mendel

There's a world of difference between expressing honest concerns and saying "they obviously ran out of money" when all you have to go on is a job ad and an update (Oct 1) with less info in it that you would have liked.

I posted a balancing comment. http://steamcommunity.com/app/231910/discussions/0/792923684205322551/

Well, the original LSL1 sold over 1 million units (and apparently the hint book sold even better), so selling 100,000 units today (to pull a number out of my hat) could be both indicative of a shrunk adventure market and a huge profit for Replay games at the same time. Actually, LSL1:R could be a huge success. We don't know. I'm noting with wonder that the press release about licensing LSL1:R for retail quoted on gamasutra dates from October 9th, the same day Paul tried to shame the SpaceVenture project for running out of money and making changes to their development team - incidentally, types of events that have happened to Replay's Larry Reloaded as well. And it falls in the same week that sees the first LSL:R weekly Steam Sale. Contrasting the polygon report about the casino game being a remake as well, as opposed to the new game Irishmile was producing concept art for, I think we can guess how that "shopping around for investors" or perhaps getting the License for an all-new game turned out. If LSL1:R actually is a financial success, and Replay did acquire a wider license to make new Larry games, what would happen? Assuming Al Lowe was still on board with Replay, and staying out of the drama?

That tallies nicely with Josh Mandel's last post on the Replay forums dating from June 27th, 2013.

Says Al ( ): Also, apparently the Kickstarter FAQ had this wording at first: The section has since been reworded, but that statement has been widely quoted on the web. It's not clear to me that Replay was obligated to do six remakes -- apparently one remake would have sufficed to prove their capabilities and to rake in enough funding to interest strong backers or, ideally, to finance a sequel outright. I have no idea how Replay's remake of Leisure Suit Larry's Casino for iOS fits into this.

Here's a quick translation of Michael Stein's news item: He might have mentioned that Leisure Suit Larry Reloaded was produced by Replay Games, but other than that, it appears a succinct summary.

I find it ironic that Paul Trowe was complaining about a lack of response from the 2GFA, yet the recurrent questions on the status of Replay doing LSL2:R remain unanswered. If I remember that correctly, Codemasters only licensed LSL1 to Replay with some (more or less implied) promise of licensing the whole series if that first game did well. Replay must now be at a point where they're negotiating for those upcoming licenses. It would certainly explain why we're seeing the first LSL:R sale now. If Replay fails to get that license, the thought arises as to which properties would carry Replay into the future. (It would also explain why we're not getting a confirmation on Josh Mandel's future (non-)role at Replay until those negotiations have concluded - if he's left for good, I could see him and Paul agreeing to keep it under wraps so as not to jeopardize Replay's bargaining position.) Certainly this kind of pressure could make Paul Trowe anxious and irritable, and also make him wish that the Two Guys had signed up with Replay (or would sign up with Replay if they needed to go looking for more funding, assuming as Paul does that their Kickstarter money has been spent). But then all of the above is pure speculation. Upshoot: as far as reading the fates of video game ventures from tea leaves (or the lack of answers to certain questions) goes, it's stones and glass houses.