Retro Remakes: Sony Controls The Way You Play

The announcement of yet another remake of a retro PS1 Classic, Medieval, leaves us scratching our heads. Does Sony want us to forget the past?

[PhoenixUp]

“You could download Crash, Spyro, Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy VII, and so many more from the PSN Store. This ability that the PS3 had was sort of a way to make up for the lack of backwards compatibility.”

Every PS3 was naturally backwards compatible with PS1 games. In fact every PlayStation device had access to PS1 games until PS4 arrived.

“The problem comes from the fact that these Crash, Spyro, and MediEvil games are, despite what Sony labels them, not remasters. They are remakes. As much as they try to mimic it, they are not the same games with a fresh coat of paint.”

Why is that a problem? The classic games weren’t perfect and in many cases the remakes fix issues that were present in the original titles.

[ShadowWolf712]

They kinda said MediEvil was a remake too so...

Plus Crash and Spyro aren't their products, they don't control what those are marketed as.

[Imalwaysright]

It was announced as a remaster and that was what I was expecting. Imagine my surprise when I went to see the gameplay reveal and it was actually a remake. Best gaming related surprise of the year.

[AspiringProGenji]

Ah shut up. Let’s us have nice things

[Gardenia]

Shadow of the Colossus was great. I can't wait to play the Spyro remastered collection. Medieval looks good and FFVII is coming at some point. There are so many great classics that can be remade for the Playstation, and I hope they will keep making them

[FallenAngel1984]

Why is the author crediting Sony for the Crash and Spyro remakes rather than mentioning the Ratchet & Clank & Shadow of the Colossus remakes?

Are they going to credit Sony with the remakes for Resident Evil 1, Resident Evil 2, Final Fantasy VII, Metal Gear Solid, Tomb Raider, Oddworld: Abe’s Oddyssey, Dragon Quest VII, Klonoa, Star Ocean 2, Tales of Destiny, Tales of the Abyss, Yakuza 1, & Yakuza 2 next?

Also the purpose of remakes isn’t to make us forget the past, but to celebrate it through a modern sensibility.

[NecrumOddBoy]

Twin Snakes credit can go to Nintendo?

[UltraNova]

Well said.

If gamers want the authentic experience they should dig up their ps1 or buy a used one and play that. Its 2019 almost, the game needs a radical do over to captivate new and reach old audiences.

[ApocalypseShadow]

Tired of these ridiculous articles about BC. You know why it isn't there. If you don't know why as a journalist, blogger, whatever, go back and research why PS4 doesn't play the old systems before making these articles. No one is forcing you to rebuy these games unless you sold them and the system to play them on.

And this idiot doesn't seem to know that Sony didn't make the remasters of Crash or Spyro. Another CLUE this idiot has no clue and may not even be a playstation fan. Read the box dummy. It says ACTIVISION.
https://images-na.ssl-image...
https://static.gamespot.com...

And, what does fortnite have to do with it? That's like if I were to bring up fortnite behind a paywall. And no articles are even written about it. WHOOPS! I just did. Week number 1234544 and no outrage still. Anyway....

You want to play them again, Buy a PS1, PS2 or PS3 if you want to play. If Sony wants to make PS5 BC with PS1, PS2, PS3 and PS4, great. That's awesome. But this Gen, I'm more than happy Sony is spending money on making new games like GofT, Spider-Man, Detroit, HZD, rebooting GOW and investing in VR backed by games like Astrobot, Wipeout, Farpoint, Blood and Truth, etc.

[Spurg]

"You want to play them again, Buy a PS1, PS2 or PS3 if you want to play."
See this is there you protest not defend. You and many more are sending mixed messages to Sony by saying things like that. They will not budge unless you say you WANT to have it. New iterations of consoles need to have BC implemented because it makes the investment in that console worthwhile, while making the games you've purchased feel future proof.
You could say things like, "I buy new console for new and future game, why should I buy it for old games." Not having BC especially on Sony consoles is a slap to its fanbase and its legacy as those very fan cherish their games so much that they stick to playstation for the long run. Not having a console that plays all of their previous Playstation games doesn't really bode well for how Sony treats their long term fans.
Also most importantly, this gen we have made several statements mentioning how we love to buy games because we want of ownership of them. Sony is stripping that ownership away by not implementing a BC and making those games feel pretty much useless as new console enter the scene.

[Nyxus]

They are not useless, they still play fine on the system they were meant for. I would like the PS5 to have BC, but is it a big deal for me personally? No it isn't. If I buy a PS5 it is to play PS5 games.

[doggo84]

Ok

[ApocalypseShadow]

PS4 can't read audio cds. That kills the chance of PS1 discs being read. As I said, if you researched on why it's not there, you would not be asking me. You know why PS4 doesn't play PS3 games. I don't need to school you on this.

PS2 games are possible because of DVD being read, but it takes money and time for Sony to be working on that instead of making new games. As I said, if Sony can do it through emulation for next Gen, great. But I didn't sell my previous consoles to worry about it. If you did, that's your own fault for not researching before buying. And assuming the switch to X86 was going to give you full playback of previous game systems.

I'm well aware Sony is in possession of emulators for PS1 and PS2. But PS3 wouldn't have been easy at all. And you know that. When I buy a new system, I expect new games. Old games get played when there aren't new ones being made. Which is Microsoft's problem. Which you also know.

It's not mixed messages. I just don't assume something will be there because I feel entitled to have it.

[FinalFantasyFanatic]

The only problem is when older consoles die, replacing them can be troublesome as finding replacements once they go out of production leads you to resorting to ebay or 2nd hand stores (and the cost goes up because they become rare).

[ApocalypseShadow]

Final,

So, you have to shop around. But being lazy, you want Sony to keep investing money in old software that you can access for free on new hardware? When you already had the hardware to play them? Sure.

I've gone through every era of gaming and never expected the new system to play the old games. I appreciated what Sony did in the past, but I don't assume they will in the future.

Google, Apple, MS Windows, Sega, Nintendo, etc, etc have new hardware that doesn't run old software. But in consoles, you expect going forward, all new hardware require access to old software. Yeah. Sure.

It would make sense if all games were digital. They're not. It would make sense if some of those companies were still around to update but they're not because they shut down years ago. It would make sense if all games' licenses auto renewed for future use. They don't.

If you expect the future PS9 to still play PS1 discs, you're crazy.

[gangsta_red]

And where's the outrage that a F2P game has free multiplayer but a game you pay for doesn't!??

Oh...yeah, scratch that, that would put all this outrage back on your piece of plastic.

You do realize this though right? In every Sony criticism piece your desperately trying to point the finger elsewhere but using the most inane subject to try and prop up.

[doggo84]

Yea Yea that's fantastic rookie monster / Septic

[gangsta_red]

@doggo

I'll also accept Kribwalker and moldybread.

Being an alt, you should know this by now.

[ApocalypseShadow]

Hey gangsta, you were raging for cross play with PS4. How come you're not raging about F2P behind xbl?

Keep having you fake concerns about Sony while not dealing with your own backyard. Also, we pay for online because xbox fans like you lead the way in paying for it. And as much as others and I said, "don't pay for online." "It's only going to effect the rest of us eventually." You did anyway. And now we all have to pay for it. It's in my past comment history. So, thanks for your blind ignorance.

Good thing we helped stop you from DRM 2013 acceptance or we'd all be in trouble this Gen leading into the next.

[Realms]

So buying remasters isn't a choice? Whatever man I buy current generation consoles for current generation games I have a PS3 fat that is in storage if I ever wanted to play PS1,PS2 PS3 games so yeah this fake outrage by people like you is totally genuine right? MS still has a pay wall on F2P games I guess that isn't a priority for you and neither is putting pressure on EA, Activision to implement cross play that so many of you kept crying over.

[gangsta_red]

I find it absolutely hilarious that your own fake concern keeps coming about in unrelated articles as you try your best to point the finger elsewhere.

I've already said my piece about f2p games being behind a paywall BACK when it was a hot issue. Back when a bunch of articles where speaking on it and devs were too, back when MS locked Netflix and other apps behind a paywall, and mainly when the World of Tanks devs was calling out MS.

You know, relevant comments related to the actual article.

You're making up your own pretend war about F2P games locked behind Xbox's paywall. Something you and other hive minded individuals decided to latch on to when Sony was getting pressure from all side about thier crossplay stance. Others have moved on though, you on the other hand just can't seem to.

But ask yourself, how come Sony can charge for those MP games but not F2P games that specializes in microtransactions, loot boxes and other grind material that's "killing our industry"?

Why can Sony bend the rules for that and not just offer free online like they did for PS3? Shouldn't you be more mad and concerned with that backyard instead of looking over the fence and yelling at MS and Nintendo?

"Also, we pay for online because xbox fans like you lead the way in paying for it"

LMAO, so it's Xbox's fault that Sony now charges you to pay for their online service?

Great argument you have there champ.

And stop this "hero of the gaming community" you're pretending to be.

You would defend Sony no matter what, just like how you're blaming Xbox for you having to pay for Sony's online service, just like how you defended Sony's stance on no crossplay even when devs called them out, just like how you try your hardest to claim journalists hate Sony whenever some piece you don't agree with appears, just like in those pieces you get all mad and start talking about MS and Nintendo.

"Good thing we helped stop you from DRM 2013 acceptance.."

Good thing, because Sony would have did it too and you would have happily accepted it as you do everything else Sony "adopted" from others.

[Dragonscale]

Looks like they are celebrating the past tbh.

[Platformgamer]

he calls the game medieval, no need to read any further

[Darkwatchman]

This was announced a long time ago. We only just saw gameplay the other day. This kid’s late

[shaenoide]

If you dont want that play on PC. Weird to call out Sony Microsoft or Nintendo for owning their distribution process.

[Legatus]

"Medieval"
LOL 'nuff said about this article.

[CobraKai]

Remake, remaster, backwards compatibility, I love them all. MediEvil was a blast back in the day. As long as they make all the right fixes, I’m ok with it not being exactly the same, I own and played the original. Plus there is always the game as it was, and the game how you remember it. Sometimes the memory doesn’t live up to the reality, which is what some developers try to change with these remakes.

[AnubisG]

A very wrong opinion piece here.

[MWH]

try to relax and enjoy the games.

[Silly gameAr]

More nitpicking. This and that article about being worried about the PS5 because the ps4 is doing well, are a couple of the most nitpicky, pointless articles I've seen this weekend. Wonder what's next?

"I'm worried that the next PS5 will be a lighter shade of black and that may cause it to fail next gen".

Can't wait for that opinion piece.

[Vanfernal]

Another "journalist" making some imaginary argument about something that's not an issue. Medievil is a classic PS franchise. People have been asking for more love for that series for a long time, especially after Daniel Fortesque appeared in PS Battle Royale. Sony delivered. There is absolutely NOTHING negative about this remake. NOTHING. This is a stealth bash article just throwing a jab at BC.

[capjacksparrow]

I like the way Sony handles these games. I see nothing wrong with a fresh coat of paint. Retro shops sell old stuff if you really want to pick up a PS1. Ebay, too.

[Imalwaysright]

Personally, I don't like remasters because for that we might as well have BC. Remakes are another story because it shows that the companies behind them are putting a lot of effort and they aren't just using a known and loved IP as a quick and easy cash grab. Having said this I hope that many PS4 owners support the game that is in the thumbnail.

[Tross]

Ummm...no TONYJAMES404, if Sony wanted people to forget about the past, they wouldn't be releasing stuff like the PlayStation Classic (as iffy as its lineup is), and they wouldn't be remaking old games. Actually, not to be pedantic, but this is the first remake of a PS1 title that Sony is actually doing, so I don't know what you're on about. Crash and Spyro were made by Activision and the Final Fantasy VII remake that I'll believe is happening when I see it is a Square Enix title. Remakes are also definitely not lazy, as they're new games built from the ground up.

More to the point though, if Sony really wanted to forget about the past and truly wished for us to do the same, by far the best way to go about it would be to not acknowledge the past. Oh, and for the record, fans of these old games love remakes, assuming they're done well, and there's nothing crooked like what Activision is pulling with Spyro 2 & 3. Remakes are great ways to actually preserve and celebrate the past, while updating the visuals, and possibly the controls and mechanics. They can appeal to new players including younger audiences, but fans of the original are sure to check them out too. Medievil is actually a pretty solid pick for a remake too.

Sony controls the way you play? Sure, I'd love for PS1 classics to be on the PlayStation Store and think that has been Sony's biggest oversight this gen, but last I checked Nintendo was sitting on even more of their history and blatantly refuses to have a Virtual Console on the Switch, because I guess it was printing too much money, while Sony at least has PS2 games on the PS4. I'm also not thrilled about how the future of gaming would look if companies like EA and MS have their way as they want way more control over our entertainment in general, and that goes well beyond the scope of a few remakes hitting the PS4.

[Realms]

At what point is Sony forcing gamers to buy these games some of which Sony doesn't even have the license for anyway so it's really not up to them.

[salmonade]

I don't want to play old crap looking polygonal monstrosities. I want a current looking remake ALWAYS.

[Segata]

I really wanted a MediEvil remake on PS4 when PS4 was announced. So I'm happy.

[Lilrizky]

Hmmm perhaps. But the reception for Ratchet and Clank, Shadow of the Collossus, Crash, Spyro even Yakuza Kiwami speak for itself

[NotanotherReboot]

leave Sony alone. I like it when they bring back old franchises