Why HD Remakes Take Advantage Of Us

Play: "Every month in Play Magazine, we take a hot topic and look at the arguments for and against. This time up, we start with Retro Gamer Editor Darran Jones stating the case against the trend for HD remasters on current-gen consoles."

[Fro_xoxo]

It's a love-hate relationship.

I've yet to buy a remaster this gen.

You might not want it, but there's an audience for it.

for example, as soon as Gears of War remaster shows up. I'm all over it.

[Yi-Long]

I love HD Remasters. perhaps it's because I'm taking advantage of THEM!?

At the end of last-gen, I didn't buy certain games like GTA5 and The Last of Us, because I was already expecting next-gen releases for them. So I just waited. Also, I recently picked up Tomb Raider for 15 euro on PS4.

As soon as DMC hits the bargain bins for around 20 euro, I'll buy that as well. And there are some more games from last gen that I never got to play, which are coming out as HD-remasters, or MIGHT come out as HD remasters.

Also, PS+ does a fine job with some last-gen HD remasters, like Fez, Guacamelee, Spelunky, etc etc.

They often offer good value for money. Obviously, there are exceptions, where the HD-remaster is just lazy, or they are extremely greedy (DOA5), but they're a nice opportunity to pick up some classics you might have missed, or want to enjoy again, for an attractive price. Nothing wrong with that.

[AudioEppa]

Take advantage? lol

I never heard of stories of people getting forced into buying anything.

[Kleptic]

exactly...it only 'takes advantage' of people who buy a remastered game, and already purchased the original...and even then, they may find enough value in it to be all about it...and so what?

I get the argument of resources being wasted by dev teams on remakes...further implementing the idea of 'no where to go with game development right now', similar to holywood and comic book movies...

but face it...gaming is still in a low risk state...no one is putting money down on anything unless its a safe bet...and great games from the past being remastered are both safe, and cheap to make, yet usually still cost almost full price...no need for anyone to complain about it...if you don't like remastered games, like me, don't buy them, like me...if you do, go for it...even without remasters; no publisher is going to go all out on some off the wall untested shat any time soon...it'll continue to be mostly sequels from franchises now older than the average gamer...

[_-EDMIX-_]

"I get the argument of resources being wasted by dev teams on remakes"

Those games released where not "remakes" they are ports in HD, they wouldn't even be close to what one would call a remake.

And games are contracted out, that team that is doing the port was never going to make some sequel, thus its a resource that wasn't even wasted as they where not going to make a game, their job was to port only.

Gearbox ported Halo 1 and 2, United Fronts ported Tomb Raider to PS4 and XONE and even helped port Halo MCC...

Sooo the reality is those teams where not wasted resources because those teams where not even owned..they where outsourced to perform a certain task. ie build my kitchen.

Thus...If I change my mind and don't want a new kitchen, I'm not just going to hire the same person that was going to do my kitchen to landscape my yard.

Many folks need to really get that gaming is contracted...

They where NEVER going to some how NOT port a game, regardless of if they are making a sequel or not, the sequel is none of the other teams business, their job is solely to port.

ie Gearbox ported Halo 1 and 2, they had nothing to do with Halo 3 and were never going to, Bungie was doing that. Not porting Halo 1 or 2 doesn't some how make Halo 3 come faster or make Halo 3 sell better...

Its a business and its about investing, did RE6 do great numbers with that 600 man team? I mean...do gamers really thank that a port is the reason why they are not seeing certain sequels? As if to say they would have made a sequel if they were not doing a port? That just sounds like most gamers don't know enough about the industry is all, example......Tomb Raider on XONE wasn't some how delayed, held back or had a lack of resources because one of the games was ported to PS4 and XONE, as CD didn't do that port, United Fronts did......United Fronts was NEVER GOING TO MAKE A TOMB RAIDER GAME!

Just like Gearbox wasn't going to make Halo 3, just like Asypr was going to make Borderlands 3 or Doom 4 etc.

The sooner gamers start to actually know that those ports most times are not done by those teams and that even the teams that do the ports are not part of the same team most times, they will fully get why ports happen. This is business, who the hell is having a better experience because 1 version of a game exist as suppose to 4?

Even with the BS excuse of resources....ok sure, put United Fronts on Tomb Raider with CD....

Square will just call another team to port last gen's Tomb Raider, "oh what"? "that is team could be working on Tomb Raider next gen too?" Ok...now we have 3 teams on Tomb Raider....ok. "let me get another team to do the port...what? OH yo want that team on the next gen version too?" I mean...do you guys get why that actually makes no damn sense? They are not doing either or, they can and are doing BOTH!

KH Collection on PS3, strange yet KHIII exist,

FFX on PS3 and PS4, strange...yet FFXV exist...do folks not get that those publishers don't just own 1 studio and only have a choice between 1 game?

[Kleptic]

you put up a huge wall of text stating mostly the same thing that i did...and i can't really tell if you're agreeing, or disagreeing...but some clarification:

ok, remake might not've been the best word to use...

but i never misunderstood how these small re-released things work...nor did i miss how games are contracted to smaller studios to handle it...

it all circles back to my initial point...which is the low risk part of the industry...and you seemed to assume that when i said a 'waste of resources', you thought i meant man power in terms of the physical people making it...which i didn't...the only relevant resource is the money, and even simple ports of older games in HD takes money...not just to make it, but they then usually market them relatively well, have to distribute them, etc...

meaning...these things still cost publishers money...and i get that some could argue they should save it, and put it into better new IPs...thats all i was saying...I don't care, and never did, who actually handles a re-release...only that in an industry where penny-pinching is reaching critical mass...some of us may prefer that the money be invested in 'better' ways...

[morganfell]

You must understand that certain people have a persistent victim mentality and some members of said victim crowd have internet access and a sucker website willing to print anything.

These are the same people who feel nothing which occurs that might be deemed wrong could ever be their fault and they are not responsible for anything they ever do. They need constant babystiing to protect them from themselves. Even the passengers on the spaceship in WALL E are more self sufficient.

[Lukejrl]

If consoles have skipped backwards compatibility in order to market the few remakes, i find it slightly disingenuous.

there is no real technical reason why we couldn't have xbone play 360 games or even OGxbox. same for ps4 with ps2 and ps1 games. the ff7 ps4 release is ridiculous. pretty much guarantees the system will never read those old discs.

[morganfell]

B/C isn't the issue here. Many want the new. I have purchased several remakes and I still own them on previous platforms as well. For most, it isn't about playing old versions on new platforms.

[_-EDMIX-_]

Square doesn't care, Sony doesn't care, MS doesn't care, buddy..no one cares.

PS3 reads PS1 disk.....have you seen PSN's PS1 collection?

Strange...........yet you can play PS1 games on PS3? Yet why have ports to PS1 games bud? FFVII already exist on PC, Eidos published it....yet Square made another version....weird.

Do you not fully get that ports are happening because they make money? It isn't for some damn logical reason solely about design. I just can't stop laughing LMFAO! ROFL! BBQ!

Wii had Gamecube games ported...Wii plays Gamecube games native.

360 had a whole XB collection on XBL....plays XB games...

Please...dear god stop being cheap and wasting everyone's time and just buy a damn used PS1, PS2 etc.

No one cares. Why should, Sony, MS, Nintendo etc waste all this time to add BC JUST to give you a free console?

We had ports with BC, we had ports before BC...get over it. Sony and MS made the right choice using x86, for the sake of gaming. Want to play your PS1,2 and 3 games?

Well....keep those systems and live life. Having BC would have never actually stopped ports, remakes etc.

I'm sorry, but even with owning a BC PS3, I don't agree.... its just not their job to offer such a thing and its best to keep the price down and the system hardware focused on NEXT GEN GAMING! They should not be wasting time and money making 1 system into 4 or 3 systems. Why? Go out, buy all systems, live life..... I'm sorry but this isn't a real issue,its something cheapskates, whiners, entitled gamers seem to love bring up. They don't owe you anything.

FFX is coming to PS4 bud, deal with it, FFXV will clearly be on PS6 lol I mean...how will you feel about that 45K NEXT GEN version on PS7 with implant support?

[rainslacker]

Older games can be hard to find...particularly if they're more than 1 generation past. Some games are really expensive to buy if they're one generation old. FFVII for instance was going for over $150 before it released digitally, and it wasn't even a remake.

BC mostly benefits the hardcore retro gamer, and those that want to continue playing older games, especially at the start of a new generation. Beyond that, people generally don't go seeking out those games, and it's much more likely people will want to play a "new" release as opposed to seeking out an older title just because.

[elninels]

The whole article is poorly written. His counterpoint to the "you don't habe to buy it" argument is, "well hell".

[lilmisscherry]

I just want additional achievements for my favourite games lol.

[Kyosuke_Sanada]

I'd rather a full-blown remake on a new engine with enough extra content to make it stand out.

[elninels]

Are the two mutually exclusive? an hd remake doesn't take from a new game; if anything it will add more resources to said new game.

[KryptoniteTail]

A good HD remake does not. Chrono Trigger HD with an orchestral soundtrack, full voice acting, additional content, new difficulty modes and gameplay tweaks, Trophy support, and the works, everything togglable to where you could theoretically just play the original; who WOULDN'T buy it?!

Same for Smash Bros Melee. HD online with balance patches? Sign me up! Mario Kart Double Dash too! Street Fighter II 4K Remix! I can go on and on...

Now, I do think it is stupid that we get remasters a year after initial launch like TLoU, but hey, you don't have to buy it, man.

Remasters kick ass when done right. I heard Silent Hill screwed up but for every screw up we get an awesome game like Wind Waker so I am thrilled.

[Hazmat13]

i hate HD remakes!
then don't buy it.
problem solved

[Dustinf11]

I don't think so..

We win too. We get a game we know we love in the best possible format (for our chosen platform). If your not broke it's no big deal to buy a game twice. imo, of course.

[Raider69]

Amazon Uk is selling this game at £49 frankly this is getting out of control,rip off price for a 5 year old game that is only getting a bump in the resolution and a bit better framerate.

[DualWielding]

I love remasters and remakes don't understand the hate

[22CobraKing]

Taking advantage?
It's you who's buying the game. If you don't want it the don't buy. Simple as that.

[ginsunuva]

"Take Advantage Of Us"

The sequel to the award-winning "The Last of Us"

[StevenSeagul]

A HD remake took advantage of me. I'm so ashamed.

[TeamLeaptrade]

I don't mind some remasters, but it's just the amount of them that are coming out that has kind of got on my nerves. I just choose not to buy them and I'm all good. It's up to the consumer after all, and if people want remasters, than I say go for it. I'm just not interested in fairly new games getting a remaster so fast. But to each their own.