On Monkey Island being cartoonish [Archive]

Kroms

06/06/2009, 09:16 am

I've noticed a lot of posters have been claiming that Monkey Island is not cartoonish. That maybe the third one is, but the real, Ron Gilbert ones are not. So I created this thread (yes, a full thread, to draw your attention).

This is a scene from Monkey Island 2. I want you to see how Guybrush escapes LeChuck's fortress (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taEM8Ck1cr8&feature=related). Specifically, the point at which Guybrush lights a match.

Very realistic, isn't it?

Monkey Island is a cartoon, and always has been. And for those of you about to mention SMI's close-ups: I was always bothered by [the] close-ups. While they were great art, I never felt they matched the style of the rest of the game. Not sure how I feel about them 20 years later.

MusicallyInspired

06/06/2009, 09:25 am

Agreed.

Armakuni

06/06/2009, 09:31 am

I partly agree, but not completely.

The first two Monkey Island games had cartoony elements, like most VGA adventure games.
But they do have more realistic graphics than the later installments.

I would say the same for the Leisure Suit Larry games... they're all cartoony, but the first three are less so than the other ones.

I was always bothered by [the] close-ups. While they were great art, I never felt they matched the style of the rest of the game. Not sure how I feel about them 20 years later
Whoah, I'm glad they still made it into the game! I absolutely love the closeups in that game!

hamzie

06/06/2009, 09:43 am

Why are you over thinking it so much

VagrantWulf

06/06/2009, 09:52 am

There's one thing to consider; even with drawn art, there are degrees of realism and cartoony, it's not a stark black & white contrast. Wander over to a comic book shop and pick up a random selection and you'll see degrees that vary from something like Dilbert, right the way up to comics that have beautifully hand-painted realistic art, and everything in between.

To say that the only consideration is cartoony or not cartoony is to look at things in a two dimensional way, but the truth of the matter is that, like comic books, Monkey Island was never really realistic or cartoony, it was always somewhere in between. If you want a cartoony adventure, look at Day of the Tentacle, then compare Day of the Tentacle with The secret of Monkey Island and Lechuck's Revenge. If you do that, the differences become rather obvious.

So no, the first two Monkey Island games were not cartoony, to simply imply the one end of the spectrum, because in doing that we might as well say that they were as cartoony as Day of the Tentacle (which they're not). We also can't say they're real-as-life art either, because that's just as absurd and they're obviously not.

And for what it's wroth, there were parts of Lechuck's Revenge which were just as vibrant as Tales of Monkey Island. And speaking of Tales of Monkey Island, do I find that really cartoony? No, not really. It is perhaps a touch more toward cartoony than Lechuck's Revenge was, but not so much. And I don't feel that Tales of Monkey Island is nearly as cartoony as Curse of Monkey Island.

Whereas Curse is nearer the Day of the Tentacle end of the cartoony scale, I think that Tales of Monkey Island actually leans toward the Lechuck's Revenge style. But that's just my opinion.

Toothless Gibbon

06/06/2009, 09:59 am

Surely they were as cartoony as they could get in those days? I always saw them that way and loved them for it.

Jake

06/06/2009, 10:15 am

When my friend loaned me his copy of Monkey Island 2, his pitch to me was "its like playing a cartoon or something!"

That said, I do like that what sets the Monkey Island games apart from a lot of other comedy adventure games is that it has a serious tone to it along with the jokes. The characters more often than not seem to believe that they're in a serious world, doing important things, even if there are wisecracks and grog machines everywhere. When LeChuck shows up in the underground tunnels, it's scary! (Or was to me!) Contrast that with Sam & Max, where everyone with few exceptions is in on the fact that they're all inside a giant joke.

That doesn't mean that stylistically it doesn't have a little cartoon to it! For instance:

http://sdb.drshnaps.com/objects/17/784/Sprite/MI2_GuybrushThreepwood.png
http://sdb.drshnaps.com/objects/17/784/Sprite/MI2_GuybrushDog.png

Mataku

06/06/2009, 10:15 am

Armakuni

06/06/2009, 10:18 am

When my friend loaned me his copy of Monkey Island 2, his pitch to me was "its like playing a cartoon or something!"

That said, I do like that what sets the Monkey Island games apart from a lot of other comedy adventure games is that it has a serious tone to it along with the jokes. The characters more often than not seem to believe that they're in a serious world, doing important things, even if there are wisecracks and grog machines everywhere. When LeChuck shows up in the underground tunnels, it's scary! (Or was to me!) Contrast that with Sam & Max, where everyone with few exceptions is in on the fact that they're all inside a giant joke.
I fully agree! This is what sets the first two Monkey Island games apart from the rest - they have this 'dark' undertone to them... something I've always missed ever since. They had a bit more atmosphere because of this, I think.

Surely they were as cartoony as they could get in those days? I always saw them that way and loved them for it.
Maniac Mansion was much more cartoony, even though it has far more simplistic graphics.

Jake

06/06/2009, 10:25 am

I fully agree! This is what sets the first two Monkey Island games apart from the rest - they have this 'dark' undertone to them... something I've always missed ever since. They had a bit more atmosphere because of this, I think.

I think all the games had it to a certain degree -- as 3 got towards its finale they started bringing it back in a way that made me happy, and/but no matter what story he's in, Guybrush is going to be taking it more seriously than most comedy game protagonists -- but it was for sure ingrained in the stories of 1 and 2 more.

VagrantWulf

06/06/2009, 10:26 am

Armakuni

06/06/2009, 10:26 am

That might be, yeah... but I noticed it much better in the first two games, probably because the graphics were much less cartoony.

Edward VanHelgen

06/06/2009, 10:48 am

all serialized adventure games of the late 80s go through the same stages:

* pixelated blobs (kq1,2, MI1,larry1-3)
* better looking pixelated blobs (MI2,KQ3,4)
*trying hard to look realistic (KQ5,6, Larry5,6)
*realizing realism sucks and taking a whole new approach, make it cartoony (Larry7, KQ7,MI3,Discworld2)
*realizing that even tho those games looked great cartoony, they are way too hard and expensive to produce that way, so they turn to 3d or just give up all together. (Larry8,KQ8,Discworld_Noir,MI4)

lol, good post

it has a lot to do with the current trend also, like it was fmv. now, we can see that disney is doing again traditional animated cartoons, so who knows, could be applied to adventure games too.

monkey 3 and 4 maybe feel more cartoonish also because of some exaggerated parts like clouds, character designs and various objects as fort, waves and others

Merkel

06/06/2009, 11:10 am

I think most of us can agree that the coulds style was one of the great additions of CMI.

VagrantWulf

06/06/2009, 11:16 am

I think most of us can agree that the coulds style was one of the great additions of CMI.

This even I would second, and I'm no great fan of CMI.

Udvarnoky

06/06/2009, 12:08 pm

That might be, yeah... but I noticed it much better in the first two games, probably because the graphics were much less cartoony.

I think part of the perception that the first two games were much less cartoony comes from the fact that, well, there's just only so much you can do with a handful of pixels, which in some ways limits how stylized the result can really look. Who knows how much more pronounced the style of the first two games might have been had the artists been able to work with the level of detail some of the later adventure games did? Look at those semi-closeups in MI2 (the Phatt Island dock, Governor Phatt, the explosion of LeChuck's fortress) - when the artists had more detail to work with, things tended to get a bit more exaggerated/cartoony, which is probably revealing about the direction they were going for. (The VGA closeups for MI1 were done after the fact and did not involve the original team.) That you find the relative realism of MI1/MI2 to carry more "atmosphere" may have been completely incidental to the artists' intentions! I think that all of the first three games are steeped in atmosphere, personally.

Don't get me wrong, the other reason CMI looks so different from the first two is because a conscious decision was made for the game to look a certain way, but that was a choice the artists of the first two didn't have, or at least had a lot less control over, so who's to say that the same folks who made the early games wouldn't have stylized the game a whole lot more if they could have? The artists who made DOTT are not the same that made Maniac Mansion, and the artists of MI1: SE are not the ones who made the original game, but the fact that their re-interpretations of an existing universe ended up more stylized than the inspiration when armed with more resources probably isn't as inappropriate as it might seem at first glance.

tredlow

06/06/2009, 01:35 pm

I think people only refer to the visual design as not being 'cartoony', instead of the story. If you look at the closeup scenes from the first game before playing it, you wouldn't call that 'cartoony'.

I, personally, detest the term 'cartoony'. I prefer 'exaggerated' or 'stylized' when discussing about visual design.

PS: thank you Jake for the MI2 sprites.

Kroms

06/06/2009, 11:23 pm

@Jake's post with the sprites.

That's what I was trying to get at too, Monkey Island (the first two) did have more serious tones to them, and that's what allowed them to walk the line between seriousness and just being a cartoon, outright. And that's even detailed in those sprites, beautifully.

Well when I say "cartoony," I do not necessarily mean "for kids," just like Pixar and Studio Ghibli don't make for-kids films. There's always a dark undertone in Monkey Island, usually around the time LeChuck comes-in. Have you listened to some of his backstories in Curse?

A lot of people are pretending otherwise, though. I can understand their point of view when they say that LeChuck's Revenge goes really dark by the end, only for the sequel to start-off all bright and shiny, but I don't agree that's necessarily a bad thing. Monkey Island always had a very cartoony element to it (especially when Guybrush starts goofing around). He really only goes serious when Elaine is in danger. Even when LeChuck is around, he still has time to give him a wedgie.

Chuck Jones/Day of the Tentacle it ain't, but there's definitely a cartoonish element in there, of which CMI is a natural evolution.

monkey_05_06

06/07/2009, 01:35 am

I think that some very valid points have been made here. Really if we look back at SMI and LCR...they were both made at 320x200 resolution. Most modern computers have their screen resolutions set to at least 1024x768 and higher, especially on widescreen monitors! As a point of reference this screenshot (http://extracine.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/the-secret-of-monkey-island.jpg) is at the native resolution for the first two games.

Now imagine if your entire desktop was displayed in that tiny, tiny space. "But I couldn't see anything!" I hear you exclaim...this is the challenge that had to be overcome in the early 90s to make games like this possible. Given what they had to work with, there is simply no way that the team could have made the graphics look either more "realistic" or "cartoony" than what we were given.

Now personally I always enjoyed the close-up screens from SMI. They are, as Ron said, beautiful artwork. Yet just as he said, they also don't flow very smoothly into the rest of the game. In the entire game of SMI there are close-ups for 1) Mancomb Seepgood in the SCUMM Bar, 2) Elaine in the Governor's Mansion, 3) Carla (the Swordmaster) outside of her house, 4) Captain Smirk outside of his house, and 5) Guybrush as he peers in on the vicious, man-eating parrot. That's it. Of the entire game, that's the close-up shots we got.

Anyone trying to demand that "MI should be realistic" based solely off of these 5 scenes from the first game is a bit off their rocker IMO. Now I have said in the past that with SMI and LCR that the graphics style did (largely) aim to be very realistic. Because they did. Yet CMI, "cartoony" graphics and all is still one of the highest-rated MI games amongst the fans.

I'm tired of hearing everyone moan and complain about the graphics style. If anything TMI is more realistic than EFMI, so that must then be considered as a step in the right direction.

And if I hear someone say that "MI was supposed to be 2D" one more time...I hope you have 911 on speed dial coz somebody's about to get beat within an inch of their life. Please, I beg of you, any of you: Show me where Ron, or Steve, or Tim, or any of the original team ever came out and in an interview said "Monkey Island was always intended to be a two-dimensional game."

Just because the graphics style has changed does not mean that the atmosphere has changed with it. I do accept and fully understand that the graphics have a large part to do with the way we perceive the game. But whether it's that old pixelated look or full 3D graphics, aren't they just there as a medium to portray what's taking place? If it's that important to you...perhaps you would be happier if once it's released someone made TMI into an IF game (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interactive_fiction)? Then you wouldn't have to worry about graphics at all! The graphics would be as "realistic" or "cartoony" as you imagine them to be!

To me the TMI models are definitely a step-up from the EFMI models. That is of course just my opinion, but are we really that blindly devoted to those pixels that anything higher than 320x200 resolution is a sure sign of witchcraft and demonic influences?

That's a bit extreme, but then so are some of the complaints against the 3D graphics. Honestly...if it bothers you that much...play with your eyes closed. :p

P.S. Sorry, I get a bit long-winded.

Shiversul

06/07/2009, 01:37 am

I wonder what would happen if the original Dev's made the first one a bit later in time, around the time of Curse release

What would that game look like?

Mataku

06/07/2009, 05:10 am

I wonder what would happen if the original Dev's made the first one a bit later in time, around the time of Curse release

What would that game look like?

that would just mean the SoMI would've looked like CMI, and the rest after that would've been 3d. everybody loses :p

Shiversul

06/07/2009, 05:48 am

What i was getting at is
Would there have been a different, darker art style

Rapp Scallion

06/07/2009, 06:03 am

Now imagine if your entire desktop was displayed in that tiny, tiny space. "But I couldn't see anything!" I hear you exclaim...this is the challenge that had to be overcome in the early 90s to make games like this possible. Given what they had to work with, there is simply no way that the team could have made the graphics look either more "realistic" or "cartoony" than what we were given..

Anyone trying to demand that "MI should be realistic" based solely off of these 5 scenes from the first game is a bit off their rocker IMO. Now I have said in the past that with SMI and LCR that the graphics style did (largely) aim to be very realistic. Because they did. Yet CMI, "cartoony" graphics and all is still one of the highest-rated MI games amongst the fans.
It's not just those 5 scenes. You also forgot LeChuck blowing up in MI1. It's the cover art. By the guy at the fishing pole in MI2. The close up of gouvernor Phatt. Rapp Scallion coming to life. Okay, you say that not much can be told from looking at the small characters we mostly see. But the reason for making a deal out of it, is that when the creators had the chance to show us a closer look at the characters, they they showed us them in a more realistic style!

Just because the graphics style has changed does not mean that the atmosphere has changed with it.
I think it has more to say than you think. How they portray the characters has a lot to say of how they want the atmosphere to be. You don't find a stylized look of the characters in Superman or Batman-comics. You don't find more realistic versions of Tom & Jerry. In many cases, the way the characters look, matches the feel of the story being told, to express the atmosphere they want. The CMI-look don't match the feel of the first games, especially not the second one. The general feel of it was darker, and a cartoon-LeChuck wouldn't have felt as scary (something I think it a big deal).

That being said, I don't complain about the style of SMI:SE. Of course, Guybrush could have been better, but the general style is okay with me. It's more stylized, but not that much that it makes that much of a difference to the feeling.

Oh, and you're wrong about "there is simply no way that the team could have made the graphics look either more "realistic" or "cartoony" than what we were given..". Day of the Tentacle is the same resolution as MI1&2, and a LOT more stylized.

Toothless Gibbon

06/07/2009, 06:37 am

Oh, and you're wrong about "there is simply no way that the team could have made the graphics look either more "realistic" or "cartoony" than what we were given..". Day of the Tentacle is the same resolution as MI1&2, and a LOT more stylized.

Yes, but it was also a couple of years more recent. The next MI after DOTT was so CMI so Im not sure I get your point.

werpu

06/07/2009, 06:56 am

I wonder what would happen if the original Dev's made the first one a bit later in time, around the time of Curse release

What would that game look like?

The backgrounds probably like curse, the character less like a beanpole :D

werpu

06/07/2009, 06:58 am

I've noticed a lot of posters have been claiming that Monkey Island is not cartoonish. That maybe the third one is, but the real, Ron Gilbert ones are not. So I created this thread (yes, a full thread, to draw your attention).

Acually given the limited 320x200 resolution I personally think stylewise the in game characters tried to follow the Tex Avery style of cartoons, but the hand drawn screens tried to be somewhat photo realistic.
My personal guess is that a Tex Avery style probably would be the one which would come out nowadays!

VagrantWulf

06/07/2009, 07:19 am

Chuck Jones/Day of the Tentacle it ain't, but there's definitely a cartoonish element in there, of which CMI is a natural evolution.

I agreed with everything you said up until this point.

I won't make any friends with this, but I feel I need to be blunt here and try to explain what bothered me so much with CMI. Let's posit for a moment that a stylised, cartoon look was the natural evolution of Monkey Island, we then have to ask ourselves what kind of cartoon that would be.

I'm going to try and use recent examples here so that people can relate, I notice that most the people on the board are a lot younger than me and my cartoons aren't their cartoons, so bear with me, I'll do my best.

Look at Nickelodeon, now I'd say the natural evolution of Monkey Island would be something that's serious but with more cartoony elements, something like Avatar: The Last Airbender, something that can have its silly cartoon moments, and yet never loses its focucs or quality.

However...

CMI wasn't that kind of cartoon, it was more akin to the low quality pap that Nickelodeon usually likes to peddle, the quality of things like Fairly Odd Parents and Spongebob Squarepants. Both of which are hilarious but it's obvious they went about the cartoon with a very low budget and cheaply, and the end result does indeed look rather cheap.

So again I'd stress the difference between cartoons. If one were to look at ToMI, it has a more serious appearance with beautiful animation, that's more of a nod toward the kind of cartoon that I would have expected, that would have been the true evolution from Monkey Island 2, I feel, not CMI.

If CMI had gone the same way as ToMI, then I wouldn't have had any complaints whatsoever, but at the end of the day, CMI looks like a cheap Nickelodeon cartoon, and that's something I cringe at whenever I see the style of that game, the animation, and those characters characters. That's what I find objectionable about CMI. If ToMI had gone down that path, I would've found it so, so much less appealing.

Wicked Mouse

06/07/2009, 07:33 am

[...], but at the end of the day, CMI looks like a cheap Nickelodeon cartoonI do not agree. I always found the scenery awesome to look at and very well done.

VagrantWulf

06/07/2009, 07:42 am

Okay...

Here's an example. (http://ui03.gamespot.com/994/mikennyscannonshop_2.jpg)

Instead of details, they use a lot of flat-colour washing (look at the brickless, tie-dyed wall, and the buildings in the background), much like they do in the remake to avoid details. There's also that 'stylised' look that cheap cartoons tend to have, things jutting out at odd angles, and things generally being comprised of weird shapes in general (look at the mouths of those cannons).

I love dadaism, but this is like a poor man's Dada art, and that's exactly what bothers me about it, it tries to hide how basic the art is within a stylised appearance.

There are cartoons that would put CMI to shame when it comes to how detailed they are, and I think that screenshot illustrates my point quite well.

Guybrush_Threepwood

06/07/2009, 02:56 pm

Monkey Island is a cartoon, and always has been. And for those of you about to mention SMI's close-ups:

It looks like you're referring to ME.
You couldn't be further from the truth. It's not a cartoon.
And it's never been.
The fact that it's cartoonish doesn't mean it should be distorted like, you see, DOTT's characters. Broken sword's a cartoon too, but it's kind of a movie.
As I said before, it would fit a movie better than a cartoon. And it's cartoonish.
And, btw, I suggest you to replay the drinking contest in MI2: when you lose, Guybrush becomes REALLY cartoonish, DOTT-like, let's say.
If they wanted to make a cartoon, they would have made him look that way during all the game. But they didn't. You know why?
'cause MI's not a cartoon, and it's never been.

Guybrush_Threepwood

06/07/2009, 03:02 pm

Oh, I forgot to mention one thing:
the style of the box covers of MI and MI2, to me, is the real style of the game.
And those covers don't look like cartoons at all. So...

EDIT: and another one too! :) Fato of atlantis, which has more or less the same graphic style of MI2, is like A MOVIE. Not a cartoon! That's the way I see Monkey Island in general.

WedgeWalker

06/08/2009, 11:53 am

But even Ron said he didn't feet the close-ups matched the vibe of the game.

Toothless Gibbon

06/08/2009, 12:50 pm

I never liked the close-ups or box art of the first two games. It didn't fit with game for me. Do you think they were going for a realistic look in game?

I wasn't sure about CMI when it came out just because it was so different but was soon won over. In the same way I wasn't sure about Tales when I first saw the trailer, but having seen the gamespot gameplay video about 564 times I now love it.

Bagge

06/08/2009, 01:00 pm

EDIT: and another one too! :) Fato of atlantis, which has more or less the same graphic style of MI2, is like A MOVIE. Not a cartoon! That's the way I see Monkey Island in general.

The character models in Fate of Atlantis are much more realistic than in the first two MI games, especially MI2. Compare any character i FA with characters like Stan, Rum Rogers jr, the bartender, the Phatt Island governor, Mad Marty, Largo, the librarian or the Scummbar cook, and you'll see a definitive stylistic difference.

Guybrush_Threepwood

06/09/2009, 02:18 am

@Wedgewalker: I know, he said that, but that doesn't mean he wanted an exaggerated cartoon style like in CMI. He didn't like something about them, that's all. He never even mentioned the word "cartoon". C'mon.

@Toothless Gibbon: You didn't like them? I LOVE'em! :)
Yes, I think they were going for a MORE realistic style, like, as I said, the cartoon style of Broken Sword, which is a toony graphic with all realistic and, most of all, WELL PROPORTIONED. No big noses, long necks, thin legs. That's my idea of MI.

@Bagge: Much more? They were A LITTLE BIT more realistic. But always well proportioned. And when they weren't, it was because they were FAT.
Stan IS realistic, it's just that MI is a dementially humorous game, Indy wasn't.

Anyway, for all of you people who care, my point is against the cartoon overload, not against the cartoon itself.
What I really hate about CMI is just Guybrush (speaking of visual style, let's leave alone other aspects), which didn't fit the original character.
(e.g. Wally in CMI was perfectly fitting his old visual ego)
And LeChuck is too large and not scary. The zombie in MI2 was REALLY anguishing. Elaine? Doesn't matter.
See what I mean? Cartoon style's OK until it preserves old feelings and emotions: when it makes things too funny and kills the serious moments, it's just crappy and ruins the atmosphere.
The rest looks pretty good: Blondebeard, Haggis, Cutthroat Bill, are all fantastic characters. The backgrounds are sweet. Hope I made myself clear this time.

Jake

06/09/2009, 08:14 am

PS: thank you Jake for the MI2 sprites.

Don't thank me, thank a Google Image search for Monkey Island 2 sprites. :)

Tacobob

06/09/2009, 08:30 am

"The serious moments"?

Bagge

06/09/2009, 08:42 am

@Bagge: Much more? They were A LITTLE BIT more realistic. But always well proportioned. And when they weren't, it was because they were FAT.
Stan IS realistic, it's just that MI is a dementially humorous game, Indy wasn't.

Nah, the proportions - especially the head to body proportions - are way off, but that goes for both games. Largo, Mad Marty and the librarian are not fat, but still very cartoony and disporoportioned. And Stan - he has a mouth the size of his own belly. Neither Mick Jagger or Steven Tyler can match the size of his mouth.

Also, take a look at this (http://www.telltalegames.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8875) thread and find the three scans of the original MI2 background art posted there. You'll see that while Fate of Atlantis strived for realistic looking backgrounds, MI2 had a much more cartoony style.

WedgeWalker

06/09/2009, 09:03 am

@Guybrush

Granted he never said "I want it more cartoony." However, if the close-ups were in a realistic style, and he said he thought that style didn't match the rest of the game, what other options are there? If you're not going for realism, what other option is there? Only stylization of one sort or another. Granted, it doesn't have to be as overtly cartoony as CMI. But it's going to have to be, by definition, something with a bit of cartooniness.

I understand your concern is about the visual style destroying what would otherwise be serious moments. You claim the first two games had serious moments, and you don't like that the style of CMI and EMI made serious moments impossible or at least unlikely. Fair enough, you are entitled to your tastes.

WedgeWalker

06/09/2009, 09:05 am

For what it's worth, Guybrush having exaggerated cartoon body proportions doesn't, for me, make it impossible for that character to be in serious situations.

Olaus Petrus

06/09/2009, 09:31 am

That said, I do like that what sets the Monkey Island games apart from a lot of other comedy adventure games is that it has a serious tone to it along with the jokes. The characters more often than not seem to believe that they're in a serious world, doing important things, even if there are wisecracks and grog machines everywhere. When LeChuck shows up in the underground tunnels, it's scary! (Or was to me!) Contrast that with Sam & Max, where everyone with few exceptions is in on the fact that they're all inside a giant joke.

I have never thought that, but it may explain why I have always enjoyed Monkey Island more than some other games, I also like film noir atmosphere combined with humour, which we have seen for example in Grim Fandango and Discworld Noir, more than lighthearted joking. Crazy characters in gloomy atmosphere seems to be combination of humour which amuses me.

To me the TMI models are definitely a step-up from the EFMI models. That is of course just my opinion, but are we really that blindly devoted to those pixels that anything higher than 320x200 resolution is a sure sign of witchcraft and demonic influences?

That's a bit extreme, but then so are some of the complaints against the 3D graphics. Honestly...if it bothers you that much...play with your eyes closed. :p

Personally I don't oppose 3D graphics per se, but often there's abysmal controls in 3D adventure games. It was mistake to adopt idiotic keyboard control system instead of mouse control in Grim Fandango, I kept walking against the walls. But there's 3D games, like Sierra's Gabriel Knight 3, where controls and 3D work extremely well. In that game you use mouse to move the character and keyboard to move the camera. By rotating camera you can look inside trash cans etc.

Guybrush_Threepwood

06/09/2009, 02:24 pm

"The serious moments"?

Yep, you know what I mean.
If you don't, I'll try to be clearer. :)
In the first 2 games there were situations that made feel the player in serious danger: I still remember that when I was a kid I was scared of LeChuck finding me during the ending of MI2. Maybe it was because I was a little kid, but I don't find it likely to give the player this kind of feelings with a style like CMI, even for a kid.

@Guybrush

Granted he never said "I want it more cartoony." However, if the close-ups were in a realistic style, and he said he thought that style didn't match the rest of the game, what other options are there? If you're not going for realism, what other option is there? Only stylization of one sort or another. Granted, it doesn't have to be as overtly cartoony as CMI. But it's going to have to be, by definition, something with a bit of cartooniness.

I understand your concern is about the visual style destroying what would otherwise be serious moments. You claim the first two games had serious moments, and you don't like that the style of CMI and EMI made serious moments impossible or at least unlikely. Fair enough, you are entitled to your tastes.

De gustibus non disputandum est. Fair enough :)

For what it's worth, Guybrush having exaggerated cartoon body proportions doesn't, for me, make it impossible for that character to be in serious situations.

But, as WedgeWalker said, it is very unlikely. C'mon, you must admit that in CMI we all played the entire game with a grin in our face. It was a lot of fun, but we never felt the situations "serious" or creepy. Even when Guybrush is nailed into the coffin, it's hilarious and not creepy at all.
Consider, instead, MI2's cemetery during the visit to Rapp Scallion.
That's creepy. For real. See what I mean?
The emotional involvement was higher to me.

Guybrush_Threepwood

06/09/2009, 02:39 pm

Nah, the proportions - especially the head to body proportions - are way off, but that goes for both games. Largo, Mad Marty and the librarian are not fat, but still very cartoony and disporoportioned. And Stan - he has a mouth the size of his own belly. Neither Mick Jagger or Steven Tyler can match the size of his mouth.

I don't understand WHY you're saying this. Really, it's not to be polemic.
I mean, Largo's very short, Mad Marty's got big glasses.
You're right for Stan, it's OK, he opens his mouth unrealistically.
And that was the reason it was fun!
A realistic character spreading the mouth that way!
I think that it's a lot more fun to see a character drawn realistically opening his mouth THAT wide, than a cartoon doing the same thing.
Anyway, I've took a look at those backgrounds... They're awesome :) Thanks for the info.
They ARE cartoony, and I like them that way. I was just referring to the characters which aren't meant to be too deformed, imo.

Bagge

06/09/2009, 02:59 pm

I don't understand WHY you're saying this. Really, it's not to be polemic.
I mean, Largo's very short, Mad Marty's got big glasses.
You're right for Stan, it's OK, he opens his mouth unrealistically.
And that was the reason it was fun!
A realistic character spreading the mouth that way!
I think that it's a lot more fun to see a character drawn realistically opening his mouth THAT wide, than a cartoon doing the same thing.
Anyway, I've took a look at those backgrounds... They're awesome :) Thanks for the info.
They ARE cartoony, and I like them that way. I was just referring to the characters which aren't meant to be too deformed, imo.

I've never talked about how deformed or cartoony they were meant to be. My point was, and is, that the graphical style of Fate of Atlantis is very different from the style of the first two MI games. Want more examples? Here you go:
http://www.scummbar.com/images/dep/mi2characters/fullK.gif http://www.scummbar.com/images/dep/mi2characters/fullG.gif http://www.scummbar.com/images/dep/mi2characters/fullQ.gif http://www.scummbar.com/images/dep/mi2characters/fullP.gif http://www.scummbar.com/images/dep/mi1characters/fullF.gif
(thanks, ScummBar.com)

Guybrush_Threepwood

06/09/2009, 03:19 pm

And I never said they have the same stile, I said they're "more or less" similar.
Looks like we already agree.

presidentmax

06/09/2009, 03:20 pm

Yep, you know what I mean.
If you don't, I'll try to be clearer. :)
In the first 2 games there were situations that made feel the player in serious danger: I still remember that when I was a kid I was scared of LeChuck finding me during the ending of MI2. Maybe it was because I was a little kid, but I don't find it likely to give the player this kind of feelings with a style like CMI, even for a kid.

Actually, i'm 20 years old and i just completed the second game a couple of nights ago. I quite literally jumped everytime Lechuck appeared on screen. That game has some serious power.

Bagge

06/09/2009, 03:31 pm

And I never said they have the same stile, I said they're "more or less" similar.
Looks like we already agree.

Well, I still disagree that they are "more or less" similar, other than that they were made around the same time, using the same tools. FA emulates a realistic style, while MI1 & 2 are obviously not (http://www.scummbar.com/imageviewer/imageviewer.php?useimage=/games/media/mi12/mi2croupier1072604070527.jpg).

I do agree that MI1 and 2 are graphically the least cartoony games in the series, and that the license took a stylistic shift with CMI, though.

Guybrush_Threepwood

06/09/2009, 03:54 pm

Actually, i'm 20 years old and i just completed the second game a couple of nights ago. I quite literally jumped everytime Lechuck appeared on screen. That game has some serious power.

Lol, thanks for saying that. Now I'm even more convinced of my point.
That could never happen in CMI.

while MI1 & 2 are obviously not (http://www.scummbar.com/imageviewer/imageviewer.php?useimage=/games/media/mi12/mi2croupier1072604070527.jpg).

I respect your opinion, but I totally disagree. To me, it's not that obvious as you say.
Let's agree to disagree.

MarkDarin

06/09/2009, 06:12 pm

I don't usually weigh in on these debates, but I just thought I'd throw this image on the fire, so to speak:

http://www.pinheadgames.com/ttg/Guybrush_GAH.gif

Guybrush_Threepwood

06/10/2009, 12:16 am

Thanks Mark, I've spoke about that scene right in this thread. :)
I mentioned it saying that imo, if they wanted MI to look exaggeratedly cartoonish as in CMI, they would have drawn Guybrush that way during ALL the game.
Instead, they've chosen to draw him in a realistic way, deformating him during some situations (as the drinking contest).
I think the result is even funnier and crazier, and would have been unreachable with a CMI Guybrush.

MusicallyInspired

06/10/2009, 08:09 am

Toothless Gibbon

06/10/2009, 08:11 am

I never felt scared at all in any MI games, even when I was a kid. Even the sinister moments were all very toungue-in-cheek.

Gryffalio

06/10/2009, 02:08 pm

Mm. I was never scared. Perhaps it's the wrong word to use. But I was definitely getting a sense of urgency every time LeChuck was about to catch me in the second MI game.

I think the MI1/2 games are based very heavily on being in Guybrush's imagination. It starts off quite dark in both games, as if he's dreaming and it's establishing itself in the dark room. And then it becomes more vivid, finally with the beautiful Monkey Island being replaced by either dark Melee or dark behind-the-scenes corridors. In fact, this darkness follows LeChuck, giving him an aura of power and evil. Look to MI3 and he's in the middle of a theme park in the end. I think the emphasis moves from being Guybrush Threepwood the mighty pirate, with the odd joke from outside, eluding to this all being imagination, to a complete fantasy world where we feel detached from the idea something bad could happen.

Look at Elaine, she's in mortal danger in MI1, then she's dumped Guybrush in MI2 and he needs to win her back. In MI3 she's not even there, and she's accepted his proposal. In MI4 she's married, and a huge part of the game dynamics is gone. Far from MI3 proving Elaine is surplus to requirements (as somebody said in another thread) I think it highlights that she is integral, and that her marriage to Guybrush was a huge mistake. But then, what can we do? A divorce would really take away from the naive charm. I think the naive charm of Guybrush, locked in a very dark comedy which rivals cult classics like Twin Peaks is exactly what made MI great. MI3 damaged this, though being a cracking game in its own right, and MI4 nuked it.

It's not that the games were too cartoony. If anything, its the 3d inflatable feel that's bad, not the story-book-animated-cartoon feel of MI3, which seemed to work nearly as well as MI1/2. I think it would be hard for Telltale to measure up to the story and feel of the first two games given what they've inherited, but the 3d is a mistake.

One major problem I had with Guybrush in MI4 is how happy and gormless he was, in all fecking situations. It really destroyed the game for me. ToMI has solved this, with more facial expressions and an infinitely better designed Guybrush in general. 3d is potentially a game-breaker for me, but it's cheap and easy to use so there's really no option unless a rich old widow patronises Telltale some time in the future :P

Having said that, I think the Wallace and Gromit experience of TT has helped them stylistically so that they can merge MI4-style with some styles they've done already. I'll be interested to see the kind of environments they have in the rest of the game. One island is hard to decide on.

Guybrush_Threepwood

06/10/2009, 04:00 pm

It's a cartoon. CMI is more of a cartoon. But they're ALL cartoons. The same way that Kim Possible looks more cartoony and exaggerated than the Police Academy cartoon (or any other cartoon from the 80s/90s of the same style). But they're all cartoons.

I'll never agree with you. To me it's not a cartoon. :)

Mm. I was never scared. Perhaps it's the wrong word to use. But I was definitely getting a sense of urgency every time LeChuck was about to catch me in the second MI game.

I think the MI1/2 games are based very heavily on being in Guybrush's imagination. It starts off quite dark in both games, as if he's dreaming and it's establishing itself in the dark room. And then it becomes more vivid, finally with the beautiful Monkey Island being replaced by either dark Melee or dark behind-the-scenes corridors. In fact, this darkness follows LeChuck, giving him an aura of power and evil. Look to MI3 and he's in the middle of a theme park in the end. I think the emphasis moves from being Guybrush Threepwood the mighty pirate, with the odd joke from outside, eluding to this all being imagination, to a complete fantasy world where we feel detached from the idea something bad could happen.

Look at Elaine, she's in mortal danger in MI1, then she's dumped Guybrush in MI2 and he needs to win her back. In MI3 she's not even there, and she's accepted his proposal. In MI4 she's married, and a huge part of the game dynamics is gone. Far from MI3 proving Elaine is surplus to requirements (as somebody said in another thread) I think it highlights that she is integral, and that her marriage to Guybrush was a huge mistake. But then, what can we do? A divorce would really take away from the naive charm. I think the naive charm of Guybrush, locked in a very dark comedy which rivals cult classics like Twin Peaks is exactly what made MI great. MI3 damaged this, though being a cracking game in its own right, and MI4 nuked it.

Amen, someone understands my point. I mean, someone AGREES. :p

Tacobob

06/11/2009, 06:34 am

I don't usually weigh in on these debates, but I just thought I'd throw this image on the fire, so to speak:

http://www.pinheadgames.com/ttg/Guybrush_GAH.gif

I have a feeling some people here haven't played the games in awhile and in their minds, the Monkey Island games (Well, the first two at least, since God Gilbert didn't make the following ones) are a series of epic Lord of The Ring-ish games with complex characters and deep storylines with a hint of humor. As opposed to a bunch of silly cartoon pirate games, which they are in..And we need them! They need to make more funny games like the MI series..Everything is either action or horror. Thank Ye Gods for Telltale! :)

Rapp Scallion

06/11/2009, 07:06 am

I think you're the one that hasn't played the first games in a while if you remember them as being just silly cartoon fun...

Gryffalio

06/11/2009, 08:59 am

I have a feeling some people here haven't played the games in awhile and in their minds, the Monkey Island games (Well, the first two at least, since God Gilbert didn't make the following ones) are a series of epic Lord of The Ring-ish games with complex characters and deep storylines with a hint of humor. As opposed to a bunch of silly cartoon pirate games, which they are in..And we need them! They need to make more funny games like the MI series..Everything is either action or horror. Thank Ye Gods for Telltale! :)

As i've written previously, I don't think they ever meant to set up the mood properly for the LeChuck vs Guybrush thing, but it happened. Sure, there was always comedy on it; the spitting-game is the first to spring to mind for cartoon-like features, but that's very different from the structureless laziness that seemed to reign in MI4 by the time we got to Monkey Island; heck the conversations with characters didn't even make sense at times and occurred at the wrong moments. The point is that with the first two games you could get lost in the moment; with the MI4 attempt, that was entirely lacking for me and most of the people I talked to at the time about it.

*edit: and let us not forget the themepark at the end of MI3.

doom saber

06/11/2009, 09:06 am

The thing is that the MI games were made to be humorous with people in troll costumes, three headed monkeys,etc

I think the first two games tried to be like a cartoon but because of the tech at the time, they could not have drawn them to look too cartoony because of sprite sizes and pixels. Also, a lot of animated features usually have the main characters look normal and everyone else look goofy

Take the Disney cartoons as an example. The love interest and the protagonist looks less cartoony than someone like Stitch or Belle's dad

I mean other than Guybrush and Elaine, all the characters were a bit cartoony lookin

Gryffalio

06/11/2009, 09:14 am

As a kind of P.S., think about the cover-art for intention:
http://www.playworksonline.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/amiga_the_secret_of_monkey_island.jpg

http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/7224/imgs/monkey2.gif

http://kuon.files.wordpress.com/2007/07/b00000k51.jpg

http://img234.imageshack.us/img234/3664/escapefrommonkeyislandkv6.th.jpg

These above images, for me, demonstrate intent of sorts. The first two boxes weren't Guybrush and LeChuck drawn like a cartoon, which the argument that they weren't cartoony in-game because of tech-constraints would suggest. CMI is very cartoony on the box; they've dropped all pretense of the Guybrush vs LeChuck battles with the seriousness and intensity of the original two games, instead it seems to be much less serious; more like they're making fun of the previous box-arts. MI4 is maybe related to the original two, but I think the difference in box-art highlights the changes well, even if it doesn't prove them.

WedgeWalker

06/11/2009, 03:44 pm

Gryffalio, box art isn't made by the game designers necessarily. That can be up to the advertising departments and such. Thus, we can't look at boxart as an indicator of the intentions of the game designers.

Moreover, boxart isn't the game itself.

So comparing box art doesn't help when thinking about the games themselves, which is what we're talking about.

And, my take on this whole cartoon issue is that the truth is in the middle.

Clearly CMI and EMI have a more pervasive exaggerated visual style than SMI and LR. Some of that may very well be due to technical limitations of the first two games (i.e. they couldn't be as cartoony as they wanted to be due to limitations in graphic tech). But in the end, there's no way to know for sure unless all the major designers tell us.

Having never played all of SMI and LR, I can't comment fully on the style differences in terms of writing and story. But, from what I have played, I do believe they exist, but I also think some of you are significantly overstating them.

The visual style of the first two games is not realistic. It simply isn't. And the writing style is still humor oriented (insult sword fighting, for just one example). It wasn't a realistic serious game with hints of humor. On the other hand, it wasn't slapstick zany either. But, neither were CMI and EMI.

At most, I think one can argue convincingly that CMI and EMI represent taking the more zany tendencies of the first two games and amplifying them.

The question is, was it too much. Well, that's a matter of personal subjective taste.

I think the amplification was fine. But that's my take.

MusicallyInspired

06/11/2009, 04:39 pm

A perfect example of box cover art not depicting the game's art direction (and proof that it doesn't have to either) is The Dig. I'd say that cover is a pretty realistic one while the game is DEFINITELY a cartoon (though not as exaggerated as DOTT or COMI).

We could have the same argument about, say, King's Quest VI. The cover art is definitely more realistically toned as are a lot of closeups in the game. The sprites are even video captured actors. But the game itself is definitely a cartoon with its talking vegetables, sticks, logs, trees, exaggerated-anatomic featured gnomes, and The Land of Chess.

Mataku

06/11/2009, 05:08 pm

We could have the same argument about, say, King's Quest VI. The cover art is definitely more realistically toned as are a lot of closeups in the game. The sprites are even video captured actors. But the game itself is definitely a cartoon with its talking vegetables, sticks, logs, trees, exaggerated-anatomic featured gnomes, and The Land of Chess.

fantasy elements =\= cartoon.

is 'the lord of the rings' movies cartoons as well?

Secret Fawful

06/11/2009, 05:17 pm

fantasy elements =\= cartoon.

is 'the lord of the rings' movies cartoons as well?

http://moviesmedia.ign.com/movies/image/fellowship-bakshi.jpg

http://www.ralphbakshi.com/images/lordoftherings.jpg

http://www.hollywoodjesus.com/movie/lotr_fellowship/features/Bakshi_8.jpg

MusicallyInspired

06/11/2009, 06:18 pm

Lol. You forgot this one ;):

http://lotr.ugo.com/images/animation/return_of_the_king/rotk_animation.jpg

fantasy elements =\= cartoon.

is 'the lord of the rings' movies cartoons as well?

No, but in King's Quest's case, yes it is. King's Quest was always a cartoon. Even MOE is a cartoon.

onlyamonkey

06/11/2009, 06:38 pm

I've always wondered if reality is a pixel? Maybe you awesome dudes could try to play MI2 again and shine the pegleg untill you have 5100+ pieces of eight? there's a clip on youtube on how to do it. Sounds meaningful and fullfilling.

Guybrush_Threepwood

06/12/2009, 01:41 am

A perfect example of box cover art not depicting the game's art direction (and proof that it doesn't have to either) is The Dig. I'd say that cover is a pretty realistic one while the game is DEFINITELY a cartoon (though not as exaggerated as DOTT or COMI).

The Dig uses cartoon graphics, but would fit better a Steven Spielberg movie than a cartoon. I love those kind of graphics 'cause they're self contained, as you say not exaggerated as DOTT or CMI.
I think a Monkey Island 3 with the graphics used during The Dig's cutscenes is my idea of how MI should really look like. Cartoon style and colors, but realistic and well proportioned characters. Boston, Maggie and Brink are cartoons, but don't make you smile or laugh when you look at them. That's MY Guybrush.