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

Forums - Gaming - Can we talk about The Wonderful 101 laughable Demaster?

JWeinCom on 17 May 2020
Barozi said:
JWeinCom said:

Aside from the use of the term remaster, I don't recall anything they said which would have lead one to expect a significant graphical overhaul. It's also being sold at $40, which is a bit cheaper than most "remasters" from that era IIRC.

So, I'd agree that they would have used another word in the title, but on the whole, anyone who does even a slight amount of research will be getting what they expect, so I'm not seeing a problem in that regard.

Like, taking myself as an example, I loved the game on Wii U, and I might have purchased it again if it had significant upgrades.  I had more than enough information to determine that it didn't have enough new content to warrant purchasing again.  Since I had enough info to make an informed decision, I don't really see the harm done by using the wrong term.

Not really. Many remasters were cheaper than $60 and included all DLCs for the game. Some others were part of a collection and therefore a little more pricey.

$40 for a lazy port of a single game that doesn't include any DLC (because there wasn't any as far as I could find) is pretty poor. But hey, by spending that amount of money you're elegible to buy the upcoming DLCs from the Kickstarter stretch goals.

Pretty much every Wii U port to Switch has been at least 50.  I'm pretty sure all of Sony's PS3 to PS4 ports have launched at full price.  Aside from games that are significantly older, I can't recall many remasters launching for cheaper.  I'm sure there are some, but that's the exception.  



Around the Network
AngryLittleAlchemist on 17 May 2020

I'd rather not



Barozi on 17 May 2020
JWeinCom said:
Barozi said:

Not really. Many remasters were cheaper than $60 and included all DLCs for the game. Some others were part of a collection and therefore a little more pricey.

$40 for a lazy port of a single game that doesn't include any DLC (because there wasn't any as far as I could find) is pretty poor. But hey, by spending that amount of money you're elegible to buy the upcoming DLCs from the Kickstarter stretch goals.

Pretty much every Wii U port to Switch has been at least 50.  I'm pretty sure all of Sony's PS3 to PS4 ports have launched at full price.  Aside from games that are significantly older, I can't recall many remasters launching for cheaper.  I'm sure there are some, but that's the exception.  

You couldn't be more wrong.

Nathan Drake Collection was $60 for 3 games.
God of War III Remastered was $40.
MediEvil was $30.
The Last of Us Remastered was $50 (1 year old port with all DLCs included).
Quantic Dream Collection was $40 for 3 games.

3rd party remasters were cheaper as well.

Collections of Spyro, Crash, Bioshock, Assassin's Creed Ezio Collection included 3 games each for a maximum of $60 ($20 a game).
Metro, Batman Arkham, Assassin's Creed III, Borderlands, FFX/X-2, Marvel Ultimate Alliance included 2 games often below $60.

Single remasters were usually between $20 and $40 but pretty much every one of them had meaty DLCs that were included.



Xxain on 17 May 2020

Heres my take:

This is an upscaled port, not a remaster and if this was CAPCOM... This thread would be 250 and replies long.

Ultimately ... who cares. I watched the video in its entirety (Dont think ive ever done that) I saw nothing "scumm" for a lack of a better world. Looks wonderful everywhere.



OlfinBedwere on 17 May 2020
NightlyPoe said:
Is the basic complaint that the game isn't better than the original? Can't say I particularly care.

It's more that it's one step forward, two steps back - the game runs at a higher resolution in docked more, but performance is slightly worse than on the Wii U in portable mode, and noticeably worse in docked mode.

That being said, performance never gets bad enough for it to be a dealbreaker, so... make of it what you will.



Around the Network
JWeinCom on 17 May 2020
Barozi said:
JWeinCom said:

Pretty much every Wii U port to Switch has been at least 50.  I'm pretty sure all of Sony's PS3 to PS4 ports have launched at full price.  Aside from games that are significantly older, I can't recall many remasters launching for cheaper.  I'm sure there are some, but that's the exception.  

You couldn't be more wrong.

Nathan Drake Collection was $60 for 3 games.
God of War III Remastered was $40.
MediEvil was $30.
The Last of Us Remastered was $50 (1 year old port with all DLCs included).
Quantic Dream Collection was $40 for 3 games.

3rd party remasters were cheaper as well.

Collections of Spyro, Crash, Bioshock, Assassin's Creed Ezio Collection included 3 games each for a maximum of $60 ($20 a game).
Metro, Batman Arkham, Assassin's Creed III, Borderlands, FFX/X-2, Marvel Ultimate Alliance included 2 games often below $60.

Single remasters were usually between $20 and $40 but pretty much every one of them had meaty DLCs that were included.

Fair enough.



curl-6 on 17 May 2020

Yeesh, that's a pretty bad port, there is no excuse for a game to run worse on Switch than Wii U.

Calling it a "remaster" borders on false advertising. Bad enough that they made fans foot the bill.

The fact it drops frames even on PS4 and only hits 1080p on Pro points to a really weak conversion across the board. If this was a game I liked/wanted I'd be pretty pissed off to be honest; I like Platinum a lot but they've really handled this poorly.

Last edited by curl-6 - on 17 May 2020

DonFerrari on 17 May 2020
RolStoppable said:
OlfinBedwere said:

Wasn't the Switch version the original focus of the Kickstarter though, with PS4 and PC being added down the line?

It seems like the original game was designed to take advantage of some quirk of the Wii U's hardware, and without it the Switch is struggling to achieve the same performance... but then the Wii U's hardware was so utterly sh*t across the board that I'm struggling to work out what said quirk might have been!

If PS4 and PC were truly added down the line, then both of those ports would have been completed in under three months which is too optimistic even for the results we are seeing.

That's why I am calling the kickstarter a preorder campaign instead of a normal funding campaign. All ports were nearly complete when the kickstarter went live and they didn't want to take on a big financial risk, so they offered all those tiers to sell a variety of special editions because they knew that the biggest fans would be willing to pay more than standard prices.

Three months is  good time for a port to a more powerfull console, easy to program for and with nothing really being upgraded.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Goatseye on 17 May 2020

Microsoft handled hundreds of BC titles ranging from OG Xbox to X360 titles, better than this steamy pos, PG called remaster. And they were all free of charge if previously owned.



DonFerrari on 17 May 2020
Goatseye said:

Microsoft handled hundreds of BC titles ranging from OG Xbox to X360 titles, better than this steamy pos, PG called remaster. And they were all free of charge if previously owned.

And you hadn't you could probably buy from 3 to 10 for this price =p



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."