Support NeoGAF

[Majormaxxx]

They should cost double. Once for the original dev cost and once more for the remake.

 

[ANDS]

Pretty wild question. I doubt anyone watching Gus Van Sant's PSYCHO was expecting to get a free ticket because they had seen it before.

Folks seem to be valuing the idea development more than the actual work to build a game. RE4R is a AAA game with a AAA budget (relative to CAPCOM). That they were able to skip the pre-production phase (or whatever the brainstorming phase in game development is called) doesn't really matter.

. . . now if this is also including remasters then no, those absolutely shouldn't cost full price I don't care how good the new models or textures look (looking your way TLOU. . .err excuse me "TLOU: Chapter I" - bleach).

 

[daffyduck]

They should cost double. Once for the original dev cost and once more for the remake.

 

[Gambit2483]

They should cost double. Once for the original dev cost and once more for the remake.

 

[BootsLoader]

If they remade MG1... But that would have to be a true remake, in the fashion of the Solid series..

You’re right my dude. I hope they really do!

 

[Spyxos]

If they remade MG1... But that would have to be a true remake, in the fashion of the Solid series..

Mgs 1 remake, that would be a dream. According to the leaks, something should come soon.

 

[daffyduck]

I meant the original, but an mgs1 remake would be ok too.

 

[ZehDon]

That’s the whole problem I think with this discussion. Is they are so much more than just remakes, that I think using the word remake doesn’t illustrate what they are/ the work done on them...

Personally, I think it's the other way around: REmake, REmake2, Dead Space - these are what remakes should be. They are what the word means.

TLOUP1? Dark Souls? Remasters - and they should be called such. They're called a "remake" only because Sony called them "remakes", and they call them that because they want to charge AUD$125.00 for PlayStation 3 games with a fresh coat of paint. Forcing everyone else to call their remakes something else so companies like Sony can continue to fleece their players doesn't feel like the right solution to me.

 

[DevilHunterX0]

Too specific...and you're dreaming if you think anyone's selling anything for less than $40 anymore. But yeah, in a perfect world maybe..

Hence, "in a perfect world"

 

[Happosai]

No. But my wife wants RE4...so full price it is. I always give things like this a few years to drop in price before purchasing otherwise. Unless it's Nintendo where that could be a long wait

 

[Zekra Dezivad]

I voted yes, because majority of the remakes (at least the ones I've been interested in) have all been worth it IMO.

I say it depends on the content included, assuming extra content, and the time between versions.

So far, I've had absolutely no problem with remake pricing until The Last of Us. Because as much as I love the game... the OG, a remaster, and a remake in less than a decade is ridiculous, lol.

Time is subjective. Resident Evil and Metal Gear Solid both received a remake in just 6 years, or DQ5 that received two remakes in just 4 years. Every case has its own history. Can't find business ridiculous, we should just accept that not everything on the market is designed to appeal to us.

 

[Comandr]

Here's an idea... Just...

Don't pay full price.

 

[In Cold Blood]

If it's something like we saw with Dead Space then yes. If it's like we saw with the Last of Us, being a minimal graphical upgrade, and so close to the original one then no.

 

[Justin9mm]

Generally yes!

If it is a proper from the ground up remake with time and money spent in development, they should be able to charge but depends on the game too. The game has to be a successful classic and actually be good. Not some cash grab bullshit.

 

[MiguelItUp]

Time is subjective. Resident Evil and Metal Gear Solid both received a remake in just 6 years, or DQ5 that received two remakes in just 4 years. Every case has its own history. Can't find business ridiculous, we should just accept that not everything on the market is designed to appeal to us.

It IS subjective, but it doesn't make it any less ridiculous, at least to some. I mean, yeah, that is also very true. Regardless of any opinion, or topic regarding anything, that's basically what it all boils down to, lol.

 

[K2D]

Yes, with a complimentary deduction

similarly to what you paid for the earlier game. I.e if you have a day one edition/pre order you get the "remake" remaster for $10 or free. If you bought the og game for 80% off you get a 20% discount off the full price.

 

[xrnzaaas]

If they're proper remakes and not remasters under a different name (like TLoU1), then yes.

 

[Bond007]

REMAKE- yes.
Remaster- no

 

[ResilientBanana]

Remake, maybe. Definitive Editions, fuck no.

 

[Thick Thighs Save Lives]

No remake is worth €80. As for remasters, I'll go as high as €40 if it contains all the previously released DLC, etc.

 

[ShadyAcshuns]

I hate to be the one to say this, but the truth isn't exactly something people speak freely about: only fools blindly pay the asking price on day one for random games. It's one thing to pay a lot for something a fan has been anticipating for a long time, but another to just buy a bunch of day one games that you might not finish, and when you do they're a fraction of the day one price.

I guess what I'm saying is this: only a select few buy the majority of games on day one, while the rest of us wait for a sale. While we appreciate the early adopters for doing it, most of us would rather save money whenever possible.