That also raises the issue of how big a market exists for these remakes, and what that, in turn, would mean as far as development resources are concerned. If ALL you have is the “nostalgia” gamers fueling purchases, I’d figure they’d peg any given remake at about the $30-40 mark for retail, and dump considerably less money into it than the latest Medal of Battlefield Duty shooter. End result: yeah, you get a somewhat prettier game, but it’d probably still be fairly lackluster. Think something along the lines of, say, Darkstar One, which, while not a remake, definitely smacked of reduced development resources (there’s a ton of potential in that game that just never gets used — things that suggest to me that the developers intended to add a LOT more depth, but had neither the time nor the money to do so). In many ways, Darkstar One played out similar to Privateer (with the one change of not having exit jump points in systems, which, really, was half the fun).

I’d love a prettier, modern 3D version of the old X-wing games, with modern online gaming options, and perhaps a full suite for making custom missions….but I also recognize that the market ain’t there for games like that. Not at the level where it’d yield the kind of game I want to play, anyway.

So, rather than some half-assed remake, I’ll just play the original games. Also, don’t forget, if a remake tanked, developers would simply say “See? This is why we don’t do more of these. You ingrates won’t shell out for our crappy, half-assed attempt to cash in on your nostalgia!”

Anyway, I think it’s POSSIBLE to do good remakes…but it’s often more likely that they’ll be done poorly, if at all.

My top vote (and it has not changed for almost a decade now): Interstate 76

Where do I sign?

For example, Icewind Dale was, in my experience, a very unforgiving game. The DnD 2ed rules mean that the penalties are harsh and the first few levels are grueling. All the new improvements in Bioware games, the regenerating health, the lesser death penalties, would completely destroy what made Icewind Dale the game it was. I’m not sure it’s possible to remake it beyond simple graphics and UI.

I think you’ve just described half the mobile phone games. I wonder how many of “classic style” phone titles are doing well. That might be pretty revealing. Overall you make several very good points, and maybe you’re right – perhaps it really is nostalgia driving most people’s desire for remakes. However, a lot of us are still playing those old games, because nothing else since has measured up for us. The answer to your question, at least for me and literally every gamer I know is a hearty, “hell, YEAH!” to the idea of a prettified, appropriately modernized X-Com, Final Fantasy 7, Total Annihilation, Blood, Warzone 2100, Baldur’s Gate, etc. If even a couple such remakes hit the market it might be a real wake-up call for an industry that has become far too focused on visuals over the last decade. I also don’t see anywhere near the problem with game remakes/reboots as you get with movies. Most games are far more timeless than films.

I think much the same can apply to gaming, and that remakes often require a particular approach to them. I thought that both Monkey Island remakes were quite good. They gave players the ability to play the original game, using an almost identical interface, just with modern 3D graphics (but still drawn to look less “in-your-face” 3D and closer to their cartoon origins). The addition of solid voiceovers really helped. A similar tack was taken with the Broken Sword remake, and I think it worked.

The problem with remaking games is also similar to the problem of remaking movies. You have to ask WHY you’re doing it.

Is it just to bring the old game to new hardware so that it’s compatible? That’s pretty much what gog.com is for (thankfully). GOG is pretty much a PC gaming preservation society, and I really appreciate that approach. So, if preservation is the goal, then we have a good setup currently.

Is the purpose to “update” the game? As Alaric accurately points out, slapping a higher-res, richer-colored visual overtop of an existing game won’t change the dated gameplay elements. I mean, a point and click adventure is still a point and click adventure, even if it looks slick. Maybe you’ll have the elimination of some particularly annoying or difficult sequences (the mid-90s VGA remake of Space Quest 1, for example, made optional a frustrating driving sequence, and the CD version of X-Wing changed some of the extremely difficult original missions), but the game is still fundamentally the game…and gaming conventions have evolved considerably since the “good old days,” as MANY people here commented on in response to the recent Duke Nukem disappointment.

Or perhaps the purpose is to “recapture the magic.” This one, I think, is the most difficult to accomplish. How do you infuse the spirit of an old game into what would essentially be a new one? I’m not sure it’s possible, really. Some games, it’d seem, would translate well (a remake of X-wing/Tie Fighter/X-Wing Alliance, or the old Wing Commander/Privateer series would still work perfectly, I think), but others? I’m not so sure. Would anyone be impressed with a 7.1 surround sound digital orchestra replacing the old 8-bit music in a potential remake of Super Mario Brothers? So, at what point are you completely abandoning the original in favor of “updating” the game…and if you’re doing that, then what’s the point?

I think that many people who are doing “remake” films or “reimaginings” or simply optioning brands like G.I. Joe and Transformers, are doing it PURELY for the marketing element. They’re capitalizing on consumers’ positive feelings towards the original, and then simply slapping on the superficial trappings of the original material onto often mediocre (or worse) new product. I guarantee you, if you stripped out all references to Autobots and Decepticons, and didn’t have Peter Cullen voicing Optimus Prime, and renamed the film, Michael Bay’s “Robotsplosions” would’ve tanked at the box office. I think the same can be applied to many many games, remakes and sequels alike.

Plus, there’s the risk of trying to capture the “feel” of the original and failing miserably, which merely exposes the game as hopelessly riding on the coattails of its predecessor(s). The reaction to the new Duke Nukem game is a prime example. And it’s not SIMPLY because the audience grew up. It’s because the newer addition just couldn’t capture the “feel” of the original (and tried too hard to do so).

I do think that SOME games could be remade effectively. Some old-school shooters like Doom, Quake, and Duke Nukem 3D could be remade with newer graphics while retaining much of the original games’ design and interface choices. But the thing is, I think a lot of reviewers would SAVAGE these games as being exactly what they are — throwbacks. As fondly as we all may remember blowing away pig cops and such, the puzzles in Duke Nukem 3D were…kinda lame. Likewise, does anyone want to return to the days of pointless maze-like maps where simply surviving until you could find the key to unlock the doors that let you get to the button you hit to advance to the next level was the whole point? Of course, in their proper context, none of this mattered. It was the height of game design at the time. But realistically, would audiences stand for a reskinned, prettier version of these old classics…if they retained their design features? And if not, how far would one have to deviate to make the interface and design choices palatable to modern audiences? And if you did that, at what point have you completely abandoned the very things that made the original cool?

While I know it’s not exactly the perfect analogy you only have to look in the direction of Hollywood to see how lifting a concept from the depths of time and giving it a modern shine pretty much always results in a disaster (there are of course exceptions, Nolan’s Batman for example but that’s a reboot rather than a remake).

Old games tend to be great because they’re old, I don’t mean in some misty eyed nostalgic way I mean that these games arrived at the time they did because that’s when they belonged. To give another movie analogy take John Carpenter’s The Thing, made during the cold war paranoia era the movie plays on the idea that anyone could be the infiltrator (in The Thing’s case a nasty alien thing but it played on the idea that anyone could be a soviet spy), it’s a great movie BECAUSE it was made mid cold war, if they remade it now they’d either lose the paranoia altogether or have to replace it with “who’s the terrorist” to bring it into line with a 21st century world view which in my mind would ruin it. Taking an old game made in the decidedly 2d era and making it 3d and chucking pixel shaders at it for the sake of appealing to modern gamers would just be a mistake (the only exception I can think of is the Metroid Prime series on Gamecube which is just brilliant and the remake of Riddick that came with Dark Athena although this was a carbon copy of the original with tarted up lighting, and not forgetting the polymost version of Duke Nukem 3d the original game just with opengl support), I think GOG.com have the right idea where old games are concerned in that they just make the original game work on new hardware (although sometimes they don’t manage it and you have to fiddle with it yourself) without trying to make it new.

Dosbox and the other virtual machines you speak of exist because people wanted to be able to play those old games as they are including the awkward controls and iffy graphics, when you mess about with something that’s a classic you always end up robbing it of something that you probably should have left alone.

Scouring the GOG archives, look no further then Ultima 4 (free, no less!). While a stunning revolution for its time, it’s almost unplayable today. The UI is so clunky it makes Nethack look user-friendly. There are gameplay elements (such as magical reagents) that are ridiculously obtuse.

I totally agree that someone needs to take these old gems and brush the dust of time off of them and show their luster to a new generation.

I wonder what we’ll dislike about today’s games in twenty years? Unlocks? DLC that’s long since broken?

I’m relatively new to the PC side of things so my reference is rooted in the darker side of gaming, consoles.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaUFx-BT2SE