Remaking a game (especially a classic one) is a very risky endeavor.
On the one hand, designers don’t want to ruin what made the game a classic to begin with, usually just releasing an almost perfectly designed clone of the original and adding new and improved graphical polish here and there to keep things interesting. But is this visually enhanced approach too boring? Why remake a game just to make it a little bit prettier?
On the other hand, in the fear that the new version will be too similar to the original, developers will sometimes change way too much, turning the remake into an almost unplayable mess, with sloppy updated controls and pointless new missions. Why fix what wasn’t broken in the first place?
Basically, remaking a classic is, in most cases, a lose-lose situation.
So, is it even possible for a remake to be a better, more fulfilling experience than the original? […]
Original post by mrdestructoid@gmail.com (Destructoid.com) and software by Elliott Back
Recently:
- Interview: Heileen And The Rise (?) Of The Western Visual Novel
- Round-Up: Gamasutra Network Jobs, Week Of Nov. 21st
- MIGS: Frontier’s Braben On Retailers ‘Killing The Longevity’ Of Games
- GameSetLinks: Loving The Interactive Journalism Alien
- Column: ‘The Interactive Palette’ - Grim Fandango and Diegesis
- GamerBytes Special: Inside XNA Community Games, Part 3
- Thanks for Fruiting Up My XBox, Microsoft
- Q&A: From Resistance To… XNA Community Games?
- GameSetLinkDump: The Quantum Of Plot Intensity
- 2009 GDC Canada Announces Dates, Calls For Submissions
Category: