bit-gamer.net

Critical Hit: Hitting Reboot

Comments 1 to 25 of 25

Reply
[USRF]Obiwan 23rd August 2011, 09:44 Quote
Movie industrial wannabe's?
Mentai 23rd August 2011, 10:09 Quote
Given enough time (I'm going with ~15 years) a reboot is ok if technology has moved on enough that a story can be told in a much more meaningful way, but I'm not a fan of the reboot in general. Even in the case of Tomb Raider, which I think does look good, it would still look just as good if it wasn't called Tomb Raider. I don't need her origins to be told again, and I don't want to envisage future Lara (who is a pretty crap character) the whole time I'm playing either.

Comic book based media is the worst at this though, even when it isn't a reboot, anything Batman related has to feature a moment with his parents dying. It's terribly repetitive. And don't get me started on how ludicrous it is to reboot Spiderman movies again.

I think if you aren't doing a straight remake/upgrade, it says a lot about the quality of source fiction. If it's so bad that you're better off with a reboot, maybe you would be better off with an entirely original story instead? Sure you have to up your marketing budget, but it would make a stronger, less dilute, brand in the end. Also, you don't have to deal with fan expectation and nerd rage until you make a sequel.
Digi 23rd August 2011, 10:40 Quote
Since when are they making a Syndicate remake?! When is it coming out? I am Joe's Sense of Excited Nostalgia.
CardJoe 23rd August 2011, 11:02 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digi
I am Joe's Sense of Excited Nostalgia.

Oh, that's where you went then.
Artanix 23rd August 2011, 11:07 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digi
Since when are they making a Syndicate remake?! When is it coming out? I am Joe's Sense of Excited Nostalgia.

Its on the cards, but its going to be a MMO Train Simulation game.
Trefarm 23rd August 2011, 12:17 Quote
Reboots are for cowards, a way to justify the initial funding for a project... Comic Books adapted into films are another example... Game/IP 'blah' once was a success/made money/has a fan base. If you provide the funding we'll do it again.

Reboots are also completely pointless, as previous Critical Hits have mentioned no-one apart from the old fashioned and obtuse goes into games blind anymore, there's always a glut of information out there. You can call it whatever you like and still have dozens of previews, trailors and write ups promoting the S@#T out of it everywhere.

You don't need a brand to sell it to anyone but the original money man, all that effort to placate fans, twist back story to make sense, force elements into a game the developer probably doesn't want to use... just to please a fat man in a suit.

Just out of curiosity how many Indie games, where the developer uses his own money are reboots?
Kenny_McCormick 23rd August 2011, 12:31 Quote
Getting money to develop videogames it's hard. With reboots they get some kind of security for the investors. They don't want to lose some hundreds of Ks funding every game.
Trefarm 23rd August 2011, 13:01 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kenny_McCormick
Getting money to develop videogames it's hard. With reboots they get some kind of security for the investors. They don't want to lose some hundreds of Ks funding every game.

Small companies are making interesting and original games, the big boys are punting sequels...the only people doing reboots are the medium size developers that could get the money anyway.

Sure it helps nervous investors cough up initially, but how many reboots have been a massive success? Name one... I 'm not exactly a typical gamer but nothing on my shelf/steam is a reboot.

Sure it would be harder, and require some balls. You wouldn't get much thanks and when it goes wrong your job would be toast... but it would make me happier, and that's what matters when ranting on the net... lol
Artanix 23rd August 2011, 13:44 Quote
Quote:
Sure it helps nervous investors cough up initially, but how many reboots have been a massive success?

None. But how many have made profit? probably all. Its risk free as far as the "big boys" are concerned, they aren't interested in whether we like it or not, they just want to see nice numbers at the end of each fiscal year.
Digi 23rd August 2011, 13:46 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by CardJoe
Oh, that's where you went then.

I do hope you get the actual reference but yes, I am keeping a hold of it for when you might actually find a game that requires it once again.
lacuna 23rd August 2011, 15:31 Quote
Difficult to say what fits the definition of a reboot. The GTA series certinaly fits, particularly when it went from top down to 3rd person but also Half Life 2 was almost a reboot of the original game. So a reboot isn't always a bad thing
MjFrosty 23rd August 2011, 16:14 Quote
Don't agree. Tomb Raider as a franchise is souly successful because of Lara Croft (obvious really). The character was unique to the time and hitting off as well as it did, nobody dare copy the same forumla. The same applies now. I'd much rather play through the origins of the character (ridiculous as she is) that I grew up playing with (tehe), then somebody entirely new that I'd never heard of - which would quite quickly be branded a Lara Croft rip off regardless of the content.

Infact Tomb Raider is the perfect example of a great time to reboot a franchise. All of the games up until now have worked on the same formula, which to be honest grew old way before Crystal Dynamics had gotten hold of it.

I'm going to throw out something that i'd personally like to see rebooted, Interplays Descent (It wouldn't work in this age, but I would definitely buy into it ;) )



Quote:
Originally Posted by Mentai
Given enough time (I'm going with ~15 years) a reboot is ok if technology has moved on enough that a story can be told in a much more meaningful way, but I'm not a fan of the reboot in general. Even in the case of Tomb Raider, which I think does look good, it would still look just as good if it wasn't called Tomb Raider. I don't need her origins to be told again, and I don't want to envisage future Lara (who is a pretty crap character) the whole time I'm playing either.

Comic book based media is the worst at this though, even when it isn't a reboot, anything Batman related has to feature a moment with his parents dying. It's terribly repetitive. And don't get me started on how ludicrous it is to reboot Spiderman movies again.

I think if you aren't doing a straight remake/upgrade, it says a lot about the quality of source fiction. If it's so bad that you're better off with a reboot, maybe you would be better off with an entirely original story instead? Sure you have to up your marketing budget, but it would make a stronger, less dilute, brand in the end. Also, you don't have to deal with fan expectation and nerd rage until you make a sequel.
OCJunkie 23rd August 2011, 18:32 Quote
Reboot is such a dumb word applied to games. The show was great, but everything else that gets rebooted gets broken. It's a double dose of laziness, not only are they rehashing used ideas instead of coming up with new IP, but they can't even do that properly.
Artanix 23rd August 2011, 19:14 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by lacuna
Difficult to say what fits the definition of a reboot. The GTA series certinaly fits, particularly when it went from top down to 3rd person but also Half Life 2 was almost a reboot of the original game. So a reboot isn't always a bad thing

I think you're mixing sequel up with reboot.

Reboots generally are from a dead IP a good while ago. X-Com for example has been dead for years, I'd even prefer to forget about enforcer and inteceptor, but that was 1998 so the series has been dead a good 13 years now, Microprose have been bought out about 3/4 times since 1998 as well, so the term reboot is generally for a game that is nothing to do with the original team, office, company, idea, etc.

GTA and Half Life were both active IP's, and both done by the same companies, GTA III vs I & II was just a progression of technology, not a reboot.
Zinfandel 23rd August 2011, 19:20 Quote
Critical Hit is pretty much the only article I read on B-T these days. It's awesome.
gosh 23rd August 2011, 19:21 Quote
x-com interceptor ? x-com enforcer ?

not played the latter but the former was pretty fun, ropey graphics (and those bloody invisible ships near end of the game made some missions near unwinnable when you had them on the ropes and they perma-cloaked) but the research and base building plus interception was much like x-com and quite a lot of fun.

i liked some of the UFO games (better narrative and multiple endings whether you attempt to understand or just kill the alien) but loved x-com for the management and building side as terror missions started to become a chore. if the new x-com games can give us strategy and management while mixing it with a greater of variety of missions/more scripting and some actual characters makes me think it being a FPS isn't necessarily bad.
RichardC 23rd August 2011, 19:49 Quote
"Critical Hit is pretty much the only article I read on B-T these days. It's awesome."

Thank you! Glad you enjoy it.

"not played the latter but the former was pretty fun"

Enforcer was an obscenity. There's no defending it on any level.
Artanix 23rd August 2011, 22:29 Quote
But yes, this made me play Enemy Unknown (Defence) again :D still get that same feeling of dread when a cyberdisc first turns up in a terror mission... usually next to petrol stations >.<
Ergath 23rd August 2011, 23:38 Quote
+1 for Interceptor not being that bad. I finished it once and that was enough, but the management side was OK. Enforcer was utter poo though. Personally I tend to find reboots disappointing -I prefer to just play the originals yet again.

And just in case the XCOM guys are reading this: look, it's simple, UFO: Enemy Unknown but with better graphics = enormous sales. :D
fluxtatic 24th August 2011, 06:39 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by lacuna
Difficult to say what fits the definition of a reboot. The GTA series certinaly fits, particularly when it went from top down to 3rd person but also Half Life 2 was almost a reboot of the original game. So a reboot isn't always a bad thing

GTA was definitely not rebooted. DMA (before the days of Rockstar North) said after GTA2 they were waiting before they developed III, as the hardware at the time (PSX) couldn't handle what they had in mind. After seeing GTA III, everyone understood what the devs meant.

And no, not always bad. Batman, for example, had been turned into a godawful mess before Chris Nolan got his hands on it (really? Mr Mom was the best Batman up to that point?) But now, Spiderman? Just because you steered in onto the rocks with the increasing ridiculousness of the sequels? How about you make one decent movie, congratulate yourselves, and move on? But no, as others have mentioned, too expensive and risky to take a chance on an unknown property when even a suckfest like Transformers will make hundreds of millions of dollars. If the average consumer would wake the f*ck up and stop swallowing the garbage the studios put out, maybe it would change. I didn't need to drop $10 to know Spiderman 3 was going to suck, so I didn't see it. How about you sit out some of these crap releases, rather than giving the studios your money and then bitching to the internet about how awful it was? You think the studios care what you thought of it when they've already got your money? /rant
stoff3r 24th August 2011, 12:03 Quote
Tomb Raider - Now with Sandra Bulloc.
Artanix 24th August 2011, 16:49 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ergath
And just in case the XCOM guys are reading this: look, it's simple, UFO: Enemy Unknown but with better graphics = enormous sales. :D

Not according to 2k Games :P

“The ‘90s generation of gamers all love XCOM and we own the IP, so we thought OK, what do we do with it? Every studio we had wanted to do it and each one had its own spin on it. But the problem was that turn-based strategy games were no longer the hottest thing on planet Earth. But this is not just a commercial thing – strategy games are just not contemporary,”


So basically, nobody has done a successful turn based strat game recently, but Battlefield and CoD sell lots, so lets go make that instead, but we'll replace russians with aliens.

(I know it wont be that bad, but meh, why does -everything- have to be an FPS?)

Source: http://www.gamesradar.com/2k-defends-xcoms-first-person-shooter-reboot/
gosh 25th August 2011, 02:53 Quote
this is definitely making me want to dust off enemy unknown. cyberdisks never used to be a problem for me because even on terror missions i just armed most of my guys with laser rifles and blew the **** out of the scenery thanks to autofire and unlimited ammo, way safer than walking into reactive fire.

back to the topic at hand though i do feel reboots are odd things and though most examples have been bad the idea remains solid (and i've seen all 3 transformers movies at cinema, if you told me a couple of weeks ago i'd find a best part of an hour long fight with giant robots twatting each other over a ruined city as one of the most boring things i've seen in a movie i'd have laughed). batman in both games and movies was a massive success, first class dragged x-men back from increasingly worse movies (been maybe a year since wolverine and a few since x3 and they already rebooted it), true grit was brilliant, V 2009 was terrible, battlestar galactica was brilliant.

guess the idea is people won't judge it on it's merits but on it's predecessors merits (and that dark and sinister thing called nostalgia that clouds mens judgement) - if it's a crap movie then fanbase would go see it anyway (how often have you discussed a crap movie more than a good movie ?), if it's a good movie bonus but i suspect the bankroll at the end of the day wouldn't be hugely better. still doesn't quite explain spiderman, first was great 2nd was good 3rd was tripe so instead of making a good 4th that fits the story they take the easy route and re-do the first ?

<edit> you guys should try some of the UFO games, quite liked aftermath (first one) - got panned by reviewers but had an interesting story which you unlocked through missions and research.
Artanix 25th August 2011, 09:49 Quote
aftermath, aftershock, and that other one were -alright-, I think they got hold of the rights to the name or something, but now its with 2k games.

I think my main gripe is the fact that we have this: (excluding interceptor and enforcer again :D)

Enemy Unknown/TFTD/Apocalypse:
turn based strategy game
based in current day/future
heavily involved research and tactical elements

New UFO game:
FPS
Based in the 1950's (ish)
dunno about the research

the only thing that relates to the x-com name, is literally the name. Why couldn't they just make it into a new IP? Nobody would've batted an eyelid, its just a cash cow 2k games want to hit up, because the name alone will get interest, even if the game is poo.

Oh and from my earlier quote, "But the problem was that turn-based strategy games were no longer the hottest thing on planet Earth."

Pretty sure 2k wont be making the next civilization game into a FPS :D
Ergath 26th August 2011, 12:57 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artanix
"But the problem was that turn-based strategy games were no longer the hottest thing on planet Earth."

Yes, I'd seen that before - they're right, it's not the hottest thing at the moment, but the thing is that the original fans are still around, and there are millions of people who still play the original game from time to time. I think the real problem is that they want to develop a game that will be a big cross-platform seller and turn-based games are clearly going to sell approximately f-all copies on X-Box. This said, I still think this leaves room for a PC exclusive Xcom4 which goes back to the game's roots.

Aftermath et al were close to being right, but were let down by fatal flaws which seemed to be down to insufficient testing and inexperience - as I remember, Aftermath went from being playable to completely impossible after the second (?) special base mission. This is the kind of thing that I would trust a bigger developer to do right.

Anyway, I'm just blowing hot air, it's clearly not happening. What I am going to do is to develop a similar game for Android. Anyone who's played the dodgy russian rewrite of UFO for Pocket PC will hopefully agree with me that the game is eminently suited to the small screen.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums