The only thing I remember about Medievil is it had a pretty bad camera, could be the reason why it got such a low rating. But again, I really remember nothing about it.
The only thing I remember about Medievil is it had a pretty bad camera, could be the reason why it got such a low rating. But again, I really remember nothing about it.
Everything in the above post is opinion unless stated otherwise.
It's great fun. One of the 3 PS1 remakes I wanted alongside Ape Escape and Omega Boost. They are very faithful to the original game and that's where opinions are mixed. The game is by no means bad. It's very well done..at being the exact same game with new visuals and music. There are some minor improvements but overall it plays like a game from that era.
Life!? ... What console is that on?
Most pro reviews on 1:1 remakes are worthless. They go into them with the mindset that old games are inherently inferior to modern games, so they'll score remakes low if they aren't totally modernized. It was the same deal with the Secret of Mana remake. People will talk like the SNES game is a classic, yet also talk like the remake is trash, even though it's basically the same game with a new coat of paint.
Eh, I'm not so sure. Crash, Spyro, and CTR remakes all were received well. It really does have the problem of not having a spectacular base on which to make a remake unlike those three.
To be fair, some games that are remade kind of don't deserve it and they really do need to be modernized as they weren't even that good when they released. As I've said the only thing I remember about Medievil is that the camera was bad, but I can't tell you whether I liked it or not because I've only played it once way back when and didn't even finish it. However, I've had the same opinion of Secret of Mana for the longest time. You know of this opinion because we spoke of it in a couple of threads prior to the remakes release. People aren't wrong about their complaints of Secret of Mana, they're right on point with their comments about the remake, but as you stated, these complaints are the same complaints they would have had back on the SNES except "bias"(not quoting you, this is actually my opinion here.) The reason people loved Secret of Mana wasn't because of the gameplay at all, and now that the game looks like a budget mobile game, or "people have finally played it" they finally are honest about this biased opinion they've held for years.Originally Posted by Aussie2B
However, journalists wouldn't have to crap all over a game for having old mechanics if it wasn't for Sony bothering to make sure whether the games are even worth remaking in the first place. Look at Nintendo's remakes. Ocarina of Time's remake on the 3DS is very playable to this day, Crash Bandicoot is playable to this day and the only reason Sony finally proposed a deal with Activision is because the fans were begging for a long time. These games are actually good. However, Sony making decisions is is like a bunch of suits saying, "oh let's remake this old game because it sold well" over people who have been developing games for over 30 years and are like "let's remake this game because it's actually good." PS1 Classic vs the SNES Classic, people who have no about games and it's nothing but a business decision over a business decision based on actual knowledge of their games.
Everything in the above post is opinion unless stated otherwise.
The last thing we need is to go back to the old days when hardware manufacturers were heavy-handed with third-party developers, telling them what they can and can't release. As I've said a million times, I don't expect the gaming industry to revolve around me and my tastes, so I don't think my tastes should determine what "deserves" to be made, nor should yours. If a developer wants to remake a game and chooses to do it 1:1, I say the more the merrier. I'd rather have the opportunity to give a game a shot and see if I like it or not than for it to not exist in the first place. Sales will determine if a release was a good idea or not for the publisher. With the Mana remakes, the green light for each project has hinged on the sales of the last. There wouldn't have been a Secret of Mana remake to begin with if Adventures of Mana hadn't sold well, and we wouldn't be getting both the first ever localization of the original version of Seiken Densetsu 3 and a remake of it if not for good sales on the Secret of Mana remake. So for that alone, I'm very grateful for the existence of the Secret of Mana remake, before I even factor in my enjoyment of it. People who have never liked Secret of Mana aren't of my concern here. The remake wasn't for them, so they only have themselves to blame if they bought a remake of a game they didn't like and somehow expected to like that version. It's the people who love the original but hate the remake who confuse me, unless their love for the original is entirely rooted in the graphics.
I wouldn't mind if hardware manufacturers prevented developers from releasing games with loot boxes or gambling mechanics in them. Also preventing games from being released if they contain game breaking bugs or are unfinished would be nice, instead of just letting them get patched later like with Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 5. Small bugs ok, but large ones not ok.
It would be nice if all games weren't released until they were polished enough to not have significant bugs, but I would worry about how that would be defined and enforced. If there were a mandated amount of QA and the cost would presumably be on the publisher, the added time and expense could kill the viability of small, niche releases, games that might not even need as extensive QA as AAA games.
Posting Permissions
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. Similar agreements apply to other advertising or affiliate programs such as those from eBay, Google, etc.
Copyright © 1991 - Present of Digital Press. All rights reserved.
Reply With Quote
