Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Why has the reputation/legacy of LucasArts fared better than Sierra?

Joined
Jul 4, 2015
Messages
917
As far as I understand, back in the day, when the two companies actually existed and were in direct companies, Sierra's games outsold LucasArt by a good margin. Now, today, Sierra's legacy seems to be of a subpar adventure game company that put out some okay games and its fanbase is confined to a small niche, while LucasArts' fanbase seems to have only grown with time and nostalgia for the games only increased.

Perhaps I am reading the tea leaves wrong, but that is the way it seems. It seems like Sierra has sort of faded away and only really is remembered by hardcore gamers, people over a certain age, or adventure game diehards (and even then, has a split legacy) whereas LucasArts nowadays seems to have become what people most associate with adventure gaming.

The question is, why and when did this happen? And why is Sierra so forgotten compared to LucasArts when both companies pretty much died out as adventure game developers around the same time?
 

Roguey

Codex Staff
Staff Member
Sawyerite
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
35,607
LA had the superior, timeless design philosophy

We believe that you buy games to be entertained, not to be whacked over the head every time you make a mistake. So we don't bring the game to a screeching halt when you poke your nose into a place you haven't visited before.

People put up with that Sierra crap because they had time to spare and nothing better to do.
 

Modron

Arcane
Joined
May 5, 2012
Messages
9,879
I could understand getting a bit fed up with the constant death in certain Space/King's/Police Quest games but if you can't appreciate the Quest for Glories, the first Castle of Dr. Brain, and Conquest of the Longbow I don't think you can really say you enjoy adventure games. LucasArts is probably better remembered because they still have business interests periodically fanning the flames with remakes/remasters and associated publicity efforts. Yeah, yeah I know they tried to reboot king's quest but that was an abomination.
 
Last edited:

Mustawd

Guest
The question is, why and when did this happen? And why is Sierra so forgotten compared to LucasArts when both companies pretty much died out as adventure game developers around the same time?

You're far too Adventure Game-centric in this question. LucasArts was much more than just its adventure games. LucasArts also made other game products outside the genre. Sierra did as well, but not with the cache of the LucasArts franchises. The biggest being Indiana Jones and Star Wars.
 

DeepOcean

Arcane
Joined
Nov 8, 2012
Messages
7,393
As far as I understand, back in the day, when the two companies actually existed and were in direct companies, Sierra's games outsold LucasArt by a good margin. Now, today, Sierra's legacy seems to be of a subpar adventure game company that put out some okay games and its fanbase is confined to a small niche, while LucasArts' fanbase seems to have only grown with time and nostalgia for the games only increased.

Perhaps I am reading the tea leaves wrong, but that is the way it seems. It seems like Sierra has sort of faded away and only really is remembered by hardcore gamers, people over a certain age, or adventure game diehards (and even then, has a split legacy) whereas LucasArts nowadays seems to have become what people most associate with adventure gaming.

The question is, why and when did this happen? And why is Sierra so forgotten compared to LucasArts when both companies pretty much died out as adventure game developers around the same time?
Ron Gilbert, Tim Schaefer and Lucas Arts survived alot longer than anyone at Sierra that mostly failed at landing new projects after Sierra died and because "CURRENT YEAR" is the only mentality of gaming journos, nobody made articles about it. Fallout was an obscure franchise that most gaming journos didn't know it even existed but it was only Bethesda making Fallout 3 and all of sudden so many journos became hardcore fans of it declaring their undying love of Fallout 1.

Sierra disappeared from view while Lucas Arts remained more because it was involved with strong brands like Indiana Jones and Star Wars.
 

Unkillable Cat

LEST WE FORGET
Patron
Joined
May 13, 2009
Messages
27,049
Codex 2014 Make the Codex Great Again! Grab the Codex by the pussy
This shit again.

cdc.jpg


EDIT: The tl;dr version: Sierra built their legacy in the 1980s, when gaming was not as widespread as it was in the 1990, when LucasArts built their legacy.

Sierra games appealed to gamers during an era when technological limitations were part and parcel of computers, LucasArts games appealed to a lower denominator when the number of gamers had increased a thousandfold and the entry level into computers had been lowered significantly.

Other factors play into this, of course, but that's the big one.
 

HoboForEternity

sunset tequila
Patron
Joined
Mar 27, 2016
Messages
9,151
Location
Disco Elysium
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
And the technical limitation might be one of the reason why they were designed to be so obtuse and frustrating. It was to artificially prolong gameplay time, and back then games were rare so in a span of several months you might play the same game over and over.

The design is admittedly frustrating and in today's standard it is almost objectively a bad design.
 

Blackthorne

Infamous Quests
Patron
Developer
Joined
Jun 8, 2012
Messages
981
Location
Syracuse NY
Codex 2014 Divinity: Original Sin 2
I used to ponder such questions, but I came to the conclusion as thus: "Who gives a fuck?" or rather "Why should I give a fuck?" Sierra is a dead, dead company, it's never coming back in any shape or form that resembled its prime. Lucasarts was always tied to LucasFilm, which is an ungodly well-spring of money and valuable intellectual properties. Their games were lots of fun, and they're easily playable by any old bitch that picks up a mouse these days. Doesn't change Sierra's legacy, or the good games they made. Some things have their time, they fade out and only a few people remember and like them. That's life. Not everything gets to ride the golden carousel forever. If you ask me, shit lasts way too long these days. I mean, fuck, the first X-Men film came out in 2000, and we just got Logan? 18 fucking years of X-Men films? I remember when shit had its time and the world moved on. We hold onto shit way too much these days. And this is coming from someone who makes games through a nostalgia lens.


Bt
 

Starwars

Arcane
Joined
Jan 31, 2007
Messages
2,829
Location
Sweden
I used to ponder such questions, but I came to the conclusion as thus: "Who gives a fuck?" or rather "Why should I give a fuck?" Sierra is a dead, dead company, it's never coming back in any shape or form that resembled its prime. Lucasarts was always tied to LucasFilm, which is an ungodly well-spring of money and valuable intellectual properties. Their games were lots of fun, and they're easily playable by any old bitch that picks up a mouse these days. Doesn't change Sierra's legacy, or the good games they made. Some things have their time, they fade out and only a few people remember and like them. That's life. Not everything gets to ride the golden carousel forever. If you ask me, shit lasts way too long these days. I mean, fuck, the first X-Men film came out in 2000, and we just got Logan? 18 fucking years of X-Men films? I remember when shit had its time and the world moved on. We hold onto shit way too much these days. And this is coming from someone who makes games through a nostalgia lens.


Bt

Best post I've read in a while, 10/10, would read again.
 
Joined
Jan 7, 2017
Messages
1,370
The main things that I remember on which Lucasarts had an advantage over Sierra back in the 80s and 90s were the access to Lucasfilm brands, the music, and that they were less prone to nonsensical puzzles, of which there were many in Sierra.

I hated Space Quest IV at so many points before I beat it...
 

Aeschylus

Swindler
Patron
Joined
Mar 13, 2012
Messages
2,538
Location
Phleebhut
Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Wasteland 2 Divinity: Original Sin 2
Feels like this is the 5th thread about this already :|. The correct answer remains the same: who cares? Both are good, both are different, enjoy them both for what they are and revel in the richness of adventure gaming history.
 

Roguey

Codex Staff
Staff Member
Sawyerite
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
35,607
Have Sierra games aged worse than LucasArts?

I'm a big Sierra fan, I have never particularly cared for LucasArt's games to be honest. But lately on the web I've noticed a sort of, in the...

Thread by: Korgoth of Barbaria, Nov 15, 2015, 97 replies, in forum: Adventure Gaming

Is LucasArts better remembered (by the public) than Sierra?

...adventure game community at large, obviously remembers and loves Sierra's games. I'm talking about your casual gamer who is between say 25 and...

Thread by: Korgoth of Barbaria, Sep 26, 2016, 21 replies, in forum: Adventure Gaming

Why has the reputation/legacy of LucasArts fared better than Sierra?

...the two companies actually existed and were in direct companies, Sierra's games outsold LucasArt by a good margin. Now, today, Sierra's legacy...

Thread by: Korgoth of Barbaria, Saturday at 2:56 PM, 18 replies, in forum: Adventure Gaming

Is this some sort of annual tradition or does Korgoth have memory problems?
 

bddevil

Educated
Joined
Apr 4, 2016
Messages
71
for the mainstream, LA adventures were more polished and more idiot-proof (ie, no dead ends/game overs) and usually with bigger budgets. they also either were funny or had a big-name license attached to the name.

the 'modern' gamer will tell you that sierra adventures are way more 'dated'.
 
Joined
Jul 4, 2015
Messages
917
I've always thought the early LA interface (prior to Full Throttle) was really annoying compared to Sierra's icon bar, and I honestly find it much more dated.
 

CreamyBlood

Arcane
Joined
Feb 10, 2005
Messages
1,392
We need a mega-merged Korgoth of Sierria thread.

And back when I was playing them, it was just Adventure Games, I wasn't differentiating between companies. To me that would have been like buying a Black Sabbath or a Judas Priest album and bothering to look at the label to see which company was pressing the vinyl.
 

Tramboi

Prophet
Patron
Joined
May 4, 2009
Messages
1,226
Location
Paris by night
So who's defending walking down from Manannan's house and falling for instance ? (Or other stairs examples).
I really fail to see what has been lost in adventure games by removing this kind of stuff.
Same for dead-ends.
 
Last edited:

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom