But on the other hand, I don’t want to take away from people’s fun.
Remakes are always okay because they’re completely new games based on old ones. It’s like a theater group doing a play their own way.
Where this conversation gets confused is in the difference between remake/remaster
Additionally FF7 should have been called a sequel because it’s a completely different game. No spoilers but it’s a different game and plot.
Yeah? I thought it was more of a retelling of the same story (FF7r), from what I was told. Is it actually stuff that takes place after the events of FF7?
FF7R is at least enough of a different thing. Kind of like how the Evangelion Rebuild movies are different from the show/comic/old movies.
I agree, though, straight up remakes are kinda boring.
Yeah I think my irkness is more towards straight remakes especially for what I consider “modern” games, that’s shit made in like 2002. It’s still very playable today!
I know what you mean, but those games are as old as Pac-Man and Zork were to us back in 2002. To a certain extent, it takes some intentionality and patience to engage with older media that you weren’t there for.
Shit, I sometimes struggle to engage with older media that I was there for lol.
I agree with this mostly, but I think the lessons devs learned over the history of video gaming means that they become exponentially more accessable and intuitive. A game from 20 years ago (a late PS2 game) takes getting used to, but a game 20 years before 2004 (so 1984) basically requires a college course in how to play it. I’ve seen some comments online about how 2009 games are so old and obtuse and I’m like, they play almost the exact same as today’s games because developers had figured out a formula that works by then!
Anything Konami does is particularly unnecessary.
I think there’s something to be said for remasters adding in quality of life features (fast travel points, quick saves, online play, accessibility features). But yeah, a lot of full on remakes are cash grabs.
This may be an even spicier take than the OP but I think most of the time “quality of life” changes are unnecessary and can undermine deliberate game design choices. Adding accessibility features (actual accessibility, as in features that allow disabled people to enjoy games they otherwise would not be able to play, not accessibility in the way Consumers use it) are obviously good changes, but otherwise I don’t think added features in remakes often make for a better experience. Most games that get remade are games that were beloved in their day, and it’s not like those games got worse or anything, people just have different standards that lead them to expect a game from 20-30 years ago to play the same as one that came out today. And tbh, if I wanted to play games that feel like modern games, I would just play modern games…
This was nice in the Final Fantasy Pixel Remasters. I’m not a damn child playing muh vidja games on summer vacation anymore; just let me fast forward through the grindy bits like I would probably do if I were playing on an emulator.
I appreciated the maps and treasure counts too. The earlier games were especially maze-like and it saved me the hassle of a search
Yes! This definitely got me down an achievement-hunting rabbit hole, though. I’ve been stressing over FF5 because I’m up to the timed bit with several missable chests.
(Insert picture of that moron goon Asmogonad saying MGS3 better not have “politics” in it.)
