Jump to content

Home

Lechuck

Members
  • Posts

    51
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Lechuck

  1. 27 minutes ago, Gins said:

    "I know you've looked forward to this new game/attraction in the Monkey Island series/amusement park. I'll do some work/cure scurvy in the meantime and then go to bed/home. Take your time and enjoy yourself, just make sure you turn on/off the dishwasher/lights when you're done, ok? Love you honey 😘"

     

    You're right that would be weird in real life 😉

     

    Bonus:

    "I wanted to surprise you and fixed you old code wheel/ship from Monkey Island 1 with some tape/tape."

     

    As someone who played the game with his wife (/ who's wife watched him play), touche. 😉

     

    But there is a difference between playing a computer game and running amok in a theme park with vivid, lifelike delusions.

     

    But then, I also play Dungeons and Dragons.

     

     

    • Haha 1
  2. What does this ending do to the character of Guybrush (whoever he really is)?

     

    There's a huge difference between a child playing make-believe and a grown man.

     

    The ending of MI2 may have been shocking and controversial at the time, but it was also... totally fine. Kids play make believe - there's nothing strange about that. We get it.

     

    But an adult living in a fantasy world to the point where his wife chaperones him to the amusement park so he can go and play just feels.... a bit weird and uncomfortable.

     

     

  3. On 10/16/2022 at 2:33 AM, KestrelPi said:

    For 2 a good rule of thumb is that Land composed Scabb, McConnell composed Booty and Bajakian composed Phatt. But there are probably exceptions to this and some level of collaboration on all of it.

     

    I think I heard Largo's theme was a group effort which is plausible but it wouldn't surprise me if McConnell was the driving force behind that as it containst a lot of his fingerprints. Compare that theme for example to Swanky Maximino from Grim Fandango (which incidentally was a tune originally written from Monkey 2, which they couldn't find a use for)

     

     

     

    Thank you for that insight, that's terrific.

     

     

  4.  

    23 hours ago, Lechuck said:

    * I didn't mind the ending - I didn't see it coming, but as soon as it was revealed, it was "aha, okay, of course." I remember when Mixnmojo first posted their theory on this years ago, and it blew my mind then. In the years since, I came to accept it as the likely truth - especially with that Bill Tiller quote about the making of the first two games, and knowing about Ron's initial inspiration. So this felt a bit like Game of Thrones to me: for better or worse, we all knew who Jon Snow was before the show got there. I'd say MI2's throwing in of some doubt made it a bit more fun, and possibly even contributed to the series' iconic status. Sometimes unanswered questions are just more fun to chew on. Maybe it was something that should never have been definitively resolved?

     

     

    Mulling on this further... I know Ron's said that Guybrush sitting on the bench at the end is channeling how he feels, and there's a genuine sadness to it. A weight has been lifted after all these years, but at what cost? Guybrush can't go and start the next adventure with Elaine because the magic is gone.

     

    I'll be interested to see if Ron does come back to make more, where he goes from here, because despite what people have said, there was a pretty clear finality to that ending. How can there be any more suspension of disbelief now?

     

     

    • Like 1
  5. Finished it a few days ago. Still processing but...

     

    * Overall I enjoyed the game and revisiting the world

     

    * Tonally it felt quite innocent and sweet - more similar to MI1 than MI2's burnt-out vibe. But even sweeter and more storybook than MI1.

     

    * I thought it was a shame you couldn't revisit locations from previous games, like Meathook's Island, Captain Smirk's hut, or the remains of the Cannibal Village, etc. Even if there was no story there, it would have been nice to see them again. And other islands let you visit locations that served no story purpose.

     

    * Contradictory maybe, but I found visiting locations that had no purpose a bit frustrating.

     

    * The art style grew on me and of course I now can't imagine the game any other way. I wonder if there are further entries, is this now The Style or will it continue to change with each game? I'd still love to see a Steve Purcell/Peter Chan art directed modern MI game.

     

    * LeChuck did not feel threatening or intimidating to me at all, which is a shame. But I did enjoy his crew.

     

    * I have mixed feelings about some of the story threads being abandoned, especially Elaine's investigation into Guybrush's activities. That had me genuinely nervous as to where that was leading and I don't think it really paid off. I was expecting something like "Guybrush is the real bad guy" maybe?

     

    * I didn't mind the ending - I didn't see it coming, but as soon as it was revealed, it was "aha, okay, of course." I remember when Mixnmojo first posted their theory on this years ago, and it blew my mind then. In the years since, I came to accept it as the likely truth - especially with that Bill Tiller quote about the making of the first two games, and knowing about Ron's initial inspiration. So this felt a bit like Game of Thrones to me: for better or worse, we all knew who Jon Snow was before the show got there. I'd say MI2's throwing in of some doubt made it a bit more fun, and possibly even contributed to the series' iconic status. Sometimes unanswered questions are just more fun to chew on. Maybe it was something that should never have been definitively resolved?

     

     

     

     

     

     

    • Like 3
  6. Didn't some blah blahs also happen with one of the LeChuck's fortress exteriors?

     

    As a fan of MI2's creepy LeChuck, I'm not loving this goofy LeChuck with his stubby legs and cartoony voice, but as with everything else, looking forward to seeing it all in proper context.

    • Like 2
  7. 10 hours ago, madmardi said:

     

    Sure... but it's also not unexpected. If we can change up characters so drastically, I still see no issues changing any of the items from your list. Frankly, I think Guybrush in Curse is unrecognizable from Guybrush in MI2, but seeing as Curse was 25 years ago I've almost forgotten how shocked I was when I first saw him in that game. Not that I'm saying I dislike any of the character redesigns, just that I don't see why changing any of the items in your list is a big deal if we're okay with other artistic changes.

     

    Anyways, I feel like now we're splitting hairs and we'll probably not agree on this, so I'l try to get back on track with ReMI 😅

     

    There's a difference between art style and content changing. The art style may have changed between games, but Guybrush is always a man with a pony tail. He doesn't fundamentally change.

     

    Architectural design and foliage changing is different. It's not like they changed them to stylized pine trees, they completely changed the plants. This would be like if Guybrush were suddenly a person of a different ethnicity or gender.

     

    There is a difference there.

     

     

  8. 14 minutes ago, Jake said:

    I’m not going to claim “it’s all Disneyland,” but Tom Sawyer’s Island in both the CA and Florida park has always had a good mix of foliage that feels “adventurous” without being explicitly regionally tropical. 
     

     

    788C1E94-7FBF-4C90-BAA6-D0A7D1756177.jpeg

    885B8478-1EE6-4BA7-991F-76C74916BFCD.jpeg

    277C38CC-8598-4B19-8D94-19AA2A1F6756.jpeg

     

    I was just going to say something similar - going with the theme park theory - it's like he's wandered from New Orleans square into a bordering section. And then Adventureland is right next to it for the tropics and the natives...

  9. On 7/1/2022 at 12:23 AM, Udvarnoky said:

     

    This seems dubious to me. The box art strikes me as more of an exercise in hypothetical movie poster art than anything else. Ultimately, the only safe interpetation of how the game "should" look is how it actually looks.

     

    Are you saying that we're supposed to look at, say, the Zak Mckracken box and not link that to the character in the game? What about the Day of the Tentacle and Sam and Max Hit the Road boxes? And Curse of Monkey Island?

     

    In the same way that Harrison Ford's likeness is featured on the Indiana Jones boxes, the box art is there to fill in the void that pixel art can't convey. They're showing us what the characters are supposed to look like, so that we'll imagine them like that in the game. And as Jake pointed out, the close ups in MI1 do resemble the box art depictions.

     

     

×
×
  • Create New...