Why?

iteite
edited June 2009 in Tales of Monkey Island
Why did u go and destroy such a good game with so terrible 3D graphic?
Was it so hard to stick with the graphic's from The curse of monkey island that was released in 1997? Thats 12years ago. 12 years old graphics looks 10 times better then this, and had much more feeling in to it.
This just looks like a bad painted child's game, like a Sprongebob game or something like that (not offence Sprongebob).

Is it only me that gets sad and upset to se this sh** ?

Comments

  • edited June 2009
    a) Monkey Island went 3D 9 years ago.

    b) Most people are happy to have a new monkey Island game

    c) A lot of people like the new look
  • edited June 2009
    I somehow agree with you. Curse of MI is in my opinion the by far best MI game. Graphics there were absolutely amazing and perfectly fitted world of MI. Still I am incredibly happy for new Monkey Island and preordered without any doubt.
  • iteite
    edited June 2009
    Xocrates wrote: »
    a) Monkey Island went 3D 9 years ago.

    b) Most people are happy to have a new monkey Island game

    c) A lot of people like the new look

    a) Orly? Hope i didnt miss anything in the first 3d game.

    b) Is that a fact that u just made? All my friends that played Monkey island 1,2,3 hated the first 3d remake 9years ago. Never heard a good thing about that game.

    c) well u are right im afraid. Otherwise they wouldnt make it in 3D. That would be stupid.
  • edited June 2009
    I was turned off by the graphics in the trailer
    Then i saw the gameplay, looks tonnes better

    go check that out
  • edited June 2009
    Nah, I think it looks great.

    Telltale are working on other projects, the team for Tales is probably half the size of the Curse team. If they went 2D, it would take them much longer to finish the game. Adventure games are still a niche market, they'll make better games if they take a low-risk approach and keep their development cycles short.
  • edited June 2009
    IF you want another 2D Monkey Island game, you´ll have to do two things!

    1. Show your support, by buying the tales, and special edition of the first monkey island

    2. Spread the love For monkey islands! Forums, internets! friends and so on!

    The more sale, the more likely Lucas arts will create a new game, they said so at E3!
  • edited June 2009
    What i find quite strange is that this probably is the first time in my life where people are saying that a 2d game is more work to do be done than a 3d game. Although i guess this could be somehow true under certain conditions if you're having your whole pipeline layed out for 3d games.

    Anyway after watching the gameplay trailer i still have mixed feelings about the look but this just might be due to that specific island and the low quality of the video. I'm quite confident that there will be scenes looking much better than the scene shown in the gameplay trailer. For instance a jungle scene should look a whole lot better and much more *new buzzword* immersive.

    But i honestly also have to say that i probably won't go wow about running through the city/harbour/?-scene after watching the video because this somehow is what i was fearing. I haven't seen how this added anything valuable to the adventure part of the game. It just seems to be more like any other 3d action game now. If this really draws a lot more players to adventures then well may it be happen but personally as a gamer i find it superfluous.

    I wonder how many people would have prefered either a more traditional Sam&Max 3d approach with mouse point&click or even an combined 2d/3d approach like AME has choosen with Vooju Island. Those backdrops look marvellous and i really like the voodoo priest ghost.
  • edited June 2009
    3D is definitely less work than 2d. That's why animated movies are also going 3D. With 2D EVERY single frame of a character needs to be hand drawn, and that also includes all angles of backgrounds that have to be drawn separately.

    With 3D you only need to build the model of the character once and build the environment once. The animations can then be applied as 'scripts' to the model and the environment can be viewed from any angle (and lighted from any angle as well).

    At least, that's the way I understand it.
  • edited June 2009
    I think you underestimate how much work it is building a good and working 3d character. Secondly you can still render out all the needed frames from a 3d model you've built before which actually also isn't needed as AME uses 3d characters in a pseudo 2d environment.
  • edited June 2009
    It's also a lot easier in 3D for many different departments to work on the same shot concurrently. Also much easier to revise if something doesn't work out. Plus it's a lot cheaper in terms of storage.
  • edited June 2009
    it's better then being a Left 4 Dead fan. Plus we are lucky to even see one monkey island game at all let alone two.. Even if the other is a slightly updated remake with voice overs.


    Also the 4th monkey island game, the first true 3D one was not a remake at all. It was the 4th one in the seires and picks up after MI3.
  • edited June 2009
    @Jayel
    I didn't have a complete 2d pipe in mind.
  • EmilyEmily Telltale Alumni
    edited June 2009
    What i find quite strange is that this probably is the first time in my life where people are saying that a 2d game is more work to do be done than a 3d game.

    Eh? We've been saying that for years. Plus, there's so much more we can do with 3D - great cinematic camera angles, dynamic animations - not to mention that we're a 3D company. Everything we do is 3D, and we're always working to make it better and more visually awesome.

    One of the journalists I showed the game to yesterday commented that it looks like a 3D version of Curse of Monkey Island. In action, the game has a much different effect than it does in the screenshots. Several of our artists worked on Curse of Monkey Island.
  • edited June 2009
    If you think about it this is quite a funny situation we're in here.

    Beside of large parts of the casual, handheld, mobile and online market the rest of the gaming industry went 3d many years ago and whilst quite some other genres are pushing the possibilities further and further on the gfx front we're somehow still satisfied with old technology and some of us are even almost even begging for maintaining this status.

    This shows that the interesting part of an adventure is more timeless like good puzzle games or games with some depth geenrally. You can still enjoy Maniac Mansion without any problems but you won't enjoy most of the old fps games.
  • edited June 2009
    You can still enjoy Maniac Mansion without any problems but you won't enjoy most of the old fps games.

    I never enjoyed Maniac Mansion. Day of The Tentacle, on the other hand...
  • edited June 2009
    taumel wrote: »
    This shows that the interesting part of an adventure is more timeless like good puzzle games or games with some depth geenrally. You can still enjoy Maniac Mansion without any problems but you won't enjoy most of the old fps games.

    uh... I'm not really going to agree with not enjoying Blood, Duke Nukem 3D, Doom II, Rise of the Triads... and so on for eternity.
  • edited June 2009
    Emily wrote: »
    Eh? We've been saying that for years. Plus, there's so much more we can do with 3D - great cinematic camera angles, dynamic animations - not to mention that we're a 3D company. Everything we do is 3D, and we're always working to make it better and more visually awesome.

    One of the journalists I showed the game to yesterday commented that it looks like a 3D version of Curse of Monkey Island. In action, the game has a much different effect than it does in the screenshots. Several of our artists worked on Curse of Monkey Island.
    Never heard it here before and as i said i also never experienced it this way but this also might be due to different designs of the 2d and 3d games we had.

    Yes there is a lot you can do with 3d but without convincing inner values you still don't have a working game, no matter how many angles and dynamic animations you're having. And once you're having those inner values, it often doesn't care anymore if it's 2d or 3d, taking game designs beside which really built on the 3d aspect. I'm not talking about how this affects sales.
  • edited June 2009
    taumel wrote:
    This shows that the interesting part of an adventure is more timeless like good puzzle games or games with some depth geenrally. You can still enjoy Maniac Mansion without any problems but you won't enjoy most of the old fps games.
    uh... I'm not really going to agree with not enjoying Blood, Duke Nukem 3D, Doom II, Rise of the Triads... and so on for eternity.

    I think the "you" Taumel was referring to was an impersonal "you," such as "one" (as in "one should always listen to one's elders").
  • edited June 2009
    I got that. I'm just sayin'... old school fps is the s'hit.
  • edited June 2009
    I got that. I'm just sayin'... old school fps is the s'hit.
    Actually, I think the point being made is that FPSs aged worse than adventure games. Not that those games are bad.

    Personally, I find it extremely hard to enjoy any pre-half life FPS. Although I should note I was never a big FPS fan.
  • edited June 2009
    Wolfenstein 3D ftw!
  • edited June 2009
    System Shock 2 is a timeless FPS.
  • edited June 2009
    Yep as well as System Shock but that's simply because, contrary to most FPS games, there is a great game inside, almost more a RPG, huh?! I for sure won't ever play again any Hexen, Heretic and most of the others which heavily rely on the graphics and age rather quickly.
  • edited June 2009
    Actually, I enjoy Hexen and Heretic and the like more than I ever enjoyed Quake (which actually looks much worse than any of the previous games in my opinion). The only modern day FPSs I enjoy are Metroid Prime (not even a real FPS and I only really like the first one so far) and Half-Life/Portal. I don't even see what all the fuss is about for Left4Dead. Sure it's fun, but it's not the second coming everybody says it is. Every other modern FPS is just plain boring and unimaginative.

    Perfect time for adventures to rise again!!
  • [TTG] Yare[TTG] Yare Telltale Alumni
    edited June 2009
    taumel wrote: »
    What i find quite strange is that this probably is the first time in my life where people are saying that a 2d game is more work to do be done than a 3d game. Although i guess this could be somehow true under certain conditions if you're having your whole pipeline layed out for 3d games.

    It's true under all conditions. Spriting takes waaaaaaaaaaaay more time than modeling/texturing/animating. Think about it like this. Once you have your 3D character modeled and textured once, you can display them from any angle doing any pose basically for free. When you animate, it interpolates between keyframes to do a lot of the work for you.

    With a 2D sprite, you have to create a brand new drawing by hand for every possible pose and direction. Not only that, but every single frame of every single animation has to be hand-drawn -there is no interpolation with sprite animation.
  • edited June 2009
    I don't even see what all the fuss is about for Left4Dead. Sure it's fun, but it's not the second coming everybody says it is.
    I don't recall anyone ever saying L4D to be the second coming (that title was reserved for Portal afterall ;) ) It is however pretty much the only game on the market that actually encourages Co-op, making it a blast to play with friends.
    Otherwise is just a very solid Zombie shooter.
  • edited June 2009
    I'm in a lot of FPS gamer circles and everybody seems to adore Left4Dead almost as much as Portal when it was first released. I don't see it. Apparently it's so good that it got a sequel at E3 this year. Something I don't really see the need for so soon.
  • edited June 2009
    Beside of the System Shock serie i enjoyed Bioshock as well as most Half Life titles and specifc games like Doom 3, Red Faction or the NOLF serie but most of the rest out there isn't something i would like to touch anymore. It's almost scary seeing some screens from the past and you instantly feel different about those games. Actually anything which doesn't rely on a specific gameplay, some special art or a story feels rather awkward and new titles sadly often come pretty soulless.

    So yeah the time is right for some games which care more about a strong story, i just hope they also evolve in this field and not just try to gain ground on the 3d gxf side. I'm not searching for the adventure version of Crysis.
  • edited June 2009
    You gotta admit it would be awesome to see one day, though! But if they lose what adventures is all about it wouldn't be worth it. But I don't see that happening. Nothing wrong with improving graphics on already great adventure games. That's what adventure games always used to do, after all. They were the latest graphics hardware and technology showcasers in the past (CD-ROM, VGA, SVGA, Sound Blaster, MT-32, General MIDI, etc), before FPS took over that rite after adventures died.
  • edited June 2009
    Ah, yes L4D2... People might complain about TMI, but it's nowhere near the hate L4D2 is getting. For no reason whatsoever other than people feeling it was too soon.

    Like I said, L4D is above the competition mostly because it's co-op, something that is exceedingly rare in the current market. (sure, there are a lot of team games, but for the most part those are equivalent to a bunch of people trying to get the most kills).

    I'm given the impression that L4D2 is being released so soon mostly to "fix" any existing issues with L4D (namely giving it an overall narrative and reducing "camping").
  • edited June 2009
    Yeah, L4D is great for what it is. And it's definitely not a stand alone FPS. At first I was a bit miffed about L4D2, but reading what they brought to it, it definitely makes sense. And what makes L4D good is really subtle.

    If you're not into co-op play though, I can see how the game would not appeal to you, plus it does get a bit repetitive after a while.
  • edited June 2009
    You gotta admit it would be awesome to see one day, though! But if they lose what adventures is all about it wouldn't be worth it. But I don't see that happening. Nothing wrong with improving graphics on already great adventure games. That's what adventure games always used to do, after all. They were the latest graphics hardware and technology showcasers in the past (CD-ROM, VGA, SVGA, Sound Blaster, MT-32, General MIDI, etc), before FPS took over that rite after adventures died.

    You can be tempted turning into a gfx whore if you're thinking of certain scenes like for instance the casting demo of Heavy Rain but in the end i think it's still not about the gfx alone. It's more about the facility that you're able to realise whatever look you have in mind and as long as hardware is an issue, that it's running without any problems on a wide range of systems.

    As long as i enjoy the art style i don't care if it's low or high specced.

    In this respect i think that the pixel look of the original SOMI looks way better than the new version.

    But as were talking about it what i always wanted to play is a game which looks the same as some cool cover art. A MI coming along in Purcell's cover style, wow! But just showing off some HDR, realtime screen space directional occlusion, next gen voxel engine, ... without a purpose doesn't make sense, at least not for the adventure genre.

    You also have to be careful because the more advanced the gfx are, the more advanced or at least different you expect the game design also to be. A riddle which is working fine in a simplified abstract look, can feel silly in a more complex realistic looking scene.
  • edited June 2009
    taumel wrote: »
    I think you underestimate how much work it is building a good and working 3d character. Secondly you can still render out all the needed frames from a 3d model you've built before which actually also isn't needed as AME uses 3d characters in a pseudo 2d environment.

    It is more work for one character, but the tools over the years have become better, and once you have it skeletal animation is a breeze, due to motion tracking which can be applied to generate scripts for animation.
    So you have 3-4 times as work for one model but that compensates because you just do it once, instead of having to draw every animation frame.
    Add to that that you basically build up environments toolbox wise and then you can move the camera around in angles.

    It really depends on the toolset you have, but I assume TTG has a very good one otherwise episodic games would not be possible!

    This is also the reason why the new 2d monkey island looks somewhat bland, they did not apply too many animations to the 2d characters, while the 2d backgrounds look gorgeous the 2d character animations definitely do not, I assume this was due to bugdet constraints!
  • edited June 2009
    ite wrote: »
    Why did u go and destroy such a good game with so terrible 3D graphic?
    Was it so hard to stick with the graphic's from The curse of monkey island that was released in 1997? Thats 12years ago. 12 years old graphics looks 10 times better then this, and had much more feeling in to it.
    This just looks like a bad painted child's game, like a Sprongebob game or something like that (not offence Sprongebob).

    Is it only me that gets sad and upset to se this sh** ?

    have a cry

    dont buy the game if u dont want to

    MI4 was 3d... did you have a cry about that too?
  • edited June 2009
    [TTG] Yare wrote: »
    With a 2D sprite, you have to create a brand new drawing by hand for every possible pose and direction. Not only that, but every single frame of every single animation has to be hand-drawn -there is no interpolation with sprite animation.
    You can do interpolation on sprite animation but it looks gruesome, just look at the average cheaply produced anime ;-)
    yikes...
  • edited June 2009
    Again, depending on the scale of your project you render those animation frames out of 3d characters you did before.
  • edited June 2009
    As much as I love the old adventure game style and would have loved nothing more than a CMI or original two looking game, I would have to say...better more monkey...than no monkey at all.
  • edited June 2009
    As much as I love the old adventure game style and would have loved nothing more than a CMI or original two looking game, I would have to say...better more monkey...than no monkey at all.

    I think if anyone produced a game that had the graphic level of the original 2 in this day and age, it would not be taken seriously. (despite the fact I still love the games, I cant play MI1 now becasue of the graphics, which is why Im also very happy about SMI:SE!)
  • edited June 2009
    I'm not bothered by 3D if the screenshots end up looking as good as the drawn still shots in CoMI, and with ToMI, I'm not saying it's as good but it's a very close call indeed, so I'm very happy indeed. There's bad 3D, and there's good 3D, and in my opinion Telltale are proponents of good 3D. The animation and character present in their games is second to none.

    If you want a great example of bad 3D, look at something like Oblivion (no, I'm not bashing on RPGs, I liked Oblivion and loved Gothic), where the animations are absolutely terrible, despite how pretty things are. In my example, that's bad 3D. To me, animation is much more important than high-res realism or cartoon perfect art.

    What I'm getting at is that even if the textures were muddier, and if the graphics were worse, as long as the animation is as good as Telltale's standard, I could live with it. But as it is, we have good animation and graphics that could stand side-by-side with CoMI (in my opinion) proudly.

    <tinfoilhat>Also, I notice tha this topic is posted by 'ite', a three letter name similar to 'Imi', furthermore the poster writes in almost an identical way, using the same txt-speak. I wonder what an IP check would reveal?</tinfoilhat>
  • edited June 2009
    I like the old 2D adventure games better too... but I also know Telltale is a business and need to cater to the wider audience so I do not blame them... in fact I would be willing to bet there is much love among their staff for 2D games....
Sign in to comment in this discussion.