Rayman Pirate-Community

I've only played AC 1 and 2, so I can't say much for the new AC games, but I really dislike how Ubi is pumping it out every year, it only means less quality the more further in.

Rayfist wrote:How the hell does the PS2 version have the most votes? wut.

razorbeard wrote:Oh. Wait. I just remembered that's the same bloody Ubisoft that made Rayman and Watchdogs.

Watch Dogs wasn't made by Michel Ancel at all though. It's a shame the Rayman games had to be published by Ubisoft, I just wish Michel would form his own company, it sucks how Rayman has to be stuck with Ubisoft.

A problem with that though is it would be a lot harder to receive funding for his more ambitious projects such as BGAE2 without a big publisher involved. However, aside from marketing, the newer Rayman games could probably be developed by an independent developer without Ubisoft.

Edit: But sadly Ubisoft own both the Rayman and BGAE Intellectual properties, so I guess he's kind of stuck with them when it comes to those two franchises.

Wait what, is this poll new?

Yup, after we've started the version discussion again, I thought we might as well see what the community thinks about the various versions.

I don't see why Forever would be on the list as it's pretty much a completely different game from Rayman 2- despite having the characters and levels from the R2 universe.

Bzzit wrote:

Embryonic Hoodbrain wrote: Others could wager it streamlines the more superfluous parts of the level design, though I'll have to see for myself how true that is..

Honestly, I feel like the majority of sections that were cut were some of the worst or least memorable in the game. I personally think the Ps1 version would deserve the backlash it gets regarding cut content, if it had involved a level like the precipice being dropped. Instead, (for the most part) it's mediocre sections such as when you are required to navigate a clunky pirate ship, ride a clunky roller-coaster, as well as the first part of "The Tomb of Ancients" which is probably my least favourite section of the other versions.

I remember someone saying that the PS1 version is the equivalent of a demo for the other versions - I definitely disagree with that statement .

That's how I felt it was going to be like. How are the load screens in the game. During the 30 minute side-by-sife comparison between the N64 and PS1 versions I watched, they kept pausing the stream of the PS1 version during load screens to let the N64 version catch up, and it wasn't representative at all of the actual loading time.

Here's the side-by-side video for reference: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJtE2oTuvtU

By far Revolution on PS2 is the best IMO.

Thanks for the clarification, I thought I was on a different thread for a minute!

Hmm, I'd expect the PS1 version to have longer loading times, being disc-based as opposed to cartridge-based. Though I don't recall the load times being annoyingly long at all anyways. I know the N64 version was also compatible with the Expansion Pak too, which gave better textures and resolution, if memory serves.

Master wrote:Hmm, I'd expect the PS1 version to have longer loading times, being disc-based as opposed to cartridge-based. Though I don't recall the load times being annoyingly long at all anyways. I know the N64 version was also compatible with the Expansion Pak too, which gave better textures and resolution, if memory serves.

That's good to know. How much does Rayman 2 N64 benefit from the Expansion Pack?

I'd say as an Army the pirates were much more dangerous then the Hoodlums.

Discuss.

rolesfamily wrote:I'd say as an Army the pirates were much more dangerous then the Hoodlums.

Discuss.

I agree there, but it was more fun beating up Hoodlums because of the improved combat. I also thought Andre was a much more fleshed-out character than Razorbeard, but I can't tell who I prefer. Not sure which final boss I prefer, either, though 3 has better overall boss battles.

Oh Razorbeard is far cooler then Andre, easily. Yeah beating up hoodlums are much more fun the dodging and trying to shoot at robo-pirates. Yeah 3 wins on boss battles for sure.

Embryonic Hoodbrain wrote:

rolesfamily wrote:I'd say as an Army the pirates were much more dangerous then the Hoodlums.

Discuss.

I agree there, but it was more fun beating up Hoodlums because of the improved combat. I also thought Andre was a much more fleshed-out character than Razorbeard, but I can't tell who I prefer. Not sure which final boss I prefer, either, though 3 has better overall boss battles.

Are you reading my mind?

Sugar wrote:

Embryonic Hoodbrain wrote:

rolesfamily wrote:I'd say as an Army the pirates were much more dangerous then the Hoodlums.

Discuss.

I agree there, but it was more fun beating up Hoodlums because of the improved combat. I also thought Andre was a much more fleshed-out character than Razorbeard, but I can't tell who I prefer. Not sure which final boss I prefer, either, though 3 has better overall boss battles.

Are you reading my mind?

Not quite. I just made sure to collect every mental fragment, piece of baggage, and memory vault before taking a whiff of my smelling salts. There's some pretty cool stuff in there. You should take a gander, sometime.

Embryonic Hoodbrain wrote:

Sugar wrote:

Embryonic Hoodbrain wrote:

rolesfamily wrote:I'd say as an Army the pirates were much more dangerous then the Hoodlums.

Discuss.

I agree there, but it was more fun beating up Hoodlums because of the improved combat. I also thought Andre was a much more fleshed-out character than Razorbeard, but I can't tell who I prefer. Not sure which final boss I prefer, either, though 3 has better overall boss battles.

Are you reading my mind?

Not quite. I just made sure to collect every mental fragment, piece of baggage, and memory vault before taking a whiff of my smelling salts. There's some pretty cool stuff in there. You should take a gander, sometime.

DAMN YOU HAVE 200 TINGS? WTF!
How fast the heck on the crap?!

Rayfist wrote:The lighting? Didn't you have that really weird copy of the game with the fucked up lighting? From my experience the lighting was fine, I could see crystal clear, and it felt if not the same as the PC version. Hrm... if only I had a game recorder. I'm gonna do emulation to take a picture of one of the levels and compare with the PC version to see what you're talkin bout later.

Yeah, though I compared using NullDC, not my copy.

Rayfist wrote:I also really didn't mind the crystals, I don't see how you could look at them as such a nuisance, I felt they didn't hinder the experience in any shape or form, they were just.... there, pick them up and proceed. Also I didn't find the map for the DC version bad at all? I think I may favor the Hall of Doors (PC) but I still didn't see much wrong with it. Also I don't get how the map screen just completely ruins a huge portion of it for you, I mean it isn't like Revolution where you have a hub world you can actually explore, the levels heavily outweigh the maps. And Globox Village was a very nice addition, you got to understand more of the personalities of the baby Globox's. It wasn't nearly as big as the hub world in Revolution, but it was nice to fool around in.

Rayman 2 to me is not really Rayman 2 without the Hall of Doors. Changing the overworld is like getting rid of Globox or Razorbeard. The Hall in Rayman 2 is iconic, there's never been any other video game to have an overworld that looks anything like it, and with that level of atmosphere and mysticism. The Isle we've seen and have since seen a thousand times over in other games.

Embryonic Hoodbrain wrote:I can tell you from experience that Far Cry 3 is complete garbage. It's one of the most irritating, shallow experiences I've ever taken. Similar to Assassin's Creed IV, but without any redeeming value. It's one of the few games to make me vomit just looking at it. To contrast, I'm incredibly excited for Far Cry 4, which releases the day after my birthday.

And I can state the opposite from my own experience, I found both games to be incredibly fun and addictive. Maybe you aren't a fan of the "here's an open world, do everything at your own pace" genre, though I personally enjoy it quite a lot.

Rayfist wrote:but I really dislike how Ubi is pumping it out every year, it only means less quality the more further in.

Well, that doesn't really make sense. Realistically, if they release one per year and continue to make profit, the quality will only increase, as the budget and staff does concordantly. Remember too that the Assissin's Creed development team is freaking massive, so realistically, they are able to make a quality game in one half or one third the time most teams would be able to. Not that that means they'll all be of substantial quality (I thought AC Revelations and III were pretty bad), but a poor game is a result of poor direction, not of a conceptually short development time if no one's feeling too strained.

iOS Master Race! Yeah, boy!

You can emulate PSX on Android.
DC too, but R2 doesn't work, said someone at Google Play.

What is an advantages of using emulator of Glide in R2 PC?

Was not ported for people with large thumbs in mind.

Maybe it's just matter of size of display?

BGAE2

Yes. That would be great.

The Hall in Rayman 2 is iconic

Yep, and that was better to leave it alone.

Embryonic Hoodbrain wrote:I can tell you from experience that Far Cry 3 is complete garbage. It's one of the most irritating, shallow experiences I've ever taken. Similar to Assassin's Creed IV, but without any redeeming value. It's one of the few games to make me vomit just looking at it. To contrast, I'm incredibly excited for Far Cry 4, which releases the day after my birthday.

And I can state the opposite from my own experience, I found both games to be incredibly fun and addictive. Maybe you aren't a fan of the "here's an open world, do everything at your own pace" genre, though I personally enjoy it quite a lot.

I'm actually a very big (fat) fan of open-world games, specifically Grand Theft Auto V and Fallout 3, and I also like the first few Assassin's Creed games. Far Cry 3 had something off, and lacked depth for me personally. It was mostly just me slogging through a very bland open-world, doing very repetitive things, to the beat of a decent story that totally lost it halfway in. The only redeeming factor was the co-op, and even that was uninspired. Keep in mind this is only indicative of my experience, and in no way the definitive experience of the game.

Sugar wrote:Nobody voted for iOS...forever alone. Actually my first Rayman game was R2. In iOS.
The iOS version is VERY UNDERRATED.It's actually fine, some things are wrong, yeah every game has one thing wrong.
But anyways the iOS version is good. Not GOODGOODGOOD but good.

Thank you! My first copy of the game was the iOS version and I loved it. But I voted for the Dreamcast version because the ports I played were ports of the DC version.

I have voted for Revolution. It was the first version I played, so all the other versions feel incomplete without the depth and story of Revolution.

Compared to the other versions, Revolution put a much greater emphesis on immersion. Rather than the Hall of Doors or the Isle of Doors where you were stuck to a fixed path in a small enclosed location, Revolution gave you a large hub world to explore, filled with new NPCs and other creatures. Because of this, the world seems seamless; you can tell how one area leads to the next and it makes the game seem a lot bigger. The Stone Circles also make it a lot more convienent than other hub worlds, as you can get to any level by hopping into a maximum of two portals.

Because of the hub world, there is room to place a lot more events. One such example is when Rayman first meets Clark. In the other versions, you first run into him in the Menhir Hills, and you know nothing about him, other than his strength. Because of this, it feels like a chore to have to go to the Cave of Bad Dreams to receive the life potion, and it feels odd that you first see him exactly when he is needed (to break through the walls). In Revolution, most players will first meet Clark near the first stone circle, where he saves Rayman from a multitude of Robo-Pirates. This gives the player insight into his kind, brave and not-so-clever personality, and the player will symphesise with him later in the Menhir Hills.

Another strong point of Revolution is the fact that there is always a reason you are going to certain worlds. In the other versions, you simply completed one world, then went to the next (taking the one trip back to the Cave of Bad Dreams). In Revolution, there was a reason for going to these worlds. For the Bayou, it was to free Bzzit, for the Tomb of the Ancients it was to help Clark. This helps the player understand why they are going through each level, making the journey feel more worthwhile, while also allowing them to emphisise with the characters and better involve themselves in the story.

Revolution also made a few other changes, such as moving the location of certain lums. This allowed for much more replayablilty, as 100% of lums could often not be collected in the first playthough of each level. Collection of lums also feels more worthwhile in Revolution, as you can use them to enhance your power from the magic well. After you have obtained all the powers, you could also purchase minigames which could be played competitively with others, allowing for a good multiplayer experience. There were also single-player challenges which could be unlocked by breaking cages, which upon completion rewarded the player with more health. The extra bosses and enemies surved to make the game more difficult, longer, and more complete than the original, and patched up a few issues as well (splitting the Iron Mountains and the Pirate Mines was definately a good idea).

All that said, there are downsides to Revolution, such as poor framerate, the voice acting (I hate Murfy so much), excessive loading and saving screens, mixing and matching levels, and the fact that it was shamed by a mass-murderer .