The Dead Space remaster sold more than the original Dead Space. People were there but the companies themselves have shifted the definition of success. I can't blame "the community" for that.
Seriously. It’s weirdly pro-corporate to pretend that the fault lies entirely on the consumer when companies like EA are well-known for setting impossible standards for their studios and shutting them down when those standards aren’t met.
@@jackjax7921Of course everyone knows EA spend a lot of money on their games. That's part of the problem. Sky high budgets require sky high sales. The original did not have a large budget which allowed it to be "successful" even with its smaller sales numbers than the remake. The Dead Space remake is not perfect, either. But sure, call people poor for disagreeing with the current mismanagement of IPs they like.
My problem with the Dead Space argument is that nowadays these devs spec 6+mi copies for every single game. They want everything or nothing and that's not sustainable.
This kind of thinking by publishers is why we have so few genres and options today. 24 years ago, we had more genres in a year, so there was something for everyone. Today, everyone gets the same homogenized million-dollar budget game-as-a-service that tries to appeal to the lowest common denomenator to maximize how many players will be enticed to buy something in the in-game shop.
To be fair that was what killed the original versions too. So ironically yeah a horror game would never be a super huge seller. So what dead space remake got was pretty good
Yeah no shit it’s fun, back then there were good games just like there is today. But the point of “nostalgia” is that you are associating your memories of childhood when you play an older game.
@@Indigo_1001 I'm emphasizing that video games used to be better. I'm talking about things like DLC replacing the fun of unlocking characters, in a game (where has that gone?), I'm talking about actual challenge, I'm talking about actual fun.
And the nostalgia is actually a good representation of things being better. Nostalgia is literally just the feeling of good memories. When that's all we have, anymore, things are bad.
@@MattsFreeChannel1 My dude there are TONS of games now a days with numerous unlocks over skins and such, you want me to list them. And tons of games dlc or expansions add so much life in games. Like the Witcher DLC, Resident Evil 4 that was 10 dollars if a 6 hour long story mode, that was longer then some games back then. People are so quick to forget all the things we have now. It will take 20 years for people to look back and suddenly act like “gaming was peak in the 2020’s”
The premise of this video isn't entirely incorrect but the arguments and examples use are pretty poor. The Dead Space remake selling poorly is due to a variety of factors not at all addressed in the video and you conflate the desire for a new entry in a series with wanting remakes of existing games which while there may be some overlap those are not the same thing. A remake of Jak 1-3, games that already exist, are a lot different than if they announced an actual Jak 4. Likewise you didn't consider the rising cost of games which makes the idea of buying a game that has already existed for years, fans of will already have, and for a higher price point isn't going to be very appealing. Even more so that the original devs are all gone and none of the people behind that original game are getting any reward out of this.
Very agreed that his points are good but the examples are wack. Another one I think falls under that umbrella is the The Crew argument, which forgets the fact that the game was removed in all contexts, with no plans for an offline edition, like Avengers for example. It's not like most games that get de-listed where a physical copy still works, because it isn't on any digital front, AND it doesn't work when you put the disc in. It's not just that nobody was playing it (which is hyperbolic) it's that nobody will ever be able to play it again (officially). If you bought this game, you paid for access in the allotted time period it was out, and now you do not have access to it anymore. That is not ownership. The outrage is an entirely different discussion on the potential that any one of your games could magically disappear because of legal issues or server costs - Just watch, STEEP is next. They could have created an offline mode, or they could have left the servers for the community to manage, even Club Penguin made that leap (Okay, Disney didn't, but fans could still de-compile the game to make community recreations, something Ubisoft is specifically trying to block). Better yet, if we were told years in advance the game would shut down one day (And it didn't cost actual money with deluxe editions) at least we could've prepared. Blaming the player for buying a game they assumed they owned is hilariously unhelpful. Like it or not, Ubisoft deleted a game from existence, and nothing is stopping them from doing it again. yes most people weren't playing it, but the few who continued to anyway would've liked to keep going. What's the point of achievements and cosmetics, or having a game at all, if it's not to play?
It's important to remember that back in the 2000s, gaming was soo good that people had to pick and choose from a ton of bangers and unfortunately, a lot of incredible games were ignored as a result of that becuase other games were just more appealing at the time and stole the spotlight. Nowadays gaming is so bad that people are seeking out these old games that flopped back in the day because they're better than the games of today are. It's that simple really.
Was it really that good though? Late 90s/Early 00s was when we had all those craptacular licensed games for IPs and franchises that didn't last past a quick cash grab because of flash in the pan hype. Those are some really rose-colored glasses if you think there were only bangers back then. One to bring up is Haze, remember that shitshow "Halo Killer"? Gaming isn't bad now as these past couple years have really brought out some excellent games. Valheim, Helldivers 2, Baldur's Gate 3, Deep Rock Galactic, Elden Ring, Kingdom Come: Deliverance, Guardians of the Galaxy are just some I can think of that came out the last 5ish years that are amazing games. I don't play console games but I know there's a lot of great games that came out the last 5 years on those too. There's just such a low bar to get in to making games that the market is flooded with cash grab live service crap like Suicide Squad.
@@jod791 This is way too subjective and long of a topic for a youtube comment thread, but I'm the camp that believes games started dropping in quality as soon as the HD era came around. The bottom line is that the 90s and early-mid 2000s had a lot of high-quality games with good budgets, relatively short development times, smaller teams able to focus on their specific vision, and less demanding requirements for graphics. Video games now are more of a business. It was always a business, of course, but it's more of a business now. It feels like every single AAA game is one of four genres. I think I'm going to puke if I'm spoon-fed any more open world or souls-like games. But games cost so much money and time to make now, why wouldn't these big companies stick with the same working formulas? And indie titles bring in the new and interesting ideas, sure, but they don't have the budget to do it on the same scale as companies who innovated in the past. If I were to look at the top games from 2000-2004 and compare them to 2020-2024, I'm taking 2000-2004, graphics be damned. It's not even close for me, and it has nothing to do with nostalgia. Games were just made differently and under better circumstances back then. That's all.
@@jod791Guardians of the Galaxy? Really? I can say unequivocally that there are a whole slew of excellent games released in the 90's / early 2000's that are indeed still better than any of those games you mentioned. Elden Ring is the only one that is in the same league. It isn't rose tinted glasses or nostalgia talking either. Many of these older games were better in part because the false narrative of "number of hours long = game value" had yet to take hold so their wasn't much filler. The games were cheaper to make so they didn't have to appeal to as wide of an audience to make a profit either. This meant that they didn't have to check off as many boxes turning the product into something that tries to make everyone happy but ends up pleasing no one. The number of people that played videogames back then was much smaller so a larger percentage of them were actual gaming enthusiasts instead of (if we're really being honest with ourselves) complete imbeciles which has swelled to depressing proportions today. There seems to be this false belief among younger gamers today that thinks good game design seems to follow this steadily rising line on a graph. It doesn't always work that way though and I think many of you don't understand why certain restrictions were built into some older games. It wasn't because "they just didn't know how to do those things back then". It's as if every single modern game is being designed to play the same because if a game releases that doesn't have the same feature set as everything else modern players will view it as flawed. There were actual game design reasons why you couldn't spin the camera around and you didn't have a parry in Resident Evil 4, but consumers today are too dumb, so we get derivative changes like that in the remake to its' detriment.
@@Cableguy15Yes! You get it. I'm so sick of people dismissing genuinely better games from earlier decades as "just seeming better because of nostalgia". There seems to be this unwritten belief that too many people hold that there is just this steady upward moving line of game design progress and everything made today is inherently designed better. That is why every single game is starting to play more and more alike. There is a design reason why you had to commit to a jump in Castlevania, you couldn't spin the camera around your character in Resident Evil 4, you could only shoot in 8 directions and not 360° in Smash T.V., and you couldn't dodge roll and parry your way out of every problem in every freaking game. Everything is being dumbed down and designed to play the same today because if it doesn't, casual gamers will view it as flawed and behind the times. I am still discovering amazing games from earlier decades that I never even played and therefore have no nostalgia for, and they are often better.
The big problem with these statements is that we consumers vote with our wallet. If we don't like a game, we can't just buy it, because it sends a message that we want more stuff like nuts and bolts. But if we don't, we risk sending a message that we don't like the entire saga. No option wins.
What happened to Dead Space is a nuanced problem and there are several reasons why lots of people held back from buying it. EA, due to fucked up executive decisions, force Visceral games to turn create Dead Space 3 the way it turned out to be and then it obviously flopped because nobody wanted it, so then they shut down the studio for not fulfilling their financial targets with a game NOBODY wanted. Then, because EA is all about milking money, they decide to REMAKE Dead Space after they killed the franchise and it's studio to milk some cash INSTEAD of just giving is a remaster - the original game absolutely did not NEED a remake as it is still a proper modern game by today's standards. They could've easily done a remastered trilogy and it would actually be preferable - bump up the res to 4k and give us 60fps. easy enough. Although a remake is more effort, I'd say it is effort wasted and they definitely wanted to sell us the "same" games again and maybe they'd change things up with Dead Space 3 to actually make it fit the franchise. However the financial incentive was clear. Now LOTS of people did not want to give EA their money after what they did to Visceral games, especially for profitting from their work AGAIN by creating a remake the franchise absolutely did not need. This is not a Resident Evil 2,3 nor even 4 case (RE4 is definitely a bit outdated by modern standards) which is not the case for Dead Space 1. I adore the original Dead Space but I was not eager to give EA my money. I bought the game after a heavy sale more out of curiosity than actual hype. I'd much rather just have a simple remaster than this unnecessary remake. The remake was nice. I don't think it vastly improved the original game by any means. There's some added value for sure and it was crafted with care and respect for the original game, so kudos to that. But it was not needed. These conflicting emotions raged in a lot of people. Lots of people did not buy the game out of principle (nor do they - most possibly - buy any game from EA) or they just waited for a sale to satisfy their curiosity. tl;dr fuck EA
Resident evil 4 remake wasn't needed yet we still got it this argument that the dead space remake was pointless doesn't make any sense buy nobody said a thing to Rockstar, Capcom and whatever gaming company decided to do a remake not a word was said. Very weird if you ask me the only reason dead space remake sold poorly was because they decided to release it a month before the re4r.
Other factors; * It’s too early for “real is brown” mid-late 2000s games to be prime nostalgia material. Their main demographic was older which could explain why they thought that it was time for a sort of revival. * Political agendas that EA doesn’t even believe in put people off.
Another interesting counter to your argument is the reignited trilogy remake of Spyro the Dragon. That game went on to sell over 10 million copies. These games do have interest, but you have to develop, market and advertise these titles intelligently.
@@Laz3rCat95 that's exciting to hear back in the day I never really got to play Spyro (only played the 2nd game of that weird serious trilogy), recently played the remake and had a ton of fun
Same with the Bandicoot he got his games remastered 1-1 just like Spyro and due to how well it sold we finally got the long awaited 4th and final game to finish Crash's story. Even if the original creators weren't fully involved it was developed by a studio who respected the franchise. Some ups and downs yes however it's a full on Crash Bandicoot game through and through not that bs Crash Bash that came out not to long after the 4th game. Tried to piggy back off of other game ideas and it flopped hard I don't think anyone talks about it anymore.
The outrage about The Crew isn't really about The Crew, it's part of a larger plan to fight the good fight against publishers killing games and providing no means to play the game without their servers
I really think the rise in remakes and remasters is because of the gaming landscape today. Are there still AMAZING games being made today? Absolutely, but with the rise of micro transactions, publishing deadlines and what seems like corporations making games instead of giving all the resources and time to devs that actually care, it’s such a turn off to gaming as a whole right now
Not to mention, most AAA games today require a TON of time to develop, far longer than any previous generation. Making remakes and remasters take a lot less time and can bring in some money in the meantime.
Indie games are the future! Until they grow into big dev studios and get bought out by the same greedy publishers and shutdown when their micro-addled games don't immediately make a billion bucks
AAA companies have become too big for their own good. Difficult to control, manage, and maintain unless there's great leadership at the top, they will eventually crumble just like when the Roman Empire split. The size which made them successful eventually became their biggest weakness.
I don’t see it as slander. There isn’t many demand for gex to return. And when it releases and inevitably disappoint in sales, publishers will haphazardly come into the conclusion that resurrecting old IPs isn’t worth investing in
@@gleam6370 Err, BS there isn't much demand for Gex, there's a underground sub-set of fans that are clamouring for Gex to come back, you see fan art of the games to this day of the iconic Anime Channel and Gexzilla and you look at the reception of FlippinDingDong's Gex animation. Heck! I get occasional comments directly complimenting that I have a Gex profile icon, Gex fans all acknowledge that the games haven't aged well in some areas but it has a charm that we loved and are eager to buy the remaster day 1.
No one I saying that amazing games didn’t exist back then. There were amazing games from the birth of gaming. But people are saying is that the type that says “gaming was much better when ” are blinded by nostalgia
@@Indigo_1001 Well it was, studios had far more creative freedom and innovation, you brought games at a honest price and were yours to actually own and while the games may have been more archaic, they none the less provided the most fun of many childhoods with friends and family you sat by in local multiplayer. Compare all those factors today, then I'd say, absolutely gaming was much better back then.
Experiencing something that existed in the past for the first time isn't nostalgia, though. Nostalgia is about remembering things you already experienced before.
@@SynthLizard8 My dude what about all the endless multiplayer games on consoles that were non existent in the past, that brought millions of people together and even created a competitive gaming scene that didn’t exist before. I promise you kids that grew up in that era wouldn’t change that for the world. Doesn’t that count at all when comparing both. People like you are so lame. Would rather pretend that when you were a teen gaming was “more special” instead of being open to new experiences and actually trying new games like you did if when you were younger Amazing games are still releasing, you ain’t playing them.
@@Indigo_1001 "that brought millions of people together" You absolutely can't compare what multiplayer was back then to what it is now, multiplayer back then was considered more like a event rather then a standard mode of play. It was more special, it was more close-knit and it was a time of abundant creative freedom and experiences, that's just un-debatable I don't know why you're applying the 'either-or fallacy', I still appreciate good games today. The indie scene is still keeping what magic of what gaming was back in the 90's and 2000's and it's those and retro games of what I only play.
TIL I'm only supposed to be nostalgic for games that make greedy companies a lot of money when they soullessly remake them. Wait, what? What is "false nostalgia"? People remember fondly the games they remember fondly and talk about them... saying that the nostalgia was fake because the game didn't sell gangbusters makes no sense. "Where were the people buying it?" I'm sure the people who loved it DID buy it. I'm sure in many cases the ones that were nostalgic for it and talking about it were the exact ones who did buy it. But because it wasn't a hit, their nostalgia is all 'false'? And to that point, I loved Gex (mostly Deep Cover and Enter, though). He was funny to me as a kid, and heck, even as an adult I can still find the quirkiness amusing... but more importantly the gameplay was fun and diverse with many worlds to enter and interesting mechanics. Will I buy the remake? PROBABLY NOT. Because it's a remake. I already played those games so why should I spend money on them again as if they're new? Will I someday revisit them with an emulator and play them as they actually were? HELL YEAH. Why does Mario get to keep making games, an IP that has never really appealed to me personally. Why is my nostalgia for Gex 'false' yet if I were nostalgic for Mario, that would be real? Just because that franchise makes money? That's a very cynical metric. I never buy Mario games, personally. My tastes tend to lean towards niche in general... the logic in this video really doesn't hold up here. I'm also nostalgic for older Hitman games... and new entries of that series have both flopped and been hits. So what's the verdict on whether my nostalgia is false or real there? Huh, maybe whether a game sells well or not has little to do with the actual interest in the IP but more to do with the actual entry itself, or perhaps even other factors. If I'm nostalgic for a game, I'm probably also nostalgic for the graphics of the times and want to relive the experience as close to how it was when I was enjoying it the first time. Remakes/remasters/rehashes are kinda dumb to me in that aspect, unless the original game is so flawed that its issues stand in the way of appreciating it - but then no one is calling for remakes of games that no one could appreciate.
Yep, I pretty much agree with everything you said. Most of the time, if I'm a huge fan of an older game, I have no desire to buy a remake because I already played (and in many cases still own) those games. And remakes can often make changes for the worse. The Ratchet and Clank PS4 remake is my personal sticking point in this regard, cutting out multiple levels from the PS2 original because 'games expensive to make' I guess. I'd rather have worse graphics with more content, thanks. That's not to say I never buy remakes/remasters, but usually they're for games I never got the chance to play, for example the Castlevania Advance collection. I played Circle of The Moon as a kid but never got a chance to play the others. I'm also eyeing up the R-Type Tactics 1+2 remake, because the second game never got released outside of Japan. But the Dead Space remake? I love Dead Space. Absolutely adore it. But I'm not buying a damn remake for it. Why, in the hopes they'll release a Dead Space 2 remake? I don't want that either!
To me it's a combination of things: - We are running out of classics to remake and remaster - Not enough "modern" classics are entering the zeitgeist, partially because most of them are remakes or remasters - Sequels, remakes and remasters are easier than good new original games - Everyone wants everything to have a second chance. That's not a bad thing. Some franchises come back and are actually good. Some were always good but couldn't sell. Some bad games have good ideas and you want to see those games get a second chance. - Brand recognition of a bad thing is still brand recognition. Do it well enough and you will fool someone. I don't actually mind there being so many alternative takes on things. I do think there are some ideas that need to lie down, I don't know if there is anywhere interesting to go with Gex, there are franchises like Bomberman which I think outlived basically any chance of being interesting again.
My dude what are all these remakes releasing? Can you list 5 major ones I the last 3 years. It has to be easy if there is SO many of them according to you. And I promise you games like Baldurs Gate 3, Elder Ring, It Takes Two and so on WILL be seen as classics in the future. A art piece is never considered a classic the minute it’s out
@@Indigo_1001 Resident Evil 4, Metroid Prime Remastered (remaster in name only, the game got completely remade), Final Fantasy VII Rebirth, Dead Space, Like a Dragon: Ishin, Persona 3 Reloaded, The Last of Us Part 1 to name a few and I left out the remasters
@@tdenzel101 Funny how remake are unnecessary when their game finally gets one. Years ago people were begging for a Resident Evil 4 remake. Now they got it and suddenly it’s “trash and unnecessary”
"Wow EA shutdown a cool studio. I would have liked to see more games from them ): " "EA made a remake of the first deadspace game that only looks marginally better than the copy I already own and still play regularly. Guess I won't buy it" Apparently this makes you not a real fan and a hypocrite.
I basically said the same thing in my comment too. Like EA dusting off Dead Space to cash in on the horror remake craze is something I'm supposed to reward them for?
@@theSHELFables not to mention wishing single player games without a bunch of bullshit were more popular is not incorrect because they make less money. Everyone knows they make less money than micro transactions and cash grabbing bs. We all know fortnite prints money faster than the federal reserve. We just wish it didn't. We just wish none of that shit ever took off and became the standard.
@@theSHELFables It’s arguably too early for mid-late 2000s “real is brown” games to be prime nostalgia material, much like how it’s becoming too late for Atari 2600 stuff to be prime nostalgia material.
but it looks MUCH better. have you looked at the original? If you think the remake and the og look marginally the same, yo're blind and on crack. seriously, go back and play it and compare it to the top settings of the remake. hell, the medium settings make it look better.
Yes, I'm the demand for the Gex Trilogy. Gex the Gecko, Banjo-Kazooie and Spyro the Dragon all deserve justice and a remaster and only one of them has gotten it. I will buy 5 copies of Gex if it gets me closer to fun 3D platformers from the 90's coming back lmao.
Theres this belief that the only reason you can enjoys something you did when you were younger is because your nostalgic for it, and that it has no value otherwise. there's also the idea that because something you liked when you were young isnt a masterpiece or Grade A product, that you couldn't possibly enjoy it now. And that sucks because for a lot of people, the truth is we just still enjoy things we liked when we were young. Did I play Gex when i was a kid, yes. Have I played it recently and still enjoyed it, also yes. Im more critical of things now and can see flaws easier, but that doesn't take away from the fact that I still enjoy things. You can like things that aren't generally considered good. It weird how when people say they like bad movies no one questions it, but when you say you enjoy a bad game there's disbelief. Theres also this underlying idea that companies wanna sell you your nostalgia and how bad that is. The truth is, its always been that way. I grew up watching old ass shit because they were trying to sell Flinstones and Honeymooners to my parents and grandparents still. I believe the true corruption is when they try to sell you older things back to you changed, altered to fit modern ideas simply to make a profit while compromising the integrity of the original work. Coming back to Gex, yeah its a company trying to make a quick buck by selling me something they don't have to spend much on making, but at least i'll get to own it. When it comes to games(and most products in general), its getting more and more expensive to find the things I liked and own them. Yes there's the high seas for when i just wanna play something, but I enjoy actually owning things I like. Re-releases and such are a good things, please let me show with my dollar what I'm willing to spend money on. I'm willing to buy ports of older games, not spend hundreds of dollars on a ps one version because the resell market is fucked. I guess I will always advocate for re-releases because at least I'll have a chance at owning it. Unless companies like Sony and Nintendo will stop being assholes and bring back things like the Virtual Console or PS classics, but that seems like a pipe dream.
My dude no one is saying that you only like older games for nostalgia. Great games existed everywhere and anytime. What is being “blinded by nostalgia” is saying “older games are better then new game” no matter what decade you stand. And trust me I’m old enough to remember seeing people say that all the way back in the 2000’s.
Can confirm. Never grew up with the classic resident evil titles but finally gave them a try 2 years ago and absolutly loved them. And even then, the games I grew up still give me a lot of joy. Just was playing some ps2 games yesterday. Heck, I still enjoy the original Lego Racers more than the current 2K racing game.
some of this is unfairly blamed on the consumer. developers make games and spinoffs we have no interest in. for example , Prince of Persia. the franchise died because the publisher and developer was making the game we didn't want. i'm not going to buy a Prince of Persia game that I didn't want. like the latest game for example. im a 3d prince fan and not a fan of the 2d ones. but the lost crown is a 2d one. the franchise was huge when they rebooted it in 3d, but back tracked for whatever reason. when they did give us 3D ones they sucked, like the Prince of Persia 3D reboot we didn't ask for that. they dropped the time mechanic that we all loved? I even bought the game forgotten sands. It was a fun game but very safe, step in right direction. or like banjo you mentioned, the latest game sucked, nuts and bolts. the gameplay is nothing like we wanted. it's frustrating, buggy and not fun and a slog. dialogue is not entertaining
Great video overall, my only nitpicks were: (1) The confrontational "Why didn't you show up!?" unnecessarily undermines the whole call to acceptance: "The past was great, but if you give it a change, the present can be great in its own ways." -- especially since in the end you even admit that showing up probably wouldn't make a difference. (2) The whole EULA thing: (a) "Buyer beware" attitude just leads to business world becoming more scammy and society in general to became less caring about people (and thus less functional); and (b) just because something's in a contract doesn't mean it's legal*, and just because something's legal doesn't mean it's good. * In this case that part of the EULA is legal, but I wanted to mention it as a general principle. Still, I support any video that promotes non-hopeless acceptance. 🙂👍
It will never stop being hilarious when people fart that out.. The cost of making a game in the 1990s- 2000s is practically nothing compared to the cost of making a game in 2010-2024. Especially with the cancer grafix whores who think that a game is not enjoyable unless its 90,000k resolution with ray tracing, super duper physics engines, photo realistic grafix and of course be 25,000fps, that is 1000hrs long never ANY extra content and has to be made in 2 years. Oh and of course raising the price is always "greedy" because games 30 years ago were $50 except there were alot of SNES games that ran $75-80 bucks. But keep making those super, duper, uber amazing games without expecting people to pay more even though tech has advanced and gaming is a WANT in life not a need.
Money is such a double-edged sword especially when it comes to video games. Yes, its a necessity but also has a high chance to cause some corporate suit's inner Scrooge that has already come out to completely engulf them. "How can we screw our customers in the shittiest way possible while still gaining huge profit?"
@ItsNightmar3 yes, creativity comes from smaller studios with limited budget working the radar. And yet bigger yet greedy companies always get the attention.
No, it’s absolutely nostalgia. Ya’ll really rather thing that your childhood was a special moment in time where things were down just for the sake of art. My dude how a days thing aren’t different. Back then games, even really good ones, were made for money and many AAA games are done out of passion today. You just became a cynical adult and refuse to see that great games still are releasing, you aren’t playing them.
It's kind of hilarious that I 100% agree with you and feel personally attacked at the same time. I'm that person that waits sometimes years before purchasing a game as that is the economical thing to do. However, when I truly want to signal to a publisher that YES, give us new stuff I tend to buy them at full price. When it comes to remakes, I'm a sucker for that, but not at full price. If I can easily emulate the originals on my underpowered PC, I'm not paying a full $40 let alone $70 for a game that I can play for effectively free. So I'm guilty, yet your doing the lords work, god speed.
Hey, its like I said in the video: "Everyone else is going to buy things in their best interest." If you're on a budget and wanna save money and don't care to play stuff the second their out, then sure, wait. My video was mostly to address some of the random demands for various IPs to "come back". Didn't make sense to me. But you do you. Don't take it personally. Thank you for watching! :)
Millennial take here, but I think the underlying issue is that people don't necessarily want to see the likes of Jak or Gex back, they want major publishers to bring their PS1/PS2-era level of creativity and output back. I've seen a post on Twitter saying that gaming shouldn't have progressed beyond the PS1 power-wise because it made games less experimental. I wouldn't go as far personally, but I can sort of agree with the sentiment. Gaming is in a sort of weird place nowadays, where it's better than it's ever been in some ways and a total mess in others. In the PS2 days, if you didn't like a Sly Cooper game, you had an entire slew of PlayStation franchises to choose, nowadays if you don't like Spider-Man or God of War, you are screwed. Hope you'll like a new Ratchet game or that new Insomniac IP in a decade or so (assuming they even get greenlight in the first place). I won't argue with you saying that Sly 4 or Nuts & Bolts were somehow big successes (although I think most revivals like this could be handled better, why didn't they make Sly 4 a PS4 launch game for example), but I don't think that every game should be excepted to be a huge multi-million seller. Entire franchises came and went (hell, sometimes even the entire genres) in the time it takes to develop a single game these days and that sucks. Your video reminded me of that whole Scorsese/MCU discourse. Just because some CGI-powered action flicks break a billy in the box office doesn't mean they should be the only kind of movies Hollywood should make.
My take is that essentially devs shouldn't feel pushed to use the maximum power of a current system if it's not actually strictly needed. It's a big reason the INdie space is doing better in a lot of ways.
@@CrashGordon94 That is so dumb cause it’s not the devs fault, it’s the gamers. Millions of gamers and begging for more graphical impressive games. The PC market is filled with people paying over a thousand dollars for the most powerful PC’s. Gamers want this, it’s not the “industry” doing it just cause.
@@Indigo_1001 You do know the Devs of the AAA game companies are withheld by their shareholders right? The people who give them the money to make these big budget games of a live service. Yet there are a few who are starting to wake up and pull money from the industry. AAA games have gotten distracted by the amount of money they can make and lost the drive to create a game for fun and escapism's like the games of the past where. Without the passion in the gaming industry we wouldn't have titles such as Earth Worm Jim, Sly, Doom, Halo, CSGo, old school Star Wars Battlefront 1&2. Fuck even pong from crying out loud. The industry as a whole really needs to take a step back and think how did we go from making fun to making greed? Just a thought.
So in the same video you acknowledge inflation for game studios, you blame fans for not buying the dead space remake without thinking the same thing effects them?
@@Daynger_Foxwhich is the industry norm now so I’m not sure what your point is. Games are getting more expensive to buy (notice I didn’t say own) and people aren’t* getting paid enough to afford more than one game every blue moon.
@@JustinTorres-mp7zp my point was that the game was 70 bucks. That game also came out in between a lot of great games. A lot of folks these days can only afford one. I have to limit my spending or I'll go broke. I only buy one new full price game a year. Otherwise, I wait for sales.
Yes. And the point in the video still stands. If a new release in a franchise doesn't sell, the franchise is less likely to continue. I don't see any contradiction. Inflation affects both companies and customers, like you said.
I love this dude! You are so spot on. In the example of Dead Space, I pre-ordered and loved it. My mate on the other hand who is always going on about how they should make a new Dead Space, 'Omg Dead Space 4 would be amazing' etc He really liked the look of Dead Space Remake, Launch day comes, Pfft £70! Im not paying that! Thought it was going to be £25 or something.... No sale from him, a supposed Dead Space fan who wants Dead Space 4... I also feel Live Service has really skewed peoples minds (casual gamers) into think buying games isnt worth it anymore, I'll just keep playing this for hundreds of hours.
In regards to "The Crew" and the current "Legal situaiton" it's in with Accursed Farms. It's not about the game itself, it's about the method of removing peoples access to a game causing it to no longer be legaly owned. The Crew is only used as an example of what could be considered illegal practices.
And maybe it is illegal, but software licenses and EULAs go as far back as the 90's. We have never "owned" our games from Day One, and if so many folks are against online-only games that could get thrown into oblivion at a moment's notice, why are folks still buying them? If so many people truly care about The Crew, why 200 concurrent players over the span of 5 of its 10 years? Why did the majority of the playerbase ditch it when the sequel dropped? Looking at those stats paints a different picture than what most folks are letting on. EDIT: I'll let the legal system make its own decision. I'm not going up to bat for Ubisoft, but let's not revise history and pretend The Crew was something we all cared about and consistently played after 2014.
@@spectrebullWell considering they say we are BUYING the game not renting, thats kind of an issue. Also if I get something physical, that copy is mine you cannot take it back. Digital doesn't grant that privilege which is kind of insane. EDIT: Also the quality of the game is not the point, whether the crew 1 sucks or not is irrelevant, its something people paid to own and now it is revoked. I don't understand why you would defend a practice that goes against your own self interest unless you just want attention.
@@spectrebull I admit I seem to have misinterpreted your initial response. It seems as though you're excusing Ubisofts behavior under the guise of claiming people don't care about the game due to low numbers. That doesn't sit right with me because obviously there would be few players on an old game if there's a newer sequel of similar quality. As for the amount of people upset about this takedown, the amount of people actively playing does not equate to the number of people online that are upset at the precedent set by the takedown of the game.
@@altonb.1396 I appreciate the rescind. I do understand at face value I do look like I'm defending Ubisoft, but I'm really not. The problem is exactly as you point out at the end: the amount of people actively playing does not equate to the number of people online that are upset. That's where the outrage doesn't make sense to me. No one cared about this game before Mutahar made his video. I do agree that they should put in an offline mode, but we as the players do need to start sticking to our guns on stuff like this. If we see a game is online only, then we need to vote with our wallets and not buy that game. But when I see "The Crew reaches 12 million players" one year, and then suddenly the playerbase drops to 200 for five years, as a publisher that would tell me "no one is playing this game and we already have The Crew 2 and Motorfest to support, so why bother". I'm not saying that's the right thought to have, that's just how publishers think. At the end of the day, though, legal systems are going to look at EULAs and Privacy Policies to determine what is legally binding and what is harmful to customers. So, maybe someone like Richard Hoeg can give us more realistic answers and properly breakdown the EULA.
There's a detail you're overlooking. The games that didn't sell well didn't do so for a reason. Nobody asked for them. Nobody was asking for Nuts & Bolts because we wanted Banjo 3. Nobody was asking for The Lost Frontier because we wanted Jak 4. And on the occasion we did get the games we wanted, like Sly 4 and Twisted Metal 2012, the devs dropped the ball.
Right and it's our fault we didn't meet their expectations of them making fortnite levels of money? Besides to be honest its not remakes of games I'm nostalgic for I really want unless it's desperately needed (i.e it's stuck to a console that's hard to emulate, graphics or controls are painfully outdated) . I want video game companies to take risks again on new Intellectual properties. Focus on making a fun compelling game rather how hard can you milk me for nickels and slam my eyes full of pop culture and ads. But it's over. I await a future where advertisements are the entertainment. Also unrelated but not every God damn game needs a battle pass and skill trees. I swear they're all just blurring together
@mattsell4568 I understand the demand for resurrecting old franchises. Hell, I'm one of those voices; I'm a Legacy of Kain fan. I've been screaming for a sequel to Defiance for 20 years now. And in this day and age of remakes and remasters, I'd be excited to see new life breathed into the old games. But I'd hate to see them do it without Amy Hennig, because she's the one who made that franchise a success.
I feel there's a good few things you fail to mention, like Developer Burnout, developers leaving the studios because they flat-out get tired of working on the same game but publishers demand it, much what happened with the Tomb Raider franchise before it was rebooted. Money talks, yes, always have, always will, but inflation means Developers have higher income expectations and customers have less buying power to vote with. The reason indie studios, developers and games do so well these days, is because they're simple, don't have microtransactions or small DLCs that try to siphon money out of their customers, and also doesn't have any grand sales expectations. Why don't AAA Studios make shorter games with retro graphics and smaller scope? There would be money in it, but I doubt they think that way. I'm not sure why you trash-talk Gex so much, they're great games and I still play them today, I have the legal copies, and Gex 4 was cancelled by Eidos, not because of money, but because they weren't interested in the franchise anymore. So it's not always about just money or Player interest, but also interest from the studios and publishers themselves. I get your point, but I don't think you presented it super well. But it could be worse!
You just earned a sub False nostalgia is something ive been talking about for a long time now, but everytime i say something people will get on my neck
I didn't play Skies of Arcadia: Legends till 2013 for the first time, was blown away by the scope, script and characters. After I finished it, it instantly got into my top 5.
All that may be true, but that would just mean that games preservation and full ownership is even more important, since those few hundred people still deserve to keep playing.
this dude sounds like hes rocked up out of nowhere into the hospital room to unplug my grandmother from the life support machine while shes still lucid. respect
I think you make alot of genuinely good points in this video, but some of them just kinda fall flat. For starters alot of people didn't buy the dead space remake not because they just didn't feel like it, but rather we didn't want a remake in the first place. We waited years for a good NEW game, not the same game we've all completed 5 times on all difficulties.
I just emulate. I wish there was more support for it. I have no interest in my old games getting remastered just being playable. They were all on modified computers it should be easy enough.
@@DraftyRum You download the game on the store and its the original game. Setting up an emulator is like setting up steam from scratch and connecting a controller to it. you download it, connect the controller and download the game you wanna play then run it on the emulator. you could make it all in one if it was better supported. heres an idea. An app you download it on your pc and you pay to unlock different system bios and after you unlock them you pay for the games. IE you download GG emulator and have nothing, you pay $20 for a sega license and then get access to the sega library and can buy sonic for $10.
I got Banana Mania on Steam. Pre-ordered it even (because they literally held the retro stuff hostage). I just went back to playing the originals on Dolphin and PCSX2 respectively. I think the reason why people are not emulating is because price of entry (building a decent PC with a smaller budget isn't an easy feat unless you got access to a lot of parts beforehand) or finding an emulator that doesn't bite them later (Project 64). Even though it IS a search away, people aren't aware emulation was/is an option.
@JasmineBrowneyes that makes more sense to me. Frankly emulating games should run easier than any modern game. My android phone runs emulators. If there was better support for it it would be a universal library that can work on any console. The only reason emulators are annoying is because a lot of times they legally have to be in pieces because parts of it are illegal.
RE: The Crew - you understand that the issue is about the underlying philosophy that big studios and publishers are bringing to game preservation and ownership, right? No one gives a fuck about The Crew. People care about these organizations creating a future where your favorite games are removed from your library forever on a whim. It’s not about the Crew, it’s about what the implications are for the future. You’re so close to understanding the point, yet still completely missing it.
I tend to look forward to trying new things more so than focusing on nostalgia. I don't want remasters or remakes I want new stories, characters and places to enjoy. The main thing I miss about older AAA games is they felt like a completed product upon release not a year after they have received multiple patches
The ubisoft argument. You cant just throw it away like that. You are completely missing the point on why people are mad about the crew. It shows, that publishers or devs, or the storefronts themselves can take away a purchased digital product without warning and reimbursement. You looking at this whole thing so narrowly you are completely not understanding why people are upset
he said that in the video, and also said what a lot of folks are only just realizing - that digital games are a license and you never at any point owned it. digital storefronts sucking for consumers is not a new problem that started with The Crew, it's just a particularly recent and salient example.
@@Vysetron just because it's not new doesn't mean it's not a good example of why digital ownership is anti consumer and regulations and rules or laws should be changed.
@@EvelineE-001rather digital or physical nothing last forever plus in order to play these games you still need the consoles good luck trying to play xbox360 or ps3 games in the year 2056 without the console.
@tdenzel101 that's a fair point, but a good counter to your point would be to keep said ps3 or xbox360 or get some now and take care of it. A little bit of basic cleaning will stretch a consoles life. Also, if like a disc drive or something breaks on it, send it it to get it repaired, or repair it yourself. 😉 see there are plenty of options. It's not all doom and gloom sorry
Sometimes I wonder how much of it is "nostalgia", and how much of it is _existential dread_ , and an inability to cope with the things we love ending in general.
I think you're not factoring in how much disposable income some people have. Some of us couldn't/can't afford games brand new as soon as they came out. So we had to wait for them to drop in price or get them second hand. Yeah it sucks for the developer that they're not getting money right away but some customers have to choose necessities over entertainment. Some people were probably choosing to pay bills over buying Dead Space remake right away Some of us have nostalgia for certain games but only after we got it a year or two after it came out
Not to mention some people may be too pissed off at the immoral developers/publishers to even bother. Doing these remakes is often too little, too late, as the company now has bigger fish to fry.
Rare Replay cost NOTHING to make. The fact that it sold badly should not discourage these companies from making more games in those IPs. It’s a bunch of games that people had already played. Why are we expected to repurchase things we can still go back and play on our old hardware?
1 - 2 million sales is usually considered to be a good selling game. Some mega hits like Mario Kart and Zelda will sell 20 million+, but average games sell 1 million+ and that's good.
Really? Then, let me give you a scenario I gave another commenter who said 1-2 million sales is good. You are running a game company consisting of 500 people on staff, including yourself. You just released a game that only sold 2 million copies at $70 a pop, giving you $140 million to fund your next game, which is going to take 4-5 years to develop as many AAA games do. This means you are going to have to pay your team of 500 people, which consists of programmers, artists, animators, managers, supervisors, administration, accountants, lawyers, tech support, PR, marketers, audio technicians, coders, and QA staff. As with most AAA companies, you will have to outsource work to other studios outside of yours to help make cutscenes, bring in voice actors and motion capture performers, and compose the music for your game. On top of all of that, you are going to need to manage bills for your building such as electric/heat, water, pest control, sanitation, and rent if you are operating in an office building. You will also have bills for licensing songs, artwork, logos, and devkits for your staff. That said, how is $140m going to get you through the next 4-5 years by the time your next game comes out?
@@spectrebull ignoring the beautifull irony that a lot of that sales don't even go into the pockets of the developers and staff that worked hard and with passion on these games, but mostly on the big guys in charge and their shareholders, heck a lot of time staff is even fired so the big ones get even more money. Can't blame the consumers for companies and shareholders greed over fictional numbers. Heck there is a reason why people rather support indi developers than AAA studios.
@@spectrebull This remasters have no business needing 4-5 years to develop. Even new games should need that much when they are simple games without super detail graphics like Sly Cooper etc. Such games should be like 2 years and with relatively low budget. You also say "well where were you". I don't know if a new Sly game sold a million i guess it means we never left, why are you asking where we are? You seem to forget that the gaming market now is much much bigger than what it was during PS1 and PS2 etc. The triple AAA game now costs 250 to 350 million and needs like 10million sales. And is it has hopes of getting those sales because the game market is huge. But back then it wasn't that huge. Back then selling 2-3 million is like selling 15-30 million now. 1 millions sales was pretty good. So the guys who loved the game back then and where the guys giving it a million sales which was great back then because games needed a fraction of what big AAA need now still bought the game. It got sold like it was selling back then. The guys loving it still bought it. But why would a 13 year old buy it. They don't know anything about it and seems less cool than the big AAA games with their super graphics. A few might check it but most not because Fortnite looks even better. Back then those games were AAA quality for their time so they looked cool enough for us to buy them. Now they aren't the big impressive titles but at the same time their remasters shouldn't cost a fortune to make. The problem is that if a game that got a little polished with a few new graphics and releases and cost just 15million to remaster and made a million sales get in the annual investors meeting. Even though it made a few millions profits that seems pointless for the big corpos that make 300million games and expect 2 billion in revenue etc or next to billions in revenue in microtranctions and all that. The goal posts changed. Now the target isn't making good money but ALL the money. So even though we still bought the game, even though it still was profitable the company doesn't care. They see it as a nothing and maybe they will bother with the IP late if they have nothing to do to boost the profits a few million more etc. But in general they have much bigger cash cows to bother with and the game is played in a much bigger table than it was back then. Square Enix todays sells millions more copies of Final Fantasy than back then yet it sees them all as failures or mildly decent sales when back then the most successful ones sold less.
I do remember playing a Gex game back in the 90s but most people associate it now to a running gag of Scott the Woz. There are some great retro games that deserve a revival and yet the bad games get the chance. Its like Morbius coming back to theaters because Sony thought people liked it when it was just to make fun of it. Companies should do a better research on what games to revive according to demand.
@@Steam_Attack I think the blow would be softened by an “& Friends”-type collection, sort of like how Capcom Fighting Collection was a “Darkstalkers & Friends” collection that had other games. Sort of a collection of the Croc series plus other games by the same developer.
I'm honestly starting to wonder if that is the case. As I said in the video, as we get older, people phase out of the hobby while kids break into the hobby. That's just the ebb and flow of the industry. So, how many of us who grew up during the GameCube and X360 years are still playing games today? I can't imagine as many people are or they are just sticking to their own corners until their boxes crap out like my sister and her husband.
Let me just say as someone around 10 years older than you, I agree that we should just leave things in the past. I grew up on old movies and TV shows that most other people my age were not exposed to. But we also weren't flooded with remakes of literally everything that used to be popular (there WERE remakes of things, but not EVERYTHING). I'm glad that there was no new version of Casablanca or The Dick Van Dyke show that more of my generation would have been exposed to. I know video games are different than movies or shows. But the same principle extends to some extent. The best way to preserve old games is not to give them remakes, remasters, and endless sequels. It's to keep those old games available for those young people who want to seek them out of a sense of curiosity regarding history. And there will always be that subset of people who are really interested in stuff from before their time. And honestly the best way to keep those things preserved and available is the emulation scene.
Agreed. I hate so much when things get remade or rebooted. Like the ideas for a Daria reboot. The show was a product of its time. Let things stay in the past. Cuz then the new versions are obviously just cashins anyway.
@Healthy_Toki That restoration is attempting to reach the same level of quality as the original film. Film preservation requires those kinds of methods because the physical medium it was created on is something that decays. Video games, being digital files, don't need any restoration to be preserved. And the best preservation of the original experiences have been in the fields of emulation, as well as people collecting and keeping the original hardware, including the CRT screens they were meant to be played with. When publishers release remasters, I almost always prefer to either play the original on retro hardware or emulate it.
GEX 2 and 3 are one of the best ps1 platformers just like the crash trilogy, spyro or croc, are very good videogames, and the character is good too, i think it is ok, and people don´t want to admit it, because the internet is full of idiots but everybody loves the Gex games and that is a fact, plays great, the ambience is great, the different style of levels and so on., idiots with loud speakers on the internet just want to bitch about it but really out there everybody loves the Gex games
Yes, and the supid internet doing it´s job again, because of the idiots on the internet we have the woke people everywhere which destroyed quality in videogames, the Gex games were amazing, had the most important factor in videogames the "fun factor" as the Gamepro magazine used to put it., Gex was far better than Croc which was good, and better than Jersey Devil which was not that good, i would say that those 2 games were better than medievil, and were second only to spyro and the Crash trilogy which were the absolute best,@@Laz3rCat95
You’ve got some valid points especially from the business perspective, the thing is those of us that still play older games and would like to see those old series that we believe still have potential to have more great entries are a minority in the community and most of these older series would be a brand new IP to newer generations so it is an uphill struggle for those series to get back their popularity now after being dormant for so long. Also besides, sales don’t say everything about how good a game is, lots of fantastic games go under the radar and never get their due…so fans don’t care about sales but still want their gaming needs met. I’d love a new a Banjo-Kazooie game but you are right if a new game was released I don’t think it’d be a huge hit but those of us asking for it do really want a new game but we aren’t being listened to as we aren’t the people that will bring in the big money. Having said all that, nostalgia does cloud our mind sometimes for sure, I’ve gone back to some older games and now I can’t play them because they feel too outdated and are no longer that fun to me but many games still hold up well.
I want to chime in about the "resurgance" part you were hitting on. Alot of fans get disgrunttled about buying a game twice. Like i am a die hard warcraft fan. But I was pissed about having to buy reforged because I bought frozen throne 20 years ago, and it works fine.
I feel a lot of the games mentioned are held back by zero marketing/console exclusivity of course rare fans arent gonna buy an xbox one to play games they already have on their n64 in the attic they probably got a wii or a switch. and no ones gonna buy the banjo port cause its a 5 dollar xbox live download they probably dont even know existed. also I hate the buy this shit you dont want or we hold your series hostage crap the industry pulls. just give us a new game dont fart out remakes then give up when a game everyone already played or didnt ask for didnt sell.
Agreed. How is it my fault that the 2D Ninja Gaiden series I loved on the NES died out because I didn't buy "Ninja Gaiden Trilogy" on the SNES which was such complete garbage that it managed to look, sound, and even play inferior to the original versions I still owned on the NES? The morons at Tecmo apparently never bothered to consider that many of us didn't buy the compilation because we already owned the games and that their remakes were released in such a poor state that we weren't going to buy a downgraded version of those games either. What was true back then is even truer today. Executives are truly some of the stupidest people alive that don't understand the buying habits of consumers. Remember when the Switch version of Dark Souls Remastered got delayed until AFTER it was announced that their would be a trilogy compilation released on the other systems? Hmmm. I wonder why the game didn't sell to expectations? So they thought there wasn't enough interest in the series on Switch and never released Dark Souls 2 & 3 because they basically told every household that had more than one current game system to hold off and get 3 games for the price of 1 in just a few months.
Stop, just stop. People need to stop farting out the "exclusivity" excuse. NO exclusivity isn't even anything close to a valid excuse. Exclusives aren't like they used to be. FFVII remake/FFXVI isn't on Xbox because Xbots don't buy games, they're expected to go straight to WelfarePass, to the point that Microsoft has had to start putting games on their "competition" platforms to make money. The "exclusivity" for FFVII remake ended after 6 months. Helldivers 2 isn't on Xbox because HellDivers is owned and trademarked by SIE and licensed to Arrowhead Sony and Nintendo don't have to put games on their competition because PS and Switch players actually buy games. If they console you own doesn't get games, then that is a personal problem. Its not up to Sony, Nintendo to put their own games on everything, nor should they be expected to put their software on all platforms. The people who constantly cry about exclusivity also need to be consistent with their "outrage" If its not OK for some then its not OK for all.....Xbox kept GTA IV DLC off PS3 for years, Xbox bought exclusivity for Rise of the Tomb Raider for a year, MS bought the Gears franchise because Epic talked about putting Gears on other platforms. MS is holding Sunset Overdrive hostage. All of them used to do it and MS seems to have been the biggest to do so, they only reason they don't know is because their hardware isn't selling.
Ever wondered why all Sonic games are often rushed and half backed, or why Sega doesn't bother with cracking down on Sonic fan games and Sonic game piracy? Look at lifetime sales numbers for each Sonic title after the very first Genesis game, you'll quickly understand why.
Killer Instinct is a great game. I feel bad it didn't have a resurgence with all the patch updates on it's 10th. Problem is, it's on the wrong console.
One point I disagree with is the Rare games. Most people who grew up with them are Nintendo owners and will remain with that brand. Xbox’s built in base will be far less likely to try. They should’ve released them on Steam instead of Xbox live. KI was cut at the kneecaps when it was made a Xbone exclusive on release. Remember there was a time when people collectively throughout the entertainment media hated Microsoft. Also, dude, that eulogy at the end wasn’t that necessary. It’s just games. Nothing wrong with wanting to have a franchise you like return, and I don’t think most people are taking it as seriously as you are.
That's why Spiritual Successesors exist. We can develop a game that is similar to older franchises. Bomb Rush Cyberfunk, Eiyuden Chronicle, Wargroove, Fast Racing Neo, and etc have shown that fans/former developers can still create those games but in New ways. We don't have to rely on the developers/publishers to Create new games in these franchises.
Nostalgia for a lot of franchises, the majority I'd argue, are barely a factor when talking to rational fans if you ask me. I had like 40 games on the PS2 growing up and have onlt revisited maybe 4 of them, most of my gaming life was right before joining the military and these last 3 years. I have zero nostalgia for most things I'm a fan of today and I play practically everything that releases, and I can confidently say post-2015 gaming just f-king sucks plain and simple, these games just ain't it. I know I'm not the only one. Playing new games has a 30% success rate and a 70% it will suck rate while for older games (specifically in the 1998-2012 time span) it's the exact opposite, 9 out of 10 times the game is either harmlessly OK at worst and peak AF at best. Being in danger of sounding like an old nut I do truly believe that "they don't make em like they used to👴🏻" and that's exactly what attracts many gamers to older titles. Deadlines were harsh, budget was miniscule, the teams were microscopic, the graphics on most are fundamentally dated to many by today's standards, however what makes gaming such an artistic medium is ever so present and timeless. The passion, the community, the creativity, the lore, the boundless ambition, 1998-2012 games just oozed with all those traits. Modern games feel shallow, they feel like Temu knock offs of past generations' attempts, usually either some whacky tone/art style or some nothing-burger technological flex is the selling point. It was always a competitive market I'm not delusional but it truly feels like there's barely any artistic integrity left, like the gaming space turned from a feelgood escape/hobby into a coprorate market, like the art of game creation turned into a race to the next tech demo, like a platform for expression turned into an outlet for sociopolitical warfare. Gaming is like a bafflingly beautiful painting that got vandalized and bastardized to the point that it's now just a mess of unflattering colors. People just want their good painting back
I'm with you there. I know not every game we played as kids was a banger, but the budgets for some of these games kinda shows how our favorite publishers and developers have fallen by the wayside. A lot more focus on making games "marketable" and not enough confidence behind interesting games.
This is so wrong though. Honestly I hate 2023 game did you play so say this nonsense. Funny how people “peak of gaming” is whoever they were a teen or early 20’s. Don’t you think that’s odd at all…
@@Indigo_1001 2023 games I played? Children of Silentown, One Piece Odyssey, NeverAwake, Fire Emblem Engage, Forspoken, NBA All-World, Risen, Warlander, Hi-Fi Rush, Dead Space, Atomic Heart, Avatar Generations, Like a Dragon: Ishin!, SpongeBob The Cosmic Shake, Ultimate Sackboy, Horizon Call of the Mountain, Company of Heroes 3, Kirby's Return to Dream Land Deluxe, Octopath Traveler II, Bendy and the Dark Revival, Street Fighter Duel, Phantom Brigade, Wo Long: Fallen Dynsasty. OK I'm getting REEEEEALLY tired of typing the games I played from last year and we were only just getting started, you get the point, I play games, lots of them, indie, AA, AAA, any genre, I'm out there a lot. It sucks. It was better back then, it simply was. The perfect era for gaming I called before, 1998-2012? I wasn't even a teen bro, hell I wasn't even born in 1998. I went through my teen years in the mid-2010s era of gaming so by your logic I should have intense nostalgia for that but I do not, it's considerably weak in fact. I'm in my 20s now and gaming is bad. It's simply the reality of the situation.
I strongly believe that the reason why so many people are calling for the more nostalgic media of their time is due to lack of diversity in game styles with presentations and issues with trends in modern gaming where companies are too scared to take chances with old IPs or make new ones, they may do a remake or remaster or just port compilations and that's it. The reason why so many indie games especially the most standout ones get so popular is because both old and young generations of gamers want more diversity in their games with more risks in trying out new styles of visuals, gameplay, etc. Also indie devs aren't toxicly greedy about getting your money all the time and charging an arm and a leg for their shitty unfinished games n more content. Also these remasters/remakes of old games can remind and teach old n younger gamers of what were the trends in gaming at the time with control, lack or less of direction and presentation regardless if it looks ugly or great. Also some games were made during a time of when staff were at specific mindsets like with how characters are portrayed and sudden gameplay styles which they fear can get them into trouble over sensitive people of today and gamers who can't cope with game changes in gameplay. Some former staff members or even new members don't know how to get a new game in these old IPs off the ground along with guaranteeing to their higher ups or share holders whatever that the game will be worth it in profit and not get fan backlash because "boo hoo this game doesn't play or look like what I played back in the 80s or 90s" It is a horrible curse to be a game developer especially if you work with "AAA Studios" which is very toxic where they only care about trends n making easiest and safest money. It is true that alot of our once beloved games did lay the foundation of how so many video game elements should be represented in future games of today with HUDs, camera, controller improvements and using limited resources to craft an acceptable visual style that can make a game look timeless to that even modern younger eyes can still tell if that character is a human or not with the limitations taken into consideration for a joke lol :P Thank god we have indie devs of old and young with unique visions of game design to make something new or something thats obscurely old but feels freshly new or bring back something old that was popular and make it look so damn good (hahha just look at the lovely Tomb Raider Trillogy Remasters, Crash Trillogy and Spyro Trillogy
Sly is the game I used to ask for a remaster of the trilogy, and even though I would definitely play it I know it won't sell. If I want the nostalgia, I'll play the original since even the flaws and aged style make it the amazing series I love.
With how more than half of these companies operate, I'd rather have new IPs and spiritual successors, and people must understand that gaming is still new as a medium. Social Media, especially, where half of the time people will talk about some of these games like they sold gangbusters when they're niche.
Some fair and well put argument here! For my own part, I loved the Gex games back in the day and I'm so excited to by them again in a remastered & collected edition for modern system (my choise is PS4 PRO). Dead Space I agree the argument with. I had bought the game IF I had a PS5 or a new gaming PC. Have not been able to buy new consoles as the prices are to high. Rare Replay I promoted like HECK evreywhere when released and done so for years. Made my lill borther buy it digitally and a friend of mine in stores. I have played through near all games on there, but 3-4 I think (Piniatas, Blast Corps and some other). Medievil I loved to see its remake and bough it of course.
@@bobafettjr85Yeah remakes are a different discussion all together. But the simple idea is still true. If you want more of your series you have to hope it does well even if it isn't your all time favorite or a rehash of something you already played. Like when DmC came out people hated it but since it sold well that's why DMC5 was able to exist. People showed interest with the franchise and the IP but they were still very vocal about what they didn't like about the game. Because of DmC selling well they even made a DMC4 Special Edition which went on to sell more than DmC. People who are truly dedicated in a series will always buy their games, especially if they're true quality and regardless if they already own a copy of it. It's very hard simple truth people need to comprehend. If you want more games of your favorite series then you should be hoping all their games sell well. It's really that simple. Which makes these Remakes even more tragic because of how obvious it was nobody would buy it. The company decided to hurt itself anyways and fridge their IP for god knows how long.
@tylercafe1260 it's not a different discussion. I'm not interested in remakes, unless it's such a huge difference that it's essentially a different game like FF7. Most people aren't. Corporations for some reason can't figure that out. Just like Dianey movies. I don't need a "live action" Lion King. Give us new movies instead.
I wanna add my two cents into this discussion. First I wanna call out the mentality of “vote with your wallet”. Most people have this idea that it will tell developers and publishers what games we actually want. In reality most developers and publishers will see low sales and assume that nobody wants the game and just stop making them. Second although I do agree that some series don’t need to go on forever I do feel like the idea should continue. A Hat in Time is Mario Sunshine 2 and though people would more than likely prefer the latter the former is still well received. Bomb Rush Cyberfunk is Jet Set Radio in all but name and people love it. Bloodstained: Ritual of the Night is Alucard from SOTN wearing a terrible disguise, yet it’s one of the most highly rated metroidvainias out there. A counter I can see to this is, “Well they’re indie games”. So then they wouldn’t sell well or would be well received because Sony, Microsoft, or Nintendo published/developed them? I feel that most people want a new Banjo Kazooie is because AAA developers that aren’t named Nintendo don’t make those type of games anymore. Sure in the indie scene Yooka-Laylee tried it just ended up being a mediocre game that did still sell well. This isn’t to discredit the entire video because I do agree with a lot of points. I argue that developers and publishers could try making budget titles. Not big million dollar games to produce. Games with a modest budget and a fair price tag that keep the idea of older games sensibilities.
I just checked out your channel and it says you do videos for longplayarchives, dude, you're my hero! I love that channel and the games they cover. Your video topics seem interesting too. New sub
I'm in my 40's and I can say that those Gex games were always pretty lame. Those of us that played platformers like Super Mario 64, Banjo Kazooie & Tooie, Rocket: Robot on Wheels, and Conker's Bad Fur Day were unimpressed by Gex. I guess it must have impressed the Playstation crowd with their weak offerings but even that had the Spyro and Ape Escape games.
@@MultiCool55 Nope. The N64 was also the greatest system for racing games with an insane amount of excellent racers. It was also the the best for FPS and, though their wasn't many, traditional shooters too like Star Fox 64, Star Soldier Vanishing Earth, Bangai-O, and Sin & Punishment.
@@davidaitken8503 I guess. The library I had was limited since my N54 was a hand me down and the gamecube had launched by then. Only racing games I had growing up were Mario kart, Diddy kong racing, and Rush 2. FPS was pretty equal between the two consoles in hindsight, though everyone knows Goldeneye ofc. I always wonder what the N64 could've been like if they went with CDs instead of cartridges. Yes loading times suck but Playstation games could be much bigger in scope with the less severe memory limitations.
"the game was online only. it says so in the eula" Eula's are not legal documents. Also the suicide squad had the same situation, and yet the devs patched the game so when support ends and the servers go down you can still play the game you paid money for. I have no idea why you are confused with the crew outrage. Its literally not about nostalgia, and entirely about setting LEGAL precedent on games ownership. Do you own the single player game that you paid money for? If so how much of that game, and are companies allowed to strip a game of advertised features after purchase? Game preservation is a big part of it, but consumer rights are just as much a part of it. Even if we ignore the suicide squad example, there is other examples that disprove your "arguments" on why people shouldn't be upset ("arguments" being a loose description of your confusion on the issue ). I recommend watching Accursed Farms video on it "The largest campaign ever to stop publishers destroying games". Again games preservation is a huge part of it, but it's a LEGAL campaign. That has greater consequences then just "i just wanna play my racing game".
While I don't agree with all your points this was an interesting video. You just earned a sub. I think one thing you forgot to mention is how emulation is incorporated into these re-releases/remasters/collections. So if a dev wants anything from Atari to psx or PSP to get re-released they can easily use an emulation wrapper and throw it on a digital storefront for cheap. For example, that's why Capcom has been selling all those Megaman Legacy Collections over the past 9 years. Cause they're cheap to produce and easy to take a hit on.
And I thank you for watching the video and thank you for your support! I would be very interested in seeing the amount of money spent on developing remasters. I know they are cheap, and in some cases, they can help offset costs in other areas of a company while providing a bit of market research. I just have to wonder how much money gets spent, in what areas, and how they view their sales data.
@@spectrebull I could be wrong about this, but I remember seeing a quote somewhere from somebody at Square Enix where he said if it weren't for the HD Remaster of Final Fantasy X they'd be out of business. Which should tell you how bad it was for Squeenix back during the 7th gen era.
I agree with some of the points in the video, but one of the symptoms of this mentality of just buying the game to maintain a franchise is a "Sonic situation" where fans will just buy whatever slop the publishers green-light for decades, just to prevent their favorite IP from fading into obscurity when it should have died a long time ago.
I brought a PS1 to replay Gex 3D and Gex: Enter the Gecko in modern day and 2 things: YES! the camera is utterly archaic but it's totally workable once you get acquainted with it by setting it to manual and get use to manually rotating the camera with the triggers and YES! it does get repetitive doing the same level 3-5 times to acquire all the remotes including the bonus ones (which I did voluntarily) but it certainly has charm, has it's shine and just needs a good polishing up.
I hate when a game is said to be underselling when I would have bought it if it was more affordable. People only have so much disposable income and a new game shouldn't be someone's top priority so that a large company can feel good about there investment.
I love it when people say games should be more affordable, as if somehow the technology hasn't advanced since the 1990s and games cost a fraction of what they cost to make now. As if somehow gaming is a NEED to survive life as opposed to a hobby. Especially when those same people expect every game to be hyper realistic run at 9,000k res, 2,000fps be 10,000hrs long and don't ever have any sort of additional content. IF someone really thinks they need to play every single game that comes out, they either 1. need to be better educated and get a real job, 2. Get a real job, 3. learn how to budget or 4. find a new hobby.
@lutherheggs451 I agree. What I'm mainly getting at is that a company shouldn't blame there customers for having higher priorities. Comes off as they assume everybody had the money and chose not to support the title out of spite or what have you.
If you loved a certain game so much, play it again. Go out to a retro-game store, buy the console and games, and play them. Bring your friends over; make a night of it. I guarantee you'll learn something. And you'll be supporting a local business to boot! Thats what im doing. Now that im finally making some real money, im buying up all the games i missed out on when i was younger.
While I am eternally bitter about KI and the hypocrisy surrounding similar situations, I do think there's more to other games than people inexplicably not buying them. Splinter cell Blacklist is considered by many fans to be a disappointment, same with the previous two games in the series. People didn't decide not to buy it because they suddenly forgot about the series, they didn't buy it because it wasn't that good. As another example, Before Samus Returns was announced, Metroid was on hiatus for a while because of poor sales. Was it because fans randomly decided that they didn't care about the series any more? No, it was because the last two games to come out were Other M and Federation Force. It doesn't matter if fans have been clamoring for a new entry in a neglected franchise, you just can't expect people buy a bad game, not in this economy. If a company can't tell the difference between those two scenarios, then that's a failure on their part, not consumers.
If it wasn't for the Switch and all of its' best of this generation games, on older hardware no less, there really wouldn't be much of any reason outside of indie to play anything new. I'm still discovering so many amazing games through emulation of older consoles that it really makes it clear that it isn't nolstalgia. The technology and budgets requirements of the PS5/X Box/PC has hit a point of diminishing returns where it is actually a detriment to the development of great game experiences.
There could always be an Okami or Armored Core 6 situation where the re release or new game sells well compared to any other game prior in the franchise … but those are always hyper rare
NO. NO there couldn't be. Okami was a flop when it came out, it was a flop when it was remastered and rereleased on the PS3, it was a flop when it was rereleased on the PS4. The game has flopped 3 times, and the DS sequel was also a flop.. Game companies aren't going to keep rereleasing games over and over in hopes that maybe people will buy the new rerelease
As far as I am concerned, and have been concerned since I learned more about Literally Ruining Games, their customer base isn't people who play games, those kinds of people are outliers. Their customer base is people putting this shit on a shelf. Criterion Collection has a similar market, but unlike LRG, Criterion prints many more discs so they actually have a market of people actually watching the movies they print and distribute as well. When a game is picked up by LRG, it might as well not being physically saved. What it's receiving is nicknacks and an official cover for a game case, which will forver sit in shrinkwrap on a shelf - a physical edition that nobody will ever get to play because it sits on eBay for $500 for its entire life might as well not exist - if the last surviving copy of a film is locked a way in a vault to rot, does it even still count? Their worst offenders are when they secure exclusive rights to a game that would have received a physical edition for North America anyway if they didn't step in and ruin it. That's why LRG can get away with releasing what amounts to shelf filling shit that someone might play out of curiosity, but certainly not *pay LRG's price tag* to play. The majority of TC1 players were on Ubisoft. Especially since Ubisoft gave the game out for free in 2016 as part of their 30th anniversary or whatever, the free bundle included The Crew (no DLC), Assassin's Creed III, Beyond Good & Evil, Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, and Splinter Cell. I was playing TC1 up until shutdown. I pre-ordered TC2, did everything in the hypetrain event for all the bonus cars, played the closed beta, ad then proceeded to put 60 hours into TC2 and will never be playing it again. I put over 3000 hours into TC1. They didn't just make it unplayable, they outright stripped accounts of licences, as in you can't even download the game on the Ubisoft launcher because you don't have a licence to anymore. You no longer own the game or the DLC you paid for - and all new copies have been invalidated too, you can't even buy a new-old-stock copy and activate it. I've heard from the other players of TC1 and it's pretty settled that the people who still played the game after 2018 are not going to move onto TC2 or Motorfest. They're completely different games and as far as "meeting half way" goes, it would be about as half-way as handing a Gran Turismo player a Forza Motorsport game (or the reverse) and saying "I don't get what you're complaining about." If you're going to make the argument of ownership to shit on players of games you don't care about, you don't own any game with any form of DRM. The only games you own are games on tape for microcomputers, and for CDs: 3DO and SEGA CD games. Maybe the rare floppy based game that has absolutely no sector based DRM, or code wheel, lookup question, or any myriad of peripherals to prove you purchased the game. You technically own a game you bought from GOG... as long as CDProjekt still exists, anyway. And as long as any storage medium you can store it on lives, if you downloaded it before that deadline that hopefully never occurs. Every console game beyond that has DRM in some form (or in the case of old cartridges without DRM, they are impractical for you to do anything with them as an owner - on purpose). You've signed an EULA to not modify your console by using it, so if we're going to argue we've intentionally signed our right to ownership away, you must also concede that you don't own the functionality of the console either. You do not own Blu-rays, you own a disc and a privilege via contract to decode the data on them with a player. Same with HD-DVDs. And DVDs. We've just known how to decode all 3 for so long that nobody realizes that software like MakeMKV isn't necessarily considered legal, as it uses AACS keys which could be considered confidential and protected under contract law - you would normally be required to pay for a licence to decode them for viewing only. Hope you like Laser Disc and VHS, and even then some VHS still have copy protection DRM. You really, really do not want to pick this fight. The people selling this shit that want you to pick this fight with other customers, to talk down to each other, instead of picking it with the people selling products under these licences, some of which aren't even proven in common law to be legally binding yet. Stop it, it's not helping anyone. All you're doing is making people hate games. The publishers enforce enough as it is to make sure we already feel that.
This video really reminded me of one video game series I enjoyed during my youth and me being in and out about it getting remastered. That series being Tak. It was a franchise that was heavily advertised during their time in the market (especially on Nickelodeon, who owns the IP rights since its inception), but are rarely talked about in nostalgic game spaces nowadays. I remember wanting a remaster of the first 3 games since my high school years and THQNordic secured the rights to do so in 2018 as part of a deal with Nickelodeon. The only thing to come out of that deal so far was Spongebob Battle for Bikini Bottom Rehydrated. I wish a version of the Tak games were released that fixed some of the original games' janky physics, but I understand that it is something not that many people are demanding for it and I am content booting the games on my Wii when I feel like playing them. I wouldn't mind seeing Tak back as a small cameo of some sort. I heard there were supposedly messages on the Nickelodeon Allstar Brawl official Discord servers of some devs having interest in including him in those games if they are allowed to.
It almost feels like THQ Nordic sort of backed out of that idea of remaking a bunch of old Nickelodeon games. All they've been doing is releasing Spongebob games and then they're releasing a new TMNT game called Rise of the Ronin. Maybe they're starting to think remakes of the Tak games and other Nick games won't sell. I would love to see a new Nicktoons Unite game with more characters, a better story, and more levels. What's funny is Gamemill Entertainment are the ones who have been releasing new Nickelodeon games. We have Nickelodeon Kart Racers 1-3, Nickelodeon All-Star Brawl 1 & 2, and Avatar: Quest for Balance from them.
@@tvgamerstan6180 A new Nicktoons Unite would be cool. At least Nickelodeon Allstar Brawl is around. I also hope Nick's legal department can resolve whatever issues are preventing Fairly Odd Parents characters from appearing in them.
@@DIASTCartoons Yeah, I want the game to be like Marvel Ultimate Alliance. It really does suck what happened to The Fairly OddParents. Nickelodeon needs to fix whatever that they can with Nelvana. They need to buy the full rights. I hate that Tarzan is going through the same thing with Disney. Apparently, they don't fully own their version of it and that's why he doesn't really show up in their crossover games. He's not in the mobile crossover games, Disney Infinity, and Disney Speedstorm. It would be a huge L on Disney's part if they ever decide to do a platform fighter and he doesn't show up in that. He deserves a spot in a game like that.
I think probably a big chunk of this is the unwillingness to make lower-budget offerings in some cases. There's clearly A market for a lot of these things, if you didn't spend as much cash to make it, then the bar of sales to make a profit is lower too. Not everything needs to be a super AAA thing either. And as well, not everything needs a super flashy remake, maybe just some way to get it on modern hardware.
I'm nostalgic for a lot of titles. I'd love a "dead" franchise to make a comeback or remaster an old beloved title for sure but if it doesn't happen, I won't lose sleep over it. That's okay. The fun memories I had with them will never be forgotten. Better to be left dead and remembered with fondness than resurrected and turned into a dumpster fire. With the power of modding and emulation, I can play any old game in the best way possible. I don't trust the major gaming companies to make a proper sequel to an old title or remaster a classic game.
Sometimes games don't need to "Come back". Most of the time they just need to consist of a trilogy and be preserved for future generations to play. I think if Ubisoft stopped making assassin's creed games after the PS3 era, they would be more respected as a time capsule of the 7th gen.
Except for the FACT that because a handful of people don't like something or constantly cry about something doesn't change the FACT that IF nobody was buying Assassin's Creed games they would stop making them. Especially from the exact same crowd who constantly cry about sequels and don't allow a series to ever end, because its too daunting of a task to consider that its OK for a story to end. Games stop getting made when they stop selling.
So you say us Banjo&Kazooie fans didnt buy nutz&boltz yet you dont realize why. Its the formula my guy, lets use Capcom and MegaMan for example yes they switch up MegaMans powers, add new characters and enemies yet the Formula is still the same. Now lets take MegaMan and do the Nutz&Boltz treatment and switch up his gameplay, movement and need for specific powers and or abilities do you think the MegaMan fans would be happy about it or would they speak with their wallets and not buy the gsme? Plus I find it funny how you are talking about games that where apart of a console war era and PC gaming wasnt as big as it is now, how many of us old heads who want our favorite ip's to make one final comeback to finish the stories left with cliffhangers. Alas we are in the age of remakes and remasters when we just want our heros to have one final win to end their story.
The dead space shouldnt be called a flop, Me and all my friend used the EA PASS to play it without actually buying the game. Just because it didnt sell well does not mean that they didnt get money from us.
@@AmethystReaver Yes, $16 that went into the revenue of a service-based product that gives you temporary access to a selection of games, not into the revenue for a game they were hoping to make a return on at $69.99 USD.
I speak for my experience, there are so many games and franchises i only discovered recently for various reasons: word of mouth, youtube, reviews, retrospectives, just curiosity ect. and a few of them happen to be SEGA franchises like nights, crazy taxi, jet set radio and especially Daytona usa. Now fortunately sega recently announced new titles for crazy taxi and JSR but for the others i have to accept that i will never (or at least not soon) a new title, but that's ok. Instead, since i've been collecting retro games for years, i simply decided to start my treasure hunt and try these titles by myself, and i'm loving every single second every time i play them. The journey of searching online for a good price, a casual encounter at a con stands or just the local retrogaming store, buy them and finally arrive at home to play them is an amazing feeling for me. I appreciate more the titles and while i will not get a new game of the franchise i recently become fan of, i'm happy just collecting the old titles, and if i can't get them i can always use emulators, or mod the console (i only recently learned how to mod my psp). Same for online only games, i've been a fan of splatoon since day 1, but i bought the first title (and the wii u) only after the final splatfest because of money, but now there's pretendo, the fan-server, i can play online whenever i want or not since i play more Splat3. At the end of the day, just play the original, it will entertain you long enough between new titles of current franchises that you will actually buy and play
Why did Dead Space need a remake? Original runs fine on modern systems afaik. Requirements for a remake would either be that the original was flawed and needed improvements or doesn't run on modern systems. Would love to get Rift Apart but there's just too many games to play and don't know when I'll get to it (Still need to play the new Crash games). Also barely played the previous entries (Never owned a PS3 or later). There's already too many games to play without remakes. Developers and publishers should start by just getting their back catalogue playable.
Killer Instinct is on my wishlist but so is Soul Calibur, King of Fighters, Guilty Gear, BlazBlue, Dragonball FighterZ, Shaolin vs Wutang and MK2 Remix (AND THAT'S FREE)
Also don't fork out money on day one or pre-order. Too many publishers are releasing half made games and milking useless DLC (Good DLC is fine, useless skins are not)
My problem with using game sales as an argument is that they're from 15-20 years ago. Theres so much more gamers now, and the market and culture has changed drastically since then. So many franchises that were niche or didn't get attention because of competing franchises or trends at the time have a space to prosper in modern market. Fire Emblem Awakening was supposed to be the last game in the series and then it revitalized the franchise and its huge in the West now. Games like THPS 1+2, MegaMan 11, Spryo Reignited prove that new people love and want to get into these old franchises, but lack of options, marketing, and many other factors prevent them from doing so. Everytime we have something good going, the companies that make the games get consolidated into a bigger company and are forced to work on games they never intended to work on. Which can cause a mass exodus of talent in the studio and the industry at large. Its not just nostalgic retro revival games that are effected my the grim reaper of the ballooning industry.
You know I agree with you a whole bunch. We have been crying for old games to come back. When they do, the audience isn't there. I bought sly cooper collection, I bought the god of war collection for my ps vita and ps3, and I have bought ratchet and clank games numerous times. Dead space remake was amazing, and so was resident evil 4. One would hope that people who are begging for these games are buying them, but that is simply not the case. I do have to say something though, some of the remakes or remasters or sequals suck sometimes. Thats why some games fail.
Videogames are just fascinating for many reasons but after so many years I came to a similar conclusion to yours. This is a "popular-niche". A key thing that ruined the industry early was just the sheer oversaturation of the market. Whether it be copying other games or milking your own franchise to death. Just flooding it with unnecessary product nobody asked for despite the fact videogames are more popular than ever. It's a miscalculation from the industry itself and not really the gamers fault for the games not selling when the industry should already know it's not going to sell as well as it thinks. Look what's happening with FF7 Rebirth. They expected huge sales numbers but it just isn't popping off like they predicted but that's because they overestimated the core audience. With older games we didn't track things like "Achievements and Trophies" so we had no indicator how much of the game was truly working. Jak and Daxter sold pretty well with it's first game but who even beaten the game? That's always an important question when it comes to any game. Love it or hate it if you beat it odds are you will play more of it. Internet forums and reviews were still pretty new at the time so only magazine ratings were the only indicators they could go off from for any critical review at the time and how often to expect players to beat it. It's not like a movie where the word of mouth is more acceptably reliable it's a whole hobby within artistic digital medium so what people find entertaining will always be wildly different from other people which in turn makes a very huge market with tons of games to play and choose but with very few people playing said games at any given time. They're ultimately just a trendy market. They'll come and go with the times. If it's a truly great game then we'll continue to see people to play it for generations but for most of these games they'll have a week or two of popularity and then fade into obscurity. Like a hit music single. Some will acknowledge that they've peaked and they won't get anywhere past this trendy moment and others will mistakingly embarrass themselves trying to stay relevant and hold on to that moment of success. Some games will be the most popular thing in the world but give it a week or two and suddenly who even recognizes it anymore? I'm sure all 12 Gex fans are disappointed but they need to wake up and realize they were never a thing. A weird phenomenon I've been seeing because of all the Remakes is people demanding "Devil May Cry 2 Remake". Not the first game mind you or the Reboot they really mean DMC2. They want Capcom to make DMC2 but good and every time I hear this request I think it's the most ridiculous thing. DMC2 is regarded as a bad game with people who straight up hate it and to see people demand a remake shows just how far they'll go to try a revise history. They don't want their beloved DMC as a series to have such a huge blemish so now they want to change it but it's far too late. The damage is done and there's no DMC2 fanbase so stop asking for a Remake. Stop asking for Gex. Please just stop people!
I will admit I am excited for the Gex Trilogy remake but that is because I have vivid memories of my childhood being able to get Gex 64 on clearance at Target. Of course as a kid, I wasn't able to get as many games as I do now so I played the hell out of it and loved what I played. I also saw Gex 3 being advertised in Nintendo Power, being confused where Gex 2 was (I was playing it) and then kinda wanting it, but never being able to buy it. I will admit that the games weren't THAT great and the remake is literally for people like me...but still.
![[UNCUT] The Loyal Pin ปิ่นภักดิ์ EP.15 (2/4)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/qbHbshrA1f0/mqdefault.jpg)
I'm still excited for the release of Super Gwimbly Redux Deluxe
I hope he gets his Gwimbly Gun in that. Super Gwimbly Creamin' Corn Edition was shit without it.
The Dead Space remaster sold more than the original Dead Space. People were there but the companies themselves have shifted the definition of success. I can't blame "the community" for that.
Seriously. It’s weirdly pro-corporate to pretend that the fault lies entirely on the consumer when companies like EA are well-known for setting impossible standards for their studios and shutting them down when those standards aren’t met.
@@egg_l0rd13Yeah I was honestly shocked about the angle the early part of this video took.
EA invest a lot of money in that game to make it perfect. Brokies wouldnt understand.
@@jackjax7921Of course everyone knows EA spend a lot of money on their games. That's part of the problem. Sky high budgets require sky high sales. The original did not have a large budget which allowed it to be "successful" even with its smaller sales numbers than the remake. The Dead Space remake is not perfect, either.
But sure, call people poor for disagreeing with the current mismanagement of IPs they like.
My problem with the Dead Space argument is that nowadays these devs spec 6+mi copies for every single game. They want everything or nothing and that's not sustainable.
Ya it's become like Hollywood. Its either billion dollar budget or a tiny 2D platformer. Almost no mid-budget projects at all are allowed.
This kind of thinking by publishers is why we have so few genres and options today. 24 years ago, we had more genres in a year, so there was something for everyone. Today, everyone gets the same homogenized million-dollar budget game-as-a-service that tries to appeal to the lowest common denomenator to maximize how many players will be enticed to buy something in the in-game shop.
@@WarningStrangerDanger exactly
To be fair that was what killed the original versions too. So ironically yeah a horror game would never be a super huge seller. So what dead space remake got was pretty good
Actually, I think our nostalgia WAS accurate. Because every time I play an old game, I realize, wow, this WAS fun.
But I hate re-releases as "new games." F u to that stuff.
Yeah no shit it’s fun, back then there were good games just like there is today.
But the point of “nostalgia” is that you are associating your memories of childhood when you play an older game.
@@Indigo_1001 I'm emphasizing that video games used to be better. I'm talking about things like DLC replacing the fun of unlocking characters, in a game (where has that gone?), I'm talking about actual challenge, I'm talking about actual fun.
And the nostalgia is actually a good representation of things being better. Nostalgia is literally just the feeling of good memories. When that's all we have, anymore, things are bad.
@@MattsFreeChannel1
My dude there are TONS of games now a days with numerous unlocks over skins and such, you want me to list them.
And tons of games dlc or expansions add so much life in games. Like the Witcher DLC, Resident Evil 4 that was 10 dollars if a 6 hour long story mode, that was longer then some games back then.
People are so quick to forget all the things we have now. It will take 20 years for people to look back and suddenly act like “gaming was peak in the 2020’s”
The premise of this video isn't entirely incorrect but the arguments and examples use are pretty poor. The Dead Space remake selling poorly is due to a variety of factors not at all addressed in the video and you conflate the desire for a new entry in a series with wanting remakes of existing games which while there may be some overlap those are not the same thing. A remake of Jak 1-3, games that already exist, are a lot different than if they announced an actual Jak 4. Likewise you didn't consider the rising cost of games which makes the idea of buying a game that has already existed for years, fans of will already have, and for a higher price point isn't going to be very appealing. Even more so that the original devs are all gone and none of the people behind that original game are getting any reward out of this.
Very agreed that his points are good but the examples are wack. Another one I think falls under that umbrella is the The Crew argument, which forgets the fact that the game was removed in all contexts, with no plans for an offline edition, like Avengers for example. It's not like most games that get de-listed where a physical copy still works, because it isn't on any digital front, AND it doesn't work when you put the disc in. It's not just that nobody was playing it (which is hyperbolic) it's that nobody will ever be able to play it again (officially).
If you bought this game, you paid for access in the allotted time period it was out, and now you do not have access to it anymore. That is not ownership. The outrage is an entirely different discussion on the potential that any one of your games could magically disappear because of legal issues or server costs - Just watch, STEEP is next.
They could have created an offline mode, or they could have left the servers for the community to manage, even Club Penguin made that leap (Okay, Disney didn't, but fans could still de-compile the game to make community recreations, something Ubisoft is specifically trying to block). Better yet, if we were told years in advance the game would shut down one day (And it didn't cost actual money with deluxe editions) at least we could've prepared. Blaming the player for buying a game they assumed they owned is hilariously unhelpful.
Like it or not, Ubisoft deleted a game from existence, and nothing is stopping them from doing it again. yes most people weren't playing it, but the few who continued to anyway would've liked to keep going. What's the point of achievements and cosmetics, or having a game at all, if it's not to play?
It's important to remember that back in the 2000s, gaming was soo good that people had to pick and choose from a ton of bangers and unfortunately, a lot of incredible games were ignored as a result of that becuase other games were just more appealing at the time and stole the spotlight.
Nowadays gaming is so bad that people are seeking out these old games that flopped back in the day because they're better than the games of today are.
It's that simple really.
Was it really that good though? Late 90s/Early 00s was when we had all those craptacular licensed games for IPs and franchises that didn't last past a quick cash grab because of flash in the pan hype. Those are some really rose-colored glasses if you think there were only bangers back then. One to bring up is Haze, remember that shitshow "Halo Killer"? Gaming isn't bad now as these past couple years have really brought out some excellent games. Valheim, Helldivers 2, Baldur's Gate 3, Deep Rock Galactic, Elden Ring, Kingdom Come: Deliverance, Guardians of the Galaxy are just some I can think of that came out the last 5ish years that are amazing games. I don't play console games but I know there's a lot of great games that came out the last 5 years on those too. There's just such a low bar to get in to making games that the market is flooded with cash grab live service crap like Suicide Squad.
@@jod791 This is way too subjective and long of a topic for a youtube comment thread, but I'm the camp that believes games started dropping in quality as soon as the HD era came around. The bottom line is that the 90s and early-mid 2000s had a lot of high-quality games with good budgets, relatively short development times, smaller teams able to focus on their specific vision, and less demanding requirements for graphics. Video games now are more of a business. It was always a business, of course, but it's more of a business now. It feels like every single AAA game is one of four genres. I think I'm going to puke if I'm spoon-fed any more open world or souls-like games. But games cost so much money and time to make now, why wouldn't these big companies stick with the same working formulas? And indie titles bring in the new and interesting ideas, sure, but they don't have the budget to do it on the same scale as companies who innovated in the past.
If I were to look at the top games from 2000-2004 and compare them to 2020-2024, I'm taking 2000-2004, graphics be damned. It's not even close for me, and it has nothing to do with nostalgia. Games were just made differently and under better circumstances back then. That's all.
Me and my siblings still play DS and 3DS games. Our PS4 doesn't work anymore and no one cares @@jod791
@@jod791Guardians of the Galaxy? Really? I can say unequivocally that there are a whole slew of excellent games released in the 90's / early 2000's that are indeed still better than any of those games you mentioned. Elden Ring is the only one that is in the same league. It isn't rose tinted glasses or nostalgia talking either. Many of these older games were better in part because the false narrative of "number of hours long = game value" had yet to take hold so their wasn't much filler. The games were cheaper to make so they didn't have to appeal to as wide of an audience to make a profit either. This meant that they didn't have to check off as many boxes turning the product into something that tries to make everyone happy but ends up pleasing no one. The number of people that played videogames back then was much smaller so a larger percentage of them were actual gaming enthusiasts instead of (if we're really being honest with ourselves) complete imbeciles which has swelled to depressing proportions today.
There seems to be this false belief among younger gamers today that thinks good game design seems to follow this steadily rising line on a graph. It doesn't always work that way though and I think many of you don't understand why certain restrictions were built into some older games. It wasn't because "they just didn't know how to do those things back then". It's as if every single modern game is being designed to play the same because if a game releases that doesn't have the same feature set as everything else modern players will view it as flawed. There were actual game design reasons why you couldn't spin the camera around and you didn't have a parry in Resident Evil 4, but consumers today are too dumb, so we get derivative changes like that in the remake to its' detriment.
@@Cableguy15Yes! You get it. I'm so sick of people dismissing genuinely better games from earlier decades as "just seeming better because of nostalgia". There seems to be this unwritten belief that too many people hold that there is just this steady upward moving line of game design progress and everything made today is inherently designed better. That is why every single game is starting to play more and more alike. There is a design reason why you had to commit to a jump in Castlevania, you couldn't spin the camera around your character in Resident Evil 4, you could only shoot in 8 directions and not 360° in Smash T.V., and you couldn't dodge roll and parry your way out of every problem in every freaking game. Everything is being dumbed down and designed to play the same today because if it doesn't, casual gamers will view it as flawed and behind the times. I am still discovering amazing games from earlier decades that I never even played and therefore have no nostalgia for, and they are often better.
The big problem with these statements is that we consumers vote with our wallet. If we don't like a game, we can't just buy it, because it sends a message that we want more stuff like nuts and bolts. But if we don't, we risk sending a message that we don't like the entire saga. No option wins.
What happened to Dead Space is a nuanced problem and there are several reasons why lots of people held back from buying it.
EA, due to fucked up executive decisions, force Visceral games to turn create Dead Space 3 the way it turned out to be and then it obviously flopped because nobody wanted it, so then they shut down the studio for not fulfilling their financial targets with a game NOBODY wanted.
Then, because EA is all about milking money, they decide to REMAKE Dead Space after they killed the franchise and it's studio to milk some cash INSTEAD of just giving is a remaster - the original game absolutely did not NEED a remake as it is still a proper modern game by today's standards. They could've easily done a remastered trilogy and it would actually be preferable - bump up the res to 4k and give us 60fps. easy enough. Although a remake is more effort, I'd say it is effort wasted and they definitely wanted to sell us the "same" games again and maybe they'd change things up with Dead Space 3 to actually make it fit the franchise. However the financial incentive was clear.
Now LOTS of people did not want to give EA their money after what they did to Visceral games, especially for profitting from their work AGAIN by creating a remake the franchise absolutely did not need. This is not a Resident Evil 2,3 nor even 4 case (RE4 is definitely a bit outdated by modern standards) which is not the case for Dead Space 1.
I adore the original Dead Space but I was not eager to give EA my money. I bought the game after a heavy sale more out of curiosity than actual hype. I'd much rather just have a simple remaster than this unnecessary remake. The remake was nice. I don't think it vastly improved the original game by any means. There's some added value for sure and it was crafted with care and respect for the original game, so kudos to that. But it was not needed.
These conflicting emotions raged in a lot of people. Lots of people did not buy the game out of principle (nor do they - most possibly - buy any game from EA) or they just waited for a sale to satisfy their curiosity.
tl;dr fuck EA
Resident evil 4 remake wasn't needed yet we still got it this argument that the dead space remake was pointless doesn't make any sense buy nobody said a thing to Rockstar, Capcom and whatever gaming company decided to do a remake not a word was said. Very weird if you ask me the only reason dead space remake sold poorly was because they decided to release it a month before the re4r.
Other factors;
* It’s too early for “real is brown” mid-late 2000s games to be prime nostalgia material. Their main demographic was older which could explain why they thought that it was time for a sort of revival.
* Political agendas that EA doesn’t even believe in put people off.
Another interesting counter to your argument is the reignited trilogy remake of Spyro the Dragon. That game went on to sell over 10 million copies. These games do have interest, but you have to develop, market and advertise these titles intelligently.
There's probably a new Spyro game in the process of being made, it just hasn't been announced officially yet
@@Laz3rCat95 that's exciting to hear
back in the day I never really got to play Spyro (only played the 2nd game of that weird serious trilogy), recently played the remake and had a ton of fun
@@vaan_Try its Gameboy Advance games specifically Spyro 2 season of Flane and Attack of the Rhynocs
Same with the Bandicoot he got his games remastered 1-1 just like Spyro and due to how well it sold we finally got the long awaited 4th and final game to finish Crash's story. Even if the original creators weren't fully involved it was developed by a studio who respected the franchise. Some ups and downs yes however it's a full on Crash Bandicoot game through and through not that bs Crash Bash that came out not to long after the 4th game. Tried to piggy back off of other game ideas and it flopped hard I don't think anyone talks about it anymore.
The outrage about The Crew isn't really about The Crew, it's part of a larger plan to fight the good fight against publishers killing games and providing no means to play the game without their servers
I really think the rise in remakes and remasters is because of the gaming landscape today. Are there still AMAZING games being made today? Absolutely, but with the rise of micro transactions, publishing deadlines and what seems like corporations making games instead of giving all the resources and time to devs that actually care, it’s such a turn off to gaming as a whole right now
Not to mention, most AAA games today require a TON of time to develop, far longer than any previous generation. Making remakes and remasters take a lot less time and can bring in some money in the meantime.
Indie games are the future! Until they grow into big dev studios and get bought out by the same greedy publishers and shutdown when their micro-addled games don't immediately make a billion bucks
AAA companies have become too big for their own good. Difficult to control, manage, and maintain unless there's great leadership at the top, they will eventually crumble just like when the Roman Empire split. The size which made them successful eventually became their biggest weakness.
My dude remakes as remasters have been common for decades.
In the PS1 era when games were going 3D is was extremely common to see remakes.
The great games are hidden behind the triple A movie like video games.
Not gonna stand for this Gex slander
Damn straight!
I don’t see it as slander. There isn’t many demand for gex to return. And when it releases and inevitably disappoint in sales, publishers will haphazardly come into the conclusion that resurrecting old IPs isn’t worth investing in
Thank you, me neither.
@@gleam6370 Err, BS there isn't much demand for Gex, there's a underground sub-set of fans that are clamouring for Gex to come back, you see fan art of the games to this day of the iconic Anime Channel and Gexzilla and you look at the reception of FlippinDingDong's Gex animation.
Heck! I get occasional comments directly complimenting that I have a Gex profile icon, Gex fans all acknowledge that the games haven't aged well in some areas but it has a charm that we loved and are eager to buy the remaster day 1.
@@gleam6370 The failure of Gex will make other publishers decide it's not worth reviving other IPs? Wow, I didn't know Gex had that kind of reach.
Nostalgia isn't a lie. I recently played metal gear solid 1-3 for the first time recently and loved them
No one I saying that amazing games didn’t exist back then.
There were amazing games from the birth of gaming.
But people are saying is that the type that says “gaming was much better when ” are blinded by nostalgia
@@Indigo_1001 Well it was, studios had far more creative freedom and innovation, you brought games at a honest price and were yours to actually own and while the games may have been more archaic, they none the less provided the most fun of many childhoods with friends and family you sat by in local multiplayer.
Compare all those factors today, then I'd say, absolutely gaming was much better back then.
Experiencing something that existed in the past for the first time isn't nostalgia, though. Nostalgia is about remembering things you already experienced before.
@@SynthLizard8
My dude what about all the endless multiplayer games on consoles that were non existent in the past, that brought millions of people together and even created a competitive gaming scene that didn’t exist before. I promise you kids that grew up in that era wouldn’t change that for the world.
Doesn’t that count at all when comparing both.
People like you are so lame. Would rather pretend that when you were a teen gaming was “more special” instead of being open to new experiences and actually trying new games like you did if when you were younger
Amazing games are still releasing, you ain’t playing them.
@@Indigo_1001 "that brought millions of people together" You absolutely can't compare what multiplayer was back then to what it is now, multiplayer back then was considered more like a event rather then a standard mode of play.
It was more special, it was more close-knit and it was a time of abundant creative freedom and experiences, that's just un-debatable I don't know why you're applying the 'either-or fallacy', I still appreciate good games today.
The indie scene is still keeping what magic of what gaming was back in the 90's and 2000's and it's those and retro games of what I only play.
I find it kind of funny that Gex was your tipping point when they did a Plumbers Don’t Wear Ties Remaster a little earlier
TIL I'm only supposed to be nostalgic for games that make greedy companies a lot of money when they soullessly remake them. Wait, what? What is "false nostalgia"? People remember fondly the games they remember fondly and talk about them... saying that the nostalgia was fake because the game didn't sell gangbusters makes no sense. "Where were the people buying it?" I'm sure the people who loved it DID buy it. I'm sure in many cases the ones that were nostalgic for it and talking about it were the exact ones who did buy it. But because it wasn't a hit, their nostalgia is all 'false'?
And to that point, I loved Gex (mostly Deep Cover and Enter, though). He was funny to me as a kid, and heck, even as an adult I can still find the quirkiness amusing... but more importantly the gameplay was fun and diverse with many worlds to enter and interesting mechanics. Will I buy the remake? PROBABLY NOT. Because it's a remake. I already played those games so why should I spend money on them again as if they're new? Will I someday revisit them with an emulator and play them as they actually were? HELL YEAH.
Why does Mario get to keep making games, an IP that has never really appealed to me personally. Why is my nostalgia for Gex 'false' yet if I were nostalgic for Mario, that would be real? Just because that franchise makes money? That's a very cynical metric. I never buy Mario games, personally. My tastes tend to lean towards niche in general... the logic in this video really doesn't hold up here. I'm also nostalgic for older Hitman games... and new entries of that series have both flopped and been hits. So what's the verdict on whether my nostalgia is false or real there? Huh, maybe whether a game sells well or not has little to do with the actual interest in the IP but more to do with the actual entry itself, or perhaps even other factors.
If I'm nostalgic for a game, I'm probably also nostalgic for the graphics of the times and want to relive the experience as close to how it was when I was enjoying it the first time. Remakes/remasters/rehashes are kinda dumb to me in that aspect, unless the original game is so flawed that its issues stand in the way of appreciating it - but then no one is calling for remakes of games that no one could appreciate.
Yep, I pretty much agree with everything you said. Most of the time, if I'm a huge fan of an older game, I have no desire to buy a remake because I already played (and in many cases still own) those games. And remakes can often make changes for the worse. The Ratchet and Clank PS4 remake is my personal sticking point in this regard, cutting out multiple levels from the PS2 original because 'games expensive to make' I guess. I'd rather have worse graphics with more content, thanks.
That's not to say I never buy remakes/remasters, but usually they're for games I never got the chance to play, for example the Castlevania Advance collection. I played Circle of The Moon as a kid but never got a chance to play the others. I'm also eyeing up the R-Type Tactics 1+2 remake, because the second game never got released outside of Japan. But the Dead Space remake? I love Dead Space. Absolutely adore it. But I'm not buying a damn remake for it. Why, in the hopes they'll release a Dead Space 2 remake? I don't want that either!
To me it's a combination of things:
- We are running out of classics to remake and remaster
- Not enough "modern" classics are entering the zeitgeist, partially because most of them are remakes or remasters
- Sequels, remakes and remasters are easier than good new original games
- Everyone wants everything to have a second chance. That's not a bad thing. Some franchises come back and are actually good. Some were always good but couldn't sell. Some bad games have good ideas and you want to see those games get a second chance.
- Brand recognition of a bad thing is still brand recognition. Do it well enough and you will fool someone.
I don't actually mind there being so many alternative takes on things. I do think there are some ideas that need to lie down, I don't know if there is anywhere interesting to go with Gex, there are franchises like Bomberman which I think outlived basically any chance of being interesting again.
My dude what are all these remakes releasing?
Can you list 5 major ones I the last 3 years. It has to be easy if there is SO many of them according to you.
And I promise you games like Baldurs Gate 3, Elder Ring, It Takes Two and so on WILL be seen as classics in the future. A art piece is never considered a classic the minute it’s out
@@Indigo_1001 Resident Evil 4, Metroid Prime Remastered (remaster in name only, the game got completely remade), Final Fantasy VII Rebirth, Dead Space, Like a Dragon: Ishin, Persona 3 Reloaded, The Last of Us Part 1 to name a few and I left out the remasters
As someone who replayed the original Dead Space recently, it was a game no one asked a remake of, the 2008 release is still very good.
My dude TONS of people asked for a remake of that game. Tons of people ask for remake for a LOT of games.
@@Indigo_1001right I said the same thing why people got a problem with dead space all of sudden when tons of games been getting remakes.
@@tdenzel101
Funny how remake are unnecessary when their game finally gets one.
Years ago people were begging for a Resident Evil 4 remake. Now they got it and suddenly it’s “trash and unnecessary”
"Wow EA shutdown a cool studio. I would have liked to see more games from them ): "
"EA made a remake of the first deadspace game that only looks marginally better than the copy I already own and still play regularly. Guess I won't buy it"
Apparently this makes you not a real fan and a hypocrite.
I basically said the same thing in my comment too. Like EA dusting off Dead Space to cash in on the horror remake craze is something I'm supposed to reward them for?
@@theSHELFables not to mention wishing single player games without a bunch of bullshit were more popular is not incorrect because they make less money. Everyone knows they make less money than micro transactions and cash grabbing bs. We all know fortnite prints money faster than the federal reserve. We just wish it didn't. We just wish none of that shit ever took off and became the standard.
@@theSHELFables
It’s arguably too early for mid-late 2000s “real is brown” games to be prime nostalgia material, much like how it’s becoming too late for Atari 2600 stuff to be prime nostalgia material.
but it looks MUCH better. have you looked at the original? If you think the remake and the og look marginally the same, yo're blind and on crack. seriously, go back and play it and compare it to the top settings of the remake. hell, the medium settings make it look better.
@@1stnarutoSo it's better and worth the money cause shiny new graphics? lmao
Yes, I'm the demand for the Gex Trilogy. Gex the Gecko, Banjo-Kazooie and Spyro the Dragon all deserve justice and a remaster and only one of them has gotten it. I will buy 5 copies of Gex if it gets me closer to fun 3D platformers from the 90's coming back lmao.
Agreed, I loved the 3D platformers of the 90s and early 2000s. I would be all for a return of Sly Cooper as well.
Putting Gex on a list next to Banjo should be a federal crime.
Theres this belief that the only reason you can enjoys something you did when you were younger is because your nostalgic for it, and that it has no value otherwise. there's also the idea that because something you liked when you were young isnt a masterpiece or Grade A product, that you couldn't possibly enjoy it now.
And that sucks because for a lot of people, the truth is we just still enjoy things we liked when we were young. Did I play Gex when i was a kid, yes. Have I played it recently and still enjoyed it, also yes. Im more critical of things now and can see flaws easier, but that doesn't take away from the fact that I still enjoy things.
You can like things that aren't generally considered good. It weird how when people say they like bad movies no one questions it, but when you say you enjoy a bad game there's disbelief.
Theres also this underlying idea that companies wanna sell you your nostalgia and how bad that is. The truth is, its always been that way. I grew up watching old ass shit because they were trying to sell Flinstones and Honeymooners to my parents and grandparents still.
I believe the true corruption is when they try to sell you older things back to you changed, altered to fit modern ideas simply to make a profit while compromising the integrity of the original work.
Coming back to Gex, yeah its a company trying to make a quick buck by selling me something they don't have to spend much on making, but at least i'll get to own it. When it comes to games(and most products in general), its getting more and more expensive to find the things I liked and own them. Yes there's the high seas for when i just wanna play something, but I enjoy actually owning things I like. Re-releases and such are a good things, please let me show with my dollar what I'm willing to spend money on. I'm willing to buy ports of older games, not spend hundreds of dollars on a ps one version because the resell market is fucked.
I guess I will always advocate for re-releases because at least I'll have a chance at owning it. Unless companies like Sony and Nintendo will stop being assholes and bring back things like the Virtual Console or PS classics, but that seems like a pipe dream.
My dude no one is saying that you only like older games for nostalgia.
Great games existed everywhere and anytime.
What is being “blinded by nostalgia” is saying “older games are better then new game” no matter what decade you stand. And trust me I’m old enough to remember seeing people say that all the way back in the 2000’s.
Bad movies only take 1-2 hours to watch. Bad games are more of a time investment. That's why people tend to be in disbelief.
Can confirm. Never grew up with the classic resident evil titles but finally gave them a try 2 years ago and absolutly loved them. And even then, the games I grew up still give me a lot of joy. Just was playing some ps2 games yesterday. Heck, I still enjoy the original Lego Racers more than the current 2K racing game.
some of this is unfairly blamed on the consumer. developers make games and spinoffs we have no interest in.
for example , Prince of Persia. the franchise died because the publisher and developer was making the game we didn't want. i'm not going to buy a Prince of Persia game that I didn't want. like the latest game for example. im a 3d prince fan and not a fan of the 2d ones. but the lost crown is a 2d one. the franchise was huge when they rebooted it in 3d, but back tracked for whatever reason. when they did give us 3D ones they sucked, like the Prince of Persia 3D reboot we didn't ask for that. they dropped the time mechanic that we all loved? I even bought the game forgotten sands. It was a fun game but very safe, step in right direction.
or like banjo you mentioned, the latest game sucked, nuts and bolts. the gameplay is nothing like we wanted. it's frustrating, buggy and not fun and a slog. dialogue is not entertaining
Great video overall, my only nitpicks were:
(1) The confrontational "Why didn't you show up!?" unnecessarily undermines the whole call to acceptance: "The past was great, but if you give it a change, the present can be great in its own ways." -- especially since in the end you even admit that showing up probably wouldn't make a difference.
(2) The whole EULA thing: (a) "Buyer beware" attitude just leads to business world becoming more scammy and society in general to became less caring about people (and thus less functional); and (b) just because something's in a contract doesn't mean it's legal*, and just because something's legal doesn't mean it's good.
* In this case that part of the EULA is legal, but I wanted to mention it as a general principle.
Still, I support any video that promotes non-hopeless acceptance.
🙂👍
This is more than nostalgia, modern gaming as we know it is ruined by greed and lacked of creativity.
It will never stop being hilarious when people fart that out.. The cost of making a game in the 1990s- 2000s is practically nothing compared to the cost of making a game in 2010-2024. Especially with the cancer grafix whores who think that a game is not enjoyable unless its 90,000k resolution with ray tracing, super duper physics engines, photo realistic grafix and of course be 25,000fps, that is 1000hrs long never ANY extra content and has to be made in 2 years.
Oh and of course raising the price is always "greedy" because games 30 years ago were $50 except there were alot of SNES games that ran $75-80 bucks. But keep making those super, duper, uber amazing games without expecting people to pay more even though tech has advanced and gaming is a WANT in life not a need.
Money is such a double-edged sword especially when it comes to video games. Yes, its a necessity but also has a high chance to cause some corporate suit's inner Scrooge that has already come out to completely engulf them.
"How can we screw our customers in the shittiest way possible while still gaining huge profit?"
we still got creativity, but the bigger studios kill it to get it more streamlined.
@ItsNightmar3 yes, creativity comes from smaller studios with limited budget working the radar. And yet bigger yet greedy companies always get the attention.
No, it’s absolutely nostalgia.
Ya’ll really rather thing that your childhood was a special moment in time where things were down just for the sake of art.
My dude how a days thing aren’t different. Back then games, even really good ones, were made for money and many AAA games are done out of passion today.
You just became a cynical adult and refuse to see that great games still are releasing, you aren’t playing them.
It's kind of hilarious that I 100% agree with you and feel personally attacked at the same time. I'm that person that waits sometimes years before purchasing a game as that is the economical thing to do. However, when I truly want to signal to a publisher that YES, give us new stuff I tend to buy them at full price. When it comes to remakes, I'm a sucker for that, but not at full price. If I can easily emulate the originals on my underpowered PC, I'm not paying a full $40 let alone $70 for a game that I can play for effectively free. So I'm guilty, yet your doing the lords work, god speed.
Hey, its like I said in the video: "Everyone else is going to buy things in their best interest." If you're on a budget and wanna save money and don't care to play stuff the second their out, then sure, wait. My video was mostly to address some of the random demands for various IPs to "come back". Didn't make sense to me. But you do you. Don't take it personally. Thank you for watching! :)
Millennial take here, but I think the underlying issue is that people don't necessarily want to see the likes of Jak or Gex back, they want major publishers to bring their PS1/PS2-era level of creativity and output back. I've seen a post on Twitter saying that gaming shouldn't have progressed beyond the PS1 power-wise because it made games less experimental. I wouldn't go as far personally, but I can sort of agree with the sentiment. Gaming is in a sort of weird place nowadays, where it's better than it's ever been in some ways and a total mess in others.
In the PS2 days, if you didn't like a Sly Cooper game, you had an entire slew of PlayStation franchises to choose, nowadays if you don't like Spider-Man or God of War, you are screwed. Hope you'll like a new Ratchet game or that new Insomniac IP in a decade or so (assuming they even get greenlight in the first place). I won't argue with you saying that Sly 4 or Nuts & Bolts were somehow big successes (although I think most revivals like this could be handled better, why didn't they make Sly 4 a PS4 launch game for example), but I don't think that every game should be excepted to be a huge multi-million seller. Entire franchises came and went (hell, sometimes even the entire genres) in the time it takes to develop a single game these days and that sucks.
Your video reminded me of that whole Scorsese/MCU discourse. Just because some CGI-powered action flicks break a billy in the box office doesn't mean they should be the only kind of movies Hollywood should make.
My take is that essentially devs shouldn't feel pushed to use the maximum power of a current system if it's not actually strictly needed. It's a big reason the INdie space is doing better in a lot of ways.
@@CrashGordon94yeah not everything has to push the console to the limit.
@@CrashGordon94
That is so dumb cause it’s not the devs fault, it’s the gamers.
Millions of gamers and begging for more graphical impressive games. The PC market is filled with people paying over a thousand dollars for the most powerful PC’s.
Gamers want this, it’s not the “industry” doing it just cause.
@@cameron6085
And there are hundreds of indie or AA games releasing. Most games aren’t AAA
@@Indigo_1001 You do know the Devs of the AAA game companies are withheld by their shareholders right? The people who give them the money to make these big budget games of a live service. Yet there are a few who are starting to wake up and pull money from the industry. AAA games have gotten distracted by the amount of money they can make and lost the drive to create a game for fun and escapism's like the games of the past where. Without the passion in the gaming industry we wouldn't have titles such as Earth Worm Jim, Sly, Doom, Halo, CSGo, old school Star Wars Battlefront 1&2. Fuck even pong from crying out loud. The industry as a whole really needs to take a step back and think how did we go from making fun to making greed? Just a thought.
So in the same video you acknowledge inflation for game studios, you blame fans for not buying the dead space remake without thinking the same thing effects them?
If I remember correctly dead space was 70 bucks.
@@Daynger_Foxwhich is the industry norm now so I’m not sure what your point is. Games are getting more expensive to buy (notice I didn’t say own) and people aren’t* getting paid enough to afford more than one game every blue moon.
@@JustinTorres-mp7zp my point was that the game was 70 bucks. That game also came out in between a lot of great games. A lot of folks these days can only afford one. I have to limit my spending or I'll go broke. I only buy one new full price game a year. Otherwise, I wait for sales.
@@Daynger_Fox ah so we’re sayin the same thing lol
My bad mate
Yes. And the point in the video still stands. If a new release in a franchise doesn't sell, the franchise is less likely to continue. I don't see any contradiction. Inflation affects both companies and customers, like you said.
I love this dude! You are so spot on. In the example of Dead Space, I pre-ordered and loved it. My mate on the other hand who is always going on about how they should make a new Dead Space, 'Omg Dead Space 4 would be amazing' etc He really liked the look of Dead Space Remake, Launch day comes, Pfft £70! Im not paying that! Thought it was going to be £25 or something.... No sale from him, a supposed Dead Space fan who wants Dead Space 4... I also feel Live Service has really skewed peoples minds (casual gamers) into think buying games isnt worth it anymore, I'll just keep playing this for hundreds of hours.
In regards to "The Crew" and the current "Legal situaiton" it's in with Accursed Farms. It's not about the game itself, it's about the method of removing peoples access to a game causing it to no longer be legaly owned. The Crew is only used as an example of what could be considered illegal practices.
And maybe it is illegal, but software licenses and EULAs go as far back as the 90's. We have never "owned" our games from Day One, and if so many folks are against online-only games that could get thrown into oblivion at a moment's notice, why are folks still buying them? If so many people truly care about The Crew, why 200 concurrent players over the span of 5 of its 10 years? Why did the majority of the playerbase ditch it when the sequel dropped? Looking at those stats paints a different picture than what most folks are letting on.
EDIT: I'll let the legal system make its own decision. I'm not going up to bat for Ubisoft, but let's not revise history and pretend The Crew was something we all cared about and consistently played after 2014.
@@spectrebullWell considering they say we are BUYING the game not renting, thats kind of an issue. Also if I get something physical, that copy is mine you cannot take it back. Digital doesn't grant that privilege which is kind of insane.
EDIT: Also the quality of the game is not the point, whether the crew 1 sucks or not is irrelevant, its something people paid to own and now it is revoked. I don't understand why you would defend a practice that goes against your own self interest unless you just want attention.
@@altonb.1396Where and when did I ever say "this game is bad and Ubisoft has the right to remove access to the game"?
@@spectrebull I admit I seem to have misinterpreted your initial response. It seems as though you're excusing Ubisofts behavior under the guise of claiming people don't care about the game due to low numbers. That doesn't sit right with me because obviously there would be few players on an old game if there's a newer sequel of similar quality. As for the amount of people upset about this takedown, the amount of people actively playing does not equate to the number of people online that are upset at the precedent set by the takedown of the game.
@@altonb.1396 I appreciate the rescind. I do understand at face value I do look like I'm defending Ubisoft, but I'm really not. The problem is exactly as you point out at the end: the amount of people actively playing does not equate to the number of people online that are upset. That's where the outrage doesn't make sense to me. No one cared about this game before Mutahar made his video.
I do agree that they should put in an offline mode, but we as the players do need to start sticking to our guns on stuff like this. If we see a game is online only, then we need to vote with our wallets and not buy that game. But when I see "The Crew reaches 12 million players" one year, and then suddenly the playerbase drops to 200 for five years, as a publisher that would tell me "no one is playing this game and we already have The Crew 2 and Motorfest to support, so why bother". I'm not saying that's the right thought to have, that's just how publishers think.
At the end of the day, though, legal systems are going to look at EULAs and Privacy Policies to determine what is legally binding and what is harmful to customers. So, maybe someone like Richard Hoeg can give us more realistic answers and properly breakdown the EULA.
There's a detail you're overlooking. The games that didn't sell well didn't do so for a reason. Nobody asked for them. Nobody was asking for Nuts & Bolts because we wanted Banjo 3. Nobody was asking for The Lost Frontier because we wanted Jak 4. And on the occasion we did get the games we wanted, like Sly 4 and Twisted Metal 2012, the devs dropped the ball.
Right and it's our fault we didn't meet their expectations of them making fortnite levels of money? Besides to be honest its not remakes of games I'm nostalgic for I really want unless it's desperately needed (i.e it's stuck to a console that's hard to emulate, graphics or controls are painfully outdated) . I want video game companies to take risks again on new Intellectual properties. Focus on making a fun compelling game rather how hard can you milk me for nickels and slam my eyes full of pop culture and ads. But it's over. I await a future where advertisements are the entertainment. Also unrelated but not every God damn game needs a battle pass and skill trees. I swear they're all just blurring together
@mattsell4568 I understand the demand for resurrecting old franchises. Hell, I'm one of those voices; I'm a Legacy of Kain fan. I've been screaming for a sequel to Defiance for 20 years now. And in this day and age of remakes and remasters, I'd be excited to see new life breathed into the old games. But I'd hate to see them do it without Amy Hennig, because she's the one who made that franchise a success.
That part was weird, you cant say ppl didnt show up for something when its not what you wanted. Car making in banjo was not it lol
I feel there's a good few things you fail to mention, like Developer Burnout, developers leaving the studios because they flat-out get tired of working on the same game but publishers demand it, much what happened with the Tomb Raider franchise before it was rebooted.
Money talks, yes, always have, always will, but inflation means Developers have higher income expectations and customers have less buying power to vote with. The reason indie studios, developers and games do so well these days, is because they're simple, don't have microtransactions or small DLCs that try to siphon money out of their customers, and also doesn't have any grand sales expectations. Why don't AAA Studios make shorter games with retro graphics and smaller scope? There would be money in it, but I doubt they think that way.
I'm not sure why you trash-talk Gex so much, they're great games and I still play them today, I have the legal copies, and Gex 4 was cancelled by Eidos, not because of money, but because they weren't interested in the franchise anymore. So it's not always about just money or Player interest, but also interest from the studios and publishers themselves.
I get your point, but I don't think you presented it super well. But it could be worse!
You just earned a sub
False nostalgia is something ive been talking about for a long time now, but everytime i say something people will get on my neck
I didn't play Skies of Arcadia: Legends till 2013 for the first time, was blown away by the scope, script and characters. After I finished it, it instantly got into my top 5.
All that may be true, but that would just mean that games preservation and full ownership is even more important, since those few hundred people still deserve to keep playing.
How have you not factored piracy and emulation into this equation?
this dude sounds like hes rocked up out of nowhere into the hospital room to unplug my grandmother from the life support machine while shes still lucid. respect
Honestly, not sure how to take this comment, but that is funny to imagine. I would never do that, though. Much love to you and yours!
@@spectrebull thanks man and same to you and yours! I’ll be sure to give those well wishes to my family, except my grandma cuz well… you know why
I think you make alot of genuinely good points in this video, but some of them just kinda fall flat. For starters alot of people didn't buy the dead space remake not because they just didn't feel like it, but rather we didn't want a remake in the first place. We waited years for a good NEW game, not the same game we've all completed 5 times on all difficulties.
I just emulate. I wish there was more support for it. I have no interest in my old games getting remastered just being playable. They were all on modified computers it should be easy enough.
It’s mostly cause there’s a lot of people that don’t wanna try to learn how to emulate and would rather have convenience of paying for it
@@DraftyRum You download the game on the store and its the original game. Setting up an emulator is like setting up steam from scratch and connecting a controller to it. you download it, connect the controller and download the game you wanna play then run it on the emulator. you could make it all in one if it was better supported. heres an idea. An app you download it on your pc and you pay to unlock different system bios and after you unlock them you pay for the games. IE you download GG emulator and have nothing, you pay $20 for a sega license and then get access to the sega library and can buy sonic for $10.
Man just yesterday I tried to play emulated Skate 3 again but I can't get that to run smoothly 😭
At least PSP and PS1 stuff runs well on my Vita
I got Banana Mania on Steam. Pre-ordered it even (because they literally held the retro stuff hostage). I just went back to playing the originals on Dolphin and PCSX2 respectively.
I think the reason why people are not emulating is because price of entry (building a decent PC with a smaller budget isn't an easy feat unless you got access to a lot of parts beforehand) or finding an emulator that doesn't bite them later (Project 64). Even though it IS a search away, people aren't aware emulation was/is an option.
@JasmineBrowneyes that makes more sense to me. Frankly emulating games should run easier than any modern game. My android phone runs emulators. If there was better support for it it would be a universal library that can work on any console. The only reason emulators are annoying is because a lot of times they legally have to be in pieces because parts of it are illegal.
RE: The Crew - you understand that the issue is about the underlying philosophy that big studios and publishers are bringing to game preservation and ownership, right? No one gives a fuck about The Crew. People care about these organizations creating a future where your favorite games are removed from your library forever on a whim. It’s not about the Crew, it’s about what the implications are for the future.
You’re so close to understanding the point, yet still completely missing it.
I tend to look forward to trying new things more so than focusing on nostalgia. I don't want remasters or remakes I want new stories, characters and places to enjoy. The main thing I miss about older AAA games is they felt like a completed product upon release not a year after they have received multiple patches
The ubisoft argument. You cant just throw it away like that. You are completely missing the point on why people are mad about the crew. It shows, that publishers or devs, or the storefronts themselves can take away a purchased digital product without warning and reimbursement. You looking at this whole thing so narrowly you are completely not understanding why people are upset
he said that in the video, and also said what a lot of folks are only just realizing - that digital games are a license and you never at any point owned it. digital storefronts sucking for consumers is not a new problem that started with The Crew, it's just a particularly recent and salient example.
@@Vysetron just because it's not new doesn't mean it's not a good example of why digital ownership is anti consumer and regulations and rules or laws should be changed.
@@Vysetron he never said any of that btw
@@EvelineE-001rather digital or physical nothing last forever plus in order to play these games you still need the consoles good luck trying to play xbox360 or ps3 games in the year 2056 without the console.
@tdenzel101 that's a fair point, but a good counter to your point would be to keep said ps3 or xbox360 or get some now and take care of it. A little bit of basic cleaning will stretch a consoles life. Also, if like a disc drive or something breaks on it, send it it to get it repaired, or repair it yourself. 😉 see there are plenty of options. It's not all doom and gloom sorry
Dead space didn't fail because of dead space but because people don't trust EA after they f'd up dead space 3. Dead Space remake by ->EA
Sometimes I wonder how much of it is "nostalgia", and how much of it is _existential dread_ , and an inability to cope with the things we love ending in general.
That’s a very Gex thing to say
Play the old games and forget about the crushing march of time, and how much my damn knees hurt.
Or maybe you became a cynical person unable to enjoy new things?
2023 had a TON of great games, you just got to play them
You think sports games are better now than 20 years ago?
A mix of nostalgia and existential dread is exactly what’s going on.
I think you're not factoring in how much disposable income some people have.
Some of us couldn't/can't afford games brand new as soon as they came out. So we had to wait for them to drop in price or get them second hand. Yeah it sucks for the developer that they're not getting money right away but some customers have to choose necessities over entertainment. Some people were probably choosing to pay bills over buying Dead Space remake right away
Some of us have nostalgia for certain games but only after we got it a year or two after it came out
Not to mention some people may be too pissed off at the immoral developers/publishers to even bother. Doing these remakes is often too little, too late, as the company now has bigger fish to fry.
Yeah viva piñata fans understand that we know there isn't enough people who want to buy it.
Rare Replay cost NOTHING to make. The fact that it sold badly should not discourage these companies from making more games in those IPs. It’s a bunch of games that people had already played. Why are we expected to repurchase things we can still go back and play on our old hardware?
1 - 2 million sales is usually considered to be a good selling game. Some mega hits like Mario Kart and Zelda will sell 20 million+, but average games sell 1 million+ and that's good.
Really? Then, let me give you a scenario I gave another commenter who said 1-2 million sales is good.
You are running a game company consisting of 500 people on staff, including yourself. You just released a game that only sold 2 million copies at $70 a pop, giving you $140 million to fund your next game, which is going to take 4-5 years to develop as many AAA games do. This means you are going to have to pay your team of 500 people, which consists of programmers, artists, animators, managers, supervisors, administration, accountants, lawyers, tech support, PR, marketers, audio technicians, coders, and QA staff. As with most AAA companies, you will have to outsource work to other studios outside of yours to help make cutscenes, bring in voice actors and motion capture performers, and compose the music for your game. On top of all of that, you are going to need to manage bills for your building such as electric/heat, water, pest control, sanitation, and rent if you are operating in an office building. You will also have bills for licensing songs, artwork, logos, and devkits for your staff.
That said, how is $140m going to get you through the next 4-5 years by the time your next game comes out?
@@spectrebull games back then didn't Sell at 70 dollars New and inflation wasn't crazy like it is right now.
@@spectrebull ignoring the beautifull irony that a lot of that sales don't even go into the pockets of the developers and staff that worked hard and with passion on these games, but mostly on the big guys in charge and their shareholders, heck a lot of time staff is even fired so the big ones get even more money. Can't blame the consumers for companies and shareholders greed over fictional numbers.
Heck there is a reason why people rather support indi developers than AAA studios.
@@spectrebull This remasters have no business needing 4-5 years to develop. Even new games should need that much when they are simple games without super detail graphics like Sly Cooper etc.
Such games should be like 2 years and with relatively low budget.
You also say "well where were you".
I don't know if a new Sly game sold a million i guess it means we never left, why are you asking where we are?
You seem to forget that the gaming market now is much much bigger than what it was during PS1 and PS2 etc.
The triple AAA game now costs 250 to 350 million and needs like 10million sales. And is it has hopes of getting those sales because the game market is huge.
But back then it wasn't that huge. Back then selling 2-3 million is like selling 15-30 million now. 1 millions sales was pretty good.
So the guys who loved the game back then and where the guys giving it a million sales which was great back then because games needed a fraction of what big AAA need now still bought the game. It got sold like it was selling back then. The guys loving it still bought it.
But why would a 13 year old buy it. They don't know anything about it and seems less cool than the big AAA games with their super graphics.
A few might check it but most not because Fortnite looks even better.
Back then those games were AAA quality for their time so they looked cool enough for us to buy them. Now they aren't the big impressive titles but at the same time their remasters shouldn't cost a fortune to make.
The problem is that if a game that got a little polished with a few new graphics and releases and cost just 15million to remaster and made a million sales get in the annual investors meeting. Even though it made a few millions profits that seems pointless for the big corpos that make 300million games and expect 2 billion in revenue etc or next to billions in revenue in microtranctions and all that.
The goal posts changed. Now the target isn't making good money but ALL the money. So even though we still bought the game, even though it still was profitable the company doesn't care. They see it as a nothing and maybe they will bother with the IP late if they have nothing to do to boost the profits a few million more etc.
But in general they have much bigger cash cows to bother with and the game is played in a much bigger table than it was back then.
Square Enix todays sells millions more copies of Final Fantasy than back then yet it sees them all as failures or mildly decent sales when back then the most successful ones sold less.
I do remember playing a Gex game back in the 90s but most people associate it now to a running gag of Scott the Woz. There are some great retro games that deserve a revival and yet the bad games get the chance. Its like Morbius coming back to theaters because Sony thought people liked it when it was just to make fun of it. Companies should do a better research on what games to revive according to demand.
I unironically love Gex and won't apologize for it. I think Gex 2 was one of the best platformers of that era.
Fr i've seen so many people here in italy asking for a croc game. CROC! taht absolute nothing of a game
@@Steam_Attack
I think the blow would be softened by an “& Friends”-type collection, sort of like how Capcom Fighting Collection was a “Darkstalkers & Friends” collection that had other games. Sort of a collection of the Croc series plus other games by the same developer.
I think the people asking for remakes are buying the games. But they are a very vocal minority
I'm honestly starting to wonder if that is the case. As I said in the video, as we get older, people phase out of the hobby while kids break into the hobby. That's just the ebb and flow of the industry. So, how many of us who grew up during the GameCube and X360 years are still playing games today? I can't imagine as many people are or they are just sticking to their own corners until their boxes crap out like my sister and her husband.
Let me just say as someone around 10 years older than you, I agree that we should just leave things in the past.
I grew up on old movies and TV shows that most other people my age were not exposed to. But we also weren't flooded with remakes of literally everything that used to be popular (there WERE remakes of things, but not EVERYTHING). I'm glad that there was no new version of Casablanca or The Dick Van Dyke show that more of my generation would have been exposed to.
I know video games are different than movies or shows. But the same principle extends to some extent. The best way to preserve old games is not to give them remakes, remasters, and endless sequels. It's to keep those old games available for those young people who want to seek them out of a sense of curiosity regarding history. And there will always be that subset of people who are really interested in stuff from before their time. And honestly the best way to keep those things preserved and available is the emulation scene.
Agreed. I hate so much when things get remade or rebooted. Like the ideas for a Daria reboot. The show was a product of its time. Let things stay in the past. Cuz then the new versions are obviously just cashins anyway.
counterpoint: the 4k restoration of Casablanca owns and I see nothing wrong with remastering media.
@Healthy_Toki That restoration is attempting to reach the same level of quality as the original film.
Film preservation requires those kinds of methods because the physical medium it was created on is something that decays.
Video games, being digital files, don't need any restoration to be preserved. And the best preservation of the original experiences have been in the fields of emulation, as well as people collecting and keeping the original hardware, including the CRT screens they were meant to be played with.
When publishers release remasters, I almost always prefer to either play the original on retro hardware or emulate it.
GEX 2 and 3 are one of the best ps1 platformers just like the crash trilogy, spyro or croc, are very good videogames, and the character is good too, i think it is ok, and people don´t want to admit it, because the internet is full of idiots but everybody loves the Gex games and that is a fact, plays great, the ambience is great, the different style of levels and so on., idiots with loud speakers on the internet just want to bitch about it but really out there everybody loves the Gex games
I haven't played any of them recently but I remember Gex: Enter the Gecko being one of my favorite PS1 games as a kid.
Yes, and the supid internet doing it´s job again, because of the idiots on the internet we have the woke people everywhere which destroyed quality in videogames, the Gex games were amazing, had the most important factor in videogames the "fun factor" as the Gamepro magazine used to put it., Gex was far better than Croc which was good, and better than Jersey Devil which was not that good, i would say that those 2 games were better than medievil, and were second only to spyro and the Crash trilogy which were the absolute best,@@Laz3rCat95
You’ve got some valid points especially from the business perspective, the thing is those of us that still play older games and would like to see those old series that we believe still have potential to have more great entries are a minority in the community and most of these older series would be a brand new IP to newer generations so it is an uphill struggle for those series to get back their popularity now after being dormant for so long.
Also besides, sales don’t say everything about how good a game is, lots of fantastic games go under the radar and never get their due…so fans don’t care about sales but still want their gaming needs met.
I’d love a new a Banjo-Kazooie game but you are right if a new game was released I don’t think it’d be a huge hit but those of us asking for it do really want a new game but we aren’t being listened to as we aren’t the people that will bring in the big money.
Having said all that, nostalgia does cloud our mind sometimes for sure, I’ve gone back to some older games and now I can’t play them because they feel too outdated and are no longer that fun to me but many games still hold up well.
I want to chime in about the "resurgance" part you were hitting on. Alot of fans get disgrunttled about buying a game twice. Like i am a die hard warcraft fan. But I was pissed about having to buy reforged because I bought frozen throne 20 years ago, and it works fine.
I feel a lot of the games mentioned are held back by zero marketing/console exclusivity
of course rare fans arent gonna buy an xbox one to play games they already have on their n64 in the attic they probably got a wii or a switch. and no ones gonna buy the banjo port cause its a 5 dollar xbox live download they probably dont even know existed. also I hate the buy this shit you dont want or we hold your series hostage crap the industry pulls. just give us a new game dont fart out remakes then give up when a game everyone already played or didnt ask for didnt sell.
Agreed. How is it my fault that the 2D Ninja Gaiden series I loved on the NES died out because I didn't buy "Ninja Gaiden Trilogy" on the SNES which was such complete garbage that it managed to look, sound, and even play inferior to the original versions I still owned on the NES? The morons at Tecmo apparently never bothered to consider that many of us didn't buy the compilation because we already owned the games and that their remakes were released in such a poor state that we weren't going to buy a downgraded version of those games either. What was true back then is even truer today. Executives are truly some of the stupidest people alive that don't understand the buying habits of consumers. Remember when the Switch version of Dark Souls Remastered got delayed until AFTER it was announced that their would be a trilogy compilation released on the other systems? Hmmm. I wonder why the game didn't sell to expectations? So they thought there wasn't enough interest in the series on Switch and never released Dark Souls 2 & 3 because they basically told every household that had more than one current game system to hold off and get 3 games for the price of 1 in just a few months.
Stop, just stop. People need to stop farting out the "exclusivity" excuse. NO exclusivity isn't even anything close to a valid excuse. Exclusives aren't like they used to be.
FFVII remake/FFXVI isn't on Xbox because Xbots don't buy games, they're expected to go straight to WelfarePass, to the point that Microsoft has had to start putting games on their "competition" platforms to make money. The "exclusivity" for FFVII remake ended after 6 months. Helldivers 2 isn't on Xbox because HellDivers is owned and trademarked by SIE and licensed to Arrowhead
Sony and Nintendo don't have to put games on their competition because PS and Switch players actually buy games. If they console you own doesn't get games, then that is a personal problem. Its not up to Sony, Nintendo to put their own games on everything, nor should they be expected to put their software on all platforms.
The people who constantly cry about exclusivity also need to be consistent with their "outrage" If its not OK for some then its not OK for all.....Xbox kept GTA IV DLC off PS3 for years, Xbox bought exclusivity for Rise of the Tomb Raider for a year, MS bought the Gears franchise because Epic talked about putting Gears on other platforms. MS is holding Sunset Overdrive hostage. All of them used to do it and MS seems to have been the biggest to do so, they only reason they don't know is because their hardware isn't selling.
@@lutherheggs451 what a chatterbox
Ever wondered why all Sonic games are often rushed and half backed, or why Sega doesn't bother with cracking down on Sonic fan games and Sonic game piracy? Look at lifetime sales numbers for each Sonic title after the very first Genesis game, you'll quickly understand why.
Capcom made good thinks with nostalgic gaming, for example resident evil 2 and 4
Killer Instinct is a great game. I feel bad it didn't have a resurgence with all the patch updates on it's 10th. Problem is, it's on the wrong console.
Yeah I think the more serious fighting game players are on the PlayStation or PC
One point I disagree with is the Rare games. Most people who grew up with them are Nintendo owners and will remain with that brand. Xbox’s built in base will be far less likely to try. They should’ve released them on Steam instead of Xbox live.
KI was cut at the kneecaps when it was made a Xbone exclusive on release. Remember there was a time when people collectively throughout the entertainment media hated Microsoft.
Also, dude, that eulogy at the end wasn’t that necessary. It’s just games. Nothing wrong with wanting to have a franchise you like return, and I don’t think most people are taking it as seriously as you are.
That's why Spiritual Successesors exist. We can develop a game that is similar to older franchises. Bomb Rush Cyberfunk, Eiyuden Chronicle, Wargroove, Fast Racing Neo, and etc have shown that fans/former developers can still create those games but in New ways. We don't have to rely on the developers/publishers to Create new games in these franchises.
the BEST game you HAVEN'T played (a video on some nes game no one played)
Nostalgia for a lot of franchises, the majority I'd argue, are barely a factor when talking to rational fans if you ask me. I had like 40 games on the PS2 growing up and have onlt revisited maybe 4 of them, most of my gaming life was right before joining the military and these last 3 years. I have zero nostalgia for most things I'm a fan of today and I play practically everything that releases, and I can confidently say post-2015 gaming just f-king sucks plain and simple, these games just ain't it.
I know I'm not the only one. Playing new games has a 30% success rate and a 70% it will suck rate while for older games (specifically in the 1998-2012 time span) it's the exact opposite, 9 out of 10 times the game is either harmlessly OK at worst and peak AF at best. Being in danger of sounding like an old nut I do truly believe that "they don't make em like they used to👴🏻" and that's exactly what attracts many gamers to older titles.
Deadlines were harsh, budget was miniscule, the teams were microscopic, the graphics on most are fundamentally dated to many by today's standards, however what makes gaming such an artistic medium is ever so present and timeless. The passion, the community, the creativity, the lore, the boundless ambition, 1998-2012 games just oozed with all those traits. Modern games feel shallow, they feel like Temu knock offs of past generations' attempts, usually either some whacky tone/art style or some nothing-burger technological flex is the selling point. It was always a competitive market I'm not delusional but it truly feels like there's barely any artistic integrity left, like the gaming space turned from a feelgood escape/hobby into a coprorate market, like the art of game creation turned into a race to the next tech demo, like a platform for expression turned into an outlet for sociopolitical warfare.
Gaming is like a bafflingly beautiful painting that got vandalized and bastardized to the point that it's now just a mess of unflattering colors. People just want their good painting back
I'm with you there. I know not every game we played as kids was a banger, but the budgets for some of these games kinda shows how our favorite publishers and developers have fallen by the wayside. A lot more focus on making games "marketable" and not enough confidence behind interesting games.
This is so wrong though.
Honestly I hate 2023 game did you play so say this nonsense.
Funny how people “peak of gaming” is whoever they were a teen or early 20’s. Don’t you think that’s odd at all…
@@Indigo_1001 2023 games I played? Children of Silentown, One Piece Odyssey, NeverAwake, Fire Emblem Engage, Forspoken, NBA All-World, Risen, Warlander, Hi-Fi Rush, Dead Space, Atomic Heart, Avatar Generations, Like a Dragon: Ishin!, SpongeBob The Cosmic Shake, Ultimate Sackboy, Horizon Call of the Mountain, Company of Heroes 3, Kirby's Return to Dream Land Deluxe, Octopath Traveler II, Bendy and the Dark Revival, Street Fighter Duel, Phantom Brigade, Wo Long: Fallen Dynsasty. OK I'm getting REEEEEALLY tired of typing the games I played from last year and we were only just getting started, you get the point, I play games, lots of them, indie, AA, AAA, any genre, I'm out there a lot.
It sucks.
It was better back then, it simply was. The perfect era for gaming I called before, 1998-2012? I wasn't even a teen bro, hell I wasn't even born in 1998. I went through my teen years in the mid-2010s era of gaming so by your logic I should have intense nostalgia for that but I do not, it's considerably weak in fact. I'm in my 20s now and gaming is bad. It's simply the reality of the situation.
Nintendo still makes bangers but I mostly agree other than that.
What do you mean? Gex was one of best early 3-D platformers when it first came out. Much better than Super Mario 64.
Dead Space remake was on gamepass, dude. A lot of people probably played it there
I strongly believe that the reason why so many people are calling for the more nostalgic media of their time is due to lack of diversity in game styles with presentations and issues with trends in modern gaming where companies are too scared to take chances with old IPs or make new ones, they may do a remake or remaster or just port compilations and that's it.
The reason why so many indie games especially the most standout ones get so popular is because both old and young generations of gamers want more diversity in their games with more risks in trying out new styles of visuals, gameplay, etc. Also indie devs aren't toxicly greedy about getting your money all the time and charging an arm and a leg for their shitty unfinished games n more content.
Also these remasters/remakes of old games can remind and teach old n younger gamers of what were the trends in gaming at the time with control, lack or less of direction and presentation regardless if it looks ugly or great.
Also some games were made during a time of when staff were at specific mindsets like with how characters are portrayed and sudden gameplay styles which they fear can get them into trouble over sensitive people of today and gamers who can't cope with game changes in gameplay.
Some former staff members or even new members don't know how to get a new game in these old IPs off the ground along with guaranteeing to their higher ups or share holders whatever that the game will be worth it in profit and not get fan backlash because "boo hoo this game doesn't play or look like what I played back in the 80s or 90s"
It is a horrible curse to be a game developer especially if you work with "AAA Studios" which is very toxic where they only care about trends n making easiest and safest money.
It is true that alot of our once beloved games did lay the foundation of how so many video game elements should be represented in future games of today with HUDs, camera, controller improvements and using limited resources to craft an acceptable visual style that can make a game look timeless to that even modern younger eyes can still tell if that character is a human or not with the limitations taken into consideration for a joke lol :P
Thank god we have indie devs of old and young with unique visions of game design to make something new or something thats obscurely old but feels freshly new or bring back something old that was popular and make it look so damn good (hahha just look at the lovely Tomb Raider Trillogy Remasters, Crash Trillogy and Spyro Trillogy
Sly is the game I used to ask for a remaster of the trilogy, and even though I would definitely play it I know it won't sell. If I want the nostalgia, I'll play the original since even the flaws and aged style make it the amazing series I love.
With how more than half of these companies operate, I'd rather have new IPs and spiritual successors, and people must understand that gaming is still new as a medium. Social Media, especially, where half of the time people will talk about some of these games like they sold gangbusters when they're niche.
Some fair and well put argument here!
For my own part, I loved the Gex games back in the day and I'm so excited to by them again in a remastered & collected edition for modern system (my choise is PS4 PRO).
Dead Space I agree the argument with. I had bought the game IF I had a PS5 or a new gaming PC. Have not been able to buy new consoles as the prices are to high.
Rare Replay I promoted like HECK evreywhere when released and done so for years. Made my lill borther buy it digitally and a friend of mine in stores. I have played through near all games on there, but 3-4 I think (Piniatas, Blast Corps and some other). Medievil I loved to see its remake and bough it of course.
5:38 I didn't want a Dead Space remake. I wanted a new Dead Space game. That's where I was.
You had the chance to say "I want more Dead Space."
@@spectrebull I did say that. But I'm not going to buy a game I already have.
@@bobafettjr85Yeah remakes are a different discussion all together. But the simple idea is still true. If you want more of your series you have to hope it does well even if it isn't your all time favorite or a rehash of something you already played. Like when DmC came out people hated it but since it sold well that's why DMC5 was able to exist. People showed interest with the franchise and the IP but they were still very vocal about what they didn't like about the game. Because of DmC selling well they even made a DMC4 Special Edition which went on to sell more than DmC. People who are truly dedicated in a series will always buy their games, especially if they're true quality and regardless if they already own a copy of it.
It's very hard simple truth people need to comprehend. If you want more games of your favorite series then you should be hoping all their games sell well. It's really that simple. Which makes these Remakes even more tragic because of how obvious it was nobody would buy it. The company decided to hurt itself anyways and fridge their IP for god knows how long.
@tylercafe1260 it's not a different discussion. I'm not interested in remakes, unless it's such a huge difference that it's essentially a different game like FF7. Most people aren't. Corporations for some reason can't figure that out. Just like Dianey movies. I don't need a "live action" Lion King. Give us new movies instead.
The PSs ratchet and clank sales were revealed to be even higher than what you showed thanks to the insomniac leak
I wanna add my two cents into this discussion. First I wanna call out the mentality of “vote with your wallet”. Most people have this idea that it will tell developers and publishers what games we actually want. In reality most developers and publishers will see low sales and assume that nobody wants the game and just stop making them.
Second although I do agree that some series don’t need to go on forever I do feel like the idea should continue. A Hat in Time is Mario Sunshine 2 and though people would more than likely prefer the latter the former is still well received.
Bomb Rush Cyberfunk is Jet Set Radio in all but name and people love it. Bloodstained: Ritual of the Night is Alucard from SOTN wearing a terrible disguise, yet it’s one of the most highly rated metroidvainias out there.
A counter I can see to this is, “Well they’re indie games”. So then they wouldn’t sell well or would be well received because Sony, Microsoft, or Nintendo published/developed them?
I feel that most people want a new Banjo Kazooie is because AAA developers that aren’t named Nintendo don’t make those type of games anymore. Sure in the indie scene Yooka-Laylee tried it just ended up being a mediocre game that did still sell well.
This isn’t to discredit the entire video because I do agree with a lot of points. I argue that developers and publishers could try making budget titles. Not big million dollar games to produce. Games with a modest budget and a fair price tag that keep the idea of older games sensibilities.
That last part is exactly the problem: oversized budgets.
On a related note, the Spyro reignited trilogy sold double that of Crash 4 AND YET
Crash 4 was terrible. Like a mod that doesn't quite get it.
I just checked out your channel and it says you do videos for longplayarchives, dude, you're my hero! I love that channel and the games they cover. Your video topics seem interesting too. New sub
Aw, thank you so much and thank you for your support! That truly means a lot.
Battletoads (2020 remake) was very disappointing for older gamers who loved the original.
Hey, I like Gex, but to each their own. You sound a bit too young to have nostalgia for Gex in any case.
I'm in my 40's and I can say that those Gex games were always pretty lame. Those of us that played platformers like Super Mario 64, Banjo Kazooie & Tooie, Rocket: Robot on Wheels, and Conker's Bad Fur Day were unimpressed by Gex. I guess it must have impressed the Playstation crowd with their weak offerings but even that had the Spyro and Ape Escape games.
@@davidaitken8503 N64 had a bunch of great 3D platformers.
Playstation had pretty much everything else.
I’ve played all those games listed plus way better ones. I still love Gex enter the Gecko… had no idea we were getting remasters LFG!!!!
@@MultiCool55 Nope. The N64 was also the greatest system for racing games with an insane amount of excellent racers. It was also the the best for FPS and, though their wasn't many, traditional shooters too like Star Fox 64, Star Soldier Vanishing Earth, Bangai-O, and Sin & Punishment.
@@davidaitken8503 I guess. The library I had was limited since my N54 was a hand me down and the gamecube had launched by then. Only racing games I had growing up were Mario kart, Diddy kong racing, and Rush 2. FPS was pretty equal between the two consoles in hindsight, though everyone knows Goldeneye ofc.
I always wonder what the N64 could've been like if they went with CDs instead of cartridges. Yes loading times suck but Playstation games could be much bigger in scope with the less severe memory limitations.
"the game was online only. it says so in the eula" Eula's are not legal documents. Also the suicide squad had the same situation, and yet the devs patched the game so when support ends and the servers go down you can still play the game you paid money for. I have no idea why you are confused with the crew outrage. Its literally not about nostalgia, and entirely about setting LEGAL precedent on games ownership. Do you own the single player game that you paid money for? If so how much of that game, and are companies allowed to strip a game of advertised features after purchase? Game preservation is a big part of it, but consumer rights are just as much a part of it. Even if we ignore the suicide squad example, there is other examples that disprove your "arguments" on why people shouldn't be upset ("arguments" being a loose description of your confusion on the issue ). I recommend watching Accursed Farms video on it "The largest campaign ever to stop publishers destroying games". Again games preservation is a huge part of it, but it's a LEGAL campaign. That has greater consequences then just "i just wanna play my racing game".
Gex 2 and 3 are legitimately good 3D platformers. Gex 1 is pretty good too. 3 is a standout, the music and level themeing is pretty great.
While I don't agree with all your points this was an interesting video. You just earned a sub.
I think one thing you forgot to mention is how emulation is incorporated into these re-releases/remasters/collections. So if a dev wants anything from Atari to psx or PSP to get re-released they can easily use an emulation wrapper and throw it on a digital storefront for cheap. For example, that's why Capcom has been selling all those Megaman Legacy Collections over the past 9 years. Cause they're cheap to produce and easy to take a hit on.
And I thank you for watching the video and thank you for your support! I would be very interested in seeing the amount of money spent on developing remasters. I know they are cheap, and in some cases, they can help offset costs in other areas of a company while providing a bit of market research. I just have to wonder how much money gets spent, in what areas, and how they view their sales data.
@@spectrebull I could be wrong about this, but I remember seeing a quote somewhere from somebody at Square Enix where he said if it weren't for the HD Remaster of Final Fantasy X they'd be out of business. Which should tell you how bad it was for Squeenix back during the 7th gen era.
Perfectly encapsulated! Great video man keep up the great work!
Thank you very much, Frankie! Much love to you and yours!
I agree with some of the points in the video, but one of the symptoms of this mentality of just buying the game to maintain a franchise is a "Sonic situation" where fans will just buy whatever slop the publishers green-light for decades, just to prevent their favorite IP from fading into obscurity when it should have died a long time ago.
I mean, I do talk about admitting when things should just end.
I brought a PS1 to replay Gex 3D and Gex: Enter the Gecko in modern day and 2 things: YES! the camera is utterly archaic but it's totally workable once you get acquainted with it by setting it to manual and get use to manually rotating the camera with the triggers and YES! it does get repetitive doing the same level 3-5 times to acquire all the remotes including the bonus ones (which I did voluntarily) but it certainly has charm, has it's shine and just needs a good polishing up.
I hate when a game is said to be underselling when I would have bought it if it was more affordable. People only have so much disposable income and a new game shouldn't be someone's top priority so that a large company can feel good about there investment.
I love it when people say games should be more affordable, as if somehow the technology hasn't advanced since the 1990s and games cost a fraction of what they cost to make now. As if somehow gaming is a NEED to survive life as opposed to a hobby.
Especially when those same people expect every game to be hyper realistic run at 9,000k res, 2,000fps be 10,000hrs long and don't ever have any sort of additional content. IF someone really thinks they need to play every single game that comes out, they either 1. need to be better educated and get a real job, 2. Get a real job, 3. learn how to budget or 4. find a new hobby.
@lutherheggs451 I agree. What I'm mainly getting at is that a company shouldn't blame there customers for having higher priorities. Comes off as they assume everybody had the money and chose not to support the title out of spite or what have you.
If you loved a certain game so much, play it again. Go out to a retro-game store, buy the console and games, and play them.
Bring your friends over; make a night of it. I guarantee you'll learn something. And you'll be supporting a local business to boot! Thats what im doing. Now that im finally making some real money, im buying up all the games i missed out on when i was younger.
While I am eternally bitter about KI and the hypocrisy surrounding similar situations, I do think there's more to other games than people inexplicably not buying them. Splinter cell Blacklist is considered by many fans to be a disappointment, same with the previous two games in the series. People didn't decide not to buy it because they suddenly forgot about the series, they didn't buy it because it wasn't that good. As another example, Before Samus Returns was announced, Metroid was on hiatus for a while because of poor sales. Was it because fans randomly decided that they didn't care about the series any more? No, it was because the last two games to come out were Other M and Federation Force. It doesn't matter if fans have been clamoring for a new entry in a neglected franchise, you just can't expect people buy a bad game, not in this economy. If a company can't tell the difference between those two scenarios, then that's a failure on their part, not consumers.
What about Crash and Spyro? Crash 4 sold over 5 mil, the remake sold 10 million. Spyro sold 10 million too. Nostalgia is real
Yes, but both of those IPs defined a generation of gamers. I don't know a single soul who grew up during the PS1 days and didn't know Crash or Spyro.
@@spectrebull nostalgia was real though with them!
If it wasn't for the Switch and all of its' best of this generation games, on older hardware no less, there really wouldn't be much of any reason outside of indie to play anything new. I'm still discovering so many amazing games through emulation of older consoles that it really makes it clear that it isn't nolstalgia. The technology and budgets requirements of the PS5/X Box/PC has hit a point of diminishing returns where it is actually a detriment to the development of great game experiences.
There could always be an Okami or Armored Core 6 situation where the re release or new game sells well compared to any other game prior in the franchise … but those are always hyper rare
NO. NO there couldn't be. Okami was a flop when it came out, it was a flop when it was remastered and rereleased on the PS3, it was a flop when it was rereleased on the PS4. The game has flopped 3 times, and the DS sequel was also a flop.. Game companies aren't going to keep rereleasing games over and over in hopes that maybe people will buy the new rerelease
Or Mega Man 11 being confirmed as the highest selling game in the entire franchise.
As far as I am concerned, and have been concerned since I learned more about Literally Ruining Games, their customer base isn't people who play games, those kinds of people are outliers. Their customer base is people putting this shit on a shelf. Criterion Collection has a similar market, but unlike LRG, Criterion prints many more discs so they actually have a market of people actually watching the movies they print and distribute as well. When a game is picked up by LRG, it might as well not being physically saved. What it's receiving is nicknacks and an official cover for a game case, which will forver sit in shrinkwrap on a shelf - a physical edition that nobody will ever get to play because it sits on eBay for $500 for its entire life might as well not exist - if the last surviving copy of a film is locked a way in a vault to rot, does it even still count? Their worst offenders are when they secure exclusive rights to a game that would have received a physical edition for North America anyway if they didn't step in and ruin it. That's why LRG can get away with releasing what amounts to shelf filling shit that someone might play out of curiosity, but certainly not *pay LRG's price tag* to play.
The majority of TC1 players were on Ubisoft. Especially since Ubisoft gave the game out for free in 2016 as part of their 30th anniversary or whatever, the free bundle included The Crew (no DLC), Assassin's Creed III, Beyond Good & Evil, Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time, and Splinter Cell. I was playing TC1 up until shutdown. I pre-ordered TC2, did everything in the hypetrain event for all the bonus cars, played the closed beta, ad then proceeded to put 60 hours into TC2 and will never be playing it again. I put over 3000 hours into TC1. They didn't just make it unplayable, they outright stripped accounts of licences, as in you can't even download the game on the Ubisoft launcher because you don't have a licence to anymore. You no longer own the game or the DLC you paid for - and all new copies have been invalidated too, you can't even buy a new-old-stock copy and activate it. I've heard from the other players of TC1 and it's pretty settled that the people who still played the game after 2018 are not going to move onto TC2 or Motorfest. They're completely different games and as far as "meeting half way" goes, it would be about as half-way as handing a Gran Turismo player a Forza Motorsport game (or the reverse) and saying "I don't get what you're complaining about."
If you're going to make the argument of ownership to shit on players of games you don't care about, you don't own any game with any form of DRM. The only games you own are games on tape for microcomputers, and for CDs: 3DO and SEGA CD games. Maybe the rare floppy based game that has absolutely no sector based DRM, or code wheel, lookup question, or any myriad of peripherals to prove you purchased the game. You technically own a game you bought from GOG... as long as CDProjekt still exists, anyway. And as long as any storage medium you can store it on lives, if you downloaded it before that deadline that hopefully never occurs. Every console game beyond that has DRM in some form (or in the case of old cartridges without DRM, they are impractical for you to do anything with them as an owner - on purpose). You've signed an EULA to not modify your console by using it, so if we're going to argue we've intentionally signed our right to ownership away, you must also concede that you don't own the functionality of the console either. You do not own Blu-rays, you own a disc and a privilege via contract to decode the data on them with a player. Same with HD-DVDs. And DVDs. We've just known how to decode all 3 for so long that nobody realizes that software like MakeMKV isn't necessarily considered legal, as it uses AACS keys which could be considered confidential and protected under contract law - you would normally be required to pay for a licence to decode them for viewing only. Hope you like Laser Disc and VHS, and even then some VHS still have copy protection DRM.
You really, really do not want to pick this fight. The people selling this shit that want you to pick this fight with other customers, to talk down to each other, instead of picking it with the people selling products under these licences, some of which aren't even proven in common law to be legally binding yet. Stop it, it's not helping anyone. All you're doing is making people hate games. The publishers enforce enough as it is to make sure we already feel that.
This video really reminded me of one video game series I enjoyed during my youth and me being in and out about it getting remastered. That series being Tak. It was a franchise that was heavily advertised during their time in the market (especially on Nickelodeon, who owns the IP rights since its inception), but are rarely talked about in nostalgic game spaces nowadays. I remember wanting a remaster of the first 3 games since my high school years and THQNordic secured the rights to do so in 2018 as part of a deal with Nickelodeon. The only thing to come out of that deal so far was Spongebob Battle for Bikini Bottom Rehydrated.
I wish a version of the Tak games were released that fixed some of the original games' janky physics, but I understand that it is something not that many people are demanding for it and I am content booting the games on my Wii when I feel like playing them.
I wouldn't mind seeing Tak back as a small cameo of some sort. I heard there were supposedly messages on the Nickelodeon Allstar Brawl official Discord servers of some devs having interest in including him in those games if they are allowed to.
It almost feels like THQ Nordic sort of backed out of that idea of remaking a bunch of old Nickelodeon games. All they've been doing is releasing Spongebob games and then they're releasing a new TMNT game called Rise of the Ronin. Maybe they're starting to think remakes of the Tak games and other Nick games won't sell. I would love to see a new Nicktoons Unite game with more characters, a better story, and more levels. What's funny is Gamemill Entertainment are the ones who have been releasing new Nickelodeon games. We have Nickelodeon Kart Racers 1-3, Nickelodeon All-Star Brawl 1 & 2, and Avatar: Quest for Balance from them.
@@tvgamerstan6180 A new Nicktoons Unite would be cool. At least Nickelodeon Allstar Brawl is around. I also hope Nick's legal department can resolve whatever issues are preventing Fairly Odd Parents characters from appearing in them.
@@DIASTCartoons Yeah, I want the game to be like Marvel Ultimate Alliance. It really does suck what happened to The Fairly OddParents. Nickelodeon needs to fix whatever that they can with Nelvana. They need to buy the full rights. I hate that Tarzan is going through the same thing with Disney. Apparently, they don't fully own their version of it and that's why he doesn't really show up in their crossover games. He's not in the mobile crossover games, Disney Infinity, and Disney Speedstorm. It would be a huge L on Disney's part if they ever decide to do a platform fighter and he doesn't show up in that. He deserves a spot in a game like that.
I think probably a big chunk of this is the unwillingness to make lower-budget offerings in some cases. There's clearly A market for a lot of these things, if you didn't spend as much cash to make it, then the bar of sales to make a profit is lower too.
Not everything needs to be a super AAA thing either.
And as well, not everything needs a super flashy remake, maybe just some way to get it on modern hardware.
I think Streets of Rage 4 is a great example of this
EA ruined dead space's chances with ds3. To revive 1 without the original creators in a remake when it probably didn't require it was a stupid choice.
Rare Replay was a pack-in too, that's where most of those numbers come from. The truth hurts. Great video bud.
I'm nostalgic for a lot of titles. I'd love a "dead" franchise to make a comeback or remaster an old beloved title for sure but if it doesn't happen, I won't lose sleep over it. That's okay. The fun memories I had with them will never be forgotten. Better to be left dead and remembered with fondness than resurrected and turned into a dumpster fire. With the power of modding and emulation, I can play any old game in the best way possible. I don't trust the major gaming companies to make a proper sequel to an old title or remaster a classic game.
Sometimes games don't need to "Come back". Most of the time they just need to consist of a trilogy and be preserved for future generations to play. I think if Ubisoft stopped making assassin's creed games after the PS3 era, they would be more respected as a time capsule of the 7th gen.
Except for the FACT that because a handful of people don't like something or constantly cry about something doesn't change the FACT that IF nobody was buying Assassin's Creed games they would stop making them. Especially from the exact same crowd who constantly cry about sequels and don't allow a series to ever end, because its too daunting of a task to consider that its OK for a story to end.
Games stop getting made when they stop selling.
So you say us Banjo&Kazooie fans didnt buy nutz&boltz yet you dont realize why. Its the formula my guy, lets use Capcom and MegaMan for example yes they switch up MegaMans powers, add new characters and enemies yet the Formula is still the same. Now lets take MegaMan and do the Nutz&Boltz treatment and switch up his gameplay, movement and need for specific powers and or abilities do you think the MegaMan fans would be happy about it or would they speak with their wallets and not buy the gsme? Plus I find it funny how you are talking about games that where apart of a console war era and PC gaming wasnt as big as it is now, how many of us old heads who want our favorite ip's to make one final comeback to finish the stories left with cliffhangers. Alas we are in the age of remakes and remasters when we just want our heros to have one final win to end their story.
The dead space shouldnt be called a flop, Me and all my friend used the EA PASS to play it without actually buying the game. Just because it didnt sell well does not mean that they didnt get money from us.
"I played it for free, so it had to have sold well since I didn't pay money to buy a copy."
@@spectrebull the EA pass thingy wasnt free it was like 16$ a month
@@AmethystReaver Yes, $16 that went into the revenue of a service-based product that gives you temporary access to a selection of games, not into the revenue for a game they were hoping to make a return on at $69.99 USD.
I speak for my experience, there are so many games and franchises i only discovered recently for various reasons: word of mouth, youtube, reviews, retrospectives, just curiosity ect. and a few of them happen to be SEGA franchises like nights, crazy taxi, jet set radio and especially Daytona usa. Now fortunately sega recently announced new titles for crazy taxi and JSR but for the others i have to accept that i will never (or at least not soon) a new title, but that's ok.
Instead, since i've been collecting retro games for years, i simply decided to start my treasure hunt and try these titles by myself, and i'm loving every single second every time i play them. The journey of searching online for a good price, a casual encounter at a con stands or just the local retrogaming store, buy them and finally arrive at home to play them is an amazing feeling for me. I appreciate more the titles and while i will not get a new game of the franchise i recently become fan of, i'm happy just collecting the old titles, and if i can't get them i can always use emulators, or mod the console (i only recently learned how to mod my psp).
Same for online only games, i've been a fan of splatoon since day 1, but i bought the first title (and the wii u) only after the final splatfest because of money, but now there's pretendo, the fan-server, i can play online whenever i want or not since i play more Splat3.
At the end of the day, just play the original, it will entertain you long enough between new titles of current franchises that you will actually buy and play
Why did Dead Space need a remake? Original runs fine on modern systems afaik. Requirements for a remake would either be that the original was flawed and needed improvements or doesn't run on modern systems. Would love to get Rift Apart but there's just too many games to play and don't know when I'll get to it (Still need to play the new Crash games). Also barely played the previous entries (Never owned a PS3 or later). There's already too many games to play without remakes. Developers and publishers should start by just getting their back catalogue playable.
Killer Instinct is on my wishlist but so is Soul Calibur, King of Fighters, Guilty Gear, BlazBlue, Dragonball FighterZ, Shaolin vs Wutang and MK2 Remix (AND THAT'S FREE)
Also don't fork out money on day one or pre-order. Too many publishers are releasing half made games and milking useless DLC (Good DLC is fine, useless skins are not)
My problem with using game sales as an argument is that they're from 15-20 years ago. Theres so much more gamers now, and the market and culture has changed drastically since then. So many franchises that were niche or didn't get attention because of competing franchises or trends at the time have a space to prosper in modern market. Fire Emblem Awakening was supposed to be the last game in the series and then it revitalized the franchise and its huge in the West now.
Games like THPS 1+2, MegaMan 11, Spryo Reignited prove that new people love and want to get into these old franchises, but lack of options, marketing, and many other factors prevent them from doing so. Everytime we have something good going, the companies that make the games get consolidated into a bigger company and are forced to work on games they never intended to work on. Which can cause a mass exodus of talent in the studio and the industry at large. Its not just nostalgic retro revival games that are effected my the grim reaper of the ballooning industry.
You know I agree with you a whole bunch. We have been crying for old games to come back. When they do, the audience isn't there. I bought sly cooper collection, I bought the god of war collection for my ps vita and ps3, and I have bought ratchet and clank games numerous times. Dead space remake was amazing, and so was resident evil 4. One would hope that people who are begging for these games are buying them, but that is simply not the case. I do have to say something though, some of the remakes or remasters or sequals suck sometimes. Thats why some games fail.
Videogames are just fascinating for many reasons but after so many years I came to a similar conclusion to yours. This is a "popular-niche". A key thing that ruined the industry early was just the sheer oversaturation of the market. Whether it be copying other games or milking your own franchise to death. Just flooding it with unnecessary product nobody asked for despite the fact videogames are more popular than ever. It's a miscalculation from the industry itself and not really the gamers fault for the games not selling when the industry should already know it's not going to sell as well as it thinks. Look what's happening with FF7 Rebirth. They expected huge sales numbers but it just isn't popping off like they predicted but that's because they overestimated the core audience. With older games we didn't track things like "Achievements and Trophies" so we had no indicator how much of the game was truly working. Jak and Daxter sold pretty well with it's first game but who even beaten the game? That's always an important question when it comes to any game. Love it or hate it if you beat it odds are you will play more of it. Internet forums and reviews were still pretty new at the time so only magazine ratings were the only indicators they could go off from for any critical review at the time and how often to expect players to beat it. It's not like a movie where the word of mouth is more acceptably reliable it's a whole hobby within artistic digital medium so what people find entertaining will always be wildly different from other people which in turn makes a very huge market with tons of games to play and choose but with very few people playing said games at any given time.
They're ultimately just a trendy market. They'll come and go with the times. If it's a truly great game then we'll continue to see people to play it for generations but for most of these games they'll have a week or two of popularity and then fade into obscurity. Like a hit music single. Some will acknowledge that they've peaked and they won't get anywhere past this trendy moment and others will mistakingly embarrass themselves trying to stay relevant and hold on to that moment of success. Some games will be the most popular thing in the world but give it a week or two and suddenly who even recognizes it anymore? I'm sure all 12 Gex fans are disappointed but they need to wake up and realize they were never a thing.
A weird phenomenon I've been seeing because of all the Remakes is people demanding "Devil May Cry 2 Remake". Not the first game mind you or the Reboot they really mean DMC2. They want Capcom to make DMC2 but good and every time I hear this request I think it's the most ridiculous thing. DMC2 is regarded as a bad game with people who straight up hate it and to see people demand a remake shows just how far they'll go to try a revise history. They don't want their beloved DMC as a series to have such a huge blemish so now they want to change it but it's far too late. The damage is done and there's no DMC2 fanbase so stop asking for a Remake. Stop asking for Gex. Please just stop people!
I will admit I am excited for the Gex Trilogy remake but that is because I have vivid memories of my childhood being able to get Gex 64 on clearance at Target. Of course as a kid, I wasn't able to get as many games as I do now so I played the hell out of it and loved what I played. I also saw Gex 3 being advertised in Nintendo Power, being confused where Gex 2 was (I was playing it) and then kinda wanting it, but never being able to buy it.
I will admit that the games weren't THAT great and the remake is literally for people like me...but still.