Rosella (spoilers for latest chapter)

[rognik]

I have to say, I was pretty surprised by the way she was characterized in the game. I mean, the whole "Graham Family" has been pretty badass and adventurous from day 1 (with perhaps the exception of Valanice, who was never really given a chance). But there's a lot about her that seems to break from the canon, or at least diverges from most fan assumptions.

*She wasn't kidnapped by a dragon that Alexander had to slay. When Alex makes his way home, she was busy having a staring contest with Graham. Did they not want to make her seem helpless? Or are they just redefining the ending of KQIII?
*She stayed in Daventry Castle. While neither ending of KQVII ever explicitly stated that she married Edgar, people generally assumed she did and stayed in... ugh, the land's name escapes me right now. Also, are they suggesting that Rosella is a single mother? I kind of got the feeling that Edgar is Gart's father, but they never say it outright in the game, nor speak about Gart's father at all. (In fact, this chapter is the first mention of Graham's kids at all.)
*She's wearing pantaloons instead of a dress. Yes, I know it would've been pretty hard for her to go climbing a rock wall in a dress, but KQIV and VII had her in a dress and she handled herself pretty well there. Does this change of wardrobe speak to some hidden aspect of her personality, or is it just easier to animate if they don't need dress physics?

Got any other thoughts on the somewhat neglected daughter? Feel free to share those as well.

[Gabby]

I had no idea that wearing a skirt meant I'm not allowed to ever wear pants.

[ClassicalCherg]

I also adored the new Rosella. I thought it added to her character and made me love her just that little bit more.
Honestly I am not really fussed by the alteration of the canon. If it works, it works and I think this way it shows the personalities and character growth of all of them. I'm not one of those classic-game canon 'purists'.
My take on the whole pants thing is the fact she is a teenager. I remember when i was that age I experimented a LOT with my fashion: i changed from pretty dresses to leather pants, to distressed denim to lolita fashion. So the fact that she is in to different fashions and is trying things out makes me connect more with her.
It probably helps that we both look alike too.
Also loving the shorter hair....or was it pulled back? I couldn't tell.
Overall i thought the character development was really good. The puzzles were a tad monotonous but i play these games for the story not the gameplay so it didn't fuss me too much.

[rognik]

Originally posted by Seraphna:

I had no idea that wearing a skirt meant I'm not allowed to ever wear pants.

That's not what I meant and you know it! For one thing, in the era King's Quest is set, it was very rare for women to be seen in anything but dresses, at least of a certain class, and I thought it might be a short cut to defining her personality.

[Pstrangler]

I think one of the intent of the re-imagination was to bring the series into equality and give women a more predominant role. Old Graham altered the rules to allow a woman to sit on the throne, Rose wears pants, Graham has to work his way into Valanice's heart, the blacksmith is a woman and a strong one at that...

This is something I applaud, canon would have felt dated by 2016 standards

[Gabby]

Originally posted by rognik:

Originally posted by Seraphna:

I had no idea that wearing a skirt meant I'm not allowed to ever wear pants.

That's not what I meant and you know it! For one thing, in the era King's Quest is set, it was very rare for women to be seen in anything but dresses, at least of a certain class, and I thought it might be a short cut to defining her personality.

Knowing Robeta's feelings on feminism. I'm fairly certain she never intended for anyone to be able to claim women belong in skirts in her setting. She even commented once that literally the only reason she did that was at the time her games were coming out the market percieved a male playing majority and due to graphical limitations it was, to her, one of the only ways to make it apparent to players that a character was female.

It should also be noted, as said above, that the Valiance under an aged Graham was never an established canon, this is the first official time we're actually seeing it.

[Gabby]

While fans do have a right to expect traditions to be upheld from older games, they should also have the right to expect a series to evolve with the time and address impracticalities. There's a very simple impracticality here and I'm going to share it as a woman:

Skirts suck to adventure in. Pants are comforterable. Rosella should be allowed to wear pants if she wants to when she's adventuring.

[ThunderMonkey]

Originally posted by Astranon:

@rognik, I'll be honest. I hate the new portrayal of Rosella. KQ4 was the first game I played when I was introduced to the original series, and she has always been my favorite character. I understand that Rosella and Alexander are teens because this game is set between KQ3 and KQ4, so some differences are to be expected. But I have a hard time imagining that the sensitive, mature girl presented in KQ4 would have been anything like the teen in this game. I mean, Rosella in the original KQ4 was crying (more so than the rest of her family, I might add) while Graham was on his deathbed. She tidied up the house of the seven dwarves while they were away. She was carried off by Lolette's bat-winged imps without any sign of physical resistance. Can you really picture that same girl running around in pantaloons swinging a sword before she ever even met Genesta? I don't think so.

We got to see Rosella again in KQ7. One could argue that her character in this game is closer to that which we see in this reimagined version. She has that same adventurous spirit. Even so, there are still moments where she cries or expresses complex emotions. We don't see any of this with the new Rosella. She's just a teen hungry for adventure. That's all.

To be fair, Episode 4 is not about Rosella. But that doesn't change the fact that what we are given doesn't honor the original work at all. Yes, the pantaloons do bother me. It makes as much sense as if they had made Rosella a Korean girl (it doesn't, in other words). It very much goes against Rosella's character as established by KQ4 and KQ7. Rosella didn't need pantaloons or a sword to show herself to be as capable a hero as Graham or Alexander. And she shouldn't need them now.

And yes, I got the impression that Rosella might be a single mother with an illegitimate child as well. It's possible that this isn't the case (Edgar may have had business elsewhere). But if it is, I have to say I'm even more disappointed that there would be such an uncalled-for departure from the original. What's next? Will we get to see her leaning against the castle wall having a cigarette? Rosella's adventurous spirit in the original series did not mean she was irresponsible. On the contrary, she did what she had to do in both KQ4 and KQ7.

Okay, I'm done venting. Don't get me wrong. Episode 4 is great in its own right. I was genuinely surprised by how relevant this episode was to the originals in terms of storyline. It was quite emotional, and I thought the puzzles were great. But I do not care for the new Rosella. Not at all.

Kind of the same. I had been playing Sierra games since the first in most of the serieses... like Space Quest, Police Quest, Leisure Suit Larry... but KQ4 was probably the first game to really peek my interest in the King's Quest series and actually kind of loved how it played... causing me to go back and play KQ1-3.

[Doesnotcompute83]

Originally posted by rognik:

I have to say, I was pretty surprised by the way she was characterized in the game. I mean, the whole "Graham Family" has been pretty badass and adventurous from day 1 (with perhaps the exception of Valanice, who was never really given a chance). But there's a lot about her that seems to break from the canon, or at least diverges from most fan assumptions.

*She wasn't kidnapped by a dragon that Alexander had to slay. When Alex makes his way home, she was busy having a staring contest with Graham. Did they not want to make her seem helpless? Or are they just redefining the ending of KQIII?
*She stayed in Daventry Castle. While neither ending of KQVII ever explicitly stated that she married Edgar, people generally assumed she did and stayed in... ugh, the land's name escapes me right now. Also, are they suggesting that Rosella is a single mother? I kind of got the feeling that Edgar is Gart's father, but they never say it outright in the game, nor speak about Gart's father at all. (In fact, this chapter is the first mention of Graham's kids at all.)
*She's wearing pantaloons instead of a dress. Yes, I know it would've been pretty hard for her to go climbing a rock wall in a dress, but KQIV and VII had her in a dress and she handled herself pretty well there. Does this change of wardrobe speak to some hidden aspect of her personality, or is it just easier to animate if they don't need dress physics?

Got any other thoughts on the somewhat neglected daughter? Feel free to share those as well.

I don't think Rosella is a single mother, much like how Alexander isn't a single father. In the Garham (Christoper Lloyd's narration) did mentioned Edgar in one line regarding how Rosella went adventuring with Edgar all the time until she had Gart, which she then focused to raise him as king. I am trying to recall if it was a cutscene narration or a throw away line during the game. Anyway, there a quote at the kq omnipedia wiki.

Maybe they rewrote the story as having Rosella and Edger staying in Daventry to not only to have one of the Daventry kids stay behind, but because Edger's parents are immortal if I am not mistaken; Rosella wouldn't be able to be queen in that line.

I find it odd that we do not see the other parents in the game, but I think it is probably due to budget and involvement to the story for an episodic series - having Cassima and Edger wouldn't add to the story.

[Doesnotcompute83]

Originally posted by rognik:

Originally posted by Seraphna:

I had no idea that wearing a skirt meant I'm not allowed to ever wear pants.

That's not what I meant and you know it! For one thing, in the era King's Quest is set, it was very rare for women to be seen in anything but dresses, at least of a certain class, and I thought it might be a short cut to defining her personality.

For a game series that adds modern and non-era diction and traditions into the series since the first game, I don't think having a Rosella with pants isn't a bad thing considering that the series plays loose with historical accuracy - like Shrek, the King's Quest series takes place in a land of fairytales. In fact, it makes more sense for Rosella to wear pants in this new iteration as she is more tomboyish than the previous incarnations. - she would have a hard time scaling that cliff is she was wearing a dress.

I think what bothers me is Graham being rewritten as an ADHD and irrational king as it is a complete contrast of his classic self. However, I can get over it.

I guess what I am saying is that almost all the characters were drasitcally rewritten over than old Valanice. Sure, Valanice origin has been completely rewritten with her having the ability to be Vee or Neese, her older self is more like the classic Valanice. Alexander has been rewritten as a rebellious, angst teen, who is the main focus in this chapter. I am not sure why you are so bothered of Rosella wearing pants and having a fire sword in the new game, but do not mention anything about Alexander being completely rewritten as a magic wielding angst teen who would prefer to be called "Caduceus the Magnificent" several times in the game. While Alexander did dabble with magic in the classic games, he didn't go around snapping his fingers and burning things. Imagine how easy he could have solved some obstacles such as getting through the hedges that guards the entrance to Beast.

[Doesnotcompute83]

Originally posted by Astranon:

Originally posted by Doesnotcompute83:

I think what bothers me is Graham being rewritten as an ADHD and irrational king as it is a complete contrast of his classic self. However, I can get over it.

Out of curiosity, why do you find the new Graham to be irrational? You're right though that he is different. The old Graham was all business, it seemed.

I meant impulsive.

Originally posted by Doesnotcompute83:

I guess what I am saying is that almost all the characters were drasitcally rewritten over than old Valanice.

This right here is the reason why people have a problem with Rosella wearing pantaloons. It's a very visual reminder that this new Rosella is different from the original (whether you think wearing pantaloons is acceptable for a female in a fairy tale setting or not).

Originally posted by Doesnotcompute83:

Alexander has been rewritten as a rebellious, angst teen, who is the main focus in this chapter.

Actually, Graham characterizes Alexander as a rebellious teen full of angst, and this was out of frustration at his son being nothing like he imagined. Alexander's character is officially undefined since he is still coming to terms with his identity as prince of a kingdom he did not grow up in. This does not clash with the original storyline. And it is easier to accept Alexander having innate magical ability than it is to think of Rosella carrying a fiery sword because we have already seen him use sorcery (albeit, using tools). I don't recall ever seeing Rosella use a weapon of any sort to take down an opponent.

Actually it does clash with the original story much like how you think Rosella wearing pants and having a sword clashes with the original story - I find justifying one reimagined portrayal and rejecting the other is picking and choosing. Graham doesn't characterizes Alexander as a rebellious teen full of angst - we actually see it being portrayed as such in the game. Alexander being rewritten is completely different than his portrayal in King's Quest 6. Sure, Alexander is a bit older in part 6, he was already an adult in King's Quest 3 and the TOG universe. As mentioned before, it is hard to imagine Alexander knowing magic as well as Manny since this version of Alexander didn't initally like solving puzzles and would use magic as a means to get through them. Imagine him going through the oracle cave. Rather than using a potion to turn into an eagle to kill the spider and into the cave, he would just fireball the spider and the spiderman web away with the snap of his fingers. Rosella only mentioned the sword as if it was her prized position - it isn't implied that she carries it around with her all the time. If she had, she would have had it on her much like how Graham carries his bow around in the new game. Speaking of which, why is it so hard to imagine Rosella having a weapon (if she carried one around) if we see Graham carrying a bow around? In the original canon, he doesn't like having weapons and instead solve puzzles with wit.

I think you are just so upset over the fact that Rosella has pants in this game world where in the original canon, is where people and creatures from Earth abandoned to. This new game is treated as a reboot where the previous series were referred to as embellishments of lore being passed down from one individual to the next. That said, TOG can do whatever they want with the characters (like they are doing now) as it is a reboot.

[Doesnotcompute83]

Originally posted by Seraphna:

While fans do have a right to expect traditions to be upheld from older games, they should also have the right to expect a series to evolve with the time and address impracticalities. There's a very simple impracticality here and I'm going to share it as a woman:

Skirts suck to adventure in. Pants are comforterable. Rosella should be allowed to wear pants if she wants to when she's adventuring.

I honestly do not get why people are peeved with Rosella having pants and not peeved at the more major retconning the new series reboot have done such as making Hagatha a princess or whatever.

[rognik]

Originally posted by Doesnotcompute83:

Originally posted by Seraphna:

While fans do have a right to expect traditions to be upheld from older games, they should also have the right to expect a series to evolve with the time and address impracticalities. There's a very simple impracticality here and I'm going to share it as a woman:

Skirts suck to adventure in. Pants are comforterable. Rosella should be allowed to wear pants if she wants to when she's adventuring.

I honestly do not get why people are peeved with Rosella having pants and not peeved at the more major retconning the new series reboot have done such as making Hagatha a princess or whatever.

I didn't reply sooner, but I do have issues with some of the things done with Alexander. I didn't say it here, though, because I wanted to focus on Rosella in this thread, especially as the game pretty much refused to do the same.

Now, I don't have a problem with Rosella being a bold fighter type (even though that wasn't exactly her characterizations in the original games), but there's this annoying trend in media that if a woman wants to be seen as strong, she has to eschew all traditional feminine traits, like wearing dresses. One of the things I liked abotu Rosella in the original games is that she was a strong female protagonist and yet was still distinctly feminine. The pantaloons, as I said, are just a symptom of a larger issue, not the issue in and of itself. Valanice herself, for instance, is pretty badass in her own right, but I don't see her wardrobe changing greatly from when she was a princess locked in a tower.

And since you keep bringing up the big changes in characterization, I'll briefly touch on that:
*I didn't mind Graham being an excitable nerd because it was funny. I liked how, in Chapter 2, he made a very specific effort not to have that outburst again as it wasn't dignified, or whatever his internal dialogue was. Thus, I really didn't like him breaking down in the Escher puzzle room. Alexander's embarassment was appropriate, though.
*Speaking of Alexander, I actually kind of liked how they dealt with his personality. He's conflicted in who he is when he arrives, partly because he spent 18 years living a life that was completely opposite to how it was supposed to go. Naturally, he'd be a bit moody. I also didn't interpret the fireballs as innate magic ability as that he spent so much time in Manannan's house learning magic to escape that he starts using it as a crutch. Both the games where he was the protagonist, magic played a big role in his adventure (although less so if you took the easy route in KQVI). What I didn't like was him wearing his KQVI outfit. Those are some pretty fancy colours for a just-escaped slave, and I really didn't like the outfit that much anyway. That's honestly a nitpick, though. The Caduceus thing... they made a fair point about him having to get used to a new name, especially after having grown up with a completely different one. I think the silliness of the name was to show that he still had a bit of his father in him, even if he grew up as a peasant.
*I had no objections at all to what they did with Hagatha. In the original game, she was just a witch who lived in a cave and was hinted at being evil (like killing you if you tried to steal her bird). Giving her a personal reason to be kidnapping princesses and making her a sympathetic character went a long way to making a tacked on character seem like a complicated one.

Everyone seems to be latching onto the pants part of my original post, when I made two other observations that people have mostly ignored. I never even said it was bad that she had a different outfit! (Although I don't think the overall look really worked. Not the point.) All I did was point out that she was wearing pants and not a skirt, and everyone starts jumping down my throat for it. I'm almost sorry I even mentioned it in the first place, but it is far too late to do anything about any of that now.

[Gabby]

Gonna repeat this simply. A woman doesn't need to be out of a dress to be seen as strong, sure. However, a woman shouldn't have to wear a dress just because she's a woman. Wearing pants is practical, not masculine. My problem with your statement is the innate sexism you're displaying while you think you're addressing a sexist issue.

This is a rediculous thing to focus on. Women aren't trying to appear bold or strong b wearing pants. They're wearing them because they're comforterable. The very fact that you see getting out of a dress as "eschewing feminine things" shows an innate sexist feeling that women are less feminine in pants than skirts.

[Doesnotcompute83]

Originally posted by rognik:

Originally posted by Doesnotcompute83:

Everyone seems to be latching onto the pants part of my original post, when I made two other observations that people have mostly ignored. I never even said it was bad that she had a different outfit! (Although I don't think the overall look really worked. Not the point.) All I did was point out that she was wearing pants and not a skirt, and everyone starts jumping down my throat for it. I'm almost sorry I even mentioned it in the first place, but it is far too late to do anything about any of that now.

I agree. Your initial comment was just about her pants and nothing more, and just to be clear, I wasn't jumping on you for your comment as you moved on from it and were talking about other topics such as Edgar being absent in the chapter - as stated before, I think it was done as a budget and time contraints regardless the game being funded by a big company. Interestingly enough, chapter 3 recycles the present day/dying Graham as Manny when he turns into a human - the camera only focuses on his hand so we do not see the entire model.

Lastly, I also think it because the developers wanted to have game focus on Graham's biological family like the classic series.

[Doesnotcompute83]

Originally posted by Seraphna:

Gonna repeat this simply. A woman doesn't need to be out of a dress to be seen as strong, sure. However, a woman shouldn't have to wear a dress just because she's a woman. Wearing pants is practical, not masculine. My problem with your statement is the innate sexism you're displaying while you think you're addressing a sexist issue.

This is a rediculous thing to focus on. Women aren't trying to appear bold or strong b wearing pants. They're wearing them because they're comforterable. The very fact that you see getting out of a dress as "eschewing feminine things" shows an innate sexist feeling that women are less feminine in pants than skirts.

I agree it is ridiculous especially when a few people are focusing her pants and not the other, more drastic changes that the reboot has made. Honestly, I didn't realized that Rosella was wearing pants even after I passed episode 4 until I read this thread as pants isn't an issue for me. I was more into Icebella's characterization in the game and how the developers made her be any of the two princesses.

They might have gave Rosella's pants because the developers had issues animating her scaling the rocks or to give her a more adventurous look as a means to reimagine the character- while it is true that Valanice has went onto an adventure of her own in KQ7, it was merely to find her daughter whereas Rosella.