Rayman Pirate-Community

Sabertooth1000000000 wrote:

Spanex wrote:You make it sound like Rayman is some 'huge regrettable misstake' Ubisoft made.

I'm sure they think it is.

But that doesn't make any sense!! Where would Ubi be if they didn't have Rayman to save their asses with his first game? They would probably still be around, but they wouldn't be as far as they are now. Not even near it.

Spanex wrote:But that doesn't make any sense!! Where would Ubi be if they didn't have Rayman to save their asses with his first game? They would probably still be around, but they wouldn't be as far as they are now. Not even near it.

Hey, don't tell me; tell Ubisoft.

I don't believe Ubisoft hates Rayman, if they hated him, they would've sold him.

But that doesn't make any sense!!

Discussion ends here?

Sabertooth1000000000 wrote:

Spanex wrote:You make it sound like Rayman is some 'huge regrettable misstake' Ubisoft made.

I'm sure they think it is.

Rayman 3, perhaps. I doubt they consider R2 a mistake.

Not to mention the entire franchise.

El Dango wrote:Not to mention the entire franchise.

What do you exactly mean by that?

I mean what I wrote. Ubisoft definitely wouldn't consider the entire Rayman franchise a mistake.

Ah, I see. I didn't really understand what you meant just there.

Spanex wrote:You make it sound like Rayman is some 'huge regrettable misstake' Ubisoft made.

It would be abysmaly stupid Ubisoft concluding that Rayman is a big mistake... *Being ironic* Yeah right, a character that saved the enterprise 15 years ago and got more recognized worldwide, sure.

I hope that "error" is about R3 and the next games to it.

I kinda enjoyed Rayman 3 actually. Though not nearly as much as Rayman 2. 8D

In my opinion, Rayman 3 should have been longer and the final boss should have been done differently. Not the first part, that was pretty awesome, but the flying part.

Spanex wrote:I kinda enjoyed Rayman 3 actually. Though not nearly as much as Rayman 2. 8D

I really enjoyed Rayman 3, but that might have been because i was probably ten at the time and had only played a demo version of Rayman 2. I enjoyed the final boss battle, the mini games, searching for hidden items and the variations in levels. I didn't think the story line was all that though.

El Dango wrote:In my opinion, Rayman 3 should have been longer and the final boss should have been done differently. Not the first part, that was pretty awesome, but the flying part.

I didn't mind the flying part, but it was very easy compared to the first part which made it seem irelevant.

This is a rather silly discussion. Of course they don't consider one of their biggest money-spinners a mistake. Michel Ancel undoubtedly considers Rayman Raving Rabbids a mistake, and I doubt he's the only one. Rayman 3 was not a mistake either, but it was rather mistake-riddled. Rayman + attempted humour = no.

PluMGMK wrote:

Sabertooth1000000000 wrote:

Jake360 wrote:Would make for a great E3 for me though if they even mentioned Rayman.

Whoa, careful. Obviously talking about Rayman at all whatsoever at Ubisoft is strictly prohibited. I wouldn't be surprised if Ubisoft made all of Rayman's fans stop talking about him completely. I also wouldn't be surprised if Ubisoft sued this forum and made it shut down. Who's Rayman? Is he a Mega Man boss? Never heard of him.

I'm sure they're kicking themselves for not tying Rayman games to a server, like they're doing with their latest games. They could just shut it down and render every Rayman game unplayable.

No they couldn't; that DRM was cracked ages ago, as per usual.

Spanex wrote:

Sabertooth1000000000 wrote:

Spanex wrote:You make it sound like Rayman is some 'huge regrettable misstake' Ubisoft made.

I'm sure they think it is.

But that doesn't make any sense!! Where would Ubi be if they didn't have Rayman to save their asses with his first game? They would probably still be around, but they wouldn't be as far as they are now. Not even near it.

Not to mention Rayman 2 gathered them even more fame and money. They aren't regretting Rayman, they are just going where they think the wealth is.

Rayman 3 wasn't under my initial expectations when I played it the first time. The humour of the game and the new Globox's voice are among the worst stuff.

I thought Leguizamo did a great job.

Maybe he did, but he was completely wrong for Globox. Jack Black was a million times better, assuming that he actually did voice Globox in Rayman 2.

I don't like Globox, i don't think he is an interesting character. To be honest i'd rather they discard Rayman 2 and 3 and start again making a sequel to the first game.

spiraldoor wrote:Maybe he did, but he was completely wrong for Globox. Jack Black was a million times better, assuming that he actually did voice Globox in Rayman 2.

I agree completely, I really enjoyed the original Globox. On Rayman 3, his new voice and the kind of humour inserted on the game made Globox get more stupid, which I don't appreciate that much.