User Avatar Image

Why?

posted by ite on - last edited - Viewed by 384 users

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

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

40 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • Yeah, L4D is great for what it is. And it's definitely not a stand alone FPS. At first I was a bit miffed about L4D2, but reading what they brought to it, it definitely makes sense. And what makes L4D good is really subtle.

    If you're not into co-op play though, I can see how the game would not appeal to you, plus it does get a bit repetitive after a while.

  • @MusicallyInspired said: You gotta admit it would be awesome to see one day, though! But if they lose what adventures is all about it wouldn't be worth it. But I don't see that happening. Nothing wrong with improving graphics on already great adventure games. That's what adventure games always used to do, after all. They were the latest graphics hardware and technology showcasers in the past (CD-ROM, VGA, SVGA, Sound Blaster, MT-32, General MIDI, etc), before FPS took over that rite after adventures died.

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

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

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

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

    You also have to be careful because the more advanced the gfx are, the more advanced or at least different you expect the game design also to be. A riddle which is working fine in a simplified abstract look, can feel silly in a more complex realistic looking scene.

  • @taumel said: I think you underestimate how much work it is building a good and working 3d character. Secondly you can still render out all the needed frames from a 3d model you've built before which actually also isn't needed as AME uses 3d characters in a pseudo 2d environment.

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

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

    This is also the reason why the new 2d monkey island looks somewhat bland, they did not apply too many animations to the 2d characters, while the 2d backgrounds look gorgeous the 2d character animations definitely do not, I assume this was due to bugdet constraints!

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

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

    have a cry

    dont buy the game if u dont want to

    MI4 was 3d... did you have a cry about that too?

  • @[TTG said: Yare;129535']
    With a 2D sprite, you have to create a brand new drawing by hand for every possible pose and direction. Not only that, but every single frame of every single animation has to be hand-drawn -there is no interpolation with sprite animation.


    You can do interpolation on sprite animation but it looks gruesome, just look at the average cheaply produced anime ;-)
    yikes...

  • Again, depending on the scale of your project you render those animation frames out of 3d characters you did before.

  • As much as I love the old adventure game style and would have loved nothing more than a CMI or original two looking game, I would have to say...better more monkey...than no monkey at all.

  • @mithrandiryod said: As much as I love the old adventure game style and would have loved nothing more than a CMI or original two looking game, I would have to say...better more monkey...than no monkey at all.

    I think if anyone produced a game that had the graphic level of the original 2 in this day and age, it would not be taken seriously. (despite the fact I still love the games, I cant play MI1 now becasue of the graphics, which is why Im also very happy about SMI:SE!)

  • I'm not bothered by 3D if the screenshots end up looking as good as the drawn still shots in CoMI, and with ToMI, I'm not saying it's as good but it's a very close call indeed, so I'm very happy indeed. There's bad 3D, and there's good 3D, and in my opinion Telltale are proponents of good 3D. The animation and character present in their games is second to none.

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

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

    Also, I notice tha this topic is posted by 'ite', a three letter name similar to 'Imi', furthermore the poster writes in almost an identical way, using the same txt-speak. I wonder what an IP check would reveal?

  • I like the old 2D adventure games better too... but I also know Telltale is a business and need to cater to the wider audience so I do not blame them... in fact I would be willing to bet there is much love among their staff for 2D games....

Add Comment