User Avatar Image

Was SoMI: Special Edition really an improvement on the original after all?

posted by Hayden on - last edited - Viewed by 1.3K users

I personally loved the game. I thought that they improved Secret of Monkey Island in every aspect. But some people have had complaints about things like the interface being difficult to use, annoying and inconvenient, people saying the artwork was bad and that Guybrush looked awful, and then of course there are those who are really like the "blocky" look of the old, classic adventure games. So, how is your view on this? Was the Special Edition really all that much of an improvement?

148 Comments - Linear Discussion: Classic Style
  • @Important-Looking Pirate said: preferred the original. why remake a classic? the words "lazy" and "money" come to mind...

    Lazy? Then why would they make the game in the 1st place?

    I know the majority of the posters on this forum already owned SOMI, but do you realize how much easier (and cheaper) it is to access the game? I am very happy that LucasArts made the remake.

    And why do people always have problems with companies making money? Let's face it, LucasArts is a business, and their goal is to sell games and to make money just like the local Deli. All products, such as Secret of Monkey Island, Grim Fandango, etc. were produced to make money. So? Because of LucasArts being "bloodthirsty for money," we end up with two masterpieces of games. As stated in the whole Piracy debate, why would any company be motivated to make a product if they gain no capital? You see, profits make the world go round:cool:.

  • As soon as you create something and put it online, it's copyrighted, and your property. Putting "copyright" on the webpage does little, except maybe convince stealers they'd better not steal this specific content.

    However, I think the point you're getting at is that it can be hard to prove it's yours. And that's true. However, if the person mails the content to themselves in a sealed envelope prior to posting it, for instance, then they can prove it.

    The problem becomes, will people bother to do that? Most people won't. It is still illegal to use their content, but it's harder for them to prove you did. Just like it's always illegal to shoplift, but if there are no cameras it's harder for the store to prove you did it.

    Doesn't make it right just because you might be able to get away with it, though.

  • And then you get all kinds of privacy laws where the right of observation of such behaviour is fought.

    Instead of cavemen who bash each other's heads in, we've become white collars sueing each other's asses off. That's civilization for ya ;) Makes you wish that sometimes people would just hit you and get it over with.


    Now, back on topic: it all depends what you understand under "improvement". Better graphics and sound will always be an improvement in my book. I'll gladly buy any game remake done in the same vein (if it's an old game I already own, or one I've been dying to get but never found a copy of). Remakes like this got me back into the King's Quest series, one which I've always abhorred. And the Quest for Glory 2 remake actually inspired me to play the third game (though I gave up on it because it became too tedious).

    Sure, individual people, and thus artists as well, all have their individual style. Concepts are created, discussed, approved. I don't think these guys simply slapped a doodle on there and called it a day. They're still creating things I can only dream of doing myself, so I'll always applaud them for that; sure, I might not like all of it for the full 100%, but so what? I don't have a problem getting over myself and moving on.

  • On topic: I didn't buy it, so I can't give my opinion on how it is, but I can tell you why I didn't buy it: you couldn't play the old game with the voices (and I didn't like the graphics of the new one).

    In other words, I wouldn't have played the new one because I thought it looked weird, and the old one being exactly the same, not with added voices, I didn't need to re-buy it.

    I would have bought it if it had been old graphics + voices.

  • On Topic: I've already said that I voted "about the same" because in some ways it's better, and in some ways it's not.

    About piracy: I think that, while legal rights to IP's are decisively more clear, we'll never actually come to agreement about the moral implications about such things.

    On the one hand, if a person or business created an intellectual property and copyrighted it, then it is theirs and they are well within their rights to be monetarily compensated (in other words, get money) for the sale, use, or distribution of it.

    On the other hand, there are times when it would seem that the price of said merchandise had been set at a value that is by far and away as higher than would seem reasonable. For example, I personally think that it is ridiculous beyond words that a retail copy of the latest version of Photoshop is ~$600, or for a copy of MS Office is ~$400. Now, I know why they charge this much. It is because such software is popular and many a corporation will pay those prices because it is still cheaper than paying for the time spent teaching employees how to use different software. To the average consumer, however, those prices are ludicrous (which is why I have Corel Paint Shop Pro, WordPerfect X2, Word 2000 and OpenOffice.)

    While it's just a cop-out for some to say "if it's on the internet, it's free" in an effort to justify their use of software piracy, I won't deny that I too have personally acquired pirated software when I felt that the publisher was charging exorbitant prices, or wanted to try out the full version of software before deciding whether or not to buy it, or else only needed to use certain software for one task only and one time only, and did therefore not feel the need to pay $50 for one simple task that I could find no decent freeware to accomplish.

    Also, I used to have the argument in favor of piracy that sometimes a version of software becomes so old that it becomes difficult to find, especially at a reasonable price. While this might still be the case in some respects (ie. original copies of old console games), I would say that in this day and age with so much business on the net, if you can't find something for a reasonable price, you probably aren't looking hard enough. (ie. I found a retail copy of CMI on overstock.com at $25 for someone on these forums who was asking about it.)

    EDIT: I bought SMI:SE from Steam, and it being my only Steam game as well as I hate to have Steam running in my system tray without it closing after I quit playing, I then acquired a torrented cracked copy of SMI:SE which does not use Steam, though I already have a legit purchased one.

    Is that piracy? If you say "yes," and that I should only use software in the condition that it was sold to me, then feel free to have that opinion, but I'm still going to use it and not run Steam.

  • Well, to be honest, you don't have to be a pirate to get free versions. Like, I could buy Illustrator for... a lot of money, or get Inkscape for free, legally. Not the same program, sure, but it gets the work done as far as I'm concerned.

    I agree about prices being ridiculous at times. For instance, I bought a pocket book 10 years ago that cost €17. It was an omnibus edition of a trilogy.
    Yesterday I thought "hey, I'll buy the first two books (didn't like the third one) for my Sony Reader" (so, e-book version).

    Looked for them, could only find the first one. For €17.50. Yeah, 50 cents more than the whole trilogy as a pocket book, and under the price was "original price 19.50" by which they meant that when it was released (20 years ago, by the way), the first edition of the book cost that (or rather the equivalent in Francs).

    Now, I don't think that a book that was released 20 years ago should be sold as an ebook for pretty much the same price as the first edition, big-sized copy, when I could buy the pocket version for 5 bucks. It does not make any sense, and I didn't buy it as a result.

    When books are first released, I can see the ebook selling for the same price - 2 bucks: that's how much they spend for printing costs, so that's how much less it should cost.
    But when the paperpack version is out, the ebook shouldn't cost more than the pocket version. It just shouldn't.

    Anyways, if people price these things so high, they shouldn't wonder why people don't buy them. But that in no way justifies pirating a copy.
    (However, since I own the paper version of the book, I've been typing it myself, which I figure is perfectly legal as long as I don't distribute it. I would hate to have to do that for every book though, so I'm glad English-language ebooks are priced more reasonably than the French ones).

  • Avistew, on the subject of books, I have bought the entire book series of Harry Potter (US edition) in hardcover. Since Rowling refuses to release said series in ebook, I downloaded a torrented copy of them in PDF format and used Calibre to convert it for use on my wife's Kindle2. Again, is this piracy? I'm not going to type it out all myself, especially since I don't have a scanner and someone else already did that... and I do own paper copies of the books. So then if it is piracy, I don't care. Rowling should make it available for ebook, and then I would consider not doing it.

    Also, I do own the first 3 Inheritance Cycle (Eragon) books in hardcover, and did also buy Eldest (the 2nd in the series), which I'm currently reading, in ebook because the PDF versions downloadable via torrent all sucked as far as formatting when converted to ebook with Calibre. However said Eldest ebook only costs $7 on Amazon.

    EDIT: Plus, I use Python scripts on a regular basis to break the DRM on any ebook I buy from Amazon so that I can change the Title and Author listed on Home menu of my Kindle, so that it will sort better in the case of book series' that don't have the series' name in the book title or have a long author name that reduces the viewable length of book titles. Is this piracy? Again, if it is, I don't care. I did buy the books legitimately, and so therefore feel within my right to organize it how I wish.

  • You don't miss out on the text box jokes on the 360 (which I played it on). You could bring up a little menu with the choices and they changed the menu just for the parrot scene. I don't know how anyone could be upset with the SE, really, considering it had the old one, too. It also brought quite a few new people into the world of MI. Always a good thing.

  • @HumpsMcLovin said: You don't miss out on the text box jokes on the 360 (which I played it on). You could bring up a little menu with the choices and they changed the menu just for the parrot scene. I don't know how anyone could be upset with the SE, really, considering it had the old one, too. It also brought quite a few new people into the world of MI. Always a good thing.

    Agreed. However fail LA was at some things regarding updating the game, getting more new fans of the MI series, or adventure games in general, is always a plus.

  • @Chyron8472 said: Avistew, on the subject of books, I have bought the entire book series of Harry Potter (US edition) in hardcover. Since Rowling refuses to release said series in ebook, I downloaded a torrented copy of them in PDF format and used Calibre to convert it for use on my wife's Kindle2. Again, is this piracy? I'm not going to type it out all myself, especially since I don't have a scanner and someone else already did that... and I do own paper copies of the books. So then if it is piracy, I don't care. Rowling should make it available for ebook, and then I would consider not doing it.

    Yeah... It's a grey area at best. I mean, while you're torrenting it you're also peering/seeding it, meaning people who might not have bought the books get to have them illegally thanks to you. I'd say as long as your ratio is under one you had a neutral impact since the people could have downloaded it from whoever you downloaded it from instead, therefore you're not making a difference.

    But I agree that when you bought the paper version and want to own it as an ebook, it's very annoying when no ebook is available. I'm not sure if the authors realise it encourages piracy. On the other hand, maybe the point is that this way, anyone who owns a Harry Potter ebook got it illegally and therefore can be sued? No clue about that.

    Other things aren't clear. For instance I lived in France, had lots of CDs, ripped them into mp3s. Had to move urgently, taking all of my possessions to Canada in a few suitcases. I didn't bring books or CDs, appart from my few favourites. Everything I could, I brought the digital copy instead. Now I technically own the digital copy and not the physical one, that I abandonned behind. Is it legal?
    And if it is, then is it legal to buy a CD, get the mp3s out of it, sell the CD on ebay and keep the mp3s?
    And how do you prove these things? I'm usually too lazy to rip my own CDs myself, so after I buy a CD I download the mp3s. Is that more illegal than ripping them myself?
    And if I then lose, break or sell the CD, and keep the mp3s, is it the same as downloading them without ever purchasing the CD?
    What if I buy a CD second hand, then rip it? Since it was second hand, the author and disc company got absolutely no money out of it. Yet it's probably legal, isn't it?

    These things are extremely complicated. A lot of the time, it's just details. If someone sees my mp3s and can prove I downloaded them from a website, how do I prove that I did purchase the CDs, but had to leave them in France? Even if I call and it turns out my parents got their hands on my stuff after I left, can I prove it is mine and not theirs? And since they could have used it, is it still legal for me to also use the mp3s?

    I'm not sure about all this stuff. But I know that if I had just downloaded the mp3s without buying any CD, it would be more wrong than the way things are now.

    Of course nowadays you can download mp3s so that makes things simpler. Plus you can usually track that. Although it brings up the point, if I already own the CD, do I legally have to pay for the mp3 version too? Probably not since I can get it out of my CD. Then can I download it for free? Probably not. If I do download it, I probably need to download the version that costs money.

    Sorry, that was a bit long.

    @Chyron8472 said: I don't know how anyone could be upset with the SE, really, considering it had the old one, too. It also brought quite a few new people into the world of MI. Always a good thing.

    I'm not upset about it, personally, but I'd say it's not worth buying it for me. Then again, I wasn't the target audience, since I already have the original game. And I agree it's good that it lets new people play the games.
    But I would have paid for just the voices and a way to add them to the game I own.

Add Comment