Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Fan HD Remakes Yet To Be Banned (redbull.com)

Posted by timothy on from the yet-being-the-key-word dept.

An anonymous reader writes: While companies like Valve have given their seal of approval to HD fan remakes and re-imaginings of their classic games, many more are all too eager to wield the ban hammer and shut down these homebrew projects with legal threats. Not all, though, as one writer points out in a new article taking a look at the most promising unofficial remakes underway right now. Some companies see these projects as an opportunity — the creator of Shen Mue HD was recently hired by Yu Suzuki to work on Shen Mue 3 — while others choose to ignore them entirely. Surprisingly, one of these appears to be Konami, which despite a controversial 2015, has shown no interest in shutting down Outer Heaven, a remake of the very first Metal Gear game. As the author points out however, given "the fact that Konami shut down a similar project not long ago – one which had the involvement of original Solid Snake voice actor David Hayter – [it] doesn't bode too well for Outer Heaven's long-term prospects...but we're crossing our fingers that it makes it to the finish line."

50 comments

  1. Hey, if that's what you want to do by NotDrWho · · Score: 2

    Hey, if you believe in a major project enough to work on it, knowing that at any time it could be quashed and never see the light of day--then I salute your passion.

    --
    SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    1. Re:Hey, if that's what you want to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just don't get all emo about it and start crying when it is quashed. You knew going in that you were breaking copyright. So don't start trowing a "But this is somehow fair use" (it's not) or "Hey, I'm a big fan, so they should have let me do this!" (they don't owe you anything, snowflake).

    2. Re:Hey, if that's what you want to do by dskzero · · Score: 1

      I agree. I can't really remember many major remakes being released unless backed by a heavyweight (IE Black Mesa)

      --
      Oblivion Awaits
    3. Re:Hey, if that's what you want to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They're un-American, anti-capitalist and they hate Liberty. They even do it for free!

      They deserve the hell in which they rot.

    4. Re:Hey, if that's what you want to do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly.

      These companies should wait until the very last minute when the unsanctioned fan project is almost done and then slap them down. On the other hand, fan projects that seek out permission before beginning should be applauded and supported.

      The most ridiculous thing I've seen on some of these totally unauthorized and illegal fan projects is a statement saying that nobody else can modify or distribute "their" work. What a fucking joke.

  2. Outer heaven by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See, what will happen with Outer Heaven is those pricks Konami will wait till the game reaches a more mature age, then be like, "right, guys, kill this now or we will sue your asses to 15 hells and back"
    They will then later go, "actually, alternatively you could just give us the game and that could be the settlement", then they will get their shit team to work on it and put it together and release it as their own a year later.

    Friends don't let friends buy Konami.

    1. Re:Outer heaven by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about they spend their time making something original rather than remaking something? Then, they will have nothing to worry about.

    2. Re:Outer heaven by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, because Konami would be the pricks in that case, not the people disrespectfully violating Konami's copyright. You know, they could have ASKED Konami if it was OK before they started.

  3. Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by tomxor · · Score: 1

    Provided it's free and they don't distribute original content directly from the game (e.g if it extends the original content then they provide it as a patch or require you to have the original game to source the original content into a new engine or something)... how can this possibly infringe on copyright. On what bases have these remakes been "shutdown"?

    1. Re:Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Provided it's free and they don't distribute original content directly from the game (e.g if it extends the original content then they provide it as a patch or require you to have the original game to source the original content into a new engine or something)... how can this possibly infringe on copyright.

      Because copyright isn't limited to commercial infringement (in the U.S. at least). And you can't use assets from someone else's game in your own without their permission.

    2. Re:Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

      Provided it's free and they don't distribute original content directly from the game (e.g if it extends the original content then they provide it as a patch or require you to have the original game to source the original content into a new engine or something)... how can this possibly infringe on copyright.

      This is a joke question right? Stories are covered by copyright. Characters can be both copyrighted and trademarked. And since this is a remake of the game using both the story and characters, they infringe Konami's IP.

      On what bases have these remakes been "shutdown"?

      Copyright and/or trademark law.

    3. Re:Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by Feral+Nerd · · Score: 1

      Provided it's free and they don't distribute original content directly from the game (e.g if it extends the original content then they provide it as a patch or require you to have the original game to source the original content into a new engine or something)... how can this possibly infringe on copyright.

      Because copyright isn't limited to commercial infringement (in the U.S. at least). And you can't use assets from someone else's game in your own without their permission.

      Maybe, but coming down like a ton of bricks on a bunch of fans improving your old games in their spare time would be just about the dumbest thing these game manufacturers could do. Antagonising your own fan base generally is a pretty stupid thing to do. Then again while most of these companies thrive on open minded talented people they are usually run by pretty conservative money men and women and the knee jerk reaction of such people is usually to regard everything as a threat rather than to embrace new trends and go with the flow. Case in point, the music industry.

    4. Re:Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by HarrySquatter · · Score: 1

      You don't know how using someone else's copyrighted characters without a license can be an infringement of copyright? Umm, lol.

    5. Re:Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 2

      Maybe, but coming down like a ton of bricks on a bunch of fans improving your old games in their spare time would be just about the dumbest thing these game manufacturers could do.

      And yet they've done it countless times and people keep buying their games by the droves. So in the real world, it seems like the nerd outrage doesn't extend to most gamers.

    6. Re:Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by tepples · · Score: 1

      I think tomxor might have been confused about the extent to which copyright covers characters as such. The statute itself (17 USC and foreign counterparts) is written to cover works of authorship.

    7. Re:Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by NotDrWho · · Score: 2

      From what I understand, one of the problems that game companies face in these situations is that they're often not the only party involved. Many games have assets that require royalties be paid to third parties (music compositions, voice performances, etc.). So even if they want to "look the other way" and tolerate these remakes, they face legal action and sanctions from third-parties (like SAG-AFTRA and other representatives) if artists get wind that the publisher is allowing the unauthorized distribution of their game without proper royalty payments.

      --
      SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
    8. Re:Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by HarrySquatter · · Score: 1

      I think tomxor might have been confused about the extent to which copyright covers characters as such.

      By being intentionally ignorant of many decades of statutory and case law? It's not some new thing that characters in films, games, TV shows, etc. are covered by copyright. It's in fact quite ancient by this point.

      The statute itself (17 USC and foreign counterparts) is written to cover works of authorship.

      Cool story. It has long ago been applied beyond that.

    9. Re: Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      IANAL, but I believe that it counts as a derivative work, which would be copyright infringement.

      However, the projects don't have to shut down at all until a judge says so. They often do because they don't want to risk a financially ruinous legal battle.

    10. Re:Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most gamers? Hell, the people who are against crappy practices aren't willing to boycott why do you think anyone else would? I loved watching the Slashdorks justify their need to see the new Star Wars while Disney was actively replacing their IT departments without outsourced slaves. When you can't turn your back on entertainment in the hopes of bettering your fellow human beings' position in life how can you expect these same people to respond when things get really bad?

    11. Re:Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am reminded of the Unseen in this regard. Some of the initial battlemech models were copied right out of anime that FASA was watching and thought looked cool. When the initial IP holders got upset about this usage, FASA tried to straighten out usage rights. For some, this was just a matter of debating and seeing if they could come to an agreement. For others, no one actually knew who had ownership of the appearance and this resulted in over a decade of legal confusion before Catalyst was finally able to get a deal in place that would permit new usage of that imagery.

    12. Re:Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. Trademarks. The laws around the world are basically - "defend it, or lose it."
      2. Copyright. Assets are protected, sounds, images, voice, music. Recreating them with new tools may also under #1.

      Remaking Jet Set Willy in 2015 probably wouldn't get peep out of anyone, but try that with a Nintendo game from the early 80s, you will have lawyers up your arse immediately.

      Many of these "remakes" don't actually exist. It's just a fan knocking up a screenshot or parts of a section in a shovelware generator like Gamemaker or Unity3D. They invariably lack the skills, knowledge or commitment to complete a project. Those that do, tip you hat to them. You won't do it very often.

    13. Re:Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe, but coming down like a ton of bricks on a bunch of fans improving your old games in their spare time would be just about the dumbest thing these game manufacturers could do. Antagonising your own fan base generally is a pretty stupid thing to do.

      You'd think that but go ahead and name an example where that's actually happened.

      I mean, game companies routinely sue their fans over posting works based on theirs. Square Enix has shut down multiple fan games based on their series. Nintendo goes after people posting videos of their games on YouTube. Yet people still buy those companies' games.

      You'd think Sony rootkitting people's PCs and actively removing features from the PS3 would scare people away from the PS4 yet it's still selling.

      I can't think of a single example where a company has sued fans and has actually faced any sort of backlash for it. It's routine and fans just don't care.

    14. Re:Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by tomxor · · Score: 1

      I said for free... i don't see how mimicking someone else's product and then releasing it for free is a problem... OSS is a massive example, WINE anyone?

    15. Re:Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by tomxor · · Score: 1

      I'm not suggesting there's something unusual about blatant distribution of the original work... that's piracy, but if you make a patch - that's not, that's original work, or if you use none of the original content and create a replica and release it for free that's original content, sure if you sell it there might be an issue but no original content was used and it's free?? or you create software that utilises the original content but don't distribute it and require the user to have a copy of the original??, please read all of my points before responding.

    16. Re: Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Use Simcity as an example, or Tetris. You can trademark a title, copyright the assets and game binary code, and patent algorithms. Since you have to aggressively defend trademark dilution, no "fan"-game would ever pass the trademark test unless the game company went out of business, and the trademarks have expired. At the very minimum this is why you can't make any kind of unofficial sequel to anything. Remaking a game that bears a resemblance to another game, right down to UI, Sprites, and music, means it's using material from the original game. That is copyright infringement. Period. This is why games like FF7 and FF8 which have PC versions from 1997 what barely improve from their PSX version, didnt get HD remakes for the PC in 2015. Fan-modifications, particularly in regards to music, exist, but only in pirate copies. To my knowledge there aren't many games that are overly reliant on a patent, but the Sierra games do contain a path-finding algorithm that was patented at the time.

      For the most part, as long as a "fan" HD-remake doesn't incorporate any of the original materials or even the title, in a sense a game that is "close enough" , may as well just write a new story and "50 shades of grey" it (50 shades of grey was a twilight fanfic before being changed to something original.)

    17. Re:Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Provided it's free and they don't distribute original content directly from the game (e.g if it extends the original content then they provide it as a patch or require you to have the original game to source the original content into a new engine or something)... how can this possibly infringe on copyright. On what bases have these remakes been "shutdown"?

      Posting AC, I sort of work in this area.

      Since it uses copyrighted material, it's infringement. The relevant question is: is it fair use? It's not one of the protected categories (e.g. parody), so you need to look at the four factors of fair use. Not being commercial is a huge point in favor of fair use (factor 1), but there are 3 other factors.

      If you want to stick to heuristics, in addition to commerciality, another important factor is whether it is a substitute for the original work, or derivatives of the original work. Chances are good the original creators view these remakes as substituting for what they would like to do in the future. If that's true then there's an easy argument against fair use.

    18. Re: Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by tepples · · Score: 1

      To my knowledge there aren't many games that are overly reliant on a patent

      The patented games I can think of are Dr. Mario, the loading minigame of Ridge Racer (despite prior art of Invade-A-Load), Dance Dance Revolution (in fact the whole rhythm genre is a patent minefield), Crazy Taxi, and Doom 3 (which contains a shadow algorithm licensed from Creative).

    19. Re:Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the discussion was about copyright, not dumb/smart. Copyright, like a gun, gives you the ability to hurt innocent people for your pleasure. Nobody ever said it's healthy to get pleasure from that, just that you can do it.

    20. Re:Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a joke question right? Stories are covered by copyright. Characters can be both copyrighted and trademarked. And since this is a remake of the game using both the story and characters, they infringe Konami's IP.

      It depends on how the remake is made. If the reimplementation is done in the engine only, then it can read graphics, audio and text from the original files, hence it will be the same game without containing the story. ScummVM is a good example of this. The X-com remake also did something like that and they added new abilities to the engine, like widescreen support, upscaling and smoothing of graphics, which makes the graphics look much better, but they really are just the unmodified original files imported and modified at runtime.

      If the remake goes "the resolution of that character is poor. Let's remake it with more details", then it becomes problematic. The same goes for including the text in the game, either unmodified or translated. This can make even translation patches problematic.

      I will not say anything about any possible infringe on Konami's IP because I don't know how the remake is implemented. Many people, including media "experts" will not mind making statements anyway, but that leaves the realm of facts and goes into political/personal views and I'm not planning on doing that.

      It would also be worth to mention in this content that some games actually allows some infringement of their IP. Particularly games with mod support tend to allow taking game files, modify them and then reuse them in a user mod. That this is allowed for some games and not others doesn't make the IP question any easier to answer when asked in general about user made content.

    21. Re: Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      no "fan"-game would ever pass the trademark test unless the game company went out of business, and the trademarks have expired.

      Not exactly. The fan game can ask permission to use the trademark, then it need not be defended as it is a licensed use. This is how Coca-Cola Bottling companies (independent companies that mix soda and distribute it) are allowed to use the Coca-Cola name and branding.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    22. Re:Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by aitikin · · Score: 1

      I'm not suggesting there's something unusual about blatant distribution of the original work... that's piracy, but if you make a patch - that's not, that's original work, or if you use none of the original content and create a replica and release it for free that's original content, sure if you sell it there might be an issue but no original content was used and it's free?? or you create software that utilises the original content but don't distribute it and require the user to have a copy of the original??, please read all of my points before responding.

      Sounds like you're describing derivative works, which requires the approval of the copyright holder under US (and many other nations) copyright laws.

      --
      "Don't meddle in the affairs of a patent dragon, for thou art tasty and good with ketchup." ~ohcrapitssteve
    23. Re:Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by aitikin · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up, this is a well thought out and explained response.

      --
      "Don't meddle in the affairs of a patent dragon, for thou art tasty and good with ketchup." ~ohcrapitssteve
    24. Re:Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by tomxor · · Score: 1

      no i'm not... i give in.

  4. Defining originality by tepples · · Score: 1

    But how can someone determine what is original before publishing it and inviting the world to sue? The Simpsons: Road Rage was not a Crazy Taxi game but still got shut down by the makers of Crazy Taxi.

    1. Re:Defining originality by Lunix+Nutcase · · Score: 1

      But how can someone determine what is original before publishing it and inviting the world to sue?

      First criteria is: Don't directly use the IP of a game company.

      The Simpsons: Road Rage was not a Crazy Taxi game but still got shut down by the makers of Crazy Taxi.

      It wasn't shut down. Sega sued them for patent infringement and they settled privately with Fox.

    2. Re:Defining originality by tepples · · Score: 1

      Don't directly use the IP of a game company.

      By "IP", I assume you didn't mean "Internet Protocol" address. Did you mean copyright, patent, trademark, trade secret, right of publicity, or something else? If "yes", which? because these are different areas of law.

      How can a game company know whether it's unintentionally using the copyright, patent, trademark, trade secret, right of publicity, or other exclusive right of some other game company? I have the feeling that refraining from using any character names, likenesses, locations, and events is not enough to avoid "directly using the IP", as shown in the Sega case mentioned above as well as Konami v. Roxor and Tetris v. Xio.

    3. Re:Defining originality by tepples · · Score: 1

      That and the Uniracers case, where Pixar sued Nintendo and successfully convinced a judge that Pixar had the exclusive right to the concept of a CGI animated unicycle.

    4. Re:Defining originality by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How can a game company know whether it's unintentionally using the copyright, patent, trademark, trade secret, right of publicity, or other exclusive right of some other game company?

      By consulting with your company's legal team. What's that? You can't afford to keep a team of lawyers on retainer? Then you don't get to create, filthy consumer.

    5. Re:Defining originality by aitikin · · Score: 1

      But how can someone determine what is original before publishing it and inviting the world to sue? The Simpsons: Road Rage was not a Crazy Taxi game but still got shut down by the makers of Crazy Taxi.

      No, but it violated a Patent not Copyright. Patents are a whole different ball of wax, whereby if you have a patent on a specific method of doing something, anything that implements that method without your approval for the time period you have said patent, is in violation of your patent rights. Copyright, on the other hand, protects the story, artwork, music, etc against someone making a copy or derivative work.

      (Standard IANAL disclaimers) As such, if I were to create a game that uses the elements (magic, physical attacks, hit points, etc) found in a Final Fantasy game, Square would have no recourse with me (duh, they lifted those elements themselves). If I were to create a game that doesn't use any elements of a Final Fantasy game, but used the characters, the music, the story, or the artwork without their permission, they would have every right to sue me (IE I make a game that's not parody set in the world of Final Fantasy VII, it's a derivative work and they can sue me if I haven't cleared it first). Now, if that game were considered parody, I would have a legal case that I could build on it. If I were to create a game, that told the exact story of Final Fantasy VII, without the same names of any characters or locations, without the same music, and without the artwork, but the actual story is identical, without their permission, I'm almost certainly going to get sued, and if I do, I'm going to lose.

      --
      "Don't meddle in the affairs of a patent dragon, for thou art tasty and good with ketchup." ~ohcrapitssteve
  5. Slash Dot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's actually "Shenmue".

    1. Re:Slash Dot by tepples · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The correct spelling is whatever the official American publisher (Sega of America) decides it is, and it was released as Shenmue here.

    2. Re: Slash Dot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The correct spelling is po-TAH-to, you insensitive clod.

    3. Re:Slash Dot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's actually "Shenmue".

      Isn't that what Michael Jackson used to say in all his songs?

  6. Well by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

    Konami shut down a similar project not long ago – one which had the involvement of original Solid Snake voice actor David Hayter

    Hayter's haters gonna hate.

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
  7. Not De Niro's best work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... or Wesley Snipes ...

    The Fan

  8. "Shen Mue" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What


    BTW in more relevant news, how about Spacequest2vga by infamousentures?

  9. RIP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Halogen mod C&D'd so they could make Halo Wars, what a shame.

  10. Always Metal Gear... by johannesg · · Score: 1

    I'd like to see remakes of their other classic MSX titles: Penguin Adventure, Kings Valley, F1 Spirit, Space Manbow, etc.

    And don't even get me started on Vampire Killer (aka Castlevania). It was hardly the best of the bunch, in the old days...

    1. Re:Always Metal Gear... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or always Final Fantasy VII. When will older classic titles like FFIV and VI going to get such treatment?