PDA

View Full Version : Game remaking.


White_Arcanine
November 3rd, 2012, 11:29 AM
What's your thought on companies remaking games? For me I think it's just stupid to remake a game, especially if it's a classic, it kind of kills the nostalgic feeling, especially if they make "better adjustments". If it's for an anniversary and it's essentially the same thing with tampered controls, then I'm okay with it. But it's not the same if you take out glitches, make a boss harder or easier, add a new mode, or change the graphics. It's honestly, just not the same. The only remakes I AM okay with is Pokemon remakes, since it's something Nintendo does traditionally with each generation and game.

How about everyone else?

Spherical Ice
November 3rd, 2012, 01:29 PM
Generally I enjoy seeing older games being remade, especially when they don't alter it too heavily but still improve it. Examples of good remakes are NSMBW and HGSS, an example of a god-awful "remake" is Sonic the Hedgehog '06.

Aeon
November 3rd, 2012, 02:30 PM
I generally think it's fine if it can become something special, and perhaps better than the original in every aspect. I'm not a fan of it though when they seem like they're remade/ported out of complete laziness.

Cassino
November 3rd, 2012, 03:25 PM
I'm not inherently for or against anything so I suppose it would depend on the game.
Either way, I think it would be more constructive to make a new game based on the original, like the difference between Fallouts 2 and 3, although hopefully without such an ironic decrease in product quality.

Squirrel
November 4th, 2012, 06:55 AM
In general when it's happened in the past, I've always been a bigger fan of the sequels. If they're remaking the game then there must be a reason for it since they think they can produce something of a much higher quality that warrants being re-marketed, so I think on the whole it's a good thing when games are remade. There are a couple of games that I'd certainly want to see remade like Grandia and H.E.D.Z, but I am a bit scared of the gameplay changing... As long as it remains basically the same game but with better features and graphics etc, then I'm mostly in favour of games being remade. :3

TRIFORCE89
November 4th, 2012, 08:32 AM
Depends how it's tackled.

I like Super Mario All-Stars. Exactly the same as the original NES versions (except for a barely noticeable physics glitch in Super Mario Bros. and Lost Levels), but with 16bit audio and visuals. I had absolutely no issues there. Felt more like just a rerelease. Or as if they were late-gen NES games that also had a SNES release at the same time.

A little bit further... would be Pokémon FireRed and LeafGreen Versions. Very true to the originals, with improved audio and visuals. Also a couple of new features and updated game mechanics. Basically "Do you like Pokémon Red and Blue? Well, here it is as if it were made today". Does not offend fans of the originals. And it is still dripping in nostalgia.

HeartGold and SoulSilver, on the other hand, I did not like. They killed the music. And the semi-3D perspective made it feel just one step too different. I did not get any nostalgia from it, which is very important with a remake I think.

Then there are things like HD and 3D remastering. That works too, I guess. If the original look and feel is maintained. I enjoyed OoT 3D, but the new textures were more cartoony than I would have liked. So, those can be good depending on how they're treated.

True remakes or reimagining is different. And... I haven't really played any except for the Wii version of GoldenEye - but that was more an adaptation of the movie, not a remake of the N64 game. So, that doesn't really count. I am looking forward to Tomb Raider though, but I haven't played any of the old games. So, I have nothing to compare that to when I do play it.

Spinosaurus
November 4th, 2012, 10:07 AM
Generally I enjoy seeing older games being remade, especially when they don't alter it too heavily but still improve it. Examples of good remakes are NSMBW and HGSS, an example of a god-awful "remake" is Sonic the Hedgehog '06.
Sonic 2006 and NSMBW are remakes? Not at all.
Sonic 2006 is a reboot, and NSMBW is a sequel to a successful game that is supposed to home classic 2D Mario.

HGSS are remakes in that they are GS in the same principle, just refined with better graphics, updated Pokemon stats, tweaks and added Pokemon/events.


Anyway I like remakes, they are older games but better. If a classic did not age well for whatever reason it is best to give it an updated remake, such as Final Fantasy 4 on the DS. It's also a good way to introduce a newer audience to timeless classics such as the aforementioned game or Street Fighter 2. I'm also looking very forward to Persona 4 Golden on the Vita. (despite some of the added stuff being fanservice...)

On another hand, they should remake F-Zero GX for the Wii-U. That games is already perfect on its own and it's hard to top perfection if they want an F-Zero game, so if they wish to follow the same formula a remake is the only option with better visuals and added online mode.

Aques Keus
November 4th, 2012, 11:31 AM
The day Sonic Adventure 2: Battle came out I was very happy, mostly because it was on the ps3 store (who has remakes for FF7 and ff8) I loved the game as a kid but played it on a gamecube, so I was happy to see it on the PS3.

FF8 I could only play at my grandmother's house because she had a ps1, I had to play through all of the game without saving because there was no memory card (I only could play disk 1) so when that came on the ps3 I was happy.

Now they are remaking FFX and Ill be even happier, both my ps2 and my old version of the ps3 are broke so I can't play that.

In short, I'm saying remakes are good if it brings it to a new console. I honestly don't like playing older consoles because it is annoying to replace something on my TV just to play a game.

TRIFORCE89
November 4th, 2012, 12:22 PM
On another hand, they should remake F-Zero GX for the Wii-U. That games is already perfect on its own and it's hard to top perfection if they want an F-Zero game, so if they wish to follow the same formula a remake is the only option with better visuals and added online mode.
F-Zero GX as it was, with HD graphics, some more tracks, and online would be perfect

Wings Don't Cry
November 5th, 2012, 01:39 PM
I'm generally fine with remakes except on a few occasions where they try to completely remake the game while trying to keep it the same.

The main one is Fr/Lg, I did not like how they did that at all. They pretty much remade the original game on a new engine so if you tried playing the game on muscle memory you'll probably have a difficult time. Then they locked up some of the Pokemon just because they weren't in the originals kind of defeated the purpose of the remake. Then the worst part is that they didn't let you trade with R/S/E until you finished an extremely long and boring side quest after you beat the Elite 4 and catch 60 Pokemon to get the National Dex.

Then there was FF3DS, I had a few problems with this. Firstly there's still no save points, at least all the FF1 and FF2 remakes they let you save anywhere but FF3DS is still on World Map only. This wouldn't have bugged me that much if the final dungeon wasn't so unbelievably long. The next problem is that the job system fixed some of the old problems but created new ones. The game does not need job change sickness, especially when you are forced to use specific jobs for dungeons you do not need some illness to hinder you. They got rid of some of the useless jobs but not all of them, Scholar is still pretty useless, they should just give the White Mage libra. The job levelling system still sucks, it has the same problem as the job change system, a job shouldn't need hours of grinding to actually be of some use. The final problem with this remake is that all the new content is locked away by the multi-player features which is pretty stupid for a single player turn based RPG.

Katholic Nun
November 7th, 2012, 07:45 AM
HeartGold and SoulSilver, on the other hand, I did not like. They killed the music. And the semi-3D perspective made it feel just one step too different. I did not get any nostalgia from it, which is very important with a remake I think.

Crazy Town, population you. HGSS were lousy with nostalgia! I agree that nostalgia is why you play a game remake, and HGSS hit the mark and just kept hitting it until it bled all over the carpet.

As for game remakes in general, I think they're the one media format where remakes are always a good thing. Movie and TV-show remakes are always dicey and rarely work out, but video games are different in that usually it's the same game but with modern-day enhancements to graphics and sound that enable you to play the game you always loved without having to gripe about how bad games were in the yesteryear.

Urugamosu
November 7th, 2012, 07:49 AM
Usually, it's how they go about it. They've been pretty awesome with the remakes so far, with Heartgold & Soulsilver being my favourite remakes to date.

It's amazing how they can hit you with the nostalgic stick (Yup, that's what I'm calling it)
and just make you feel like you are back in the games which you first played years ago, and just make you feel back at home.

Captain Fabio
November 7th, 2012, 03:21 PM
Normally, you can never beat the original game. For me, remakes are a 'per game' basis on if I like them or not and if I feel they deserve a remake.

Anything that was very popular on 'retro' consoles, that are difficult to get a hold of, should be considered for remakes.

Spinosaurus
November 7th, 2012, 04:11 PM
Anything that was very popular on 'retro' consoles, that are difficult to get a hold of, should be considered for remakes.
That reminds me...

How hype would it be if a Mother remake was announced? They refuse to port it to virtual console, so....

Fenrir Reki
November 7th, 2012, 08:24 PM
It depends on how they plan on remaking the game, but generally i'm fine with any remake.

If it's an HD remake, I expect a higher quality game with game breaking and annoying bugs/glitches to be fixed and to retain the exact same concepts as the original. (gameplay, storyline, etc) So far all HD remakes have done this.

If it's a fresh remake, then I expect the developers to label the game as so, which means maintaining the original name and adding something else to easily indicate it is a "spin-off". If a company wants to go in that direction and continue developing their fresh remake into future titles, then they can. Making connections to the older entries such as easter eggs, references, or possibly a character is fine. Also, sometimes some of the concepts are too complicated or taken too far, and it results in a disappointing game. Most of the time, the remade game will never be as good as the classic game, because it doesn't have the same value as the older games.

Valvatorez
November 8th, 2012, 04:28 AM
Really, I think it depends on the game, and the extent to which they're overhauling it.

As a general rule, I have nothing against remakes. If the game is being remade fully, the chances are it's been out for at least two generations now, and it's nice to see these things brought up to speed; remakes usually mean glitches are ironed out, gameplay is more streamlined and, best of all, additional content. Whilst remakes are all about making money, a lot of the time they justify the re-release by turning it almost into a completely different game: using Pokemon HG/SS as an example, they added so many additional features to that it was unbelievable, remixed the music, updated the graphics, and even packaged it with a Pokewalker reminiscent of the Pocket Pikachu. Whether you like it or hate it, that is a remake done right: it keeps the formula of the original, but establishes its own identity by adapting it to fit the parameters of the current generation. It differentiates itself enough to be worth buying for more than just the nostalgia it generates in people who played it the first time around.

In the case of HD remasters, which are not technically remakes but are something I want to touch on anyway, I think their potential needs to be utilized properly: we need to see more games like Zone of the Enders being given this treatment, and less like the Prince of Persia trilogy. That is to say, older games that are extremely difficult to find for a reasonable price and haven't had quite as much exposure as other games may have. Games like Final Fantasy X, God of War, Splinter Cell and Metal Gear Solid, in my opinion, don't warrant HD remasters, because you can find them just about anywhere for a cheap price and really all they're doing is tacking on some trophies; it's a cheap ploy to make more money by developers who really don't need that money in the first place.

The 3DS remaster of Ocarina of Time, similarly, was just a shameful attempt to boost the sales of a handheld that had absolutely nothing in the way of worthwhile titles on it at the time. If games are going to be remastered, then the reason should be for more than just milking a franchise for all it's worth. It's a way to bring lesser known games to the front, not for popular games regarded as "classics" to make even more money than what they already do...or, at least, it should be. Alas, gone are the days when developers cared about anything other than making money. But I'd still like to see more HD remasters of games that are harder to find, and remakes of older, less popular games.

Spinosaurus
November 8th, 2012, 10:58 AM
In the case of HD remasters, which are not technically remakes but are something I want to touch on anyway, I think their potential needs to be utilized properly: we need to see more games like Zone of the Enders being given this treatment, and less like the Prince of Persia trilogy. That is to say, older games that are extremely difficult to find for a reasonable price and haven't had quite as much exposure as other games may have. Games like Final Fantasy X, God of War, Splinter Cell and Metal Gear Solid, in my opinion, don't warrant HD remasters, because you can find them just about anywhere for a cheap price and really all they're doing is tacking on some trophies; it's a cheap ploy to make more money by developers who really don't need that money in the first place.

You do know...HD remastering's purpose is to get older games in HD and better framerate, specifically games with amazing visuals. God of War, Metal Gear Solid and Splinter Cell all warranted HD because of their stunning visuals at their time. Say what you will, but I enjoyed MGS2 and MGS PW in HD and 60 fps. (And can't wait to try out MGS3 as well, which I enjoyed in 3D.) Also they're not remakes.

And Ocarina of Time 3D is shameful? The 3D added a lot of depth AND Ocarina of Time is a game that was heavily requested to be remade. Also your arguments against it can be applied to HG/SS as well, moreso since Pokemon is a milked franchise. There's nothing wrong with HD/3D remasters especially since their main purpose is to let people tr-
Alas, gone are the days when developers cared about anything other than making money.Holy crap, nevermind. :/

Nintendork15
November 10th, 2012, 05:09 AM
Some Remakes are good, Some are bad.
For example to me, Fire Red and Leaf Green were good, because they didn't change a whole lot. Where as Heart Gold and Soul Silver to me, was a new game, just in the same region. The whole, Legendary Dogs, should of stayed in crystal and the you HAVE to go see Ho-Oh or Lugia sucked too. I like it when I choose to see them, not when I'm forced too.
Another remake I'm displeased of is Sonic Adventure 2 Battle HD.
I thought this was gonna be good, but it's too similar, y'know. I know it's exactly what it says on the tin, but it's just HD textures, if I wanted that, I'd make a hack of the Dreamcast or Gamecube version. For free. I was at least expecting new features or better 3D models, like ones from Generations or something.

Mr. Magius
November 10th, 2012, 12:42 PM
I say I'm all for remakes of a game. It gives the player a different perspective on the overall concept of the original, and when all is said and done, you still have the original as well as the new one. A lot of games that are given a huge graphics overhaul and a bunch of new features can be a little over-the-top, but still, I'm extremely easy to please when it comes to playing a game.

For example, HG/SS were fantastic games imo. Both G/S/C and HG/SS were great, and I see them as completely different games. They're both worth praising. It's neat to see how the developers remake the game, because it can be really different, but that's exciting to me.

Anyway, if the new ones ever suck, well then dang, play the old one.

Zet
November 10th, 2012, 10:45 PM
I love game remakes, in fact; a remake I'm looking forward to will be released in 9 days(destructoid even rated it 10/10).

Spinosaurus
November 11th, 2012, 04:23 AM
I love game remakes, in fact; a remake I'm looking forward to will be released in 9 days(destructoid even rated it 10/10).
You're talking about Persona 4 Golden, correct?

Yeah I actually wanna talk about this. It's not really a remake per se, rather a port of the PS2 game with added stuff. Or maybe an update would be better (Like Marvel vs Capcom 3 -> Ultimate Marvel vs Capcom 3 or even Persona 3 -> Persona 3 FES and SMT Nocturne -> SMT Nocturne Maniax), just on a different system. It's the same exact game, but with added stuff. Though it's the added stuff that I'm concerned about, which apparently is a lot of fanservice.

Not gonna spoil or anything, but after I heard how bad the fanservice is, I decided to check what they're all about. Yeah pretty much, they're really downgrading to the characters (particularly Naoto, who just so happens to be my favorite in vanilla P4), so it really bothers me that I have this crap in a Shin Megami Tensei game. I'm still getting it because Persona 4 is my favorite RPG (with Nocturne) and I can get to social link with Adachi and get new demons/Personae. (Loa, Baphomet and Son Wukong. <3) And it's Persona 4 on the go, that's good enough of a reason to get it.

Also the reviewer who gave the game 10/10 is a huge fanboy of Persona, and gave vanilla Persona 4 and Persona 3 [FES] 10/10 as well. lol

abnegation
November 16th, 2012, 11:59 AM
Depends on the game. Some games would benefit from prequels, sequels or simple revisits. Games that totally don't warrant a remake bother me. Without playing the remake of OoT I was scepticle, still am, and would rather see it on the Wii. So I'm hoping we see something like MM remade.

Overall, if there's going to be a remake of a game, I really want it to feel like a remake and not a re-release with updated graphics. I feel the developers really need to put a lot of effort into a remake at the risk of seeming lazy otherwise.

ZetaZaku
November 16th, 2012, 01:11 PM
Let's say, something like Final Fantasy IV for DS, or Dragon Quest IV-VI also for DS. I don't mind if they change something about the story and add some new characters. Even better I guess, since it's the same game I originally liked, yet a bit different to make it more interesting. The same game with only updated graphics and no new content would kinda suck. Imagine if all Super Mario All Stars games would be sold separately, so you'd only get the remake of the first game, or third etc. That would kinda suck, no?