Tomb Raider Forums  

Go Back   Tomb Raider Forums > General Forums > Video Games

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-03-20, 00:04   #21
charmedangelin
Member
 
charmedangelin's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 22,971
Default

Edit

Also to add to Pokemon Let's Go was actually a test to see how well Pokemon would perform on console because Gamefreak was considering making Gen 8 for mobile devices and skip the Switch. This is confirmed by an interview with Masuda in which he explained the purpose for Let's Go.

Edit 2

To further our fact from fiction Masuda also came out and said that the Let's Go was a one time thing and that no other Let's Go games are being considered for development. A remake of gen 4 is possible, but it won't take away from Gen 9 new games because it's rumored that a whole new team is coming in to help them create console games since they already struggle with what they have without remakes.

Last edited by charmedangelin; 09-03-20 at 00:06.
charmedangelin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-20, 00:09   #22
New Dwight
Inactive
 
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 3,888
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by charmedangelin View Post
Absolutely necessary, take for example TR3. It works right now on PC and other hardware for now, but eventually Microsoft could end up stop supporting 32bit programs. Then what you gonna do? Especially given the advance in technology. While yes we can switch to emulators the thing about them is that you need very powerful hardware to run certain games from them. Like PS3 for example, even a 2080 GTX struggles to emulate those.

Eventually we will run out of software and hardware support for old games.

Remasters and remakes are absolutely necessary for the longevity of old games. That's why Nintendo has updated and constantly remastered their old games, because they understand this, unlike other gaming companies.


How is that problem? You keep acting like they work on one thing at a time. And your examples of remasters getting in the way was very poor. Underworld especially suffered because they tried to force a lot of BS into it that didn't belong. The remake of TR1 had nothing to do with that. They also had plenty of time just like other games.

I think your misguided when it comes to remakes imo and unfairly Target them because you don't fully understand why some games fail.

Would you claim a PSP remake of TR1 caused problems with TR Legend? No because that game revised the franchise despite Core already working on the remake, and official company.

Anniversary turned out well enough for the niche audience it was meant for.

Underworld suffered for a lot of reasons that have nothing to do with remakes.

I get everyone has an opinion but it bothers me how misguided your logic on this subject seems to be.

Edit

Also look at Zelda, are you seriously.going to claim that remakes made BoTW suffer? No it didn't, BoTW won game of the year despite the many remakes and remasters of old Zelda games.
Its a problem coz there shouldn't revisited old titles constantly. Make new titles, write new stories, new characters, new adventures.
Do you get it? Or must I dub it down further?

I want to see FFXVI after the FF7R. The Agnis Philosophy tech demo just maybe it, (god I hope it is) and hopefully features another female lead as FFVI and FFXIII-effectively making up for FFXV's faults.
New Dwight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-20, 00:16   #23
charmedangelin
Member
 
charmedangelin's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 22,971
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by New Dwight View Post
Its a problem coz there shouldn't revisited old titles constantly. Make new titles, write new stories, new characters, new adventures.
Do you get it? Or must I dub it down further?

I want to see FFXVI after the FF7R. The Agnis Philosophy tech demo just maybe it, (god I hope it is) and hopefully features another female lead as FFVI and FFXIII-effectively making up for FFXV's faults.
Not sure if you missed my other post but I explained why they do remakes and remasters. No one can crap out an Emmy winning title. Sometimes they revisit the old in order to gain new ideas and perspective for the new.

People claim they want new games but when they make them people hate them and want them to be like the old games, but then people complain they want new games and then the cylce just repeats.

And when they make them they get met with





Ew lazy, no creativity

Too much change not enough like the old game

We want new games not old games

These new games suck make them like the old games



It's legit a zero win situation for them. And I don't get why people complain so much about wanting new games when many people have a backlog to fill the entire library of Congress.
charmedangelin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-20, 02:58   #24
New Dwight
Inactive
 
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 3,888
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by charmedangelin View Post
Not sure if you missed my other post but I explained why they do remakes and remasters. No one can crap out an Emmy winning title. Sometimes they revisit the old in order to gain new ideas and perspective for the new.

People claim they want new games but when they make them people hate them and want them to be like the old games, but then people complain they want new games and then the cylce just repeats.
Isn't Death Stranding and Cyberpunk 2077 new games ppl want and love?
Dont tell me I've found a loop whole there.
New Dwight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-20, 03:16   #25
charmedangelin
Member
 
charmedangelin's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 22,971
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by New Dwight View Post
Isn't Death Stranding and Cyberpunk 2077 new games ppl want and love?
Dont tell me I've found a loop whole there.
Several people hated Death Stranding, people are hoping for Cyberpunk though. But then again what remake is getting in the way of that game? None.

Development studios work on more then one project all the time. Unless they are indie where they don't have the man power for it, but studios rarely work on one game or movie for that matter at a time.
charmedangelin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-20, 04:03   #26
KIKO
Member
 
KIKO's Avatar
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 5,889
Default

I don't think it's fair to call a remake a lazy thing for a game developer to do. Try and recreate a painting from a well known artist and see how you do. Trying to make sure every color, every line is there, trying to make it look better, improving on it. Of course improving is debatable. There will always be those who prefer the original and those who have never seen the original. Remakes are not easy to make.

There are a lot of remakes and remasters out there lately but only because there's a demand for them. Wether they cash in on nostalgia or they're trying to keep the franchises alive, it doesn't matter. They exist by popular demand for the most part anyway.

Last edited by KIKO; 09-03-20 at 04:05.
KIKO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-20, 04:27   #27
Ceamonks890
Member
 
Ceamonks890's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 3,635
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by charmedangelin View Post
...but eventually Microsoft could end up stop supporting 32bit programs...
That is never going to happen. Microsoft would get justifiably mauled for discontinued support of older games and programs that many still utilize for both personal and public gain to this very day. For goodness sake, they're offering backwards compatibility for as much Xbox console games as they can on the Xbone and soon Xbox SeX (many of which were designed in a time when 32bit was the norm).

While much of the company is incompetently managed these days, they're not like Apple with MAC computers. They know what consumers want and effectively coded backwards compatibility into 64-bit OSs for 32-bit applications, so users can still rely on them long into the future.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

And as for remakes, I personally find them mostly unnecessary (as they primarily tackle content that got things right the first time and tend to deliver it far worse when recreated usually as soulless, creatively bankrupt cashgrabs). Most of these projects also tend to be worked on by developers who had no involvement in the original releases way back when and arrogantly presume their take is better whilst unceremoniously talking down to all those who brought it to life before & the fans who prefer things as they were, from what I've noticed countless times over the years.

Even if you do end up getting original developers back to work on a remake alongside new blood, they still aren't completely the same people who worked on them. Their perspectives on game design and general way of thinking won't be exactly the same and as a result, won't be able to capture that identical magic or charm as they did in their glory days.

A good product is like lightning in a bottle, serving as a time capsule for the tastes and views of when it was made.

Attempting to modernize it with the ridiculously expensive, over-detailed visual fidelity and largely generic unremarkable writing standards of today, merely robs it of a ton of its subtleties & nuances (such as actor performances for characters, artstyle and creativity brought about by the technology limits of the era it was developed in, approaches to characterization, gameplay style and music etc).

If its a very bad game or one from say the NES era that's aged very poorly getting a remake however, I'm more tolerant towards it (as it could hardly be any worse than the original already was before, in the right hands). Ex: The fan-made remake of Metroid 2 or the official remake of Zelda 1 offered through the since discontinued Satellaview service that were luckily archived by passionate individuals for future gamers to enjoy.

Ultimately, I just prefer to play the original release of a game because it allows you to feel more on-edge or immersed with your imagination filling in the blanks (brought about by more dated visuals that possess their own innate charm). And that's something AAA games of today don't really provide me anymore (which has served as a major turn-off in spite of possessing hardware at time of writing, that could run them largely without a hitch if properly optimized).
Ceamonks890 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-20, 08:44   #28
dg1995
Member
 
dg1995's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2019
Posts: 1,976
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by charmedangelin View Post
Absolutely necessary, take for example TR3. It works right now on PC and other hardware for now, but eventually Microsoft could end up stop supporting 32bit programs. Then what you gonna do? Especially given the advance in technology. While yes we can switch to emulators the thing about them is that you need very powerful hardware to run certain games from them. Like PS3 for example, even a 2080 GTX struggles to emulate those.

Eventually we will run out of software and hardware support for old games.

Remasters and remakes are absolutely necessary for the longevity of old games. That's why Nintendo has updated and constantly remastered their old games, because they understand this, unlike other gaming companies.


How is that problem? You keep acting like they work on one thing at a time. And your examples of remasters getting in the way was very poor. Underworld especially suffered because they tried to force a lot of BS into it that didn't belong. The remake of TR1 had nothing to do with that. They also had plenty of time just like other games.

I think your misguided when it comes to remakes imo and unfairly Target them because you don't fully understand why some games fail.

Would you claim a PSP remake of TR1 caused problems with TR Legend? No because that game revised the franchise despite Core already working on the remake, and official company.

Anniversary turned out well enough for the niche audience it was meant for.

Underworld suffered for a lot of reasons that have nothing to do with remakes.

I get everyone has an opinion but it bothers me how misguided your logic on this subject seems to be.

Edit

Also look at Zelda, are you seriously.going to claim that remakes made BoTW suffer? No it didn't, BoTW won game of the year despite the many remakes and remasters of old Zelda games.
Well maybe due to this that they wasted their time with other zelda remakes is what that caused Zelda Breath Of The Wild to be delayed for 3-4 years.

I think TR anniversary effected Legend in some way.
When CD started working on Anniversary(Probably at 2005) they had to split their team into 2 and start development of it alongside Legend.
Maybe this is why Legend was the shortest TR game.

Also Underworld faced some development problems due to Anniversary just look it up. CD couldn't work on Underworld at full force before Anniversary was released.(And after that they had to waste their time making the updated version of it for xbox360 and ps3 where they updated the graphics)
dg1995 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-20, 08:45   #29
Yeauxleaux
Member
 
Yeauxleaux's Avatar
 
Joined: Oct 2016
Posts: 10,356
Default

Neither necessary nor useless. They are what the fans make of them.

Some games are classics that were extremely popular at the time. However, they might have had severe graphical limitations or other technological limitations, that meant the ideas behind the games couldn't be executed all that well. As long as they're playable and enjoyable the original does hold up ok, they could be left as they are sure, a remake isn't "necessary". It is ****ing cool to see them updated though, with more fluid gameplay, more realistic or timelessly/deliberately stylised graphics and with any common criticisms fixed.

You can argue with me up and down about this all day I don't care, 1990s era video game graphics have NOT aged well. They were a product of a time where 3D gaming technology was very primitive and developers were limited in what they could achieve with them. That's nobody's fault, there were extremely talented and passionate developers back then who still made amazing games with the tech available to them, they even compensated for the graphical shortcomings in other areas. However, it does show that the technology wasn't there. Nothing about the way games looked at the time necessarily looked "deliberate", as though it was intended for them to be stylised like that and unrealistic.

So personally, I'm all for them. There's business practices I do really hate in the gaming industry that I'm principled to my word about and do not pay for, but remakes aren't among them. I like the remakes. I don't think they're "lazy" at all.

Also let's stop acting like companies don't do what there's a market for. You can call remakes "lazy" all day but if you buy them, you are the reason this "lazy" business practice is a profitable model for these companies. You ARE the market these companies sell to. Same with these people who sit and complain all day long about DLC and microtransactions, but continue to pay for them anyway. You want to see less of something? Complaining about it does absolutely ****ing nothing. Withdrawing your financial support is what really pulls the rug out from under capitalism, not complaining about it but still silently partaking in it.

Last edited by Yeauxleaux; 09-03-20 at 08:51.
Yeauxleaux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-20, 10:56   #30
charmedangelin
Member
 
charmedangelin's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 22,971
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dg1995 View Post
Well maybe due to this that they wasted their time with other zelda remakes is what that caused Zelda Breath Of The Wild to be delayed for 3-4 years.

I think TR anniversary effected Legend in some way.
When CD started working on Anniversary(Probably at 2005) they had to split their team into 2 and start development of it alongside Legend.
Maybe this is why Legend was the shortest TR game.

Also Underworld faced some development problems due to Anniversary just look it up. CD couldn't work on Underworld at full force before Anniversary was released.(And after that they had to waste their time making the updated version of it for xbox360 and ps3 where they updated the graphics)
That's not actually true, the team for Zelda actually said the product was ready 3-4 years ago, but they kept thinking of new ideas to put into the game because they wanted it to be a full experience. Then Nintendo came around and wanted BotW to be a Switch Launch title as well. So they effectively were working on two ports of the game while creating a bunch of new ideas. During this time the team would pivot to making classic Zelda remakes which actually gave them a lot of inspiration for BotW.

It's the same boat for BotW 2, that was originally going to be DLC, but they again kept thinking of new ideas that it became too big for it to be just simple DLC. Thus we got a sequel, whose development has not been effected by the latest remake of Links Awakening.

LAU had a lot of problems because they were working cross gen. CD didn't have to make Anniversary, they could have refused as Core was already working on it. They decided they had the man power to work on that project as well.

Also Anniversary couldn't have been that big of a project given the massive reduction in budget that game had compared to Legend and Underworld. Unless Eidos again was repeating the mistakes they made with Core, Anniversary should not have had much if any impact on Underworld. The only thing about Underworld that got impacted from Anniversary was the story. Whether it was Eidos or CD who decided to scrap the original idea for Underworld in favor of it being connected to the remake that is the only impact that was really had.

From everything we know about Eidos I'm willing to bet money on them being the actual culprit for LAU. Square have at least given CD more development time then Core ever got under Eidos and I'm willing to bet Eidos pushed CD to try and make more Tomb Raider games then they could work on at the time. CD wasn't as big a studio now, but I suspect a lot of things that have little to do with a remake itself having any impact.

In terms of resident Evil remakes have actually revived what was considered a dead frsnchise. They have given them lots of room to experiment and figure out how best to approach RE8. It's smart because the fan base is divided and the first person experience wasn't something a lot of fans were find of in RE7. They knew they had to make a change, but they didn't know what kind of change. So they made remakes of RE 2 and 3 in order to strike a balance between the old and the new. I'm willing to bet that RE8 will be that much better.

Imagine if they just kept going on after RE6, pure action, especially after the spin off titles it got. If Capcom didn't pause and reconsider what was actually resident Evil then RE could be in a different place.

Plus the remakes brought in and are bringing in tons of new fans who may have never experienced the original and do not have access or don't really want to go back and play an old game.

I only see positives that the remakes of RE titles have had on the franchise they have reignited an old flame that appeared to have died out.

While I do understand the sentiment of too many remakes, like there is too many reboots of movies and TV shows, I actually feel it's different for video games and partially necessary for some franchises to continue for many years to come.

Look at franchises who never released remakes at all, several of them have actually stopped being made. Like Prince of Persia for example.

Last edited by charmedangelin; 09-03-20 at 10:58.
charmedangelin is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT. The time now is 18:41.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Tomb Raider Forums is not owned or operated by CDE Entertainment Ltd.
Lara Croft and Tomb Raider are trademarks of CDE Entertainment Ltd.