Adventure Gamers - Forums

why on earth wouldn’t he go back to a Monkey Island 1 or 2 style game? Everyone would flip their shit and he’d get a million bucks. Maniac Mansion really isn’t at the heart of the nostalgia people have for LucasArts. Weird move.

They might end up getting a million bucks regardless, actually.

Doom - 25 November 2014 06:08 AM

RockNFknRoll - 24 November 2014 04:07 PM

why on earth wouldn’t he go back to a Monkey Island 1 or 2 style game? Everyone would flip their shit and he’d get a million bucks.

I think he is waiting for Monkey Island license to do that. Also he probably can’t afford Steve Purcell and Peter Chan even for a million bucks today. And without them it wouldn’t be the same.

I said Monkey Island STYLE. Not an actual Monkey Island game. Just something in that era’s LucasArts style.

tomimt - 24 November 2014 02:39 AM

orient - 24 November 2014 12:50 AM

It crushes me every time a developer caves in to “fan pressure”, like the whole Mass Effect 3 ending debacle. What kind of TV writer would redo the ending of their TV series because a vocal minority of whiny fans didn’t like it? What type of musician would re-record a song for the same reason? It’s just absurd, but for some reason gamers think they’re entitled to make demands of creative works.

While I do agree with the sentiment, let’s not pretend other mediums of entertainment are any holier about keeping “artistic integrity” in check. TV-scripts, movie scripts and books chnage all the time based on some ones whims. In those cases it’s usually because of the whims of the studio that is bankrolling it. The original script of Interstellar for an example is pretty much a different movie with actual aliens in it.

It’s hard to escape corporate meddling with any type of big budget production, but at the end of the day it’s the studio’s money (or the publisher’s in the case of video games)—the creators have an obligation to those who are writing the paychecks. That’s the reality of big budget entertainment.

What I was referring to is different: outside of delivering a working piece of entertainment, game creators have zero obligation to those who play their games. Consumers who think they’re entitled to some sort of creative input just because they bought a game are delusional. That includes backing a Kickstarter. Unless the creators have explicitly stated that they’re soliciting fan feedback, you have no right to tell them how to make their game. Being a backer is not an investment, it’s a gamble on a creative work. Don’t like the look of it, don’t back it.

Wow. This thread is really depressing.
I don’t post much here but I’m often lurking around and all this talk of Maniac Mansion and Zak McKracken being “lousy games” just blows my mind.

Maniac Mansion is my favorite game of all time.  That’s right.  I love it.  I played it as a kid and go back to it every few years.  It was creepy, funny and captured perfectly the feel of movies like “Return of the Living Dead.”

The verb interface only added to the sense of freedom.  I think MM and Zak hold up perfectly today.

By the way, the NES version of MM, with its incessant music and family friendly cleanup is the worst possible way to play the game.  For those of you whose only exposure to that game was on your NES, then for God’s sake load up the revamped fan version that came a few years ago on your PCs.

I also don’t understand where all this anger and distrust at Ron Gilbert is coming from.  Was it because of “The Cave?”  Give me a break.  That was a solid little game.

Thimbleweed Park is going to be an out of the park homerun for people like me.  This is exactly what I’ve been waiting for and in order for it to work it MUST have this graphical art style.

Just a quick interview round-up in case anyone missed these:

AdventureTreff
Mixnmojo
and of course, AdventureGamers

If there are others, feel free to add them.

orient - 25 November 2014 08:32 AM

What I was referring to is different: outside of delivering a working piece of entertainment, game creators have zero obligation to those who play their games. Consumers who think they’re entitled to some sort of creative input just because they bought a game are delusional. That includes backing a Kickstarter. Unless the creators have explicitly stated that they’re soliciting fan feedback, you have no right to tell them how to make their game. Being a backer is not an investment, it’s a gamble on a creative work. Don’t like the look of it, don’t back it.

Even (or perhaps especially) creators who have a strong artistic vision can benefit from an outside perspective and audience feedback on what works and what doesn’t. Kubrick used test screenings, most authors have editors and readers of early drafts, games go through playtesting, and so on. (The only reason TV shows typically don’t is that the production schedule generally doesn’t allow it.)

So there’s nothing wrong with fans providing early feedback on which parts of a project’s design they like and don’t like, and it might in fact be helpful for the creators if they can learn about strong audience reactions for or against certain aspects before it’s too late to do anything about them. Of course, it’s then up to the creators to interpret that reaction and decide on what (if anything) to do about it, so they’re not just letting the Internet design their game by committee.

The only problem is if fans start to feel entitled to dictate the design. They have to realize that they’re entitled to their opinion, but not to have it implemented. If they don’t like what the creators decide to do, they don’t have to back it or buy it.

I’m pretty sure Ron Gilbert was entirely aware of the frothing reaction to their graphical choice, and did it precisely BECAUSE it would be controversial.  I mean seriously, that reveal trailer was genius.  Starting out zoomed all the way in onto the blackness of the eyes, and slowly pulling out to reveal the chunky pixels in all their glory.  They WANTED to get people talking, and mission accomplished.  I can’t wait to see what they do with this one.