Article: Of Remakes and Reboots

Post by **Dog Pants** » July 31st, 2009, 12:30

An article regarding remaking, faithfully or not, old classics. I'm sure many of you will have your own suggestions as to games to remake. Please discuss.

http://www.5punk.co.uk/wiki/index.php?t ... nd_Reboots

Post by **HereComesPete** » July 31st, 2009, 13:00

Frisbee!

The Sections on what gets remade, remake vs reboot and the top of to reboot seem to run together a bit despite their clear seperation. I think it's the way the bottom (hur hur) part of the reboot section is bulleted making it seem less dense and wall of words (even though it isn't)

Possibly a few pictures, one of each game? A new vs old comparison of something like bionic commando or monkey island?

I would love to see most classic games have new installments added in the same way as fallout 3 as opposed to the originals themselves re-made. Letting them rest on their laurels and taking the core ideas but utilising the advances of technology and interfacing ideas to provide an installment that harks back to the great bits of classic games and builds on them.

Post by **HereComesPete** » July 31st, 2009, 13:02

Also, endless iteration with a few minor changes a la mario/sonic/EA sport seem a waste of time to me but I get on well with a very similar set up for shooters like COD or UT. I guess it's mainly my interest levels in their respective genre's that denotes how accomodating I am.

Post by **Dog Pants** » July 31st, 2009, 13:13

HereComesPete wrote: The Sections on what gets remade, remake vs reboot and the top of to reboot seem to run together a bit despite their clear seperation. I think it's the way the bottom (hur hur) part of the reboot section is bulleted making it seem less dense and wall of words (even though it isn't)

I think I understand you. Any suggestions as to how I can prevent it though? Strategically placed pictures might work, or removing the comments from the reboot suggestions.

HereComesPete wrote:Possibly a few pictures, one of each game? A new vs old comparison of something like bionic commando or monkey island?

Oops, I meant to do exactly that. I'll get round to it.

HereComesPete wrote:I would love to see most classic games have new installments added in the same way as fallout 3 as opposed to the originals themselves re-made. Letting them rest on their laurels and taking the core ideas but utilising the advances of technology and interfacing ideas to provide an installment that harks back to the great bits of classic games and builds on them.

I wouldn't say most - many games just aren't as good as they once were by comparison. Cannon Fodder, for example, while brilliant in its day, just wouldn't work any more. Fallout 3 is a good example of a 'reboot' actually, although as I found while writing there's very little difference between a reboot and a sequel. In fact I don't like the word reboot, but I didn't coin it. On the other hand, X-Com has been remade several times but never got it right because they changed it slightly. The original two got it perfect, and by fiddling with the formula they threw it all off.

Post by **HereComesPete** » July 31st, 2009, 13:28

Well I never said they would work, but I'd still like to see it tried with loads of old games, even if it was just an extended fly by past some updated models from some classic games.

spoodie · Post by **spoodie** » July 31st, 2009, 13:33

This has reminded me that I still want to play Conker: Live and Reloaded. For the single player bit, that I never played on the N64. eBay time.

Post by **FatherJack** » July 31st, 2009, 13:46

Dog Pants wrote:I wouldn't say most - many games just aren't as good as they once were by comparison. Cannon Fodder, for example, while brilliant in its day, just wouldn't work any more. Fallout 3 is a good example of a 'reboot' actually, although as I found while writing there's very little difference between a reboot and a sequel. In fact I don't like the word reboot, but I didn't coin it. On the other hand, X-Com has been remade several times but never got it right because they changed it slightly. The original two got it perfect, and by fiddling with the formula they threw it all off.

I was struggling to see how they differ from sequels, another term used is 'redux'.

While a redux usually seems to be done by the same team, fairly recently after, effectively saying 'we* fucked it up first time' or can be a re-release with patches applied. Examples inlcude the Witcher and any GOTY edition of a game.

Reboots seem to happen much longer after and are often modern takes on really ancient classics - perhaps games that are too irritating to play now without extensive modification both to the graphics and the gameplay.

The XBox live arcade is full of classic arcade games like Pac Man and Asteroids, often sold alongside updated 'shiny' versions. BattleZone has both an Evolved and Classic mode and also adds Deathmatch and CTF multiplayer.

Perhaps it is that the current generation of game-makers or their target audience remember these arcade games more - probably more people played arcade games than had nerdy Spectrums or C64s, I bet.

* or the publisher, impossible deadlines, etc.

Post by **Dog Pants** » July 31st, 2009, 16:04

FatherJack wrote: BattleZone has both an Evolved and Classic mode and also adds Deathmatch and CTF multiplayer.

I did think of Battlezone 2 while writing. By my definition I would think of it as a reboot, but is was sold as a sequel. Ultimately I think reboot is just a buzzword that could be applied to a sequel or a remake to make it sound cool.