• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Why are gamers O.K with HD 'remakes' ?

Provided it's decent. ICO/SOTC was pretty good, since SOTC had a lot of technical issues on the PS2. If it's well made then I have no problems with it.
 
General Shank-a-snatch said:
Is there a huge difference between PS2 and PS3 version?

There is no difference. It's not an HD update, it's a PS2 Classic. Basically a straight port. But unlike HD updates, it's cheap. I believe God Hand is $9.99.
 
When they're given the proper care, absolutely.

I just played ICO and Shadow of the Colossus in 1080p with MLAA and a smooth framerate. How could that ever be a bad thing?
 
nincompoop said:
I wonder if these companies can get away with selling "Super HD" editions next gen that run at a full 1080p. Seems like lots of people will be happy to re-buy their entire collections every five years instead of just playing the PC versions/emulating the originals on PC which gives you all of the benefits of the HD "upgrades" and more.
Ehh, emulating PS2 games is still largely a crapshoot. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any cases where PCSX2 is outright better than an official HD re-release.
 
I missed pretty much all of last generation so I am more than fine with all of these remakes coming. While I have been working through older games while I have time (played MGS1-3 for the first time right before 4 came out), I am more than happy to hold out for an HD remake if I know it is coming.

Also there are new people getting into gaming every generation and I would imagine a lot of them never go back. This is a good way for them to get to experience an older series and there is always the hope this will help get a new sequel made.
 
Sometimes we just didn't get enough time to play some great games last gen. Getting a second chance to play them in HD is great. One of teh best ideas this gen. They are also good deals at either $13.33 for Trilogies, up to $20 per game for the double packs... Good deals either way!
 
Wolfgunblood Garopa said:
Sega could keep remaking Bayonetta every year, get rid of the tearing, give her a little more ass jiggle, whatever, and I'd buy it every time.

Only if Kamiya also does associated press tours every time.
 
Orayn said:
Ehh, emulating PS2 games is still largely a crapshoot. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any cases where PCSX2 is outright better than an official HD re-release.
SotC can be run at 60 fps on PCSX2.
 
Why wouldn't we be? Some haven't had the chance to play some of those games, and some are getting sizeable upgrades that even improve on the game itself, like Shadow of the Colossus which run like butt on the PS2 and now runs at a locked framerate on the PS3. I'm really happy with my ICO&SOTC collection purchase, despite owning both games on PS2.

And they're not full price either, ICO&SOTC you're getting for $20 a piece pretty much.

Loxley said:
For the same reason I'm okay with Blu-ray re-releases of movies that I've already seen on DVD; it's an awesome experience and looks 10x better then it ever has (normally, at any rate :P).

This is a great analogy.
 
Kraftwerk said:
I mean, isn't it an obvious way to make money based on peoples nostalgia?

Hey, I know it is none of my business how others spend their money, but this just seems wrong. I see people complaining about DLC, sequels, limited edition bundles. But when it comes to HD remakes 99% of the comments are "OMG THANK YOU BASED GOD".

I myself said the same thing when I saw FFX HD coming to Vita / PS3. Then I said F* you square I already have 2 copies.

Nobody seems to say " Hmm, pay $50 for this HD remake (lol) or get it for $10 on craigslist"
Beyond Good & Evil HD was 10€ for me, not 50. Sly Raccoon Collection was something like 29€ for THREE games. These collections are generally really cheap, especially given the amount of quality gaming you get for said prices.

Why get them? To be able to play the best versions of games I really like. SOTC was almost unplayable on PS2, the HD version runs like a dream compared to it (and looks seriously awesome in HD).
 
H_Prestige said:
There is no ps3 version. It's just the ps2 version emulated. It's exactly like playing it on a ps2 or BC ps3.
Not exactly like it. When playing Godhand through PS2, there's no upscaling, so unless your TV can handle shitty source, you'll get an awful picture. In the case of emulation, you get a free picture scaling, so the game looks smooth even on big TVs - on all TVs, actually.

I'm speaking from my experience of using PS2 with my Bravia 40".
 
Wolfgunblood Garopa said:
Sega could keep remaking Bayonetta every year, get rid of the tearing, give her a little more ass jiggle, whatever, and I'd buy it every time.
Remake it on Ps3...
 
Orayn said:
Ehh, emulating PS2 games is still largely a crapshoot. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any cases where PCSX2 is outright better than an official HD re-release.
Any game that doesn't actually have improvements beyond resolution is better emulated. Not sure about the God of War games, but the Ico remaster is certainly a big enough improvement I'd go for the new version.

Pretty sure stuff like Tomb Raider and Prince of Persia are the exact same as the PS2 games but in 720p, so you could do better with an emulator by running them at 1080p with AA/AF and (depending on your CPU) no slowdown.
 
HD remakes are the gaming equivalent of releasing an old movie on blu-ray. As long as the games still hold up (and are ported well) I have no problem with it.
 
Green Scar said:
Yeah, I'm glad someone made the comparison to DVD/BD boxsets or remasters, because, um, it's the same thing.
Exactly. With the jump to HD consoles, this is a logical move.

It doesn't mean it has to replace direct BC from now on. But I do think paying $25 or so for a ps3 version of a ps2 game is a better value than being able to play my ps2 copy directly on my 60gb ps3.
 
No I hate it >:( who do these motherfuckers think they are, give me HD versions of (mostly) awesome games I may have missed out on in the past... ugh,. the nerve.
 
Classic games with improved visuals and framerate that work on current systems for ~$20 a pop? What's not to love?

If they were charging the $50 you claim in the OP, there would be an outrage. However, that is simply not the case.

nincompoop said:
SotC can be run at 60 fps on PCSX2.

Correction: it still runs at 30fps, even if your framerate counter says 60fps. Also, there are most certainly issues, and it takes a really beefy system to even attempt this.

Even as someone with a 2500k @ 4.6GHz and a GTX 570, the PS3 version is still the best one for me.
 
Usually I don't bother with HD remakes, but I did buy the GOW collection because I missed out on them the first time and so I owed it myself to play them in HD and in 60 FPS.
 
I don't care for HD remakes and don't buy them. Call me crazy but most of the times I think they look worse than the original, the most recent example is The House of the Dead Overkill where the upscaling of texture-resolution and lack of 16-bit color-dithering and color-banding completely ruins the gritty lighting of the original. I must admit that ICO looks surprisingly decent.
 
LOVE & TRUTH said:
Not exactly like it. When playing Godhand through PS2, there's no upscaling, so unless your TV can handle shitty source, you'll get an awful picture. In the case of emulation, you get a free picture scaling, so the game looks smooth even on big TVs - on all TVs, actually.

I'm speaking from my experience of using PS2 with my Bravia 40".
Right. The BC ps3 also has those same options. From what I remember it just slightly smooths out edges, but it would be hard to tell without a side to side comparison. It still looks very much like a ps2 game being played on a hdtv.
 
chaosblade said:
Any game that doesn't actually have improvements beyond resolution is better emulated. Not sure about the God of War games, but the Ico remaster is certainly a big enough improvement I'd go for the new version.

Pretty sure stuff like Tomb Raider and Prince of Persia are the exact same as the PS2 games but in 720p, so you could do better with an emulator by running them at 1080p with AA/AF and (depending on your CPU) no slowdown.
Official 16:9 support is still nice for the games that didn't originally have it, though.
 
I liked SotC's jumpy and unintentionally dramatic framerate :(

Depending on the game and the additions I would have no problem paying full price. My expectations aren't as high expecting a complete remake.

IMO, SotC alone would be worth a full price
I didn't really like ICO :p
 
Kraftwerk said:
I mean, isn't it an obvious way to make money based on peoples nostalgia?

Hey, I know it is none of my business how others spend their money, but this just seems wrong. I see people complaining about DLC, sequels, limited edition bundles. But when it comes to HD remakes 99% of the comments are "OMG THANK YOU BASED GOD".

I myself said the same thing when I saw FFX HD coming to Vita / PS3. Then I said F* you square I already have 2 copies.

Nobody seems to say " Hmm, pay $50 for this HD remake (lol) or get it for $10 on craigslist"


Maybe it's just me. 'puts up nostalgia flame shield'

While I do understand the reasons why some like the HD 'remakes', I'm with u OP. In most cases, these remakes aren't really remakes, just having sharper textures (properly using the original textures, looks sharper with better hardware), nothing else. Yep I'm looking at you especially, Capcom.
 
TheExodu5 said:
Classic games with improved visuals and framerate that work on current systems for ~$20 a pop? What's not to love?

If they were charging the $50 you claim in the OP, there would be an outrage. However, that is simply not the case.



Correction: it still runs at 30fps, even if your framerate counter says 60fps. Also, there are most certainly issues, and it takes a really beefy system to even attempt this.

Even as someone with a 2500k @ 4.6GHz and a GTX 570, the PS3 version is still the best one for me.
Nope, if your system is beefy enough and you don't have speedhacks enabled then it will run at 60. You can even download a video of it running at 60 if you don't believe.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=ZF4MZGZI -part1
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=M4UFBGFJ -part2
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=X0FN4FDG -part3
 
I think this thread covers it pretty well, but yeah, basically if it's 20$ per title or less and it's got better visuals and trophies why the hell not?

Now if they are going to sell PS2 games on PSN for 10$ and I can get that same game off ebay for 10$ with a disc that's some stupid BS right there.
 
Great games usually have the gameplay stand up but the graphics rarely if ever do. Pretty much nothing on the PSX or N64 looks good in this day and age -- honestly, there isn't much outside of the SNES that still looks good.

I'm all for it personally.
 
Tylahedras said:
I think this thread covers it pretty well, but yeah, basically if it's 20$ per title or less and it's got better visuals and trophies why the hell not?

Now if they are going to sell PS2 games on PSN for 10$ and I can get that same game off ebay for 10$ with a disc that's some stupid BS right there.
It's not BS. It's no different than the same movie being sold on DVD and BD.
 
General Shank-a-snatch said:
Is there a huge difference between PS2 and PS3 version?
PS3 version has some slowdown not present in the PS2 version.



As for HD rereleases, why the hell not more games on the market gives people a chance to play games they may have missed or overlooked.
 
Kraftwerk said:
Nobody seems to say " Hmm, pay $50 for this HD remake (lol) or get it for $10 on craigslist"

Except we do:

"Hmmm, pay $50 for achievements/trophies and I CAN SEE CLEARLY NOW THE BLUR AND 480p IS GONE~ or Pay $10 and MOMMY I NEED GLASSES BECAUSE MY HDTV CAN'T SHOW 480p CLEARLY because the consoles and games weren't built for HD at the time oh and no ability to 'show them online' for those that are into that sort of thing!"

Or:

MoxManiac said:
Because PS2 games are too ugly to be playable on HDTVs. It's as simple as that.

This, really. On SDTV's they're tolerable. But on HDTV's they're really REALLY dismal. Trying to play FFX-2 on my HDTV/monitor is painful because at times the black level is bad and because the game is slightly blurry due to not being HD and the cables being non-HD, they're not clean.
 
I prefer the Resident Evil gamecube remake style of remakes but most HD remakes come bundled with 2 or 3 games and if you haven't played them they're a pretty good value. Resident Evil 4/Code Veronica are stupidly priced though.
 
Why not? There are some games worth revisiting and some of us aren't collecting and saving games/consoles, plus my HDTV won't scale back for SD games.

I can't WAIT to play through MGS2 and 3 again, especially 3 later this year. MGS3 is in my top 5 games ever, and it getting an HD upscale is just the way I would want to redo it, aside from an entire from scratch remake on a new/upgraded engine.

They are priced lower too. I mean MGS HD collection comes with a total of 5 games for 40 bucks. How is that NOT a great deal? Metal Gear, Metal Gear 2, Metal Gear Solid 2 Sons of Liberty, Metal Gear Solid 3 Snake Eater, and Metal Gear Solid Peace Walker. All in 1080P 60FPS? Fuck yeah.

Some remakes I don't agree with or I guess I'm just not the focus for like the Halo one, but like someone mentioned it's a great way to experience an upgraded version of something many find to be classics in the history of games.
 
Some people don't own every console every generation, so re-releases are a good way to catch up on classic games and series. The up-ports often fix niggling IQ problems that were inherent to older hw.
 
I understand what you guys are saying, but based on that logic:

Will you buy the new Super Enhanced ICO / SotC bundle in 2018 for your 8k resolution t.v?
 
nincompoop said:
Nope, if your system is beefy enough and you don't have speedhacks enabled then it will run at 60. You can even download a video of it running at 60 if you don't believe.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=ZF4MZGZI -part1
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=M4UFBGFJ -part2
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=X0FN4FDG -part3
Are we talking about 60 actual frames per second because the original wasn't capped at 30, or 60 vertical interrupts per second? There's a distinction. Ocarina of Time runs at "60 FPS" but that doesn't change the internal ~24FPS framerate.
 
Kraftwerk said:
I understand what you guys are saying, but based on that logic:

Will you buy the new Super Enhanced ICO / SotC bundle in 2018 for your 8k resolution t.v?
Yup
 
Kraftwerk said:
I mean, isn't it an obvious way to make money based on peoples nostalgia?

Yeah, and..? It's a classic win-win situation. Everything in the open, and both sides happy. Nothing sly or wrong about it. Good times. Can't wait for the Halo Remake btw.
 
Top Bottom