Okay, quick show of hands, how many people here have actually played Deadly Alliance and Deception? It doesn't sound like too many from the ridiculous claims I'm seeing tossed around.

An awful lot of people accuse the modern era of being less dark and serious than the old 2D games, saying the ones Tobias was writer and art director for had a feel that they've never recaptured.
That's an out-and-out falsehood. I daresay DA and Deception were the "darkest" games they've done. In DA they killed off the main hero and let the villains WIN, for God's sake. Those two games were all about dread and despair.

And maybe you guys didn't notice, but the games that had Friendships, Babalities, and Animalities? The one that was set in a modern American city instead of being all dark and ancient Asian? The one with the worst, most cartoony Fatalities? Those were Tobias games.
The only thing in the modern era that fits the parody category is Mokap. ONE character. A HIDDEN character no less.
BTW, TrueNoob, Tobias left Midway in the middle of production of Special Forces. That was years before development had even started on Deadly Alliance.

*shows hand*

Mainly what I get from reading the perception all the time, and actually, personally sharing the opinion, is that there is a context issue.

What's that supposed to mean? Well,

In the early games, they accomplished photo-realism better than the current "better" technology has been able to. Basically.

But to take that a little further, they placed those photo-realistic (okay, digitized animations), and placed them in harms way. Almost seamlessly establishing a "connection" with whoever the favorite character was, and the player themselves....*tah-dah* = "Darker Game."

Instead, we have the cartoon graphics(which, for the sake of arguing about that tiny little detail, let's just say, we all can live with "less than realistic" graphics. k?), that are put into surroundings that are now, not as "threatening" because there is no "connection" to the pixels, aaand here's where you get "Not As Serious".

Because if you don't care about the character anymore = You're not taking playing the game serious anymore.

There, that's basically the explanation I have consequently read over and over and over. And share actually. All it says is that, "Sure I can see where that is coming from without diving off a bridge, just cuz it's not the old game.
--
Now, there's also something you're missing the point on. And it's that, in these latest games, they threw around the color "black" alot more. But that doesn't make the game "darker", you see(no pun). Part of the "horror" of being scared of something, is actually seeing it happen to you.

And in this context, "darker" doesn't actually, Literally mean..."darker". See what I'm sayin' there? (again, no pun, no joke intended) That's what it is.

Also, to take the fact that there were "weird-alities" in the older games, and put it like you have there, doesn't "connect" a point more accurately. It only justifies that those things fit better, in these newer games. Cuz I mean, if they're gonna make a game I can't actually connect with//relate to, then why not just go all out, and have the "weird-alities" in these new-er games too?

So, in the older games with all the "weird-alities", we just take it as the joke its supposed to be and move on. The whole.."It's just a video game folks" thing, plays with all the "weird-alities" in the older games, because it creates a balance between reality and fantasy. There isn't a balance in the newer games, it's just black-er. *wow*

--

Dread and Despair was accurately captured, actually. But it was not remembered, it didn't "stick". Says, that the execution was off, and or that the information was mal-received. Which is still an execution issue.

I mean, y'know, of course everybody remembers THAT Liu Kang was killed, and even how(who did it)....but why? And who else?

Of course I remember all this stuff, but I sorta have to.
--

The point here, is that once MK went 3D, and especially after experiencing MKD-A, the attachment to playing & enjoying Mortal Kombat, has disappeared.

And it's because it's not a dark & serious game any longer.

The Lure to the game has changed, and it's not photo realistic any more.
========----------=========

Story is another separate issue too btw. Because it's a separate reason people buy MK games.

You take all the inconclusiveness, retcons, potholes, ect...and add that to a roster that's outrageously large, AND has cartoon-like graphics, AND has stepped away from the reason people really wanna buy a MK game....

And you get disappointment everytime.

enter: MkvsDC

===============================================

Here's one of those vids I was talking about earlier:

Behind the Scenes("BTS") vid:

(1:30sec)

Ed Boon credits Tobias as the creator of the "feel" of the early MK games, and in particular, as the "visionary".

Haven't re-found the quote about blood being in the games, but I will eventually. heh

So your whole problem with the newer games is the graphics?

That's...pretty shallow.

Of course not. But I said that story is an entirely different issue. That seems apparent in this thread because, I see the misinterpretations between how Tobias effected just the story, and then, how Tobias effected the early games overall all over this thread.

There's a few components that aren't organized in this thread that's letting an "argument" continue. heh...

And besides, that's not all I was talking about.

Story stuff now?

You said you take the games less seriously because you find it harder to emotionally invest in 3D models than in the old digitized sprites.

You also said the new games have more black in them, but that doesn't make them darker in tone.

First of all, I have to disagree with the second part. The new games have more stages set in daylight than MK2 and 3 did, and the characters are dressed just as colorfully as they always were.

Secondly, that IS saying your problems with the tone lie in the graphics. That's exactly what it's saying. Personally, I have absolutely no problem treating the 3D characters exactly as seriously as I did the 2D ones.
In fact, I take them MORE seriously. The opening cinema to Deception sent actual physical shivers up my spine the first couple times I watched it. Sometimes, if I'm in the right mood, it still does. I don't remember ever having that experience with the 2D games.

Well yea, I'm not gonna deny that - that's one issue. But it's not the only thing that separates 2d from 3d MK games. I mean c'mon, I'm better than that.

I take it one at a time, and what I quoted from you, directly related to the reply it got from me.

As far as how you take it, and the connections that you make with either 2d or 3d MK games, Cool. aheh....You're just different than me. So?

I'm pretty sure you've seen my analyst of the graphics on MKvsDC renders lately. It shouldn't be a surprise that one good, big issue with the difference between 2d & 3d is it's graphical context.

And also, how can it be difficult to conclude that if I'm playing with someone clos-er to "real", the connection can be stronger?

I mean, that's not a problem is it? Should be basic human stimuli, right?

===

On the "black-er" thing, No, there's no more arenas at night or day in the older games, than there are in the newer ones. Or vice versa...

But I recognize that in shading things, and in trying to get better textures on things, greys and blacks on top of a base color allow that to happen.

lol, I'm just sayin' they did it too much in these newer games, and it spoiled the balance that was probably meant. hmhm..

I wonder if you could post some examples of what you mean by too much black and gray. Because, y'know...



I ain't seeing it.

Hold on and I'll show you...

Hold on and I'll show you...with this picture.

I should have included a pic from one of the 2D games for comparison purposes. Here we go...

Then wouldn't it be this one:



vs

this

one:



click to see the whole thing.

Wait, and then this Sub-Zero:



vs This one, both untouched:



and especially this one:




I should've have to bend up images for that to be apparent now. And it's THAT kinda difference all over these newer games.

More shades of grey and black give more definition to a texture. It doesn't need to be like that though, in order to get "A darker" feeling game.

The colors used are pretty much the same there, dude.

YES.

The color scheme is the same. But I know, that the way you get to that, is a whole different process, and end result of the later games, yielded "blacker".

There IS without a doubt....*sigh* here:

Click

The newer one, has alot more blacks and really dark hues of the colors than the older one.

Mainly because computers let the creators interpret more colors, which is good. BUT, when they went in and edited the thing, it's like they hit the contrast button too much or something. Course I don't know what they did exactly, but that was done in a "PhotoShop" program.

===============================

Just in case we wonder if I'm competent,

Here

we go

And these are just some lab assignments I had to do last week for school.

I think you might be splitting hairs there, chief.
The newer example not only appears to have a wider spectrum of shades, but also more apt lighting effects, versus the flat, but still quite dark, 2D version. I think it's less about using more black, and more about casting a fuller illusion than the 2D version, which hovers around a very cartooned middle.

Then again, I think continuing to read this thread is giving me brain damage, so I'm not longer sure...

Nah, it's a fine interpretation man.

My only point in all this is that if we wanna sit here, and debate the difference between Tobias and Team, and the time after he was no longer there, regardless of all this trivial stuff?....we can't get away from his ideas.

lol

So essentially, I'm just saying give the guy all of the credit, if not a little more than what's due.

Truth be told, Goskie and or Beran probably came up with those arena designs. But if we talk about which game is darker, and blacker and all that bs, fine. I will make sure I at least tried to show you.

More specific to where the difference between Tobias and no Tobias would be right here:





I mean c'mon, is that really deniable? One's real and the other two, are not real. Just making my point on the disconnection between 2d & 3d.

Even the old Jax looks more "real" than these:

I guess part of the reason I kept thinking we were talking about the writing is because I thought the involvement of other forces in the visual design was well known. So, rather than trying to weed out Tobias' involvement in the visual design, I assumed we'd be talking about the domain generally described as his -- the writing (which, granted, overlaps with other creative roles).

Which is why I would say acknowledging Tobias on the basis of the longevity of what he put forward is giving him credit for what isn't there, because it's talking about potential. Potential that struggled to go beyond dot points in the first four games, which, also happened to have a similarly basic design base for characters.

If anything, I think the advantages of building characters with CG meant we started getting a much better visual representation of each. I tend to be a fan of MKDA's direction in most areas, character designs included.
The restrictions of the digitization meant everything was exceptionally simple, and more prone to colour-swapping complacency. At least in the newer games the existence of a CG build means they've been more likely to add some sense of individuality, even if a lot of the cases are arbitrary placement shifts and clutter.

Jax' characterization in the earlier games - what little was there - was definitely better, but the design? I'm not a big fan of the new stuff, but it's headed in the right direction! Sports design lycra and arm paint doesn't really do it for me.

Contrary to popular belief, dark, be it visual or conceptual, does not equate to good. Which is why I would never bring that up.

Alright, I'm good on that.

So now, as far as the writing is concerned, Tobias really didn't leave any staples. But I think that's because they refuse to end one thing, and start another.

And in that respect, neither did Vogel leave any staples. If I take Raiden, not just cuz I like Raiden, but because he had one of the most radical changes in his story; then it depends on what they do with the character next that will define whether or not "staying power" is established.

But if they retcon or something silly like that, it's just a repeat of the time during Tobias, and I'd see no reason to separate them as "this one was better than the other one", ever again.

During the time of Tobias, there we more, and stronger staying characters created than during the time of mainly Vogel.

And I mean, if I had to pick, I'd probably go with Tobias. Just because in the early games, things built up to a "final", and then started all over. MK1-3

Then MK4, started on something else completely different, but within the context of MK content.

But, y'know, both have had their share of "catastrophe", and both have created some pretty wack characters. But what? = Trial and error?

Comes with the territory.

==

Far as who wrote darker stuff? *searches memory*

I think....Vogel wrote more.

See...he killed the hero, changed the god, dealt with more realms & characters. I'd say they're even on "dark written content". Vogel just wrote more, for more characters and such.

hm

The most telling sign, I think, is the value of story we've been able to get out of Vogel's work. I'm not particularly inclined to say Vogel's the best we'll ever see, but if we're pitting the two against each other, I find it impossible to get past the fact that Tobias was really only able to present abbreviated concepts.

MK4 and MKDA seem like good comparisons just because they use fairly similar techniques of telling a story that, despite not being followed up on, could be interpreted as a cohesive chapter. We get a fuller understanding in-game of what's happened from start to finish through bios, and endings that aren't all at odds.

With those examples, Vogel definitely achieved a more narrative experience when you line up all the pieces on the same board. We get a better impression of the story as an event that had different characters moving with different motivations into different scenarios.

MK4 was more of a dot point exercise again, shifting around a few concepts (like Scorpion's history), while essentially sticking to the same basic formula of the previous games without any poignancy.

The exposure different modes granted the Vogel era probably further highlighted the fact that characterization was stil heavily lacking, but we got the opportunity to establish some more rooted concepts that connected more to sequences of events. The illusion cast by his fiction was fuller than just about anything Tobias did.