Alright guys, the last roundtable turned out pretty well and we got some interesting discussion going on, let's see if we can keep it up.
With yesterday's announcement of Silent Hill Shattered Memories it seems like a good time to talk about ports and remakes. Though most ports and remakes kind of take a bad rep, the overall vibe surrounding Silent Hill seems very positive. It looks like a lot of effort is going into the game and it looks to be one of the few (sadly) Wii full action/adventure titles that tries to use the Wii remote in interesting ways.
What do you guys about ports and remakes on the Wii? Dead set against them? Mostly against them unless some true effort is put into a total re-envisioning? Ok with them as long as they aren't rushed jobs?
Do you want to see past titles you never got around to checking out ported / remade on the Wii? What about titles you have already played through, interested in playing again with new controls or a completely new take?
Are you ok with simple graphical / control updates, or do you want to see a lot more out of ports and remakes on the Wii?
For or against Nintendo's New Play Control! lineup? (Gamecube games brought to Wii, $30 price point, graphics identical, Wii controls added.)
Do you expect these ports and remakes will ever lead to brand new titles in these series, or is it just a cheap way to get games on the large Wii market while keeping the main development resources pointed at the Xbox 360 and PS3?
Would Resident Evil 2 really work with Resident Evil 4 controls?! Should Final Fantasy 7 see the much desired remake? Ocarina of Time?
Personally, as far as my own personal tastes are involved, I don't really mind the ports and remakes of games I've never gotten around to checking out. Especially if they are highly praised games, at least I figure... it's tough to mess up already established awesome gameplay, but it's easy to halfass new gameplay it on the Wii. Two of the best 3rd party games so far are ports (Okami, Resident Evil 4) and well worth playing for those who haven't played them yet.
Games I have played already... not really interested if all that is added is Wii controls or better graphics. I'm only really interested if it is a complete remake, or at least a lot is changed up (like Ocarina of Time Master Quest) to make it feel pretty new.
And of course, ports and remakes should only be ONE part of a publisher's approach to the Wii.
Ports and remakes definitely like easy ways for publisher/developers to make some quick cash in on the uberpopular Wii. In the long run this is really probably great for everyone. Companies make money which they can then put into more Wii development, and they've also spent more time with the Wii hardware which will allow them to make better games in the future with all the new money they have from their port/remake.
I definitely agree that Okami and RE4 are some of the best 3rd party games on the Wii right now.
For me in general though, if I've already had my full fun with a game, then a remake isn't that important. If it's something great, that I missed then awesome. Some games I gladly go back and play again though, i.e. MGS: Twin Snakes on GC.
'Companies make money which they can then put into more Wii development'
Unfortunately it is difficult for me to believe that this will ever turn out to be the case. In fact, a lot of publishers have kind of openly stated that they use Wii titles to finance bigger PS3/360 titles. I'm crossing my fingers that some real Wii support follows the ports and remakes but I haven't really seen it so far.
Now this would be cool if Konami pulled off what Capcom did last generation with the RE series on the GC leading the series in a new gaming direction but keeping it real, making several ports, and a new exclusive pushing the system hardware to the limits and showing that the two can be a team to be reckoned with...I'm liking what I'm reading so far....I'm wondering about the no combat part...What about boss battles????
:) LOLz IaMspAmBOt. yeah, i remake of Ocarina of Time with Wii-mote control would be very different, but hey i WOULD BUY IT! I'm not sure about graphics changes, i suppose it would possibly make the game a little more fun for some but maybe the game would be changed to much. However some gamers like me, don't tend to play a game more than 2 times over. This could make it hard to sell remakes if old games but with the smaller price tag this may not be the case.
It would be hard to port a game and make it have the Wii control's. though I'm sure this could be done with a bit of work. although the classic controller could be used to play CG games. if they give multiple control methods I'd certainly buy a remake.
'I'm wondering about the no combat part...What about boss battles????'
I haven't played the original but I have played Silent Hill 2 and the boss battles in that were erm... unremarkable. The end boss was the only somewhat interesting one. As long as they add in some intense stuff it could work just making you run and survive. Most of the time you had to run from Pyramid Head anyway and when you finally did fight him, it was a very lame fight.
What do you guys think about the idea of remaking Resident Evil 2 with the Resident Evil 4 camera and controls? I think it is an interesting idea, but to me for that to stand ANY chance of working it would require a complete redesign. Part of why Resident Evil 4 works is the huge wide open areas like the village where you have a lot of options for where to run, where to make your stand, etc. Not to mention it would NEED more faster zombies like the crimsons, the slowly plodding zombies with an RE 4 camera and pinpoint gun aiming just wouldn't work, at all.
Essentially if you have played Metroid Zero Mission and the original Metroid I'm thinking it would have to be that drastic. But even moreso, because those at least had the same perspective. It'd have to be a brand new game that takes some story and basic settings from Resident Evil 2 but pretty much recreates everything else new.
I also think for it to have any chance to not suck it would have to be a full production... Huge, high quality team, 2-3 or more years in development, etc. It would have to get the same love and care that a Resident Evil 4-2 type game would have to get.
So I'm behind the idea in theory, but only if Capcom approaches it as one of their BIG games, not another side project.
I agree that a RE2 remake with RE4 controls would require a complete redesign. For that reason, I don't think it's really worthwhile. I haven't played the RE4 Wii version, so I'm not sure how well they did that, although I here it's pretty good. It seems like changing the whole control scheme just wouldn't work out.
"Personally, as far as my own personal tastes are involved, I don't really mind the ports and remakes of games I've never gotten around to checking out. Especially if they are highly praised games, at least I figure... it's tough to mess up already established awesome gameplay, but it's easy to halfass new gameplay it on the Wii. Two of the best 3rd party games so far are ports (Okami, Resident Evil 4) and well worth playing for those who haven't played them yet.
Games I have played already... not really interested if all that is added is Wii controls or better graphics. I'm only really interested if it is a complete remake, or at least a lot is changed up (like Ocarina of Time Master Quest) to make it feel pretty new."
This is pretty much my exact take on the issue, I can't see much of a point in buying what is essentially the same game twice unless I have no reliable/regular means of playing my old copy anymore. Nintendo's Play Control range is a perfect example of the sort of thing I totally wouldn't bother with. I love Metroid Prime sure, but I can still play that by loading my GC disc into the slot. If I'm that desperate for motion control then I still have Prime 3. Now if the were to give Prime the Master Quest treatment then there would be incentive, but as it stands I don't really care.
Remaking stuff that I never got to play of course is great. (It's part of why I love VC). However you could argue that whilst I may not have played it and see it as a good thing, someone else who did play the original could apply the logic of my previous paragraph and give it a miss. The question becomes then is there an audience of people who would appreciate a remake large enough to justify it.
Best way to deal with it IMO is to always add in more incentive for the game to be picked up beyond a mere graphical and/or control upgrade, whether it be new content or tweaked level design. As Zero said, Metroid: Zero Mission is a perfect example of how to do this right. If they remade Ocarina they'd need to do this. Ground up redesign of the graphics to at least TP quality, Wii controls as standard (no brainer), and a couple of extra dungeons & items.
.....An FFVII remake would be nice purely because I'd love another version to play besides my glitchy torrented PC version :P
What other games would you guys like to see remakes of?
(PS Zero, are you looking at adding a quote functionality to the board? Copy/Paste works and all, but I feel like a bit of a neanderthal doing it :P)
Resident Evil 2... well, I'm sure it was amazing at the time, but going back to it after playing Remake was tough. And as for the best of the older style games, I'd have to say Code Veronica myself.
But yeah, to remake it at this point in Resident Evil 4 style... it'd be such a huge project I'd just prefer they make a brand new game.
A full-on Ocarina of Time remake... hmm, I wonder if Nintendo would ever do something like that? They seem happy enough to stick with the New Play Controls! for their Wii "remakes." And I think Zelda still has a large enough following that you don't necessarily have to go back to the "classic" one to get people interested. Though they did just remake the original Fire Emblem, so who knows.
'(PS Zero, are you looking at adding a quote functionality to the board? Copy/Paste works and all, but I feel like a bit of a neanderthal doing it :P)'
Yeah it's on the big list. Somewhere near the top. You know, the big list of things that I want to get around to but never have time to do so. Still though, doesn't seem like it'd be too tough.
A remake of a good game that you've never played is potentially a very good thing. But I'm against them, in principle, and they probably won't do much to strengthen the system's library. Like Klonoa. What the fuck. How many people does it take to make a new Klonoa game? All you need is a puzzle designer and a couple of tabs of acid.
But, you know, maybe having great ports (RE4) is the only way to get truly great, substantial third-party games, as sad as that is. At the very least, these ports can serve as proof of concept, since third-parties are too lazy and shiftless and cowardly to put their full effort into Wii products. Like how RE4 showed that mature, third-person shooters can work really well with Wii controls.
But I don't like remakes. I'll buy them if I never had the original, but sequels are always, always, always better. Even when they're worse. I hate when people ask for remakes. Fuck that noise.
As far as OOT, Stephen Totilo had an interesting (and horrifying idea). According to him, when a series reaches the point of greatness, they should stop developing sequels, and just modernize and update the existing masterpiece every couple of years, so the new generation can enjoy it. Ostensibly, that would free up development resources for new stuff. His example was Zelda. He didn't think Twilight Princess was necessary, since OOT already existed. I'm all for fresh games, but that's kind of chilling.
I'm definitely against Stephen Totilo's idea. If that were the case then, we would just have the same games over and over in a series.
Let me take for example the Red Faction series. (Mars based FPS that introduced destructible environments) The original Red Faction was way better than it's sequel. RF2 just ended up being cheesy and lame, while the original was really fresh and innovative. They did destructible environments and vehicles long before anyone else was.
Now years after Red Faction 2 came out, Guerilla is due out this summer. This game looks to have totally changed the formula moving to a 3rd person perspective and allowing much more free-roaming/sandbox elements. It really looks to be a great move for the series after the abomination that 2 was.
I'm much more pleased with this new direction as opposed to a recycled #1. That would be dull. Now lots of people do vehicles and destructible environments, and they do it much better (I'm looking at you Bad Company).
I think in the end ports and Wii-makes will be beneficial, but I definitely don' want to see a bunch of recycling.
Hmm... I suppose I'm one of the few that really doesn't mind a remake, as long as its done well. :p
Like with a lot of people here, I don't care for direct ports unless for some reason or another I never got to play the game or had it but never gave it a fair shake before selling it or... something along those lines. Perfect example for me would be Phantom Brave: I didn't give it a fair chance on PS2 because at the time I was still playing Disgaea like crazy (in fact until recently I didn't give any of Nippon Ichi's games a fair chance unless it was Disgaea). Now that it's being ported to the Wii (more than likely with some extras but I'm obviously nto positive on that), I'm willing to give it another go on there to see what's up.
Strangely enough though, I contribute a lot to this problem, because I'm one of those idiots that gets really attracted by an "updated version" of a game. I still own Metroid Prime 1, but I'm extremely anxious to play through it again with Wii controls. Of course, that's helped by the fat that it;s one of my favorite games of the entirety of last gen, and one my second favorite Metroid game behind Super Metroid. Anyway, point being, I'm a bit of a sucker for ports and/or collections.
That said, they do have to be quality products and at least bring one positive aspect or feature to the table to entice me.
As far as RE2 in RE4 style, I definitely wouldn't mind that, as I never got to play RE2 and have hear d nothing but positive things about it. However, RE4's gameplay just meshed so well with me that I can't really go back and play the older games as much now. A bit ridiculous, I know, but the controls feel so archaic! So, if they were to re-envision RE2 with RE4's style (without leaving behind what makes the earlier games scary), I'd definitely be on board.
I will say that Silent Hill wasn't on my radar until I read the "removing combat" thing. Now I'm thoroughly excited to see how far they explore this concept.
'I'll buy them if I never had the original, but sequels are always, always, always better. Even when they're worse.'
Hmm. I've been thinking about this a bit though. In some cases, certain developers have gone so far downhill that it is tough to trust them with sequels. It might be a bit better to just update. I don't have a whole lot of concrete examples, but Sega comes to mind. I'd bet an updated Nights would have been better than the new one. And instead of new Jet Set and Panzer Dragoon games I'd almost relish Wii ports, at least I know the originals were (supposedly) great games, something Sega barely puts out nowadays.
Then again, Sega would somehow manage to ruin them anyway, most likely.
Yea I can guarantee that the latest sonic game pales in comparison to the original genesis game. Sure it might look snazzier and sonic might be able to wield a sword and turn black. But sonic was always about super fast platforming, and just flying through levels.
SEGA is definitely one company that used sequels to destroy franchises