Talk:Monkey Island 2: LeChuck's Revenge

Work on Story

As mentioned below, I took it upon myself to correct several details regarding the end of the story. The corrections ended up being quite a bit longer than I'd anticipated. Would it be worthwhile to rework the whole plot summary, maybe break it into its component acts? --68.41.122.213 09:50, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Ending: different versions?

"The two brothers, one from the wound and the other from the gas, fall unconscious and wake up in an amusement park, as children." Are there different versions of the game? When I played it, the brothers were discovered by an employee of the amusement park, who says something among the lines of: "Hey, you kids shouldn't be here.". They never "fall unconscious". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.146.104.168 (talk • contribs) 18:07, 16 August 2006

No, I think the article is just a bit wrong...--Wormsie 20:59, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

I just finished the game about ten minutes ago, so I'll fix it. --68.41.122.213 09:31, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Icons?

What's the point of those icons in this and the "The Secret of Monkey Island" -article. I think they look funny and are wrongly placed (if it was in the template it would be OK).--Wormsie 10:21, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

• Also, both Monkey Island 1 and LOOM has them. It was not me who put them (although I have restored them whenever they were removed), but I find nothing wrong and I find no reason to be removed. Pictureuploader 12:09, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

As fair-use images, they should only be kept if there is a point. Rather than there being no point to removing them. --JiFish(^Talk/_Contrib) 18:57, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

The usage of icons doesn't seem to be very uniform - some articles like that of SimCity 4 has an icon in the info box (which I think would be a good place, as for example ScummVM has its icon there - too bad the template doesn't support it), most game articles don't seem to have one at all. And besides, are those official icons? And what's the point of them? I think they just look "unprofessional", especially when placed like that. DOTT doesn't have an icon, Sam & Max: Hit the Road doesn't have an icon, Grim Fandango doesn't have an icon, The Curse of Monkey Island and Escape from Monkey Island don't have icons... I thought they were just put there by some enthusiastic fan who just wanted something to contribute, and didn't really care if it looked ugly or not.--Wormsie 12:12, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

I would support complete removal. --JiFish(^Talk/_Contrib) 13:31, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Somebody removed the icon from The Secret of Monkey Island on the basis that "Wikipedia articles don't have icons".--Wormsie 11:53, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

So you say that they should stay. Shouldn't we all agree on something? Pictureuploader 12:56, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't remember saying that icons should stay... I meant that when someone said "Wikipedia articles don't have icons" I wondered if that was some sort of... Wikipedia policy? I don't know. Personally, I'm still against icons. :-P--Wormsie 10:14, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Please can we sometime settle on the matter of icons? During the last two days, someone restored it and someone else re-removed it. If others are pro icons except me, why don't they write their opinion here? Pictureuploader 02:17, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually, looking at the icon used for the Monkey Island 1 article, if memory serves correctly, doesn't the Macintosh version of the game use that icon? --4.156.210.217 13:51, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello people, I know it's been nearly a year since this discussion took place. But I just want to point out something. If the images are copyrighted then they cannot be there, they fail the fair use criteria due to the fact fair use images must be involved in part of a discussion (for example a screenshot which has text about the game, or box art with all the release info are both acceptable, an icon for display reasons is not). Otherwise they're perfectly fine in my opinion and it comes down to aesthetics. Sorry to bump this topic but it didn't look as if there was a result to the discussion. ●BillPP ^{(talk|contribs)} 16:47, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

cell dog with key

i wanted to add this pic

but there is no space in the text. Somebody could do it? Pictureuploader 12:09, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

MOD -form?

Uhm, the music in MI2 is definitely just MIDI. Has nothing to do with MOD. If you don't believe me, rip the files yourself with ScummRevisited. The music was definitely not made with a tracker, and the sounds are MIDI sounds, not samples.--Wormsie 15:51, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Except in the case of Amiga probably Pictureuploader 08:35, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Good point. (Never had an Amiga myself, so I wouln't know.) But the original wording was still incorrect, as it only concerned the Amiga version.--Wormsie 08:55, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:MonkeyIsland2.decor.640px.jpg

Image:MonkeyIsland2.decor.640px.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:50, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Review links

I'm just leaving these here for now until I (or somebody else) expand the reception section ●BillPP ^{(talk|contribs)} 03:14, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

1. http://www.adventureclassicgaming.com/index.php/site/reviews/37/ (Adventure Classic Gaming)
2. http://www.quandaryland.com/jsp/dispArticle.jsp?index=470 (Quandaryland)
3. http://uk.gamespot.com/pc/adventure/monkeyisland2/review.html?mode=web&om_act=convert&om_clk=stats&tag=stats;theysay (gamespot)
4. http://amr.abime.net/review_12055 (Computer and Video Games)
5. http://amr.abime.net/review_8171 (Amiga Computing)
6. http://amr.abime.net/review_3925 (CU Amiga) Budget Rerelease
7. http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/games/archives/2005/07/06/point_and_click.html (Professional blog)
8. http://www.gamerseurope.com/articles/128

Thanks! Kariteh 08:04, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Excellent, having the raw materials to hand will make work on the article much easier. QuagmireDog 11:50, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:MonkeyIsland2.decor.640px.jpg

Image:MonkeyIsland2.decor.640px.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

References and in-jokes

There is yet another reference to Indiana Jones although it may be a bit too obvious: Indy's Whip™ in the Booty Boutique on Booty Island. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.186.78.33 (talk) 13:38, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Images

I just put back the game box cover art (File:Mi2cover.jpg) into the infobox and moved the alternative image (File:LeChuck's Revenge artwork.jpg) further down the article. The box art image was about to be deleted as being orphaned and I wanted to make sure that we had the chance to discuss which image to use before anything got deleted.

The alternative image has obvious benefits over the box cover art, eg the lack of the IBM VGA sticker and it's clearer. The problems are that it's probably a modern, cleaned up version of the original artwork and omits things like the number 2 in the title. I feel that the original box image and original artwork should be used rather than some modern promotional image. Like using the first edition book cover rather than a reprint. the VGA sticker also has some historical interest in that it seemed a pretty big deal at the time!

Please could we discuss which image to use, and the other can then be orphaned and deleted. GDallimore (Talk) 09:50, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I've only just artificially added the "2" to the poster. However, I'm also not sure replacing all the box art pictures with the posters is a good idea. I don't really see any reason to do it - apart from them being a little more "polished" - and they have some details changed/removed, such as the "2" in this one, and things like developers' names.

I think I was happier with the box covers, and I don't think it was a good idea to switch them all en masse without discussion, but if the posters do stay, I think the descriptions should at least mention the extensive retouching efforts, and link to the originals. CountingPine (talk) 10:44, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I replaced the box art because it is a low quality scan that's skewed colour contrast and doesn't come out well when reduced from its high-res version to meet fair use requirements (a problem systemic among the LucasArts adventure games on Wikipedia and online generally). The new image had none of the defects caused by a low quality scan, and thus appears much clearer at the 256px resolution. Therefore, its more useful to the reader in displaying the artwork chosen to represent the game. Any alleged retouches would have been made the original author and only to make the image clearer rather than change it entirely (unlike with the analogy between first editions and reprints)—this is still the same artwork produced for the game in 1991. Artwork like this, when higher quality, is perfectly acceptable for infobox purposes: see Myst, Halo 2, Halo Wars, Half-Life 2: Episode Two, among many others. The less markup to clutter the image with small things unreadable at anything less than a 600px resolution, the better. An image where the reader can see clearly and without hinderance at web-resolution is superior to a low-quality image which robs the image of many finer details at web-resolution and obsurces other parts with markup. A couple of examples: in the first image, can you tell there's a monkey on the mast next to Guybrush? I couldn't until I uploaded the clearer image, it looked like rope before. Secondly, you can't make out Purcell's signature engraved on the wood at the bottom left in the first image, you can read it the second. -- Sabre (talk) 13:56, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I largely agree, BUT feel that it's essential to know when this image was produced? Was it used to promote the game in 1981? If not, we need to update the image description and perhaps even the caption to avoid misleading people. For similar reasons (to avoid misleading people) the edited version of the clearer image with the addition of the 2 and other box art is a bad idea, in my view.

As another option, I think I still have an original box myself and could easily do a better photo. GDallimore (Talk) 14:22, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I really think we are making mountains out of a very small mole-hill here. This is the same artwork, it was produced at the same time as the other one, back in 1991, by the same person: Steve Purcell. There is no chance of misleading the reader, for all intents and purposes the artwork is the same: the only difference is that one has been created using a regular scanner not designed to reproduce artwork properly, while the other is the original artwork itself put through a commercial scanner designed to produce a crystal clean version. There's also the added bonus of complete platform neutrality; the artwork in this form represents all four platforms, whereas the old one only represents the DOS version of the game. -- Sabre (talk) 14:32, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

On the subject of images, I think we should lose one of the in-game images. The fair use rational is pretty weak. I suggest losing the crypt scene. It's too large anyway (it's at full resolution so saying that the resolution is low is just a lie) and not the best image from the game. The Walt the dog image seems better done to me and is more representative of the game's darker tone. GDallimore (Talk) 09:50, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I don't much mind having both, but of the two, I'd get rid of the Stan one. It's not just at full resolution - it's doubled up! Also, it's not from the full game, but the demo. CountingPine (talk) 10:44, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I'd retain the dog image: its useful for commentary on inspiration from Pirates of the Caribbean, which will produce a far stronger fair use rationale than the Stan one. We need to get the HUD back in though, considering it was redesigned for MI2 for the first time since Maniac Mansion, it is a further point of commentary for the caption. -- Sabre (talk) 13:56, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Again, largely agreed. I'll see if I can get a full screen grab. But, since I'll be getting a new screen shot, I think I'll look for one that's more of an Indy reference in view of the large section about this in the article. GDallimore (Talk) 14:22, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Focusing on the Indiana Jones references is unwise: they essentially mount up to little else than trivia - its their franchise, so they shove references to it in their games. Not a big deal, nor would it be seen significant enough against WP:NFCC. Most of it shouldn't be there, its only there because the article hasn't taken proper form yet. The Pirates of the Caribbean bits though, were a conscious design decision, and are cited as a direct influence. From the real-world perspective, the PotC stuff is more relevant. I've updated File:Monkey island 2 prison.png to version with a HUD and fleshed out its fair use rationale. -- Sabre (talk) 16:04, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Gameplay

I removed the reference to MI2 being the 'first' adventure game to offer two levels of difficulty; previous Lucasarts games, such as Loom, offered the same option. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmical (talk • contribs) 06:47, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Special Edition

Why is there no mention of the special edition in this article —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.239.38.135 (talk) 23:17, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Other than the fact that MI2 is the sequel to TSoMI, is there any relationship between the special edition and this game? —LOL ^T/_C 23:21, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

er yes? isnt it obvious? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.1.177.59 (talk) 21:59, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Story summary at the top of the artcle

The short story summary at the beginning of the article states that "The sequel involves Guybrush's attempts to [...]win back Elaine's love". As I remember it, the only moment of affection between the two in Monkey Island 2 is when Guybrush sweet-talks with her to obtain one of the Big Whoop map pieces. I can't remember any dialouge or events in the game that implies that one of Guybrush's goals is to win back Elaine.

he mentions it when he has the love bomb and at other verious times —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.1.177.59 (talk) 22:00, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm also unsure if it's correct to call Guybrush a wannabe pirate after he completes the three trials in SMI. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Baggethun (talk • contribs) 00:49, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

SE version announced

No news stories yet, but LA's twitter just announced that the SE version of MI2 is coming. Stories hopefully soon. --MASEM (t) 02:53, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

new information on SE

I'd like to point out since the SE release of this game, there has been cometary by the original makers, maybe someone could make a triva section of what the mentioned, but one section in here I'd like someone or me to change since the SE game is this

"According to Gilbert, the Monkey Island series was partially inspired by the Pirates of the Caribbean ride. Monkey Island 2 features a number of tributes to it, particularly a scene with a guard dog in a prison being lured by a bone and Disneyland"

either in the commentary they said the dog was ripped from the game from the pirate movie, or that disney ripped it all off by MI

and the dogs name was revealed in the Com to not of been named after walt disney, just by someone who was working on the game, dog named walt, but they thought that the dog named after walt Disney would be better

there is alot more, but I only ask because someone( with alot of time on there hands) could improve the article more by adding everything the creators have said in the SE verison —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.232.5.243 (talk) 05:43, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Trivial

I've just reacently noticed that Big Whoop is the spitting image of booty island, if you look carefully you can see that the buildings are the same shape and are in the same place, but with things added too them, you can also see a giant S at the furthest right corner of Big Whoop which clearly belongs to Stans, although it does lack the lights.

I just thought I should mention this it's up to whom ever reads this what it mean.

I've written this here because I don't think it acctually belongs in the article, if for some reason you don't believe me, you can compare the two place yourself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.103.116.63 (talk) 15:51, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't remember where i read it, but i think it was due to the usage of the booty Island layer and had noch deeper meaning. KhlavKhalash (talk) 10:45, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Reception

No references to the fact that the developers, in the Special Edition commentary, have stated the ending polarized fans and that MI2 has landed on both the Top 10 Best AND Worst Endings among video games. To be perfectly honest, the Reception feels very sparse, and I'm sure that there's more documentation floating around the internet someone (who is better at finding good references) could locate and use to update the article. As someone else in here stated, there was a lot of information in the SE commentary that reveals Ron Gilbert's thoughts on the game (and the sequels).--68.6.182.39 (talk) 06:23, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Special Edition Alternate Ending

Okay, so I played this game back when it first came out, and Elaine NEVER mentioned anything about a "SPELL" in that last end scene. That was added into the Special Edition version. There was a scene with Elaine in the original, but all she said was, "I wonder what's keeping Guybrush?" I changed this before, and even cited my sources (Youtube LPs of both the original Amiga version, dated from 2006 four years before the SE version was released, and the new SE version, dated from 2010), but someone decided to change it back without justification or citing sources. Given the hot topic of some gamers as to what the actual "secret" of MI is, I think this edit should be left in to help the article remain unbiased as well as logically accurate. The two sources I added are these: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_e-YZvFu3E&feature=youtu.be&t=2h21m45s http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKsly5lbHBM&feature=youtu.be&t=3m Killpurakat (talk) 22:44, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Well, you happen to be wrong. I don't know why she didn't say it in that Amiga playthrough, but here's the DOS version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nUb8BXL8xWU&t=7m56s. --LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 23:29, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Not so. The Youtube source you have listed specifically states that the copy being played is the "White Label CD edition," not regular DOS (recall, before CDs, there were floppies). This source has me confused anyway, because the CD versions of the game boasted improvement musical accompaniment, and this sounds like it is using midis. It isn't even mentioned as a version one the World of Monkey Island page Killpurakat (talk) 08:00, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

The CD versions of Monkey Island 2 don't have any enhancements, unlike Monkey Island 1. It's basically the floppy copypasted on a CD-ROM, except for the removal of copy protection and Lite mode. Here's another DOS version playthrough, and you can recognise it as the floppy version because of the copy protection and difficulty mode selection screen at the very beginning. Anyway, it currently seems that the line was removed in the Amiga version.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 09:59, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Ah, maybe that was it; I was confusing it with MI1 (I recall getting my CD disks at the same time, along with MI3 as a special promotion; before that, I played them on my Amiga). Okay, thanks.Killpurakat (talk) 11:58, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Monkey Island 2: LeChuck's Revenge. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100315104359/http://grumpygamer.com/7662723 to http://grumpygamer.com/7662723

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:36, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Source

• Staff (August 2009). "Master of Unreality". Edge (204). United Kingdom: Future Publishing: 82–87. - [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]
• https://web.archive.org/web/20031002204704/http://www.gamespy.com/legacy/halloffame/monkey2_a.shtm

A success or failure?

The article can’t seem to make its mind up on wether LeChuck’s Revenge sold well or poorly upon release. Bob3458 (talk) 15:03, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

Root Beer on LeChuck again

Guybrush want to do that again to shoot and spray the root beer on LeChuck as a Zombie. Root beer only works on ghost. Having been resurrected, LeChuck is a ghost before of his spiritual essence, and now a zombie. LeChuck is not Guybrush's brother. That's a lie. 100.2.114.167 (talk) 23:42, 31 October 2022 (UTC)