Can we have a thread about the recent trend in the video game industry of remakes and remasters...

unironically this

God i want this game so bad

The zelda maker thing looks like it has more depth than they showed off because they said shadow link was a modifier that could be attached to a dungeon, so what else could be a modifier?

Remakes are fine, remasters will die next gen anyway

Nah its fine, video games is an entertainment form in its tween years compared to movies/music.

Its perfectly fine to remake games for new generations - let them experience classics in a modern way.

And remember, Nintendo has been doing remakes from the early 90's with Super Mario All Stars.

yes, because 95% of NES era games are nearly umplayable from how outdated they are, and maybe 50% of SNES era too
>Z-ZOOMER
nostalgia is not a replacement for a personality

>remasters will die next gen
you're silly, user
next gen just means they'll have yet another gen to remaster games from
>Witcher 3 remaster, Breath of the Wild remaster, God of War 4 remaster, etc etc etc
while still releasing remasters of games from previous gens that haven't gotten one yet

>nostalgia is not a replacement for a personality
What modern games have "personality"?

Attached: 1545150916340.jpg (1200x1541, 338K)

The video game industry has been plagued with endless sequels since its inception. Remakes/remasters are hardly that different. Also it's not just the video game industry, the film industry is plagued with endless remakes too.

Feels like they're testing the waters.
Zelda maker has a ton of potential

I've been tackling a backlog for five years, so I don't mind too much. Sometimes there are good remakes, sometimes there's not. I'm fine just playing the original version of a game, but if a good remake comes around, I'm okay playing that.

> SNES era too

Eh... I could agree with you on the NES era even though I personally don't have an issue with most NES games I play, but I can't think of any SNES games that were once considered good but are now nearly unplayable.

It all depends. some games benefit from a remake, others do not

Absolute horrendous taste. NES I could see and I grew up with one, but SNES and Genesis era are legit still god-tier consoles

Attached: viper02.jpg (509x371, 34K)

I can't wait to get this, I've never played the original

Attached: 1560368312462.jpg (1080x1080, 223K)

Yup. Visual remakes that don't touch the physics/classic gameplay are fine, better than reboots

I'm afraid that this trend will only deepen the belief that old graphics=bad and new graphics=good

Well heres the thing.
Remakes don't work well in the movie industry because the technology was sound enough to show us what the director wanted. A remake tends to needlessly add CGI and alter the movie and also tend to be made by people who had nothing to do with the original in the first place.
Remakes work well in the video game industry because the old games were bound by technical limitations and couldn't fully realize the teams vision. Remade games also tend to have key figures from the original dev team returning to enhance the original now that technology has advanced considerably.

Remasters on the other hand are the opposite.
Movies benefit greatly from remasters since it only increases the fidelity of the movie while at most adding commentary from the actors and director and the making of the film. This also brings classic movies to the attention of a new generation.
Video games tend to pretty much get nothing from remasters. Yes the game is upscaled from a previous resolution but with the original so readily available for less of a price you would be hard pressed to purchase a remaster unless it was something that goes for hundreds of dollars. A newer generation couldn't give a fuck about what you liked back before graphics got as good as the 360 and PS3 era of games.

Fuck you, it's cute

>Remakes don't work well in the movie industry because the technology was sound enough to show us what the director wanted.
>Remakes work well in the video game industry because the old games were bound by technical limitations and couldn't fully realize the teams vision.
I don't see how movies and vidya are different in this regard. Almost all forms of media or art are bound by technical limitations

that is one incredible steelbook

This is hard to say since you clearly put a lot of effort into this post but pretty much everything you said is wrong.

I've played the GBC version a lot, but the QoL changes really make me interested in the remake.

i don't mind a remake if the original game is extremely buggy and/or outdated by today's standards.
though most of the time nowadays, the remake is based on a game that plays just fine, and only really adds a couple of QoL improvements.

Generally bad.
But as for Link's Awakening specifically, it is the best Zelda game and legitimately deserved a remake. It also, presumably, was just a project to keep the Zelda team busy while the higher ups planned out Zelda Switch in pre-production.

Remakes work great in both industries.

People already know they like a thing, so there's less risk involved in developing a remake. Remakes continue to sell and companies will continue to remake games instead of risking millions of dollars on a new IP.

People have believed that forever though. There were graphics whores in the very beginning days of video games.

I don't hate the artstyle itself but I would've rather had a new game with the style than remaking LA like this

fpbp based and redpilled

Attached: 1560464080685.gif (320x384, 280K)

>QoL changes
I don't really see a lot in the remake besides not having to equip the Sword and Shield every time.

I know. But the status of certain games as classics is one of the ways that gets younger players to play older games that they otherwise wouldn't. But if all these old games get remakes, then young gamers will probably think "This will give me the same experience, only better" and not play the actual originals.

That alone is nice. Plus certain things like the power bracelet are passive, there are multiple rupee colors, and bomb arrows off the top of my head.

Remakes are good because they allow people who don't have access to old hardware play the classics which games today are built from.

This is assuming it's a quality remake that doesn't bastardize the original with unnecessary additions and balance changes.

Why not just port the classic instead of entirely remaking it, then?

Yeah that sucks. A friend of mine won't even entertain the idea of playing FF VII now that he's seen the remake footage. Even if it is going to be a completely different experience, it'll take probably at least ten years and another console to finish it.

Why not just rerelease the originals in combo packs with all the older games at a reasonable price? Why waste time and money making a game worse?

Music sounds really good
youtube.com/watch?v=3XlbhzcygDw

seems really charming and brimming with soul

They're definitely running out of ideas.
It's like the film industry nowadays.
A lot of creatively bankrupt fucks everywhere.
But if it's a good game regardless then, hey.
That's fine as long as it doesn't mess with the actual gameplay.

>trend

Attached: 1454912059375.png (400x400, 55K)

blame the market
new ips don't usually do that well

The Starcraft remaster was good, basically the same but updated resolution. REmake was great. When they're done well they're great but the majority can be complete downgrades and might not even work properly

As long as it isn't just a strict graphics overhaul I think they are fine.

Its because they want casino cancer shit
But know that half the audience of gaming,hates it
So they want to have their cake and eat it too

Remakes are fine in concept, but nobody should be charging a full $60 for a remake of a Game Boy game without a lot more content.

Attached: 1129823923_preview_Fnaf_1_teaser_freddy (2).png (417x467, 228K)

>Can we have a thread about the recent trend in the video game industry of remakes and remasters?
>recent trend
And it's still nowhere near as bad as Hollywood.

Attached: she_sees_your_sword.jpg (69x137, 6K)

I have fond memories of renting Link's Awakening from Blockbuster for summer road trips with the family. I loved the game.

I'm excited about the remake too. New, improved music; a fresh, beautiful set of visuals; better controls (I assume -- as there are more buttons to map items to, for example); and new features will certainly make the game worthwhile.

But then, if I were to ever return to the series, say in 20 years' time, it's hard to say at this point which one I'd pick up and play. Could easily go either way. I can't see the two being so different that I'd want to play them back to back; nor do I see one being so much better than the other that I'd much prefer to play that one instead. Both are essentially the same game; but both are charming for different reasons.

I think it's a terrible thing. Every console a company makes should be fully backward compatible with all their consoles before it.

>running out of ideas
I personally think we're in a golden age of video games. This decade has been much better than the 2000s.

>I can't think of any SNES games that were once considered good but are now nearly unplayable
You may have expelled this from your brain, but there are a number of SNES titles that attempted 3d graphics.

The early half of the 2000's was great though. It's only the second half that sucked. And the early 2010's sucked too. So if you're talking about a decade that sucked, it's more like 2005-2015 than 2000-2010 that sucked.

>new ips don't usually do that well
This is really only true when the new IP is competing in an oversaturated genre.

The 6th gen was the golden age. There are still good games being released today, but they come out less often than in the early 2000s.

Why do I keep seeing idiots say that remakes are a "recent" thing? The last 5 SNES games I played were remakes of NES games, and that number is soon to be 6 when I get to megami tensei ii. Remakes have always been here and in no less quantity than they exist now.

If remakes are the sign of a creatively bankrupt industry, then the video game industry has been creatively bankrupt since the beginning.
Need I remind you Link Awakening DX was a remake as well, 20 years ago?

There are honestly less remakes now, since they're remaking shit from 20 years ago like ffvii and links awakening rather than stuff from last gen.

There's something about the music that sounds, I don't know quite how to describe it, weak? The melodies are soft, and at some points it's hard to make them out at all. Like they've tried to make the soundtrack a lot more ambient.

>I personally think we're in a golden age of third person over the shoulder action-shooter games.
ftfy. Even fucking god of war is just a shitty RE4 knockoff now.

My only issue is that Zelda doesn't fucking need it. The Zelda name prints money no matter what so a new game in this style isn't going to do significantly worse or better than a remake. In that sense it feels lazy. I get reviving Crash and Spyro to see if the market is there for example but what purpose does remaking Zelda serve.

Yeah I remember. What about them?

Neither video game developers or TV/film producers are running out of ideas. It's the companies funding projects that demand everything be remakes, because they're financially safer in the short run. What they don't realize is, in the long run, they have no new series to remake. We're already hitting the wall where the public is tired of remakes and they have 5+ years of remakes still in production.

Link's Awakening remake looks fantastic. You fags can say it looks like a mobile game all day, it's full of soul.

Attached: Nice.gif (240x200, 2.6M)

I used to find them stupid until AoE2 DE was announced. Now I'm pretty hype for that.
It's nostalgia bait. This entire board would go nuts over Diablo 2 remake in the same aesthetics if it was announced.

>Why waste time and money making a game worse?

because you can sell it for full price that way and still sell all the classic versions for 5-10 bucks each.
hopefully nintendo adds stuff to the remake. i like what they did with SM64DS

I totally agree. A few Zelda game could be improved. But they only remake the games that are already good, because those are the ones people like. Link's Awakening especially will not work. It was made specifically for the Game Boy hardware. And as such, even good adaptations of the music and graphics won't have the same effect. And from what we've seen so far, we don't even have good adaptations of those things.

It's also pointless because we've gotten three other Zelda games which took their inspiration from (or directly used the game engine of) Link's Awakening. Why remake it again. Oh right...money.

Attached: la la la.gif (500x200, 20K)

DX wasn't a remake you dumb fuck. It's the equivalent of what a remaster is now, except actually moving to a 15 bit color palette from a monochrome palette is a big deal.

>it's full of soul
You don't know what soul is, you complete retrograde.

Modern games are mostly garbage. Remasters/porting older games that people like and are actually good is a non-duh idea.

>except actually moving to a 15 bit color palette from a monochrome palette is a big deal.
Okay well since its a big deal then I really wouldn't consider it the equivalent of what a remaster is now. But sure remake or remaster, my point still stands.

I honestly think they aren't 'that' bad. Unlike movies or TV shows that get rebooted, these give some older games a new audience to check them out on new hardware especially for games older than like 2004

This remake is going to be garbage. The art is shit, the pacing is trash, and once again Nintendo can't help but hamfist their shitty minor characters into new entries or remakes. Why the fuck would you replace the picture mouse guy with Dampe for some shitty dungeon maker? His interactions are what made Link's Awakening a work of art, and now they are fucking gone. Boy I can't wait to see what else they removed. Bet Marin will just warp straight to the fucking walrus and wake him up now when it comes to that point instead of having her follow you and have some nice quirky interactions. Bet you can't steal from the shopkeeper anymore. Watch as the entire trading subquest is wiped completely. And for what purpose? It's $60 too??! Nintendo is off their goddamn rocker.

This remake literally has no soul, and I mean that in the most unironic way. There's no reason for them to be cutting content like that and selling this remake of a GAMEBOY GAME years ago for a full price game. I really love Link's Awakening but I'm definitely passing on this remake.

Attached: 1455589651887.png (1182x791, 1.72M)

The Sinking City is going to bomb user

Name movie remake better than original

its supposed to be a toybox and since you are stuck in a dream it makes a lot of sense. plus this game is heavily designed around nostalgia which for many people this was their first Zelda game. sucks that you cant enjoy it but it was actually a great choice

they literally show link doing the pathing to start steeling you are just a paranoid retard

It's half and half. I agree that there are a lot of really good games coming out lately but it is strongly marred by the whole live service and games being built around p2w, gacha and predatory DLC

Some of them have merit on their own so that's alright, no remasters in that category but some remakes. As an enhanced port, assuming it doesn't take a lot of effort/money then it's a decent way to bring some of the original to a new audience who wouldn't give the old one a try. Besides those cases, it's self indulgent trash made for babies who wants to wallow in nostalgia instead of experiencing something new that might challenge them. The industry in general is obsessed with escapism though so a sequel or even new IP isn't too likely to be better in that regard, but remake/remaster is the worst version of that. Even when it fits in a category above, a new game will always be better.

The main ones I played OTOH were:
>Crash
The originals are better
>Dark Souls
The original is better besides framerate
>Metroid ZM
Different game, same story

Spyro has different physics and a different but still pretty good (mostly) art style, so that seems like it has some merits of its own even if you played the classics, though I haven't so I'm not too sure.

NES you're right, only SMB3 is worth playing

Didn't mean to be so aggressive, my bad. A remake from my perspective is rebuilding the majority of all assets, but DX still uses the same engine and textures.

It's just added color reshading, photos and sea shells. It's still fundamentally the same game.

A new generation of players will experience the best 2D Zelda, so I don't mind.

>You don't know what soul is, you complete retrograde.
You don't know what soul is either.

I like it, because I prefer good old game to new bad game

>new ips don't usually do that well
It just depends on how much marketing/hype they get and what their parent company expects. Many new IPs do great. They'll sell 1 million or more. The problem is, their parent company compares that to their highest selling games. Like fucking SquareEnix.

Companies with realistic expectations keep making more games. Like Vanillaware. Their games started off selling only 400k. Now they sell 1.5 million. Because they built a brand.

Attached: 1405472801617.jpg (872x1000, 618K)

A chibi art style with a magnifying glass filter is soul? I used to wish for more 2D Zelda's, now I wish they didn't bother.

>yes, because 95% of NES era games are nearly umplayable from how outdated they are
95% of games on any platform are bad. Including the current platforms. This isn't because they became "outdated" but because they were bad from the start. There's still 100+ NES games that are worth playing today. But that's out of some 5,000 NES/Famicom games total.

>new ips don't usually do that well
Uh, no? New IPs that are actually good do very well

I didn't grow up with shit, and the actual good NES games hold up perfectly fine as long as you're not some participation trophy spoiled bitch. Of course there are a lot of trash games but that goes for most consoles. The most recent ones I played were Ninja Gaiden and Super Mario Bros 3, both among the best in their genres. The Legend of Zelda has 17 games after it in the franchise, and none of them have done exploration as well as it (BOTW came close, admittedly).

The art style isn't chibi with magnifying glass filter you uncultured weeaboo. It's tilt-shift photography style. Fucking look it up.

>Do you like this? Do you see it as a good thing or do you see it as devs running out of original, creative ideas?

I liked it at first but honestly, even I'm getting a little sick of it. They've remade or are currently remaking just about every classic game ever at this point except for maybe Banjo-Kazooie and a few others. They'll eventually run out of games to remake and have to start putting in some creative effort again.

I really don't care what it is, it still doesn't look that great. The backgrounds look kind of alright, but the character models are plain fucking trash. The camera is more akin to ALBW, but it's way too close to Link.

There is literally nothing wrong with remaking GOOD games like Resident Evil or Final Fantasy. Who gives a crap about Zelda though?

i dont mind it that much. im not interested in LA but nintendo is still making decent new games in between the remakes

If you're looking to trigger someone, start a thread about Thanos snapping Pokemon.

>The Legend of Zelda has 17 games after it in the franchise, and none of them have done exploration as well as it (BOTW came close, admittedly).

Thisx although I'd put BotW on the same level as LoZ personally. WW also had the right idea for an exploration-based Zelda but totally botched the execution.

I like it because it gives me a chance too play games that i missed out on during my childhood for not having enough money

i would have preferred that they used the setting of links awakening but remade it with the wind waker engine since breath of the wild was such a shit game

It's a terrible thing, especially for 2D Zelda. Aonuma is such a fucking hack that he thinks conventional Zelda involves just reskinning old games.

That's the worst false dilemma I've ever seen.

To be clear, I wasn't referring to Nintendo so much as the industry in general. I think Nintendo is fine for their part since they're working on new sequels and even new IPs.

I just take care of that with emulation.

How can you say that the camera here
is too close to link? You actually see more than you would've on the GB screen? Did you only view interiors, or something?

Oh, and you can actually see more onscreen in this remake than you can in ALBW -- 4 extra "squares" vertically, and 2 extra horizontally. You have a weird bias that doesn't even line up with your argument.

most anons would disagree with soul posting but I usually prefer the new graphics over old once in games. emulation can´t help with that

>did you only view interiors
Why are you creating an argument, if you've just answered it yourself?

>Aonuma is such a fucking hack that he thinks conventional Zelda involves just reskinning old games.

Except Aonuma is absolutely right, you faggot. What people consider the "conventional" Zelda formula is stale as fuck now and the only way to keep it alive at this point is by just remaking the old ones that people have nostalgia for. It's time to move the fuck on.

I like old and new. There's just something about older, 2D graphics. I even have a liking for Playstation era 3D visuals even if they're mostly bad. But for the case of LA, I like the old look and the new look.

I like 2d as well. ps1, ps2 and gamecube however is a bit hard for me to except these days.

It happens a lot with remakes.
The original's OST is very deliberate and is crafted with the game and the system it's running on in mind.
The remake's is a riff off of the original's, it's different for the sake of being different. It lacks natural limitations so it creates artificial ones.
I honestly can't think of a single remade OST that's legitimately better than the original's as a whole. You have ones that are serviceable, you can sometimes point to good individual tracks, but remade OSTs are inevitably fundamentally inferior because they were crafted in a different context.

Well then why the fuck should it matter if the screen is too close to Link inside, since the whole screen is viewable anyway? The most important point for view distance is outside, since the screens are no longer self-contained.

I'm just surprised that your argument is so fucking stupid.

This. 6th gen was basically a 5th gen with more possibility and creativity due to better hardware and better understanding of the fundamentals of 3D. As time went on, 3D games got more refined at the cost of being formulaic, which is definitely visible throughout the 7th and the early half of the 8th gen. Now with crowdfunding and indie studios breaking out into making successful 3D games as well as 2D (which in turn has brought back many sub-genres back from the dead), I have hope for future generations of consoles and their libraries.

>ps1
Okay, I can understand this.

>ps2 and gamecube

This, however, I can not. Visually, many games still look great. The only problem I have is when I play them on modern TV. It seems especially bad with older PS2 games, they just look unappealing on modern TVs.

You're absolutely retarded. Did you even play ALBW? They could have easily taken that and put it in a new setting with new mechanics. They didn't need to literally reskin an old Gameboy game. Link's Awakening itself was very distinct from LttP despite carrying over a number of its mechanics. That's what good sequels are supposed to do, still feel like they're from the same franchise while having their own unique qualities that give it its own identity. If Aonuma actually let his developers make a new 2D Zelda, they would. It would be easy. The well has not even remotely run dry.

It's shit and I hate it.

There's nothing good about remakes and remasters. A port is one thing, it can be nice to port an original game to a more modern system for a resurgence in active players or an addition of online multiplayer to old titles that could only be played locally, but actually remaking things is pointless from a consumer standpoint. It's only done because it's cheaper and easier than making something entirely original and you can coast off the established IP's name recognition when you sell it.

It depends on how old and outdated the original is. In this case the original is extremely outdated so it's a great thing to do. Remastering a game that came out last gen is fucked up.

>Did you even play ALBW?

Did you, retard? ALBW isn't that conventional at all and half the fanbase complained about the new item system. This item gating bullshit needs to stay in Metroidvania where it belongs, we don't need two IPs with the same progression elements and we sure as fuck don't need a "new" Zelda game that rehashes the same formula people were burned out from since Skyward Sword. Fuck that, and fuck you.

it's not as bad as HD remakes that are basically the same except high res

but best are remakes that actually reimagine the originals, for example a link between worlds

Some remakes are really nice, man. Take games like the original Dragon Quest where you had to pick "North, South, East, West" when talking to people because your sprite always faced a single direction. The SNES remake added some nice QoL changes to that and DQ II which just made them more fun to actually play. A lot of remakes are pointless. The Spyro ones, the MediEvil remake looks like it's just for people who don't like old graphics as well. But when you've got remakes like LA which adds a fresh coat of paint and improves the gameplay in some respects, I'd say they're worth it. Maybe not worth 60 bucks, but that's another matter entirely. Then of course there are those remakes which change so much that they're basically different games, like REmake 2.

>some people complained so we should never be creative ever again
>two franchises have a semi-similar feature (despite being completely different in every other regard) so one should just be destroyed
You are legitimately the dumbest faggot on Yea Forums I've seen this week.

Metroid came from Zelda. It was literally combining the platforming of Mario with the item progression of Zelda. And while the item system in ALBW isn't standard for Zelda, it's also not like Metroid.

I would like them to go back to making some 2D Zelda games (that aren't remakes) while doing new things. And we really haven't had a 2D game since 2003. All the games since have just been 3D games with an isometric view. Which I dislike. And why I'm not interested in Link's Awakening remake.

Attached: 1274468182370.jpg (600x476, 191K)

>that rehashes the same formula people were burned out from since Skyward Sword
Gee, did you ever think people were burned out from it because they did nothing interesting with it and stopped making the subitems worth using outside of battle starting from TP onward? This is on top of them making all dungeons in general braindead easy to complete, just compare something from the Oracle games to something in TP or Skyward Sword, it's ridiculously easy and outside of the bow you don't really need to use anything. That's on Nintendo's end, not on players' ends. Even in ALBW you could go in any direction so they couldn't balance anything or do anything interesting because they have to assume you don't have certain items.

The formula isn't the problem and it's superior to BotW's "Don't get anything new or special for most of the game because you got everything unique at the start" problem. Even your guardian powers are on a disgusting time limit which makes them virtually worthless until you're close to finishing the game and own the DLC. The only real joy you get for exploring is to find shrines which are over as quickly as you find them and the occasional quest which usually isn't involved in any impactful way.

The old formula needs better dungeon and world design while also giving reasons to use them in combat (WW was the last one I can recall that did this with the Deku Leaf, the Ice Arrow + Megaton Hammer combo, the grappling hook getting you items from enemies, boomerangs disorienting enemies and bringing them closer to you, etc) on top of increasing the difficulty to stop babying players. The newer formula needs to have more variety, more reasons to explore, it needs to reintroduce sub items to make traversal more fun, it needs to give actual rewards instead of useless rupees/minor crafting items/breakable equips you already have 60 of, and it needs to have actual dungeons that aren't glorified shrines.

I didn't say any of those non-arguments you're greentexting you absolute brainlet. Learn to read or get fucked.

Fine. You know what? That's fair. 2D Zelda has charm and I don't want to see it go, but at the same time, I'm sick and fucking tired of people pretending the old formula hasn't worn out its welcome. If they're going to develop a new 2D Zelda then they're going to need to try new things. The LA remake is for people who can't get their heads out of their nostalgia-riddled asses long enough to appreciate new features, identities and formulas.

>people complained so we should never be creative ever again

Not that guy, but an increasing amount of people have been complaining about Zelda being too formulaic since at least TP. Some probably even earlier. I'm not sure why complaining about a series being stale has anything to do with disallowing developers to not be creative.

Except Skyward Sword unironically had better dungeon design than Twilight Princess, as well as some cleverly designed puzzles, bosses and combat mechanics.

The formula IS the problem. It's one of the biggest reasons SS is lambasted to this day.

have sex

>The formula isn't the problem and it's superior to BotW's "Don't get anything new or special for most of the game because you got everything unique at the start" problem.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with BotW's approach, and I enjoyed it far more than being arbitrarily cucked out of areas for no reason because I didn't have a specific item. There's also far more to explore and do in the game than you're dishonestly giving it credit for.

You absolutely did you dumb faggot.
>half the fanbase complained about the new item system
>This item gating bullshit needs to stay in Metroidvania where it belongs, we don't need two IPs with the same progression elements
Not my fault you don't understand the garbage you're spouting.

The problem is not the fucking formula. The problems are inherent to the games themselves. They've become increasingly linear/handholdy and gimmicky. Every 3D Zelda from WW onwards is inherently polarizing because they all have major fuck-ups. It's not because of item progression, a two act structure, etc. You idiots are incapable of nuance and have no idea what the actual problems are with the franchise at all. You're too in love with these all-encompassing narratives that ignore the actual design of the games themselves. Stop trying to ruin franchises with your bullshit.

Except SS is lambasted due to the ridiculous amount of handholding, the repeated returns to the same areas over and over again with next to no changes, the horrendous swing detection at times (Which may be tied to the standalone Motion Plus and not the Wiimotes with it built in, but I kept spamming diagonal slashes when I wasn't at all), Demise being reused three separate times with only small changes to how the fight is handled, and then the boss rush which requires you to fight it another six times. There's also the Silent Realms and the underwater adventure in the forest which takes an eternity.
I agree with you that SS has some decent dungeons at times, Ancient Cistern and the pirate ship come to mind, but they hold your hand like crazy and you can almost never deviate from their set path or make mistakes. The major problem we have is that they've stopped incorporating multiple subitems into fights and puzzles. You rarely if ever have to use a different subitem once you've gotten that dungeon's one, and the boss is always beaten with that subitem in some way. There's also no inventive ways of finding new areas with the subitems and secrets in general area made braindead easy to find because everything sticks out like a sore thumb.

>and I enjoyed it far more than being arbitrarily cucked out of areas for no reason because I didn't have a specific item
I'm on the opposite end. I'd rather have areas unlock because I found new equipment. Having access to everything means I know from the get-go I will not find anything special that I couldn't find right from the start and it loses that feeling of mystery and exploration. Hell, losing bottles and pieces of hearts for the shrine rewards is something I have a problem with because Korok Seeds and the shrine rewards feel nothing like getting a hidden item. Yes, you will find new biomes and new areas, not disputing that, but it's not the same as the old system, not even close.

>It's not because of item progression

Yes it is. You just said yourself that they've become increasingly linear, which is entirely because of item gating.

Link's Awakening alone is probably one of the most linear Zelda games ever and that's an old one, so even your claim that they somehow became more linear over time is wrong. Nobody enjoys this shit outside of a handful of autists and nostalgianiggers.

Finally someone who actually cares about the design of the games themselves rather than painting the whole franchise with a broad brush. Extremely based.

>Remakes like FF7, RE2
Really cool.
>Remakes like Link's Awakening
Really shitty.

I don't need the combat system to be reinvented and have 8 blurays of uncompressed audio. It's just that Link's Awakening isn't really using the original concepts and design references as a base, it's using the compromises that were reached due to technical limitations at the time.

SS is lambasted for those reasons too, which is why I said ONE of the biggest. Dude, tons of people have bitched and moaned about how formulaic Skyward Sword feels and how linear it all is because of the way its progression consistently roadblocks you throughout the game. In fact, so many people were shitting on the formula by that point that it single-handedly inspired the development process behind BotW.

Remakes and remasters have been going on for almost 20 years; some of the launch games for the GBA were SNES ports. Remakes and remasters are not going away anymore than 4k bluray releases of good movies from the 1960s. The vast majority of games aren't going to get remade, only the ones that were popular.

>You idiots are incapable of nuance and have no idea what the actual problems are with the franchise at all.

I've been saying the same shit as you for years, you self-absorbed idiot. When I say it's the formula I'm talking about how the developers let the formula control them, not the other way around. You could tell that they just started checking shit off and not actually THINKING anymore. The creativity was gone. So I was happy to see something totally new. I'm also okay with going back to something closer to how Zelda was before if they can figure out how to actually make it entertaining rather than just a game made from checklists again.

You realize LoZ, LttP, and OoT all have item gating right?
I do actually think LA's structure is not ideal and is too linear, but that's a far cry from how insanely handholdy and on-rails games like Skyward Sword can be. LA at the very least leaves you be outside of the occasional owl conversation, even if the dungeon order itself is linear. It's a matter of weighing the game's strengths and weaknesses.
The games being too linear doesn't mean the franchise needs to go the exact opposite end and have no structure at all. There's clearly a middle ground. Again, you're incapable of nuance.

>Nobody enjoys this shit outside of a handful of autists and nostalgianiggers.
Yeah that's why Zelda is Nintendo's second biggest long running franchise. Because nobody ever liked it. What?

I used LA as just one example, retard. People have complained about the formula LTTP/OoT established for a long fucking time. Hell, read any of the archived threads here before BotW. I have no idea why you sound surprised by this.

>Dude, tons of people have bitched and moaned about how formulaic Skyward Sword feels and how linear it all is because of the way its progression consistently roadblocks you throughout the game
Again, that's just one of the things that is not a fault of the old system, it's a fault of their implementation and structure using the system. ALttP, the Oracle games, Minish Cap, and LA are examples of games which aren't bitched about despite having the same exact formula. TP and SS are using it in the incorrect way, they are locking items and only the items behind a very very rudimentary puzzle with the item or literally in plain sight, the dungeons don't even involve using anything but the subitem of the dungeon or performing very basic puzzles with the previous dungeon's subitem before getting the current dungeon's one, the subitems themselves are barely even justifiable to use in combat, and the game itself railroads you because it wants to treat you like a complete idiot.

Take OoA for example, you could wander around quite a bit after you got the shovel, and even more if you got the Mystery Seeds. Yes, you are locked to certain landmasses until you get something else or progress a certain way, but it utilized a whole host of items in your fights and travels, it constantly required you to switch items out, it expected you to think about your actions like in Jabu Jabu's Belly, the trading part of the story, or when you have the Tune of Return I think it was called.

ALBW is a step in the wrong direction of giving you everything and the kitchen sink but then forgetting how to balance anything because of it and acting more like a retread of ALttP rather than its own unique game.

Creativity is dead

I don't mind them, I played Spyro recently, never played it before and really enjoyed it.

Except again, it's not the formula that's the issue. You are completely misdiagnosing the problem. If they were following the formula they wouldn't have intentionally made the games more handholdy and gimmicky. Vehicles, tears of light sections, obnoxious companions, enemies hitting for a quarter of a heart, etc. It has nothing to do with having item progression. Yes, item progression can be done poorly, but so can literally anything. It's all about execution. I can think of a ton of open world games that are done poorly.

Lots of people are retards who don't know what they're talking about, especially on here. Do you not know the difference between "nobody likes it" and "some people don't like it"?
>the formula LTTP/OoT established
Oh yeah the first act linear second act non-linear structure is just so tired, that's why only three Zelda games use it.

There are bomb arrows in the GB version too.

>Remakes and remasters have been going on for almost 20 years; some of the launch games for the GBA were SNES ports.
I know. I said that.

>Remakes and remasters are not going away anymore than 4k bluray releases of good movies from the 1960s. The vast majority of games aren't going to get remade, only the ones that were popular.
The problem with this is, we're getting so many remakes and stuff right now, we're actually having a dearth of new content. Aside from the Marvel films, which they're already planning to reboot, we don't have anything really worth remaking.

They keep remaking the original movies that came out in the 1960s-1990s. But in the year 2030, when studios start going "okay, we need to milk to nostalgia of the 2010 kids. What do we remake?" They're going to look around and realize all the best selling movies...were remakes of 1980/1990ss movies and franchise films they've already remade. Of course, they'll probably just remake them again for the third or fourth time. But they won't be running on nostalgia anymore. No one is going to have nostalgia for the live action Aladdin or the remake of Spartacus or whatnot.

Eventually, Hollywood will have to go back to making original films. It just might take two generations for them to accept it.

>Except again, it's not the formula that's the issue. You are completely misdiagnosing the problem.

It's like you didn't even read my post. I made it quite clear that I was talking about the developers letting the formula control them, which is their fault, not the formula's.

>Again, that's just one of the things that is not a fault of the old system

No, it IS the old system. Item gating isn't just about the implementation, it's literally a hallmark trait of the previous formula and it's exactly what people, particularly 3D Zelda fans, have been complaining about. People don't usually complain about the old handhelds because quite a bit of Zelda's fanbase today hasn't even fucking played them. LOOOOOAAADS of posters even here have been clamoring for a more open world approach to Zelda for years before BotW was released. I really don't get all this sudden revisionism.

LA isn't bitched about because of its setting and story. Without those things, I'm almost certain a lot more folks would be complaining about how it kinda goes off the deep end in terms of linearity.

Well it's not like some of the 3D games that used it after OoT were particularly interesting, even Majora's Mask understood that if you have a world with cool shit to do and the game is fun to control then you can literally rehash everything and get away with it. I don't think that Zelda needs saving, I think Twilight Princess and Skyward Sword just failed to take the basic Zelda elements into something else that made them their own like BoTW did and Wind Waker kinda tried to do.

Was there? I completely forgot about them then.

New games are basically remakes anyway. How often do people need a new Watch Dogs or Assassins Creed?

It's all the same shit.

It's weird that video games forgo all other game conventions with sequels. Remakes/remasters are more true to games than what video games have been doing since its inception.
I want some developer to have the balls to turn their series into a single game they continuously fine tune. That's what video games is missing.

Is Saturn emulation still fucked? I'm pretty pumped for the Panzer Dragoon remake, but that's because I remember Saturn emulation being very under developed.

I like it when the remakes are faithful enough. Why reinvent the wheel when there are so many game formulas that worked great?

>and it's exactly what people, particularly 3D Zelda fans, have been complaining about.
Because it's being implemented wrong, how many times do I have to say it? There's nothing inherently wrong with item-gating, it opens up access to new areas you couldn't reach before and new secrets you couldn't find before. You can even provide multiple routes if you feel like it with the formula. The problem is the implementation in the newer games mixed with Aonuma's fetish for treating players like 2 year olds who just learned how to read.

I don't even know what you're arguing for at this point.
Again, if they "let the formula control them" they wouldn't have made the games more handholdy and gimmicky. That was something they did independently of the formula. What your'e really complaining about is the direction Aonuma has taken the franchise.

Every single (non-spinoff) game in the franchise has item gating. Including LoZ and AoL. BotW frontloads a lot of its item progression but still has a few examples here and there.

You are basically advocating to turn Zelda into something other than what it is. Which begs the question, why are you even playing the games in the first place? Why do you want to turn the franchise into a generic open world, something that is far more tired and gets far more complaints nowadays than item gating?

I dont mind if they are well made and reasonably priced. Even better if they include some bonus content.
The cashcrabs that look and run worse than originals should fuck off and people that made them burned on stake.

Not the best thing I hope for, but considering what business tactics companies find hip to do these days, remakes are a lesser evil.

>Because it's being implemented wrong, how many times do I have to say it?

You can repeat it all you want, but you're not reading what I'm saying. All I'm telling you is that people were complaining about the old system itself, not the way it was being implemented. I don't care about debating over which formula/implementation is better because that's highly subjective and VERY highly disputed anyway, and it leads nowhere.

Not him but what argument are you even trying to make? You're being incredibly flimsy.

>Chibi plastic artstyle
>Unsatisfying "It was all a dream none of it was real" story
>$60
I want to finish the game but I have a hard time justifying buying it.

>Again, if they "let the formula control them" they wouldn't have made the games more handholdy and gimmicky.

This is very difficult for you to understand, I see. I thought anyone could understand that that means that they got lazy and just started checking off boxes, but I guess some people have problems with simple English. It doesn't even matter, your fear of bored people causing the franchise to change has already come to pass and you're not changing it by complaining on Yea Forums.

Wow, what a cop-out.

>All I'm telling you is that people were complaining about the old system itself
BECAUSE OF ALL THE STUPID SHIT THEY WERE DOING WITH IT
Holy shit how is this not getting through to your skull? Of course people would complain about it if it was progressively getting worse with how they were doing basic things. They were complaining because of them making dumb decisions and dumbing the system down to retarded degrees therefore taking the fun and thought out of it while putting you on a narrow and easy path each time.

This is like saying "People were complaining the new system is bad for years" and then I tell you "It's because they were constantly reusing the same items, characters, and areas over and over with barely any changes while just adding more Korok seeds" and then you go "But people were complaining about new system for years, you just don't get it."

Mad at the truth.

>You are basically advocating to turn Zelda into something other than what it is

No, I'm just telling you how a considerable portion felt about the series up until BotW's release. Whether you think Zelda still needs item gating or not is for you to decide, although I personally like the new approach more.

Jesus Christ, you can't read.

No, it's not because of what they were doing with it. How do I know that? Because it's literally not what people were complaining about, you fucking retard. Even here on Yea Forums there were tons of people flat-out saying they didn't want the gated item progression of the older titles PERIOD. Posters were even saying Wind Waker was held *back* by the fact that it was gated up until a certain point, namely the Triforce quest.

see You both cloak yourselves in ambiguity and fallacious appeals. One could call you formulaic. Neither of you understand your own arguments and backpedal when you get called out.

You don't even know what you're arguing for. How can a developer be "lazy and just check off boxes" while shoving the franchise full of vehicle gimmicks?

I don't think I'm backpedaling at all, although it's clear everyone in this thread is shouting past each other instead of having a discussion.

>Posters were even saying Wind Waker was held *back* by the fact that it was gated up until a certain point, namely the Triforce quest.
and the Triforce quest itself is implemented poorly. It just stops you to go and grind a bunch of shit out instead of progressing normally. Yes, people have been complaining about being item-gated, but at the same time people have been severely complaining about the dumbing down and linearity which has only been progressively getting worse over the years.

retard

>Developers get complacent. Just check off boxes when designing the game.
>Some of these check boxes are gimmicks when their boxes decide to add gimmicks

It's not that hard.

You went from arguing that item gating is bad, to arguing that some people think item gating is bad. That is 100% backpedaling.

crap like >I don't care about debating over which formula/implementation is better because that's highly subjective and VERY highly disputed anyway, and it leads nowhere.
is veiling yourself in ambiguity.

It's hard to talk to people who don't understand their own arguments.
>if I say "everyone" I can avoid being accountable myself

Nice explanation. I didn't know that occasional shitty mode 7 graphics in a game like FF VI makes the whole game unplayable trash.

So you just don't understand game development then? Okay. You think it was easy for them to implement the boat in Wind Waker?

The Triforce quest is implemented poorly purely because of the rupee grinding and the underutilization of islands you explore over the course of that segment. That's completely different from what we're talking about. Literally nobody complains about the openness of the Triforce quest, which isn't gated at all, and in fact it's what several people wanted for the entire game.

To do that, you would need to completely purge the old system, not just do it differently.

>and the Triforce quest itself is implemented poorly. It just stops you to go and grind a bunch of shit out instead of progressing normally.
I'd argue most of the game is like that. Want to go do the next dungeon? Nope, first the game is gonna stop you and show you a half hour cutscene. Then you gotta go back to WIndfall island and do two stupid fetch quests for NPCs. Okay, now you can go do that dunge...no, wait. You gotta get ice arrows first. Okay no...oh, another cutscene. Okay NOW you can do it!

...just kidding. You have to go pick up an NPC first. And use her the entire dungeon.

Wind Waker (and TP and most Aonuma Zeldas) are just endless filler to pad out the game. This is why I didn't have much animosity towards the Trifroce quest. Because you could do it at your own pace, weren't constantly stopped by cutscenes/filler and could do it in less than an hour.

Attached: 1195623673452.png (182x226, 36K)

>nobody likes this
>well some people think
>nobody
>somebody
>these other people
Just say you. It's you. You want this.

Wind Waker was before they got lazy.

>recent trend
nintendo has been doing this since before you were born lad

I see you can't handle discussions more advanced than 2nd grade playground discussions.

Do I need to go down the list? Do you think it was easy to implement Skyward Sword's motion controls? It was easy to implement Phantom Hourglass's touch controls? Come on now. It was never about laziness, it was about vision/direction. Again, Aonuma.

>You went from arguing that item gating is bad

Quote where I said that. For reference, my first post on this topic is .

>devs running out of original, creatives ideas
Only an absolute moron would say that
developers come and go. Remaking an old game isn't only an easy way to make cash, but also an easy way to train younger developers or new managers.

Sorry, I meant

Just say you clearly didn't participate in any Wind Waker related discussion ever.

We agree that Aonuma is shit, I've been complaining about him for years. But that doesn't change the fact that Aonuma himself and the developers stopped thinking about the actual formula. They can work hard at new gimmicks but not think twice about the majority of the game because "Okay, we'll have the player collect three things, get the Master sword, go through a few more dungeons to collect more things, and then defeat Ganon." For whatever reason, concepts like these are beyond you.

I think remakes are good "filler" content, but should never overwrite or replace the main and new content of a franchise. I think if a game is 20 or so years old, then a remake is justifiable.

Really, it's like a theme park analogy; lets say you have an old, beloved roller coaster. You can either demolish the coaster and build something new in its place (aka letting the game be forgotten, or something similar), or you can renovate it for your next season of guests. Sometimes a renovation can simply be repainting parts of the ride, or replacing old features (what I'd see as a remaster), or you can give it some more extreme makeover such as re-theming the ride or replacing certain elements entirely (what I'd see as a remaster). There's pros and cons to both sides of the coin, but I don't see the harm in it as long as new content is still delivered as well.

Stuff like remakes and remasters should be (and usually is) a way to pad out the franchise between bigger projects.

Attached: TwistedColossusRacing-5bbfc2254cedfd0051d821d1.jpg (3600x2400, 1.17M)

Fuck off, i want my Botw-looking tier "the mysterious murasame castle" remake.

anybody shitting out BOTW can't be shit in my book. Didn't Aonuma supervise it?

I don't mind it. It get's tiring some times but hey, not everyone was born the same day as we. Think about it, Link's Awakening on the Switch is going to be a kids first Zelda

I think it's a fairly good thing. For one thing, a lot of these old games are hard to find, so having a new, shiny version is pretty cool. To add to that, a lot of modern kids never got to play these games. Remakes give them a chance to play them on a more modern system with more polish. It's also great if you're a parent that played the original. You can play with your kid and show him/her the ropes.

I also don't think that developers are out of ideas. I just think that the people that control the money for development only allow them to work with genres and ideas that have already proven profitable. They're risk adverse, and honestly who can blame them? One real bomb in this industry these days can put an entire company out of business.

I never got to play most of these remakes as a kid and I don't think I'd enjoy them today as much without the upgrade, so I see it as a plus

>Yes, people have been complaining about being item-gated, but at the same time people have been severely complaining about the dumbing down and linearity

But the linearity is literally because of the item-gating. Now, you can weasel your way around this and claim they could do it in a not-purely linear way by having multiple routes, but that's still pretty linear compared to the open adventure idea we've been wanting.

>no og zelda remake
What are they saving it for?

full 3d reimagining

>recent trend
is everyone on this board 15 years old

Attached: luluco)-(.jpg (400x545, 39K)

I think this new Link's Awakening style is the only one which could really do the original justice. I can't see a BotW-style remake working well.

I get sick of people who get so up their own ass they don't understand the underpinnings of their own arguments. Even if I do absolutely nothing to convince you ITT I'll still give you pause the next time you get into an argument like this.

Or, what, were you just arguing about Yea Forums's popular opinion and you had no dog in this race yourself?

All you're proving to me is that you don't know what the formula actually is. We should have established that from the get go. There are a metric shitton of games that have you collecting macguffins in 2-3 acts, that is basic shit. Even some movies follow that structure. And there are plenty of conventional Zelda titles that don't, including Link's Awakening which does not have a clear first and second half. What makes the "Zelda formula" is the actual gameplay of finding items in order to access dungeons to find items to access dungeons. Knowing that, it's hard to argue that the developers have "stopped thinking about it" when they've gone out of their way to make their games more and more handholdy and gimmicky. Skyward Sword arguably has three acts if you include the dragon trials, not two. Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Tracks are both structured around unlocking four regions each. To say they're just mindlessly copying LttP's two-act structure is dumb.

>But the linearity is literally because of the item-gating
Every game in the franchise outside of certain spin-offs have item gating.
>the open adventure idea we've been wanting
That you've been wanting. You. Not "people". Argue for your own interests instead of hiding behind others.

Not worth 60 dollars.

>Every game in the franchise outside of certain spin-offs have item gating.

BotW is only gated in terms of getting out of the plateau. Most of the entire game is freely accessible, which is what I'm talking about.

>That you've been wanting.

Sure, that too. I wouldn't be even remotely close to the first person to make that argument, though, so don't act like it isn't common.

I don't have a dog in this race because as I said before, these talking points never go anywhere. I do prefer Breath of the Wild's approach but I also see the merits of both styles.

Just make sequels in the same style as the old games, stop trying to revolutionize/reinvent IPs and you faggots also stop complaining about sequels

Destroy All Humans is a game that will benefit from upgraded physics and mobility but I fear that the game is gonna become too easy with how buffed up Cryto is becoming

Attached: 1559942895457.jpg (448x423, 98K)

Sheeeeit nigga I'd play a Destroy All Humans remake.

yes i hate this RECENT trend of remakes, it's truly only a RECENT thing, definitely

Attached: 5285409.png (866x600, 1.08M)

All-Stars being a collection of Mario remakes doesn't mean they were widespread at the time.

I wish modern remakes had this much quality.

>$60