I certainly liked the original MI dialog style better. In the original games, there were a couple of occasions where Guybrush said something other than what you'd expected, and that added comic effect.
When you do it in EVERY DIALOG, the comic effect is lost.
Except they don't. It happens a few times with Nipperkin, and is actually pretty funny. The other options would have been pretty out of character, but it's funny to imagine them as what Guybrush was thinking of saying - and what you think isn't always what comes out. I'm all for ridiculous dialogue options, but I can respect the way they decided to do it. The first four games did it as well!
Maybe a few more times when your choice changes the dialogue would be good... On the other hand, I hate feeling like I've missed dialogue, and all the times this happened actually prevented there from being 2-3 lines that I was unable to pick which may have had hilarious results. This way they can focus on writing dialogue everyone can see. The comedy to those choices is just in the choices, and that's actually enough.
It's ridiculous to complain that a minor detail like this completely ruins the game. It still sounds and plays like Monkey Island and still has the same great writing. It doesn't feel wrong because of a few little spots where they simply added humorous "fake" options rather than having nothing at all.
Except in this case he does say basically what was written, but he phrases it differently so you get two jokes for the price of one. Except for one or two spots where all the choices come out the same (EVERY Monkey ISland game did these, it's just a joke) you still have full control of the conversation.
I'll play the game when I get home tonight. But to be clear, a typical conversation in a previous Monkey Island game.
Line 1 > My name is Guybrush Threepwood.
Line 2 > Who are you?
Line 3 > Have you seen my monkey?
I choose Line 3.
Guybrush says: "Have you seen my monkey?"
Character Replies: "No, I haven't seen any monkey's, now leave me alone!"
Dialog changes to:
Line 1 > My name is Guybrush Threepwood.
Line 2 > Who are you?
Line 3 > Are you sure you haven't seen my monkey? I can see banana's in your back pocket.
So, by selecting Line 3, I have been lead down a new path discussing my lost monkey.
But from what I understand, TMI is more like this:
Line 1 > My name is Guybrush Threepwood.
Line 2 > Who are you?
Line 3 > Have you seen my monkey?
I select Line 3.
Guybrush says: My name is Guybrush Threepwood, I'm a mighty pirate!"
Which is a problem because it makes the game linear. Please tell me it's not like that.
Excuse me if I am being particular about this, I am a game designer and am just purely interested.
From what I've seen so far there's only been one conversation that was actually like that. People are just overreacting and trying to pretend the whole game doesn't care about what you choose, which just isn't the case.
But from what I understand, TMI is more like this:
Line 1 > My name is Guybrush Threepwood.
Line 2 > Who are you?
Line 3 > Have you seen my monkey?
I select Line 3.
Guybrush says: My name is Guybrush Threepwood, I'm a mighty pirate!"
That's not how it works at all. It's more like this:
Line 1 > My name is Guybrush Threepwood.
Line 2 > Who are you?
Line 3 > Have you seen my monkey?
I select Line 3.
Guybrush says: "Hey, have you seen a monkey running around here... er, I mean besides the ones that are normally running around?"
It's just a rephrasing of whatever you choose. Just play the game, people are being stupid and they're sucking you into their vortex before you get to play it for yourself.
I agree with the original post: this new dialogue is terrible.
When you make a new monkey island game you have to keep certain elements of the game or you lose the entire atmosphere.
Having the dialogue choices make no impact on what Guybrush is saying or on the outcome sucks big time. Just look at the difference in the intro when what you say to Lechuck matters vs. later on in the game....
Utterly disappointed here... :mad:
"Great" job TellTale, you managed to save some $$ on dialogue lines... hooray for you and for ruining this long awaited experience....
"Great" job TellTale, you managed to save some $$ on dialogue lines... hooray for you and for ruining this long awaited experience....
Dude, play the goddamn game. You're under a completely mistaken conception. They wrote twice as many lines for this system just to make the game that much better. Every time you choose a line, he says something with the same intent/meaning but phrased a different way, usually with a joke thrown in. It's the same as Mass Effect or Tex Murphy.
God, some of you people are the biggest bunch of whiners I have ever seen. The worst part is that it's all over something so completely trivial and asinine. I could understand if this was some truly significant issue, but of all the things you could possibly complain about this is what you make a fuss over?
I'm honestly ashamed that I belong to the same fanbase as you people. This is pathetic.
I don't mind Guybrush saying something a bit different from the answer I choosed. It's fun.
But I must say that I found quite cheap the fact that Guybrush would say the exact same things for all my choice in the first dialogue on the island...
It's one the cheapest things in bad jrpg and wrpg, I was a bit disapointed to see that in Monkey Island.
I hope it's not something which will happen in every dialog.
Dude, play the goddamn game. You're under a completely mistaken conception. They wrote twice as many lines for this system just to make the game that much better. Every time you choose a line, he says something with the same intent/meaning but phrased a different way, usually with a joke thrown in. It's the same as Mass Effect or Tex Murphy.
What are you talking about? If that were the case then it is acceptable.
But in all the dialogue choices i have seen since the intro, the choices have no effect whatsoever on the outcome: Guybrush just says the same line all the time (see the above example about going to rescue the wife).
Dude, play the goddamn game. You're under a completely mistaken conception. They wrote twice as many lines for this system just to make the game that much better. Every time you choose a line, he says something with the same intent/meaning but phrased a different way, usually with a joke thrown in. It's the same as Mass Effect or Tex Murphy.
You realise that you are completely missing what most of the people in this thread are talking about?
They're talking about the conversation with the reporter at the start of Chapter 1 which seems very poorly written. The intention, I believe after talking to others, was to be a callback to the prior installments in the series where Guybrush says one thing despite the multiple options. However in the previous games it was obviously funny, whereas in this one it's incredibly bland and banal.
The reporter asks him what his name is, Guybrush has four fairly standard answers. No matter which one you pick, Guybrush introduces himself how he normally does. Fine. But then you have the option of saying what you're looking for. You have three or four options regarding a ship, saving Elaine/finding LeChuck/getting back to the rock of Gelato (paraphrasing here). No matter which option you choose, you end up saying finding Elaine.
I can vaguely understand what they were trying to do (callback to previous times that Guybrush has had multiple options but goes for the 'safe' dialogue regardless of what the player chooses), but as you can see it was so poorly executed that most people think it's just being cheap.
You realise that you are completely missing what most of the people in this thread are talking about?
Different people are talking about different things, and there seems to be a lot of confusion all around.
They're talking about the conversation with the reporter at the start of Chapter 1 which seems very poorly written. The intention, I believe after talking to others, was to be a callback to the prior installments in the series where Guybrush says one thing despite the multiple options. However in the previous games it was obviously funny, whereas in this one it's incredibly bland and banal.
Whether or not the joke worked is a matter of debate, but I think most people seemed to miss the fact that that was just a joke/callback. They seemed to think it was a "cost cutting" thing or some other nonsense, and then others seemed to think the whole game was like that and not just the one or two lines in the beginning.
If the worst thing you can say about the game is that a couple jokes failed, then that hardly seems worthy of a thread saying they "ruined the whole style of dialog."
Whether or not the joke worked is a matter of debate, but I think most people seemed to miss the fact that that was just a joke/callback. They seemed to think it was a "cost cutting" thing or some other nonsense, and then others seemed to think the whole game was like that and not just the one or two lines in the beginning.
If people didn't get it, if it wasn't funny, then the joke doesn't work _for those people_. If people, upon further reflection, don't link it back to being a callback or realise that it's a failed joke, then it's failed rather badly. I'm a pretty big MI fan and I'm on a couple of other boards with healthy Monkey Island fan populations; it's not isolated to a few people 'whining' here.
Apparently, and I can't vouch for the truth of it as I haven't played a heap, it comes up in other conversations than the reporter one.
I'm not going to touch the other ancillary issues brought up in the thread, but I just wanted to clarify the particulars of this one because I was confused as hell as to why there was such a poor choice in dialogue delivery at a major beat in the game.
I'll agree this particular issue hasn't ruined the dialogue system and leave it at that.
I certainly liked the original MI dialog style better. In the original games, there were a couple of occasions where Guybrush said something other than what you'd expected, and that added comic effect.
When you do it in EVERY DIALOG, the comic effect is lost.
But he's just lying... Like, you can't even argue it, it's just not even remotely true...
That makes no sense. Everything he says is true, look:
In the original games, there were a couple of occasions where Guybrush said something other than what you'd expected
This is undoubtedly true. In the original games Guybrush would say exactly what you clicked, except for a few occasions, like when the Voodoo lady asks him if he wants to see pictures of her grandchildren, or when Minnie Goudsoup asks if you're married. So that wasn't a lie.
<i>and that added comic effect.</i>
I think we can all agree that those particular scenes are great especially because they subverted expectations.
<i>When you do it in EVERY DIALOG, the comic effect is lost.</i>
That's true too. The humor in those joke derives from the unexpected difference between Guybrush's line and the line you clicked. If Guybrush never says the same things you click, you don't expect him to say the same line that you click and thus there's no suprise, and no comedy, when he says something different than you clicked.
Now, wether this happens in TOMI is another matter, but everything the guy said was true, there's no arguing that.
Not every dialouge can be met with "Oh look a three headed monkey" gags or the wittish humor. Plus, not every piece of dialouge calls for that. But yes there are plenty of conversations that you expect Guybrush to say something stupid and see what the npc reacts with.
But as a character, Guybrush isn't you. You can click to make him walk towards a cliff, but you can't tell him to jump off it. You're more of the subconcious giving him mental suggestions. So while he may not choose to say your line, you can think of the thought going through his head
Plus where's the surprise in making all the choices reflect what you pick? I suspect that the really funny dialouge will come from those situations where you don't expect your choice to be taken seriously and then suddenly it happens.
In short, I hope that they do both systems. Maybe a little more of the older system in future releases, but definitely not that many steps backwards
I agree 100 percent that the dialogue system is at times god-awful terrible. I'm cool with Guybrush just saying something similar to what you've selected, but when he completely ignores it, what's the point? I may as well be watching a cutscene. At least then I wouldn't feel frustratingly ignored.
Agreed. Part of the fun was always seeing how Guybrush would paraphrase his way out of social awkwardness after choosing something stupid/inappropriate. The choices and speech need not match identically, but the thought/sentiment of the choice SHOULD be represented in what is said and not completely ignored.
This system is a mere cutscene interruption, with all interaction removed.
The OP is over-reacting but I do agree that so far the 'several dialogue options, one result' thing was over used and used in the wrong places in this episode. It's not just in that conversation, too - there are a couple of other points, too.
It's not a game ruiner, that's just being ridiculous, but I do totally agree it was occasionally disappointing to click on a dialog option and for it to turn out to be completely pointless. I love the jokes in the first games where you'd pick one option and Guybrush would come out with another, but this wasn't really the same because it did it even when I wanted to pick a perfectly sensible dialogue option.
So, dialogue not a complete disaster, no. But I think the way this sort of thing is used could do with some tweaking in future episodes.
And yes, note that the complaint is not about the dialogue being not word for word what the text is, it's about there being situations where the dialogue choice seems to have no effect on the conversation whatsoever - and not just on the beach.
Yeah, the Nipperkin conversation struck me as quite odd, and I thought "oh god, please let them not have saved on the dialogue lines".
Having played Sam & Max, I really liked the fact that they don't say EXACTLY what you clicked. I found that extremely refreshing over adventures of old.
It just feels as if that one scene tried to achieve a comedic effect and backfired.
Also, saying something *slightly* different still allows for a joke where Guybrush says the total opposite of what he's "thinking".
So I'm generally fine with this. Just *please* don't try a joke where there's only one possible answer without making it clear that this is really MEANT to be a joke. With Nipperkin, I didn't get it at all - and I'm still not sure whether this was really meant to play like this, given how unfunny it is. You almost have to come up with this as an excuse.
Still, as long as this doesn't happen all the time, I don't mind...
That makes no sense. Everything he says is true, look:
...
<i>When you do it in EVERY DIALOG, the comic effect is lost.</i>
That's true too.
Well I suppose it might technically be true that doing it in every dialog makes it lose effect the implication is that this game does it in every dialog, and that's a bald-faced lie. It does it in two or three.
i agree the first scene with nipperkin was a bit badly done but so far it hasnt happened twice, most of the time yeh when they say something in a different way to the dialogue choice it is funny as long as it means the same thing
Yeah, let's acknowledge the 99% of the time when the system worked really well rather than obsessing over the 1% where it didn't. I really like the indirect wording thing.
Slightly OT, as I am doing a disk cleanup before I download the first episode and therefore haven't downloaded it yet (cheapo student laptop with a lot of essays and music saved), but I wanted to say that I found the whole 'do you want to see pictures [of the kids]' that the Voodoo Lady says in CMI and the options are variants of 'no' and 'for the love of all that is good and holy, no!' and then Guybrush'll say 'maybe later' thing hilarious, so I'm thinking I might like this idea in TMI. But not if it keeps occurring. A few times will be amusing, the whole game consisting of it would not.
Well I suppose it might technically be true that doing it in every dialog makes it lose effect the implication is that this game does it in every dialog, and that's a bald-faced lie. It does it in two or three.
Maybe that's how you're reading it, but I didn't read it in that way at all. The fact that you call it an implication already suggests that it's down to one's own interpretation. And to say that you "Can't even argue" something that's open to interpretation anyway makes no sense at all.
I found the whole 'do you want to see pictures [of the kids]' that the Voodoo Lady says in CMI and the options are variants of 'no' and 'for the love of all that is good and holy, no!' and then Guybrush'll say 'maybe later' thing hilarious, so I'm thinking I might like this idea in TMI. But not if it keeps occurring. A few times will be amusing, the whole game consisting of it would not.
Totally agree with this. Seems to happen all the way through ToMI which is disappointing but I guess that's already been covered in this thread.
wow. when posting this I was venting my frustration at the new dialogue system. I did not expect people to start a flamewar with two sides. why is it that some of you feel you have to resort to attacking people? this is stupid.
I got the impression that perhaps the Nipperkin conversation was originally a long non-interactive cut scene. Then at some point they decided to flesh it out into a conversation but for whatever reason (time constraint I'd guess), they weren't able to turn it into a proper dialog tree. That would explain why they give you dialog choices but they are irrelevant.
It seems unlikely that this was a design choice. While it is unfortunate and feels a bit sloppy, in all fairness this is the only conversation I've noticed it in. (Then again, I'm not yet finished with the episode.)
Since dialog is so important to the Monkey Island series, hopefully they'll take care to avoid this in future episodes. Certainly not a deal breaker in my mind this time around, though.
It's not a game ruiner, that's just being ridiculous, but I do totally agree it was occasionally disappointing to click on a dialog option and for it to turn out to be completely pointless. I love the jokes in the first games where you'd pick one option and Guybrush would come out with another, but this wasn't really the same because it did it even when I wanted to pick a perfectly sensible dialogue option.
Agreed. I am sure Telltale will read this thread and be more careful in later episodes however... (:
Comments
Except they don't. It happens a few times with Nipperkin, and is actually pretty funny. The other options would have been pretty out of character, but it's funny to imagine them as what Guybrush was thinking of saying - and what you think isn't always what comes out. I'm all for ridiculous dialogue options, but I can respect the way they decided to do it. The first four games did it as well!
Maybe a few more times when your choice changes the dialogue would be good... On the other hand, I hate feeling like I've missed dialogue, and all the times this happened actually prevented there from being 2-3 lines that I was unable to pick which may have had hilarious results. This way they can focus on writing dialogue everyone can see. The comedy to those choices is just in the choices, and that's actually enough.
It's ridiculous to complain that a minor detail like this completely ruins the game. It still sounds and plays like Monkey Island and still has the same great writing. It doesn't feel wrong because of a few little spots where they simply added humorous "fake" options rather than having nothing at all.
I'll play the game when I get home tonight. But to be clear, a typical conversation in a previous Monkey Island game.
Line 1 > My name is Guybrush Threepwood.
Line 2 > Who are you?
Line 3 > Have you seen my monkey?
I choose Line 3.
Guybrush says: "Have you seen my monkey?"
Character Replies: "No, I haven't seen any monkey's, now leave me alone!"
Dialog changes to:
Line 1 > My name is Guybrush Threepwood.
Line 2 > Who are you?
Line 3 > Are you sure you haven't seen my monkey? I can see banana's in your back pocket.
So, by selecting Line 3, I have been lead down a new path discussing my lost monkey.
But from what I understand, TMI is more like this:
Line 1 > My name is Guybrush Threepwood.
Line 2 > Who are you?
Line 3 > Have you seen my monkey?
I select Line 3.
Guybrush says: My name is Guybrush Threepwood, I'm a mighty pirate!"
Which is a problem because it makes the game linear. Please tell me it's not like that.
Excuse me if I am being particular about this, I am a game designer and am just purely interested.
Seriously, guys, that's hardcore nitpicking.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16RO-ddmSE8
Line 1 > My name is Guybrush Threepwood.
Line 2 > Who are you?
Line 3 > Have you seen my monkey?
I select Line 3.
Guybrush says: "Hey, have you seen a monkey running around here... er, I mean besides the ones that are normally running around?"
It's just a rephrasing of whatever you choose. Just play the game, people are being stupid and they're sucking you into their vortex before you get to play it for yourself.
When you make a new monkey island game you have to keep certain elements of the game or you lose the entire atmosphere.
Having the dialogue choices make no impact on what Guybrush is saying or on the outcome sucks big time. Just look at the difference in the intro when what you say to Lechuck matters vs. later on in the game....
Utterly disappointed here... :mad:
"Great" job TellTale, you managed to save some $$ on dialogue lines... hooray for you and for ruining this long awaited experience....
Holy s***, you must lead a sad existence.
I'm honestly ashamed that I belong to the same fanbase as you people. This is pathetic.
I really like the game.
I don't mind Guybrush saying something a bit different from the answer I choosed. It's fun.
But I must say that I found quite cheap the fact that Guybrush would say the exact same things for all my choice in the first dialogue on the island...
It's one the cheapest things in bad jrpg and wrpg, I was a bit disapointed to see that in Monkey Island.
I hope it's not something which will happen in every dialog.
What are you talking about? If that were the case then it is acceptable.
But in all the dialogue choices i have seen since the intro, the choices have no effect whatsoever on the outcome: Guybrush just says the same line all the time (see the above example about going to rescue the wife).
You realise that you are completely missing what most of the people in this thread are talking about?
They're talking about the conversation with the reporter at the start of Chapter 1 which seems very poorly written. The intention, I believe after talking to others, was to be a callback to the prior installments in the series where Guybrush says one thing despite the multiple options. However in the previous games it was obviously funny, whereas in this one it's incredibly bland and banal.
The reporter asks him what his name is, Guybrush has four fairly standard answers. No matter which one you pick, Guybrush introduces himself how he normally does. Fine. But then you have the option of saying what you're looking for. You have three or four options regarding a ship, saving Elaine/finding LeChuck/getting back to the rock of Gelato (paraphrasing here). No matter which option you choose, you end up saying finding Elaine.
I can vaguely understand what they were trying to do (callback to previous times that Guybrush has had multiple options but goes for the 'safe' dialogue regardless of what the player chooses), but as you can see it was so poorly executed that most people think it's just being cheap.
Whether or not the joke worked is a matter of debate, but I think most people seemed to miss the fact that that was just a joke/callback. They seemed to think it was a "cost cutting" thing or some other nonsense, and then others seemed to think the whole game was like that and not just the one or two lines in the beginning.
If the worst thing you can say about the game is that a couple jokes failed, then that hardly seems worthy of a thread saying they "ruined the whole style of dialog."
If people didn't get it, if it wasn't funny, then the joke doesn't work _for those people_. If people, upon further reflection, don't link it back to being a callback or realise that it's a failed joke, then it's failed rather badly. I'm a pretty big MI fan and I'm on a couple of other boards with healthy Monkey Island fan populations; it's not isolated to a few people 'whining' here.
Apparently, and I can't vouch for the truth of it as I haven't played a heap, it comes up in other conversations than the reporter one.
I'm not going to touch the other ancillary issues brought up in the thread, but I just wanted to clarify the particulars of this one because I was confused as hell as to why there was such a poor choice in dialogue delivery at a major beat in the game.
I'll agree this particular issue hasn't ruined the dialogue system and leave it at that.
This guy nailed it.
But he's just lying... Like, you can't even argue it, it's just not even remotely true...
That makes no sense. Everything he says is true, look:
In the original games, there were a couple of occasions where Guybrush said something other than what you'd expected
This is undoubtedly true. In the original games Guybrush would say exactly what you clicked, except for a few occasions, like when the Voodoo lady asks him if he wants to see pictures of her grandchildren, or when Minnie Goudsoup asks if you're married. So that wasn't a lie.
<i>and that added comic effect.</i>
I think we can all agree that those particular scenes are great especially because they subverted expectations.
<i>When you do it in EVERY DIALOG, the comic effect is lost.</i>
That's true too. The humor in those joke derives from the unexpected difference between Guybrush's line and the line you clicked. If Guybrush never says the same things you click, you don't expect him to say the same line that you click and thus there's no suprise, and no comedy, when he says something different than you clicked.
Now, wether this happens in TOMI is another matter, but everything the guy said was true, there's no arguing that.
Not every dialouge can be met with "Oh look a three headed monkey" gags or the wittish humor. Plus, not every piece of dialouge calls for that. But yes there are plenty of conversations that you expect Guybrush to say something stupid and see what the npc reacts with.
But as a character, Guybrush isn't you. You can click to make him walk towards a cliff, but you can't tell him to jump off it. You're more of the subconcious giving him mental suggestions. So while he may not choose to say your line, you can think of the thought going through his head
Plus where's the surprise in making all the choices reflect what you pick? I suspect that the really funny dialouge will come from those situations where you don't expect your choice to be taken seriously and then suddenly it happens.
In short, I hope that they do both systems. Maybe a little more of the older system in future releases, but definitely not that many steps backwards
Agreed. Part of the fun was always seeing how Guybrush would paraphrase his way out of social awkwardness after choosing something stupid/inappropriate. The choices and speech need not match identically, but the thought/sentiment of the choice SHOULD be represented in what is said and not completely ignored.
This system is a mere cutscene interruption, with all interaction removed.
It's not a game ruiner, that's just being ridiculous, but I do totally agree it was occasionally disappointing to click on a dialog option and for it to turn out to be completely pointless. I love the jokes in the first games where you'd pick one option and Guybrush would come out with another, but this wasn't really the same because it did it even when I wanted to pick a perfectly sensible dialogue option.
So, dialogue not a complete disaster, no. But I think the way this sort of thing is used could do with some tweaking in future episodes.
And yes, note that the complaint is not about the dialogue being not word for word what the text is, it's about there being situations where the dialogue choice seems to have no effect on the conversation whatsoever - and not just on the beach.
Riiiiiiiiiiight guys?
Having played Sam & Max, I really liked the fact that they don't say EXACTLY what you clicked. I found that extremely refreshing over adventures of old.
It just feels as if that one scene tried to achieve a comedic effect and backfired.
Also, saying something *slightly* different still allows for a joke where Guybrush says the total opposite of what he's "thinking".
So I'm generally fine with this. Just *please* don't try a joke where there's only one possible answer without making it clear that this is really MEANT to be a joke. With Nipperkin, I didn't get it at all - and I'm still not sure whether this was really meant to play like this, given how unfunny it is. You almost have to come up with this as an excuse.
Still, as long as this doesn't happen all the time, I don't mind...
Maybe that's how you're reading it, but I didn't read it in that way at all. The fact that you call it an implication already suggests that it's down to one's own interpretation. And to say that you "Can't even argue" something that's open to interpretation anyway makes no sense at all.
Totally agree with this. Seems to happen all the way through ToMI which is disappointing but I guess that's already been covered in this thread.
also I can't wait to finish the game!
It seems unlikely that this was a design choice. While it is unfortunate and feels a bit sloppy, in all fairness this is the only conversation I've noticed it in. (Then again, I'm not yet finished with the episode.)
Since dialog is so important to the Monkey Island series, hopefully they'll take care to avoid this in future episodes. Certainly not a deal breaker in my mind this time around, though.
/thread
Can we be friends, hamzie? You seem delightful.
*what have you done!?
*you have completely ruined the MI style of dialogue that is so central to the game.
*in Tales of Monkey Island, it is a joke.
*this is ridiculous.
*really disappointing!
*this takes away so much of the joy for me.
*I'm really almost heartbrokenhere...
*a cosmetic gimmick that serves no purpose.
*I just hope the other stuff weigh up to this catastrophy.
And to think I believed my kids whined a lot, even if they were younger than 6 years old.