The artist has also made a 3D version of the “Rise of the Dragon”.
The graphics are impressive but I still don’t know if I should like these 3D versions of old 2D adventure games. I think they are losing their “charm” in 3D. I can’t remember a 3D remake that I really liked - especially if the graphics aren’t very detailed like in Maniac Mansion 3D (aka Meteor Mess 3D):
Haven’t really put much thought but I think it’s related to how attached I’m to the game. i.e., the more attached the less likely I would like a remake. So no monkey or maniac 3D remakes for me (I would still play them, just not prefer them). I would probably like indy remakes (assuming the art is good obviously).
That’s pretty much my own sentiment. In this particular case, I think the 3D re-imagination is pretty close to the original, and it does a good job at filling the blanks with enough detail. Though perhaps this only works so well, because I did not actually play that game, and have not yet made up my own details.
But even in case of this example, when looking at screenshots on the website which do not mimic the original 2D art, but look like an actual 3D 3rd person view, I’d rather not play that.
In summary, I wouldn’t want to walk across, say, Mêlée Island fully modelled in 3D, but I might be okay with a remake that uses an actual 3D engine and 3D characters to recreate the original scenes in much more detail.
The question is: What is it really adding? More realism? Why is that good? Better controls? OK, that’s good. Higher definition graphics… what for? Do they enhance the atmosphere or just add detail for the sake of it?
I’m sure it could be done well, but I’ve never seen a version that didn’t lose all its personality in the process.
Yeah I get when I absolutly love a world I´d enjoy walking around in it in a realistic as possible way. My favourite Maniac Mansion will always be the C64 version. If someone however told me that there is a VR version in which I feel like I´m actually INSIDE the house, I would play that in an instant!
Depends on your definition of remake. To make a good 3D adaptation you’ve got to be willing to let the original go. Neither Mario 64, Duke Nukem 3D, Rayman 2 nor Escape from Monkey Island may technically be remakes, but in any case they’re all successful 3D adaptations of the same basic concept.
I think the biggest problem with 3D in general is that it’s so easy for the world to feel either really small or rather barren. Maniac Mansion’s primitive graphics ooze a level of personality that your Earthworm Jim 3D or Simon 3 just doesn’t.
I agree with 3D remakes BUT it very depends who made them! 98% of 3D remakes is a crap! Looking terrible, because its made somebody who has no clue about how it needs to be done and what people he needs to accomplish the quality the game deserve.
Recently we had good success with 2D remakes and most of the fans are not as brave to make 3D versions. Btw, fans projects progress very slowly, because its free time effort, and they are fine with it. What bothers me the most, if I see a great remake made by fans, the original creators is trying to refuse it, because they haven’t get a chance to make it officially by themselves and they would barely reach the quality fans has made and for FREE.
I admire fans who can bring up a new look to the classics, but they need to be very talented people with a strong motivation. Either way, it needs a good luck.
I agree, I think 3D remakes are great, as long as effort is actually put into them, and it’s not just a cash grab, I got Gabriel Knight Sins of The Fathers 20th Anniversary Edition and it was a pretty good game, I enjoyed it.
Official Thimbleweed Park Forums powered by Discourse.