Yes, he would. He stated it, somewhere, I can’t find where. @Nor_Treblig???
Hmmmmm… Again I have a Deja Vu. Somewhere I wrote this, but I can’t find where @Nor_Treblig???111 . I’ll rewrite my opinion:
I don’t think the story in MI1 is more sophisticated. It is more thrilling indeed. It is a classical plot. You know the protagonist, he grows up, falls in love, meets an opponent, his love is in trouble, he saves the world, happy end. It is a stand-alone title. The story in MI2 is definitely more sophisticated, thus more difficult to follow, the objectives are less clear and maybe less thrilling. And the finale, according to many, is meh. Maybe also because while MI1 is a stand alone title, MI2 is clearly a second chapter of a (unfinished) trilogy. This is a plus to MI1, to me.
The gags in MI1 are great, and so in MI2. Deuce. The puzzles… I must admit that puzzles in MI2 are far better, and the whole architecture of the game is better and more mature.
Music: unforgivable the MI1 music because it’s the first game. But the music in MI2 is much more complex, and iMuse is a total experience.
About the graphics, again, I do agree. MI1 was a stunning Mark Ferrari work. The art was real pixel art. And that is why it fits so cleverly the technical limitations.
The art in MI2 isn’t pixel art. It is hand-drawn art. That was the future. But at present times, it was too much ahead of the times, and it aged badly. Hand drawn scanned art presented in 320x200 shows all its limitations. Playing MI2 makes you desire continuously a better resolution.
My conclusion? MI2 il much more colorful, polished, full of music, more structurated, more fancy, with a much bigger production value and so unsurprisingly is considered better than MI1. But, in my opinion, is only one of the first (improvable) attempts of 90s adventure games. MI1, conversely, is the last and maximum expression of 80s adventure games.
Anyway, I found this thread where I made my personal standings: