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."

26 of 50 comments (clear)

  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 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
  2. 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 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.

    2. 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.

    3. 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.

    4. 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.

    5. 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.

    6. 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.
    7. 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.

    8. 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?

    9. 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.

    10. 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).

    11. 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?
    12. 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
    13. 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
    14. Re:Someone Enlighten us on the Copyright Details by tomxor · · Score: 1

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

  3. 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 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
  4. 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.

  5. 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.
  6. 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...