Collector

John Williams is Ken's brother, who was, I believe, something like the Marketing manager for Sierra. He is very much in the loop about things Sierra. He is more or less the go-to-guy for things about Sierra and its history.

I haaaaaaaate the retry button. Screw that button. Might as well not even have deaths. Call me old fashioned, but I believe if you got yourself killed then it's your own fault that you didn't save. There's no threat to a death with a retry. It's part of the atmosphere. It adds to the tension. Retries completely ruin the whole point of deaths.
 
That's my opinion which also happens to be fact and anyone who disagrees is wrong and needs to seriously reevaluate their life choices, values, and goals. You're also stupid.

One of my favorite Stargate SG1s

The reviews were salvaged from the Wayback. If you want to do a review, write it up and get it to me.

http://sciwiki.sierrahelp.com/index.php?title=Sierra_Game_List

Sierra was pretty innovative. They did not only strive to use best tech possible, they also tried to advance the way stories were told in games. They also were among the first game companies to utilize the use of things like CD audio, full voice acting, sound cards. It might not look like much in today's POV, but back then those were humongous strides.

Just looked at the linked article. There have been a number of articles on this. The writer of the Gamespot article must be in his early 20s if he thinks those titles are for what Sierra is known. Most of the commenters are nearly as clueless.
 
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/136708-Activision-Teases-the-Return-of-Sierra-Entertainment
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/473467/activision-teases-the-return-of-sierra/
http://www.polygon.com/2014/8/8/5981675/activision-sierra-entertainment-gamescom
http://www.kitguru.net/gaming/matthew-wilson/activision-teasing-the-return-of-sierra/
http://www.ign.com/articles/2014/08/08/gamescom-2014-activision-teases-sierra-resurrection
http://gamerant.com/sierra-entertainment-return-tease-site-activision-gamescom/
http://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/activision-is-planning-something-for-kings-quest-franchise-rights-reportedly-recovered-from-telltale-games/#!by6B9k

John Williams seems to know something about it, but can't say anything.

Many of you may know that I have been working with Sunlight Games to bring the original Gold Rush! to modern PCs. This work is now done and the game will be released shortly. It will be available as a digital download from Sunlight's store and Steam. There will also be a boxed copy that will be shipped worldwide.


 
 

The GOG dev team was talking to me a while back about Shivers. They can't do Shivers because it is a Win only 16-bit game. The only solution for x64 users is a VM. Shivers two has too many bugs on modern systems to run properly They were trying to contact jafa for permission to use his StC installer, but he has faded from sight. He usually responds to me when I email him, but he never responded to GOG, even when I told him.
 
As to the other titles, it is arranging for the licensing that is the problem. Activision is not the easiest company to work with when it comes to IP rights. Outside of newer titles that have API issues on modern Windows, there are few Sierra titles that I have not already solved, so technical issues aren't really the problem. GOG has access to my resources to make them work, as they have done for so many of their other Sierra releases.

Exactly. I would have probably spread this around, but that last panel blows it. It turns what could have been a good argument for a point that I have often made into a brainless misogynistic rant.

Exactly. I would have probably spread this around, but that last panel blows it. It turns what could have been a good argument for a point that I have often made into a brainless misogynistic rant.

Yeap, I have to comment. I love how a comic strip that might've been able to make a point once throws it away at the last panel by implying that "rape" is a word that women like to blurt out when they lose a discussion. I'm not against using the word or the act for a bit of raunchy black humour, but honestly, this is a crock of shit.
 
Unless it's some sort of clever meta-comment, but I don't buy that. Looking at that comic, I smell fratboy scrotum sweat and not pipe smoke.

Apologies in advance if my post comes off like I'm firing from both barrels without warning.  Because this has been irking me all day and I wanted to chime in.
Yup.  The article Fronzel linked points that out later on: "The sexual violence at the end of that tutorial will single out a fifth of the female audience who have experienced sexual violence".  There's also this October 2013 report from the World Health Organization which shows that number jumps up to 35% on a worldwide scale for general sexual violence.
 
Look Fronzel, this isn't some sort of moral panic like the ones you're equating it to.  No one is saying people need to stop making these games because bad things will happen if they don't.  People want the industry to shift away from a very entrenched worldview.  This isn't a hobby that is the domain of only adolescent white males these days.  There are other people playing games, and they are all minorities who are very underrepresented by the medium.  You say "It's 100% pure escapism".  How is it escapism for women if the majority of the time they're forced to play as a male character?  How is it escapism for a person of color when the vast majority of game characters are white?  Or LGBTQ players who want to have a non-heterosexual relationship option in a game but the developers didn't think to include one?
 
This isn't the gestapo coming by and saying we need to burn these games.  This is criticism.  This is a reviewer doing her job and saying that she had a very negative reaction to a specific scene in a game that she didn't think was handled properly by the developers.  This is a reviewer who clearly enjoyed the previous game and is pointing out to the developer and the community that she thinks a specific scene weakens the product and will likely negatively impact other players too.  Criticism allows people to have a dialogue about issues.  Censorship does not.  Shouting down people who bring up valid points is not how you have a dialogue such as this follow-up interview with Dennaton on RPS.  What Cara's doing is no different than someone pointing out they didn't think the voice acting was good on a specific character, or something in the story doesn't make sense.  She's not doing it because she hates the game, she's doing it because she wants this to be a good experience for anyone who plays it.  People don't get better at making things unless people are willing to explain the faults in their work.  And considering rape isn't usually handled well in a lot of fiction, it's a good criticism to levy because it can encourage the authors to revisit their work and see if they can handle it better or use a different scene to convey the same information (see the above interview).
 
She's also doing other people a favor by highlighting content that might be problematic for them.  With 1 out of every 5 women having suffered from rape (and the real statistic is probably higher because it's an underreported crime for various reasons) there's real reason to let victims who might not be aware of the content in the game (especially considering the previous game didn't have any sexual violence in it).  Rape victims often suffer from something akin to PTSD like soldiers (and this is true of other abuse victims as well) and stuff like this can cause a very physical response for them.  That's being an empathic human being and looking out for others.
 
No one is saying you can't enjoy these things.  I enjoyed the Larry games because I found them funny, but I also acknowledge there's some problematic bits in them as well (and a lot of this is due to the age in which the games were made).  I also like Game of Thrones which is also problematic in spots.  Does people pointing out the problematic bits diminsh my enjoyment of them?  Not really, but I also don't think people shouldn't voice their opinions and criticisms when there's something problematic going on.
 
As for why it seems like this is all you see about games these days... Well it's a combination of factors.  The main one is that there's a lot more gamers out there from all walks of life and it's no longer the 80's or 90's where many of the minorities were unwilling to speak up.  The Internet has given a lot of groups their own safe spaces to gather and discuss issues without fear of retaliation.  Some of these people are now writing for game publications, running their own sites, or just being vocal on social media.  So a lot of opinions that were being kept underground before are now out in the open and finding there's an audience of likeminded people.  There's also the fact that a lot of people are dissastisfied with the current stagnation in the market and encouraging developers to write for different demographics is one way of addressing this.  And some people are growing older and looking around and noticing that "hey, there's very few games with good female characters for my daughter to look up to".  (Great post here by Jeff Vogel of Spiderweb Software if anyone's interested)
 
I'm 31 and have been gaming since I was 5.  I know I'd much rather live in a world where more people feel empowered by games because they can find characters to relate to other than buff macho white guy with a gun.  I love games and I want more people to enjoy them.  I also want to live in a world where hopefully my offspring will be able to enjoy a large variety of games regardless of their gender (or sexual orientation, or religious beliefs, or ethnicity, etc.).
 
So I ask you, Fronzel, what the fuck gives you the right to air question another person's opinion in such a callous manner?

Wow, just wow. You realize that there is a pretty high chance that she is a rape victim. Women have a 20% to 25% chance of being raped. It is a danger that all women face. you should probably back off of this one.

Many of you may know that I have been working with Sunlight Games to bring the original Gold Rush! to modern PCs. This work is now done and the game will be released shortly. It will be available as a digital download from Sunlight's store and Steam. There will also be a boxed copy that will be shipped worldwide.


 
 

For me, it's a bit hard to take argumentation seriously because we've only seen a fraction of the game. Probably a fraction of the third that's been completed, too. Of course, they're not gonna show off all the good stuff right now. Pope has written countless of times that Mark, especially, doesn't want to spoil anything major. Judging from that, we can probably conclude that anything released prior to the game that is Mark Crowe-approved will be fairly innocuous.
 
I think you're acting like you instantly know how the entire game is going to be just by looking at backgrounds (without characters and, presumably, objects you can interact with) and critiquing an early build which didn't even contain the complete script for the section it showcased. It comes off as more than a bit arrogant. The guy who was pretty much forced to take over as lead programmer on the game (pcj) has stated, like, two or three times that you're only really stirring the pot here. That your fears are unfounded. I don't know what else you want. A piece of paper going "SpaceVenture will NOT be what you fear!" signed by the entire team? 
 
In that light, it becomes more than a little bit annoying to read "Yes, but here's a[n] [hyperbolic adjective] worry of mine that would [hyperbolic verb] the entire game for me!" And to me, it honestly doesn't seem like you're interested in a discussion that goes beyond "Well, yes, Fronzel, you could very well be right". I am trying to reply in a serious fashion, you know. Not just put down your arguments for the fuck of it. You could be right, but in my view, chances are you're not.
 
Ultimately, I suppose it's a "glass half-full, glass half-empty"-type thing. I just choose to be optimistic. Fair enough that some people have become pessimistic due to the delays and their reactions towards the material they've seen, but just remember that:
 
1) It's a crowdfunded game, so it's literally based on goodwill.
 
2) It was pitched as the Guys from Andromeda doing their thing in 2014. Not as Guys from Andromeda pulling a Tim Schafer, Guys from Andromeda looking over the shoulders of Telltale or the AAA companies, or Guys from Andromeda asking the community for advice when every design decision has to be made.
 
Even if it's been 2+ years, I personally pledged to give them a chance. Till they either give up or release the game, that's still my goal. And yes, dammit, I will be popping in here regularly to dish out a bit of vitriol to ensure that people do not forget the two points above.

Space Venture looks Space Quest-y as fuck!! They know what the hell they're doing; it's funny how everyone's turned into armchair game-designers over the years.  I mean, I thought my armchair quarterback Uncle was bad, shouting at the players on the television when they mangle their latest sports games, but people these days in the video gaming world have taken it to an art form.
 
They know what they're doing; Space Venture looks cool as hell to me.  I know, since it's not out, all people can do is speculate - but it's going to be funny to look back on times like these when it's done and out, isn't it?
 
On my end, I think things are looking good - and if they're finishing in 9 months, that is awesome.  It can happen, really - sometimes you have all the stuff; it's just putting it together in the engine. And the development of the "stuff" takes longer than the programming in the engine, generally.
 
 
Bt

Hush! Don't silence the debate!  ;) I can be an asshole if it's just a good-natured jab, right?
 
Seriously, kudos for doing your research. And, unintentionally, proving why everyone really ought to take a deep breath, count to ten and just trust the Two Guys basically because they're the Two Guys.

Hence why developers can be reluctant to release too much their early work to the public.

Hence why developers can be reluctant to release too much their early work to the public.

No, I don't think ST always has to be deep. The Trouble with Tribbles is certainly not that thought provoking, but was was still driven by the narrative and very entertaining. Not all stories have to be dramatic or serious, but still the narrative is part of what made Trek so enduring. As to Abrams, I don't dismiss him because he is a newbie, but he is still a clueless git when it comes to understanding what made it work. Let him go ruin some other franchise. Let's see how he makes Star Wars "more exciting."