HOME › Forums › Fan Fiction, Games & Art › Sierra Game Remakes › Reply To: Sierra Game Remakes
(re: re: re: re: Sierra Game Remakes) I realise some of the following may sound like my spitting bile, but it’s not. I simply feel very strongly about the issue of remakes. And Classic Sierra meant a lot to me back in the eighties and early nineties.
I really liked what Tierra “did to” KQ2. They made it into a much more robust game, but still kept the basics from the original — it was like playing a brand new Sierra game. I appreciate all their hard work and think what they’re doing is amazing — especially for free. The original KQ2 may have sentimental value for some, but it’s not much by today’s standards. Not only did AGDI give us something new to play, they did it in a way that was respectful to the original. 1. It was nothing like playing a brand new Sierra game. Why not? 1. Because it isn’t a brand new Sierra game. Because Classic Sierra doesn’t exist anymore. 2. It’s free. Yes. Certainly no true Sierra fan would buy into such sacrilege. 3. The original KQ2 isn’t much by today’s standards? Are you kidding me? It’s King’s Quest 2! It’s King Graham rescuing his Queen, the future love of his life! 4. AGDI did give us something new to play. Except, by it’s very nature, this remake is not respectful to the original. Different interface. Different graphics and sound. Different gameplay. Not designed by the designer of the original. You call that respect? I don’t see how a remake is harming anyone or “ruining the experience.” If you don’t want to play the remake, go play the original — it’ll give you a good 45-minutes or so of entertainment. <GRIN>How is Tierra’s remake ruining your experience of playing the original? 1. Sure it’s not *harming* anyone (physically), except of course the gamer who plays the remake, but never finished the original. 2. It takes much more than 45 minutes to play through. Especially if you truly ENTER the world through your imagination, as the goal of all successful adventure games should be. On the flip side, those who want to experience the game (and the feeling of what those old games were like, for free, on today’s computers without technical problems) can do so with the remake. No. Those who want to experience the game, and the feeling of what those old games were like, cannot do so with the remake. Remakes are, by definition, new creations. It is not the same game. The only way you can experience the original game and the feelings it (still) generates, is by playing the ORIGINAL. AGI games run fine whatever OS is on your PC. While DOSbox runs the rest (of the DOS games). Just my $0.02. I’m looking forward to the QfG2 remake – in fact, I’m waiting to play the rest in the series until after that comes out (I have already played the QfG1 VGA remake of Sierra’s, but the rest of the series is currently sitting on my shelf, on hold). You are waiting for the fabrication that is the QG2 remake, in order to play through the whole series? And you’ve already played the QG1 remake? That means you’re going to come to the end of QG5, only to have to go back again and replay the original QG1 and the original QG2. That’s the only way you are going to experience Quest for Glory as it was/is meant to be played. And those are the only TRUE versions of these games that exist. Actually, I’m in the process of playing through the whole series myself. And the 16-colour games work perfectly in DOSbox. Why in the world would you prefer the remakes over them??? These are classics! And like good art, no classic game can ever be replaced by a remake. You’ve seen all those modern re-interpretations of the Mona Lisa, havn’t you? Not worth much compared to the original, are they?