Does that mean more gamers use the platform than previously?

You know what they say: there's a first time for anything.

Really??? there maybe some lies on there to, some but not all. I think they just want to milk their ip a little bit more and the rest is like what they try to explained on the OP, but 80% is to much, I believe most of PS4 owner are people who own PS3 if not PS2 consoles. Maybe I am wrong, but 80% is just impossible unless most of PS3 owner was owned by Children and unable to play due to age restriction and now they a already mature.

80% PS4 users PSN profile doesn't show Uncharted trophies. This is correct info. I made a new profile for my PS4 and this doesn't mean I haven't played Uncharted before.

Hmm, what was the percentage for PS3 owners...? o:

Thats not actually true, it depends on the type of remaster. If assets are remade, like textures or redid music rather than just upscale and porting, it can be very expensive (asset creation is the most expensive part of game development), cheaper than the combined total, but more expensive than any single one of the games. And since, remasters rarely if ever sell as much as the originals, they don't make that much to beginning with.

The only reason you get so much is because they are easy/straightfoward and fast to develop, and can be done with a small team,  despite being expensive.

And that speed is important for two reasons, cost accumulates with duration and they can release fast with games instead of nothing. As opposed to new IP or sequels which just take longer period.

I.E what originally took like 5 programmers and 5 artists can now be done in 1 programmer and 5 artists but the artists are generally more expensive then the programmer.

The only people who care about first party line up are on Nintendo b/c 3rd party barely exists, for the rest of the gaming world, its just game line-up.

Price and Popularity are much more of a distinguishing figure than exclusives at this point. Only the big titles like Halo are things people actually care about.

If you don't fill up droughts with something, remasters, indies, etc... your going to end up like the Wii U which huge launch droughts b/c Nintendo didn't realize that HD development is serious shit. That's called poor planning ladies and gentlemen.

And the whole nothing's better that "crap" argument might be appealing on the internet, but in the real world,

and you can see that on teh Front Page holmes.

You can demonize remasters all you want but without a viable alternative, you simply don't have a high horse to stand on. 

I didn't demonize anything, I just gave the real reasons why companies make remasters instead of the PR spin ND is trying to force down our throats constantly. And first party certainly matters, even for Sony.

Stop being so defensive, this post comes across as laughable. Why even bring up Nintendo? This is a Sony thread. Attack the post, not the poster. When you do the latter I know I won the argument.

 You gave your reasons to why companies make remasters being wrong on 2/3 of the reasons

1) they are not low effort, they can be done with a smaller team however

2) they are not low cost.,

that's like the Majority and stuff, you basically failed the exam, you got like a 30% . And PR is PR, you only add the word spin to add a negative connotation to it. In order to make PR, a morally neutral advertising tactic, look bad (THE DEFINITION OF DEMONIZING ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°))  in this case because you vehemently disagree with the concept of remasters despite it having little measurable effect on your life. The only reason people ever call PR spin is because they believe it is misleading, that's your opinion not the "real reason"

My "defense" is just tearing down your """""offense""""" if you could even call it that, that's the real laugable part about this whole thing.

1) If they can be done by smaller teams than they're a low effort. WW HD was made in 6 months. It's a low effort.

2) They're much cheaper to produce than new games.

I don't disagree with the concept of remasters, they make a lot of sense from a business perspective (see my 3 reasons). As a gamer though, I don't care much about them.

I call it spin because he's spinning. More than 90% of the PS3 owners didn't play Uncharted 3. If they weren't interested in it then, chances are they won't be interested in it now. Games don't start off with a 100% attach ratio lmao.

You're not tearing down anything except your credibility with posts like that.

Oh and I'll lead you to this thread if you think Sony doesn't care about their first party line-up.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=208911&page=1