I've noticed that there are quite a few high profile projects on here that use other peoples IPs.
I was curious why people even want to make a game using someone else's characters and/or plot and what do those people feel they are bringing to the medium.
I mean we have the Maniac Mansion game, a remake of that and then another remake in a different style. Is it really necessary? How does that advance gaming?
Now, I dont begrudge the people who remake games or make the latest Indiana Jones game and I'm sure then end up being very enjoyable but I don't understand the appeal from a designer's perspective. Isn't making the story and the world the best part of game design?
Also it seems that remakes attract some of the best artists and talent. Why is this? Surely artists of all people would rather create something original?
Thoughts?
They're playing it safe. Remakes have a guarenteed audience. Artists will work on something with a guarenteed audience because it means their work isn't going to fail.
By remaking a game, you already have the game's structure practically there, so the art and such are the most important parts.
It's basically what the industry does. And someone might want to make a game, but not want to go through all the design process. Remakes are like that.
Quote from: Calin Leafshade on Wed 11/11/2009 08:01:16I mean we have the Maniac Mansion game, a remake of that and then another remake in a different style. Is it really necessary? How does that advance gaming?
Not everything need to advance gaming. An original adventure games that stick to the tried and true formula of Monkey Island 1 without deviating by one iota does not advance gaming any more than a remake do, yet nobody complains about that.
QuoteNow, I dont begrudge the people who remake games or make the latest Indiana Jones game and I'm sure then end up being very enjoyable but I don't understand the appeal from a designer's perspective. Isn't making the story and the world the best part of game design?
There's still decisions involved in a remake. New interfaces need to be implemented, puzzles need to be adapted, backgrounds designed for 30 pixel high character need to be adapted to for 70 pixel high character, more details absent from the original game can be added, whole new atmospheres can be created, adding more text, creating musics for games that were generally completly silent... Dualnames probably spend tons of sleepless nights when designing his H2G2 remake.
It can also be a very good training ground before producing completly original games, not only on the coding, design, artistical and musical plan. Team managing, learning commitment, not giving up projects halfway, testing a game correctly... these are all skills that can be carried onto bigger, original projects.
QuoteAlso it seems that remakes attract some of the best artists and talent. Why is this? Surely artists of all people would rather create something original?
But there's artists who like to draw fanarts too, it's not just limited to adventure game remakes (Look! I drew Zoidberg! :D). And most artists, animators and musicians here now produce materials that rival the best materials remakes offered.
Myself, I've always wondered about the utility of remakes, how many of these projects, generally focusing on LucasArts and Sierra games, were basically just remaking games that were perfectly playable and enjoyable in their original version and didn't need to be remade compared to other, more obscures but none the less great titles that could benefit from a more user friendly design philosophy to reach a bigger audience. But a couple of years ago I realized that less than an insignificant fraction of all announced remakes and fangames reach completion and in the end there was really no reason to complain on the situation.
Quote from: blueskirt on Wed 11/11/2009 09:55:59
Not everything need to advance gaming. An original adventure games that stick to the tried and true formula of Monkey Island 1 without deviating by one iota does not advance gaming any more than a remake do, yet nobody complains about that.
but arent games art? shouldnt they explore the ever stretching depths of the human soul.. n stuff? The story can be used as much as the game mechanics to 'advance gaming'. To explore new topics and so on.
Quote from: blueskirt on Wed 11/11/2009 09:55:59
There's still decisions involved in a remake. New interfaces need to be implemented, puzzles need to be adapted, backgrounds designed for 30 pixel high character need to be adapted to for 70 pixel high character, more details absent from the original game can be added, whole new atmospheres can be created, adding more text, creating musics for games that were generally completly silent... Dualnames probably spend tons of sleepless nights when designing his H2G2 remake.
thats a fair point. Though i give the H2G2 remake a lot more credance since it was a text adventure. That seems more valid to me than remaking a low-res graphical adventure into another low res graphical adventure.
I guess the point of my thoughts was not WHY make a remake.. but rather why is that PREFERABLE to making something original.
To me, most of your reasons for doing a remake can be just as easily applied to making something original, plus you get the advantage of having something you made from scratch.
I can think of a couple of reasons, and some of them might even be valid:
Playing it safe, like Scavenger said, is something that would attract allot of "I"s. Especially if your testing the waters. Nothing is going to be more disheartening than making something from scratch, only to find that no-one actually plays it.
Of course, there is the flip side of that, where people who idolise the original don't like what you've made of it.
Second, and this ties in with the first a little, is that getting art is much easier.
Not only is it that attracting artists could be easier, but the person leading the project doesn't have to go through the process of coming up with an art style that would suit the game, and doesn't have to spend hours trying to explain it to the artist.
It could be seen as a status symbol, that having made a remake of the game you become a "Super Fan".....yeah, I thought it sounded lame as well... :P
Coming up with something of your own is hard, even when you've got a basic concept, it could be Years before you have something coherent enough that someone would want spend time working on it with you.
That's a couple of things I could come up with off the top of my head, but I'm sure there are better reasons :).
Well, the upside of a remake is you know you're working on something good. If the original is solid then it's unlikely you'll end up wasting your time.
Also there's clearly defined project outline. For an artist this means less chance of time wasted drawing 100's of sprites \ backgrounds that the project leader decides he doesn't need once he 'revises' his vision.
There is also the point that by doing a remake you can work on a game that you love, and likely fell in love with as a child, I can see how that would be cool.
Furthermore, AGD's VGA remakes of the old Kings Quest games have probably helped introduce them to a new generation of gamers who were put off by the look of the originals. Don't know if that is exactly advancing gaming, but it's certainly advancing kings quest!
I know there's a current trend in official remakes recently as well: Resident Evil, Silent Hill (Shattered Memories), and I'm sure there are more out there as well. So it's not just AGS or indie efforts that like to do remakes. I personally think it's the nostalgia factor on the part of the game makers. Of course the ready made audience probably doesn't hurt.
The only remakes I see as being worth looking at are the updates of AGI games like King's Quest I, II, and II and Space Quest II and such. Otherwise, I do agree that remakes tend to be a dime a dozen.
Also, not everyone who can assemble a smart puzzle, or make a great sprite can write a great story. It's probably nice to be able to have the backbone of your game laid out neatly for you, and just work on building the skills you're already strong with. And, from a player's view point, I have a few games that I've run through multiple times, because I just loved them that much, and it's nice when the game can be a smidge different for you after awhile.
Actually, like when they finally released the Project HDTP for the original Deus Ex. It made it way easier on the eyes, and what started out as a quick start up to check out the new textures turned into the longest play through for me.
Quote from: Calin Leafshade on Wed 11/11/2009 08:01:16
I mean we have the Maniac Mansion game, a remake of that and then another remake in a different style. Is it really necessary? How does that advance gaming?
A good question. Since both remakes are made by germans, I asked the same question in the german AGS-forum.
The people from the MM 3D-projects said, that it is their goal not to make another MM-remake but to establish their 3D-adventure-engine.
The people from the MM-DOTT-project said, that they do not stick too closely to the original MM, but to alter the puzzles, add new ones, add new characters and that it will be a new game that feels like a mix between MM and DOTT.
I still prefer to create my own universe, than to alter the universe of someone else.
If I was interested in coding, but none of the other aspects of game design particularly appealed to me, or I felt I was not good at them, I think I would find making a remake very appealing. I can just look at what other people have done, and done well, and the challenge for me, then, is to reproduce what they've done. It would be great experience, and I wouldn't have to get bogged down in all the other little details of plotting and puzzle design. I suppose this could also be true of artist/musician types.
Personally, though, remakes don't really appeal to me. Not just with games, either. Movies, songs, books, comics, books turned into movies, comics turned into games. Etc. etc. The only exception being when the remake does something to make itself notably different from the source material. When the artist takes the original and makes it his or her own. Remakes that are really faithful seem pointless and bland to me, and remakes that stay mostly faithful but change a few things to accommodate budget or technical constraints, or appeal to a more mainstream audience almost always seem to detract from the original. But if you can subvert the source material, turn it on its head, or take low quality source material and turn it into something amazing, take vague source material and flesh it out, make the player/reader/viewer/listener think about it in a whole new way, that's a worthy remake. I could conceive of wanting to make a remake like that.
Oh. Or if I were to remake some of my own work, to improve it, with the intention that the remake be what I am remembered for, rather than as a new work specifically paying homage to an older work.
I rather like demakes actually.
Turning Tales of MI into a MI2-style game, e.g., I'd love to do that if it weren't for my huge laziness.
People play remakes, so why shouldn't people make them?
I think most indie remakes are made by fans of the original. They're trying to recapture and recreate something that they have fond memories of. And also, it makes sense if the developer's strong points are artwork and/or programming, but not so much the bit about coming up with an original story, then this is a good way for them to use the creativity they DO have.
I'm going to regret this post...but ah well.
Quote from: Stupot on Fri 13/11/2009 16:21:23People play remakes, so why shouldn't people make them?
Because
apparently the
sole purpose for making games is
supposed to be the advancement of the gaming industry as a whole and bringing the realm of gaming out of the world of "Children's Games" into the more serious light that games can be as much an artform as any other medium. Having fun, entertainment, enjoyment, "people play[ing them]", none of that is what
actually matters (apparently). Developing skills in the realm of game creation, nostalgic tribute, and so forth have no merit here. It should solely be about advancing the industry. Only. Exclusively.
[/overbearing.sarcastic.tones.and.attempted.satire]
Ha ha. Go, monkey!
I might have stated my preferences a little strong. While I tend to get a little bored of the pure nostalgia after a while, I still played KQII+, the new Maniac Mansion, and intend to check out QfGII VGA. And I still get giddy when my favorite books get turned into movies. I think homage is a legitimate form of expression and that amateur game makers, especially, should make whatever the hell kind of games they feel like. And while I might not be first in line to download the latest fan remake, let alone make it, I don't expect or particularly want everyone to make games with me in mind.
I think if anything I get more frustrated with Hollywood, where it seems like almost all the high profile fantasy etc. movies are based on something else.
I'm making the remake, partly for the sense of adventure, partly for the sense of really wild things, but mostly about fame and glory.
Seriously the answer is in my signature. Simple and straightforward.
I never play remakes and don't understand their appeal as a player. Even if I didn't play the original yet, I always want to play it rather than the remake.
Ok, actually I lied a bit because I was happy to play Tex Murphy: Overseer, but kept away from Tex Murphy: Mean Streets. It's just that after the disappointed with Martian Memorandum I just wasn't interested in the dead ends and personality-less main hero from the old Tex games.
Oh, and I found RealMyst a blast - pretty much the same as Myst, but all in 3D and with a bonus Age at the very end.
But other than those two games, no remakes do it for me.
Quote from: monkey_05_06 on Sat 14/11/2009 04:51:44
I'm going to regret this post...but ah well.
Quote from: Stupot on Fri 13/11/2009 16:21:23People play remakes, so why shouldn't people make them?
Because apparently the sole purpose for making games is supposed to be the advancement of the gaming industry as a whole and bringing the realm of gaming out of the world of "Children's Games" into the more serious light that games can be as much an artform as any other medium. Having fun, entertainment, enjoyment, "people play[ing them]", none of that is what actually matters (apparently). Developing skills in the realm of game creation, nostalgic tribute, and so forth have no merit here. It should solely be about advancing the industry. Only. Exclusively.
[/overbearing.sarcastic.tones.and.attempted.satire]
It's fairly clear i wasnt going to let this lie without some kind of answer.
I feel its more about advancing someones creativity rather than gaming as a whole.
Think of it in terms of a book. Someone has written a story but you feel it doesnt fit in with modern sensibilities or it was poorly written. Do you rewrite the story? the same narrative just with different language? No ofcourse not, that would be absurd.
So why, from a personal perspective, remake a game?
I understand commercial remakes like tomb raider anniversary. they brought a classic game up to modern standards and improved its flaws. But that was to make money and i'm sure if you asked the developers if they'd rather make a NEW tomb raider or remake an old one they would rather make a new one.
I appreciate that people enjoy remakes. I enjoyed anniversary despite knowing what happens for the most part but i wouldve prefered a NEW one.
This is my point. Why is it PREFERABLE to make a remake. You arent being mandated by anyone to do so. You arent going to sell it and capitalise on its IP. So why not just make a high quality original game (almost all the remakes are of a very high quality)? If you cant handle writing your own story, form a team with someone who can.
Its the developers perspective that i dont understand. not the players.
Quote from: Calin Leafshade on Sat 14/11/2009 14:57:37
Think of it in terms of a book. Someone has written a story but you feel it doesnt fit in with modern sensibilities or it was poorly written. Do you rewrite the story? the same narrative just with different language? No ofcourse not, that would be absurd.
Yes, that would be absurd (http://www.fanfiction.net/) :P
fan fiction are usually stories written within a universe.. which I find less odd since you can create an entire narrative and use new characters. All the extended universe star wars stuff is essentially 'fan fiction'
thats slightly different to rewriting a story.
(Completely separate from the rest of this topic), but people DO rewrite a story as well, and it could very well be used as a parallel to game-making:
You've got a book written 400 years ago, and you really enjoy it, but you acknowledge that it is probably difficult for people to get into. So you rewrite it in modern language, so that more people would have access to it, and enjoy it the same way you enjoyed it.
You've got a game made 20 years ago, and you really enjoy it, but you acknowledge that it is probably difficult for people to get into. So you remake it with modern graphics, and maybe an improved interface, so that more people would have access to it, and enjoy it the same way you enjoyed it.
Quote from: Babar on Sat 14/11/2009 17:00:20
You've got a book written 400 years ago, and you really enjoy it, but you acknowledge that it is probably difficult for people to get into. So you rewrite it in modern language, so that more people would have access to it, and enjoy it the same way you enjoyed it.
You've got a game made 20 years ago, and you really enjoy it, but you acknowledge that it is probably difficult for people to get into. So you remake it with modern graphics, and maybe an improved interface, so that more people would have access to it, and enjoy it the same way you enjoyed it.
That's cheating.
Also, the value of the original gets diluted.
I don't cheat, Ascovel.
Enjoy (http://www.lumpcity.co.uk/~babar/Morte.txt) :P
Seriously though, yes, perhaps it does dilute the original meaning. There is always a trade-off. Sometimes it is worth it.
Quote from: Calin Leafshade on Sat 14/11/2009 14:57:37
Think of it in terms of a book. Someone has written a story but you feel it doesnt fit in with modern sensibilities or it was poorly written. Do you rewrite the story? the same narrative just with different language? No ofcourse not, that would be absurd.
Well this would be an example of a crappy remake.
I think a better example is reading a book and enjoying the concept behind it, but saying to yourself "I think I could tell that story better" and releasing, say, a graphic novel.
Yes, it's the same storyline, but it's a completely different take on it. Things like this happens all the time in the film industry, with the release of director's cuts and the like.
Quote
This is my point. Why is it PREFERABLE to make a remake. You arent being mandated by anyone to do so. You arent going to sell it and capitalise on its IP. So why not just make a high quality original game (almost all the remakes are of a very high quality)? If you cant handle writing your own story, form a team with someone who can.
No money is changing hands, but seeing as you're an independent game maker your self, I'm sure you can understand that the thought of people playing and enjoying your game is more than enough of a pull for many, and now the player's perspective comes into play, because this means you are almost guarantee some kind of audience from the get go. In this sense, would'nt you agree, that the maker
is capitalising on the IP?
Quote from: Ascovel on Sat 14/11/2009 17:04:28
... the value of the original gets diluted.
This is also a good point, however, whenever you bring anything into the mainstream market, much of what made it popular amongst its cult following is lost.
This is just one of the unfortunate things about it, but you have to remember that the original was not accessible or relatable by the mainstream anyway, so at least this could now be experienced by them in some form.
Would re-imaginings fall into this category as well? For example, was Sci-Fi Channel's "Tin Man" mini-series pointless, because it was essentially a re-writing of The Wizard of Oz?
No. A remake is no less creative than an original game. It's not just that the plot and puzzles are already designed for you. Many of the Sierra remakes actually have brand new puzzles mixed in, and even fixed the walking deads (this is especially true of the KQ1 and KQ2 remakes by AGDI). You're basically taking a great game, and making it even better.
I don't see why a developer wouldn't want to take on that sort of challenge. It doesn't mean they're lacking in any creativity, nor are they unable to come up with anything themselves.
And like it has been said before, it's mainly about nostalgia. The developers love an old classic, so they revamp it into something even better.
Another final reason why developers make games is to please and entertain fans. If fans are entertained by remakes, why not make them?
By The Sword has been remade about 70 times. Only thing is, time #1 never was released.
What d'you think of that, eh?
:P
Quote from: Mods on Sun 15/11/2009 03:18:34
By The Sword has been remade about 70 times. Only thing is, time #1 never was released.
What d'you think of that, eh?
:P
I'm still waiting for Kinky Island and FoY, douchebag. ;)
Quote from: Calin Leafshade on Sat 14/11/2009 14:57:37It's fairly clear i wasnt going to let this lie without some kind of answer.
Why do you say that...?
Quote from: monkey_05_06 on Sat 14/11/2009 04:51:44
I'm going to regret this post...but ah well.
::) I had no idea you would have anything to say in response...
Quote from: Calin Leafshade on Sat 14/11/2009 14:57:37I feel its more about advancing someones creativity rather than gaming as a whole.
Does it inhibit someone's creativity when they create what they consider to be an "improved" version of, for example, the sprites? Does it hold them back just because instead of writing a "new" piece of music, they are updating, for example, from MIDI music to a full musical score? Does it make someone a less skillful programmer because they have managed to emulate the style of another game within a different engine or language? I appreciate what you're saying (so don't get me wrong) but in all fairness it must also be taken into account that even doing a remake can provide numerous opportunity for the creative juices to flow and abilities to expand.
Quote from: Calin Leafshade on Sat 14/11/2009 14:57:37Think of it in terms of a book. Someone has written a story but you feel it doesnt fit in with modern sensibilities or it was poorly written. Do you rewrite the story? the same narrative just with different language? No ofcourse not, that would be absurd.
Why would it be absurd? If I honestly think that I could improve upon the story, or that I could bring a unique idea, aspect, twist, or otherwise to the story, why not rewrite it my own way? I could give it some of my own personal flavor. One of my favorite authors is Michael Crichton (most notably author of Jurassic Park), and he did exactly this. And no one called it absurd. What am I on about?
The Thirteenth Warrior (a.k.a.
Eaters of the Dead in book form). Yeah, that movie with Antonio Banderas. It wasn't exactly a flop. And it was based on Beowulf. Crichton had a friend (colleague, associate, something like that) who told him that nobody likes the story of Beowulf. So Crichton took it upon himself as a challenge to rewrite the story to be more engaging, more appealing to a more modern audience. And the book was successful enough it got a major motion picture developed with a few very notable actors.
I would hardly call it absurd to say that just because it's not an original concept means I can't bring something unique to it. John Gardner also wrote a book titled
Grendel which told the tale from the monster's point of view. And that is one of my favorite books I've ever read.
Quote from: Calin Leafshade on Sat 14/11/2009 14:57:37So why, from a personal perspective, remake a game?
For the reasons I've said here as well as in my last post. Perhaps someone isn't the best artist, or the best musician, or the best scripter, or the best storyline or dialogue author, or whatever other positions may need to be filled...writing a remake means that you have a definite base to work from. You're not starting from scratch and trying to make sure that every point of the story flows smoothly, trying to determine where puzzles should go, what types of things your character might say, it's not left up to you to define the character's personality. However, maybe you are a world-class artist, and think you could improve upon the graphic style of one of your favorite games. Why then should it be frowned upon just because you wanted to use your talent as a homage to this game?
Quote from: Calin Leafshade on Sat 14/11/2009 14:57:37I understand commercial remakes like tomb raider anniversary. they brought a classic game up to modern standards and improved its flaws. But that was to make money and i'm sure if you asked the developers if they'd rather make a NEW tomb raider or remake an old one they would rather make a new one.
I don't know that that's necessarily true. Both remakes and new productions have pros and cons. For example if you're making a new game you run the risk of introducing plot holes, misinterpreting existing character roles, redefining personalities and character traits, etc. which may cause fans to be dissatisfied with your product. Conversely however, a remake has all these points firmly established, though you may still run the risk of unagreeable graphics format, atmospheric changes (particularly in the music and/or if adding/replacing voice acting), etc.
Quote from: Calin Leafshade on Sat 14/11/2009 14:57:37I appreciate that people enjoy remakes. I enjoyed anniversary despite knowing what happens for the most part but i wouldve prefered a NEW one.
This is my point. Why is it PREFERABLE to make a remake. You arent being mandated by anyone to do so. You arent going to sell it and capitalise on its IP. So why not just make a high quality original game (almost all the remakes are of a very high quality)? If you cant handle writing your own story, form a team with someone who can.
Its the developers perspective that i dont understand. not the players.
It can actually be exciting from a developer's perspective to face the challenge, particularly when working with an older game, of emulating certain aspects of a game. For example in the
Monkey Island series, there's the running joke about Stan's jacket which has a plaid pattern which defies the laws of physics and reality and the pattern remains completely static (http://stansellseverything.ytmnd.com/) as the jacket moves throughout space; as if the pattern were stitched into the fabric of space-time itself instead of the jacket. In the days of 2D graphics this was as simple as drawing straight lines on each frame of the character sprite. However in the world of 3D graphics the same concept provides much more of a challenge (http://www.telltalegames.com/forums/showthread.php?p=216700#post216700).
Now that was just recreating one specific aspect of the series in a new game, but the same idea applies to the entire concept of a remake. Challenges such as these are exactly the type of things that a developer has to face in creating a remake that could actually make it more appealing than just creating a new game entirely from scratch.
It's not
always preferable to
everyone to do a remake, and it's absurd to do a remake just for the sake of doing a remake. For me the enjoyment of working on a remake would come from the challenges and opportunities it presents. For example The Secret of Monkey Island: Special Edition has beautiful graphics (except Guybrush's hair! :P ...and some of the close-ups), faithfully renewed musical score, voice acting, etc. all of which made it (to me at least) a very worthwhile purchase. Not to mention they built it right on top of the old game and there's the ability to switch at any time between the two. Working on such an endeavor would to me (noting of course I really only do programming not any art or music) be extremely worthwhile.
I've actually taken a few days in authoring this post so as to try and provide an intelligent and well thought-out response to your concerns. If in any way I have fallen short of that goal it's just coz it's me writing it. := I fully understand and appreciate your point of view and your concerns, but hopefully now you can understand and appreciate equally the other side of the argument. ;)
Quote from: Babar on Sat 14/11/2009 17:10:44
I don't cheat, Ascovel.
Enjoy (http://www.lumpcity.co.uk/~babar/Morte.txt) :P
Seriously though, yes, perhaps it does dilute the original meaning. There is always a trade-off. Sometimes it is worth it.
I agree that sometimes it is worth it (and your example is very good). Actually, very often doing a remake is more worthwhile than doing nothing at all (if there exists a state of doing absolutely nothing). However, if you are able to come with decent original ideas then spending your time realizing them is always preferable than reusing old ones, even though the latter might bring a greater popularity.
If you do a remake of a game, then you should most likely remove any dead ends that the original has.
Quote from: mkennedy on Sun 22/11/2009 05:49:34
If you do a remake of a game, then you should most likely remove any dead ends that the original has.
Is this a pinch line for me? ;)