Quote:
Originally Posted by Bagge
Of course Lucasarts are hoping to profit from these remakes and special editions, but that is also the case with pretty much any game you'll ever play. I really don't see what the alternatives to these games being done for profit are - either short-term or long-term. In any case, they are not doing these remakes simply to be nice.
|
Everyone who creates and sells a product expects to(or at least WANTS to) make money. This reality isn't lost on me, but there's something more "mechanical" about a corporation the size of LucasArts than...say, a company the size of Telltale or the dozens of developers smaller than Telltale.
Quote:
There is a financial plan behind doing special editions of old adventure games. Either Lucasarts management is hoping to turn a nice little profit per game, or they are looking at the oppurtunity to reenter the adventure game market, and needs to test the financial waters for these games and give their staff expertise in working on adventure games.
However, while the managment of a company looks at games from a financial view, the developers, artists, writers and coders working on the game can have a much more artistic and creative view on the project they are working on. The way I see it, nothing negatve can come from this. Worst case-scenario is that Lucasarts does a couple of flawed remakes of old adventure games before returning to doing Star Wars games, and the best case-scenario is a full fledged return of Lucasarts as a creative powerhouse doing new adventure games. We're probably landing somewhere in the middle.
|
It's not a detrimental thing if LucasArts only pumps out a few shallow remakes. But it's hardly something to be extremely excited for in my eyes. Unlike other genres, adventures aren't something you can really play through again until you've sufficiently forgotten enough aspects of the puzzles. You're not really "playing" it if you know what's going to happen, after all, since a good 80%* of the gameplay is in your head. So I don't get much value there, I don't get anything new.
Also, I have a more grim view of the worst-case scenario. The LucasArts remakes could be mediocre, and siphon money from the indie adventure game market, effectively suffocating and killing the market of creative games that I've been enjoying for years.
*Statistic completely made up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pale Man
People are always going to judge a book by its cover, so if LEC wants new fans (which they do, and I think we all want adventures to be profitable), they pretty much have to make sure the games don't look like crap to newer generations of gamers who have never known anything worse than PS2.
|
I'd like adventures to be SUSTAINABLE, but I'd rather it not make heaps of money. That has ruined pretty much every genre of game and film already, but I've played plenty of great adventures since the "Great Fall of LucasArts". Granted they've been fringe titles, but I as a consumer really don't have to care how many people bought the same thing as I did, my only concern is that what I get is good. And I've played many great games that were obviously made because they wanted to make something incredible, and not because graphs, charts, and spreadsheets fed the latest financial trends decided that X+Y=$ because certain elements are "in season".
Now, again, I only care that the product is good. So if the result of bureaucratic mingling in the arts produces something good, I'm not going to complain. But my list of modern mainstream games that have been good in recent years is smaller than my list of good indie games in the past year, so at least there's a trend there. It's not an idealism thing so much as it is I think the indie market fuels the kind of creative environment that produces what I want. And LucasArts has proven to be so turbulent and unreliable in both the Star Wars and Adventure departments due to that type of mechanical logic that I can't be excited for this sort of thing from them. Lucidity has my attention far more than, say, Game #54:Special Edition.
Quote:
|
Shallow? Yes. Graphics whores? Yes. That's the way of things. You know and I know that good game > graphics, but there are people who are dumb enough to get that equation mixed up
|
First of all, that's not an equation. An equation includes an "=" sign, what you have there is an inequality.
Secondly, graphics are PART of what make the game good. I care more about style and can tolerate the technical limitations of older machines far better than some, but I'd rather not play a game in which every graphical asset was replaced with random blobs, and my interest in the games "Machinarium" and "Insanely Twisted Shadow Planet" is based almost SOLEY on graphics, I love the look of "World of Goo", and one of my big issues with Curse of Monkey Island is the art and animation for characters.
A mechanic can make up for graphics, and to a lesser extent vice-versa.
Quote:
|
and Lucasarts wants their money just as much as they want ours, and hey, if it works, good for them, they deserve money from idiots and people with common sense alike.
|
I don't WANT the industry to get their money. We all know what THEIR vote does to a product, what the popular consensus demands.