Jump to content

Home

RobDangerous

Members
  • Posts

    13
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by RobDangerous

  1. 12 minutes ago, KestrelPi said:

    So it would be really easy to have the end not feel surprising, or not feel like the rug pull that it is. It must have been really quite hard to balance the desire to make the themes of the game clear with still wanting the ending to feel like a surprise.

    That so didn't work for me. I expected to go back to the park and I already recognized the door from the other side.

  2. 22 minutes ago, KestrelPi said:

    To me, the implication is that we actually don't KNOW how MI2 ends from Guybrush's perspective. It could end that LeChuck puts a curse on him and he ends up in some sort of hell carnival, or it could be something else. Which is perfect to me  because it means we can take the start of CMI at face value and say that yes, he did indeed escape some sort of carnival of the damned, and similarly the ending.

    Aye, that seems to be the intent now. And I'm betting eight pieces of eight that it wasn't the intent in 1991. Anyway, two meta-layers on top of each other is too much for me, Monkey Island 2: Guybrush's Director's Cut next please.

  3. 52 minutes ago, Marius said:

    Yes! After Guybrush says "Look behind you, a three-headed monkey!", Lila says: "You can't fool us. There aren't any monkeys here. This is Monkey Island!"

    What a strange line. But it sounds like the developers know that there is a lack of monkeys. It seems intentional.

     

    I found that one funny. I remember the developers of Monkey 3 and/or 4 talking about their game actually having a decent amount of monkeys, Monkey 1/2 had only one each (or did I forget some?) and I think some people used to wonder about that.

  4. 39 minutes ago, backtothemansion said:

    I'll post my gushing thoughts on this amazing game later but a couple of questions I have.

     

    1. Why is Lechuck a zombie again? (Don't get me wrong its my favourite form but shouldn't he be something else after the pirate god form?)

    2. Why are there no monkey's in this game?

    3. Why wasn't Elaine bothered by anything? (In previous games she would get angry at him like at the costume party, the cursed ring and Tales) is this because its Guybrush telling the story through rose tinted glasses?

    4. I'm surprised Madison wasn't the last of the trio standing, i dont even remember seeing her die. Guessing mutiny?

    1. He was a zombie in Tales already. There's no more logic to LeChuck's switching forms since Monkey 4.

    2. Monkey Island isn't about monkeys. It's about parrots.

    3. No idea.

    4. Killed by Lila. She made a comment about that when you see Madison's hat.

    • Like 1
  5. 13 minutes ago, Dmnkly said:

    But unless I'm mistaken, I believe the notion that Ron HAD ideas for MI3 back in 1992 assumes facts not in evidence. I mean, I'm sure his mind wasn't a total blank. But has he ever said that there was any vision for MI3 back in the day? Again, I might be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure that never existed.


    Quoting https://web.archive.org/web/20051122075149/http://idlethumbs.net/display.php?id=59 once more:

    Quote

    I think the thing is, when I planned those games out — and this is nothing new — but, when we did the first one the whole story just got too big, which is when I broke it up into three different parts. I know what that third one is, right? So it's not that I kind of sit there and think about "oh, what would the third one be?" I kind of know how that story's supposed to end, so I don't really think about it too much.

    He also always insisted that nobody really figured out what the secret is even though "it's just fantasies in a theme park" has always been the most widely seen theory. In the end I'm not disappointed - I long suspected there's nothing more to it and after Thimbleweed Park I was quite sure about it. But the game just ending as expected is also not very exciting.

    • Like 1
  6. 3 minutes ago, Jake said:

    I still believe that, to some degree, Ron has been more consistent than it seems. For example if the original idea was that LeChuck gets worse and worse, and goes down these paths of increasingly dangerous voodoo as Guybrush chases at his coattails the whole way, and if the secret of monkey island is that it’s a gateway to hell itself that gives you more and more access to this power, that’s enough of an outline to know vaguely the tone and shape you might want the third act to take, even if you haven’t figured out what it is yet. 
     

    I don’t know what it would have actually been - that vague thing above is something I made up just now to fit that hypothetical - but I don’t believe you need to actually have something plotted out and fully broken down, to know if the shape of the story feels right. 

    The point I wanted to make is not that his answers are inconsistent. I think his answers are strategic - he doesn't seem interested in opening up, he seems interested in making people curious.

  7. 7 minutes ago, Sadbrush said:

     

    Yeah, fair enough. When I say "ad nauseam," I just mean we've already covered all this ground before. This game doesn't really further the plot or add much more coal to the fire, it's pretty much the same conversation we've been having all this time.

     

    I know the difference is that a lot of time has passed and the devs aren't the same people who made the originals, which is why I'm so interested in Ron's ideas for MI3 back in 1992. I think it would have been a much different experience overall, and they probably would have handled the final reveal differently. For one, we know in Ron's vision that Guy and Elaine weren't a couple, so they presumably didn't have kids, which would have altered the framing story considerably. There's just a lot of conjecture for things that could have been. I hope at some point Ron opens up about it and shares his original outline/notes for the game.

    I have no hope that he will ever open up about it. How he talked about it also completely changed over the years. In 2005 (https://web.archive.org/web/20051122075149/http://idlethumbs.net/display.php?id=59) he said

    Quote

    I think the thing is, when I planned those games out — and this is nothing new — but, when we did the first one the whole story just got too big, which is when I broke it up into three different parts. I know what that third one is, right? So it's not that I kind of sit there and think about "oh, what would the third one be?" I kind of know how that story's supposed to end, so I don't really think about it too much.

    while in every recent interview it was always just versions of "Guybrush goes to hell and Stan is there is all I ever had".

  8. 6 minutes ago, Jake said:

    I believe the amusement park fantasy is the original, and that is the meaning of the plaque. The tshirt is your reward for finding the secret, and is a fun callback to the three trials. I don’t think the tshirt would hit as hard without the passage of time, the pent up desire, but the amusement park fantasy thread has always been there. 

    Ron always denied that but after Thimbleweed Park I thought https://mixnmojo.com/news/On-this-day-16-years-ago-Bill-Tiller-revealed-the-secret-of-Monkey-Island was likely actually spot on. Now I think so even more.

    • Like 2
  9. To me the "less extravagant park" looked like it was the same one, just 20 years or so later, implying that this indeed happened before - in which case the original Chuckie would still be quite the mystery.
    Speaking of which, Monkey 2 implied that Guybrush and LeChuck/Chuckie were the only "real" characters. In Return it's now Guybrush and Elaine (and Stan) instead. Maybe Ron swapped LeChuck and Elaine in that role because of the marriage.

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...