Jump to content

Home

Return to Monkey Island


Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, fentongames said:

Is E3 happening this year? If so, I'd imagine we'll hear something there. Otherwise, whatever the next big gaming event is should hopefully reveal some more info!

 

I'm looking forward to seeing what all of the characters look like. Murray looked great in the preview, but to be fair, it's a skull! And I can't wait to hear brand new Guybrush Threepwood dialogue after all these years!

E3 is cancelled, but Summer Game Fest starts on the 9th of June. Devolver always have a big showcase there, so I think a peek at the game there is pretty much locked in. 

 

Having said that, we don't even know how close the game is to coming out. Maybe they'll drop a trailer tomorrow and it'll be out in 2 weeks, or it won't be finished til December. I'm inclined to think it's closer than we think though because they were doing voiceover and music recording when the announcement dropped, which is generally the last thing to be done, and Thimbleweed Park was released around 2-3 months after voices were added in. All I know is that I'm craving more.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, roots said:

I think we've tipped past the peak with the art issue and descended into being a reactionary counter-jerk. It seems now to be vastly more people complaining about other people complaining which really isn't any more helpful that the latter.

 

People are going to have negative and positive responses to the art regardless. Better to just drop it and move on.

 

Yes, exactly this. Ron even made the point of saying how he disliked the DOTT art style. It's not wrong to dislike an art style. But it is wrong to a) act like a jerk about it or b) act like a jerk towards those who don't like it. And the worst comments I've seen have been directed to those who otherwise expressed fairly innocuous (but negative) opinions.

 

Someone loves it? Someone hates it? It's fine. Just let it be. 

 

I'm glad Ron owns a pair of Big Boy Pants, frankly, because thankfully he's pretty much taken it all in his stride.

 

Now please bring on the new stuff, Ron and Team, because every free moment I'm checking to see if there's been any news!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel more sorry for Rex than Ron on this one. I'm sure he must have anticipated it but I think no matter how much you do, it must sting a little to be a fan of something since forever, land an absolute dream gig of being able to work on it, putting your heart into your interpretation and then getting told by some people that you did it wrong or don't get it.

 

I get that's just... the nature of this, but I still think it would be nice if people paused for 5 seconds before putting their words out into the world.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The vast majority of comments now is positive. Unfortunately, the negative tormentors, I mean commentors, have the tendency to bla majorly.

 

Quote

I am really excited that a new Monkey Island game is in the works, but I just have to say that I don't like the art either. The trailer is mostly fine, but the art in the released screenshots is really lacking. It just looks so generic, like a corporate cash grab where the art was outsourced to some sweatshop in India.

 

I really understand how responding adequately to such nonsense doesn't serve a real purpose besides generating instant negativity. "Don't try to be Batman" is one of the central teachings I took away from "Crash Override". But with comments like that, it's so_damn_difficult. I'm absolutely okay with people that didn't like the artwork at first sight. I myself was exactly as shocked and provoked by the artwork as Ron Gilbert vocally intended.

 

But this. These "arguments", the artwork supposedly looking "generic" or cheap or "like a mobile game", whatever that means. I don't know how to handle that without exploding. I've tried for 18 years to draw and paint, and I haven't got an ounce of Crowle's inventiveness, creativity and stylistic consistency. These backgrounds aren't jotted down, they are meticulously planned. The composition is, the angles are, the color scheme is. The position of the main character is, his impact is planned. 🎯

 

And why doesn't this guy know that the LeChuck's Revenge Special Edition was mostly outsourced to "some sweatshop" aka Lucasfilm Animation Singapore?

 

I really hope Rex and his entire team can disregard comments like that by people who don't know their sh*t, and I hope those comments won't reflect negatively on the MI fandom as a whole. It's clear what's happening here, we're tapping into childhood memories which elevate MI1 and MI2 (or even CMI for those late to the party) to a level of perfection that these games never had. The visual nostalgia was always destined to be the most bitter and divisive battlefield.

 

I still think that this kind of gatekeeping mentality is more prevalent in other franchises, but I kind of dread the release of the first Guybrush pictures. 💣

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Vainamoinen said:

The vast majority of comments now is positive. Unfortunately, the negative tormentors, I mean commentors, have the tendency to bla majorly.

 

I really understand how responding adequately to such nonsense doesn't serve a real purpose besides generating instant negativity. "Don't try to be Batman" is one of the central teachings I took away from "Crash Override". But with comments like that, it's so_damn_difficult. I'm absolutely okay with people that didn't like the artwork at first sight. I myself was exactly as shocked and provoked by the artwork as Ron Gilbert vocally intended.

 

But this. These "arguments", the artwork supposedly looking "generic" or cheap or "like a mobile game", whatever that means. I don't know how to handle that without exploding. I've tried for 18 years to draw and paint, and I haven't got an ounce of Crowle's inventiveness, creativity and stylistic consistency. These backgrounds aren't jotted down, they are meticulously planned. The composition is, the angles are, the color scheme is. The position of the main character is, his impact is planned. 🎯

 

 

Yeah, I felt the need to respond to that "corporate cash grab" comment myself, just because reading the full comment, I felt like the guy genuinely believed he was leaving constructive feedback. People forget that there are actually real people behind this, who maybe have friendships and working relationships with each other. So I did respond, biting my tongue enough not to get nasty but unable to conceal a little venom:

 

Quote

Hm. Regarding one of the above comments, if I were wanting to leave critical feedback about someone's game, I would perhaps pause and wonder whether I would ingratiate myself to the person by saying that the work of a cherished colleague that they've been collaborating with for 2 years looked 'like a corporate cash grab where the art was outsourced to some sweatshop in India.' Do you honestly think Ron's going to look at that and think 'hmm, useful feedback, thanks, I'll pass that onto Rex'?

You're entitled not to enjoy the (very small amount of mostly static and out of context) art that you've seen so far. You can also do so while respecting the professionalism of an artist who has worked on several titles that have been celebrated for their art direction.

I do not want this thread to turn into a flame war that makes Ron regret turning comments back on. In order to keep it that way, let's perhaps think a little about the words that are coming out of our fingers and consider whether they're just openly insulting Ron's friends and colleagues before pressing send, eh?

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Vainamoinen said:

 "Don't try to be Batman" is one of the central teachings I took away from "Crash Override".

The other thing I forgot to respond to on this post is this. And like... maybe I shouldn't try to be Batman. But it's what I was saying before. I often wondered whether I was spending too much time responding to misguided comments on Double Fine's forums. And then I met Tim Schafer one day and was a bit too shy to explain exactly who I was on the forums, and he found out later on and sent me this:
 


And I have to admit I was kind of bowled over, but since then I've always felt like going out of my way to speak up when I have the energy to, because you never know who might be looking and appreciating it from a distance and thinking 'I'm glad someone said it'.

 

I think often times when you're a creator you feel like you can't wade into heated discussions, because of a need to keep a professional distance, so I guess it's nice when there's someone there to say the thing you really wanted to say.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Vainamoinen said:

These "arguments", the artwork supposedly looking "generic" or cheap or "like a mobile game", whatever that means.

 

I know exactly what it means. I think a lot of people do. Basically what we've seen so far has the faint whiff of a Flash game. I don't see what's gained by trying to claim other people's opinions on something as subjective as aesthetics are "nonsense". It's piling negativity on top of negativity, and is precisely why the GG comment section got so toxic. 

 

Ron decided to mention that he doesn't like the DOTT art style. Is he "wrong" for not liking? Should he be worried about hurting Peter Chan's feelings? Opinions are fine... it's how you express them. Can't we just let people do that without trying to incite a mob?

 

1 hour ago, Vainamoinen said:

I kind of dread the release of the first Guybrush pictures.

 

I have a feeling it's going to be shit show again... although Ron is deliberately taking his time on this one. Presumably the longer people wait, the more their expectations will go down? Maybe?

 

Edited by ThunderPeel2001
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the people coming to Ron’s (online) home to yell in his face is a problem. I also think people who don’t like the art style trying to claim they speak for others (or accuse others of lying or having an ulterior motive for saying they like the art) is also a problem. That is the actual objectionable behavior. And it has been happening. 
 

It’s fine to not like the art. It’s fine to be disappointed. It’s even fine to be mad about it. But do it on your own time, and don’t take it out on other people.

 

From every poll about the art that has shown up on Twitter, Reddit, and even Facebook where the most arms-folded adventure curmudgeons seem to hang out these days, the answer skews overwhelmingly positive, so any sense of a groundswell or anger or disappointment really is a small group of people trying to take up all the air in the room, get in peoples faces, rally others to their cause. 
 

Again, if people were just saying “I don’t like it because X, it makes me feel Y, which really sucks,” that would be fully fine! And many of people who are feeling that way are saying those things, but an unfortunate number of the comments can’t resist going a step further, into conspiratorial speculation — “it’s a sell out choice” “it’s a cheap out” “Disney made them,” etc — because they’re seemingly unwilling to accept that other people see the world differently from them or have different tastes, that there must be some nefarious reason for their disappointment. That stuff is what really gets me down.

 

A person not liking a creative choice? We’ve all been there! Being unwilling to accept that’s all it is? Ooof. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, KestrelPi said:

People forget that there are actually real people behind this, who maybe have friendships and working relationships with each other.

30 minutes ago, Jake said:

And many of people who are feeling that way are saying those things, but an unfortunate number of the comments can’t resist conspiratorial speculation, “it’s a sell out choice” “it’s a cheap out” “Disney made them,” etc, because they’re unwilling to accept that other people see the world differently from them or have different tastes, that there must be some nefarious reason for their disappointment. That stuff is what really gets me down.

 

Those run-off-the-mill conspiracy myths make the dehumanization so much easier. "Corporate cash grab" isn't criticism, it's not an "opinion", it's not an argument, it's plainly a personal insult. Same goes for "outsourced to a sweat shop". Some people seem to think that the lower they go, the more influence they will have on the final product. It's an attempt at emotional blackmail: I will tell you that you're a bad person for not making this game in exactly the style I want. And that's indeed nonsense.

 

I don't even doubt that this person thought he was giving honest and maybe even constructive criticism. But he did it in the way the internet taught him to. Maximum impact on the site of construction at the press of a button, details when I finally have your attention. I know how this game works, I've been there, I've flung horrible things.

 

And I can say with absolute certainty that it draws the life blood out of creators.

 

Granted, giving art criticism is one of the most difficult things you could do. Even in my drawing forums, i. e. my actual motivation/support groups, there are those artists that know how to give a great critique and those who don't and probably never will. It's always tiptoeing around the sensibilites of a very vulnerable soul, artists and authors alike. They're the most human of all of us, often the most insecure, and would of course love to explode in some critics' faces.

 

 

Edited by Vainamoinen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's grimly relieving that this game was announced well after all the primary creative decisions were under glass. It seems unlikely that a team of professional game developers would ever depart from their own tastes and instincts in response to men's room graffiti, but between Ron feeling the need to put his blog in timeout and Dom directly engaging with Reddit comments to address the feedback, it's unfortunately clear that there is some personal impact here, so knowing that the shrillest voices were denied the ability to have even a subconscious influence on the game's development is satisfying.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Udvarnoky said:

It's grimly relieving that this game was announced well after all the primary creative decisions were under glass. It seems unlikely that a team of professional game developers would ever depart from their own tastes and instincts in response to men's room graffiti, but between Ron feeling the need to put his blog in timeout and Dom directly engaging with Reddit comments to address the feedback, it's unfortunately clear that there is some personal impact here, so knowing that the shrillest voices were denied the ability to have even a subconscious influence on the game's development is satisfying.

Definitley, the last thing i want is the team changing their vision to fit what fans think they want.

 

I want Ron and Dave's vision.

Edited by Toymafia1988
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, Thrik said:

Nice piece of fan art imagining ReMI Guybrush. 🙂

 

 

I really like this.

 

I've been really nervous after seeing Rex's original Guybrush drawing. I hear it wont be like that design at least.

 

I would love it to be similar to this. Like a hd version of a sprite.

 

Going by the other character designs i bet Guybrush will have a more angle-ish face and a long neck 

Edited by Toymafia1988
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like a lot of Rex's stuff it'll really come into it's own once in motion. He actually makes really expressive characters, so I'm not worried about that aspect at all. By the way, Ron has actually posted a comment on the blog:

 

Quote

The reason I closed comments on the other post wasn't because people didn't like the art style, it was that I got tired of deleting comments that were personal attacks on the team or just anger for the sake of anger. You don't have to like the art style but keep in mind you've only seen 4 static screen shots. We have done extensive outside playtesting and the art always threw people for the first hour and by the time they were done, all the art and animation got very high praise. I worry that some people have gotten so worked up that they will rage quit and never give the game a chance. If anyone is calling this crappy flash animation I suggest you go look at some actual crappy flash animation. There is no comparison.

 

I think everyone is just very anxious to see it in motion but I trust the art team to have put together something special, I really do.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, KestrelPi said:

The reason I closed comments on the other post wasn't because people didn't like the art style, it was that I got tired of deleting comments that were personal attacks on the team or just anger for the sake of anger. You don't have to like the art style but keep in mind you've only seen 4 static screen shots. We have done extensive outside playtesting and the art always threw people for the first hour and by the time they were done, all the art and animation got very high praise. I worry that some people have gotten so worked up that they will rage quit and never give the game a chance. If anyone is calling this crappy flash animation I suggest you go look at some actual crappy flash animation. There is no comparison.

 

Ron once again wearing his Big Boy Pants. So glad he's helming this project, I have a feeling it would have crushed a lesser mortal.

 

3 hours ago, Toymafia1988 said:

Definitley, the last thing i want is the team changing their vision to fit what fans think they want.

 

 

Thankfully I think Ron has been around long enough to understand that when you're creating something you had no choice but to have faith in your own decisions... it's what you're bringing to the project after all. Thankfully I don't think any of the comments are going to change anything at all.

 

All comments are based on previewed content, after all, not the final game. And by the time people have the finished product in their hands, it will be too late for their comments to have any effect!

 

Keep going, Ron!

 

Edited by ThunderPeel2001
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Vainamoinen said:

And I can say with absolute certainty that it draws the life blood out of creators.

 

Creators wired that way should avoid reading anything. David Lynch avoids all reviews. Why? Because: "A good review is never good enough, and a bad review will kill you."

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a bit of a danger in the first place, whenever this whole narrative crops up of developers changing their games against their will in response to feedback from the internet. I think it fundamentally misunderstands how the creative process works. I mean, we know Ron is making the game he wants to make, but he's doing it with... plenty of feedback.

 

In that last post he talks about how the game has had extensive external testing. Even Return, with its secrecy, hasn't been immune to this, and that's because the creative process thrives on feedback. We have this idea of the genius creator working in their secret factory and emerging with a fully formed work, but it rarely happens that way in reality.

 

And so in the age of social media, whenever a creator is caught in the act of changing their mind, or responding to feedback, suddenly there's an outcry that the purity of the work has somehow been tainted by external feedback. Sometimes it's silly stuff like people arguing against accessibility features that don't affect them in any way. And it's often, but not always used as a stick to beat marginalised communities with, if things are changed as a result of feedback they gave.

 

(Aside - I know this well. I remember asking a well-meant question about whether there was a place for gay people in Massive Chalice, and the response from Double Fine was GREAT and they did end up implementing some stuff based on it. The response from a small vocal section of the community was NOT great, and I was accused of all sorts of ulterior and corrupting motives for my fairly innocent bit of feedback)

 

I think it's actually (and if you think about it unsurprisingly) very rare that creators are willing to sabotage their own vision for what their work should be, in order to please some randos on the internet. What they might do, is see some feedback, and find themselves agreeing with it and making changes accordingly. It's a pet peeve of mine that a significant portion of the internet don't seem to be able to tell the difference.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/9/2022 at 7:28 PM, Zaxx said:

 

I basically have the same argument for why he's outdated. :D That kind of annoying person would be the "influencer", the life style coach or the fitness guru now, not the used car salesman, right? Compared to those people Stan is just a hard working citizen doing the hustle. :D

 

 

I also Stan is always up to date. For example, when watching Breaking Bad and Better Call Saul, the character of Saul Goodman just reminds so much of Stan. I would even have Bod Odenkirk play him

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ThunderPeel2001 said:

 

Creators wired that way should avoid reading anything. David Lynch avoids all reviews. Why? Because: "A good review is never good enough, and a bad review will kill you."

 

 

Why should we put the onus on artists to avoid all commentary on the work they put into the world, on the assumption that there's nothing to be done about people acting hideously when responding to it, rather than on players/viewers/readers etc. to be more mature and respectful when offering criticism? There's a world of difference between "I never liked the artwork in Day of the Tentacle because it wasn't an aesthetic I ever enjoyed" and "You sellout hack, you only chose this art style because the corporate hog at whose teat you greedily suckle has rendered you a flaccid, boneless puppet." The first guy is sharing an opinion; if somebody can't handle that, yeah, maybe avoid any critique of your work. The second guy is being a prick, and we don't have to just put up with that as a fait accompli. Personally I think it's better and healthier for everyone to say "Knock that off, we don't need that here and you're making it worse for everybody" than it is to tell his target "Maybe just rearrange your life so you can't hear him, because he's never going away."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just read a comment on Ron's blog that is the biggest crock of shit I've ever seen. It's too long to post here, but I'll show you the opening paragraph so you get the gist of the bullshit that's coming from this person:

"Sorry Ron, but you can't make whatever game you want to make! When you release first entry in series, it's not your game anymore, it also game of fans, not in terms of authorship, but in terms of belonging. Fans buy this game and sort of own it. 1st game sets standards and expectations. Then when sequels comes out they set even more standards and expectations and of they are not done by you but fans loved them, because sequels met their expectations, it is not your game anymore even more than before, it's collective game, which belongs to you, other authors which was accepted by fans, and to fans.

Consider fans as your investors or producers, who pay you! You can't simply do whatever you want without majority of investor's or producer's approval!!!

if majority of your investors or producers say they don't like art style, then you should abandon this idea and make something that would please your investors and producers or fans!!!"

I can't believe someone thinks that creators owe fans anything just because they consume the content. That's not how this stuff works, it's so selfish and entitled. I just....grrrrr! I'm just mad now.

  • Confused 2
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The most disappointing part of this controversy is it has tainted any chance for a "retro mode" as an addendum (even post-release) to the base game. Not out of any commentary on the art, but rather from the perspective of parity between RMI and the Special Editions and forming a neat cohesive trilogy.

 

Putting that aside, I'd love it if RMI ties the stump joke into the Underground Tunnels providing that the plot does end up continuing down that line. It's such a perfect way to throwback to "the infamous stump" IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, roots said:

trilogy.

I don’t know that Gilbert is interested in parity with the Special Editions, which he had nothing to do with other than being on the commentary track, and at this point it doesn’t seem like he or Grossman see this as the third game in a trilogy, but rather the nebulous “next” entry in a series that has had many beloved entries.
 

Did people ask for a retro pixels mode for Curse when it came out in 1997? (Actually they probably did and I’ve forgotten. Actually I probably asked for that sort of thing on this very forum and have forgotten, may I never be reminded of my old posts.) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Thrik unpinned this topic

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...