Rant: Why Gamers Are Killing Progress

I'm not even going to try to come up with some kind of fitting opening sentence for this. I am going to write a disclaimer though.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this blog are OPINIONS! They are NOT demands on anyone, and whatever you want to spend your own money on is completely up to you, so don't try to come in here and tell me that I'm telling you how to spend your money because I don't care how you spend your money. I do, however, care about the direction of the gaming industry and how it can move forward.

To answer your question, yes this is another blog about the remake crap that's going on.

Today there was a rumour, that's most likely fact, that God of War: Ascension is going to have a PS4 version. That's right, another COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY "remaster" is almost assuredly coming to the PS4. Right away the comments in support of this sprung up.

"This is great for people who didn't get a chance to play it on the PS3"

What the hell was stopping them? What is stopping them now? Absolutely nothing.

"This is going to have graphical upgrades, and most likely all the DLC."

WHO CARES?! These games aren't even HD remasters, they are HD touch ups.

Tomb Raider, The Last of Us, Mass Effect Trilogy (still a rumour, but you know it's coming), and now GoW:A are all games that are already HD.

"But they aren't in 'true' 1080p HD."

See, this is why the gaming industry has a problem with content. Too many people care far too much about how many pixels are on the screen. This is just proof that the majority of gamers these days care more about graphics than anything else. Which makes me question why there aren't more PC gamers talking on this site then since if graphics were what you all really want, then PC is where you need to be.

"But the PC doesn't have the exclusives that consoles have"

You don't care about exclusives. You're supporting HD touchups because the graphics are better. A gamer that actually wants to play games will play them when they come out. If you really want to play these games, and not their HD touchups, then you'd have played them already. You clearly want to play graphics first, everything else second. Exclusives are just a convenient excuse.

I'm particularly disappointed in Sony for what are such lazy moves on their part. Yeah, I get that they need money, but this is frickin' sad. Where is the Sony of the PS2 days who actually tried to get new and exciting experiences for their console?

All I see is a Sony that's content with letting indies carry the ball while they greenlight touchups of games that aren't even a year old. And so many support this nonsense.

Where are your standards? Why support the complete halt of innovative progress in favour of being patronized with lazy offerings like hd touchups?

If this were something like an HD remaster of, say, Legend of Dragoon then that would be amazing. That game is pretty old and flew under the radar of a lot of JRPG fans. But these are games that aren't even close to being that old, and in the case of TLOU not even a year old.

I mean is this really what you want for your current gen consoles? HD touchups?

"Gee, I really liked this game, but I don't think it had enough pixels in it. I'd love to play the same game again, but with more pixels and DLC included for the price of a brand new game."

I have never seen a community more like a pancake than the gaming community. There is absolutely no consistency in the standards of what we should expect from the development scene and so many flip flop on what they have a problem with. It's like a massive case of bipolar disorder.

You want to support this creative laziness, all the power to you. You're definitely entitled to enjoy what you want. But you're killing progress. You're telling Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft that they can appease you with graphical touchups instead of new experiences. You're telling them all that it was ok that they launched new consoles COMPLETELY unprepared to have new experiences steadily available or announced within a timely manner.

At this point, I wouldn't be surprised if games that aren't even out yet have an HD touchup planned for 6 months after they release. Because why not, "it's good for people who didn't get a chance to buy a PS4/XB1/Wii U 6 months ago" right?

[randomass171]

I do definitely see an issue when it seems like HD remasters (essentially last generation games) are more prevalent on next generation hardware than any modern exclusives. They're there for people who did not play them before, but I think that it would not even be a thing if backwards compatibility was still included.

But it may not all be bad. It gets more money to the developers and publishers for little loss and generally such remasters are outsourced to smaller teams while the big ones focus on the new stuff. I myself don't usually buy remasters but I make an exception here or there. God of War I won't buy because I already own the entire collection on PS3.

[Meep]

"What the hell was stopping them? What is stopping them now? Absolutely nothing."
Maybe they didn't have a PS3?

"WHO CARES?! These games aren't even HD remasters, they are HD touch ups."
I agree on this. I consider the new "remastered editions".

"You don't care about exclusives..."
Again...maybe I didn't have a PS3??? Or maybe your right. It could that I just didn't want to get the game because it was not 1080p at 30fps. Now if I had a choice to buy TLOU PS3 or PS4 version, I would buy the PS4 version because it just seems better since they are the same price at gamestop.

"Gee, I really liked this game, but I don't think it had enough pixels in it. I'd love to play the same game again, but with more pixels and DLC included for the price of a brand new game."
I'm pretty sure this has been happening for a loooong while. GOTY version have been gaming out for a while, and I don't think anybody complained about those. I wonder if there would be less blowback if they just called this the GOTY version.

I don't understand the anger. The people that missed out on this now have a chance to get a better version. I do call bullshit on Tomb Raider that the PS4 and Xbox One versions are double the price of the original, but that is easily smelled. In the case of TLOU PS3 and PS4 versions are the same price.

[DragonKnight]

"Maybe they didn't have a PS3?"

So.... what's stopping them from getting one? They're cheaper now than they have ever been and are only going to get cheaper.

"GOTY version have been gaming out for a while, and I don't think anybody complained about those. I wonder if there would be less blowback if they just called this the GOTY version."

GOTY versions are literally the same game with all the patches and expansions and USUALLY are cheaper than a full retail priced game. Remasters are touched up GOTYs that are full priced. GOTY's also typically don't release less than a year after the original game either.

The anger comes from the fact that this is a clear indication of a lack of ideas, poor preparation, and creative laziness. It's asking the gaming community to accept games that we've already played (it's been proven that remasters are mostly bought by people who already own, or played and beaten, the original) being resold to us for full retail price. It shows that graphics are at the forefront of gamer interest, which is annoying as hell because graphics then become the priority and substance wanes due to this.

I mean, we've already seen games where the focus was too much on the graphics this gen. Infamous: SS anyone?

And now, supporting these HD touchups merely sends the message of "yes, more grfx please, I don't care that you're overcharging me for the same game I've already beaten with a new coat of paint on it."

It's a poor direction to head in.

[HyperBear]

@DragonKnight: Great blog post man, however, I disagree with a couple of your comment points:

Firstly, I did not own a PS3 at the time The Last of Us came out, as I was saving away for my PS4 and thereby did not get a chance to play the game...And your saying I should go out and buy a PS3 just for one game after all the money I've spent on my PS4?? Yes the PS3 TLoU Bundle is cheaper, but why would I go out and spend another $270 to play one game (maybe a couple more through PS+), when I have the opportunity to play it on my PS4, with all the DLC included and with increased visuals? It makes no sense.

Secondly,"(it's been proven that remasters are mostly bought by people who already own, or played and beaten, the original)". I don't think you realize how many of us Xbox 360 only owners from last-gen, jumped ship to Sony and bought a PS4 for their current-gen system of choice. There are a lot of us who never owned, who never played or never beaten TLoU, and we would really like to play it on our PS4's. I don't know if you have actual proof of that quote or just making it up, but to each their own I suppose.

Thirdly, I don't necessarily agree that Sony and Microsoft are just doing these "HD touchups" just to make a quick buck and not create something new or doing them as a result of being lazy. You have to understand that it costs a lot of money to create and develop a new IP, be it a long-term franchise game or not, and developers/publishers have to find some way of getting that extra income, on top of what they've already earned in sales. And it usually consists of re-releasing games in HD or GOTY Editions, or creating additional DLC content for their currently released game.

Like I said before, to each their own and I'm not going to insult you or downplay you cause we have different opinions on the matter. It does seem that's the way most newly released games from last-gen are going this route...But this new-gen just started, and if you give it some time, there will be more and more new experiences on the horizon!

[DragonKnight]

I don't know why someone disagreed with your post considering how well done it was.

First point: I'm actually saying it's cheaper for you to buy the PS3 for that one game (and consequently have access to all of the PS3's comparatively better games than the PS4 currently) than it is to buy a PS4 for the remasters. Like I've been saying, if it was about the games and not the touchups, anyone could have played it at any time. TLOU isn't even a year old and it's being re-released. That's just a waste manpower even if it were 1 guy doing it.

Second Point: There was nothing stopping anyone from "jumping ship" before now. There still isn't. TLOU can be played today, this very second. And that quote was actually a poor choice of words. There is no substantial evidence that I have to prove that, I just wrote it in the moment. I'd edit that out if I could, but I can't. I should have said suggested because that's more accurate. Based on the sales numbers of most remakes, they normally don't exceed the numbers of the originals, most won't even come close to equaling those numbers, so it's more logical to believe that there aren't many new people wanting to play those games and instead it's people who already know how the game is that are buying it.

Third Point: I disagree. Yes, I know it costs money to make games, but it always has even before remasters. Remasters are the result of B.C. being removed. I really find it funny how many people are against the removal of B.C. and would complain that the existence of these remasters is nickel and diming every one because of a lack of B.C. but then turn around, one gen later, complain about B.C. again but support these remasters. Pancake mentality.

Final Point: Yes, the gen has just started. But unlike previous gens, this one is starting out with the mentality of re-releases instead of new releases. I know that at least 2 of these games are rumours, and 1 isn't even from Sony, but there has been no other gen where the launch window of the console is filled with even the idea of re-releasing games, especially ones that aren't even a year old. That is why I say it's creatively lazy.

[Meep]

"So.... what's stopping them from getting one? They're cheaper now than they have ever been and are only going to get cheaper."

So instead of buying TLOU for the PS3, you are insisting on people just buy a PS3 with the TLOU?

"GOTY versions are literally the same game with all the patches and expansions and USUALLY are cheaper than a full retail priced game. Remasters are touched up GOTYs that are full priced. GOTY's also typically don't release less than a year after the original game either."

They were never cheaper than the original retail game. Also GOTY editions released around 1 year(plus or minus maybe 2 months) from the original. I'm guessing you are talking about Tomb Raider. It released 10 months after the original. I think that is close enough to a year.

"it's been proven that remasters are mostly bought by people who already own, or played and beaten, the original"

Where did you get that info?

******damn, I didn't hit reply

[DragonKnight]

"So instead of buying TLOU for the PS3, you are insisting on people just buy a PS3 with the TLOU?"

I think you mean PS4 right? Anyway, yes I am. Why? For one it's cheaper. Two, PS3 is established with many great games. Three, so far the PS4 is about indie games and re-releases, so there is nothing to suggest that a person who is buying a PS4 for future games is going to be satisfied in the same way they would be if they bought a PS3 with its already established library of games.

"They were never cheaper than the original retail game. Also GOTY editions released around 1 year(plus or minus maybe 2 months) from the original. I'm guessing you are talking about Tomb Raider. It released 10 months after the original. I think that is close enough to a year."

10 months being "close enough" to a year is just a convenient excuse. Would you say the same thing about any other consumer product? If you loved Star Wars, and there was a new Star Wars movie released on Blu-Ray just before a new format came out, then the new format came out 10 months later and that same Star Wars movie was released at full price with director's commentary, would you say that that was worth it for SLIGHT picture quality upgrades and somebody talking? I have more examples, but I digress.

"Where did you get that info?"

As stated above, it was a poor choice of words and I apologize for that.

[Darkstares]

I don't think you really get how consumers work and your views are coming off from tunnel-vision and I will explain why.

a) Telling people they should buy the original system to play these games on isn't as convenient as you think. The PS4 is selling very well, perhaps some of those owners never had a PS3 nor do they want one which is why they never bought one in the first place. Secondly not everyone wants multiple game systems lying around. That's why some also like backwards compatibility.

b) you can't call it laziness if there is a demand for the product. Should we all still be listening to music on vinyl? Should we now upgrade our DVD collection to bluray or are we supporting laziness?

c) with new hardware comes new possibilities. New games and experiences, yes. But it also allows the developers to clean up their games because we all know many developers want to push the hardware to the extreme. So yes, we are a very graphic oriented supporter. If we weren't DriveClub would be running at sixty frames per second. Now we can play those games from last generation that are cleaner looking and run smoother. Again, you simply do not want to understand the consumer and think within a vacuum. There is nothing at all about supporting laziness wanting a better product.

d) how many games did the consumer get per year during the Sega/Nintendo days? Are you seriously trying to suggest that in todays market we see less software to the point of caring about HD remasters?

[Meep]

"I think you mean PS4 right"

Yea. My fault for sloppy typing.

"10 months being "close enough" to a year is just a convenient excuse. Would you say the same thing about any other consumer product?"

Yes I would be saying the same thing. 10 months to me is close enough. If it was 11 months, would that make it better? Hell Batman: Arkham City GOTY edition released 7 months after the original. I don't think anyone complained about that. Also TLOU port is being released over a year from the original, and so is the rumored God Of War port.

"If you loved Star Wars, and there was a new Star Wars movie released on Blu-Ray just before a new format came out, then the new format came out 10 months later and that same Star Wars movie was released at full price with director's commentary, would you say that that was worth it for SLIGHT picture quality upgrades and somebody talking? I have more examples, but I digress."

You wouldn't say it worth the buy because you already have the original copy. If someone didn't have a Blu-Ray player and got the new format instead, they'll probably buy the new version. Not got out and by a Blu-Ray player.

Also in another comment you say this.
"...but there has been no other gen where the launch window of the console is filled with even the idea of re-releasing games, especially ones that aren't even a year old. That is why I say it's creatively lazy. "

You you are right, Every other console release just had barely anything. It is known that the launch windows of a consoles release almost always has no games. PS3 had crap until about 2008.

Also making a port takes way less effort than what you are implying. From what I have read around, developers have at least 3 teams. Pre-production, Production, and Post-production. So my educated guess is that the Post-preduction teams are working on TLOU port and the Pre-production, and Production teams are making a new game.

The rumor of the God Of War Port stared from a known guy on twitter. http://www.gamepur.com/news...
He also says that ports take minimal effort.

As I said before I don't understand the anger. These are just ports. These games are not people who already have the game.

[Chard]

Relax, HD touch ups aren't coming at the expense of new games. Believe it or not, I bought Super Mario All-Stars on SNES, yet the original SNES games still kept coming.

Resolution has only become an issue because the PS4 is the only console that was designed well enough to consistently achieve a resolution that we've been promised for years, and should have gone without saying this gen.

[Conzul]

Well said.
These Remasters won't take much manpower/effort to do, since they are all coming from 2013. The assets are new and good looking and don't need to be redrawn. The projects are still fresh off the spinning platters at their respective studios. I can guarantee that no new games are being pushed out of the way to achieve them.

Even ND said that the bulk of their studio had shifted to UC4 while part of the TLOU team worked on the remaster.

Personally, I love all these ports. I hate buying games for old consoles on the eave of a new generation, so I usually skip all but the best rated ones.

Now I can play Tomb Raider (skipped it)
Ascension (1 more playthrough + the MP I skipped)
The Last of Us ('cus DUH)
Beyond ( Hopefully, 'specially if they added a new diffficulty level)

[rainslacker]

I might agree with you if there weren't also a slew of new games coming as well. Some of them original. Some of them possibly innovative.

All those points people make are completely valid.

The only one I might agree with is the $60 price tag issue. But as consumers, one has a choice to wait a month to buy it for half of that.

As a company, they want to maximize revenue from every game they make, so if there is an audience, they will make it available.

I don't really see the problem here. The day when E3 is mostly filled with remakes is the day I'll stand up and preach with you, but I think you're just upset about nothing.

[caseh]

These HD re-releases from PS3/360 era need to stop. They should be reserved for games that missed an iteration on the last gen of consoles as a minimum.

People can say 'you don't have to buy it' and you're correct, I don't and I won't but i'm sat here waiting for NEW games on my shiny PS4 and i'm presented with sequels of sequels and HD remakes of HD games.

Current gen is a bit of a joke as it stands, I know it will improve but the cries for the next gen of consoles to release when they did was just a crap and rushed decision in my opinion.

[TransientDreamer]

"You don't care about exclusives. You're supporting HD touchups because the graphics are better."
Show some proof that HD remakes/remasters affect the development of other titles. Otherwise you're just talking.

"A gamer that actually wants to play games will play them when they come out."
Not everyone has the time/resources/patience to do this. Also, people have backlogs and they may prefer to wait a while before picking up certain games.

"If you really want to play these games, and not their HD touchups, then you'd have played them already. You clearly want to play graphics first, everything else second. Exclusives are just a convenient excuse."
The lack of logic here is astounding. Is the air thin up there in your ivory tower, sir?

"I'm particularly disappointed in Sony for what are such lazy moves on their part."
Calling developers "lazy" is a lazy statement in itself. It means you don't understand ANYTHING that goes on behind the scenes in game development, and further proves that all you're doing is running your mouth. There's no substance to what you're saying. Nothing tangible.

"Yeah, I get that they need money, but this is frickin' sad. Where is the Sony of the PS2 days who actually tried to get new and exciting experiences for their console?"
It's less about "needing" money and more about the fact that when they produce these games, people buy them. If there was no demand, if the games didn't sell, then HD remasters would go away. Until then, you should get used to it.

And again, what evidence is there that states that these HD remasters have an impact on the development of other titles?

"All I see is a Sony that's content with letting indies carry the ball while they greenlight touchups of games that aren't even a year old. And so many support this nonsense."
Obviously you see only what you want to see.

"Where are your standards? Why support the complete halt of innovative progress in favour of being patronized with lazy offerings like hd touchups?"
Where's the proof of this so-called "halt of innovative progress"? Do you have any evidence? Or do you just think that being condescending is enough to convince people?

"If this were something like an HD remaster of, say, Legend of Dragoon then that would be amazing. That game is pretty old and flew under the radar of a lot of JRPG fans."
Ah, I see. So HD remasters are only okay if they correspond to your standards.

"I have never seen a community more like a pancake than the gaming community. There is absolutely no consistency in the standards of what we should expect from the development scene and so many flip flop on what they have a problem with. It's like a massive case of bipolar disorder."
Maybe you should associate with other members of the community then. I know plenty of people who love this generation so far, who have enjoyed the HD remasters we've gotten, and are equally looking forward to the new IPs, sequels, and HD remakes coming down the pipeline.

"You want to support this creative laziness, all the power to you. You're definitely entitled to enjoy what you want. But you're killing progress."
PROOF?

[DragonKnight]

Ah TransientDreamer, the guy that needs proof that water causes things to be wet, and that fire burns. Everywhere you go, all I see you is demanding proof of something or another. Too lazy to do anything yourself eh?

"The burden of proof blah blah blah" anyway.

"Show some proof that HD remakes/remasters affect the development of other titles. Otherwise you're just talking."

You need proof that HD remakes take people off of a other projects and, if they didn't exist, other games could be released in their place? You know, human lungs process oxygen. You want proof of that too? Yeah, I just made a sarcastic answer to a stupid question.

"Not everyone has the time/resources/patience to do this. Also, people have backlogs and they may prefer to wait a while before picking up certain games."

So they have more time, more resources, and more patience to pay more money for a touchup? And they'll still have a backlog anyway. YAY FOR SPECIOUS REASONING!

"It's less about "needing" money and more about the fact that when they produce these games, people buy them. If there was no demand, if the games didn't sell, then HD remasters would go away. Until then, you should get used to it."

So... it's about money... which is what I said. You changed it from a need to a want but it's still about money. Ugh, you can drive someone to drink.

"Obviously you see only what you want to see."

Let's test that out... I want to see 100 trillion dollars in front of me right now... damn, didn't work. Guess you're wrong.

"Where's the proof of this so-called "halt of innovative progress"? Do you have any evidence? Or do you just think that being condescending is enough to convince people?"

Electricity powers your television. Do you require proof of that? You already asked me this question, I already responded above. Next.

"Ah, I see. So HD remasters are only okay if they correspond to your standards."

Damn right. I make the rules. Nah, but seriously, your facetious response doesn't really deserve any effort to reply to. You're basically asking me, or anyone, to be ok with remasters of products that are currently available right now for cheaper, and to pay full price for them, instead of offering people remasters of games that people DEFINITELY didn't play years ago that are great games and worthy of remasters because they can't be found easily anywhere else. Great job having low standards.

"Maybe you should associate with other members of the community then. I know plenty of people who love this generation so far, who have enjoyed the HD remasters we've gotten, and are equally looking forward to the new IPs, sequels, and HD remakes coming down the pipeline."

Good for you. I know plenty that expect more for their money than HD touchups, maybe you should associate with them.

"PROOF?"

Third time ain't the charm for you.

[TransientDreamer]

"Too lazy to do anything yourself eh?"
Coming from you... the person who wrote this article. The burden of proof is indeed on you to back up your claims.

"Show some proof that HD remakes/remasters affect the development of other titles. Otherwise you're just talking."

"You need proof that HD remakes take people off of a other projects and, if they didn't exist, other games could be released in their place?"
Yes.

"Yeah, I just made a sarcastic answer to a stupid question."
Nah, you're just dodging the question.

"It's less about "needing" money and more about the fact that when they produce these games, people buy them. If there was no demand, if the games didn't sell, then HD remasters would go away. Until then, you should get used to it."

"Let's test that out... I want to see 100 trillion dollars in front of me right now... damn, didn't work. Guess you're wrong."
Ah, so sarcasm is your recourse when someone proves you wrong. Got it.

"Electricity powers your television. Do you require proof of that? You already asked me this question, I already responded above. Next."
More sarcasm in lieu of backing up YOUR argument. Next.

"Ah, I see. So HD remasters are only okay if they correspond to your standards."

"You're basically asking me, or anyone, to be ok with remasters of products that are currently available right now for cheaper, and to pay full price for them, instead of offering people remasters of games that people DEFINITELY didn't play years ago that are great games and worthy of remasters because they can't be found easily anywhere else. Great job having low standards."
When you can provide evidence that Sony and all of these other companies are pulling people off projects, delaying other games, pulling crucial resources, etc. to focus on HD remakes, then MAYBE I'll take you seriously. You just come off as a conspiracy nut with all this garbage.

"Third time ain't the charm for you."
That's okay. Keep dodging the question :)

[Bundi]

So many quotes!! For once I agree with DragonKnight, what do you mean "where is the proof that HD remasters take away resources from new games"?
Are you serious? Whatever resources, however little, that go into making HD remasters is resources that could have gone into new games.

Look at the PS4 line-up for proof.

[TransientDreamer]

@Bundi
"Whatever resources, however little, that go into making HD remasters is resources that could have gone into new games."
Says who? That's just pure speculation. Developers and publishers do allocate resources to multiple projects at once, you know.

You and especially DragonKnight are really not fit to make a call on whether or not they're negatively influencing development of new titles. Especially when you bring NO evidence to the table.

[LoveOfTheGame]

It's not just me seeing this right? TransientDreamer is actually arguing against simple logic.

Here's an experiment for you TD, you and two friends go pick some apples for an hour. Now for the next hour have one of those friends count the apples you had previous collected while the rest of you continue to pick apples.

Hypothesis: More apples will be picked the first hour than in the second hour.

Reasoning: Since less people were picking apples in the second hour, the number of apples picked will decrease by the amount of apples one person can pick.

Analogy: It's kinda like making a video game. If you have 50 devs available to work, but only have 40 working on non HD "remasters", then you are not using the full potential on new games.

Nothing in life is free, you don't just move resources without it effecting(affecting?) negatively what it was taken from.

[rainslacker]

I don't think you know how game development works. A project, no matter how big or small gets a budget. That budget determines how many resources are allocated to it. When those resources are allocated, they stay where they are for the most part. When their job is done on the project, they may be moved to another project if it's behind. In many cases though, the people that were on contract are just let go. The occasional collaboration happens between teams in one studio, but not days or weeks of resources being pulled.

In many cases these HD updates are small teams, likely leftover contractors and maybe a few key personnel who get assigned to them, or in other cases the work is offloaded onto an entirely different developer who isn't making anything anyways. Not the case with TLOU, but that's usually how it goes. The only instance I know of a big team being pulled was for the remake of FFXIV.

E3 is probably more disruptive to the development process as resources often have to be pulled in order to get a product ready for display. I know, half of my internship was spent getting a game ready for E3. I don't see people saying E3 should stop. I'm pretty sure most people would be raising hell should many devs decide to focus those 3-4 weeks of prep time on getting the game out instead.

Naughty Dog, for example, is a studio of 250 people. They're currently working on 2 games, and an HD remake. Their development staff is about 90 people per game. An HD touch-up, on an engine which is already ready for the PS4, probably has a team of 10-15 people. Hell I wouldn't doubt that a bulk of the touch up work is stuff allocated to interns.

In the end, the resources poured into the simple project you so despise, and that you claim is holding back game development, results in revenues, and hopefully profits for the company making them. This in turn helps fund future projects, and helps show that there is a marketable gain for investors to invest in future projects. Those things are more important to getting those new games you're clamoring for than whether or not 10-20 people happen to not work on a particular game.

And Transient is right. Until you can prove that the people put on those small teams were pulled from the bigger projects, you're just assuming things that may not be true. There are plenty of games coming out, but you are only focusing on the ones you don't like to make your point.

[Ducky]

"Electricity powers your television. Do you require proof of that? You already asked me this question, I already responded above."

... but you're not arguing that electricity powers your television. What you're arguing is that plugging in a toaster will suck away electricity from the TV and degrade the picture quality.
It's an asinine opinion that is going to be dismissed outright unless you actually justify it, and the sarcasm isn't doing you any favours.

A PS4 remaster shouldn't require a large amount of resources. A remaster doesn't require an army of writers, animators, or artists. What a remaster does do is allow for programmers to get used to the hardware by making a port.
This is what ND says they're doing, and last I checked, there is no indication that TLOU's PS4 version is slowing them down.

Try looking at the PS4 as just another console, and the games as just another port.
Do you think that innovation is halted when a game is ported from X360 to PS3, or to PC with better visuals?

[DragonKnight]

@Ducky: "What you're arguing is that plugging in a toaster will suck away electricity from the TV and degrade the picture quality."

That is literally the worst analogy ever made on the internet. It's nothing like that, and it's not even relevant to what I was saying. My comment was a reference to TD's incessant need to go around asking everyone on the site to prove life for him.

The way to make your analogy apt would be to say that the toaster is taking electricity away from other devices, and if you know anything about electricity then you know that the more stuff you have plugged in and on, the greater chance you have of tripping a breaker.

"It's an asinine opinion that is going to be dismissed outright unless you actually justify it, and the sarcasm isn't doing you any favours."

Good thing I don't write to please your criteria then isn't it? It's a statement of fact that resources are being diverted for this game. It's a statement of fact that if this game didn't exist, a new one could exist in its place. Ignore fact all you want to, won't make it go away.

"A PS4 remaster shouldn't require a large amount of resources. A remaster doesn't require an army of writers, animators, or artists. What a remaster does do is allow for programmers to get used to the hardware by making a port.
This is what ND says they're doing, and last I checked, there is no indication that TLOU's PS4 version is slowing them down."

Large or not, it requires resources. The staff members who work the longest are the programmers, writers are done before programming even happens. It's akin to making a movie. The script is done before shooting even happens. So while a remaster may not require those kinds of people, they do require the most important people. And this is the PS4 we're talking about. It runs on PC architecture. They don't need to learn what they already know. This is a cash grab pure and simple.

"Try looking at the PS4 as just another console, and the games as just another port.
Do you think that innovation is halted when a game is ported from X360 to PS3, or to PC with better visuals?"

I'm looking at the PS4 as a console that wasn't prepared to launch. I'm looking at ports as an excuse, an answer to poorly timed releases or none at all. I'm looking at this whole situation as creatively lazy and greedy. It's sad that people are excusing touch ups for goodness sake.

Look where the B.C. argument has shifted. We've gone from arguing that B.C. being excluded is wrong, to accepting remasters that would be completely unnecessary if B.C. were still around. Basically, you're accepting that Sony, and those like them, are charging for what B.C. would have done for free all in the name of graphical touchups.

I love the high standards being showcased.

[NYC_Gamer]

I hope this gen of consoles doesn't become the HD remake era

[BillytheBarbarian]

It already has. 1080p/60fps is all that matters. Otherwise, we're doomed to 720p purgatory where everything is blurry and unplayable...

...sarcasm for those who are clicking those disagrees...

:P

I poop on this new generation

[Blacklash93]

Part of me thinks it's sort of a "Test the new console waters while making some money." sort of deal. It could be partly for the sake of better HD optimization down the road and getting a sample of software sales potential thus far, without much cost.

Anyway, there's no reason to blindly blame gamers. You're throwing out a lot of broad and vaguely directed accusations. And throwing around pronouns like "You" and "Your", like you're just mentally assuming that all your readers are part of your problem, is not helping.

Some people haven't played those games before and would rather play the superior version even if it costs a bit more. Some people are really big fans of these franchises and will buy anything from it. Some people just want something to play on their new console. Some people might not even know what they're buying or how little new they're getting. Or any combination of these. I can virtually guarantee that the majority of consumers do not visit or research on gaming sites. And, as always, consumers are manipulated by hype. It's a big, diverse market.

"I have never seen a community more like a pancake than the gaming community. There is absolutely no consistency in the standards of what we should expect from the development scene and so many flip flop on what they have a problem with. It's like a massive case of bipolar disorder."

Who is "so many"? Unless you can point out many specific individuals with evidence who demonstrate flip-flopping opinions, this is a difficult statement to take for granted. If you're actually just talking about the gaming community in general, I should point out that we're no hivemind and no group-think consistentcy should be expected.

[mydyingparadiselost]

I logged in to say pretty much everything you just said but you beat me to it. I especially think your spot on with the idea of devs getting to know the hardware while putting out a product to generate cash :)
I would add that this isn't something that is new to this gen, I seem to remember a bunch of HD collections and upgrades being released on the ps3 and 360. The DMC HD trilogy, Serious Sam collection, GoW 1 and 2, Kingdom Hearts (which is still in the process of releasing its HD versions) Ninja Gaiden Sigma and many more all came out to mostly rave reviews and very few complaints from critics or customers over their release.
I'm actually kinda hype about some of these since I didn't buy TLOU, Tomb Raider, GoW ascension. Even the ME trilogy, which I did buy, would be worth replacing with a version that runs better than the current offering. By the time I pick up a PS4 these games will be cheap and worth buying to help give me something to play on a budget.
My main concern is not for remakes now but if we're still getting this stuff halfway through this gens life cycle in the quantity that we are now. It's nice to get some gloss on the favorites but I wouldn't want to see new game production become slowed by devs working on too many remakes/remasters.

[maniacmayhem]

Why can't Sony offer this game as a PSNow title?

My problem is some of these games being re-mastered are not even 3 to 4 years old. These games are still fresh on the minds of all gamers. It's almost like the Star Wars collection and how Lucas was bringing out the same film with little touches here and there that never changes the story...(in fact made it worse).

It's funny that a lot of folks are willing to forgive these consoles for not having backwards compatibility, because the main consensus on N4G was "we buy new consoles to play new games" but now a lot of you are willing to re-buy SEMI old games with a graphics bump?

If that was the case you guys should have demanded or been fighting mad that Sony/MS didn't offer BC. It's definitely a cash grab, especially for games that are even a decade old yet. And God:A...one of the worse in the series gets a PS4 update, definitely a cash grab.

[Batnut00]

1. Because this game actually does deserve a proper treatment, not compressed HD where it wouldn't even look as good as the disc-based PS3 version

2. Point taken, but at least we're getting extra content and the developers aren't fiddling with anything that could ruin the game, unlike Lucas who felt the need to change everything with every re-release

3. Yes. Because isn't one of the points of Next-Gen to offer a graphics bump? It certainly didn't stop me from getting the Jak and Daxter and Sly Cooper and GOW collection despite the fact that I still had most of these for PS2. I get to enjoy these games again and it's easier on the eyes. Does it mean I care more about graphics? Yes, but while I don't believe it should necessarily be at the total forefront, there's still a certain expectancy that comes with new consoles that we should see developers pushing their graphical boundaries to the limit whatever the style wither it be cartoonish like Ratchet and Clank or photorealistic like Ryse and if they want to give that treatment to games Semi-old or otherwise, no skin off my nose because at the end of the day, it's all a matter of choice of wither I want to dip my wallet to do so.

4. Now, BC is a tricky thing. Say we did push for it, we'd only end up getting more expensive PS4's and Xbox Ones, something I'd rather not have. If it means having to keep up with my PS3 than fine, I'd rather do that than pay an extra hundred or so just for one feature, even as important as BC.

5. That...yeah I do agree with that. I mean GOW:A? I really hope that one isn't true.

[kewlkat007]

Agree with the blog...Standards are so low now. Gamers get excite for an HD remastered game not a year old..

Waste of resources that could be put towards brand new and re-freshed genres and games.

Man oh man I miss the Genesis/Super Nintendo/N64/PS1/2 days...

[Darkstares]

Naughty Dog still managed to pump out 3 Uncharted games and The Last of Us on one platform. Clearly the PS3 was not lacking in content and it is highly doubtful neither will the PS4.

The problem with games late in a generation such as The Last of Us and Beyond and Gran Turismo 5 is they are so close to new hardware coming out. So you either scrap the project and make it for the new hardware like The Last Guardian is now rumored to be, or you do something like Nintendo did with Zelda on the Wii and Gamecube or you do this.

What some people are neglecting is by re-releasing this game you are also attracting new fans that may not have experienced it on the PS3. This will make the game even more popular and hopefully make them extra income that can go towards more games and also reach out to more consumers for the next one if there is indeed The Last of Us 2.

I could see the argument if this was a regular thing on a system that doesn't get much content but we all know the PS4 will be rich in content. So what exactly is the issue? Sony has been the leader when it come to game support but now all of the sudden because we see a few HD Remasters we're going to worry about resources being deflected? I think some of us just like to whine a little bit too often.

[uth11]

""This is great for people who didn't get a chance to play it on the PS3"

What the hell was stopping them? What is stopping them now? Absolutely nothing. "

What's stopping them? Most people don't own every console. It's not practical. I'm looking forward to playing some of these, especially TLOU.

It's simple, if there's demand for these, they'll produce them. If there isn't they'll stop. If you don't like it, it wasn't marketed to you.

[DragonKnight]

How many people demanded God of War Ascension for the PS4?

@below: I'm going to spare myself some time and say to you that remasters were never originally demanded. They were a response made through initiative to answer the lack of backwards compatibility. They persist because even if they perform poorly in a market standard, if they perform at all they reward is greater than the risk.

Asking "how many people demanded GoW Ascension" is appropriate because it's still asking the question from a marketing perspective. GoW:A has been blasted as being the worst of the series, and anyone's projections should show that sales of said remaster would reflect that sentiment. This should make anyone shelf the idea of remastering that game as not worth it, yet it's likely that it's coming. No demand was shown, yet here it comes anyway? Explain it.

[uth11]

'demand' in the economic sense that there's a market for a product. Not that people literally demanded something.

[rainslacker]

To my knowledge GOWA hasn't been confirmed yet. Secondly, we don't know if SSM would even be handling the project if it does exist. Given the layoffs, and the cancellation of their new IP project, there is no merit to your argument that that game, if it does indeed exist, is taking resources away from another project. If it does exist, and if SSM is remaking it, it can very well be that they are using it as a temporary workload while they design whatever game they plan on making next, remember their last game got cancelled. Pre-production is about 6 months of the development process...which is about the time it would take to port a slightly upgraded port.

Also before you say it, I doubt their last IP was cancelled so they could make a remake. SSM is a top tier studio, that just wouldn't make sense.

You claim it's likely to be coming. Why do you feel that? Because some insider claims it to be so. Sony has one, I repeat one, confirmed remake as of right now, and all indications point to there being a pretty big demand for it.

Very few remasters were demanded. The ones that are very rarely get remade. It's been like that since remasters became a thing last gen. That doesn't mean they don't sell. It also doesn't mean that when they are announced that there isn't demand for them.

You're viewing all this in such a way as to what it is you want,and completely ignore that these things sell. Again, I would be upset and agreeing with you if new IP's and new games weren't also coming out, but that's just not the case.

[zero_gamer]

Nintendo has been doing this for the past two decades and works very well for them. Sony's following Nintendo's footsteps because they know their diehard fans (which is many) would gladly buy the same games they purchased less than 3 years ago, even at full retail price.

It's a given though. Sony was widely held all of last generation as the big new IP machine but that has changed. Now they're milking GoW, Killzone, and Uncharted, and pump more remakes than ever before...like Nintendo.

[MacDonagh]

The difference between Nintendo's IPs and Sony's IPs is that Nintendo's IPs are the core of their business model and usually the sole driving force behind the selling of their consoles since the 3rd parties can't deign to support a "weaker" console.

Not to mention that they at least attempt to try bold things with those IPs and experiment new ways of play. There are massive gameplay differences between Mario 64 to Super Mario Galaxy for instance while the differences between the Uncharted series or GOW or Killzone are negligible at best. Probably because they are set in worlds which leave no space for experimentation, growth or any sort of spark.

You could take another example such as the Super Metroid games compared to the Metroid Prime series. Sometimes the risks just don't pay off though and you get games like Starfox Adventures or Other M but at the very least; Nintendo experiment with interesting concepts and new ways of playing games while other companies (not just counting Sony here but most companies now) release games based on ideas that are well-worn and old or ridiculously generic.

In terms of remakes; Nintendo tends to play the nostalgia card pretty hard. It's what keeps their customers coming back. I'll show you a video which shows how powerful nostalgia can be.

https://www.youtube.com/wat...

Also, Windwaker is the only "HD remake" that Nintendo has released thus far and that game is eleven years old.

[memots]

isnt Ryse a remake? it was original planned and built for xb360 then development stopped and moved to Xbo. There isn't really a difference.

Who cares if it came out on another console. This is more option to people, Its more game on a console, i really don't see a problem here.

A friend of mine who never heard about the last of us just got a ps4, I told him all about The last of us and now he is super stocked for it. *yes he isnt a hardcore gamer and had a ps3 before.

[LoneWolf019]

So basically your telling me im only buying this game for the graphics if i waited this long? lol so wrong. Buddies of mine didnt want to buy a ps3 for one game so that makes them non gamers? Nah wrong again. I for one will be buying this game again because it is THAT good. I said many times it could look exactly the same and id be fine. Looks better then most of these current gen games anyway. Shit id even buy a post pandemic edition again.

[Sleet]

Wow, this topic again.

Seriously dragon shut up already, your getting stale man and this dumb argument that people should buy a PS3 to play TLOU is...well dumb.

[wopsie]

I agree 110%.
But one thing, microsoft and nintendo are not as guilty of this, if not their not guilty at all. Sure nintendo released a HD remake of zelda windwaker, but that game was 10 years old at the HD rerelease and was 2 gaming generations old. Microsoft has remade Halo 1 as a anniversary edition, wich in my opinion is perfectly legid as it is an old game and great in its own rights. In wind waker HD they also made improvements, reacting to complaints fans had etc. What sony is now doing however is even worse than the shit capcom has been pulling on us with countless versions of street fighter 4 and resident evil 4. if sony really wanted to make some money the shpuld just make a brand new crash bandicoot, jak and dexter and sly cooper game for the PS4 and have them being up to par with the quallity of the nintendo platformerd and games as rayman origins and rayman legends.

They just have to make good and new games that take advantage of the "next-gen" hardware without spending it on extra pixels. Instead they should focus on adding in sophisticated mechanics, wide and sprawling worlds that feel more alive. Because like you mentioned, if the consoles are trying to make pretty graphics they might as well go bankrupt right now. Because there is no way they could possibly beat PCs in that way.