Article: Remakes are stupid

Contrary to the title, remakes are not stupid. From a business perspective they are an extremely clever way of generating revenue from work that has already been done, tried and tested. Often throwing in nothing more than a facelift under the pretence of a ‘better experience’, they offer little more to a gamer than a higher price tag. In consumer terms that’s a money-grab and we really shouldn’t tolerate such shameless acts of greed.

Whenever news of a remake starts to surface, fans curiously start vibrating with nostalgic excitement. For the life of me I can’t understand why. The game in question is more often than not sat in their cupboard slowly degrading. Everything that makes that game special is there, contained inside its hallowed frame just waiting to be re-explored, but it takes a lick of paint and a handful of gimmicky alterations to convince these supposed fans to revisit their childhood exploits.

The attitudes of would be fans is even more confusing. Most behave like the game has been completely inaccessible and that someone is finally giving them the opportunity to access its evasive content. In truth, ignorance and sheer laziness is to blame for their lack of familiarity.

Online stores house thousands of old titles and online markets, such as e-bay, grant us access to a wealth of gaming history for a massively subsidised price, often lower than that of a full price remake. So why do we feel the need to pay a premium for reconstituted left over’s?

A sweep of console marketplaces quickly reveals titles of generations gone by, offered as digital downloads and often with extortionate price tags. While these can’t be considered remakes, they are still games which should be backwards compatible with the current breed of powerhouse consoles, a feature that has seemingly become long forgotten.

There are of course exceptions, such as valves incredible Orange Box bundle which offers 5 quality games for obscene value for money, even if you aren’t a half-life fan (which I’m not). Unfortunately, this is a rarity and if you want to carry your past with you, you’re going to have to pay for it. So much for rewarding loyalty.

At least Nintendo are kind enough to guarantee 100% backwards compatibility with their Wii console, for GameCube titles anyway. Worth a round of applause surely? But before you get carried away there are some serious issues to attend to.

Ninty have been heavily criticised for flooding the market with low quality casual games and not producing enough new IP’s for the core (whoever that is). And too often they rely on their old school name stays to provide a base from which they launch countless shit riddled title after the next. It’s not a strategy a particularly agree with but its not one I take personal offence to. After all, sieving the gold from the mud isn’t overly difficult with the use of a web browser and without the dirt; the gold would have washed away long ago.

But the Japanese giants have milked their franchises dry, so much so they have resorted to recreating the very best from their archives and now it is the turn of the Holy Grail.

The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time is a timeless classic (excuse the pun). The crowning jewel in the N64’s epic back catalogues. Lauded as a game ahead of its time, its gameplay mechanics and sense of meaning put the majority of modern titles to shame. Still relevant to this very day it seems to ride the advances in gaming technology and still hold its own among a mass of graphical orgasms for the eye and motion sensing masterpieces.

Its appeal then shouldn’t warrant any more justification. Those with an interest should have experienced it or have found the means to do so. Instead, the market has indicated the need for a remake, and a 3D remake at that.

The 3DS has been a handheld on a knife edge ever since its inception. Critics have been unsure whether its technology can support itself and if enough developers would be willing to invest their faith in such an experimental proposition. Not helped by its migraine and seizure inducing tendencies, it seems that Link has been called in to help bolster sales and try to cement the 3DS as a serious competitor in an already Ninty dominated market.

And that is the problem. I have no opposition to anyone who wants to realise a game in a way that was never possible 20 years ago, but to use a title of such legendary status to try to promote your next gimmick platform is wrong.

OoT 3DS offers little more to the user than its N64 counterpart. It may have received a graphical overhaul (though its restriction to 2 smaller dual screens is questionable) and it may have harboured the recent trend of 3D, but what does this do to improve the game? Both are visual effects, both are inapplicable to gameplay and more to the point, both do nothing to enhance the experience. Some controls have been streamlined, which is a welcome addition to the originals sometimes fiddly mapping, but is this really worth a £40 price tag and new console? According to its reception and early sales figures, it’s more than enough.

And this is the crux of the matter. As a rule in business and in the industry, companies will feed off the consumer’s wants and needs, and to a certain extend their naivety.

This is why COD outsells everything each year and why DLC exists and is so competitively priced. People will pay for what they want, no matter how unfair it might be and we will stick closely to what is familiar and pay the premium that comes with that internal weakness.

Perhaps it’s our desperation not to miss out on anything or maybe our gung-ho approach to spending the few pennies we do manage to filter out of our various places of work. Either way, as long as we continue to create a market for the games that we’ve already paid for or neglected to explore, we will continually be hampering progress in gaming as a whole.

Why hasn’t Nintendo created a new Zelda for the 3DS? Why are Microsoft intent on milking Halo for all its worth, culminating in a Combat Evolved remake and rumoured second trilogy. Why is Sony re-releasing HD versions of ICO and Shadow of the Colossus when the community is screaming out for new IP’s? Why does every game franchise need 5 sequels and then 5 remakes?

All have the same answer; because we’ll buy it.

Sad then, that our future could not be a future at all but just a recycled past where we sit in arm chairs watching our kids play games of yesteryear remade with all the glitz and glamour of whatever fad technology is in at the time. A world devoid of all imagination and initiative to create something new and unexplored and one where our bank accounts are valued above all else.

The past and the future really are in your hands. That game you’ve always been meaning to play but never got round to locating? Go do it, you might see past its graphical shortcomings and find something truly magical. You’ll also save yourself a ton when they remake it for the 6th time.

On a final note I feel I’ve been a little mean to Nintendo so here’s a little glimmer of hope for them and remakes in general.

Final Fantasy III, a game that until recently hadn’t been released outside of Japan, found its way to the DS in 2006. Seeing that a 2D perspective game from 1990 probably wouldn’t appeal to the new age gamer, Ninty went all out to create a completely new game from the ground up, while keeping the story, character development and basic gameplay elements intact. For me, it’s a lesson in how and why to remake a game. Not only did it far exceed its original in terms of quality, it also had a real purpose and reason to be remade.

Well done Nintendo!