If Nintendo go totally HD collection crazy on Wii U...

[Fierce_LiNk]

Yes, but many people haven't. There's a whole generation that has never played through such classic games and these re-release give them the opportunity to do so, without having to track another console down on ebay.

 

I can totally see what you are getting at, but at the end of the day if the HD releases are being outsourced and made by other people, which 99% of them do, then I don't see any harm in it. It's not as if they would be taking focus away from the AAA teams.

 

I'm just going to highlight the original opening post from James again.

 

 

...are you in?

 

Imagine the possibilities. HD Gamecube classics like Wind Waker and Prime...and then Wii games, like Galaxy, Donkey Kong Country Returns, etc.

 

I'm just wondering, how much will people let Nintendo away with it? Are you gonna let them get away with milking SD for years and buy all their games again...or are you deliberately not reward them for it and not buy any?

 

 

So, I'm basing this on me. I'm not talking about people who haven't experienced these games. They're free to do whatever they want. As far as I'm concerned, a HD-re-release of classics is so far down at the bottom of the list of things that needs addressing on Nintendo systems.

 

Secondly, I'm going to argue that there already is a system in place for "new gamers" to experience "old games."

 

It's called the Virtual Console. If these new gamers want to experience games such as Super Metroid, or A Link To The Past, then they can do it through there. That's where they should be.

 

Thirdly, who does the marketing for these games, like Ocarina of Time 3D? If it's Nintendo, then I am going to argue that it's using their resources for something that is not necessarily needed.

Edited May 7, 2012 by Fierce_LiNk

[Beverage]

Imagine something like people playing Mario Kart online and, at the same time, Smashers are fighting on a Mario Kart stage which become obstacles for the Mario Karters

 

I would find that totally amusing! I think lap records would constantly be getting smashed because all the racers would be eager to get to the 'smash area' to change a brawlers luck lol - firing items or knocking their smashin' shoes off!! ("it was Pokemon Trainer who got in my way... you wait 'til I go round there again! *saves bob-omb")

 

teh second idea was tasteful two

Edited May 7, 2012 by Beverage

[Hero-of-Time]

Secondly, I'm going to argue that there already is a system in place for "new gamers" to experience "old games."

 

It's called the Virtual Console. If these new gamers want to experience games such as Super Metroid, or A Link To The Past, then they can do it through there. That's where they should be.

 

Thirdly, who does the marketing for these games, like Ocarina of Time 3D? If it's Nintendo, then I am going to argue that it's using their resources for something that is not necessarily needed.

 

A lot of newer gamer won't touch stuff like the VC/older games due to them being in SD/shoddy graphics. Two of my nephews are such gamers. They complain about things looking fuzzy on their LCD televisions. I can get over such things but many people can't.

 

OOT was essentially a remake not a HD upgrade. Things like Devil May Cry, Silent Hill, Splinter Cell, Sly Trilogy, Prince of Persia etc. didn't seem to get any form of advertising. At the end of the day these HD collections are just to make a quick buck for the developers and also to increase the awareness of the franchises they represent.

 

Nintendo have kinda done this in the past with Play and Control. While the HD twins had HD collections, Nintendo dished out a few Cube titles with waggle added. They didn't get a big advertising push, were obviously cheap to make and gave people a chance to play games they had missed out on. This especially helped with Pikimn 2 as it goes for quite a high price on ebay. Also, if the rumours are true and the US is indeed finally getting Pikmin 2 on the Wii, it supports the idea of increasing the awareness of a franchise, especially with Pikmin 3 around the corner.

[Magnus]

Thirdly, who does the marketing for these games, like Ocarina of Time 3D? If it's Nintendo, then I am going to argue that it's using their resources for something that is not necessarily needed.

Well, presumably they'd try to make a profit (or they wouldn't bother with it), so if anything they should end up with more money to spend on new games.

[Sheikah]

I don't think I did get the wrong end of the stick at all. My argument is, regardless of what code house remakes a game, its all man hours and comes at a cost. Or is that cash and development talent better spent put towards a brand new game?

 

Actually you haven't grasped the point at all.

 

The people they hire out to do HD makeovers are companies that probably won't have the money/expertise to make their own games (or at least decent games) ie. nobody cares if doing this means they can't do anything else.

 

e.g. the company Just Add Water are handling Oddworld remakes. They've made pretty much sod all else so who cares that they're spending their time making Oddworld games? In fact, they're probably (in fact, almost certainly) glad for the business.

 

The money they charge for doing the remakes is obviously just a small chunk of the profit the game will make back through sales (else they wouldn't comission it).

 

Ergo, no loss of Nintendo man hours, no loss of Nintendo profit (in fact, gain).

 

Well, presumably they'd try to make a profit (or they wouldn't bother with it), so if anything they should end up with more money to spend on new games.

 

Exactly. None of it would be done if there wasn't profit made through doing it.

 

It's probably a good thing having remakes, might give Nintendo marketers some games to actually market (if that's even Nintendo and not contracted it out as well). :p

[david.dakota]

Actually you haven't grasped the point at all.

 

The people they hire out to do HD makeovers are companies that probably won't have the money/expertise to make their own games (or at least decent games) ie. nobody cares if doing this means they can't do anything else.

 

e.g. the company Just Add Water are handling Oddworld remakes. They've made pretty much sod all else so who cares that they're spending their time making Oddworld games? In fact, they're probably (in fact, almost certainly) glad for the business.

 

The money they charge for doing the remakes is obviously just a small chunk of the profit the game will make back through sales (else they wouldn't comission it).

 

Ergo, no loss of Nintendo man hours, no loss of Nintendo profit (in fact, gain).

 

 

 

Exactly. None of it would be done if there wasn't profit made through doing it.

 

It's probably a good thing having remakes, might give Nintendo marketers some games to actually market (if that's even Nintendo and not contracted it out as well). :p

 

You're clearly not grasping my point either: its all cash out of the bank and that could go straight to some developer to create some small piece of software that actually makes use of the tablet or NFC or some other piece of WiiU magic. New software beats a simply HD remake hands down; I'm not privy to the budgets here but I'd rather have the next Flower than a HD post of a 5 year old game (i'd wager that Flower was cheaper to produce than, say SOTC HD).

 

I've also made it as clear as water that certain software and hardware solutions already make SD visuals palatable on HD screens - so why bother with farming out the archive stuff just to appease the handful of die-hard fans who didn't bother investing in a decent TV?

 

I'll be honest I just see this as the old pointless argument of 'Nintendo should do what Sony and Microsoft do'. Well, fuck that for a game of soldiers, i'd rather see investment in new games than HD-ize the back catalogue.

 

We can argue all day about this but we both know that, given Nintendo's insistence on not improving VC games, they will never offer HD ports of back catalogue games.

[Sheikah]

You're clearly not grasping my point either: its all cash out of the bank and that could go straight to some developer to create some small piece of software that actually makes use of the tablet or NFC or some other piece of WiiU magic. New software beats a simply HD remake hands down; I'm not privy to the budgets here but I'd rather have the next Flower than a HD post of a 5 year old game (i'd wager that Flower was cheaper to produce than, say SOTC HD).

 

Wow, that's a pretty naive view. 'It's all cash out of the bank' - like Nintendo have a very limited amount of cash, and spending a small amount on a HD remake means they can't afford to make other games.

 

No, companies hire out other companies to make HD remakes, said games then make a profit so there's even more 'cash in the bank'. More cash to spend on waggle gimmicks, or whatever the crap they'd like.

 

I've also made it as clear as water that certain software and hardware solutions already make SD visuals palatable on HD screens - so why bother with farming out the archive stuff just to appease the handful of die-hard fans who didn't bother investing in a decent TV?

 

Change 'handful of die hard fans' to 'anybody who has bought a TV in the last 3 years and from now on'. Nearly all reasonably sized TVs being sold now are in HD, and larger TVs are cheaper than ever before. Larger the TV, shitter the old game looks. Completely understandable why people might like to play old classics in HD.

 

I'll be honest I just see this as the old pointless argument of 'Nintendo should do what Sony and Microsoft do'. Well, fuck that for a game of soldiers, i'd rather see investment in new games than HD-ize the back catalogue.

 

I would rather see Nintendo invest in good games and HD, like the other two companies have, which they've only really just started doing. Last step? Implement a non-shit online infrastructure.

 

We can argue all day about this but we both know that, given Nintendo's insistence on not improving VC games, they will never offer HD ports of back catalogue games.

 

Then let's pray more wonderful franchises like Banjo Kazooie get sold off then.

[Aimless]

Nintendo were re-releasing games before Sony and Microsoft were even part of the industry. Why wouldn't they sell HD versions of past games?

 

Actually, I'll answer my own question: because they know they can release the exact same thing instead of bothering to put any effort in.

[Cube]

Why would a game with the graphical detail and physics of Flower cost less than changing two values, and possibly fixing a few bugs that may appear?

[david.dakota]

Wow, that's a pretty naive view. 'It's all cash out of the bank' - like Nintendo have a very limited amount of cash, and spending a small amount on a HD remake means they can't afford to make other games.

 

No, companies hire out other companies to make HD remakes, said games then make a profit so there's even more 'cash in the bank'. More cash to spend on waggle gimmicks, or whatever the crap they'd like.

 

I'd argue that your view is naive though. It is all cash in the bank, Nintendo is a business first and foremost and the idea that anything else is really a priority is ridiculous. The investment has to bring in a return and I don't feel that HD ports have the sales figures, margins or added value that Nintendo focuses on. You just seem to be assuming that because they're relatively cheap that they're profitable, but I don't feel that they sell in the volumes necessary to make them a worthwhile investment. Honestly, if it were the case that they were just this big cash cow every game would be a HD port.

 

Change 'handful of die hard fans' to 'anybody who has bought a TV in the last 3 years and from now on'. Nearly all reasonably sized TVs being sold now are in HD, and larger TVs are cheaper than ever before. Larger the TV, shitter the old game looks. Completely understandable why people might like to play old classics in HD.

 

Jesus, I wondered what that big black panel was in my lounge! Thanks for enlightening me. Its not anyone who has bought a HDTV, its die hard fans. Little Joey probably isn't that bothered by playing old games in HD - its the die hard fans who want to - and even then, they're more concerned about the new games than a decade old port.

 

But its like I said before, there are solutions about (decent TVs, Dolphin) and these are probably preferable to Nintendo. I see Nintendo optimising WiiU somehow to run something like Dolphin. That's why I can't see them having a HD ports range- like Wii VC emulation, they'll have WiiU providing some extra video processing.

 

I would rather see Nintendo invest in good games and HD, like the other two companies have, which they've only really just started doing. Last step? Implement a non-shit online infrastructure.

 

I'm not sure if you're insinuating that I don't think Nintendo should be investing in HD. Admittedly, I'm one of the few who wasn't originally bothered by Wii being SD only, I felt they had 3-4 years before HD investment was needed. I had expected some sort of WiiHD in 2010. They're well overdue HD.

 

Then let's pray more wonderful franchises like Banjo Kazooie get sold off then.

 

And I really don't know what this means. Are you asking for my opinion on a 10 year old business transaction?

 

I don't think I'm being naive or missing the point; its two sides of the argument. Time will tell, but I am adamant its not going to be a business priority for Nintendo in the next few years.

[dazzybee]

I think NIntendo are MOST DEFINITELY up for doing HD ports, if they're willing to do 3D classics (though admitted it kind of is too much work for what it's worth) I reckon they'll go with HD versions of old games. They've done just rereleases with no effort (All stars TWICE) all the way to full on remakes (Ocarina), with stuff in-between (3D classics, play control pitmans and reworked Metroid controls).

[Fused King]

So, ....a remake of A Link To the Past in HD ?

[Cube]

So, ....a remake of A Link To the Past in HD ?

 

I thought Miyamoto wanted a 3D version of aLttP?

[James McGeachie]

What I was wondering with this thread was: Did some people feel that HD was so sorely lacking in this generation that it significantly hindered their enjoyment of games to the point where they'd be willing to look past how cheap it'd be of Nintendo to cash in on HD re-releases? That you'd gain more from it than the respect you might lose for Nintendo and hence, lap them up?

 

OR perhaps in fact maybe some people would respect Nintendo more for being willing to admit that HD in these games would be of benefit and worth re-releasing them for?

 

I guess possibly the price is the deciding factor here. I'm kind of imagining if they release games at basically retail price, or at a bare minimum, £20. Also, I was thinking of HD collections in the vein of the Silent Hill one and others - some upgraded assets e.g. textures, but no additions to the game design. Not remakes or recuts, the same game.

 

For me personally - I don't think I'll be buying any. I personally don't feel like I lost out much. I think I was able to enjoy the beauty of Wii games in standard def by appreciating their context - what they were achieving on the machine. Also, the art design of some games (e.g. Skyward Sword, Galaxy) was enough to make them stunning in their own right. HD would only barely enhance that for me and mainly only for a brief moment when I initially saw it. It wouldn't be long before I didn't care - much like I don't ever get impressed by the resolution of any next gen games now. I'm used to it.

 

ON ANOTHER NOTE though, if the "leaked Wii U launch line up" on the front page is true, then oh boy, bring on some HD upgrades to make it look a bit more respectable in terms of quality game choices, much like the 3D upgrades did for the DS.

Edited May 8, 2012 by James McGeachie

[Cube]

What I was wondering with this thread was: Did some people feel that HD was so sorely lacking in this generation that it significantly hindered their enjoyment of games to the point where they'd be willing to look past how cheap it'd be of Nintendo to cash in on HD re-releases?

 

Personally, the HD is probably the least important part about the graphics of the 360, PS3 - the extra power allows them to do so much more. For example, Skyward Sword could have gone for a proper watercoloured look rather than doing it just to cover up how poor the textures would have been.

 

People seem to confuse "HD graphics" with the graphics capable due to more powerful consoles, rather than it simply being related to the resolution. PC games have been "HD" and beyond way before "High Definition" meant anything.

[Hero-of-Time]

A lot of Nintendo's own games already looked great on the Wii. The Mario Galaxy games, as you pointed out, look stunning on the Wii hardware.

 

I can think of 3 instances with my experience on the Wii, where I wished that the games were in HD. Those titles were The Last Story, Xenoblade and Monster Hunter. The games looked fine in their own right but if you're a multi console owner and zip between consoles you can see how blurry/jaggy some of these games are. With them having realistic characters and worlds it tends to show more.

 

I would quite happily pay for HD versions of some of my favorite Nintendo games, especially if Nintendo do decide to add an achievement like system to the Wii U. I love me some blink.

[James McGeachie]

Personally, the HD is probably the least important part about the graphics of the 360, PS3 - the extra power allows them to do so much more. For example, Skyward Sword could have gone for a proper watercoloured look rather than doing it just to cover up how poor the textures would have been.

 

People seem to confuse "HD graphics" with the graphics capable due to more powerful consoles, rather than it simply being related to the resolution. PC games have been "HD" and beyond way before "High Definition" meant anything.

 

Yeah don't worry I solely was thinking of the importance of resolution in this topic. I see some people whining around the internet that they can't even look at 480i or 480p on their TV without feeling ill.

[Beverage]

Well just like I said a few dayz ago, I wouldn't buy a HD version of a game that I already own. I bloody have the N64 cartridge of OoT (I always use this game for examples ), the disc that came with Wind Waker (you can kind o' count that as three OoT' if you were to include the Master Quest ... but it was a neat deal since the Wii hasn't any cartridge slots ). Not to mention some may have it on VC and the 3D version on the 3DS.

 

Graphics, waggle or little little depth-perception tricks won't get me to buy the same thing twice. However, if the enitre thing was re-animated with more 'origional ideas being able to be fitted in' (with the addition of the new controls, power, graphics etc etc) the hizz yeah will I buy that shizz! It'd be like, it'd be like old feelings travelling through time making you feel like an infant again.

 

... But generally speaking; new games, please.

[Sheikah]

I'd argue that your view is naive though. It is all cash in the bank, Nintendo is a business first and foremost and the idea that anything else is really a priority is ridiculous.

 

Well it's good you cleared up that one. Nintendo are a business, ergo Nintendo wants to make profit. HD remakes make profit, else companies wouldn't commission them. Obviously.

 

The investment has to bring in a return and I don't feel that HD ports have the sales figures, margins or added value that Nintendo focuses on. You just seem to be assuming that because they're relatively cheap that they're profitable, but I don't feel that they sell in the volumes necessary to make them a worthwhile investment.

 

Even if your opinion was based on little more than hunch and guess, it makes no difference. These games make profit, and don't take up time of the company themselves. So from a business standpoint your argument is poor, even nonsensical.

 

Obviously, if it were the case that they were just this big cash cow every game would be a HD port.

 

Who said every game? Just the ones that people liked/would love to play again. Of which Nintendo have many.

 

Jesus, I wondered what that big black panel was in my lounge! Thanks for enlightening me. Its not anyone who has bought a HDTV, its die hard fans. Little Joey probably isn't that bothered by playing old games in HD - its the die hard fans who want to - and even then, they're more concerned about the new games than a decade old port.

 

Please, take off the blinkers grandad and join the rest of us in 2012. It's surprising how little you think HD has caught on, I'd bet a significant proportion of gamers have HDTVs (at least gamers with HD consoles, which owners of the WiiU will be).

[dazzybee]

Please, take off the blinkers grandad and join the rest of us in 2012. It's surprising how little you think HD has caught on, I'd bet a significant proportion of gamers have HDTVs (at least gamers with HD consoles, which owners of the WiiU will be).

 

To be fair, I don't think he's saying most people don't have HD teles. I think you're both saying the same thing.

[Sheikah]

Either way, it's not 'die-hard' fans buying HD remake classics on the PS3. I'd wage a lot have never played the originals before and find it a nice opportunity to dig into a popular classic.

 

A lot of people do have HDTVs, and I'd be lying if I said SD content didn't look crap on it (even upscaled). I'm grateful for them and have bought quite a few.

Edited May 8, 2012 by Sheikah

[Fierce_LiNk]

A lot of newer gamer won't touch stuff like the VC/older games due to them being in SD/shoddy graphics. Two of my nephews are such gamers. They complain about things looking fuzzy on their LCD televisions. I can get over such things but many people can't.

 

But surely that's part of the appeal of playing these older games? That's how the looked and sounded back then. Goldeneye may look quite square-ish now but there's a certain charm to it. As great as this Perfect Dark HD-boost looks, it doesn't look like the same game I played all those years ago.

 

What I find slightly concerning as well is this idea that these games need to look "beautiful" by being upgraded to HD. It just feels a bit wrong in a way, that the game needs to look this way to be acceptable.

 

OOT was essentially a remake not a HD upgrade. Things like Devil May Cry, Silent Hill, Splinter Cell, Sly Trilogy, Prince of Persia etc. didn't seem to get any form of advertising. At the end of the day these HD collections are just to make a quick buck for the developers and also to increase the awareness of the franchises they represent.

 

Nintendo have kinda done this in the past with Play and Control. While the HD twins had HD collections, Nintendo dished out a few Cube titles with waggle added. They didn't get a big advertising push, were obviously cheap to make and gave people a chance to play games they had missed out on. This especially helped with Pikimn 2 as it goes for quite a high price on ebay. Also, if the rumours are true and the US is indeed finally getting Pikmin 2 on the Wii, it supports the idea of increasing the awareness of a franchise, especially with Pikmin 3 around the corner.

 

I'm not totally comfortable with the idea of Nintendo sticking Wii-controls onto games either. In fact, one of my biggest gripes with them is that we were all craving a new Mario Tennis instead of having the GC one with tacked on controls. Rather than having a game with tacked on features years afterwards, surely it's always better to have one made with those features in mind?

 

As you say, it's to make a quick buck. So, if there's money to be made there, no doubt Nintendo will try and do that. Same probably goes with the idea of HD collections. Surely an idea would be to have this on the VC, where you can decide whether to play the original version of the game, or the HD-version? Obviously for a higher price.

 

Well, presumably they'd try to make a profit (or they wouldn't bother with it), so if anything they should end up with more money to spend on new games.

 

 

Part of my point is that rather than spending the money advertising this, they could be spending it on advertising something else. But then, when I think about it, the 3DS's launch window line-up wasn't hugely exciting. So, Ocarina of Time really was the main thing to advertise. :/

 

Just for the record, I understand there's potentially a lot of money to be had in this and that there will be loads of fans who would be craving to play the classics in HD. If the right game comes along, such as the opportunity to play Ikaruga or some other rare games, then I'm totally happy with that. I feel this would be used best with games that are either really difficult to find (such as Ikaruga) or even ones which never made it here.

[darksnowman]

I'm not totally comfortable with the idea of Nintendo sticking Wii-controls onto games either. In fact, one of my biggest gripes with them is that we were all craving a new Mario Tennis instead of having the GC one with tacked on controls.

 

Have you played any of the New Play Control! range? I have Pikmin 2 on the GC but never played the original. H-o-T gave me NPC! Pikmin (how great is that) and the pointer controls are so good in it. I would really recommend checking it out if you haven't played it and see it on the cheap.

 

They should have, without question, made Mario Tennis Open for the Wii a few years ago, instead of waiting til now with the 3DS. Its baffling that they never tried to outdo Wii Sports Tennis. We all know Nintendo + Camelot could have really nailed some great Motion+ tennis controls.

[Cube]

Have you played any of the New Play Control! range? I have Pikmin 2 on the GC but never played the original. H-o-T gave me NPC! Pikmin (how great is that) and the pointer controls are so good in it. I would really recommend checking it out if you haven't played it and see it on the cheap.

 

I'm curious to see what the Wii controls are like, considering how the controls (and most of the gameplay) were designed specifically for a dual analogue controller.

 

How do you move the Pikmin around Olimar?

[Beverage]

But surely that's part of the appeal of playing these older games? That's how the looked and sounded back then. Goldeneye may look quite square-ish now but there's a certain charm to it. As great as this Perfect Dark HD-boost looks, it doesn't look like the same game I played all those years ago.

 

What I find slightly concerning as well is this idea that these games need to look "beautiful" by being upgraded to HD. It just feels a bit wrong in a way, that the game needs to look this way to be acceptable.

 

Two things:

Numero uno - Long time fans most-likely have old classics that're laying around somewhere, plus, for both them and the new audience, VC and this eShop has thankfully been set in motion. So everybody should still have huge opportunies to experience such experiences.

 

Numero dos - I think that only a selected few big-hitters should/would eat the Mega 'Shroom if Nintendo did ever decide to power-up any of their titles.

 

They should have, without question, made Mario Tennis Open for the Wii a few years ago, instead of waiting til now with the 3DS. Its baffling that they never tried to outdo Wii Sports Tennis. We all know Nintendo + Camelot could have really nailed some great Motion+ tennis controls.

 

Ya done-know, fam! I always wanted a nice little online tennis game with no fancy items or anything (maybe a mode for it) so that you could have a nice little skilled game. Maybe even a two on Two mode - oh sh!t!