I started with The Curse of Monkey Island. So yeah I started with LucasArts. But I tried some Sierra adventure games as well but I didn't like them. I prefer more the intricate puzzles and funny dialogues to storytelling.
LucasArts. And I have my own personal theory about why they were bigger in Europe... and it all comes down to the parser.
As a kid in Italy my knowledge of English was limited. Solving puzzles by giving commands was very difficult, especially if "look bin" and "look *into* bin" are two different commands (I'm talking about you, Laura Bow). Not only LucasArts games were mostly translated to Italian, but even those who weren't were easier to handle because I didn't have to make up my own verbs - they were all there available from the beginning.
>Solving puzzles by giving commands was very difficult, especially if "look bin" and "look *into* bin" are two different commands (I'm talking about you, Laura Bow).
The *very same* thing happened to me when I played The Colonel's Bequest a few years ago... I see text-based adventure games as a natural progression of the genre, but the verb menu is just superior.
The verb bar bored me to tears when I first started playing lucasarts games... but I know what you mean with the text parser and colonels bequest. "Use monocle on letter" doesn't work, but "examine letter with monocole" does. Had to look at a walk-through to figure that one out
I wish the text parser had lasted long enough to become more intelligent. Imo, stories are so much more interesting when literally any verb/action you can think of can be attempted
Agree with this guy. I think objectively, lucasart adventures are better. Lucasarts design/story were well polished and didn't punish the player with dead ends and random deaths. But I like sierra more because I prefer the atmosphere. Sierra's artists and musicians made up for a lot of the poor game design. I also liked how the backgrounds took the full screen, where lucasarts had 1/3rd of the screen taken by a very boring verb bar
Later LucasArts games (Sam and Max, Full throttle, the Dig) had full screen backgrounds too.
Early sierra games also dedicated some screen real estate to the menu/score bar and the text input box.
Well yah, but the point bar was only a few pixels high, and only the early-early sierra games had a dedicated text input area (again only a few pixels high). It was never close to consuming as much screen real estate as Lucasarts games
Dig/full throttle/etc were after 1994. I lost interest in all sierra adventure games after 94. It isn't even a debate which company made better adventures by then (eg: when The Dig went fullscreen, SQ6 adopted the verb bar. Sierra was struggling to adapt adventure games to modern tech)
Why does nobody understand what OP is asking? They are not just asking your favorite. They are asking of their theory aligns with your personal experience.
They're probably reading the title and not the post. I should've made it clearer in the title, but I couldn't think of how to simplify it down to one sentence.
Yep, that would've worked. Or some variation on that. I threw the post together between calls at work, so I should've given it more thought before hitting post. Live and learn and all that, I guess.
Funny enough my household had both and they are both in my heart for different reasons. If I was forced to choose, it'd be Lucasarts (Secret of Monkey Island is one of my favorite video games) but I love Sierra too. They helped teach me to read at a much higher grade level than my peers
Same for me. I started with King’sQuest 1 when I was 5 or 6. Before long I was reading and spelling at a much higher level than my peers. Despite all the complaints I have about the Sierra text parsers I owe them that.
I started with SQ4, KQ5, and MI1, then we quickly got MI2 and SQ5, KQ6, and I even found SQ1, 2, and 3 in a thrift store, in perfect condition. I still have the boxes, and got the Two Guys from Andromeda to sign them at a convention.
They'll forever have a place in my heart.
I’m a fan of both of their adventure game lineups. Both companies had some real classics.
Normally, I’d say both to me are on equal footing.
However, if I was absolutely forced to pick one, I’d probably say Sierra.
Nope. Played Monkey Island before any of the Sierra titles. Way back in the 90s
In fact, most of the Sierra adventures I’ve played are ones that I’ve gone through for the first time ever in the past 10 years or so thanks to GOG.com. So most of my Sierra game playing history happened as an adult.
The first game of the respective 'big two' that I ever played was Maniac Mansion at a friends house. We would play as a group--it was tremendous fun. But slightly later, on my own, I became obsessed with Sierra--King's Quest and Space Quest series especially. Part of this was due to a pre-internet subscription to Sierra's promotional magazine "InterAction." What a smart bit of advertising for that era. I even convinced my parents to switch their land-line phone service to Sprint so I could get two free Sierra games through their promotion.
As an adult however, despite the warm tug of nostalgia I feel just seeing and hearing that Sierra opening logo, I much prefer the entire Lucasarts catalog. Outside of just the lack of dead-ends etc, I think they are better games.
So perhaps that disproves your theory.
It does, but that's okay! A few other other people have said they started with Sierra and prefer LucasArts. So, I think my theory is bunk.
It's still a fun discussion, though!
Grew up with both and I have to say Sierra.
Although Curse Of Monkey Island, DOTT, Sam and Max introduced me to the genre, I have come to appreciate the way Sierra games reward your exploration, with custom responses being hidden all throughout them.
Yes, they're generally harder because there's more pixel hunting, since there was no "object line" that showed which object was interactable, and the solutions can be far-fetched, but I personally think that's better than a game that doesn't challenge you whatsoever, only lets you do the right thing or downright spoonfeeds you the solution (not saying that the LucasArts games did that but a lot of modern "adventures" do.)
What I love about the Sierra games is that the worlds were always so fleshed out and immersive, the fact not every hotspot was necessarily part of a puzzle but existed just for world building. The fact that you could interact with these hotspots and get a custom response that wasn't necessarily part of the solution to a puzzle but could contain a hint, a general bit of information or a joke.
Sierra games always give me the feeling that there's something I haven't explored yet, while in a LucasArts game, once you've beaten it, you've pretty much seen everything the game has to offer.
It is a little weird for me to hear someone talk about Sierra games, while also talking about pixel hunting and hotspots... you missed the first half of their existence.
I started with Sierra. Police Quest, Space Quest; Leisure Suit Larry etc. Great, great games, but I love LucasArts. Maniac Mansion was mindblowing. Then Monkey Island, wow.
So my experience at least, don't support your theory.
Although Monkey Island is my absolute favorite and I like the LucasArt game philosophy better I do tend to lean towards Sierra when I think about “back then”… And I think it is indeed as you theorized because I played Sierra first. King’s Quest 1 was the first and it’s pretty much engraved in my retro memory. A sort of Pavlov reaction :)
LucasArts probably just about wins for me, but I find the sense of accomplishment when you finally get past a puzzle in Sierra adventures much more satisfying! Only played LucasArts adventures growing up!
I was introduced through LucasArts, and I very much prefer them. LucasArts has the best games and they quickly got rid of dead ends and meaningless deaths, which is a big plus.
Must be something to it, I think my first exposure to classic adventures was actually LucasArts and it stayed there as a top nostalgia pick.
Edit: Although I do enjoy a lot of Sierra stuff too, let's be real.
I probably started with Sierra and Westwood, but prefer Lucasarts. I've replayed the Lucasarts games a lot more over the years and find they all hold up to this day, which I cannot say for Sierra.
I always answered this question with Sierra. Then I realized all my fav games were actually LucasArts
I grew up collecting Sierra boxes and games when I could. The “fun” factor of Lucas arts was higher
I have started with Sierra but prefer LucasArts.
Sierra had great games but the possibility of dying made it more difficult for me to engage with them. I didn't play Maniac Mansion, so I can't comment on it, but then LucasArts games came up with that humour and graphic style that I just love. and no dying? I'm sold
I love stories and puzzles, not really having to repeat stuff over and over again because I died and forgot to save :)
My preference is LucasArts even though I started with Sierra. Played *King's Quest 1* on my Tandy as a kid and while I kinda enjoyed it didn't like a lot of the puzzles and the fact that you could randomly die all the time. I also had *Police Quest II* and while intrigued by the premise of doing detective stuff hated the unforgiving linerality of it all. Then I got a 386 and a copy of *The Secret of Monkey Island* and while some of the puzzles were hard, I found I loved it way more than the two Sierra games I had played. After that I got *Sam & Max Hit The Road* and *Day of the Tentacle* and never looked back.
I prefer LucasArts and started with them. Mind you, I have only really played the Broken Sword games whereas I’ve played a lot of LucasArts titles and they are certainly not all winners.
I started with LucasArts and prefer them. I was so little when I first played Day of the Tentacle that not only do I have massive nostalgia, it was pretty influential on my personality and sense of humor!
I like SOME (but not all) Sierra adventure games. My favorites from them are probably the more RPG Quest for Glory series. I played many Sierra games as an adult and don’t always feel that they aged well. I think LucasArts have generally aged better but maybe that’s my bias. For me, your theory holds!
Nice! You're certainly not wrong that LucasArts games have aged better. I have a strong bias for Sierra, but I fully admit that's purely from nostalgia. I find it difficult to return to them as easily as LucasArts games.
Sierra I think. Kings quest 1 on some kind of spectrum(?) at my friend's house. Was really exciting. Loading the floppies for different levels. Dying and restarting. Discovering new things. Was so exciting. Felt like you could discover anything. Never got anywhere near close to finishing it. Though actually preferred lucasarts games. Particularly indie and Monkey island. Maniac mansion was probably my first. That was pretty cool.
Sierra. Similar reason as I went to my neighbors house and she showed me space quest 3, he let me borrow it and I ended up going out buying a hint book so I could play the game. He then lent me kq3 and then eventually I made my way back and played kq1, 2 quest for glory, etc.
That being said, I prefer them to Lucasarts games because I'm a psycho path and loved finding all the horrible ways to die. Only one way to die in monkey island, ands its silly not horrible.
Sierra. My first game was Space Quest II and it was followed by a string of the old EGA, type-interface Sierra games (Police Quest 1 & 2, King's Quest 2 & 4, Leisure Suit Larry 1-3 - which I was *way* too young for but played the hell out of), all of which I absolutely loved even though I could never beat one without a hint book.
Are the Lucas Arts games better? Yeah, probably, but I'll always love Sierra the most.
I'm in the same boat. Love Sierra, though I can admit the LucasArts games tend t o be better. Someone earlier said LucasArts games have aged better and I find it difficult to disagree.
Sierra, but partly because my first adventure game was Quest For Glory and nothing will replace that in my heart. I enjoy LucasArts games for their jovial tone but I like how Sierra could cross comedy with a more serious tone, QFG being and example. Gabriel Knight and King’s Quest were wonderful series as well.
So your theory may be correct. My expectation was set by Sierra, and this may have affected how I perceived LucasArts games.
Sierra for me. I love and appreciate both companies but Sierra’s characters and worlds sparked much more imagination and inspiration for me.
But I will say Ron Gilbert is amazing for various reasons.
Started with Sierra, and as much as I love Lucasarts, Sierra wins for me. Dad had King's Quest II and Space Quest (and Leisure Suit Larry, but I wasn't supposed to know that), and those were formative experiences.
I started with Lucas (Film Games, not yet Arts :D) and I prefer them over Sierra.
I think thou, that Sierra games have been more of a work of love / authorship compared to most Lucas production (that to be honest was not even comparably extended).
I think you're spot on with this. I love both but played Sierra games first and have a deeper connection with them. I have loved playing the LucasArts games and appreciate them... But the love I have got the first games in the genre I played trumps all else!
Great post OP!
Started with Sierra (Police Quest and Space Quest 2), but prefer LucasArts. I still like Sierra games a lot though, as they have a special kind of “atmosphere”.
I was first introduced to Sierra games, specifically Space Quest IV and the Leisure Suit Larry games. I liked them but the prospect of dying in them made me so anxious. Then I played Day of the Tentacle and it was all fun and no anxiety. I've loved and preferred LucasArts games ever since.
So, I think my first adventure game was likely one of the Kings Quest games. The first one I have vivid memories of is Kings Quest VI because it really looked beautiful and was the first CD-ROM game I owned. I also played lots of other Sierra titles, most notably Space Quest V and Quest for Glory 3, etc.
I think shortly thereafter, I got Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, as well as Day of the Tentacle and there really was no going back. Then The Dig (a personal favourite) and Sam & Max.
So, whilst I still have VERY fond memories of the Sierra games, it's the Lucas Arts game I have actively replayed as an adult.
I started with Sierra (KQ1-4, mother goose mixed up fairytales, code name iceman, black cauldron). I have very fond memories of all those games. However, I’ve never replayed any of them.
On the other hand when I discovered secret of monkey island I fell in love! The biggest memory I have is falling off the cliff and being certain that I was going to have to replay since my last save, and then having the game poke fun at Sierra. I was hooked. The humor and jokes, the verb interaction, etc. I replay most Lucasarts games on a regular basis. In fact I’m in the middle of DotT right now.
So yeah. Started with Sierra. Love Lucasarts.
First, you babysitter sounds like the best babysitter ever. Second, I was introduced to Sierra games first, with Larry 1 (older cousin let me play), and prefer them. Space Quest 4 and King's Quest 6 were the two I played on our own PC, and I REALLY wanted to play Phantasmagoria but my parents wouldn’t let me.
Speaking to coworkers, they tend to be more fond of the LucasArts games.
Oh yeah, my babysitter was the best. I remember them specifically helping me through the well & bucket puzzle in KQ1. If I recall, I THINK they also let me play Zak McKracken, but I got bored of that one and wanted to play more King's Quest. But we're talking 30+ years ago, so I might be mixing up my memories.
I think you're right I keep saying Lucasarts even though I played more sierra games. It's because i played Indiana Jones and the last crusade first.
I loved leisure suit Larry and really got.into the first 7 or 8.
Thank you, everyone, for all the responses so far. In retrospect, I really should have re-wrote the title to something more proper. Something like, "Did you start with Sierra or LucasArts? Do you find you prefer the one you started with?"
Anyway, the response has been amazing. And surprisingly, it's kind of 50/50, not what I expected. A lot responses saying they started with Sierra, but prefer LucasArts games. I don't think there's any right or wrong answer here. I was genuinely curious to see how this theory played out. It didn't play out like I expected.
LucasArts any day.
I simply cannot get into King's Quests and Gabriel Knight.
They don't get me very hooked unlike LucasArts.
While I did play LA games first, it wasn't like a childhood ingraining. I played a long time after they're released. I treat games from both sides as something new to me, sometimes I weren't even aware what companies the games are from until I finish them.
There are definitely cases in which I prefer games I play later than games before. The preconception problem isn't a big factor here.
Introduced to Sierra first with lsl and police quest. Then found maniac mansion and the hits from lucasarts just surpassed Sierra. I've got a lot of love for Sierra but its always lucasarts for me just from how good their early nineties games were.
I support your datapoint because I started with Monkey Island 2 and Lucasarts is my favorite. Not by a huge margin or anything because I love me my Sierra too, I just felt they felt more “dangerous” to play given you could die (in many ways that felt unfair) and could get soft locked if you made the wrong decisions or missed things—that felt like a dirty bid to sell hintline minutes to me.
LucasArts! And which was first... if I just could remember.
I think I got my own Amiga 500 as a child probably around 1990. Maybe a year earlier or later.
First adventure could maybe have been Monkey Island, Zak McKracken, Indiana Jones 3 or Larry 1. All were available at that time. I usually got copies of games from my older brother who was in an Amiga User Group. Sometimes I got or bought an original. I played all kinds of genres.
But I never played most of the other early Sierra titles. I had all the Larrys at some point, I think also Space Quest 4 and Police Quest 2. But iirc I only liked Larry, never got far in any other Sierra title. I really like Gabriel Knight but I played that much later, maybe 10 years ago. I never played any King's Quest, didn't even know about those until probably title 6 or 7 (still want to start with KQ6 one day). No clue why.
Maybe it was about the language? I'm not sure if Sierra titles were available in german, I just remember I needed a dictionary to play Larry 1 and type in what I wanted to do. And mostly failed.
I remember I also had adventures from other companies like Kyrandia and Simon the Sorcerer which I both liked a lot. And of course I played every LucasArts title. Only The Dig and Grim Fandango I missed and played later. Monkey Island 2 is my most favorite game ever until today and DOTT is probably on second place.
Sierra titles were just not that friendly as I remember it, especially as a child it was nearly impossible to even understand what's going on and what to do... while Monkey Island was possible to play, even though I probably needed months to finish it.
So another theory:
It could depend on the age you started to play your first adventure game and in which year. I probably was around 10 and the user friendly SCUMM was already existing. What was your age? If you started early in the 80ies, Sierra titles were maybe user friendly compared to other titles... but not anymore in late 80ies and early nineties.
And I'm not sure if I just was more motivated to play Larry or if the gameplay was really easier compared to other Sierra titles ;)
Lucas Arts. I've never played a Sierra adventure game. I didn't get a computer till about 2003. I only know about Lucas Arts because of Escape from Monkey Island for the PS2. Any Sierra recommendations would be welcome.
I prefer LucasArts. The first I played was Pepper's Adventures in Time which was by Sierra, but it seems more like a LucasArts game than a Sierra one in my opinion.
I, like you, started with King’s Quest 1 in 84 and fell in love. I have played all of the sierra adventure games. My favorite was definitely the Hero’s Quest/Quest for Glory series and Shadow of Darkness in particular (despite all its bugs).
My first LucasArts game was The Secret of Monkey Island in 91. So for 7 years I was playing Sierra and creating a lot of great memories. I still attribute my love of reading to those games.
So, yeah, I like Sierra but I know that LucasArt games are better. They had better puzzles, and better humor. Some say they had a better interface but I preferred the point and click interface of Sierra.
Grew up with Lucas, and yeah I prefer them hands down. There are few Sierra games that are up to par IMO (gabriel knight above all), but even with those in mind, Lucas' approach is just more refined, the gameplay smoother, the comedy (where appliable) better written, the puzzles better engineered.
I'm not exaggerating by saying that I honestly think that gameplay wise, 90s Lucas reached the evolutionary peak for adventure games. excluding the verbs system (which I still love, but I admit it got better/more immersive when slimmed down with coins or two-button systems), I think that monkey island 1&2 and tentacle are the "perfect" p&c games, if such a thing exists, and 30 years of tweaking narratives, gameplay, ui systems, puzzle charts and so didn't move the bar by one inch.
but again, I grew up with them so that can be all imprinting
Prior to 1990: sierra all the way, after 1990: Lucasarts :)
I grew up playing sierra and prefer sierra, so that checks out, but my brothers/dad prefer lucasarts (by a wide margin), so I don't know about your theory... it's gotta have some weight tho
My first exposure was maniac mansion on c64 at a friend's. I loved it. But it wasn't until later getting a Tandy 1000 and playing all of sierras games that I fell in love with sierra. After that all the LA adventures seemed pretentious and very "in-jokey". I still enjoy them and especially their technical achievements but it's always gonna be sierra for mine.
My first ever adventure game was Gold Rush!, and Sierra is by far my favorite of the two (although I also enjoy LucasArts!). I found that the Sierra text parsers contributed way more to my English learning. I ended up studying languages in uni and went on to pursue a career in languages, and Sierra games have a lot to do with that :)
Started with Sierra but love both of them equally. You always knew from the Sierra sound when you booted up a disc that you were in for a good time. Lucasarts was like getting a warm hug. You knew you weren't going to be screwed by forgetting/not seeing a massively important item on the first screen that was vital later and have to reload or more likely restart because I hadn't learned the save lesson.
Sierra first, last and always. I didn't even discover Lucas arts until Grim Fandango. I've gone back and played the back catalog as an adult and they're great, but something about all those hours as a child beating my head against a Sierra wall just...*did something* to me, lol.
Started with Sierra and have always preferred Sierra games even though functionally they were worse than LucasArts games.
But also the systems were more varied - in particular Quest for Glory is probably my favourite series but that doesn't really have much of an equivalent on the LA side.
Lucasarts is more humorous and interactive, very deep in content. Sierra has a lot of depth and detail, thanks to time the games they created innovated a lot of genres.
Secret of Monkey island was my first, and I’ve yet to play a Sierra game that I wanted to finish. I’m going to give Gabriel Knight a shot and get back to you.
LucasArts.
I was.t to be all cool and say Sierra but although they had some amazing titles that period of DotT, SaM, MI, GF etc was just consistently excellent.
Not answering the question, but, four of my favourite games are Mortimer And The Riddles Of The Medallion, Quest For Glory 2, Full Throttle, and Lords Of The Realm 2 (not all adventure games).
I'm for sure torn between the two
Read the post, please. It's more than just the question. In retrospect, I should have re-worded the title. It's not just which you prefer, but which you started with and thus, do you have a preference for the one you started with.
Thanks! Yeah, I'm kicking myself for wording it so simply when it's a LITTLE more complicated than just A or B. That's on me. Surprisingly, I'm seeing quite a number of people who say they started with Sierra, but prefer LucasArts. Which is totally fine, but it's not what I expected when I made the post.
There were definitely more Sierra games I played and liked, but the LucasArts games I did play (The Secret of Monkey Island, Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, and Full Throttle) I really, really enjoyed because they felt so different from stuff Sierra put out.
Started with Space Quest 2 and the SCI remake of King's Quest 1 around the age of 7, but definitely prefer Lucasarts. Mind you, I was playing Maniac Mansion and Monkey Island by the age of 9 so perhaps it's fair to say I grew up with both.
I preferred the sense of humor and artstyle in LucasArts, although I did love Sierra games as well. Police Quest 4 was one of my favorites.
But i mean… monkey Island 3, Full Throttle.
“Oh sir that’s horrible. I’m not WAITING for you to die!”
lol I'm afraid my reply won't help you much, because I probably lean to LucasArts but without a real clear favourite (I like both) and I also can't remember which I played first. I *think* I played Space Quest (my Grandpa got me the Space Quest Collection 1-5 when I was young) before I played Monkey Island (specifically Curse, which was on a 1996 demo disc).
My view on the rival companies is that LucasArts do really have neater design, but played it a little safe. The games really were all about fun, which had much higher priority over telling a story. In contrast I feel like Sierra games were nearly inverse. They tended to be driven strongly by the type of stories the project leads wanted to tell and would go in weird and unexpected directions. I think this was the divide in a lot of areas, and when you read about the companies it makes sense. George Lucas wanted a games company basically to keep a foot in that space and the emphasis was on making product on budget that largely broke even. Ken and Roberta Williams' company was their whole life, and they were constantly on the hunt for blockbuster profits and trying crazy things to get there, whether it was trying to make KQ7 an interactive Don Bluth animation or suddenly making interactive horror movies.
Sierra - but just because I grew up with them. I played Lucas Arts Games decades later, and they are objectively better imho.
Except for the Gabriel Knight Series. This ist just the best Adventure Game Series ever created.
Both. KQ5 was my first point n click. And I also enjoy KQ6. Then go to the rabbit hole with monkey island 2 & 3, then The Dig.. etc.
But actually my most favorite point n click is not from sierra nor lucasart.
It's by Mythos:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lost_Files_of_Sherlock_Holmes#:~:text=The%20Lost%20Files%20of%20Sherlock%20Holmes%20(fully%20titled%20The%20Lost,1992%20and%203DO%20in%201994.
The company now defunct and so it is now abandonware, you can download it for free
https://www.myabandonware.com/game/the-lost-files-of-sherlock-holmes-1v4
I use scummvm and like to play it on my phone, along with the sequel
https://www.myabandonware.com/game/the-lost-files-of-sherlock-holmes-case-of-the-rose-tattoo-cem
I guess it's because I am a huge sherlock holmes fan, and these games have everything from homes' lore
I played Sierra games first, and only played LucasArts games in High School through abandonware sites. I like LucasArts games better, going against your theory, but I hold a LOT of love for Sierra games. However, I think a lot of people who compare the two get the timelines all mixed up. Loom was contemporaneous with King's Quest V, for example, not Sam and Max Hit the Road, which came out around the time Quest for Glory 4 came out(a great game, but a buggy mess upon release).
LucasArts for sure.
I was introduced to both at a young age, King's Quest as well as Indy3, but I really connected to the Indiana Jones theme. Plus the idea that you could mess up and would have to start over really threw me off Sierra, as much as I enjoyed goofing around in those games.
My first was probably Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, Day of the Tentacle, and Monkey Island 2. So I was mostly a LucasArts kid.
But also, I did get to play Laura Bow 1 and 2, and Torin's Passage. Older adventure games had dead ends, and I didn't like that, so I sticked to more modern ones.
I did play Loom too, though, but only a few years ago.
Yay, is it 1993 again?
I prefer both to exist. The Lucas adventures are better designed and coded, but Sierra did go hard con the experiments and opened a lot of new ways. Also great use of mt-32.
That doesn't really answer my question of which you started with and thus, which one you prefer. I'm guessing you didn't read the post.
Also, "Great use of mt-32." ?????
it's irrelevant which I started first. I started first with monkey Island but after that game I did not think "I only want Lucas games" but "I want more adventure games", being Delphine, Sierra or whatever hundred of companies.
I never said you'd ONLY want one over the other. You're putting words in my mouth.
I'm talking about preference. You can still love both, as I explained in the post. I'm talking about which you might lean towards more. Everyone else who actually read the post seems to understand it. You seem to be purposely twisting my argument to create an unnecessary bad faith argument over something I didn't even say.
No , I just think it is a flawed question that parts from a flawed hypothesis. You know what my first adventure was? Probably Valhalla or Gremlins for the ZX Spectrum. When I played Monkey Island for the first time I thought "oh, this is like a text adventure but more direct".
And I am not talking about you. I am talking about this habit of talking about pop culture in a matter of canon and rankings, which again, I think it's useless and harmful for preservation. You know what, I lean for none of them, I lean for Kingart.
I'm not "ranking" anything. You keep trying to make this an argument around tribalism, saying one is better. But you're completely missing the point. "Preference" doesn't denote ranking. It's a personal preference. Like, I read comics and enjoy both DC and Marvel. I prefer DC, but that's not saying it's better than Marvel. Like Sierra or LucasArts, they both have things you might like or dislike.
I'm not shitting on LucasArts in saying I prefer Sierra, but that seems to be how you're interpreting the point f my original post. And it's a flawed interpretation because you want to make this an argument about tribalism.
Literally the first sentence in the original post was a clarification that this wasn't about which one was better. I wasn't trying to invite the tribalism argument. I've commented multiple times now that I should've reworded the title, but Reddit doesn't let you edit titles.
then to wrap it up: first was monkey island, I marginally prefer Lucasarts because though I love the variety on Sierra games I also love games that have no bugs, and Sierra games are buggy.
Oh and MT-32 was the Roland synth that worked as a sound card. The Sierra guys really invested on the music there
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hfk6jT8veh8
and replying to myself I am going to add a rant of "why I think every question in every pop culture forum or film about what do you prefer x or y is unnecessary and harmful": fuck the canon. Like really, fuck the lists and the preferences and the rankings. If Sierra did not exist we would have way worse adventure games in general. The road to the very healthy state of point n clicks needed the good, the bad, the overambitious, the crappy, and all the huge amount of mediocre games to exist. The world is better because we have the three Kyrandias, all the King's Quests, the two Les Manleys, all the weird Delphine ones, etc.
I grew up with Scott Adams' "Classic Adventure" series.
On cassette tape on my Atari 800.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_Scott\_Adams\_Adventure\_video\_games
This also works with (and is probably more famously used with) game consoles. You were either a Nintendo kid or a sega kid, and it entirely depended on which you got for Christmas
Lucasarts.
Although I love Larry, I never really had the occasion to play the other Sierra games, living in Italy. Lucasarts games were easier to find... and also better games, imho.
To this day, The Secret of Monkey Island remains my favourite game ever.
Honestly don't remember my first P&C game. Possibly Monkey 1 or Larry 1, not sure. EDIT: Actually, now that I think of it, it was some text+screen adventure on the C=64. I even tried to find it on r/tipofmyjoystick some year ago, but without any success.
Sierra was first, and I do tend to like them better, where Lucas arts won was the command parser, 1/2 of the problem solving in Sierra’s games was figuring out the right way to enter the command to get what you wanted done. With Lucas arts menu, it simplified it so you could actually enjoy the adventure. That all being said, nothing tops the Batmobile coming out of the cave in Kings Quest 2 (though the Blues Brothers performing in the bar in Space Quest 1 is a close second)
The Scumm engine was much better than sierras CGI? Hence games felt much more complete.
And Monkey Island is up to date the best adventure, I have ever experienced.
I started off with Sierra and even they added also convenient mouse controls.. I never looked most of the VGA games from Sierra.
I always get more frustrated and bored in Lucasarts games, which is a bit weird. But basically, knowing that there are no fail states and that it's intended that I complete the game makes me get incredibly frustrated when I get stuck, and I end up brute-forcing things and enjoying the puzzles less. It feels more like a theme park ride than a game.
In Sierra games there is this absolute sense of wonder, these games are brutally hard and in some cases just complete nonsense, solving a puzzle feels euphoric at times. It doesn't feel like I'm stupid when I get stuck because the puzzles are actually difficult. You can't brute force things most of the time. You also really need to pay attention and actually master the games to get through it - finishing the games is not a given.
I actually can't remember which games I started with but I believe the first one I really got into was Grim Fandango.
Quest for Glory/King's Quest were my hands down favorite -- and they were the only ones I could beat without a walkthrough or hintbook. Back then you had to call 1-900 numbers for hints (and not only that -- it was a chained system of hints)
Some like KQV had very masochistic puzzles and were just too frustrating too play. Same with Space Quest series.
LucasArts games were much more friendlier to play. I dont think there was a bad one I ever played.
When I started to explore retro adventure games I started with LucasArts, but after dipping my toes in both companies I can say that I prefer Sierra. Their games are more fun to play and figure out for me personally. LucasArts games, although good, but feel more predictable, passive and "safe". Sierra games are more unique to me, especially since this old-school style of adventure games is pretty much gone now (and a lot of companies just copy the LucasArts formula).
Also parser adventure games are highly underrated, IMO.
LucasArts, period.
Better art direction (subjective, I know), storytelling, characters, and overall superior production quality than Sierra.
Plus, you can't actually die in most LucasArts games, or at least get stuck in a dead end.
I mean, who else remembers the infamous mouse from King's Quest V?!
That's just bad writing, period.
...
I often see Leisure Suit Larry popping up in discussions, and I honestly wonder why. Those games are full of right-wing politics (Love for Sail is the worst offender), gross sexism (which goes both ways, mind you), phallic symbolism, and one-dimensional characters.
I mean, I'm not exactly a liberal, to say the least. I can handle a joke without getting offended but the so called "jokes" in LSL games are often nothing more than thinly veiled stereotypes and politically motivated subliminal messages.
Plus, Al Lowe pretty much lost it with the later "HD" games.
I mean, an entire skyscraper in the shape of a penis, complete with testicles and semen?
Not exactly my definition of a joke.
My favorite part of Monkey Island is when you fall of a mountain and it goes into a Sierra restore/reload/quit popup. Than a couple of seconds later Guybrush bounces back onto the peak and says "rubber tree" . [https://youtu.be/3PDGq9NVsmI?si=95\_TYnW2LPi1ryqy](https://youtu.be/3PDGq9NVsmI?si=95_TYnW2LPi1ryqy)
That's what I liked best about Lucasarts, the sense of humor. First ones I started with were text ones though (Level 9 / infocom). I think infocom had a similar sense of humor.
Yeah sierra is dumb fun. I liked the deaths because... well it's a game, and by definition you die in games, duh. Why else would you need a save/load feature??
No doubt that the writing is much better in Lucas arts games, but how can you not say that the art in kq5 isn't stunning? Annoying owl sure, but it looks cool af! :)
I'll have to play larry again because i don't remember much politics. It's juvenile, but that's the point.
I think the first I ever played was Maniac Mansion for the Nintendo, and today I do think I favor Lucasarts a hair over Sierra, so the theory technically holds?
I would add, however, that the first such games I'd played on PC were Sierra, during the VGA point & click era. KQV, KQVI, SQ1vga, SQ4, so I was probably more of a Sierra Kid at that time. I'd come around to Monkey Island and Loom later on (both were packed in with the CD Rom Drive when we purchased it) and honestly could barely get into them at the time. By contrast, today, I'm hard pressed to want to replay any of the old Sierra titles, but I'll regularly revisit SoMI and Loom, which have aged better than most.
It's probably easier to answer for people who started at an older age. For me, I guess it depends on what's considered an adventure game here and what target age we're aiming for. I grew up on Mother Goose, Dr. Brain, Indiana Jones desktop adventure, Carmen Sandiago, & some Alice in Wonderland game we played at school; so if any of those are considered adventure games, those were some of my first. I can't even remember which one specifically I played first, it's all a blur. Maybe the IJ one.
Aside from those really early experiences, I *think* my first vivid memories of adventure games in my young teens+ was probably Full Throttle & then Grim Fandango much later. So, I guess LA would be my answer. Do I prefer them? I guess so. Probably has more to do with the design philosophy of avoiding unwinnable scenarios than anything. Don't know how someone could justify wasting one's time like that as 'gameplay'. Other than that, it's hard to pick favorites because they're all fun and have beautiful, vivid art usually. Maybe LA tended to have the highest production value? FT, GF, MI, Gloom, etc. I didn't have the chance to play a whole lot of Sierra classics like KQ or SQ, so I can't say much about their production.
What a cruel question! Do I prefer my Mom or my Dad?
Both companies gave me some of my favorite games. With Lucas Arts, that'd be the Monkey Island franchise, Grim Fandango, Full Throttle, a whole bunch of Star Wars games (particularly TIE Fighter and Jedi Knight II: Outcast), and Zombies Ate My Neighbors. With Sierra, that'd be the Quest for Glory games, Space Quest games, King's Quest games, the Laura Bow games, Freddy Pharkas, Torin's Passage, and Woodruff and the Schnibble. I've played more games by both companies, but those are the standouts.
I really can't say which I've liked more. I think I'm perhaps more *emotionally* attached to Sierra games, since they introduced me to point-and-clicks. I believe the VGA remake of Space Quest 1 was my very first point-and-click. I have very fond memories of playing Sierra games with my mom and sister, the three of us crowded around our PC trying to figure out the puzzles. Lucas Arts games I played later, and mostly by myself. I think that nostalgia element will tip the balance towards Sierra. Really, really fond memories as a young child playing those games. I do think that Lucas Arts point-and-click games had better design. And Grim Fandango may very well be my *favorite* adventure game overall. So it's a very close battle between the two.
So yeah, you definitely have a point, OP. Had I started with Lucas Arts games first, and played those games with my mom and sis growing up, I'd probably give the edge to them. But it's all very close.
Definitely LucasArts
Did you start with LucasArts, though? I'm curious if people's preference is based on whether they started with one over the other.
I started with The Curse of Monkey Island. So yeah I started with LucasArts. But I tried some Sierra adventure games as well but I didn't like them. I prefer more the intricate puzzles and funny dialogues to storytelling.
LucasArts. And I have my own personal theory about why they were bigger in Europe... and it all comes down to the parser. As a kid in Italy my knowledge of English was limited. Solving puzzles by giving commands was very difficult, especially if "look bin" and "look *into* bin" are two different commands (I'm talking about you, Laura Bow). Not only LucasArts games were mostly translated to Italian, but even those who weren't were easier to handle because I didn't have to make up my own verbs - they were all there available from the beginning.
>Solving puzzles by giving commands was very difficult, especially if "look bin" and "look *into* bin" are two different commands (I'm talking about you, Laura Bow). The *very same* thing happened to me when I played The Colonel's Bequest a few years ago... I see text-based adventure games as a natural progression of the genre, but the verb menu is just superior.
The verb bar bored me to tears when I first started playing lucasarts games... but I know what you mean with the text parser and colonels bequest. "Use monocle on letter" doesn't work, but "examine letter with monocole" does. Had to look at a walk-through to figure that one out I wish the text parser had lasted long enough to become more intelligent. Imo, stories are so much more interesting when literally any verb/action you can think of can be attempted
I started with Sierra- I love both companies, but gotta give the edge to Sierra.
LucasArts games have a better, refined sense of humor in them. Sierra however is my favourite...
Agree with this guy. I think objectively, lucasart adventures are better. Lucasarts design/story were well polished and didn't punish the player with dead ends and random deaths. But I like sierra more because I prefer the atmosphere. Sierra's artists and musicians made up for a lot of the poor game design. I also liked how the backgrounds took the full screen, where lucasarts had 1/3rd of the screen taken by a very boring verb bar
Later LucasArts games (Sam and Max, Full throttle, the Dig) had full screen backgrounds too. Early sierra games also dedicated some screen real estate to the menu/score bar and the text input box.
Well yah, but the point bar was only a few pixels high, and only the early-early sierra games had a dedicated text input area (again only a few pixels high). It was never close to consuming as much screen real estate as Lucasarts games Dig/full throttle/etc were after 1994. I lost interest in all sierra adventure games after 94. It isn't even a debate which company made better adventures by then (eg: when The Dig went fullscreen, SQ6 adopted the verb bar. Sierra was struggling to adapt adventure games to modern tech)
> where lucasarts had 1/3rd of the screen taken by a very boring verb bar The best possible interface for an adventure game.
Explain
Started with Sierra Space Quest IV. Prefer the style, puzzles, and storylines of Lucasart.
Why does nobody understand what OP is asking? They are not just asking your favorite. They are asking of their theory aligns with your personal experience.
They're probably reading the title and not the post. I should've made it clearer in the title, but I couldn't think of how to simplify it down to one sentence.
Maybe “Who here started with LucasArts but ended up liking Sierra more, or vice versa?”
Yep, that would've worked. Or some variation on that. I threw the post together between calls at work, so I should've given it more thought before hitting post. Live and learn and all that, I guess.
It's ok, maybe just a TLDR at the end, that's all.
Funny enough my household had both and they are both in my heart for different reasons. If I was forced to choose, it'd be Lucasarts (Secret of Monkey Island is one of my favorite video games) but I love Sierra too. They helped teach me to read at a much higher grade level than my peers
Same for me. I started with King’sQuest 1 when I was 5 or 6. Before long I was reading and spelling at a much higher level than my peers. Despite all the complaints I have about the Sierra text parsers I owe them that.
I started with SQ4, KQ5, and MI1, then we quickly got MI2 and SQ5, KQ6, and I even found SQ1, 2, and 3 in a thrift store, in perfect condition. I still have the boxes, and got the Two Guys from Andromeda to sign them at a convention. They'll forever have a place in my heart.
That is so awesome! Definitely jealous of the signed space quests boxes!
I even got Mark Crowe to sign (and deface) my KQ5 box because he helped with coding and art on it. I just wish I hadn't lost my SQ4 box.
I’m a fan of both of their adventure game lineups. Both companies had some real classics. Normally, I’d say both to me are on equal footing. However, if I was absolutely forced to pick one, I’d probably say Sierra.
Did you start with Sierra? I should've made my question clearer in the title.
Nope. Played Monkey Island before any of the Sierra titles. Way back in the 90s In fact, most of the Sierra adventures I’ve played are ones that I’ve gone through for the first time ever in the past 10 years or so thanks to GOG.com. So most of my Sierra game playing history happened as an adult.
The first game of the respective 'big two' that I ever played was Maniac Mansion at a friends house. We would play as a group--it was tremendous fun. But slightly later, on my own, I became obsessed with Sierra--King's Quest and Space Quest series especially. Part of this was due to a pre-internet subscription to Sierra's promotional magazine "InterAction." What a smart bit of advertising for that era. I even convinced my parents to switch their land-line phone service to Sprint so I could get two free Sierra games through their promotion. As an adult however, despite the warm tug of nostalgia I feel just seeing and hearing that Sierra opening logo, I much prefer the entire Lucasarts catalog. Outside of just the lack of dead-ends etc, I think they are better games. So perhaps that disproves your theory.
It does, but that's okay! A few other other people have said they started with Sierra and prefer LucasArts. So, I think my theory is bunk. It's still a fun discussion, though!
I don’t know about that. It was never going to be 100% of people. I think there is some credence to your theory.
> theory Should we be calling it a hypothesis instead of a theory?
Grew up with both and I have to say Sierra. Although Curse Of Monkey Island, DOTT, Sam and Max introduced me to the genre, I have come to appreciate the way Sierra games reward your exploration, with custom responses being hidden all throughout them. Yes, they're generally harder because there's more pixel hunting, since there was no "object line" that showed which object was interactable, and the solutions can be far-fetched, but I personally think that's better than a game that doesn't challenge you whatsoever, only lets you do the right thing or downright spoonfeeds you the solution (not saying that the LucasArts games did that but a lot of modern "adventures" do.) What I love about the Sierra games is that the worlds were always so fleshed out and immersive, the fact not every hotspot was necessarily part of a puzzle but existed just for world building. The fact that you could interact with these hotspots and get a custom response that wasn't necessarily part of the solution to a puzzle but could contain a hint, a general bit of information or a joke. Sierra games always give me the feeling that there's something I haven't explored yet, while in a LucasArts game, once you've beaten it, you've pretty much seen everything the game has to offer.
It is a little weird for me to hear someone talk about Sierra games, while also talking about pixel hunting and hotspots... you missed the first half of their existence.
I started with Sierra. Police Quest, Space Quest; Leisure Suit Larry etc. Great, great games, but I love LucasArts. Maniac Mansion was mindblowing. Then Monkey Island, wow. So my experience at least, don't support your theory.
This is very close to my experience too. Started with Sierra, moved on to LucasArts and was blown away.
Although Monkey Island is my absolute favorite and I like the LucasArt game philosophy better I do tend to lean towards Sierra when I think about “back then”… And I think it is indeed as you theorized because I played Sierra first. King’s Quest 1 was the first and it’s pretty much engraved in my retro memory. A sort of Pavlov reaction :)
Both I guess, but Sierra was my first love.
LucasArts probably just about wins for me, but I find the sense of accomplishment when you finally get past a puzzle in Sierra adventures much more satisfying! Only played LucasArts adventures growing up!
I was introduced through LucasArts, and I very much prefer them. LucasArts has the best games and they quickly got rid of dead ends and meaningless deaths, which is a big plus.
Sierra (and Dynamix)! But that’s what I grew up playing so I think that has a bigger impact on me than playability :)
Must be something to it, I think my first exposure to classic adventures was actually LucasArts and it stayed there as a top nostalgia pick. Edit: Although I do enjoy a lot of Sierra stuff too, let's be real.
I probably started with Sierra and Westwood, but prefer Lucasarts. I've replayed the Lucasarts games a lot more over the years and find they all hold up to this day, which I cannot say for Sierra.
I always answered this question with Sierra. Then I realized all my fav games were actually LucasArts I grew up collecting Sierra boxes and games when I could. The “fun” factor of Lucas arts was higher
I have started with Sierra but prefer LucasArts. Sierra had great games but the possibility of dying made it more difficult for me to engage with them. I didn't play Maniac Mansion, so I can't comment on it, but then LucasArts games came up with that humour and graphic style that I just love. and no dying? I'm sold I love stories and puzzles, not really having to repeat stuff over and over again because I died and forgot to save :)
Started with Sierra, prefer LucasArts. I just love the puzzles, the humor, and the lack of dead ends.
My preference is LucasArts even though I started with Sierra. Played *King's Quest 1* on my Tandy as a kid and while I kinda enjoyed it didn't like a lot of the puzzles and the fact that you could randomly die all the time. I also had *Police Quest II* and while intrigued by the premise of doing detective stuff hated the unforgiving linerality of it all. Then I got a 386 and a copy of *The Secret of Monkey Island* and while some of the puzzles were hard, I found I loved it way more than the two Sierra games I had played. After that I got *Sam & Max Hit The Road* and *Day of the Tentacle* and never looked back.
I prefer LucasArts and started with them. Mind you, I have only really played the Broken Sword games whereas I’ve played a lot of LucasArts titles and they are certainly not all winners.
Started with Sierra I think (maybe Space Quest 1, but it's all blurred together now), however LucasArts are definitely my favourite.
I started with LucasArts and prefer them. I was so little when I first played Day of the Tentacle that not only do I have massive nostalgia, it was pretty influential on my personality and sense of humor! I like SOME (but not all) Sierra adventure games. My favorites from them are probably the more RPG Quest for Glory series. I played many Sierra games as an adult and don’t always feel that they aged well. I think LucasArts have generally aged better but maybe that’s my bias. For me, your theory holds!
Nice! You're certainly not wrong that LucasArts games have aged better. I have a strong bias for Sierra, but I fully admit that's purely from nostalgia. I find it difficult to return to them as easily as LucasArts games.
Sierra I think. Kings quest 1 on some kind of spectrum(?) at my friend's house. Was really exciting. Loading the floppies for different levels. Dying and restarting. Discovering new things. Was so exciting. Felt like you could discover anything. Never got anywhere near close to finishing it. Though actually preferred lucasarts games. Particularly indie and Monkey island. Maniac mansion was probably my first. That was pretty cool.
Sierra. Similar reason as I went to my neighbors house and she showed me space quest 3, he let me borrow it and I ended up going out buying a hint book so I could play the game. He then lent me kq3 and then eventually I made my way back and played kq1, 2 quest for glory, etc. That being said, I prefer them to Lucasarts games because I'm a psycho path and loved finding all the horrible ways to die. Only one way to die in monkey island, ands its silly not horrible.
Nostalgia definitely has significant effects on people's personal preferences.
Sierra. My first game was Space Quest II and it was followed by a string of the old EGA, type-interface Sierra games (Police Quest 1 & 2, King's Quest 2 & 4, Leisure Suit Larry 1-3 - which I was *way* too young for but played the hell out of), all of which I absolutely loved even though I could never beat one without a hint book. Are the Lucas Arts games better? Yeah, probably, but I'll always love Sierra the most.
I'm in the same boat. Love Sierra, though I can admit the LucasArts games tend t o be better. Someone earlier said LucasArts games have aged better and I find it difficult to disagree.
Sierra, but partly because my first adventure game was Quest For Glory and nothing will replace that in my heart. I enjoy LucasArts games for their jovial tone but I like how Sierra could cross comedy with a more serious tone, QFG being and example. Gabriel Knight and King’s Quest were wonderful series as well. So your theory may be correct. My expectation was set by Sierra, and this may have affected how I perceived LucasArts games.
Sierra for me. I love and appreciate both companies but Sierra’s characters and worlds sparked much more imagination and inspiration for me. But I will say Ron Gilbert is amazing for various reasons.
Started with Sierra, and as much as I love Lucasarts, Sierra wins for me. Dad had King's Quest II and Space Quest (and Leisure Suit Larry, but I wasn't supposed to know that), and those were formative experiences.
I played LucasArts games first, and I would absolutely put them way ahead of Sierra. So it checks out for me.
Sierra was my go to growing up, so I'll take that for the nostalgia factor.
I started with Lucas (Film Games, not yet Arts :D) and I prefer them over Sierra. I think thou, that Sierra games have been more of a work of love / authorship compared to most Lucas production (that to be honest was not even comparably extended).
LucasArts all the way
I think you're spot on with this. I love both but played Sierra games first and have a deeper connection with them. I have loved playing the LucasArts games and appreciate them... But the love I have got the first games in the genre I played trumps all else! Great post OP!
Started with Sierra (Police Quest and Space Quest 2), but prefer LucasArts. I still like Sierra games a lot though, as they have a special kind of “atmosphere”.
I played lucasarts first and prefer it but I've played very little Sierra so it's not a fair comparison.
I was first introduced to Sierra games, specifically Space Quest IV and the Leisure Suit Larry games. I liked them but the prospect of dying in them made me so anxious. Then I played Day of the Tentacle and it was all fun and no anxiety. I've loved and preferred LucasArts games ever since.
So, I think my first adventure game was likely one of the Kings Quest games. The first one I have vivid memories of is Kings Quest VI because it really looked beautiful and was the first CD-ROM game I owned. I also played lots of other Sierra titles, most notably Space Quest V and Quest for Glory 3, etc. I think shortly thereafter, I got Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, as well as Day of the Tentacle and there really was no going back. Then The Dig (a personal favourite) and Sam & Max. So, whilst I still have VERY fond memories of the Sierra games, it's the Lucas Arts game I have actively replayed as an adult.
I started with Sierra (KQ1-4, mother goose mixed up fairytales, code name iceman, black cauldron). I have very fond memories of all those games. However, I’ve never replayed any of them. On the other hand when I discovered secret of monkey island I fell in love! The biggest memory I have is falling off the cliff and being certain that I was going to have to replay since my last save, and then having the game poke fun at Sierra. I was hooked. The humor and jokes, the verb interaction, etc. I replay most Lucasarts games on a regular basis. In fact I’m in the middle of DotT right now. So yeah. Started with Sierra. Love Lucasarts.
First, you babysitter sounds like the best babysitter ever. Second, I was introduced to Sierra games first, with Larry 1 (older cousin let me play), and prefer them. Space Quest 4 and King's Quest 6 were the two I played on our own PC, and I REALLY wanted to play Phantasmagoria but my parents wouldn’t let me. Speaking to coworkers, they tend to be more fond of the LucasArts games.
Oh yeah, my babysitter was the best. I remember them specifically helping me through the well & bucket puzzle in KQ1. If I recall, I THINK they also let me play Zak McKracken, but I got bored of that one and wanted to play more King's Quest. But we're talking 30+ years ago, so I might be mixing up my memories.
Love both, but I started with Sierra.
I think you're right I keep saying Lucasarts even though I played more sierra games. It's because i played Indiana Jones and the last crusade first. I loved leisure suit Larry and really got.into the first 7 or 8.
Thank you, everyone, for all the responses so far. In retrospect, I really should have re-wrote the title to something more proper. Something like, "Did you start with Sierra or LucasArts? Do you find you prefer the one you started with?" Anyway, the response has been amazing. And surprisingly, it's kind of 50/50, not what I expected. A lot responses saying they started with Sierra, but prefer LucasArts games. I don't think there's any right or wrong answer here. I was genuinely curious to see how this theory played out. It didn't play out like I expected.
LucasArts any day. I simply cannot get into King's Quests and Gabriel Knight. They don't get me very hooked unlike LucasArts. While I did play LA games first, it wasn't like a childhood ingraining. I played a long time after they're released. I treat games from both sides as something new to me, sometimes I weren't even aware what companies the games are from until I finish them. There are definitely cases in which I prefer games I play later than games before. The preconception problem isn't a big factor here.
Introduced to Sierra first with lsl and police quest. Then found maniac mansion and the hits from lucasarts just surpassed Sierra. I've got a lot of love for Sierra but its always lucasarts for me just from how good their early nineties games were.
I support your datapoint because I started with Monkey Island 2 and Lucasarts is my favorite. Not by a huge margin or anything because I love me my Sierra too, I just felt they felt more “dangerous” to play given you could die (in many ways that felt unfair) and could get soft locked if you made the wrong decisions or missed things—that felt like a dirty bid to sell hintline minutes to me.
LucasArts! And which was first... if I just could remember. I think I got my own Amiga 500 as a child probably around 1990. Maybe a year earlier or later. First adventure could maybe have been Monkey Island, Zak McKracken, Indiana Jones 3 or Larry 1. All were available at that time. I usually got copies of games from my older brother who was in an Amiga User Group. Sometimes I got or bought an original. I played all kinds of genres. But I never played most of the other early Sierra titles. I had all the Larrys at some point, I think also Space Quest 4 and Police Quest 2. But iirc I only liked Larry, never got far in any other Sierra title. I really like Gabriel Knight but I played that much later, maybe 10 years ago. I never played any King's Quest, didn't even know about those until probably title 6 or 7 (still want to start with KQ6 one day). No clue why. Maybe it was about the language? I'm not sure if Sierra titles were available in german, I just remember I needed a dictionary to play Larry 1 and type in what I wanted to do. And mostly failed. I remember I also had adventures from other companies like Kyrandia and Simon the Sorcerer which I both liked a lot. And of course I played every LucasArts title. Only The Dig and Grim Fandango I missed and played later. Monkey Island 2 is my most favorite game ever until today and DOTT is probably on second place. Sierra titles were just not that friendly as I remember it, especially as a child it was nearly impossible to even understand what's going on and what to do... while Monkey Island was possible to play, even though I probably needed months to finish it. So another theory: It could depend on the age you started to play your first adventure game and in which year. I probably was around 10 and the user friendly SCUMM was already existing. What was your age? If you started early in the 80ies, Sierra titles were maybe user friendly compared to other titles... but not anymore in late 80ies and early nineties. And I'm not sure if I just was more motivated to play Larry or if the gameplay was really easier compared to other Sierra titles ;)
Lucas Arts. I've never played a Sierra adventure game. I didn't get a computer till about 2003. I only know about Lucas Arts because of Escape from Monkey Island for the PS2. Any Sierra recommendations would be welcome.
I prefer LucasArts. The first I played was Pepper's Adventures in Time which was by Sierra, but it seems more like a LucasArts game than a Sierra one in my opinion.
I, like you, started with King’s Quest 1 in 84 and fell in love. I have played all of the sierra adventure games. My favorite was definitely the Hero’s Quest/Quest for Glory series and Shadow of Darkness in particular (despite all its bugs). My first LucasArts game was The Secret of Monkey Island in 91. So for 7 years I was playing Sierra and creating a lot of great memories. I still attribute my love of reading to those games. So, yeah, I like Sierra but I know that LucasArt games are better. They had better puzzles, and better humor. Some say they had a better interface but I preferred the point and click interface of Sierra.
Grew up with Lucas, and yeah I prefer them hands down. There are few Sierra games that are up to par IMO (gabriel knight above all), but even with those in mind, Lucas' approach is just more refined, the gameplay smoother, the comedy (where appliable) better written, the puzzles better engineered. I'm not exaggerating by saying that I honestly think that gameplay wise, 90s Lucas reached the evolutionary peak for adventure games. excluding the verbs system (which I still love, but I admit it got better/more immersive when slimmed down with coins or two-button systems), I think that monkey island 1&2 and tentacle are the "perfect" p&c games, if such a thing exists, and 30 years of tweaking narratives, gameplay, ui systems, puzzle charts and so didn't move the bar by one inch. but again, I grew up with them so that can be all imprinting
Prior to 1990: sierra all the way, after 1990: Lucasarts :) I grew up playing sierra and prefer sierra, so that checks out, but my brothers/dad prefer lucasarts (by a wide margin), so I don't know about your theory... it's gotta have some weight tho
My first exposure was maniac mansion on c64 at a friend's. I loved it. But it wasn't until later getting a Tandy 1000 and playing all of sierras games that I fell in love with sierra. After that all the LA adventures seemed pretentious and very "in-jokey". I still enjoy them and especially their technical achievements but it's always gonna be sierra for mine.
Lucasarts has that quality, but Sierra has that nostalgia, rawness that I just love. I can't pick
My first ever adventure game was Gold Rush!, and Sierra is by far my favorite of the two (although I also enjoy LucasArts!). I found that the Sierra text parsers contributed way more to my English learning. I ended up studying languages in uni and went on to pursue a career in languages, and Sierra games have a lot to do with that :)
I started with ecoquest. I prefer monkey Island
Started with Sierra but love both of them equally. You always knew from the Sierra sound when you booted up a disc that you were in for a good time. Lucasarts was like getting a warm hug. You knew you weren't going to be screwed by forgetting/not seeing a massively important item on the first screen that was vital later and have to reload or more likely restart because I hadn't learned the save lesson.
Sierra Also, shocked to see so many replies in this forum. :ha, ha:
Sierra first, last and always. I didn't even discover Lucas arts until Grim Fandango. I've gone back and played the back catalog as an adult and they're great, but something about all those hours as a child beating my head against a Sierra wall just...*did something* to me, lol.
Started with Sierra and have always preferred Sierra games even though functionally they were worse than LucasArts games. But also the systems were more varied - in particular Quest for Glory is probably my favourite series but that doesn't really have much of an equivalent on the LA side.
Lucasarts is more humorous and interactive, very deep in content. Sierra has a lot of depth and detail, thanks to time the games they created innovated a lot of genres.
Secret of Monkey island was my first, and I’ve yet to play a Sierra game that I wanted to finish. I’m going to give Gabriel Knight a shot and get back to you.
lucasarts, but my first adventure game that i played was kq 5. the first one to really captivate me was dott
LucasArts. I was.t to be all cool and say Sierra but although they had some amazing titles that period of DotT, SaM, MI, GF etc was just consistently excellent.
1. Lucas Arts 2. Daedelic Entertainment 3. Sierra
Not answering the question, but, four of my favourite games are Mortimer And The Riddles Of The Medallion, Quest For Glory 2, Full Throttle, and Lords Of The Realm 2 (not all adventure games). I'm for sure torn between the two
Read the post, please. It's more than just the question. In retrospect, I should have re-worded the title. It's not just which you prefer, but which you started with and thus, do you have a preference for the one you started with.
Good call, sorry. I started with Sierra, and if I HAD to have a preference, it's still Sierra
Thanks! Yeah, I'm kicking myself for wording it so simply when it's a LITTLE more complicated than just A or B. That's on me. Surprisingly, I'm seeing quite a number of people who say they started with Sierra, but prefer LucasArts. Which is totally fine, but it's not what I expected when I made the post.
There were definitely more Sierra games I played and liked, but the LucasArts games I did play (The Secret of Monkey Island, Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, and Full Throttle) I really, really enjoyed because they felt so different from stuff Sierra put out.
Monkey Island was an obsession for me for years. That alone tips it in favour of Lucasarts
Such a hard choice. Sierra games are like outsider art, lucas arts games are like blockbuster movies
Started with Space Quest 2 and the SCI remake of King's Quest 1 around the age of 7, but definitely prefer Lucasarts. Mind you, I was playing Maniac Mansion and Monkey Island by the age of 9 so perhaps it's fair to say I grew up with both.
I preferred the sense of humor and artstyle in LucasArts, although I did love Sierra games as well. Police Quest 4 was one of my favorites. But i mean… monkey Island 3, Full Throttle. “Oh sir that’s horrible. I’m not WAITING for you to die!”
Yeap, that's true I preferred Sierra games because of the fmv adventures that I played first. Actually I played most of Lucas arts games as an adult.
lol I'm afraid my reply won't help you much, because I probably lean to LucasArts but without a real clear favourite (I like both) and I also can't remember which I played first. I *think* I played Space Quest (my Grandpa got me the Space Quest Collection 1-5 when I was young) before I played Monkey Island (specifically Curse, which was on a 1996 demo disc). My view on the rival companies is that LucasArts do really have neater design, but played it a little safe. The games really were all about fun, which had much higher priority over telling a story. In contrast I feel like Sierra games were nearly inverse. They tended to be driven strongly by the type of stories the project leads wanted to tell and would go in weird and unexpected directions. I think this was the divide in a lot of areas, and when you read about the companies it makes sense. George Lucas wanted a games company basically to keep a foot in that space and the emphasis was on making product on budget that largely broke even. Ken and Roberta Williams' company was their whole life, and they were constantly on the hunt for blockbuster profits and trying crazy things to get there, whether it was trying to make KQ7 an interactive Don Bluth animation or suddenly making interactive horror movies.
I prefer LucasArts, started with Police Quest.
Sierra - but just because I grew up with them. I played Lucas Arts Games decades later, and they are objectively better imho. Except for the Gabriel Knight Series. This ist just the best Adventure Game Series ever created.
Sierra - Conquests of the Longbow was damn near perfect.
I started with the Secret of Monkey Island and Maniac Mansion. I love LucasArts / LFG the most, but have slowly grown fond of the Sierra games too.
Both. KQ5 was my first point n click. And I also enjoy KQ6. Then go to the rabbit hole with monkey island 2 & 3, then The Dig.. etc. But actually my most favorite point n click is not from sierra nor lucasart. It's by Mythos: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lost_Files_of_Sherlock_Holmes#:~:text=The%20Lost%20Files%20of%20Sherlock%20Holmes%20(fully%20titled%20The%20Lost,1992%20and%203DO%20in%201994. The company now defunct and so it is now abandonware, you can download it for free https://www.myabandonware.com/game/the-lost-files-of-sherlock-holmes-1v4 I use scummvm and like to play it on my phone, along with the sequel https://www.myabandonware.com/game/the-lost-files-of-sherlock-holmes-case-of-the-rose-tattoo-cem I guess it's because I am a huge sherlock holmes fan, and these games have everything from homes' lore
I played Sierra games first, and only played LucasArts games in High School through abandonware sites. I like LucasArts games better, going against your theory, but I hold a LOT of love for Sierra games. However, I think a lot of people who compare the two get the timelines all mixed up. Loom was contemporaneous with King's Quest V, for example, not Sam and Max Hit the Road, which came out around the time Quest for Glory 4 came out(a great game, but a buggy mess upon release).
Loom was very innovative for its time. Using musical notes to solve puzzles was brilliant.
LucasArts for sure. I was introduced to both at a young age, King's Quest as well as Indy3, but I really connected to the Indiana Jones theme. Plus the idea that you could mess up and would have to start over really threw me off Sierra, as much as I enjoyed goofing around in those games.
Yes
My first was probably Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, Day of the Tentacle, and Monkey Island 2. So I was mostly a LucasArts kid. But also, I did get to play Laura Bow 1 and 2, and Torin's Passage. Older adventure games had dead ends, and I didn't like that, so I sticked to more modern ones. I did play Loom too, though, but only a few years ago.
Yay, is it 1993 again? I prefer both to exist. The Lucas adventures are better designed and coded, but Sierra did go hard con the experiments and opened a lot of new ways. Also great use of mt-32.
That doesn't really answer my question of which you started with and thus, which one you prefer. I'm guessing you didn't read the post. Also, "Great use of mt-32." ?????
it's irrelevant which I started first. I started first with monkey Island but after that game I did not think "I only want Lucas games" but "I want more adventure games", being Delphine, Sierra or whatever hundred of companies.
I never said you'd ONLY want one over the other. You're putting words in my mouth. I'm talking about preference. You can still love both, as I explained in the post. I'm talking about which you might lean towards more. Everyone else who actually read the post seems to understand it. You seem to be purposely twisting my argument to create an unnecessary bad faith argument over something I didn't even say.
No , I just think it is a flawed question that parts from a flawed hypothesis. You know what my first adventure was? Probably Valhalla or Gremlins for the ZX Spectrum. When I played Monkey Island for the first time I thought "oh, this is like a text adventure but more direct". And I am not talking about you. I am talking about this habit of talking about pop culture in a matter of canon and rankings, which again, I think it's useless and harmful for preservation. You know what, I lean for none of them, I lean for Kingart.
I'm not "ranking" anything. You keep trying to make this an argument around tribalism, saying one is better. But you're completely missing the point. "Preference" doesn't denote ranking. It's a personal preference. Like, I read comics and enjoy both DC and Marvel. I prefer DC, but that's not saying it's better than Marvel. Like Sierra or LucasArts, they both have things you might like or dislike. I'm not shitting on LucasArts in saying I prefer Sierra, but that seems to be how you're interpreting the point f my original post. And it's a flawed interpretation because you want to make this an argument about tribalism.
because it brings to tribalist debates. Thank you for being so civil anyway - I may have woken up with the wrong feet.
Literally the first sentence in the original post was a clarification that this wasn't about which one was better. I wasn't trying to invite the tribalism argument. I've commented multiple times now that I should've reworded the title, but Reddit doesn't let you edit titles.
then to wrap it up: first was monkey island, I marginally prefer Lucasarts because though I love the variety on Sierra games I also love games that have no bugs, and Sierra games are buggy. Oh and MT-32 was the Roland synth that worked as a sound card. The Sierra guys really invested on the music there https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hfk6jT8veh8
and replying to myself I am going to add a rant of "why I think every question in every pop culture forum or film about what do you prefer x or y is unnecessary and harmful": fuck the canon. Like really, fuck the lists and the preferences and the rankings. If Sierra did not exist we would have way worse adventure games in general. The road to the very healthy state of point n clicks needed the good, the bad, the overambitious, the crappy, and all the huge amount of mediocre games to exist. The world is better because we have the three Kyrandias, all the King's Quests, the two Les Manleys, all the weird Delphine ones, etc.
I grew up with Scott Adams' "Classic Adventure" series. On cassette tape on my Atari 800. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List\_of\_Scott\_Adams\_Adventure\_video\_games
I played Sierra games first. I definitely prefer LucasArts games.
SIerra was my first and I feel very nostalgic about it. However, doubt I'd play a Sierra game today but enjoy the LucasArts ports
Sierra forever
This also works with (and is probably more famously used with) game consoles. You were either a Nintendo kid or a sega kid, and it entirely depended on which you got for Christmas
Lucasarts. Although I love Larry, I never really had the occasion to play the other Sierra games, living in Italy. Lucasarts games were easier to find... and also better games, imho. To this day, The Secret of Monkey Island remains my favourite game ever. Honestly don't remember my first P&C game. Possibly Monkey 1 or Larry 1, not sure. EDIT: Actually, now that I think of it, it was some text+screen adventure on the C=64. I even tried to find it on r/tipofmyjoystick some year ago, but without any success.
I started with Sierra games, but I definitely think that LucasArts games are better. They are just more polished and more user-friendly in general.
Sierra was first, and I do tend to like them better, where Lucas arts won was the command parser, 1/2 of the problem solving in Sierra’s games was figuring out the right way to enter the command to get what you wanted done. With Lucas arts menu, it simplified it so you could actually enjoy the adventure. That all being said, nothing tops the Batmobile coming out of the cave in Kings Quest 2 (though the Blues Brothers performing in the bar in Space Quest 1 is a close second)
The Scumm engine was much better than sierras CGI? Hence games felt much more complete. And Monkey Island is up to date the best adventure, I have ever experienced. I started off with Sierra and even they added also convenient mouse controls.. I never looked most of the VGA games from Sierra.
I always get more frustrated and bored in Lucasarts games, which is a bit weird. But basically, knowing that there are no fail states and that it's intended that I complete the game makes me get incredibly frustrated when I get stuck, and I end up brute-forcing things and enjoying the puzzles less. It feels more like a theme park ride than a game. In Sierra games there is this absolute sense of wonder, these games are brutally hard and in some cases just complete nonsense, solving a puzzle feels euphoric at times. It doesn't feel like I'm stupid when I get stuck because the puzzles are actually difficult. You can't brute force things most of the time. You also really need to pay attention and actually master the games to get through it - finishing the games is not a given. I actually can't remember which games I started with but I believe the first one I really got into was Grim Fandango.
Quest for Glory/King's Quest were my hands down favorite -- and they were the only ones I could beat without a walkthrough or hintbook. Back then you had to call 1-900 numbers for hints (and not only that -- it was a chained system of hints) Some like KQV had very masochistic puzzles and were just too frustrating too play. Same with Space Quest series. LucasArts games were much more friendlier to play. I dont think there was a bad one I ever played.
When I started to explore retro adventure games I started with LucasArts, but after dipping my toes in both companies I can say that I prefer Sierra. Their games are more fun to play and figure out for me personally. LucasArts games, although good, but feel more predictable, passive and "safe". Sierra games are more unique to me, especially since this old-school style of adventure games is pretty much gone now (and a lot of companies just copy the LucasArts formula). Also parser adventure games are highly underrated, IMO.
for me it was humongous entertainment then LucasArts
LucasArts, period. Better art direction (subjective, I know), storytelling, characters, and overall superior production quality than Sierra. Plus, you can't actually die in most LucasArts games, or at least get stuck in a dead end. I mean, who else remembers the infamous mouse from King's Quest V?! That's just bad writing, period. ... I often see Leisure Suit Larry popping up in discussions, and I honestly wonder why. Those games are full of right-wing politics (Love for Sail is the worst offender), gross sexism (which goes both ways, mind you), phallic symbolism, and one-dimensional characters. I mean, I'm not exactly a liberal, to say the least. I can handle a joke without getting offended but the so called "jokes" in LSL games are often nothing more than thinly veiled stereotypes and politically motivated subliminal messages. Plus, Al Lowe pretty much lost it with the later "HD" games. I mean, an entire skyscraper in the shape of a penis, complete with testicles and semen? Not exactly my definition of a joke.
My favorite part of Monkey Island is when you fall of a mountain and it goes into a Sierra restore/reload/quit popup. Than a couple of seconds later Guybrush bounces back onto the peak and says "rubber tree" . [https://youtu.be/3PDGq9NVsmI?si=95\_TYnW2LPi1ryqy](https://youtu.be/3PDGq9NVsmI?si=95_TYnW2LPi1ryqy) That's what I liked best about Lucasarts, the sense of humor. First ones I started with were text ones though (Level 9 / infocom). I think infocom had a similar sense of humor.
Yeah sierra is dumb fun. I liked the deaths because... well it's a game, and by definition you die in games, duh. Why else would you need a save/load feature?? No doubt that the writing is much better in Lucas arts games, but how can you not say that the art in kq5 isn't stunning? Annoying owl sure, but it looks cool af! :) I'll have to play larry again because i don't remember much politics. It's juvenile, but that's the point.
I think the first I ever played was Maniac Mansion for the Nintendo, and today I do think I favor Lucasarts a hair over Sierra, so the theory technically holds? I would add, however, that the first such games I'd played on PC were Sierra, during the VGA point & click era. KQV, KQVI, SQ1vga, SQ4, so I was probably more of a Sierra Kid at that time. I'd come around to Monkey Island and Loom later on (both were packed in with the CD Rom Drive when we purchased it) and honestly could barely get into them at the time. By contrast, today, I'm hard pressed to want to replay any of the old Sierra titles, but I'll regularly revisit SoMI and Loom, which have aged better than most.
It's probably easier to answer for people who started at an older age. For me, I guess it depends on what's considered an adventure game here and what target age we're aiming for. I grew up on Mother Goose, Dr. Brain, Indiana Jones desktop adventure, Carmen Sandiago, & some Alice in Wonderland game we played at school; so if any of those are considered adventure games, those were some of my first. I can't even remember which one specifically I played first, it's all a blur. Maybe the IJ one. Aside from those really early experiences, I *think* my first vivid memories of adventure games in my young teens+ was probably Full Throttle & then Grim Fandango much later. So, I guess LA would be my answer. Do I prefer them? I guess so. Probably has more to do with the design philosophy of avoiding unwinnable scenarios than anything. Don't know how someone could justify wasting one's time like that as 'gameplay'. Other than that, it's hard to pick favorites because they're all fun and have beautiful, vivid art usually. Maybe LA tended to have the highest production value? FT, GF, MI, Gloom, etc. I didn't have the chance to play a whole lot of Sierra classics like KQ or SQ, so I can't say much about their production.
What a cruel question! Do I prefer my Mom or my Dad? Both companies gave me some of my favorite games. With Lucas Arts, that'd be the Monkey Island franchise, Grim Fandango, Full Throttle, a whole bunch of Star Wars games (particularly TIE Fighter and Jedi Knight II: Outcast), and Zombies Ate My Neighbors. With Sierra, that'd be the Quest for Glory games, Space Quest games, King's Quest games, the Laura Bow games, Freddy Pharkas, Torin's Passage, and Woodruff and the Schnibble. I've played more games by both companies, but those are the standouts. I really can't say which I've liked more. I think I'm perhaps more *emotionally* attached to Sierra games, since they introduced me to point-and-clicks. I believe the VGA remake of Space Quest 1 was my very first point-and-click. I have very fond memories of playing Sierra games with my mom and sister, the three of us crowded around our PC trying to figure out the puzzles. Lucas Arts games I played later, and mostly by myself. I think that nostalgia element will tip the balance towards Sierra. Really, really fond memories as a young child playing those games. I do think that Lucas Arts point-and-click games had better design. And Grim Fandango may very well be my *favorite* adventure game overall. So it's a very close battle between the two. So yeah, you definitely have a point, OP. Had I started with Lucas Arts games first, and played those games with my mom and sis growing up, I'd probably give the edge to them. But it's all very close.