Brushguy Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 EMI: definitely misunderstood. Compared to the previous three MI games, it's not bad, just different. By itself, it is an awesome game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jolly Rasta Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 Originally posted by Akril [ Oh yeah, there are five pirana poodles in addition to Spiffy in MI1, so my theory still holds... Akril [/b] Sorry mon...my bad. I didn't see your post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gabez Posted March 2, 2004 Share Posted March 2, 2004 Jeeze I've yet to read a bad review of EMI from the game journalism industry, and I believe the game sold well enough - so the only negativity comes from die-hard Monkey Island fans who were obviosuly expecting something completly different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brushguy Posted March 3, 2004 Share Posted March 3, 2004 And now for something completely different! (Liberty Bell March plays) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Darthy Posted March 23, 2004 Share Posted March 23, 2004 EMI isn't a bad game by any stretch of the imagination and like most games it is flawed. But that's something we don't expect from a MI game - I'm struggling to think of any flaws with the first 3. And don't moan about plot holes - that has nothing to do with gameplay. EMI had some serious design issues within some of the puzzles themselves creating moments of pure, unadultered tedium. The Mists of Time (or whatever it was called) being a prime example. That puzzle dragged on far too long and was incredibly repetative, likewise Monkey Kombat. I understand why Monkey Kombat was there, I just don't understand how it got past quality control. Another problem was that EMI, like CMI it was a very linear experience - a total departure from the island hopping open ended-ness that MI2 set the benchmark for. DOTT and S&M followed that open design flow perfectly, if you got stuck in one place just go somewhere else and see what else you can do. I've played through the first 3 many times because they're incredibly replayable but EMIs moments of crapness, although few and far between, are very crap indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Governor Phatt Posted March 24, 2004 Share Posted March 24, 2004 i agree that CMI's non island hopping did make it a little tedious, but at the same time i don't think it ruined the game at all. The 1st game had no island hopping but is still great. I do disagree that plot holes can ruin the gameplay, especially for fans of the series who work their way through the game to a point where the story no longer flows because the writers obviously couldnt be bothered to replay the original games in order to follow it up realistically. As for the Mysts of time i found that puzzle quite easy, as with all of the puzzles in the game. EDIT: in reply to Gabez, just because a game sells well doesnt nesecarilly make it a good game. I'm sure The Phantom Menace sold an awful lot of tickets but well... you get the point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joni Posted March 28, 2004 Share Posted March 28, 2004 I personally didn't liked EMI because of the console interface, adventure games simply doesn't work without Point 'n' Click, for example all the best adventure games released in the past couple of years have Point 'n Click, and upcoming Longest Journey 2 and Syberia 2 also have Point 'n Click, dunno why LucasArts did EMI like it is, maybe to save some time and money on the console conversions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mapixx Posted March 28, 2004 Share Posted March 28, 2004 Obviously Pont'n Click rules only Grim Fandango worked without it (I liked EMI though) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.