Rayman 1

[Shrooblord]

I'm all for new games, don't get me wrong. But if you know the Binding of Isaac: Rebirth, you know how remakes are done right. Recreating an old gem to make it live up to its intented potential sounds A-OK to me!

[Adsolution]

Yeah but what's the point in a remake, you can play the same game on your PC for free, just find some abandoneare.

In what way does that nullify or even relate to the point of a remake?

A brand new 3-D game would be infinately preferable, rather than them wasting that time making a game's graphics look better...

Diplomacy in action; let me follow suite:

A modern recreation of a beautiful, timeless adventure previously hindered so much by the technology of the time that its true artistic potential hadn't even begun to shine through would be infinitely preferable to Ubisoft making a cheesy slapstick Origins-styled 3D platformer.

-These are not my actual thoughts.

If you want beter music, wouldn't a soundtrack do? Nintendo have been ding that, like in SSB4 for Wii U there's tons of remixes and stuff of old and classic tracks.

Yeah, but listening to the music by itself and then playing the game with the music all programmed in to cut, loop, transition and play at the appropriate times accommodating the gameplay is very different.

[technology4617]

Yeah but what's the point in a remake, you can play the same game on your PC for free, just find some abandoneare.

What? A PC port in no way substitutes a remake of a 2D game, as it's not exactly possible to increase the spatial resolution of a 32x32 pre-rendered sprite; it's not like an in-game 3D character model that doesn't have any such constraint associated with it.

Besides, the likelihood as to whether a PC port of an older console game is going to be any good is pretty much up for grabs. Rayman is no exception, the technical limitations of MS-DOS causing the PC port of the game to be probably the weakest of the three CD versions. Compatibility is iffy to an even greater extent as well, those from the W95/98 library being particularly difficult to get up and running properly, if you're able to get them up and running at all (and even though Rayman isn't in that category, no one really knew a bug-free DOSBox configuration until emshomar came along).

Earthworm Jim's also a fantastic example of the above, the DOS version being absolutely horrendous from what I've heard, and the Windows port of SE being impossible to play on modern systems without having a constant framerate of sub-20 FPS (that is, if you can get the sound working first).

A brand new 3-D game would be infinately preferable, rather than them wasting that time making a game's graphics look better...

This is entirely your view, and no matter how "infinitely preferable" you may find the creation of an entirely new title to be, it still only speaks for some of the people here; note that no one here has stated that it would be objectively preferable to a new game. I myself would actually be more excited for the remake given that I'm particularly attached to this game, to the point where I'd most likely shit my pants if was announced (albeit figuratively).

If you want beter music, wouldn't a soundtrack do? Nintendo have been ding that, like in SSB4 for Wii U there's tons of remixes and stuff of old and classic tracks.

That's a very, very small factor of why people want a remake for the game; it's just another element that could be improved should there be one, but it's far from the main attraction.

[Adsolution]

Even Optimum isn't perfect, the sound effects are delayed, though that's moreso a result of DosBox's emulation itself.

[Ambidextroid]

Yeah but what's the point in a remake, you can play the same game on your PC for free, just find some abandoneare.

In what way does that nullify or even relate to the point of a remake?

You're pulling it out of context, this point is in conjunction with the second point. Making a new game would be preferable, because a HD remake is just the same game we have available but made to look and sound fancier. It might make the experiene of playing the game more enjoyable, but it's not as fun as a brand new game.

A brand new 3-D game would be infinately preferable, rather than them wasting that time making a game's graphics look better...

Diplomacy in action; let me follow suite:

A modern recreation of a beautiful, timeless adventure previously hindered so much by the technology of the time that its true artistic potential hadn't even begun to shine through would be infinitely preferable to Ubisoft making a cheesy slapstick Origins-styled 3D platformer.

-These are not my actual thoughts.

I don't actually understand what you mean here... If you're saying I was making the idea look worse than mine, it wasn't what I did at all. All I was saing was that a brand new 3-D game, in a new style (just like R2 and R3 had styles new to the previous instalments) would seem to be a choice that anyone would pick, with brand new mechanics, level design, story etc. rather than a remake with exactly the same mechanics, level design, story etc.

The 3-D platformers in the series are widely seen as the best, so it would seem like an obvious choice, rather than creating a remake that, in gameplay, is exactly the same as a game that's been around for many years...


(Again, I didn't really understand what you meant, so if this has nothing to do with your point then sorry)

If you want beter music, wouldn't a soundtrack do? Nintendo have been ding that, like in SSB4 for Wii U there's tons of remixes and stuff of old and classic tracks.

Yeah, but listening to the music by itself and then playing the game with the music all programmed in to cut, loop, transition and play at the appropriate times accommodating the gameplay is very different.

But would you really want Ubisoft to make a whole new soundtrack and draw new graphics just to make an experience better? The original game was perfectly fine in my opinion, the art was beautiful and the music was amazing. Making these better won't make a new game...

No, a standaone soundtrack wouldn't be the same as a full remake with the music timed in, but just for the experience of having better visuals and music and whatnot it doesn't seem worth the money and time when the much more enjoyable experience of playing a brand new game, and a 3-D platformer (arguably the best of the games in the series) at that with the amazing but new graphics and music you want could be experienced instead.

Yeah but what's the point in a remake, you can play the same game on your PC for free, just find some abandoneare.

What? A PC port in no way substitutes a remake of a 2D game, as it's not exactly possible to increase the spatial resolution of a 32x32 pre-rendered sprite; it's not like an in-game 3D character model that doesn't have any such constraint associated with it.

I wasn't saying it was a substitute... I didn't say the PC port is basically the remake you want, I'm just saying it's the game you want.
And this is besides the point, but 3-D character models do have such constraints with polygons, where scaling a model up makes it look very bad quality...

A brand new 3-D game would be infinitely preferable, rather than them wasting that time making a game's graphics look better...

This is entirely your view, and no matter how "infinitely preferable" you may find the creation of an entirely new title to be, it still only speaks for some of the people here; note that no one here has stated that it would be objectively preferable to a new game. I myself would actually be more excited for the remake given that I'm particularly attached to this game, to the point where I'd most likely shit my pants if was announced (albeit figuratively).

It's not just entirelymy view, and it's not just some people... This opinion is probably the single most popular opinion in the Rayman community (The release of a brand new 3-D Rayman platformer).

If you want beter music, wouldn't a soundtrack do? Nintendo have been ding that, like in SSB4 for Wii U there's tons of remixes and stuff of old and classic tracks.

That's a very, very small factor of why people want a remake for the game; it's just another element that could be improved should there be one, but it's far from the main attraction.

And the main attraction is the game, the game that we already have. The graphics and the music and whatever that would be added to make a HD remake are all nice and dandy, but those things (new music, grahics etc.) could just be applied to a brand new game, and beng a new game and a new experience, it would make the experience better over all.
I think the old game and it's music and graphics have a charm to them that a HD remake wouldn't improve on anyway, but that's just my opinion.

(Sorry for the ridiculous wall by the way )

[Adsolution]

You're pulling it out of context, this point is in conjunction with the second point. Making a new game would be preferable, because a HD remake is just the same game we have available but made to look and sound fancier. It might make the experiene of playing the game more enjoyable, but it's not as fun as a brand new game.

I was questioning how 'playing the same game on your PC for free' tied in to the rest of your post at all, or the idea of a remake. What I got out of it was "What's the point of a remake when you can play the original?", and that question really isn't able to lend itself to any kind of intellectual ponderance.

Regarding the topic at hand though, you're trying to make something completely subjective objective again. I find the first Rayman game to be more fun than Rayman Legends, a 'brand new game', therefore your argument is conditional, making it nothing more than a vague assumption.

If you're saying I was making the idea look worse than mine, it wasn't what I did at all.

You quite literally said that remaking something is a waste of time. Look at Black Mesa, a complete ground-up remake of the original Half-Life and tell me that that was a waste of time.

But would you really want Ubisoft to make a whole new soundtrack and draw new graphics just to make an experience better?

Sure, why not? I would keel over and pay a thousand bucks for it. Not that everyone would, it's simply a nice thought.

And this is besides the point, but 3-D character models do have such constraints with polygons, where scaling a model up makes it look very bad quality...

I'd care to argue that Rayman 2 running at 1080p with 32x anti-aliasing looks better than it running at 480p.

[Bradandez]

I think the cartoony yet pixelated style of R1 was perfect, I probably wouldn't like a HD remake.
Anyway if they made it a HD remake they would probably use the new Origins design...

You wanna tassel my tangerines, don't ya?

[Ambidextroid]

Regarding the topic at hand though, you're trying to make something completely subjective objective again. I find the first Rayman game to be more fun than Rayman Legends, a 'brand new game', therefore your argument is conditional, making it nothing more than a vague assumption.

You're pulling it out of context again.
I didn't say just a 'brand new game', I said a brad new 3-D game.
I don't like RL or RO as much as the original, but I, as do many, many people, think the 3-D games are the best.
That's why I'm saying specifically a 3-D game like R2 and R3.

Also when I said it's a waste of time, you're pulling it out of context again...

It's a waste of time when that time could be used to make a new 3-D platformer Rayman, arguably the typofgame most in demand.

And when I said scaling models up, meant like really big, not just any size. Scaing the R1 sprite up doesn't look bad either, unless it's a huge upsize

[technology4617]

Regarding the topic at hand though, you're trying to make something completely subjective objective again. I find the first Rayman game to be more fun than Rayman Legends, a 'brand new game', therefore your argument is conditional, making it nothing more than a vague assumption.

You're pulling it out of context again.
I didn't say just a 'brand new game', I said a brad new 3-D game.
I don't like RL or RO as much as the original, but I, as do many, many people, think the 3-D games are the best.
That's why I'm saying specifically a 3-D game like R2 and R3.

Also when I said it's a waste of time, you're pulling it out of context again...

It's a waste of time when that time could be used to make a new 3-D platformer Rayman, arguably the typofgame most in demand.

That's completely irrelevant, though, as it's still entirely subjective as to whether you'd be more excited about the new game or not. Adding another random factor doesn't change that.

And when I said scaling models up, meant like really big, not just any size. Scaing the R1 sprite up doesn't look bad either, unless it's a huge upsize

Adsolution's point and my point was that image scaling inherently isn't involved when changing the operating resolution of a 3D game, whereas in a 2D game, the sprite needs to be appropriately scaled to whatever resolution the game is set at; to clarify, the "pixelated" look you've been talking about wasn't at all intentional, but a product of viewing the technical limitations of the time via nearest-neighbor interpolation of the original 320x240 image, limitations which are actually intended to be masked by scanlines on a CRT television. If you're able to discern individual pixels in an HD remake beyond its native spatial resolution, then that is quite bad.

[Adsolution]

You're pulling it out of context again.

Maybe you aught to spend a little more time assembling your posts if I'm pulling so many things 'out of context'. They contain enourmous amounts of typos, grammatical errors and non-sequitors that seem to make it very difficult to piece them together in a way that matches what you're hearing in your head.

I didn't say just a 'brand new game', I said a brad new 3-D game.
I don't like RL or RO as much as the original, but I, as do many, many people, think the 3-D games are the best.
That's why I'm saying specifically a 3-D game like R2 and R3.

I don't think you realise how popular Origins and Legends are. A huge percentage of people here on RPC, even Bradandez for instance, far prefer them to the 3D games, and I'm sure the vast majority of younger gamers who were introduced to the series through Origins or Legends haven't touched the 3D games.

And when I said scaling models up, meant like really big, not just any size.

Scaing the R1 sprite up doesn't look bad either, unless it's a huge upsize

Are you trying to say that sprites look better when scaled up from theit native resolution than 3D models do? That's not much different than saying that an upscaled bitmap looks better than an upscaled vector image - but to each their own.

[Shrooblord]

Ambs, you're hiding behind numerous ad populi. Stop saying what you say is 'what most people think' and come with something objective, if you're really trying to say something objective.
If you're being subjective - which you are -, stop saying you're not. There's no point. You can voice an opinion and we will hear it. If you want to state facts, state facts. Your opinion isn't fact and the facts don't collectively become your opinion (though they will influence it).

[Ambidextroid]

Alright, sorry. When I say "most people" it's just from my experience. Other than people who haven't played the 3-D games, most people who I have met at least enjoyed the 3-D games better, so I guess I'm presuming a lot.

And I really don't even understand the terms "subjectively" and "objectively" so I can't deny being either, if I am.


As for the typos and the messy ordering of my posts, it's because I haven't got the articulation that I would with a computer, as it's being repaired and I'm having to use an iPad. Not only is typing quickly a nightmare, but sorting things out and using correct BB code is too.
I swear I wrote the post before last about 3 times, each time with safari crashing, clearing my clipboard and forcing me to we write everything as fast as I can without forgetting things.

Even writing this my touchscreen keyboard hasn't responded properly many times and I've had to tediously fix about 15 typos...

Also, as you probably noticed, I suck at arguing and making valid points, and I hate arguing, so next time I make a bullshit claim please point me out and I'll try refrain from making the same mistake twice

[Shrooblord]

You're being subjective when you're basing what you're saying on your own beliefs and values, your opinion.
You're being objective when you base what you're saying on factualities, things that actually are, things that can be measured, tested, contested, queried, lost, found, subjected to public inquiry, lost again and finally buried as soft peat for three months before being repurposed as firelighters.

Uhh I kinda derailed but you get my point, right? When you say "most people think x", unless you have proof that most people indeed think x, you're being subjective. When you use your subjective views as though they were logical arguments, your arguments contain logical fallacies - in other words, you talk nonesense. People tend to disagree with you a lot more when you talk nonesense.

But I get what you mean. I just think you're wrong; I myself completely adore the second Rayman game - it has shaped a big part of my art style, my ideas of what makes a good game, my views on what good music is - it has filled many hours with joy and I can replay it over and over and over and I never tire of it. Rayman 3, however, I think is a good game, but it stays at that. Rayman 1 is more alongside where Rayman 2 is. It's not my favourite game, but it's damn good, and I don't mind picking up dat controller to play it.

Most people don't look forward to a '3D Rayman game' specifically. I'm not even sure what most people would expect from the franchise nowadays. I'm a bit up in the air about that one myself. I'd like a new 3D installment, but the direction the series has headed in with Origins and Legends disappoints me, even though I think both are fantastic, A-grade games. To be perfectly frank, I'd like for the series to take a breather again for a little while. Don't start churning out sequels like you're Mario. Rayman doesn't work that way - or at least, he shouldn't, in my view. A good game, a good Rayman game, takes time and devotion, years of planning and work to erect. But most of all, it requires a vision. I like Ancel's vision, though what he saw a couple of years ago interests me more than what he sees now.

[Ambidextroid]

Yes, I was being very subjective I guess...
I just miss the entertainment I had as a child, the experience of playing a game in X series that I had never played before.
I started playing games around the time when all the best 3-D third-person platformers (I wish there was a better word for that) like Ratchet and Clank, Jakc and Daxter, R2, R3 etc.
I wish they still made them...

In my opinion R3 has more replayability value though because of the score system and the large amount of minigames, including a multiplayer one if I can remember... I think R2 is better though, I had more fun with it as a child on my first run and it's in my top 5 games of all time, I might find it hard to pick up and play though.

[Thebananacrafter!]

Why are we talking about rayman 2 and 3? Shouldnt we be talking about rayman 1?

[technology4617]

Why are we talking about rayman 2 and 3? Shouldnt we be talking about rayman 1?

Well, the actual discussion does relate to R1, and talking about the other games to provide some context and to elaborate on an opinion I think is more valuable to the topic than very strictly confining yourself to only referencing the first game.

[Droolie]

While we're (or at least we were) on the subject of a R1 remake, I think the best way to do it would be to make it look painterly and add a lot of new lighting, but still emphasize the colours, like this: http://anthony-philippeau.deviantart.co ... -499052918
It could still be semi-3D like Origins and Legends are, but painterly. They could use the same techniques they used in Child of Light.
That's basically my vision of a perfect R1 remake. In fact, if they ever do a remake, whether it's 2D or 3D, I think they should just hire Anthony Philippeau and let him redo the game's art entirely, so Ubisoft itself can focus on new games.
Of course, Ubisoft would never let fans work on their games, nor would they ever use their money or talent to work on something they could just republish on Xbox Live and PSN without any reworked graphics whatsoever, as a quick cash grab.

Personally, however, I would just like Beyond Good & Evil 2. After the last two Rayman games, I'm just not really that excited to see where they'll bring Rayman next anymore. Perhaps it would even be better to let another team handle the next Rayman games.

[ikke471]

While we're (or at least we were) on the subject of a R1 remake, I think the best way to do it would be to make it look painterly and add a lot of new lighting, but still emphasize the colours, like this: http://anthony-philippeau.deviantart.co ... -499052918

That's be a great choice!
Rayman 1's world would look beautiful in a painting-ish style.

[Haruka]

I love to watch Anthony's work in dA. Surely one of the most talented Rayman fanartists I've caught in recent times. It would give an interesting result but like Droolie said, I highly doubt they would hire a Rayman fan regardless the level of talent/knowledge of the franchise.

I am not expectant to see novelties of Rayman very soon but I'll be ready to listen to their new projects.

[Adsolution]

I think the best way to do it would be to make it look painterly and add a lot of new lighting, but still emphasize the colours, like this:

Precisely my vision of it as well!