I mean, it's not like there's anything to rebuild. There's only so many times you can kill a worm before it starts to get a bit old.
Which is ironic because for me as a consumer, it's the pre-360/PS3 gen games that are the most worthwhile to remaster. Current games aren't all that different from previous-gen games, but the further back you go the bigger the differences get so the more interested I am for a retake of them with modern sensibilities.Basically, remastering anything older than the Xbox 360/PS3 generation would simply require way too much work to be worth it
Thanks... that was my point?FirstNameLastName said:An absurd comparison. Those paintings have a certain style that still holds up and wouldn't really be improved by modern technology.
For a lot of games I would agree. But not for Morrowind. I actually think it's a really good example of how graphics artists can turn what are actually technical limitations into features (which you can also say about Seurat's pointillism, which is why I used it as an example). The crappy draw distance? That gave the game a foggy and murky atmosphere. The triangular textures? They worked those limitations into the unique monster, building and weapon designs Morrowind was famous for. Think of something like the Netch or the Dwarven spider and how angular it looks.The dated graphics of Morrowind aren't simply a timeless artistic choice, they're born out of the extreme limitations of the time. I really don't think the developers, having the technology we have now, would opt for a terrible draw distance, triangles so blatant you can count them, blurry textures, hideous lighting, and all the other things that come with early 3D graphics. Look, even 16 bit 2D graphics can still look fine to this day, but the early days of 3D graphics look like complete and utter shit. They've not aged well at all.
OK, I'm confused. His reasoning for not remaking Morrowind appears to be that Morrowind would actually benefit from being remade, while it's fine to remake Skyrim because it won't actually involve doing anything. Obviously Skyrim will make more money, but surely they should at least pretend to have a real reason rather than explicitly saying "We're just going to sell people the same game again without doing any work".Steven Bogos said:"To take Morrowind and then to completely rebuild it? It was an Xbox game. To completely rebuild it have it be relevant for today? That's a pretty massive team doing a massive amount of work,"
Why? Graphics may not be everything, but it's silly to pretend they're completely irrelevant. Many old games look truly terrible, especially ones made in the early days of 3D models. And of course it's not just graphics, things like user interfaces (OK, not so important in this example given that Skyrim's is quite possibly the worst interface ever made) and compatibility with modern systems. Why should we just live with what we had in the past when the limitations that forced numerous compromises are no longer present?Shamanic Rhythm said:So the graphics are a little dated. Live with it.
It's much more like going to the Sistine Chapel and being glad you can actually see the artwork because made a massive effort was made to stop it looking like shit, at least five separate times. Without constant remastering, a huge amount of famous art simply wouldn't exist today. And of course, Seurat is a particularly ironic one for you to have chosen given how heavily influenced he was by Chevreul's work on restorations.It's like going to a Seurat exhibition and asking for a pair of 3d glasses
Because we should be encouraging companies to continue innovating, instead of just continuously rehashing old content?Kahani said:Why? Graphics may not be everything, but it's silly to pretend they're completely irrelevant. Many old games look truly terrible, especially ones made in the early days of 3D models. And of course it's not just graphics, things like user interfaces (OK, not so important in this example given that Skyrim's is quite possibly the worst interface ever made) and compatibility with modern systems. Why should we just live with what we had in the past when the limitations that forced numerous compromises are no longer present?
You should have a read of my reply to someone else in this thread. Much of Morrowind's aesthetic is a product of the limitations of the time. I feel like that's something that people should just experience so that they understand progress - in much the same way that people prefer to watch the original version of A New Hope instead of the 90s Lucasfilm remakes.It's much more like going to the Sistine Chapel and being glad you can actually see the artwork because made a massive effort was made to stop it looking like shit, at least five separate times. Without constant remastering, a huge amount of famous art simply wouldn't exist today. And of course, Seurat is a particularly ironic one for you to have chosen given how heavily influenced he was by Chevreul's work on restorations.
Well at least they are fully aware that they are marketing to people stupid enough to get confused by a scroll bar....Steven Bogos said:"To take Morrowind and then to completely rebuild it? It was an Xbox game. To completely rebuild it have it be relevant for today? That's a pretty massive team doing a massive amount of work," he explained. "You go back and look at it. Do you remember the dialogue system in Morrowind? Do you remember what it was like talking to someone and scrolling through this long list of questions. You put that out for someone that just finished Skyrim and they're going to be like 'What in the hell...?'"
Funny that, it was the last PC-centric elder scrolls game.It was an Xbox game.
Given that bethesda is still running on patched up Gamebryo from 1997 with Havoc ducktaped to the side (you cant really call it integrated by how badly it performs), i would bet on them not having multicard support for next game as well.direkiller said:If they give it SLI/crossfire support pc players would go crazy for it but, as Bethesda has never done this I will not get my hopes up.
i couldnt find reliable figures for the entire industry (most are either for single continent or for seperate platforms) but the market size certainly grew few times over since 2002 (morrowind release). I mean just look at current consoles, they are selling multiple times more copies than their previuos ones and still loosing market share like crazy.Elfgore said:Nope. But I don't think that matters too much when the most I can find Morrowind selling is around 2 million and Skyrim being in 20 million. That's an insane gap.
All reasons why I could never get into it. Morrowind is absolutely a game where you need an instruction manual: Not only to learn the basic goddamn mechanics, but to learn how to approach them in the right order. For example, there's no indication of whether you can even properly wield the weapon you're currently holding (as I remember), which led me to stupidly flailing my spark shortsword at mudcrabs in the hopes that I might some day hit them. As I recall, lockpicking and character creation are pretty much the only mechanics you're given any kind of tutorial on. No introduction to magic, alchemy, crafting, economy, speech mechanics and so on. And the combat system is horseshit on toast.Gethsemani said:The disconnect between people in this thread and the rest of the gaming hobby is amazing. Morrowind was a great game for its' time and intended audience (me included) but it is an incredibly clunky, counter-intuitive game by modern standards and was to some degree even on release. From its' "dialog"-system that was basically just keywords to get intended response and the adjoined "persuasion"-system that meant you clicked a button and prayed to the counter-intuitive fighting system where you could see your sword connect but the game said you didn't hit to the lack of directions in many quests that led to a lot of people spending a lot of time just running around aimlessly hoping to find their destination. And let's not even get into the fact that to make the game somewhat manageable to playthrough you had to abuse alchemy and/or enchanting at some point so that you could get a long duration or constant levitation effect to spare yourself the trouble of backtracking up and down hills.
Don't get me wrong, I love Morrowind. I love it for a lot of its' weird flaws, but I also know that those same flaws is what made most of my friends give it a pass. Remaking Morrowind is not a cash-cow, at best it is a break even proposition or a minor profit. Morrowind never was and never will be a mainstream appeal game and there's absolutely no point in re-making it when the same team could be making the next TES or Fallout game, a game that is likely to sell at least twice or thrice as much as a Morrowind re-make.
Lockpicking in Morrowind was done by aiming an equipped lockpick at a locked container and clicking. Then you got a message informing you of success or failure. There were also tool called "probes" that you used to deactivate traps in the same manner, but most people I've talked to never realized that was what probes did, since the game never bothered to explain it.bartholen said:All reasons why I could never get into it. Morrowind is absolutely a game where you need an instruction manual: Not only to learn the basic goddamn mechanics, but to learn how to approach them in the right order. For example, there's no indication of whether you can even properly wield the weapon you're currently holding (as I remember), which led me to stupidly flailing my spark shortsword at mudcrabs in the hopes that I might some day hit them. As I recall, lockpicking and character creation are pretty much the only mechanics you're given any kind of tutorial on. No introduction to magic, alchemy, crafting, economy, speech mechanics and so on. And the combat system is horseshit on toast.