Did Bill Tiller said too much about the ending of Monkey Island 2?

Checking on of the topics of this forum http://www.telltalegames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8696 there was in the 1st post a link for a blog of Bill Tyler one of the creators of Monkey Island 3. Among lots of things he said, he wrote the following:
...yes, I’ll make a MI inspired pirate game, but instead of a geeky kid at Disneyland/ Big whoop™ wishing he was a pirate, I’ll make three cursed pirates who start off as ghosts. But that is far as I got, and then I put the idea on the back burner for about six years.

I think he must have had some type of insight of the ending of the 2nd game of Monkey Island. But i dont know, but this blog definetly spat out his though on the ending of MI2. Do you guys think this is how should we interpretate Ron Gilbert's ending?

Edit: I also read from people here that the creators of Curs eof Monkey Islands had no insight on what was the storyline for the sequel supposed to go. But i have no clue if this is true or not
«13

Comments

  • edited August 2009
    Bill Tiller sounds a bit bitter in that quote. Although I suppose he has some legitimacy to that feeling, after the disaster for him that was Full Throttle: Payback.

    Dave Grossman has gone on record saying, "Those who know don't tell." Bill Tiller - apparently - doesn't know or Dave is lying to cover Ron Gilbert. I don't know any of these people to make such personal judgments about their character nor do I really care. The explanation I care about is the canon one at the end of The Curse of Monkey Island.
  • edited August 2009
    Then how do you explain Eline's lines?
  • edited August 2009
    I think he is wrong. Guybrush IS a pirate not a kid. Big Whoop is a portal to another dimention and Guybrush is under a spell that turned him to a kid or made him believe he was one.

    Voojoo Island is looking great as most work from Bill Tyller and I would be pissed of with Lucasarts too if they didn't give the credit my work deserves. But there is no need to bash MI 2 which is one of the best games ever as I feel somewhat is his intention.

    There are never enough pirate games and the more the better.
  • edited August 2009
    I am so lost. Can somebody please explain the purpose of the first post? (BTW.... I mean that quite literally. I'm totally not trying to be an asshole here.)
  • edited August 2009
    pilouuuu wrote: »
    I think he is wrong. Guybrush IS a pirate not a kid. Big Whoop is a portal to another dimention and Guybrush is under a spell that turned him to a kid or made him believe he was one.

    Honestly I think that there's some other explanation that was never brought to light. Curse did the best they could think of to continue on with the series in my opinion. I don't believe Guybrush is a geeky kid at a theme park wanting to be a pirate, but I don't fully accept Curse's explanation either. But it's all we got. But that's another discussion altogether.
  • edited August 2009
    I am so lost. Can somebody please explain the purpose of the first post? (BTW.... I mean that quite literally. I'm totally not trying to be an asshole here.)

    There is some debate whether Guybrush is a "real person" or all in the imagination of some kid at Disneyland, due to some events at the end of MI2. MI3 said that it was a hallucination by real guybrush caused by a portal to "heck" created by lechuck.
    That is what has been taken as canon up to now, but there is still an issue of whether or not that was the original story or not.
  • edited August 2009
    alexonfyre wrote: »
    There is some debate whether Guybrush is a "real person" or all in the imagination of some kid at Disneyland, due to some events at the end of MI2. MI3 said that it was a hallucination by real guybrush caused by a portal to "heck" created by lechuck.
    That is what has been taken as canon up to now, but there is still an issue of whether or not that was the original story or not.

    Thats for clearing that up. I have only played 1 & 4. I guess that would explain why I am clueless ay? :)
  • edited August 2009
    Why in the world would the people who worked on Curse know ANYTHING? I mean, in regards to the original ending? If they knew its original purpose, they would have actually USED it, rather than creating the blindly stumbling mess that they did.
  • edited August 2009
    Why in the world would the people who worked on Curse know ANYTHING? I mean, in regards to the original ending? If they knew its original purpose, they would have actually USED it, rather than creating the blindly stumbling mess that they did.

    Goodness, I think we need to sit down, take a Xanax and try to curb the urge to kill everyone who made, bought, liked or ever thought about anything Monkey Island in a positive light after 1991.
    Just repeat to yourself...it's just a game
  • edited August 2009
    PariahKing wrote: »
    Bill Tiller sounds a bit bitter in that quote. Although I suppose he has some legitimacy to that feeling, after the disaster for him that was Full Throttle: Payback.

    Dave Grossman has gone on record saying, "Those who know don't tell." Bill Tiller - apparently - doesn't know or Dave is lying to cover Ron Gilbert. I don't know any of these people to make such personal judgments about their character nor do I really care. The explanation I care about is the canon one at the end of The Curse of Monkey Island.

    He sounds like that when you read it. But seems like TTG is in friendly terms with him. Judging by the other topic opened. But that comment on his blog for me stood out alot, because its his judgement. Honestly if thats how MI3 should have run, alot of people would have been pissed off. Since one of the main reason people play this game is for pirate adventures, and not to play a kids imagination fixation. Im jumping the gun on what may have been MI3 in Ron Gilbert's plan, but who knows.
  • edited August 2009
    alexonfyre wrote: »
    Goodness, I think we need to sit down, take a Xanax and try to curb the urge to kill everyone who made, bought, liked or ever thought about anything Monkey Island in a positive light after 1991.
    Just repeat to yourself...it's just a game
    ..what?

    1. Logically speaking, I don't see why the quoted person would even know what the OP says they are giving away.

    2. If the Curse staff wasn't blindly stumbling in the dark for an explanation, there would be no debate about the ending.

    3. The only thing that genuinely pisses me off in these discussions is that "it's just a game" garbage. We're having CONVERSATION, not planning a coup or basing our lives around someone else's creation. I can have an opinion, you can have an opinion. People are free to agree or disagree. I sure as hell am not going to change my name to Moonbeam Starchild, grasping hands with the community while singing Kumbaya and yelling out that every thought is an individual whathaveyou.

    Yes it's just a game. Guess what? That's the whole point of this forum, the General boards being only a very SLIGHT exception(in that they're mostly game-dominated as well). They're kind of important here, in that they're the focus of all discussion.

    My real life is not affected by what goes on here. I come to this forum in my free time to discuss games and a company that I love, I do not come here to join in your "just a game" chorus. There are no opinions in this space, there is no diversity, there is no unique spirit. Stop telling me that I can't contribute what I want to the conversation, because everything I said was both valid and on-topic. Don't tell me I'm an overreacting anger management case, because that kind of talking down and diminishing of the value of my opinion and contribution to the discussion is the only thing about this discussion that has made me remotely peeved.
  • edited August 2009
    Thats for clearing that up. I have only played 1 & 4. I guess that would explain why I am clueless ay? :)

    Get this man a copy of Monkey Island 2 and 3, stat!!
  • edited August 2009
    bobhobbit wrote: »
    Get this man a copy of Monkey Island 2 and 3, stat!!

    Yeah really... I use Vista though... stupid... STUPID VISTA!!!!
  • edited August 2009
    Why in the world would the people who worked on Curse know ANYTHING? I mean, in regards to the original ending? If they knew its original purpose, they would have actually USED it, rather than creating the blindly stumbling mess that they did.

    Blindly stumbling mess? Did you play the same game that I did?
    Yeah really... I use Vista though... stupid... STUPID VISTA!!!!

    ScummVM is your friend.
  • edited August 2009
    Pale Man wrote: »
    Blindly stumbling mess? Did you play the same game that I did?

    It's a wonderful game, but towards the end it does sort of bend over backwards trying to explain what happened. I might even call that
    lengthy dialogue tree with LeChuck
    a "blindly stumbling mess"... but I think you can skip most of it if you don't care to hear it.
    ScummVM is your friend.

    Listen to this man, roberttitus.
  • edited August 2009
    ..what?

    1. Logically speaking, I don't see why the quoted person would even know what the OP says they are giving away.

    2. If the Curse staff wasn't blindly stumbling in the dark for an explanation, there would be no debate about the ending.

    3. The only thing that genuinely pisses me off in these discussions is that "it's just a game" garbage. We're having CONVERSATION, not planning a coup or basing our lives around someone else's creation. I can have an opinion, you can have an opinion. People are free to agree or disagree. I sure as hell am not going to change my name to Moonbeam Starchild, grasping hands with the community while singing Kumbaya and yelling out that every thought is an individual whathaveyou.

    Yes it's just a game. Guess what? That's the whole point of this forum, the General boards being only a very SLIGHT exception(in that they're mostly game-dominated as well). They're kind of important here, in that they're the focus of all discussion.

    My real life is not affected by what goes on here. I come to this forum in my free time to discuss games and a company that I love, I do not come here to join in your "just a game" chorus. There are no opinions in this space, there is no diversity, there is no unique spirit. Stop telling me that I can't contribute what I want to the conversation, because everything I said was both valid and on-topic. Don't tell me I'm an overreacting anger management case, because that kind of talking down and diminishing of the value of my opinion and contribution to the discussion is the only thing about this discussion that has made me remotely peeved.

    This argument is worth about four words to me: You're right, drop it.
  • edited August 2009
    Pale Man wrote: »
    Blindly stumbling mess? Did you play the same game that I did?
    Probably. It was called Curse of Monkey Island and I did buy it in a store. Granted a good majority of the rest of the game was really well done(with the other "problem areas" being a nagging minority of the puzzles and pretty bad character art), but the explanation for the LeChuck's Revenge ending always felt like they were explaining it away to retcon into the status quo rather than organically growing from it.

    Granted, they could have done far, FAR worse.
  • edited August 2009
    i agree with mr. dashing here..curse wasn't a bad game, but how they managed to continue from the ending of part 2 felt somewhat...artificial. on the other hand, it wasn't an easy task to begin with. i mean, there are a lot of theories, what the ending of mi2 actually meant...but it would have probably been difficult even for ron gilbert to find a good start for mi3.
  • edited August 2009
    I think he was just making a generalization of what people's expectations for what a new Monkey Island game would be about and then he threw in his own ideas.
  • edited August 2009
    Obvioulsy Bill Tiller is an excellent artist but I'm yet to be convinced by his/Autumn Moon's storytelling.
  • edited August 2009
    I dunno, having recently replayed the first two games... there's a lot of evidence supporting the "kid lost in a theme park" theory. Could we not simply assume that 3 is him returning to that fantasy? Does it really matter? heh.

    Explain Elaine, well, either it's another dimension, she's another kid playing the game (plausible right?) or Guybrush is clinging to the dream. Who can say?

    I like to think it's all an elaborate fantasy though, I think it's a nice touch and explains so many of the 4th wall breeches hahahaha.
  • edited August 2009
    Am I the only person who played MI2, loaded up Curse years later and went "Ah - he must've gotten free from the curse LeChuck put on him" and didn't pay it any mind until the end of the game?
  • edited August 2009
    Am I the only one who thinks "kid in a theme park" would be the lamest and most idiotic thing to ever happen in gaming history if that were the "true" explanation?

    (PS Curse's explanation is the true explanation as far as I'm concerned)
  • edited August 2009
    Pale Man wrote: »
    Am I the only one who thinks "kid in a theme park" would be the lamest and most idiotic thing to ever happen in gaming history if that were the "true" explanation?
    CarZ%202009-05-13%2018-31-29-73.jpg
  • edited August 2009
    I guess it was a nod to the pirates of the carribean ride inspiration. However remember we see his brother show his true face as Lechuck so wouldn't that suggest that it was a trick of some kind?
  • edited August 2009
    I guess it was a nod to the pirates of the carribean ride inspiration. However remember we see his brother show his true face as Lechuck so wouldn't that suggest that it was a trick of some kind?
    Or the final remnants of his imagination.

    EDIT: I don't understand why "he's a kid in a theme park" with all the overwhelming evidence surrounding it - look at the TUNNELS even - isn't a secret enough. It's shocking and unexpected and makes for a good twist, even if it finishes off the series. And ultimately what other secret do you really expect Ron to pull? It may or may not be anywhere near as satisfying - maybe worse.

    It's like wondering where you can pick up some Mexican while you're standing inside a Taco Bell.
  • edited August 2009
    I 100% agree with PariahKing and Pale Man. That's all.
  • edited August 2009
    The other thing I don't get - and it's not "just a game, you should relax" - is why people have expectations that the Ron Gilbert sequel...

    A: Was really planned - he didn't make it up years later after things didn't work out with Cavedog entertainment (people act most of the time like Ron was screwed out of making his sequel, but that's anything but what happened)

    B: Will have a super tight fit continuity that explains EVERYTHING. This almost never happens in any medium. A lot of the counterpoints people bring up with probably would be explained away or ignored, to fit whatever mold. It's already pretty confusing for anyone who wants to deny the curse theory - is he a kid or isn't (if not how do I explain the anarchronisms and references to Disney Land)

    I think it'll be interesting once Deathspank comes out how we re-evaluate if we really WANT this Ron Gilbert sequel. It'll be his first game in forever and we'll see if he still can hack it. Several authors "lose it" over the years. MI2 came out in 1991. I have nothing against Ron and he's done some amazing, brilliant things I'll always cherish until I'm dead but I don't deify the man. He's not perfect.

    I would also be really surprised if it didn't finish the series off and make zero sense with the later installments. At this point MI is proving to be profitable and of a high quality with both Tales of Monkey Island and the Special Edition. Yeah sure, back in April we would've all loved to see Ron's intended game because all looked bleak in the MI department but is that really what we want anymore - an alternate Monkey Island timeline that trounces over the established canon? It's not like he couldn't have told us when all hope looked lost for nine years.

    What Telltale is doing looks compelling - and if that cover and their interviews are anything to judge by - and seems to be building off of MI2's atmosphere and mythos anyway, which is what I've really wanted all these years.

    I don't want an explanation, I want to play a MI game like MI2.
  • edited August 2009
    I just posted this in a similar topic, but it fits with this discussion as well:
    I don't honestly care what Ron Gilbert would've done, because he didn't care enough about it to actually do it, so it must not have been that great.
  • edited August 2009
    Haggis wrote: »
    I 100% agree with PariahKing and Pale Man. That's all.
    I think I'll go out of my way to make contreversial statements now.
  • edited August 2009
    Imagine what will happen to this discussion when/if they release MI2:SE
  • edited August 2009
    PariahKing wrote: »
    I think I'll go out of my way to make contreversial statements now.
    Disclaimer: My statement was only valid for the two or three posts above it, in the state they were in at the time of my posting it (to cover myself in case you edit the post in question ;)).
  • edited August 2009
    Have to disagree on the "Kid in a theme park being the lamest idea" part. While such ideas as "It was all a dream" have been used before to ruin a series, it was usually as part of a attempt to retcon mistakes made earlier in the series (the Dallas series in which they made an entire season into a dream in order to bring Bobbie back from the grave and undo hideous subplots being the poster child of this). If it's used as part of the plot from the get go then it can actually work really well, especially if the 'reality' of the 'dreamworld' isn't necessarily completely untrue (Mirror Mask is an excellent example in my mind of how this can be done to good effect).

    It all depends on how it is done really, and the reasons for it. As for the MI2 ending, well we can all accept what we want to believe and it gives a good basis for discussion! :D
  • edited August 2009
    If it were all the "kid in a theme park" crap, what would the 3rd game have been? Guybrush and "Chuckie" having a slap fight in the backseat of their parents' car on the way home from the theme park?

    There wouldn't have ever been a third game if the entire premise was "kid in a theme park."
  • edited August 2009
    Pale Man wrote: »
    If it were all the "kid in a theme park" crap, what would the 3rd game have been? Guybrush and "Chuckie" having a slap fight in the backseat of their parents' car on the way home from the theme park?

    There wouldn't have ever been a third game if the entire premise was "kid in a theme park."
    Depends on how real the pirate world would be and whether it is entirely in Guybrush's mind or if it has a life of its own. The Neverending Story was based around a kid imagining a fantasy world and they managed to make sequels out of it (whether they were any good is a different matter...)
  • edited August 2009
    Pale Man wrote: »
    If it were all the "kid in a theme park" crap, what would the 3rd game have been? Guybrush and "Chuckie" having a slap fight in the backseat of their parents' car on the way home from the theme park?

    There wouldn't have ever been a third game if the entire premise was "kid in a theme park."
    This is kind of why I think it's like looking for someplace where you can pick up some Mexican food while standing inside Taco Bell. The "kid in a theme park" ending for the series could've been a definitive ending to the series. Thankfully it's not, because the idea that all your adventures and your work was really for naught just rings hollow to me. I can understand the "cool aspect" of the ending but the idea everything is just one big acid trip created without the need for illegal stimuli ultimately seems depressing overall.

    I don't think the ending implies a third game was intended. I think it works better as a series closer - look at all the hoops MI3 jumped through to explain it all. I think their effort in this underappreciated - they jumped through A LOT of hoops and managed to create something the fans didn't crap all over. (A miracle in itself.)
  • edited August 2009
    PariahKing wrote: »
    This is kind of why I think it's like looking for someplace where you can pick up some Mexican food while standing inside Taco Bell. The "kid in a theme park" ending for the series could've been a definitive ending to the series. Thankfully it's not, because the idea that all your adventures and your work was really for naught just rings hollow to me. I can understand the "cool aspect" of the ending but the idea everything is just one big acid trip created without the need for illegal stimuli ultimately seems depressing overall.

    I don't think the ending implies a third game was intended. I think it works better as a series closer - look at all the hoops MI3 jumped through to explain it all. I think their effort in this underappreciated - they jumped through A LOT of hoops and managed to create something the fans didn't crap all over. (A miracle in itself.)
    Well that's the thing, I have a liking for stories that cause an emotional response, even if it is a depressing one, but I can see why others would not, so I suppose that is a matter of taste.

    And just to be clear, I'm not saying that I believe that the premise is the kid in a theme park, just that I don't think it would have been lame if it had been. Of course, I'd want some more Monkey goodness before they did end it like that! :D
  • edited August 2009
    PariahKing wrote: »
    This is kind of why I think it's like looking for someplace where you can pick up some Mexican food while standing inside Taco Bell. The "kid in a theme park" ending for the series could've been a definitive ending to the series. Thankfully it's not, because the idea that all your adventures and your work was really for naught just rings hollow to me. I can understand the "cool aspect" of the ending but the idea everything is just one big acid trip created without the need for illegal stimuli ultimately seems depressing overall.

    I don't think the ending implies a third game was intended. I think it works better as a series closer - look at all the hoops MI3 jumped through to explain it all. I think their effort in this underappreciated - they jumped through A LOT of hoops and managed to create something the fans didn't crap all over. (A miracle in itself.)

    Have you read much of this thread, I would classify a lot of it as "crapping all over"
  • edited August 2009
    I don't buy the kid in a theme park explanation because MI2 itself didn't fully accept it. I mean come on. When they walked away Chuckie's eyes glowed with electricity and he laughed at the screen. Then half-way through the credits Elaine is left standing at the hole and says "Gee, I hope Guybrush is ok. I hope LeChuck didn't put a spell on him or anything!" So if it was a series closer it was one of the worst executed in history.

    This to me explains that CMI didn't have to reach too far to "explain away" the MI2 ending. It was mentioned in MI2 itself! But I still don't think that CMI's explanation is the best one....seems rather silly and clunky. Then again it kind of adds to CMI's whole atmosphere. A sense of over-monologue and master plan speeches that kind of makes it look like a satire. Which works. But I definitely wouldn't buy the "kid in a theme park" explanation. Even if CMI was never made.
  • edited August 2009
    I think the biggest mistake LucasArts did with the Monkey Island series, was to give it a continuing story after MI2. LucasArts could very well have made CMI a game in the Monkey Island universe, and not trying to give an explanation at all to MI2.

    Personally, I think the MI series should be unrelated, considering how it's turned into. They should just give up on the whole "canon" thing, and not have a timeline for the events at all. Just have them all as individual stories, unrelated to eachother, kind of like Zelda (yeah, I know there's a timeline, but it's more about the mythology of Link, Zelda and Ganon).

    Another thing, how popular aren't reboots of famous series, be it games or movies, nowadays? LucasArts could easily enough reboot the series, and decide only the two first games are canon, and then move on to make a third. Wouldn't it be great if after MI2:SE (if it ever is released) they released Ron Gilbert's Monkey Island 3 in the same style as the first two and as a downloadable title?
Sign in to comment in this discussion.