Well, I respect those who created masterpieces without any regard for all those things, like Fallout 1. And you know, I'd rather see a masterpiece made and a studio go bust, than even a good game be made and people keep their jobs. I guess I just put some things above others.
All of those games are awful. Mass Effect being the prime example of a mass product - superficial one-dimensional game without any choice or freedom, for those who want to be handheld and not make any decisions at all (there are no real decisions in Mass Effect, no).
Are you suggesting that JA3 should be made for a different audience than JA2? It, in all probability, will be made for "wider audiences", meaning a superficial, dumbed down, one-dimensional game with no depth, challenge, difficulty, etc. That is the modern way, it is what it is. Money is more important now, than the games themselves. Those pure early gaming times are gone forever.
Let the superficial type enjoy superficial games. If JA3 is meant to be turned into a superficial game for a completely different type of player than JA2 - then what's the point of using the same title? Then it's just a cashgrab, and nothing more than that.
I really don't understand why you are writing about other games, it's like you want JA to be something different than what it is. Maybe they will make it more "modern", dumb and boring, and will make it popular. That's not what I would want for the legacy of that game, though. But it's pretty much impossible, everything gets tainted by greed in our times. It's just inevitable. And your arguments about wider audiences and more time spent playing superficial games just point out the core issue - stupid games will be developed instead of intelligent ones, if they bring more money. And they do, because that's just the nature of complexity and intelligence - they are far less widespread, than superficiality and stupidity.
Oh, I don't expect them to honor the game. No. I fully expect them to betray it's legacy. That is why I wrote my message. It's a done deal already. I will be shocked if it's gonna be anything even decent, never mind good.
I fully expect it to cater to the "wide audience", with everything that implies. Sometimes it's best not to sully old things with trying to do better. Oftentimes, I'd say. It's just better to make new things. But then these are the times of exploiting nostalgia for profit. And I don't hold any illusions of this being anything else than that.
They should endeavor to create new things, not to exploit old masterpieces. And if someone takes on the responsibility of measuring up to a masterpiece - they should be ready to be criticized will all the harshness of unsatisfied nostalgia they are trying to exploit.
These excuses are just that, and they are pathetic. Excuses can be found in ANY situation, and they are needed only by the guilty.
Don't use an old title, don't exploit nostalgia - and you won't get expectations. Wanna create something new?? DO THAT. Don't be so obvious as to exploit a trademark for easy marketing. If you are foolish to do that - then you deserve all the criticism of a fan of the franchise.
If you want a fresh game - name it something fresh then. Do a spiritual successor, like some more principled and ethical developers (Xenonauts didn't quite measure up to the original X-Com for me, but in many regards Goldhawk Interactive did an outstanding job, surpassing the original, for example).
DON'T. CALL. IT. JA3. THEN. DO make something fresh. But I'm not naive, I get that this is already a done deal. And that it WILL NOT be half as good as even the vanilla JA2. I'll only be overjoyed to be wrong. But I won't be. I just accept the new age of superficial remakes, and refuse to be a part of that world. It's enough for me. I only pay tribute to the really dedicated to their craft gamemakers - inspired new world creators.
Exploiters of the old successes of others - do not impress me.
Dumbed down version is what you'll get. Because nowadays we let things slide too much. I'm not one of those who does that. I'll DEMAND perfection from those who dare to claim they are good enough to measure up to great things. I'm not someone who's afraid to call out anyone on anything. Although in the virtual censored world it's becoming nigh impossible.
I did not take them any other way than being friendly.) That said, I really put honesty as the cornerstone of friendliness. So my reply is also friendly to a fault.)
And I can not say that I respect all opinions. I respect only intelligence, not stupidity. This is not addressed to you specifically, just a part of me being totally honest. I don't think stupidity should be respected, I think us respecting stupid things just perpetuates stupidity. I prefer being painfully honest, and challenging stupidity to become intelligence.
Thank you.)
