Submitted 11 months ago by stopthatgirl7@kbin.social to games@lemmy.world
https://kotaku.com/the-last-of-us-part-ii-2-remaster-remake-ps5-tlou-1851036983
When should developers go back and remaster or remake their most popular games?
I think the issue is calling a next gen port a remaster. Yea it is technically a remaster but adding that to the title makes it seem like more then that.
If said game was released as definite or something nobody would be talking rn
Those words never meant anything anyway
No one would be complaining if it was labeled as a director’s cut but maybe theres a legit marketing reason to avoid the label
A remaster implies that it’s taking what exists and bringing it to a new thing.
If there’s a 4k scan of a movie that was made for blurays and then a few years later that 4k scan gets used to release an uhd version, we don’t complain.
If developers want to re-release their games on new platforms, I say sure? No skin off my back, helps them work on engine and tooling for the new platforms, gives games another wind. Literally does not matter to me.
I really struggle to see why anyone would be against these ports, honestly.
People aren't against them. They are against pointless remakes like the PS5 version of The Last of Us 1 (not the remaster, they fully remade the game), which changes...fuck all. Like seriously, what does it change of significance?
Like, sure, if the game isn't otherwise playable on the platform then by all means, but why waste all that time?
Then there is the confusion as to the categorisation of returning games and what label to put them under. In my book, you've got:
Emulation: literally the same game from the old console running in an interpreter program. Examples: NSO Collections, MGS 1 from MGS Master Collection
Port: Same game, more or less, but running natively on the console/PC.
Remaster: As above but with updated textures, models, FMVs, etc
Faithful Remake: The game code, assets, etc are completely re-done but the game strictly adheres to the source material, save for a few modern amenities like auto save and ironing out bugs. Examples include Spyro Reignited, Resident Evil 1 and Halo Anniversary.
Interpretive Remakes: Basically a completely new game using the old game's basic plot points and designs. Examples include: the Resident Evil Remakes (except 1) and the Final Fantasy 7 remake.
Some people might be against them for the reason that they can de-list their old games from digital storefronts. For newer games especially it'd make that hard to compare what was changed.
I guess it's not as relevant with newer titles, but I feel like the classics looked fine (especially with higher internal res which is a good option for emu) and had some really cool tech that gave it a nice aesthetic without it being bloated. So it kind of feels like it's missing the point.
Like with Spyro, a big draw for me is the usage of vertex color including the skyboxes (one example, album). So it went from ~300MiB to 30-60GiB+. I mean sure some old games were designed with raster graphics that look crusty now, but for something like Spyro I'd rather play even a fan _de_make (leaning further into vertex colors) with more fleshed out gameplay (/more content) though too many fan game creators haven't learned to distance even their game titles from trademarks.
People are against them. Demonstrably.
Also worth reading everything I wrote not just the bits you want to read
If developers want to re-release their games on new platforms, I say sure? No skin off my back, helps them work on engine and tooling for the new platforms, gives games another wind. Literally does not matter to me.
No more remakes until Xenogears is remade.
25 years is definitely not too soon 😫
Forever is too soon. STOP regurgitating content and create new IP.
I’m going to go with 1 year for every 2 years since 1970. So 10 years for a game released in 1990, 26 years for a game released this year.
How long until the next Skyrim release? Todd, you sonovabitch…
I mean, is it too soon if people are still going to buy it? More seriously, I think one whole console generation is a good standard for remasters. Just so long as you can point to something that looks or plays better than the original did. For a remake, I think you need more time and the game your making needs to feel like it couldn't have been made on the original hardware. Either way three years feels way too soon, especially for what is essentially a next-gen port or a definitive edition.
I may be an outlier here, but I don’t think remakes should be done at all anymore. They were great when the medium was still new and we made major jumps between generations or when we started to figure 3D out. Nowadays, I can’t even tell the difference between a PS4 and PS5 game. The medium is evolved enough to just go back and play the originals without them feeling dated in a bad way. Take for example the demon souls remake: Yes, it looked nice, but people argue to this day whether or not it’s better. The gameplay is identical. Or even worse: Look at Pokemon. The remake for Gen 4 is worse than the original and didn’t even include Platinum content. Instead of wasting dev time on a full on remake, they could have ported Platinum to the switch and called it a day. A remake probably only makes sense anymore if you can’t port a game at all. Make new games instead.
New games don’t make as much money as old games that people are nostalgic for. I hate that fact but its what the AAA industry has turned towards
It’s not just AAA gaming but all over Hollywood too, has been for a while. Nostalgia is a powerful force and churning out sequels or prequels or spinoffs off of recognizable IPs is just less risky an investment than trying to make something new.
Unfortunately you’re right seeing how well the Super Mario RPG remake does. They could have put it on their online serice and worked on a new one instead. That’s something I dislike about pretty much all media.
I don’t see the point of doing a remaster of that game now as it still looks and feels perfect.
But, I also won’t complain about it if it makes other people happy and lets them experience the game while allowing Naughty Dog to maximize their earnings with such a masterpiece.
I just hope a fresh project isn’t pushed back because of that remaster.
Aremel@lemmy.world 11 months ago
My vote is 10 years as an arbitrary number, or 2 or more console generations as the graphics technology will have (hopefully) have advanced enough to make an impactful difference in graphics quality.
Control schemes have largely not changed since the PS3/360 era, so there would be no point in remaking a game solely for that, at least not if it’s from around that era. For anyone that has played the Rare Replay, Rare Studio’s entire collection of games, Jetforce Gemini (a N64 game) had an option in the control settings to make the controls modernized.
All in all, a game should be remade/remastered if it is going to be significantly different to its original form. A fresh coat of paint does not a remake, uh make. For the best example of proper remakes in my opinion, see the Demon Souls remake or the Halo 2 Anniversary edition.
RGB3x3@lemmy.world 11 months ago
The Resident Evil remakes are also great examples of doing it right.
They’re not just a coat of paint, they’re the clearest examples of remakes with better everything.