Why are remakes/remasters getting so much hate?

I didn't buy a new console to replay games I beat less than 5 years ago. I want new IPs or sequels at the very least!

I think people believe that an HD version or collection is taking away from a new game being made. I think those people don't know what they are talking about.

Final Fantasy Type-0 HD

I like the remasters because I have never owned a Playstation before. I think the only thing people are getting worked up about is that there are not very many new big games coming yet.

I think the problem is that when Sony's biggest game (of 2014) is a release of game that came out a year earlier there is a problem. I (we?) bought the new consoles with the promise of new content. I didn't buy a new console to play games that were one to five years old. If I wanted that experience I would have bought a new graphics card and bought the games again on Steam for $12 during a sale... they'd even run a 60 FPS.

I guess it's just disappointment for me. I wanted something new; while they've been releasing stopgap remakes and remasters for consoles that are already feeling old.

You could have not purchased The Last of Us: Remastered. That would simulate a scenario in which Sony simply did not put it out. The assumption that releasing remasters is done in lieu of producing new content is a fallacy. What could Naughty Dog have done in the 8 or 9 months (I think that's a generous guess) they spent on that remake? I doubt they could have taken an original game from initial concept to finished product. More likely they would have just rolled those man-hours into their next project to be released in 2018.

The hi-res assets for remastered versions of all these last-gen games already exist. It's just a matter of getting the games to run on the new hardware. Producing new art/models/animations takes a lot of time, and those are kind of the things we need new consoles for. If these hardware manufacturers were to simply release games half-baked in order to get something out, why would we need more powerful hardware than the PS3/360?

No idea. I think it's great they exist. (For example) I never would've played Ico if it wasn't re released on the Ps3. These remasters give people new opportunities to experience older games they may have passed over for whatever reason. If you don't like them then just ignore it.

I support the idea of remasters, I see them as similar to ports, so long as they don't infringe on the development of new games. If they were handled by a separate division, or outsourced, surely they would act as an avenue for more developer jobs whilst hopefully allowing for the creation of new video games from the studio responsible for the game in the first place.

Eh I don't mind them really, it's just that there are so many of them all coming out in a short space of time with very few big new games between them. Plus most (all?) of the ones that have come out so far this gen haven't been massive improvements either so the only reason I can see for getting them is if you hadn't played the game before or want to replay it but no longer have access to a PS3/360, which is fine but not exactly what most people are wanting.

I think hating on them is just a way people are venting their frustration that there are so few big new games out/coming soon that interest them tbh

How about the part where most of them run like crap? Especially the games that have PC versions that look better AND run at 60 FPS on modest machines. That's a pretty good reason.

I don't really have a problem with them; in fact, I wouldn't mind a few more of them for particular games--Mass Effect, Dragon's Dogma, FFXII. It does get a little tiring to keep getting announcements that aren't for anything new, though. While I sympathize with developers/publishers who need to keep people employed, game development can only grow and evolve if companies take risks and try new things.

People tend to believe that if they aren't interested in a product, then that product has no right to exist, ought NOT to exist, and should be shouted down as an immoral transgression. Phrases such as "cash-grab" and "creatively bankrupt" are often employed to imply that offering a remastered catalog title on new hardware is a slight against those people who don't wish to buy it.

In short, it's human nature on the internet.

I don't mind them. As someone who only owned a Wii for the entirety of the last generation, these remastered versions give me a chance to play some of the last generation's games without having to purchase an old console.

People love hating . For me , I don't mind . It means more TROPHIES !

There are very few new games on the consoles we spent $400+ dollars on, and the news cycle in the last year has mostly consisted of "New game X has been delayed, remake game Y has been announced."

It's a necessary part of the industry. We have seen a huge number of delays and broken games in this generation. For whatever reason it seems like it is just going to take more time to develop a game. I think that caught a lot of publishers off guard going into this generation. They had to put something out even if their big guns weren't ready. I don't think it's something that we will see in another year once the games start flowing a bit more freely.

I don't mind them. Preferably, I'd like to see remakes from the PS2 era or earlier for native widescreen support, etc. But no matter if it's not something I feel like I need, I can just you know, not buy it. For the most part, the developers of the original don't even work on the HD remakes, so it's not like it's sucking up resources that would've gone to new games. They're not something to be celebrated nor derided.

I think the basic of source of the discontent is that there is a dearth of new AAA titles Gen 8 exclusives being released.

So it feels like that pubs & devs are devoting resources to ultra-safe re-releases & remasters instead of creating & shipping new games that make the console a worthy purchase for most folks. Even if that may not be the whole or possibly even actual truth, that is how it feels to consumers I think.

"Have you done anything to the game beyond boosting the resolution?" Nope

"Does the remaster even hit 60fps?" Sometimes, try pointing the camera at the ground.

"Is AAA gaming in big trouble?" Yes

"We have seen a huge number of delays and broken games in this generation."

2013 and 2014 on PC were both hysterical in this regard. What a mess. Add the "DLC feeling", which is the frustration you get when your game doesn't feel like it is the full game.

What about the 3DS Zelda games?

Forgot about those.

@jesus_phish: one thing I don't like about it is it just points out that if you bought the pc version of the game you'd already have a version that you can already up grade the graphics to 1080p and usually the frame rate to 60+ fps with out being ask to buy a new version of that game.

Yes I understand that the new systems don't yet have the audience yet for publishers/developers to take the chance and truly make new games that can't be done on the older systems, but for me it just makes the new system really boring. I'm still playing ps3 and Xbox 360 games I've yet to have gotten to and I'm having a great time. When the new systems start impressing me I'll invest the money in one but at this point a ps4 would just get dust on it as I play my back log of last gen games.

I also think these new systems need a Microsoft Speed wheel type accessory, that thing had made Forza games so much fun for me on my Xbox 360! Am I the only one using this thing? People get one and experience the only fun motion controlled gaming that happened last gen, the gyroscope steering wheel.

People's attitude to these depends hugely on how many of these last-gen games they played. I personally missed a lot of the AAA stuff from the last gen so I couldn't be more supportive. I get a better looking version of a game that I already know is supposedly good (they don't tend to remaster the bad ones) at generally a lower price. Perfect! Bring it on.

Honestly I'm okay with the majority of re-releases but publishers need to be selective what they bring to us, dmc was a good call since it tests the waters for a follow up, the last of us was good because it hit the ps3 when people had already started moving to PS4. Even some larger games like the Arkham games and Uncharted deserve a collection of sorts and im sure people would love a collection for the Mass Effect games. Some games such as Final Fantasy X stink of cash grab, it literally just got re-released not long ago and now we have a re-release of a re-release which is just weird.

@fattony12000 said:

Final Fantasy Type-0 HD

What is this? I've looking at it trying to get the point but its not clicking... weird contrast

@rongalaxy said:

Gamers, and especially the ones who are active within the various online communities, are not very well known for their patience.

I'm sad that there's less innovation/creation on these consoles, but I also don't have consistent feelings regarding the whole thing. I, having a PC that could absolutely run them, would maybe really enjoy all three Mass Effect games running at a consistent framerate on my PS4. (Doubt that would happen because of the weirdness regarding Mass Effect 1, but whatever!) Am I the problem? I dunno, certainly don't give a damn about DmC, Batman, or God of War, but I would be up to buying Dark Souls II once Bloodborne has run its course with me.

I think it's because this gen has been a bit rough on the great new games front, and so the load of remasters can make that stuff extra depressing. As much as it's illogical, I can see how people have that knee-jerk reaction.

But yeah, ultimately, if you're not interested, don't buy it. I'm certainly glad these games are making their way to the new systems, even in cases where they're games I love and already own.

That said, by all means express that you're not interested if that's what you want to express, as long as your intent isn't that these things stop getting made.

@gamefreak9:

The extreme motion blur in Type-0 HD is so violent and awful, it makes the whole game look like an FF7 battle transition screen. That's the joke.

I think it's just silly because both companies claimed that no one wants backwards compatibility, but then are just using these re-makes to exploit the people who clearly just want to play their last-generation games on their new machine. A bunch of people bought this hardware but all the publishers are realizing that the only games that sell enough anymore to support them (in the AAA space, at least) are the biggest of the big, e.g. Call of Duty. So, they are spending small amounts of money to sell people the same game again 2-3 years later. Console games are either on their way out or in a dark, dark period.

@supermike6: I don't remember either company saying nobody wanted backwards compatibility, though I do remember the Microsoft comments about "we make a console for those people, it's called the xbox 360" back when the One was meant to be always connected to the internet.

Backwards compatibility requires additional hardware. In the case of the PS3, you would've had to put a PS3 into the PS4, think how much that would've cost and how big the device would've been. We'd have gotten a PS4 that cost about $600 on launch.

Sonys answer to that is PS Now, which has growing pains but is still a pretty new technology.

@jesus_phish said:

I understand why they don't put backwards compatibility in. Maybe I am misremembering about both companies making comments against backwards compatibility; I was probably mainly thinking of that Mattrick quote. I don't think either of them would've meant it either way. It was just damage control, but when you consider that sentiment in the current landscape of current-gen games then it starts to seem a little silly. I think PS Now is a pretty great idea for providing those games for those that didn't play them, much better than what publishers are currently doing. Personally, it's no difference to me because I don't own either console and probably never will. The disc-based console games market is in a really weird place right now. I think the answer to your original question is somewhere amidst this conundrum, though. People are getting very concerned now that we are almost a few years into this generation and there have been very few tent-pole releases, with even fewer of those being new IP, while last-gen games continue to be ported at quite a rate.

EDIT: The scary/worrying part for people being the fact that publishers have realized new, innovative game ideas simply don't sell well enough to support their creation in the AAA space, and what this realization means for the future of high-budget games.

@supermike6: The numbers don't support adding extra hardware and resources to backwards compatibility. I remember Microsoft, when pressed about the lack of backwards compatibility on Xbox One, revealed that after the first year of the 360 the number of users regularly using backwards compatibility was like 5% of the install base. Basically the early adopters use it when the library is small and then stop once the console has a larger library.

@meteora3255: That makes sense. It seems that these ports might actually be easier to produce than backwards compatibility. From the publisher/console manufacturer side, it is obvious why they continue to pump out these remasters. The remasters themselves are not an issue; it is their prevalence in the context of a hardware generation with very few new titles or IP being released or announced.

Lazy remasters deserve the hate, but remasters like DmC: DE, REmake, or even DMC4: SE (which is going the extra, extra mile) should be welcomed IMO

I'd also recommend trying Black Mesa!

All this talk about "exploiting" and "cash-in" is nonsense. I don't see the difference between game re-releases and old movies being released in new formats (DVD, BluRay, etc.). I didn't buy a DVD player just to watch movies tmade after 1998, and I didn't buy a BluRay player just to watch movies made after 2006. I also want to watch old movies and I want those movies to look better.

If you don't want to play the game (or play it again), don't buy it. It's a low cost turn around that maintains steadier revenue streams for game publishers. That "cash-in" approach is what gives game publishers the financial stability they need to take risks on expensive new games. It also keeps jobs in the industry.

Like Jeff said, the ratio of remakes/original stuff is off.

@atwa: I don't think he's accounting for the time and money it takes to make games these days. Remember, CoD games are using three different studios in a cycle to ensure a different CoD game every year. There are plenty of original indie games coming out, which don't take as long as AAA games do.

Don't own any of the current gen consoles, but I think I can take a rough stab at this. People bought consoles thinking that new games were coming out, and that kind of has not been happening, especially if you own a PS4. I'd say that Bloodborne is the first big non-launch title exclusive for that system, and it's a pretty long time for that happen. The next big one, in my opinion, is Persona 5, a port job of the PS3 version.

I think that also we are beginning to see the start of diminishing returns when it comes to this stuff. The difference between a PS2 game and the rereleased version of it on PS3 is huge, and there was purpose behind the rereleases. PS2 was made in a HDTV-less era, and it kind of looks not super great on modern screens (hell, P4G being played on a PSTV, which is basically a Vita upscaled onto a TV, looks better than playing P4 on a PS2). Rereleases made those games look good on current hardware for those that didn't want to touch emulation or didn't have a PC for it.

Compare a PS3 release to that of its PS4 rerelease and the difference is nowhere near as noticeable. It's still there, especially with framerate improvements, but creates nowhere near as an impact.

I'd say that if anything, we should be more concerned about the industry and funding trends that drive all these rereleases rather than the rereleases themselves.

Also: They killed any hope for backwards compatibility for future generations.

I think it's just so that publishers have something to sell on the new platform while they are working on new games. I bought a couple HD collections last gen that I thought were worth it, like Ico/SOTC, Jak & Daxter, Devil May Cry, etc. but most of the ones for the current gen definitely strike me as unnecessary. Nevertheless, I did pick up the Master Chief Collection and Metro Redux, because those games were significantly upgraded for the new consoles.

Besides, it's going to be fantastic in a couple years (or months?) from now when all these ports are in the bargain bin, or hell on the digital store for mega cheap.

New IPs being a risk on the part of a developer/publisher doesn't cut it as an excuse for pumping out remasters/thesamegamejustpackagedanew, but I doubt big devs are resting on their laurels with that hot HD money. I don't think it takes away a huge amount of efforts from new development though, that much seems obvious. That said, it does look strange to see a new console populated by more than a few remasters while there seems to not be many new big games for it on the horizon.

Remakes I'm less dismissive towards. Stuff like, I dunno, the Halo remakes, or the Monkey Island remake, or stuff more like Black Mesa Source that inches closer to reimaginings are alright by me. But then even things like the DMC4 HD version 2.0 having new playable characters goes a long way. Collections are generally alright as well.

Honestly, I'm more weirded out by 30+ dollar season passes. I mean, it makes sense when you consider that they're essentially expansions these days (or at least the good ones are), but seeing a game launch for 60 bucks and immediately have a 30 dollar season pass available (with nothing to show for it of course) feels kinda skeezy.

As a satisfied owner of a current-gen console, I don't buy into the idea that new games are lacking at all. New games (and some good new games) are coming out and have come out; it's just that the internet always finds a way to marginalize/dismiss them out of some shitty desire to play PC elitist and crap on the consoles. Any game that's not a 100% new IP apparently doesn't count, so that's an easy way to inherently discount some great games like Horizon 2, Bayonetta 2, and Bloodborne simply because they're sequels. Upcoming games like Halo 5, Gran Turismo 7, MGS 5, etc. might all be fucking awesome, but will face this same awful "oh, it's another ____ game" sentiment regardless of their quality. So that's a nice and shitty starting point many use to pretend new games aren't new games.

Then there are actual new IPs that are quality like Destiny, Titanfall, Sunset Overdrive, etc. Well, obviously that can't be acknowledged, so those must be nitpicked to death. Any minor flaws should be overblown to comical extremes. And if these new IPs are also made available on PC, those don't count as new games on consoles anyway (and be sure to point out if the console version is <60 fps or <1080p because obviously all games run perfectly on all PCs). Quality console exclusives, though, can be tricky. Generally, exclusives by their very nature make for excellent criticism because there simply isn't that many of them and this fact can serve as blanket ridicule of consoles on the whole, but when a good exclusive comes out, just turn the focus to the other consoles and their lack of exclusives. That, or just do a complete 180 from mocking the lack of exclusives and complain about the very existence of exclusives as if every game should come out on everything and it's unfair that this doesn't happen. Use phrases like "bad for gamers" or "anti-consumer" for dramatic effect.

If all else fails, there's always the classic "none of these games interest me" catch-all. The best part about this is that it doesn't even have to be true, nor substantiated, nor can it really be challenged as one person's supposed opinion. There's nothing better than deciding to just be "right" based purely on claimed personal preferences, and it's very easy to remain disinterested while blindly apathetic and actively ill-informed. No good, new games are out there on consoles. It has been decreed. And who better to pass this judgment than those who have NOT tried playing these games? We must all bow before PC elitism and its true and just impudence. Thank you, internet, for informing me that I'm not actually enjoying my console because it's impossible to enjoy console gaming, for there are no good, new console games, provided you ignore the good, new console games.

Just don't buy 'em, guys. If everyone feels the same they won't be profitable and the practise will die out naturally. It's common knowledge to not buy a console this early into any generation and this is one of the big reasons why, wait a few years so there's a catalogue of games available. Those that don't can expect this kind of disappointment for a while.

Because they are indies. Small games from small teams that need money. Remastering big games (especially first party games) like God of War, is a simple cash grab when Sony should be focusing on getting something new out.

If someone wants to remake an old 8-bit or 16-bit game, sure I'll be all over that. Bringing a PS3/Xbox 360 game over to current gen and calling it a remaster? Most of the time, I'll pass, especially when the game lacks all of the dlc and is full priced.

Because for the last few years of the last generation of consoles, we were told that we were getting so many remasters and ports and "unneccessary half-assed sequels (ie Gears of War: Judgment, God of War: Ascension, Batman: Arkham Origins)" because the technical limitations of those consoles were holding devs back from utilizing their creativity on new IPs and concepts, and that those that weren't releasing games weren't because they were busy working on launch games for the newer better consoles.

Then the new consoles came out, mostly with up-ressed half-gen ports, and most of the games announced were additions to existing franchises, and most of the best of THOSE were delayed into 2015, and then 2016.

And the console manufacturers cut out backwards compatibility because "gamers don't want to play their old games on new consoles".

And then all the devs sought to "fill up the holes in their lineup" by charging $40-60 for all those old games (some of which were only just released 2 years ago!) people supposedly didn't want to play anymore.

So the new consoles were "necessary" for new amazing games that still haven't come out, and backwards compatibility was "unneccessary" because nobody wants to play their old games that they can instead buy for nearly full price because those new amazing games still haven't come out.

If we were getting new IPs, or at least new sequels to old franchises, that weren't also available on the older generation of consoles, and all these remastered releases were coming out, I wouldn't have a problem with it. Instead, 25% of the XBone and PS4 retail games so far are remasters or ports.

I think game remasters are generally good. I don't know what it costs in money and personnel to get a remaster out, but I would expect they're at least making a profit. I want to see new games too, but re-releases aren't the only thing currently holding back new games. Historically, games have also been terrible at staying available for longer than their initial release. Sure you can try to hunt down old systems or use emulation, but making games available on modern consoles and keeping them in print helps people enjoy old games in a more convenient way. Other media like books, music, and movies have been doing remasters and rereleases for decades and they're important to keeping the medium alive for people who didn't have the experience in the first go-around.

@jesus_phish:

Because it is contributing to the feeling that this gen is weak, because publishers are not satisfying consumers demands for content with their meagre output of new games. You're right bringing out these "remasters" (the only one I would consider a proper remaster is GTA V at this point) probably does not stop other new games being made but the percentage of remasters taking up space at retail is seriously off putting and leads me to believe that the industry is only a few bad turns away from falling apart completely.

Its been a year and a half since the consoles released, I can count the number of new games I've really enjoyed on one hand. I expected by now that the floodgates would have parted a little, but here we are and new games are being pushed and pushed further out and more and more remasters are being announced.

Its a sign things are very wrong with gaming, at least gaming in the AAA retail space, which like many others, I used to very much enjoy.