Gaming Reboots

.

We shy worth hair
Often if a game series has been long lasting and is losing popularity(Even sometimes still has popularity) or the team behind the series has just gotten fucking lazy and are completely inept in creativity for another sequel, they reboot a game series to fix any of these problems. These sometimes involve starting the game off in a completely differant time period then when the original series started( I.E Fallout 3 started us off 200 years after the original two games.), or just a brand new game all together(ShadowRun went from one of the best RPG's of its time to a God damn FPS!), modifies a character or two and maybe a new genre instead(DOOM 3 changed DOOM's regular Action genre to a more horror orientated style). The most recent evidence of one of these styles of reboots is in the latest Devil May Cry(A game series I personally hate but see it's positives points) game, where one of one of CAPCOM's best ever characters Dante, A white haired Badass who uses guns AND a sword(Which is pretty badass.) has been rebooted to a twilight vampire lookalike:
screenshot_237825.jpg

That's not to say that gaming reboots are necessarily a bad thing, some game series reboots have been nothing short of a blessing on the series and even sometimes perfected them and made them better than they originally were. The most evident example of this for me was Fallout 3. While the original Fallout games were good in their own way for their time, Fallout 3 has little to do with the previous games in the series, save for its post-apocalyptic setting. By combining the series’ signature conversation system and RPG elements with a first person viewpoint, Fallout 3 was able to give players a sense of immersion that few games have. You truly felt isolated, yet the decisions you made had lasting effects on the world around you. Black Isle Studios brought Fallout into this world, but when Bethesda took over they perfected it. Other great reboots were Tomb Raider being rebooted by the release of Tomb Raider: Legend and Prince of Persia going from a good platformer PC game to an excellent adventure game that introduced us to Parkour elements that were never seen but are being used nowadays for popular games like Assassin's Creed & Uncharted.

An overflow of good converts to bad. This is most evident in terrible reboots. Crappy reboots are mostly done in great old games that are rebooted to effectively rape our childhood completely and often totally miss the point of what the game was originally about in an attempt to make it a “gritty” and “edgy” incarnation. One prime example of this is Space Invaders. You remember this game right? The retro game where you play as the little ship fighting hordes of spaceships who get faster with every level making it the first game with an increasing difficulty. This game was rebooted to Space Raiders in 2002 which was a game that involved the main character fighting gigantic bugs (Not aliens) in a suburb(Not space) as a single character(NOT a spaceship!) with two guns. It had a storyline that featured a love interest. Does any of this sound like Space Invaders to you? It sounds like madness™ to me. Ask about any retro games from the past: Bomber man, Pac Man, Bionic Commando; They all had crappy modern day remakes that would bring a person closer to the brink of throwing their game console against a brick wall over and over again.

Personally I hate Game reboots but what are your thoughts on them? Creative or just pure Laziness?
 
Great thread SoM, but I respectfully disagree. I think game reboots are great for a number of reasons, but first here's my personal definition of what a reboot should be:

A reboot should retain the core ideas that gave the series both it's identity and success, while updating or altering everything else to create a new experience welcomes new fans and caters to it's established fanbase.

Here's why I like reboots. One, it gives a developer a fresh start. You say that rebooting equates to a lack of creativity. I feel it's the total opposite. It gives a developer a blank canvas to try all sorts of new and exciting ideas instead of the same old formula.

Rebooting provides the luxury fixing a long running narrative that has either contains elements that are too dated or has just become too confusing. For example, Resident Evil I feel is a series in dire need of a reboot. It's storyline as become so crazy and convoluted that it's getting harder to keep up with every new game. A reboot is needed that takes the series back to it's survival horror roots, eliminate the countless virus strains in favor of a single virus again, and have a more focused, character driven plot.

Rebooting makes old game new again. By updating the gameplay you can still enjoy the formula that made you a fan of the series but with a fresh coat of paint. The new Mortal Kombat returned to the classic 2D plane but offered a more robust version of it's signature fighting system with new special attacks, tag team moves, and more accessible fatalities. The gameplay feels both familiar and fresh at the same time which is how a reboot should feel.

Of course, rebooting doesn't always work. Castlevania: Lords of Shadow took it's famous 2D gameplay and translated it into a modern 3D action game and that worked great. However, Bionic Commando did the same thing and ended up faceplanting. But that all comes down to the quality of the game itself more than it being a reboot.
 
I think it depends on if the game has any real success after the reboot.

Mortal Kombat was a big deal when I was little. MK3 was my favorite, but I digress. :)p). However, I don't think they have had much success with games that were made in the past ten years. There's just so many options for fighting games that, even though MK always adds new people in each game, it just feels dated if you were around or uninteresting because some other recent series has player loyalty.

Then again, I am not sure if I really get what constitutes as a reboot. Is it just taking an older game and making it more relevant to current consoles and playing trends?
 
Because letting a franchise die completely is totally not dangerous at all...

Reboots are good for a number of reasons, like Sean here has stated. For one, it gives developers an insight on what franchise games are still worth the investment and which ones should be canned.

Mortal Kombat is a perfect example of this as we've seen games just crumble to the ground and become obscurity after MK: Deception... which was totally fucking wicked! The franchise's recent reboot has brought life and interest back into the game and has also given developers more to look into so that the franchise can continue to grow.

Sure, some games that are rebooted don't need to be done as such... like Pacman. Why anyone would want to risk a reboot on that is beyond me, but then again, it was worth a shot I guess.

But most of the time, the reboots are done to revive interest in a game and garner new fans to the franchise that you never seen before. And when you're talking business, then more interest is always a good thing.
 
I also Disagree Because Halo: Anniversary is coming out Late this Year to Build Interest in Halo in Time for Halo 4. The Halo Games have Been Going down Hill since Halo 3 (although i Loved Halo Wars) and what better Way to Create Interest in the Halo Franchise than Remake the Game That Started it all?
Not Lived Through Video Game Reboots (not Been Into Video Games too Long)
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
174,826
Messages
3,300,733
Members
21,726
Latest member
chrisxenforo
Back
Top