Zechs Merquise Posted September 16, 2013 Posted September 16, 2013 (edited) Good thing that products aren't priced depending on their development cost then (or else god knows how much GTA5 would cost!) Wind Waker is well worth the £40 price tag. It's one of the best games ever made, made even better with all the awesome upgrades they've made to it (HD visuals, remastered music, Gamepad use with touchscreen inventory/map/motion controls/off-TV play, Miiverse integration, fast sailing, game tweaks like remixed item placement and Triforce hunt tweaks, Hero mode etc). I will happily plonk down £40 for it and feel that I got a bargain! Can't wait to experience it all over again in a new way Exactly, £40 for a timeless classic with all new graphics and tweaks to the game play is a fair price! It's not being greedy, it's just being realistic. What's more, I'd rather have a Nintendo HD remake for full price where Nintendo have taken the time, love and effort to re-craft and tweak a masterpiece than one of the cheap shoddy cash-ins that many companies pass off as HD remakes. Just look at the mess Turtles in Time or Silent Hill were! If people don't like it, no one is forcing them to buy it! The only reason I haven't put down a pre-order is I haven't seen any of the sites I usually pre-order from offer the boxed edition with the statue! Edited September 16, 2013 by Zechs Merquise
Ike Posted September 16, 2013 Posted September 16, 2013 If people don't like it, no one is forcing them to buy it! The only reason I haven't put down a pre-order is I haven't seen any of the sites I usually pre-order from offer the boxed edition with the statue! That's because it's exclusive to GAME.
Zechs Merquise Posted September 16, 2013 Posted September 16, 2013 That's because it's exclusive to GAME. Noooooo!!!! Oh well, I'll probably just give it a miss then as I dislike game and their overinflated prices.
Sheikah Posted September 16, 2013 Posted September 16, 2013 Exactly, £40 for a timeless classic with all new graphics and tweaks to the game play is a fair price! It's not being greedy, it's just being realistic. If people don't like it, no one is forcing them to buy it! The only reason I haven't put down a pre-order is I haven't seen any of the sites I usually pre-order from offer the boxed edition with the statue! You only need to look at the FFX + FFX-2 remaster to see that so much more work is being done on an equally epic game but will cost us just a fraction of this to buy. I mean, if people are happy to pay it because they really want it then that's fair enough. I'm not here to convince you against buying. It's just that the fact remains that this won't have cost them anywhere near as much as a new Zelda to design and develop, yet they're charging the same price for it. And lol @ 'no one is forcing you to buy it'. Such a weird comment I see a lot. So what? You can still comment on whether you think it's overpriced or not. It's a forum and we're here to discuss.
Dcubed Posted September 16, 2013 Posted September 16, 2013 You only need to look at the FFX + FFX-2 remaster to see that so much more work is being done on an equally epic game but will cost us just a fraction of this to buy. I mean, if people are happy to pay it because they really want it then that's fair enough. I'm not here to convince you against buying. It's just that the fact remains that this won't have cost them anywhere near as much as a new Zelda to design and develop, yet they're charging the same price for it. And lol @ 'no one is forcing you to buy it'. Such a weird comment I see a lot. So what? You can still comment on whether you think it's overpriced or not. It's a forum and we're here to discuss. How are S-E putting more effort into FF10/10-2 HD? The upgrade seems pretty comparable to me. Both have redrawn textures, both have other graphical enhancements (FF10/10-2 has 720p resolution and touched up polygon models while Wind Waker has 1080p resolution, SSAO, dynamic shadows, unlimited draw distance thanks to the entire ocean being loaded into RAM at once, self shadowing, HDR & bloom lighting, an all new dynamic lighting system and other shader effects added), both have extra content (FF 10/10-2 has extra content from the JPN re-releases translated into English, while Wind Waker has new gameplay features that utilise the Gamepad, Miiverse integration and tons of gameplay tweaks; features that didn't exist in any previous version might I add!) and both have remastered music. The only real difference in terms of "effort" here is that FF10/10-2 HD includes 2 games (granted they use the same engine and assets, so sprucing up both games at once is reletively easy, but it's still two for the price of one), while Wind Waker HD is just one game - well that and the fact that Nintendo made WW HD very quickly in comparison because S-E are so pathetically mismanaged that it actually took them longer to remake FF10 than it did to make the original PS2 game in the first place It's really just a matter of whether or not you think that Wind Waker is worth more than FF10 & FF10-2 and for me, that answer is an unequivicable YES! EASILY!
Sheikah Posted September 16, 2013 Posted September 16, 2013 (edited) Simple, they're putting more work in because the game is A) Two games, and B) FFX alone is a far, far larger game than WW. In fact most of WW's perceived scale is nothing more than a trick. Either way, you just said they're comparable in scope. Yet the price is not comparable, which agrees completely with the point I've been making. Edit: Ugh, just re-read your post. Such a fanboy whiff from the small 'touched up' comment regarding FFX relative to your waxing lyrical about WW. Please don't be so blatantly biased when trying to compare things. =/ Edited September 16, 2013 by Sheikah
Dcubed Posted September 16, 2013 Posted September 16, 2013 (edited) Simple, they're putting more work in because the game is A) Two games, and B) FFX alone is a far, far larger game than WW. In fact most of WW's perceived scale is nothing more than a trick. Either way, you just said they're comparable in scope. Yet the price is not comparable, which agrees completely with the point I've been making. They both have roughly the same amount of effort/production values being put into them, but FF10/10-2 is cheaper, yes I acknowledge that. So the issue of value has nothing to do with the actual HD upgrades that these games have recieved, but rather it comes down to the value of the original games. Is Wind Waker worth more than FF10 & FF10-2 combined? For me, that answer is VERY obvious. I would happily pay more for Wind Waker than FF 10 and FF10-2 (and yes, I've played all the FF mainline games) because it's a far better game than those two combined. Simple You Edited: Huh? What part of "touched up" is inaccurate here? They took the high detail cutscene models for the characters, smoothed out the rough edges and added extra detail. That is surely the definition of "touched up". It's not like they redid all of the models at FF13 quality, they're still based off the PS2 models but with an increased polygon count. It looks great, but it's not a gigantic upgrade that is tantamount to a full remake (and they haven't really tweaked the visuals outside of the redone models and high res textures either, so I fail to see where I'm being inaccurate here). Edited September 16, 2013 by Dcubed
Sheikah Posted September 16, 2013 Posted September 16, 2013 (edited) But in saying they have the same amount of effort put in you've just ignored the whole point about it being 2 games, and the fact that FFX alone is a bigger game in terms of areas, enemy and chacter models, etc. The more game there is, the more work that needs to be done. Surely you can see that? This all comes down to the acceptance that because you really like the game, you're happy to pay an amount of money that is not justified by anything other than your desire to be bathed in nostalgia. Certainly not its production cost. Also your last comment is rather lol. Regardless of whether you prefer WW to FFX or not (I certainly don't), they're comparable in that they've both garnered considerable praise and been held up as great examples for their relevant genres. Edited September 16, 2013 by Sheikah
Rummy Posted September 16, 2013 Posted September 16, 2013 What I really want from a Zelda game is a system where they remind you which colour rupee is which every time you restart the game. I almost answered this seriously until I remembered the faint feeling/nuance of frustration. Which game was it? WW? I feel like it was MM for some reason, but then I feel that can't be right...
Zechs Merquise Posted September 16, 2013 Posted September 16, 2013 Edit: Ugh, just re-read your post. Such a fanboy whiff from the small 'touched up' comment regarding FFX relative to your waxing lyrical about WW. Please don't be so blatantly biased when trying to compare things. =/ Nah, I'd say the real fanboy is the one who doesn't like something and comes onto a discussion board about that thing solely to complain about it and try to convince others who do like it that they shouldn't! I would choose a Zelda game over a Final Fantasy game any day of the week! That's why I come on the Wind Waker HD discussion and why I don't spend my time on the Final Fantasy HD discussion telling the people looking forward to that game why I won't be purchasing it! And as I said, considering the state of some of the HD remakes or collections, I'd rather pay £40 and have a lovingly crafted tribute to the original than a cheap and clumsy update that spits on the legacy of a game I once loved!
Sheikah Posted September 16, 2013 Posted September 16, 2013 You Edited: Huh? What part of "touched up" is inaccurate here? They took the high detail cutscene models for the characters, smoothed out the rough edges and added extra detail. That is surely the definition of "touched up". It's not like they redid all of the models at FF13 quality, they're still based off the PS2 models but with an increased polygon count. It looks great, but it's not a gigantic upgrade that is tantamount to a full remake (and they haven't really tweaked the visuals outside of the redone models and high res textures either, so I fail to see where I'm being inaccurate here). They clearly have done a lot more than your comment gave them credit for. Watching comparison videos, the difference between FFX original and HD is a lot more noticeable than WW and WWHD (well, apart from the bloom, but I didn't like that). Anyway, my point was that you summarised FFX's work done in a shallow way, then rattled off a load of features of WW that could just as easily been grouped. Nah, I'd say the real fanboy is the one who doesn't like something and comes onto a discussion board about that thing solely to complain about it and try to convince others who do like it that they shouldn't! I would choose a Zelda game over a Final Fantasy game any day of the week! That's why I come on the Wind Waker HD discussion and why I don't spend my time on the Final Fantasy HD discussion telling the people looking forward to that game why I won't be purchasing it! And as I said, considering the state of some of the HD remakes or collections, I'd rather pay £40 and have a lovingly crafted tribute to the original than a cheap and clumsy update that spits on the legacy of a game I once loved! That's ridiculous. So discussion must always be praising a game/company/decision, lest you be called a fanboy?
Dog-amoto Posted September 16, 2013 Posted September 16, 2013 I almost answered this seriously until I remembered the faint feeling/nuance of frustration. Which game was it? WW? I feel like it was MM for some reason, but then I feel that can't be right... It was TP I think...
Dcubed Posted September 16, 2013 Posted September 16, 2013 (edited) Nah, I'd say the real fanboy is the one who doesn't like something and comes onto a discussion board about that thing solely to complain about it and try to convince others who do like it that they shouldn't! I would choose a Zelda game over a Final Fantasy game any day of the week! That's why I come on the Wind Waker HD discussion and why I don't spend my time on the Final Fantasy HD discussion telling the people looking forward to that game why I won't be purchasing it! And as I said, considering the state of some of the HD remakes or collections, I'd rather pay £40 and have a lovingly crafted tribute to the original than a cheap and clumsy update that spits on the legacy of a game I once loved! To be fair, FF10/10-2 does look like a great HD remaster (assuming that they haven't chucked Lightning in there...), but yeah. A lot of HD Remasters out there have been absolutely dreadful! (I'm looking at you Silent Hill HD Collection, Splinter Cell HD Collection, Prince of Persia Collection and Beyond Good & Evil HD! - Even the MGS 2 & 3 HD were riddled with problems and they're somehow considered to be "quality" HD Remasters!) They clearly have done a lot more than your comment gave them credit for. Watching comparison videos, the difference between FFX original and HD is a lot more noticeable than WW and WWHD (well, apart from the bloom, but I didn't like that). Anyway, my point was that you summarised FFX's work done in a shallow way, then rattled off a load of features of WW that could just as easily been grouped I didn't mean to belittle FF10/10-2 HD at all, the point I was trying to make was that the work involved in the upgrade was roughly equal in both Remasters. WWHD's additional graphical effects aren't really hard to add on their own, but when you combine them all together it becomes a lot of work to balance it all and make sure it all looks right; making the amount of effort involved roughly equal to touching up the polygon models in FF10/10-2 (which in of itself is a large undertaking that involves more than just turning on bloom or SSAO). I think you're reading too much into it here... I'm not out to "get" S-E, just trying to make a point of both productions being roughly equal in terms of "effort" involved (meaning that the concept of comparing the value of both products coming down to whether or not you feel that TWW is worth more than both FF10 and FF10-2 combined at a lower price). Edited September 16, 2013 by Dcubed
Sheikah Posted September 16, 2013 Posted September 16, 2013 Most HD remasters I've played have been really good. Beyond Good and Evil and MGS I had zero issues with, so I'm not really sure what you guys are talking about.
Ike Posted September 16, 2013 Posted September 16, 2013 I almost answered this seriously until I remembered the faint feeling/nuance of frustration. Which game was it? WW? I feel like it was MM for some reason, but then I feel that can't be right... It was TP I think... It was Skyward Sword. --- Also, cool it with the "fanboy" name calling before it explodes into something worse. Feel free to discuss things rationally without resorting to personal attacks. Consider this an early warning.
Dcubed Posted September 16, 2013 Posted September 16, 2013 Most HD remasters I've played have been really good. Beyond Good and Evil and MGS I had zero issues with, so I'm not really sure what you guys are talking about. Beyond Good & Evil had various framerate problems, sound glitches and a slightly messed up camera (moreso than the original), while MGS HD was missing content (mainly from MGS 3, though a few bits like Snakeboarding was missing from MGS 2 as well) and had various missing graphical effects (toned down rain in MG2, missing bees in MGS 3 etc). Peace Walker HD was apparently an excellent port though with no problems at all.
Sheikah Posted September 16, 2013 Posted September 16, 2013 I think the fact you're having to tell me what these issues are when I completed these games shows just how devastating/noticeable these problems were to your average gamer. :p
EEVILMURRAY Posted September 16, 2013 Posted September 16, 2013 Doing so would greatly increase the time and cost of development - eating into development of both A Link Between Worlds and Zelda Wii U. And based on that to be honest they shouldn't have bothered with this game at all. If they're not going to do this sort of thing properly then they shouldn't bother at all. Before we begin, no I don't think adding some Miiverse things, the ability to tap tap tap on the gamepad and "fast" sailing is enough by a long stretch. The latter by its creation shows that Nintendo have realised the sailing was boring as fuck. So apart from making it look shinier all they've done is make it quicker to complete the game. And they want more money for this? Many people think this was the greatest Zelda since sliced bread, personally I think it's way off. But if people are willing to piss money away on this when they could just whip out their Wii and put the 'Cube disc in, that's fine. I hope they enjoy themselves, I shan't be getting it as I'd like a newer, decent game. Hugs all round.
Wii Posted September 16, 2013 Posted September 16, 2013 It was Skyward Sword. Yes it was Skyward Sword and it wasn't just limited to rupees. It was every collectible in the game. Just one of the many faults of this game. How the hell did something so simple make it through the game testing phase?
Retro_Link Posted September 16, 2013 Author Posted September 16, 2013 @Wii can you start your own let's hate on Skyward Sword thread please and just go be bitter in there? :p I GET IT.
Ronnie Posted September 16, 2013 Posted September 16, 2013 So, deku leaf brought back for future Zeldas yay or nay? Yay x a million IMO
Dcubed Posted September 16, 2013 Posted September 16, 2013 More than anything else, I want the Ball & Chain back but with actual 1-1 Motionplus controls & physics! Twilight Princess was such a goddamn tease! (And Skyward Sword disappointed me by not having it ). Dammit! It would feel amazingly fun to use!
Jonnas Posted September 16, 2013 Posted September 16, 2013 I almost answered this seriously until I remembered the faint feeling/nuance of frustration. Which game was it? WW? I feel like it was MM for some reason, but then I feel that can't be right... It was Skyward Sword. No, it was definitely TP that had it with the rupees. Skyward Sword only had it with the collectibles. Gosh, people. If we're gonna bash serious flaws, let's make a good job of it :p And based on that to be honest they shouldn't have bothered with this game at all. If they're not going to do this sort of thing properly then they shouldn't bother at all. The main point here, is that the dungeons were never close enough to completion to begin with. Yes, there were some assets and ideas, but tacking them now on a newly-designed dungeon would either make too big an impression (thus clashing with everything else), or not at all (making the addition moot and pointless). Or did you also want Ocarina of Time to have the Ice and Wind medallions that were missing?
EEVILMURRAY Posted September 17, 2013 Posted September 17, 2013 The main point here, is that the dungeons were never close enough to completion to begin with. Yes, there were some assets and ideas, but tacking them now on a newly-designed dungeon would either make too big an impression (thus clashing with everything else), or not at all (making the addition moot and pointless). I get that they weren't too far along with them to put them in, but I don't see the point that is being made that just because the original idea was used in Twilight Princess that a similarly inspired dungeon can never be made. Why no middle ground with the other point? You could apply that to almost every gameplay addition put in a remake/sequel. Or did you also want Ocarina of Time to have the Ice and Wind medallions that were missing? Don't see why not. The difference with that is that it wasn't so blatently obvious that it was missing. Yes, Zora's Domain didn't unfreeze over ever but that's far more subtle than having the third dungeon ripped out in a Zelda game.
Recommended Posts