Path: utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!ucselx!crash!pnet01!steves
From: steves@pnet01.cts.com (Stephen Scheck)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.games
Subject: Re: Sierra Games
Message-ID: <7608@crash.cts.com>
Date: 17 Feb 91 18:16:01 GMT
Sender: root@crash.cts.com
Organization: People-Net [pnet01], El Cajon CA
Lines: 37

specter@disk.uucp (Byron Max Guernsey) writes:
>
>I doubt that someone who buys games just for the graphics could solve one.
>I wanted a serious reply. The graphics suck on zork too, but it stills sells.
>:) Geez and how graphic is the card game poker? People play them for fun, not
>just graphics. If I wanted graphics I would go buy SOB II. 
>
>My vote for the game with the best graphics goes to Beyond Zork. There are NO
>better graphics than what your imagination can create. Sierra Games just
>add the "graphic" interface to give it a 3-dimensional feel and add more to
>game play. 
>
>But for those that still damand graphics, Sierra ahas made Kings Quest V and
>is working on Space Quest IV. They already screwed up big time by taking
>out the command interface and replacing it with icons. 
>
>Maybe SQ III will be better. I hear it will have scrolling. UGH. I like the
>old simple format better. Give me a game that takes little space on my HD,
>alot of space in my imagination, and alot of intelligence to solve and I'll
>give you a best seller. :)
>
>Byron 'Maxwell' Guernsey

Actually, I agree with you. I'd rather have a playable game than one with
great graphics but lame playability. I was just taking a cheap shot at Sierra
for using ugly dither patterns when they could have used more colors. I havn't
played Sierra games, but I have seen them being played, and the graphics and
slow animation were pathetic.

My complaint is that they give us direct IBM ports and don't spend a little
extra time to support the Amiga's capabilities (like blitter).

Steve

UUCP: {hplabs!hp-sdd ucsd nosc}!crash!pnet01!steves
ARPA: crash!pnet01!steves@nosc.mil
INET: steves@pnet01.cts.com