Gamers are the most entitled consumer group I've ever seen. It's astounding. Someone wants to create something, and there's just so much hate and negativity on something that people didn't even pay for. I've seen it on HN also. Someone creates a thing, and then people pour out of the woodwork to lump horrible criticism. No one is asking for blind praise for what they create, but surely there's a middle ground between…
Because unmoderated internet comment sections on non-gaming topics are such wholesome and positive places?
I'm not sure if it's even an exclusively nostalgia thing. Over the past few years I've seen a lot of complaining around art style changes. Notably the Civ V -> Civ VI art style change pissed a lot of people off. Personally I loved the game, but a lot of series veterans didn't even bother to try it.
In the other thread about this, someone brought up the colloquially named "Zelda Effect". It is most evident when reviewing Wind Waker, which used cartoony cell-shaded graphics: contemporary comments featured quite a lot of vitriol over that decision, but the game is now fondly remembered as one of the best entrants in the series.
I don't think that's exactly true.
Nintendo did give people what they wanted with Twilight Princess.
Both of those games had around 9.5 - 9.6 ratings, and the realistic Twilight Princess was the best selling Zelda until Breath of the Wild came out.
I think a very loud minority likes Wind Waker, but sales show something a bit different.
Gamers are the most entitled consumer group I've ever seen. It's astounding. Someone wants to create something, and there's just so much hate and negativity on something that people didn't even pay for. I've seen it on HN also. Someone creates a thing, and then people pour out of the woodwork to lump horrible criticism. No one is asking for blind praise for what they create, but surely there's a middle ground between…
That is what was going through my mind while reading it. Entitled brats. They are a bunch of entitled brats.
You can imagine a bunch of nasty teenagers posting stuff like that, but fun fact: Most MI fans are likely to be over 30. (Many over 40)
I don't understand the outrage at this art style. Granted, I've never played any of the Monkey Island games, and have no emotional attachment to the content. To me, the art style seems very similar to a Cartoon Network cartoon, and that may have broad appeal to kids today. Like I kind of understand why people are upset: this thing you loved 32 years ago is being vandalized in your eyes. However, you're really old now…
I'm not sure if it's even an exclusively nostalgia thing. Over the past few years I've seen a lot of complaining around art style changes. Notably the Civ V -> Civ VI art style change pissed a lot of people off. Personally I loved the game, but a lot of series veterans didn't even bother to try it.
I loved the art direction, but can't stand the micromanagement. Every time I look at it, I want to play it again, but I just don't like the city districts thing. It's too hard to keep my happiness up.
Gamers are the most entitled consumer group I've ever seen. It's astounding. Someone wants to create something, and there's just so much hate and negativity on something that people didn't even pay for. I've seen it on HN also. Someone creates a thing, and then people pour out of the woodwork to lump horrible criticism. No one is asking for blind praise for what they create, but surely there's a middle ground between…
I feel bad for him, but really the problem is he’s made a directorial mistake and it looks like the only point it’s gonna click is when the sales numbers hit. Will he realize his mistaken then or will he continue to blame the customer?
I could not agree more. A lot of game producers get this arrogant approach of: "Making games would be such awesome job if it wasn't for those pesky gamers". The question here is: "Is this a really innovative graphical design that will get praised by future generations but is misunderstood now" or "Is this just a bad decision that the creator is unwilling to own". I tend to think it's the latter. Ultimately the sales…
I'm sorry, but getting upset about a sequel you didn't want is an immature and entitled attitude. This is a sequel from the original creator, not some corporate cash-in, what else do you want? Ron Gilbert is not a mind reader, he can't deliver on 1000 contradictory fan expectations. This is the game they wanted to make, that's their right, if you don't like it just move along.
I could give two shits about the art style. I just can't stand the worry that he's going to grimdark the storyline. It is important to me that guybrush and elaine and the gang don't go that way.
I don't imagine it's that kind of game (the series thus far hasn't been), but at the same time I like the idea that we're seeing a mature Guybrush reflecting on his adventures and mistakes in life. At this point I don't really mind what direction they take at the end of the day. I love the characters, and just want to see where they end up. I do hope we get another game where they play with Claymation style animation…
the crux of my worry is this: the ending of MI2 compared to the ending of a non-gilbert MI3, and I love MI3.
I played the original ones and I would have preferred a pixel art closer to the original. That being said, I subscribe what Ron and many people here said. If you don't like it, don't buy it. There's no need for all vitriol. I will buy it the same, since for me Monkey Island was always about much more than the graphics. On top of everything, this is the actual _creator_ of all the games and stories' vision. It's not l…
Pixel art like which of the originals? Monkey Island 3 and 4 had nothing remotely resembling pixel art and were still beautiful.
They were quite pretty but Ron Gilbert wasn't involved in MI3 and 4. That's why this is a bit like a branch off MI2
Gamers are the most entitled consumer group I've ever seen. It's astounding. Someone wants to create something, and there's just so much hate and negativity on something that people didn't even pay for. I've seen it on HN also. Someone creates a thing, and then people pour out of the woodwork to lump horrible criticism. No one is asking for blind praise for what they create, but surely there's a middle ground between…
Most hours gamed are by kids, of course they're gonna be nasty, have you ever seen an unsupervised kid without threat of physical violence for being shitty to other kids?
The fact that people care about an insult or attack in a comment section of a random site they read about a game is what surprises me. What lives some people must live for this to be something that even registers as an annoyance.
Gamers are the most entitled consumer group I've ever seen. It's astounding. Someone wants to create something, and there's just so much hate and negativity on something that people didn't even pay for. I've seen it on HN also. Someone creates a thing, and then people pour out of the woodwork to lump horrible criticism. No one is asking for blind praise for what they create, but surely there's a middle ground between…
Well, they're gamers. Not that anything's wrong with playing video games, but I wouldn't be surprised if they're on average less mature than the general population.
I think I'll play through the first two parts with my children and if they're interesed I'll get this one as well.