• Log In | Sign Up

  • News
  • Reviews
  • Games Database
  • Game Discovery
  • Search
  • New Releases
  • Forums

Adventure Gamers - Forums

Welcome to Adventure Gamers. Please Sign In or Join Now to post.

You are here: HomeForum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread


   

Is it illegal if someone wants to make a cancelled game ?

Total Posts: 162

Joined 2018-12-01

PM

tomimt - 23 January 2020 03:34 AM

You can get a good indicator from Jensen’s own Moebius, which was clearly too ambitious of a game for the budget they had in hand. They tried a lot, but in the end, didn’t have the needed resources to pull it off technically or narratively. It’s the same reason why Gabe remake feels like a budget remake because that is exactly what it is, a game made with a tight budget.

That’s not why the GK1 remake failed. There are numerous reasons for that. Replacing world-class actors like Tim Curry and Mark Hamill (why?), making Gabe look like a barbie-doll, and a sterile, squeaky clean New Orleans replacing the gritty, lived-in feel of the original graphics. They made it look like a casual game (according to Jane, this was intentional) and that choice had nothing to do with budget. Moebius had a similar look, so I assume the goal was the same, to attract the kinds of players which the casual market had flourished from (and over 40s women from America, by Jane’s admission). I think we can finally conclude that approach was a total failure.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 5914

Joined 2007-07-22

PM

I don’t know how to explain it because I lack artistic knowledge and don’t know the right words for it - BUT, GK1 remake (the same with Monkey Island remakes to a lesser extent) has bland, Flash games-like graphics compared to mature, almost art-like backgrounds that are found in the original. You know something is not right when you’d rather look at low-res locations than the new high-resolution ones. This is almost a “rule” with remakes and I have no other explanation but to come to two conclusions:

1) Artists in the golden days were geniuses
2) Nobody wants to put attention to backgrounds, sprites etc. the way it was done in 90s because it’s EXPENSIVE and time-consuming, and game designers don’t think it is important for a final product as other aspects/ simply don’t have the budget for it.

     

Recently finished: Four Last Things 4/5, Edna & Harvey: The Breakout 5/5, Chains of Satinav 3,95/5, A Vampyre Story 88, Sam Peters 3/5, Broken Sword 1 4,5/5, Broken Sword 2 4,3/5, Broken Sword 3 85, Broken Sword 5 81, Gray Matter 4/5\nCurrently playing: Broken Sword 4, Keepsake (Let\‘s Play), Callahan\‘s Crosstime Saloon (post-Community Playthrough)\nLooking forward to: A Playwright’s Tale

Avatar

Total Posts: 2307

Joined 2013-03-14

PM

Vehelon - 23 January 2020 08:19 PM
tomimt - 23 January 2020 03:34 AM

You can get a good indicator from Jensen’s own Moebius, which was clearly too ambitious of a game for the budget they had in hand. They tried a lot, but in the end, didn’t have the needed resources to pull it off technically or narratively. It’s the same reason why Gabe remake feels like a budget remake because that is exactly what it is, a game made with a tight budget.

That’s not why the GK1 remake failed. There are numerous reasons for that. Replacing world-class actors like Tim Curry and Mark Hamill (why?), making Gabe look like a barbie-doll, and a sterile, squeaky clean New Orleans replacing the gritty, lived-in feel of the original graphics. They made it look like a casual game (according to Jane, this was intentional) and that choice had nothing to do with budget. Moebius had a similar look, so I assume the goal was the same, to attract the kinds of players which the casual market had flourished from (and over 40s women from America, by Jane’s admission). I think we can finally conclude that approach was a total failure.

I didn’t say that was the reason why it failed, I said it looked like a budget game because it was one.

I don’t think Jensen actually had much choice with GK1 remake in the end, as the work Phoenix Online did with it, at least for background and character art, was a continuation from an already existing remake project Activision had been doing internally. I remember them talking about it how they had to do additional animations as for example the original team had not intended Gabe to put on the leather jacket. In the end, Jensen’s own effort had even less money at disposal than what the internal Activision team had had, so they didn’t really have a lot of resources for multiple art iterations.

     

Total Posts: 46

Joined 2020-01-20

PM

The thing you have to remember is that Jane wanted to continue the story, not remake stuff. Activision needed to see that there is a market for it. But it was a wrong decision. There obviously is a market for GK4 but not many wanna play the first one again, when they’ve spent two decades replaying it annually anyway.

That being said, I don’t think the remake was that bad. I appreciate the tidbits of info, and I think it was a fun playthru. You mightve noticed that Jane spoke about tablets being the future of adventure gaming. The game was def meant to be played on one. That’s why the graphics are the way they are. But most gaming still happens on a PC or PS4. And from what I’ve read, tablet sales are actually down so I don’t see it as the future.

What is heartbreaking is that it nearly bankrupted them. Had Activision gone with Jane’s ideas the situation would probably be the opposite.

I do feel the merch related to GK isn’t taken care of properly. There should be a collection of the games on the market. The books, soundtrack and graphic novels… Should be in there. It doesn’t cost much to put them together and upload them to iTunes, Spotify and gaming platforms as a collection. Hell, even a fan can do a pack like that. For nothing but time.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 248

Joined 2017-12-19

PM

Vehelon - 23 January 2020 08:19 PM
tomimt - 23 January 2020 03:34 AM

You can get a good indicator from Jensen’s own Moebius, which was clearly too ambitious of a game for the budget they had in hand. They tried a lot, but in the end, didn’t have the needed resources to pull it off technically or narratively. It’s the same reason why Gabe remake feels like a budget remake because that is exactly what it is, a game made with a tight budget.

That’s not why the GK1 remake failed. There are numerous reasons for that. Replacing world-class actors like Tim Curry and Mark Hamill (why?),

The cause and effect should be obvious here.
They could have called all of the previous cast from Mark Hamill to Michael Dorn*, and had them re-record their lines. I’m sure they would have agreed to do it. For the protagonist they could have chosen either one of the actors who had done the role previously. But they chose all new, unknown actors, because… they had no money for any others!

Nobody believes that those new actors were “an artistic choice”, it was simply that they were what they could afford.


* = Has anyone noticed that in the original game there’s one line that is spoken by some other actor, not Michael Dorn. I wonder what’s the story behind that. Probably they didn’t want to bother bringing him in for just one more line, so they tried to have some other guy imitate him with bad results.

     

Total Posts: 46

Joined 2020-01-20

PM

GateKeeper - 24 January 2020 03:46 AM
Vehelon - 23 January 2020 08:19 PM
tomimt - 23 January 2020 03:34 AM

You can get a good indicator from Jensen’s own Moebius, which was clearly too ambitious of a game for the budget they had in hand. They tried a lot, but in the end, didn’t have the needed resources to pull it off technically or narratively. It’s the same reason why Gabe remake feels like a budget remake because that is exactly what it is, a game made with a tight budget.

That’s not why the GK1 remake failed. There are numerous reasons for that. Replacing world-class actors like Tim Curry and Mark Hamill (why?),

The cause and effect should be obvious here.
They could have called all of the previous cast from Mark Hamill to Michael Dorn*, and had them re-record their lines. I’m sure they would have agreed to do it. For the protagonist they could have chosen either one of the actors who had done the role previously. But they chose all new, unknown actors, because… they had no money for any others!

Nobody believes that those new actors were “an artistic choice”, it was simply that they were what they could afford.


* = Has anyone noticed that in the original game there’s one line that is spoken by some other actor, not Michael Dorn. I wonder what’s the story behind that. Probably they didn’t want to bother bringing him in for just one more line, so they tried to have some other guy imitate him with bad results.

I don’t believe they ever claimed it was an artistic choice. Jane clearly said they didn’t have the budget for it.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 2307

Joined 2013-03-14

PM

In the end, considering the budget they had for GK4, it is amazing it turned out as good as it did. You can definitely see it is a bit rough around the edges like some screens clearly would have needed some more time to be fully fleshed out and some of the new ideas they did with the game were far from being necessary. But still, it’s not a complete travesty of a game, which is probably more thanks to how well the original game still holds up together.

In comparison to LSL Reloaded, GK anniversary is a much better game. Reloaded is all in all more polished, but in the end, you can see even with the changes, the story and mechanics of the original Larry 1 just aren’t enough to hold up on their own.

     

Total Posts: 46

Joined 2020-01-20

PM

I personally loved all the insight of the original game put in the remake. That was a really cool idea.

     

Total Posts: 162

Joined 2018-12-01

PM

GateKeeper - 24 January 2020 03:46 AM
Vehelon - 23 January 2020 08:19 PM
tomimt - 23 January 2020 03:34 AM

You can get a good indicator from Jensen’s own Moebius, which was clearly too ambitious of a game for the budget they had in hand. They tried a lot, but in the end, didn’t have the needed resources to pull it off technically or narratively. It’s the same reason why Gabe remake feels like a budget remake because that is exactly what it is, a game made with a tight budget.

That’s not why the GK1 remake failed. There are numerous reasons for that. Replacing world-class actors like Tim Curry and Mark Hamill (why?),

The cause and effect should be obvious here.
They could have called all of the previous cast from Mark Hamill to Michael Dorn*, and had them re-record their lines. I’m sure they would have agreed to do it. For the protagonist they could have chosen either one of the actors who had done the role previously. But they chose all new, unknown actors, because… they had no money for any others!

Nobody believes that those new actors were “an artistic choice”, it was simply that they were what they could afford.


* = Has anyone noticed that in the original game there’s one line that is spoken by some other actor, not Michael Dorn. I wonder what’s the story behind that. Probably they didn’t want to bother bringing him in for just one more line, so they tried to have some other guy imitate him with bad results.

I wasn’t aware that a remake cannot reuse some assets, but can reuse others. Those actors don’t own their recorded lines, their employer does.

     

Total Posts: 46

Joined 2020-01-20

PM

Vehelon - 24 January 2020 06:52 AM
GateKeeper - 24 January 2020 03:46 AM
Vehelon - 23 January 2020 08:19 PM
tomimt - 23 January 2020 03:34 AM

You can get a good indicator from Jensen’s own Moebius, which was clearly too ambitious of a game for the budget they had in hand. They tried a lot, but in the end, didn’t have the needed resources to pull it off technically or narratively. It’s the same reason why Gabe remake feels like a budget remake because that is exactly what it is, a game made with a tight budget.

That’s not why the GK1 remake failed. There are numerous reasons for that. Replacing world-class actors like Tim Curry and Mark Hamill (why?),

The cause and effect should be obvious here.
They could have called all of the previous cast from Mark Hamill to Michael Dorn*, and had them re-record their lines. I’m sure they would have agreed to do it. For the protagonist they could have chosen either one of the actors who had done the role previously. But they chose all new, unknown actors, because… they had no money for any others!

Nobody believes that those new actors were “an artistic choice”, it was simply that they were what they could afford.


* = Has anyone noticed that in the original game there’s one line that is spoken by some other actor, not Michael Dorn. I wonder what’s the story behind that. Probably they didn’t want to bother bringing him in for just one more line, so they tried to have some other guy imitate him with bad results.

I wasn’t aware that a remake cannot reuse some assets, but can reuse others. Those actors don’t own their recorded lines, their employer does.

Guys please read the Jane interviews from 2014-2015. They could not use those voices without repaying the original actors again. That’s the law. She has answered all the topics you guys are discussing here.  Heart

     

Total Posts: 162

Joined 2018-12-01

PM

Hannes084 - 24 January 2020 06:56 AM
Vehelon - 24 January 2020 06:52 AM
GateKeeper - 24 January 2020 03:46 AM
Vehelon - 23 January 2020 08:19 PM
tomimt - 23 January 2020 03:34 AM

You can get a good indicator from Jensen’s own Moebius, which was clearly too ambitious of a game for the budget they had in hand. They tried a lot, but in the end, didn’t have the needed resources to pull it off technically or narratively. It’s the same reason why Gabe remake feels like a budget remake because that is exactly what it is, a game made with a tight budget.

That’s not why the GK1 remake failed. There are numerous reasons for that. Replacing world-class actors like Tim Curry and Mark Hamill (why?),

The cause and effect should be obvious here.
They could have called all of the previous cast from Mark Hamill to Michael Dorn*, and had them re-record their lines. I’m sure they would have agreed to do it. For the protagonist they could have chosen either one of the actors who had done the role previously. But they chose all new, unknown actors, because… they had no money for any others!

Nobody believes that those new actors were “an artistic choice”, it was simply that they were what they could afford.


* = Has anyone noticed that in the original game there’s one line that is spoken by some other actor, not Michael Dorn. I wonder what’s the story behind that. Probably they didn’t want to bother bringing him in for just one more line, so they tried to have some other guy imitate him with bad results.

I wasn’t aware that a remake cannot reuse some assets, but can reuse others. Those actors don’t own their recorded lines, their employer does.

Guys please read the Jane interviews from 2014-2015. They could not use those voices without repaying the original actors again. That’s the law. She has answered all the topics you guys are discussing here.  Heart

Which law, exactly? Jane’s not a lawyer, as far as I know, and if she got advice then neither was the person giving it.

     

Total Posts: 46

Joined 2020-01-20

PM

Vehelon - 24 January 2020 07:07 AM
Hannes084 - 24 January 2020 06:56 AM
Vehelon - 24 January 2020 06:52 AM
GateKeeper - 24 January 2020 03:46 AM
Vehelon - 23 January 2020 08:19 PM
tomimt - 23 January 2020 03:34 AM

You can get a good indicator from Jensen’s own Moebius, which was clearly too ambitious of a game for the budget they had in hand. They tried a lot, but in the end, didn’t have the needed resources to pull it off technically or narratively. It’s the same reason why Gabe remake feels like a budget remake because that is exactly what it is, a game made with a tight budget.

That’s not why the GK1 remake failed. There are numerous reasons for that. Replacing world-class actors like Tim Curry and Mark Hamill (why?),

The cause and effect should be obvious here.
They could have called all of the previous cast from Mark Hamill to Michael Dorn*, and had them re-record their lines. I’m sure they would have agreed to do it. For the protagonist they could have chosen either one of the actors who had done the role previously. But they chose all new, unknown actors, because… they had no money for any others!

Nobody believes that those new actors were “an artistic choice”, it was simply that they were what they could afford.


* = Has anyone noticed that in the original game there’s one line that is spoken by some other actor, not Michael Dorn. I wonder what’s the story behind that. Probably they didn’t want to bother bringing him in for just one more line, so they tried to have some other guy imitate him with bad results.

I wasn’t aware that a remake cannot reuse some assets, but can reuse others. Those actors don’t own their recorded lines, their employer does.

Guys please read the Jane interviews from 2014-2015. They could not use those voices without repaying the original actors again. That’s the law. She has answered all the topics you guys are discussing here.  Heart

Which law, exactly? Jane’s not a lawyer, as far as I know, and if she got advice then neither was the person giving it.

I’ll find the interview for you but it’s kind of silly that you seriously question her words when she is creator of those games and knows and has studied all the possibilities including using original voices.

Edit: here is the interview. Dunno if it’s a specific law or just something they have to do.

https://www.pcinvasion.com/jane-jensen-interview-gabriel-knight-sins-of-the-fathers/

“According to the SAG rules, if you were to re-use it you’d have to pay everybody again, and at the current rate… Well, to do that exact game again, it would’ve been a huge amount of money that we didn’t have as part of the budget.

We thought about trying to reassemble some of that cast, but it’s been 20 years. People’s voices have changed, people are ill, people have retired, or their rates are crazy, so it just didn’t really make sense to do that, unfortunately”.

     
Avatar

Total Posts: 2307

Joined 2013-03-14

PM

Even they had been able to use the original voices, there would not have been a way to clean it up to modern standards, as all the original recordings have been lost. When Double Fine did the remasters from Day of the Tentacle, Grim Fandango and Full Throttle, they were in a lucky position of being able to use the original master tapes and provide that on its full glory without compression that is quite noticeable on Gabriel Knight’s voices.

Furthermore, you have to remember, it was Activision who was paying the bills, so they probably weren’t too keen on spending too much money on securing the original cast.

     

You are here: HomeForum Home → Gaming → Adventure → Thread

Welcome to the Adventure Gamers forums!