Fan-Made 'Metal Gear Solid' Remake Cancelled; Gamers Blame Konami (hothardware.com) 118
MojoKid writes: Fans of the popular Metal Gear Solid series are ticked off at Konami over the cancellation of an unofficial, fan-built remake of the very first title that shipped for the original PlayStation way back in 1998. The remake's cancellation was announced on the project's Facebook page, which immediately prompted backlash aimed at Konami for presumably having a hand in it. The project, dubbed Shadow Moses, was the brainchild of indie game designer Airam Hernandez. It appears he may have assembled a small team to remake the original Metal Gear Solid using Unreal Engine 4. While it hasn't been confirmed that Konami shut the project down, it wouldn't be surprising to find out that it did. This wouldn't be the first fan project to be cancelled, and it likely won't be the last— Metal Gear Solid is Konami's property, and even Hernandez acknowledged at one point that he would eventually need Konami's permission to publish it.
Not surprising. Konami is an industry psychopath. (Score:5, Interesting)
These days basically everyone in the gaming industry agrees that the world would be a better place if Konami finally dies in a fire.
#Fuckonami [twitter.com], started by Jim Sterling [thejimquisition.com] (Think Moviebob, but for Games) has gotten trendendous pickup right up to the audience having a solid reason to Boo! Konami at the Game Awards [youtube.com] - they legally prevented from Hideo Kojima from recieving his own award (No joke!).
The borderline insane bullshit Konami has done in recent years is bedazzling and let's even non-industry observers wonder why a company is so hell bent on destroying its reputation and ip. Hideo Kojima [kickstarter.com] has since moved on and Konami is shunned as the semi-dangerous nutbag bum in gaming town by just about anybody.
Bottom line:
If you want to mod a commercial game, steer clear of Konami.
Re:Not surprising. Konami is an industry psychopat (Score:5, Funny)
These days basically everyone in the gaming industry agrees that the world would be a better place if Konami finally dies in a fire.
...and then dies again 29 more times.
Re: (Score:1)
Except Konami wasn't the first to take down a project based on one of their still-actually-available-for-sale productions, and it won't be the last.
Remake or not, the game is still Konami's property. If you replaced Metal Gear/Konami with Final Fantasy/Square Enix or Mario/Nintendo or any other game/game's owner you get the same response.
The only "borderline insane bullshit" here is from people that think Konami was wrong in this particular case.
Re: (Score:3)
Hell, they could just make a game in the same style with a marginally modified story to avoid the copyright lawyers
Until they end up getting lawyers breathing down their necks anyway on a claim of "nonliteral copying".
Tetris v. Xio; Konami v. Roxor; Sega v. Fox (Score:3)
Game mechanics can't be copyrighted
Counterpoint: Tetris v. Xio [slashdot.org].
and pretty much nobody actually bothers filing patents for them.
Except Konami, which prevailed in a claim construction hearing in Konami v. Roxor that its patents for Dance Dance Revolution covered a competitor's game. Other games have patents, such as Dr. Mario (US Patent 5,265,888, since expired), the cylinder mode of Pokemon Puzzle League, Crazy Taxi (enforced in Sega v. Fox), and plenty of other rhythm games.
Re: (Score:3)
So much human effort wasted on projects destined to die, which could have been spent on something more original and less obviously derivatively infringing...
Maybe, but consider this: why are you holding these unpaid enthusiasts to a far, far higher standard than what you're holding the game companies and Hollywood to?
All I've been seeing out of Hollywood and the game companies for the past decade now (at least) is derivatives. Granted, they're derivatives of stuff they actually own the rights to, but sti
Re:Not surprising. Konami is an industry psychopat (Score:4, Interesting)
Streets of Rage Remake, Resident Evil 2, Chrono Trigger, Legend of Zelda (Link to the Past, typically). Even the Mario 64 tech demo in Unreal 3 got shut down, it wasn't even released or any levels created.
I'm sure there are others, but the only instances that come to mind where they publisher didn't go ape on the little guy was Duke 3D remake in Unreal Engine, and The Dark Mod (basically Thief remade in the Doom3 engine).
No, Konami is deranged (Score:3)
Re:not supprising (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly. I really don't know what they expected. Trademark law requires you to defend your trademark or you risk losing it. It would have made much more sense to just make a game that copied the style of the original game without making an outright copy. Konami is still selling games using the Metal Gear Solid [steampowered.com] name. So I could see why they would want to shut down this project to get rid of any confusion between the fan-made game and official releases from Konami.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Yeah... no.
Unless tons of stealth games suddenly start referring to themselves as "Metal Gear Solids", and Konami does nothing about it, they're in no danger whatsoever of the brand name becoming genericized [wikipedia.org] (ala Kleenex).
Konami shut down this project because it could potentially harm sales of their own remake down the line. That's it. They certainly have every right to protect their IP in this manner, but it's not because "they had to or risk losing the IP", or because "consumers would become confused"
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah... no.
Unless tons of stealth games suddenly start referring to themselves as "Metal Gear Solids", and Konami does nothing about it, they're in no danger whatsoever of the brand name becoming genericized (ala Kleenex).
Yeah... yes. It's not about being genericized, it's about trademark law requiring it. They forfeit their rights to the trademark if they don't enforce it.
Re: (Score:2)
Tons of fan-made games have been made over the years without issue.
Example: http://openxcom.org/ [openxcom.org]. You're suggesting Firaxis is in danger of losing their Xcom IP because of this?
Can you cite a single incident of this ever happening?
Re: (Score:3)
PROTIP: That is a myth.
Wrong. "They let this other entity use it!" ... is a valid legal defense.
Re: (Score:2)
Here is an article from the EFF about it:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/... [eff.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Looks like I have some more reading to do, thank you.
My source was that a friend of mine is the creator of a semi-known comic. His character was parodied on a popular TV show. His lawyer was pressuring him to take action about it, that was the reason he gave him. Perhaps I misread an attempt to drum up business for the lawyer.
Re: (Score:2)
You know what dude? Kudos to you.
Too many people just refuse to even admit they might've possibly misspoken about something. I learned some stuff too from this exchange too.
High five. Have a great weekend.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry for the double reply, but I thought I would add that you should direct your friend to both the article I posted, highlighting this bit:
And also, to the Mattel vs RCA case [wikipedia.org] which is linked at the end of that article, which specifically deals with parody (Mattel was pissed about t
Re: (Score:2)
Thank you! I realize I'm a little late in saying this, but have a good weekend, man.
Re: (Score:3)
Firstly, every damn game company is doing "classic" remakes of everything in their catalog so it is pretty stupid to assume this company wouldn't be thinking forwards like that.
Especially since Konami's already done it more [wikipedia.org] than once [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How does "intellectual property" promote progress? (Score:2)
The IP holder does not want the content to go out. Why should they not do with what is theirs?
First, why say "intellectual property" instead of "copyright"? The term "intellectual property" lumps together copyright, patent, trademark, trade secret, and right of publicity. These areas of law have different origins, different scopes, and different reasons for existing. Conflating them just confuses readers [gnu.org].
Second, Konami's IP is 133.221.216.6. When you abbreviate "intellectual property" to "IP", you're making restrictions associated with copyright, patent, trademark, trade secret, and right of publici
Re: (Score:2)
Because, as opposed to physical property that can be held in hand, intellectual property is immaterial and is held in the mind.
A lot of things cannot be held in hand, but that doesn't make them "intellectual property".
Referring to those combined as intellectual property is more accurate than focusing only on copyright.
How long does "intellectual property" last? Under intellectual property, what uses are reserved for the copyright owner and what uses are subject to a limitation on exclusive rights (such as fair use or exhaustion after first sale)? The answer is not the same for these disparate areas of law. It's clearer to pick the most pertinent area of law and talk about that. And in the case of fan games, copyright is likely to b
Re: (Score:2)
In this case Konami actually made a remake for it on the Game Cube if memory serves.
Re: (Score:2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
butthurt gamers (Score:1)
Now let's all listen to the butthurt gamers...
Open Source It (Score:1)
Just open source the game's code. Then there's really no way to stop its "viral" spread.
And all you'd need to do was change an unused/little used variable, like the text on a sign, and BAM, new compiled file, new file signature, new MD5 sum, so any automated search would fail to find it. As for the source code, that could be passed on discretely through email or even sneakernet.
Game Designer? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
The standard method:
#0: notice wallet is getting thin.
#1: download Unity 3D of Gamemaker, as you've heard all about them from mobile shovelware.
#2: realise you don't know how to use these basic tools, so ask a friend to knock-up some concept art.
#3: friend is already playing with $LATEST_THING (UE4) and uses that instead.
#4: post screenshots, raise a kickstart campaign, promise the world on an IP you know cannot be used (but hey, the fans won't know until you have their money).
#5: count your money while dir
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Game Designer? (Score:3)
What is an "original" idea anyway?
This is Tech; Philosophy's down the hall, third door on the left. ;)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The only thing that matters is solid implementation, ...
... which is exactly what these developers did!
Re: (Score:2)
Did they? I could have sworn that I read it was unfinished. Maybe we have a different definition of "solid?" I dunno, I am not really a gamer.
Re: (Score:2)
An original idea is easily recognized by not being able to recognize it.
Re: (Score:2)
TV Rerun Advertising Corollary: "If it's new to you, it's not a rerun!"
Damned if you do.... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Rubbish! The characters are protected by trademarks and copyright. You cannot simply decided to create something based on an existing IP and then hope the owner gives a green light later. Try applying your logic to a Marvel character or two. See how far you get making a film or show with the Iron Man or Wolverine.
If this was a real project they could have made a game based on the mechanics and feel of MGS, but using their own world, story and lore. They didn't. They wanted to leverage an extremely famous IP
Game designer or game ripoff artist? (Score:1)
Having worked in the industry as a programmer for the better part of 11 years now, all I can do is scoff at this point at the countless aspiring developers who decide that their best bet is to remake an actively-marketed IP held by some other company. Sorry, but I'm innately skeptical of the game design chops of someone for whom designing a game involves going "Let's remake [some existing game]," or perhaps "I'm going to make [game], but with [thing]."
If you're a creative or skilled enough designer, program
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
There may not be any harm, but it also means you have exactly zero moral high ground to try to claim when the company inevitably shuts it down.
The fact that someone really loves an IP typically has no bearing on whether a company will grant permission or not, and given the fact that Konami is a Japanese arcade company at its heart - the type of company that is traditionally very resistant to let the "gaijin" have anything to do with their studios - anyone in the industry with a modicum of sense could have s
Re: (Score:2)
If you're a creative or skilled enough designer, programmer or artist to the point that you could actually do justice to a remake of a classic, well-respected game, then surely you're creative or skilled enough to make your own game, right?
Let's look at it from the other perspective:
If you're a big company that has enough creative or skilled designers, programmers, and artists to actually do justice to a remake of a classic, well-respected game, then surely you're creative or skilled enough to make an origi
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not a gamer; my last game system was the NES. I don't have a horse in this race, I'm just pointing out what I see.
Back in the 80s, Nintendo and Sega had no trouble getting regular people to buy all kinds of original (for then) games: Castlevania, Metroid, Zelda, Metal Gear, Sonic, etc. But now, apparently they can't do it any more. It seems to me they just can't come up with good, original concepts any more, so they resort to mining the past.
Apart from a very small handful of notable indie titles tha
Parody (Score:1)
I don't understand why when faced with a cease and desist, groups don't just switch gears to making a parody.
Konami issued the following statement: (Score:5, Funny)
"!"
What did they expect? (Score:5, Insightful)
This was pure stupidity from start to finish. Putting considerable time and effort into developing a game which you know you do not have the rights to publish is generally not a bad idea. When the game you are developing is a remake of a game which still has considerable commercial value, and which is owned by a company which does not have a long history of encouraging third party modding and development, it is dafter still.
Konami own the rights to Metal Gear Solid. If you want a remake of it, tell them so (letters, e-mails, petitions, questions from the floor at trade-shows - whatever). Companies like making money and if they think there is an audience for a remake of an old game, then they will generally do the remake. If they don't, then... there's not really much you can do.
If you want to make a stealth-action game, then make one. Konami own the rights to Metal Gear Solid, but they do not own the rights to "everything that looks a bit like Metal Gear Solid". There are no shortage of games out there, both AAA and indie, which take a degree of inspiration from Metal Gear Solid. If you have a team with the skills to make a game as ambitious as a full remake of Metal Gear Solid would be, then go that route.
But trying to make a game which you know it is vanishingly unlikely you will be allowed to publish and then whinging when you are not allowed to publish it is just stupid.
Re: (Score:2)
They did have the option to try and get a license for the IP. No idea if Konami would have gone along with it, or they might have wanted to charge them for it, thus creating a rather large hurdle for a free game.
You can easily show you're defending your IP if you give out a license, even one that allows a free remake. So, I'm not sure why the developers started this effort if they weren't willing to talk to Konami first. The only thing I can think of is that they hoped to have it done enough for a good d
Konami has patented its game rules (Score:2)
Konami own the rights to Metal Gear Solid, but they do not own the rights to "everything that looks a bit like Metal Gear Solid".
I wouldn't be so sure. Konami once convinced the judge in Konami v. Roxor that its patent on Dance Dance Revolution extends to "everything that looks a bit like Dance Dance Revolution".
Re: (Score:2)
The problem, of course, is that no one would pay any attention to the game if it wasn't a clone of a famous game like Metal Gear Solid.
Also, as it turns out, creating an original game design is surprisingly difficult. The only real way to determine if a game design idea will actually work is to try it out, which means you need a lot of art and code assets generated for a number of ideas you then decide to completely throw out. Most people never see the horrible, un-fun, utterly failed design attempts that
Very First Title? (Score:3, Informative)
Metal Gear Solid was like the 3rd game in the series. The first 2 were 8-bit top down games for the NES.
Stop announcing them before they're done! (Score:1)
And then when they are, distribute it in a way that makes it very difficult to shutdown, from a country that isn't beholden to the copyright cartel.
But no, everyone announces their silly clone project, and then the C&D's come flying. Either commit to the 'outlaw' approach, or don't announce anything until you're secured permission; anything else seems foolish.
What did they expect was going to happen? (Score:2)
Jeez, once again, here we are with an Internet Outrage![tm] story about IP on Slashdot. And once again, it's some fucking moron who didn't even know better than to not rip off a major corporation's IP. Come on! You think just because you're not making any money they should allow it? By lawyer standards, they're losing money! It doesn't matter what makes sense!
God damn, how hard is it to make something new. Really hard, I guess! All these efforts on remakes and reimaginings and reboots. And supposedl
The Simpsons: Road Rage (Score:2)
God damn, how hard is it to make something new. Really hard, I guess!
Especially when the developers of The Simpsons: Road Rage got sued by Sega for copying Crazy Taxi.
Dear fans: No, it's NOT your game (Score:4, Informative)
The game belongs to the company that made it. It doesn't belong to you. They paid for the development. They took the risks. You bought it and played it, great. But the fact that you bought it and played it doesn't mean you somehow own it now.
If they don't want it remade, then what you want is irrelevant. You're not entitled to anything, snowflakes.
WTF? (Score:2)
remake of the very first title that shipped for the original PlayStation way back in 1998.
And here I was thinking that was actually "Battle Arena Toshinden" in '94...
That's one less _____ remade in UE4 project..... (Score:1)
Create original content (Score:3)
If you can get this far into a game's development, please consider creating original content. It has never been easier to fund or publish a game. You can get paid instead of shut down.
What did he use of Konami's, exactly? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Next Up (Score:1)
Re-implementations *are* OK (Score:2)
No, almost all the posters have it wrong - a carefully done re-implementation can be legit. You can't use the exact same potentially trade-marked names. You can't re-distribute the original art work. But, you can do things like create a new engine and anyone who owns the original game can then re-use the content in the new engine. See the article on Game Engine Recreation [wikipedia.org] or the OpenMW [openmw.org] project that's creating a version of the Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind game in a new engine.
That said, I don't know i
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
See what I did there?
Re:Call the waaaaaaambulance! (Score:4, Insightful)
It probably wasn't about making a game to make money or the like. They probably liked the old game and wanted to play it with a modern engine.
Re: Call the waaaaaaambulance! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If every gamer was as good at playing a games as they are at bitching and moaning about them, then I wouldn't have to deal with so many shit players in my PUGs.
No one gives a shit, snowflakes. Konami, Valve, Bioware, etc. don't owe you ANYTHING. If you don't like what they're doing, then stop buying their games and move on.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I'm bitching about bitchers--but only because I'm bitching to the bitchers about their bitching.