Too many Remakes

[Elias]

I have noticed lately that the majority of games are now just remakes or expansions of popular titles. I have not seen an original game for some time now mabey RON. not that I have anything aginst expanding on good game but when you no longer have any original Ideas to expand on theres no point. The most annoying remake is by far War craft 3 the game I hate more then any other but some how it seems to have become incredably popular.
Think as many games as you can that is not a remake, a clone, or has been expansioned to death.

[alva]

Just like films, eventually you are going to run out of stories.

Was it Socrates who said there are only a maximum of seven different stories to tell?

Game creation isn't all that different.

[Apocalypse]

Well, it's not like the gaming industry is really solid enough to try a lot of new things.

[Urban Ranger]

But it was.

[Apocalypse]

And when it was, new things came out.

[Mr. President]

Should we not interpret this to mean that all the good games were made in the 20th century, and all the games to come will be either crap or reprints?

[Apocalypse]

Nah...it's possible for some good games to come out from smaller European companies generally....that's where innovation will probably come from now if anything.

[Zero]

Re: Too many Remakes

Originally posted by Elias
I have noticed lately that the majority of games are now just remakes or expansions of popular titles. I have not seen an original game for some time now mabey RON. not that I have anything aginst expanding on good game but when you no longer have any original Ideas to expand on theres no point. The most annoying remake is by far War craft 3 the game I hate more then any other but some how it seems to have become incredably popular.
Think as many games as you can that is not a remake, a clone, or has been expansioned to death.

Whoa, whoa.. Are you saying Warcraft 3 is a remake? That is rediculous. But I'll let DrSpike tackle that if he's up for it.

Remakes are GOOD. Do you know how hard it is to come up with an original game that actually PLAYS good? Besides most games don't come out near perfect in its first try. Lots of patching and lots of sequels and lots of hours/days/years and feedback from player and testers equates to great game. If you want game developer to create a completely new game everytime, there will never be time for refinement.

I think that the ENTIRE reason why fightiing game genre is so good is because it takes concept that works and refined over 20 year period. Unfortunately, it might not be the most audience grabbing move because casual gamers seem to all have A.D.Ds, but 2D fighting games have really explored the potential of the game concept well over that two decades and it wouldnt have been possible with bunch of patching/expansion/remake/sequel. I'm pretty sure that fighting community would have been long dead if Street fighter just stopped at World Warrior version... no matter how good the original was...

Same goes for Sports games like Madden. Essentially all madden game from year from year is the same game (exception of when they completely revolutionize to take full potential of new platform). But the remake improves on the forumula that works.

And except for the pretty graphics, FPS has kind of been that way too. Not much revolutionizing the genre, just bits of gameplay tweaks here and there. I havent had that much difficulty applying what I learned from my Quake1/Painkeep/TForiginal days into any new FPS...

[Adagio]

Originally posted by alva
Just like films, eventually you are going to run out of stories.

Was it Socrates who said there are only a maximum of seven different stories to tell?

Game creation isn't all that different.

7 different stories?

I've already got more original stories (some of them complete) in my head, ready to be put into some game... sure, some of them might already exist, but not that I know of... for most of them anyway...

And all these games can be done with what's possible today

[Jamski]

Erm... 7 stories...

Let's have a shot at this.

1. Boy meets girl - happy end.
2. Boy meets girl - sad end.
3. Quest story (external) - someone has to go somewhere and get/do something.
4. Quest story (internal) - someone has to overcome obstacles placed in their path.
5. Mistaken identies (comedy or tragedy)
6. Mystery/secrect is uncovered
7. Erm... I dunno.

-Jam

[DrSpike]

With sequels it all depends. Some are happy with a remake as 'more of the same' if the original was good. Others (I'd include me here) don't like paying full price for a glorified expansion.

However, not all sequels are remakes. Far from it, in fact. They make sense because the world is often already fleshed out, and there is an existing fanbase. The gameplay is in no way forced to be the same. Also, a new game gives a chance for a well liked game to evolve, sometimes for the better. The example given of Warcraft3 is a case in point. The gameplay is different to Warcraft2, and the standards in terms of race diversity and campaign immersiveness rose over the time period between the games, so a new game was fully justified both commercially and from the gamer's perspective.

So, whilst sequels can be annoying and unimaginative, it is not always thus. Your ire should not be directed at sequels per se, just bad ones.

[Adagio]

But I've seen too many sequels who tries to evolve, but fails to include what make the first game(s) a success... I can mention The Settlers (3+), Battle Isle (2+) and Warcraft (3) as sequels turned too far from the original...

[duke o' york]

1. Man v (Wo)man
2. Man v Nature
3. Man v Environment
4. Man v Machine
5. Man v The Supernatural
6. Man v Self
7. Man v God

Although you could argue that machines, God and the supernatural are all much of a muchness, depending upon your definitions of each.

Now what has this got to do with remaking computer games?

[Asmodean]

It also depends on how you define a sequel/expansion. Some would argue that RoN was just a sequel to Age of Empires, because of similar gameplay.

Truly original games are few and far between. That is sad, because as a gamer, you eventually get to feel that even the best games offer little in the way of new ideas.

Asmodean

[Adagio]

Originally posted by Asmodean
It also depends on how you define a sequel/expansion. Some would argue that RoN was just a sequel to Age of Empires, because of similar gameplay.

There's more difference between those two games, than between Serious Sam and Doom