Hahaha. Sure. It’s just that I went directly from the C=64 to Windows 95 – with nary a computer in between. I have very fond memories which are compartmentalized to that period.
I would have liked the MM style, too, but I appreciate the level of detail in Mark’s artworks. Also, I think that the music and the voice-overs would have sounded too sophisticated for the MM style.
I agree. I remember playing adventures with a similar graphics style as a child, and they all had a certain kind of simplicity about them. Combining that with voice-overs and full background music might have resulted in a somewhat jarring experience.
I think this overall change in style is reflected well in how Ron changed the way he talked about the game. He went from “like … finding an undiscovered LucasArts adventure game” to “how you remembered [classic adventure] games, not how they actually were.” To me, that’s exactly the point: Unless you compare the two styles side-by-side, the final style still rings true to your memories of those games. At the same time, it is a much richer experience.
I’m on mobile, now, and it’s not easy to find and copy the first wireframes drawn by Mark, but for example I like more his first backgrounds for the circus.
I think that the reason is that it has less shades of colors, which to me is a more pure form of pixel art. Fewer colors give me the impression that they were hand-picked and that everything was painted pixel-by-pixel.
Only a few white pixels in the left upper corners turn something that is esentially black squares into something that feels tangible, thick, round and having light reflect in it.
I agree wholeheartedly. Not to take away anything from Mr. Ferrari’s final art, it is indeed very beautiful; but there is something to be said about the art of crafting beautiful imagery that conveys depth, meaning, emotion, and atmosphere with the subtle and clever use of a very limited palette on big chunky pixels.