Nintendo gets HD remakes

[josemlopes]

And yet, Nintendo is the one company that I allow to get away with remakes. You want to know why?

Because you're a dedicated fan.

Say all you want about how Nintendo does it "better", but based off your posts here, I'm 100% sure you wouldn't give a remake from Microsoft the same shake if they were to do the same damn thing.

Were Microsoft to make a remake of a reasonably old game, yet add a significant amount of content, I would trumpet that from the rooftops. Indeed, if they have already done so, then calling attention to that instance would be your best bet for winning this argument.

Perfect Dark, it now has online and the ability to play with more bots at the same time, it doesnt run like shit too.

Duke Nukem 3D, if you want the original experience without mods (or the expansions) then this one is even better then the ones found on the PC with features like time rewind (when you die you can resume at anytime during your playthrough) and integrated co-op.

 

[Dragonbums]

Like others have said remakes have been dine well by other companies too. And its not like Nintendo is free from lazy ones. For instance Pokemon remakes their old games almost to a T and only adding a few things.

...huh?

Pokemon FireRed LeafGreen: Updated the battle system to match the new rules and learn sets that were brought about by RSE, included pokemon powers, added endgame material, and added seven new islands to explore that included a bunch of pokemon from GenII to be caught.

Pokemon HG/SS: Again, updated the battle system to GenIV, allowed any pokemon that were given additional evolutions in Gen III and Gen IV to be evolved before completing the game, added gym leader rebattles, added one of the most indepth safari to ever be implemented in a pokemon game, allowed pokemon to walk around with you, pokeathlon, ability to catch way more legendaries than before...

Are you telling me all of the above is merely remaking their old games to the T, and adding in only a sparse few things? No, no it is not.

Actually it is, and you even stated that yourself. FireRed and Leafgreen had the updated system that Ruby/Sapphire implemented because it would only make sense to do that, not doing so would server to confuse new players who thought that those games would work the same. This is not the mention the fact that if both games were to connect with each other, which "rules" would apply in said battle? The original Red/Green/Blue rules? Or Ruby/Sapphires rules?

The same will be said for the HG/SS remakes. They HAVE to implement those things because the newest games have them implemented, and it's expected for those same rules to apply to those games.

It was confusing as fuck in the R/G/B days where I couldn't get a Jigglypuff from Gold/Silver because Jigglypuffs didn't get those moves in the first game and vice versa.
People were even confused now (me included) when for whatever reason they decided to revert the Exp. Share item back to it's original function where it gives exp. to all party members and not just the Pokemon holding it.
Imagine if they did that for the entire game?

 

[Exius Xavarus]

Nintendo put effort in for their remakes? They selectively graphically touched up Zelda for the 3DS, that's it. They added some bloom and tweaked Wind Waker to have a less annoying quest, that's not a lot for them asking $50-$60 bucks vs what you can find the original for.

You're downplaying it, just a bit. Ocarina of Time 3D got more than just entirely new models and textures and everything. Although that alone shows that they put a lot more effort into OoT3D than simply remaking it. While several bugs arose specifically on the 3DS, a great many from the original were fixed.

Several changes to the UI were made that made the game infinitely easier to play, such as using C-Button equipment with the touchscreen. Even adding the option for a fourth piece of equipment. This most notably makes the Water Temple much less of a hassle, by virtue of not having to enter the equipment menu every time you need to equip or unequip the Iron Boots. They also made it so that button sequences for songs on the ocarina stay on the screen, for quick reference.

A Boss Rush mode was also added, for players that enjoy such a feature. Master Quest also received a significant change in that it mirrored the entire game, not unlike the CG and Wii versions of Twilight Princess. That did not happen in the original Master Quest. It was also changed so that enemies and bosses deal 2x damage to Link, which is also reflected in the Boss Rush within Master Quest.

Several changes were made to Wind Waker HD, as well. There's a new sail so that you move across the water faster, Hero Mode was added to the game, some events changed, some rupee prices changed, some item locations have changed and several glitches and exploits were fixed. Speed runners were mighty upset that some of their most valuable speed running methods were repaired. And like you mentioned, one of the late game quests were changed to make it much less tedious.

I strongly urge you to rethink your argument against Nintendo putting effort into their remakes, as far as the Legend of Zelda series is concerned, as you could not be further from the truth.

 

[TheSapphireKnight]

And yet, Nintendo is the one company that I allow to get away with remakes. You want to know why?

Because you're a dedicated fan.

Say all you want about how Nintendo does it "better", but based off your posts here, I'm 100% sure you wouldn't give a remake from Microsoft the same shake if they were to do the same damn thing.

Were Microsoft to make a remake of a reasonably old game, yet add a significant amount of content, I would trumpet that from the rooftops. Indeed, if they have already done so, then calling attention to that instance would be your best bet for winning this argument.

So...... Halo Anniversary?

A remake of a launch game from a previous generation on its 10 year anniversary seems to fit the "reasonably old" criteria especially when that game is slightly older than Wind Waker. As for content, they added collectible difficulty modifying skulls to find throughout each level. They added terminals throughout the the levels that added to the overall series and flesh out the one of the key antagonists. They added online co-op and to top it off they included some remakes of multiplayer maps for Reach multiplayer(that could be played without owning Reach).

That is not including the work they did with the models and textures of the "anniversary" portion on top of the upscaled original visuals. Redoing the original score with a proper orchestra and updating the sound design didn't hurt either. I would say they added quite a bit on top of the original while leaving pretty much all of the moment to moment gameplay intact quirks and all(which is something much of the community wanted).

I generally agree that the HD remakes are getting a little excessive in some areas(Though PS4/Xbone Tomb Raider is a port), but Halo Aniversary is one of the best examples of it done right(Kingdom Hearts 1.5 being another great example).

 

[Matthew Jabour]

And yet, Nintendo is the one company that I allow to get away with remakes. You want to know why?

Because you're a dedicated fan.

Say all you want about how Nintendo does it "better", but based off your posts here, I'm 100% sure you wouldn't give a remake from Microsoft the same shake if they were to do the same damn thing.

Were Microsoft to make a remake of a reasonably old game, yet add a significant amount of content, I would trumpet that from the rooftops. Indeed, if they have already done so, then calling attention to that instance would be your best bet for winning this argument.

Perfect Dark, it now has online and the ability to play with more bots at the same time, it doesnt run like shit too.

Duke Nukem 3D, if you want the original experience without mods (or the expansions) then this one is even better then the ones found on the PC with features like time rewind (when you die you can resume at anytime during your playthrough) and integrated co-op.

Well played. Brb, off to the rooftops.

 

[Snotnarok]

Nintendo put effort in for their remakes? They selectively graphically touched up Zelda for the 3DS, that's it. They added some bloom and tweaked Wind Waker to have a less annoying quest, that's not a lot for them asking $50-$60 bucks vs what you can find the original for.

You're downplaying it, just a bit. Ocarina of Time 3D got more than just entirely new models and textures and everything. Although that alone shows that they put a lot more effort into OoT3D than simply remaking it. While several bugs arose specifically on the 3DS, a great many from the original were fixed.

Several changes to the UI were made that made the game infinitely easier to play, such as using C-Button equipment with the touchscreen. Even adding the option for a fourth piece of equipment. This most notably makes the Water Temple much less of a hassle, by virtue of not having to enter the equipment menu every time you need to equip or unequip the Iron Boots. They also made it so that button sequences for songs on the ocarina stay on the screen, for quick reference.

A Boss Rush mode was also added, for players that enjoy such a feature. Master Quest also received a significant change in that it mirrored the entire game, not unlike the CG and Wii versions of Twilight Princess. That did not happen in the original Master Quest. It was also changed so that enemies and bosses deal 2x damage to Link, which is also reflected in the Boss Rush within Master Quest.

Several changes were made to Wind Waker HD, as well. There's a new sail so that you move across the water faster, Hero Mode was added to the game, some events changed, some rupee prices changed, some item locations have changed and several glitches and exploits were fixed. Speed runners were mighty upset that some of their most valuable speed running methods were repaired. And like you mentioned, one of the late game quests were changed to make it much less tedious.

I strongly urge you to rethink your argument against Nintendo putting effort into their remakes, as far as the Legend of Zelda series is concerned, as you could not be further from the truth.

I've put much thought into my argument and it's sound.
These are games that were already made, concepts, art, story, music, level designs are all done already, they've been touched up visually and had tweaks done, that does not, in any way warrant a full purchase price of $40 for OoT3D and $60 for WW.

They changed the controls and interface for OoT, well that's good, the original N64 controller does not match up to the 3DS so it'd be a pretty weak port if they didn't make the controls at least work for the device it's ported to. Touching up the visuals is good too, a boss rush mode is moot, many games have them and it adds nothing to the overall experience and tweaks are expected as it's an old game and game design has changed.

Wind Waker is a game I think to this day looks AMAZINGLY pretty, the HD touch up was unneeded in every regard, it was the last Zelda game that needed that kind of make-over. That said, it does look really nice but I'm not convinced it's a lot of effort as it's a cell shaded game, it didn't age to begin with and the visuals aren't exactly demanding to do (no textures or normal maps,bump maps or adding new tech like physics and what-have-you), but the visuals are indeed better and quite pretty. Tweaking items and quests a bit isn't enough to wow me either into spending FULL PRICE for a re-release, had they added the dungeons they cut out, added new enemies to said dungeons then sure, it'd be a bit steep still but it'd have been worth it to see new content, but they opted out for that.

Now let's compare that to God of War:

They touched up and remastered 4 games, 2 from PS2, 2 from PSP adding wide screen, HD touch ups, modified the PSP games to work like the PS2 version in terms of controls, and slapped in God of War 3 for good measure in ONE collection for $50 bucks. Every God of War game came with a battle arena, difficulty modes as it stands, so understand where I'm coming from when boss rush isn't a feature that wows me when it's added.

But let's say you're not a fan of God of War, I know a lot aren't, let's look at other re-releases:

Deus Ex Human Revolution for PC and if you owned the previous version and DLC you got to get the game with fixed boss fights, better visuals and gameplay fixes for $5 dollars. I was okay with that, and got it on sale for less. Yes I understand this is a newer game with DLC not being around for the Gamecube but, they put their touch up for full price. A more similar example then would be:

Riddick Escape from Butcher Bay, they did a HD overhaul up with some new stuff, they stapled on an entirely new adventure, new weapons, new voice acting, characters and story events in a completely different place, so it's 100% new content tacked onto a HD rerelease with added content.

Mario All Stars + Mario World, back when Nintendo actually kicked out collections I was wowed by, you got ALL the NES Mario games remastered, Mario World, and Lost Levels- something NOT put out in the US originally- wow, holy crap sign me up.

Kirby Super Star- I do not need to say anymore, this collection speaks for itself, not the full priced touch up for DS, the SNES one.

Resident Evil- It's practically a new game, there's nothing reused, many areas are only slightly known, the map isn't the same, the visuals are 100% redone, there's new enemies, new events, new puzzles, new maps, a new entire section, plot and boss it's an amazing remake of game, one of the best games on the Gamecube.

Metroid Zero Mission- again it's practically a new game, it took the base game, used all new better visuals, artwork, new events, new bosses, new chapter, AND included the original game on top of that. It's a stellar remake, one of my favorite games.


Listen, if what they did was enough for you with the Zelda games? That's all well and good, I'm not saying you are wrong for buying them, or especially enjoying them, or anyone else as it's your money and if you have strong nostalgic feelings for the games that warrant the purchase, while I've not experienced that I can say I understand as I know friends with the same interest. That's great! I hope you enjoy what you bought, I hope it brings you years of enjoyment.

I however feel they're overpriced, lack luster remakes that have moderate effort touch-up polish on them but do not impress as they could have done much more, because others have done better and in the past they, Nintendo HAVE done better. Graphical touch ups and tweaks & fixes to the games are not enough to warrant a full purchase price. I'd rather play the originals as they're currently cheaper, much cheaper and had I enjoyed them more I'd still have had them to play. They didn't do enough to the touched up games, not for the price they're asking, so no I strongly disagree in just about every way possible.

I apologize for the ...wall of text, however I don't really feel a summary would accurately sum up why I think the touched up titles are not worth it and why I feel others are and makes them worth it. I hope you read it and at least will see where I'm coming from, I'm not asking you to bow to my opinion, just understand why I disagree, I can see why you enjoy them.

 

[Exius Xavarus]

Snipped for brevity.

If you find them not worth it, that's all well and fine. However, that's another thing entirely. What I take issue with is the way you seriously downplay the effort that was put into Ocarina of Time 3D. You're trying to say little to no effort was put in and you really could not be further from the truth on this point. What I find rather odd is how you go "oh the graphics were just touched up in OoT3D" and then trumpet a simple coat of HD on God of War like it's something amazing. I understand they performed this work on every God of War title and that alone is a tremendous amount of work.

That does not, however, belittle the effort that was put into OoT3D. The game has entirely new character and world models along with entirely new textures. It was literally built from the ground up, for the 3DS. That alone shows that Nintendo put a tremendous amount of effort into their remake. My previous post doesn't even list half the changes they made to the game to make it that much better.

As far as Wind Waker HD is concerned, I'll parrot my previous post as I'm too lazy to type it out again [sub][sub]sorry[/sub][/sub]. And you're never going to find Wind Waker HD at full price, unless you're in an area with inflated pricing. Wind Waker HD was $50 at launch and still is $50.

http://zeldawiki.org/The_Legend_of_Zelda:_Ocarina_of_Time_3D
http://zeldawiki.org/The_Legend_of_Zelda:_The_Wind_Waker_HD

Above are a couple links to their respective Zeldawiki pages. I understand that it's just a wiki page but should you decide to look at them, I hope you'll see there's enough there that I didn't fill all of that in, to support my argument. I wanted to link them because there's so much there, it'd take me all day to type it out here.

I'm not contesting whether you believe they're worth the price. If you don't, that's entirely on you and I have no problem with it. I do, however, have a problem with you trying to say that neither of these Zelda titles have little to no effort in them at all. They have a lot more effort in them than simply touching up the visuals, especially when you compare it to the God of War Collection where control changes, visual updates and trophy support are all that happened. I maintain my stance that I strongly urge you rethink your argument in saying that Nintendo put lackluster amounts of effort into these two games, whether you think they're worth it or not.

 

[Poppy JR.]

And what bothers me so much is that these remakes don't add anything.

I have not played my copy of WindWaker HD yet, but if I remember reading correctly, they added a higher difficulty setting. This is something every Zelda game desperately needs. I would consider that "adding something". I really hope we get another version of Twilight Princess with this.

I'm glad other people think this too! If there's anything that can turn me off of a zelda game, it's how easy it is! Pretty much Link Between Worlds in a nutshell to me. I've yet to die and I'm nearing the final dungeon. I did hear there's a more difficult second play though but I haven't gone to see if that's true.

Also was Master Quest released with OoT 3D? If so I need to hop on that!

Master Quest is included with Ocarina of Time 3D.

 

[Snotnarok]

Snipped for brevity.

If you find them not worth it, that's all well and fine. However, that's another thing entirely. What I take issue with is the way you seriously downplay the effort that was put into Ocarina of Time 3D. You're trying to say little to no effort was put in and you really could not be further from the truth on this point. What I find rather odd is how you go "oh the graphics were just touched up in OoT3D" and then trumpet a simple coat of HD on God of War like it's something amazing. I understand they performed this work on every God of War title and that alone is a tremendous amount of work.

That does not, however, belittle the effort that was put into OoT3D. The game has entirely new character and world models along with entirely new textures. It was literally built from the ground up, for the 3DS. That alone shows that Nintendo put a tremendous amount of effort into their remake. My previous post doesn't even list half the changes they made to the game to make it that much better.

As far as Wind Waker HD is concerned, I'll parrot my previous post as I'm too lazy to type it out again [sub][sub]sorry[/sub][/sub]. And you're never going to find Wind Waker HD at full price, unless you're in an area with inflated pricing. Wind Waker HD was $50 at launch and still is $50.

http://zeldawiki.org/The_Legend_of_Zelda:_Ocarina_of_Time_3D
http://zeldawiki.org/The_Legend_of_Zelda:_The_Wind_Waker_HD

Above are a couple links to their respective Zeldawiki pages. I understand that it's just a wiki page but should you decide to look at them, I hope you'll see there's enough there that I didn't fill all of that in, to support my argument. I wanted to link them because there's so much there, it'd take me all day to type it out here.

I'm not contesting whether you believe they're worth the price. If you don't, that's entirely on you and I have no problem with it. I do, however, have a problem with you trying to say that neither of these Zelda titles have little to no effort in them at all. They have a lot more effort in them than simply touching up the visuals, especially when you compare it to the God of War Collection where control changes, visual updates and trophy support are all that happened. I maintain my stance that I strongly urge you rethink your argument in saying that Nintendo put lackluster amounts of effort into these two games, whether you think they're worth it or not.

I cut out my wall of text hoping this to be shorter.
I'm not downplaying Zelda vs God of War, I stated the reason for God of War being worth it was that it was 5 games for 50 with similar fixes vs Zelda which just the 1 game.

Listen I looked into it again using your sites, and it's even lazier than I thought when they are only using the textures used in development as well as the midis before they needed to be compressed to fit on the gamecube. The items and bug fixes are not impressing me as that's something you'd expect to see in a patch or a mod fix, they alone are not worth the 50 dollars if you already have the game. I am in no way suggesting they are bad versions or crummy ports, they're lazy and have nothing new, no new dungeon, no new weapons/armor/accessories that change gameplay, quests or whatever.
Again what made God of War isn't the name, isn't the graphical touch ups, it's FIVE games for the price of ONE, that's why I'm behind that idea. 5 games that have had similar effort put in, if it was 1 GoW title I'd have said lazy, heck the version with 3 games I don't think is worth it either, the FIVE pack though is a steal.

Zelda is a lazy port because they didn't add anything new to either game beyond a few items and bug fixes. Had there been a new optional quest or two with some dungeons maybe a town to help out, extra monsters, new gear, yes it'd be a totally down for it. But graphics and fixes are not something that sells me, like Wii owners once said graphics don't make the game, and both updates are nicer but it's not something that'd make me buy it again, if the person hasn't played it yes it makes sense for them to get this version unless they don't have a WiiU already.

Compare this to Resident Evil for Gamecube
Visuals are all completely new as is the audio, there's a new area with a new boss that has a heavy effect on what happens in the game, new spots on the map, new enemies, new events, and you like noting this stuff so: the controls have been redone for the gamecube, the interface is totally new and polished to a shine, new items are also in the game.
Wind Waker to me is a graphical update with some fixes, same with OoT. I stand by what Wii owners used to say, graphics aren't everything, and touching up a games visual aesthetics is not enough for me to get wowed and pay full price for that title instead.
Megaman X for PSP
Visuals are completely new, they redid the music with remixes, you can play as another character with his own tunes/weapons/gameplay/voice acting and events, there's full anime cutscenes in the game including a short movie, voice acting, armor is in different locations and there's a hard mode, levels are different. It's not the definitive version as the SNES version was better in some ways but they're both good in their own right, and I think it was launched at a budget price to boot.

-Zelda WW:
Nicer visuals, bug fixes and new items
-God of War collection.
Nicer visuals, fixes, 5 games on one disc <=selling point.
-Resident Evil Gamecube:
Game is redone, new events, new monsters, new area, new chapter
-MMXSP
3d visuals, different level layouts, anime cutscenes, short movie, play as Vile, hard mode, levels remixed, voice acting.

Never said they were bad ports, never said they broke the game, but unless players have not played the games and already own a WiiU I have no reason to recommend them, there's nothing new to bring the player back. As Wii owners used to love to say: "graphics aren't everything" I play games on their original consoles most of the time unless they had a remake that changed shit completely like Resident Evil.
I'll step back and say OoT 3D is worth it if you want Zelda on the go, I got the MMX game for PSP for the same reason despite there being more stuff added, fun game on the go and you can put it into standby and resume when you want. That is something that really can make the game worth it if that is a specific thing you are seeking.

Again, I do not depute the value to you, to me the games don't bring anything new to make me spend full price and play those versions of the games when I already have the previous titles which offer the same experience, but for the money I already paid for them.

 

[Exius Xavarus]

Snip.

I'm sorry, but if you're going to look at all those changes and additions to Ocarina of Time 3D and still call it a "lazy port," so far as to say it's even lazier than you thought, we have nothing further to discuss. You and I clearly have two very, very different definitions of the term "lazy." I'm going to leave it at agree to disagree.

 

[Snotnarok]

Snip.

I'm sorry, but if you're going to look at all those changes and additions to Ocarina of Time 3D and still call it a "lazy port," so far as to say it's even lazier than you thought, we have nothing further to discuss. You and I clearly have two very, very different definitions of the term "lazy." I'm going to leave it at agree to disagree.

Given that I gave paragraphs and comparisons out what wazoo I'm not sure how much more I could have delved into it to explain why I feel the titles are not worth their asking price.
Again I am not suggesting you are wrong, I am saying in no way do I find it worth the money, nor would I recommend unless there's certain things, like the person having a wiiU and not having played them prior. They are GOOD ports, they're expensive, and I would never buy them for the asking price. OoT 3DS or Link Between Two Worlds, it's not even a thought, the new game for the same price.

I gave my reasons in full detail and remastered titles I felt was worth it, you are basically telling me "look at all the graphical touches and interface fixes, it's worth it" It's not, graphics don't make a $50 purchase on top of the $50 I paid for the previous game, again if they included those cut dungeons from Wind Waker? Yes, it'd have been worth it, but instead they cut down a tedious quest, made the sailing faster (which wasn't a issue to me) and there is nothing new.
If it's worth it to you then that's great, really I don't know how much I can stress this, I'm not sure why my opinion on this bothers you. I'm really not saying your wrong, to me it's not worth it, that's it.

What they did wasn't enough to warrant a purchase for me, there was no new content, it's a graphical fix and update, I have played them and owed them there's nothing new to make me say it's worth $50. Had it been a budget release then sure, till there's a price drop.

It's nothing against Nintendo, again I thought the Zero Mission remake was amazing, the Super Mario All Stars was another great remastering. I never thought we'd see eye to eye but I figured you could at least understand why I don't, as I understand why you do.

 

[Exius Xavarus]

Snip.

And therein lies the problem. You think I'm trying to convince you why they're worth it. I'm not. What I'm actually saying is that you're wrong in calling them "lazy ports." What I'm actually arguing against is your silly notion that Nintendo put no effort into their remakes.

I understand that you think they aren't worth the price. That's fine, I don't care. But you're still wrong in saying they're lazy and have no work or effort put into them.

 

[Snotnarok]

Snip.

And therein lies the problem. You think I'm trying to convince you why they're worth it. I'm not. What I'm actually saying is that you're wrong in calling them "lazy ports." What I'm actually arguing against is your silly notion that Nintendo put no effort into their remakes.

I understand that you think they aren't worth the price. That's fine, I don't care. But you're still wrong in saying they're lazy and have no work or effort put into them.

How am I wrong with me calling the game lazy? I feel they were lazy because what they did was use original development textures and midis, they used unchanged original GCN models, added a lighting engine, tweaked some settings...how does that add to the experience? How does any of that make it more impacting on your experience in this game?
I'm wrong because I value different things in a game?
I already said they made a competent port, but that's about it. The value has a lot to do with it as if it's not worth rebuying as the original holds up just in telling the story, and the new one adds nothing new then it's not worth seeking.

This is where I say you're wrong: I never said Nintendo made lazy ports/remakes. I said the two Zelda games were lazy, and I stated more than once that Nintendo had some amazing remakes.

Metroid Zero Mission: remade from the ground up visually and audio-wise, new power-ups, monsters, bosses, areas a new chapter with totally different gameplay, and the original Metroid to boot on the same cart. THAT is a stellar remake from Nintendo. You can feel the effort by the devs and tell they cared.
Mario All-Stars + World all the NES classics remade graphically and audio-wise in one collection and Mario World as the cherry on top.

Again, if you disagree that's fine, but you're the one challenging me here telling me I'm wrong in my opinion when I've said nothing like that against yours . I already said I can see why you may value the game and I insist that's totally fine and I'm honestly glad you do.
However you are telling me I'm wrong because you value different things in a game. Sorry, that's not how this works.I'm not going to listen to you just saying I'm wrong, it's an opinion just like yours and if you don't agree you have the option to shrug your shoulders and enjoy the game you bought instead of trying to tell a stranger online he's wrong because he'd like to see the dev put some heart into a remastered game.
I'm glad you enjoy the graphical touch ups and tweaks but it's half hearted and as an artist who like to see passion in art made.

 

[DRTJR]

One of the games I am most looking forward to is Fable Anniversary on the 360, which is going to be awesome.

 

[MrDumpkins]

Halo Anniversary was awesome, it was only $40 on release, so it wasn't actually full priced. And it came with a fully redone graphics engine (you can switch between the new and old with a button.) New music, hidden terminals and skulls, new multiplayer maps for halo reach (you didn't need halo reach to play them though). Honestly I got so much joy just walking around in the old engine, and then being amazed at how much more detail they crammed into the new engine. And it's on the fly so it felt natural and unobtrusive to game flow. You must not have played Halo Anniversary if you think it was just a rerelease.

 

[Exius Xavarus]

How am I wrong with me calling the game lazy? I feel they were lazy because what they did was use original development textures and midis, they used unchanged original GCN models, added a lighting engine, tweaked some settings...how does that add to the experience? How does any of that make it more impacting on your experience in this game?
I'm wrong because I value different things in a game?
I already said they made a competent port, but that's about it. The value has a lot to do with it as if it's not worth rebuying as the original holds up just in telling the story, and the new one adds nothing new then it's not worth seeking.

This is where I say you're wrong: I never said Nintendo made lazy ports/remakes. I said the two Zelda games were lazy, and I stated more than once that Nintendo had some amazing remakes.

First order of business: When I said that you're saying Nintendo put no effort into their remakes, I was referring specifically to the two Zelda titles we've been discussing. I was unclear earlier and for that, I apologize. And now:

For Wind Waker HD, you're not completely wrong, but not completely correct. The music for WWHD has been remastered. It's not fully orchestrated or anything fancy, but the music is composed of higher quality instrument samples. They even added new instrumental tracks. They redrew the UI and the altered the controls in a way to take full advantage of the GamePad. This makes tasks easier to perform and reduces the time spent changing out equipment or going into your menu to view the map(s), so you can keep up the momentum. A new sail was added to as an option the player can use to drastically reduce the time they spent sailing so they can faster get to where they want to go. The Triforce quest was altered to become much less of a slog, so you don't get so bored and discouraged from finishing the game. Are you really going to tell me this doesn't, at all, add to the experience?

As for Ocarina of Time 3D, I'm not sure how you can call it a lazy port. It was literally rebuilt from the ground up for the 3DS. New models, new textures and a few new features. Master Quest has been changed to mirror the world and cause Link to take 2x damage, to make it even more of a challenge. Your inventory can be personally managed for more convenient use, you no longer need to access menus to look at your map and even the boots were changed to items you can put on item buttons for better ease of use. Boss Rush was added for players that want it and even hints were added by way of Shieka Stones, for players that get stuck. Are you going to try telling me none of that, in any way, adds to the experience?

Whether you value different things than I do is irrelevant. Whether you or I believe they're worth the price is irrelevant. What is relevant is the work and effort put into the two Zelda titles. A lazy port would be simply upscaling the visuals, reprogramming the game to work for the system it's being ported to, and left alone just like that. You can value different things and that's fine. That's not what I'm trying to tell you that you're wrong about. What I'm saying is that you are wrong in saying that OoT3D and WWHD were lazily done, like it's a fact. If you don't believe they're amazing and you don't believe the added features add to your personal experience, that's fine. That's what you believe. But yours isn't the only opinion. Whether you believe they're amazing remakes or not so amazing, you cannot objectively claim that they're no more than lazy ports.

 

[Fox12]

I enjoy good HD remakes. I never would have found ICO if it hadn't been re-released in glorious HD. Re-releasrs allow old games to fall into the hands of younger gamers. Just look t KH, which actually added things.

As much as I hate to defend HALO, it was a great remake that honored fans. It allowed you to toggle classic and modern graphics and added features. HD remakes are usually great.

 

[Snotnarok]

How am I wrong with me calling the game lazy? I feel they were lazy because what they did was use original development textures and midis, they used unchanged original GCN models, added a lighting engine, tweaked some settings...how does that add to the experience? How does any of that make it more impacting on your experience in this game?
I'm wrong because I value different things in a game?
I already said they made a competent port, but that's about it. The value has a lot to do with it as if it's not worth rebuying as the original holds up just in telling the story, and the new one adds nothing new then it's not worth seeking.

This is where I say you're wrong: I never said Nintendo made lazy ports/remakes. I said the two Zelda games were lazy, and I stated more than once that Nintendo had some amazing remakes.

First order of business: When I said that you're saying Nintendo put no effort into their remakes, I was referring specifically to the two Zelda titles we've been discussing. I was unclear earlier and for that, I apologize. And now:

For Wind Waker HD, you're not completely wrong, but not completely correct. The music for WWHD has been remastered. It's not fully orchestrated or anything fancy, but the music is composed of higher quality instrument samples. They even added new instrumental tracks. They redrew the UI and the altered the controls in a way to take full advantage of the GamePad. This makes tasks easier to perform and reduces the time spent changing out equipment or going into your menu to view the map(s), so you can keep up the momentum. A new sail was added to as an option the player can use to drastically reduce the time they spent sailing so they can faster get to where they want to go. The Triforce quest was altered to become much less of a slog, so you don't get so bored and discouraged from finishing the game. Are you really going to tell me this doesn't, at all, add to the experience?

As for Ocarina of Time 3D, I'm not sure how you can call it a lazy port. It was literally rebuilt from the ground up for the 3DS. New models, new textures and a few new features. Master Quest has been changed to mirror the world and cause Link to take 2x damage, to make it even more of a challenge. Your inventory can be personally managed for more convenient use, you no longer need to access menus to look at your map and even the boots were changed to items you can put on item buttons for better ease of use. Boss Rush was added for players that want it and even hints were added by way of Shieka Stones, for players that get stuck. Are you going to try telling me none of that, in any way, adds to the experience?

Whether you value different things than I do is irrelevant. Whether you or I believe they're worth the price is irrelevant. What is relevant is the work and effort put into the two Zelda titles. A lazy port would be simply upscaling the visuals, reprogramming the game to work for the system it's being ported to, and left alone just like that. You can value different things and that's fine. That's not what I'm trying to tell you that you're wrong about. What I'm saying is that you are wrong in saying that OoT3D and WWHD were lazily done, like it's a fact. If you don't believe they're amazing and you don't believe the added features add to your personal experience, that's fine. That's what you believe. But yours isn't the only opinion. Whether you believe they're amazing remakes or not so amazing, you cannot objectively claim that they're no more than lazy ports.

I never said my opinion is the only one, I've explicit stated if you feel the game is worth it then awesome, you on the other hand are condescendingly telling me my thoughts on the games are wrong. why ,oh why can't you let me think what I want about this? You started this argument and you've challenged me and are defending a pair of touch ups of games that I will never buy. I thought it was a discussion but this is apparently a lecture on why my opinion has no weight when it comes to Zelda games. I'm not writing an article denouncing them, I'm saying they're lazy remasters on a forum where we discuss things, not where you tell me my thoughts are wrong. This isn't a lightswitch, it's not black and white, I gave my reasons, you gave yours, I see what you mean, you tell me I'm wrong, see where this is falling apart?

I don't think enough was put into it, I think the games are lazy, end of story. You're not going to convince me otherwise I've played them both, in person, full versions I've not just formed this opinion off a few photos and went dur it's a bad touch up of a game. They are barebones efforts, competent touch ups that function and look pretty but don't offer anything special they're not bad, they're lazy, I expect better from nintendo from other remakes they've done far better with.

Edit-
No I don't think the minor tweaks add to the game, because that's what they are, tweaks, if it was that AND they added in the cut dungeons yes it'd be a nice effort! As I said twice already.
I played the remasters, I watched Let's Plays, I'm sorry this seems to hurt your feelings but that is not enough, to me. If that's good enough for you, then that's awesome. I don't know how much I can stress this point enough as you seem to think I'm forcing my opinion on you when I have no intention of that. I'm explaining my reasoning as you've for some reason challenged it.

They did that with Deus Ex, they charged 5 bucks if you already owned the game, had this been a budget release I'd say it was a fitting effort for the money, but they didn't and it isn't. They knew what they did and charged for it, they were fixing complaints the fans had and while many agree it should have been free, 5 bucks wasn't bad, they weren't charging 50 for it.
------

I've stated my reasons why and if you disagree fine, but I think it's time you lay off the pressure because I frankly don't care to be talked to when you're defending this with a fanboy shield and I've been pretty polite here, because again, I'm 'answering' why I feel it isn't worth it since you posed this to me. I'm not trying to convince you, at least hoping you'd understand, but you don't so oh well.

You like the games, that's great, I don't, get over it.

 

[aozgolo]

I can't hate on HD Releases for games, I mean in truth there's several game collections I've played for the first time because they are all packaged together in a HD release (Jak and Daxter for one) and yes I went out of my way to buy Ico & Shadow of the Colossus HD despite owning both for PS2, fully knowing that it was just an HD upscaling (with a few minor behind the scene videos).

I can understand if someone can't justify buying them, but in my mind it's basically the difference between buying a game on DVD or Blu-ray. Sure it's the exact same game/movie and one is more costlier, and maybe I do already own the SD version, but let's just say I'm in a bit of a collector's mood and want to experience the game in the best way possible on my HDTV... lo and behold I can do that.

I have no issues with HD re-releases, I actually wish more games would get it (Final Fantasy XII please!)

 

[Exius Xavarus]

I never said my opinion is the only one, I've explicit stated if you feel the game is worth it then awesome, you on the other hand are condescendingly telling me my thoughts on the games are wrong. why ,oh why can't you let me think what I want about this? You started this argument and you've challenged me and are defending a pair of touch ups of games that I will never buy. I thought it was a discussion but this is apparently a lecture on why my opinion has no weight when it comes to Zelda games. I'm not writing an article denouncing them, I'm saying they're lazy remasters on a forum where we discuss things, not where you tell me my thoughts are wrong. This isn't a lightswitch, it's not black and white, I gave my reasons, you gave yours, I see what you mean, you tell me I'm wrong, see where this is falling apart?

I don't think enough was put into it, I think the games are lazy, end of story. You're not going to convince me otherwise I've played them both, in person, full versions I've not just formed this opinion off a few photos and went dur it's a bad touch up of a game. They are barebones efforts, competent touch ups that function and look pretty but don't offer anything special they're not bad, they're lazy, I expect better from nintendo from other remakes they've done far better with.

Edit-
No I don't think the minor tweaks add to the game, because that's what they are, tweaks, if it was that AND they added in the cut dungeons yes it'd be a nice effort! As I said twice already.
I played the remasters, I watched Let's Plays, I'm sorry this seems to hurt your feelings but that is not enough, to me. If that's good enough for you, then that's awesome. I don't know how much I can stress this point enough as you seem to think I'm forcing my opinion on you when I have no intention of that. I'm explaining my reasoning as you've for some reason challenged it.

They did that with Deus Ex, they charged 5 bucks if you already owned the game, had this been a budget release I'd say it was a fitting effort for the money, but they didn't and it isn't. They knew what they did and charged for it, they were fixing complaints the fans had and while many agree it should have been free, 5 bucks wasn't bad, they weren't charging 50 for it.
------

I've stated my reasons why and if you disagree fine, but I think it's time you lay off the pressure because I frankly don't care to be talked to when you're defending this with a fanboy shield and I've been pretty polite here, because again, I'm 'answering' why I feel it isn't worth it since you posed this to me. I'm not trying to convince you, at least hoping you'd understand, but you don't so oh well.

You like the games, that's great, I don't, get over it.

See? You're doing it again. You're telling me that I'm arguing the worth of the game to us. Defending the game like a rabid fanboy. I am, in truth, not at all defending the game's worth. I'm not telling you your feelings are wrong, at all; that's not for me to decide. You weren't telling me that you think they're lazy, you were telling me they ARE lazy.

There's a difference in telling me how you perceive something and what that something actually is. This isn't a matter of whether you or I like the games or think they're worth the price or effort put into them. As long as you continue to try and come at me from that angle, you and I may as well be having an entirely different discussion with each other, at the same time.

I never came at you with my opinion. Beliefs and feelings have no place in discussion upon facts. If you believe they're lazy, that's fine and that's what you think. But if you're going to argue that, don't tell it to me like it was a matter of fact.

I'm just going to say we agree to disagree. Our time spent on each other has been proven fruitless. If you'll agree, I would rather we simply shake hands and walk away.