LucasArts adventures were great because unlike Sierra games you couldn't die/lose. So you were never paranoid about doing the wrong thing.
I couldn't get on with the Sierra games because of that ridiculous insta-death culture, you could be killed merely by moving East or walking through a doorway. The only Sierra game I ever managed to stay with all the way through was the original 'Gabriel Knight' which did have a great atmosphere. But still with the stupid, irrational deaths.
There is actually one point in Monkey Island 1 where you can die but it takes 10 minutes, during which you have plenty of time to think your way out of it. If you do still somehow die, they even managed to make that hilarious.
Like Plasma above, I greatly prefer the original pixel art games to, say, the kind of early object modelling which was used for MI3 or Alone In The Dark, or 'Cruise for a Corpse' for example. I think Pixel art is a real, and almost lost art form nowadays. Some of the pixel art and animations in MI1 and MI2 are amazing for the time.
One of my other favourites at the time was 'Indiana Jones And The Fate Of Atlantis'. Iike MI1 and MI2, that (And Day Of The Tentacle) was made when the Scumm Interface had reached its absolute zenith. Later LucasArts games took to either simplifying the UI (Full Throttle, with a dumbed-down UI ideal for players who were unable to form sentences) or hiding it away out of sight (The Dig), which wasn't particularly sensible because you needed it to play the game.
I know it's at least true for Monkey Island, Day of the Tentacle, The DIG, and Full Throttle since I played through those. Maybe the early ones were different, or just had bugs? IDK.Is that true? I seem to remember playing Zak and missing something somewhere that prevented me from winning the game. Same with Maniac Mansion. I'm pretty sure in MM you could end up with everyone trapped in the basement if I'm not mistaken.
Actually there was a way to get out of the dungeon if you got trapped in there, though you needed two kids to do it (one to push the loose brick, the other to get out). But I am not sure there was a no-win situation, rather multiple endings and a bit at the end where you had to be quick (or you'd "die" when the house blew up, though it just put you back at the start of the countdown if you did this).Is that true? I seem to remember playing Zak and missing something somewhere that prevented me from winning the game. Same with Maniac Mansion. I'm pretty sure in MM you could end up with everyone trapped in the basement if I'm not mistaken.
Yes, and I fully agree with what he said. I tried hard playing the Sierra adventures back then, but you could "just" die and it killed my motivation to keep playing quickly.Is that true? I seem to remember playing Zak and missing something somewhere that prevented me from winning the game. Same with Maniac Mansion. I'm pretty sure in MM you could end up with everyone trapped in the basement if I'm not mistaken.
I loved space quest series, especially the time rippers... But that damn dripping acid was a pain. And flying in the middle of the mall... And the fun of Radio Shock...
Tell me about it, I remember playing Leisure Suit Larry III on my old Compaq Deskpro 386 (one of the early ones), which had the OEM Compaq DSM Monochrome monitor on it from the EGA card - oh my god, how I got through that thing was a miracle.Another great hate of mine was non-linear mazes in adventure games (whether text or graphic), where moving east from location A to B and then back west from location B wouldn't necessarily return you to location A, but bizarrely to new location 'C' instead, so you'd be forced to drop an object in nearly every maze location in order to map the maze. Encountering a maze like that in an otherwise good game was sometimes enough to end my interest in playing the game any further, as I found them such a chore.