R4 concept art

[SuperSunshine]

So what you're saying is, Mario games are bad?

To me mario games have not changed since Mario 64 its just collect stars kill Bowser and save the princess. To me it just gets boring after awhile.

[spiraldoor]

Nintendo featuring a Nintendo-exclusive shit port such as Rayman Advance in one of their magazines doesn't impress me.

That's exactly my point. Why would they feature such a bad game in Nintendo Power if they didn't respect Rayman? They also featured Rayman 2, but not on the cover.

Did it occur to you that they may have been trying to promote the game to increase their profits? If they really respected Rayman, why do you think they don't they have a proper Rayman game this gen, yet have three exclusive Rabbids games?

Nintendo making a slew of mediocre titles for Rayman like they've done for Mario is far worse than nothing.

So what you're saying is, Mario games are bad?

Actually, I said that Nintendo have made "a slew of mediocre titles" for the Mario series.

~Our friend Guillaume has approved Stacey's comment; therefore, he was online today. Hmm...

[Cairnie]

If you want mediocre Mario games then sure I know some.

- Mario VS Donkey Kong
- Mario Ball (the pinball one)
- Mario Slam Basketball on the DS

I can also name several other titles that I just can't get into, like Super Mario World for example.

[spiraldoor]

I never saw what the fuss was about SMW1 or why some people think it's the best game in the series. I like SMW2 much better.

Guillaume Bonamy Sketchbook
Guillaume Bonamy on IMDb
Guillaume Bonamy on MobyGames
Guillaume Bonamy on Urban Sketchers

No sign of an email address...

[Sabertooth]

If they really respected Rayman, why do you think they don't they have a proper Rayman game this gen, yet have three exclusive Rabbids games?

Nintendo didn't know at the time that Rayman 4 was going to be turned into a party game, but when it did, it was Ubisoft that wanted the games to be Wii-exclusive. Nintendo isn't greedy and lazy like Ubisoft, you know. They actually make good games these days.

Oh, and SMW is awesome.

[spiraldoor]

If they really respected Rayman, why do you think they don't they have a proper Rayman game this gen, yet have three exclusive Rabbids games?

Nintendo didn't know at the time that Rayman 4 was going to be turned into a party game, but when it did, it was Ubisoft that wanted the games to be Wii-exclusive. Nintendo isn't greedy and lazy like Ubisoft, you know. They actually make good games these days.

Oh, and SMW is awesome.

Nintendo and Ubisoft had a deal to make R4 a Wii launch title. Ubisoft then turned R4 into a party game. Nintendo obviously would have been informed of this at the time, and clearly didn't care. And what makes you so sure that it was Ubisoft that wanted the Rabbids series to be Nintendo-exclusive? Do you have anything to back that up.

And no, Nintendo is very definitely greedy. It was fined €120,000,000 by the European Union for illegal price-fixing. And your assertion that they "actually make good games these days" implies that their games from years gone by are not as good as their recent ones, which I disagree with; the quality of Nintendo's game output is at an all-time low in my opinion.

[Sabertooth]

Nintendo and Ubisoft had a deal to make R4 a Wii launch title. Ubisoft then turned R4 into a party game. Nintendo obviously would have been informed of this at the time, and clearly didn't care.

That's because it wasn't their decison. What did you expect, for them to sue Ubisoft for changing one of their games (No matter how stupid it was)?

And what makes you so sure that it was Ubisoft that wanted the Rabbids series to be Nintendo-exclusive? Do you have anything to back that up?

Nintendo can't just decide for Ubisoft which console their games are on, you know. They could've put it on, say, the Xbox 360, but the decided on Wii and DS because of the motion controls.

And your assertion that they "actually make good games these days" implies that their games from years gone by are not as good as their recent ones

Uh, no, it doesn't. Do you see Ubisoft coming out with something up to the standards as Super Smash Bros Brawl these days? No, it's mainly "Imagine: Party Animalz Party Gamez" for the Wii, and Prince of Persia, Assassin's Creed etc. for other consoles. A lot of this is Ancel's fault, since he barely does anything.

the quality of Nintendo's game output is at an all-time low in my opinion.

And Ubisoft's isn't?

[Cairnie]

By price fixing do you mean the fact that they jacked up the price of Bowser's Inside Story to £33? That was WAY too much for a DS game, I'm sorry.

[Sabertooth]

By price fixing do you mean the fact that they jacked up the price of Bowser's Inside Story to £33? That was WAY too much for a DS game, I'm sorry.

They're usually $35 in America, I don't know how much that is to euros...

[Cairnie]

Newsflash Britain doesn't use Euros dawg.

33.00 GBP = 53.2322 USD

www.xe.com
For all your exchange rate needs.

[spiraldoor]

That's because it wasn't their decison. What did you expect, for them to sue Ubisoft for changing one of their games (No matter how stupid it was)?

We know that the two companies had agreed that R4 was to be a Wii launch title; when Ubisoft cancelled one of Nintendo's launch titles and replaced it with a completely different game, Nintendo would have had to have been informed of this. The fact that they were completely willing to accept RRR1 as a replacement for R4 shows that they did not care. Perhaps they simply like having a monopoly over the platforming genre on their systems and didn't want to give Ubisoft a cut of the Wii platformer market?

Nintendo can't just decide for Ubisoft which console their games are on, you know. They could've put it on, say, the Xbox 360, but the decided on Wii and DS because of the motion controls.

What makes you so sure that Ubisoft decided of their own volition to forfeit all additional profits that they would have made from making the Rabbids games multiplatform? How do you know that they weren't paid by Nintendo for exclusivity? Please don't state such theories as fact if you don't have anything to back it up.

Uh, no, it doesn't. Do you see Ubisoft coming out with something up to the standards as Super Smash Bros Brawl these days? No, it's mainly "Imagine: Party Animalz Party Gamez" for the Wii, and Prince of Persia, Assassin's Creed etc. for other consoles. A lot of this is Ancel's fault, since he barely does anything.

I'm intrigued by your phrasing, "and Prince of Persia, Assassin's Creed etc. for the other consoles". Are you trying to say that Brawl is better than those games?

"A lot of this is Ancel's fault"? That's just ridiculous. You seem to think that he's the CEO, or somehow has the power to override Ubisoft's desire to make huge amounts of money by exploiting the small children who own Nintendo systems.

And Ubisoft's isn't?

What? Sure it is, but only on the Nintendo platforms. Ubisoft is currently serving the PS3 and Xbox 360 owners quite well. My point still stands. In the long term I'd much rather see Rayman in the hands of the people who brought us R1 and R2.

[Sabertooth]

I'm intrigued by your phrasing, "and Prince of Persia, Assassin's Creed etc. for the other consoles". Are you trying to say that Brawl is better than those games?

Yep.

"A lot of this is Ancel's fault"? That's just ridiculous. You seem to think that he's the CEO, or somehow has the power to override Ubisoft's desire to make huge amounts of money by exploiting the small children who own Nintendo systems.

I'm not talking about the large amounts of shovelware, I'm talking about the lack of good games. Ancel has all this talent that he never uses. In his long career he's only made six games. If he were smart he'd be working on Rayman 6 right now, but nope, he's too busy making movie adaptations. He also didn't have to leave Rayman 4 to work on other stuff right before it was released. That was a huge factor in its transformation into a party game.

[spiraldoor]

Yep.

Ubisoft has recently released quite a few high-quality games, including Rainbow Six Vegas, Rainbow Six Vegas 2, Assassin's Creed, Assassin's Creed 2, Prince of Persia, and are currently developing Splinter Cell: Conviction, which is likely to be a great game. Curiously, AC2 comes in less than one percent lower that Brawl, which seems to go against your assertion than Ubisoft is not producing anything of its quality.

I'm not talking about the large amounts of shovelware, I'm talking about the lack of good games. Ancel has all this talent that he never uses. In his long career he's only made six games. If he were smart he'd be working on Rayman 6 right now, but nope, he's too busy making movie adaptations. He also didn't have to leave Rayman 4 to work on other stuff right before it was released. That was a huge factor in its transformation into a party game.

Six games? Where did you get that from? He designed four and had smaller roles in the development of many others. You said that "a lot of this is Ancel's fault" when referring to Ubisoft's allegedly poor game output; this is nonsense. He cannot simply choose to taks a large chunk of Ubisoft's money, get together a team and start making as many good games as he likes, or Rayman 4 and BG&E2 would not have been cancelled.

Ancel obviously did not "have" to leave R4 before it was released, but why should he have stayed? His work on the project was already complete, and he had no idea or input on what was going to happen to the game between then and the day it went gold. R4 becoming a party game was not Michel Ancel's 'fault'. If you really want to point fingers I suggest you consider the fact that it was the arrival of Nintendo's Wii devkits that led to the developers (obviously not including Ancel) adopting the 'party game' angle.

[Sabertooth]

Ok, I'm not sure how this arguement has spun so far off topic, so I'm going to end this now.

Bottom line: Rayman getting sold to Nintendo and getting a game every 2-3 years and a chance of appearing in Smash Bros is better than the current situation of nothing at all. This does mean Ancel won't be able to make the games anymore, but let's face it, he was never going to anyway. There. I'm done. Now get back on the concept art discussion.

[spiraldoor]

Ok, I'm not sure how this arguement has spun so far off topic, so I'm going to end this now.

Bottom line: Rayman getting sold to Nintendo and getting a game every 2-3 years and a chance of appearing in Smash Bros is better than the current situation of nothing at all. This does mean Ancel won't be able to make the games anymore, but let's face it, he was never going to anyway. There. I'm done. Now get back on the concept art discussion.

The reason it spun so far off-topic is that you randomly suggested that Rayman be sold to Nintendo in an unrelated thread. I strongly disagree with your "bottom line"; firstly, I would rather replay the old Rayman games than have a Nintendo-exclusive Rayman; Rayman already has a chance of appearing in Smash Bros; it's highly likely that Ancel will eventually make a Rayman game at some point, and our current situation is not that bad at all.

~Please don't say things to the effect of "Okay I'm going to end this argument now and nobody is allowed to continue it after this post". It gives an impression of naïvety; perhaps arrogance. I wish for an on-topic discussion just as much as you do, if not moreso.

Hunch: Have you attempted to contact Guillaume through the comments section of his portfolio? If you give him an outline of the information you're looking for (in French, for added authenticity!) and leave your email address, he may reply, and perhaps you could get some information about R4 or more concept artwork from him?

[Droolie]

Curiously, AC2 comes in less than one percent lower that Brawl, which seems to go against your assertion than Ubisoft is not producing anything of its quality.

Sorry, but do you know why AC2 has such a good score? Read this.

And I really think Rayman should stay with Ubisoft. Selling him won't do him any good.

[spiraldoor]

I don't think it would have received such high scores if it was not a good game.


If you look closely (to the right; just above some flutes), there's something which appears to be a 3D rendition of a flying ring (with feathers and everything). I think Guillaume was drawing directly from R1, not taking into account such details as the flying rings becoming the Purple Lums in R2...

[Acarr]

Does it really matter? As far as I'm concerned, Rayman 1 and Rayman 2 are vastly different worlds.

[spiraldoor]

Does it really matter? As far as I'm concerned, Rayman 1 and Rayman 2 are vastly different worlds.

Does it matter than he drew a 3D flying ring? Not particularly, though I find it quite interesting. And I don't know how literally you mean "vastly different worlds" to be taken, or how it's relevant, but I can assure you that both games are indeed set in the same world. I have done extensive research on the subject.

[Acarr]

I didn't mean "worlds" as in different planets.