Syndicate Remake Revealed as a Shooter - UPDATED

[Boris Goodenough]

Next EA will make Dungeon Keeper into a cooking game(yes yes I know they sold the IP).

 

[b3nn3tt]

I'm not sure that quality necessarily has any bearing on how well a game will sell though. Case in point, many people considered Okami to be an amzing game, yet it sold extremely poorly.

Re-invention just nails it though. That's saying "We'll take the pieces we like that are easy and cut/paste our ideas in". That's not even making a game anymore.

They have to know that a re-made Syndicate would sell well, but it's too difficult so they're taking the faster "re-invention" route. That means any moments of genius is does have will be entirely accidental.

On the other hand, many people dislike the Call of Duty franchise, yet the games sell like hotcakes each year.

Shit, I could put a Call of Duty card game out online and I'd have 10,000 players - no matter how bad it was.

But why would you make something targetted to inflame your target audience - unless your audience would be buying it to spite the alleged target audience?

But yeah. They've not just missed the point of Syndicate, they've replaced it with one of their own. One of their cookie cutter, chest high wall, ironsight, regenerating health fiascos that sell so well because they've had their Persuadotron working for ages.

If I had to guess, I'd say that they were trying to steal the audience of other games by making a game that is similar. I'd guess that they also want the people who might be interested in this similar game to hopefully be aware that the old games exist but not necessarily have played them themselves.

So the potential customer would think: 'Oooh, this sounds like exactly the kind of game I like. I'm not sure I want to take a risk on an unknown IP though. But I think there was another game called Syndicate, so this is probably pretty good if there's already been one.'

Of course all of this is wild speculation. And to be honest, they probably could have made a game similar to the original and made a lot of money from the fans of that game. But I imagine there's more money to be (potentially) made by copying the market leader.

 

[Grampy_bone]

It better have the Persuadertron

 

[tetron]

Another generic looking fps game ? *Yawn* When they said they were remaking Syndicate I thought it was the one from 1993 for the PC.

 

[GrayJester]

I'll leave this here.
http://www.somethingawful.com/d/news/populous-syndicate-xcom.php

 

[Kathinka]

huh..i'd think that a vast majority of todays cod-console-gaming-kiddie-generation is way to young to remember the original syndicate. so i don't really know what they hope to achieve..

oh, and american revolt. that thing was bastard hard. tried and failed soooo many times.

 

[TheDooD]

See what bugs me here is not changing the genre, syndicate was always an action game and action - shooter is less of a jump than turn based strategy to shooter.. but look at the screenshots.

Syndicate was a really grim cyberpunk game about a world where guys with trenchcoats, ludicrously dyed hair and excessive cybernetics hack peoples brains or ventilate them with miniguns while hyped up on combat drugs, all in the name of corporate interest.

This game doesn't even have the distinction of looking like Human Revolution, it looks like Mass Effect or Half Life 2 with clean environments, sleek technology and rugged, dark haired protagonist types.

From what I remember from the Syndicate I played on the SNES it CAN be done on modern consoles its just that they over think things. How fucking hard is it to make an isometric game these days with the graphical tech we have. They're only making it a FPS as a cop out because they think "FPS = MONEY" when these days people are fucking tired of First Person games. The game would stand out if it stuck to that isometric view and improved on it. They could have made the game basically a top down shooter that you had to options to either hack people brains or make'em Swiss cheese. If publishers stop trying to make developers make movies instead of games then we can get some where.

 

[evilneko]

"No Syndicate," thanks.

This should've been the end of the thread.

To quote the AVGN, "What were they thinking?!"

Y'know, EA's been said to be the Microsoft of the gaming industry. I disagree: they are far, far worse.

 

[Social Pariah]

F######################################################################K.
I hate people. I hate people so much. Why must they make me hate them... why...

"Hey guys, I've got a great idea! Lets make Syndicate!"
"Ooo! Ooo! I've got an even better idea... lets NOT make Syndicate!"
"My god... he's really on to something..."

 

[SenseOfTumour]

This just reminds me of the exciting news that Shadowrun was getting an update...

'Yayy'

'as a tedious FPS, just case you thought we'd actually played the SNES classic.'

'you mother fu-'

Honestly, how intensely pointless.

Hey, maybe they'll make a great game out of this, but choosing to start from the memories of a great and well loved property isn't the best way to start.

I bought Shadowrun in a sale, for the PC, but got to play the 360 demo before I got home. I was so disappointed. It's still sat on my shelf sealed and untouched, I meant to resell it or give it away, but never got around to it.

I'll probably send it to the next charity store clear out.

 

[Cat of Doom]

WOW I remember playing this ages ago on my dads computer, must have been one of my first games. Don't really care if its RTS or FPS, It will be great to return to the world. Plus its co-op, hopefully will be good, I'v been waiting for a good co-op game for a while.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Of course all of this is wild speculation.

Honestly? I think you're giving far too much credit to the buyers. People who have heard of it will buy it and go yeuch. People who haven't will look at the pictures and decide on that.

Names aren't as powerful as people think because with the fans, you also get the fans. (points to Steam forums)

And to be honest, they probably could have made a game similar to the original and made a lot of money from the fans of that game. But I imagine there's more money to be (potentially) made by copying the market leader.

But that's one of EA's main problems - they're always trailing the market instead of making it. Even Ubisoft/Blizzard know that to hold the market, you have to take a risk and cover it's ass. EA seems to be pushing blandy Mcbland and raking in clone fees, rather than pushing the envelope like they used to.

You're never gonna do fast food better than McDonalds or Burger King, but you can do better food and still make a profit. Rather than trading on burger and chips to the people who can't be arsed to get the real stuff.

Call the damn game "Zenith" or "Cybermancer" or "GodNet" and we don't have a problem, because you're not crushing the original's potential sequel. Simply steal the name and you're selling a lie. And a lie that stops the new truth.

Half the defenders here are violently defending how good something's going to be from the screenshots, for Gabe's sake.

If it's a choice between wildly nostalgic dreams, and synthesized nightmares; pull the damn plug on us all now.

 

[b3nn3tt]

Of course all of this is wild speculation.

Honestly? I think you're giving far too much credit to the buyers. People who have heard of it will buy it and go yeuch. People who haven't will look at the pictures and decide on that.

Names aren't as powerful as people think because with the fans, you also get the fans. (points to Steam forums)

And to be honest, they probably could have made a game similar to the original and made a lot of money from the fans of that game. But I imagine there's more money to be (potentially) made by copying the market leader.

But that's one of EA's main problems - they're always trailing the market instead of making it. Even Ubisoft/Blizzard know that to hold the market, you have to take a risk and cover it's ass. EA seems to be pushing blandy Mcbland and raking in clone fees, rather than pushing the envelope like they used to.

You're never gonna do fast food better than McDonalds or Burger King, but you can do better food and still make a profit. Rather than trading on burger and chips to the people who can't be arsed to get the real stuff.

Call the damn game "Zenith" or "Cybermancer" or "GodNet" and we don't have a problem, because you're not crushing the original's potential sequel. Simply steal the name and you're selling a lie. And a lie that stops the new truth.

Half the defenders here are violently defending how good something's going to be from the screenshots, for Gabe's sake.

If it's a choice between wildly nostalgic dreams, and synthesized nightmares; pull the damn plug on us all now.

I don't really know. I mean, I never played the original, and all I've heard of this game is pretty much this article.

At the end of the day, a lot of people complaining will still buy it anyway to see how much it changed, and new buyers will buy it based, as you said, on the box and whatever marketing they hear.

Also, if fans of the original don't like the look of thiis enw game, nobody is forcing them to buy it. If they loved the original that much, and hate the new one so much, simply don't buy it.

 

[Thyunda]

Okay, now I'm usually the last to leap up and shout "O NOES FPS ARE BAD!!!!!" but even I'm getting a little weary of this. Now I don't know the original Syndicate - however this top-down squad game I just read about in the above article sounds like fun....mentally challenging, but fun. First person shooters are never mentally challenging. They just occasionally have a pattern it takes a minute to figure out, but then it becomes another going-through-the-motions.

Why would you take a squad game and make it into another FPS? And a story about 'corruption and revenge'? Can we not have a morally ambiguous game? Please? Just once? Like, y'know, the protagonist is going for revenge against an action that was not actually committed by the Big Bad for the sake of being bad...perhaps an emotional struggle wouldn't go amiss?

But nope. We get "You're morally pure, they're not. Shoot them in the face." What absolute bollocks.

 

[Atmos Duality]

Tell you what, I'll give your desires thought if you can name me more than three modern squad-based, tactical RTS games for consoles that actually sold well and got critical acclaim. I'll even give you the first two for free: Halo Wars and Dragon Age.

I cared about this point until you said "Consoles".
And right there the point became clear. More on this later.

If you nix "real time" from strategy and tactics, you can easily make these sorts of games on consoles. Hell, the original XCOM games used Time-Units and turns, but I suppose the assumption now is that your stereotypical fratwad Xbox 360 gamer wouldn't play it...

Really, play the first two games again and tell me they work well anymore. I'm even a fan of the series, and I can admit that they did NOT age well. Putting HD textures on them and calling it a next gen title won't help that.

Deus Ex proved that you can take an older design and bring it up to modern standards without sacrificing the entire genre. Before you say "Well, Deus Ex 1 was also a shooter.." you will find that it doesn't play AT ALL like most shooters; today or then.

I get what you want... but you don't reboot a franchise by putting a new coat of paint on a 16 year old game and slapping it on Steam, bypassing consoles completely.

This is part of where the ire comes from.
They dredge up old PC-games/IP and then they truncheon them over the head with the Console-marketing-stick until they no longer contain anything but REFERENCES to the elements that made them successful in the first place. The results in the franchise ceasing to retain its mechanical identity and thus it gets turned into generic mediocre garbage.

What this tells me: The IP is just there to sucker players of the older Syndicate games into buying their new shooter. Exactly like XCOM.

It slays me that we live in an age where BOTH MODERN CONSOLES (no, not the Wii. That's last-gen tech.) have access to USB Mouse and Keyboard, yet nobody is even trying to develop strategy games for them.
(And this is the same market demographic who paid 100 bucks for Steel Battalion's controller?)

And it's all because of an "image problem" that many perpetuate but few are willing to defy or change.

"Nobody will buy tactics games on console because the developer assumes that their audience assumes that they will suck. Their audience assumes they will suck because nobody develops them."

It's a Mobius Loop of assumptions. I'd wager that if consoles started making small unit tactics games the genre could grow, and we'd have more solutions for the controller problem.


Until then, we're stuck in this console-only shit-cycle where older properties keep getting rebooted and "reinvented" for the maximum exploitation of nostalgia at the minimum of design effort.
Distinction has become the new "niche", and in today's gaming industry, "niche" is something that the Publishers want to destroy entirely.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

Also, if fans of the original don't like the look of thiis enw game, nobody is forcing them to buy it. If they loved the original that much, and hate the new one so much, simply don't buy it.

It's a little more complex than that.

The NEW IP will either crash - in which case it's a stain on the IP. Or perform, in which case it takes over from the OLD IP (See Transformers), in which case the old one is stained.

Same thing with Bond, Doctor Who, Highlander, Led Zeppelin, Guitar Hero or any other media. There's going to be a fragment of it that you really don't like, and that can spoil the whole experience for you. If you want to talk wistfully about something from Syndicate, and you have to explain which one, then it's already aggravating.

If you've re-imagined it, then the two IPs don't actually cross in anything but name. Would you want to watch the original Mission Impossible based on Tom Cruise's Mission Impossible? Probably not.

So the New IP hurts the old IP, whether you acknowledge it or not.

That's the real problem. Ask the fans of Silent Hill.

 

[ThunderCavalier]

As a fan of shooters, I'm honestly wondering if every single game company thinks a perfect game requires shooting mechanics.

Because no, it doesn't. imo, the best way to kill a genre is to keep feeding it with numerous installments. It doesn't matter if they're all the second coming of a gaming Jesus or something; if you keep giving us the same concept every time with just a new storyline and a new character and possibly a new gimmick, we're eventually going to get bored of it.

I hope it doesn't take the death of the FPS genre in order for people to realize this, because I luv FPSs, and I don't want to see that happen to them.

 

[b3nn3tt]

Also, if fans of the original don't like the look of thiis enw game, nobody is forcing them to buy it. If they loved the original that much, and hate the new one so much, simply don't buy it.

It's a little more complex than that.

The NEW IP will either crash - in which case it's a stain on the IP. Or perform, in which case it takes over from the OLD IP (See Transformers), in which case the old one is stained.

Same thing with Bond, Doctor Who, Highlander, Led Zeppelin, Guitar Hero or any other media. There's going to be a fragment of it that you really don't like, and that can spoil the whole experience for you. If you want to talk wistfully about something from Syndicate, and you have to explain which one, then it's already aggravating.

If you've re-imagined it, then the two IPs don't actually cross in anything but name. Would you want to watch the original Mission Impossible based on Tom Cruise's Mission Impossible? Probably not.

So the New IP hurts the old IP, whether you acknowledge it or not.

That's the real problem. Ask the fans of Silent Hill.

I'd never thought of it like that actually. That's a very good point. In which case, I've got to fall back on the brand recognition argument, because I can't see any other reason why they'd call it Syndicate.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

I'd never thought of it like that actually. That's a very good point. In which case, I've got to fall back on the brand recognition argument, because I can't see any other reason why they'd call it Syndicate.

And which leaves the brand recognition as a version of emotional blackmail ("It could be as good as you remember it being" - which, of course, it will never be).

That's why emotions run high from the "NO SYNDICATE" side.

The "THIS SYNDICATE" side tend to be people who never experienced the recognition, and so are fighting to have it themselves.

It's a very dirty game being played. Faction stirring just for hype. But then this is from the people who have boobies everywhere else. Not the most subtle of companies.

 

[Bonecrusher]

See what bugs me here is not changing the genre, syndicate was always an action game and action - shooter is less of a jump than turn based strategy to shooter.. but look at the screenshots.

Syndicate was a really grim cyberpunk game about a world where guys with trenchcoats, ludicrously dyed hair and excessive cybernetics hack peoples brains or ventilate them with miniguns while hyped up on combat drugs, all in the name of corporate interest.

This game doesn't even have the distinction of looking like Human Revolution, it looks like Mass Effect or Half Life 2 with clean environments, sleek technology and rugged, dark haired protagonist types.

interesting thing is,
80's movies were more darker, detailed, dirtier and atmospheric.
today people are encountered with sleek, clean, smooth things.
Ok it was good with Portal but not everything should be lab-clean.