Capcom announces new Duck Tales game, made by wayforward

[Betamax001]

It would be really cool if they combined DuckTales 1 & 2 into one super mega awesome game. But probably not. Either way, I hope it turns out!

[Jmustang1968]

Oh wow this market value debate again... retrodude, I think you live in some denial of reality and how things work. A market is value is a general value people are willing to pay for it, outliers aside.

On the other hand, it looked goodin person and we are working on an interview. I will try to play it tomorrow.

[aaron]

I would like to see Capcom bring out some of their 16-bit Disney games again, like Magical Quest and Aladdin

is aladdin on blu-ray yet? might be a possibility.

[Menegrothx]

Is this now a general Duck Tales topic? Because if it is, there's two kind of off-topic things I'd like to mention
1. Any one here familiar with the DuckTales: The Quest for Gold? It came a year after the NES game. Considering the release year and what the NES game is like, the game has very impressive graphics and animations, voice acting etc. It's more of an adventure game than a side scroller though, so it's not as intresting as the original NES game imo. Although I've never played it from start to finish myself.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U60ad2wRYII Here's a longplay of it if any one's intrested of seeing what the game is like. Seems like that video has some framerate issues at times though, the platforming sections didn't lag like that when I played the game.

2.I wish they made a duck cartoon (and then a game) based on Dona Rosa's comics. They could start with The Life and Times of Scrooge McDuck. As much as I like Duck Tales, I'd like to see a more detailed art style and writing that's not aimed just for kids. Oh and the storylines and settings are just epic in DR stories at best.

Oh and on-topic: as a fan of detailed&cartoony 2D graphics, I really hope that they won't just try to make a "faithful" HD remake of the original game. We've got this amazing technology now so better put it to good use and give us some amazing level art. I don't see why a game like this should settle for minimalistic graphics just because the NES couldn't handle more details. If the graphics, character animations, music etc are going to be improved anyways, might as well go all the way with it, as long as the gameplay remains the same.

[Retrodude]

But then it wouldn't be a remake and the entire point of the project would be lost. That said, it would be cool if they followed the remake with a full-fledged original game.

[emwearz]

I hope the sequel gets put in, I can dream!

[Menegrothx]

But then it wouldn't be a remake and the entire point of the project would be lost.

Where's the line between what's acceptable and what's not when doing a remake? You are still improving the original games graphics and music (presumably) so I don't see why you can't as well add some more details to the levels, as long as you don't fundamentally change them. There have been remakes of old games that have added new details and objects, and some times even completely new areas, to the old levels. If I just want to play the original game, I'll play the original one.

I'd even argue that in most cases lack of detail is detrimental to a remake: the old pixelated 8 and 16 bit level art and characters blended together well, but if you just update the character models and backgrounds with out adding anything to them and increase the resolution, the game will suddenly start looking very bland and devoid of life. Less is more when it comes to pixel art. For example many earlier Sierra adventure games had quite a lot of (relatively) beautiful scenery even though it was still very pixelated. But the same scenery would become dull if there was a fan made remake with out any kind of new details added to it.

[hashiriya1]

I can't wait to hear a new take on the moon theme.

For now, this will do
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKDTJfjFwwI

[AppleQueso]

But then it wouldn't be a remake and the entire point of the project would be lost.

Where's the line between what's acceptable and what's not when doing a remake? You are still improving the original games graphics and music (presumably) so I don't see why you can't as well add some more details to the levels, as long as you don't fundamentally change them. There have been remakes of old games that have added new details and objects, and some times even completely new areas, to the old levels. If I just want to play the original game, I'll play the original one.

I'd even argue that in most cases lack of detail is detrimental to a remake: the old pixelated 8 and 16 bit level art and characters blended together well, but if you just update the character models and backgrounds with out adding anything to them and increase the resolution, the game will suddenly start looking very bland and devoid of life. Less is more when it comes to pixel art. For example many earlier Sierra adventure games had quite a lot of (relatively) beautiful scenery even though it was still very pixelated. But the same scenery would become dull if there was a fan made remake with out any kind of new details added to it.

My metric for how an ideal remake should be handled is the Resident Evil remake on Gamecube. It's very familiar and clearly a remake of the original game, but it's also got enough new content seamlessly integrated into the main game to feel like a fresh experience even for people who've beaten the original game multiple times in the past.

[Ack]

Does anyone else feel like marathoning the cartoon now, or is it just me?

Yes. Yes, I do.