Fairly interesting narative, very interesting structure and the secret ending is up there as one of the greatest endings in video game history for me.

Plays like shit at first but once you get some decent weapons and upgrade them fully it's perfectly playable (occasionally fun even.) Getting the secret ending is a slog and while weapon stories are a great addition, grinding out the weapons to unlock all the stories is not at all worth it.

That last paragraph sounds bad but I really did love the game, just don't go in expecting great combat and probably use a guide to unlock all the weapons.

This is a game I've wanted to play as long as I can remember and finally gave up hope that it would ever exist, but as release came closer, and especially after replaying the first two I began to wonder if this should exist at all. Monkey 2 is such a perfect statement, what reason is there for more? Besides the fact that it's long been believed that Ron had alway's intended to produce a trilogy, but it's been clear from recent interviews that his concept for a Monkey 3 was vague at best, and he left LucasArts of his own free will to create his own company. However it's clear not only from interviews, but from just playing the game, this only exists because Ron and Dave had something to say with it.

It could be argued the thematic point of all three of Ron's Monkey Island games is the same, and told with less subtlety each time. But I think there's enough off a difference between them to warrant their existence. Plus the context behind this one does give it some more weight.

I dunno... It's just beautiful... American games rarely try to say anything, but Ron is one of the few real auteurs in the space. I'm so glad he's back, and hopefully continuing to make these kind of games.

God this game looks beautiful too, anyone complaining about the art direction can shut the hell up.

To me, great in its level design philosophy of Famicom action-platformers, specifically Castlevania. It's about trial and error, every time you die you make it slightly further the next time.

Like, it's not hard, you've just got learn how to beat it by failing, which is great. Despite only dying to two or three of them, the bosses were all insanely interesting.

I don't mind the online elements, though with the servers shut down it makes it impossible to get the intended experience years later which is shit. Luckily, thanks to fans, I was able to play this online on an emulator with a DS3, so it's still doable, but games should be designed with the future in mind. (Is it playable? Sure, is one of its key features completely gone? Yes)

I've really gotta play Dark Souls at some point.

Such an amazing structure to not only this game but the whole trilogy, some of the best plotting of any trilogy not just in video games.

Most of the open world design was outdone just two years later by Nintendo but the quality of the writing in not just sidequests, but even Witcher contracts made this just as memorable as Breath of the Wild, even if most "exploration" in this one is just going to each question mark on the map instead of actually exploring.

I felt like the preperation required before battles in the first two was heavily downplayed by the streamlining in this one, but I'm sure it's much more necessary on harder dificulties (which I will inevitably try on a replay.)

I don't think I've ever come close to a 100 hour single playthrough on a game before but seeing that playtime after I finished really spoke volumes to me that I was able to stay invested for that long and commited so much time to it, and I think it does justify it's length when like 98% games can't, nothing felt unnecessary at all.

This trilogy is some of the best storytelling of the medium (even if the standards are quite low, but still) and despite the fact that once I get around to Hearts of Stone & Blood and Wine I'll have probably sunk 200 hours into the series, I'm certain I'll be back to replay it someday.