Ameritrash Remakes - Past, Present, Future.

Don't forget: Hannibal: Rome vs. Carthage, Horus Heresy, Britannia and Chaos Marauders.

As for future possible reprints, you forgot Magic Realm.

Oh, and GMT is reprinting Slap Shot right?

And Betrayal at House on the Hill.

metalface13 wrote:

Oh, and GMT is reprinting Slap Shot right?

It's Columbia Games.

jeb wrote:

I don't think I've ever heard of anyone preferring the original ARKHAM HORROR to the new one. I don't think there was a lot of game in that first version.

What about TITAN? Reprint of the year! (2008).

I bought the original Arkham Horror back in the day, and my gaming group played the heck out of it. We probably played at least 150 times, judging by our extended win/loss records that we kept while we played. Then we finally lost interest in it, and played maybe a couple more times before the new version from FFG came out.

Comparing the two, there is slightly more gameplay in the original AH than there is in a single small box expansion to the new AH. There are only 6 different possible encounters at every location, including interesting places like R'lyeh. There are only two allies, and no special endgame. The quantity of spells and monsters is roughly comparable between the FFG baseset and the original game, but there are probably twice as many items in the FFG baseset. The investigators in the original have just four skills with fixed values and no sliders or special abilities. The original AH had very nice components compared to other games made in the '80s, but the modern AH is superior and has much better artwork. The original AH rules were poorly organized and distributed between two separate rules books, but they were fun enough once you agreed upon how you would play them.

In short, the original Arkham Horror is a light, fun randomfest that lacks the massive replay value of the FFG Arkham Horror. I suppose somebody might prefer the original Arkham Horror if they were too lazy to set up the modern one, or didn't have enough time to play a game that would last more than 2 hours. But otherwise, there is no contest, modern AH is much better than the original.

Not to be outdone, we have ZMan's reprint of Tales of the Arabian Nights.

Betrayal at House on the Hill is also being reprinted this year.

Grudunza wrote:

Betrayal at House on the Hill is also being reprinted this year.

Oh man! Really?

Add Republic of Rome as a present remake.


So does this mean that with remakes of classic AT games (with better components) becoming more likely, people will think twice about bidding outrageously for old copies on eBay, which will cause those prices to drop, which will lead publishers to believe there is no longer a market for the re-print?

I wish they would release a Collector's Edition Trilogy of: Magic Realm, Gunslinger, and Merchant of Venus. I have the originals, but some streamlined rules (although they are pretty damn good how they are) and a little updating with gameplay would make something like this the crown jewel of all my games.

From what little I know of Magic Realm and Gunslinger, they are a bit overwrought for the the typical BGG crowd these days.

Now Merchant of Venus....we have already seen some impressive pimped out print n play kits over on BGG . If some company were to do some DECENT figures - and you don't need a lot, just ships and maybe factories - and a nice mapboard, the game would be a widespread hit, instead of the hidden gem that it is .

As for Fortress America, maybe the upcoming Red Dawn remake ( they'll never get the same quality cast as the original IMO ) will spur interest . For the upcoming CSW Expo in June, one industry map artist auctioned off a custom map of any game the winner wanted . The winner chose....FORTRESS AMERICA ! If the artwork is done by the time of the Expo, I am sure pictures will be posted.

Stephen Avery wrote:

Warhammer Quest is one of the few games I've nto tracked down. I can't really think of anything else I want that is unavailble. Oh- maybe block Mainia but that is not going to happen.

Steve"I am the Law"Avery

Well, if you ask Games Workshop REAL NICELY, you may have a shot. Or you can ask Rebellion, the owner of the 2000AD properties, to ask FFG to make a new version of it.

Jack Hooligan wrote:

The problem I see with WHQ, is that even 'back in the day' they couldn't put all the necessary minis in the box. You got a hand full of orks, goblins, skaven, some critters, and a minotaur or two. Enough monsters for the first level or so. Sure, the rulebook had stats for all the other monsters for later levels, but that money sink would be greater than fielding several warhammer armies!

HeroQuest and SpaceHulk have all the minis you need right in the box.

I doubt I'd want to start investing in a modern WHQ...

Not to mention the fact that most of the end battles it seemed that they threw darts at a board and came up with some insane numbers of enemies to populate the map for the last battle. Nearly every time I played, there were just too many to populate the board.

jeb wrote:
" I don't think I've ever heard of anyone preferring the original ARKHAM HORROR to the new one."
There're two in this thread.

Shellhead wrote:
" In short, the original Arkham Horror is a light, fun randomfest that lacks the massive replay value of the FFG Arkham Horror. I suppose somebody might prefer the original Arkham Horror if they were too lazy to set up the modern one, or didn't have enough time to play a game that would last more than 2 hours."
You say it lacks replayability and "We probably played at least 150 times"?!! You're wrong on both counts of "too lazy" and not wanting to play "more than 2 hours". Three reasons off the top of my head why the new doesn't appeal: it's too easy to win, the special endgame, and endless expansions (maybe that's two).

Notahandle wrote:

jeb wrote:
" I don't think I've ever heard of anyone preferring the original ARKHAM HORROR to the new one."
There're two in this thread.

Yes, color me surprised! That's like a mauve--heading towards a pale magenta, but not quite making it.