Oddworld Forums - Is New 'n' Tasty what AO "should" have been?

Oddworld Forums (http://www.oddworldforums.net/index.php)

- Oddworld Discussion (http://www.oddworldforums.net/forumdisplay.php?f=6)

- - Is New 'n' Tasty what AO "should" have been? (http://www.oddworldforums.net/showthread.php?t=22143)

Is New 'n' Tasty what AO "should" have been?

Is NnT the "real" Oddworld? Here are the points made by Holy Sock: http://www.oddworldforums.net/showth...t=21696&page=3

AE is the game where they actually seemed to figure out what Oddworld was supposed to be.

So to me it seems like they figured out who they wanted Abe to be, what personalities the Glukkons, Sligs, and Mudokons have in AE and NnT seems to be very much in line with that.

If the tone of AE is the tone of Oddworld it makes no sense to take a step back with NnT. It's fine that they hadn't figured out Oddworld in the first game but it doesn't make sense to then take that step back in the remake 17 years on - when the tone of Oddworld has been pretty firmly established: satirical characters within a bleak world. Comedy and darkness.

I'm more just saying it's a sense of consistency. since they seemd to have locked down a tone in AE (which isn't necessarily lighter - since AE's plot is pretty dark) which is probably more the fact that the characters (Mudokons, Sligs, Abe) have more humourous elements to them. So it makes sense to add these to a remake of AO since there's a consistency in the characters and less of a noticeable change between NnT and future installments of the Quintology.

And mudokons and Sligs had those personalities in the AE cutscenes. The only reason they weren't in gameplay is because of memory limits in the PS1 era.

By my argument would be that that was not particularly intentional - maybe it the sense that they told the story the way they did because they wanted to keep the story very basic (and focus on the game itself) - and to be the worldbuilding of Oddworld is more significant in its story ie going from saving Mudokons from Molluck to saving the Queen from Lady Margaret to saving whatever from her great grandmother to the huge Oddworld cities and Khanzumers or whatever.

Giving the Mudokons and Sligs dialogue, in game, that makes them seem more like the Mudokons and Sligs in AE doesn't feel like it's ruining this world progression at all. But that they had a chance to give some personality to these creatures that they couldn't afford to do in the first game because of either time, memory, or they simly hadn't figured out yet. And since they *did* figure it out it only makes sense to include some of that in the remake - so Sligs and Mudokons don't seem very different between this game and the next. And so you don't get people debating about the difference between Sligs with essentially no dialogue - and Sligs with some humourous dialogue.

Moreover, NnT was supervised by Lorne Lanning (which means it was intentional). It's also why I'm saying a darker tone for AEHD isn't going to happen.

What do you think about it (keep in mind I'm talking about Lanning's perspective)? It's not about "what I like or dislike about NnT".

If you perceive it real, then it is real for you.
Depends on the person.

I agree with most of the points Holy Sock made there. I don't think it's a problem that NnT is goofier than the original.

That said I still think the production quality is significantly lower. I get that it's a small indie studio or whatever, but I'm still disappointed, especially by the animations. And, dear god, that credits song is horrifically unfitting.

Maybe we can get a second remake in another twenty years or so that does everything right.

AE was never that dark to begin with except for thematically. NNT was literally taking AE's tone and slapping it onto AO and all the discussions I had with Sock at the time were saying "I sure don't think AE's tone fits AO at all even if that's the way Lorne always wanted Oddworld to be". AE has always been a more lighthearted and goofy game comparitively, it set the stage for the mood of Oddworld from that point onwards even if MO over did the goofy aspect of it, and NNT eventually made it to the point where Lorne wanted to make it his "original vision" of Oddworld which just so happened to have the same tone as AE.

I'll use the Star Wars Special Edition analogy again, because it worked pretty well. That may have been what Lucas envisioned all along, but it was poorly executed and also shitter.

Just to emphasise, this thread is to discuss what you think Lorne's vision was originally and whether it was met by NnT. Not whether you personally agreed with any of the decisions.

I can't say that this isn't weird.

I will argue that AE is actually a pretty dark game despite all that comedy in it's cutscenes. It's a lot grimmer than AO I think. I know AO has the whole Soylent Green angle going on - which is obviously nastier - but I think the themes of AE come across as darker. Simply because it's a more developed narrative. You have the exploitation of those blind Mudokons in the Mines, the natural environments have a haunted feel to them as opposed to AO's which felt like it was introducing Abe to this wonderful, natural environment that was simply being exploited. But in AE you're exploring dark burial grounds and tombs. It deals a bit with addiction, depression and extracting tears is pretty grim.

But it's goofier and funnier at the same time.

Whether or not AO was originally supposed to be like NnT, though. Who knows? But that wasn't really my point. My point was that since AE was actually a developed game it was a much clearer indication of the tone they wanted Oddworld to have. Particularly since it was released a year after the original.

So when they remade AO it makes sense they tried to inject some of that sensibility into the game. However, perhaps the problem here was that they didn't rewrite and redevelop the story like the upcoming Ratchet and Clank remake. Instead they injected most of this into the gameplay - in the form of idle chatter and ragdolls. It's a bit more cosmetic, ya know?

But, you know, I would still argue that where NnT fails isn't in its boost of humour but some of the visual design and sound design that creates a rather different tone than the original. Abe's deaths never feel as visceral, Slog chases and Scrab chases never feel as tense, Sligs beating Mudokons feel rather tame, Rupture Farms looks rather glossy (the dirty lens does the game no favours).

I mean look at that 2012 footage. It's not perfect but that opening segment creates a much different atmosphere - which I don't think some of the small injections of AE like humour would really detract from that much.

Not sure if I'm included in Nate's post, but to clarify mine a little more, I was essentially saying that NNT isn't what AO should have been, but what it would have been based on Lorne's comments and interviews since AO's conception, and even moreso during NNT's production.

Whether or not AO was originally supposed to be like NnT, though. Who knows?

I can't be bothered to go back and find every interview or statement by Lorne but if memory serves me right, he constantly said throughout NNT's production, once it was decided it'd be a full remake rather than just the same essential game with better graphics, that NNT would be more true to his "original vision" of Oddworld, which is what brought up the whole George Lucas parallels to begin with.

However, perhaps the problem here was that they didn't rewrite and redevelop the story like the upcoming Ratchet and Clank remake. Instead they injected most of this into the gameplay - in the form of idle chatter and ragdolls. It's a bit more cosmetic, ya know?

Hah man remember when they said the level of gore and violence would be the same as it was in AO and how they'd try to capture the original tone of the game before they didn't at all? Or who knows, JAW may have tried, because a lot of the early production stuff really did have the tone, but Lorne decided he wasn't fond of it so he directed it in a different direction, or some other tomfoolery commenced and resulted in the game we have today

For example, the Mudokon Pop:

Nathan: The thing is, with that one I actually prefer the newer design, because it has that gloss of marketing, hiding the true horror of what the Glukkons were doing.

Lorne: I agree. I never liked the first one either. But that was just what came out from the artists and I was like “Uhhh… okay”. I mean, I try to give the artists some room and not change everything to my liking, but empower them to take ownership. Sometimes that means you like what they produce, sometimes you don’t, and sometimes it’s just not acceptable.

http://oddworldlibrary.net/blog/nath...lanning-again/

Sorry for the double posting. Here is my interpretation of the Holy Sock law: characters that revolve around Abe are goofy (like Munch and maybe Squeek) which explain, by the way, why the tone of SW is different. What do you think?

()

I'd agree with that. Abe and Munch are inherently cute (well, ugly-cute) and goofy characters, despite the horrible and hilariously-dark situations they find themselves in. It helps the player feel empathy for them. I think SW's tone was different for two reasons:
1) Lorne was feeling a bit disillusioned after how badly MO fell on it's face, and wanted to step away from the familiar corners of Oddworld for a while and take a break.
2) Lorne felt that the gaming market was shifting away from more stylized, artistic games and towards darker, grittier titles (Halo, CoD, etc) and wanted to keep Oddworld relevant. If we had gotten Fangus Klot, we possibly would have seen that trend continue, which I can't say I'd be all that enthusiastic about. The Oddworld games are dark, but in a sort of ridiculous, over-the-top way rather than something grim and gritty.

That's just my interpretation, though. I like these games for their humor and satire, not their gore factor.