Rayman Pirate-Community

Not long ago I read about a user who heavily criticized Rayman 3 Hoodlum Havoc calling it a "typical shitty american game": too fast and shipped, superficial and in general not to be a valid title.
Not long after I was reading another user who heavily criticized the last Rayman titles (Rayman Origins and Rayman Legends) comparing them in a face-to-face with the first two titles of the series, explaining how Rayman had lost in time its seriousness and his style.
Today, finding myself in full agreement with these two users and in general with all those who prefer quality of the series over quantity, I decide to open a discussion about how the Rayman's series it evolved (and impoverished) over the course of the 21st century.

It's clear that this is obviously a personal discussion and therefore unofficial, but everyone can join explaining their point of view. However, I ask to the fanatics who want to be at every cost extremist and aggressive to abstain, since although my discussion isn't nothing official has also been corroborated by authoritative magazines (as for example Nintendo Power) and critics in general, that those who criticize the new Rayman series is not necessarily a fool or a quarrelsome, and that the series, like it or not, has suffered an inexorable and undeniable decline.

So let's start from the first two games and therefore Rayman in the '90s:

RAYMAN (original 1995 PlayStation version) is an innovative platform both as regards the character, both for the style. The game features a great impact soundtrack with strong Jazz and Ragtime influences.
The characters are based on their role: heroic (Rayman), magic (Betilla and The Magician), bad (Mr Sax), more or less extravagant (Mr Skops) without ever falling into the ridiculous but appearing simply "strange" or evil (Mr Dark) .
The plot is treated with due seriousness. For seriousness I mean that gaming issues are not treated superficially and you can breathe the atmosphere of a world that is going against to the catastrophe.
Not to mention for finally atmospheres that is able to propose, simply deep and engaging.

RAYMAN 2 THE GREAT ESCAPE (original 1999 Nintendo 64 version) is a title on which I would really much to write, but I will limit myself to a brief description, just like that of the first Rayman.
Also in this case the game has a great impact soundtrack with a mainly Pink Floyd's influence mixed with Ambient, Breakbeat and New Wave style. This soundtrack is in my opinion epic and mystical, powerful and delicate at the same time, in short, something unique and unrepeatable.
The characters are differ, but not too much, from those of the first title simply because adopting stylistic canons that differs from that of the main protagonist. But also in this case each one reflects its role: heroic (Rayman), the spiritual guide (Murphy), magic (Ly and Teensies), helpers (Globox and Clark), bad and dark (Guardian of The Cave Of Bad Dreams), and evil (Razorbeard). Each character reflects faithfully and brilliantly its role without ever deviate from it.
Also in this game the plot is treated with extremely seriousness. Also in this case for seriousness I mean that gaming issues are not treated superficially and you can breathe the atmosphere of a world that is going against to the apocalypse.
Not to mention for finally atmospheres that is able to propose, sublime, dark, distressing, phobic, spatial and mystical (as its soundtrack).
In short, the best game of the series (and the best game of all in my opinion) immediately followed by the first.

So let's start from the other games and therefore Rayman in the '00s:

RAYMAN REVOLUTION (original 2000 PlayStation 2 version)
I take the opportunity just to criticize this remake since I think has shuttered the magnificent and wonderful essence of the original game.
I think this remake marked the beginning of the end of Rayman and its series adding unnecessary elements that have distorted the plot of the game and removing/replacing others who have literally shuttered the essence of the original Rayman 2.
This remake is awful, the new 3D skin or elements of the characters and all the other changes are simply unwatchable!

RAYMAN M (original 2001 PlayStation 2 version)
A chldish and silly game, just watch the introductory video or the awful characters Dark Globox (Rayman Arena) Tily and Razorwife that are simply embarrassing, meaningless and devoid of charisma that have characterized Rayman and Rayman 2 The Great Escape.
Also Razorbeard have turned into a bad lot and they should explain how the Robots-Pirates are back if Rayman and Polokus defeated them all at the end of Rayman 2 The Great Escape.
As we see that Ubi Soft has simply paid rights to Michel Ancel just to sell, sell and sell... with no more heart.

RAYMAN 3 HOODLUM HAVOC (original 2003 GameCube version)
The game features a soundtrack decidedly weak and sometimes unbearable.
The characters are the bastardized copy and paste of the characters of Rayman 2 The Great Escape where developers and voice actors have brought out the worst in each of them: awful the new skin of Rayman and it has become an anti-hero who spends his days lounging, Murphy by a spirit guide has become a talkative and bad taste satyr, the Teensies known as builders gnomes have become less serious and a metamorphoses all-purpose, Globox from loyal assistant has become a coward out of mind, the fairies have disappeared, the Hoodlums seem sacks of potatoes and more than an enemy seem crazy disarray and Knaaren are those a bit more serious, but nothing that is clear!
Also in this game the plot is treated with inexistent seriousness and the gaming issues are treated with extreme superficiality. In Rayman 3 Hoodlum Havoc you can breathe the atmosphere of a world OF FOOLS!
Not to mention for finally atmospheres, trivial and not at engaging.
In short, SEE NINTENDO POWER SEPT. 2006

RAYMAN RAVING RABBIDS (original 2006 Game Boy Advance version)
The game had the potential but the trivial and irritating presence of Rabbids, the new design of the characters and also in this case the general less seriousness of the game make it an anonymous title and of fact a copy of the first Rayman in 2006 style.

RAYMAN ORIGINS (original 2011 version)
Also this game features a decidedly weak and unbearable soundtrack.
The characters are an extreme bastardized copy and paste of the characters of Rayman 2 The Great Escape: awful the new skin of Rayman (how Rayman 3) Murphy, Globox, Teensies, Betilla and Polokus are simply monstrous, appear scrawls.
The plot... seriously, but EXISTS!? You do not understand anything, it's confusional!
They made a fruit salad, items from Robot-Pirates (disappeared), elements from the first Rayman that are interwoven bad, that's a game made just to silence the fanatics who couldn't wait Rayman for years now.

RAYMAN LEGENDS (original 2013 version)
Same features of Rayman Origins but worse, the rest to the worst there is no limit!
Interestingly the choice to copy Super Mario 64 by using the paintings as levels selection, bah!

I wanna just concluding by saying that for me Rayman is died with Rayman 2 and there will be no more like the first two titles.
And concluding by saying that the true fanatic isn't not who collects everything and at all costs of his hero but who, precisely because he/she loves him, collects the good, recognizing when there is something wrong and avoiding the rotten! Greetings

These opinions are bad and you should feel bad.

Bradandez wrote:These opinions are bad and you should feel bad.

I motivated my opinions.

In addition, I repeat, there's not just my opinions. So many other people think like me.

Also Nintendo Power criticized Rayman 3 just to mention the most striking case. Also Nintendo Power staff are bad in your opinion!?

I love Rayman 1 and 2 for the same reasons you do - they're my favourites in the series - but you're looking at the games from an extremely biased and childish point of view; I shared your opinion when I was twelve.

darkx wrote:since although my discussion isn't nothing official has also been corroborated by authoritative magazines (as for example Nintendo Power) and critics in general,

Is that why Rayman 3, Origins and Legends each have a higher aggregate score than Rayman 1?

darkx wrote:RAYMAN (original 1995 PlayStation version)
(...)
The characters are based on their role: heroic (Rayman), magic (Betilla and The Magician), bad (Mr Sax), more or less extravagant (Mr Skops) without ever falling into the ridiculous but appearing simply "strange" or evil (Mr Dark) .
The plot is treated with due seriousness. For seriousness I mean that gaming issues are not treated superficially and you can breathe the atmosphere of a world that is going against to the catastrophe.

Rayman's world has a lot of very goofy/odd imagery, but the game presents itself in such a way that they're meant to be taken seriously, as if nothing in Rayman's world is supposed to be seen as even remotely goofy or odd. Rayman 2 does this as well, and that's one of the reasons I like the two games so much.

However, I think you're placing far too much importance on individual occurrences of this and extrapolating concepts that were never there to begin with. That's fine when keeping your own head-canon, but not when you're trying to create an objective comparison between the games. What does "The characters are based on their rolls" even mean? Doesn't every narrative in history do this? Or are you saying that the Magician is portrayed as a stereotypical Magician, and that that's a good thing? Furthermore, what makes Mister Sax more deserving of being called "bad" than any of the other bosses (also, I thought the game implied that the bosses are actually good and that they were under control, hence why they dance after being defeated), and in what way is Skops "More or less extravagant"? I have literally no idea what that's even supposed to mean.

darkx wrote:RAYMAN 2 THE GREAT ESCAPE (original 1999 Nintendo 64 version)

The N64 version was released first, but it's not the original. The PC version is technically the original version.

darkx wrote:bad and dark (Guardian of The Cave Of Bad Dreams)

I don't think Jano is supposed to be portrayed as "bad", I think he's supposed to be more of a Satan character whose purpose is to see if you have the will to resist selfish temptation.

darkx wrote:Each character reflects faithfully and brilliantly its role without ever deviate from it.

Faithfully and without deviation? Yes, though the reason they achieve this is because it's a platformer without that much depth to the narrative; the characters are very standard archetypes. That's not what I would call even remotely "brilliant". However, I agree that, on the whole, the game's presentation is brilliant.

darkx wrote:Not to mention for finally atmospheres that is able to propose, sublime, dark, distressing, phobic

The game is clearly supposed to be a charming, cute and heart-warming adventure. There are dramatic moments and horror-themed levels, but they're all quite light-hearted for the most part. Literally speaking it is the darkest game in the series probably one of the darkest platformers to exist, but that's because almost all platformers let slapstick play a far greater role than it does in Rayman 2. Again, that's one of the reasons I like Rayman 2 so much, but in reality, the game is not that dark. You're looking at it through the eyes of a younger, more sensitive version of yourself who could actually have been frightened or distressed by some of what happened in the game.

darkx wrote:In short, the best game of the series (and the best game of all in my opinion) immediately followed by the first.

I noticed that, throughout this entire comparison, you hadn't brought up gameplay even once. Rayman 1 is very well-designed in some respects, but it also definitely contains flaws, especially towards the latter half of the game. Even in terms of presentation, let's not forget how anti-climactic the final phase of the Mister Dark fight is.

Rayman 2 has relatively poor combat and most of the gimmicks (like the walking shells, flying barrels, and even plums) are very nonsensical to control. The final battle is climactic, but my biggest issue with it is that most of it utilises a gimmick that was literally introduced to you just earlier in the same level, rather than actually putting the skill you earned throughout the entire game to the test.

Neither of these games are perfect. I think they're both phenomenal and, like I said, are two of my favourite games of all time, but they aren't even close to being the most well-designed games ever to exist.

darkx wrote:RAYMAN REVOLUTION (original 2000 PlayStation 2 version)
I take the opportunity just to criticize this remake since I think has shuttered the magnificent and wonderful essence of the original game.

In some respects, yes, but in other respects I think Revolution greatly improved upon Rayman 2's world. The Front (the hub world) is a great attempt at bringing more depth to the world, and in that sense I think it succeeds greatly. It's fun to explore, contains a variety of areas, and is quite pretty to look at (especially the forest) - I think one of the most magical moments in the game is when you enter the Front for the very first time. However, one major complaint I have with it is that it ironically makes Rayman's world feel a lot smaller than it should, as it gives the impression you can walk from one end of the world to the other in about two minutes.

The Hall of Doors, while not being interactive, is one of the most magical things I have ever seen in my life. It makes you feel as if, upon entering each level, that you're being teleported to an entirely different part of the world, and the need for these warps only makes you ponder how big the world actually is. It directly implies that these areas are not within walking distance of each other!

darkx wrote:the new 3D skin or elements of the characters and all the other changes are simply unwatchable!

Seriously? I think the game's graphical updates are superb. The world feels so much more alive and vibrant (it did before, but now even more so). Have you seen the area where you save Ly in the Fairy Glade? They clearly put a lot of love into Revolution, and I'm almost offended by your words on behalf of the development team.

darkx wrote:RAYMAN M (original 2001 PlayStation 2 version)
A chldish and silly game, just watch the introductory video

I kind of like the intro. It's silly and entertaining.

darkx wrote:Tily and Razorwife that are simply embarrassing,

Yes they are indeed. No objections here.

darkx wrote:Also Razorbeard have turned into a bad lot and they should explain how the Robots-Pirates are back if Rayman and Polokus defeated them all at the end of Rayman 2 The Great Escape.

You're complaining about the canonical continuity of a party game, when literally no franchise party game has ever given a rat's ass about continuity. Also, who ever said the game canonically takes place after Rayman 2?

darkx wrote:As we see that Ubi Soft has simply paid rights to Michel Ancel just to sell, sell and sell... with no more heart.

Are you serious? Have you heard the soundtrack? Let me introduce you to Rise and Shrine and Spellbound Forest. These are outstandingly beautiful tracks, and the main theme to my fangame is hugely inspired by the latter.

The gameplay isn't great, but I dare you to tell me with complete sincerity that the environments (especially those in the water world: Dawn Sand, Water Canyon and 1000 Waterfalls) aren't absolutely gorgeous.

darkx wrote:RAYMAN 3 HOODLUM HAVOC (original 2003 GameCube version)
The game features a soundtrack decidedly weak and sometimes unbearable.

It's not my favourite in the series, but it still contains a lot of great tracks. Since you seem to like Rayman 2's soundtrack so much, let me link a couple tracks that I think easily reach it in terms of being mystical and beautiful and stuff:

Once Upon a Time
Searching for Globox
Under the Starlight
The Magic Mirror
The Land of the Livid Dead

And here are some energetic tracks that are just great in general:

Hoodoo
The Knaaren Warrior
Perilous Pathways
Ascended Knaaren Warrior

darkx wrote:The characters are the bastardized copy and paste of the characters of Rayman 2 The Great Escape

I'm a fan of continuity. Are you not or something?

darkx wrote:awful the new skin of Rayman

That's completely subjective. A lot of people really like the design and favour it over his previous ones.

darkx wrote:and it has become an anti-hero

wat

darkx wrote:who spends his days lounging

This has been depicted in Rayman's limited personality since, literally, the introduction sequence of the first game.

darkx wrote:Murphy by a spirit guide has become a talkative and bad taste satyr

How is it in bad taste? I think both he and Globox are utterly hilarious, through a combination of the writing and the voice acting. I actually find them funnier now than I did as a kid.

darkx wrote:the Teensie known as builders gnomes have become less serious and a metamorphoses all-purpose,

So seriousness is a measurement of quality? Why don't we just make all comedies serious? They'd be better then, right?

darkx wrote:Globox from loyal assistant has become a coward out of mind

Again, immediately after you free Globox in Rayman 2 it's established that he's a coward. He's a loyal coward in both Rayman 2 and 3, nothing has changed in that respect, and that's what I think is most important.

darkx wrote:the Hoodlums seem sacks of potatoes and more than an enemy

I like how you didn't acknowledge how clever the name "hoodlum" itself is. Also, their designs are easily on par with the robo-pirates' in terms of creativity.

darkx wrote:tseem crazy disarray and Knaaren are those a bit more serious, but nothing that is clear!

Nothing is clear?

darkx wrote:the gaming issues are treated with extreme superficiality.

I've almost gotten the impression that you haven't even played the game at this point. The game, unquestionably, has the greatest depth out of the three in terms of gameplay. The combat system is widely praised as being some of the best ever to exist in a platformer, even overtaking many games in the beat-em-up genre; power-ups such as the lockjaw take abilities introduced in the previous games and give them far more flexibility in terms of their purpose and function, and the game contains a variety of puzzle elements not really present in Rayman 2. The gimmicks are also far more solid.

darkx wrote:RAYMAN ORIGINS (original 2011 version)
Also this game features a decidedly weak and unbearable soundtrack.

While I think the soundtrack kind of never knows when to shut up and it frequently detracts from the atmosphere of certain areas, the main theme is very catchy, and the compositions themselves are quite brilliant. Besides, it's not like it's without tracks that are probably more up your alley:

Desert Mirage
The Abyss

And of course, this outstanding fella:

Chasing a Dream

darkx wrote:The characters are an extreme bastardized copy and paste of the characters of Rayman 2 The Great Escape: awful the new skin of Rayman (how Rayman 3) Murphy, Globox, Teensies, Betilla and Polokus are simply monstrous, appear scrawls.
The plot... seriously, but EXISTS!? You do not understand anything, it's confusional!
They made a fruit salad, items from Robot-Pirates (disappeared), elements from the first Rayman that are interwoven bad, that's a game made just to silence the fanatics who couldn't wait Rayman for years now.

Again, you've mentioned absolutely nothing to do with the gameplay. Personally, while I think it gets a little bit repetitive at times and has far too many mosquito levels, the levels are incredibly well-designed, and the mechanics are fun and fluid. Also, the artwork is breathtaking - perhaps a bit too Earthy for my Raymanian tastes, especially the backgrounds, but it's breathtaking nonetheless.

darkx wrote:RAYMAN LEGENDS (original 2013 version)
Same features of Rayman Origins but worse, the rest to the worst there is no limit!

I thought this was the preface to your prose, but I was wrong.

darkx wrote:And concluding by saying that the true fanatic isn't not who collects everything and at all costs of his hero but who, precisely because he/she loves him, collects the good, recognizing when there is something wrong and avoiding the rotten! Greetings

When you start use terms like "recognise" when discussing art, you become the fool.




All in all, your opinions have largely consisted of false extrapolations and totally arbitrary (actually, completely nonsensical) measurements of quality. The only thing you've managed to articulate throughout this entire post of yours is that humour is apparently bad for some reason.

darkx wrote:Also Nintendo Power staff are bad in your opinion!?

No, but whoever wrote the review in Nintendo Power was just another guy giving his opinion, and his opinion doesn't necessarily have any more weight to it than yours or mine. Usually however, you can expect professional critics to be relatively free from bias, or at least capable of providing well-supported reasoning for their views. Personally, I can't imagine that Nintendo Power's review was anything like yours, except for maybe having vaguely echoed the notion that Rayman 1 and 2 are better than Rayman 3.

Rayman 1, being 2D, plays distinctly different from Rayman 2 and 3, so I would not directly compare it to these two games. Rayman 1 is an insanely hard game by modern standards. It's unforgiving, sometimes to the point of being unfair. And you have to find every single cage to beat it, so you can literally get stuck for months because of a few not obvious, hard to find cages.

It does get simpler once you figure out how to replay easy levels (Allegro Presto) for unlimited lives, but it is still a serious challenge. Some like it, some don't.

Going to the 3D games: while Rayman 3 is more advanced than Rayman 2 in every way (gameplay, graphics, story depth), I too find that its atmosphere is just... not as magical. It makes me want to replay the game far less than Rayman 2. In fact, the part in Rayman 3 that has the best replay value to me is the silly mini-games.

I cannot agree about the music of Rayman 3 being bad. I found that it has a lot of great tunes, and in fact many of them are more complete and stand better as individual musical pieces than the tunes of Rayman 2, which are composed of short bits and pieces, a lot of which are just reprises of the same tune. It works marvelously in the game, but it does not create a soundtrack to listen to independently.

Even I'll start with answer you step by step, to demonstrate that I speak from my personal experience because I've played every title in my 26 years of life and because certainly I did not a negative mood 24/7 but simply hate the hilarity at any cost and the real nonsense (not mine) and seeing that these two characteristics prevail in my favourite series causes me anger, doesn't sit well with me.

I love Rayman 1 and 2 for the same reasons you do - they're my favourites in the series - but you're looking at the games from an extremely biased and childish point of view; I shared your opinion when I was twelve.

I will not be here to dispute the part in which you consider my opinion childish, like that of a twelve years old kid, after all if I did I would be really childish.
For this I will give you a more concrete answer, by telling you that my opinion is not biased because "the eye" and the good taste wants its share. Really biased is to base everything on the gameplay and game mechanics as you did (at least based upon your answers) and forgetting the rest, instead I try to make people understand what the gameplay is important but also the good taste and therefore the design should not be less than the action and the fun it brings.
Therefore if being childish is being your own judgment more authentic, genuine, I am happy to be childish but my opinion seeks to be complete (not biased) for the reason mentioned above.

Is that why Rayman 3, Origins and Legends each have a higher aggregate score than Rayman 1?

Precise for first that I think with my head, always.
Apart that, Rayman 3, Rayman Origins and Rayman Legends were too subject of many criticisms, which are beyond my ordinary person.
However you have to consider two aspects, even the criticism evolves according and "adapting" to his own era. Let me explain, in the 2000s Rayman 3 for its style was acclaimed, in the '90s instead, based my thought on the standards of the '90s, it would have been widely criticized. Indeed Rayman 3 was developed in '00s and not in the '90s that on the contrary created the first and the second Rayman that is another story respect to Rayman 3 and the others next Rayman.
I conclude by saying that Rayman 3 has received overall poorer receptions compared to Rayman 2 (just as well this website recognizes and affirms, I wonder why!?) and although Rayman 3, Rayman Origins and Rayman Legends the fanatics want to protect them in their heart we all know that does not bear comparison with the first Rayman, never and ever.

Rayman's world has a lot of very goofy/odd imagery, but the game presents itself in such a way that they're meant to be taken seriously, as if nothing in Rayman's world is supposed to be seen as even remotely goofy or odd. Rayman 2 does this as well, and that's one of the reasons I like the two games so much.

However, I think you're placing far too much importance on individual occurrences of this and extrapolating concepts that were never there to begin with. That's fine when keeping your own head-canon, but not when you're trying to create an objective comparison between the games. What does "The characters are based on their rolls" even mean? Doesn't every narrative in history do this? Or are you saying that the Magician is portrayed as a stereotypical Magician, and that that's a good thing? Furthermore, what makes Mister Sax more deserving of being called "bad" than any of the other bosses (also, I thought the game implied that the bosses are actually good and that they were under control, hence why they dance after being defeated), and in what way is Skops "More or less extravagant"? I have literally no idea what that's even supposed to mean.

What I mean is a lot simpler than it sounds. Regardless of the role each character plays, he plays its role seriously and without frills.
In the first and second Rayman no character in a dangerous situation such as a contamination of the world show off their foolish as a Rayman 3's Murphy, don't ever feel Globox fart (forgive the vulgarity) in Rayman 2 The Great Escape, and not never would you see the Fairy Betilla be lifting her skirt from Rayman's hair almost to see what lies beneath. That is, they were more serious games and although more or less extravagant but took seriously every aspect.

The N64 version was released first, but it's not the original. The PC version is technically the original version.

The PlayStation version is technically the original version.
But apart this for me the only two versions of Rayman 2 The Great Escape are the PlayStation version (because emphasizes the original soundtrack thanks to CD and the cosmic nature of the game) and the Nintendo 64 (since it's the version that shows the most darker nature of that great game).

I don't think Jano is supposed to be portrayed as "bad", I think he's supposed to be more of a Satan character whose purpose is to see if you have the will to resist selfish temptation.

However, is not a definition of evil?

That's not what I would call even remotely "brilliant".

Razorbeard is simply perfect. And his wickedness and anger is expressed in a superb manner.

Literally speaking it is the darkest game in the series probably one of the darkest platformers to exist... but in reality, the game is not that dark

First you contradict yourself. Second he involved and amazed me but never traumatized. You think that today to 26 years I'm going to see the videos on internet because I can not do without its atmosphere and its colors, its music and its environments.
Simply we're talking about something so successful that has stolen my soul, and do not think I'm the only one. Therefore is a platform succeeded if they have been able to. And know that because I've seen and played to the most beautiful video games of all kinds in the '90s, from Super Mario 64 to Zelda The Ocarina Of Time, from Need For Speed 2 to Touring Cars 2, from Monster Bash for DOS up to Command & Conquer Red Alert just to name a few, so I think I can recognize when something succeeds better than another.
Therefore this beautiful game is not meant to be a dark fantasy but for what shows, and the experience it offers could disturb and fascinate even an adult.

I noticed that, throughout this entire comparison, you hadn't brought up gameplay even once. Rayman 1 is very well-designed in some respects, but it also definitely contains flaws, especially towards the latter half of the game. Even in terms of presentation, let's not forget how anti-climactic the final phase of the Mister Dark fight is.

Rayman 2 has relatively poor combat and most of the gimmicks (like the walking shells, flying barrels, and even plums) are very nonsensical to control. The final battle is climactic, but my biggest issue with it is that most of it utilises a gimmick that was literally introduced to you just earlier in the same level, rather than actually putting the skill you earned throughout the entire game to the test.

Neither of these games are perfect. I think they're both phenomenal and, like I said, are two of my favourite games of all time, but they aren't even close to being the most well-designed games ever to exist.

To the first statement I recognize that Mr. Dark is perfect in its own form and its metamorphoses are a bit rough.

To the second statement I just don't agree with you because not everything has to be discovered or learned for the final battle. In every game the protagonist has to adapt himself to the battle and not the contrary.

To the third statement just say that the game physics of Rayman 2 preceded games of sixth generation like Rayman 3 and GTA SA, moreover Rayman 3 is based on the graphics engine of Rayman 2 non-random and Rayman 2 stunts are far more subdivided than Rayman 3.
Even the critics consider it the most advanced of its era (1999/2000) because to the dynamics, movement, dialogues and overall the game.
Then normally there are those who prefer the characters of Zelda, Super Mario... but Rayman 2 The Great Escape for me, also thanks its lightness, beats the darlings Nintendo, Sega, Atari etc.

For me this is art:


This scene that arouses love, considering the whole game, even beats Titanic.

The Hall of Doors, while not being interactive, is one of the most magical things I have ever seen in my life. It makes you feel as if, upon entering each level, that you're being teleported to an entirely different part of the world, and the need for these warps only makes you ponder how big the world actually is. It directly implies that these areas are not within walking distance of each other!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBC86e5cT5U Not by chance!

Seriously? I think the game's graphical updates are superb. The world feels so much more alive and vibrant (it did before, but now even more so). Have you seen the area where you save Ly in the Fairy Glade? They clearly put a lot of love into Revolution, and I'm almost offended by your words on behalf of the development team.

Do not be offended, if you worked to Rayman Revolution guess you've worked accordingly to Rayman 2 The Great Escape so I admire you.
I just say that the skin present in the original Nintendo 64 (and PlayStation) version/s with the hub in 2D and 3D gaming features used only where necessary is in my opinion the best.
The Rayman's skin in the original version for Nintendo 64 and PlayStation appear delicate and expressive while in PC and Dreamcast versions, and PlayStation 2 remake appears little expressive, squat and ungainly. Just compare the dialogues of the Nintendo 64 version with 128-bit versions to understand what I mean.

Also, who ever said the game canonically takes place after Rayman 2?

Also desiring to justify it, Razorbeard takes part in a competition where it looks like a perfect fool, and then submits the world with him aggressiveness and seriosuness. Sounds bad, don't you think?!

Are you serious? Have you heard the soundtrack? Let me introduce you to Rise and Shrine and Spellbound Forest. These are outstandingly beautiful tracks, and the main theme to my fangame is hugely inspired by the latter.

The gameplay isn't great, but I dare you to tell me with complete sincerity that the environments (especially those in the water world: Dawn Sand, Water Canyon and 1000 Waterfalls) aren't absolutely gorgeous.

I had and completed the game around 2002/2003 then remember soundtrack and stages.
I dare to say that it is not exceptional since it is based entirely on Rayman 2 The Great Escape. I mean, everything you see in Rayman M is in fact already seen in Rayman 2. I did not like Rayman M and Arena is even worse.

It's not my favourite in the series, but it still contains a lot of great tracks. Since you seem to like Rayman 2's soundtrack so much, let me link a couple tracks that I think easily reach it in terms of being mystical and beautiful and stuff:

Once Upon a Time
Searching for Globox
Under the Starlight
The Magic Mirror
The Land of the Livid Dead

And here are some energetic tracks that are just great in general:

Hoodoo
The Knaaren Warrior
Perilous Pathways
Ascended Knaaren Warrior

I had and completed the game in 2003 then remember soundtrack and stages. I think exactly how Rayman M.
And I add that I am sorry because Rayman 3 if it had been directed by Michel Ancel would be as serious like the predecessors. But unfortunately from beginning to end the atmosphere is shallow, just think the languages selections by means of underwear, bah!

I'm a fan of continuity. Are you not or something?

Continuity yes, but with style!

This has been depicted in Rayman's limited personality since, literally, the introduction sequence of the first game.

On this I can give you right, but saved the world you can not go back to sleep as if nothing had happened!

Again, immediately after you free Globox in Rayman 2 it's established that he's a coward. He's a loyal coward in both Rayman 2 and 3, nothing has changed in that respect, and that's what I think is most important.

In Rayman 2 is a coward who risks his life by being captured and bring his will on the prison ship to free Rayman. In Rayman 3 What is it? A useless coward and that's it.

I've almost gotten the impression that you haven't even played the game at this point. The game, unquestionably, has the greatest depth out of the three in terms of gameplay. The combat system is widely praised as being some of the best ever to exist in a platformer, even overtaking many games in the beat-em-up genre; power-ups such as the lockjaw take abilities introduced in the previous games and give them far more flexibility in terms of their purpose and function, and the game contains a variety of puzzle elements not really present in Rayman 2. The gimmicks are also far more solid.

I repeat that the gameplay is not everything for me and in Rayman 2 The Great Escape Rayman performs acrobatics less dynamic but more articulated how the attack position even by hanging, feature absent in Rayman 3. Otherwise locked on enemies, somersault backwards and forwards and helicopter are present in both.
In Rayman 2 is missing the side somersault and kick but compensates with magic fist, also in Rayman 2 (original version) if Rayman falls from high altitudes does not do anything while in Rayman 3 is crushed and therefore the character appears more vulnerable than Rayman and Rayman 2 The Great Escape (original PlayStation and Nintendo 64 versions respectively).

While I think the soundtrack kind of never knows when to shut up and it frequently detracts from the atmosphere of certain areas, the main theme is very catchy, and the compositions themselves are quite brilliant. Besides, it's not like it's without tracks that are probably more up your alley:

Desert Mirage
The Abyss

It is useless to give me just of insensible why I say that not everything is music as not all the paintings are art.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfiyCEYYnmU just to say https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPjGfW1FZec mixed to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITaAM_juHqc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6pvAkActvU and just to say yet https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=645-hlo ... 2&index=51 mixed to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdgNtcxbVGA

Again, you've mentioned absolutely nothing to do with the gameplay. Personally, while I think it gets a little bit repetitive at times and has far too many mosquito levels, the levels are incredibly well-designed, and the mechanics are fun and fluid. Also, the artwork is breathtaking - perhaps a bit too Earthy for my Raymanian tastes, especially the backgrounds, but it's breathtaking nonetheless.

I repeat that also counts the gameplay but not only that.

I thought this was the preface to your prose, but I was wrong.

To make a small but concrete example, this is true Globox:

not this:


It seems a scrawl! And I will not be offensive, it hurts me to speak so of my hero's universe but it is objectively unwatchable, is no longer the Globox that i knew!

When you start use terms like "recognise" when discussing art, you become the fool.




All in all, your opinions have largely consisted of false extrapolations and totally arbitrary (actually, completely nonsensical) measurements of quality. The only thing you've managed to articulate throughout this entire post of yours is that humour is apparently bad for some reason.

Again we resort to insult me, but in my reply I better articulated my point of view and, I think, my culture regarding Rayman that I grow away from 1996/1997 so do not think I'm an ignorant that speaks for conjecture.
My mood has nothing wrong, I laugh and joke as anyone but when I get serious I just do it!
If I developed a new Rayman would certainly based on the serious and impressive style of the first or second of course with a touch of veiled humor which is good, but Rayman's basically narrate the exploits of a hero who must save his world, not a fool who must save a stupid world, surrounded by stupids, also deformed.
If Michel Ancel has no more ideas or must continue to waste his creation it is better to stop publishing new Rayman titles.

No, but whoever wrote the review in Nintendo Power was just another guy giving his opinion, and his opinion doesn't necessarily have any more weight to it than yours or mine. Usually however, you can expect professional critics to be relatively free from bias, or at least capable of providing well-supported reasoning for their views. Personally, I can't imagine that Nintendo Power's review was anything like yours, except for maybe having vaguely echoed the notion that Rayman 1 and 2 are better than Rayman 3.

Nintendo Power has made its review/critics. The following is my own, that I think I have articulated, explained and reasoned just like a member of the Nintendo Power staff for example. Indeed for some reason still have said what I say first of 2006, and that Rayman 3 has lost the magic atmosphere of predecessors revealing disappointing.
To confirm basically what I say.

Going to the 3D games: while Rayman 3 is more advanced than Rayman 2 in every way (gameplay, graphics, story depth), I too find that its atmosphere is just... not as magical. It makes me want to replay the game far less than Rayman 2. In fact, the part in Rayman 3 that has the best replay value to me is the silly mini-games.

I cannot agree about the music of Rayman 3 being bad. I found that it has a lot of great tunes, and in fact many of them are more complete and stand better as individual musical pieces than the tunes of Rayman 2, which are composed of short bits and pieces, a lot of which are just reprises of the same tune. It works marvelously in the game, but it does not create a soundtrack to listen to independently.

Please not say nonsense, the story depth of Rayman 2 it's not even comparable to that of Rayman 3 that almost doesn't exist. While in gameplay in my opinion are on the same level: Rayman 2 results more articulated while Rayman 3 results just more dynamic.

As for the soundtrack it should be like in Rayman 2 because the rest is the soundtrack of a video game and is made to play into it, certainly not to be put into the CD player.
However, I often listen to the soundtrack of Rayman 2 and never fails, that of Rayman 3 I got tired just finished the game.

These opinions are some of the worst I've seen in a while. Though these are the norm for very biased Rayman fans who think the two first games are perfect, unflawed games and everything else after sucks.

I'm not biased, I have explained and motivated because the first two Rayman are the only valid in my opinion. Then, I do not like insult my idol, indeed I just try not to pay more attention. I can not do anything else, but if it were up to me Rayman would returned to 20 years ago.

These opinions are some of the worst I've seen in a while. Though these are the norm for very biased Rayman fans who think the two first games are perfect, unflawed games and everything else after sucks.

Well, Rayman 1 is a good game but the difficulty gets waaay out of hand in the later stages (and this is coming from a guy who beat the game without the 99 lives cheat). And Rayman 2 is hardly challanging at all (except for some parts, but that's it). I'd say Rayman 3 is the best of the original 3, but that's just my opinion.

Also, since when is Origins trash? That game brought the franchise back from the dead!

I've almost gotten the impression that you haven't even played the game at this point. The game, unquestionably, has the greatest depth out of the three in terms of gameplay. The combat system is widely praised as being some of the best ever to exist in a platformer, even overtaking many games in the beat-em-up genre; power-ups such as the lockjaw take abilities introduced in the previous games and give them far more flexibility in terms of their purpose and function, and the game contains a variety of puzzle elements not really present in Rayman 2. The gimmicks are also far more solid.

I repeat that the gameplay is not everything for me and in Rayman 2 The Great Escape Rayman performs acrobatics less dynamic but more articulated how the attack position even by hanging, feature absent in Rayman 3. Otherwise locked on enemies, somersault backwards and forwards and helicopter are present in both.
In Rayman 2 is missing the side somersault and kick but compensates with magic fist, also in Rayman 2 (original version) if Rayman falls from high altitudes does not do anything while in Rayman 3 is crushed and therefore the character appears more vulnerable than Rayman and Rayman 2 The Great Escape (original PlayStation and Nintendo 64 versions respectively).

while Rayman 3 is more advanced than Rayman 2 in every way (gameplay, graphics, story depth)

Please not say nonsense, the story depth of Rayman 2 it's not even comparable to that of Rayman 3 that almost doesn't exist. While in gameplay in my opinion are on the same level: Rayman 2 results more articulated while Rayman 3 results just more dynamic.

I retrieved two videos from the Nintendo 64 version of Rayman 2 The Great Escape that show how the mechanics and gameplay of Rayman 2 was and still is advanced and literally unique, also for the overrated Rayman 3.
For first ask you to read the various Quote in order to follow the logical thread of my answer.
In the first video it shows how Rayman can assume the attack position when hanging probably to acquire a target or simply to move sideways (features absent in Rayman 3): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zxEw5NgJp9c (minute 12:51)

In the second video it shows how Rayman through the use of first person view can virtually acquire the target (probably through a kind of logical memory of game) that without the use of the first person view should hit the switch jumping on ropes placed down over the acid pool: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHN0myEoKYo (minute 8:40)
Without the first person view you can too but not at the very first try as there because doesn't allow Rayman to acquire the target. Seeing is believing.

A further features of the game I can reveal to you but you have to put it into practice personally. The first is that if you walk with slow and silent step nearby of the sleeping Robot-Pirates do not wake up avoiding the battle and this demonstrates that the slow step is not them at random. But this feature is known and presumably obvious.
The second is if you walk at reverse into the tunnel at minute 8:00 of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyHoxokc69E reach the post which has the barrel, and exit the tunnel without reversing the shot in the PlayStation version exploiting the 2D cursor and pressing only the down arrow or in the Nintendo 64 version holding the movement stick exclusively downwards you will notice that be leaving automatically the tunnel as the character will follow the camera and you will not have to literally move a finger.

Also, since when is Origins trash? That game brought the franchise back from the dead!

It is for me personally speaking. Also it isn't that had this box-office records: http://www.giantbomb.com/rayman-origins ... ld-525479/

darlx wrote: In the second video it shows how Rayman through the use of first person view can virtually acquire the target (probably through a kind of logical memory of game) that without the use of the first person view should hit the switch jumping on ropes placed down over the acid pool: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHN0myEoKYo (minute 8:40)
Without the first person view you can too but not at the very first try as there because doesn't allow Rayman to acquire the target. Seeing is believing.

Since when is it a good thing that you have to enter first person mode to target something in a game? The combat and auto-targeting is so much more refined in Rayman 3 than in Rayman 2. Sure, I think Rayman 1 and 2 are better than 3, but that doesn't mean that Rayman 1 and 2 do everything right and Rayman 3 does everything wrong, and specifically when looking at the combat Rayman 3 is superior in many ways.

darlx wrote:I retrieved two videos from the Nintendo 64 version of Rayman 2 The Great Escape that show how the mechanics and gameplay of Rayman 2 was and still is advanced and literally unique, also for the overrated Rayman 3.

darlx wrote:Rayman 2 was and still is advanced and literally unique, also for the overrated Rayman 3.

darlx wrote:the overrated Rayman 3.

darlx wrote:Rayman 3

darlx wrote:overrated

What

Carrot-master wrote:

darlx wrote: In the second video it shows how Rayman through the use of first person view can virtually acquire the target (probably through a kind of logical memory of game) that without the use of the first person view should hit the switch jumping on ropes placed down over the acid pool: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHN0myEoKYo (minute 8:40)
Without the first person view you can too but not at the very first try as there because doesn't allow Rayman to acquire the target. Seeing is believing.

Since when is it a good thing that you have to enter first person mode to target something in a game? The combat and auto-targeting is so much more refined in Rayman 3 than in Rayman 2. Sure, I think Rayman 1 and 2 are better than 3, but that doesn't mean that Rayman 1 and 2 do everything right and Rayman 3 does everything wrong, and specifically when looking at the combat Rayman 3 is superior in many ways.

Although for me the series has stopped to Rayman 2 due to the reasons that I have already explained and I think this is taken for granted by now I am not saying that Rayman 3 doesn't everything right. I'm just saying that Rayman 2 is more complete even in fighting techniques since Rayman 3 is just more dynamic while Rayman 2 moves are far more structured.
Rayman 2 shows characteristics of attack, combat moves and target acquisition identical to Rayman 3 (but simply stylistically different as for example the viewfinder that in Rayman 2 it's automatic but invisible while in Rayman 3 is automatic but visible because the more physical confrontation) with extra hanging attack position and optical target acquisition, as the contrary Rayman 3 shows two additional combat moves such as the side somersault and spin kick at close range. Features which, although absent in Rayman 2 would prove unuseful anyway since the Robot-Pirates are definitely more powerful than a "potato sacks" with a shotgun and since Rayman in Rayman 2 uses a different energy to deal their enemies, ie its inner energy, that are totally different concepts but nonetheless Rayman 2 in my opinion remains the most comprehensive and superior in this regard too.

So recapping Rayman 2 have:
1st) the same combat moves of Rayman 3 but simply stylistically different. Parity!
2nd) the protagonist implementing somersault after a jump automatically, unless you stop before; in Rayman 3 you must impose the somersault at the end of a jump. Rayman 2 is better!
3rd) Rayman stops the helicopter as soon as he touches the ground; in Rayman 3 the helicopter is switched off as soon as the player releases the button. Rayman 2 is better!
4th) extra hanging attack position and optical target acquisition; in Rayman 3 shows two additional combat moves such as the side somersault and spin kick at close range. Parity!
5th) Rayman uses the magic fist which it's much more powerful, concentrated and devastating; on Rayman 3 returns the telescopic fist already seen in the first Rayman. Rayman 2 wins!
6th) Rayman can obtain the more powerful and devastating power fist; in Rayman 3 there are the laser detergents or five cans which together don't form the potential of the power fist. Furthermore the laser detergent has a short duration while the power fist is permanent unless the protagonist is not weakened, the super helicopter it lasts for as long as it takes to the protagonist and at last what happened to the purple lums!? Rayman 2 wins!
7th) reached the final battle, in Rayman 2 the resistance is higher while in Rayman 3 is slighty lower. Rayman 2 wins!
8th) in Rayman 2 exists the apnea; in Rayman 3 (and next Rayman in general) no and don't understand why (sure developers superficiality) but however can use his hair as a propeller. It should be parity but Rayman 2 wins for the additional difficulty and the realism!
9th) in Rayman 2 if Rayman falls from a great height it does nothing and mitigates the fall with somersault while in Rayman 3 is crushed (also with you use somersault), synonymous of new character weakness. Rayman 2 wins! Because, regardless of realism that still appears incorrectly in Rayman 3, we are talking about a hero who can not go splat on the ground.
10th) in Rayman 2 the main character performs a slightly more slender and higher jump than Rayman 3. Rayman 2 wins!
11th) in Rayman 2 is the key to the rocks containing the masks; instead in Rayman 3 gets power of leptys which is simply the bigmouth which is able to do in the first Rayman but with trivial adding that turns blacks in red lums. Just short of ideas, ridicolous! Rayman 2 wins!
12th) in Rayman 2 it performs an epic adventure; in Rayman 3 is not able to beat one knaaren without laser detergent... that more less powerful of power fist. Rayman 2 wins! Because he is a hero and as such is shown, not indestructible but powerful!
13th) on Rayman assumes automatically an aggressive facial expression and a position of attack loading the telescopic fist while in Rayman 2 assumes a frenzied posture of attack especially when stationary which you load the magic fist; in Rayman 3 will load a punch without expression and right attack posture, unless you're it assumes an attacking position, in short in Rayman 3 seems almost mechanical, with no personality. Rayman 2 wins but especially Rayman wins!
14th) the skin of Rayman 2 it remains the original one exactly as in the first Rayman but in 3D; Rayman 3 and next are just a makeover. Rayman 2 WINS AGAIN!

After this you are still sure that Rayman 3 is superior in terms of actions and gameplay!? I do not seem, indeed!

CHRdutch wrote:

darlx wrote:I retrieved two videos from the Nintendo 64 version of Rayman 2 The Great Escape that show how the mechanics and gameplay of Rayman 2 was and still is advanced and literally unique, also for the overrated Rayman 3.

darlx wrote:Rayman 2 was and still is advanced and literally unique, also for the overrated Rayman 3.

darlx wrote:the overrated Rayman 3.

darlx wrote:Rayman 3

darlx wrote:overrated

What

Read everything so you will be all clear.

Adsolution wrote:It's not my favourite in the series, but it still contains a lot of great tracks. Since you seem to like Rayman 2's soundtrack so much, let me link a couple tracks that I think easily reach it in terms of being mystical and beautiful and stuff:

Once Upon a Time
Searching for Globox
Under the Starlight
The Magic Mirror
The Land of the Livid Dead

And here are some energetic tracks that are just great in general:

Hoodoo
The Knaaren Warrior
Perilous Pathways
Ascended Knaaren Warrior

Thank you. I usually neglected much of Rayman 3's soundtrack - the Land of the Livid Dead is beautiful - but, yes, thank you for reintroducing these to me.

In Rayman 3 the only tracks that I remembered was more pleasant than the other was this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uposbNBhg30
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmH6FDNl9nI

but nothing exceptional, especially when compared to the soundtrack of the first two titles.

This topic is just filled to brim with stupidity.

barkx wrote:I will not be here to dispute the part in which you consider my opinion childish, like that of a twelve years old kid, after all if I did I would be really childish. For this I will give you a more concrete answer, by telling you that my opinion is not biased because "the eye" and the good taste wants its share. Really biased is to base everything on the gameplay and game mechanics as you did (at least based upon your answers) and forgetting the rest, instead I try to make people understand what the gameplay is important but also the good taste and therefore the design should not be less than the action and the fun it brings.
Therefore if being childish is being your own judgment more authentic, genuine, I am happy to be childish but my opinion seeks to be complete (not biased) for the reason mentioned above.

barkx wrote: Precise for first that I think with my head, always.
Apart that, Rayman 3, Rayman Origins and Rayman Legends were too subject of many criticisms, which are beyond my ordinary person.
However you have to consider two aspects, even the criticism evolves according and "adapting" to his own era. Let me explain, in the 2000s Rayman 3 for its style was acclaimed, in the '90s instead, based my thought on the standards of the '90s, it would have been widely criticized. Indeed Rayman 3 was developed in '00s and not in the '90s that on the contrary created the first and the second Rayman that is another story respect to Rayman 3 and the others next Rayman.
I conclude by saying that Rayman 3 has received overall poorer receptions compared to Rayman 2 (just as well this website recognizes and affirms, I wonder why!?) and although Rayman 3, Rayman Origins and Rayman Legends the fanatics want to protect them in their heart we all know that does not bear comparison with the first Rayman, never and ever.

If Rayman 3 came out in the 90's it would've been releasing in the same time period as super mario 64's goofy ass camera and controls, Rayman 3 would've been the shit. And it wasn't like gamers in 2003 had a completely different psyche than they did 5 years ago, Osama's air sports didn't affect video games.

Rayman Legends is almost objectively a better game than Rayman 1. I like Rayman 1 better because it's got the art and sound that makes me wet, but being forced to collect a gazillion cages placed in fuckawful locations and meme difficulty just doesn't hold up to consistently tight design. There's plenty to praise and like about Rayman 1's design but it's undeniably flawed.

barkx wrote:don't ever feel Globox fart (forgive the vulgarity)

i dont forgive you

barkx wrote:Razorbeard is simply perfect. And his wickedness and anger is expressed in a superb manner.

He has like 3 cutscenes in the whole game and they're all identical

barkx wrote:Simply we're talking about something so successful that has stolen my soul, and do not think I'm the only one. Therefore is a platform succeeded if they have been able to. And know that because I've seen and played to the most beautiful video games of all kinds in the '90s, from Super Mario 64 to Zelda The Ocarina Of Time, from Need For Speed 2 to Touring Cars 2, from Monster Bash for DOS up to Command & Conquer Red Alert just to name a few, so I think I can recognize when something succeeds better than another.

wtf

barkx wrote:Therefore this beautiful game is not meant to be a dark fantasy but for what shows, and the experience it offers could disturb and fascinate even an adult.

lol

barkx wrote:To the first statement I recognize that Mr. Dark is perfect in its own form and its metamorphoses are a bit rough.

Devoid of personality and no dialogue, just like the Magician in Rayman Origins!

barkx wrote:To the third statement just say that the game physics of Rayman 2 preceded games of sixth generation like Rayman 3 and GTA SA, moreover Rayman 3 is based on the graphics engine of Rayman 2 non-random and Rayman 2 stunts are far more subdivided than Rayman 3.

barkx wrote:This scene that arouses love

Yeah ly is a qt3.14

barkx wrote:even beats Titanic.

This nigga probably paid 10k for a blank canvas and goes "you just dont UNDERSTAND" when people laugh

barkx wrote:Do not be offended

im triggered!

barkx wrote:I just say that the skin present in the original Nintendo 64 (and PlayStation) version/s with the hub in 2D and 3D gaming features used only where necessary is in my opinion the best.
The Rayman's skin in the original version for Nintendo 64 and PlayStation appear delicate and expressive while in PC and Dreamcast versions, and PlayStation 2 remake appears little expressive, squat and ungainly. Just compare the dialogues of the Nintendo 64 version with 128-bit versions to understand what I mean.

ew ps1 and n64 are the worst versions, PC/Revolution/Dreamcast is the way to play baby

barkx wrote:I think exactly how Rayman M.

You can't just play the game. You gotta think like Rayman M, act like Rayman M, become Rayman M.

barkx wrote:And I add that I am sorry because Rayman 3 if it had been directed by Michel Ancel would be as serious like the predecessors.

Michel Ancel is behind Rayman Origins and Legends

barkx wrote:But unfortunately from beginning to end the atmosphere is shallow

Really? I thought the Bog of Murk or Desert of the Knaaren were some of the most atmosphere-y places in the series. Rayman 3 tries and fails to be funny, but I think if anything some of that was implemented to not make the game too edgy for being a kids platformer. And besides, the knaaren were still terrifying to the kiddos regardless of dad jokes.

barkx wrote:just think the languages selections by means of underwear, bah!

Rayman has always had a comedic aspect however subtle or blatant, and flag underwear is actually kinda clever.

barkx wrote:Continuity yes, but with style!

Fucking plebs!

barkx wrote:I repeat that the gameplay is not everything for me and in Rayman 2 The Great Escape Rayman performs acrobatics less dynamic but more articulated how the attack position even by hanging, feature absent in Rayman 3. Otherwise locked on enemies, somersault backwards and forwards and helicopter are present in both.
In Rayman 2 is missing the side somersault and kick but compensates with magic fist, also in Rayman 2 (original version) if Rayman falls from high altitudes does not do anything while in Rayman 3 is crushed and therefore the character appears more vulnerable than Rayman and Rayman 2 The Great Escape (original PlayStation and Nintendo 64 versions respectively).

I think Rayman's movement and controls are tighter in Rayman 3, especially in the combat department.

barkx wrote:It is useless to give me just of insensible why I say that not everything is music as not all the paintings are art.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lfiyCEYYnmU just to say https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPjGfW1FZec mixed to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITaAM_juHqc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6pvAkActvU and just to say yet https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=645-hlo ... 2&index=51 mixed to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdgNtcxbVGA

barkx wrote:To make a small but concrete example, this is true Globox:

not this:

It seems a scrawl! And I will not be offensive, it hurts me to speak so of my hero's universe but it is objectively unwatchable, is no longer the Globox that i knew!

I get what you're trying to say but all characters in the new games were redesigned like that, sillier and without any personality. I don't like that personally, but in the context of the games it's an understandable design choice. I think if there were to be a new game that developed Globox into a "dumb but lovable" personality he could be like a Patrick (from Spankbob) type character, which seems like it could be more interesting than the coward thing they went with in R2/R3. I always really liked that early Origins trailer that depicted ray and globox as two young retards who became friends.

I feel like Globox just kinda boils down to "his personality is coward" - I like him, but there's only so much you can do with him spotting an enemy and then he gets scared. Besides, Globox is hardly a deeply developed character in Rayman 2, all real character development happened in Rayman 3's depiction of him, which according to your war on humour would be the worst character of the game.

barkx wrote:I laugh and joke as anyone but when I get serious I just do it!

This sounds like something Jeb Bush would say to try and identify with the common folk.

barkx wrote:If Michel Ancel has no more ideas or must continue to waste his creation it is better to stop publishing new Rayman titles.

Origins is an enormous redesign that completely transformed the series, how is he low on ideas?

Nintendo Power wrote:In fact, the part in Rayman 3 that has the best replay value to me is the silly mini-games.

Wow, that reviewer fucking sucks

barkx wrote:As for the soundtrack it should be like in Rayman 2 because the rest is the soundtrack of a video game and is made to play into it, certainly not to be put into the CD player.
However, I often listen to the soundtrack of Rayman 2 and never fails, that of Rayman 3 I got tired just finished the game.

My only beef with the R3 soundtrack is the battle themes interrupting the actual soundtrack too often, but the music itself is fantastic. The dramatic changes of the Land of the Livid Dead theme, or the music when you walk into the huge eagle hall by the Knaarens, or all those mechanical tracks that play while you climb the Tower of Leptys. Rayman 2's soundtrack is awesome and really plays into the mood, but Rayman 3 offers much more diversity and never compromises on quality.

barkx wrote:I will not be here to dispute the part in which you consider my opinion childish, like that of a twelve years old kid, after all if I did I would be really childish.

The suffix "-ish" in "childish" doesn't necessitate you be a child in order to have it apply to you. An adult can act childish at times, and likewise, a child can demonstrate bouts of maturity.

barkx wrote:For this I will give you a more concrete answer, by telling you that my opinion is not biased because "the eye" and the good taste wants its share.

You've just stated here that you are the arbiter of good taste. Who are you to say that?

barkx wrote:Really biased is to base everything on the gameplay and game mechanics as you did (at least based upon your answers) and forgetting the rest

That's a blatant lie. Of my sixteen quoted replies to you talking about the style of the games, only 3.5 of them are focused on gameplay.

barkx wrote:instead I try to make people understand what the gameplay is important

You didn't mention gameplay even once when lauding about Rayman 1 and 2. In fact, the only time you even mentioned gameplay at all in your entire post was here:

darkx wrote:[Rayman 3's] gaming issues are treated with extreme superficiality

barkx wrote:Let me explain, in the 2000s Rayman 3 for its style was acclaimed, in the '90s instead, based my thought on the standards of the '90s, it would have been widely criticized.

I highly doubt that - it would probably have been seen as revolutionary.

barkx wrote:I conclude by saying that Rayman 3 has received overall poorer receptions compared to Rayman 2 (just as well this website recognizes and affirms, I wonder why!?) and although Rayman 3, Rayman Origins and Rayman Legends the fanatics want to protect them in their heart we all know that does not bear comparison with the first Rayman, never and ever.

Rayman 1 is better because "it's just so obvious"? I'm phrasing my question this way because that's the exact same answer my friend once gave me when I cornered him after he tried to use secular reasoning to justify his disdain for homosexuality.

barkx wrote:The PlayStation version is technically the original version.

How exactly did you come to that conclusion?

barkx wrote:But apart this for me the only two versions of Rayman 2 The Great Escape are the PlayStation version (because emphasizes the original soundtrack thanks to CD and the cosmic nature of the game) and the Nintendo 64 (since it's the version that shows the most darker nature of that great game).

Since you're comparing the two, how is the N64 version any "darker" than the PlayStation version? Also, have you played the PC version? It's the same as the N64 version but with significantly better graphics, music and performance.

barkx wrote:However, is not a definition of evil?

You said Jano was "bad" and Razorbeard was "evil". Also, no, it isn't.

barkx wrote:

Adsolution wrote:Literally speaking it is the darkest game in the series probably one of the darkest platformers to exist... but in reality, the game is not that dark

First you contradict yourself.

That's not a contradiction. The first half of my statement was comparing the game to other platformers, and the latter half was comparing it to other games, and all other media as a whole.

barkx wrote:I've seen and played to the most beautiful video games of all kinds in the '90s, from Super Mario 64 to Zelda The Ocarina Of Time, from Need For Speed 2 to Touring Cars 2, from Monster Bash for DOS up to Command & Conquer Red Alert just to name a few, so I think I can recognize when something succeeds better than another.

Most of those I wouldn't consider particularly beautiful, they just sound like a random assortment of games from your childhood.

barkx wrote:To the second statement I just don't agree with you because not everything has to be discovered or learned for the final battle. In every game the protagonist has to adapt himself to the battle and not the contrary.

Sure, but that's a very cheap excuse that can be used to justify literally anything if you want it to.

barkx wrote:To the third statement just say that the game physics of Rayman 2 preceded games of sixth generation like Rayman 3 and GTA SA, moreover Rayman 3 is based on the graphics engine of Rayman 2 non-random and Rayman 2 stunts are far more subdivided than Rayman 3.
Even the critics consider it the most advanced of its era (1999/2000) because to the dynamics, movement, dialogues and overall the game.

There are a lot of games preceding Rayman 2 that handled their gimmicks far better than Rayman 2 did.

barkx wrote:I just say that the skin present in the original Nintendo 64 (and PlayStation) version/s with the hub in 2D and 3D gaming features used only where necessary is in my opinion the best.

It's my favourite as well, but remember, there's a very even split between people who prefer the older design and those who prefer the new - in fact, I'd say there are a greater number of fans who prefer the new skin. They're not wrong, as everyone is entitled to their own opinion. However, what I'd refrain from doing is trying to actually determine which skin is "better", because the only reasoning you're able to provide are subjective extrapolations based off of your personal experience. An opinion is an attempt at objectivity where fact isn't readily discernible, and there's no point in holding an opinion if there's no substance to it. Remember, having an opinion is not the same thing as having a preference, for preference speaks only for yourself and not for anyone else.

barkx wrote:The Rayman's skin in the original version for Nintendo 64 and PlayStation appear delicate and expressive while in PC and Dreamcast versions, and PlayStation 2 remake appears little expressive, squat and ungainly.

The N64's and PlayStation's models are downgraded versions of the the PC and Dreamcast models. The N64 and PlayStation's are not the originals, and I can't agree that they're more expressive than the originals. Revolution's model on the other hand is an upgraded version of the original PC/Dreamcast model. I agree that in that game his expressions are a little "squat and ungainly", because all they really did was smooth out his face without adding any extra detail or modifying his animations accordingly.

barkx wrote:Just compare the dialogues of the Nintendo 64 version with 128-bit versions to understand what I mean.

There are no 128-bit consoles. Also, the only versions of the game with voice acting are the PlayStation and PlayStation 2 versions.

barkx wrote:Also desiring to justify it, Razorbeard takes part in a competition where it looks like a perfect fool, and then submits the world with him aggressiveness and seriosuness. Sounds bad, don't you think?!

Not really, it's just a party game. Not everything has to have some deep meaning.

barkx wrote:I had and completed the game around 2002/2003 then remember soundtrack and stages.
I dare to say that it is not exceptional since it is based entirely on Rayman 2 The Great Escape. I mean, everything you see in Rayman M is in fact already seen in Rayman 2.

That's not true, actually. The aesthetic heavily mixes elements from both Rayman 2 and Rayman 3, before Rayman 3 was released. In many ways, it's actually one of my favourites in terms of style.

barkx wrote:But unfortunately from beginning to end the atmosphere is shallow, just think the languages selections by means of underwear, bah!

Once again, you've somehow equated humour with a shallow atmosphere. The two are completely unrelated. Rayman 3 to me has a very strong atmosphere even in light of its humour.

barkx wrote:On this I can give you right, but saved the world you can not go back to sleep as if nothing had happened!

Why not? Also, I thought that ending cutscene was a genuinely magical scene.

barkx wrote:In Rayman 2 [Globox] is a coward who risks his life by being captured and bring his will on the prison ship to free Rayman. In Rayman 3 What is it? A useless coward and that's it.

Yeah, but I think his hilarious writing in Rayman 3 makes up for that. I know you don't like the humour, but at least understand that other people do and that they're not wrong for liking it.

barkx wrote:I repeat that the gameplay is not everything for me and in Rayman 2 The Great Escape Rayman performs acrobatics less dynamic but more articulated how the attack position even by hanging, feature absent in Rayman 3.

There are very few points in the game where you actually hang, and when you do, there aren't ever any enemies from what I can recall.

darkx wrote:It is useless to give me just of insensible why I say that not everything is music as not all the paintings are art.

Yes, but you seemingly dismissed the entire soundtrack as complete and utter trash in your first post.

darkx wrote:To make a small but concrete example, this is true Globox:
https://raymanpc.com/wiki/script-en/ima ... _dance.gif
not this:
storage/26735/978c3704aa2ff642e78bf58da33b45f2

It seems a scrawl! And I will not be offensive, it hurts me to speak so of my hero's universe but it is objectively unwatchable, is no longer the Globox that i knew!

Look, I understand where you're coming from, as I too was dismayed when they decided to simplify the characters. In reality however, there's nothing intrinsically wrong with doing that, and people who were introduced to the series through Origins see a lot of charm in the new designs.

barkx wrote:Again we resort to insult me,

In your first post, you called everyone who disagreed with your viewpoints foolish. Additionally, you pulled the biggest no-no of all when it comes to any kind of debate, which I've gone over many times already.

barkx wrote:If I developed a new Rayman would certainly based on the serious and impressive style of the first or second of course with a touch of veiled humor which is good, but Rayman's basically narrate the exploits of a hero who must save his world, not a fool who must save a stupid world, surrounded by stupids, also deformed.

And that's exactly what I'm doing, because like I said, I also prefer the presentation of the first two games.

barkx wrote:If Michel Ancel has no more ideas or must continue to waste his creation it is better to stop publishing new Rayman titles.

And this is exactly what I meant when I said you totally lack empathy: you don't care about anyone's preferences but your own. You would rather that the countless number of people who enjoy the new series suffer, simply because you don't like it.

barkx wrote:Nintendo Power has made its review/critics. The following is my own, that I think I have articulated, explained and reasoned just like a member of the Nintendo Power staff for example. Indeed for some reason still have said what I say first of 2006, and that Rayman 3 has lost the magic atmosphere of predecessors revealing disappointing.
To confirm basically what I say.

A lot of people find that Rayman 3's humour conflates with the atmosphere, but I don't think it does. I find that, in the span of any one given scene, it achieves an excellent balance between humour and atmosphere.

barkx wrote:

dr_st wrote:I cannot agree about the music of Rayman 3 being bad. I found that it has a lot of great tunes, and in fact many of them are more complete and stand better as individual musical pieces than the tunes of Rayman 2, which are composed of short bits and pieces, a lot of which are just reprises of the same tune. It works marvelously in the game, but it does not create a soundtrack to listen to independently.

Please not say nonsense, the story depth of Rayman 2 it's not even comparable to that of Rayman 3 that almost doesn't exist.

In Rayman 2, while there definitely is a narrative with plenty of cutscenes, they only show up once in a while: less than once per level, with sometimes no narrative showing up for many in a row. From beginning to end, the story of the game essentially comprises, in no necessitated order, you rescuing your friends and collecting the four masks while Razorbeard throws various different obstacles your way. A lot of the cutscenes with Razorbeard are actually very pointless, but are inserted to give some semblance of narrative pacing. Essentially, very little happens between the beginning and the end of the game that isn't just a camera following Rayman through his journey. The PlayStation version actually brings greater depth to the narrative, which is quite nice.

Rayman 3 has a structured narrative. Rayman finds Globox and gets his hands back; they discover André who's trying to destroy the Heart of the World, but Globox accidentally swallows him; Rayman and Globox go to various doctors to try and get André out of Globox's system; Rayman discovers an ancient mystical tower from the teensies that opens a portal between worlds; Rayman gets captured by the Knaaren and has to fight their leader, Reflux, whom Rayman defeats; André is finally set from from Globox's stomach and goes to team up with the vengeful Reflux; the teensies show Rayman a shortcut to get to a boat which will take him overseas to a mountain housing Hoodlum Headquarters; Rayman destroys Hoodlum Headquarters; Reflux uses the power of the Leptys to transform himself into a beast; Rayman defeats Reflux and turns André back into a red lum.

To say Rayman 3's plot is nonexistent compared to Rayman 2, let along that it has no plot at all, is just silly.

barkx wrote:As for the soundtrack it should be like in Rayman 2 because the rest is the soundtrack of a video game and is made to play into it, certainly not to be put into the CD player.

Individually you said "The soundtrack should be like Rayman 2" and "a game soundtrack is meant to be played alongside the game", but I'm not sure what this sentence as a whole is trying to convey, can you rephrase it?

barkx wrote:I'm not biased, I have explained and motivated because the first two Rayman are the only valid in my opinion.

Given that hoards of people would care to disagree and there are plenty of things other people seem to see in the other games that you don't, are you positive you aren't biased? Is everyone else wrong, despite the fact they're clearly seeing something you aren't?

darIx wrote:So recapping Rayman 2 have:
1st) the same combat moves of Rayman 3 but simply stylistically different. Parity!

The combat moves in Rayman 1 and 2 are completely different; the only thing they have in common is that you can strafe and lock on.

barkx wrote:2nd) the protagonist implementing somersault after a jump automatically, unless you stop before; in Rayman 3 you must impose the somersault at the end of a jump. Rayman 2 is better!

Are you joking? Firstly, that's the stupidest, most useless criticism of a game I've ever heard. Secondly, I think the need to move forward to actually initiate the somersault is a great little detail they added.

darIx wrote:3rd) Rayman stops the helicopter as soon as he touches the ground; in Rayman 3 the helicopter is switched off as soon as the player releases the button. Rayman 2 is better!

I prefer Rayman 3's helicopter.

darIx wrote:4th) extra hanging attack position and optical target acquisition; in Rayman 3 shows two additional combat moves such as the side somersault and spin kick at close range. Parity!

That's hardly a parity.

darIx wrote:5th) Rayman uses the magic fist which it's much more powerful, concentrated and devastating; on Rayman 3 returns the telescopic fist already seen in the first Rayman. Rayman 2 wins!

How is the magic fist more powerful, concentrated and devastating?

darIx wrote:6th) Rayman can obtain the more powerful and devastating power fist; in Rayman 3 there are the laser detergents or five cans which together don't form the potential of the power fist. Furthermore the laser detergent has a short duration while the power fist is permanent unless the protagonist is not weakened, the super helicopter it lasts for as long as it takes to the protagonist and at last what happened to the purple lums!? Rayman 2 wins!

These gameplay modifications are made to suit each game individually. Personally, I found the heavy metal fist a lot more useful than the golden fist in Rayman 2.

darIx wrote:7th) reached the final battle, in Rayman 2 the resistance is higher while in Rayman 3 is slighty lower. Rayman 2 wins!

This is categorically wrong on every level. Rayman 3's final boss has four stages, each of which is roughly the same length as both of Rayman 2's combined. I personally hail Rayman 3 as having one of the greatest final bosses of all time.

darIx wrote:8th) in Rayman 2 exists the apnea; in Rayman 3 (and next Rayman in general) no and don't understand why (sure developers superficiality) but however can use his hair as a propeller. It should be parity but Rayman 2 wins for the additional difficulty and the realism!

This post of yours took an incredibly long time to decipher.

While Rayman 3 had only a very brief swimming segment where you could only move on the horizontal plane, not only was the idea of him using his helicopter to swim creative, I hated having to collect lums and bubbles to breathe in Rayman 2. I mean, the game was designed around it, but I much prefer it when games are designed with unlimited breath so that you can explore the amazing vertical underwater worlds at your leisure, without being put on a timer.

darIx wrote:9th) in Rayman 2 if Rayman falls from a great height it does nothing and mitigates the fall with somersault while in Rayman 3 is crushed (also with you use somersault), synonymous of new character weakness. Rayman 2 wins! Because, regardless of realism that still appears incorrectly in Rayman 3, we are talking about a hero who can not go splat on the ground.

I agree that the height damage mechanic doesn't serve much of a purpose, but does it really affect your experience enough to bring it up in a brief bullet-point list like this?

darIx wrote:10th) in Rayman 2 the main character performs a slightly more slender and higher jump than Rayman 3. Rayman 2 wins!

Rayman jumps slightly higher in Rayman 3.

darIx wrote:11th) in Rayman 2 is the key to the rocks containing the masks; instead in Rayman 3 gets power of leptys which is simply the bigmouth which is able to do in the first Rayman but with trivial adding that turns blacks in red lums. Just short of ideas, ridicolous! Rayman 2 wins!

Rayman 3's concepts are supposed to be ridiculous/funny, that's not a criticism.

darIx wrote:12th) in Rayman 2 it performs an epic adventure; in Rayman 3 is not able to beat one knaaren without laser detergent... that more less powerful of power fist. Rayman 2 wins! Because he is a hero and as such is shown, not indestructible but powerful!

Rayman 3's concepts are supposed to be ridiculous/funny, that's not a criticism.

darIx wrote:13th) the skin of Rayman 2 it remains the original one exactly as in the first Rayman but in 3D; Rayman 3 and next are just a makeover. Rayman 2 WINS!

What are you implying? That Rayman 3 should've been the first Rayman game in 4D?

"RAYMAN 2 WINS!"

Let's make this a meme please.

Also thank you Adsolution and Keane for pointing this retard's bullshit out.

Also, darkx, I'm just curious, why do you make a new account for every time you post?

I can't say for sure but, I think it's the same OP from this thread.