The unfortunate state of game preservation

[Zenpai]

57 minutes ago, gameoverDude189 said:

It's sad that some good licensed games end up getting delisted from PSN, Xbox Live, GOG, Steam & Origin, etc. after awhile. 

Too bad publishers can't cut a non-expiring license deal for individual games.  Even if it would drive up the price of the game another $3-5, it'd be worth it.

 

Great point. A lot of the Harry Potter games (mainly the first ones) were really good, and yet, none of them have been made available digitally or even remastered yet. Spider-Man 2 is also considered one of the best Spider-Man games and yet it's still stuck on the 6th generation.

[Honor_Hand]

I'm gonna try to participate with the limited perspective I have...

 

I believe the main problem with video game preservation is that it is not yet seen as work of art by most people. Cannot really speak for other countries and/or cultures but at least where I live in video games are still a pastime or a child's hobby and, due to that, they are treated as such by the general population. Of course that I don't agree with that, nor with many other things. Video games are true creative works that deserved to be preserved in time, of course, some deserve that more than others but even the shittier ones should be stored and considered for preservation as well.

 

Not sure if other societies see video games in a different way? I live in one where violent video games are legally banned and where authorities think it would be right to pass a steamroll over them in order to destroy them (they actually did that once you know), so there is that... Nowadays, nobody cares about that though and people just do as they please. 

 

In any case, I do collect video games in physical form as a hobby. I do so because I really appreciate the medium and because I think they should be preserved. I used to be very active in getting games from a number of classic devices I own, whatever could be found here I bought it if it was at a reasonable price. Nowadays, with the crisis that is going on, I stopped doing that and my very limited budget is directed to collect and play the most recent console I have, which would be the PS3. Digital distribution isn't really my thing because I never felt as if I really truly own the game. Not to mention that internet sucks in my country so downloading a big game is quite a titanic effort and streaming services such as PSNow are totally out of the question.

 

While I do understand people have valid concerns about how remakes, HD collections, reimaginings and general re-releases work, I do appreciate that we are able to get a second updated take of an old classic at a reasonable price, even if the author's original idea is lost in the process, sadly. I guess it is something that just goes with the industry and the people. In the end, I'm all in for proper video game preservation as I also think most kind of creative works should be preserved for future generations.

 

I hope to have understood the topic in question. If not, let me know. ?

 

 

[Sir-Syzygy]

21 hours ago, Honor_Hand said:

I hope to have understood the topic in question. If not, let me know. ?

 

You understand the topic far better than that charlatan who was the first responder to this whole thread (you did a good job at understanding @Honor_Hand).

I'm able to empathise with you as I too am a part of a nation infamous for mistreating video games as an art; whether it's blatant censorship or in the case of GTAV, removing them from store shelves.

I also think your sentiments regarding physical vs. digital media ring very true. It's become almost common knowledge (amongst those who actually look into things) that when you buy games on places such as Steam, you're only paying for the ability to access a game that technically isn't something you own.

 

  

 

 

 

Edited April 18, 2018 by Crispy78923

[starcrunch061]

9 minutes ago, Crispy78923 said:

You understand the topic far better than that charlatan who was the first responder to this whole thread (you did a good job at understanding @Honor_Hand).

 

Easy there. Sir Bee is a good egg.

[Honor_Hand]

21 minutes ago, Crispy78923 said:

You understand the topic far better than that charlatan who was the first responder to this whole thread (you did a good job at understanding @Honor_Hand).

I'm able to empathise with you as I too am a part of a nation infamous for mistreating video games as an art; whether it's blatant censorship or in the case of GTAV, removing them from store shelves.

I also think your sentiments regarding physical vs. digital media ring very true. It's become almost common knowledge (amongst those who actually look into things) that when you buy games on places such as Steam, you're only paying for the ability to access a game that technically isn't something you own.

1

 

Thanks. And yes, digital distribution does have its benefits but I don't personally like the idea of paying for just a license to play a video game that is not tangible to me. That's why I decided against renewing my subscription to PS Plus years ago. Sure, the discounts were great sometimes but I didn't feel like as if I ever really got any asset I could completely use on my own. Not to mention that the games that were given away to me for free, weren't really mine either, they were just rented to me for as long as I was part of the subscription.

 

I can understand why people like digital distribution as there are a number of valid reasons for it but for me, in my particular context, it really makes more harm than good. Pretty sure I'm on the minority side of things but that's just how I see it.

[Sir_Bee]

1 hour ago, Crispy78923 said:

You understand the topic far better than that charlatan who was the first responder to this whole thread (you did a good job at understanding @Honor_Hand).

 

I'm confused, you wanted to start a conversation, I added to the conversation by bringing up the other side, and I am somehow a charlatan?  I feel that I was unfairly attacked here ... all I did was disagree with you.

Edited April 18, 2018 by Sir_Bee
Removed the unnecessary ending statement. Unfairly harsh.

[Sir-Syzygy]

11 hours ago, Sir_Bee said:

 

I'm confused, you wanted to start a conversation, I added to the conversation by bringing up the other side, and I am somehow a charlatan?  I feel that I was unfairly attacked here ... all I did was disagree with you.

It wasn't meant as a personal attack. Don't worry about it. I've been spending too much time on MAL. 

Edited April 19, 2018 by Crispy78923

[MMDE]

Not enough Tomba! HD trilogies!

[AJ_Radio]

On 4/16/2018 at 2:26 PM, jrdemr said:

This a topic that says much to me. I really hate seeing games and people's hard work lost to time, and hence why backwards compatibility is so important to me. I get that the gaming industry as a whole had to go through a lot of growing pains, but after more than 40 years of maturity, I think it's time to treat games with the kind of respect all art forms deserve.

 

It still boggles my mind how digital purchases aren't transferrable between generations. If I bought the game back on PS3, why don't I have the right to automatically use it on my PS4? There's literally no other reason than to make more money off of double dipping. I really love Sony to death for all they've done for gaming, but this is the one issue they desperately need to improve upon. Microsoft showed how it's done back at E3 2015 and is even allowing you to use your physical games on your current consoles. Granted, the compatible games need to be approved one by one, but it's still a hell of a lot better than what Sony allows us to do, which is... jack shit. No matter how good your service and your games may be, good will creates the most long lasting kind of loyalty.

 

Regarding remakes, I think they're a very good thing. They allow us to have our old experiences back while also having all the bells and whistles of modern gaming - better graphics, improved controls, more functionalities... that's not to say that I believe the old versions should be erased or something, though. A good remake should contain every single thing the original had and just improve on the technical aspects, but even so, there might always be something intangible that people just liked about the original, and hence why you should make remakes for the new gamers, or for the people that just want to re-experience their old games in a new light, but keep the original as a digital download, or better yet, as an unlockable on the disc together with the remake, as some people here have suggested.

 

Game preservation is the reason the feature I want the most out of the PS5 is backwards compatibility. I don't even really want there to be a PS5. Graphics are already more than perfectly fine on the PS4 and I already have way too may consoles hooked up to my TV. But backwards compatibility would soften that blow considerably, since that would mean I would only need one machine to play all games that have come out since the end of 2013.

 

We've reached the point where console manufacturers have finally realized that a simple, PC-like architecture will go a long way in streamlining things and making your platform accessible and easy to develop for. Microsoft has done this from the very beginning (hence why all of their consoles have backwards compatibility), but Sony had to go through the PS3 to understand that. They have now, so if the PS5 has an architecture similar to the PS4 (and everything points towards the fact that it will), there will be literally no excuse to keep backwards compatibility from us. One generation of remasters we can handle, as a lot of games were getting a bit too old by modern standards, but two in a row? Getting the same games sold to us time and time again? Enough is enough. Just give us backwards compatibility and focus on giving us new experiences.

 

BriHard spoke about this issue better than I ever could have (the titles of the video and your topic are extremely similar... was this what inspired you to write the topic in the first place?...):

 

You make a very good effort to make your posts concise and clear with proper punctuation and getting straight to the point. 

 

I personally don't think Sony really cares at this point. Sure, their developer companies are still making great games. God of War is coming out tomorrow at midnight for the masses to enjoy, and I will definitely play and platinum that game when I get around to it.

 

From what I've learned these past few months the Playstation 3 was hard to code for, which could be a reason why we're seeing all these remasters this generation. If I enjoyed a game well enough then I may buy it again as either a different region or a remaster. But most remasters for the most part are unneeded. All they've really done in most of them is increase the framerate, up the resolution to 1080p (or 4K), and maybe add one or two new features to the games. That's it. People are essentially buying the same game twice because they would much rather play it on their pristine PS4 Pro with Ultra 4K TV rather than go back to their Playstation 3 that has inferior resolution. 

 

LA Noire got a remaster, and in 4K. Was that really necessary? The game isn't even that old, not compared with many PS1/PS2 titles that could of used a much needed remaster. I literally couldn't really note any serious change between the 720p in the original release of LA Noire, and the supposed 1080p/4K resolution in the remastered version.

 

A game like Shadow Warrior makes sense. It is a reboot of the 1997 classic, and modern audiences will probably say the original is too "old" and "archaic" by today's standards. This is perhaps true. Wolfenstein was also given a reboot along with DOOM a couple years later. I have no complaints against those since the developers of both games did build them from the ground up, and they turned out to be great experiences. They also have tidbits to the old classic games, which is always nice to see.

 

But remasters have been for the most part the same games sold off again. If I played Assassins Creed Rogue and I truly loved it to the point where I wanted to buy the remaster on the PS4, I have no issues with that. However just buying the game just to play it on a more modern console is just downright stupid. Backwards compatibility is needed, I would much prefer to just pop in the PS3 disc of Assassins Creed Rogue and play it on my PS4. Remasters, in my mind, are a cheap way to get more profits.

 

I don't understand why graphics are the end-all-be-all type of thing. I played through all of Horizon Zero Dawn on my vanilla PS4 with 1080p TV and I probably wouldn't get too much more satisfaction if I played it on a PS4 Pro with Ultra 4K TV. I likely would of been "wowed" by the graphics for a solid hour but that would of been it.

 

That's what I see a lot of gamers talk about in God of War. The graphics are going to be amazing in 4K, we need higher framerate, etc etc etc. Graphics are FAR from what constitutes as real quality gaming. Your game can look utterly amazing but if it plays like shit I'm not going to bother with it.

 

This is a reason why I've been getting into more indie games, because they better strike a balance between the old retro games of decades past and having modern capabilities. Rogue Legacy and Shovel Knight I definitely enjoy. What they lack in amazing graphics they more than make up for in good gameplay.

[Sir-Syzygy]

On 4/17/2018 at 0:40 AM, Sir_Bee said:

Is it really that important to preserve beyond the fact that they still exist?  And it isn't just video games that would have this problem, it is anything that using any form of technology at all to be observed.  Films that were printed on the old film reels, Music that was printed on vinyl (while still not rare, wont be forever) or what about cassette tapes or 8-track?  Photography negatives that would need to be developed (again, still around but not forever).  This even goes into other mediums like the automobile.  What about all the beautiful cars that were made in the early 1900's?  Cars that run on leaded fuel, or are broken down in general without the original parts to repair them?

 

We still have the games that were made early on, they are just uncommon, and run on outdated tech.  We don't need to keep the old games front and center by re-making them, or HD re-releases.

 

Why should a game maker be obligated to include the original game?  I don't think that makes any sense?  What value would the original game have to 90% of the audience who don't have the tech to play it?  And if you suggest that they should make the original game run on current tech, that is a HUGE ask, and not reasonable to expect. 

4

Hey @Sir_Bee, could you please elaborate on your points? I don't fully understand what you're trying to say, especially the highlighted and underlined section.

Edited April 20, 2018 by Crispy78923

[AJ_Radio]

On 4/16/2018 at 7:40 AM, Sir_Bee said:

We still have the games that were made early on, they are just uncommon, and run on outdated tech.  We don't need to keep the old games front and center by re-making them, or HD re-releases.

 

Megaman Legacy Collection Vols 1 & 2 are perfect examples of older games getting preserved, with history tidbits and art that created the characters in the Megaman Universe. 

 

The industry will always focus on the latest and greatest. The latest and greatest now is God of War. Games like that attract impressionable kids. 

 

Guys like me who are getting older and have played video games for over 25 - 26 years are no longer the target audience. AAA games have always drawn the up and coming generation of gamers. 

 

We should be thankful some of those old games from the NES/SNES/N64 eras are getting any kind of preservation at all. There are many games that don’t get this. 

 

Then again a company of developers can come around and reboot an older game series to much success. Look what MachineGames did to Wolfenstein.

Edited April 20, 2018 by Spaz

[Zenpai]

11 hours ago, Spaz said:

From what I've learned these past few months the Playstation 3 was hard to code for, which could be a reason why we're seeing all these remasters this generation. If I enjoyed a game well enough then I may buy it again as either a different region or a remaster. But most remasters for the most part are unneeded. All they've really done in most of them is increase the framerate, up the resolution to 1080p (or 4K), and maybe add one or two new features to the games. That's it. People are essentially buying the same game twice because they would much rather play it on their pristine PS4 Pro with Ultra 4K TV rather than go back to their Playstation 3 that has inferior resolution. 

 

LA Noire got a remaster, and in 4K. Was that really necessary? The game isn't even that old, not compared with many PS1/PS2 titles that could of used a much needed remaster. I literally couldn't really note any serious change between the 720p in the original release of LA Noire, and the supposed 1080p/4K resolution in the remastered version.

 

A game like Shadow Warrior makes sense. It is a reboot of the 1997 classic, and modern audiences will probably say the original is too "old" and "archaic" by today's standards. This is perhaps true. Wolfenstein was also given a reboot along with DOOM a couple years later. I have no complaints against those since the developers of both games did build them from the ground up, and they turned out to be great experiences. They also have tidbits to the old classic games, which is always nice to see.

 

But remasters have been for the most part the same games sold off again. If I played Assassins Creed Rogue and I truly loved it to the point where I wanted to buy the remaster on the PS4, I have no issues with that. However just buying the game just to play it on a more modern console is just downright stupid. Backwards compatibility is needed, I would much prefer to just pop in the PS3 disc of Assassins Creed Rogue and play it on my PS4. Remasters, in my mind, are a cheap way to get more profits.

 

I don't understand why graphics are the end-all-be-all type of thing. I played through all of Horizon Zero Dawn on my vanilla PS4 with 1080p TV and I probably wouldn't get too much more satisfaction if I played it on a PS4 Pro with Ultra 4K TV. I likely would of been "wowed" by the graphics for a solid hour but that would of been it.

 

That's what I see a lot of gamers talk about in God of War. The graphics are going to be amazing in 4K, we need higher framerate, etc etc etc. Graphics are FAR from what constitutes as real quality gaming. Your game can look utterly amazing but if it plays like shit I'm not going to bother with it.

 

This is a reason why I've been getting into more indie games, because they better strike a balance between the old retro games of decades past and having modern capabilities. Rogue Legacy and Shovel Knight I definitely enjoy. What they lack in amazing graphics they more than make up for in good gameplay.

 

 

Well, remakes and remasters are very different things. The Crash Bandicoot N'Sane Trilogy, The Spyro Reignited Trilogy, Shadow of the Colossus (PS4) and the upcoming Final Fantasy VII for PS4 would be remakes - games rebuilt from the ground up but using the exact same level design, art style and mechanics. They're a way to make a new audience appreciate the same game without it looking as old as the original.

 

Remasters on the other hand... well, if you were to ask me, I'd say I don't really have a problem with them. The 7th generation was a very divisive one (in the sense that there was no clear winner), so now that more people are gathering around a single system (the PS4), they're a way to ensure that everyone can experience the last generation's greatest gems without having to buy a new console. And as long as they're going to the effort of porting over the game, might as well make some graphical adjustments and technical improvements. I myself couldn't possibly care any less about increased resolution, but increased performance and frame rates I will gladly take. Granted, they're not enough to make me buy the same game again, but if I've never played the game in the first place, I'm obviously getting the new shiny version, right? I myself have bought a few of them that I'd never played before.

 

I won't get games that I've already played and cleared, though. I'm not a graphics whore by any stretch of the imagination and if the games were good enough for me back then, they're good enough for me right now. Gameplay is what's most important. As long as it still plays well, why would I fork over money just to play a shinier version of something that I thought was already plenty shining in the first place?

 

Granted, while there have been plenty of remasters, I've never seen any remakes of games I previously played before. I did, however, get an enhanced port of one of my games: Persona 4. While I enjoyed the PS2 version plenty, the Golden edition added so much stuff and made the game so much more convenient to play that I just decided to take the plunge.

 

 

Nevertheless, I think this is the last generation the gaming community will tolerate remasters. With the transition from the PS2 to the PS3, we had so many technological advances that it made sense for games to have a bit of a facelift. When the PS4 came around, its architecture was so different from its predecessor that it was justified to have enhanced versions on the newest platform. But now... no more excuses. Sony has learned its lesson with the PS3 and the PS5 will more than likely have an architecture similar to the PS4. The only reason for the PS5 not to have backwards compatibility would be sheer greed on the part of Sony. However, in my opinion, backwards compatibility would be the single greatest thing they could do for the platform. It would ensure that its huge current user base would have all the more reason to get their hands on their newest platform, since they wouldn't have to get new versions of their existing games. They could just put the same discs on the console and pick up exactly where they left off, being able to play two different generations on the same machine. Not to mention people are getting sick of seeing the same games for sale over and over again. Just give us backwards compatibility with at least the PS4, Sony (though as powerful as the PS5 is going to be, backwards compatibility with all previous Playstations would be more than possible... if only Sony is willing to put in the effort). The current games look more than good enough that they don't need any further enhancements. Just let us enjoy our old games and focus on creating new experiences.

 

From what I've been reading of your posts, seems like we have a pretty similar stance on the gaming industry in general. After a certain age (I'm 30 myself), all the shiny new bells and whistles just don't do anything for you anymore and you just want to have new experiences.

 

 

12 hours ago, Spaz said:

You make a very good effort to make your posts concise and clear with proper punctuation and getting straight to the point.

 

Thanks!

[Honor_Hand]

25 minutes ago, jrdemr said:

 

 

Well, remakes and remasters are very different things. The Crash Bandicoot N'Sane Trilogy, The Spyro Reignited Trilogy, Shadow of the Colossus (PS4) and the upcoming Final Fantasy VII for PS4 would be remakes - games rebuilt from the ground up but using the exact same level design, art style and mechanics. They're a way to make a new audience appreciate the same game without it looking as old as the original.

 

Remasters on the other hand... well, if you were to ask me, I'd say I don't really have a problem with them. The 7th generation was a very divisive one (in the sense that there was no clear winner), so now that more people are gathering around a single system (the PS4), they're a way to ensure that everyone can experience the last generation's greatest gems without having to buy a new console. And as long as they're going to the effort of porting over the game, might as well make some graphical adjustments and technical improvements. I myself couldn't possibly care any less about increased resolution, but increased performance and frame rates I will gladly take. Granted, they're not enough to make me buy the same game again, but if I've never played the game in the first place, I'm obviously getting the new shiny version, right? I myself have bought a few of them that I'd never played before.

 

Nevertheless, I think this is the last generation the gaming community will tolerate remasters. With the transition from the PS2 to the PS3, we had so many technological advances that it made sense for games to have a bit of a facelift. When the PS4 came around, its architecture was so different from its predecessor that it was justified to have enhanced versions on the newest platform. But now... no more excuses.

2

 

This is a huge point of contention nowadays. There have been way too many remasters on PS4. As you said it, it made sense in the PS3 era considering the technical leap of the console. Being able to play all those PS2 games in clean HD with a set of trophies was a nice experience. For those of us that didn't have a PS2 in its time, it was a great offer but nowadays it just doesn't make much sense. I don't have a PS4 yet but I find it hard to justify buying the same game all over again just for the extra bump in resolution and frame rates alone. They are nice to have, of course, but games are so much more than that.

 

Just a quick check to the current PS4 library will show a lot of remasters from last gen and it looks kinda silly to me. While they are a good way for people that haven't played these games to experience them for the first time, they definitely need to cut down on them a little and focus more on offering new and fresh ideas either on old or new IPs. That would definitely push the industry forward. Let's hope the PS5 pans out better in that regard. 

[Sir_Bee]

4 hours ago, Crispy78923 said:

Hey @Sir_Bee, could you please elaborate on your points? I don't fully understand what you're trying to say, especially the highlighted and underlined section.

 

Lol, first you call me a charlatan, and then you want to hear more of what I have to say?

 

What I meant when I said "We still have the games that were made early on" is that these games still exist.  As mentioned earlier in this chat, if we upgrade the hardware, and make these games run on modern systems, that in a way is taking something away from the original experience.  I do not think that it is required that developers take old games and re-distribute them to the public (for free or even for a cost) so that they can be played on modern systems.  The gaming market is already flooded with remakes, remasters and sequels.  I would much rather see developers making new IP's than re-releasing a game that came out many years ago.

 

That being said, I am not against the idea of preserving the original games.  I mean we have museums for all kinds of things, why couldn't we have a museum dedicated to the art of video games?  That would be a perfect way to preserve gaming art as a whole.  It is not like everyone has a 'Mona Lisa' or a 'Starry Night' in their house.  If you want to get a print you can (at least I think you can), but it would not be the original.  If you want to play one of the older games, there are many emulators out there that would allow you to experience the basic experience of the older games.  Why is that any different?  Why do old games need to be made ubiquitous?  They still exist, and those who want them can still find a way to play them.

[eigen-space]

3 hours ago, Spaz said:

Guys like me who are getting older and have played video games for over 25 - 26 years are no longer the target audience. AAA games have always drawn the up and coming generation of gamers. 

 

I always laugh at this. I mean, it probably is true, but they'd be insanely profitable to market to adults who actually have money rather than kiddos who get games for their birthdays or with their pocket change.

 

And now for some disjoint thoughts. Sorry if they seem non-sequitur.

 

I really enjoy that the Vita was built with the ability to play PS1 or PSP games in their original format. A third of my "Vita" collection is actually PS1/PSP games.

If they can do that on the Vita, why can't they do it on their much more powerful console systems? Seems odd.

 

I personally think it's ridiculous that people want games like FFXIII or Ni No Kuni "remastered" for PS4. There's not really much you can do there as they were solid games with fantastic graphics/sound quality... what are you gonna do? Make it super-ultra-violet 4K HD or whatever the heck is the "latest and greatest" resolution? I mean, I could hardly tell the differences in graphics in the FFX and FFXII remakes, and it honestly didn't enhance my experience (though the extra content was nice, as well as trophies)...

I can understand something like Tomb Raider or FFVII (a game I loathe) being remastered/remade because their graphics were abysmal...

I can also understand not wanting to have multiple systems, but the PS3 isn't quite dead yet... but if that's the only reason, a simple port would do.  

 

Not really a fan of "if you wanna play old games, download an emulator and a ROM." Y'all know that's copyright infringement and illegal? Right?

[Lava_Yuki]

Hmm to be honest I much prefer the remakes and the new features. The originals were great to play at the time, but I find many of the remakes to be quite refreshing and fun to play. In particular, FF12, FFX/X-2  HD remaster and the KH games were very well done, although the PS2 is probably not that old. As for PS1 and before, I admit that Crash Bandicoot was not greatly done in that it was made far to difficult with jump mechanics. 

It seems like a hit and miss. Spyro and Disgaea 1 are getting PS4 remakes and I'm looking forward to seeing how they turn out, esp. Spyro as I loved to the PS1 versions.

[AJ_Radio]

5 hours ago, eigen-space said:

I always laugh at this. I mean, it probably is true, but they'd be insanely profitable to market to adults who actually have money rather than kiddos who get games for their birthdays or with their pocket change.

 

The 25 to 40 age market is the most profitable. But AAA games will always appeal to kids because they are young and impressionable. 

 

I can just imagine kids out there wanted to beg their parents to buy Horizon Zero Dawn because it just so happened to be shown on a 4K TV at Best Buy. Yes, a lot more adults than children have played the game but it appeals to children because of how good it looks. 

 

Graphics are not the primary reason I play games. 

 

It irritates me when a new AAA game like God of War gets perfect scores all across the board and I think much of that has to do with how fucking good the graphics are. I’m certain it’s a great game and I will enjoy playing it as I’m a God of War fan. But there’s much more out there to consider than just the graphics. 

 

Then again most people out there only buy 2 - 5 games at most a year, so a new AAA release that opens to overwhelmingly positive reviews gives them a reason to go out and buy it.

[AJ_Radio]

8 hours ago, jrdemr said:

Well, remakes and remasters are very different things. The Crash Bandicoot N'Sane Trilogy, The Spyro Reignited Trilogy, Shadow of the Colossus (PS4) and the upcoming Final Fantasy VII for PS4 would be remakes - games rebuilt from the ground up but using the exact same level design, art style and mechanics. They're a way to make a new audience appreciate the same game without it looking as old as the original.

 

There was a 20 year gap between the old Crash Bandicoot on the Playstation 1 and the N'Sane Trilogy. I felt a remake was much needed, but people complained the mechanics were slightly different as Crash has more of a pillbox hit detection compared to the originals.

 

I will get Spyro when it comes out, but I don't really care for Shadow of the Colossus. Getting the PS3 version is likely, but I got too big of a backlog as it is to be buying a bunch more games.

 

Reboots are games completely made from the ground up but are considered a continuation, or revival of an older series. Wolfenstein and DOOM are probably two of my all time favorite FPS franchises going back to the 1990s. Wolfenstein: The New Order and DOOM (2016) both did a great job for what they offered, while still keeping the series fresh and having that old school feel to it like those games back in the day.

 

I just don't think remasters are really all that needed. If the PS4 was backwards compatible I would bet everything that you wouldn't be seeing nearly as many remasters, if any at all. Assassins Creed Rogue I have on the PS3 and people already enjoyed that game well enough, especially compared to the disaster that was Unity. So why do we need a remaster for the PS4?

 

Increased performance is always nice, but if you want the best of the best I would suggest getting yourself a custom built PC desktop that can run the latest AAA games off of Steam. A remaster like LA Noire to me was mostly sold on the idea that the resolution would be better. I honestly couldn't care less. It's just a lazy remaster in my opinion.

 

8 hours ago, jrdemr said:

I won't get games that I've already played and cleared, though. I'm not a graphics whore by any stretch of the imagination and if the games were good enough for me back then, they're good enough for me right now. Gameplay is what's most important. As long as it still plays well, why would I fork over money just to play a shinier version of something that I thought was already plenty shining in the first place?

 

This is one of the reasons why I enjoy good indie titles. Undertale was open to good reviews when it released and it was developed on a shoestring budget. The game looks like it's straight out of Earthbound for the SNES, but I don't really care as gameplay is my vital factor when playing a game.

 

Games don't always have to look pristine and impressive like Horizon Zero Dawn and God of War. I just don't understand the reasoning for so many people out there to buy a game just because it looks good. I will take performance improvements any day over a game looking slightly better from a cheap remaster, or a game that looks visually a bit more impressive if I had a PS4 Pro and Ultra 4K TV. I would have to fork over nearly $1000 if I want that setup, and money is not something I can't afford to lose too much of since I'm currently poor with a shitty job.

 

8 hours ago, jrdemr said:

 Nevertheless, I think this is the last generation the gaming community will tolerate remasters. With the transition from the PS2 to the PS3, we had so many technological advances that it made sense for games to have a bit of a facelift. When the PS4 came around, its architecture was so different from its predecessor that it was justified to have enhanced versions on the newest platform. But now... no more excuses. Sony has learned its lesson with the PS3 and the PS5 will more than likely have an architecture similar to the PS4. The only reason for the PS5 not to have backwards compatibility would be sheer greed on the part of Sony. However, in my opinion, backwards compatibility would be the single greatest thing they could do for the platform. It would ensure that its huge current user base would have all the more reason to get their hands on their newest platform, since they wouldn't have to get new versions of their existing games. They could just put the same discs on the console and pick up exactly where they left off, being able to play two different generations on the same machine. Not to mention people are getting sick of seeing the same games for sale over and over again. Just give us backwards compatibility with at least the PS4, Sony (though as powerful as the PS5 is going to be, backwards compatibility with all previous Playstations would be more than possible... if only Sony is willing to put in the effort). The current games look more than good enough that they don't need any further enhancements. Just let us enjoy our old games and focus on creating new experiences.

 

What concerns me is the LAST console Sony made that had backwards compatibility was the first model Playstation 3. That console was able to play Playstation 2 games, so if you wanted to pop in Grand Theft Auto San Andreas or play some classic God of War, you were good to go.

 

That was 12 years ago, in 2006. Since then all of their models have not supported backwards compatibility. These days if you don't own a Playstation 3 you have to settle with Playstation Now, which streams PS3 games to your PS4. I'm sure plenty of people out there love PS Now for what it is, but it requires a pretty robust internet connection and it's just a cheap way for Sony to say "Yes, you can play games from the previous generation on your Playstation 4".

 

The Playstation 5 is going to be more of the same. A few years from now developers are going to look back on games like Horizon Zero Dawn and God of War and try to one up the graphics. Hideo Kojima's current project which is going to be a Sony exclusive is probably going to be what we're going to expect to see when the Playstation 5 hits.

 

Anymore I'm just not as obsessed or into gaming as I used to be. The same themes are being sold over and over, very much like you said the same games are for sale over and over again.

 

We have gone so far from the Mario and Sonic rivalry days that it won't be too long before our AAA games will resemble real life. Games like Detroit: Become Human and Spider-Man are already looking like they are what Hollywood would make. A fully blown, multi million dollar film with tons of CGI (think Michael Bay's Transformers), lots of special effects, but that's about it.

 

I played video games to escape real life and be immersed into a world that had a whimsical feeling. That's exactly what those old Mario and Sonic games did. Today the only games that really give me that feeling are indie games. For AAA games I may as well think I'm watching a Netflix drama series, or watch a movie where I'm thrust into the reality we live in.

[Dreakon13]

11 hours ago, jrdemr said:

Well, remakes and remasters are very different things. The Crash Bandicoot N'Sane Trilogy, The Spyro Reignited Trilogy, Shadow of the Colossus (PS4) and the upcoming Final Fantasy VII for PS4 would be remakes

 

Slightly off topic, but the ironic thing there is that the Crash N'Sane Trilogy official box art refers to them as remasters (or at least claims that they're "remastered").  Though I agree that a game rebuilt from the ground up with brand new assets would be misleading if called a "remaster"... which to me refers to the improvement of a games original assets.  Not to claim I know everything about everything, but I think even a game publishers/marketing can be out of touch about these things.

 

Same goes for the Spyro trilogy with its speculated box art.

 

Edited April 21, 2018 by Dreakon13

[Crzy Minus]

[SaAlLoAg]

On 29/3/2021 at 2:12 PM, Crzy Minus said:

Funly enough, there is a public 2015 study funded by de European Comission to see if Copyright infringement does affect negatively in the product's legal sales.

In short, this is what they said:

Quote

With the exception of recently released blockbusters, there is no evidence to support the idea that online copyright infringement displaces sales. - Julia Reda, Ex-member of the European Parliament (Investigation and results available in: https://juliareda.eu/2017/09/secret-copyright-infringement-study/

 

Piracy doesn't affect sales as much as companies say, mainly because people that have illegally-owned material weren't gonna pay for the product anyways. Those were "lost sales" from the start, but having an experience with the product, even if infringing with copyright, most likely will help to boost sales when they have enough interest and/or money.

[kingofbattle8174]

As the soon closure pf three console stores are soon upon us, this is a conversation that again has merit. Both of the companies, Microsoft and Sony, pushed to have this latest generation all digital but for what reason? People still want to play these games. Dont let them get lost to history. Films used to not be preserved either. I am sorry, but it bugs me watching a old Dr. Who and it switches to a cartoon for 30 minutes because they lost almost all the footage from the first few doctors. It is something that can never truly be recreated. Here is my solution, move all the games to ps now, no trophies added, just to enjoy at your pleasure. 

[Kazduin]

On 4/16/2018 at 10:23 AM, Crispy78923 said:

*The following is an excerpt from my own "about me" section on this very site*

I feel most don't realize the unfortunate state of video game preservation. Unlike other art forms, (film, music, literature etc) you can't easily access classic video games due to outdated hardware and such.

Granted, we occasionally receive HD collections, ala 'Metal Gear Solid HD Collection' or 'The Ico & Shadow of the Colossus Collection'. However, sometimes the original masterpieces are altered in such a way that the whole process is rendered pointless; the 'Silent Hill HD Collection' being the most famous blunder of that type. I'm also not a huge fan of the "from the ground up" remakes (E.g. Crash Bandicoot N. Sane Trilogy & Shadow of the Colossus 2018 remake). They're a cool idea, but the notion that video games need updated graphics to be justified re-releases is something that, without exaggeration, makes me sick. I view them in the same way as the infamous 'Star Wars Special Editions' (albeit with less discontent), as they change a lot of elements that I liked to begin with (E.g. I prefer the art-style of the original 'Shadow of the Colossus' over the 2018 remake). I did happen to prefer the N. Sane Trilogy art-style over the PS1 graphics but I know a lot of people who really didn't.

Personally, I believe the best remakes are the ones that include the original visions, such as 'Halo: The Master Chief Collection' or 'Metroid: Zero Mission'. Games don't require technically impressive graphics to be relevant, as long as they play well, I want them untouched. 

I hope my perspective is understood, this is something I am deeply passionate about and wish to discuss with anyone willing to have a reasonable discussion.

Be sure you know what you're talking about before replying, I consistently find people don't understand this specific topic when in discussion.

 

EDIT: So it's clear (since a few people don't seem to understand): 

This topic is about how many video games are extremely hard to pass on to future generations due to outdated hardware (E.g. Ratchet & Clank (2002) and MGS4). It is also about how sometimes, even when games are remastered, they're altered to the point of basically being a completely different product. Ala 'Silent Hill HD Collection'; the change of voice actors, in particular, is especially notable (just imagine if the voices were changed for the Metal Gear remasters). This also includes things such as 'Crash Bandicoot: N. Sane Trilogy', while being a game I like, the graphics change really wasn't something I appreciated or felt looked nice. 

 

If I wasn’t out of upvotes I would upvote this!