21st September 2004, 3:03 PM
I was mainly just ranting actually. Considering what I've heard in the past from OB1 about RPG combat systems and how he seems to consider that gameplay style perfectly valid, I'd be hard pressed to see a couple quotes, possibly taken out of context, as a knock against the entire RPG method of combat. So, mainly that was a rant against the casual gamer who, upon watching me play an RPG like Chrono Trigger, or even NWN, says to me "you should be able to control that guy and just duck out of the way and deliver a sword blow to the back of the head right when they dive, like in Soul Calibur!", namely, the sort of casual gamer that totally misses the point of the genre.
Perhaps I shouldn't have quoted OB1, certainly that WAS a focus. I'll also add I was talking to ABF about this stuff for some time and will continue to do so :D.
Anyway, youi seem to want to discuss King's Quest, so let's go ahead and do that now since we seem to pretty much totally agree about the roll of controls in games and the fact that if every single game allowed the same full control, games would get redundant very quickly.
So then, KQ7, glad you enjoyed it. It is a fun game, though as I've said not my favorite in the series. It's kinda the Wind Waker of the series, what with the art style being controversial and the gameplay being on the easy side (though yes, there are challenging puzzles, they did take out the point system and the idea of finding really clever ways to solve puzzles rather than the "obvious" way though).
Anyway, that plot hole. At first I didn't know what you meant, but then you pointed out something I noticed myself when I first played the game :D. It's true isn't it? Rosella and Valanice really shouldn't have missed each other so utterly there. They seemed to take good care in keeping the two seperated between most chapters, but when it came to that particular point, yes, you'd think one would have seen the other wandering in the land of zombies :D. I admit it would have been a tough plot hole to stitch up, but I think it could have been handled just a little better. As it is, you just have to assume a very cartoonish "both wandering within feet of each other, but missing each other by a second" scenario :D.
King's Quest 1, which one are you playing? There are two official versions, one using the old engine and the other using the updated SCI engine made for King's Quest 4 (still used the old 16 color video cards of the time, but it was a much cleaner, higher quality, and just plain better engine, actually inspired by Japanese programmers when Ken Williams visited Japan to try selling games there and eventually got the rights to publish the PC version of Thornado (I think that's what it was called). The updated version has sound card and mouse support. The old version is a game that consists of large blocks making up each character :D. You'll know the difference :D.
But yes, the parser interface (what I've learned the text interface system is called) is pretty easy to use in KQ 1-4. I never played QFG, but I did have the pleasure of playing Laura Bow: The Colonel's Bequest (a detective adventure game, meaning you have to learn who the MURDERER is, it's fun actually, just remember, with a keen eye for details, ONE TRUTH PREVAILS). That game had a text interface as complicated as the one you describe, in conversations anyway. I could still just type "look painting", or actually even "talk lady" if I felt like it, and I'd get some basic information. But yes, to get any real progress in conversations, one had to actually keep track of a lot of information. You had to learn to type things like "tell Patricia about Clair and Robert", and then watch the fun. So, I went around picking up all sorts of info like "Wait a sec, the secret is, he isn't wheel-chair bound at all!" or "I see! So THAT'S how they got into the second balcony of a house that's nowhere near any other houses!". Fun game actually, comes with the Roberta Williams Collection which has KQ1-7, both Laura Bow games, and an assortments of Apple II games (with an emulator program so you can actually play them). Oh yes, Laura Bow 2 (The Dagger of Amen Ra) used a mouse interface (also, it is very VERY picky about the computer you run it on, KQ5 was less picky), but in order to keep you from being able to solve pretty much any conversation just by scrolling through a short list of 3 options (ala KOTOR, seriously, those "tests" people gave you were pathetic for the most part, except the murder mystery where you actually had to unlock chat options by talking with people, as it should be), instead, you got a massive number of headings you wrote in your little notebook. When you wanted to talk to someone, you had to decide exactly what to ask them about. As you can imagine, there was a lot of speech in the game :D (recorded in lovely 8 bit quality...), but it meant you actually had to solve the puzzles conversations presented, which is a good thing.
Okay, back on topic, sorta, with the KQ text interface games. Yes, you'll never really have to worry too much about forming complex sentence structure. You will still run into the annoyances of trying to think of just the right synonymn for the word you are thinking of, and yes, it is annoying when a word as simple as "bowl" manages to totally escape you during these games :D (it's like the game casts a stupidity beam out of the moniter that makes you forget half your vocabulary during the puzzles). But anyway, almost every puzzle can be solved with 2-3 word commands, so it's not too tough. Cursor is better than parser (when done right), but they did a pretty good job with KQ1-4 anyway.
Perhaps I shouldn't have quoted OB1, certainly that WAS a focus. I'll also add I was talking to ABF about this stuff for some time and will continue to do so :D.
Anyway, youi seem to want to discuss King's Quest, so let's go ahead and do that now since we seem to pretty much totally agree about the roll of controls in games and the fact that if every single game allowed the same full control, games would get redundant very quickly.
So then, KQ7, glad you enjoyed it. It is a fun game, though as I've said not my favorite in the series. It's kinda the Wind Waker of the series, what with the art style being controversial and the gameplay being on the easy side (though yes, there are challenging puzzles, they did take out the point system and the idea of finding really clever ways to solve puzzles rather than the "obvious" way though).
Anyway, that plot hole. At first I didn't know what you meant, but then you pointed out something I noticed myself when I first played the game :D. It's true isn't it? Rosella and Valanice really shouldn't have missed each other so utterly there. They seemed to take good care in keeping the two seperated between most chapters, but when it came to that particular point, yes, you'd think one would have seen the other wandering in the land of zombies :D. I admit it would have been a tough plot hole to stitch up, but I think it could have been handled just a little better. As it is, you just have to assume a very cartoonish "both wandering within feet of each other, but missing each other by a second" scenario :D.
King's Quest 1, which one are you playing? There are two official versions, one using the old engine and the other using the updated SCI engine made for King's Quest 4 (still used the old 16 color video cards of the time, but it was a much cleaner, higher quality, and just plain better engine, actually inspired by Japanese programmers when Ken Williams visited Japan to try selling games there and eventually got the rights to publish the PC version of Thornado (I think that's what it was called). The updated version has sound card and mouse support. The old version is a game that consists of large blocks making up each character :D. You'll know the difference :D.
But yes, the parser interface (what I've learned the text interface system is called) is pretty easy to use in KQ 1-4. I never played QFG, but I did have the pleasure of playing Laura Bow: The Colonel's Bequest (a detective adventure game, meaning you have to learn who the MURDERER is, it's fun actually, just remember, with a keen eye for details, ONE TRUTH PREVAILS). That game had a text interface as complicated as the one you describe, in conversations anyway. I could still just type "look painting", or actually even "talk lady" if I felt like it, and I'd get some basic information. But yes, to get any real progress in conversations, one had to actually keep track of a lot of information. You had to learn to type things like "tell Patricia about Clair and Robert", and then watch the fun. So, I went around picking up all sorts of info like "Wait a sec, the secret is, he isn't wheel-chair bound at all!" or "I see! So THAT'S how they got into the second balcony of a house that's nowhere near any other houses!". Fun game actually, comes with the Roberta Williams Collection which has KQ1-7, both Laura Bow games, and an assortments of Apple II games (with an emulator program so you can actually play them). Oh yes, Laura Bow 2 (The Dagger of Amen Ra) used a mouse interface (also, it is very VERY picky about the computer you run it on, KQ5 was less picky), but in order to keep you from being able to solve pretty much any conversation just by scrolling through a short list of 3 options (ala KOTOR, seriously, those "tests" people gave you were pathetic for the most part, except the murder mystery where you actually had to unlock chat options by talking with people, as it should be), instead, you got a massive number of headings you wrote in your little notebook. When you wanted to talk to someone, you had to decide exactly what to ask them about. As you can imagine, there was a lot of speech in the game :D (recorded in lovely 8 bit quality...), but it meant you actually had to solve the puzzles conversations presented, which is a good thing.
Okay, back on topic, sorta, with the KQ text interface games. Yes, you'll never really have to worry too much about forming complex sentence structure. You will still run into the annoyances of trying to think of just the right synonymn for the word you are thinking of, and yes, it is annoying when a word as simple as "bowl" manages to totally escape you during these games :D (it's like the game casts a stupidity beam out of the moniter that makes you forget half your vocabulary during the puzzles). But anyway, almost every puzzle can be solved with 2-3 word commands, so it's not too tough. Cursor is better than parser (when done right), but they did a pretty good job with KQ1-4 anyway.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)