Rayman Pirate-Community

I changed my opinion about many things.

TheTempurmental wrote:Goddammit, you can like whatever video game that you want! I don't see why we have to "convince" each other!

Well, what's the point of sharing opinions or even debating if we didn't want to convince eachother of something? Ultimately, if you want to converse about something like that, then to the best of your knowledge, you're sure that you're right until someone else offers in a more comprehensive and enlightening thought than your own; the whole point of debate is to find out who holds the clearest, most objective answer.

However, there's a time and place for this sort of thing, and right here and now, in the Rayman Legends thread after its release, is a very logical setting. "X whatever you want without question, no one can stop you" is one of those ideas that came to be through trying to be open-minded without realising what having an open mind actually is, and I find it to be just pure, rotten ignorance.

OldClassicGamer wrote:I consider PC Version to be the weakest one.

I disagree with this since despite of having a more poor collection of sound effects and a little less musics, it is still quite enjoyable as when playing in PS1. For me the worst Rayman 1s were in Rayman Advance and Rayman DSi.

I also agree with other opinions in here said. Like I said, I'm opened to discuss about the fan-facts of RL/R3 since I'm still with some doubts whatever one is better than other, because as a game in a whole I think RL was better but it is hard to explain since one game is 2D and other is 3D...

I thought Rayman Legends was better than Rayman 3 too, Haruka had almost convinced me that it was. But then I started thinking for myself. I suggest everyone thinks for him/herself too instead of simply listening to the opinion of others (that includes mine of course). But I hope other people's arguments help everyone see the good and bad points about the game too.

sergiomonty wrote:You're saying the exact same thing as Haruka , and I'm gonna respond you the exact same way: NO, I DIDN'T LIKE ANY OF THEM. They all were too grey and sad for my taste . What's so special about Razoff's Mansion, by the way? It's just a wooden house with red walls. A very cliché house for a safari man.
The Land of the Livid Dead doesn't give me any magical feeling either. It's just a rocky landscape, a very depressing rocky landscape. The starry staircase? that one was gorgeous, but why do we keep getting magic and beauty in just a few shots? Why not beauty, colors and surrealism in every corner, LIKE IN LEGENDS?

It's weird that you couldn't feel anything in Rayman 3 but you can feel something in every corner of Rayman Legends. I must have missed so many corners while getting nearly 100% completion. Can you give me some examples?

sergiomonty wrote:

Drolpiraat wrote:Also, you find the main themes from the worlds I mentioned generic? In Legends, the music was certainly epic, but it was far more generic than Rayman 3's music. Sure, Rayman 3 had some irritating tracks (urgh, the Muddibog ones), but Rayman Legends has them too: all the percussion-only tracks for one. Ultimately, all the upbeat music starts to get irritating too. Even the musical levels themselves are simply out of place in the Rayman universe.

I disagree with this part entirely. None of the tracks in Legends are generic. They are strong, they are heroic, they have lots of personality. A few of them are very comparable to The Precipice from Rayman 2, (NOSTALGIA APPART). You say all of them are upbeat, then there's Ray and the Beanstalk, with a pretty deep, depressing song,like something terrible happened there. I don't even get why are you defending R3 in this one either. You're basically saying that Rayman Legends's music is epic but generic, and Rayman 3's music is generic but irritating.

Read my post again. I'm saying some of the music in Rayman 3 was irritating, but Rayman Legends had a lot more irritating tracks (for me). I listed them in that part you quoted. I'm also not saying that the music in Rayman 3 was generic - to the contrary, a lot of the music created atmosphere that you just don't seem to feel. Too bad for you, really. So many games and films are probably very overrated for you because you're not able to feel atmosphere when it's there.
And yes, I do like Ray and the Beanstalk. It's one of the only slow pieces in the game - most of the other music is (too) upbeat. While I won't try to convince you that the music is far from comparable to the Precipice from Rayman 2, Rayman 2 would have been shit if the game had nothing but Precipice-like music.

sergiomonty wrote:I disagree with the part of the music levels too. If you didn't know most of these songs were copyrighted, you wouldn't establish them as "out of Rayman's universe". They all were remixed perfectly to fit the atmosphere where they are. Gloo Gloo is perfect when you don't think about Kill Bill.

Gloo Gloo fits perfectly in Rayman Origins, yes. It's completely crazy. But Rayman Legends is a different game, and the Origins universe isn't a universe I consider "Rayman" anyway. That's an opinion, of course, but as the Rayman 2/3 universe and the RO/RL universe are very different (even the recurring characters don't seem to be the same), I have to pick one of the two as "the" Rayman universe. And I simply prefer the R2/R3 one, not only because it's more atmospheric and it really seems like a world, but also because a lot more thought and effort went into making that universe, while in RO and RL they simply slapped together a few elements and they had a "world". It just feels really, really lazy to me.

sergiomonty wrote:

Everyone and everything is insane in it

Especially the Bubble Dreamer, right?

Yes, the Bubble Dreamer's portrayal in Rayman Legends, while short (the in-game version doesn't do much), was awesome. I agree.
I liked Murfy too. Can you name any other non-insane characters?

sergiomonty wrote:Rayman 3 might be a gorgeous bird that knows how to fly through the sky, but it doesn't come close to touching the stars like Rayman Legends did.

It really seems to me like you've swapped those two games in your mind.

Drolpiraat wrote:If. I suggest everyone thinks for him/herself too instead of simply listening to the opinion of others (that includes mine of course). But I hope other people's arguments help everyone see the good and bad points about the game too.

I initially thought a little at first (since I was in real doubts if RL was better than R3) but this is why I also want to listen to the arguments of others to see if there's something I didn't catch and all, and see if I can polish better my opinion. I would like to note that back in 2011, while I initially thought that RO was a great game, I only started to notice its problems after replaying a 2nd time, and my opinion did change a lot. That could happen once I start playing again in the Wii U version.

But then, while R3 was a good game in its whole, there are fan-details that I didn't like at all, so I still have a love-hate relationship with this title (there's one personal fact: it is the Rayman title, without counting RL, that I replayed from the start less times).

Haruka wrote:

OldClassicGamer wrote:I consider PC Version to be the weakest one.

I disagree with this since despite of having a more poor collection of sound effects and a little less musics, it is still quite enjoyable as when playing in PS1. For me the worst Rayman 1s were in Rayman Advance and Rayman DSi.

I also agree with other opinions in here said. Like I said, I'm opened to discuss about the fan-facts of RL/R3 since I'm still with some doubts whatever one is better than other, because as a game in a whole I think RL was better but it is hard to explain since one game is 2D and other is 3D...

When I said weakest one, I was referring to Original release and not the later ports and remakes. I think that PS1 version and Saturn version were better because like Adsolution said, Consoles were much more powerful back then, then Home computer. Not to mention that when I first played Rayman on PC, I did not have controller and I found playing games with keyboard not that great.
PC version is of course better then GBA version. As for DSi version, I cannot speak about it since I have not played it.

Do you thinks guys it would be possible to create an online mode for Kung Foot on PC ?

If someone could be able to work on something like that, I would take the game on PC too only for this ^^

Hackers did not create online mode for Origins so I guess same answer goes for Kung Foot.

Unless Hamachi would work along with Rayman Legends.

OldClassicGamer wrote:Hackers did not create online mode for Origins so I guess same answer goes for Kung Foot.

Yes but for Origins, if they would have made an online mode, it would have been for all levels, so more complicate.

Im' speaking about an online mode only for Kung Foot, it's just an mini-game, so I think it's possible.

Haruka wrote:Unless Hamachi would work along with Rayman Legends.

But why didn't Rayman Origins work with Hamachi?
Many games worked fully with Hamachi so I am sure it is possible to make Kung Foot playable, but I wonder if it will happen.

Adsolution wrote:Well, that was a PC-exclusive area, but it's my favourite:



Such majesty.

Overly saturated if you ask me. I like it better for it's gameplay.



------

Guys... what worries me about your point of view of Rayman 3 is that you don't want to see which one is a better game. You just want to demonstrate which one has more atmosphere. You're just trying to demonstrate which one has the best establishment for Rayman's world, and that makes no sense.

We're talking about videogames, not tv shows. There are many HORRIBLE flaws that Rayman 3 had and you just let them go because the sky of the Land of the Livid Dead is starry and beautiful.

How about the navigation? The navigation is something that should not be mistaken in a 2003 game. Rayman 3 had the worst navigation in the entire franchise. Want to visit a specific level? Too bad, you have to play aaaaaall the world again, no matter if you're returning just to save one Teensy. Rayman 2 didn't have such problems with the navigation and that's why I praise it.

How about the platforming? the balloons are the only ones that add something great to the platforming, but that's it. You're basically walking in a straight line, which is something that Legends fixes in some levels. Most of Rayman 3 was about the combat. Terrible, repetitive combat with the same enemies all over again.

How about the multiplayer? Kung Foot gives HOURS of entertainment, something that the minigames in R3 could never reach. The addition of Murfy to the Wii U version not only adds something cool to the mix: It adds innovation.

How about content? R3 lacks it. The minigames aren't even a satisfying reward, because most of them are half assed and have clunky controls.

These last three problems aren't even compared to how big the first one is. You are forced to play between worlds instead of choosing the level you wanted, and that killed the replay value for me.

Currently at 249/700 and I didn't even have the game for a full day yet. This game is just amazing. I admit the visuals are astounding from previous titles, yet the game is very fast-paced and I cannot get immerse into the atmosphere. Breathing Fire is one level that got me to feel immersed a bit , seriously those fucking Lividstone bandits are just bat shit insane! I'm loving the game so far.

I've never quite understood why some people think Rayman should be all about magic. I love the atmos from the hoodlum hideouts or the Great Hall. Again, I won't every say Rayman 3 isn't flawed, but there's a lot of places like that. Every world has at least one area that really puts all the pieces of the puzzle together.

And the music is really not that bad. A lot of effort went into making 3-5 minute tracks that might only play for a very short moment in the game (Hall of Mirrors). Not that that means its good, but I find a lot of tracks to really work. Origins and Legends (Although I haven't heard a lot from Legends yet) have good soundtracks, but very few tracks stand out. And like Droolie said, Ray and the Beanstalk is one of the best tracks because it isn't so upbeat. I would instantly recognize almost any track from R3.

Adsolution wrote:Well, that was a PC-exclusive area, but it's my favourite:



Such majesty.

It was in the DSi version as well, but it's just ugly there. Not sure why they messed with the background and slide colour.

sergiomonty wrote:Guys... what worries me about your point of view of Rayman 3 is that you don't want to see which one is a better game. You just want to demonstrate which one has more atmosphere. You're just trying to demonstrate which one has the best establishment for Rayman's world, and that makes no sense.

If I didn't want to compare RL with R3 I wouldn't have even mentioned that in the review. Plus, I needed to play the whole RL in order to try to get a more solid opinion. Playing half of it was not enough, and most of the reasons were already said in previous posts by other members.

We're talking about videogames, not tv shows. There are many HORRIBLE flaws that Rayman 3 had and you just let them go because the sky of the Land of the Livid Dead is starry and beautiful.

Not exactly. As a fan, there are many things in Rayman 3 that I disliked and there's no secret about why before RL, it was 3rd on my top Rayman titles. Sure, R3 had its moments like the giant magical tower of the LOTLD, but unfortunately the good things done in it were not enough to enter in my favourite titles.

How about the navigation? The navigation is something that should not be mistaken in a 2003 game. Rayman 3 had the worst navigation in the entire franchise. Want to visit a specific level? Too bad, you have to play aaaaaall the world again, no matter if you're returning just to save one Teensy. Rayman 2 didn't have such problems with the navigation and that's why I praise it.

Actually, you are confusing parts of levels by levels. There are only 9 levels in the the game, divided in parts. So you are simply repeating a level like in other games, the only difference is that the levels are longer in duration than in any other Rayman game. I know it is a shame you can't simply replay a battle, but the same thing happens for all the other Rayman games (except for rare situations that are more straightforward in cases like the Mocking Bird and the Grolgoth).

How about the platforming? the balloons are the only ones that add something great to the platforming, but that's it. You're basically walking in a straight line, which is something that Legends fixes in some levels. Most of Rayman 3 was about the combat. Terrible, repetitive combat with the same enemies all over again.

I can agree about the combat system of R3 ending up repetitive (and it is a detail in R3 I don't like a lot), but weren't you also walking in RO in a straight line? Think well.

How about the multiplayer? Kung Foot gives HOURS of entertainment, something that the minigames in R3 could never reach. The addition of Murfy to the Wii U version not only adds something cool to the mix: It adds innovation.

Nobody was criticizing about Kung Foot in here so far, but nobody in here was also saying that the R3 minigames are perfect (and they aren't, they are pretty much dull and focused in single-player with the exception of Wheelis and Mad Trax from GameCube). And one of the things I enjoy in RL is Murfy indeed, it adds innovation with really interesting ways to play a level or solve a puzzling situation, but I believe that mostly applies for Wii U players. In all the other platforms, you are just doing a multitasking.

How about content? R3 lacks it. The minigames aren't even a satisfying reward, because most of them are half assed and have clunky controls.

True, but I can't deny the fact I expected to see more minigames similar to Kung Foot in Rayman Legends, because this was mentioned in early interviews.

These last three problems aren't even compared to how big the first one is. You are forced to play between worlds instead of choosing the level you wanted, and that killed the replay value for me.

Again, you are confusing parts of levels with levels.

Keane wrote:I've never quite understood why some people think Rayman should be all about magic. I love the atmos from the hoodlum hideouts or the Great Hall. Again, I won't every say Rayman 3 isn't flawed, but there's a lot of places like that. Every world has at least one area that really puts all the pieces of the puzzle together.

I was just about to come here and type exactly something like this. The not-so-pretty places are crapsacky in a charming creepy way.

I don't think I'm confusing anything. I just have a different name for everything in Rayman 3, Haruka

The Fairy Council, you may call it a level, but I technically consider it more like a "world", and you may call one of the sections a "combat", but I think "level" is a more fitting name for it. Or... it can either be levels AND sublevels. The results are the same. Only the names are different.

Let's apply R3's flaw to... let's say, Rayman Origins. It's like you're forced to play all of the levels in The Desert of Dijeridoos when the only level you want to play is the Moskito level. It's not practical.

BTW, I didn't defend RO, I accept that it was as lineal in level design as R3, maybe even worse.

I like your point of view Haruka. At first when you said Rayman Origins was not in your top 3, I thought there was some nostalgia from you that didn't let you accept it... then I found the terrible flaws of the game after my 5th playthrough. All of these mistakes were adressed properly in Rayman Legends, and I see that you noticed that too and were extremely concrete with your preferences. Sure, it's the Rayman game with the most barebones story, but we were previously told about that with a porn comparison, unlike the case of Origins which hyped up everything for nothing. It's certainly an epic experience with tons of content and excellent multiplayer

I just wish Kung Foot had online that would have made the game even more excellent.

OldClassicGamer wrote:Too bad it is only in PC Version because besides this, I consider PC Version to be the weakest one.

Why's that?

Hoodcom wrote:

OldClassicGamer wrote:Too bad it is only in PC Version because besides this, I consider PC Version to be the weakest one.

Why's that?

Adsolution wrote:Unfortunately so. Back then, consoles were far superior to your regular home-kept PC.

Like Adsolution said, Back then, console versions were always better because not many people had strong computers in their homes (I did not have it as well) so they had to downgrade the PC version. Aside from that exclusive part in Band Land, everything else in PC version is weaker then in Saturn and PS1 version. Sound effects, Animations, heck, some PC versions did not even include opening. If emshomar did not create the patch, I don't think I would touch PC version ever again.

sergiomonty wrote:Guys... what worries me about your point of view of Rayman 3 is that you don't want to see which one is a better game. You just want to demonstrate which one has more atmosphere. You're just trying to demonstrate which one has the best establishment for Rayman's world, and that makes no sense. We're talking about videogames, not tv shows.

Oh but it does. There are people who, unlike you, not only play a game simply for its gameplay, but also for its story, environments, music, etc. Are you saying this is only important in tv shows?

sergiomonty wrote:There are many HORRIBLE flaws that Rayman 3 had and you just let them go because the sky of the Land of the Livid Dead is starry and beautiful.

True, Rayman 3 is not without its flaws, just like Rayman 2. The combat is often criticized in both games, and let's admit that Rayman 2's combat was worse than Rayman 3's. Rayman 2 also had less content. So why is it that many here think Rayman 2 is still a better game? Yep, you guessed it. Because the Hall of Doors was starry and beautiful. The overall feeling (which depends largely on the atmosphere) of the game was simply better.

sergiomonty wrote:How about the navigation? The navigation is something that should not be mistaken in a 2003 game. Rayman 3 had the worst navigation in the entire franchise. Want to visit a specific level? Too bad, you have to play aaaaaall the world again, no matter if you're returning just to save one Teensy. Rayman 2 didn't have such problems with the navigation and that's why I praise it.

I agree, that was quite bad in Rayman 3. I hope they never do that again. But it didn't matter: Rayman 3's worlds had a better atmosphere and were quite a lot more interesting than the levels in Rayman Legends, which is why I will still replay Rayman 3 more than Rayman Legends (and Origins).

sergiomonty wrote:How about the multiplayer? Kung Foot gives HOURS of entertainment, something that the minigames in R3 could never reach. The addition of Murfy to the Wii U version not only adds something cool to the mix: It adds innovation.

Since when does every game need multiplayer?
Either way, Kung Foot only gives hours of entertainment if you're willing to play the same game over and over and over again.
And you can't possibly drag Murfy into this comparison - you could only use a normal gamepad to control Rayman 3.

sergiomonty wrote:How about content? R3 lacks it. The minigames aren't even a satisfying reward, because most of them are half assed and have clunky controls.

So why do you even prefer Rayman 2? Like that had any rewards at all, except for some ultra-hidden minigames that weren't fun and then that bonus level with, you guessed it, clunky controls.

sergiomonty wrote:How about the platforming? the balloons are the only ones that add something great to the platforming, but that's it. You're basically walking in a straight line, which is something that Legends fixes in some levels. Most of Rayman 3 was about the combat. Terrible, repetitive combat with the same enemies all over again.

Excuse me? Rayman Legends is far more linear than the 3D Rayman games. There are only a few levels I can name that weren't extremely linear in Rayman Legends, and they were: Mansion of the Deep, the Amazing Maze, uh... hmm... can't find any others at the moment.
Rayman 3 on the other hand has a lot of well-hidden secrets - secrets that you can actually miss: for example, I didn't get all the green gems, nor all the Matuvus, nor all the Tribelles on my first R3 HD playthrough, but I did complete RL 100% (except for those two skins and the final awesomeness level) without replaying any levels. In Rayman 3, you had to actually look for these secrets.
I agree that Rayman Legends has a lot better platforming. You have to think about which path you take a lot in the invasion levels, for example. But a lot of that can be very frustrating. It's trial-and-error.

Rayman 2 and 3 focused on the journey more than the platforming (which seems to be the only focus in both Origins and Legends), so in the end they're different kinds of games. I'd even label Rayman 2 and 3 (mostly) action-adventure games, while I'd label Rayman Legends a platformer. This makes me wonder whether anyone can even compare Legends with Rayman 3. But whether the games can be compared or not, I know for sure that I like Rayman 3 a lot more and will still replay it more than Rayman Legends, which I will likely never touch again after I unlock the final skins. I also know why I like it more. I tried to explain that in my last few posts and whether that makes sense to you or not is entirely up to you. I'm sure a lot of people share my opinion though, so you might want to think about it just a little.

Keane wrote:I've never quite understood why some people think Rayman should be all about magic. I love the atmos from the hoodlum hideouts or the Great Hall. Again, I won't every say Rayman 3 isn't flawed, but there's a lot of places like that. Every world has at least one area that really puts all the pieces of the puzzle together.

Indeed, Rayman is not all about magic. A good game has good pacing, putting less beautiful places between beautiful places (and the same counts for story, gameplay, etc). It would simply not make sense to have a world that consists of Razoff's mansion only - it needs to be after a lot of dark swamp-y levels to make it stand out and be memorable. The player needs to feel that he just came out of that horrible, horrible swamp and into that wonderful place.
A good developer sacrifices certain parts of a game so other parts stand out and are forever remembered by the player.

I loved the Great Hall. So mysterious and majestic! Those murals were interesting too. That is also what Rayman is all about - the temples and their mysteriousness. And again, none of that in Rayman Legends. :/
I liked the Hoodlum hideouts too, but even so, I didn't like Clearleaf Forest a lot because the music in it was nearly only combat music (and the same for the Tower of the Leptys).