What would worry me with a change of graphics would be "Oh, so we change the graphics... Oh wait... we will change that too... and that also... While we are at it, let's change that as well! Why not changing that?"
And then we end up with another game...
I know it's silly in a way to say that but I don't mind so much about the IP (if I recall, meaning the characters, the areas, the names and such... don't quote me on that, I was one of those who never really understood). If I had the choice of using CoH Gameplay in a total new environnement or using another Gameplay with Ms Liberty, Atlas Park and all that, I would take first option anytime soon...
I know things must evolve but... how to compare it... There are classics and "sequels" of classics. Like in movies, the classics are great, often, the sequels are not so good, sometimes bad, sometimes mediocre. While I know it would be theorically "the same game", if they start to touch a bit of here and a bit of there (starting with the graphics I guess), I'm afraid to end up with a brand new game... which I don't necessarily want since to me, CoH was perfect despite its flaws.
I'm not against progress but in this case, I don't see what it would improve. Someone's signature on this forum kinda summarizes it all: Don't fix what is not broken!.
I'd have to agree with this... I'm all for "continuing the legacy," and I'm totally up for at least TRYING a sequel to see if it had the same "feel" as the old one, but let's be honest.... One person's sense of "feel" for the game is far different to another's. It's very subjective. So, the sequel might have the same "feel" according to the people making it, but it might not to someone who liked something different about the game that might not be the same in the new iteration.
Let's look at the adventure game "The Longest Journey." That was a CLASSIC. It had its own "feel." (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Longest_Journey)
Then they made "Dreamfall: The Longest Journey." It had the same main character, and it was also an adventure game, but it didn't have the same "feel." For one, they changed the 2D mode to a 3D one. That was a fundamental difference, and something that definitively gives a game a different "feel." It also didn't have the same quality writing. In fact, it didn't even seem to have the same "quirkiness" and true dream fantasy elements the first one had.
You can SAY that "updating the graphics" or "making it for a modern audience" or "creating a different experience" is all for the good, but in the end, you may be alienating an audience BECAUSE of that, since some of those things are what pulled them in in the first place.
I'll leave you with this: This was a COMIC BOOK game.
City of Heroes looked like a comic book.
I knew a lot of people who were able to make their own "classic comic characters from the 60s and 70s" with this game...
Game graphics these days seem to be headed the same direction Hollywood is going--which is "ultra realism."
That doesn't mesh well with certain comic book crowds.
Yes, the Christopher Nolan "ultra realistic" Batman was cool and all....But, some of us liked the more "comic book-y" Michael Keaton Batman too.
Graphics aren't everything.