ACtually Sierra games SUCKED. Couldn't beat them without a walk through...how the heck are you supposed to figure out rumple still skin as a password!?
!? !? There's puzzles like that, that are just truly go buy our book or call this number if you're stuck that makes the games fall apart and crumble so hard core before Lucas Arts solid golden adventures.
L.A. isnt immune to this, I've never been able to complete Fate of Atlantis
I think the only sierra game I finished without help was Quest For Glory III which had a sligly more direct plot that wasn't as much guessing, though iirc there was one point where I literally had to just start doing random things to try and progress...
ACtually Sierra games SUCKED. Couldn't beat them without a walk through...how the heck are you supposed to figure out rumple still skin as a password!?
Everyone cites the Rumplestiltskin puzzle as an example of Sierra's cruelty...but they forget that even if you get it wrong, you still get the key to the mountain, which is actually less frustrating to deal with than trying to climb the beanstalk.
Basically, if you get that puzzle wrong, the game makes it EASIER for you. If you get it right, it rewards you with a frustrating one-false-move-and-you're-dead minigame.
Rumlestiltskin was easy to figure out. What was not so easy was the real solution for the puzzle they wanted. *spelling it backwards* // swapping a with Z, B with Y etc.
Literally you have to spell it backwards. Nikstlitslepmur.
Granted that's brutal, but I've heard Brits complain just as loudly about the monkey wrench in MI2.
The rumeplstiltskin puzzle is actually pretty easy if you happen to find the piece of paper in the witches hut first But if you don't stumble upon it first, it's pretty much impossible to solve my chance.
The rumeplstiltskin puzzle is actually pretty easy if you happen to find the piece of paper in the witches hut first But if you don't stumble upon it first, it's pretty much impossible to solve my chance.
Some of us didnt connect the two. There shoudl have been some reference to the paper made by the troll "oh I see you beat the witch, she was an old enemy of mine" or on the paper "sometimes dwarfs tend to think backwards" or something
I reiterate: regardless of how difficult or illogical the puzzle was, the game is easier when you get the gnome's name wrong. You basically get rewarded for losing that particular puzzle. The only reason to care about getting the name right is if you want full points.
And yes, the A=Z, B=Y, etc. was the solution in the original version; spelling it backward was the solution in the various remakes.
There's quite a few King's Quest 'puzzles' that have irritated the crap out of me, but the winner by far is finding that effing bridle in KQIV. Can anyone tell me if there are any clues regarding its location, or are you just meant to keep using 'look ground' everywhere until you stumble across it? (IMO, that's not much of a puzzle) I got so frustrated trying to get Rosella to ride that bloody unicorn, and the way I eventually 'solved' that puzzle back in the day (before I'd ever heard of the internet) was to go into my local games store, find a copy of the King's Quest Compendium and look up the solution.
Seriously, is there some sort of clue that I missed that will now make me feel really dumb for not being able to work it out?
I have to say Lucasarts, I just enjoy their games more than Sierras. And I do think that Lucasarts have been a bigger influence on the whole "adventure game industry". But I must admit that I haven't played many of Sierras games, so I could still change my mind.
And I do think that Lucasarts have been a bigger influence on the whole "adventure game industry".
Whoa, now, I'm not denying LucasArts had an incredible impact on the industry, but Sierra released the first game to include graphics, as well as the first adventure game with animated characters. Hard to have a bigger influence than that. :P
Well...Lucas Arts is more my style. I can't think of any Lucas Arts games that had a dead end.
I don't hate Sierra games but I don't want to devote my time to them. You spend all that time trying to find the solution but at any given point you have to back track and see the infinite possibilities at some given point of time where you screwed up and possibly why you screwed up and in your current situation you examine the possibilties and realize you're stuck and the game isn't well enough designed to get out of the current jam and then you have to back track and try to find a point where you can find a solution to the problems in the game...
It's over complicated design and it isn't fair. You'd have to play the game several times or know the complete story before winning, it just isn't my type of game.
It takes too much on at once, without being able to really keep you on the straight and narrow path.
I never liked the Sierra adventures a lot, apart from a few pieces of Space Quest. I found it annoying that you could die and the tech, the story, the characters, the gfx, the sfx, all was worse than in Lucasarts adventures but now as an adult it might be interesting giving at least one a second chance as i sometimes enjoy games which don't yell at me.
It is quite funny in my opinion that everyone claims that Sierra puzzles are more frustrating that the LucasArts ones. In fact, I remember many people, (in Israeli forums, at least,) who claimed that they prefer Sierra because LucasArts puzzles made no sense. (I believe that the most known example for this is Day of the Tentacle.) I guess the monkey wrench one was a famous issue too, since it is basically understood only by American audiences.
Anyway, I can't say I have much experience, since I didn't play so many adventure games. I am mainly familiar with Quest for Glory, King's Quest, Loom and Monkey Island.
Basically, the biggest difference I see between the game styles are the types of puzzles. In LucasArts games, there is a much greater focus on the dialogue, (Loom being more in the style of Sierra,) while Sierra games focus more on inventory and item use puzzles.
Oh, I almost forgot to mention: I voted for both.:)
That's interesting, never thought of it this way, most probably because i haven't played them all but this certain portion of weirdness is something i loved in Lucasarts adventures and which also made them special. Still, i think The DIG is the best adventure, *woohoohooo shaking hands like a voodoo priest*, mankind ever invented.
It would be awesome if someone would at least make the version they first wanted to make, from what i read about it and the graphics i have seen, it would have been quite a bit darker which i definately would have appreciated. There aren't many games which are this special to me. Beeing able to work on such a game would be fascinating and you could throw all you passion at it.
Quest for Glory remains my favorite adventure game series to this day. And Roger Wilco can go head-to-head with Guybrush Threepwood in a comedy competition any day.
Maniac Mansion. Get one kid killed and the game is unfinishable.
Actually, you didn't even have to do that. I believe it was possible to start the game in an incompletable state if you chose all the wrong kids. Zak McKracken was also brutally difficult by the end.
Sierra definitely takes the cake for unfairly difficult adventure games though, if only because of Codename: ICEMAN.
....So, the reason people hate Maniac Mansion is that they've never played it and have no idea how it works? Because that would make sense.
I played Maniac Mansion a long time ago. I never beat the game, and found it rather frustrating. The game really lacked direction, and it was pretty hard. I enjoyed Day of the Tentacle though
Isn't it possible to beat Maniac Mansion with any combination of kids? I always liked how you could go about the game in different ways depending on which kids you picked. And even though you could get killed, there were less dead ends than there were in the early King's Quest games. And once you found
the key to the dungeon
you never got stuck there again, no matter how many times you got thrown in there.
I haven't played any Sierra games. I guess its because I like most Lucasarts games because there is no pressure to do things, and the game doesn't call you an idiot for making a mistake. The exceptions being both the Indiana Jones games which I love even though you can die.
I found the original Maniac Mansion and ZacMcKracken fun but frustrating. It wasn't so much that you could die, as it was they could lock you up and you could get out if you had an item that didn't exist in the game. This was made doubly frustrating by the fact that I was used to the bit in Monkey Island 2 where you can get out of prison by making use of what's around you.
However, I count these as some of my favourite games:
Indiana Jones And The Last Crusade
MI1
MI2
Loom
Sam And Max Hit The Road
Day Of The Tentacle
Indiana Jones And The Fate Of Atlantis
Full Throttle
MI3
Grim Fandango
You're not really qualified to say one way or another then are you?
Exactly! Thank you for saying this!
I haven't actually voted yet because I haven't played very many Sierra adventure games, and I'm still yet to play all of LucasArts'. So, I don't feel that it's fair to select either option, which is why I haven't done so. And neither should any of you until you've played a significant amount of both.
Agreed. The only Sierra games I've played are King's Quest IV and Laura Bow and the Dagger of Amon Ra, so I haven't voted yet either. Sierra adventure games just really haven't attracted my interest the way Lucasarts has, but I don't feel I can pass judgement on them as an adventure game company because of just that.
Comments
!? !? There's puzzles like that, that are just truly go buy our book or call this number if you're stuck that makes the games fall apart and crumble so hard core before Lucas Arts solid golden adventures.
I think the only sierra game I finished without help was Quest For Glory III which had a sligly more direct plot that wasn't as much guessing, though iirc there was one point where I literally had to just start doing random things to try and progress...
Everyone cites the Rumplestiltskin puzzle as an example of Sierra's cruelty...but they forget that even if you get it wrong, you still get the key to the mountain, which is actually less frustrating to deal with than trying to climb the beanstalk.
Basically, if you get that puzzle wrong, the game makes it EASIER for you. If you get it right, it rewards you with a frustrating one-false-move-and-you're-dead minigame.
Rumlestiltskin was easy to figure out. What was not so easy was the real solution for the puzzle they wanted. *spelling it backwards* // swapping a with Z, B with Y etc.
--> Ifnkvohgroghprm
That's not spelling it backwards.
Literally you have to spell it backwards. Nikstlitslepmur.
Granted that's brutal, but I've heard Brits complain just as loudly about the monkey wrench in MI2.
Well it was the solution in the first version of the game. In later versions Nikstlitslepmur was added.
The rumeplstiltskin puzzle is actually pretty easy if you happen to find the piece of paper in the witches hut first
Some of us didnt connect the two. There shoudl have been some reference to the paper made by the troll "oh I see you beat the witch, she was an old enemy of mine" or on the paper "sometimes dwarfs tend to think backwards" or something
And yes, the A=Z, B=Y, etc. was the solution in the original version; spelling it backward was the solution in the various remakes.
Seriously, is there some sort of clue that I missed that will now make me feel really dumb for not being able to work it out?
Whoa, now, I'm not denying LucasArts had an incredible impact on the industry, but Sierra released the first game to include graphics, as well as the first adventure game with animated characters. Hard to have a bigger influence than that. :P
I don't hate Sierra games but I don't want to devote my time to them. You spend all that time trying to find the solution but at any given point you have to back track and see the infinite possibilities at some given point of time where you screwed up and possibly why you screwed up and in your current situation you examine the possibilties and realize you're stuck and the game isn't well enough designed to get out of the current jam and then you have to back track and try to find a point where you can find a solution to the problems in the game...
It's over complicated design and it isn't fair. You'd have to play the game several times or know the complete story before winning, it just isn't my type of game.
It takes too much on at once, without being able to really keep you on the straight and narrow path.
Maniac Mansion. Get one kid killed and the game is unfinishable.
Anyway, I can't say I have much experience, since I didn't play so many adventure games. I am mainly familiar with Quest for Glory, King's Quest, Loom and Monkey Island.
Basically, the biggest difference I see between the game styles are the types of puzzles. In LucasArts games, there is a much greater focus on the dialogue, (Loom being more in the style of Sierra,) while Sierra games focus more on inventory and item use puzzles.
Oh, I almost forgot to mention: I voted for both.:)
It would be awesome if someone would at least make the version they first wanted to make, from what i read about it and the graphics i have seen, it would have been quite a bit darker which i definately would have appreciated. There aren't many games which are this special to me. Beeing able to work on such a game would be fascinating and you could throw all you passion at it.
But ähm back to, Sierra vs. the better team...
Actually, you didn't even have to do that. I believe it was possible to start the game in an incompletable state if you chose all the wrong kids. Zak McKracken was also brutally difficult by the end.
Sierra definitely takes the cake for unfairly difficult adventure games though, if only because of Codename: ICEMAN.
No. Only the boy that you are forced to take does not enable any way to finish the game on his own.
I played Maniac Mansion a long time ago. I never beat the game, and found it rather frustrating. The game really lacked direction, and it was pretty hard. I enjoyed Day of the Tentacle though
I found the original Maniac Mansion and ZacMcKracken fun but frustrating. It wasn't so much that you could die, as it was they could lock you up and you could get out if you had an item that didn't exist in the game. This was made doubly frustrating by the fact that I was used to the bit in Monkey Island 2 where you can get out of prison by making use of what's around you.
However, I count these as some of my favourite games:
Indiana Jones And The Last Crusade
MI1
MI2
Loom
Sam And Max Hit The Road
Day Of The Tentacle
Indiana Jones And The Fate Of Atlantis
Full Throttle
MI3
Grim Fandango
Which means that Lucasarts win hands down.
You're not really qualified to say one way or another then are you?
Exactly! Thank you for saying this!
I haven't actually voted yet because I haven't played very many Sierra adventure games, and I'm still yet to play all of LucasArts'. So, I don't feel that it's fair to select either option, which is why I haven't done so. And neither should any of you until you've played a significant amount of both.