Glen-i

Fixed that for you. Only a little sorry for that open-goal.

I can't speak for others, but I'm thinking of publishers. Developers can definitely fall into a genre they excel at, but I can't help but notice that Sony are slowly narrowing the kind of games they give the go-ahead over time. You mention some of the games in the PS4 era, but I can't help but notice that it's, well, noticeably less than the PS3 era (and the PS2 era before that) Back then, I was under the impression that it was because of increasing difficulty and costs when it comes to game development over the past decade, but if this report is accurate, it shows that Sony are starting to think that only multi-million smash hits are worth investing in. Which sounds fine from a purely business point of view, but fans who only have access to a Sony console for whatever reason, as well as developers that may want to work with Sony on a project, they may find themselves suffering as a result. It's actually quite similar to The Pokémon Company's worrying steps in regards to what they helped to fund over the past few years. Outside of the main Pokémon games, what Pokémon titles have there been that didn't have some kind of microtransaction stapled to them? Not many. It's gotten a little better, what with Rescue Team DX and the upcoming New Pokémon Snap, but it's not as varied as it was back in the days of the DS. I can't help but see similarities between that and this direction Sony is taking. And it's not good.

"Crush it with the inside of your thighs!" I mean, Ring's commentary is a minefield of accidental innuendo, but that one made me drop the Ring-con (it was in between said thighs) in laughter! Inadvertently made me take a five-minute break because I was having one of those laughing fits where it actually starts to hurt. Although that might have been exacerbated by the previous excerise. 17 days in now, I'm on World 5 now. The "Mountain Climber" exercise I was introduced to today is the first time where I couldn't pull it off. It was excruciatingly exhausting! I don't like it one bit! Had to cut my session short because it left me gasping for breath. I apologise, squat exercise, there are far worse things for me to attempt.

I mean, I like a Vita joke as much as the next person, but that did feel like kicking a guy while he's down, @Ronnie. It may be kinda niche, but it's a fantastic way of playing old PS1 games.

I'd probably play that. The world needs more rhythm games with the possibility of dancing lizards. Prove me wrong.

I want to argue for Pokémon Mystery Dungeon's case, but it's only 5 entries long, so I don't think it can stand up to the likes of Castlevania. It's still super consistent with the high quality of the soundtracks. I love that Smash Ultimate gave Castlevania so much attention in the music department. It must have been a nightmare whittling down those songs to the selection we got.

Yes, When something is described as a remake, I tend to expect something more than what we got in this regard. Yeah, there's a very realistic chance that you're right about me getting too hung up about it. I accept that maybe my standards for this kind of thing are too high. But you start throwing the term remake around with games that don't really do that much to actually provide a fresh take on an old classic and the gaming industry will start pushing it further to see just how much they can get away with. To be fair, I don't think Bluepoint are in the wrong, they were hired to handle this because that's what Bandai Namco wanted out of it. They did their job well and they should be praised for that. It's just not interesting to me in the slightest because I could theoretically boot up the PS3 and get the same experience, albeit at a lower resolution.

For what it's worth, @Rummy, I actually chuckled a bit at your response to "Person you MS Painted over to maintain anonymity" I like me some ironic humour. Not to mention the quote you quoted being quite eloquent and then your next post being anything but. But yeah, bots don't have a sense of humour, so that comment taken out of context would look bad to them. It sucks.

Look, I don't want to belittle the effort that went into this, because there was certainly effort, but it still doesn't make it more interesting than a remaster in my eyes. I've said it before and I'll say it again, graphics are the least important aspect of a game. I think that gets more and more true as we go further into console generations and the increases in graphical prowess get more and more miniscule. The fact is that by sticking so close to the original game, it's cemented itself as a remake that doesn't try to do anything new or interesting with the source material. And don't games as popular as the Souls series deserve better than being the same game, but prettier? Ironically, if a Last of Us remake were to happen and it just so happened to include mechanics from the sequel, then I'd have to concede that despite it still being way too soon, it at least tried to mix things up more than the Demon's Souls remake. And that's my issue with remakes like that. Yes, I'm well aware that I'm in the minority on this matter. A lot of gamers are perfectly content to have their remakes be purely visual upgrades and not much else. But that really shouldn't be good enough and no-one will change my mind on that.

Hate to say it, but loads of games are guilty of this. It's just a necessary evil whenever something becomes majorly successful.

It's not inherently a bad thing, but I still think that defeats the point of a remake in the first place. It's perfectly serviceable, but it's not as interesting as it could have been. You start throwing around remakes that are just effectively fancy remasters, and you run the risk of stagnation. I still believe that the worst thing a game can be is boring. If fans keep asking for the same thing over and over again, then it stifles creativity.

If they do, then it should take a leaf from Cadence of Hyrule's book and have a super goofy and squishy Lizalfos. Actually, I think Lizalfos should be the litmus test for all Zelda cross-overs. If your IP can't have a dopey looking Lizalfos and feel natural, then it shouldn't be allowed to cross-over. Sorry, Darkest Dungeon. Lizalfos just isn't supposed to be macabre.

I don't understand what you're asking. Why would you want an inferior remaster when they can give you a remake? A remaster would not look as graphically impressive. It doesn't matter if they change the gameplay much or not in the remake, in fact I'm sure certain people would be complaining for destroying the "identity" of the original game if they did that. Because the point of a remake is to aim for a new experience with a familiar setting. @Dcubed mentioned Link's Awakening, which is absolutely an improvement as far as presentation goes, but the game beneath is still very similar to the Game Boy version, with a couple of QoL improvements. Because of this, it doesn't feel as fresh as it could have. Compare that to something like FF7 Remake and you'll see what I mean. It's a beloved classic being presented via a completely different method of gameplay. While it's way more extreme than your average example of a remake, it's a great example of what I mean. You can play the original PlayStation entry and then play the remake and they'd feel different enough that you'd probably wouldn't get bored. (Assuming you actually enjoy both games, but that's not the point) This is why I cite the likes of Metroid: Zero Mission and PMD: Rescue Team DX, they're more similar to their originals in the sense that they don't change genre, but they feel very different to each other despite sharing similar plots. (Zero Mission differentiates itself from the NES Metroid by having completely different upgrades and radically overhauled level design. Rescue Team DX switches things up by adopting mechanics introduced in the 3DS entries to provide a more varied and interesting gameplay flow) EDIT: Ah, you edited while I was posting. If you're aiming to preserve the original feeling of the game, then a remaster does that well enough in my view. Why go so far to remake something if you're just going to give it a fresh coat of paint?

Ah, see. You're thinking about this from a viewpoint that a remake should happen because games should be accessible on the current generation of consoles. While I do agree with this sentiment, don't simple remasters fulfill this purpose well enough? Let me try and put this in the form of a question. Apart from the visual upgrade, what's actually new in the Demon's Souls remake?

Oh my daze, I feel stupid for forgetting Final Fantasy's prelude. I knew that fact beforehand as well!

This is where I stand as well. If you're gonna remake a game, do so in a way that offers something new to those who have already played the original. (Metroid: Zero Mission is another good one) It's kinda why I'm a bit apprehensive about the upcoming Pokémon Diamond/Pearl remakes. The previous 3 remakes (FireRed/LeafGreen to OmegaRuby/AlphaSapphire) take the familiar settings of older games and use the more modern mechanics and new Pokémon available to offer a different take on those games. But Brilliant Diamond/Shining Pearl are hinting that it's going to remain very faithful to the original as far as the mechanics go. If this is the case, I think it's a mistake. Most of the appeal of a Pokémon remake is experiencing a game with updated mechanics and a larger roster of Pokémon and moves to utilise.

Actually, I'm playing that on the side. I had a feeling you'd mention that. Just recruited a robot called Adam. Which sounds cool, until I realised that he's 30 levels behind everyone else and can't hit any enemy for more than 1 damage. Completely useless at this point in the game.

Quoting from the article that was posted in the PS5 thread. Originally, it was meant to be a new development team handling it, but then Sony moved some of Naughty Dog to the remake because they wanted them to take over. @CrowingJoe79 aren't most Resident Evil games kind of silly? They tend to be the kind of thing you'd see in B-movies. If anything, it's the recent entries that have tried to be more serious, plot-wise.

I don't think Capcom use Resi Evil anymore than they normally have. It's one of their flagship IP's. I think you're being quite harsh on Capcom, especially if you're referring to the likes of RE2 Remake. That's a pretty substantial remake when you compare it to the original game. It's not quite the same thing.

I've been thinking about a certain kind of remix today. Mostly because I've started playing most of the console entries of the Wonder Boy series (I'm dubbing that the "Wonder Bender"). The kind of remix I'm thinking about is the remix that subverts expectations by adding a new section to an original track in some way. Whenever I think about this, Death Mountain in A Link Between Worlds comes to mind. Here's the original. A pretty great song. But the version that appears in it's 3DS version is one that I absolutely adore. You hear that? That little extra bit at 42 seconds? It's a small thing, but I think it really elevates the track while not sounding out of place. The way it flows into the last few notes of the song is just brilliant. Anyway, moving on to Wonder Boy: The Dragon's Trap, the game that got me thinking about this in the first place. Here's a song from the Master System version. Pretty catchy, huh? Nice beat to it. Here's the remake version. OK, it has to be mentioned, but taking that original version and making it sound absolutely melancholic in comparison is already pretty amazing, but that's not even the aspect I'm thinking about. At the 1:20 mark, just when you're thinking "Oh, it's looped, that was quick" the song takes a sudden swerve from melancholy to bombastic! It's such a powerful moment and it gives me goosebumps. Speaking of goosebumps, back to Zelda and the game that takes subversive remixes to the extreme, Link's Awakening. It's 51 seconds long, and while it does have some atmosphere to it (as atmospheric as the Game Boy can do, in reality), it can get really repetitive. Enter the Switch version. I mean, wow. What else is there to say? I might have spent 5 minutes standing still in the first room of that dungeon just to take it all in. Apart from 80% of the Link's Awakening Switch soundtrack, I have to say, I can't think of many other examples of this kind of thing. Which is a shame, because I think it's really powerful when done right.

I don't think Naughty Dog themselves pitched the idea. But the reason is pretty obvious. It's money. It normally is when it comes to games. Sony have themselves a smash hit in The Last of Us and they want to milk that cash cow as much as they can. It's the same reason why Nintendo are doing a straight-up sequel to Breath of the Wild, not to mention commissioning Koei Tecmo to make a Hyrule Warriors sequel that serves as a prequel to BotW. That said, it's not seen as blatantly greedy because at least fans will get a new game out of it and even a BotW sceptic like me got some fun out of it. Age of Calamity is legit fun. The difference with this is that a theoretical remake of such a recent game shouldn't cost nearly as much as most remakes. The Last of Us still holds up as far as it's production values go (I don't care for these kind of games, but that's besides the point). A remake wouldn't really bring that much to the table. It'd look as good as the second game while maybe bringing a few mechanics to it. But yeah, because it's so recent, there's not much that would feel different. You'll never get a remake that feels fresh out of it. You want remakes that do this well, just look at the likes of Wonder Boy: The Dragon's Trap. When this remake came out, the original game was 28 years old! And I legit think it's the gold standard for video game remakes. It's one of the most beautiful games I've ever played. (Seriously, seeing it in motion is something else) Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Rescue Team DX is another good example. It's impossible to apply that kind of radical shift to The Last of Us, doesn't matter how good your development team is. It's far too soon. So yeah, big profit with relatively little effort is the reason for this.

I was looking at my shelf and saw my Mega Drive Mini sitting there, and I realised I haven't actually finished any game on it yet. (OK, I have finished Sonic 1 and 2, but that was on the Gamecube, way back) So I booted it up and realised something. Between the Mega Drive Mini and the Switch, I think I have access to every console entry of the Wonder Boy series. Except the first one, but no-one cares, because that game is awful. So I've started with Wonder Boy in Monster World, which I've only just learnt isn't the second game, because the second game is called "Wonder Boy in Monster Land" and is an arcade game (Why are the titles in this series so bloody confusing!?) No, I've accidentally started with the fifth entry! Um... Woops? (BTW, what entry do you think "Wonder Boy III: The Dragon's Trap" is? Nope! It's the fourth entry, idiot!) Despite the fact that I've accidentally pulled a Virtue's Last Reward with this (Hi, @Dcubed), I'm going on regardless, because I'm halfway through and I doubt the order is that important as long as Monster Boy and the Cursed Kingdom is played last. Anyway, it's a pretty fun game so far. Leans more heavily into the Metroid genre than Dragon's Trap does. Which I guess is because the Mega Drive is more capable of pulling that off then the Master System was. Now that I know Dragon's Trap was before this game, it's kind of strange that this doesn't have some kind of unique mechanic to replace Dragon Trap's animal transformations. It feels a lot more basic as a result. (Which is my excuse for thinking it was the second game) The soundtrack is also kinda lame? I know, going from Cursed Kingdom's wide variety of songs and Dragon Trap's glorious remastered soundtrack is a bit unfair on this game, but it doesn't quite hit as hard. Also, and this is probably because of it being a product of it's time, but there is one enemy that shows up that... Well, it's racist. Simply put. That kind of stereotypical native cliché that would never fly these days. It was especially jarring seeing as the setting is "Monster World" and all the other enemies are, well, monsters. So it doesn't even fit in the game! It seems to only show up in one 5 minute section that I never need to go back to again, but that's still a big "Oof". That said, I don't think going back to mess with an original version of a game to change something like that would be the right way to go about it. But a disclaimer before I booted it up would've been welcome. (Kinda like how Warner Brothers handles their more questionable older cartoons)

Honestly, I'm just reeling from the fact that someone in 2018 looked at 5 year old super mega hit The Last of Us and thought, "We need to remake this" That's a big "WTF?" from me. Seems way too soon to consider that.

Releasing a version of Banjo-Tooie where you aren't able to break the game with the Super Banjo cheat should be a criminal offense. It's literally... Actually made me sick. The final battle being a million times harder because of the borked aiming was the final straw.

I gotta say, did not expect the thread to lurch in this direction when I made it. It's great!