine.  I'm just giving you back some
of your own medicine, which you richly deserves.


> > Both the Kings Quest and the Space Quest games can be picked up in a
> > collection quite inexpensively.  Sierra advertises them as "digital
> > antiques", and they are - the earlier ones don't have sound (except
> > from the speaker).  Personally, I liked the later Kings Quest games -
> > 5, 6, and 7, rather than the earlier.  Possibly because I played them
> > before playing the earlier games, so there was no nostalgia factor.
>
>         I feel very sorry for you for two reasons.  First of all, that you

Oh, he IS?  Feeling sorry?  Wow, Mr Guru is pitying us for our misguided ways!  We
will all be punished for loving Betrayal at Krondor and King's Quest 6!  Boo hoo!

> actually consider that King's Quests V, VI, and VII (ESPECIALLY VII) are
> better than the earlier games in the series, and second that you didn't
> get the opportunity to play them the first time around.  When those games
> first came out, they had a very special magic to them that games today
> just don't have.  Sierra has forgotten how to put magic and love into
> their computer games, and it really shows.  Maybe it's hard for you to
> see because you didn't play them the first time around, but the
> collections serve to show more than anything else what Sierra once did
> right but is now doing wrong.
>
> > The early ones have CGA graphics - quite blocky.
>
>         So?

Wow, I actually agree with you here.  I find that the graphics didn't detract from
my enjoyments.

> > The story line is
> > OK, but there are some annoyances.
>
>         Some annoyances?  Sorry, the plots of the first two King's Quest
> games aren't great, but the games as a whole are more fun than King's
> Quest VI or King's Quest VII.  As for the writing of KQ3 and KQ4, don't
> even say there are some annoyances.  Maybe, but at least their annoyances
> aren't the entire stories!  King's Quest VII is exceptionally bad in this
> regard.  Can you HONESTLY compare the story of King's Quest VII with the
> story of King's Quest III and tell me that the former is better written?

Wow, I agree with you here too.  Far out, dude.  But that's only cause KQ3 is my
favorite.

> > Some of the puzzles are based on
> > the difficulty you have maneovering with the keyboard.
>
>         Like...?
>         Once again, I feel very sorry for you.  There is more to life than
> moving a mouse.  At least with the original Sierra games, you didn't have
> a group of icons that you had to click on to perform actions or (even
> worse) merely ONE icon that does everything.  Even if I did have trouble
> maneuvering with the keyboard (which I can never recall), I still much
> preferred that method of movement and puzzle interaction to the way it is
> now.

You know, I might agree with you, but I'm not feeling "sorry" for them.  Get off
your damn holier-than-thou perch then maybe we can discuss things in a more
civilized manner.

Raymond
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> 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
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In article <34FD3268...@polymail.calpoly.edu>,
Raymond Pat  <rpha...@polymail.calpoly.edu> wrote:
>
>Matthew Murray wrote:
>
>> Betrayal at Krondor NO.  Awful, pointless game.
>> Avoid avoid avoid!
>
>HAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!
>
>And this is the guy who said that there people like me playing games nowadays (a
>put down).  And here he is, Mr. Matthew Murray, dissing one of the greatest RPGs of
>all time!!!!  My god!!!!!
>And I thought you lost it before!!!!
>
>Betrayal at Krondor is one of THE best games EVER.  There's a LEGION of people who

Ray, count me out of that legion... BAK is pointless and extremely
boring game, IMHO. Although I must admit that the story is very nice.
For some reason, it gets boring very fast. I tried twice, and threw
it away around chapter 4-5.

My 2 cents.
--
Noman

Syed Noman Ahmad wrote:

> In article <34FD3268...@polymail.calpoly.edu>,
> Raymond Pat  <rpha...@polymail.calpoly.edu> wrote:
> >
> >Matthew Murray wrote:
> >
> >> Betrayal at Krondor NO.  Awful, pointless game.
> >> Avoid avoid avoid!
> >
> >HAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!
> >
> >And this is the guy who said that there people like me playing games nowadays (a
> >put down).  And here he is, Mr. Matthew Murray, dissing one of the greatest RPGs of
> >all time!!!!  My god!!!!!
> >And I thought you lost it before!!!!
> >
> >Betrayal at Krondor is one of THE best games EVER.  There's a LEGION of people who
>
> Ray, count me out of that legion... BAK is pointless and extremely
> boring game, IMHO. Although I must admit that the story is very nice.
> For some reason, it gets boring very fast. I tried twice, and threw
> it away around chapter 4-5.

That's fine.  I respect your opinion.  I only have problems with people who go around
insulting the designer of games, calling her talentless, and an imbecile.  I also have
problems with people who think too highly of themselves and go around criticizing
others' tastes when he has no reason to.  If some dislike KQ6, that's fine.  But if the
argument they present against KQ6 is flawed (ie. the lamp is NOT required to win the
game), then I will defend that game on its merits.  And so far the defendants aren't
able to produce ONE substantial evidence that proves that the game can't be finished
without the lamp.

> Raymond

> My 2 cents.
> --
> Noman

  If some dislike KQ6, that's fine.
 But if the
> argument they present against KQ6 is flawed (ie. the lamp is NOT required to
win the
> game), then I will defend that game on its merits.  And so far the
defendants aren't
> able to produce ONE substantial evidence that proves that the game can't be
finished
> without the lamp.
>
> > Raymond
>
> > My 2 cents.
> > --
> > Noman


>>>>>>>>>> Earth calling, Matthew doesn't care if you need the lamp to finish
the game... he's just trying to say that... well, I'm not repeating that, go
read his ealier posts, than try to dispute that - I'd love to see you try.

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/   Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading

On Wed, 4 Mar 1998, Raymond Pat wrote:

> That's fine.  I respect your opinion.  I only have problems with people who go around
> insulting the designer of games, calling her talentless, and an imbecile.  I also have

	I also don't think that should be going on.  Calling someone an
imbecile is ridiculous--calling Roberta Williams talentless, however, is
fair, I feel.

> problems with people who think too highly of themselves and go around criticizing
> others' tastes when he has no reason to.  If some dislike KQ6, that's fine.  But if the
> argument they present against KQ6 is flawed (ie. the lamp is NOT required to win the
> game), then I will defend that game on its merits.  And so far the defendants aren't
> able to produce ONE substantial evidence that proves that the game can't be finished
> without the lamp.

	THAT'S NOT THE ARGUMENT!  How many times must we explain this?  I
will type in all caps so maybe you have the slightest chance of seeing it
this time:
	IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER OR NOT THE LAMP IS NECESSARY TO FINISH
THE GAME--THE PUZZLE IS POORLY DESIGNED BECAUSE THERE IS NO WAY FOR
ALEXANDER TO KNOW THE CORRECT LAMP.  ONLY THE OMNISCIENT PLAYER CAN KNOW
THIS BECAUSE OF THE CUT SCENE.  ALEXANDER >>>CANNOT<<<--HE HAS ONLY A 20%
CHANCE.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Matthew Murray wrote:

> On Wed, 4 Mar 1998, Raymond Pat wrote:
>
> > That's fine.  I respect your opinion.  I only have problems with people who go around
> > insulting the designer of games, calling her talentless, and an imbecile.  I also have
>
>         I also don't think that should be going on.  Calling someone an
> imbecile is ridiculous--calling Roberta Williams talentless, however, is
> fair, I feel.

Well, then why were you defending the original post when he DID call her an imbecile?  Then
you came around and said that I didn't read his post? Excuse me?

> > problems with people who think too highly of themselves and go around criticizing
> > others' tastes when he has no reason to.  If some dislike KQ6, that's fine.  But if the
> > argument they present against KQ6 is flawed (ie. the lamp is NOT required to win the
> > game), then I will defend that game on its merits.  And so far the defendants aren't
> > able to produce ONE substantial evidence that proves that the game can't be finished
> > without the lamp.
>
>         THAT'S NOT THE ARGUMENT!  How many times must we explain this?  I
> will type in all caps so maybe you have the slightest chance of seeing it
> this time:

No, that's YOUR ARGUMENT.

The ORIGINAL topic raised by the original post was about how ONE CAN'T FINISH KQ6 WITHOUT THE
LAMP!!!!!!!  YOU changed the subject, and then focused on that damn omniscience thing.  I
have said MANY that if YOU find it unfair, that's your perogative.  But that WASN'T even the
argument!!!!  So who wasn't listening?

>         IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER OR NOT THE LAMP IS NECESSARY TO FINISH
> THE GAME--THE PUZZLE IS POORLY DESIGNED BECAUSE THERE IS NO WAY FOR
> ALEXANDER TO KNOW THE CORRECT LAMP.  ONLY THE OMNISCIENT PLAYER CAN KNOW
> THIS BECAUSE OF THE CUT SCENE.  ALEXANDER >>>CANNOT<<<--HE HAS ONLY A 20%
> CHANCE.

I KNOW.  You've been shoveling this on me for a while!

> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Matthew Murray wrote:

> On Wed, 4 Mar 1998, Raymond Pat wrote:
>
> > That's fine.  I respect your opinion.  I only have problems with people who go around
> > insulting the designer of games, calling her talentless, and an imbecile.  I also have
>
>         I also don't think that should be going on.  Calling someone an
> imbecile is ridiculous--calling Roberta Williams talentless, however, is
> fair, I feel.

Well, then why were you defending the original post when he DID call her an imbecile?  Then
you came around and said that I didn't read his post? Excuse me?

> > problems with people who think too highly of themselves and go around criticizing
> > others' tastes when he has no reason to.  If some dislike KQ6, that's fine.  But if the
> > argument they present against KQ6 is flawed (ie. the lamp is NOT required to win the
> > game), then I will defend that game on its merits.  And so far the defendants aren't
> > able to produce ONE substantial evidence that proves that the game can't be finished
> > without the lamp.
>
>         THAT'S NOT THE ARGUMENT!  How many times must we explain this?  I
> will type in all caps so maybe you have the slightest chance of seeing it
> this time:

No, that's YOUR ARGUMENT.

The ORIGINAL topic raised by the original post was about how ONE CAN'T FINISH KQ6 WITHOUT THE
LAMP!!!!!!!  YOU changed the subject, and then focused on that damn omniscience thing.  I
have said MANY that if YOU find it unfair, that's your perogative.  But that WASN'T even the
argument!!!!  So who wasn't listening?

>         IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHER OR NOT THE LAMP IS NECESSARY TO FINISH
> THE GAME--THE PUZZLE IS POORLY DESIGNED BECAUSE THERE IS NO WAY FOR
> ALEXANDER TO KNOW THE CORRECT LAMP.  ONLY THE OMNISCIENT PLAYER CAN KNOW
> THIS BECAUSE OF THE CUT SCENE.  ALEXANDER >>>CANNOT<<<--HE HAS ONLY A 20%
> CHANCE.

I KNOW.  You've been shoveling this on me for a while!

> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Matthew Murray <mmu...@cc.wwu.edu> wrote:


>> Not anymore, Ken got the boot, and I doubt she'll be around after KQ8 bombs.
>> They have their millions, let them go off and die somewhere.
>
>	Come now!  That's pretty harsh.  True and funny, but harsh
>nonetheless.
>	<snicker>
>
Sorry I missed the humor....I found it mean-spirited at best....

Carlos DaSilva <cdas...@earthlink.net> wrote in article
<6dkf3a$1...@bolivia.earthlink.net>...
> David Morris wrote in message <34f9c14a...@news.earthlink.net>...
> >On Sun, 01 Mar 1998 02:45:53 -0600, thya...@sol.com.br wrote:
> >Although I agree that the games are medeocre at best, it is going to
> >be hard to get rid of her... since she and her husband own the
> >company.
> 
> Not anymore, Ken got the boot, and I doubt she'll be around after KQ8
bombs.
> They have their millions, let them go off and die somewhere.

Charming! 
I wish you all the best for the future as well.

"Carlos DaSilva" <cdas...@earthlink.net> wrote:


>
>Not anymore, Ken got the boot, and I doubt she'll be around after KQ8 bombs.
>They have their millions, let them go off and die somewhere.
>
>CJD
>
>
Whoa bud! "let them go off and die somewhere." ???? Pretty harsh, man.
They're just a couple of game developers... get a grip..

Alex

>"Carlos DaSilva" <cdas...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Not anymore, Ken got the boot, and I doubt she'll be around after KQ8
bombs.
>>They have their millions, let them go off and die somewhere.
>>
>>CJD
>>
>>
>Whoa bud! "let them go off and die somewhere." ???? Pretty harsh, man.
>They're just a couple of game developers... get a grip..
>
>Alex

Everybody dies. Deal with it.

CJD

Raymond Pat <rpha...@polymail.calpoly.edu> wrote:

>No, that's YOUR ARGUMENT.
>
>The ORIGINAL topic raised by the original post was about how ONE CAN'T FINISH KQ6 WITHOUT THE
>LAMP!!!!!!!  YOU changed the subject, and then focused on that damn omniscience thing.  I
>have said MANY that if YOU find it unfair, that's your perogative.  But that WASN'T even the
>argument!!!!  So who wasn't listening?

My attempt at being a voice of reason:

Thyagosm wrote in response to a poster's enthusiastic post about KQ8:
> Not really. It'll take some serious recommendation from friends before I
>contemplate buying it. Especially if I won't be able to finish it because I
>failed to get a tiny coin in a maze room I didn't even had to visit to
>proceed. Or if I have to choose a lamp from five being offered by a merchant
>and if I get the wrong one... well, you can always start over.

He thus pointed out examples of what he feels has been poor puzzle
design from the KQ series. He did imply (though he didn't directly
state) that choosing the wrong one leads to a dead end.

In another branch of the thread, Thyagosm referred to the "design
faults" he had pointed out. You responded with:
>What deisgn fault?  You DON'T need the lamp to finish the game!!!! I have
>stated that MANY times before!  There are 4 ways to finish the game, and
>if you missed something, you could always use another route to pass.  So I
>DON'T think the "design" flaw you mention DOES exist.  

You pointed out that the player does not need the lamp to finish the
game. In your opinion, that means that the puzzle is not an example of a
design flaw.

Matthew Murray then responded:
>	Yes, it DOES.  Whether you need the lamp or not is irrelevant.
>You are using information obtained as the player to solve a puzzle as
>>Alexander<.  Whether or not you need the lamp to finish the game, that is
>>poor< puzzle design.

He believes that the puzzle is a design flaw, though not for the same
reason that the first poster does. Evidently, his contention is that
even though solving the puzzle is not necessary, it is still an example
of poor design because its solution defies logic and what many view as
good story-telling form.

Strictly speaking, Matthew changed the then focus of the argument: that
the lamp was necessary to complete the game and obtaining the lamp
involves random chance. You corrected that assumption, but then Matthew
contributed his own point of view on why the puzzle is poor. In a more
general sense, he did not change the subject of the thread: whether or
not Roberta Williams' games have merit.


--
"When I was a young man I vowed never to marry until I found the ideal
 woman. Well, I found her -- but, alas, she was waiting for the
 perfect man."
     -Robert Schuman

In article <6dnl13$f...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>,
  knj...@worldnet.att.net (Nick Jong) wrote:

> >The ORIGINAL topic raised by the original post was about how ONE CAN'T
FINISH KQ6 WITHOUT THE LAMP!!!!!!!  YOU changed the subject, and then focused
on that damn omniscience thing.  I have said MANY that if YOU find it unfair,
that's your perogative.  But that WASN'T even the argument!!!!  So who wasn't
listening?


>>>>>> Let's get this out of the way: I really thought the lamp thing was
necessary, and I was wrong. Period. The puzzle still suffers from some
seriously amateurish design and Matthew is not changing the subject, he's
just giving his opinion. No one has been able to prove him wrong yet, and
that's because he isn't - some of you won't recognise he's right and will just
accuse him of deviating from the my original argument, which, as far as I'm
concerned, is over. And I still haven't heard of a way around the coin
or rat puzzle, but I might be wrong again. And just because I am admitting my
mistake, it doesn't mean I appreciate RW's work any more now: I still think
she is a bad games designer, and she should stick to running the company
(unless it has been sold, I've heard something of the sort...) and support
people like Jane Jensen (sorry to bring her name again, but that's what talent
is all about).
 As for calling RW an imbecile, I wasn't talking about Roberta, the woman; I
wasn't talking about Roberta, the wife, the business woman, the mother (if
that applies). I was calling RW, the games designer, an imbecile. To make my
point clear: Thyago (and that would be me), the driver, is an imbecile. I have
my driver's license, but I recognise I won't be taking my car out in the city
until I'm certain of what I'm doing. I call it responsibility. Still, I'm
sorry I used the word I did, since it apparently offended so many people out
there. Let's just stick to talentless then, because that I won't retract.

                                                                Thyago S. M.

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/   Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading

In article <6dnl13$f...@bgtnsc02.worldnet.att.net>,
  knj...@worldnet.att.net (Nick Jong) wrote:

> >The ORIGINAL topic raised by the original post was about how ONE CAN'T
FINISH KQ6 WITHOUT THE LAMP!!!!!!!  YOU changed the subject, and then focused
on that damn omniscience thing.  I have said MANY that if YOU find it unfair,
that's your perogative.  But that WASN'T even the argument!!!!  So who wasn't
listening?


>>>>>> Let's get this out of the way: I really thought the lamp thing was
necessary, and I was wrong. Period. Matthew is not changing the subject, he's
just giving his opinion, and no one has been able to prove him wrong yet.
Because he isn't. And I still haven't heard of a way around the coin puzzle,
but I might be wrong again. And just because I am admitting my mistake, it
doesn't mean I appreciate RW's work any more now: I still think she is a bad
games designer, and she should stick to running the company (unless it has
been sold, I've heard something of the sort...) and support people like Jane
Jensen (sorry to bring her name again, but that's what talent is all about).
 As for calling RW an imbecile, I wasn't talking about Roberta, the woman; I
wasn't talking about Roberta, the wife, the business woman, the mother (if
that applies). I was calling RW, the games designer, an imbecile. To make my
point clear: Thyago (and that would be me), the driver, is an imbecile. I have
my driver's license, but I recognise I won't be taking my car out in the city
until I'm certain of what I'm doing. I call it responsibility. Still, I'm
sorry I used the word I did, since it apparently offended so many people out
there. Let's just stick to talentless then, because that I won't retract.

                                                                Thyago S. M.

-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/   Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading

thya...@sol.com.br wrote:

> >>>>>> Let's get this out of the way: I really thought the lamp thing was
> necessary, and I was wrong. Period. Matthew is not changing the subject, he's
> just giving his opinion, and no one has been able to prove him wrong yet.

Ok, that's fine.  the number one thing I was most miffed about is the lamp thing,
and how you don't need it to finish the game.  THAT was my point.  As for Matthew,
how could one prove an opinion wrong?  I think his opinion is absurd, but it's not
WRONG.  I never said it was wrong, he can believe whatever he wants.  But like I
said before, I really don't care about that.  MY main issue has now been settled.

> Because he isn't. And I still haven't heard of a way around the coin puzzle,
> but I might be wrong again. And just because I am admitting my mistake, it
> doesn't mean I appreciate RW's work any more now: I still think she is a bad
> games designer, and she should stick to running the company (unless it has
> been sold, I've heard something of the sort...) and support people like Jane
> Jensen (sorry to bring her name again, but that's what talent is all about).
>  As for calling RW an imbecile, I wasn't talking about Roberta, the woman; I
> wasn't talking about Roberta, the wife, the business woman, the mother (if
> that applies). I was calling RW, the games designer, an imbecile.

And from what background are you basing this on?  You may not like her work, but I
STILL think calling her an imbecile is very inappropriate.   I think we should go
over what imbecile means.

> To make my
> point clear: Thyago (and that would be me), the driver, is an imbecile. I have
> my driver's license, but I recognise I won't be taking my car out in the city
> until I'm certain of what I'm doing. I call it responsibility. Still, I'm
> sorry I used the word I did, since it apparently offended so many people out
> there. Let's just stick to talentless then, because that I won't retract.

I wouldn't call you an imbecile.  I would call you inexperienced.  Perhaps you
really should look up what imbecile means.

imbecile :- 1. a feeble minded person, 2. a stupid person (Webster's Dictionary)

Now how does calling Roberta "feeble-minded" or "stupid" in any way prove your
point?
The word obviously makes no suggestions about her talent, only her brain.

Talentless, I accept, because it's an opinion.  I will not argue with you on that,
for that would be moot.

But anyway, let's just halt the topic.  I think we have come to some sort of
agreement at this point, so lest not carry on. I personally agree 100% anyway that
KQ6 is WAY heavily cliched.  If it were a Disney movie, the muslim minorities
would be having a fit over Alhazred.

Raymond

>                                                                 Thyago S. M.
>
> -----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
> http://www.dejanews.com/   Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading

RW can't die, because the memories of her games will live on!

Carlos DaSilva skrev i meldingen <6dpnhv$p...@ecuador.earthlink.net>...
>>"Carlos DaSilva" <cdas...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>Not anymore, Ken got the boot, and I doubt she'll be around after KQ8
>bombs.
>>>They have their millions, let them go off and die somewhere.
>>>
>>>CJD
>>>
>>>
>>Whoa bud! "let them go off and die somewhere." ???? Pretty harsh, man.
>>They're just a couple of game developers... get a grip..
>>
>>Alex
>
>Everybody dies. Deal with it.
>
>CJD
>
>

Actually, Ken still works at Sierra, even if he isn't owning it, and Roberta
owns quite alot of it...

Carlos DaSilva skrev i meldingen <6dkf3a$1...@bolivia.earthlink.net>...
>David Morris wrote in message <34f9c14a...@news.earthlink.net>...
>>On Sun, 01 Mar 1998 02:45:53 -0600, thya...@sol.com.br wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>  For God's sake, Sierra, get rid of the imbecile - the design in her
>games
>>>are the ultimate proof of what you can achieve with a careful combination
>of
>>>laziness and complete lack of any visible talents.
>>>  I'm sure I'm not alone here. What do you guys think?
>>>
>>>-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
>>>http://www.dejanews.com/   Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
>>
>>
>>Although I agree that the games are medeocre at best, it is going to
>>be hard to get rid of her... since she and her husband own the
>>company.
>>
>>David
>
>Not anymore, Ken got the boot, and I doubt she'll be around after KQ8
bombs.
>They have their millions, let them go off and die somewhere.
>
>CJD
>
>