Why not remake actually BAD games?

I’ll add on to all this: if you can in theory take a bad game, and rework the concept to remake it without the bad parts… why would you associate your new project with a failed one, when you can get more creative freedom, no baggage, and more of a blank slate by making a spiritual successor?
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Vyse Inglebard
Sounds to me like you're gay.
You're not my type, please stop fantasizing.

I’ll add on to all this: if you can in theory take a bad game, and rework the concept to remake it without the bad parts… why would you associate your new project with a failed one, when you can get more creative freedom, no baggage, and more of a blank slate by making a spiritual successor?
But this just begs the question of why people do make remakes of things like Action 52 then.
 
But this just begs the question of why people do make remakes of things like Action 52 then.
Because Action 52 is a meme that got popular after AVGN made multiple videos about it, which prompted people to go "wow it would be fun to remake these shitty broken NES games into something actually fun"

Is human decision making really that hard for you to understand?
 
I've actually heard there's fan patches that make it... not exactly good, but way better than it was at launch.
Yeah, but that would be a fan work and I mean that if Romero after being humbled to some extent by the failure of the original game would go back and make it like he envisioned it back then, but with more experience and modern tech during the current boomer shooter craze, that would be a perfect third act for his character's arc. Fuck, I am indifferent with shooters, but even I would try it since the case would be too unique to ignore it.
 
But this just begs the question of why people do make remakes of things like Action 52 then.
Not really. The action 52 thing is a ‘fan’ remake by my understanding, so it doesn’t matter as much if it lives or dies. Whereas the remakes I’m talking about are professional studio projects, with IP licenses and the like behind them. Obviously the math’s going to be very different - performing a revival on something that was unpopular the first time is just adding constraints and licensing when you could just pick and choose what you want and make your own thing.
 
Is human decision making really that hard for you to understand?
Yours certainly are. I keep hitting you and you just keep coming back. You're like that family of raccoons that decided they like being under my front porch.

Not really. The action 52 thing is a ‘fan’ remake by my understanding, so it doesn’t matter as much if it lives or dies. Whereas the remakes I’m talking about are professional studio projects, with IP licenses and the like behind them. Obviously the math’s going to be very different - performing a revival on something that was unpopular the first time is just adding constraints and licensing when you could just pick and choose what you want and make your own thing.
Yeah but nowhere in this thread did I say it was strictly for official remakes. Heck in the OP I even mentioned inspired games that aren't technically remakes.
 
Yeah but nowhere in this thread did I say it was strictly for official remakes. Heck in the OP I even mentioned inspired games that aren't technically remakes.
I mean, if you want an answer that addresses fan works as well, there's an even more obvious one; if a game is only a few pieces away from being actually good, why remake it when a mod might do the job fine?

And it's not like the points of creative freedom and no bad press don't also apply to fanworks.
 
The King's Field games are NOT bad games.
For some reason a lot of people are convinced they are though.

I've never gotten it. I first got a taste of this in the 1990s when mainly the reason they were hated is... they were called RPGs but didn't play anything like Final Fantasy.

Nowadays (even here on the Farms) I often hear BS statements like that they instakill you all the time (there are instant death traps but they're not as omnipresent as people claim and usually you see them coming a mile away). Other times its stuff like them not having analog look (who cares?)

I sometimes think a lot of games that are considered "bad" are only considered as such because they have that reputation already. Like how a lot of AVGN fans are convinced the Sega CD had no good games or that every eighties cartoon was entirely dictated by toy companies (being based on a toy does not mean Hasbro had total creative control).

EDIT: Incidentally I've heard there actually is a fan remake of the first King's Field. I don't see a lot of point.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Samuel Fuller
Videogames are pretty high risk as it is, so remaking a known failure is only magnifying that risk statistically.
 
For some reason a lot of people are convinced they are though.

I've never gotten it. I first got a taste of this in the 1990s when mainly the reason they were hated is... they were called RPGs but didn't play anything like Final Fantasy.

Nowadays (even here on the Farms) I often hear BS statements like that they instakill you all the time (there are instant death traps but they're not as omnipresent as people claim and usually you see them coming a mile away). Other times its stuff like them not having analog look (who cares?)

I sometimes think a lot of games that are considered "bad" are only considered as such because they have that reputation already. Like how a lot of AVGN fans are convinced the Sega CD had no good games or that every eighties cartoon was entirely dictated by toy companies (being based on a toy does not mean Hasbro had total creative control).

EDIT: Incidentally I've heard there actually is a fan remake of the first King's Field. I don't see a lot of point.
The fan remake of King's Field is crap. It's just for morons who can't figure out how to use DuckStation.

AVGN's contributions to zoomer video game misinformation makes me want to punch that faggot so hard. Sure, a lot of SEGA CD games were FMV crap, but some of the non-FMV games were amazing. Final Fight CD, Eternal Champions, The Terminator (Yes, it also came on cartridge, but the CD had two more levels and a killer soundtrack) and the definitive release of The Secret of Monkey Island are just a few of the greats on it.
 
The fan remake of King's Field is crap. It's just for morons who can't figure out how to use DuckStation.
The little bit of footage I saw looked to me like they took a game that originally had a bit of character, and turned it into a generic unity engine game.

I can be forgiving if its just some teen's project to learn a new engine, but that doesn't mean I wanna play it.

(There's also the Sword of Moonlight remake, tho I recall that being buggy and unplayable).

AVGN's contributions to zoomer video game misinformation makes me want to punch that faggot so hard.
AVGN and Channel Autism contributed to me hating Youtube critics early on as for years I had to deal with people just endlessly parroting their uninformed takes.

Sure, a lot of SEGA CD games were FMV crap, but some of the non-FMV games were amazing. Final Fight CD, Eternal Champions, The Terminator (Yes, it also came on cartridge, but the CD had two more levels and a killer soundtrack) and the definitive release of The Secret of Monkey Island are just a few of the greats on it.
On top of that, being an "FMV game" doesn't necessarily mean a game is bad. It's actually kinda surprising how fun and hectic Night Trap and Double Switch get--they actually do kind of require you to keep an eye on things. It's amazing to me that Scott Cawthon got big off of making FNAF, which as Retsupurae once said is "Night Trap for furries," and yet Night Trap itself is not fondly remembered except by cool people.

It does, admittedly, run into a problem: Sometimes I want to actually enjoy the story. Thankfully you can find "movie cuts" of both games online.

Remember the Sega 32X review, where when he got to Star Wars Arcade he couldn't think of an actual thing to criticize and just said the polygons were boring?
 
Back