I know. Every response is "blame the publisher", conveniently.

oh and hey, wait one darn minute, what happened to this?
It still says that right on the kickstarter. But then they want to turn around and blame it on the publisher.

yeah, the license situation doesn't make sense.

It would be interesting to see what would happen if this project DOESN'T reach its target. I think it will, but if not, I also think it will still be published and the money left where it is.

Well, Roberta might not have credited everyone out of jealousy. Because I just checked Paul Trowe's IMDB resume, and it turns out he co-wrote, co-designed and scripted almost every single Sierra adventure! I underestimated him. Here are just few mere examples of his talent:

I know it was originally supposed to be a small game, but were they going to make a documentary about 3 people, really? :crazy:

This remake clause may have been the only way Replay Games was able to snag permission to use the Larry IP.

Getting the rights doesn't mean Codemasters could have paid for the project - it means Codemasters won't sue or close down the production.

DF originally planned to license a graphic adventure engine: youtube Tim interviews Ron. So, this licensing fee was included in the initial 400 k budget of DF. Not sure why replay games claim DF already spent millions of a engine, as they did not. With that respect there is no reason why they need $500 k. :frown:

I thought that DF weren't planning an iOS release from the start. If memory serves me, it wasn't until they surpassed the goal that they made the announcement regarding an iOS release.

I interviewed Tim Schafer recently for a magazine article and we talked about the original budget. He admitted that the $300k he asked for was tiny and that it would have been a very small game with a very small team. (The quote was something like "one or two people for six months.") Even so, comparing what he planned to do with what Replay plans to do is apples and oranges, and the fact that they are comparing it to justify their own budget doesn't really make sense to me. If you need $500k, you should be able to say why, based on your project's needs and goals, not based on what someone else who works somewhere else said he'd be able to do in a completely different situation...

You can make a great documentary about one person, that's irrelevant. There would have been peripheral characters anyway (everyone else at the studio not working on the game, possibly the designers' friends and family, etc.).

Personally I am actually very excited about this re-make, better graphic does so much for a game. It will almost feel like playing a brand new game I think. But that's also because I like the Love for sail look. I would have never spent money on the Monkey Island remakes. And 15 dollars for a game is still very cheap. If it doesn't get made you get your money back so it's a pretty safe investment.

True, but people were comparing the budgets in their minds, the 300,000$ figure with the 500,000$ figure, so I think the response is an apt one.

I agree with everyone stating that Al Lowe should make a new Larry game instead of yet another remake of a game that's gotten multiple already.

Especially since the first Larry game (like Kurufinwe already said) was very time-specific. It was a game that captured the feel of the late '80s. Now it's outdated (and I'm not talking about the text parser or the graphics here). A remake of something that's outdated, is itself outdated from the get-go.
Even moreso if they want to appeal to "modern" gamers. "Modern gamers" aren't used to the text parser, and won't like it. Heck, even I've gone so far as to avoid text parsers nowadays. I no longer have the patience to experiment with words to figure out what I need to do in an adventure game. Point-and-click has grown on me in such a way that I'll happily replay classics, as long as they don't use a text parser. Imagine how a gamer who's never used a text parser in a game before would react, then.
But scrapping the text parser means the game will be lacking half of the charm and humour of the original. The great thing about the first game actually WAS the text parser and the fact that you could experiment with it and get an actual (funny) response most of the time - especially if you wrote something dirty. Lose the text parser and you lose this.

As for the comparison with the Monkey Island remakes: the best thing about those remakes was the added voice-over. NOT the graphical update, because that was a tad too generic and lacked some of the original's charm.
This will be a huge trap for the Larry remake as well: having voice-over like in Love for Sail would be a plus, but any graphical update not only has to contain the charm of the original, but it also has to compete with the VGA remake.

I just don't think this is worth it. Not even for the fans.

A new game, with a new storyline, adapted to present-day situations (and humour), THAT's what we'd like to see. But with the Larry-character, that would also be hard to do. Larry was a late '80s - early '90s phenomenon.

Përsonally, I think it should stay there. Let Larry live on in our dreams, in our memories and in Germany. No matter how good Love for Sail is, this franchise is imo a thing of the past.



Regarding those questions Al Lowe answered: I agree with most of you.
I don't get the Codemasters involvement. Did they sell back the rights or didn't they? Cause if they did, why would they need to see a remake of the first game to give them freedom for the next game? If they sold the rights, they don't need to see anything, they're basically out of the equation. If it's a funding thing, however, then why the Kickstarter? If Codemasters want to fund Al Lowe for the game, but want to see a remake first, then THEY should fund that remake. Not the fans.
And if Al Lowe & co want Codemasters out of their neck so they could make a new game, then why not launch a Kickstarter for a NEW game? Why still this remake?
Unless Codemasters didn't actually sell them the rights, but then I still don't see why they'd need a Kickstarter for the remake. I hope someone can clarify a bit, because this just doesn't make any sense to me...

it makes no sense to me why they would license out the rights to remake the first game but refuse a new game. Only one thing makes sense: the publisher wanted more money to license out a new game, and everything about the remake is cheaper. They should just say that and stop this dancing around.

Yeah, that's what Vivendi tried to do when they replaced Laffer with this Larry Lovage abomination.

The team has already stated the game is going to be expanded and updated from the original anyway.

And would you donate if they do come out and say that? Is it even that important? That's what I thought.

In the comments of the LSL announcement:

Does anybody know how to predict a Kickstarter's final total from the first 24-48 hours? Like if something makes $100K in the first 48 hours, is it likely to make $500K after 30 days? The current $140K after 36 hours is a little disconcerting (while still much better than the guy in that link I posted predicted).

Yeah actually, i probably would if they were that frank about it. But its not the point anyway.. These things hinge on trust and transparency, and if theres any murkieness and confusion its bad news.

Well this sounds kind of weird, im still gonna put 15 dollars there...just in case
this leads later to a GK4 or a new MI5, etc etc...

I played and enjoyed all the Larry games in the 80s and 90s, but I don’t want a new Larry. Let alone a remake. Or six remakes. Shudder. I agree with the criticism of previous posters: times have changed. Worse, one look at the new, glossy Larry was enough for me. The receding hairline, the big nose, the expanding waistline are there, but he has lost everything that made him Larry. No personality.

If you're going to remake, or make a sequel to the 20+ old game, of course there will be issues of whether it's suited for modern gaming. However, Monkey Island proved otherwise, remakes did nothing spectacularly new but they can still be considered a success. Because humor ages well. Peter Sellers as Pink Panther might feel "outdated" for modern film, but it's got pure quality with simple humor. So, that doesn't bother me much, but for a new game, of course times ask for something "new", and not just the same old concept - Larry is looking to "score", or is stranded in a closed space brimming with hot chicks. Oh wait, that's fun! :D

But i'm with Fien here on the "personality" issue. I completely missed the early Larry era, so i'm not really the one to judge it, but comparing Larry 7 and new screen:
http://i.imgur.com/84cgJs.jpg
the remake feels kinda bland, like the sprite is somehow "out of place".

Josh Mandel, who is working on the Larry remake, is talking with Scott Murphy to get on board with a Space Quest 7.

Nabbing the Space Quest rights from Activision might be a bit more of a challenge compared to Codemasters considering Activision is a wing of Satan's army. However, Telltale got the rights to King's Quest. Funny how all of this is coming full circle.

And the Larry remake looks good regardless of the VGA remake. The animation is on the same level of quality as the recent AAA release, Rayman Origins.

The first Leisure Suit Larry I played was Love For Sail. Absolutely loved that game! After playing it, played all the previous Leisure Suit Larry games. However, although I enjoyed them, none inspired the excitement and level of involvement that Love For Sail did. Was so looking forward to the Lust In Space sequel hinted at in that game. While I'll probably give the remakes a go should they get made, I would have committed to this Kickstarter campaign without hesitation if it had been for a new LSL game (perhaps Lust In Space?).

I've been posting here a lot lately, but here's more clarification on this project by Paul Trowe over at Replay Games:

On the $500,000 project goal.
On extra content to the game.
I'm kind of shilling by posting this, but I hope it clears up a few more things.

Don´t really like the art style of the new Larry, but I´m there with 15 dollars. Jane Jensens projects is backed with 100 dollars.

It seems strange that they are talking about the Kings Quest rights, considering Telltale Games are working with that license right now.

Haven't read the whole thing yet, but here's an interview with Lowe from Kill Screen:

http://killscreendaily.com/articles/...iews/lowebrow/

Incidentally, Kill Screen is excellent. It's like the New York Times, New Yorker or Wall Street Journal of games journalism.

I agree too. It is even a remake of a remake, definitely not something I would want. I also don't understand why they need 500000 to just upgrade an old game with the new sounds and graphics. I will rather support Jane Jensen's project that has in my view much more to offer but at the monent sadly less backers than Larry.

^ This.

Jane Jensen's Kickstarter over Al Lowe's Kickstarter any day!

It's not a "remake of a remake", it's a reboot. The F.A.Q. and pitch video stipulate they're going to revise the game and possibly add to it. Sort of like a director's cut.

The main point is that the goal is to introduce new fans to adventure by reviving one of the most accessible games in the genre and propelling Al Lowe back into gaming after being burned time after time over the past several years. Seriously, read up on the development of Magna Cum Laude and the demise of Sam Suede - it'll make you furious.

Paul Trowe from Replay Games has already said the $500,000 is the lowest he could get to have professional artists, animators, voice actors, programmers and musicians to work on the game. This wasn't intended to be a 30 minute iOS game on the Scumm engine like Tim Shafer originally intended when he budgeted his Double Fine game for $300,000 - it's a full game release.

Sure, this reboot could have possibly been a fan game. But, I've seen talks about Larry fan games numerous times over the past ten years that never went any where and if they do manage to pull one off it'll take YEARS to make and have no greater impact outside of warming the hearts of people who've already played the game. Money makes a difference.

And let's not do the Jane Jensen vs. Al Lowe thing because you really don't want me regurgitating that Old Man Murray article. Al Lowe was never blamed for the death of adventure games. I support them both.

I really enjoyed Larry adventures from 1 to 7. But I really aren't that interested in remakes, reboots or sequels. I agree that Larry was a product of his time and today I want something else.

I would definitely back up some other project by the same makers but I don't really need to see Larry again.

If you like the people involved are you able to chip in some small amount to help these makers out? There seems to be a theme running through this thread of users talking themselves out of helping someone and I'm starting to suspect this reaction would have been the same even if the Kickstarter was for a new game by the same people.

"This Larry style of comedy has passed." "Why is this $500k when X is Y?"

Let's look past personal gain at the bigger picture for a moment. For many people Larry was the gateway game into the adventure genre by those who would have avoided adventure normally. It's proud of being unpretentious and that's the game's strength - something like this on Steam would go gangbusters and would help our cause in getting REAL adventure to be mainstream again instead of trying to claim games from other genres as our own like Portal or Journey (or Heavy Rain, but that opens a can of worms so strike that from the record :D).

It's frustrating enough seeing publishers turn their back on Al Lowe, I couldn't bare seeing adventure gamers doing the same. I mean he's tried it all - he tried making a new IP and failed, he tries to re-introduce a classic and take back the property he created and his own base responds with ennui.

It's all coming out now.

Josh Mandel was asked about the possibility of a sequel to Callahan's Crosstime Saloon.

It made me wonder who owns the rights to the Legend Entertainment games.

Since it was published by Take-Two Interactive Software, they more than likely own the rights. And would have to negotiate a deal to buy them.

Hey, guys,

Josh here. Take-Two only had the rights to publish it; the content still belonged to Legend. The game is in complete legal limbo, for two reasons: one, the rights to use the material were only licensed from Spider Robinson for three years; and two, the rights to game were not included in the contract, I'm told, when Activision bought out Legend. So the rights remained with Legend, which no longer exists. Even if it did, they wouldn't be able to republish it without complete renegotiation of the property rights.

In sum, this means that if I wanted to do another CCS game, it would be strictly between Spider's people and those of us doing the game. Neither Take-Two nor Activision would be involved.

Hey Josh, you were producing console games for sega right? It is so good to see so many of you guys coming back to PC adventure games. A new Callahan's would be cool as hell. Many Legend games also deserved sequels. Just the idea of adapting books to the adventure genre deserves continuity, actually.

Funny thing, so many classic adventure series are/were in the limbo because of the difficulty of securing intellectual property rights(i.e: Gabriel Knight 4 and others). I imagine most legend games wouldn't have that problem in the end since they were licensed from writers. I don't know if the idea of more Legend games would have the pull you are getting with LSL on something like Kickstarter(sadly they are not as well known), but I'm sure many people would support it. I would. They were great games. Spider has a very loyal and tight fanbase as well, I imagine those that played that game surely enjoyed it enough to want another one.

First things first though, off course. I hope the LSL game will be a hit and your company will grow after that and deliver many quality games. I actually hope all the adventure kickstarters popping up will do so well that you people will be swimming in funds and won't even need something like kickstarter to get to work. Adventure gaming has been in dire straits for too long now.

Paul Trowe is doing live chat at the moment (while watching LSL7 ;)).

Al Lowe posted a video on the Kickstarter page clearing up some of the questions we had. They did not buy the rights, they're only licensing it from Codemasters, and they're only allowed to do a remake right now. The hope is to build up enough money from the remakes to eventually make a new Larry game. LSL7 cost $1.5 million and that was 15+ years ago.

I am not so wealthy that I would donate to every adventure game they are raising money for now. I rather give a little bit of extra for those that really matter, like Jane Jensen's project or the new Tex Murphy. There's no way I even have enough money to back up all the games I actually want to play let alone all the nice and talented people who are doing uninteresting projects.