Hi all,

my gaming buddy and I have a very long Excel list of all games we plan to play sometime. Having turned 47 recently,
I came to realize that even this list will be too big to ever be completed ;-) So the most obvious solution is to try to skip
average and bad games and try to identify the best ones of this big list.
Of course I do realize that 'good/bad' cannot be objectively defined, so there is a certain degree of uncertainty in this approach
but I guess it is still better than just blindly picking games

For me the two sources to decide are reviews, obviously, and also the gaming community, so that's
why I want to ask you all about the Kings Quest series today.
Of course I also googled and of course there are different reviews, but it seems to me the overall review tendency is that

Kings Quest 1 (AGD remake) --- > quite good, worth playing (played it and agree)
Kings Quest 2 (AGD remake) ---> quite good, worth playing (played it and agree)

The other game (KQ 3-8) of the series I have not played yet, according to reviews:

Kings Quest 3 (AGD reamke) --> did not find enough info about that
Kings Quest 3 (infamous adventures remake) ---> did not find enough info about that - which remake of III is better?
Kings Quest 4 (original) ---> not worth playing, average at best
Kings Quest 5 (original) ---> not worth playing, average at best
Kings Quest 6 (original) ---> quite good, worth playing
Kings Quest 7 (original) ---> quite good, worth playing
Kings Quest 8 (original) ---> not worth playing, average at best

So my question is, would you agree with this assessment? I am really interested if there is a general consensus about this
or if there are drastically different opinions about which of these games are good and which are not so good.

So, it would be great to get some feedback. Looking forward to read your opinions. Thanks in advance

My opinion, for what it's worth, is that king's Quests 4, 5, 6 & 7 are the best.

With KQ6 being the very best.

But you have to enjoy that style of game in the first place

Thanks for your input, Mad. I like many subgenres of the adventure genre, point&ckick with a good story included.
As I mentioned I quite liked KQ remake 1 and 2. I wouldn't say they are really great games, but I enjoyed playing them
and that is my intention: I would like to increase the odds to enjoy the games Jochen and I will be picking in the next couple of
years. Of course there will still be some misses because of different tastes etc, but if let's say 5-6 Gameboomers agree that KQ 6
is the best of the series, the odds are higher that KQ 6 is a 'Safe' choice for a game to play, rather than e.g. KQ 3 where we read
4-5 posts of gamers stating they did not like the game that much.

That is kind of my intention for these questiosn about the KQ-games.

Did you play both remakes of KQ III, Mad? If so, which remake did you like more?

No.
All the KQ games are different.
Which are best is a matter of taste of taste of course.
But it's also interesting to see how the series changed over time.

Some people like the parser in the originals.
Some will only play with a cursor.
I don't have a strong preference.
For some game styles cursor is definitely better.
But for other game styles I think parser is better -- at least if it is a good parser.

I really didn't have much interest in the King's Quest games until I watched YouTube playthroughs by people who loved them. They got me interested and I was better able to appreciate the games for what they were.

King's Quest 1 -- the first Sierra version -- allowed you more freedom in what quest to do first, and also more options in how you could accomplish goals. That freedom made this one a favorite. It wasn't really a feature that Sierra stuck with though.
King's Quest 1 -- the 2nd Sierra version -- Graphics are more attractive (more colors). Some changes -- I liked the well better in the first version. Option for much better music quality (watch a YouTube where the person is using a Roland MT-32 or MUNT emulator). Less freedom than the first version.
King's Quest 2 -- I don't remember it that well. It wasn't close to being a favorite. I liked the first KQ better overall.
King's Quest 1 and 2 remakes. The King's Quest 1 remake was truer to the original than the King's Quest 2 remake. The King's Quest 2 remake had major changes from the original Sierra version, most of which people enjoyed. I didn't like them all, but they were at least interesting, making it worthwhile for me to play both the original and the remake.
King's Quest 3 -- It's timed in the beginning, which I don't like at all. After watching a YouTube playthrough I realized the timer wasn't as bad and unpredictable as I thought, and I could work around the timer, unpleasant though it was. I also initially didn't like that this game wasn't about King Graham, like the first two games were. Instead we play as Prince Alexander. I haven't played the remakes. Neither was available at the time I wanted to play them (which was right after playing the original). I'm curious how well they turned out.
King's Quest 4 -- This one was about Princess Rosella. I liked this depiction of her in this game, where she is a gutsy heroine, far more than in King's Quest 7 where she seems to have devolved.
King's Quest 5 -- In this one you play as King Graham, restored to health and something resembling youth by Rosella in the previous game, and ready for questing. I liked KQ5 for the graphics, which I think may have the most attractive graphics in a King's Quest game. I played it with a walkthrough so the "illogical puzzles" didn't bother me so much. I recommend playing a text version if possible because the voice acting for Cedric the Owl is execrable. Despite Cedric, KQ5 is either my favorite, possibly after KQ1 (which I liked for entirely different reasons).
King's Quest 6 -- In this one you play as Prince Alexander, on a quest to find his future bride. This one is the favorite most King's Quest fans. The quality / logicality of the puzzles is a step up from the previous game. The voice acting is more professional.
King's Quest 7 -- In this one you play partly as Queen Valanice and partly as Princess Rosella. As I said earlier, I didn't like the depiction of Rosella in this game. I also didn't like the "Disneyfication" of the game compared to the other games in the series. Unfortunately the animation of the characters was poor compared to previous KQ games (IMO) and certainly compared to actual Disney animations. The backgrounds were nice, but I didn't care for the character models. This game was a lot more forgiving than previous King's Quest games though, and is the only one where I attempted it without a walkthrough. The game may kill your character, but it instantly restores you, so at first I was confused about whether the character was killed at all.


I would say to play them all yourself and make up your own mind.
My opinions rarely jive 100% with anything resembling "general consensus" for any game or game series, and I've been steered wrong with game recommendations (and the reverse of recommendations) so many times in the past that I've realized I just have to play the game(s) for myself.
That doesn't mean I don't agree on some things -- Cedric the Owl for example. Nearly everyone doesn't like him or his voicing. But there are even exceptions for that (mostly for people who played the text version, or perhaps he's OK in a non-English version).


Of course I do realize that 'good/bad' cannot be objectively defined, so there is a certain degree of uncertainty in this approach but I guess it is still better than just blindly picking games. [/quote]
That's how I felt when I first started playing adventure games -- play the best-rated ones first.
Eventually I got around to playing some of the lesser-rated ones and found I liked them better.

You have to start somewhere though. So what I did when I first started playing adventure games was read reviews and avoid those where the reviewer characteristics I knew I absolutely didn't like (such as kills you every 2 minutes without warning, many dead ends, unstable, etc.) Something as general as a letter grade or star rating alone doesn't really tell me much though, unless I'm familiar with the reviewer and know their likes and dislikes are very similar to my own.

Anyway, start with the games that look most attractive to you, but don't rule out eventually playing the ones that aren't on your "short list."

I have been playing King's Quest VIII: Mask of Eternity off and on for a while now, having played it through once when it was first released. It's an excellent game but it's not a pure adventure game as there is also some combat. When the game was released, diehard fans were expecting another King's Quest game like the previous ones and the game got a lot of hate thrown at it for not being what was expected. Playing it now, the game holds up well. And there are patches now that make it nicely compatible with newer systems.

Anyway, I think the game is very underrated. If you accept the fact that it's not a pure adventure game and don't compare it to the other games in the series, I think you would like it, providing you don't mind some combat mixed in with your adventuring. It's also a large and ambitious game.

"Did you play both remakes of KQ III, Mad? If so, which remake did you like more?"

No. I only ever played one re-make and at this late date I'm afraid couldn't tell you which one.
I thought it was "alright" but it didn't really appeal to me all that much

Thanks to all! of you for your input, in particular to Jenny for this long and informative post.
Really appreciated, Jenny.

It seems there was a small misunderstanding, probably because english is not my first language.
Jenny, of course I realize that the only 100% approach is to play all games myself, like you suggested
for the KQ's series. But for the reason I mentioned (time constraints and huge pool of available games),
this is not possible. So reviews and input from the community are the two 2nd best options ,obviously.
And yes, what happened to you from time to time, will happen to me as well ( (dis-) liking a game the majority (dis-)liked)
but it is not about being 100% perfect when picking games, it is about increasing the quality of my picks in total, while still having
some bad picks due to different tastes etc.
In other words, setting aside other (good) sources like reviews from people you know that have similar tastes, I am sure
that for the big majority of gamers, myself included, playing 20 adventure games with steam review status 'overwhelmingly positive' is a better
choice overall than playing 20 games with review average 'mostly negative', even though I will maybe miss 1-2 games
in the other bucket I would have liked for whatever reason (and vice versa). This is an extreme example of course, but I chose it to get my point across.

Having said that, it will happen from time to time that the feedback is so varied/mixed that indeed there is no
other option than to play the game(s), which seems to be the case for the KQ's series.
Seems I have to play them all (or at least: 'start them all' and see for myself in this case ;-)

Last but not least, maybe my first post sounded like I am a newbie regarding adventures. This is not the case,
I played over 100 adventures for sure already (which is most likely way less than what other gamers played ;-)

Btw, I am also wondering about the Quest-for-Glory series. I haven't heard/read much about that series so far. Same goes for Space Quest and Police Quest. All I know they are considered classics (SQ and PQ probably more than QFG, I feel). But you guys have spent so much time already for KQ series, so I don't expect replies about these series here. I will start reading a couple of reviews about these series first and maybe come back with specific questions

Keep in mind also, that reading all those reviews takes a lot of time that you could be using to play the games .

I can add to what Jenny100 has said: I have played both remakes - both are quite nice and much better looking (and sounding) than the original, although I liked the Redux (AGD Interactive) version a little bit more. Still, it is certainly not the best game in the series, and the first half of the game is not interesting at all (especially considering that we are playing for some unknown person instead of Graham).


Well, Quest for Glory series is my favorite of all Sierra games. I am not a fan of Sierra at all (being a big fan of LucasArts ), but I have played and enjoyed all 'Quest for Glory' games (and participated in fan-translating them into Russian). Each one of the first four games is a classic (the fifth one is less so), and each one presents a rather unique and different atmosphere (the first one is of classical fantasy fairy tale Germany-like, the second one is of an Arabic '1000 nights' feel - and has a fan-made VGA remake, the third is a rare instance of African-based game, and the fourth one is of Eastern European vibe).
So I would rather recommend playing 'Quest for Glory' than any other Sierra series, including 'King's Quest' (I liked only a few games of it, not all of them).

I consider the Quest for Glory series to be RPG's because you have to build up your
character's abilities before you can do certain things, go certain places in the
game, and accomplish quests for other characters. There is some grinding in the
Quest for Glory games, so they can take longer to complete than the King's Quest
series or other Sierra "Quest" games. If you want to play the most number of early
Sierra games in the least amount of time, don't start with the Quest for Glory series
because of the grinding.

The Quest for Glory games are all different from each other, and it's
interesting to see how the series changed over time.

You can play the same character through all the games, importing
him into the next game. The ability to import the character into the
next game is a big help for the 2nd game, where you have limited
time to buff up your character.

The 1st Quest for Glory takes place in a woodsy area called
Spielburg, which I think is meant to be in medieval Germany.

The 2nd Quest for Glory takes place in a 1001 Nights type middle
eastern area.
The 2nd Quest for Glory has a sort of timer -- you have to accomplish
a certain number of things within a certain time period before you have
to leave for the next location.

The 3rd Quest for Glory takes place in Africa. Although I liked it overall,
I have to agree with the people who didn't like how so much of it involved
traipsing across the desert / savannah area.

The 4th Quest for Glory takes place in some place with vampires possibly
Romania. Most people seem to like the 4th one the best.
The voiced version has some excellent voice acting.
For example, John Rhys-Davies is the narrator.

The 5th Quest for Glory takes place in ancient Greece. Unfortunately
the graphics were done in 3D and took a downturn compared to the
4th one. The main character looks nothing like he used to, and
pretty much all the characters have that doll-like appearance that
early 3D characters tended to have. The game is still worth playing.
Of all the Quest for Glory games, the 5th one is the most RPG-like
while the others are closer to adventures.

There is a sort of overarching story to the entire Quest for Glory series,
so it makes some sense to play them in order -- more so than for the
KQ or SQ series where you can sort of skip around between the
games.

I don't know which Quest for Glory I like best.
I like them all, but for different reasons.


Of the Space Quest games I liked the 3rd one the best, though I don't
remember the exact reason.
I think that in general people like the 4th Space Quest game the best though.
Space Quest 5 is sort of a takeoff on Star Trek. Even some of the music
is obviously derived from Star Trek theme music, especially near the
beginning of the game.

Wow, what can I say? Big thank you to all of you for these interesting infos!

I think I will follow Jenny's advice to start with something other than QFG.
Btw, when I was younger I also played RPG's - Bard's Tale on the C64 was my first one
and I LOVED Ultima IV and V, but nowadays I have to limit myself to the genre I like a bit more, which is the adventure genre.

I will bookmark this thread - playing one of these series has been on my list for quite a while,
now I am even more motivated to do it and this thread will be helpful to decide where to start.
It certainly won't be KQ III, so far (not only this thread) this was the game I read the most negative things about
(in general, as I mentioned I could not find much details about the remakes/which of the remakes is better)
and thanks to you i know it is not required to play the KQ's games sequentially.

@oldbroad: LOL I think reading 3-4 reviews about a game still takes less time than buying, installing and playing it ;-)



Btw: This is totally off-topic but it is not worth a separate thread: I played 'There is no game - Jam Editon 2015' on Steam the other
day. It only takes about 10 minutes to solve and it is free. I think it is hilarious and brilliantly original. I recommend to try it out
when you need a laugh.

You played the 15-minute Flash title from 2015. In the past couple weeks a much longer version of this game was released on both GOG and Steam. Average playtime is approximately five to six hours. You can find the GOG version here. Adventure Gamers gave it five stars and their review is here.

Yes, I know about the longer version, should I have mentioned it, sorry. We wanted to check the free version first.
After having played it, we will definitely buy the long version sometime. So many games to play, so little time

No worries. And some of our other members might be interested in the game too.

I agree with Marian that KQ8 is highly underrated. The action sequences were totally pointless though.