Playing my way through Bioshock at the moment. Even better than I remember it. The remaster is nice, helps that it's an incredible game.

Remakes or remastered depends on the age of the game. Something like Resi needed and entire remake whereas as B'Shock a mere remaster. It'll be interesting to see when they start to entirely remaster games from the PS2/Xbox era instead of remastering them, or if such a thing will ever be necessary.

(They may have already done so I just can't think of one...)

I'm rarely interested in remasters, replaying anything since the 32-bit era doesn't appeal.  There are always numerous new games I like the look of that pass me by due to lack of time/motivation (mainly indie titles these days, I usually make the time for the handful of retail games I want each year).  I'd rather stick to the memories than replay even my absolute favourites.  I'm more up for Remakes but no-one's bothering to green light most of the ones I want.  In theory I'd be all over a Panzer Dragoon reboot.

From a perspective that I imagine very few of you are interested in, because most of you aren't big wanks, I think remasters can be fairly problematic. gaming history is in flux anyway, and pinning down what the 'authentic' version of a game is can be really difficult - with longer conversations to be had about the preservation of games and hardware to be had. 

People have already documented a few changes in graphical style in Bioshock Remastered, and the Arkham Asylum remaster also looks to be changing the lighting and texture work in a way that makes it look different. I've no truck with remasters personally, but I do hope the industry affords archivist a chance to retain the original vision of a lot of these titles, lest they get washed away by versions that at worst, can totally fuck the entire theme and tone of the game - eyes are squarely on Silent Hill 2 HD and Wind Waker HD here.

As for remakes. DOOM is a good example of how to do it well. It leans into your expectations, and your rose tinted glasses, and tricks you into thinking that you're playing Doom again, but it's built in a totally different way and plays totally differently, but still has the ethos of the original in it.

I disagree, and it may be down to what we mean when we say remake or remaster. For me, a remake is a new title, like Magnificent 7, whereas a remaster is like the constant fuckery applied to Star Wars over the years. New Doom does not erase old Doom, they're separate titles. But Silent Hill 2 HD has a chance of becoming the default copy in the future.

I don't really mind a game going from 2D to 3D, like Metroid, because they're entirely different experiences. But if Metroid had been given a 2DHD spit and polish that had given it floaty controls, then we'd be into different territory. Inf act I imagine there are purist who argue that Zero Mission messes sufficiently with the original Metroid that its an issue for preservation, but luckily SNES emulation is easy as pie.

Moot_Geeza wrote:

lest they get washed away by versions that at worst, can totally fuck the entire theme and tone of the game - eyes are squarely on Silent Hill 2 HD and Wind Waker HD here.

How so Wind Waker?  I haven't played through it, but I pottered around the first island for a minute or two and it still looked stunning.

Struggling to get a decent sized picture but the gist is here:



Pic 1 looks stunning, Wind Waker HD is a total looker. BUT. It kinda misses the point of the original. First of all it's more uncomfortable to look at because there is bloom lighting everywhere, and second of all (which is much harder to see) its's not really using cell shading. Matthewmatosis covers it much better than me. In the end it's personal preference, but I think he's bang on the money when he says that HD is against the aestehtic ideal of the original.



In fact that thumbnail utterly nails it - that isn't cell shading. The remake definitely improves on some areas - widescreen, shadows, but it isn't the same style. Luckily Dolphin exists and is a powerful and well supported emulator, but Nintendo can be very shitty about this, and if they demand it then WWHD may be the default the game is remembered by, and it's basically not even true to the technology they developed to make the cell shading style work.

It's all such fussy terminology, but yeah you could label it a reboot, in which case I'd agree with Muzz and say that remakes are dangerous too. State the terms!

Fair do's Tempy, will watch the vid shortly.  Ico/Okami and their remasters had a similar-ish problems I think, although I'm entirely going on still shots for that.

Hopefully the system shock 1 redo will be good.

Come games are a funny one. Also n64. The latter on virtual console upscales because, I recall, the Roms naturally upscale to match the level of hardware available. Is blur o matic Mario 64 the true vision? Or the impinged vision because the hardware was jank? Arguably you can say similar to wind waker hd. The starkness is as much because the hardware couldn't do x y z as much as intent. (Perhaps working around things creates the best thing possible as a marriage of hw and sw)

Zero mission absolutely smashes metroid out of the park.

A remaster should address technical issues.  A dodgy texture here, a framerate issue there.  A remake is something else.

If you going to do a remaster, make sure you've got the tools to achieve it.  Chucking in a few god rays, slapping on a bit of bloom and bumping up the textures a notch or two does not make a remaster. Skyrim Special Edition, I'm looking at you.

FFVII remake is gonna be utter dogshit. You heard it here first, folks.

Ooh how is it free?

acemuzzy wrote:

Ooh how is it free?

If you already owned it there is a free update.

Yeah, saw the Bioshock remasters pop up in my Steam Library hence the thread.
The bioshock infinite remaster hasn't shown up yet for some reason.

It's remastered for consoles I think.