How come Nintendo doesn't get flack for re-releasing games?

Wind Waker HD
Ocarina of Time 3D
Majora's Mask 3D
Star Fox 64 3D
Xenoblade Chronicles 3DS
Pokemon Omega Ruby & Alpha Sapphire

All of these games have been hyped up by sheep and Nintendo fans, yet they are basically refined ports. Doesn't really matter how long ago they came out, it's a money grab nonetheless. Can we admit that Nintendo is just as guilty as other companies, SW?

I know they got flak for Wind Waker HD. Pricing it was, I think.

Not sure about the rest.

Old classics that deserves remasters, or a year old games that are just thrown into the mix of the new generation to buff up the weak game library.

As far as being refined ports, I'll just give you Xenoblade and Wind Waker. But Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask are closer to remakes.

I've been calling out Pokemon milkage for years. It's getting fucking ridiculous at this point.

Ummm what are you talking about? For years the main complaint haters have had about Nintendo is that they rehash the same games over and over again.

And lol @ calling remakes "money grabs." News-flash bro: every product that has ever been released in the history of mankind is a "money grab."

Aside from Xenoblade, which is going to the handheld crowd like DK, those are all actual remakes of games that could use them. Thought this thread would be about the Wii games on Wii U lol

I mean they have small ass adjustments. Otherwise they are port jobs. Resident Evil Remake exists, and that was a true remake. What Nintendo does is no better than the hd ports and definitive editions we get.

Nintendo gets enough flack already/

Agreed that the term money grab is overused.

Also, I'm not really seeing any inherent problem with re-releases. My issue is more with the yearly spamming of some franchises, tho, all things considered, that's a quite a first world problem. But one can't help but think, "Come on. Give it a break."

They do. Undeservedly so. By people like you.

I didn't say what Nintendo does is always better (hence me agreeing that WW HD is just a refined port with bloom out the ass; also, they spammed ports of old Mario games during the GBA era) but the graphical overhaul in OoT and MM3D is far more than an HD coat of polish. I don't see how that's debatable.

Why do you care? Nintendo get's plenty of flack. Are you that obsessed with hating a piece of plastic. And Xenoblade new 3ds has gotten it's fair share of flak.

They do all of the time.

Not sure where you've been, but they get criticized all the time. Hell, people call new games like Galaxy 2 and Smash Bros. 4 and Mario Kart 8 "rehashes" or "re-releases".

because this forum is FILLED with kidtendo apologist

they do and rightly so

Did he say Nintendo does not get flack? Have you been on SW?

SW is full of Nintendo haters for just about everything. It is cool to hate on Nintendo. Just ask those High School kids.

If OoT is somehow a remake, then Ninja Gaiden Sigma 1 and 2 are remakes as well. I always had the impression that a remake was an entirely different game, not just the same game with minor additions...

A remake is not an entirely different game. It's the same game rebuilt.

I'm not saying that OoT and MM are full on remakes but they are closer to remakes than ports because of the dramatic visual overhaul.

Ninja Gaiden Sigma 1 and 2 are enhanced ports.

But they do. Even games like A Link Between Worlds were criticized for borrowing too much a previous title (in this case A Link to the Past).

A remake is an entirely different game. It follows the same story and events, but it is coded on an entirely different engine. Examples of remakes would be Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes, REmake, or Tomb Raider: Anniversary.

OoT and MM are more like enhanced ports. They're the same game with minor additions. Adding a new coat of paint does not make them actual remakes.

Remakes, Remastered, seriously guys, the new IP are coming, just be patients and besides, these remasteres, remake games have been going on since the Arcade Era.

Being ignorant of one's own actions (not you, a good chunk of people who criticize Nintendo for doing stuff they don't like and say they get a pass for doing it when they're proving it's far from the case).

Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes is not any more of a different game than OoT and MM are . It has same content with dramatically better visuals and some control adjustments and additions. I'll agree that MGS: TTS was a more dramatic upgrade, but I'm not going to entertain the idea that's an entirely different game because it isn't.

Also, OoT and MM's graphical overhaul is not just a fresh coat of paint:

That is a night and day difference.

The funny thing is when the Wii version of SMG 2 hit the e-shop some people go 'ah, I wish it was remastered in 1080p'

Yet if Nintendo did that, other people would go 'another game Nintendo remasters. What a money grab'

Are we really going to act like this is just a fresh coat of paint:

Twin Snakes is not the same as it's original. Everything about the game plays like Metal Gear Solid 2, it does not play like the original game. All of the assets were completely remade for the gamecube. It's not the same game with minor tweaks and new visuals.

OoT 3D and MM 3D are the SAME game from before. I don't understand how you can't see the difference. Yes, OoT 3D looks better and has some minor adjustments. However, it plays exactly the same as it did 17 years ago. Everything about Twin Snakes is completely different. It follows the same story and events, but at its core, it feels like a different game.

Nintendo doesn't get criticized for a lot of things my friend, that's just the way it always has been.

@GreySeal9: Twin Snake? Same as MGS1? Did you actually play Twin Snake?

I didn't say Twin Snakes=the original. Yes, the visuals are dramatically upgraded and Snake's moveset and overall feel is closer to MGS2. But the content is still the same. You still go through the same environments which haven't changed but for a visual upgrade, do the same tasks, fight the same boss fights, listen to the same dialogue, watch the same custscenes. It is not a different game. It is a remake of the same game. Sequels are entirely different games; remakes are not.

I admitted that OoT is not as much of a remake as Twin Snakes is. It is a more of a grey area. But it is not comparable to an HD coat of paint either. Like I keep saying, the visual difference is too dramatic to lump it in with HD remasters.

They do get flack for it.

It just doesn't look like it to you, because SW is Sheep Central.

Yeah, Twin Snakes isn't the same as the original. It takes all the mechanics from MGS2, and uses it on its own. It's not just a visual upgrade. The way you can play the game is way different from the original.

How has OOT changed mechanically? I haven't noticed a thing.

Lol

Makes me wonder. All of the cutscenes in TTS were redone by a different director. The gameplay is also that of MGS2 built on the MGS setting of Shadow Moses. It's an entirely different game in that regard. The original MGS is more of an isometric TPS, while MGS:TTS and MGS2 are more third-person stealth games.

you can use the gyroscope to aim.

I mean, that's just a feature implemented because the platform had this little thing for it. It doesn't change a thing from the game itself. Aiming was there back when it released on the N64.

Good lord. Why are you guys being so black and white about this?

I didn't say that TTS doesn't have dramatic differences. But that doesn't make it a different game. It makes it a remake: the same game rebuilt.

Sequels are entirely different games; remakes are not.

It's easy money.

I don't blame companies for these ports (Nintendo, Sony, Capcom, M$, Sega, Konami, Ubisoft, etc), but it's a little lame to see some people I know who owned the originals go hog wild re-buying them over and over at full price. I'd rather wait, and reboot my old copy if need be, but to each their own. Although I've had a Wii U since launch 2012, on principle, I refuse to buy Windwaker HD brand new until it's sub $20 (I've seen it for $30 new, but that wasn't low enough, I'll wait I'm in no rush). Now, if I hadn't bought Wind Waker for GC on launch waiting in a huge Zelda line paying full price back in 2002, I would have happily bought WindWaker HD full price for the Wii U as it would have been a new game to me, but alas, I remember the game well and I refuse to pay full price again since there are soooo many games to buy across so many systems I can't throw money at the same games over and over and over without some limit.

I don't buy any games I already own at full price again. As a CEO though? If I saw that everytime I re-released a "classic" the company got millions and I got paid millions in bonuses? I'd keep doing it. Slow and steady. Thinking about it, porting these games over to new machines costs pennies on the dollar compared to actually making a new game...I'd do the same thing. As a consumer, my stance is different and these standards I have? They aren't new. I've been the same for decades. I buy it once at full price. Great game. However, a re-release I will also want, but at a reduced price (if I'm interested at all). I think I learned my lesson between all the Street Fighter 2 revisions back in the SNES--Genesis-Saturn-PS1 era.

There was a time when SF2 was brand new and I thought SF2 was the pinnacle of balance and game design. The game was so supreme it could never be topped...hahaha. Oh naive SolidTy.

I took this picture for another thread, but it shows some other Zelda remakes I got in the past on Gamecube way before the Wii released or Wii U. You'll see three Zelda remakes in this picture. It's not like Nintendo is new at this. On my SNES I got Super Mario All-stars (Mario 64 DS, Super Mario Advance games, etc)...I just think like many companies, Nintendo is releasing these ports more and more as it pays so well. As I said, I don't blame them, but the most exciting thing is when the new games finally release.

I admitted that OoT is less of a remake and more of a grey area. But there's no way it's akin to a regular HD remaster.

Also, you can play GTA V for PS4 way different than the original due to first person view. That does make it a different game.

That's not to say that GTA V remaster's changes are as dramatic, but new mechanics does not add up to an different game.

I don't really give any companies flak for relreleasing games (whether remakes or just ports). I'd be a huge hypocrite to considering I've bought almost every version of FFIV (except the PS1 version). If there is interest in these things and people get value from them, then so be it. As long as new, good games are still being released alongside ports and remakes than I don't really care.

And that being said how is WWHD a port? the graphical jump wasn't as huge/noticeable as OoT -> OoT3d sure, but WWHD did still add a good amount of things (fast sail, fixed triforce quest, selfie mode, aiming with gamepad, a couple of redone music tracks I think...).

lmao at people still dont understanding the difference between a remake and a remaster.

visually enhancments or minor adjustments to game = remaster

building a new game entirely = remake

no fukin way in hell is majora mask a remake, its a remaster plain and simple.

• Windwaker HD - They did get flack because they fully priced it.
• Ocarina of Time 3D - People begged for that. It's also like 13 years old when it came out (now closer to 17 years) and the game didn't look like a 13 year old game.
• Majora's Mask 3D - ANOTHER game People begged for. It's also a 15 year old game that doesn't totally look like it was made 15 years ago.
• Xenoblade Chronicles 3D - The only major complaint I hear about this game is that it's NEW 3DS exclusive. Other than that, it's another platform to play this game on AND I don't think it's Gamestop exclusive this time around so it'll be more available.
• Pokemon Alpha Shappire & Omega Ruby - HOENN CONFIRMED!!!!! *TRUMPETS! TRUMPETS!* (it was begged far more than Majora's Mask 3D)

Still all better re-release remasters than The Last of Us re-release.

Are the Star Wars special editions also remakes because they have dramatic visual differences from the original? Is King Kong (1933) the same movie as King Kong (2005)? They both follow the same story and events, but the direction leading them is completely different.

If these games were movies...then Twin Snakes isn't the same movie as the original. Someone had to reshoot the entire movie. It follows the same events but the artistic direction of the story, gameplay, actors, special effects, etc. are all completely redone.

OoT is the same movie. The footage has been cleaned up and edited differently, but all the work done 17 years ago still remains in that movie.

They uprezzed the textures. Re-did those, sure. It's not far off, as opposed to Twin Snakes or Anniversary.

While first person view gives it a different look on things, it doesn't change the core mechanics of the game. Everything is still the same, except you're looking through a person's eyes. First person, and all that.

I'm just saying there's a difference between something like OoT, which is still the same game, and Twin Snakes, which plays differently due to added mechanics.

WInd Waker-Gamecube 2003 - Wii U 2013

OOT- N64 1998 - 3DS 2011

Majoras Mask- N64 2000 - 3DS 2015

Ruby & Sapphire- GBA 2003 - 3DS 2014

Xenoblade - Wii 2012 - N3DS 2015? most likely.

Other than Xenoblade those are some big gaps and 3 out of those 5 games had major improvements.

A remake does not build a new game entirely. It rebuilds an old game. Building an entirely new game is called a sequel or a reboot.

Can't believe I'm having this discussion.

Also, I didn't say MM and OoT are full on remakes but they are not garden variety remasters either.