Rayman Origins

[spiraldoor]

The main problem with that theory is that it’s obviously not what the developers intended.

[THEdragon]

The main problem with that theory is that it’s obviously not what the developers intended.

Yeah, but it's still quite difficult to tell exactly what the developers intended with the storyline!

[TeensieKing]

The main problem with that theory is that it’s obviously not what the developers intended.

Yeah, but it's still quite difficult to tell exactly what the developers intended with the storyline!

Got a point here.I actually hate how unclear they are being this time!

[Shrooblord]

It looks like balls.
But in all earnesty, it does look like a Mini-Jano, yes, with the claws and all. However, for the rest it still looks like just a Psychlops.

[Electoon]

LOL

I guess this ties into the the allusion in the manual with Jano making "Darktoons like cows make milk"

[sergiomonty]

I guess the ubisoft crew found really funny our confusion about the Magician and Mr Dark, so they decided to screw our mind even more with a bald rayman. They're surely laughing their asses off reading this

[TeensieKing]

lol at sergiomonty

Anyways I think they just wanna connect everything,like create random stories to explain many things,but instead of explaining more interesting things,like something about Sssam,they tell us things we never wondered about

[Smega]

Maybe they like it when we have our own theories about the Rayman universe.

[Adsolution]

Maybe they like it when we have our own theories about the Rayman universe.

Companies like Ubisoft are always looking to find aspiring new artistic/creative/emo people to mesh into their team that works in square buildings mostly filled with pirate doppelgangers.

[MasterHero]

by the way....i don't know if anyone noticed this:

Some lividstones have no weapon (the stick)....
- If you get really close to them (not attack), they get afraid and try to get rid of you. That animation (+sound) is really funny
- Some of them hides heir eyes in their hats (like the livingstones in Rayman 1).

[Haruka]

by the way....i don't know if anyone noticed this:

Some lividstones have no weapon (the stick)....
- If you get really close to them (not attack), they get afraid and try to get rid of you. That animation (+sound) is really funny
- Some of them hides heir eyes in their hats (like the livingstones in Rayman 1).

I think I remember spotting the eyes, but now the first thing you mention I don't think so. I should replay to confirm.

[Serza5]

OMG SERZA IS ON A RAYMAN THREAD- Yes I am with a discussion which follows on from this one : viewtopic.php?p=665099#p665099 (I took it here mainly because a mod would most likely ask to take it here anyway).

But anyway people saying that RO is less serious than the prequels is bullshit. Sure it was silly by no means I am not suggesting that but they way i've seen people talk you're saying that RO game from a series of games which where up-tight serious, which is nonesense, with the obvious exception of R2 which I think is the most serious out of the main game series.

I'm not saying much on R1 basically because I never finished the game but what i've played of it is no different to RO with the exception of lack of Teensies and Globox. It wasn't silly by any matter of means but it isn't exactly up-tight serious either. Sure he wanted to go save the world from Mr Dark but that's no different to RO really, nor was the fact that he needed to collect all the electoons to unlock new levels, nor was the fact that he needed magical creatures to give him powers, and lastly nor was the levels (Both of them from what I know has forest based levels, air based levels, and food related levels). To put it simply here I see no difference between the games except for the fact that R1 is shittingly hard and didn't have much (if any at all) silliness in it.

But onto the main point : R3.

I've had the most lovely lengthy discussion with PowerPatrick over on the IRC regarding this and why he believes that R3 is much more serious than RO is baffling. I am not going to go into too much detail but I will list my main arguements :

• R3 had a completely silly, almost off-the-wall storyline to begin with, lums turn evil after being scared and decide to mess things up only for their leader to be eaten. Is this really more serious than Rayman being woken up to complete mayhem and having to deal with it?
• The characters in game where certainly as silly as they are in RO, only difference being they actually talked.
• While I do agree with the fact that some bosses, namely Reflux, were serious there was also the silly ones as well, including Bégoniax and to some extent Count Razoff as well. On the other side of the argument RO had some serious bosses as well namely the sea dragon

To sum this whole mess up : Yes RO is silly, yes it's more silly than the prequals but by no means was it much more silly than them. It bothers me when people say it has little to no serious around because it is there, you just choose not to see it because the silliness stands out much more.

[TeensieKing]

Actually I hope newer games are more serious,much like Rayman 2.But anyways I do think RO is a good game,and is silly but not too much,just a good game,it somewhat makes up for Rayman's harshness in Rayman 3.I never liked Rayman 3 because it was too serious: Rayman 2 had very magical and creative creatures,while Rayman 3's were uncreative,and Rayman was too harsh and Globox was too stupid.I think Michel Ancel should recover the character's personality as it was in Rayman 2.The only change I actually liked was Murfy's,who because much funnier and a better character,though he should be mroe iportant from now on...

[El Dango]

Holy momma, I did not expect that! Hell, this might turn into a massive subject for debate (which is probably a good thing, since I think a lot of people here need to tackle it).

[Serza5]

Actually I hope newer games are more serious,much like Rayman 2.But anyways I do think RO is a good game,and is silly but not too much,just a good game,it somewhat makes up for Rayman's harshness in Rayman 3.I never liked Rayman 3 because it was too serious: Rayman 2 had very magical and creative creatures,while Rayman 3's were uncreative,and Rayman was too harsh and Globox was too stupid.I think Michel Ancel should recover the character's personality as it was in Rayman 2.The only change I actually liked was Murfy's,who because much funnier and a better character,though he should be mroe iportant from now on...

Yeah.

Never mentioned it in my post is the way I see it is : 1,2 and 3 are all major plots to the series, while Origins is a nice sub-plot (As well as Rabbids). The creators should leave the really serious stuff to the main games, while we have more fun but still slightly serious stuff to the side-games.

[Haruka]

Actually I hope newer games are more serious,much like Rayman 2.But anyways I do think RO is a good game,and is silly but not too much,just a good game,it somewhat makes up for Rayman's harshness in Rayman 3.I never liked Rayman 3 because it was too serious: Rayman 2 had very magical and creative creatures,while Rayman 3's were uncreative,and Rayman was too harsh and Globox was too stupid.I think Michel Ancel should recover the character's personality as it was in Rayman 2.The only change I actually liked was Murfy's,who because much funnier and a better character,though he should be mroe iportant from now on...

Same opinion here. I quite like Rayman Origins although the final version isn't the same one mentioned in E3 2010 and in early interviews, which is disappointing.

Rayman 3 actually had some problems for me in terms voice casting (Arrrg, why Globox's and Murfy's voices got changed?), the kind of humour used on it, its relatively short longevity (lets not count the HOF scores in here), Globox became too much stupid, Murfy suddenly starts talking about girls with boobs (it is funny at a point but I was so used to the Rayman 2's Murfy...) and Rayman is too much rebel. André is an inferior antagonist compared with Mr. Dark and Admiral Razorbeard.

I do miss the atmosphere that characterizes Rayman 2: The Great Escape. It would be very nice watching a return of a Rayman game using this kind of model.

[Adsolution]

After a long cup of tea and much pondering, I feel rather equal to all three games. I don't think it would be a hundred percent necessary to emulate the atmosphere of a past game, but I think the series has done an excellent job at variety with the original trilogy. Rayman 1 had the dark/childish/fantastic/nostalgic feel to it, Rayman 2 has that magical/quirky/whimsical/surreal feel, and Rayman 3 feels large/epic/adventurous/apocalyptic. I think each of those three games perfectly followed each other and none disappointed. They had enough variety so that you felt like you were on a completely fresh adventure, and they shared more than enough similarities/atmosphere to instantly make you say "that's Rayman, how I love it."

Origins really doesn't feel like a sequel, as there's no story present, and the atmosphere is far different (honestly, I think RRR1 had much more of a Raymanish atmosphere than Origins). It feels far more like a side-game, and a pretty damn good one at that. I've never had so much fun beating the crap out of enemies. I've never played with another player, but I can only imagine that it makes it exponentially more fun.

I have a feeling that if a Rayman 4 is created, it will probably include all the elements that made the past games so great and incorporate them into a completely new adventure; it will truly feel like a revolutionary moment in the series. Even the way the title "Rayman 4" looks and sounds, it's like a futuristic dream.

[TeensieKing]

Well Rayman 3 didn't feel so much Rayman for me.I got it when I was like 8 and I always thought that games was too serious and its humour was too harsh.I personally think Rayman didn't need to look and "cooler",so they didn't have to change his appereance/personality.Globox was coolio in R2 but it's really dumbass character in R3,I wish he was more like in R2,which would be the perfect Rayman game imo.

[Master]

I think each game has their own atmosphere and tone which fits their story and purpose, to me:
Rayman 1 had a colourful, yet calm atmosphere.
Rayman 2 had a more serious, yet vibrant tone.
Rayman 3 had a more quirky, yet dark (in terms of it's humour) tone.
Rayman Origins has a colourful tone like the first game, but it mixes up bits and bobs from the other games, it sometimes feels magical, which happens in all three, it can be VERY quirky and also vibrant, but it never did seem to have it's own unique atmosphere.

I agree with people in saying that RO does not feel like a proper Rayman 4, I've always felt it was a continuation of sorts to Rayman 1, whilst attempting to unify the series' stories and events.

If and when Rayman 4 is made, I would like it to be what the original trilogy was, separate, but remaining coherent whilst remaining unique in it's tone, which helps it stand out from the current entries in the series.
Remember the Original Raving Rabbids? The tone shown in the trailer was unique as well.

[spiraldoor]

But anyway people saying that RO is less serious than the prequels is bullshit. Sure it was silly by no means I am not suggesting that but they way i've seen people talk you're saying that RO game from a series of games which where up-tight serious, which is nonesense, with the obvious exception of R2 which I think is the most serious out of the main game series.

The key here isn’t seriousness. It’s dignity. R1 has dozens of goofy cartoon characters and ridiculous situations, but no matter how outlandish it gets, the game always maintains a certain level of respectability. It doesn’t expect us to take it seriously, but it does take itself seriously, and this enables it to work on other levels. The undercurrent of magic and mystery never stops. The music plays a bigger part in this than most people know.

Origins doesn’t have much in the way of dignity. The game doesn’t pay itself the respect it deserves, so it rarely reaches the heights of the original.