[Rasher]

I love fan made remakes, and I'm wondering why can't a professional company remake a few classics? I'm not doubting the love and passion of fans, but they can't do what the professionals can simply because they don't have the same tools at their disposal.With XP slowly being taken over by Vista it might be much harder to get older games running.

A great story never dies and great adventure games have great stories. Why not introduce Gabriel Knight, Guybrush Threepwood, and many others to a whole new generation?

Great movies are remade all the time, and granted that some of those remakes should never have seen the light of day. My main point is that it will become harder and harder to get a new generation to accept even VGA graphics.

Is this a terrible idea? Any thoughts?

[D.C.]

I wouldn't neccessary say it's a bad idea, just depends on a case-by-case basis. For example if the only thing that's altered is the graphics, etc. All week I've been playing my favourite game GK3 and have thought about not only what this game would be like if it played exactly the same just on the Half-Life 2 engine, but also how GK1 and 2 would as well. With GK3 I find no matter how much the graphics age the story is what keeps me coming back, so it's really not a huge deal - but for curiousity sake I'd be interested in playing shiny, new versions of these classics. But if Sierra decided to invest resources in a large scale process like this I think I'd rather see GK4 than a remade version of the older games.

[Rasher]

Oh, I agree 100%. The main thing I want to preserve is the story. No other game has the enotional resonance of a great adventure game. I am playing though Gabriel Knight and falling in love all over again.

I'd pay $40 for a Gabriel Knight with shiny new graphics and Vista compatiability. Although it would be very to imagine a better Gabe than Tim Curry.

The Tex Murphy games remade would aslo be awsome.

[Periglo]

Originally Posted by Rasher

Oh, I agree 100%.

I do, too. I'd say AGs are ideal for remakes: you can take a classic, provide new graphics and sound and have a brand new, amazing, game. That has (partly) been done in some cases, with new versions of the same game having better graphics and voice acting (specially when CD games were being introduced). I don't mind playing an old game, but I must say I really appreciate voice acting and sound these days.

[Bobske]

Although I love fan remakes, I always have the feeling that they'll never be as good as the original. I have the same feeling with classic movies.

Just try to name one movie remake that is better than the original

However, I would love to see a GK1 remake with high res graphics with the same voice actors, a GK2 remake with HD FMV or a GK3 remake with the HL2 engine...

But unfortunately, remaking classics is way too expensive so the only remakes we'll ever see are the fan remakes, which is a good thing

PS: A Tex Murphy remake would be awesome, but for now I'd settle for a 3D patch. UAKM would look so much better with bilinear filtering...

[Periglo]

Originally Posted by Bobske

Just try to name one movie remake that is better than the original

Psycho. Just kidding. Seriously: it is true few remade movies are better than the originals (I can't think of a single example either, perhaps The Fly, or The body snatchers, but both versions are good.) But, this could be more like the "remastered" versions of movies and music that can sometimes be better than the original. Or the "director's cuts".

[CaptainDread]

Originally Posted by Bobske

Although I love fan remakes, I always have the feeling that they'll never be as good as the original. I have the same feeling with classic movies.

The thing about fan remakes is that every one that has been released so far has been done in the style of the original company's own remakes. Both the Sierra and LucasArts fan remakes have felt like they were made by Sierra and LucasArts themselves, respectively.

Originally Posted by Bobske

Just try to name one movie remake that is better than the original

That anology really doesn't fit for most of these remakes. For example, KQ1 and KQ3 were 1:1 remakes, but with updated graphics, sounds, and music. They also used the same voice actor who did King Graham in the later KQ games. Here's a movie analogy that would fit:
Imagine a black and white movie that was remade later in color with the same script and camera angles, but the star of the black and white movie was also the star of the color remake. That would be how most of these adventure game remakes are.

Now, some games do fit in your analogy - the more extreme remakes - the remakes that change things around: take Maniac Mansion Deluxe for example. The script is the same, but some things have been changed to 1) make the game harder 2) fix some of the dead ends in the original. Now, #2 is definitely a good thing, as dead-ends are almost unheard of in today's adventure games, so it's bringing the classic up to date, so to speak. There aren't many changes in the #1 category, so it doesn't mix the formula up too much. It also makes the game seem fresh when you think you know a puzzle by heart, but you have to go about it a different way (though completely logical). Now, die hard fans might not like these changes, but most people would agree that they did nothing to harm the general fun of the game.

And King's Quest II+ VGA - they changed the script, and puzzles because they thought the game was lacking. Now, this one definitely fits in your analogy. Some people like the new plot, some people preferred the simplicity of the original.

[ATMachine]

Originally Posted by CaptainDread

Now, some games do fit in your analogy - the more extreme remakes - the remakes that change things around: take Maniac Mansion Deluxe for example. The script is the same, but some things have been changed to 1) make the game harder 2) fix some of the dead ends in the original. Now, #2 is definitely a good thing, as dead-ends are almost unheard of in today's adventure games, so it's bringing the classic up to date, so to speak. There aren't many changes in the #1 category, so it doesn't mix the formula up too much. It also makes the game seem fresh when you think you know a puzzle by heart, but you have to go about it a different way (though completely logical). Now, die hard fans might not like these changes, but most people would agree that they did nothing to harm the general fun of the game.

Spoiler:

IIRC the only puzzle in MMD that was altered to be "harder" was using the paint remover to discover a hidden door. In fact, it was changed because the original way of using the paint remover (use paint remover can with ____) allowed for dead ends (as you used the whole can at once), and the new way (dip paintbrush in paint remover, then use paintbrush on ___) didn't.

Plus the fan writers added a few new bits of dialogue (by inserting a "Talk to" verb) which in fact gave hints to the puzzles.

[GhostPirateLechuck]

Kings Quest 2 Tierra remake was way better than the original. I consider it a top 20 game.

[Dasilva]

Originally Posted by GhostPirateLechuck

Kings Quest 2 Tierra remake was way better than the original. I consider it a top 20 game.

Miles ahead of their KQ1VGA too.

[Jatsie]

I'm all in favour of remakes.

I'd love to see designers revisit their old games, and implement some of the ideas they originally had, but were forced to abandon due to the technological limitations of the day.

A beautiful talkie version of The Secret of Monkey Island would send me into fits of ecstasy.

[Squinky]

I, personally, think that if the classics were continuously updated to run on newer computers, and became easily available (and marketed) for purchase in online stores, that would be enough to attract a newer audience.

Of course, fixing certain flaws and generally improving the classics wouldn't hurt, either.

[chapter11studios]

A beautiful talkie version of The Secret of Monkey Island would send me into fits of ecstasy.

Yes, I would pay to play a "director's cut" of some of my favorite games. I think I read somewhere that both MI2 and MI3 had lots of material cut from the final game.

On the topics of remakes in general, I'm all for it. I think Sierra really started the trend with its remakes of KQ1 and SQ1 -- a brilliant marketing move, really, to bring new players into these established series.

[crabapple]

I'd like a remake of The Dig with the graphics approaching the quality of the soundtrack. And maybe of Loom too. The humorous LucasArts games work just fine for me with quirky old pixellated graphics. But with The Dig, I missed not being able to see the majestic alien landscape described by the music.

I'd also be interested to see graphic versions of the old Infocom adventures. Of course they'd have to be well done, and that might be somewhat cost prohibitive.

[After a brisk nap]

Originally Posted by Bobske

Just try to name one movie remake that is better than the original

The Fly
The Thing
Ocean's Eleven
Scarface
Heat
...

I'm all for remakes of pre-VGA games, but I don't really see much point of remaking a 2D VGA point-and-click game into a higher-resolution 2D point-and-click game (though the double-size Monkey Island sprites in this thread make me think twice).

Now, on the other hand I could certainly go for a series of Tex Murphy remakes in cutting-edge 3D (maybe 3rd person over-the-shoulder style) and DVD-quality video. And a streamlined interface, please. And Grim Fandango could benefit from being remade as a point-and-clicker.

[Nautilus]

"Old" games are re-recreated/ported/updated every week, but being released for pocket consoles, mobile devices, and cell phones.

[EvilMulder]

The problem that makes oficial remakes a bit problematic is the puzzles. Non-hardcore adventure fans would probably feel cheated if the remake had the exact same puzzle solutions as the original. Casual gamers won't be amused when they notice that the game they've paid for is the exact same one they have lying somewhere on the attic, only with better graphics. It has to be more than just a trip down memory lane to appeal to the masses.

However that means totally new puzzles, which means new objects, which might well mean additional locations.... and before you know it your new shiny Monkey Island: Origins might as well be called Monkey Island 5. The problem is that the bulk of an adventure game is DEFINED by the puzzles, so that when you chance the puzzles, you've basicly changed the game. And like I state above, I don't think most players will be satisfied by anything less than a completely new set of puzzles.

By the way, a good example of a recent and succesfull game remake is Tomb Raider: Anniversary. It has the exact same story as Tomb Raider 1, and enough of the same level design to feel constantly familiar, but the puzzles and climbwork have changed enough to be fresh. It's the ideal mix. I don't see an easy way to achieve the same with adventure games though.

[Nautilus]

Originally Posted by EvilMulder

By the way, a good example of a recent and succesfull game remake is Tomb Raider: Anniversary. It has the exact same story as Tomb Raider 1, and enough of the same level design to feel constantly familiar, but the puzzles and climbwork have changed enough to be fresh.

I was very excited about Tomb Raider: Anniversary, but the released game is boring. The creatures' AI is awfully bad, character control is a pain in the *ss, but Lara moves beautifully and the ambience/atmosphere/mood is very good.

Anyway, new generations haven't played old games, so, an old game with a strong brand and new graphics/sound is cash in the register.

[aries323]

No, I don't think they should. (ducks from incoming rotten tomatoes and other vegetables....)

The reason is that the classics belong to a certain time period in the 1980's or the 1990's and that when we play games we get a certain feeling associated with playing games.

I know that many players become surprised when they play older games today since they think they were better than they actually are. (ducks more rotten tomatoes...)

I have tried the demo of Tomb Raider: Anniversary. And while the graphics etc. are very nice & well and the game looks amazing, the controls are as bad as the original...

[noknowncure]

Originally Posted by After a brisk nap

Ocean's Eleven.

I agree with The Fly and The Thing - and I expect I'm in a minority here, but - I despised the remake of Ocean's Eleven. It was the most desperately "cool" film I'd seen in a long time - embarassingly so. A smug cast, smugging their way through a smug plot with absoloutely zero jepardy. Nothing goes wrong. Where's the character?


Anyway, in regard to remaking the classics - it's a fine line to walk. As mentioned by EvilMulder, there's the double edged danger: If you remain 100% true to the original, people moan about the lack of new stuff and if you tinker with it too much, diehard fans will bay for your blood and it may as well be a new game.

I think that, if done well, it could be a great idea, but I'm not sure that I currently trust anyone to do it, yet.