Have remakes been detrimental to the series?

[BettyNewbie]

The whole discussion about XY, ORAS, Z, and SM has got me pondering a new question--Have remakes really been a net positive for the series?

It's hard not to notice that one of the biggest reasons XY feel so incomplete and overshadowed is not because of SM, but because of ORAS. A lot of spotlight and attention that could've otherwise gone to promoting Kalos and polishing its story instead went to the remade Hoenn, and even the Gen 6 Pokémon themselves were extremely overshadowed by the Gen 3 ones (especially because of Mega Evolution). On top of that, the addition of new Megas and other features in ORAS literally rendered XY obsolete in the technical sense, despite the games only being a year old at the most.

At first glance, it just appears to be an example of poor planning on Gen 6's part until I realized that almost the exact same thing happened with Emerald and FRLG in Gen 3. While it was more polished than RS, Emerald still didn't have nearly as many fixes and updates as it could have, and a big reason for that was because of GF devoting time and resources to FRLG and the remade Kanto.

And, just as ORAS still seemed light on features and new additions despite a shoehorned postgame story, this was even more true for FRLG, which was literally just a straight GBA revamp of RB with a few generic islands tossed into the postgame. In both cases, not only did the new regions suffer from being overshadowed and unpolished, but the remakes themselves also turned out rather unpolished and thrown-together.

These issues didn't seem to happen in Gen 4, but then again, DP were still extremely broken, unpolished games, even if Platinum wasn't. Plus, GF got lucky with the DS being such a popular, long-lived handheld, which gave them more time to fully flesh out both Sinnoh and the remade Johto/Kanto and let Sinnoh have its proper time in the spotlight before moving onto the remakes. If Gen 6 is anything to go by, the handling of Platinum and HGSS was likely the exception rather than the norm.

There's probably a good reason why Gens 2 and 5 frequently rank high on "favorite generation" lists. Not only did GSC and BW/2 both come out on the tail ends of their respective handhelds, but neither gen saw GF devoting half of its time to remaking a past game, so the new games got the attention and fleshing out they deserved. We got more quality with less quantity, the exact opposite of what happened with Gens 3 and 6.

Do you think that remakes dragged down Gens 3 and 6 from their full potential? I'm starting to feel this way more and more myself, which is yet another reason why I want to see remakes abandoned in favor of VC re-releases. I'd rather have one set of quality games than two sets of mediocre games, and if doing away with remakes means more games like GSC and BW/2 and fewer like RSE and XY, then I'm all for it.

 

[smocks]

I can't really put an opinion on Gen 3, but for Gen 6, Kalos was just a filler generation. Kalos was a test for the upcoming Pokemon Sun and Moon, it was never really intended to be a "real region", therefore, the whole feeling of Kalos feeling rushed. On the other hand, Pokemon Sun and Moon has been in the making for a few years, unlike Pokemon X&Y. All in all, I think Gamefreak just has some planning issues in a sense. They could've of made Kalos a wonderful region, more fulfilling than what it is already, but again, Kalos was only made for Sun & Moon's benefit

 

[Nah]

Idk, I feel more that Game Freak purposely makes the first pair of generation hella unpolished in order to make more money and not so much that time and resources are spent on remakes and 3rd versions and that takes away from the initial pair. If R/S or X/Y or D/P were actually polished, complete products, why bother with any games after that in that generation? No, put out games that you know that people will scoop up but also be left wanting more, and then make what you should've made in the first place in order to temporarily satisfy people who wanted a polished game and grab some extra, easy $$$.

Though really they could/should just spend more time developing each game instead of doing this yearly release shit we've had since ~2009

 

[BettyNewbie]

I can't really put an opinion on Gen 3, but for Gen 6, Kalos was just a filler generation. Kalos was a test for the upcoming Pokemon Sun and Moon, it was never really intended to be a "real region", therefore, the whole feeling of Kalos feeling rushed. On the other hand, Pokemon Sun and Moon has been in the making for a few years, unlike Pokemon X&Y. All in all, I think Gamefreak just has some planning issues in a sense. They could've of made Kalos a wonderful region, more fulfilling than what it is already, but again, Kalos was only made for Sun & Moon's benefit

But, again, what was a big reason why Kalos was rushed in the first place? ORAS. GF had to set aside time and attention to remake Hoenn, so that was less that could've gone to Kalos instead.

I cannot seriously believe that XY were actually intended to be nothing more than a test run for the 3DS, even if it feels that way. If GF truly intended for Gen 6 to be nothing more than a filler generation, then ORAS would've been all we would've gotten, as it would've made more sense to just remake an old game for filler than attempt to throw together a new one.

 

[Hikamaru]

This reminds me how much I haven't enjoyed 6th Gen as much as I initially thought, and like what Betty said, X/Y was pretty much obsolete once OR/AS came out. Remakes are great at attracting older fans while also welcoming newer ones, but I don't like how Game Freak polishes them more at the expense of the new region, which should be the real main focus of the generation.

Considering how much work was done on Sun & Moon and how long it took, I won't expect a D/P remake anytime soon but if third versions are officially a thing of the past due to GF wanting surprises, I wouldn't mind a B2/W2-esque sequel because I wouldn't want 7th Gen to end after just one paired version. 7th Gen needs to have all the quality like we had with 2nd and 5th Gen, and will be remembered for more than just another 3DS game because X/Y felt like a testing ground and that's why there was a notable amount of lacking content.

 

[BettyNewbie]

This reminds me how much I haven't enjoyed 6th Gen as much as I initially thought, and like what Betty said, X/Y was pretty much obsolete once OR/AS came out. Remakes are great at attracting older fans while also welcoming newer ones, but I don't like how Game Freak polishes them more at the expense of the new region, which should be the real main focus of the generation.

What makes it worse is that the remakes themselves don't even turn out that complete or polished, either. There have been loads of complaints about missing features in ORAS, be they from Emerald, XY, or any other past game, and FRLG were even worse in this regard. In both Gen 3 and Gen 6, we basically got two sets of mediocre games instead of one set of great games.

On the other hand, the most polished remakes, HGSS, were the ones that shared more equal time with its gen's new region (which, itself, had been equally polished and perfected in Platinum). However, as I said, Gen 4 seemed to be the exception rather than the rule.

I won't expect a D/P remake anytime soon

Honestly, I'm hoping that DP remake never happens. After what happened with FRLG and ORAS, I've become a lot more cynical in regards to Pokémon remakes, and plus, I can't really see how a remake would improve much on Platinum, anyways. (And, there's always the fear that they'd just ignore Platinum and give us straight DP remakes, which would really suck.)

Besides, with the RBY re-release breaking sales records, and ORAS, in contrast, somewhat underperforming in sales, I could actually see GF opting to abandon remakes in favor of VC re-releases, which are not only cheaper, but have also proven themselves to be an easy profit.

I wouldn't mind a B2/W2-esque sequel because I wouldn't want 7th Gen to end after just one paired version. 7th Gen needs to have all the quality like we had with 2nd and 5th Gen, and will be remembered for more than just another 3DS game because X/Y felt like a testing ground and that's why there was a notable amount of lacking content.

I agree, especially since SM are supposed to be the big 20th Anniversary games. I'd happily embrace a future that has more sequels and fewer third versions and remakes.

 

[Cerberus87]

I can't really put an opinion on Gen 3, but for Gen 6, Kalos was just a filler generation. Kalos was a test for the upcoming Pokemon Sun and Moon, it was never really intended to be a "real region", therefore, the whole feeling of Kalos feeling rushed.

lol no, if that was true then Sinnoh would also be a filler due to how generally lacking in features DP were. Are you telling me the grandiose beginning of handheld Pokémon in full 3D, which they made a huge fanfare for, was just "filler"? {XD}

If there's a gen that was filler despite its possible quality, that gen was 5th gen. Kalos was not filler, it had some performance quirks by virtue of the 3DS being "uncharted territory" to GF. That's to be expected from the "first" games on the system.

 

[smocks]

lol no, if that was true then Sinnoh would also be a filler due to how generally lacking in features DP were.

If there's a gen that was filler despite its possible quality, that gen was 5th gen.

I don't think either 4th or 5th gen were filler, due to them at least having a fuller dex, Kalos was the only region to have less than 100 new Pokemon I believe. Also, Sinnoh and Unova were given polished remakes(?versions) of the gen, unlike Kalos, so far there's no intent for a remake for it.

 

[VisualJae]

All I see here are speculation and conspiracy theories. No one here would know what the tech roadmap looks for a game's development unless you're on the team from beginning to end. For all we know, Game Freak intended it all. No one said they had to push out a product in X months or years. They felt it was ready and they pulled the trigger. Or conversely, shareholders of Nintendo pressured them to act fast. We don't know and corporate PR will never let us know.

As for sticking to the main point of the topic, I don't think remakes are detrimental at all. They serve double duty in retaining existing fans by shoving a heavy dose of nostalgia in their faces while also reintroducing an older region to new fans who weren't around during the first pass. Countless kids nowadays claim to have started in Gen IV or V and missed out on I through III. Many were recommended to play HGSS remakes in order to get a taste of Gens I and II, but none truly experienced Gen I (at least not until Nintendo released the RBY ports to the 3DS) and they wouldn't have gotten anything out of III had it not been for ORAS.

Remakes are fine as long as they offer something new. Even the RBY ports have a "new" aspect to them as they'll be compatible with Sun & Moon. I'm just thankful that Nintendo hasn't drowned their games in horrendous DLCs. When you buy the games you know you're getting the complete product and won't have to pay a truckload of extra cash just for content that should've been in there in the first place.

And as for a last note on "rushed" games. Sure, it's logical to think that XY was simply a test product for the 3DS as it's the first core series game to get such a massive overhaul (give Game Freak credit for doing this). However, an average playthrough still provides 15-20 hours of gameplay, much like the other core series games. If it's completely lacking in content, you'd think you'd get less out of the game than that.

 

[BettyNewbie]

As for sticking to the main point of the topic, I don't think remakes are detrimental at all. They serve double duty in retaining existing fans by shoving a heavy dose of nostalgia in their faces while also reintroducing an older region to new fans who weren't around during the first pass. Countless kids nowadays claim to have started in Gen IV or V and missed out on I through III. Many were recommended to play HGSS remakes in order to get a taste of Gens I and II, but none truly experienced Gen I (at least not until Nintendo released the RBY ports to the 3DS) and they wouldn't have gotten anything out of III had it not been for ORAS.

Remakes are fine as long as they offer something new. Even the RBY ports have a "new" aspect to them as they'll be compatible with Sun & Moon. I'm just thankful that Nintendo hasn't drowned their games in horrendous DLCs. When you buy the games you know you're getting the complete product and won't have to pay a truckload of extra cash just for content that should've been in there in the first place.

VC re-releases can do all of those things, too, you know. ;) Just think of all of the people who are getting to play Gen 1 for the first time because of the recent re-release. No different from a remake, except that they're actually getting to experience the game as it originally was, which is far better, IMO.

While HGSS are fine games on their own merit (although, so are GSC), I'd honestly recommend the original RBY and Emerald over the mediocre FRLG and ORAS anyday.

 

[VisualJae]

VC re-releases can do all of those things, too, you know. ;) Just think of all of the people who are getting to play Gen 1 for the first time because of the recent re-release. No different from a remake, except that they're actually getting to experience the game as it originally was, which is far better, IMO.

While HGSS are fine games on their own merit (although, so are GSC), I'd honestly recommend the original RBY and Emerald over the mediocre FRLG and ORAS anyday.

You can argue for both. I was happy that RBY got ports to the 3DS simply for nostalgia reasons. But if you have a remake, you're catering to both sides of the spectrum: the original fans and the newcomers. If you're going for a straight port like that they did with RBY, the newcomers benefit more than the original fans, who will likely pay/play only to relive the experience.

A remake (FRLG, HGSS, ORAS) introduces previously existing material to new fans who might struggle to find older products (at least legally) while simultaneously bringing something new to fans who are familiar with the content. It's the middle ground/best of both worlds scenario you can't find otherwise. Plus it's more revenue for the company, which fans should support if they wish for a continued line of products.

If Game Freak announced another remake of Generation I or II for the 3DS, as an old fan I would welcome it with open arms as long as it stays true to the original concept while introducing some new elements. At the same time, I'll be happy for newer fans who never owned an original GB, GBC, GBA or managed to obtain a copy or play the old games while they were on shelves.

I'll use a real example. Recently one of my buddies was visiting now that he's on break from medical school. One of our best childhood memories was playing RSE on our original GBAs in middle school. The guy hasn't touched Pokémon since then really. But when I showed him ORAS a few days ago, he was absolutely blown away and started playing one of my files on the spot, jumping straight to the Battle Resort. This is a guy who appreciated the modernized graphics and feel (he spent quite a bit of time just using the soaring feature), along with the content he was familiar with from over a decade ago.

If Game Freak decides to remake Gen. IV and I buy a copy of it for my friend, I can guarantee he'll play it. It'll be the first time he'll experience the Sinnoh region.

 

[BettyNewbie]

You can argue for both. I was happy that RBY got ports to the 3DS simply for nostalgia reasons. But if you have a remake, you're catering to both sides of the spectrum: the original fans and the newcomers. If you're going for a straight port like that they did with RBY, the newcomers benefit more than the original fans, who will likely pay/play only to relive the experience.

You don't think old fans also benefit from re-releases of their favorite games? A lot of older fans had no way to (legally) play RBY anymore before the VC release, whether it was because of lost/dead cartridges or no longer owning a handheld that could play the games, and I can assure you that those people jumped for joy when the VC release was first announced.

A remake (FRLG, HGSS, ORAS) introduces previously existing material to new fans who might struggle to find older products (at least legally) while simultaneously bringing something new to fans who are familiar with the content.

Not necessarily true. FRLG added hardly anything new to RB, and what little new content that was added was pretty explicitly meant to cater to new fans over older ones (ie. tutorials). And, then there's all of the Emerald content that ORAS took away, which angered more fans than pleased.

Plus it's more revenue for the company, which fans should support if they wish for a continued line of products.

The remakes have consistently sold far less than the main paired games and even the third versions if you account for them being two games instead of one. The RBY re-release, on the other hand, broke eShop sales records and was a smashing success, especially when you consider how little GF and Nintendo spent on it compared to the remakes.

 

[Kurosaki]

This is part of why remakes worry me, because I love seeing old games with new graphics and gaining new fans, but not focus is taken away from the newer games.

I like the Kalos anime a lot, but X&Y as games - I own X, and have played through the gyms / E4 once and never went back to it. I love the concept of it, and the graphics, and the trainer customization, but ORAS got even more focus when it came to graphics, and already had a decent story. People kicked X&Y to the wayside when ORAS came out. X&Y didn't even have much of a story to speak of, it basically felt like I was playing a game that was created to show off its graphics. Which doesn't make it a good game. It was cute, but as far as main series Poke games go, I much prefer B&W, DPPt, and others to it. Black and White had very good characters and plotline IMO, and I was hoping X&Y would beat it out, but eh.

I really hope Sun and Moon has had as much focus as some people in this thread are saying, because I think the franchise could really use a Pokemon game right now that doesn't feel so rushed. ORAS is out of the way, so hopefully their focus has been mostly on Sun and Moon and not on some Sinnoh remakes. At least not yet.

Another downside is that a lot of us have already played the games the remakes are created from, so no matter how excited people get for remakes, there's still more hype to the new games that are full of unknowns for everyone.

TLDR: yes, I do think remakes get in the way of the newer generation's games, and it's really a shame.

 

[VisualJae]

You don't think old fans also benefit from re-releases of their favorite games? A lot of older fans had no way to (legally) play RBY anymore before the VC release, whether it was because of lost/dead cartridges or no longer owning a handheld that could play the games, and I can assure you that those people jumped for joy when the VC release was first announced.

I don't think I once mentioned re-releases are a bad thing. My whole point is that remakes from a company standpoint is a good move.

Not necessarily true. FRLG added hardly anything new to RB, and what little new content that was added was pretty explicitly meant to cater to new fans over older ones (ie. tutorials). And, then there's all of the Emerald content that ORAS took away, which angered more fans than pleased.

FRLG didn't add anything new? Updated graphics, the Sevii Islands, corrected bugs/glitches that plagued the original Gen. I games? Those are all critical changes.

Careful about assuming public opinion. We don't know if content removal from Emerald truly angered more people than not. The vast majority for any game's playerbase is not vocal and that's something I've learned from years of being involved with game development and community management. Changes typically are not done on a whim; they're based on data. But that's a completely different subject. And considering Emerald is the worst selling core series game to date, the sample size is even smaller.

The remakes have consistently sold far less than the main paired games and even the third versions if you account for them being two games instead of one. The RBY re-release, on the other hand, broke eShop sales records and was a smashing success, especially when you consider how little GF and Nintendo spent on it compared to the remakes.

There are two things I need to mention here. First, in what market will 100% of all customers buy the same or similar product twice? You're not banking on existing customers to convert 100%. You're looking at reaching at least a percentage of the current audience while marketing to pull in new ones as an investment for the future. In addition, a better comparison would be to see how many copies Ruby/Sapphire sold in its first X months and check how many ORAS sold in the same time period. So here are numbers as food for thought.

Between November 2002 and end of March 2003, accounting for both JAP/NA releases of Ruby/Sapphire, the games sold 6.6 million units.

Between November 2014 and end of March 2015, ORAS sold nearly 10 million units. And as of March 2016 (~16 months), sold 11.8 million units.

Granted, ORAS was a simultaneous release in both Japan and North America while the original Ruby/Sapphire were released in NA in March 2003. Similarly, it wasn't until March 2004 (~16 months) that the games surpassed the 12 million mark. I would hardly say this remake has sold far less.

Lastly, we have to take into account the performance of these games in comparison to other Nintendo titles. The Pokémon core series games, remakes or not, routinely sit in the Top 5, if not #1, on Nintendo's handheld game sales during their first couple fiscals.

The second factor unrelated to comparing fiscal numbers is that it's very difficult to compare FRLG and HGSS with RBY and GSC, respectively. The initial Pokémon phenomenon was unprecedented. The mania had long died down by the time the remakes came around (better yet, the mania already died down by the time RSE came around). A better comparison would be if Game Freak releases a Gen. IV remake and compare the numbers with the original Diamond/Pearl sales (again, taking into account the same time frame).

Again, my whole point is that remakes are not detrimental. Re-releases a la RBY in the VC are not detrimental. They do more for a company than what you see at a glance. Thinking the remakes screwed with the counterparts in their generation is like conspiracy theory (again, we don't know how the development tech roadmap is laid out and whether or not company pressure was involved). Another angle to take is, "Would you have preferred the remakes to be of equal or poorer quality than the previous installment (i.e. ORAS vs. XY), or would you like to see an improvement?" I'm confident had ORAS been of shoddier quality than XY, fans would have complained the games were rushed.

 

[BettyNewbie]

VisualJae, we're just going to endlessly go back and forth without ever reaching an agreement, and I'm honestly not in the mood for it. I've already told you my thoughts; take 'em or leave 'em.

This is part of why remakes worry me, because I love seeing old games with new graphics and gaining new fans, but not focus is taken away from the newer games.

I like the Kalos anime a lot, but X&Y as games - I own X, and have played through the gyms / E4 once and never went back to it. I love the concept of it, and the graphics, and the trainer customization, but ORAS got even more focus when it came to graphics, and already had a decent story. People kicked X&Y to the wayside when ORAS came out. X&Y didn't even have much of a story to speak of, it basically felt like I was playing a game that was created to show off its graphics. Which doesn't make it a good game. It was cute, but as far as main series Poke games go, I much prefer B&W, DPPt, and others to it. Black and White had very good characters and plotline IMO, and I was hoping X&Y would beat it out, but eh.

I really hope Sun and Moon has had as much focus as some people in this thread are saying, because I think the franchise could really use a Pokemon game right now that doesn't feel so rushed. ORAS is out of the way, so hopefully their focus has been mostly on Sun and Moon and not on some Sinnoh remakes. At least not yet.

Another downside is that a lot of us have already played the games the remakes are created from, so no matter how excited people get for remakes, there's still more hype to the new games that are full of unknowns for everyone.

TLDR: yes, I do think remakes get in the way of the newer generation's games, and it's really a shame.

Agree 100%. We really do get better generations when GF isn't devoting half of their time and resources to remaking an old game. Again, look at Gens 2 and 5, for example. (And, compare them to, say, Gens 3 and 6.)

 

[Pinkie-Dawn]

I find remakes to be detrimental for failing to fix the problems the original games had, which include the dex rosters, level curves, and postgame content.

 

[Hikamaru]

I find remakes to be detrimental for failing to fix the problems the original games had, which include the dex rosters, level curves, and postgame content.

We mostly have to blame that on Game Freak for trying to keep most of the content as close to the originals as possible, aside from some extra stuff added like Sevii Islands, Pokeathlon and the Delta Episode.

 

[Desert Stream~]

I'm pretty sure they start remakes/third versions after the first games are done so it isn't taking up any time. I really don't think they are bad.

 

[BettyNewbie]

We mostly have to blame that on Game Freak for trying to keep most of the content as close to the originals as possible, aside from some extra stuff added like Sevii Islands, Pokeathlon and the Delta Episode.

Yeah, GF seems to have issues with deviating too much from the original games in remakes, usually for the worst.

Look at FRLG, for example. They actually went so far as to remove time and prevent you from evolving Pokémon like Golbat and Chansey, all in the name of being "faithful" to the originals. And, they didn't even include stuff Yellow added. Obviously, the Pikachu starter wasn't happening, but why not still have the regular starters (and their evolutions) follow you around? Or, Rocket Grunt double battle encounters in place of Jessie and James? Or, Yellow gym leader teams and levels? Or, the surfing Pikachu minigame? They could've even reused the Yellow gift starter events to give you Johto starters (which were very hard to get in Gen 3).

Even HGSS and ORAS still had many of these same issues, although to a lesser degree than FRLG. HGSS still retained GSC's awkward level curve and did little to fix the wild Pokémon distribution and gym leader/E4 teams, while ORAS completely ignored Emerald's additions and did little to fix Hoenn's type distribution and map design issues.

Why bother with a remake if it's going to retain most of the same flaws of the original? Luckily, HGSS and (to a lesser extent) ORAS still offer enough new content to have value over the originals, but the same cannot be said for FRLG, especially ever since the RBY re-release.

 

[Elysieum]

I don't think remakes are getting in the way of anything. I have enjoyed every one of the games individually and in the order that they were released in. Come to think of it, Fire Red is the game that I have replayed the most out of all of them. Yes, that enjoyment probably has a lot to do with the nostalgia tied to Red and Blue, but there is nothing wrong with that.

Of course, when Game Freak works on multiple games their resources will be divided, but that balance is something the company is growing very well at keeping. It would seem silly to me to bind a company of that size and success to the production of one game at a time. I don't know how far they will take the business of remakes into the future (imagine an XY remake by the time Gen IX comes around), but thus far, I for one have not been disappointed.

That Game Freak keeps more than one iron in the fire is not something to disparage.