2nd nostalgia threads--homage or blatant name-grabbing?

[Nisarg]

On a related but different topic to my first "nostalgia" thread, which is debating the concept of whether nostalgia games as a whole are a good or bad thing, I would like this thread to discuss the nostalgia games themselves, and what and how they would be true to their base or a false grab at a "brand name". for the purpose of this thread, a "nostalgia game" is defined as a new version of a classic game that has not been in continuous print. SO for example Vampire or Call of Cthulhu are NOT nostalgia games, because they've never been away.
I'm talking about the "Insert Game Here is back!! and now its D20/Unisystem/updated for the 20th century/finally how the author intended/fat free/insert selling point here!"

Some examples:

Paranoia XP: a nostalgia remake of the original Paranoia. To me this is an example of a nostalgia game done right. It is true to the paranoia base, keeps everything nescessary that people playing it say "this is paranoia, for sure". It was written by people clearly familiar with the classic game and with the fan base and what they would want from it.
However, it is also not stuck in the past. It takes the old concepts and remakes them in a way that is not disrespectful but that gives the game some new spins and concepts.

Gamma World D20: An example in my opinion of how to do everything wrong with a nostalgia game. The author clearly has zero respect for the fans of GW, and what he produced was basically a post-apocalyptic game that has NOTHING to do with the original Gamma World other than the title, which leads one to the conclusion of "blatant name-grabbing", that the author simply wanted to steal the name "gamma world" to make his rather dull pseudo-intellectual work sell much more copies than it would if it had been under any other title. He does this by stabbing the old fan base in the back, spitting on their dreams of a return of their classic game.

please give your opinions of other nostalgia games, and whether they do a good job or fail to capture the original spirit, or are a blatant name-grab.

Nisarg

 

[Dragonhelm]

please give your opinions of other nostalgia games, and whether they do a good job or fail to capture the original spirit, or are a blatant name-grab.

I think it depends on the setting and who you ask.

I work a lot with Dragonlance with Sovereign Press, and we've got a bit of that on-again, off-again mentality with DL as an RPG. The last incarnation was with the SAGA system, which has caused a bit of a rift in fandom. This isn't to say that SAGA was bad, just that it was different, and not classic AD&D which people were accustomed to.

The current incarnation is the best, IMO. DL is back to its D&D roots. Sov. Press is going back to the very foundation of DL to get the tone right, yet are working on moving the setting forward. It's a very nice blend.

Note that I am biased.


With other settings, it is hard to say. Again, it depends on the setting.

I know that most fans I hear talk about the 3e mock-up of Dark Sun in Dragon and Dungeon recently didn't care for the conversion, prefering instead the Athas.org version. The difference here is that the Dragon version is PHB-centric while the Athas.org version is setting-centric.

Spelljammer saw print in Polyhedron, which also had mixed fan reactions. This conversion missed out on some classic elements of Spelljammer. At the same time, I felt it was a good starting point, and could be integrated into the larger whole.


As for other settings...I've heard mixed reviews, again depending on the setting. Some seem to live up to the original spirit, others seem to be a situation where the name recognition is being taken advantage of.

 

[WizarDru]

Gamma World D20: An example in my opinion of how to do everything wrong with a nostalgia game. The author clearly has zero respect for the fans of GW, and what he produced was basically a post-apocalyptic game that has NOTHING to do with the original Gamma World other than the title, which leads one to the conclusion of "blatant name-grabbing", that the author simply wanted to steal the name "gamma world" to make his rather dull pseudo-intellectual work sell much more copies than it would if it had been under any other title. He does this by stabbing the old fan base in the back, spitting on their dreams of a return of their classic game.

Gamma World has a pretty mixed-up history, though. Not being familiar with more recent versions and recognizing that GW was never that popular to begin with...I'm just curious: what are some examples of elements or things that were left out of the new version. Quite honestly, my vague recollections of GW from the past was primarily that it was like D&D, but set in a post-apocalyptic world with lots of intelligent animals and everyone had mutations that gave them weird super powers, and had them wielding stop signs as weapons and the like. Has the latest version abandoned that?

Honestly, I can't think of many systems that match your criteria. Many games go from system to system, like Star Wars, Star Trek and others. Does Talislanta or Earthdawn count? I ask, not having seen said systems latest incarnations.

For that matter, is it even fair to compare dungeon and polyhedron's magazine articles against actual games? I mean, a 3e Dark Sun conversion and Spelljammer 40 page 'mini-game' isn't really the same as an entire line of products or even the original box set, is it?

 

[Desdichado]

I'm not sure I'm the right person to talk about this, being much more of a "looking forward" kinda guy, but I liked 3e Forgotten Realms much better than the 2e version. I think they really learned from some of the mistakes of the 2e days (primarily in focus on "novellistic" modules and plot hooks and NPCs) and made the setting more appealing than it ever had been to me in the past.

 

[Nisarg]

Gamma World has a pretty mixed-up history, though. Not being familiar with more recent versions and recognizing that GW was never that popular to begin with...I'm just curious: what are some examples of elements or things that were left out of the new version. Quite honestly, my vague recollections of GW from the past was primarily that it was like D&D, but set in a post-apocalyptic world with lots of intelligent animals and everyone had mutations that gave them weird super powers, and had them wielding stop signs as weapons and the like. Has the latest version abandoned that?

The current version of Gamma World has little or nothing to do with the older gamma world editions. I can only conclude that the writers of GW either didn't actually bother to read earlier editions, and knew nothing about what the fan expectations were, or just didn't care and decided to piss on the history and the fanbase.

The current GW is basically an eco-morality tale with a very serious tone, with a highly detailed (to the point of dullness) backstory that goes into grueling detail about the specific nature of the apocalypse. Gamewise it has very few mutations, and none of the randomness or joie de vivre that the old GW rules and settings used to have. It has lots of rules about sociological concepts of community (based of course on certain premises promoting the authors particular views).

So instead of wandering around a post-apocalyptic wasteland destroying mutants to gain ancient artifacts, or leading an army against a cryptic alliance set on destroying the last bastion of civilization, it appears that in the d20 "gamma world" pcs are mostly expected to sit around decyphering little pieces of info about how nanobots destroyed the environment and grow carrots in an anarcho-communal kibbutz while bemoaning how man's foolishness led to the collapse of our fragile ecology.

In other words, its not Gamma World at all. Its at best a blatant effort to make profits by stealing the name of a classic game that has nothing to do with the modern version (aside from the fact that both are post-apocalyptic, but are completely different otherwise); and at worst it is an attempt by pseudo-intellectuals to attack the fans of a well-loved game that the author clearly despised, by trying to "educate" them on the correct way to roleplay, which is certainly not that "fun" gaming that the classic gamma world involves.

Nisarg

 

[MrFilthyIke]

And the GWd20 argument is a horse so dead and beaten, I'm sure PETA is already involved.

Both of the recent versions have re-invisioned GW. It's not what some like, and those w/o nostalgia have other opinons. I liked it, but realise it is different from other editions. Don't like it, buy 4th ed. It's so painfully similar to d20 it's not funny.

 

[Nisarg]

And the GWd20 argument is a horse so dead and beaten, I'm sure PETA is already involved.

Both of the recent versions have re-invisioned GW. It's not what some like, and those w/o nostalgia have other opinons. I liked it, but realise it is different from other editions. Don't like it, buy 4th ed. It's so painfully similar to d20 it's not funny.

While 4th ed. was my favourite game which actually had the word "gamma world" on it, rather than suggesting people go search for that old chestnut I would rather people showed their distaste for the butchering of Gamma World by purchasing either Darwin's World or Redline, which are both good post-apocalyptic games (of the two, Darwin's World is a lot closer to the real Gamma World, ironically making it the most GW-style game in a market that includes a game entitled "gamma world").

Or, even better, we could all really really bug Jonathan Tweet until he agreed to make an expanded full-edition version of Omega World, which small as it is still manages to be my favourite D20 take on the Gamma World setting.

Hmm, so that would actually make 2 games for d20 that are closer to Gamma World than "gamma world d20" is.

Anyways, all of this is a bit off the main subject of the thread.

Nisarg

 

[MetalBard]

I have to agree with both Dragonhelm and Joshua Dyal. Both Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance are much improved with the advent of their d20 versions. I've always been an FR fan and I think the coherence and organization that is being put into the new version of the realms is great. The various sourcebooks now all keep the rest of the realms in mind and everything gels together really well. I think the trade map diagram in the FRCS epitomizes this and really set the tone for the whole line. Ancient Empires seems like it's really going to tie all the past together.

I've always had a love/hate relationship with Dragonlance. I loved reading chronicles and legends, but I always hated playing in the game world (I never DMed it because after trying to work with the 2e boxed set, I just gave it back to the friend I was borrowing it from). I'm now playing in the new version, and it gives the kind of play opportunities that the novels hinted at, but the earlier game material never delivered on, because it mostly spent its time idolizing the novels' characters and such. Now there's room for other adventurers beyond the Heroes of the Lance or the second generation.

An example of a d20 nostalgia non-D&D game done right is Traveller T20. I've always skirted around the original traveller, but the T20 one was what drew me in and really came off as a very powerful hard sci-fi toolkit. The Gateway Sector book is just icing on the cake.

I've learned to steer away from the ultimate nostalgia grabs that in some cases reveal how weak the original material was to begin with. Judges' Guild by Necromancer Games is one that comes to mind. Not to insult anyone who likes the new stuff, but it just seems like my taste in what fun D&D is has become something rather different from the Wilderlands model.

I do think people are being rather harsh in their criticism of the short "mini-game" revivals of whole settings like Spelljammer and Dark Sun. They always seem like short little stop-overs on memory lane, just before merging onto the super-highway of all the great RPG material that's being produced now.

 

[The Shaman]

I've learned to steer away from the ultimate nostalgia grabs that in some cases reveal how weak the original material was to begin with. Judges' Guild by Necromancer Games is one that comes to mind. Not to insult anyone who likes the new stuff, but it just seems like my taste in what fun D&D is has become something rather different from the Wilderlands model.

Interesting that you would mention that particular example, as I planned on citing that as a nostalgia effort that I appreciate and enjoy. The Wilderlands and the City-State have always held a special place in my heart, and I'm happy enough with the updated versions to consider breaking my sacred vow of "homebrew-only" settings to run a "Return to the Winedark Sea" campaign.

Funny ol' world, i'n it?

I do think people are being rather harsh in their criticism of the short "mini-game" revivals of whole settings like Spelljammer and Dark Sun. They always seem like short little stop-overs on memory lane, just before merging onto the super-highway of all the great RPG material that's being produced now.

I like(d) the mini-games as a starting point to building my own campaigns, and while I can see how someone attached to a now-defunct setting might feel slighted, I also think a little elbow grease is all it takes to make-over a mini-game into a full campaign - that however is my personal experience, and others may find that a tough row to hoe.