Kjølen Posted December 30, 2001 Share Posted December 30, 2001 They should try and make MI5 with Shreky graphics. Shrek was a good graphiced movie. Not blocky like MI4 or Super Mario 64. Who would like Shrek-like graphics on MI5? *Insert poll here* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brief Posted December 31, 2001 Share Posted December 31, 2001 Shrek was much more expensive to produce than any of the Monkey Island games (and probably more than all four games combined, but I don't have any figures to back this claim up), so it would be very difficult for LucasArts to make the graphics look as good as a movie. Besides, the game's graphics needs to be rendered in real-time. Graphics of the quality of something like the Shrek movie cannot be rendered in real-time even with a very powerful PC... This is why the cutscenes in EMI look so much better than the graphics while we are playing the game--those prettier looking stuff are pre-rendered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haggis Posted December 31, 2001 Share Posted December 31, 2001 Originally posted by Guybrush M-T Not blocky like MI4 or Super Mario 64. Super Mario 64 is not blocky! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kjølen Posted December 31, 2001 Author Share Posted December 31, 2001 Originally posted by Haggis Super Mario 64 is not blocky! *Quote from MI4, Dainty Lady* Oh yes it is! [/daintylady] Have you ever seen Mario's fingers at the end when he talks to Peach? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haggis Posted January 1, 2002 Share Posted January 1, 2002 Details. Most of the time, you don't see Mario's fingers. His hands are just fists. When he walks, climbs, swims... er, not then, but almost always. But anyway, I love Mario. Have you ever played DK 64? Now that looks good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshi Posted January 1, 2002 Share Posted January 1, 2002 i think everyone seems to be missing the big picture here, about half the worlds population (exagerrated, but worth it) wants to see our good friend guybrush in 2D agi=ain, like in COMI. Shrek (allthough a brill movie) would be going a bit too far when it comes to monkey island. don't you agree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kjølen Posted January 6, 2002 Author Share Posted January 6, 2002 Originally posted by Neil Joshi i think everyone seems to be missing the big picture here, about half the worlds population (exagerrated, but worth it) wants to see our good friend guybrush in 2D agi=ain, like in COMI. Shrek (allthough a brill movie) would be going a bit too far when it comes to monkey island. don't you agree Too far? What do you mean? LucasArts hasn't really gone up in graphics they just stayed with second best until the new stuff came out, then they get the new second best. Anyways, LucasArts is a billionare company (Hypnotises you with all the zeros, over $10,000,000,000) so they could afford better graphics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurrayDude Posted January 6, 2002 Share Posted January 6, 2002 But they wouldn't blow all that money on 1 comp. game. They are guarenteed to not make a profit if they do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kjølen Posted January 6, 2002 Author Share Posted January 6, 2002 Originally posted by MurrayDude But they wouldn't blow all that money on 1 comp. game. They are guarenteed to not make a profit if they do that. True, but it won't cost them even 10% of all there money! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joshi Posted January 6, 2002 Share Posted January 6, 2002 even still (is that right?) i'd prefer a 2d monkey island 5, i know lots'a people agree with me, even if some don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brief Posted January 7, 2002 Share Posted January 7, 2002 Originally posted by Guybrush M-T Too far? What do you mean? LucasArts hasn't really gone up in graphics they just stayed with second best until the new stuff came out, then they get the new second best. Anyways, LucasArts is a billionare company (Hypnotises you with all the zeros, over $10,000,000,000) so they could afford better graphics. You've missed two very important points. Allow me to reiterate: Many MI fans prefer the 2D look for MI games, rather than 3D games, making this entire arguement moot. What LucasArts can afford to make is besides the point, since the bottleneck is not on their side, but on the side of the consumers' computers. Sure, they could make their games with as much detail as an animated movie, but very few people have computers that are powerful enough to render those 3D images in a timely fashion. That means if they do make a game with such good graphics, virtually everyone will need to spend thousands of dollars upgrading their computers, or else they won't be able to play the game. That was the point of my first post in this thread. "Remember kids, there are no stupid questions, only stupid people." --Mr. Garrison, South Park Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kjølen Posted January 8, 2002 Author Share Posted January 8, 2002 Originally posted by brief ... but very few people have computers that are powerful enough to render those 3D images in a timely fashion. That means if they do make a game with such good graphics, virtually everyone will need to spend thousands of dollars upgrading their computers, or else they won't be able to play the game. Not really...1 of my friends has a really bad computer and he could play Shrek on it just fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brief Posted January 8, 2002 Share Posted January 8, 2002 Originally posted by Guybrush M-T Not really...1 of my friends has a really bad computer and he could play Shrek on it just fine. What, Shrek, the DVD movie? That is pre-rendered. When they produced the movie, they had HUNDREDS OF SUPER COMPUTERS RUNNING FOR MONTHS ON END to produce the realistic 3D graphics for the movie. The rendered results are then transferred onto film/media format, so that the computers don't have to render those 3D motions again. Am I getting through at all? Is this too complicated a concept for you to grasp? Hello? McFly? Am I just not explaining it in a simple enough manner? Somebody else want to try to paraphrase what I said in a more simple manner? Or, if you're saying that there's a Shrek computer game with graphics that looks just as good as the movie... then I must say this--what have you been smoking, and where can I get some? "Why must I be surrounded by friggin' idiots?" --Dr. Evil, Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Metallus Posted January 9, 2002 Share Posted January 9, 2002 I liek movies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kjølen Posted January 9, 2002 Author Share Posted January 9, 2002 Originally posted by brief Hello? McFly? Well, someones been watching Back to the Future lately:rolleyes:. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.