Adventure Forums - View Single Post

Sky Warrior Bob · 04-22-2004, 01:08 AM

I liked Lucasarts better, for a number of reasons...

1: Lucasarts had a better understanding of computer mechanics than Sierra ever did. Sierra started out w/ a few text adventures, and then used a program made by IBM to make their early adventure games. They later had better engines built for them, but it was nothing like Lucasarts, which upgraded its Scumm engine w/ each game.

2: Sierra had too much of a cookie cutter aspect. The games, from the earlier engines all looked practically the same, and had the same sense of humor. Later on, Sierra much improved, and did a fine job at making the games seem far more dissimilar from one another.

3: To many Quest games. Frankly, I wish Sierra would've tried to have been a bit more creative with its series titles.

Sky Warrior Bob

04-22-2004, 01:08 AM	#19
Sky Warrior Bob 8-Bit Spritemaster™ Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: South Hero, VT: USA Posts: 387	I liked Lucasarts better, for a number of reasons... 1: Lucasarts had a better understanding of computer mechanics than Sierra ever did. Sierra started out w/ a few text adventures, and then used a program made by IBM to make their early adventure games. They later had better engines built for them, but it was nothing like Lucasarts, which upgraded its Scumm engine w/ each game. 2: Sierra had too much of a cookie cutter aspect. The games, from the earlier engines all looked practically the same, and had the same sense of humor. Later on, Sierra much improved, and did a fine job at making the games seem far more dissimilar from one another. 3: To many Quest games. Frankly, I wish Sierra would've tried to have been a bit more creative with its series titles. Sky Warrior Bob __________________ Because breakdancing is evil, and so is the Black Mage, you will click on this link: The power of evil compels you...