Will we get a new game from Ron Gilbert and Team in near future?

Plus some extra. Otherwise it isn’t called an investment but a triple-F free loan. Quadruple-F loan? Anyway: family, friends & fools who are willing to lend you some money for free.

That’s because of the 7th law of thermodynamics, which states that the appreciation of graphics is a constant equal to the product of the graphics’ dimension and the players intellect.

1 Like

I just remembered that Alone In The Dark was release in 1992. Can we blame that one for the rise of 3D Adventure games? It seems unlikely that there is anything even older than that, or is there?

I think Lara Croft is the real culprit of the 3D craze. Sex sells. Don’t get me wrong: it is a great game, but since then, almost noone looked back.

More historically accurate: Myst and Doom were huge early succeses of 3D. When CD-Rom came around the year after, diskspace was no issue any longer, which opened up the gates for 3D in any genre. Including the wonderful tomb raider and Grimm Fandango

1 Like

3D games are actually now to the point where they can combine a 2D look with a 3D environment (like the South Park RPGs), and I think that kind of a workflow would be awesome for adventure games.

Something like Escape from Monkey Island, but with Bill Tiller’s lovely hand-drawn art from Curse of Monkey Isla d would be awesome. You’d have the enhanced sense of exploration that a 3D environment gives you, but it would look much more charming with the hand drawn art.

Ghost Pirates of Vooju Island by Bill Tiller himself looks somehow as if 2D drawings were combined with 3D graphics for the backgrounds.

I agree with you that 2D would look more charming. And, it is a nice compromise to combine it with 3D graphics - taking advantage of smoother and more realistic animations. Though, it’s nonetheless not easy to make 3D animations look charming.

Hmmm…

very interesting

1 Like

Youtube did mention other Monkey Island 3D Projects too when watching this.

Ugh, no. “Bad” 3D didn’t go over well even when it was new and cutting-edge. Crude 3D tends to lose the visual charm that even 16-color 2D art had, as the simplistic models impose too many limitations on the art. Plus, modeling in 3D is inherently more complicated than drawing in 2D. You benefit from not having to draw lots of discrete frames, but the model is more complicated to make in the first place, and posing the model is like posing a mannequin using only one hand and with one eye closed.

1992 cutting-edge 3D

1992 cutting-edge 2D

I don´t know guys, I think one of those has aged significantly better than the other…

5 Likes

Which one? :grimacing:

2 Likes

Honestly, and jokes apart, between the two I like more the first one (Alone in The Dark).
Despite the character being realized with a extremely low number of poligons (or maybe there are many things I’ve still got to learn about women’s bodies), their shapes, their colors are really good.
Not to mention how the “Low Poly” style is spreading around, in graphics, video and games nowadays.
The art in the second image, which I didn’t recognize, seems to belong to a manneristic style of drawing with pixels, common in many platform games of the early nineties, that I never liked too much.
Gary Winnick, Mark Ferrari and more recently Octavi Navarro have a different style and are much better to me. It is not that pixels are absolutely better at aging than 3D or viceversa.

1 Like

First one is Alone In The Dark second is Super Castlevania IV.
Well, personally I don´t see any nostalgic charm in the early 3D, not the way I see it in the 2D pixel graphics from around the same time.

Well, I actually see a slight charm in such old 3D graphics from a technological point of view. Moreover, it was interesting for racing games and shooters back then.
Though, when it comes to adventure games, such graphics were definitely not on a par with the graphics from the SCUMM games at that time. Adventure games take great advantage of detailed graphics.

I just played Star Fox on the SNES Mini (I didn´t have that back in the day) and I have absolutly no idea what that is that I´m shooting.

Yeah, the screen resolutions were low back then. But, if you think about how revolutionary 3D graphics were, it’s understandable that a lot of people appreciated those games back then. Nonetheless, I admit that most of the 3D games were just crappy back then.

Oh, come on, you make an example of 1992 cutting-edge 2D and cite Castelvania instead of this:

image

… or this?

image

5 Likes

Yes.

Also it seems that I´ve read a certain username on here often enough that now that sentence seems wrong somehow…:open_mouth:

What is the second one?