Exactly. One can make as many Tetris clones as one wants, but you cannot use the word 'tris' in any part of the title, or game. It's the name that is being infringed upon. If they called it 'Prince's Task' and changed all the names (I dunno if the look of the character is copyrighted) it should be legal, but they don't.

They're using trademarked names (King's Quest), they're using protected characters (Graham,...) and so on and so on. It's illegal and there's no way to deny it. What does that have to do with Abandonware? Can't you distinguish between stating facts and giving opinions?

It's not okay, but it's legal.

Mr Creosote: IMO, if it was a direct copy, it would be illegal. But, they're not. The plotline is different. Besides, if we're going to get into all these copyright issues, you shouldn't be hosting an abandonware site Also, I'd be pointing at ALL of those stinkin' Mario freeware games if we're going to be talking about stealing copyrights.

Goat: With my statement about remakes on the same system vs. remakes on the same platform, I wasn't talking about legality, but about common sense - pointing out that helping more people to play a game is useful, but providing the same people who can run it anyway with 'another version' is not. The legality is obvious: it is illegal, because they're using trademarked names and characters at the very least.

Just slimming down your quote:



In other words, "stealing is fine". The author of your quote still admits that taking graphics or plot is stealing. Since when is stealing okay?

Actually, these are legal. I had this question when I was going to review a Super Mario World remake, and I asked where the boundary was between warez and remakes:

Also, it should be duly noted that these are not the exact same games. They reworked part of the plot, and did some other stuff. Also, earlier was a comment that was something like "if it was on another system and ported to the computer, it would be ok". That's not true. They could easily make a rom, and then compile it so that it looks as if it was their own. Also, that famous "Prince of Persia 4D" is illegal.

Goat: If the "remake of King's Quest 2" is indeed different from the original game in plot, I don't even understand why they call it "King's Quest 2".

NetDanzr:That is indeed a valid point - Sierra's graphics have always been some of the worst I've ever seen!
That's not a point in favour of a remake, but one against it: the story and puzzles of King's Quest already exist in the original games (and they're of the worst quality ever), so why dig up this trash again and put it into a new package?

Of course those remakes are not legal, but Sierra is pretty good at tollerating it. I see nothing wrong with them, mainly for two reasons.

1. In games that use text parser interface, you should be able to recognize the items on the screen. Early Sierra adventure games are so blocky that often you can't recognize and name various items, and you get stuck. I still remember one really bad case of a device in the rainforrest in Space Quest II.

2. Adventure games get great or fail miserably because of the story and puzzles. Graphics and sound are not that important, which is why there's nothing wrong with making a remake.

There's one thing that bothers me, though. Microsoft is in talks with Vivendi, and may buy the Vivendi entertainment software division. I'm wondering whether they will tollerate these remake projects as well.

Well, you could try reading the review, that explains some of the common 'irritations' with this game. I'm the first to admit that I used to love King's Quest II when I first played it; nowadays I'm not so sure anymore: I hated every other part of the series anyway (except for King's Quest VI, the only other game in the series that I actually finished), and don't know if I'd still enjoy a game of King's Quest...

I'll find out after my exams, when I'll have the time to rediscover my 'Roberta Williams Anthology'. There's at least one adventure on there that I know I'll still love: Laura Bow: Colonel's Bequest! A good old murder mistery, and at the same time highly replayable... great game.

I've played these (they're on Game Hippo). The first one seemed like just a spice-up, but the second had some plot twists that the first didn't. And why don't you like the KQ games?

Yes, they 'remade' the first part of King's Quest and this remake is the version I reviewed. Nothing happened to KQ2 as far as I know.

Didn't Sierra release enhanced versions of all their old games a while ago anyway, inc;uded in these KQ1 & 2 so whats worse why remake games that allready have remakes

"Tierra Entertainment"? Is that supposed to be legal? I would love to see them sued and brought to the electric chair, where they belong

Why "remake" games (even supposing they're good) which run on the same platform anyway? I can understand and appreciate projects like ScummVM, because it helps getting the original games to run on more machines than they were meant for. But why the fuss for games which are running on the same machine which the remake is for? That's incredibly silly, a huge waste of time! Use your own imagination any make something original instead...

Edited by Mr Creosote at 14:03 on January, 25th 2003

A group of people decided that since King's Quest 1 and 2 are SO great, they have remade them. I'd like to see people's creative energy go to something better, but...

http://www.tierraentertainment.com/