/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.1205325]

What does /vr/ think of video game remakes?

I never quite get why so many people love them. So what if the graphics aren't up to date? In ten years these new one'll probably be sub-par anyway..

[Anonymous No.1205338]

I prefer demakes honestly.

[Anonymous No.1205341]

I think people like them because its a rerelease of a game they might not otherwise have

[Anonymous No.1205342]

2d graphics doesn't age at all if it's at least 640x480.

[Anonymous No.1205345]

sometimes they add new features, for example metroid zm updated graphics, but it added more gameplay as well as new gameplay mechanics not present in the original. tbh it really just comes off like metroid + super but whatever

[Anonymous No.1205347]

It really depends on the game. Graphics aren't the only thing updated in several cases.
Sometimes I will prefer one of the later versions, sometimes I prefer the original.

[Anonymous No.1205358]

>>1205338
I for the life of me cannot stand faux-retro games. It just screams "irony", and has no real effort put into it other than "it's ironic because I CHOSE to work with a palette of only 4 colors, despite this game being made for a platform nowhere near as limited".

It'd be much more impressive if this were a Game Boy game, but it's not. Idea guys can not learn assembly and how consoles actually worked. They'd rather learn a programming language that writes itself and pretend they're geniuses instead of actually fighting those limitations head on.

This rule always worked for me: If it looks too cool to be an actual retro game, it's probably a faux-retro game. If the game looks like it sucks, it actually is a retro game.

[Anonymous No.1205365]

>>1205358
>minimalism is lazy

Also, you have no idea what "irony" is.

[Anonymous No.1205367]

>>1205342

[Anonymous No.1205368]

>>1205325
>What does /vr/ think of video game remakes?

I like them for the sole purpose of introducing games to a younger generation that might overlook some games. The Monkey Island 1 & 2 remakes were excellent, and the Wind Waker HD remake is great for kids who are new to the series, but I wouldn't buy it.

Another thing to note is that remakes shouldn't be run on a smaller resolution than the original. I played A Link to the Past on the GBA, but I sold it and got the original because the resolution was so tiny. Kirby: Nightmare in Dreamland was a great remake on the GBA, but the resolution held it back.

Warning: controversial opinion below
The Ocarina of Time remake was a massive disappointment for me, so I sold my 3DS for a Vita. The remake should have been on the Wii U if anything. I really enjoyed playing MGS1 on the Vita. There are times I regret it, but then I remember that the Vita will be hacked eventually, so it's all good. /opinion

[Anonymous No.1205375]

>>1205365
It is. It's "ironic" because they made this game for a PC, which is far more powerful that the Game Boy could hope to be. It's "ironic" because this game looks and sounds like a Game Boy game, but it isn't programmed for the Game Boy.

And I'm sure minimalism is indeed lazy. It takes nothing to take some sprites, scale them down, refine them so that they look human, and only throw 3 colors there.

[Anonymous No.1205383]

>>1205358
Minimalism is lazy? You have no taste.
Also let me add remakes of jap games are great when the original is translated poorly. See: ye olde dragon warrior

[Anonymous No.1205417]

>>1205375
Minimalism is a stylistic choice.

And you STILL don't know what irony is. Protip: Faux-retro games are a stylistic choice probably because the developers like the aesthetic of 8-bit games.

[Anonymous No.1205464]

Really depends on the game. Most times I think they're at least on par with the original, sometimes they surpass them. I can't think of many examples where the remake was significantly worse than the original game, but I'm sure someone will provide some.

[Anonymous No.1205470]

>>1205368
>The remake should have been on the Wii U if anything.

Well I think we can all agree with that. I know Japan is in love with their handhelds because of how their society functions (hour long train rides, etc), but for me I'd rather play the game on my 50" TV than try to squint at a tiny 3" screen and worry about battery life and all that. Either go big or don't go at all.

[Anonymous No.1205482]

>>1205368

A Link to the Past is a port, not a remake.

[Anonymous No.1205492]

Every single remake that I've played was drastically better than the original, even if I already loved it before and replaced any need to go back to them them.

I get the feeling the only people who truly hate remakes are dolts who think games cannot be good at all unless they're old.

[Anonymous No.1205498]

>>1205325
If done right, they're a good way to both preserve and maybe even expand on a classic. For examples on how to do it right, see Resident Evil REmake.

[Anonymous No.1206996]

I don't like them. To properly appriciate any work you need to experience it in as genuine a form as possible else you're not appriciating it for what it is but rather for what the remake is.

Point is: you can't say Game X is a good game because you've played Game X: Reloaded. Your opinion is cunts because you've never played Game X, ya poofter.

I don't like faithful remakes much either for that matter, because I beleive that effort spent remaking old games could be better spent making sequels to those games or new games. Imagine if instead of remaking Sonic 1 or CD for modern systems that exact same game engine was used to make entirely new levels. Would that not be better than playing the same game but now in widescreen?

[Anonymous No.1207005]

Some are kind of cool. What's so bad about having an alternate version of a game? It doesn't ruin the original.

[Anonymous No.1207073]

>>1205358
>>1205375
So you don't like sentimental homages to games past? That's not ironic!
You are the worst poster.

[Anonymous No.1207297]

If I wanted to play a typing-based adventure, I'd pick up an Infocom title.

Sierra games are better with the newer interface

[Anonymous No.1207302]

>>1205342
>2d graphics doesn't age at all if it's at least 640x480.

They age fine nigger. Just more difficult to display on a "modern" shitty LCD. That's a display problem, not a game problem.

[Anonymous No.1207421]

>>1207302
"Doesn't age" is a compliment when coming from the VIDEO GAMES AGE crew. That something ages means IT LOOKS LIKE LITERAL SHIT, doesn't age means it's still playable for them.

[Anonymous No.1207446]

>>1207073

Not the same guy but I kinda see his point. For me, this new games that try older art styles just dont feel right. That old pixel art style looked nice because they were actually trying to work their best with what they had at the moment, I wont say it's lazy, IMO the correct word should be shallow, even if they can match the style, the magic is just not there.

As for remakes, I kinda enjoy them when they actually add some new stuff or seriously improve the gameplay. The Monkey Island remakes were not that good on that aspect, because they were exactly the same old games, It's almost a walk in the park if you already played them. On the other hand, games like Leisure Suit Larry Reloaded are amazing as remakes, because they actually added new stuff and changed some puzzles for the old players.

[Anonymous No.1207705]

>>1205358
I'm 100% with you, and it's the biggest problem I have with the indie community. It's remarkable how similar the indie video game scene has become to the indie rock scene. People wearing "lol so retro xD" graphics like fashion accessories so they can sell their shitty uninspired game to their "omg so nerdy :O" hipster friends. No game that goes out of its way to look "retro" is worth a shit, they are cancer that is killing this industry just as much as cookie-cutter AAA titles. Fuck that shit.

[Anonymous No.1207706]

>>1207705
All those buzzwords in one post...

[Anonymous No.1207707]

>>1207706
How about you try and construct an argument instead of trying to dismiss any points I may have had because a particular word or words that I used happens to fit your definition of a buzzword? Or do you even have the critical thinking skills to comprehend and address my point? Stop shitposting you fucking heathen and actually try and have some discussion onf this fuck-awful board for once.

[Anonymous No.1207710]

>>1207707

You didn't really make a point, though. Just a bunch of buzzwords, misconceptions, and generalizations. Just because you typed a paragraph doesn't mean it's a good post.

[Anonymous No.1207719]

>>1207710
Let me repeat my point for you since you're too fucking stupid to understand anything if it's written in a way that pisses you off:

Indie games with retro aesthetics are lazy and contribute little, if anything, to the industry. When games that looked like that came out on older systems, it was because they were working within the confines of the limitations of those systems and oftentimes pushing them to their limits. When your average hipster fuck decides to make an unispired Zelda clone and slaps lazy 8-bit graphics on it to appeal to other hipster fucks, it shouldn't be commended, it should be discouraged. It is this complete and utter lack of originality and hundreds upon hundreds of "retro" indie games that is polluting the market, just as cookie cutter bands with no soul and lo-fi production values for the sake of appearing more "indie" are killing (or have already killed, depending on who you ask) indie music.

Did that read any better for you, sherlock?

[Anonymous No.1207721]

>>1207719

That post isn't any better because it's the same thing without the buzzwords. I didn't just say your post was shitty because of buzzwords in that last post.

And maybe you want to calm down first.

[Anonymous No.1207724]

>>1207721

just because of buzzwords*

[Anonymous No.1207723]

>>1207721
How about you address my points and then maybe we can have a discussion, instead of you droning on about how perceived buzzwords piss you off?

[Anonymous No.1207725]

>>1207723

Why should I bother with someone who makes such broad generalizations on games that he hasn't even played?

Like, how does La Mulana fit anything you just said, aside from the retro aesthetic? Clearly you've played every faux-retro indie game, so you know exactly what's "wrong"

Also see >>1207724

It isn't just about the buzzwords. Go read the last post again.

[Anonymous No.1207730]

>>1205358
>If it looks too cool to be an actual retro game, it's probably a faux-retro game. If the game looks like it sucks, it actually is a retro game.
A stupid post like this really should be expected by someone who posts a Jontron image.

[Anonymous No.1207736]

>>1207725
I'm not talking about games like La Mulana or Cave Story, because those games actually have substance and good design. I'm talking about all the games out there that only exist to satisfy the hipster mentality that playing them will make them look nerdier, and have very shallow gameplay with little to offer. Games like Shovel Knight.

[Anonymous No.1207737]

I just played the PSX version of Lunar 2. And it pretty much is how I feel about all these remakes. Worse graphics, worse sound, ugly updated art, and game changes for the worse.

There are a handful of remakes that are about on par with the originals, but I can't think of any off the top of my head that I think are over all better.

[Anonymous No.1207741]

I dont mind them. When done right. But usually they are fucking garbage.
>Only remake games you can genuinely improve
>Slapping a smudgy "HD REMAKE" on a rom,and calling it new. should be punishable by death
>You should be able to play the original, as well as the new version.

[Anonymous No.1207747]

>>1207736
Move that goal post some more.

Also, Cave Story isn't "faux-retro". It just has pixelated graphics, though I'm not surprised you're someone who thinks that "pixels = retro". La Mulana, on the other hand, was crafted specifically to look like an MSX game.

[Anonymous No.1207752]

I like them if they are good.

[Anonymous No.1207783]

Is this the best remake?

[Anonymous No.1207789]

Unless it's a really early PC game or one of those really early 3d games that were great at the time but practically unplayable now I don't like them. Work on something new instead of giving us what we already have.

[Anonymous No.1207791]

>>1207730
I'm sorry, I was talking about newer games released recently. According to indie game makers, this is what NES games look and sound like.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Foxoybx4g0

But Homebrew NES games made in the same year look like this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEvl8rBjptc

I didn't mean that old games were terrible, in fact, many of them are amazing because of what those Japanese programmers could do with a 1.79 MHz computer with only 2KB of RAM.

[Anonymous No.1207823]

>>1207791

You do realize Retro City Rampage is nearly 10 years old and started as Grandtheftendo, a GTA3 demake that ran on actual NES hardware, right? He eventually scrapped the project and turned it into Retro City Rampage. And after playing the NES build and the finished PC version, I'm glad he did. PC version doesn't run like shit.

And people don't mimic shit like NES slowdown because no one wants that shit in the first place.

[Anonymous No.1207836]

>>1207823
It ran like shit because it wasn't "hand written" in assembly like most games, he used a high level assembler to do that. It's theoretically possible to make a slowdown free NES game, but it was never done for various reasons; optimizing code takes a long time, and there'd be zero financial gain.

He initially shifted development to the PC so that he could use that as a reference point and port things over when they were ready to save time, but eventually stuck with the PC version only.

[Anonymous No.1207849]

>>1207791
>Mega Man.... all those types of games
This is how you can tell this guy isn't actually a "big retro gaymurr"

[Anonymous No.1207854]

>>1207791
You're clueless.

Along with the other stuff the above anon mentioned, the developer even made a working version of the game within actual NES hardware specs.

[Anonymous No.1207851]

>>1207849
what

[Anonymous No.1207860]

>>1207856
No, I'm asking you to explain your post.

[Anonymous No.1207856]

>>1207851
The guy in the first video.

[Anonymous No.1207864]

>>1207860
Oh it's just, I find if people say something like "I'm a huge fan of [x]" and then give one of the easiest examples followed by a pause and then "all those types of [x]" or "and so on" they tend to actually mean "I played a game on the NES one time when I was 5."

[Anonymous No.1207862]

>>1207854
No he did not. It's just a map of the game (and only some of it, at that) with only one car type, one mission, and no music.

[Anonymous No.1207869]

>>1207864

So in other words to show your "HXC NES indie kid cred" and impress you dummies you need to make reference to something that no one has heard of. Got ya.

[Anonymous No.1207875]

>>1207869
What's your problem?

[Anonymous No.1207878]

>>1207869
No.

[Anonymous No.1207893]

>>1207875
Don't have one.

>>1207878
Then do go on.

[Anonymous No.1207895]

>>1207893
Obviously you do, otherwise you wouldn't be making these posts.

[Anonymous No.1207903]

>>1207895
Okay, sure.

[Anonymous No.1207909]

>>1207903
Thanks for confirming.