Poll: Poll: Why are we seeing so many reboots?

[Sargonas42]

I actually think it's because the industry wants to make new IPs and do new things with games at the moment, but is still a bit hesitant because the new console generation has gone on longer than they thought.

So they make clean breaks at established games and freshen up the weight of continuity a bit

So very true. A new IP is the riskiest, most dangerous thing a publisher can put their money into. The mere talk of doing so makes some execs uncomfortable and their accountants cringe. New IPs are best reserved for new console cycles, that is the "safest" time to try it with the largest likelihood of a return and the smallest chance of tens of millions of dollars going down the drain. Sadly however this console cycle has gone on for far, far longer than they have in the past so Publishers are having to hold out more. I will bet you with the new consoles hitting this holiday season you will see the floodgates open as everyone finally can get to work on those new ideas they have had waiting in the wings for the right time to take a risk on them. (Watchdogs anyone?)

 

[jcfrommars9]

Reusing old ideas that are guaranteed to sell is a classic sign of a recession. Risks are discouraged and investments are almost exclusively on the "safe" side. Blame the economy, I guess.

This is what i was going to say.

While i have nothing against reboots . And i can see why sometimes they are cool . I just find that they reek of unoriginality and using the name of a series to ensure sales . There is no reason why a reboot couldn't be a new IP, other than the fact that new IPs bring risk , and slapping an old and popular name on the cover ensures that the game sells .

Originality is overrated. If it's original and a bad idea, no one cares. They'll perpetually complain it should have been like everything else. If it's original and a good idea, everybody else will do it until it becomes monotonous and then people will complain no one does anything original anymore. Reboots are risky but they're acceptably risky. In my opinion, different is better than original. Furthermore, a popular name doesn't ensure sales. If Batman Begins, Casino Royale, Tomb Raider, etc. were done terribly for example, they would end up more akin to Superman Returns. Maybe not bad but certainly not good enough to continue.

It's not about continuing . It's about here and now . Let's say the new tomb raider game was a new IP . If it was a new IP ( with a different name )it would have sold less , because few people would know what it is and what's it's about . Because it's named Tomb raider , you go a fanbase from go . Day 1 sales will be a lot higher and thats when companies make the most money. So inatial sales would be higher.

I disagree. It is definitely about continuing because that means more money. With this recent Tomb Raider game for instance, you best believe they have made certain preparations in case the game sells like hotcakes. As far as name brands go, that only goes so far. Sure you can slap a brand name across a game like Tomb Raider but you better deliver or else you soil the name brand along with any chance for continuing sales. It's like wanting to be involved with someone. Sure the looks draw your attention but without any substance underneath, it's not only not worth sticking around but the infatuation quickly dies off too.

 

[Racecarlock]

Well, because obviously gritty reboots worked for GTA IV and the dark knight, so obviously it works for everything, right?

 

[Darken12]

You do realize that "profit" means all the money they earn -after- they earned back all of their expenses right? So say a game costs 20,000,000 to make, and they get a total of 45,000,000 from sales. That means they would still have 25 mil in profit. And what is that money used for? It's 'extra' money...I doubt all of it goes into a new game as budgets haven't risen that high yet.

And where do you think investments come from? Do you think investors just magically conjure money out of thin air? No, this week's profits are next week's investment. An investor without substantial profits cannot reinvest into another project. While I won't defend the rich old white men who run things, most of their obscene profits goes right back to being invested in different projects (not necessarily within the same company).

Reusing old ideas that are guaranteed to sell is a classic sign of a recession. Risks are discouraged and investments are almost exclusively on the "safe" side. Blame the economy, I guess.

Yeah, that's why Hollywood crashed in the mid-00's, right?

Uhhhh... no idea.

Except reboots are inherently risky, because of the potential to alienate the fanbase while also going unnoticed to the mainstream audience. Sure, they are safer than brand new IPs, but they are still not without risks.

Want to know an example of playing on the "safe side"? Look at sequels that are barely different, like GOW:Ascension, AC:Revelations or GoW:Judgement...

Yes, of course, sequels ARE safer than reboots. But failing that, reboots are the next safest thing. Something that's also safe is "re-releasing" old games (especially to try and cash-in on nostalgia value) particularly this new wave of iPhone, Android and mobile re-releases of old-school games.

 

[Samasson]

It seems as though there is a sense in which the reboot syndrome is for all the reasons given in the poll. Which doesn't make them bad even if it is very cash grabby at first glance. On the other hand in theory younger developers grew up with these old franchises. As these developers move into more creative positions within companies they will want to make their 'version' of their favorite games from childhood that have long since died out or become irrelevant in the face of new products. This isn't based on any fact or knowledge of the age demographics of the reboot development teams, it just seems like a plausible theory in my mind. Its kind of the age old thing of experience a cultural artifact and thinking, hey I could do this better.

 

[GrimHeaper]

I can't do multi-votes?
Anyway I would say it's hollywood syndrome, but... video games are far more creative and still are.

I reeeeaaaaaaally hope you don't mean to imply that film is inferior to video games.

More ideas come out with it being interactive that is how it is.
Not to mention I see far more risks happen with games.

 

[Treblaine]

And I remind you this is the SECOND time that Tomb Raider has been rebooted.

I think one reason Tomb Raider is so rebooted is people are so bloody shirty about female protagonists and give them such an unfair rap, they will keep going back to established ones.

You can have a male character be like anything in a computer game, a blank slate or with the most extreme character aspects without having any derogatory labels used nor accusations against the developers...

What about cases where it really is a new IP even though the name might be the same or very similar? I mean Bioshock had not connection to System Shock. Bioshock Infinite doesn't seem to have anything to do with Bioshock 1 or 2. Final Fantasy has been doing this for the past 25 years, using the same title for almost completely different IPs. Call of Duty 4 really had nothing to do with any of the games that came before it, except Captain Price and the basic concept of being about warfare.

Look at sequels that are barely different, like GOW:Ascension, AC:Revelations or GoW:Judgement...

Hmm, definite biblical overtones in games subtitles these days. Can't wait to play CODXVIII: Leviticus. Or maybe not.

 

[Elijin]

Obviously they were stuck for ideas and they got desperate and asked someone in IT what to do.

Typically the IT guy had no idea what was going on and asked them if they'd turned it off and then back on again.

 

[OldDirtyCrusty]

Didn`t you all know reboots are the trendiest shit in Hollywood (for about 50 years, not sure) and since the software industry tries to make their games like movies it`s all crystal clear. A copied copy of a copy, as long as it`s good (meaning i`m liking the new one)i`m fine with it. The new "uncharted gears of the raider" is a prime example of a reboot i like. It`s not like the original and that means some people will be grumpy about it but alot of others may like it. Same goes for the DMC reboot.

Edit: I should have read the other posts more carefully. Hollywoodstyle was allready named, sorry.