JimmyTwoBucks

I can see why someone would prefer the more detailed art work and I agree it is impressive/beautiful, though I personally prefer the style that the SV demo is in, at least for this type of game... Out of the SQ games, I liked the SQ4 graphics the best, even though SQ6 had more detail... With the LucasArts games I liked the first Monkey Island level of graphics over the later Curse/Escape graphics... Part of that I think is the feel of the game and how the visuals represent it, whether it's meant to look like real life or creating a world with a specific visual style. Also you can't really make something hyper-realistic with the backgrounds and then have more cartoony characters walk through them without it looking odd, so it will be interesting to see the Exogenesis game's characters... Plus, when things get really detailed it can make some of the puzzles needlessly difficult, as usually you're only looking for a handful of key items and there's just so much on the screen it detracts from the actual gameplay. Part of it as well is just subjective - I always found the first Monkey Island game's graphics hilarious in a way that the later games didn't capture as well. For me, the lack of items so far isn't a problem with the few bits and pieces we've seen - I don't really expect corridors to be full of items... they weren't in the Space Quest games.

Great game, I just finished it and I enjoyed it a lot! Things I liked the best: The humor was great, it had a witty sarcastic vibe throughout... I think the humor is one of the most important things in Space Quest and this really nailed that. I loved the narrator in particular, the descriptions and the interplay between the narrator and the main character... I like that the narrator was genuinely helpful, but was also sarcastic at the same time. I really liked the helpfulness of the descriptions, so that you knew where there was a definite dead end, or an object that definitely didn't need messing with. In other games I often find I'm wasting time trying everything out on an object that doesn't do anything, when the game should have just told me something like, "this bush probably doesn't do anything," so I'm glad this game did that! I liked that the puzzles were clear and logical and you had enough clues to let you know the kind of direction you were meant to be going in without having to randomly guess. I liked the plot, characters, and the puzzles and thought they were interesting and fun. I also liked the art work and it felt like I was playing a classic game (I think the pixelated graphics actually help with that to keep the look consistent... sometimes fan games' art is a bit of a hodgepodge when it's higher-res). The music was good too, just to keep the mood ticking along. Things I thought could be changed or improved (these are all pretty minor things): I enjoyed the pixel-hunting, but early on I didn't know that there was going to be pixel-hunting, so I was stumped at not finding the "shiny piece". Once I knew there would be pixel-hunting, I was able to figure out later puzzles without as much frustration, but the game could have maybe given a clue about this earlier on, so the player knows that there will be some pixel-hunting to do. I would have liked a bit more space stuff and a bit more alien stuff personally, I think that would have made the locations a little more varied (but they were great locations for what they were). There were a number of grammar/spelling mistakes (I noticed at least a couple of "form" instead of "from" and stuff like "engne" instead of "engine")... not a big deal, but I think getting a couple of people to play through it and note down these things would just tidy it up a bit. There was one odd instance near the end of the game (I think just before we get on the ship) where the word "shitty" was included, which kind of threw me for a second like, wait, there's swearing in this game! I think if there were swear words throughout the whole thing that would be ok, as it would be consistent, but because it was like a one-off instance, it seemed weird... I'd just replace that with "crappy" or some other less sweary word. So I enjoyed this game a lot! The minor quibbles I have are more to do with just tidying up the game than any proper problem with it... This is the first SQ fan game I've tried, so I'll have to give the others a shot in the near future...

Gary Owens: "Well guys, that was a tough 72 hours straight of recording, but job done!" Two guys: "Yep! Oh no, wait... it looks like pcj and Troels just made a ton of changes to the script while you were in the recording booth. Well, back in you go Gary." Gary Owens: " :( "

I wouldn't mind it ending on a cliffhanger of sorts... as long as the game is awesome and has some sense of resolution of its main plot, I think it's fine to end with something suggesting a sequel...

I've been playing through some of the games I never got a chance to play when they came out... Sam & Max (the original one)... I didn't think I'd like this, but I enjoyed it a lot, liked the humor, nice locations, good plot, etc. It was pretty short though, finished it in a few days. Full Throttle... I'm not really into bikes, etc. but this was also very enjoyable, good characters, some nice humor, good locations. This was also pretty short and I finished it in a few days. I thought the puzzles in some places were a little bit too straightforward as well, i.e. if you pick up an object and then use it immediately in the very next location I feel like it's a bit of a non-puzzle. Grim Fandango... I had heard great things about this for years and I remember as a teenager seeing it in the store and feeling kinda "meh" about it... the cover art work didn't really give me an idea of what it was about and the characters didn't really even have "faces" to know what sort of characters they would be, and I wasn't sure if it would be humorous, so I didn't buy it at the time (I think I bought the Curse of Monkey Island instead at the time). So I started playing this and at first I'm going, ehhh, I'm not really feeling the blockly 3D graphics and how you have to use the arrow keys and how he has to be next to something to look at it, but as it went on it grew on me... By the time I got to Rubacava I was sold, excellent games, one of my favorites now. It's a shame it's a game you have to play before you realize how good it is or is going to be, as I think that's probably why it didn't do as well as it should have. Good length of game as well, felt maybe three times long as Sam & Max or Full Throttle. I've heard that a lot so far about Broken Age, that the puzzles aren't really like proper puzzles. I've been put off getting it so far because it seems very kiddy and a bit Disneyfied almost like, "kids finding themselves" sort of thing, and I'm not hugely keen on the look of the animation, and I prefer puzzles that are at least a bit more complicated... Having said that, I didn't think I'd like Grim Fandango, so I'm definitely willing to give Broken Age a shot...

Though I hope they are still having a Taco Nova place in the game, as per the art from earlier on, as well as this location...

Awesome, already looks like a classic location! From what we've seen, it looks like there's going to be quite a number of locations in the game, which is good, because I don't want it to be a short game. I also like that they said you'll be able to freely revisit places like in SQ3.

Yeah, I liked how in Grim Fandango you could hold shift to run, that came in handy a lot. Also I think in some LucasArts games you can double click on a door or end of street, etc. and it just takes you right there, that's also very helpful. It becomes very important when you're stuck on a puzzle and have to do the obligatory "go everywhere and try everything with everything else" routine.

I think the critiques are ok IF they actually understand the game and what it's doing, but it is annoying when a reviewer clearly does not really understand what's going on and is just crying "sexism" etc. at anything. With something like the Eurogamer review of Leisure Suit Larry, part of the misunderstanding seemed to come from the reviewer not getting that it was aimed squarely at guys and with a certain type of humor (eg. Monty Python surrealism, Blackadder style wit and language, etc.) and not taking any of that into consideration. The dialogue all the way through the game is very wry and satirical, including things like breaking the fourth wall with the "Larry factory" and other surreal humor. I think the game goes out of its way to show that it's not a realistic depiction and I don't know how anyone could not pick up on that, unless they were so focused on the sexism angle that it blinded them. LSL is clearly not meant to inform anyone's life choices and I'd be very surprised if it has done. I spent many an hour playing LSL when I was around maybe 10 or so and even then I knew this was a game that was highly satirical and the fact it was so risque was part of the thrill of playing it, especially as a kid. Part of it also may just be down to lack of historical knowledge on the reviewer's part: LSL is seen as a classic game, pioneering in many ways, including its subject matter and to not address that while critiquing it from just that one angle of it being sexist made the reviewer seem very ill informed. It would be like if someone reviewed Doom and just complained about how violent it is and how it'll make kids violent for the entire review without looking at anything else. The King's Quest critiques are a little different... the stories are based around traditional forms and tropes, so the critique isn't really with the games, it's with the traditional forms they're using. The thing is, when you use that traditional form, you're doing it to evoke some of the nostalgia and feelings that people have about that kind of story... if you alter it, it kind of defeats the object of using the established form. (I.e. if you add a modern update to a traditional story format, it's going to lose the "traditional" feel.) Having said that, I think it's a more genuine critique than the LSL one, because it at least understands what the game is about and what's going on and it isn't just a blind attack.

The Kickstopper could also have stretch goals, like: -- The whole game runs as if you're trying to load SQ6 on a 386 computer with a 2x CD-ROM drive, for that "authentic" nostalgia feel. I would gladly pledge extra to have that not be a feature.

The trouble with gaining a woman as an object is it's always difficult to combine them with other objects... "Use woman with datacorder," "use woman with chicken-on-pulley," etc.

Yes! It could be everyone's favorite corridors from all the SQ games linked together, and you've basically just got to run away from the slime from SQ4 and the robot from SQ2... And at the very end of all the corridors is the SQ4 skate-o-rama where you have to dodge the sequel police and the slime and the SQ2 robot all at the same time.

I think you also have to remember that most of the stuff we've seen involve being on a ship with corridors... You could judge all the Space Quests pretty harshly if all you saw was: And I think this Spaceventure room and others from the demo are already up there with the best and most interesting ship rooms from the Space Quests:

I feel the opposite on this one... I loved a lot of the locations and rooms so far, the demo went a long way in convincing me that the graphic style works... I particularly liked the lab room place where something has escaped from and the room with the magazines, etc. in it. Also the pic of the potential desert planet location looked awesome.

I'd be pretty much fine with it being split in half, rather than numerous episodes. I hadn't really thought about a split down the middle before, but that sounds ok, as it would avoid breaking it up too much, and presumably it would mean the first half would come out sooner than we could expect the whole game to have done.

I'd be ok with episodic, but there are three main reasons I don't really like it as much as a full game: -- With episodic, it makes it really obvious where the "joins" are, when one area ends and the next begins. This exists in "full" games anyway, but you don't notice it as much, you just know you're in another section of the game. The episodic way makes it feel like a series of mini-games which aren't really that well joined together, IMO. -- The nostalgia factor... I like getting a game as a whole game, in the same way I like buying music as "albums". There's just something about the complete thing. -- Episodic also feels like the game isn't properly finished a lot of times (often because the other parts AREN'T finished yet). That means when I'm playing one episode, it feels like I'm not really playing the "real" game, if that makes sense. So really, there is not necessarily a huge difference, these are all just feelings I get from episodic games more than anything else, but it still does affect the enjoyment a little for me. I would imagine finishing the whole thing also makes the whole thing better... in the same way if you write a novel, you might "finish" the first couple of chapters, but then once the whole thing is done you realize that those first couple of chapters could have x, y, z added or changed to make the whole thing work better. If they offer the game all as a single full game at the end, and put all the parts together properly, then I can deal with that.

Yeah, I just finished playing Full Throttle (another game I had never got round to playing earlier) and it was very heavy on story and the cinematic aspects. I enjoyed it a lot, but it was very quick to complete, as a lot of the puzzles were where you only had access to 2-3 items and could only use them on 2-3 things, so you very quickly figured out the puzzles. I did have to use ONE hint though, haha... there is a part where you have to control a car in a derby, it's essentially a mini-game that you have to finish, and I had two of three things worked out for it, but I wasn't enjoying the mini-game much, and I didn't want to be playing it for hours, so I looked it up. What I find sometimes is that you can be really close to figuring out a puzzle, but the game doesn't give you any sense that you're going in the right direction, so you wonder if you're totally on the wrong tack, and mistakenly think you'll have to spend hours to figure it out. I'll give a game the benefit of the doubt for a few puzzles... I think every game is allowed a few puzzles that didn't work out that great, but yeah, if it's a reoccurring thing, then I'm more likely to go to the hints. I think in general, I prefer longer games with medium-to-easy level of puzzles, rather than short games with really hard puzzles.

It's funny, I hadn't noticed that as a kid playing games like Monkey Island 1+2, but when I just played Sam and Max now, I was definitely surprised by the lack of hotspots. There were some rooms where there was literally only one thing that had a hotspot. One other thing I am fine going to the hints for, is where there is some sort of bonus game, but it's not clear if it HAS to be done to finish the main game. Especially if it's a bad bonus game, I'll usually look it up to see if I actually get an object for doing it. Also there are places in games where I know how to figure out the puzzle, but I also can see it'll take hours to go through it (something like the library book thing in Monkey Island 2 comes to mind), and I know I won't enjoy the tediousness of it, so I just look it up. Haha, yes, also I usually get one of two feelings, either: "phewf, glad I looked that up, I would have NEVER thought of that" or, "ohhh! Damn, I so could have figured that out if I'd given it a little longer and hadn't been impatient." Maybe there is a real art to looking up hints... to know when you are truly stumped as opposed to just momentarily flummoxed. Yeah, the thing that normally prompts me to look something up is when I just start randomly trying every object with every other object... that will eventually reveal the answer, but why bother, just look it up. And yes, it's one thing to not be able to figure out a puzzle and another to not even know what puzzle you're meant to be trying to figure out! Yeah, on the one hand, I love it when games have many locations to jump to, but at the same time, if it's like the solution is hidden in one of 20 locations, it's like, ehh, I don't want to have revisit ALL the places and try everything to find the solution, so it sometimes helps if games are structured so that you are in a relatively finite area for each part. I am trying to work out how I am going to approach this when Space Venture finally comes out, I think so far am I going with a "no hints at all" policy as it'll be a special occasion!

That sounds like a good system, I might have to adopt that. I think for me it also depends on the actual game, if it's something I'm really enjoying and think is a superb game, I definitely try to avoid any hints whatsoever... But if it's midway through the game and I'm kind of "meh" about it, I'm much more likely to want go to the hints.

I think on several occasions I've used the walkthrough AS the hints (i.e. I look up the answer for just the one thing I'm stuck on and don't read the rest) which is probably not a good idea... I should probably look up the actual "hints" from the hint books if I'm going to go down that route. I think even just seeing the overall look of a walkthrough, with the game reduced to a series of simple instructions, kind of kills the magic a bit, even if you're just there for the one puzzle. I would definitely ideally have a "no hints, no walkthrough" policy and the games I completed back when I couldn't get hold of those things were the best experiences. On the other hand though, there were games I spent ages on as a kid but ended up giving up on. It tended to be when there wasn't a clear idea of what the next objective was, and there being hundreds of possible things to do, and where I'd resorted to just trying every object and action with every other object and action in every location.

I'm currently playing Sam and Max, which I never got round to playing as a kid, and it got me thinking about walkthroughs and/or hints... This is when I used hints in the SQ games (in the order I played them): -- SQ4: I don't remember using any hints (no internet back then and the country I was in didn't have hint books!) -- SQ6: I'm pretty sure I used hints on how to kill the terminator guy, I can't remember how I got those hints at the time though -- SQ1VGA: I don't remember using any hints for this -- SQ2: I think I reached for the walkthrough quite early on and I think I used it continuously throughout the game! -- SQ3: I think I needed the hints for the early part, but got through most of the rest without hints -- SQ5: I think I got lazy with this one and if something didn't click right away, I just looked at the walkthrough I think the real danger with walkthroughs, is if I check one thing on them, I feel like I've "cheated" (because I kinda have, lol), and then I'm much more likely to not play the game seriously for the rest of it... I tend to then go right back to the walkthrough as soon as I get stuck AT ALL after that initial use of it. But then again, sometimes I really think I need the walkthrough, especially when there is something fundamental I've missed and I would just spend months wandering around if I hadn't gotten the help. For example, with Sam and Max, I got "stuck" halfway through the game because in one section I didn't realize you could walk past a certain point on the screen, so it wasn't a "puzzle" that got me stuck, it was just a graphical thing. But then I got stuck again at a later point and went back to the hints and I was like, ah, damn, I COULD have figured this puzzle out, I just got lazy. Do you use walkthroughs/hints at all, do you think they spoil the game?

Sounds like he followed them on twitter, maybe read a tweet or two he didn't like or didn't agree with and has now just convinced himself he won't like the game either... Otherwise why say, "The characters and storyline do not appeal to me" when we don't even know the storyline and we have only seen one character essentially? I reckon there is something specific he's not saying, they probably dissed something he likes... eg. this guy might be a big fan of pineapples and the two guys may have been like, "pineapples suck," and this guy is now all like, "oh no, the people who made a game I like aren't exactly the same as me, therefore I can't like the game anymore."

It's funny really, because the IPs on their own are almost worthless if you don't also have the talented people who made the games what they were. It's like imagine if I owned the name The Rolling Stones, and I wanted to put out an album under that name, but I couldn't get any of the members of the band to play on the album. At the peak of the game series' fame, you could have probably got some hacks to put out a SQ7 and sold a few copies off JUST the name Space Quest, but people would soon realize if the game sucked, and you wouldn't be able to sell any of a SQ8. And at this point in time the name isn't even recognizable to most people, so what is the point in owning those IPs at all. The name Space Venture is probably worth more right now, because it's had proven recent investment with the kickstarter and most importantly it has the real creative team behind it.

I will add that SQ6 was probably the game my computer had the most trouble with at the time, I think it was pushing the boundaries of what most people's computers could do around then, so unless you bought a computer just as it came out, you'd get some lagging and it could get a bit annoying. That did deter me a bit early on, especially if you are stumped on a puzzle and you need to go back and forth trying everything out, if it's taking a long time to load, it gets frustrating pretty fast. I think the first three games didn't have that kind of problem as far as I recall, though I remember I managed to make SQ4 crash in several places, mainly in the time pod.

I agree that it's one of the best... and probably THE best as far as sci-fi comedy/satire goes. One thing I always loved from Star Wars was the idea of a "bar full of different types of aliens", which I felt other sci-fi never really developed further or included that often. I think SQ really nailed that area and took it to another level with the Monolith Burger and the Galaxy Galleria and Polysorbate. I also really liked how they merged the best of lots of different ideas, like having a Terminator character hunting down the hero, and also time travel elements, combined with a Star Wars type of world with many different alien cultures and also aliens that are monstrous in some way, AND stuff like Blade Runner as well. I think it's hugely under-appreciated as a sci-fi world... I find it more interesting than the Star Trek universe (which is why I think SQ5 is not quite as good as the others, as it kind of undermines the SQ universe to make it more like Star Trek), and I think it's as interesting as the Star Wars universe in a different way.