- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Are Ports and Remasters healthy for the Gaming Industry?
Posted on 6/13/19 at 4:51 pm
Posted on 6/13/19 at 4:51 pm
Obviously they are good for the budget and getting a profit with little investment. The motivation to monetize isnt the problem, but the obvious low effort trickling into the newer titles is.
The trade off is that the consumer is essentially getting less. The Switch is currently doing it, but the problem has been persistent since the 6th generation of consoles. The past two generations have almost half their libraries full of remastered old games. More than that if you count direct sequels to those old games. New IPs are essentially becoming rare and even then most are just carbon copies of other series (like the current bomb known as Anthem)
The current model seems to be that you release a successful game, then create DLC to extend its lifecycle along with microtransactions to "expedite the experience" for some players. (Ignoring the fact the game was designed to be grindy for monetization)
Alternatively, release a good game, then create low effort, broken side project games (Fallout 76, ES Blades) until you create the game people actually want.
The typical arguments I expect are:
1. If you dont like it then dont buy it.
True. And it's okay if the game came out recently in past 2 years. But at a certain point it becomes obvious they are just milking an old IP and not really working on a new product.
2. Games are very expensive to make.
True. But as a consumer you should want the optimal value for your money. Instead of getting the same game for a different console, I'd rather just buy a new game.
3. I want to play my old game a new console.
This is a mixed response. It is relevant if the person doesn't already have the previous generation console. The irony being that a good portion of the target audience has the old console and likely the game already.
If the game is a GOTY edition, it matters if you haven't already bought all the DLC.
4. Modding or other forms of hacking
This is where I typically land on this topic. Certain mods work better on the latest release on PC.
I'd be a hypocrite to say I don't occasionally buy a release, but I do feel the reliance on them has left gaming more hollow.
The trade off is that the consumer is essentially getting less. The Switch is currently doing it, but the problem has been persistent since the 6th generation of consoles. The past two generations have almost half their libraries full of remastered old games. More than that if you count direct sequels to those old games. New IPs are essentially becoming rare and even then most are just carbon copies of other series (like the current bomb known as Anthem)
The current model seems to be that you release a successful game, then create DLC to extend its lifecycle along with microtransactions to "expedite the experience" for some players. (Ignoring the fact the game was designed to be grindy for monetization)
Alternatively, release a good game, then create low effort, broken side project games (Fallout 76, ES Blades) until you create the game people actually want.
The typical arguments I expect are:
1. If you dont like it then dont buy it.
True. And it's okay if the game came out recently in past 2 years. But at a certain point it becomes obvious they are just milking an old IP and not really working on a new product.
2. Games are very expensive to make.
True. But as a consumer you should want the optimal value for your money. Instead of getting the same game for a different console, I'd rather just buy a new game.
3. I want to play my old game a new console.
This is a mixed response. It is relevant if the person doesn't already have the previous generation console. The irony being that a good portion of the target audience has the old console and likely the game already.
If the game is a GOTY edition, it matters if you haven't already bought all the DLC.
4. Modding or other forms of hacking
This is where I typically land on this topic. Certain mods work better on the latest release on PC.
I'd be a hypocrite to say I don't occasionally buy a release, but I do feel the reliance on them has left gaming more hollow.
17
Posted on 6/13/19 at 5:33 pm to volod
Ports and remasters are bad because CEOs know if their new games suck, all they need to do is fire a few people they overworked to meet some ridiculous deadline and then re-release a game from 2001 to save their company.
Posted on 6/13/19 at 5:53 pm to volod
gaming industry is like the movie industry: totally out of ideas and purely about profit. now having said that, if blizzard released a D2 remaster shut up and take my money
Posted on 6/13/19 at 5:57 pm to volod
Can we get a tl;dr?
Also, as long as they are remasters of games we love and want, yes.
Also, as long as they are remasters of games we love and want, yes.
Posted on 6/13/19 at 6:20 pm to volod
quote:
The current model seems to be that you release a successful game, then create DLC to extend its lifecycle along with microtransactions to "expedite the experience" for some players. (Ignoring the fact the game was designed to be grindy for monetization)
This, mixed with
quote:
2. Games are very expensive to make.
True. But as a consumer you should want the optimal value for your money. Instead of getting the same game for a different console, I'd rather just buy a new game.
Is really the core of the problem. As the market shifted to accommodate this, you had to balance large scale projects that cost a ton with smaller, revenue focused products. This is why you see remasters on the X1/PS4, they help build revenue to create the big games. It's funny you said this...
quote:
The Switch is currently doing it,
Nintendo actually has fought and is still fighting the cost problem above. The reason they do ports is different....
There are now too many games, and too many missed experiences after decades of gaming. And now, funny enough, what happened to Nintendo back during the Gamecube/Wii/WiiU years is now the very thing helping to make the Switch super successful.
They are betting on the idea that many of their fans are either 1) Single console owners or 2) Dual console owners who just couldn't play every game available.
And they have the perfect console to support it.
How many consoles can say they have Secret of Mana, Doom, Super Mario Kart 8, Final Fantasy 9, Skyrim, and Tales of Vesperia? Not many.
They are betting that people are ok:
1. Getting the best NIntendo has to offer
2. Getting the best Indie Studios have to offer
3. Playing Remasters of great games, most likely older games, from other consoles.
I missed out on A LOT of PS1/3/X360 games and am perfectly fine spending $40 on those games now. Throw in modern ports like Doom and it's a super easy call.
Posted on 6/13/19 at 8:51 pm to volod
I think it depends on the remaster.
I bought and played the shite out of the remasters of Skyrim, FFX/X-2, Spyro trilogy and Dragon's Dogma.
I wanted to see how those games would be with smoother animations, better detail and significantly shortened load screens (console play). I was happy to not spend minutes at a time starting at a blank screen.
I'm ok with remasters I suppose. If I really enjoyed it on a previous gen console, I'll buy it on current console with updated features. If it's just a sudden hankering to play something I used to play, I still have a PS2 and PS3 consoles and quite a few games for them.
I bought and played the shite out of the remasters of Skyrim, FFX/X-2, Spyro trilogy and Dragon's Dogma.
I wanted to see how those games would be with smoother animations, better detail and significantly shortened load screens (console play). I was happy to not spend minutes at a time starting at a blank screen.
I'm ok with remasters I suppose. If I really enjoyed it on a previous gen console, I'll buy it on current console with updated features. If it's just a sudden hankering to play something I used to play, I still have a PS2 and PS3 consoles and quite a few games for them.
Posted on 6/14/19 at 8:35 am to volod
I love them since it's hard for me to play anything less than 60 FPS. As long as they aren't full price.
Posted on 6/14/19 at 8:49 am to volod
We are getting to the point where we're seeing diminishing returns with innovations to game design and visuals. It's easier than ever to play a game from a prior generation system, and it feel like a new game.
This allows new players who have never experienced the older game and players who loved the game on previous gen systems a chance to play on modern hardware. Until game consoles are like PCs, I don't see this as a bad thing.
Some remasters do amuse me though. I remember thinking it was odd that Sleeping Dogs was getting a remaster near the start of this gen. Now you have games like The Last Remnant remastered on current gen hardware
This allows new players who have never experienced the older game and players who loved the game on previous gen systems a chance to play on modern hardware. Until game consoles are like PCs, I don't see this as a bad thing.
Some remasters do amuse me though. I remember thinking it was odd that Sleeping Dogs was getting a remaster near the start of this gen. Now you have games like The Last Remnant remastered on current gen hardware
This post was edited on 6/14/19 at 8:56 am
Posted on 6/14/19 at 9:01 am to BulldogXero
And then you have the remasters that suck (like Splinter Cell and Silent Hill). Or putting a PS3/XB360 game on PS4/XB1 and it still doesn't run at 60 FPS.
Posted on 6/14/19 at 9:27 am to volod
If they turn a profit, I don't see how they're bad for the industry. And I do think you hit on why they get made. They're cheaper to produce than a brand new game and people buy them, particularly if it's a well done port or remaster.
Ports and remasters often serve 2 different purposes, however. Ports are trying to catch those who missed the initial release of a game or capitalize on convenience features of new hardware.
Remasters are trying to play on nostalgia by (hopefully) making beloved games look like we may have imagined them in our heads back when we originally played them, or at least get them closer to modern standards.
But like you said - don't buy the ones you don't care about. Your favorite remastered game of the past is very likely the exact title someone holds up as an example of unnecessary remasters "ruining the industry."
Besides, there are still plenty of original games / IP's being released every week, particularly in the indie space if you're willing to look. Gaming should only feel hollow and bereft of new ideas if you're solely focused on the big budget titles that are merely released a few times a year.
Ports and remasters often serve 2 different purposes, however. Ports are trying to catch those who missed the initial release of a game or capitalize on convenience features of new hardware.
Remasters are trying to play on nostalgia by (hopefully) making beloved games look like we may have imagined them in our heads back when we originally played them, or at least get them closer to modern standards.
But like you said - don't buy the ones you don't care about. Your favorite remastered game of the past is very likely the exact title someone holds up as an example of unnecessary remasters "ruining the industry."
Besides, there are still plenty of original games / IP's being released every week, particularly in the indie space if you're willing to look. Gaming should only feel hollow and bereft of new ideas if you're solely focused on the big budget titles that are merely released a few times a year.
Posted on 6/14/19 at 9:51 am to Korin
Lol nvm I misread this post
This post was edited on 6/14/19 at 9:54 am
Posted on 6/14/19 at 10:50 am to volod
I don't have a problem with it. Don't like it don't buy it. To me, getting remasters of games you enjoy playing every few years is absolutely worth it. I have the remasters for FFX, Arkham Series, and Dark Souls. I still play all 3.
Posted on 6/14/19 at 10:53 am to volod
I don't buy them unless it's a game I don't already have.
Exception being games that are completely redone, like the upcoming FF7 Remake.
Exception being games that are completely redone, like the upcoming FF7 Remake.
Posted on 6/14/19 at 1:21 pm to volod
I would say they are healthy because they generate some easy cash. It does delay action on new games but without that easy cash, prices would probably be higher and games would be released even earlier to get some cash flow.
I used to be against the cash grab but since my last comments on this issue a few years back, I've played Last of Us Remastered, Bioshock Remastered, Metro & Last Light Remastered and RE2 Remastered. All games I probably would never have played without the remaster.
So it does get me to play games I skipped when they first came out and it gives the studios a decent cash stream without as much risk.
I used to be against the cash grab but since my last comments on this issue a few years back, I've played Last of Us Remastered, Bioshock Remastered, Metro & Last Light Remastered and RE2 Remastered. All games I probably would never have played without the remaster.
So it does get me to play games I skipped when they first came out and it gives the studios a decent cash stream without as much risk.
This post was edited on 6/14/19 at 1:26 pm
Posted on 6/14/19 at 5:16 pm to volod
I think it’s all just a smart move.
Most of us 90’s gamers are at that age where we are prime for nostalgia and are still interested. By the time we are 50...who knows if a FF7 remake or a FF8 remaster would hold as much weight. They are cashing in on us and I’m okay with it as long as the product is fine.
Most of us 90’s gamers are at that age where we are prime for nostalgia and are still interested. By the time we are 50...who knows if a FF7 remake or a FF8 remaster would hold as much weight. They are cashing in on us and I’m okay with it as long as the product is fine.
This post was edited on 6/14/19 at 5:17 pm
Posted on 6/14/19 at 5:53 pm to volod
remasters are great,
Call of Duty studios, who remastered mw2 and their maps, over and over
Call of Duty studios, who remastered mw2 and their maps, over and over
Posted on 6/16/19 at 12:28 pm to TigerMyth36
quote:
So it does get me to play games I skipped when they first came out and it gives the studios a decent cash stream without as much risk.
This. I mean I finally got to play Dark Souls. The original ideas will still be coming out but they might be made by more indy developers. This is fine with me because now those types of games are done so very well.
Posted on 6/16/19 at 2:33 pm to volod
I would give my left nut for a complete remake of Ocarina of Time and Majoras Mask for the switch.
Posted on 6/16/19 at 2:40 pm to Nguyener
What did you think of the 3DS remasters? You can emulate them in 4K on PC.
Posted on 6/16/19 at 3:07 pm to Korin
quote:
What did you think of the 3DS remasters?
I think I want them on my switch.
quote:
You can emulate them in 4K on PC.
I don't have the time or space for PC gaming anymore unfortunately.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News