I'd like to see some real action, some drama, some seriousness! If it's all too cartoony, I can't take it for real. Not with BTTF.
Imagine the DeLorean in a cartoony way..it's just not right. But, then again, if someone told me that I will cry while playing a Monkey Island game, I would have never believed him/her! Telltale can do pretty amazing stuff with their tool, including creating a cool atmosphere...almost perfect.
They probably already know what style they're going for and thus are sitting behind their super-size computer-screens, in their big velvety thrones laughing maniacally at us.
I voted cartoony for want of a "somewhere in between the two" option.
But Jurassic Park, on the other hand, must be realistic.....or not. I guess it could work. I don't know. As long as the story is good and the gameplay fun and the graphics at least comparable to Wallace & Grommit.
Also, You'd better bloody well be able to die in Jurassic Park. Maybe in BTTF creating a paradox could result in an unwanted game ending, but I don't think it needs deaths per se. But both games need to feel dangerous. BTTF was all about time limits, high speed action, and JUST making it. This needs to be presented and experienced in the game. Jurassic Park's danger atmosphere goes without saying...
And they'd just better get Michael J Fox and Christopher Lloyd to voice it (unless those characters won't be in the game) or it'll be a huge epic fail. I know Fox would be up for it (he's done quite a bit of voice work since his condition) but I don't know about Lloyd. And Jeff Goldblum for Jurassic Park if nobody else.
I can't rally decide. Although I think if it goes for realistic people need to remember this is an adventure game, and while the graphics will obviously be better than say, Half Life 2, you shouldn't expect Crysis.
Yeah I don't think it has to be cartoony per se, but it should be stylized rather than realistic. I'm thinking of The Beatles Rock Band as an example of this, but there's a lot of space on that spectrum.
You know, for example, the new human characters (or even the redesigns of the old ones) that are seen in the last season of Sam and Max look really detailed and sleek.
Cartoony, but not over the top. Someone mentioned the Wii Ghostbusters and I think that's perfect. The BttF movies always were a bit zany and over the top so the game should capture that spirit. A realistic look would only make the characters seem like lifeless mannequins and we don't want that for something as fun as BttF.
What about the Star Trek Online stylized look. Originally it was going to be photo-realistic but they changed to a stylistic approach. I think the result is something that would work fairly well for BTTF.
It doesn't exist. That's the whole problem with asking if you'd like "realistic" graphics or not. EVERY computer graphic representation has some degree of abstraction. And abstraction does not lie along a continuum. You don't just "crank up/down the abstraction" when producing art.
In other words, I refuse to vote on the grounds that you don't really know what you're voting for. It's almost political.
I'd like to see some real action, some drama, some seriousness! If it's all too cartoony, I can't take it for real. Not with BTTF.
Impossible? Really? Absolutely? What do you think of this:
(Large: http://cghub.com/images/view/25222/ Artist's name is Dan Schoening, brilliant guy, not that anyone thinks I could do that. Oh my god, if only. You'll see MY hideous new BTTF fan art soon enough )
It doesn't exist. That's the whole problem with asking if you'd like "realistic" graphics or not. EVERY computer graphic representation has some degree of abstraction. And abstraction does not lie along a continuum. You don't just "crank up/down the abstraction" when producing art.
I would disagree with this statement, but I'm a pretty classical student of the McCloud Theory of Visual Iconography. ALthough I sort of suspect your definition of abstraction is slightly different, in which case I ask for clarification.
I would disagree with this statement, but I'm a pretty classical student of the McCloud Theory of Visual Iconography. ALthough I sort of suspect your definition of abstraction is slightly different, in which case I ask for clarification.
Yes, I can offer that level of theory. Nonetheless, I would like to re-read my McCloud library first (granted, it consists of only 2 of his 3 books, "Understanding Comics" and "Making Comics").
On a preliminary note, it's McCloud's tendency (and ability) to classify everything along lines and continuums. That makes his works (a) very understandable, (b) very interesting and (c) very debatable. I love all three qualities in his works. It was particularly impressive in the last chapter of "Making Comics" - concerning personal style. Very, very, very debatable classifications there - but that was the whole merit of that chapter. Really kept you thinking what you actually wanted to DO.
McCloud's students now to be named "classical". Not bad! I'm with you!
I would prefer a Cartoon Style. So, like other Telltale Games.
It's a kind of Brand, you know. You looking on a running Adventure Game and knowing that it must be from Telltale.
that illustration is outstanding, i love it, i wouldnt mind it being like that.....but i also wouldnt mind it being pixelated like Indiana Jones was and all the other classic point and click games :P
Like the picture very much. Certainly wouldn't mind if the game looked like that. But it's not the engine Telltale usually uses, right? How would it look more 3D-ish?
I wouldn't want it too cartoony. It's based on a live action movie, after all. It should remain recognizable and cartoonifying something usually makes things look silly, like caricatures.
I wouldn't want it too cartoony. It's based on a live action movie, after all. It should remain recognizable and cartoonifying something usually makes things look silly, like caricatures.
Like the cartoon, which with the exception of Lloyd as Doc Brown, was as lame as the PG-13 Robocop who NEVER SHOT ANYONE.
(Einstein stole the Time Train in the opening credits F.F.S.)
Some people will always love it , Other people will hate it
My presonal rule is 'nothing is ever as good or bad as you imagine it', I set my expectations low and so then the chances of being impressed are higher.
Hyping something up to insane levels can only lead to dissapointment and stupid posts on this forum about how much telltale ruined their lives and general immature shenannigans
To me they're just horrible and childish.
Hope TT brings up a somewhat realistic cool 3D design.
This.
But obviously not going too far overboard in making it realistic. Anyway, given budgets and speed of creation it wouldn't make any sense to make cartoons, when 3D models are quicker and cheaper these days.
I seriously doubt we'll see super realistic models. I actually wouldn't be the slightest bit surprised to see the character look based off the BttF Cartoon.
Duh, I'm still not ready to pick up Soup's friendly-thrown gauntlet and really get into the details of "iconic abstraction for everyone".
However, here's a thought with a far simpler theoretical foundation: The cartoon version of BTTF is obviously far too simplified to remind people of the original actors - which would be a prerequisite for the BTTF game. However, as the BTTF movies show loveable, but definitly exaggerated, over-acted characters, one could state that the movies actually lend themselves to cartoonisation.
I will think about this still... but the more I think about the "animating Doc"-thread, the more I seem to come to this conclusion...
I'm just listening to the PC Gamers Podcast - it seems like Grossman announces a "realistic" art style (more or less). But actually, this feels like the interviewers avoid actual questions while Grossman avoids actual answers. It's really heartbreaking for people waiting a full nine days for new information.
I think a CGI cartoony style like the Clone Wars series could fit Back to the Future quite well.
Jurassic Park needs something more realistic, though.
I admit, although I was never interested in the "Clone Wars" series, the animation/art, with all its stylistic edges, caricature exaggerations, grainy textures and realistic lighting effects, was something I thought to be really interesting.
Here's a little citation from Scott McCloud's 1993 book "Understanding Comics", which I'm re-reading at the moment. It might fuel the discussion:
"When we abstract an image through cartooning, we're not so much eliminating details as we are focusing on specific details. By stripping down an image to its essential "meaning", an artist can amplify that meaning in a way that realistic art can't." ("Understanding Comics", page 30)
I think it should be clear that different artists can focus on wildly different details and thus create wildly different styles.
Comments
I'm a little worried that with Telltale doing bigger and more popular games they may abandon lucasarts titles for bigger things.
Imagine the DeLorean in a cartoony way..it's just not right. But, then again, if someone told me that I will cry while playing a Monkey Island game, I would have never believed him/her! Telltale can do pretty amazing stuff with their tool, including creating a cool atmosphere...almost perfect.
I voted cartoony for want of a "somewhere in between the two" option.
But Jurassic Park, on the other hand, must be realistic.....or not. I guess it could work. I don't know. As long as the story is good and the gameplay fun and the graphics at least comparable to Wallace & Grommit.
Also, You'd better bloody well be able to die in Jurassic Park. Maybe in BTTF creating a paradox could result in an unwanted game ending, but I don't think it needs deaths per se. But both games need to feel dangerous. BTTF was all about time limits, high speed action, and JUST making it. This needs to be presented and experienced in the game. Jurassic Park's danger atmosphere goes without saying...
And they'd just better get Michael J Fox and Christopher Lloyd to voice it (unless those characters won't be in the game) or it'll be a huge epic fail. I know Fox would be up for it (he's done quite a bit of voice work since his condition) but I don't know about Lloyd. And Jeff Goldblum for Jurassic Park if nobody else.
I want that style.
It doesn't exist. That's the whole problem with asking if you'd like "realistic" graphics or not. EVERY computer graphic representation has some degree of abstraction. And abstraction does not lie along a continuum. You don't just "crank up/down the abstraction" when producing art.
In other words, I refuse to vote on the grounds that you don't really know what you're voting for. It's almost political.
Impossible? Really? Absolutely? What do you think of this:
(Large: http://cghub.com/images/view/25222/ Artist's name is Dan Schoening, brilliant guy, not that anyone thinks I could do that. Oh my god, if only. You'll see MY hideous new BTTF fan art soon enough
Yes, I can offer that level of theory. Nonetheless, I would like to re-read my McCloud library first (granted, it consists of only 2 of his 3 books, "Understanding Comics" and "Making Comics").
On a preliminary note, it's McCloud's tendency (and ability) to classify everything along lines and continuums. That makes his works (a) very understandable, (b) very interesting and (c) very debatable. I love all three qualities in his works. It was particularly impressive in the last chapter of "Making Comics" - concerning personal style. Very, very, very debatable classifications there - but that was the whole merit of that chapter. Really kept you thinking what you actually wanted to DO.
McCloud's students now to be named "classical". Not bad! I'm with you!
It's a kind of Brand, you know. You looking on a running Adventure Game and knowing that it must be from Telltale.
(rethinks his previous statement)
I also like cheese...
(thinks of cheese)
...
I'm hungry!!
I wouldn't want it too cartoony. It's based on a live action movie, after all. It should remain recognizable and cartoonifying something usually makes things look silly, like caricatures.
Like the cartoon, which with the exception of Lloyd as Doc Brown, was as lame as the PG-13 Robocop who NEVER SHOT ANYONE.
(Einstein stole the Time Train in the opening credits F.F.S.)
This kind of character design would suit telltale perfectly
Some people will always love it , Other people will hate it
My presonal rule is 'nothing is ever as good or bad as you imagine it', I set my expectations low and so then the chances of being impressed are higher.
Hyping something up to insane levels can only lead to dissapointment and stupid posts on this forum about how much telltale ruined their lives and general immature shenannigans
To me they're just horrible and childish.
Hope TT brings up a somewhat realistic cool 3D design.
This.
But obviously not going too far overboard in making it realistic. Anyway, given budgets and speed of creation it wouldn't make any sense to make cartoons, when 3D models are quicker and cheaper these days.
The comicstyle posted by Vainamoinen (http://cghub.com/images/view/25222/) would be awesome (especially as 3D engine).
Design, I wouldn't mind either way; cartoony or realistic is fine by me.
Graphics, I prefer it advanced enough to be stunning, but modest enough for my computer.
However, here's a thought with a far simpler theoretical foundation: The cartoon version of BTTF is obviously far too simplified to remind people of the original actors - which would be a prerequisite for the BTTF game. However, as the BTTF movies show loveable, but definitly exaggerated, over-acted characters, one could state that the movies actually lend themselves to cartoonisation.
I will think about this still... but the more I think about the "animating Doc"-thread, the more I seem to come to this conclusion...
Love to hear your thoughts on this!
Jurassic Park needs something more realistic, though.
I admit, although I was never interested in the "Clone Wars" series, the animation/art, with all its stylistic edges, caricature exaggerations, grainy textures and realistic lighting effects, was something I thought to be really interesting.
Here's a little citation from Scott McCloud's 1993 book "Understanding Comics", which I'm re-reading at the moment. It might fuel the discussion:
"When we abstract an image through cartooning, we're not so much eliminating details as we are focusing on specific details. By stripping down an image to its essential "meaning", an artist can amplify that meaning in a way that realistic art can't." ("Understanding Comics", page 30)
I think it should be clear that different artists can focus on wildly different details and thus create wildly different styles.