Topic: Nintendo Remaking games? Is it helping or ruining game legacy's?

Well I always get mad when I see a new remake for a game especially Legend of Zelda Windwaker and Majoras Mask. I believe that when Nintendo releases a remake it ruins the legacy a game has created for example. When I saw the Majoras Mask trailer I felt i was going to barf. I mean has it really come to this you can't make a sequel or a new original. So I want to hear everyone elses opinions!

The game is only rumored to exist, any trailer [footage] would be premature at best.

While sometimes a remake of a game may seem like a lazy way of supplying a "new" game of a franchise rather than an entirely new adventure, I see it as a chance to reintroduce an old title to a younger audience and create a new generation of fans. We can better share experiences of great games of the past to those who weren't around at the time and might not have interest in playing an old game with dated graphics. Also, I like to see it as a sort of "redemption" for a game. With technology more advanced in today's modern world, games from the past who's looks were held back by the tech back then can now better express their world and appearance and look as they originally intended! Not to mention, fixing bugs in games with patches and updates is now possible with today's tech!

I like remakes. My first few Mario games were remakes- Super Mario Bros 2 and Yoshi's Island for GBA, and Super Mario 64 DS. For some reason, I only got Kirby Super Star Ultra last month, and it very well may be my favorite game ever. I think remakes can be great, as long as they're done right. Ex. Ultra did it right by keeping everything from the original and adding more games. A bad remake would basically be a port of the original, or somehow even worse than the original.

If you don't like it don't buy them and they'll stop making them. Simple.

They're only bad if they are...um...well...bad. Or if it actively gets in the way of good new releases.

Remakes rarely takes away to much resources from making a new game since they are often handled by outside studios. Most of the time you can get a remake and a new game.

It's not only Nintendo that's remaking old games. Konami has recently released HD versions of Metal Gear Solid, and Capcom redid their Resident Evil line.

What hurts Nintendo, especially, is that the Wii U has gotten a lot of PS3/Xbox ports from other developers so far. Then they get a gamecube Zelda, a 3DS Mario, and Donkey Kong. I know they will be great games, but the timing of their release doesn't help the image of the Wii U in any way.

The way I see it, Nintendo either rushed the release of the Wii U a year early, or they misjudged the time it takes to develop their games for it. So then they got other teams together to pick up the table scraps of already-made games and release those meanwhile the real games are still being worked on.

and? Every console gets that. The Wii had a lot of PS2 (Okami, Klonoa) and Gamecube ports (Twilight Princess, RE4, Metroid Prime 1 & 2 and the NPC games) as well as games, like New SMB Wii, that people labeled DS ports. The 3DS got a bunch of N64 ports (OoT and Starfox) and some of the best titles have been very derivative like Animal Crossing and Luigi's Mansion. Same happened with the DS (N64 and SNES ports) and the GBA (lots of SNES ports) and so on.

Same is true with the 360/PS3 and even the XBone/PS4. I don't think it's fair to label cross platform games as "360/PS3 ports" because they are cross platform games and are "ported" to everything. It's just that early in the life of a console you get ports, remakes and re-imaginings of existing ideas more than new IPs. I don't see what the problem is and as I said if you don't want them you don't have to buy them.

I feel Nintendo remaking games is perfectly fine. I mean, it's not like we didn't have a ton of remakes on the GBA, DS and Wii for instance. And the Wind Waker 'remake', while not something I particularly care for any more, still seems like it's mostly improving on the original rather than 'ruining' it.

Remakes are fine. I usually don't buy them since I already own the originals, but it's a great way to introduce old games to newer players. In that sense, it's actually strengthening the Nintendo legacy.

I'd say remakes help the legacy of the game and show it in a better light if done correctly. OoT3D was a fine example of this, as it included the Master Quest version and it was generally a lot easier to play than on the N64 (for me at least). And I'm sure Majora's Mask will have the same kind of effect as well, the moon will literally be falling on you in 3D.

While SF643D held no significance for me what-so-ever, it was just a pure graphical update as far as I can tell.

Wind Waker remake might seem a bit strange, but it's rebuilding the game and giving it a better look with some extra updates. There is so much to love.

And as @CM30 said, there have been countless remakes in Nintendo's history. Heck, there's even been reboots of old series.

The remakes could change up things, but usually those changes are good. Ocarina of Time seems to have fine changes and additions. Well, that doesn't go for everything. My opinion will vary based on the game since it will have its differences as compared to others. I bet Star Fox 3D had good changes and additions too, but my opinion will differ for each remake.

From a business perspective, they are awesome. Take a game that is already made, add changes that require no creativity or actual thought, release it in HD and Nintendo fans are like 'omg best thing EVAR'

For people that like new games, they are horrible. They take devs away from new projects. Any resources that go into making remakes are resources that are taken away from new projects. Nintendo doesn't hire and fire outside devs on a regular enough basis for them to be responsible for these.

That's why I fought so adamantly against people that liked those stupid NPC games. They added waggle to GC games and Nintendo fans were like 'OH YEAH'. Thankfully not enough consumers bought into this and the NPC games failed hard.

Now Im guessing Nintendo is going to start the whole 'now in HD' thing. Wouldn't surprise me to see them make a few HD remakes out of older games, as if Nintendo fans (or anyone for that matter) should be excited about HD in 2013. Welcome to 2005, Nintendo. That's why I won't be purchasing Wind Waker. That is easily my favorite Zelda game (well mostly because I don't like the others) but I refuse to support Nintendo cashing in on old games we have already played.

Direct those resources to new games and perhaps even... New IPs. Yes crazy, I know.

@AlexSays They might not be good for the gamer who's looking for new experiences, but it's good for those who never played it before to give it a whirl this time around. However I'm starting to see them as more of a filler between releases.

The 3DS was failing terribly in its first few months, so out came OoT3D and Star Fox to fill in the gap while we waited for Mario. And I think they'll be doing the same thing again with Wind Waker, filling in the gap while we wait for the next big release.

And I agree with you on the whole NPC thing, it was literally the exact same game but with waggle. Innovation! To this day I still don't understand why they bothered, they just weren't needed... at all.

Admittedly, there are good and bad remakes. Star Fox for instance makes no sense, it was a direct port with a graphical upgrade. While OoT3D did at least include Master Quest to make it a little worth while getting. DKCR3D is probably in the middle camp though, it's neither a good nor bad port, but it certainly isn't needed.

The problem I envision with this line of thought though is that gaming is still relatively young. I know people are like 'omg I've been playing video games since the 90s', but in the grand scheme of things, that's a very short amount of time. Think of other big entertainment industries such as the movie industry. That has been around for a significantly longer period of time.

So what is the problem with this.. Remakes are increasing linearly with the aging of gaming. As the years pass on, publishers have larger and larger libraries to pull from. What is the second problem in all of this.. Video games will continuously be made to be played differently. Whether it be due to the controls, resolution, virtual reality, etc.

To bring this all together, we are venturing down a road where publishers use remakes as an easy source of revenue to fund more spread out releases. Publishers will have an increasingly large amount of games to remake with the passage of time, and there's always a new novelty factor they can advertise it as (now in HD, now with motion control, now in 3D, etc.). What is the point in putting resources into new projects that may not be successful, when you can put less resources into easily remaking an older, successful game and pass it off as being new because of factor x? There is no point.

I've always maintained, if you missed out on an older game, go find a system and play that game. Supporting devs to remake a game simply because you missed it is seemingly selfish when the overlying consequences are far greater. If remakes are wildly successful now, they'll only be more popular in the future. I don't think many people realize the importance of NPC games failing, because that may have very well dictated how many remakes we saw on the Wii U.

@AlexSays I do see your point, especially when finding an old NES or N64 is only one click away on sites like eBay and Amazon. The devs could easily pursue making new IPs and making bigger and better games than what they did before. But gaming is in such a delicate position now, where one wrong turn can lead you to bailing out as we've seen in recent years with some companies (THQ for instance), so it's no surprise devs keep to the tried and tested avenue of releasing sequels and remakes because you never know if the gaming crowd will buy your new game.

But there's also the whole Virtual Console aspect Nintendo try to market off. If Nintendo are going to keep making remakes here and there on the next console iteration, what is the point in having the VC? For example, I could either buy OoT on the Wii VC for £10 or I could buy OoT3D for about the same price that looks better and has Master Quest included.

Obviously Nintendo won't remake every single game out there, so there is still merit for the VC, but the point still stands that something is gonna have to give. We'll either be swamped by remakes because that's what people want, or we'll have a bunch of sequels with a few IPs scattered here and there.

Despite what most of you think, remakes don't really take developers away from new projects.

Remakes do provide pubishers with revenue to fund risky new IPs though. If you hire a external team to do it then that could help new IPs to made by making the risk's impact on the company less horrible if it doesn't work.

And is it really that different from all the 'revamped' versions of old movies being released 'in 3D' nowadays? Those are basically the film world equivalent to HD remakes/ports.