The hate towards remasters/remakes

[mibu no ookami]

I always find it interesting when I see people hating on remasters/remakes.

Remasters and remakes not only in many ways modernize games, but it keeps games alive for current and future generations.

Metal Gear Solid Collection came out with MGS1-3 (as well as MG1-2), but people immediately complained that Metal Gear Solid was 240p30... with drops in frame rate... There was so much of a leap with MGS2 over MGS; imagine if we had a proper remaster on PS2 and no I'm not talking about Twin Snakes. That game would be far more playable today it it had received a remaster. One of my favorite games of all time, but it does not hold up well.

Then you have a number of games from the PS3 that aren't playable on the PS4 or PS5. Shadow of the Colossus got a great remake (though it should get a patch to allow fidelity at 60 fps) but the same isn't true of Ico or the Last Guardian.

People are begging for Bloodborne because it is stuck in 30 fps, but ALL games that are viable deserve preservation and not just preservation in their original quality, but with the advantages of technology, especially for a price that suits consumers and businesses. You won't see me scoff at a 10-dollar upgrade for a game that keeps it modern for another 10-15+ years.

I guess at the end of the day I would say, if you aren't interested in a game, just don't buy it, but there are plenty of people who would love to play their favorite games from previous generations as well as people who were LTTP on certain games. Right now we have the technology to bring some of the best games ever made to a much more playable state in modern times.

I'll take a remaster/remake or nothing or over a cheap/lazy/broken port any day.

 

[toadsage44]

There's a big difference between remaking/remastering an old game that's no longer accessible or has mechanics that haven't aged well, and a game that came out on PS3 and already had a remaster on PS4. Especially when the PS5 plays PS4 games. I'm all for remakes and remasters of games that need them, but you're out of your fucking mind if you can tell me with a straight face that TLOU1 needed a remake, or that TLOU2 needed a remaster, etc etc

 

[Orangee]

Issue is in which games are redone, not that they are redoing games I feel. Also, when you reveal one new game inbetween 3 remasters, then I am not surprised people are mad lol

 

[arvfab]

I always find it interesting when I see people hating on remasters/remakes.

Remasters and remakes not only in many ways modernize games, but it keeps games alive for current and future generations.

Metal Gear Solid Collection came out with MGS1-3 (as well as MG1-2), but people immediately complained that Metal Gear Solid was 240p30... with drops in frame rate... There was so much of a leap with MGS2 over MGS; imagine if we had a proper remaster on PS2 and no I'm not talking about Twin Snakes. That game would be far more playable today it it had received a remaster. One of my favorite games of all time, but it does not hold up well.

Then you have a number of games from the PS3 that aren't playable on the PS4 or PS5. Shadow of the Colossus got a great remake (though it should get a patch to allow fidelity at 60 fps) but the same isn't true of Ico or the Last Guardian.

People are begging for Bloodborne because it is stuck in 30 fps, but ALL games that are viable deserve preservation and not just preservation in their original quality, but with the advantages of technology, especially for a price that suits consumers and businesses. You won't see me scoff at a 10-dollar upgrade for a game that keeps it modern for another 10-15+ years.

I guess at the end of the day I would say, if you aren't interested in a game, just don't buy it, but there are plenty of people who would love to play their favorite games from previous generations as well as people who were LTTP on certain games. Right now we have the technology to bring some of the best games ever made to a much more playable state in modern times.

I'll take a remaster/remake or nothing or over a cheap/lazy/broken port any day.

Remakes and remasters are not the problem. Even the ones which do not deserve one are not the problem.

The problem is it, when there is barely anything new ADDITIONALLY to the remasters/remakes.

 

[Johnic]

I love a good remake/remaster. Just not of games that are completely fine and readily accessible today. Remake stuff from the PS1/2 eras, not stuff from last gen.

Remaster PS3 games that most people don't have access to on current gen consoles, not a game that's playable on PS5. So many great series left on that console.

And as Orangee said, when you have a major studio announce nothing but remakes and remasters in 4 entire years, while cancelling another project, people tend to get pissed.

 

[Old Gamer]

Remasters are fine, when they are complementing new releases and new IP. Overreliance on remasters is the problem.

 

[Jivesh1995]

I thinks more frustration that games that have already been updated to run at 60 fps are getting remasters whilst games that haven't or are stuck on old platforms are being ignored

 

[Hezekiah]

I think £10 remasters for more recent games are fine - even with Zero Dawn a lot of people changed their minds on it once they realised it was a cheap upgrade (plus it helps that Forbidden West is such a beautiful looking game and a clear improvement graphically).

I think $70 remakes are a bit of a pisstake. I know people who liked Demon Souls, but it doesn't appear to have sold that well. TLOU wasnt needed imo and was priced terribly. Should have been £40, maybe £50 tops.

It doesn't help when several come at once because I think it highlights the long development times that AAA games now have.

Basically I think Sony would be better off doing £10 remasters where needed (and this does not include Days Gone!), and remakes of older classic games like God of War 1 - 3 and Ascension, and Killzone 2 and 3.

 

[Bo_Hazem]

People hate remakes/remasters because the very same studios haven't made new games in years. So yeah the hate is 100% granted.

 

[mibu no ookami]

There's a big difference between remaking/remastering an old game that's no longer accessible or has mechanics that haven't aged well, and a game that came out on PS3 and already had a remaster on PS4. Especially when the PS5 plays PS4 games. I'm all for remakes and remasters of games that need them, but you're out of your fucking mind if you can tell me with a straight face that TLOU1 needed a remake, or that TLOU2 needed a remaster, etc etc

Did MGS1 need a remaster on PS2? No, but had it received one, it would be a more playable game today and a more marketable game today.

If a Metal Gear Solid movie came out today, how many people would rush out to play the first game for the first time?

My biggest criticism of TLOU1 remake is that they kept the gameplay the same and that it feels super dated compared to TLOU2. They had a real opportunity to bring that game in line with the sequel. It feels more like a remaster of remaster than anything, but explain why it sold so well if it wasn't needed.

TLOU2 is perfectly playable now, but how will that game look and run as is on machines in 5-10 years? What you don't realize is that what Sony is doing now is investing in preserving and promoting its IP, something that people WISH Sony did more of in their earlier days.

 

[mibu no ookami]

I thinks more frustration that games that have already been updated to run at 60 fps are getting remasters whilst games that haven't or are stuck on old platforms are being ignored

How viable are the games that don't run at 60 fps? Are they popular games? Are their studios still around? Was it developed by a company that owns the studio who made it? Does the studio still have the assets required to remaster it?

 

[Systemshock2023]

If a 6th generation game has widescreen support and a PC port, it does not need a remaster/remake. Just a re release in modern platforms.

5th generation games and older could use remakes.

 

[BillyZ]

Pretty much all remakes and remasters from Sony are lazy, overpriced and creatively bankrupt. Do something interesting and it will be received better.

 

[mibu no ookami]

I think £10 remasters for more recent games are fine - even with Zero Dawn a lot of people changed their minds on it once they realised it was a cheap upgrade (plus it helps that Forbidden West is such a beautiful looking game and a clear improvement graphically).

It's interesting. I think these 10 dollar upgrades are a great value proposition for existing owners who want to replay the game and keep their license preserved for future systems that may not go as far back as older console generations, but this also kind of reveals that people are just a bit cheap as well.

I think $70 remakes are a bit of a pisstake. I know people who liked Demon Souls, but it doesn't appear to have sold that well. TLOU wasnt needed imo and was priced terribly. Should have been £40, maybe £50 tops.

Demon's Souls is a ground up remake of a game, is there a reason in particular it shouldn't be full price? The original game didn't sell that well, but souls games have become much bigger since. I think it made sense to remake the game and if you're judging it on sales doesn't that make an argument for TLOU which sold well?

It doesn't help when several come at once because I think it highlights the long development times that AAA games now have.

Basically I think Sony would be better off doing £10 remasters where needed (and this does not include Days Gone!), and remakes of older classic games like God of War 1 - 3 and Ascension, and Killzone 2 and 3.

Maybe it reflects a lack of general maturity from some gamers who don't understand that yes development times are longer now and that one of the best ways for studios to onboard new staff is to have them work on low stress low difficulty remasters and that it brings the studios much needed revenue when their cashflow is stretched between games. That this allows studios to grow and make games with the AAA scope that we're looking for.

It also seems there is a lack of maturity in realizing that whether a game is for you personally doesn't dictate whether there was value in remastering it.

 

[Bo_Hazem]

Did MGS1 need a remaster on PS2? No, but had it received one, it would be a more playable game today and a more marketable game today.

If a Metal Gear Solid movie came out today, how many people would rush out to play the first game for the first time?

My biggest criticism of TLOU1 remake is that they kept the gameplay the same and that it feels super dated compared to TLOU2. They had a real opportunity to bring that game in line with the sequel. It feels more like a remaster of remaster than anything, but explain why it sold so well if it wasn't needed.

TLOU2 is perfectly playable now, but how will that game look and run as is on machines in 5-10 years? What you don't realize is that what Sony is doing now is investing in preserving and promoting its IP, something that people WISH Sony did more of in their earlier days.

MGS1 needs a remake.

 

[mibu no ookami]

MGS1 needs a remake.

It needs a remake because it never got a (proper) remaster. Let's say Twin Snakes was a proper remaster, it would be the definitive version of the game and it would be the version used in these collections. Instead we have a 240p30 game. In fact, the entire lineup runs at 30fps.

Metal Gear Solid came out in 1998. 26 years ago. You have to remake it now. And that remake won't involved Kojima or Kojima Productions and that's going to be problematic, because this is going to need an RE2 style remake not just a remaster.

Games like Horizon and TLOU are going to be playable for significantly longer than MGS because of the remasters/remakes the franchise has received. When they want to put out a trilogy collection, these games aren't going to be in piss poor states. And you'll note that both TLOU and Horizon launched on their respective consoles at 30 fps as well. 1080p30 in a 4K era just doesn't cut the mustard. You can upscale these games as much as you want and double their framerate, but that won't hold up well over time either.

 

[Bo_Hazem]

It needs a remake because it never got a (proper) remaster. Let's say Twin Snakes was a proper remaster, it would be the definitive version of the game and it would be the version used in these collections. Instead we have a 240p30 game. In fact, the entire lineup runs at 30fps.

Metal Gear Solid came out in 1998. 26 years ago. You have to remake it now. And that remake won't involved Kojima or Kojima Productions and that's going to be problematic, because this is going to need an RE2 style remake not just a remaster.

Games like Horizon and TLOU are going to be playable for significantly longer than MGS because of the remasters/remakes the franchise has received. When they want to put out a trilogy collection, these games aren't going to be in piss poor states. And you'll note that both TLOU and Horizon launched on their respective consoles at 30 fps as well. 1080p30 in a 4K era just doesn't cut the mustard. You can upscale these games as much as you want and double their framerate, but that won't hold up well over time either.

Problems people are having is not having new games, not remasters/remakes themselves. Last MGS game was 9 years ago. It's one of the most important games to me since 1998. Many nights and days, lots of tears and joy with this series. Heck, I've been #1 in the world for 1-2 weeks with MGSV because since it opened day one I played non-stop for 51 hours with no sleep and skipped work.

I support making MGS6 without Kojima. He's a brilliant producer but it's not like they can't make a good MGS6 without him. Japan must have some good producers that can continue the series and bring back David Hayter like they did in the latest remake.

 

[mibu no ookami]

Problems people are having is not having new games, not remasters/remakes themselves. Last MGS game was 9 years ago. It's one of the most important games to me since 1998. Many nights and days, lots of tears and joy with this series. Heck, I've been #1 in the world for 1-2 weeks with MGSV because since it opened day one I played non-stop for 51 hours with no sleep and skipped work.

I support making MGS6 without Kojima. He's a brilliant producer but it's not like they can't make a good MGS6 without him. Japan must have some good producers that can continue the series and bring back David Hayter like they did in the latest remake.

I'd be less worried about them making MGS6 without Kojima than them remaking MGS1 without him.

MGS1 is going to need a ground up remake, choices are going to have to be made to modernize it.

Capcom was able to remake RE2 superbly without Kamiya and Mikami, but there's no guarantee that Konami has the talent to do the same, hence why they're farming these games out and why they started with MGS3 rather than 1 or 2.

I'd love a competent remake to MGS1 and we'll see how well Virtuos does here with Delta, but I'd be really nervous about this. You look at FF7 remake and you can see how poorly things can go when people make the wrong choices. Ironically, that's with a lot of the original people in charge.

 

[TrishaCat]

I like remasters and remakes I just wish it'd be games older than last gen getting them

 

[RE4-Station]

I wish Capcom would just port (Not even remaster) cult classics from the Gamecube Gen. PN 03 was like Stellar Blade 21 years ago and Haunting Grounds has gained a cult following.