Xenosaga 2 was the first game I went to GameStop and bought on release day. It wasn’t big enough for a midnight release so I just got there at opening. I still think about that game often and would love a remake. KOSMOS was a great character and the antagonists were great across the board.
The game for me that I loved but never hear about is the 2d platformer Thomas Was Alone. Really fun gameplay and a fun little story that was gripping, especially considering you’re just playing a bunch of different shapes.
The Legend of Heroes: Trails in the Sky (Part 1 + 2) are really the first ones that come to mind for me. They reignited some of the feeling of excitement I have for JRPGs, where you become deeply invested in the struggles of the characters and enjoy every last “Big damn heroes” moment and sudden twist they pull out. The villains in those games are pathetically irredeemable, a far cry from some of the better written ones, but their amazing quality is in forcing out the most dramatic possible circumstances from the characters. Combat keeps its pace and was generally enjoyable for me, plus it had an XP catchup/slowdown system that stopped the game from ever feeling too grindy.
Funny thing is, I personally bear no recommendations for any games in that series beyond those two. They are, to my mind, a testament to good singular stories that leave the opportunity for future ones - even if those follow-ons didn’t click with me.
For Metroidvania style, Aquaria is one I don’t see mentioned much. I got it in one of the classic Humble Bundles, and it had a LOT more content than I was expecting for an indie game. Many different abilities to gather, a soundtrack and appearance that all blended together so well, and even optional bosses hidden in the waters.
And then, it comes up every so often to divisive opinions, but there’s plenty of shooter players that still need to try Spec Ops: The Line. It’s not terribly well-done in terms of gameplay, but tells a very compelling story about heroism and violence - even if it is NOT the one you hope to see. Much of the controversy over the game’s ranking has to do with how much it offers freedom of choice - but I’ve always felt that freedom of choice starts in the type of adventures you choose to play. You see the assault rifles on the cover. You’re planning for this.
Trails in the Sky‘s story is so goated, it‘s in my top 5 favorite stories. The combat wasn‘t my cup of tea, but I managed to get through without any bigger problems, I forgot how though lol
“All I really need to tell you is that one of the weapons shoots shurikens and lightning. I wish I had made that up. It shoots shurikens and lightning! This gun could only be cooler if it had tits and was on fire.”
It’s a cheesy Doom-like game from the Quake 2/3 era
Cataclysm dark days ahead is to zombie survival what doom is to demon shooting or monster hunter is to monster hunting. Project zomboid? Can’t even play that garbage now. Cataclysm actually gives you the reigns. Out in the wild? Use the very deep crafting system to go from practically neolithic to the iron age out of a cabin you found . Not strong enough to take on dozens of zombies you’ve attracted raiding a city? Climb a drain pipe and run across the roof tops. Tired of living out of a run down cabin you found? Build an in depth base with it’s own power grid or build your own car. Or train.
Rain world is one of the best games ever, reaching the highest point in that game is an experience everyone should feel.
Lunacid is an old school dungeon crawler with vibes that are completely immaculate.
Kenshi is a genre all it’s own. Be a wuxia style master of whatever style of combat you like most (I’m partial to martial arts and punching off limbs), build up your base, create an army, and go to war against the holy nation.
Cassette Beasts is a monster tamer that is full of charm, had the best soundtrack of any game last year, and had great gameplay to boot. Comparing it to Pokemon (because duh), the type match ups matter so much more due to a reactive system that can change up gameplay instead of just altering damage. the fact that it went unnoticed last year is a crime!
It was on PS+ while I had the service so I tried it for the brawler part but it’s like a good anime with a murder mystery plot, it has elements of GTA and Phoenix Wright mashed together with a brawler, and the story is focused on a high school so you get to beat the ever-living snot outta bratty teenagers which is really cathartic.
And despite the serious tone of the main plot, the game is very goofy and over-the-top (again, it’s like playing an anime; complete with all the tropes you’d expect from an anime) and has me laughing my ass off pretty regularly. I had to actually buy a copy because I have barely scratched the surface of it and I’m not renewing my PS+ sub any time soon. Sucks that I got it on sale and the one DLC that adds content is twice as much as what I paid for the main game, cuz I know I will end up wanting it lol
Some games are so old that the technology needs to be sorely updated for modern gamers to be able to understand the controls, and “upating (the controls) for modern audiences” can be good.
Further, older games often have some pretty awful stereotypes in them that don’t need to be preserved so we can remember them.
I know Disney’s Bambi isn’t a video game, but I’ll use it as an example that’s being re-made. Bambi was made in 1942, and a massive amount of cultural references and ideas just don’t make as much sense in the modern era. There are literally things young people today would be like “what now?” in films that old. Sometimes “updating for modern audiences” is removing stuff that just doesn’t make sense anymore, or people don’t recognize or understand.
Even further, it used to be that “getting updated for modern audiences” was the norm. Anyone remember that hokey fucking Romeo & Juliet with Leonoard DiCaprio in the 90’s? Yeah, that was “updated for modern audiences” and it was a smash fucking hit. Back then, updating for modern audiences meant setting it in Verona instead of Venice and swapping swords for guns.
Like if you’re dealing with games that were always meant to frustrate and offend like Postal 2 or Conker’s Bad Fur Day or Redneck Rampage, you’re probably not gonna have a lot of people happy to “update for modern audiences” but there’s not much to update about campy schlock humor anyway.
So yeah, sometimes its not great, but I think the worries about it are overblown.
In movies there used to be a joke about how “the black guy always dies first” in action/horror movies because it held true for a long time. Black characters were given bit-roles that were quickly written out of movies. That is no longer the case, but you don’t see movies that don’t kill off black characters right away as being advertised as “updated for modern audiences” because that’s just silly.
“updating (the controls) for modern audiences” can be good.
My only experience of that is when they removed grid based movements from New N’ Tasty and forced players to use the analog, trying to walk felt horrible.
But something like the first 2 Fallouts on the other hand can really use a controls overhaul.
But something like the first 2 Fallouts on the other hand can really use a controls overhaul.
Those were literally on my mind! I know Baldur’s Gate and Baldur’s Gate II got some updated control schemes more recently, including gamepad support, but it seems my favorite Fallouts are still stuck in the past.
God damn it what I would give for a modern Fallout in the style of Baldur’s Gate 3. It breaks me how Bethesda has ruined that series.
I think you're looking for Wasteland. They shared a lot of DNA already, and they've got different senses of humor, but Wasteland still has a black comedy angle.
As in most RPGs, having more actions was always beneficial, so I for sure always had companions in Fallout, even though they were AI controlled and often got in the way. At least Wasteland just gives you control of them.
Both updating the controls, and removing stereotypes, should be optional, at most behind a parental lock.
Some historic material is evil shit, and some people may understandably not want to get exposed to it… but it shouldn’t be some censor’s decision which scholars get access to the historical originals, while everyone else only gets the PC mush of the moment.
Everyone should have the option to see as much evil as they want, no more, no less.
Going back to your Bambi example, I learned a lot about 1942 US by watching the now censored scenes, much more than by just listening to the opinions of those who condemned them.
I agree with this sentiment in respect to the idea that you’re actually trying to learn something from what you’re looking at. I agree, because I felt the same way when I watched censored WWII cartoons. If you’re willing to learn from them, that’s great, but here’s the thing.
Not everybody is taking away the same things.
What you take away from it isn’t what everyone takes from it. While you might rightfully not be a giant piece of shit yourself, there’s a lot of people who are.
My personal example is growing up with the Grand Theft Auto series. As a youth, I thought concerns with it were more or less overblown, and I was more or less right, for the most part.
However, after the torture scene in GTA 5 and talking to a wider community about it, I started to realize a lot of people weren’t learning anything good from that scene other than how to torture people, and a perverted glee in being able to do so.
And that’s where I begin to worry, because while like, I’m in the middle of an Evil playthrough of Baldur’s Gate 3, like… It’s hard to feel real “glee” at being evil. Many of the decisions I make tend to make me go “awwww” inside, but I tell myself “I can’t get caught up in that if it’s an evil playthrough.” And in that sense is where I agree, because like, yeah, I should be allowed to play evil if I want.
But the reality also is that a lot of people don’t care about the nuance and are looking for reasons to be pieces of shit, looking for dark things to make fun of, and are generally going to take horrible justifications from what they do learn, and yes, that does worry me a bit.
while everyone else only gets the PC mush of the moment.
You realize that while there might be some hamfisted attempts at this, that not all of them are so hamfisted, right? This statement doesn’t inspire confidence that you see that.
The commentary said they wanted to do rival criminal gangs, which would have made a lot more sense than the construction magnates they went with, but my guess is they realised West Side Story already did it.
I started playing the last of us 2 remastered. I didn’t play the original (but did play 1 remastered). I don’t know if it was modified “for modern audiences”, but it would depend a lot.
Having more characters from Asian or African descent would please me. Making it look more like the (in my opinion) excellent tv series would be less great, but understandable. Removing the whole “military is bad” arc (like they did in the tv show), would suck.
I was excited to play the remake of my all time favourite game Mafia 1, but it only lasted for about 20 minutes. They put utterly pointless additions in and the AI was somehow way dumber despite being 20 years newer.
I think I read about that remake. Did they also change the soundtrack or am I tripping? I loved Mafia 1 back in the day, and the Django Reinhardt songs in the original were iconic.
This is exactly the game that came to my mind when reading title. I loved old Mafia, but the remake? It’s not a bad game, but it lost like 90% of atmosphere original had. Like those cop chases that are utter joke that doesn’t belong to the game.
Was it System Shock? Then yeah, it probably could use some love.
Was it Turok? Then hey, HD Dinos can be cool.
Was it Okami? Then why not, giving it some polish and getting it playable on PC is worthwhile.
Was it Ty the Tasmanian Tiger, Spyro, or Crash? Then absolutely, again for having them playable on PC at the very least.
I think all of these are examples where it makes sense to give them an update because various controls or even systems of today just don’t work with the old versions. All of these examples were also done pretty well overall.
On the other hand, I’m more conflicted on games from the last 10-12 years or sooner. Especially if it’s like The Last of US Remastered where it just isn’t supported well.
But then again, I appreciate getting Spider-Man and Horizon: Zero Dawn on PC, and I believe we only got those because of the remasters? But I would not be buying another remaster of either for PC in even 10 years from today, because what point would there be?
All in all, I think there are many examples where it “is technically fine”, but if it’s not done well then there was never a point in the first place. The Tony Hawk ones kind of fit here, as they partly feel really good and partly feel really janky - it’s nice having them on PC but they are no where near as polished as the other games I mentioned
Look a remaster should or could have obvious upgrades, sometimes it’s visuals, videos, style, controls etc. that to me is good.
But that quote specifically tells me “the game has been changed for current day sensibilities” and I hate that. I feel it takes away from what the original had in mind, for good or bad.
I understand that many media have been racist/misogynist/ageist and accept that it was a product of its time. But I don’t think it does it any good to essentially pretend that it didn’t happen and I feel we’re just pretending it isn’t what it truly is when it’s changed.
I do think remakes are different however. I feel they are taking the idea of the original but redesigning it in a way that the new designers for see.
BUT the fact is, that quote is only ever seen on media that hides the past, not remakes the future.
It does tell you that it’s been changed, though. You can typically still go and play the original game. And it enables the people affected by -isms to enjoy it when sometimes said -isms would pull them out of it for them otherwise.
And it’s not like the original intent was for people to be distracted by what would have, to the developers, have likely seemed a small or unquestioned detail. We can never truly approach a game the way its original audience did anyway because culture changes so much, and a large part the experience you have with art is what you bring to it. Thus why graphical updates can make the game look like you remember it, even though it now looks much prettier. I think these sorts of updates can be similar to that.
Granted, it’s harder to access the original game because of hardware. But even so, a lot of original intent is always lost in the process of making a remaster. I’d argue “for modern audience” updates tend to be less of a departure than changes in visual design (the different lighting in the various Myst remasters that changes the mood, the extra foliage in Shadow of the Colossus remasters) or mechanics updates (the ability to control Resident Evil like a regular game instead of via tank controls).
Edit: I think my ideal scenario would be if remasters include “modern audience” updates of all kinds, to make the game as enjoyable for new players as possible, but also that the originals be made more easily available such as by legalizing or sanctioning emulation for old games.
Interesting but I do think things are a little different:
A lot of people seem to be commenting about how a remaster is about changing atmosphere or visual changes. And I agree with you. But OP is asking specifically about games with the quote “for modern audiences” in the game and that quote is not added for the visual or control or minor game design changes, but instead specifically to tell you it’s removed the “isms” out.
I think your point about isms makes sense, it’s just that I’m of the opposing view. That I think the “isms” have been removed out is like censoring a painting or movie. Sure it’s easier to digest, but what made the media so poignant is sometimes the rawity of it.
I guess I don’t think you’re wrong, just that I think it takes away from the original media for the only reason that “it sells more if we can widen the audience”.
For me the ideal would be you could choose between the two. How the game was originally made but with the updated graphics/control/design. Or the new one that removes any isms to placate people’s sensibilities.
I don’t think however my preference would happen because it goes against the idea of “hay we can sell more if we tell everyone we removed everything controversial about the game”. So I guess your idea solution is probably the best middle ground :)
bin.pol.social
Najstarsze