On remakes.

[Calin Leafshade]

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?

[Scavenger]

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.

[blueskirt]

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?

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.

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?

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.

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?

But there's artists who like to draw fanarts too, it's not just limited to adventure game remakes (Look! I drew Zoidberg! ). 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.

[Calin Leafshade]

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.

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.

[Wonkyth]

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...

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 .

[Victor6]

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.

[Intense Degree]

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!

[auriond]

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.

[TerranRich]

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.

[mouthuvmine]

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.

[Helme]

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.

[Charity]

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.

[Khris]

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.

[Stupot]

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.

[monkey0506]

I'm going to regret this post...but ah well.

People 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]

[Charity]

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.

[Dualnames]

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.

[Igor Hardy]

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.

[Calin Leafshade]

I'm going to regret this post...but ah well.

People 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.

[Radiant]

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