Gabez Posted December 29, 2001 Share Posted December 29, 2001 No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snapcase Posted December 29, 2001 Share Posted December 29, 2001 I loved EMI myself. But yes, it has a different type of humour to CMI (which I thought was boring) and to the first two games. It's inevitable with different writers and different designers. CMI managed to capture a lot of the innocent humour of the first two games; EMI the sharp sarcasm and pop-culture cynicism. Arguably, they both failed to capture the other half of the Monkey Island magic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trapezoid Posted December 29, 2001 Share Posted December 29, 2001 Originally posted by Snapcase I loved EMI myself. But yes, it has a different type of humour to CMI (which I thought was boring) and to the first two games. It's inevitable with different writers and different designers. CMI managed to capture a lot of the innocent humour of the first two games; EMI the sharp sarcasm and pop-culture cynicism. Arguably, they both failed to capture the other half of the Monkey Island magic. And likewise, the first two MIs failed to capture CMI and EMI's magic. It's good that they're different. Variation keeps the series interesting. Strange but true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squinkee Posted December 29, 2001 Share Posted December 29, 2001 Was there a huge outrage when MI2 came out? I would think there was, however I don't know because at that point I wasn't really old enough to care about how a game compared to its predecessor(s). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin_Br Posted December 29, 2001 Share Posted December 29, 2001 Okay, here are my two cents: I enjoyed the first three games the most. CMI was great, beautiful graphics and the voice acting was perfect. Somehow, Guybrush sounded just like I expected. Okay, CMI looked different than the two previous games, but it captured the right MI feeling immediately. Then EMI came... I don't think it was the story (although it's a tad weak)... I don't think it was the humour (although the funniest part for me in the whole game was Guybrush tied up in the intro). It definately wasn't the music and voice acting (LucasArts know what they are doing on that part). I think it was the 3D part. Now, I don't want to say that 3D is bad, because I enjoyed Grim Fandango very, very much. I think 3D just wasn't right for a Monkey Island game. The 2D graphics in Monkey Island 1, 2 and 3 had far more detail. Characters were much more interesting (I think because of the facial expressions or something). Instead, the latest game looks flat and misses the warmth of the gorgeous hand-drawn images from Monkey Island 2 and CMI. Action elements like 'Monkey Kombat' didn't add much goodness to the game either, it just did the opposite. I think I would have enjoyed this game much more with hand-drawn images looking like pictures from a pirate-story capturing the feeling Ron Gilbert had in mind. The feeling of Monkey Island has gone away in EMI... Of course this is all in my opinion, this is how *I* feel about it. --Erwin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Navhead Posted December 29, 2001 Share Posted December 29, 2001 It's the old skool vs 3d people all over again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remi Posted December 29, 2001 Share Posted December 29, 2001 Hm... I have a feeling that MI5 will be cel-shaded. That could have some potential. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
telarium Posted December 29, 2001 Share Posted December 29, 2001 I don't find fault with the nature of 3D, but rather the way it is used. EMI could have looked better than it did... I felt the backgrounds were really lacking in many places (like Lucre Island)... but I don't agree about characters being more expressive in 2D than 3D. It depends on the artist and how 3D is used. I, however, felt that much of the animation in EMI was really quite good. SCUMM 2D animation is actually a tad limited in terms of the more common animation like talking. EMI had lip sync technology, which I really enjoyed. But I do theorize that the art direction on EMI was more of the problem than the nature of 3D. Bill Tiller commented on how he drew all of the backgrounds himself in CMI, then had others paint them. It gave the backgrounds a unified style. EMI didn't adopt this method, and it may show. On a side note, I hope for the next game, LEC uses non-photorealistic rendering to make a 3D Monkey Island that looks 2D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dark spirit Posted December 29, 2001 Share Posted December 29, 2001 Originally posted by remio Hm... I have a feeling that MI5 will be cel-shaded. That could have some potential. over on the milegend forums I suggested they did it using cel-shading like this: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trapezoid Posted December 29, 2001 Share Posted December 29, 2001 On a side note, I hope for the next game, LEC uses non-photorealistic rendering to make a 3D Monkey Island that looks 2D. Yeah, or just the next game period. Cel shading is cool. But it looks best with black outlines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schmatz Posted December 29, 2001 Share Posted December 29, 2001 Yeah, EMI wasn't THAT bad... I just said it's probably best to wait until it COSTS five bucks... because, honestly, I don't think it's worth it. I mean, they used Murry from time to time in CMI and that was cool, but then he made a one-scene appearence and all he did was hang out on a stool. Plus the fact that they made him shaped like a real skull, not like the cartoon one in CMI. I also found it funny how all the characters changed heights and looks. Otis didn't have reddish-brown hair and had like facial hair, etc. In this game he just wasn't cool... and the Swordmaster, Carla, looked like she was friggin pregnant. EMI wasn't a bad game, it just followed the story horribly compared to the other MIs. If you want it for an adventure game go for it, but if you want another great MI game, don't bother. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trapezoid Posted December 29, 2001 Share Posted December 29, 2001 Or if you want a great MI game, DO bother. I think it's a great MI game. And so does my hairy little friend. And Max does too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remi Posted December 30, 2001 Share Posted December 30, 2001 Originally posted by Schmatz Yeah, EMI wasn't THAT bad... I just said it's probably best to wait until it COSTS five bucks... because, honestly, I don't think it's worth it. I mean, they used Murry from time to time in CMI and that was cool, but then he made a one-scene appearence and all he did was hang out on a stool. Plus the fact that they made him shaped like a real skull, not like the cartoon one in CMI. I also found it funny how all the characters changed heights and looks. Otis didn't have reddish-brown hair and had like facial hair, etc. In this game he just wasn't cool... and the Swordmaster, Carla, looked like she was friggin pregnant. EMI wasn't a bad game, it just followed the story horribly compared to the other MIs. If you want it for an adventure game go for it, but if you want another great MI game, don't bother. They couldn't very well make Murray as cartoony as in CMI as EMI had a very different look to it. I also think I'd argue that CMI followed the storyline of the first two MI games as badly as EMI did. I still dig both new games. I don't think the MI series should be taken too seriously, especially after all of the original team left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Squinkee Posted December 30, 2001 Share Posted December 30, 2001 You have to take EMI for what it is, and that's a humor game. Not a pirate adventure, not another installment in an epic series, just a little thing that's meant to make you chuckle. If it doesn't, hey, that's your perogative. But don't bash it just because it dosn't live up to MI1 or 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meksilon Posted December 30, 2001 Share Posted December 30, 2001 Originally posted by Squinkee You have to take EMI for what it is, and that's a humor game. Not a pirate adventure, not another installment in an epic series, just a little thing that's meant to make you chuckle. If it doesn't, hey, that's your perogative. But don't bash it just because it dosn't live up to MI1 or 2. So why'd they call it MONKEY ISLAND? And what other reason is there to bash it? It's crap. Accept it; even you didn't think it was an adventure. =mek= Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flirbnic Posted December 30, 2001 Share Posted December 30, 2001 EMI was just a high-budget Monkey Island fangame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meksilon Posted December 30, 2001 Share Posted December 30, 2001 Except it wasn't made by people who understand the first 2 games. =mek= Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elTee Posted December 30, 2001 Author Share Posted December 30, 2001 I seem to recall we talked about this to death on the old forum. Basically, MI1 and MI2 are special. They are different - RON made them. MI3 and MI4 are bother great as GAMES. They are not great as MONKEY ISLAND GAMES. There is a difference. The major problem with MI4 is that it seems that Clarke and Stemmle don't respect the originals - I mean, that monkey head: It was the entrance to the catacombs. Wouldn't we have noticed back in 1990 when we first used the Q-tip in the ear 'oh look, controls. Why are there chairs in this Monkey Head?' etc etc. Basically, MI4 was a MI game for people who had only played MI3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meksilon Posted December 31, 2001 Share Posted December 31, 2001 But you speak for yourself there, I am disappointed that most "Monkey Island fans" are fans of CMI and EMI. =mek= Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trapezoid Posted December 31, 2001 Share Posted December 31, 2001 Jesus! Ron isn't a god. He's not as cool as Tim Schafer is. Meksilon, you seem to be obsessed with the first two games and you won't give the third and fourth a break. CMI was a beautiful update to the Monkey Island mood and style. EMI, yes, didn't respect the first two games, but it had a very 'Who cares, screw you' attitude that I and many other found very funny. If YOU don't appreciate CMI and EMI, and they aren't hard to appreciate, you shouldn't be complaining about the games. I believe Ron Gilbert said something to the effect that he hates it when gamers complain and think that the creators of games owe them something. No, you shouldn't be complaining, we should be pitying you because you've become too biased towards the "originals", and as a result you automatically shield your eyes from CMI and EMI's appeal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remi Posted December 31, 2001 Share Posted December 31, 2001 Originally posted by Trapezoid Jesus! Ron isn't a god. He's not as cool as Tim Schafer is. Meksilon, you seem to be obsessed with the first two games and you won't give the third and fourth a break. CMI was a beautiful update to the Monkey Island mood and style. EMI, yes, didn't respect the first two games, but it had a very 'Who cares, screw you' attitude that I and many other found very funny. If YOU don't appreciate CMI and EMI, and they aren't hard to appreciate, you shouldn't be complaining about the games. I believe Ron Gilbert said something to the effect that he hates it when gamers complain and think that the creators of games owe them something. No, you shouldn't be complaining, we should be pitying you because you've become too biased towards the "originals", and as a result you automatically shield your eyes from CMI and EMI's appeal. I was sorta sick of this discussion about three years ago, so I'll just say I generally agree with most of Trap's statements. Just for the record. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trapezoid Posted December 31, 2001 Share Posted December 31, 2001 Originally posted by remio I was sorta sick of this discussion about three years ago, so I'll just say I generally agree with most of Trap's statements. Just for the record. What about my Tim Schafer statement? I thought that was probably sacrelige, but I really do think he's got more cool and original ideas stirring in his mind. Even though I like Monkey Island more than his games (except perhaps Grim Fandango), Ron's other works aren't as cool as Tim's. IMO. But yes, I too am sick of the me-no-like-EMI discussion. But I'm a defensive person and I don't get out enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meksilon Posted December 31, 2001 Share Posted December 31, 2001 Originally posted by Trapezoid I too am sick of the me-no-like-EMI discussion. Just like I get sick of me-like-EMI-it-is-Monkey-Island discussion. Can't you see that Trap? =mek= Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trapezoid Posted December 31, 2001 Share Posted December 31, 2001 Maybe so, maybe so. But you can't deny that quite a few people love EMI (and CMI). I don't like it because it's Monkey Island. I like it because it's damn funny. If you don't see its humor it's your problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meksilon Posted December 31, 2001 Share Posted December 31, 2001 Originally posted by Trapezoid But you can't deny that quite a few people love EMI (and CMI). I don't like it because it's Monkey Island. Contradicting yourself? Originally posted by Trapezoid You hate EMI and CMI because they're not made by Ron Gilbert, I love them because they're Monkey Island games. http://www.lucasforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=28990&pagenumber=3 =mek= Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.