By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - How Many First Party Remasters Has Sony Actually Done?

JWeinCom said:

And would it not have been better for perspective consumers to know that both versions were coming out so they could choose whether to wait for the better version?  I don't see what new system or old system had to do with it.  It is OBJECTIVELY BETTER for consumers to know about both versions. 

As for GOTY editions, I honestly don't like that practice.  But, at least it's common enough that gamers should know it's coming.  On the other hand, I don't believe there is a precedent for a game being rereleased that quickly, so gamers should not have expected it.

Don't you think you are going a little too far with this, I mean yeah for sure it would be nice for the consumer to know everything that is going to release at what time and date. The consumer isn't obligated to know that though, corporations have rights as well and there are laws in place that are fought all the time between consumers, firms, and corporations and for good reason. TLoU Remastered is not a good reason to claim anti-consumerism just because they didn't let people know a year in advance that a new version for a new system that 95% of the PS3 owners won't even buy right away will be getting a better version. I mean, that's pulling straws like crazy.

Sony advertised TLoU for the PS4 well before its launch and that is literally the most standard of practices that you can get from any industry.



Around the Network
A_C_E said:
JWeinCom said:

And would it not have been better for perspective consumers to know that both versions were coming out so they could choose whether to wait for the better version?  I don't see what new system or old system had to do with it.  It is OBJECTIVELY BETTER for consumers to know about both versions. 

As for GOTY editions, I honestly don't like that practice.  But, at least it's common enough that gamers should know it's coming.  On the other hand, I don't believe there is a precedent for a game being rereleased that quickly, so gamers should not have expected it.

Don't you think you are going a little too far with this, I mean yeah for sure it would be nice for the consumer to know everything that is going to release at what time and date. The consumer isn't obligated to know that though, corporations have rights as well and there are laws in place that are fought all the time between consumers, firms, and corporations and for good reason. TLoU Remastered is not a good reason to claim anti-consumerism just because they didn't let people know a year in advance that a new version for a new system that 95% of the PS3 owners won't even buy right away will be getting a better version. I mean, that's pulling straws like crazy.

Sony advertised TLoU for the PS4 well before its launch and that is literally the most standard of practices that you can get from any industry.


It isn't a matter of law.  I never claimed that Sony broke any law. It's a matter of making decisions that are the best for their consumers.  They had two choices.  One was better for their consumers, and one was better for them.  They chose the one that was best for them.  Nothing illegal about it, but personally, if I had bought the original, I'd have been miffed about it.



JWeinCom said:

It isn't a matter of law.  I never claimed that Sony broke any law. It's a matter of making decisions that are the best for their consumers.  They had two choices.  One was better for their consumers, and one was better for them.  They chose the one that was best for them.  Nothing illegal about it, but personally, if I had bought the original, I'd have been miffed about it.

Fair enough, but I know for me I was thrilled when I heard Sony had just announced TLoU Remastered. Some people like remasters, some people couldn't be bothered to spend their money to play something they already played just to get better performance and I respect your opinion.



A_C_E said:
JWeinCom said:

It isn't a matter of law.  I never claimed that Sony broke any law. It's a matter of making decisions that are the best for their consumers.  They had two choices.  One was better for their consumers, and one was better for them.  They chose the one that was best for them.  Nothing illegal about it, but personally, if I had bought the original, I'd have been miffed about it.

Fair enough, but I know for me I was thrilled when I heard Sony had just announced TLoU Remastered. Some people like remasters, some people couldn't be bothered to spend their money to play something they already played just to get better performance and I respect your opinion.


Like I said earlier, it's less about the actual remasters, and more about the lack of original content.  The two things may be related or not, but they are connected in the mind of many gamers.  It's like if you go to a restaurant, and you order your main course, and you're waiting for your meal, and the waiter keeps bringing basket after basket of bread.  Even though the bread probably doesn't have anything to do with your meal being delayed, after a certain point, you're going to be all like "enough with the fucking bread".

Edit:  And when you have companies like Capcom, whose E3 lineup is 3/4 remasters, it gives the impression that remasters are being financed over new games.



JWeinCom said:

Like I said earlier, it's less about the actual remasters, and more about the lack of original content.  The two things may be related or not, but they are connected in the mind of many gamers.  It's like if you go to a restaurant, and you order your main course, and you're waiting for your meal, and the waiter keeps bringing basket after basket of bread.  Even though the bread probably doesn't have anything to do with your meal being delayed, after a certain point, you're going to be all like "enough with the fucking bread".

Edit:  And when you have companies like Capcom, whose E3 lineup is 3/4 remasters, it gives the impression that remasters are being financed over new games.

I agree with you that certain companies are focusing too much on remasters but the amount of original titles in the first two years of 8th gen has to be comparable to the first two years of the 7th gen. Less original content could be attributed to the influx of remasters but there just isn't any evidence of that. Why not outsource older games to another studio that specializes in remastering content and put the profit towards the budget of the next game.

Anything that supports a higher budget for a game can only be a good thing. But yes, too many remasters per company can pretty questionable.



Around the Network
JWeinCom said:
The_Sony_Girl1 said:
Not that much compared to the amount of remasters and ports we got during the early years of Gen 7.

I don't really recall any remasters at the begining of gen 7.  Some crossgen titles that released across both gens, but not many straight up remakes that I recall.

I was talking about the crossgen titles.



Bet with Xander XT: 

I can beat more games on his 3DS than he can on my PSVita in a month. Loser has to buy the winner a game on his/her handheld Guess who won? http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=193531

Me!