Return To Monkey Island - MI2 sequel from Ron Gilbert

[IHaveHugeNick]

That's not Guybrush, that's Sarah Jessica Parker.

 

[JarlFrank]

"graphical fidelity" whatever that mean to national socialist above

It means exactly what it says in the words: level of technical advancement of the graphics.

Yes, the old MI games have an excellent artstyle and are beautiful games. But their graphics are low resolution with a limited color palette, therefore they have low graphical fidelity.
Monkey Island 4 looks much uglier but it has a higher graphical fidelity, being full 3D and of a much higher resolution.

There's nothing hard to understand about this.

Graphics = tech level of the visuals.
Art style = quality of the actual art.

You can have games with a very low graphical fidelity that look amazing because of the top tier art, but you can also have games with a very high graphical fidelity but they look like shit because the art is bad.

 

[Darkozric]

The drama has started, to justify the unjustified.

 

[Boleskine]

The thread Ron is linking in that tweet:

Some people who don't like the art style are "retro-fascists." I guess that's a step up from being goobergaters, transphobes, or Nazis.

 

[Darkozric]

Retro-fascists Mfuckers! I have spoken.

 

[Hellion]

Everyone who doesn't like Star Wars: Kenobi Return to Monkey Island artstyle is racist retro-fascist.

 

[Darkozric]

Someone should give to this fag some fucking tissues, so much sadness. This brave tormented soul carries the sadness of all of us, and the burden is heavy.

 

[Jenkem]

ahh yes calling your playerbase with a long history in your franchise "retro-fascists" for not liking your shitty art style. and they keep using the term "retro" to push their "woe is us" narrative. NO ONE has specifically said they are mad the game doesn't look retro, the overwhelming complaint is that the graphical style fucking SUCKS. If it was a minimalist retro style like, say, darkside detective or something people would also say it sucks and doesn't fit the series. These people are so far up their own ass it's incredible.

 

[Boleskine]

That would be a good title for the site in browser tabs.

"rpgcodex > Home of Retro-Fascists"

 

[Jenkem]

is retro-fascist just nuspeak for grognard?

 

[ADULF HITLOR FAN KLUB]

RETRO FASCIST

Releasing heaping piles of shit, and then picking fights with fans, seems to be all the rage these days.

 

[negator2vc]

So that's why the company name is "Terrible Toybox"!
So Thimbleweed Park was bait-and-switch??

The drama has started, to justify the unjustified.

At least now we know that attacking the fans it's a group effort and not just Gilbert's effort ;-)

 

[Curratum]

There is nothing worth being a fan of anymore.

Thief was a fluke. Its lead designer was also lead designer on Underworld Ascendant.
Everyone you thought you loved and respected from the Sierra / LucasArts days is now a loony too.

 

[Infinitron]

people who don't like the art style are "retro-fascists." I guess that's a step up from being goobergaters, transphobes, or Nazis.

People are being a bit unfair here since his point was that it's not fair to assume that's what they are.

Still, DarkUnderlord new forum tagline

 

[Boleskine]

people who don't like the art style are "retro-fascists." I guess that's a step up from being goobergaters, transphobes, or Nazis.

People are being a bit unfair here since his point was that it's not fair to assume that's what they are.

Still, DarkUnderlord new forum tagline

My quote began with "Some people who don't like..." I was acknowledging that he didn't say every person is a "retro-fascist". Here's the whole tweet:

In defense of some folks who have said they don’t like the new style, I don’t think it’s fair to assume they’re retro-fascists. I mean… some are, sure, but there’s no reason somebody can’t be totally open to a new art style and just not be particularly enamored of this one…

People will have whatever reason they have to dislike the art - even if Dominic is saying not all critics are "retro-fascists" he's still saying some are. It's bad form to ascribe a negative label to anyone who is a fan or potential customer.

These guys really can't help themselves. All they have to say is, "We hear the feedback and understand the art style may not be quite what some of you were expecting. However once you play the game we are confident you will fall in love with it and the game." That's all it takes. You get more flies with honey than with vinegar.

Instead if one person writes, "Rex's art sucks," they focus on that and generalize the criticisms to invalidate them. Even if they make a half-hearted distinction between "retro-fascists" and other detractors, they're still labeling the fans and antagonizing people. Bad PR. Then again it's Disney, whose marketing strategy has consistently been: "If you don't like _____ you're a (racist/homophobe/transphobe/misogynist)."

 

[Infinitron]

And my post began with the word "people", not "you"!

 

[ADULF HITLOR FAN KLUB]

people who don't like the art style are "retro-fascists." I guess that's a step up from being goobergaters, transphobes, or Nazis.

People are being a bit unfair here since his point was that it's not fair to assume that's what they are.

"Not all, but SOME"

This is your typical guilt by association fallacy.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

I proudly identify as a Retro-Fascist.

 

[Luka-boy]

Are retro-fascists the new Deplorables?

 

[Boleskine]

My point was, why leave the "some" out at the beginning of that quote from my post? It changes the impression I'm conveying of his tweets, aka interpreting his comments as saying "[all] people who don't like it are retro-fascists" vs "some people who don't like it are retro-fascists."

If the "some" from my quote isn't removed, it becomes unnecessary to clarify that he was saying it's not fair to assume any detractor is a 'retro-fascist' as the "some" specification conveys that concept from the tweet.

Regardless, he's still saying it's fair to assume "some are, sure..." so like others have pointed out it's a half-hearted distinction that only serves to splinter the art critics into the 'good ones who aren't retro-fascists' and the actual, abominable, deplorable, entitled 'retro-fascists'.

I will never get tired of typing 'retro-fascist'.

 

[Naraya]

Retro-fascists in the wild:

And some AI-generated retro-fascists:

 

[Difera]

I can't believe that, of all the characters, they decided that Guybrush would be the one cursed with this stupid looking red nose. Really, it's one of the most ugly, low-effort, artistic choices I've seen popping up in american drawn comics during the last decade... it's like they decided to shit all over the previous art style and in the in the end thought: "Let's add an extra pile of shit on the main feature just to make sure the message goes through".

 

[IHaveHugeNick]

1. Make a sequel to a retro game
2. Oh my I didn't expect the fans to be so much into retro stuff

 

[Alienman]

How do you do fellow retro-fascists?

 

[Strig]

There's something about modern art and animation that has always bothered me. It's as if it looks too clean or polished.

The first thing that comes to mind is The Simpsons. I haven't watched it since the early 2000s but when I see a commercial or ad the modern animation seems like a huge downgrade. The 90s episodes had softer colors and edges. Modern animation is too sharp or detailed. I can't quite put my finger on it but it's like there's too much stark contrast. It's jarring and I honestly find it unpleasant to look at the second image. Every color is so bold in a way that my eyes don't know how to focus. Maybe I'm just getting older.

I don't know if this is related to the issues others have with ReMI's art, but I get a similar feeling as with The Simpsons example. The ReMI art is too clean and polished. On one hand the art style looks objectively well-done and unique in its own way, but on the other hand there's something that feels "off". The foreground blends into the background, like Strig and Jenkem noted.

It's (at least) two things.

First, it's hand-drawn animation vs computer-drawn, AI-assisted CGI.

Second, the former was intended to be shown on standard definition televisions, while the latter was intended for HD flatscreens. The lines need to be thicker on the former and the colors different on the latter, for the end result to 'look' right.

Personally, I prefer the term "traditional animation" because technically "hand-drawn" and "computer-drawn" are rather illogical. The latter is still being drawn by hand, simply using different tools. But other than that you're absolutely right. The artists knew their medium well and actually took into account how the animation would look on a standard TV. Line work was adjusted and so were the colors, if you look at the original animation cells the palette is always quite stark and it was precisely because they knew that it's going to get muted during the development, making copies/generation loss and finally on a standard broadcast. I believe that current digital artists either use the old color tables from pre-digital era or just don't care how it looks on a modern screen. And modern TVs, for some bloody reason, have often this oversaturated look to begin with. On top of that artists usually are pretty enamoured with digital line work as they get a consistent, clean result with every stroke of the pen. That's exactly what every course trains you to do, it's just that with any tactile material you get texture and the pen in your hand will never make two lines which are exactly the same. Many creators hate that prefering this consistent sterile look. Generally, I believe that limitations breed creativity and slight imperfections give character. Not to mention that any grain or texture on a flat color is just free detail. Even if you skillfully clean traditional animation to somewhat match the current standards it still looks way better with its painterly backgrounds and evidently inked lines. I'll just again fall back on City Hunter as an example.



Funnily enough the silver and bronze age comic books suffer from similar ails. When they're not being completely recolored they get "restorations" with absolutely garish colors. They probably match the original tables but there's a slight problem. New editions are printed on a white paper, often glossy, and the originals were printed on cheap yellowish pulp which chugs the inks like Russkij udarnik chugs vodka on his day off. It's all about mastering the medium, nowadays they think that if it's done digitally it'll look good on anything, no need to think about it too much. We could even circle back to vidya by discussing how pixelart looks now and how it's "supposed to look" with CRT monitors or shaders, but there already is a topic for that, I believe.

I will never get tired of typing 'retro-fascist'.

I like how it's not even an actual "fascist". Just the one from that Orwell quote:

“It will be seen that, as used, the word ‘Fascism’ is almost entirely meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social Credit, corporal punishment, fox-hunting, bull-fighting, the 1922 Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek, homosexuality, Priestley's broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women, dogs and I do not know what else.”

As terms go he would probably use "reactionary" if he was more politically retarded (or savvy, depends on your personal outlook). If he knew what kind of art was embraced by the actual Italian fascists he wouldn't be so quick to use that word. Maybe Tullio Crali, Gerardo Dottori or Guglielmo Sansoni would even earn praise as being "stupid talented" for "pouring their cuore nero into their artistic choices" and "not running the formula through the photocopier". I, of course, wouldn't insult Futurists by comparing them to that picassoid loose stool of an art-style.

Also, Dominic Armato? Armato di cosa? Armato con un pugnal fra i denti e bombe a mano? Molto sospettoso, se me lo chiedi.