Articles

LucasArts rebrands? 05 Sep, 2005 / Comments: 34

By Jake


Whoa check it out. What the hell is that little squiggly thing at the bottom there? Here, one sec:


A new LucasArts logo? I have to say, it just kind of looks like someone stepped on the old one. Anyway, maybe they have a new logo, and maybe it's that. I guess with no actual new games coming up, sales and marketing needed something to do to make them look busy to the boss.

Ah: Apparently this logo is one of a matching set that all Lucas companies have been given under the new "we're all under the same roof figuratively and literally" corporate structure. You can see them all here.
34

34 Comments

  • valkian on 07 Sep, 2005, 14:46…
    What's all this?
    What the hell they did with the ILM logo? It was perfect. Now it looks as if someone grabbed it and threw it off a very tall building.
    Fortunately the Skysound logo is almost intact, if someone stepped on it I would be very mad.
    The weird thing about all this is that today I had a dream which featured the guest appearence of George Lucas.
    It was the first time a movie director gets into my dream. It was a very odd and real-looking dream, I don't know if you wanna hear it. I feel so odd.
  • JBRAA on 07 Sep, 2005, 08:40…
    lollll

    Lucas Licensing reminds me of the Microsoft Office stick figure clip arts.

    Lucasfilm Animation looks very different. Looks like an egg with legs. I my self 'automatically associate' the 'egg' with some lousy 80's cartoon commercial.

    Skywalker Sound looks very decent though.

    The change to a new LucasArts logo feels to fit in pretty good. Lots of new fundamental company-directions the last 10 or so years. Perhaps an easy and cartooney approatch will attract 12 year olds. I was in that age when I played Dott and Sam & Max.
  • JBRAA on 08 Sep, 2005, 14:23…
    The ISP "Glocalnet"'s logo is somewhat similar to some of the new 'Lucas logos'
    http://www.glocalnet.se/
  • Jayel on 06 Sep, 2005, 15:00…
    OH fooking hell!
    What they did to the ILM logo is despicable!
  • tigercore on 06 Sep, 2005, 10:00…
    it's lost the quirkyness and originality of the old one. its gone all corporate and 'shiney' - i think it sucks.

    suppose it fits in with the loss of the classic game style. then again all good things must come to and end.
  • telarium on 06 Sep, 2005, 03:41…
    I kind of like it, but I agree that it's not quite timeless. I also question the decision behind the logo, as I don't really imagine it's going to appeal to the hardcore gaming audience. Who are they trying to target with this new logo?
  • netmonkey on 06 Sep, 2005, 08:27…
    Quote: Who are they trying to target with this new logo?

    Your mom! oohhhh snap.

    Sorry. :D
  • woxel1 on 05 Sep, 2005, 20:09…
    The Golden Guy is too small compared to the name of the company he's standing above. I wish I could see the whole logo without so much damn self-shadowing...
  • elTee on 05 Sep, 2005, 19:55…
    Thinking of it in the "it's an eye" sense, now it looks almost bad-trippy. Think about it - the bottom arc (the legs) is the insane cheekbone of a horrifying being, while the eye (head and upper arc) is now looking down at you in malevolence.

    I quite like it.
  • Shanty on 06 Sep, 2005, 20:37…
    Oh, man, you're right! Argh! Ew! Wretched! It's not so much looking down at you, though. It's more... Well, I think it looks more like the vacant stare of a fresh corpse, to be honest with you. Eek!
  • counting_pine on 06 Sep, 2005, 10:56…
    It reminds me of the eye of Sauron for some reason...
  • Bobbin Threadbare on 11 Sep, 2005, 03:57…
    Sauron is evil. It reminds you of that because ucasArts has turned to th dark side. It would look better if both legs were the same length. I like the font, probably the best thing about it.
  • Scummbuddy on 06 Sep, 2005, 00:49…
    I agree that they forgot about the original intentions of the gold guy. the eye is less now. which is more correct with their current company, that their invision has faded and dulled.
  • Shmargin on 06 Sep, 2005, 03:19…
    you sir, are correct.
  • Udvarnoky on 06 Sep, 2005, 01:20…
    Profound!1
  • Udvarnoky on 05 Sep, 2005, 19:15…
    It looks retarded.
  • Thrik on 05 Sep, 2005, 18:34…
    Wtf.

    I do like the improved type, though it's still not exactly perfect and the leading looks kind of iffy. Other than that, the old logo is far better -- and as Jake says, what the hell is going to be gained from changing their identity? If anything, it'll mean a less recognised and more shitty LucasArts in general. Argh.
  • Remi O on 05 Sep, 2005, 18:19…
    This reminds me of the "re-imagined" Burger King, Pizza Hut, UPS, etc. logos, none of which I like. They all just look a bit too cartoony for me.

    The typography is nice though; it looks a bit more in line with the other Lucas companies.
  • Jake on 05 Sep, 2005, 18:44…
    Yeah agreed. Burger King and Pizza Hut in particular were burdened by outdated typefaces in their logo, but the overall designs of their logos were really sound, and really recognizable. They switched from something instantly recognizible and timeless to something far less iconic and more modern and stylized that they'll need to pay someone to update every five years to keep it hip looking.

    It makes sense though, in a fucked up way. Why design something genuinely timeless and iconic that a company can be recognized by for years (see: AT&T, IBM, Coke, Pepsi, Apple, Nike) when you can instead make something cheezy, cheap, and hip that you then get paid to re-design and re-brand (and then get paid to market the re-branding!) every five years. If you do it right the first time, youre only paid once.

    Clearly it makes more financial sense from the point of any designer or marketing person. Why a corporation would want that, I don't really know. Because they got hoodwinked by a bunch of marketeers and designers, I guess.
  • Scummbuddy on 05 Sep, 2005, 17:56…
    With this younger, smaller gold boy, I feel that this should be a logo for LucasLearning, not adult/teen games like Battlefront, Revenge of the Sith, and Super Badbomb Racing... wait.
  • Jake on 05 Sep, 2005, 18:54…
    LucasArts likes their boys smaller and younger these days, apparently.
  • Jake on 05 Sep, 2005, 15:13…
    Yeah the new typography is nice (the old fonts were looking pretty dated), but you have to ask what they actually gain by changing their logo?
  • QueZTone on 06 Sep, 2005, 01:10…
    jake i like you, you and i are not that much diffreent, we are in fact quite alike, im a bit drunk cause i jsut returned from the local bar but tha t doesnt matter youre cool, hey :)
  • Paco on 05 Sep, 2005, 16:24…
    Respect? Either that. Or World piece.
  • Mr. Tusk on 05 Sep, 2005, 14:26…
    I think it's good! It's quirky and arty, but in an elegant, understated way. I really, really hope I'll be able to say the exact same thing about their games in future.
  • QueZTone on 05 Sep, 2005, 13:23…
    its a nice modernisation, i think i'd like the old gold guy with this new font look, that would be nice
  • monkeyboobs on 05 Sep, 2005, 15:46…
    yepp, ol' good guy with new fine font... the other ?golden boy? looks like sh... and has nothing to do with, ehm, arts.
  • Thriftweed on 05 Sep, 2005, 13:17…
    What's the deal with that logo! The Golden man looks disabled
  • itchythesamurai on 06 Sep, 2005, 20:28…
    Yeah, that one creepy long leg gives me the willies, like he's some kind of triplegic serial killer.
  • Gabez on 05 Sep, 2005, 11:43…
    Well... at least maybe they're sorta trying to change? I like the new font anyway.
  • jp-30 on 05 Sep, 2005, 10:27…
    It looks like a faucet. "Going down the drain" jokes ahoy!
  • netmonkey on 05 Sep, 2005, 07:02…
    Then the transition is complete. This is no longer the LucasArts we knew.
  • Jayel on 05 Sep, 2005, 06:32…
    Shorter and slimmer!
    I actually kinda like it
  • chuzwuzza on 05 Sep, 2005, 17:47…
    Phew, I was beginning to think I was the only one!

    Looks nice and modern