Scratching my head... Why?

[BR B-263-54]

First of all can I just say really enjoyed the Remastered version of System Shock and I'm hugely looking forward to SS2 remaster.

But... Why on earth was the effort made to remaster this 2002 title which if we're being honest was a mediocre game at best back in the day, I say this as someone who played it to completion back in 2002... It was OK but nothing more than a middle of the road game which had some glaring faults.

The blood testing mechanic was infamously broken, I have a disappointing memory of testing a soldier with the kit only to have him change into a thing at an obvious scripted point, that was the turning point for me where it took me out of the game entirely.

Anyone else thinking along these lines?

[Schofield]

Because it was fun?

[BR B-263-54]

Originally posted by Spirited Brown Moose:

Because some folks who never played it back then can appreciate it now.
Well I am appreciating it myself, new experience for me.

If I remember rightly I had no interest in thios back in the day, I was also 12 years old when it released.

I was 14.

Plenty of ways to have played the original in 2024 if you really wanted to, it was released on PC.

My overall point is why bother? We getting a remaster of Zoo Tycoon anytime soon? 🤣🤔

[BR B-263-54]

Originally posted by Schofield:

Because it was fun?

Alot of expense and money to throw at a title which has rarely been mentioned over the last 20 years.

[Schofield]

Originally posted by BR B-263-54:

Alot of expense and money to throw at a title which has rarely been mentioned over the last 20 years.

And the problem with that is what? Is there some rule that only popular games should be remastered?

[BR B-263-54]

Originally posted by Schofield:

Originally posted by BR B-263-54:

Alot of expense and money to throw at a title which has rarely been mentioned over the last 20 years.

And the problem with that is what? Is there some rule that only popular games should be remastered?

It doesn't make financial sense from a developer which could be fast tracking other more anticipated titles such as the aforementioned SS2 release.

As one example.

[Schofield]

Originally posted by BR B-263-54:

It doesn't make financial sense from a developer which could be fast tracking other more anticipated titles such as the aforementioned SS2 release.

As one example.

Perhaps they decided to remaster this because they felt it was worthy of preservation, rather than going with what would make the most money. I'd rather have them doing that than chasing the big bucks constantly. So long as they remain financially solvent and can continue working, what's the problem?

[Optimaximal]

Originally posted by BR B-263-54:

But... Why on earth was the effort made to remaster this 2002 title which if we're being honest was a mediocre game at best back in the day, I say this as someone who played it to completion back in 2002... It was OK but nothing more than a middle of the road game which had some glaring faults.

The literally point of this remaster is to fix the mediocre problems, like removing the scripted transformations, fixing the save system and restoring cut content still in the game files.

[BR B-263-54]

Originally posted by Schofield:

Originally posted by BR B-263-54:

It doesn't make financial sense from a developer which could be fast tracking other more anticipated titles such as the aforementioned SS2 release.

As one example.

Perhaps they decided to remaster this because they felt it was worthy of preservation, rather than going with what would make the most money. I'd rather have them doing that than chasing the big bucks constantly. So long as they remain financially solvent and can continue working, what's the problem?

You don't seem to understand that I think this is a financial risk rather than a sound investment.

[BR B-263-54]

Originally posted by Optimaximal:

Originally posted by BR B-263-54:

But... Why on earth was the effort made to remaster this 2002 title which if we're being honest was a mediocre game at best back in the day, I say this as someone who played it to completion back in 2002... It was OK but nothing more than a middle of the road game which had some glaring faults.

The literally point of this remaster is to fix the mediocre problems, like removing the scripted transformations, fixing the save system and restoring cut content still in the game files.

My understanding is they didn't remove the scripted transformations or really dug into the mechanical problems of the original - this is mainly a graphical upgrade.

[Schofield]

Originally posted by BR B-263-54:

You don't seem to understand that I think this is a financial risk rather than a sound investment.

According to who? You? Are you their CFO?

Again, so long as they remain solvent and can continue to work, there's no problem.

[BR B-263-54]

Originally posted by Schofield:

Originally posted by BR B-263-54:

You don't seem to understand that I think this is a financial risk rather than a sound investment.

According to who? You? Are their CFO?

Again, so long as they remain solvent and can continue to work, there's no problem.

You think this will sell as well as System Shock 2? A game which was critically acclaimed and lauded vs this title which was a footnote on the PS2 in 2002?

[Schofield]

Originally posted by BR B-263-54:

You think this will sell as well as System Shock 2? A game which was critically acclaimed and lauded vs this title which was a footnote on the PS2 in 2002?

No, I don't. But I also don't think this game will fail, either. So long as this game recoups its costs, then there's no real risk. Not every release needs to focus on being a huge payday, sometimes it can be about the art.

Again, I don't want Nightdive to only focus on popular and well known games. Them giving lesser known games a second chance is what remasters should really be about.

[Deathstroke72]

Originally posted by Schofield:

Originally posted by BR B-263-54:

You don't seem to understand that I think this is a financial risk rather than a sound investment.

According to who? You? Are you their CFO?

Again, so long as they remain solvent and can continue to work, there's no problem.

It is financial risk actually. Look how much Killing Time has sold. It will kill them if they keep remastering games that don't bring in much revenue. Why do you think their games went up in price. More expensive to make, Which in return means they need more sales.

[SmugeeBear]

because i've been itching to play this again for ages

[PanzerWolfEG73]

Originally posted by BR B-263-54:

Originally posted by Optimaximal:

The literally point of this remaster is to fix the mediocre problems, like removing the scripted transformations, fixing the save system and restoring cut content still in the game files.

My understanding is they didn't remove the scripted transformations or really dug into the mechanical problems of the original - this is mainly a graphical upgrade.

See, that's just it....for a lot of people on here, their 'understanding' is wrong. :) They gave it more than just a new coat of paint like Optimaximal has said.

It fits the very definition of 'a game by fans for fans'. Any fan of Carpenter's film can tell the devs cared about the source material. I bought it day one back then for my PS2, XBOX and PC. There are mods for the original PC game but this Night Dive release outclasses any of those.

I'm seeing quite a few posts like "Why did they choose THIS game to remaster?"...like it was a total piece of crap. It wasn't. It was a bit niche and flew under the radar. The people who liked it, (like me), really liked it. Just because you don't like something, that doesn't mean that it's the way everybody feels about it. Get over yourselves...but I guess that could be said for just about any game or forum post on Steam. Lot of hate on these forums anymore.

Anyway...I'll be picking this up today on Steam and GOG. Peace people.