....................It's funny to think that back when The Simpsons first made the leap from animated shorts to their own show the idea that a cartoon that wasn't aimed only at children could succeed was considered by many to be preposterous, and now it's like the most successful television show of all time. Shows like South Park, Family Guy, Futurama, etc, just further enforce what can be achieved with the medium.
Prior to the Simpsons the Flintstones had been the longest running cartoon in a primetime spot... while the Flintstones is known as wholesome entertainment it was infact aimed at a broad audience including adults... hence the primetime air time.
Death of Buchanan
Death of Edgar
Death of Teri
Mason getting radiation poisoning
Death of Renee
Lynn McGill's death by nerve gas
Jack being taken to a Chinese prison
Wayne Palmer's assassination attempt
Daniels completing Wayne's term
President Taylor effectively ending her term after Season 8
Suitcase nuke blowing killing countless innocents
Jack being forced to sacrifice Paul Rayne's life to save a terrorist
James Heller being forced to resign after confronting President Logan
Airforce One being shot down and killing President Keeler's son
Jack being forced to kill Curtis
That took me less than 45 seconds to come up with, and there are many more moments that far exceed the Simba scene.
That list was pretty much what I was expecting, a bunch of secondary, poorly developed character deaths and M. Night Shyamalan-like twists-for-the-sake-of-twists that leave most viewers shocked rather than genuinely saddened, so shocked they have to tune into the next episode and the next season to see what happens next ("24" is a one-trick pony that way).
You may find these things sadder than Mustafa's death but I'm willing to wager that all but the most ardent "24" fans and/or the most despondent animated film detractors would completely agree with you.
Prior to the Simpsons the Flintstones had been the longest running cartoon in a primetime spot... while the Flintstones is known as wholesome entertainment it was infact aimed at a broad audience including adults... hence the primetime air time.
A perfect example. It's funny to think that back when The Simpsons first made the leap from animated shorts to their own show the idea that a cartoon that wasn't aimed only at children could succeed was considered by many to be preposterous, and now it's like the most successful television show of all time. Shows like South Park, Family Guy, Futurama, etc, just further enforce what can be achieved with the medium.
Is the simpsons serious?!! No it's not even the slightest and my point was a cartoony style is less serious than a more real life looking graphics.
Is the simpsons serious?!! No it's not even the slightest and my point was a cartoony style is less serious than a more real life looking graphics.
I don't know. I've watched a lot of serious things that were "cartoony" that were very emotionally evocative. How about Akira? How about the ending to Bastion? All it was was a painting, a song and a narrator's voice over and I was almost in tears.
Just goes to show that it's a bit silly to say one style is more emotionally evocative than the other. It all comes down to the story-teller's ability to draw you in and make you care about the characters.
I don't know. I've watched a lot of serious things that were "cartoony" that were very emotionally evocative. How about Akira? How about the ending to Bastion? All it was was a painting, a song and a narrator's voice over and I was almost in tears.
Just goes to show that it's a bit silly to say one style is more emotionally evocative than the other. It all comes down to the story-teller's ability to draw you in and make you care about the characters.
Ok this sounds like im being a smartass but I dont mean to sound like one, If there is a cartoon film and a family are crying because there dog died, but then there was a real life version with the same thing I would find the real life version more sad because you believe it more, if it is all cartoony and full of really silly jokes then you dont believe it and you can say: 'Just a cartoon it's not real'.
Yes maybe SOMETIMES < (Look what I just said everyone only sometimes :P)
Sometimes a more cartoony film or tv program or even a game can be sad but it is never more sad than a real life thing because if it looks real you can believe it more and be more sad.
Of course it is too late for telltale to change the style for law and order but I am very sure they will get more very big franchises (Maybe a back to the future season 2 wink wink)
But you need to think about making better graphics and as I have said many time's it doesnt have to be like La noire but at least something I can believe and say, 'Well done telltale I can see you put effort into every aspect of the game 10/10'
On a side note.
I really like the back to the future game but the only problem was the graphics, it had a fantastic story and I liked the characters but then when I looked at the graphics I was dissapointed because if the graphics had been better I would of believed the game was more of a continuation and not so much another cartoon series.
if it is all cartoony and full of really silly jokes then you dont believe it and you can say: 'Just a cartoon it's not real'
Aha, but now we're talking about two different things. Cartoony visuals and cartoony writing. Silly jokes would of course ruin anything dramatic and emotional, but the same can be said of a silly program that's not a cartoon. The Three Stooges comes to mind. You laugh when the characters beat each other up, because it's written to be silly. If that were happening in real life, it would be monsterous!
But you need to think about making better graphics and as I have said many time's it doesnt have to be like La noire but at least something I can believe and say, 'Well done telltale I can see you put effort into every aspect of the game 10/10'
I can vouch 100% that the people who make games at Telltale do it because it's their passion. There isn't a person I've met at Telltale who puts less than their whole heart into what they do here, if that counts for anything :P
This argument is going nowhere - Different people think the game should go for different styles. Telltale made a decision rather than some half-way monster. And I'd say that's a brave, bold thing to do.
Ok this sounds like im being a smartass but I dont mean to sound like one, If there is a cartoon film and a family are crying because there dog died, but then there was a real life version with the same thing I would find the real life version more sad because you believe it more, if it is all cartoony and full of really silly jokes then you dont believe it and you can say: 'Just a cartoon it's not real'.
I don't think that's true at all. I often find that cartoons can have heightened emotional impacts if done well. I have friends who outright refuse to watch the Futurama episode "Jurassic Bark" because the ending makes them collapse into a fit of tears and sobbing.
But I said that you dont believe as much, yes sometimes cartoons can be sad and there are a few serious cartoon films but they are not based on a book or another film but telltale make game's for big franchises which are real life, so if telltale can make better graphics why not use better graphics it would be easier and they would get more ratings in the graphic aspect of thing's but if they dont bother with graphics there is nothing good.
But I said that you dont believe as much, yes sometimes cartoons can be sad and there are a few serious cartoon films but they are not based on a book or another film.
Batman DC Animated Universe films are way more emotionally gripping then any of the live films including Dark Knight.
I really only liked the joker parts the rest wasn't that good for me.
and batman forever was very tense sometimes
Batman Mask of the Phantasm was theatricality released about 1 or 2 years before Batman Forever and there's no way in hell that anyone could think batman forever is more dramatic then mask of the phantasm.
Batman Mask of the Phantasm was theatricality released about 1 or 2 years before Batman Forever and there's no way in hell that anyone could think batman forever is more dramatic then mask of the phantasm.
I agree. In that example the live action film is definitely sillier and more cartoony than the animated film.
Because this is absolutely ridicilous.
When is TTG going to learn and actually implement some proper graphics and animations into their games?
While this style of graphics is too cartoony and doesn't fit the L&O genre at all but I wouldn't mind that so much if Telltale would just take the graphics aspect somewhat seriously.
Now, this is a valid argument and I agree wholeheartedly.
The graphics aspect is so important in a computer game that in many cases, it determines whether it becomes a success or failure. And it is one of the most contributing factors to replay value and how drawn you as a player get into the game.
And it's where you drop the ball in my opinion. I know this is said to death, especially in these forums by dozens of people already -everyone's used to hear it I think people started to call people agree with me here "the hippies of videogaming"- but graphics are only an aspect and depending on the variety of the game itself and the promises of the developers depending on its production value, budget, etc.; the kind of graphics Telltale uses for their games can still be used to the way to success, given that "success" itself is relative. A game that makes more money than what has been paid for, is a success. The chimes of fan appreciation through your communication channels, are a sign of success. For example, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 is sadly a success. At the same time, indie game Terraria is also a MAJOR success even though the community of the latter example is much smaller. As I said before, the tone of the game you aim for is also a big defining factor on which visual style you need to go for.
I disagree completley batman forever was only a bit silly most parts were really serious
Is this... is this a joke? Have you seen Batman Forever? It's one of the most over-the-top, ridiculous and silly films ever produced! (Bested in this regard perhaps only by its sequel.) Tommy Lee Jones EATS the scenery, Jim Carrey is... well Jim Carrey, and Joel Schumacher seems to be under the impression that the only real Batman worth imitating is Adam West and the gang.
But forget all this for a moment, the argument that you are attacking isn't 'Is Batman Forever a silly or serious film?' it's 'Is Batman Forever sillier than Batman Mask of the Phantasm?' Have you seen Batman Mask of the Phantasm, because you make no mention of it? If not then you can't really have anything constructive to add to the conversation.
Your quote defending Batman Forever as a serious film shows that you have a blinding prejudice against animation over live action, one so strong and fervent your argument could be considered irrational.
Is this... is this a joke? Have you seen Batman Forever? It's one of the most over-the-top, ridiculous and silly films ever produced! (Bested in this regard perhaps only by its sequel.) Tommy Lee Jones EATS the scenery, Jim Carrey is... well Jim Carrey, and Joel Schumacher seems to be under the impression that the only real Batman worth imitating is Adam West and the gang.
But forget all this for a moment, the argument that you are attacking isn't 'Is Batman Forever a silly or serious film?' it's 'Is Batman Forever sillier than Batman Mask of the Phantasm?' Have you seen Batman Mask of the Phantasm, because you make no mention of it? If not then you can't really have anything constructive to add to the conversation.
Your quote defending Batman Forever as a serious film shows that you have a blinding prejudice against animation over live action, one so strong and fervent your argument could be considered irrational.
Um yes Jim Carrey was silly in Batman Forever but I am sure you dont know what Batman
is, it is a comic so it having a animated film makes sense and it having a real life action film doesnt, also I recall the comics being a very silly but brutal theme just like the films and tha
Um yes Jim Carrey was silly in Batman Forever but I am sure you dont know what Batman
is, it is a comic so it having a animated film makes sense and it having a real life action film doesnt, also I recall the comics being a very silly but brutal theme just like the films
Actually there are some very serious Batman comics, such as Batman: The Killing Joke, which served as inspiration for a couple of Batman films, including The Dark Knight. To say Batman Forever is silly because it is based off a comic is a gross oversimplification. There are many factors involved, from it being produced by a major toy manufacturer more interested in selling action figures and different kinds of Batmobiles than making anything that resembled a good film, to a delusion on the part of the filmmakers that people wanted a return of the camp style of the old Adam West television show.
But again this is entirely missing the point. You seem to be utterly convinced that live action = automatic seriousness and that animated/comic style = automatic silliness despite the fact that you seem to be deeply ignorant about the latter. The point I and others are trying to put forth is that this isn't always so; live action/realistic can be silly and animated/comic can be serious. It's all about the execution. I'd make a list of animated films, graphic novels and yes, even video games to watch/read/play in order to educate you on the topic but you seem so closed mined about the whole thing it would hardly be worthwhile.
But again this is entirely missing the point. You seem to be utterly convinced that live action = automatic seriousness and that animated/comic style = automatic silliness despite the fact that you seem to be deeply ignorant about the latter. The point I and others are trying to put forth is that this isn't always so; live action/realistic can be silly and animated/comic can be serious. It's all about the execution. I'd make a list of animated films, graphic novels and yes, even video games to watch/read/play in order to educate you on the topic but you seem so closed mined about the whole thing it would hardly be worthwhile.
I was not saying that what I said was that Serious live action films and tv programs or even games with decent graphics are always more serious than cartoony serious films and tv programs or game like I said a while ago, if there was a live action film where a family are crying over a dog because it dies but then there was a animated version I would find the real life action one more sad because I believe it more than a animated version, let me use of mice and men (the film version) if there was a animated version with lennie talking about the rabbits people would just laugh because his voice and the animation mixed together looks stupid but a real life version you understand it more and understand the point of it more.
I was not saying that what I said was that Serious live action films and tv programs or even games with decent graphics are always more serious than cartoony serious films and tv programs or game like I said a while ago, if there was a live action film where a family are crying over a dog because it dies but then there was a animated version I would find the real life action one more sad because I believe it more than a animated version, let me use of mice and men (the film version) if there was a animated version with lennie talking about the rabbits people would just laugh because his voice and the animation mixed together looks stupid but a real life version you understand it more and understand the point of it more.
So you are saying if there was an animated version of Of Mice and Men it would be bad merely because it is animated and thus would have to have poor voice acting and a lack of believability? I really have to come back to the fact that you are clearly ignorant of what animated films are capable of achieving. Look at Grave of the Fireflies, it is an extremely tragic film, even more tragic than Of Mice and Men, and it is completely animated. People don't laugh at it because the voice and animation mixed together looks stupid, they usually just cry or feel really, really sad.
You are completely incapable of providing tangible examples of why animated films are always less serious than a live action equivalent and the fact that you assume that a live action version of Of Mice and Men would have to be bad and people would laugh at it shows an utter lack of imagination. I'll admit, the live action version of Of Mice and Men is really good, but if you think they couldn't make a good animated version you really don't know what animation is capable of.
So you are saying if there was an animated version of Of Mice and Men it would be bad merely because it is animated and thus would have to have poor voice acting and a lack of believability? I really have to come back to the fact that you are clearly ignorant of what animated films are capable of achieving. Look at Grave of the Fireflies, it is an extremely tragic film, even more tragic than Of Mice and Men, and it is completely animated. People don't laugh at it because the voice and animation mixed together looks stupid, they usually just cry or feel really, really sad.
You are completely incapable of providing tangible examples of why animated films are always less serious than a live action equivalent, and the fact that you assume that a live action version of Of Mice and Men would have to be bad and people would laugh at it shows an utter lack of imagination. I'll admit, the live action version of Of Mice and Men is really good, but if you think they couldn't make a good animated version you really don't know what animation is capable of.
You didnt understand what I was saying I was saying they would laugh because of lennies voice because of him being disabled but if it is animated it is harder to understand.
You didnt understand what I was saying I was saying they would laugh because of lennies voice because of him being disabled but if it is animated it is harder to understand.
And you don't understand what I'm saying, that what you're saying isn't necessarily so. Just because it would be animated wouldn't mean it would be harder to understand. You have no basis for saying that other than your personal prejudice against the medium.
And you don't understand what I'm saying, that what you're saying isn't necessarily so. Just because it would be animated wouldn't mean it would be harder to understand. You have no basis for saying that other than your personal prejudice against the medium.
I would like to ask you why you prefer animation more than real life, after all real life action is real talent with people acting and having to come up with the emotion to get the audience to be sad, the way I see it animation is just for lazy people or for directors who cant find any good actors or japanase people (Because nearly all there films are animated)
It seems you hate the fact I dont like it when people turn serious films or tv programs into animation but im not the only one who hates it when people turn serious tv programs or films animated look at bttf.com lots of people were outraged at telltales art style for the bttf game.
If you were a big fan of real life action films or tv programs then you would understand why a fair amount of people spread about the telltale games forums keep complaining about the art styles telltale choose, and explaining that there are a few serious animated films wont change the fact Law & Order, Jurrasic Park or Back to the future fans want a decent art style.
If you have not already watch The UNTOUCHABLES and imagine a game was made for it with the worst graphics ever, would you understand if the fans were pissed off.
I would like to ask you why you prefer animation more than real life, after all real life action is real talent with people acting and having to come up with the emotion to get the audience to be sad, the way I see it animation is just for lazy people or for directors who cant find any good actors or japanase people (Because nearly all there films are animated)
I don't prefer animated over live action, I just have a tremendous about of respect for it. When you say "after all real life action is real talent with people acting and having to come up with the emotion to get the audience to be sad, the way I see it animation is just for lazy people or for directors who cant find any good actors or japanase people (Because nearly all there films are animated)" it just shows how ignorant you are of animation. If this were true why would anyone bother making animated films at all? They actually take a lot longer to make and in some instances even cost more than live action. A director for an animated film actually has to put in a lot more work than a director of a live action film, but if you knew anything about animated films you'd probably know this.
If directors who can't find any good actors are the ones who make animated films then why do big name stars voice all the lead characters in the latest animated films? The english cast of Ponyo included Cate Blanchett, Matt Damon, Liam Neeson and Tina Fey. All of these actors are in high demand, why would they lend their voices to some Japanese anime film when in your world live action is unconditionally superior?
It seems you hate the fact I dont like it when people turn serious films or tv programs into animation but im not the only one who hates it when people turn serious tv programs or films animated look at bttf.com lots of people were outraged at telltales art style for the bttf game
It's not that I hate the fact that you "dont like it when people turn serious films or tv programs into animation," I hate that you have a complete lack of respect for animation as a medium despite really not knowing anyting about it.
You say there are other people who hate the graphical style of BttF. I have at no point said I like the graphical style of BttF: TG, but all the same I can sit here and say there there are a lot of people who loved the graphical style. I've seen a lot more people on these forums that have said they like it then those who don't. There will always be people on each side of this debate. (For the record I can't stand BttF: TG but for reasons other than graphical.)
If you were a big fan of real life action films or tv programs then you would understand why a fair amount of people spread about the telltale games forums keep complaining about the art styles telltale choose, and explaining that there are a few serious animated films wont change the fact Law & Order, Jurrasic Park or Back to the future fans want a decent art style.
I am a big fan of live action and television shows. There is no rule that says I can't be a fan of both live action and animation, this is just you assuming things with no basis.
You say fans want something with a decent art style but the only two art styles you seem to think exist are realistic and not realistic. You only accept realistic but Telltale make small, downloadable games that don't really specialise in graphics. They try to make up for lack of realism with artistic style but you seem to think that's somehow lazy. I don't think that's really a fair assumption to make.
If you have not already watch The UNTOUCHABLES and imagine a game was made for it with the worst graphics ever, would you understand if the fans were pissed off.
As a matter of fact, and completely by coincidence, The Untouchables is one of my favourite films. (I assume you are talking about the 1987 film here and not the original series, you don't really make it clear.) I can actually imagine an Untouchables film with BttF style graphics made by Telltale. In fact if they included good puzzles I think that would be an awesome game.
As a matter of fact, and completely by coincidence, The Untouchables is one of my favourite films. (I assume you are talking about the 1987 film here and not the original series, you don't really make it clear.) I can actually imagine an Untouchables film with BttF style graphics made by Telltale. In fact if they included good puzzles I think that would be an awesome game.
I hope your joking it is fine when they are not based on anything and they make animated things but if they animated a serious deppressing film like the Untouchables I have no doubt they would get bad marks just for the cartoony art style
Also quote somebody who said they liked the art style for back to the future and not one of the telltale fans who just make a second account and only ever post one comment and the comment is like this: ''The game was the greatest thing ever it looked exactly like the films and even though you made a few mistakes the game is great and has no problems''
And no im not making that up I have seen many people do that and you can tell they are telltale fans, yes there are people who liked the game, I liked the story but the graphics were a problem back to the future is real life action and the game should be close.
Lets try the other way what is your favourite animated thing ever which you never stop talking about and you have posters of, imagine if someone made a game or film of it with real life action but it didnt look right because it didnt work in real life action as it does in animation, thats how many people felt about the bttf game and I hope telltale learn to add some better graphics for the second season of the bttf game because you get more benefits from good graphics than bad graphics.
I hope your joking it is fine when they are not based on anything and they make animated things but if they animated a serious deppressing film like the Untouchables I have no doubt they would get bad marks just for the cartoony art style
I'm sure it would get bad marks from you but thankfully you are not the only opinion that matters. Here is a link to Roger Ebert's review of Grave of the Fireflies. Please read it, it's not terribly long. Though if you can't be bothered then at least read this quote (it is really worth reading the whole thing, though):
The book is well-known in Japan, and might easily have inspired a live-action film. It isn't the typical material of animation. But for "Grave of the Fireflies," I think animation was the right choice. Live action would have been burdened by the weight of special effects, violence and action. Animation allows [the directer] to concentrate on the essence of the story, and the lack of visual realism in his animated characters allows our imagination more play; freed from the literal fact of real actors, we can more easily merge the characters with our own associations.
Grave of the Fireflies is a more serious and depressing film than The Untouchables and it's completely animated. You may not believe it's possible but that's because, as I keep saying, you are completely closed minded on what animation is capable of.
Also quote somebody who said they liked the art style for back to the future and not one of the telltale fans who just make a second account and only ever post one comment and the comment is like this: ''The game was the greatest thing ever it looked exactly like the films and even though you made a few mistakes the game is great and has no problems''
And no im not making that up I have seen many people do that and you can tell they are telltale fans, yes there are people who liked the game, I liked the story but the graphics were a problem back to the future is real life action and the game should be close.
Here is a poll where people are outright asked if they think the game should be realistic or cartoony and the majority of people said they prefer it to be cartoony. I'm not sure what further proof you need to be convinced that of all the things that was wrong with BttF: TG the graphics isn't widely considered to be one of them.
I also found this little gem. The OP says that he thinks that BttF would work perfectly as an animated film and nobody else in the thread say it wouldn't work stylisticly.
And finally, here's another poll a fan started saying that they should make the game into a CGI film, to which the majority votes yes.
Lets try the other way what is your favourite animated thing ever which you never stop talking about and you have posters of, imagine if someone made a game or film of it with real life action but it didnt look right because it didnt work in real life action as it does in animation, thats how many people felt about the bttf game and I hope telltale learn to add some better graphics for the second season of the bttf game because you get more benefits from good graphics than bad graphics.
I have to point you back to the above graphs. The many people you speak of that feel that BttF: TG had the wrong art style are the minority. There aren't even any art style bashing threads like this one over at the BttF forums. I really don't think that there are as many people supporting you on this as you seem to think there are. At best it's a vocal minority.
Here is a poll where people are outright asked if they think the game should be realistic or cartoony and the majority of people said they prefer it to be cartoony. I'm not sure what further proof you need to be convinced that of all the things that was wrong with BttF: TG the graphics isn't widely considered to be one of them.
I also found this little gem. The OP says that he thinks that BttF would work perfectly as an animated film and nobody else in the thread say it wouldn't work stylisticly.
The first thing you said I notice most of the people who voted cartoony said they wanted it inbetween which I dont have anything against and the other people were telltale fans who are of course going to support cartoony graphics
Also the thing about a animated film the OP said he watched tintin and thinks it would work well for back to the future, tintin is a realistic cartoon but telltales art style is incredibly unrealistic.
I have said many times before in other thread's I dont want uncharted or la noire graphics, just something which looks right and I can tell you that the art style for bttf the game does not suit it at all
You have not made a refrence to back to the future so im not sure if you have seen back to the future films but go and watch them, they are a very good set of films and if you took the jokes and the odd silly scene's out I would say it is a very serious film and the fans on bttf.com have said they want a more realistic art style.
(Also this is becoming more about Back to the future and not so much about Law & Order)
Animated films can definitely handle very serious material if done well. Check out this animated adaptation The Tell-Tale Heart. It is the most faithful adaptation of an Edgar Allen Poe poem that I have ever seen, animated or live-action.
Animated films can definitely handle very serious material if done well. Check out this animated adaptation The Tell-Tale Heart. It is the most faithful adaptation of an Edgar Allen Poe poem that I have ever seen, animated or live-action.
Yes if it is done well but thats rare and telltale well they always add jokes to there games combine crappy graphics and jokes and it straight away looks like they are making fun.
The first thing you said I notice most of the people who voted cartoony said they wanted it inbetween which I dont have anything against and the other people were telltale fans who are of course going to support cartoony graphics
A lot of people on the first couple of pages wrote that they'd like to see something in-between but the point is that when asked flat out, black and white, one way or the other would people prefer the game to be realistic or cartoony the majority of people said cartoony. If people were as disgusted as the art style as you say they are this wouldn't be the case, it would be the other way around.
You are completely discounting the opinions of people who are fans of Telltale but I could just as easily say we should discount the opinions of people like you because you are clearly prejudiced against cartoon styles despite being ignorant of the history of animation and what can be achieved though the medium. Not to mention we could do the same with all the graphics whores who aren't happy with any game not running on the latest Unreal Engine. With any debate there will always be people deeply prejudiced one way or the other and unable to see reason, but the usually cancel each other out (and make life miserable for the rest of us.)
Also the thing about a animated film the OP said he watched tintin and thinks it would work well for back to the future, tintin is a realistic cartoon but telltales art style is incredibly unrealistic.
The idea of a realistic cartoon seems to go against everything you've said in your past posts. So you admit that cartoons can be realistic?
You have not made a refrence to back to the future so im not sure if you have seen back to the future films but go and watch them, they are a very good set of films and if you took the jokes and the odd silly scene's out I would say it is a very serious film and the fans on bttf.com have said they want a more realistic art style.
I have seen the bttf films many times, I even own them all on DVD and Blu-ray. And I'm sorry but your definition of serious here is very skewed. BttF does not take itself seriously at all, and that's a huge part of what makes them good. I'm not saying serious = bad because there are many excellent serious films out there but bttf is very clearly not one of them.
Marty jamming Johnny B Goode in front of a crowd of 1950's teenagers is not serious, Marty going back to the American wild west in a pink cowboy outfit is not serious, Michael J. Fox playing his own daughter is not serious, the Flux Capacitor is not serious, Doc's crazy inventions are not serious, the delorien time travel machine in not serious. These are all jokes and are all ones off the top of my head.
If you take out all the silly scenes you really aren't left with much of anything. BttF does not attempt to be realistic, not even a little. It's a comedy and its subject for parody is different eras in time. It's light-hearted silly fun. Even the very concept of the whole film series, travelling through time in a delorian, is a joke. If you think the BttF films are serious then you are deluded. Deeply, deeply deluded.
the fans on bttf.com have said they want a more realistic art style.
I took a loot at the bttf.com forums and saw a lot of what I see here: differing opinions. Some were vocally against the art style and some said it suited. I don't think you can say with any authority how the people at bttf.com feel one way or another about the topic. However, in your world where everyone who is against the graphics is right and everyone who is for it is a fanboy and their opinion is discounted I can see why you would think that everyone over there is on your side.
I took a loot at the bttf.com forums and saw a lot of what I see here: differing opinions. Some were vocally against the art style and some said it suited. I don't think you can say with any authority how the people at bttf.com feel one way or another about the topic. However, in your world where everyone who is against the graphics is right and everyone who is for it is a fanboy and their opinion is discounted I can see why you would think that everyone over there is on your side.
Im not saying that people who prefer cartoony graphics are completley wrong full stop in everything but with back to the future they are wrong, true fans take back to the future very seriously and most fans dont like the art style.
to try and make this more about law & order read this:
The guy said he didnt like the art style, are you going to say his opinion is wrong and he is not a fan because he also thinks the art style is just wrong.
I will admit there are some cartoony films which can be more serious than a real life film but I will not agree that a cartoony art style is the best art style for a bttf or law & order game because if you asked the true fans most of them would say they want a more realistic art style.
Wait... people actually give a **** about graphics!? Guess, I'm a freak. Liking all that game play, I mean, games have nothing to do with game play right? Apparently.
Anyway, personally, I like the cell shading. I think it looks nice. I never found Law & Order to be that much of a drama anyhow. It's a good show though.
Im not saying that people who prefer cartoony graphics are completley wrong full stop in everything but with back to the future they are wrong, true fans take back to the future very seriously and most fans dont like the art style.
to try and make this more about law & order read this:
The guy said he didnt like the art style, are you going to say his opinion is wrong and he is not a fan because he also thinks the art style is just wrong.
I will admit there are some cartoony films which can be more serious than a real life film but I will not agree that a cartoony art style is the best art style for a bttf or law & order game because if you asked the true fans most of them would say they want a more realistic art style.
Your definition of a true fan here seems to be people who line up with your own opinion. I could just as easily say that the true BttF fans are the people who embrace cartoony graphics that are more in line with the silliness of the film series. I have no less right to label someone a true fan as you do. It's not really fair to call people on one side of the debate true fans and the other side not. It's a label people apply to delude themselves into thinking they are right and others are wrong. Saying you are a true fan doesn't make your flawed argument any stronger.
The reviewer you posted talks about graphics but as an aside. After talking about the graphics she immediately says "The real issue is gameplay," and then goes into detail about that. She understands that the graphics are only part of it, a part that pails in comparison to aspects such as gameplay, which sound like the real problem with Law & Order (and BttF while we're at it). It sounds like she'd have said the game was bad even if it did have the right art style.
I think it's important for you to know that art style isn't the only thing that makes a good game, it's not even the most important aspect, just one of many.
Your definition of a true fan here seems to be people who line up with your own opinion. I could just as easily say that the true BttF fans are the people who embrace cartoony graphics that are more in line with the silliness of the film series. I have no less right to label someone a true fan as you do. It's not really fair to call people on one side of the debate true fans and the other side not. It's a label people apply to delude themselves into thinking they are right and others are wrong. Saying you are a true fan doesn't make your flawed argument any stronger.
The reviewer you posted talks about graphics but as an aside. After talking about the graphics she immediately says "The real issue is gameplay," and then goes into detail about that. She understands that the graphics are only part of it, a part that pails in comparison to aspects such as gameplay, which sound like the real problem with Law & Order (and BttF while we're at it). It sounds like she'd have said the game was bad even if it did have the right art style.
I think it's important for you to know that art style isn't the only thing that makes a good game, it's not even the most important aspect, just one of many.
I didnt say that fans who dont care about the cartoony graphics are wrong at all look at what I posted.
Also the reviewer also didnt like the art style and I didnt say graphics are the most important aspect, it just needs to look nicer I think graphics just a tad better than jurrasic park are perfect for bttf or law and order for all of telltales games really.(Not sam and max or Tales of Money Island or wallace and gromit)
Back to the future has odd silly scenes yes but overall people take it very seriously, you made it sound like a spoof the way you described it and failed to see the point of some of those scenes like the time machiene being a delorean or why he played the song Johnny B good in front of everyone,
It fits into being a comedy not a spoof, and usually comedys dont get so many refrences like:
> Nike Shoe's
> Argentina shop advert
>Tv advert
>Many quotes in films and tv programs (I have seen about 30)
>Huge refrence in the spike awards beginning
>One of the scenes played at the Oscars
And many more.
The people have put effort into making delorean time machienes and telltale dont even put effort into graphics.
also because you keep saying I hate cartoony graphics, Thats a lie some of my favourite games are cartoony or Zork which has no graphics at all and I enjoy that game.
I just hate it when you take a film which is taken incredibly seriously by it's fans and give it crap graphics.
Please open your mind and try and see like me and a lot of fans.
I respect your opinion but I am sure I am a bigger bttf fan than you and know more about that art style fits bttf than you.
I didnt say that fans who dont care about the cartoony graphics are wrong at all look at what I posted.
Maybe you should look at what you posted, you said they were wrong about BttF. In fact your exact words were "Im not saying that people who prefer cartoony graphics are completley wrong full stop in everything but with back to the future they are wrong, true fans take back to the future very seriously and most fans dont like the art style."
I'll also mention that you say they are wrong without saying why they are wrong. All you talk about is seriousness and who the true fans are, like you have the right to decide such things.
Also the reviewer also didnt like the art style and I didnt say graphics are the most important aspect, it just needs to look nicer I think graphics just a tad better than jurrasic park are perfect for bttf or law and order for all of telltales games really.(Not sam and max or Tales of Money Island or wallace and gromit)
Jurassic Park's graphics got blasted way worse than BttF, they look nice on the surface but the people and dinosaurs have stiff, unrealistic animations. On the whole people seemed more happy with the BttF graphics than JP's so I'm not quite sure why you are clambering for "just a tad better than jurrasic park" graphics.
Back to the future has odd silly scenes yes but overall people take it very seriously,
Back to the Future is all odd silly scenes. Almost every scene in the film is laden with gags and jokes. Look at the opening sequence, which sets the scene for the entire movie. You're in a house and the camera is panning past old newspaper articles, an absurd amount of clocks, and some of Doc's crazy inventions. Marty enters and flicks on a bunch of switches and turns up some dials to full one by one. He plugs his electric guitar into into a comically massive set of speakers. Then he plays a note on the guitar and the speaker explodes, the force of the explosion sends Marty flying into a La-Z-Boy on the other side of the room and a set of shelves collapses on him. He pulls himself out of the mess, unhurt and unscratched. 'Whoa, rock'n'roll,' he says. This is not something that happens in a serious film, it's more like a live action cartoon, right down to the slapstick. Less than five minutes into the film I've found an example of it not being serious. If you still don't believe me I can find a lot more. I think this live action cartoon style the film has is a big reason why a lot of people (though clearly not you) have accepted the cartoony art style of the game. The films are not totally unlike a cartoon, and thus cartoon visuals in the game are not out of place.
you made it sound like a spoof the way you described it and failed to see the point of some of those scenes like the time machiene being a delorean or why he played the song Johnny B good in front of everyone,
You keep saying people take it seriously but just because you do but this doesn't mean the films take themselves seriously.
And don't say I've missed the point of the scenes. First off it's not best to challenge my film knowledge, I'm an A+ average cinema studies student and have spent a considerable amount of time dissecting films and looking at what makes them work. Second off, you are right about one thing, it's not a spoof it's a comedy, but it still doesn't take itself seriously, few comedies do.
You take it seriously, fine, but that doesn't mean the media associated with the franchise has to adhere to your vision of what the films are, especially when your vision is as misguided as thinking the films are serious. I think it's more important that they adhere to the spirit of the films, which is more cartoony in nature then I'm sure you're ever going to admit.
It fits into being a comedy not a spoof, and usually comedys dont get so many refrences like:
> Nike Shoe's
> Argentina shop advert
>Tv advert
>Many quotes in films and tv programs (I have seen about 30)
>Huge refrence in the spike awards beginning
>One of the scenes played at the Oscars
And many more.
I don't understand the point of this list. So are you saying the films are high profile? Do you think the films being high profile somehow make them more serious than other comedies? I'm a bit lost by this to be perfictly honost.
The people have put effort into making delorean time machienes and telltale dont even put effort into graphics.
Why do you think cartoony graphics equate a lack of effort? And we're talking about small, downloadable games here. Telltale needs to keep the file sizes low so people with bad internet connections can still have access to their games. There was never any hope that Telltale would have AAA realistic graphics, it's more a matter of art style.
also because you keep saying I hate cartoony graphics, Thats a lie some of my favourite games are cartoony or Zork which has no graphics at all and I enjoy that game.
Good to hear, I just hope you give more respect to cartoony games then you do to animated movies.
Also, check your wording. I can't lie to you about what you like, only you can lie about what you like. I can accuse and you can admit or deny; that's about the extent of it.
I just hate it when you take a film which is taken incredibly seriously by it's fans and give it crap graphics.
And I think this pet peeve of yours has blinded you to a couple of realities:
1) The majority of people don't agree with you on the art style.
2) The films aren't supposed to be serious, they're fun, over-the-top popcorn entertainment with some decent human drama thrown in to ground the experience.
Please open your mind and try and see like me and a lot of fans.
I respect your opinion but I am sure I am a bigger bttf fan than you and know more about that art style fits bttf than you.
I'm not the one with the closed mind here. Alas, you are still under the impression that your opinion on BttF's art style is the only one that matters. Why? Because you take it more seriously? You take Back to the Future so seriously you fail see how little it takes itself seriously. Yes, you're a fan but you don't seem to understand the subject of your fandom. Taking something seriously doesn't necessarily mean you understand it.
You really have yet to come up with a good reason why the BttF game should have had a realistic art direction. All you do is talk about seriousness and apparent unhappy fans who don't seem to be a numerous as you think they are. You keep saying the films are serious and yet you have provided no reasons why you think they are serious.
For both our sakes please explain, hopefully using examples, why you think BttF, which is filled with jokes and gags and unrealistic cartoony elements, is such a serious film series, because I don't understand where you are coming from with this.
Comments
Prior to the Simpsons the Flintstones had been the longest running cartoon in a primetime spot... while the Flintstones is known as wholesome entertainment it was infact aimed at a broad audience including adults... hence the primetime air time.
That list was pretty much what I was expecting, a bunch of secondary, poorly developed character deaths and M. Night Shyamalan-like twists-for-the-sake-of-twists that leave most viewers shocked rather than genuinely saddened, so shocked they have to tune into the next episode and the next season to see what happens next ("24" is a one-trick pony that way).
You may find these things sadder than Mustafa's death but I'm willing to wager that all but the most ardent "24" fans and/or the most despondent animated film detractors would completely agree with you.
(Sorry, couldn't resist.)
Yeah.
"Style" > "Photorealism"
Is the simpsons serious?!! No it's not even the slightest and my point was a cartoony style is less serious than a more real life looking graphics.
I don't know. I've watched a lot of serious things that were "cartoony" that were very emotionally evocative. How about Akira? How about the ending to Bastion? All it was was a painting, a song and a narrator's voice over and I was almost in tears.
Just goes to show that it's a bit silly to say one style is more emotionally evocative than the other. It all comes down to the story-teller's ability to draw you in and make you care about the characters.
Ok this sounds like im being a smartass but I dont mean to sound like one, If there is a cartoon film and a family are crying because there dog died, but then there was a real life version with the same thing I would find the real life version more sad because you believe it more, if it is all cartoony and full of really silly jokes then you dont believe it and you can say: 'Just a cartoon it's not real'.
Yes maybe SOMETIMES < (Look what I just said everyone only sometimes :P)
Sometimes a more cartoony film or tv program or even a game can be sad but it is never more sad than a real life thing because if it looks real you can believe it more and be more sad.
Of course it is too late for telltale to change the style for law and order but I am very sure they will get more very big franchises (Maybe a back to the future season 2 wink wink)
But you need to think about making better graphics and as I have said many time's it doesnt have to be like La noire but at least something I can believe and say, 'Well done telltale I can see you put effort into every aspect of the game 10/10'
On a side note.
I really like the back to the future game but the only problem was the graphics, it had a fantastic story and I liked the characters but then when I looked at the graphics I was dissapointed because if the graphics had been better I would of believed the game was more of a continuation and not so much another cartoon series.
Aha, but now we're talking about two different things. Cartoony visuals and cartoony writing. Silly jokes would of course ruin anything dramatic and emotional, but the same can be said of a silly program that's not a cartoon. The Three Stooges comes to mind. You laugh when the characters beat each other up, because it's written to be silly. If that were happening in real life, it would be monsterous!
I can vouch 100% that the people who make games at Telltale do it because it's their passion. There isn't a person I've met at Telltale who puts less than their whole heart into what they do here, if that counts for anything :P
I don't think that's true at all. I often find that cartoons can have heightened emotional impacts if done well. I have friends who outright refuse to watch the Futurama episode "Jurassic Bark" because the ending makes them collapse into a fit of tears and sobbing.
Batman DC Animated Universe films are way more emotionally gripping then any of the live films including Dark Knight.
I disagree, the dark knight was very emotional and batman forever was very tense sometimes
I really only liked the joker parts the rest wasn't that good for me.
Batman Mask of the Phantasm was theatricality released about 1 or 2 years before Batman Forever and there's no way in hell that anyone could think batman forever is more dramatic then mask of the phantasm.
Look at TF2, it's graphics are downed due to an ARTSTYLE.
I disagree completley batman forever was only a bit silly most parts were really serious
Now, this is a valid argument and I agree wholeheartedly.
And it's where you drop the ball in my opinion. I know this is said to death, especially in these forums by dozens of people already -everyone's used to hear it I think people started to call people agree with me here "the hippies of videogaming"- but graphics are only an aspect and depending on the variety of the game itself and the promises of the developers depending on its production value, budget, etc.; the kind of graphics Telltale uses for their games can still be used to the way to success, given that "success" itself is relative. A game that makes more money than what has been paid for, is a success. The chimes of fan appreciation through your communication channels, are a sign of success. For example, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 is sadly a success. At the same time, indie game Terraria is also a MAJOR success even though the community of the latter example is much smaller. As I said before, the tone of the game you aim for is also a big defining factor on which visual style you need to go for.
Is this... is this a joke? Have you seen Batman Forever? It's one of the most over-the-top, ridiculous and silly films ever produced! (Bested in this regard perhaps only by its sequel.) Tommy Lee Jones EATS the scenery, Jim Carrey is... well Jim Carrey, and Joel Schumacher seems to be under the impression that the only real Batman worth imitating is Adam West and the gang.
But forget all this for a moment, the argument that you are attacking isn't 'Is Batman Forever a silly or serious film?' it's 'Is Batman Forever sillier than Batman Mask of the Phantasm?' Have you seen Batman Mask of the Phantasm, because you make no mention of it? If not then you can't really have anything constructive to add to the conversation.
Your quote defending Batman Forever as a serious film shows that you have a blinding prejudice against animation over live action, one so strong and fervent your argument could be considered irrational.
Um yes Jim Carrey was silly in Batman Forever but I am sure you dont know what Batman
is, it is a comic so it having a animated film makes sense and it having a real life action film doesnt, also I recall the comics being a very silly but brutal theme just like the films and tha
Actually there are some very serious Batman comics, such as Batman: The Killing Joke, which served as inspiration for a couple of Batman films, including The Dark Knight. To say Batman Forever is silly because it is based off a comic is a gross oversimplification. There are many factors involved, from it being produced by a major toy manufacturer more interested in selling action figures and different kinds of Batmobiles than making anything that resembled a good film, to a delusion on the part of the filmmakers that people wanted a return of the camp style of the old Adam West television show.
But again this is entirely missing the point. You seem to be utterly convinced that live action = automatic seriousness and that animated/comic style = automatic silliness despite the fact that you seem to be deeply ignorant about the latter. The point I and others are trying to put forth is that this isn't always so; live action/realistic can be silly and animated/comic can be serious. It's all about the execution. I'd make a list of animated films, graphic novels and yes, even video games to watch/read/play in order to educate you on the topic but you seem so closed mined about the whole thing it would hardly be worthwhile.
I was not saying that what I said was that Serious live action films and tv programs or even games with decent graphics are always more serious than cartoony serious films and tv programs or game like I said a while ago, if there was a live action film where a family are crying over a dog because it dies but then there was a animated version I would find the real life action one more sad because I believe it more than a animated version, let me use of mice and men (the film version) if there was a animated version with lennie talking about the rabbits people would just laugh because his voice and the animation mixed together looks stupid but a real life version you understand it more and understand the point of it more.
So you are saying if there was an animated version of Of Mice and Men it would be bad merely because it is animated and thus would have to have poor voice acting and a lack of believability? I really have to come back to the fact that you are clearly ignorant of what animated films are capable of achieving. Look at Grave of the Fireflies, it is an extremely tragic film, even more tragic than Of Mice and Men, and it is completely animated. People don't laugh at it because the voice and animation mixed together looks stupid, they usually just cry or feel really, really sad.
You are completely incapable of providing tangible examples of why animated films are always less serious than a live action equivalent and the fact that you assume that a live action version of Of Mice and Men would have to be bad and people would laugh at it shows an utter lack of imagination. I'll admit, the live action version of Of Mice and Men is really good, but if you think they couldn't make a good animated version you really don't know what animation is capable of.
You didnt understand what I was saying I was saying they would laugh because of lennies voice because of him being disabled but if it is animated it is harder to understand.
And you don't understand what I'm saying, that what you're saying isn't necessarily so. Just because it would be animated wouldn't mean it would be harder to understand. You have no basis for saying that other than your personal prejudice against the medium.
I would like to ask you why you prefer animation more than real life, after all real life action is real talent with people acting and having to come up with the emotion to get the audience to be sad, the way I see it animation is just for lazy people or for directors who cant find any good actors or japanase people (Because nearly all there films are animated)
It seems you hate the fact I dont like it when people turn serious films or tv programs into animation but im not the only one who hates it when people turn serious tv programs or films animated look at bttf.com lots of people were outraged at telltales art style for the bttf game.
If you were a big fan of real life action films or tv programs then you would understand why a fair amount of people spread about the telltale games forums keep complaining about the art styles telltale choose, and explaining that there are a few serious animated films wont change the fact Law & Order, Jurrasic Park or Back to the future fans want a decent art style.
If you have not already watch The UNTOUCHABLES and imagine a game was made for it with the worst graphics ever, would you understand if the fans were pissed off.
I don't prefer animated over live action, I just have a tremendous about of respect for it. When you say "after all real life action is real talent with people acting and having to come up with the emotion to get the audience to be sad, the way I see it animation is just for lazy people or for directors who cant find any good actors or japanase people (Because nearly all there films are animated)" it just shows how ignorant you are of animation. If this were true why would anyone bother making animated films at all? They actually take a lot longer to make and in some instances even cost more than live action. A director for an animated film actually has to put in a lot more work than a director of a live action film, but if you knew anything about animated films you'd probably know this.
If directors who can't find any good actors are the ones who make animated films then why do big name stars voice all the lead characters in the latest animated films? The english cast of Ponyo included Cate Blanchett, Matt Damon, Liam Neeson and Tina Fey. All of these actors are in high demand, why would they lend their voices to some Japanese anime film when in your world live action is unconditionally superior?
It's not that I hate the fact that you "dont like it when people turn serious films or tv programs into animation," I hate that you have a complete lack of respect for animation as a medium despite really not knowing anyting about it.
You say there are other people who hate the graphical style of BttF. I have at no point said I like the graphical style of BttF: TG, but all the same I can sit here and say there there are a lot of people who loved the graphical style. I've seen a lot more people on these forums that have said they like it then those who don't. There will always be people on each side of this debate. (For the record I can't stand BttF: TG but for reasons other than graphical.)
I am a big fan of live action and television shows. There is no rule that says I can't be a fan of both live action and animation, this is just you assuming things with no basis.
You say fans want something with a decent art style but the only two art styles you seem to think exist are realistic and not realistic. You only accept realistic but Telltale make small, downloadable games that don't really specialise in graphics. They try to make up for lack of realism with artistic style but you seem to think that's somehow lazy. I don't think that's really a fair assumption to make.
As a matter of fact, and completely by coincidence, The Untouchables is one of my favourite films. (I assume you are talking about the 1987 film here and not the original series, you don't really make it clear.) I can actually imagine an Untouchables film with BttF style graphics made by Telltale. In fact if they included good puzzles I think that would be an awesome game.
I hope your joking it is fine when they are not based on anything and they make animated things but if they animated a serious deppressing film like the Untouchables I have no doubt they would get bad marks just for the cartoony art style
Also quote somebody who said they liked the art style for back to the future and not one of the telltale fans who just make a second account and only ever post one comment and the comment is like this: ''The game was the greatest thing ever it looked exactly like the films and even though you made a few mistakes the game is great and has no problems''
And no im not making that up I have seen many people do that and you can tell they are telltale fans, yes there are people who liked the game, I liked the story but the graphics were a problem back to the future is real life action and the game should be close.
Lets try the other way what is your favourite animated thing ever which you never stop talking about and you have posters of, imagine if someone made a game or film of it with real life action but it didnt look right because it didnt work in real life action as it does in animation, thats how many people felt about the bttf game and I hope telltale learn to add some better graphics for the second season of the bttf game because you get more benefits from good graphics than bad graphics.
I'm sure it would get bad marks from you but thankfully you are not the only opinion that matters. Here is a link to Roger Ebert's review of Grave of the Fireflies. Please read it, it's not terribly long. Though if you can't be bothered then at least read this quote (it is really worth reading the whole thing, though):
Grave of the Fireflies is a more serious and depressing film than The Untouchables and it's completely animated. You may not believe it's possible but that's because, as I keep saying, you are completely closed minded on what animation is capable of.
Here is a poll where people are outright asked if they think the game should be realistic or cartoony and the majority of people said they prefer it to be cartoony. I'm not sure what further proof you need to be convinced that of all the things that was wrong with BttF: TG the graphics isn't widely considered to be one of them.
I also found this little gem. The OP says that he thinks that BttF would work perfectly as an animated film and nobody else in the thread say it wouldn't work stylisticly.
And finally, here's another poll a fan started saying that they should make the game into a CGI film, to which the majority votes yes.
I have to point you back to the above graphs. The many people you speak of that feel that BttF: TG had the wrong art style are the minority. There aren't even any art style bashing threads like this one over at the BttF forums. I really don't think that there are as many people supporting you on this as you seem to think there are. At best it's a vocal minority.
The first thing you said I notice most of the people who voted cartoony said they wanted it inbetween which I dont have anything against and the other people were telltale fans who are of course going to support cartoony graphics
Also the thing about a animated film the OP said he watched tintin and thinks it would work well for back to the future, tintin is a realistic cartoon but telltales art style is incredibly unrealistic.
I have said many times before in other thread's I dont want uncharted or la noire graphics, just something which looks right and I can tell you that the art style for bttf the game does not suit it at all
You have not made a refrence to back to the future so im not sure if you have seen back to the future films but go and watch them, they are a very good set of films and if you took the jokes and the odd silly scene's out I would say it is a very serious film and the fans on bttf.com have said they want a more realistic art style.
(Also this is becoming more about Back to the future and not so much about Law & Order)
Yes if it is done well but thats rare and telltale well they always add jokes to there games combine crappy graphics and jokes and it straight away looks like they are making fun.
A lot of people on the first couple of pages wrote that they'd like to see something in-between but the point is that when asked flat out, black and white, one way or the other would people prefer the game to be realistic or cartoony the majority of people said cartoony. If people were as disgusted as the art style as you say they are this wouldn't be the case, it would be the other way around.
You are completely discounting the opinions of people who are fans of Telltale but I could just as easily say we should discount the opinions of people like you because you are clearly prejudiced against cartoon styles despite being ignorant of the history of animation and what can be achieved though the medium. Not to mention we could do the same with all the graphics whores who aren't happy with any game not running on the latest Unreal Engine. With any debate there will always be people deeply prejudiced one way or the other and unable to see reason, but the usually cancel each other out (and make life miserable for the rest of us.)
The idea of a realistic cartoon seems to go against everything you've said in your past posts. So you admit that cartoons can be realistic?
I have seen the bttf films many times, I even own them all on DVD and Blu-ray. And I'm sorry but your definition of serious here is very skewed. BttF does not take itself seriously at all, and that's a huge part of what makes them good. I'm not saying serious = bad because there are many excellent serious films out there but bttf is very clearly not one of them.
Marty jamming Johnny B Goode in front of a crowd of 1950's teenagers is not serious, Marty going back to the American wild west in a pink cowboy outfit is not serious, Michael J. Fox playing his own daughter is not serious, the Flux Capacitor is not serious, Doc's crazy inventions are not serious, the delorien time travel machine in not serious. These are all jokes and are all ones off the top of my head.
If you take out all the silly scenes you really aren't left with much of anything. BttF does not attempt to be realistic, not even a little. It's a comedy and its subject for parody is different eras in time. It's light-hearted silly fun. Even the very concept of the whole film series, travelling through time in a delorian, is a joke. If you think the BttF films are serious then you are deluded. Deeply, deeply deluded.
I took a loot at the bttf.com forums and saw a lot of what I see here: differing opinions. Some were vocally against the art style and some said it suited. I don't think you can say with any authority how the people at bttf.com feel one way or another about the topic. However, in your world where everyone who is against the graphics is right and everyone who is for it is a fanboy and their opinion is discounted I can see why you would think that everyone over there is on your side.
Im not saying that people who prefer cartoony graphics are completley wrong full stop in everything but with back to the future they are wrong, true fans take back to the future very seriously and most fans dont like the art style.
to try and make this more about law & order read this:
http://www.appolicious.com/games/articles/10644-law-order-legacies-is-more-like-interactive-tv-than-adventure-gaming
The guy said he didnt like the art style, are you going to say his opinion is wrong and he is not a fan because he also thinks the art style is just wrong.
I will admit there are some cartoony films which can be more serious than a real life film but I will not agree that a cartoony art style is the best art style for a bttf or law & order game because if you asked the true fans most of them would say they want a more realistic art style.
Anyway, personally, I like the cell shading. I think it looks nice. I never found Law & Order to be that much of a drama anyhow. It's a good show though.
Your definition of a true fan here seems to be people who line up with your own opinion. I could just as easily say that the true BttF fans are the people who embrace cartoony graphics that are more in line with the silliness of the film series. I have no less right to label someone a true fan as you do. It's not really fair to call people on one side of the debate true fans and the other side not. It's a label people apply to delude themselves into thinking they are right and others are wrong. Saying you are a true fan doesn't make your flawed argument any stronger.
The reviewer you posted talks about graphics but as an aside. After talking about the graphics she immediately says "The real issue is gameplay," and then goes into detail about that. She understands that the graphics are only part of it, a part that pails in comparison to aspects such as gameplay, which sound like the real problem with Law & Order (and BttF while we're at it). It sounds like she'd have said the game was bad even if it did have the right art style.
I think it's important for you to know that art style isn't the only thing that makes a good game, it's not even the most important aspect, just one of many.
I didnt say that fans who dont care about the cartoony graphics are wrong at all look at what I posted.
Also the reviewer also didnt like the art style and I didnt say graphics are the most important aspect, it just needs to look nicer I think graphics just a tad better than jurrasic park are perfect for bttf or law and order for all of telltales games really.(Not sam and max or Tales of Money Island or wallace and gromit)
Back to the future has odd silly scenes yes but overall people take it very seriously, you made it sound like a spoof the way you described it and failed to see the point of some of those scenes like the time machiene being a delorean or why he played the song Johnny B good in front of everyone,
It fits into being a comedy not a spoof, and usually comedys dont get so many refrences like:
> Nike Shoe's
> Argentina shop advert
>Tv advert
>Many quotes in films and tv programs (I have seen about 30)
>Huge refrence in the spike awards beginning
>One of the scenes played at the Oscars
And many more.
The people have put effort into making delorean time machienes and telltale dont even put effort into graphics.
also because you keep saying I hate cartoony graphics, Thats a lie some of my favourite games are cartoony or Zork which has no graphics at all and I enjoy that game.
I just hate it when you take a film which is taken incredibly seriously by it's fans and give it crap graphics.
Please open your mind and try and see like me and a lot of fans.
I respect your opinion but I am sure I am a bigger bttf fan than you and know more about that art style fits bttf than you.
Maybe you should look at what you posted, you said they were wrong about BttF. In fact your exact words were "Im not saying that people who prefer cartoony graphics are completley wrong full stop in everything but with back to the future they are wrong, true fans take back to the future very seriously and most fans dont like the art style."
I'll also mention that you say they are wrong without saying why they are wrong. All you talk about is seriousness and who the true fans are, like you have the right to decide such things.
Jurassic Park's graphics got blasted way worse than BttF, they look nice on the surface but the people and dinosaurs have stiff, unrealistic animations. On the whole people seemed more happy with the BttF graphics than JP's so I'm not quite sure why you are clambering for "just a tad better than jurrasic park" graphics.
Back to the Future is all odd silly scenes. Almost every scene in the film is laden with gags and jokes. Look at the opening sequence, which sets the scene for the entire movie. You're in a house and the camera is panning past old newspaper articles, an absurd amount of clocks, and some of Doc's crazy inventions. Marty enters and flicks on a bunch of switches and turns up some dials to full one by one. He plugs his electric guitar into into a comically massive set of speakers. Then he plays a note on the guitar and the speaker explodes, the force of the explosion sends Marty flying into a La-Z-Boy on the other side of the room and a set of shelves collapses on him. He pulls himself out of the mess, unhurt and unscratched. 'Whoa, rock'n'roll,' he says. This is not something that happens in a serious film, it's more like a live action cartoon, right down to the slapstick. Less than five minutes into the film I've found an example of it not being serious. If you still don't believe me I can find a lot more. I think this live action cartoon style the film has is a big reason why a lot of people (though clearly not you) have accepted the cartoony art style of the game. The films are not totally unlike a cartoon, and thus cartoon visuals in the game are not out of place.
You keep saying people take it seriously but just because you do but this doesn't mean the films take themselves seriously.
And don't say I've missed the point of the scenes. First off it's not best to challenge my film knowledge, I'm an A+ average cinema studies student and have spent a considerable amount of time dissecting films and looking at what makes them work. Second off, you are right about one thing, it's not a spoof it's a comedy, but it still doesn't take itself seriously, few comedies do.
You take it seriously, fine, but that doesn't mean the media associated with the franchise has to adhere to your vision of what the films are, especially when your vision is as misguided as thinking the films are serious. I think it's more important that they adhere to the spirit of the films, which is more cartoony in nature then I'm sure you're ever going to admit.
I don't understand the point of this list. So are you saying the films are high profile? Do you think the films being high profile somehow make them more serious than other comedies? I'm a bit lost by this to be perfictly honost.
Why do you think cartoony graphics equate a lack of effort? And we're talking about small, downloadable games here. Telltale needs to keep the file sizes low so people with bad internet connections can still have access to their games. There was never any hope that Telltale would have AAA realistic graphics, it's more a matter of art style.
Good to hear, I just hope you give more respect to cartoony games then you do to animated movies.
Also, check your wording. I can't lie to you about what you like, only you can lie about what you like. I can accuse and you can admit or deny; that's about the extent of it.
And I think this pet peeve of yours has blinded you to a couple of realities:
1) The majority of people don't agree with you on the art style.
2) The films aren't supposed to be serious, they're fun, over-the-top popcorn entertainment with some decent human drama thrown in to ground the experience.
I'm not the one with the closed mind here. Alas, you are still under the impression that your opinion on BttF's art style is the only one that matters. Why? Because you take it more seriously? You take Back to the Future so seriously you fail see how little it takes itself seriously. Yes, you're a fan but you don't seem to understand the subject of your fandom. Taking something seriously doesn't necessarily mean you understand it.
You really have yet to come up with a good reason why the BttF game should have had a realistic art direction. All you do is talk about seriousness and apparent unhappy fans who don't seem to be a numerous as you think they are. You keep saying the films are serious and yet you have provided no reasons why you think they are serious.
For both our sakes please explain, hopefully using examples, why you think BttF, which is filled with jokes and gags and unrealistic cartoony elements, is such a serious film series, because I don't understand where you are coming from with this.