Not much has been said about what exactly the Double Fine Adventure will be, except that it will be a point and click adventure game made by a small team at Double Fine led by Tim Schafer and with input from Ron Gilbert.
But now we know in what dimension the game will be created. And that dimension is two! That's right, not only will it be a point and click adventure game, it will be a 2D point and click adventure game! A game like that by Tim Schafer featuring input from Ron Gilbert hasn't happened since Day of the Tentacle in 1993!
So what are you waiting for! Support the Double Fine Adventure today! If you've already supported it, then choose a higher tier of support!
Update (February 14, 2012): This is another bit of scraps scrounged from twitter about the game, but we'll take it. Especially since it's a great Valentine's day present full of sweet lovin' sweet music for your ears: Tim Schafer wants music by Peter McConnell for the Double Fine Adventure! So, here's hoping Mr. McConnell takes him up on the offer, as it would make the game have so much more of that old school feel we hear so much about.
SurplusGamer
Yes, graphics are important for graphic adventures. It's all about world building and the graphics are your window into that world. But I've never been let down visually by a Tim Schafer led game yet. He seems very interested in making games that have a very distinctive visual style, and I don't see any reason that he'd settle for anything less than excellence this time around, either.
Sure, Tim never let me down either! I was referring to some comments about how awesome it would be to have DOTT graphics in 2012. I trust Double Fine a billion times more than I trust Telltale, which I left something like one or two years ago for being cheap, buggy and often uninspired.
I think one of the causes that led to the so-said decline of adventure games is the fact that every graphic adventure progressively received less care about the graphical aspect.
As everyone here, I'm an old-school-hardcore-point'n'click lover but I never really understood WHY some of us consider graphics unimportant or (even worse) a flaw... a great game needs to be great in every possible way. No, I'm not saying I want crappy games with wonderful graphics and shitty gameplay/story. I'm just pointing out a great game should have BOTH of them.
So, would I be happy if DF's new game had a DOTT-like resolution? ABSOLUTELY NOT! I'd love that style, but I want it done in a modern high-resolution way. How could we possibly give old-school adventures a second youth and commercial success if they lack in what their own name is about? GRAPHIC adventures. Sorry for this rant, I guess I'm just too excited about the great news.
First of all, Full Throttle looks a thousand times more "cinematic" than any Telltale game. It was 2D and had some 3D elements and cut scenes drawned too.
2D doesn't mean it has to be "limited". Look at the broken swords, those were amazing. On a pretty similar to lucas games gameplay, there are the runaway games (2D backgrounds and characters rendered in 3D then reworked in 2D).
Those games are so much better than any telltale game, graphics wise (and anything else wise actually...).
I m a digital artist. Depending on the art style, going 1080p is actually easier to go than low res. For instance, the "cartoon" style Dott had, you realize how easy that is to make ? It doesn't use shades on the characters, the details are minimal etc.... It's easier to just draw it right away instead of having to create something "faithful to concept arts" in low res. Also, using Illustrator, the animations process is simplified A LOT. You need to create key frames, but the "in between" can be created really easily (and I'm not talking about the automated process but the simple fact that you can change any drawing the way you want).
Also, what a lot of devs do simplify the 2D art, is having pieces of animations in 3D, and they draw over it (King of Fighters dev explained the method ^^).
So anyway, they said it would use "modern technology", so I assume it will not be low res.
MrManager
I suppose my assumption at this point is something closer to the Special Editions.
Exactly how they will do it on the budgets they're operating under, I don't know. I would guess most backers are expecting something closer to the visual quality of DF's last few outings, particularly seeing 2D wasn't specifically stated up-front.
Either way, I'm sure it'll look great; Costume Quest might not have been up there with Skyrim as far as technical complexity goes, but artistically I still feel it's one of the better looking games over the past few years. (The color palettes alone are incredible.)
That's a good point. I wonder what they're thinking. If it's 2D then that does limit what they can do, possibly in a good way: It might mean they have more time to spend on puzzles/story. If they go "Full Telltale" then there's opportunity for the cut-scenes to be more cinematic -- which surely must cost more?
Hmm. It's an interesting question, either way.
Personally I'd be REALLY happy if they produced a game that was graphically equal AND story/puzzlewise equal with Day of the Tentacle. I'd be less happy if they produced a Tales of Monkey Island shorter game, with similar graphics. Hmm.
koosjebig
BTW, in addition to the money from the Kickstarter backers (approximately 2 M$), they will also be able to sell the game via steam, to another 100 k or so gamers (in the same ballpark as the number of backers). Or is it naive to think this way? I assume lots of gamers won't pay now, but might be enticed to pay for a finished product.
I think it might be a bit silly if they go over their budget in the hopes that there are some people on Steam who haven't Kickstarted it. I'd personally like to see them have a guaranteed margin... they deserve some financial success.
ThunderPeel2001
I think it seems fair to say that it will either be old-skool, low resolution, or involve some 3D aspect (even if it's pre-rendered a la the Monkey Island: Special Editions). High definition, quality animation seems outside of this game's budget -- and I know I for one would prefer a longer game than one that looked super-spiffing.
Would people be happy if they got DOTT style graphics? Or do you think the backers would expect higher resolution?
I suppose my assumption at this point is something closer to the Special Editions.
Exactly how they will do it on the budgets they're operating under, I don't know. I would guess most backers are expecting something closer to the visual quality of DF's last few outings, particularly seeing 2D wasn't specifically stated up-front.
Either way, I'm sure it'll look great; Costume Quest might not have been up there with Skyrim as far as technical complexity goes, but artistically I still feel it's one of the better looking games over the past few years. (The color palettes alone are incredible.)
Indiana Smith
It's the perfect opportunity for the LucasArts trio of composers to make an awesome comeback!
Shmargin
I remember a time when this site thrived off of snide remarks and sarcastic attire. Now it seems like people just get all indignant as soon as I disagree and voice my opinion in a mildly insulting way. I also remember a time when reading news stories on here made me LOL in RL. And I dont any more. Maybe its just times changing around me.
I think we've all just matured a bit. It's worth noting that we've had complaints from other users about the tone being TOO sarcastic recently. Needless to say that your "mildly insulting" manner of conducting yourself has not won you any friends here. Nor has the fact that your complaint was completely antagonistic and based on your own whimsical imaginings.
Thrik
On a personal note I'm actually surprised they are apparently going down the road of traditional sprite art, as that's fairly time-consuming to produce in HD at high levels of detail in comparison to burning it all out in 3D. Both can potentially look gorgeous (an adventure game using DF's current tech could look better than Grim Fandango in real time), but I guess 2D art has a particular charm and allure to it.
I think it seems fair to say that it will either be old-skool, low resolution, or involve some 3D aspect (even if it's pre-rendered a la the Monkey Island: Special Editions). High definition, quality animation seems outside of this game's budget -- and I know I for one would prefer a longer game than one that looked super-spiffing.
Would people be happy if they got DOTT style graphics? Or do you think the backers would expect higher resolution?
It was a perfectly reasonable expectation that DF might go Telltale-style and adapt its existing, very capable 3D engine and development pipeline for a point-and-click adventure. Wouldn't be the first time Schafer's gone with 3D in a 'classic adventure game'.
On a personal note I'm actually surprised they are apparently going down the road of traditional sprite art, as that's fairly time-consuming to produce in HD at high levels of detail in comparison to burning it all out in 3D. Both can potentially look gorgeous (an adventure game using DF's current tech could look better than Grim Fandango in real time), but I guess 2D art has a particular charm and allure to it.
Strayth
Are you stupid ?
Since I'm responding to you, I'm going to have to go with "Yes".
Strayth
1) Don't you think, that if they posted such a news, with a new information ( a tweet ), you could have checked you actually read it somewhere ( you did not ) before posting your crap ?
2) You did not even read the second comment. First of all, 3D or 2D is just the shape, that is not what would make it old school or not, as they were clearly referring to the game design and not just the artwork. I guess you missed Grim Fandango in their video ?
And that's the point, as I indicated on the second post, what they did say is that they would make an old school adventure game using MODERN TECHNOLOGY. How could you rule out 3D with no information ?
No, I disagree with you completely. Sorry.
ThunderPeel2001
Hey Schmargin, what gives?
Spelled my made up word wrong.
ThunderPeel2001
What's the deal with insulting the people who run this site? And what does that have to do with you being mistaken? No need to lash out.
I dont really feel like I'm lashing out, its pretty much just my opinion. I remember a time when this site thrived off of snide remarks and sarcastic attire. Now it seems like people just get all indignant as soon as I disagree and voice my opinion in a mildly insulting way. I also remember a time when reading news stories on here made me LOL in RL. And I dont any more. Maybe its just times changing around me. I also hate skinny jeans, and wouldnt ever be caught dead wearing a pair, even though its all I ever see people wearing. So, I'm most likely the one thats out of the loop.
Speaking of LOLing in RL though, Jasons video brought back the LOL.
Oh yeah, and my comment about the not funny names, was just refering to the ACTUAL names of the posters. For example, I think "Darth Jennifer" would have been alot more funny than just "Jennifer". But thats just me nit picking.
Remember not to feed the trolls!
Shmargin
jp-30
It seems every time Jennifer posts a mojo news story, you're there mocking it. In this case you're wrong with what you posted, and based your comment on your own assumptions.
Jennifer's news post was reporting on the first bit of news to confirm it was a 2D game.
Nah, it has nothing to do with whos posting it, I would have done the same regardless. Gabez is the one that said he didn't like posting news stories like that, which I think is stupid, which is why I point it out whenever someone posts news about sales.
In THIS case, I actually was pretty sure I read it was a 2D point-and-click. But I posted my comment before I checked. And as I said, the way they've described it, even without them saying it, I assumed it was. Notice how they didn't officially say it was in some sort of press release? They said it matter of fact style in a twitter comment.
It has nothing to do with Jennifer. Shes just another not funny name I don't recognize that's taken over posting duties for all the people that used to post funny stuff here.
Are you stupid ?
1) Don't you think, that if they posted such a news, with a new information ( a tweet ), you could have checked you actually read it somewhere ( you did not ) before posting your crap ?
2) You did not even read the second comment. First of all, 3D or 2D is just the shape, that is not what would make it old school or not, as they were clearly referring to the game design and not just the artwork. I guess you missed Grim Fandango in their video ?
And that's the point, as I indicated on the second post, what they did say is that they would make an old school adventure game using MODERN TECHNOLOGY. How could you rule out 3D with no information ?
jp-30
It seems every time Jennifer posts a mojo news story, you're there mocking it. In this case you're wrong with what you posted, and based your comment on your own assumptions.
Jennifer's news post was reporting on the first bit of news to confirm it was a 2D game.
Nah, it has nothing to do with whos posting it, I would have done the same regardless. Gabez is the one that said he didn't like posting news stories like that, which I think is stupid, which is why I point it out whenever someone posts news about sales.
In THIS case, I actually was pretty sure I read it was a 2D point-and-click. But I posted my comment before I checked. And as I said, the way they've described it, even without them saying it, I assumed it was. Notice how they didn't officially say it was in some sort of press release? They said it matter of fact style in a twitter comment.
It has nothing to do with Jennifer. Shes just another not funny name I don't recognize that's taken over posting duties for all the people that used to post funny stuff here.
Shmargin
jp-30
Where did they say that? Got a link?
Nope. But when you sell it as "a classic point-and-click adventure." and say in your Q&A "it will be an old school adventure", then I guess I assume 2D. Because 3D point and click wouldnt be classic or old school.
And actually, I'm pretty sure I did see it directly referred to as a 2D point-and-click adventure early on, but I dont feel like looking to see if I'm right. You can though!
But anyway, don't worry son, I don't have a link right now.
It seems every time Jennifer posts a mojo news story, you're there mocking it. In this case you're wrong with what you posted, and based your comment on your own assumptions.
Jennifer's news post was reporting on the first bit of news to confirm it was a 2D game.
Also, there's no Dave.
jp-30
Where did they say that? Got a link?
Nope. But when you sell it as "a classic point-and-click adventure." and say in your Q&A "it will be an old school adventure", then I guess I assume 2D. Because 3D point and click wouldnt be classic or old school.
And actually, I'm pretty sure I did see it directly referred to as a 2D point-and-click adventure early on, but I dont feel like looking to see if I'm right. You can though!
But anyway, don't worry son, I don't have a link right now.
Shmargin
They said it would be 2d right off the bat. I thought that was why it was a big deal.
Where did they say that? Got a link?
Jason
I wonder who the artists will be? Klint Honeychurch did Host Master. Who's to say they won't be going that retro for this, too.
This was my first thought too, but because they've raised more money maybe they will switch to a hi-fi presentation.
Also, Ron Will be a little more than input, he Will actually work on the game.