There is a canned boxart for Curse of Monkey Island that has the Monkey Island 3 logo on it. So I guess if you want to get technical. (I shouldn't know this but I do.)
Nah, there was no canned CMI boxart with a "3" on it. You're talking about the german localization of CMI, which added a little monkey holding a "3". That has nothing to do with the official name of the game, which is simply "The Curse of Monkey Island".
Nah, there was no canned CMI boxart with a "3" on it. You're talking about the german localization of CMI, which added a little monkey holding a "3". That has nothing to do with the official name of the game, which is simply "The Curse of Monkey Island".
:eek:
The italian version too! Never noticed the original USA version package doesn't have it!
I have to hand it to you, Guybrush_Threepwood. very well said. exactly what i wanted to say.
To whoever said TMI should look like crysis:
THAT IS ABSOLUTELY NOT WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR. we're not asking for realism, but rather beautifully rendered graphics. it can be in a cute sense, vibrant, colourful, detailed, lush. Take 'prince of persia (2008)' for example. it doesnt have realistic graphics, but it's very beautifully rendered.
And Guybrush_Threepwood emphasized another issue which i have brought up earlier: "if we all want graphic adventures to be competitive again within this crazy business and attract more young players, graphics must be very good looking". I truly believe that the only buyers TMI will attract is old fans like us and perhaps a minority of ppl who have never played MI before.
I mean, let's put ourselves in their shoes and imagine if we've never played MI before. we're in a store looking for a good adventure game. Would you rather choose Call of Duty: modern warfare 2, assassin's creed 2 or TMI which looks like fake plastics? i mean, who are we kidding. and if u think i'm wrong, let the sales statistics tell the whole story.
having said that, i'm not saying graphic is the most important element in a game. PLEASE STOP ARGUING THAT. but graphic is just as equally important as other gaming aspects like story, music, gameplay, dialogue, etc. all these must work together to make a really really good and kick ass game which offers remarkable gaming experience.
and one last thing, someone was right. i dont think 3 weeks time is enough for telltale games to make any MAJOR improvement on the graphics now. mostly the finished product will look just like the unfinished product from screenshots, since they have released a trailer with that graphics. Trailer usually represents what the end product will look like. So, there really isnt any point discussing this topic any further. let's all just stop and enjoy the final product when it's released.
Again, Telltale Games, THANK YOU FOR DOING THIS!!! WE ALL REALLY REALLY REALLY LOVE MONKEY ISLAND AND YOU GAVE US NEW HOPE!!!
My kudos to your post.
The example of a person that doesn't know what MI is, going in a store and having to "judge" by the screenshots on the boxes before buying a game says it all.
Everything you said is my thought.
Thanks for sharing yours, I was starting to feel alone with my opinion.
if we all want graphic adventures to be competitive again within this crazy business and attract more young players, graphics must be very good looking"
I understand your points about the graphics. I love good graphics but at the same time I would MUCH rather have a fun game with a good story rather than a mediocre game that looks beautiful. However, in regards to this quote, I feel like the real battle for these kind of adventure games is the fact that you don't kill anything. It's a very pathetic, but true, fact. Even one of my friends that is my age (granted that is only 20) saw me playing LOOM one time and asked me "So how do you fight stuff?" Games like Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed pull in the violent aspect of gamers (usually younger kids who just want to shoot/kill things rather than actually have to work to beat a game). This is what truly causes problems for this genre and is most likely what caused it to die out in the first place. We're just lucky that we actually have dedicated game developers like the guys at TellTale who share the same love for these games as we do.
As far as the graphics for Tales go, I feel pretty indifferent about them. I think they look pretty good, and with a little polishing could look great (and by the way for everyone who says the trailer shows the finished product, they still hadn't decided on a control scheme as of like last week so I doubt they have the finished product, that's one of the advantages of an episodic adventure). They are a bit cartoony but hey that's not bad. I really am not fond of the way that Guybrush looks, he just doesn't even seem to resemble any of the other Guybrushes, but I'll get over that eventually.
Bottom line: graphics good, not great. Great graphics =/= great game.
Well - I'll say that the graphics could have been a lot better, but they can always change them in the next episodes...
I normally priotitize the values of a game like this -
1)Story
2)Gameplay
3)Graphics
And I'd rate TMI like this
Story - 9-10(Probably, at least)
Gameplay - 9-10(Judging by TTg's previous games)
Graphics... err... 7-8.
So basically, graphics ARE an important part of the game, but if the two other MORE important factors are given more attention, it's still gonna kick butt.
No one ever discussed about that.
But I suggest you two more equations:
great humour + great story + bad graphics = very good game
great humour + great story + great graphics = great game
So basically, graphics ARE an important part of the game, but if the two other MORE important factors are given more attention, it's still gonna kick butt.
Absolutely, graphics the last thing (but they MUST be there at last).
But my rating for graphics would be... 6.
No one ever discussed about that.
But I suggest you two more equations:
great humour + great story + bad graphics = very good game
great humour + great story + great graphics = great game
You are correct, sir. But I wouldn't say these graphics are bad. And either way, graphics aren't what killed the adventure genre, consumers did (which was my main point of the post).
But they DO have time to improve the graphics significantly. For the following reasons:
1) The build they were showing at e3 is unlikely to be the absolute latest build they had of the game, they probably put something together that they knew would work well in advance, so they've got more time than you think they have.
2) It's amazing how much a few shaders and some tweaking of the lighting, post processing effects etc can improve the over all look of a game and compared to the actual modelling/texture work/world building are not particularly time consuming to implement; this sort of final polish is routinely done late in the day, especially in Telltale's case where several episodes are being built at once. I'm sure you will be surprised.
Shaders aren't going to help the quality of the graphics. Shaders are for eye-candy. Realism. What everyone seems to be asking for is more detail which is what higher poly models, hi-res textures, detail textures, normal/spec/parallax mapping, and dynamic lighting/shadows would provide. Which all would be pretty cool, but I can live without it....for now. I do hope that Tell Tale continues to improve their engine to encompass these superior effects.
Shaders aren't going to help the quality of the graphics. Shaders are for eye-candy. Realism. What everyone seems to be asking for is more detail which is what higher poly models, hi-res textures, detail textures, normal/spec/parallax mapping, and dynamic lighting/shadows would provide. Which all would be pretty cool, but I can live without it....for now. I do hope that Tell Tale continues to improve their engine to encompass these superior effects.
Thing is, I'm not sure that's what they ARE asking for. Whenever someone complains about the graphics, they almost always pull up the ugliest, most unfinished looking shot they can find and the problems are mainly in the areas of lighting and texture polish.
Anyway, it shows a lack of understanding of shaders if you think they're just about eye candy and realism, they're much more flexible than that and can really add to the overall artistic look and graphical quality of a game.
Also, shaders were not the only thing that I mention, I also talked about things like lighting and colour balance, and post-processing which, again, are things which make a big impact to how the final piece looks.
Finally, I'd just like to point out that I'm not just guessing this is what is going to happen. I have been very reliably informed that this is the case. In fact, what I was told is that the aim for the final release is to have every shot looking one more pass of visual polish better than the shot of Guybrush holding the sword and the bottle, which I think is a great looking screen already.
even bigger issue for me then plain graphic quality is some sort of sense of epic proportions of locations, the surroundings. the perfect examples would be a great rendition of mystery island such is the Monkey Island in the first game, the Woodtick town, Puerto Pollo.. no matter where your character is at the moment, in which part of the locations, you would have that sense of rich locations around you, of distance, wide area and so on.. Thats maybe harder to achieve with 3D, but not impossible. I already said that Sam & Max and Wallace and Gromit, speaking of that aspect, looks more like a theatre stage shows, which is maybe good for that type and sort of a "situation comedy", but Monkey Island is something also like a grand adventure, in style of movies and need maybe little different approach in that terms
even bigger issue for me then plain graphic quality is some sort of sense of epic proportions of locations, the surroundings. the perfect examples would be a great rendition of mystery island such is the Monkey Island in the first game, the Woodtick town, Puerto Pollo.. no matter where your character is at the moment, in which part of the locations, you would have that sense of rich locations around you, of distance, wide area and so on.. Thats maybe harder to achieve with 3D, but not impossible. I already said that Sam & Max and Wallace and Gromit, speaking of that aspect, looks more like a theatre stage shows, which is maybe good for that type and sort of a "situation comedy", but Monkey Island is something also like a grand adventure, in style of movies and need maybe little different approach in that terms
I actually see where Guybrush is coming from here... now before you jump down my throat let me get this clear - I love Telltale for what they're doing. Despite a few issues I have the way Telltale do things (repeative annoying characters being the main one), I'll try and focus on graphics.
MI1's look blew me away on Amiga. MI2 -again, a more developed look with so much glorious art to look at. THEN I remember when the first screenshots and demo of CMI came out. It blew my mind. Graphics in these games are so important that to say they're not.. you may as well read a book!! The nature of the game is to stare at the screen whilst trying to solve puzzles... surely you want to be staring at something that looks decent?
Now I only say this because I want my Monkey Island comeback experience to be the best it can be...
I do think the TMI characters look a bit plastic and the overall graphics are generally a bit "lifeless". I think if you're going for a cartoon-style of CMI - why not make it a cartoon 2D game proper CMI-style? I don't see why games companys need to make everything in 3D these days just because its modern! In fact, the adventure game style works better in 2D by it's nature. I would have thought getting an artist to create a few glorious 2D backgrounds per episode would be easier than making an entire 3D world?
Jezz Guybrush... Go easy on the huge bold letters. Actually I like the style of TMI... It's how I always imagined CMI if it went 3D. And I disliked (hate is such a strong word, although my feeling was closer to it) the style of EMI (And yes, I played Simon the Sorceror 3D). Now, my most important concern if wether or not it will be full point&click. I hope it is and that we get to use different verbs in the same object, not the simplistic choice (of some adventure games now) of "to click or not to click".
I don't see why games companys need to make everything in 3D these days just because its modern!
Its not for being modern. 3D adds different gameplay options and also improves the whole..."feeling" of the game, it makes it more immersive for the player i think.
3D is evolving right now, like 2D did at its time. 2D adventures looks really awesome today because in the past they tried different things to make them what they are now. You will never know how good a 3D adventure can get, if you first dont start making them in 3D, one step at a time.
By the way, i think this graphics are great, i also notice those "plastic" brights that bug me a little, but its just a detail, in general it looks awesome.
Its not for being modern. 3D adds different gameplay options and also improves the whole..."feeling" of the game, it makes it more immersive for the player i think.
3D is evolving right now, like 2D did at its time. 2D adventures looks really awesome today because in the past they tried different things to make them what they are now. You will never know how good a 3D adventure can get, if you first dont start making them in 3D, one step at a time
Don't forget, it's also MUCH, MUCH easier to do stuff in 3D... Cameras, animation, all that.
I do prefer 2D, though. I think the new Guybrush would look awesome in 2D.
Don't forget, it's also MUCH, MUCH easier to do stuff in 3D... Cameras, animation, all that.
I do prefer 2D, though. I think the new Guybrush would look awesome in 2D.
I really dont see how this is true... The 3D artists would have drawn their designs first... there you go! 2D artwork done. All it needs is colouring resulting in a much more colourful and vibrant game world.
I really dont see how this is true... The 3D artists would have drawn their designs first... there you go! 2D artwork done. All it needs is colouring resulting in a much more colourful and vibrant game world.
No, you see - to draw/paint every character/object/environment in every needed angle can be quite a pain in the whicheverbodypartyouwant...
With 3D, you just finalize a model, and you can have it on screen in any position you want. Actually, it's not easier but faster... Also, the moving cameras they're using in this game wouldn't be possible in 2D.
No, you see - to draw/paint every character/object/environment in every needed angle can be quite a pain in the whicheverbodypartyouwant...
With 3D, you just finalize a model, and you can have it on screen in any position you want. Actually, it's not easier but faster... Also, the moving cameras they're using in this game wouldn't be possible in 2D.
I see your point yeah.. But there are nice tricks such as the layering of foreground and background 2D art to give perspective. And we've seen that used way back in MI1! In past games, there was rarely 2 scenes with the same background models which would reduce the need to re-draw the same models by hand. Moving cameras aren't used all that well in past Telltale games as well.
I dunno. I'm just a cranky purest! heh... and YES! The new Guybrush would look ace in 2D!
Also, I'm pretty sure they also said (in the private forum?) that the "not MI5" thing was a joke people took far too seriously.
I conceed it is the 5th monkey island game, but this is unlike all the games in the series so far because it's episodic. In fact, Tales of Monkey Island, assuming it is successful, is likely to have multiple seasons. Is it really an offical entry in the series or is it something else? In my opinion ToMI is to the Monkey Island Series what Sarah Conor Chronicles is to the Terminator series. It different but it's going to be a lot of fun, and having it now is much better than waiting for the Monkey Island blockbuster that LucasArts is unwilling to risk money on.
Imo I think the graphics are charming, colourful and vibrant. I like what I see and can't wait to see more. Hopefully they'll grow on you
I've noticed in the diarama thing in Sam and Max games. Never really felt it was a bad thing, it reminds me of the panning scenes from the old adventure games. I think it's been kept this way to make sure navigation is simple and non-frustrating, but Telltale are always refining and trying new things with their engine, always driving towards a more cinematic experience so it will probably improve in time.
Thing is, I'm not sure that's what they ARE asking for.
Speaking for myself, what I'm asking for is a look that's not "edgy".
What's smooth MUST be smooth, a wheel MUST be a wheel (it mustn't look as an edgy prism).
Have you seen the ship in a TMI screenshot? Its back really bothers me: not because I want it realistic, but because I want it to actually look like a ship.
In the previous Monkey Island games, the inspiration for the player came also from the fact that you felt really inside the situations. How can I feel inside the game, when every smooth object, like a ship, is a mere edgy approximation of what it should look like?!?
You can obtain what I'm asking for just with one thing: INCREASING THE NUMBER OF POLYGONS.
You can obtain what I'm asking for just with one thing: INCREASING THE NUMBER OF POLYGONS.
Well, in that case you're asking the impossible. As a Wiiware release they need to be economical with the number of polygons on screen and that's that. Personally speaking I can't think of any screenshots where the number of polygons has bothered me in the slightest. In fact, I've been rather impressed with the level of background detail in the games.
If that's really your trouble with the game I don't know what to say. There isn't going to be any more polygons because there very probably CAN'T be any more.
I imagine you will, like me, be playing on PC and wondering why you have to put up with fewer polygons. That's fair enough, I suppose. However, I think they've found a good style even within the limitations.
Yes, Inso, I know.
In fact, I'm a bit disappointed that the graphics are VOLUNTARILY a little limited with the aim to make it playable on the Wii.
MI's always been a PC game first, then the conversion to other platforms.
I perfectly understand TTG's decision to embrace a bigger part of the market, and the Wii hardware can't handle more than we see in TMI (or maybe it can, but TMI's being released on Wiiware).
I do think that they've found a good compromise, anyway.
I'm just a little disappointed, that's all.
It's funny how people seem to miss the posts where team members state that the graphics are heavily compressed for the Wii version, which can only be 40mb, as opposed to the PC version, which is sometimes nearly 500mb. And no, they don't just compress the textures and sound. Polys get decreased too. Just look at the differences between the Wii and PC versions of SBCG4AP.
Yes, Inso, I know.
In fact, I'm a bit disappointed that the graphics are VOLUNTARILY a little limited with the aim to make it playable on the Wii.
MI's always been a PC game first, then the conversion to other platforms.
I perfectly understand TTG's decision to embrace a bigger part of the market, and the Wii hardware can't handle more than we see in TMI (or maybe it can, but TMI's being released on Wiiware).
I do think that they've found a good compromise, anyway.
I'm just a little disappointed, that's all.
Yeah, it's a PC game, and you know what? Not all of us have magical state-of-the-art PCs that can handle Crysis-quality graphics. Besides, if the graphics were too much more technically sophisticated than this, then it wouldn't match Telltale's business model of fast, inexpensive, episodic games. To be honest, I've seen the gameplay footage, and I think the graphics are just fine. Polygon count is completely overrated, some of the best looking games in history had modest polygon counts. Just look at Ocarina of Time, I think it looks better than over half of the games made today because its aesthetic far outweighs its technical merits. It's not your number of polygons, it's how you use them. From what I've seen so far, Telltale has really made the most of its modest technology.
Really, just lighten up. I'm positive that any MI fan is going to love this game.
I think there is one key aspect of the graphic design that many people overlook: MONEY! I hate to break it to you guys, but 2-D games with hand-painted backgrounds cost quite a bit of money. The reason that Telltale has been able to make adventure games is because their business model is cost-efficient. Telltale releases its games digitally because they don't have to pay high distribution costs. 3-D games with lower-quality graphics are much cheaper to make than high-rendered graphics or hand-painted scenery. Look around, how many other companies continue to make Adventure games? Not many, mostly because there isn't a perceived market. Until that market grows, the best thing to do is stick with the companies that are making them, as the bigger the market, the more these companies can spend on production values.
I think there is one key aspect of the graphic design that many people overlook: MONEY! I hate to break it to you guys, but 2-D games with hand-painted backgrounds cost quite a bit of money. The reason that Telltale has been able to make adventure games is because their business model is cost-efficient.
That's just... wrong. It shows a very fundamental misunderstanding of the topic, more to the point.
The Secret of Monkey Island: Special Edition will be costing less to make than Tales.
Yeah, it's a PC game, and you know what? Not all of us have magical state-of-the-art PCs that can handle Crysis-quality graphics. Besides, if the graphics were too much more technically sophisticated than this, then it wouldn't match Telltale's business model of fast, inexpensive, episodic games. To be honest, I've seen the gameplay footage, and I think the graphics are just fine. Polygon count is completely overrated, some of the best looking games in history had modest polygon counts. Just look at Ocarina of Time, I think it looks better than over half of the games made today because its aesthetic far outweighs its technical merits. It's not your number of polygons, it's how you use them. From what I've seen so far, Telltale has really made the most of its modest technology.
Really, just lighten up. I'm positive that any MI fan is going to love this game.
What makes you think I'm speaking of Crysis-quality graphics?
Every time I speak of good graphics, here's a person who brings out Crysis from his hat.
I'm not speaking of Crysis level of detail, I'm speaking of great UNREALISTIC graphics.
It's not the highest level of detail that me and a lot of hardcore fans are asking for, it's just an ARTISTIC look that is hardly reachable with too poor graphics.
MI's always been artistic and inspiring with his look, if you sacrifice graphics this way it's really hard to obtain that kind of gaming experience.
Yes, its built on an existing game!!!! Of course it will cost less! (although it has taken longer)
That's a good point, Telltale's business is also based on its monthly release schedule. Starting from scratch with hand-painted backgrounds will take much longer to produce than simply building a new adventure game on the same engine and programs that have been used to make all of the other Telltale games. And time is money.
I don't know if you're referring to me, but I never said it should look like Crysis. I did say it'd be nice to see a future Monkey Island game with Crysis-level graphics and realism (much like the Zelda style shift from Wind Waker to Twilight Princess).
lol ... i hope you are the only one who thinks this, a monkey island with crysis graphics ... just lol ... monkey island is a PIRATES GAME! in a "phantasy world" ... i think catoonish graphics are the best for such a game ...
but back to the 3d vs 2d discussion, i also think a mix of both would have been great, look at those graphics: http://www.gbase.ch/PC/shots/Ghost+Pirates+of+Vooju+Island+(9+Screenshots)/8821/5375.html
they look really good, this is the kind of graphics style tales of monkey island should have gotten, they probably did not want such graphics because it would have increased the production costs a lot.
anyway monkey island will probably be a great game, i love all previous games from telltale games and im sure they will bring us a real monkey island game, not one like mi4 but one like mi1 or mi2, with lots of funny parts, a great story, cool characters and lots of great puzzels!
Comments
Nah, there was no canned CMI boxart with a "3" on it. You're talking about the german localization of CMI, which added a little monkey holding a "3". That has nothing to do with the official name of the game, which is simply "The Curse of Monkey Island".
I don't think it's a real problem like the Sam & Max sound was. As long as there's decent graphics i'll play it happily.
You're right, I really shouldn't listen to one of the original creators of Monkey Island when he says "We aren't doing Monkey Island 5."
:eek:
The italian version too! Never noticed the original USA version package doesn't have it!
My kudos to your post.
The example of a person that doesn't know what MI is, going in a store and having to "judge" by the screenshots on the boxes before buying a game says it all.
Everything you said is my thought.
Thanks for sharing yours, I was starting to feel alone with my opinion.
I understand your points about the graphics. I love good graphics but at the same time I would MUCH rather have a fun game with a good story rather than a mediocre game that looks beautiful. However, in regards to this quote, I feel like the real battle for these kind of adventure games is the fact that you don't kill anything. It's a very pathetic, but true, fact. Even one of my friends that is my age (granted that is only 20) saw me playing LOOM one time and asked me "So how do you fight stuff?" Games like Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed pull in the violent aspect of gamers (usually younger kids who just want to shoot/kill things rather than actually have to work to beat a game). This is what truly causes problems for this genre and is most likely what caused it to die out in the first place. We're just lucky that we actually have dedicated game developers like the guys at TellTale who share the same love for these games as we do.
As far as the graphics for Tales go, I feel pretty indifferent about them. I think they look pretty good, and with a little polishing could look great (and by the way for everyone who says the trailer shows the finished product, they still hadn't decided on a control scheme as of like last week so I doubt they have the finished product, that's one of the advantages of an episodic adventure). They are a bit cartoony but hey that's not bad. I really am not fond of the way that Guybrush looks, he just doesn't even seem to resemble any of the other Guybrushes, but I'll get over that eventually.
Bottom line: graphics good, not great. Great graphics =/= great game.
I normally priotitize the values of a game like this -
1)Story
2)Gameplay
3)Graphics
And I'd rate TMI like this
Story - 9-10(Probably, at least)
Gameplay - 9-10(Judging by TTg's previous games)
Graphics... err... 7-8.
So basically, graphics ARE an important part of the game, but if the two other MORE important factors are given more attention, it's still gonna kick butt.
No one ever discussed about that.
But I suggest you two more equations:
great humour + great story + bad graphics = very good game
great humour + great story + great graphics = great game
Absolutely, graphics the last thing (but they MUST be there at last).
But my rating for graphics would be... 6.
You are correct, sir. But I wouldn't say these graphics are bad. And either way, graphics aren't what killed the adventure genre, consumers did (which was my main point of the post).
But it is the 5th Monkey Island
Also, I'm pretty sure they also said (in the private forum?) that the "not MI5" thing was a joke people took far too seriously.
But they DO have time to improve the graphics significantly. For the following reasons:
1) The build they were showing at e3 is unlikely to be the absolute latest build they had of the game, they probably put something together that they knew would work well in advance, so they've got more time than you think they have.
2) It's amazing how much a few shaders and some tweaking of the lighting, post processing effects etc can improve the over all look of a game and compared to the actual modelling/texture work/world building are not particularly time consuming to implement; this sort of final polish is routinely done late in the day, especially in Telltale's case where several episodes are being built at once. I'm sure you will be surprised.
Thing is, I'm not sure that's what they ARE asking for. Whenever someone complains about the graphics, they almost always pull up the ugliest, most unfinished looking shot they can find and the problems are mainly in the areas of lighting and texture polish.
Anyway, it shows a lack of understanding of shaders if you think they're just about eye candy and realism, they're much more flexible than that and can really add to the overall artistic look and graphical quality of a game.
Also, shaders were not the only thing that I mention, I also talked about things like lighting and colour balance, and post-processing which, again, are things which make a big impact to how the final piece looks.
Finally, I'd just like to point out that I'm not just guessing this is what is going to happen. I have been very reliably informed that this is the case. In fact, what I was told is that the aim for the final release is to have every shot looking one more pass of visual polish better than the shot of Guybrush holding the sword and the bottle, which I think is a great looking screen already.
the screens look like a diorama
MI1's look blew me away on Amiga. MI2 -again, a more developed look with so much glorious art to look at. THEN I remember when the first screenshots and demo of CMI came out. It blew my mind. Graphics in these games are so important that to say they're not.. you may as well read a book!! The nature of the game is to stare at the screen whilst trying to solve puzzles... surely you want to be staring at something that looks decent?
Now I only say this because I want my Monkey Island comeback experience to be the best it can be...
I do think the TMI characters look a bit plastic and the overall graphics are generally a bit "lifeless". I think if you're going for a cartoon-style of CMI - why not make it a cartoon 2D game proper CMI-style? I don't see why games companys need to make everything in 3D these days just because its modern! In fact, the adventure game style works better in 2D by it's nature. I would have thought getting an artist to create a few glorious 2D backgrounds per episode would be easier than making an entire 3D world?
Anyway, I'm pumped for TMI... I love my Guybrush!
Its not for being modern. 3D adds different gameplay options and also improves the whole..."feeling" of the game, it makes it more immersive for the player i think.
3D is evolving right now, like 2D did at its time. 2D adventures looks really awesome today because in the past they tried different things to make them what they are now. You will never know how good a 3D adventure can get, if you first dont start making them in 3D, one step at a time.
By the way, i think this graphics are great, i also notice those "plastic" brights that bug me a little, but its just a detail, in general it looks awesome.
I do prefer 2D, though. I think the new Guybrush would look awesome in 2D.
I really dont see how this is true... The 3D artists would have drawn their designs first... there you go! 2D artwork done. All it needs is colouring resulting in a much more colourful and vibrant game world.
With 3D, you just finalize a model, and you can have it on screen in any position you want. Actually, it's not easier but faster... Also, the moving cameras they're using in this game wouldn't be possible in 2D.
I see your point yeah.. But there are nice tricks such as the layering of foreground and background 2D art to give perspective. And we've seen that used way back in MI1! In past games, there was rarely 2 scenes with the same background models which would reduce the need to re-draw the same models by hand. Moving cameras aren't used all that well in past Telltale games as well.
I dunno. I'm just a cranky purest! heh... and YES! The new Guybrush would look ace in 2D!
BTW, Elaine kinda looks weird on the front page... The jaw in particular. Or is it just me? Probably the angle though...
I conceed it is the 5th monkey island game, but this is unlike all the games in the series so far because it's episodic. In fact, Tales of Monkey Island, assuming it is successful, is likely to have multiple seasons. Is it really an offical entry in the series or is it something else? In my opinion ToMI is to the Monkey Island Series what Sarah Conor Chronicles is to the Terminator series. It different but it's going to be a lot of fun, and having it now is much better than waiting for the Monkey Island blockbuster that LucasArts is unwilling to risk money on.
Imo I think the graphics are charming, colourful and vibrant. I like what I see and can't wait to see more. Hopefully they'll grow on you
I've noticed in the diarama thing in Sam and Max games. Never really felt it was a bad thing, it reminds me of the panning scenes from the old adventure games. I think it's been kept this way to make sure navigation is simple and non-frustrating, but Telltale are always refining and trying new things with their engine, always driving towards a more cinematic experience so it will probably improve in time.
Speaking for myself, what I'm asking for is a look that's not "edgy".
What's smooth MUST be smooth, a wheel MUST be a wheel (it mustn't look as an edgy prism).
Have you seen the ship in a TMI screenshot? Its back really bothers me: not because I want it realistic, but because I want it to actually look like a ship.
In the previous Monkey Island games, the inspiration for the player came also from the fact that you felt really inside the situations. How can I feel inside the game, when every smooth object, like a ship, is a mere edgy approximation of what it should look like?!?
You can obtain what I'm asking for just with one thing: INCREASING THE NUMBER OF POLYGONS.
Well, in that case you're asking the impossible. As a Wiiware release they need to be economical with the number of polygons on screen and that's that. Personally speaking I can't think of any screenshots where the number of polygons has bothered me in the slightest. In fact, I've been rather impressed with the level of background detail in the games.
If that's really your trouble with the game I don't know what to say. There isn't going to be any more polygons because there very probably CAN'T be any more.
I imagine you will, like me, be playing on PC and wondering why you have to put up with fewer polygons. That's fair enough, I suppose. However, I think they've found a good style even within the limitations.
In fact, I'm a bit disappointed that the graphics are VOLUNTARILY a little limited with the aim to make it playable on the Wii.
MI's always been a PC game first, then the conversion to other platforms.
I perfectly understand TTG's decision to embrace a bigger part of the market, and the Wii hardware can't handle more than we see in TMI (or maybe it can, but TMI's being released on Wiiware).
I do think that they've found a good compromise, anyway.
I'm just a little disappointed, that's all.
Really, just lighten up. I'm positive that any MI fan is going to love this game.
That's just... wrong. It shows a very fundamental misunderstanding of the topic, more to the point.
The Secret of Monkey Island: Special Edition will be costing less to make than Tales.
Yes, its built on an existing game!!!! Of course it will cost less! (although it has taken longer)
The original had a much higher budget.
Hammy797 was spot on.
What makes you think I'm speaking of Crysis-quality graphics?
Every time I speak of good graphics, here's a person who brings out Crysis from his hat.
I'm not speaking of Crysis level of detail, I'm speaking of great UNREALISTIC graphics.
It's not the highest level of detail that me and a lot of hardcore fans are asking for, it's just an ARTISTIC look that is hardly reachable with too poor graphics.
MI's always been artistic and inspiring with his look, if you sacrifice graphics this way it's really hard to obtain that kind of gaming experience.
That's a good point, Telltale's business is also based on its monthly release schedule. Starting from scratch with hand-painted backgrounds will take much longer to produce than simply building a new adventure game on the same engine and programs that have been used to make all of the other Telltale games. And time is money.
lol ... i hope you are the only one who thinks this, a monkey island with crysis graphics ... just lol ... monkey island is a PIRATES GAME! in a "phantasy world" ... i think catoonish graphics are the best for such a game ...
but back to the 3d vs 2d discussion, i also think a mix of both would have been great, look at those graphics:
http://www.gbase.ch/PC/shots/Ghost+Pirates+of+Vooju+Island+(9+Screenshots)/8821/5375.html
they look really good, this is the kind of graphics style tales of monkey island should have gotten, they probably did not want such graphics because it would have increased the production costs a lot.
anyway monkey island will probably be a great game, i love all previous games from telltale games and im sure they will bring us a real monkey island game, not one like mi4 but one like mi1 or mi2, with lots of funny parts, a great story, cool characters and lots of great puzzels!