VGChartz hates Ocarina of Time 3D

[milkyjoe]

Doobie_wop said:

milkyjoe said:

Doobie_wop said:
Ocarina of Time 'was' the perfect game back in 1998, my grandpa was also a really good boxer back in 1972, but that doesn't mean that I'd want him to back me up in a punch on in 2011. Games age, game design evolves, Ocarina is a fantastic game but it's flaws have become apparent and maybe other people have come to that same conclusion.

The people bringing up the HD collections are running into brick walls, the collections usually come with three games on one disk, they all cost $40 each, they run at a smooth 30 FPS or 60 FPS and they are made to look better by upressing them. All the games on the collections are also fairly new, the oldest God of War game is from 2005, the oldest Tomb Raider game is from 2006 and the oldest Sly Cooper game is from 2002. All the games released on these collections are also critically acclaimed and some of them are the best of breed. Ocarina of Time is one game released at $40 with a decent visual upgrade, added touch controls and an extra 'Boss Challenge' mode, it's a good remake, but it also has much less value than the HD collections.

That's where the argument falls down. If stuff is going to be remade, it should be older games, not stuff from ~5 years ago. Hell, the recent Tomb Raider set has games from this generation FFS...

There's a whole heap of old games I'd love to see updated and remade to modern standards just out of sheer curiousity to see if they'd stand up.

How does that destroy my argument? What an odd thing to say.

Newer games are games that don't suffer the aging evolution of gaming as much, they all still hold up really well and they actually look good when upressed and stabilized. MGS1 will always look ugly by todays standards, the only thing they could possibly do is remake the whole game, gameplay and all, because anyone who's not a masochists and who's recently played MGS1 (I have) knows it doesn't hold up well at all. 

My argument was also about value, three five year old games that were all critically acclaimed and actually look good are better than a single game that's probably older than a lot of people buying it, especially when they are all being sold for the exact same price.

I didn't say it destroys it, I said that's where it falls down.

You make the point about MGS1, and it's fair, but I'd wager that more people would be excited about a remake of that than they would be for a remake of MGS4, when what you're saying would supposedly negate that.

And it's not alone in that respect. Just as a few examples of things that I think would be better suited to a remake rather than their modern day counterparts, and also some that I think the fans would get behind...

I'd rather play a remake of SMB than a remake of NSMBWii.

I'd rather play a remake of RE than a remake of RE5.

I'd rather play a remake of GTA I/II/III than a remake of GTA IV.

I'd rather play a remake of Goldeneye (and I did) than a remake of Quantum of Solace (actually I'd rather not play this one full stop).

I'd rather play a remake of Banjo Kazooie than a remake of Nuts & Bolts.

I'd rather play a remake of OoT than a remake of Twilight Princess.

Finally (although I could happily keep going for hours), we have one of the most requested remakes of all time. The fans want a remake of FF7, I doubt they'd rather have a remake of FFXIII...