lfnetwork.com mark read register faq members calendar

Thread: Monkey Island 2 Remake
Thread Tools Display Modes
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Old 04-06-2010, 04:50 AM   #161
Haggis
Mojorator
 
Haggis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Rotterdam
Posts: 560
Looks very nice, I must say. Better than the SMI:SE; hopefully all the backgrounds will be this great.

Haggis is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-06-2010, 08:26 AM   #162
ThunderPeel2001
Lovebucket
 
ThunderPeel2001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,768
Wow, that screenshot looks really good (apart from the characters). Nice!!!

ThunderPeel2001 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-06-2010, 08:33 AM   #163
SyntheticGerbil
Pasta Master
 
SyntheticGerbil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Underwater
Posts: 2,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkey Mania View Post
So I guess that was a dude.
Haha, I'm not sure how you figured it wasn't a dude, but I can see exactly what you are saying.
SyntheticGerbil is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-07-2010, 02:44 AM   #164
Laserschwert
 
Laserschwert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Cologne, Germany
Posts: 1,076
Notable contributor 
Next:




Stupid inflated moon. But the rest looks nice

Laserschwert is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-07-2010, 03:25 AM   #165
Monkey Mania
 
Monkey Mania's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Right behind you
Posts: 771
Monkey Mania is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-07-2010, 03:41 AM   #166
Laserschwert
 
Laserschwert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Cologne, Germany
Posts: 1,076
Notable contributor 
Sure, but the shot of Scabb is not a zoomed shot, so that's too big a moon for it. Plus, the original sky doesn't have it.

They did the same with the moon on the docks of Mêlée in the MI1:SE... too big!

Laserschwert is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-07-2010, 05:48 AM   #167
Thrik
Symbolically Compelling
 
Thrik's Avatar
 
Status: Administrator
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 4,202
Hot Topic Starter Forum Veteran LFN Staff Member 
It looks really nice. Ironically enough though, the closer they get to matching the originals the more picky I find myself being tempted to become!

I'm guessing there was a fairly stern 'minimal creative liberty' type order from above this time around.


Thrik is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-07-2010, 06:02 AM   #168
elTee
beatnik
 
elTee's Avatar
 
Status: Super Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Cheltenham, England
Posts: 2,912
The International House of Mojo Staff LFN Staff Member 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thrik View Post
It looks really nice. Ironically enough though, the closer they get to matching the originals the more picky I find myself being tempted to become!
Heh that's exactly how I feel. But it's all much better so far.


LucasTones - LT - elTee
The International House of Mojo - writing long-winded gibberish increasingly infrequently
elTee is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-07-2010, 07:58 AM   #169
Snugglecakes
Junior Member
 
Snugglecakes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Cape Town, South Africa
Posts: 352
Current Game: Mata Hari
Very nice.
Snugglecakes is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-07-2010, 11:23 AM   #170
SyntheticGerbil
Pasta Master
 
SyntheticGerbil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Underwater
Posts: 2,241
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thrik View Post
I'm guessing there was a fairly stern 'minimal creative liberty' type order from above this time around.
It sure is nice, too!
SyntheticGerbil is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-07-2010, 12:35 PM   #171
Monkey Mania
 
Monkey Mania's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Right behind you
Posts: 771
The shading indicates the moon should be on the left of the screen, not behind the weenie hut.
Monkey Mania is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-07-2010, 12:53 PM   #172
Kroms
Moose fell on my head
 
Kroms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 697
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThunderPeel2001 View Post
Wow, that screenshot looks really good (apart from the characters). Nice!!!
Oh come on, the carpenter is fantastic. I'd like a bit more color - the SE edition is grimming everything - but overall he looks great. I think you imagine them being some form of realistic...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Laserschewert
They did the same with the moon on the docks of Mêlée in the MI1:SE... too big!
It's just a design decision that has little bearing on the game itself. It's okay to indulge in something like that. I don't see you complaining that the clouds have become curly!
Kroms is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-07-2010, 01:12 PM   #173
SyntheticGerbil
Pasta Master
 
SyntheticGerbil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Underwater
Posts: 2,241
Really I think sky type things tend to be nitpicking. People love huge dominant moons. I mean look at the grass they drew this time around. You guys remember last time how they copied and pasted the same group of 6 blades over and over for all of the forest scenes?

I'm curious to see if Bart and Fink look okay close up though.
SyntheticGerbil is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-07-2010, 01:56 PM   #174
Scapetti
Junior Member
 
Scapetti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Aberystwyth, Wales
Posts: 273
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monkey Mania View Post
The shading indicates the moon should be on the left of the screen, not behind the weenie hut.
Umm keep in mind that the moon is really far away...

Also keep in mind that lighting does not have to make sense, it just has to be aesthetically pleasing... look at lighting on faces in films.

If you're gona complain about shading then why aren't you complaining about Guybrush's golden glow o_O

And why is everyone complaining about the moon anyway... that's just ridiculous!

TOO MUCH COMPLAINING! XD

Should be more appraisal for things such as the weenie hut finally having a human sized door and the sign being readable
Scapetti is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-07-2010, 03:05 PM   #175
Kroms
Moose fell on my head
 
Kroms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 697
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scapetti View Post
And why is everyone complaining about the moon anyway... that's just ridiculous!

TOO MUCH COMPLAINING! XD

Should be more appraisal for things such as the weenie hut finally having a human sized door and the sign being readable
I'd be shaking your hand if I could.
Kroms is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-07-2010, 04:09 PM   #176
Laserschwert
 
Laserschwert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Cologne, Germany
Posts: 1,076
Notable contributor 
Despite all this nitpicking I'm still sure I'll absolutely love the SE.

Laserschwert is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-07-2010, 07:52 PM   #177
Laserschwert
 
Laserschwert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Cologne, Germany
Posts: 1,076
Notable contributor 
Next:




Interesting choice to move the pillar away from the steps... definitely makes sense.

Laserschwert is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-07-2010, 08:04 PM   #178
Aububuh
Rookie
 
Aububuh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 182
I like it. I never noticed that giant feather pen before, though.

Aububuh is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-07-2010, 08:16 PM   #179
Fealiks
NAMBLA member
 
Fealiks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Britain
Posts: 2,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scapetti View Post
Umm keep in mind that the moon is really far away...

Also keep in mind that lighting does not have to make sense, it just has to be aesthetically pleasing... look at lighting on faces in films.
Monkey Mania's right - the shadows of the rocks indicate that the moon should be further left than it actually is. This doesn't bother me in the least, I'm just defending Monkey Mania's rightness

Also, I'm not sure you got what he meant. The lighting in films can't possibly be wrong unless the film is hand-drawn. He was talking about the fact that the shadows don't correspond properly to the light source rather than the aesthetics of the lighting in general.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Laserschwert View Post
Next:




Interesting choice to move the pillar away from the steps... definitely makes sense.
This looks awesome! Also, I never noticed that the pillar was directly in front of the steps in the original game... that's interesting. So, so far, MI2:SE has fixed: the weenie hut's door being too small, the weenie hut sign having a weird blob on it instead of actual words and the pillar in the inn being placed illogically. Things are really looking up from MI1:SE! I never expected they'd actually improve on the original art in these ways.

The only picture where I can categorically say that I prefer the Special Edition art, though (which is a HUGE compliment), is the swamp scene. The lighting on that scene is fantastic.


Also, Kroms, you can rejoice in the fully-saturated Alligator & bowl in the latest screenshot
Fealiks is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-07-2010, 08:59 PM   #180
MusiclyInspired
Junior Member
 
MusiclyInspired's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 304
Current Game: Wallace & Grommit
Regarding the large moon, I can't remember where I heard this but isn't there some kind of lensing effect that can happen to the sky near a body of water where it makes the moon or sun look larger than it actually is? I'm sure this is scientifically correct...might only apply to being out at sea, though, rather than on land now that I think of it.


"Booyah! Look out, LeChuck! Here comes Guybrush Threepwood's glowing sword of hot monkey vengeance!"
-Guybrush Threepwood, Tales of Monkey Island
MusiclyInspired is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-08-2010, 12:18 AM   #181
Aububuh
Rookie
 
Aububuh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 182
I just noticed that the chairs look more blocky and angular in the special edition than they do in the original.

Aububuh is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-08-2010, 12:34 AM   #182
Fealiks
NAMBLA member
 
Fealiks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Britain
Posts: 2,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by MusiclyInspired View Post
Regarding the large moon, I can't remember where I heard this but isn't there some kind of lensing effect that can happen to the sky near a body of water where it makes the moon or sun look larger than it actually is? I'm sure this is scientifically correct...might only apply to being out at sea, though, rather than on land now that I think of it.
That rings a bell.
Fealiks is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-08-2010, 01:32 AM   #183
Scapetti
Junior Member
 
Scapetti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Aberystwyth, Wales
Posts: 273
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fealiks View Post
Monkey Mania's right - the shadows of the rocks indicate that the moon should be further left than it actually is. This doesn't bother me in the least, I'm just defending Monkey Mania's rightness
Not really sure how to explain but, knowing that the moon is... really really far away (not on the planet). If the angle was directed more towards the right, the moon would seem to be a lot further to the left. It wouldn't stay in the static position behind the hut.

Considering the background as a whole is a static image, as the scene scrolls when Guybrush moves, the moon will always be directly behind the hut, and so the moon will be in the wrong position 99% of the time. Blah blah blah, can't explain... (skip)

But anyway, it makes sense as long as the lighting is on the left of the rocks when the moon is on the left. If you look at the rocks in the foreground, directly in front of the moon, you can see that the lighting is more or less on the top of the rocks as opposed to the left or right. And I would presume on the other side of the moon, the lighting would be on the right of rocks etc.

Maybe you think it's wrong because of the shape of the rocks in front of the moon? As they are all at an angle which could give the misconception that the light source is further to the left.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fealiks View Post
Also, I'm not sure you got what he meant. The lighting in films can't possibly be wrong unless the film is hand-drawn. He was talking about the fact that the shadows don't correspond properly to the light source rather than the aesthetics of the lighting in general.
I know what he meant. I was basically saying, there's no need to complain about whether it makes sense, it's about aesthetics; it looks better that way. Otherwise (presuming it's wrong which I still don't think it is) the rocks would lack shine and therefore also lack definition.

And my point about lighting in films... since when have films been accurate to the light source? Have you not heard of studio lighting? Three-point lighting? And you can hand draw films now?
Scapetti is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-08-2010, 02:45 AM   #184
Snugglecakes
Junior Member
 
Snugglecakes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Cape Town, South Africa
Posts: 352
Current Game: Mata Hari
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aububuh View Post
I just noticed that the chairs look more blocky and angular in the special edition than they do in the original.
This is a strange one I've noticed too. It's not "blocky" but there are some sharp angles in the technique they've used to paint these. First SE was the same. The original backgrounds, while blocky due to resolution, had smooth objects everywhere. The new ones do look a bit angular sometimes. This must be really difficult to do, but yes indeed I'd say there is probably more "detail" in the original than in the SE, although this is probably due to the original being so low res that your brain fills in the gaps. Look at the chair on the left for example, the original version looks richer and more detailed somehow, while the SE version is just a sort of blurry blob. There's a sort of deep texture to the original that is missing here. Am I the only one who thinks there's a bit too much light in the SE? The original seems darker, literally, and looking at the new box art, figuratively too.
Snugglecakes is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-08-2010, 05:19 AM   #185
SurplusGamer
aka 'MrCoulomb'
 
SurplusGamer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 239
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snugglecakes View Post
This is a strange one I've noticed too. It's not "blocky" but there are some sharp angles in the technique they've used to paint these. First SE was the same. The original backgrounds, while blocky due to resolution, had smooth objects everywhere. The new ones do look a bit angular sometimes. This must be really difficult to do, but yes indeed I'd say there is probably more "detail" in the original than in the SE, although this is probably due to the original being so low res that your brain fills in the gaps. Look at the chair on the left for example, the original version looks richer and more detailed somehow, while the SE version is just a sort of blurry blob.
Well, first I'd say that the more angular thing is just a stylistic decision that they've gone with. A foible of the artists involved - you see it a lot in Lucidity, for example. I'm not against that - after all they are taking pains to be faithful to the source material where possible, so I can't really fault them for having their own artistic stamp on it somewhere - especially when it's really quite subtle.

As for the detail, I think you're right in that part of the implied detail is in the brain filling in details that weren't there - I actually think the character designers have done a pretty good job in capturing the essence of characters who didn't have many pixels in their faces when originally created.

As for the environments, I think it's not just the brain filling in details, it's the pixellation itself. Because these were originally painted, then scanned then downscaled to 256 colours and low-res, there's a natural 'grit' in the way it looks. I'd wager that the chair in the original painting of that room looks a lot like in the upscaled version, but because it's got so much fewer pixels and colours, and so the colours differ more from one pixel to the next it lends it a grainy-ness that was never really present before except perhaps a slightly in the texture of the paper. I can sort of understand why they wouldn't bother going back in and simulating grainy-ness that was never really supposed to be there in the first place...

Finally, I'm not convinced it was anything to do with grit and grainy-ness that made the art in MI2 pleasing. To me it was always the colour palette used and just the composition of the scenes, and that mainly has been adhered to very closely. I can load up one of those new shots and instantly recognise what I'm seeing even though some of the details, as some have pointed out, have changed quite a lot.
SurplusGamer is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-08-2010, 08:57 AM   #186
ThunderPeel2001
Lovebucket
 
ThunderPeel2001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,768
It looks too "smooth" and "clean" to me... (sorry I've not read anyone else's comments, that's just how the images look to me). I'm sure the original artwork looked the same, but being scanned and shrunk probably "dirtied" it up a bit.

ThunderPeel2001 is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-08-2010, 09:29 AM   #187
Thrik
Symbolically Compelling
 
Thrik's Avatar
 
Status: Administrator
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 4,202
Hot Topic Starter Forum Veteran LFN Staff Member 
It might be some of the finer details (noise, subtle strokes, etc) aren't very visible in such small, compressed pictures. The art on the official site and in the earlier HD screenshots looked warmer and less smooth.


Thrik is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-08-2010, 10:03 AM   #188
Fealiks
NAMBLA member
 
Fealiks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Britain
Posts: 2,202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scapetti View Post
Not really sure how to explain but, knowing that the moon is... really really far away (not on the planet). If the angle was directed more towards the right, the moon would seem to be a lot further to the left. It wouldn't stay in the static position behind the hut.

Considering the background as a whole is a static image, as the scene scrolls when Guybrush moves, the moon will always be directly behind the hut, and so the moon will be in the wrong position 99% of the time. Blah blah blah, can't explain... (skip)

But anyway, it makes sense as long as the lighting is on the left of the rocks when the moon is on the left. If you look at the rocks in the foreground, directly in front of the moon, you can see that the lighting is more or less on the top of the rocks as opposed to the left or right. And I would presume on the other side of the moon, the lighting would be on the right of rocks etc.

Maybe you think it's wrong because of the shape of the rocks in front of the moon? As they are all at an angle which could give the misconception that the light source is further to the left.



I know what he meant. I was basically saying, there's no need to complain about whether it makes sense, it's about aesthetics; it looks better that way. Otherwise (presuming it's wrong which I still don't think it is) the rocks would lack shine and therefore also lack definition.

And my point about lighting in films... since when have films been accurate to the light source? Have you not heard of studio lighting? Three-point lighting? And you can hand draw films now?
I think you're still misunderstanding what Monkey Mania and I meant (I assume we both mean the same thing ).

What I'm saying is that the shadows cast by the rocks are physically incorrect according to the light source. I'll draw a picture in paint to show you what I mean.



The green lines show the shadow that's been drawn, and the red lines show the direction of the light and the shadow that should have been drawn. It's not a big deal, but the shadows are behaving as if the moon is way further left than it is.

Also, it's impossible for shadows to defy a light source in film because the shadows are actually being cast by real, physical lights... how can shadows in real life point in the wrong direction? I think I'm misunderstanding your point some how And I meant hand-drawn films as in animated ones.

Anyway, the point is, the most aesthetically pleasing lighting will always be correct. If a shadow or reflection is incongruous with its light source, our brains will pick it up subconsciously and find something off-putting about the image.
Fealiks is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-08-2010, 11:36 AM   #189
MusiclyInspired
Junior Member
 
MusiclyInspired's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Posts: 304
Current Game: Wallace & Grommit
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThunderPeel2001 View Post
It looks too "smooth" and "clean" to me... (sorry I've not read anyone else's comments, that's just how the images look to me). I'm sure the original artwork looked the same, but being scanned and shrunk probably "dirtied" it up a bit.
Not to mention the palette being lowered to 8-bit 256 colours.


"Booyah! Look out, LeChuck! Here comes Guybrush Threepwood's glowing sword of hot monkey vengeance!"
-Guybrush Threepwood, Tales of Monkey Island
MusiclyInspired is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-08-2010, 01:07 PM   #190
Sk-F
Rookie
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 34
Yeah I think exactly the same. Monkey 2 backgrounds had that dirty, grainy filter on them that made the game look dark, pretty and "magical" in a sense; like an old movie, that is. What I'm seeing in the SE, despite making a great revamp, is too clean and luminous (even lifeless I'd say). Most ppl find the hotel background pleasing, but I personally dislike it the most: the overall dim red light is too bright and doesn't give the impression of the old rat-infested hole that was before. It lacks personality; you agree?

Picky note of the day: Just realized the carpet isn't on the ground but floating now! A new means of transport apart from barrels and coffins, maybe?

Last edited by Sk-F; 04-08-2010 at 01:17 PM.
Sk-F is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-08-2010, 02:32 PM   #191
Kroms
Moose fell on my head
 
Kroms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 697
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sk-F View Post
It lacks personality; you agree?
I think you mean it lacks nostalgia.

Quote:
Picky note of the day: Just realized the carpet isn't on the ground but floating now! A new means of transport apart from barrels and coffins, maybe?
Looks close enough to the original.
Kroms is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-08-2010, 04:30 PM   #192
Thrik
Symbolically Compelling
 
Thrik's Avatar
 
Status: Administrator
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Nottingham, UK
Posts: 4,202
Hot Topic Starter Forum Veteran LFN Staff Member 
Haha, the pickiness level in this thread is getting pretty extreme. Everything else aside, the faithfullness of the background art is extremely tight and goes well beyond any remake of anything I've ever seen.


Thrik is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-08-2010, 04:58 PM   #193
Kroms
Moose fell on my head
 
Kroms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 697
Yeah. I try to stop myself from getting into these threads, but can't help it. I get too angry with purist nitpickers to not post. Remi was right: Monkey fans are Trekkies. It's infuriating to deal with.

It's not like the classic version is going away, guys, so chill.
Kroms is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-08-2010, 05:20 PM   #194
Scapetti
Junior Member
 
Scapetti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Aberystwyth, Wales
Posts: 273
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fealiks View Post
It's not a big deal, but the shadows are behaving as if the moon is way further left than it is.


It would appear to me that the rocks are on the beach below the mound of grass. In which case the moonlight could easily shine over the rocks, onto the grass which you state should be shadowed.

I haven't drawn every possibility of the moonlight being able to creep through (which it does through reflection and diffraction etc.) but my main indication is that the light can shine over the rocks and is only more shadowed on the right because of the much taller weenie hut.

The orange lines are more suggestive of what you think. The green lines however, show how the light can easily go over the top of the rocks as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fealiks View Post
Also, it's impossible for shadows to defy a light source in film because the shadows are actually being cast by real, physical lights... how can shadows in real life point in the wrong direction?


This is all I really mean... lights off camera. If you look up three-point lighting you will understand a little better.
Scapetti is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-08-2010, 05:56 PM   #195
Giant Graffiti
Custom User Title
 
Giant Graffiti's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 828
I don't understand. How does the light coming from the moon have any bearing on the game at all?
Giant Graffiti is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-08-2010, 06:03 PM   #196
Sk-F
Rookie
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kroms View Post
Yeah. I try to stop myself from getting into these threads, but can't help it. I get too angry with purist nitpickers to not post. Remi was right: Monkey fans are Trekkies. It's infuriating to deal with.

It's not like the classic version is going away, guys, so chill.
Ey Kroms no need to get angry! It's a kind of pastime, u know, like "what could we possibly complain about?" Kind of lame, but good to keep ppl posting, nonetheless. After all, we all will be buying it the second it's released!

PS: LOL @ Moon discussion.
Sk-F is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-08-2010, 06:06 PM   #197
Scapetti
Junior Member
 
Scapetti's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Aberystwyth, Wales
Posts: 273
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gιygαs View Post
I don't understand. How does the light coming from the moon have any bearing on the game at all?
Aww man, that's what I was saying in the first place D: Actually pointless nitpicking, I'll quote myself and not speak of it again...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scapetti View Post
why is everyone complaining about the moon anyway... that's just ridiculous!
Scapetti is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-08-2010, 06:30 PM   #198
elTee
beatnik
 
elTee's Avatar
 
Status: Super Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Cheltenham, England
Posts: 2,912
The International House of Mojo Staff LFN Staff Member 
I don't particularly like this new moon either (purely for being a weird and unnecessary addition, that actually adds nothing) but some of you have possibly lost your minds here... it's not a big deal ;


LucasTones - LT - elTee
The International House of Mojo - writing long-winded gibberish increasingly infrequently
elTee is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-08-2010, 07:21 PM   #199
Snugglecakes
Junior Member
 
Snugglecakes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Cape Town, South Africa
Posts: 352
Current Game: Mata Hari
I love this place.
Snugglecakes is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Old 04-08-2010, 10:05 PM   #200
Aububuh
Rookie
 
Aububuh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 182
I was comparing Purcell's concept art for Wally's house with the SE version, and the SE actually seems a bit darker and grittier. I just thought I'd point that out.

*EDIT * Oh, you haven't posted the image here yet. Okay then.



Last edited by Aububuh; 04-08-2010 at 10:35 PM.
Aububuh is offline   you may: quote & reply,
Post a new thread. Add a reply to this thread. Indicate all threads in this forum as read. Subscribe to this forum. RSS feed: this forum RSS feed: all forums
Go Back   LucasForums > Network > Mixnmojo.com > Mojo Discussion Forums > General Discussion > Monkey Island 2 Remake

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:30 AM.


LFNetwork, LLC ©2002-2011 - All rights reserved.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.