:
I still don't know what makes you say redoing 2D doesn't make much sense - take a look for example on Monkey Island 2 Special Edition: http://www.videogameszone.de/screens..._edition_3.jpg
2D does provide incredible detail support, spectacular light effects and animated elements of background etc. And requires less effort than doing 2.5D which, let's face it, wouldn't look as nice (and/or work smoothly) as prerendered 3D graphics. You'd be able to create game which looks good and still is really close to original...
...without huge system requirements |
I think Lucasarts did that because the Scumm engine supported bigger image formats, therefore they didn't have to rebuild anything.
You're assuming that we're going to be building some mental, unscalable beast of a game that needs 14 gpus and a psu the size of Bournemouth in order the run it. In reality we're going to make the best game we can that will run on as many systems as realistically possible.
While we're on the subject of performance, I should point out that the fill rate of a PS3 isn't particularly good, where as the vertex buffers are very good. So we would be in a situation where building a nice looking 3D (ostensibly 2.5D) game would actually be better than a full 2D game. Further more, with 3D environments the world can be made much more lush, interactive, dynamic, and scalable.