Metroid Zero Mission is the only game I can say this for.
Because it does what any remake should, include the original game as well as an unlockable.
Which means the original still has merit, otherwise they wouldn't bother to include it.
Metroid Zero Mission is the only game I can say this for.
Because it does what any remake should, include the original game as well as an unlockable.
So does this go for Dracula x chronicles with it's built in SOTN and og rondo too?Which means the original still has merit, otherwise they wouldn't bother to include it.
I literally bolded it for you.
We have someone in this very thread saying they prefer the original Sotc over the remake due to facial animations you can't even see half of the time, if that's not blind nostalgia idk what is then.
So does this go for Dracula x chronicles with it's built in SOTN and og rondo too?
I find it hard to argue against that😅 but the best part about it was having the three games in one. Unlocking symphony of the night during game play has to be the ultimate trophyI remember a lot of people saying the remake was the worst part of that release lol
It's sad the direction the series decided to take starting with the 3ds games, i remember being super excited over the thought of finally getting a mainline Pokémon game in 3D when X and Y got announced.Heartgold and Soulsilver.
Not just great remakes but the best pokemon games in general.
Its a shame the series ended there though, we never got to see them move to ambitious 3D.
I don't think the purpose of the thread is to replace older games with the shiny remake per se. More to highlight how rare it is that a remake does good on recreating what made the original great to the point it could be recommendable as an alternative for the experience it brings.The original game will always have value (not simply monetary, mind) just by the virtue of being the original game which had an impact in the first place.
So the entire premise is impossible, unless a remake somehow figures out how to apply itself retroactively to the original release, by traveling through time. And even then it would be doing damage, not good.
Well, yeah, that's kind of the point of my post, haha.Which means the original still has merit, otherwise they wouldn't bother to include it.
Try not to take offence by the word "mate", it's just chatty.I know you're playing stupid when you list the game FFVIIR, and intentionally ignore what remake means, then intentionally ignore That's a game only contains midgar when the original had many other locations, characters, and story elements that are not in the so-called remake.
"Mate"
Could you explain why? Whats missing in the remake for your? Gameplay loop, camera distance?
Also, what is Bright doing with a Titans uniform?
1. I dislike the muddy art of the remake, as well as I do not find the changes to the gameplay enjoyabale. It helps that I enjoy the low poly look.
2. he a bad boi
it is a full game, but it's not a full remake. it can't make the original pointless when it's missing 80% of itTry not to take offence by the word "mate", it's just chatty.
And no, I didn't play stupid. This is a full game. Like when they split the Hobbit into two movies, the first was a full movie.
This is a full game, it doesn't matter how you want to downplay it.
There's nothing the original does better than this version, although I have fond memories of waiting in line for the special gold cartridge edition of the original N64 version back in November of 1998.
That was back when you could go outside and wait in line for things.
This is true. The entirety of the 3DS is probably still smaller than the infamous trident N64 controller.I prefer the original just because I like the bigger screen/controller.
I don't care at all for the more cartoonish, overly brightened visuals and I think they actively remove a lot of the atmosphere the original had in certain darker parts.
There's nothing the original does better than this version, although I have fond memories of waiting in line for the special gold cartridge edition of the original N64 version back in November of 1998.
That was back when you could go outside and wait in line for things.
More_Badass had a great thread on this subject, some time back (the Gamasutra article by Hamish Todd in his OP could be the one you have in mind): LTTP: Tomb Raider (1996) remains an innovative platformer and I wish there were more games like it [Sep 18, 2018]
Some older posts on the subject: one / two / three / four / five.
Always enjoy reading Semfry's takes on this subject, as well.
Thanks for the shout out. Yeah, I imagine we will never see that kind of platforming return, but I think a hybrid of analog movement for regular navigation and a grid mode for platforming could be interesting. Kind of like how Transistor blended real-time with semi-turn-based combat
Thanks. Even more goodies to read.
I think the Gamasutra was the one I was thinking of yes.
I was still in the mood for more Tomb Raider after finishing Shadow and decided to check out the originals since I had never played them. I was deciding between the original and Anniversary but from watching comparison videos, Anniversary seemed too much like modern TR compared to the original. By that I mean the level design in Anniversary seemed more linear and obvious in the route you have to take, plus I didn't want to deal with more ledge grip QTEs
After five and a half hours, I'm currently up to level 5/St. Francis' Folly in Tomb Raider 1. I'm surprised by how fast I adjusted to TR1's controls. For one, the tank controls are much less...tanky than I expected. And I'm really liking how much control you have over movement. I totally get now what people were saying about the movement and jumping being grid-based. It sounded weird on paper but it is really intuitive in practice. It gives the platforming this technical structure that is unlike any other platformer I've ever played, the kind of methodical pacing that the Souls game crafted for its combat or a game like Duskers provided by having you control movement with command lines. As someone who has grown up playing N and Super Meat Boy, PoP: Sands of Time and Mirror's Edge, Tomb Raider 1's approach to platforming feels utterly unique.
Platformers, both 2D and 3D, are primarily designed around being fast and fluid, where the movement is more about avoidance and traversal. In a game like Super Meat Boy or in Mario, the challenge doesn't come from how you will get through a gauntlet, but if you can and what route to take. The actual act of navigating that route becomes a matter of timing.
In Tomb Raider, the movement is the gameplay. Where you stand, when you jump, how high you jump are all tools in your toolset, and how you reach a place is not a fast and fluid act, but careful precise clambering that feels like the caution of maneuvering through deadly unknown tombs translated directly to the controls.
This Gamasutra article delves into the movement in detail here
The grid-based system feels like it is to typical platforming what turn-based design is to real-time combat, Much like how turn-based systems turns combat into a game of tactical positioning and balancing of numbers, the grid-based traversal turns what is usually automatic and fast and makes it precise and deliberate.
Now I want some modern games to attempt this grid-based movement system. I'm honestly surprised that there are no modern indie games that have attempted to create a spiritual successor to classic Tomb Raider's movement, considering so many other classic styles of gameplay have been revived. We've had resurrections of 90s shooters, 3D platformers, CRPGs, point-n-clicks, arcade racers, and so on.
It really comes down to automated platforming versus one that requires patience and skill. It's a problem these specific types of games haven't really solved. I can understand why some folks might find the originals clunky but they require a lot from the player in order to succeed and simply climbing a tall structure can be quite thrilling once you get the hang of it. In the modern games, climbing is basically busy work - there is no skill involved and no real challenge. It's just empty space between puzzles and combat. I'd like to see some sort of middle-ground solution.
Incorrect.
1) Walking simulator has typically been used as a pejorative in reference to games which are entirely narrative focused - interaction is kept to a minimum and you simply walk around experiencing the narrative. Thus the description has been poisoned even though it does fit this.
2) What's different here [in Death Stranding] is that the focus is on actual traversal in a way that we very rarely see. Most open world games can be tedious when it comes to walking from point A to B because there isn't much happening between those points. You CAN find things, but you can also just run straight most of the time. With Death Stranding, I was surprised by how engaging getting from one point to another truly is. You'll be asked to basically climb a mountain, cross a river or walk through a huge storm and actually getting there takes figuring out both in terms of equipment loadout and actually finding a path. It kind of reminds me of something like Jet Set Radio Future when you're dropped at the bottom of a large area and need to figure out how the heck to get to the top.
In other words, this is similar to the Mario 64 versus other collect-a-thon platform games. You collect star in Mario 64 but those stars are not what's interesting - it's the path you take to get there. Figuring out how to navigate a large level. It basically acts as an endpoint for each possible stage within a stage. In some ways, DS is similar to a game like this only on a larger scale.
This is tied to the online systems, which allows the community playing to basically populate the world with traversal objects such as ladders and ropes, and the physicalization of the inventory. That last one is especially unique in that most games virtualize the inventory - you may have to arrange objects, but those objects aren't always physically represented. The need to choose how and what you carry has a huge impact on the experience as not planning well can leave you in a difficult spot.
So while it's not entirely NEW, per se, there are a lot of unique elements and it's an interesting game as a result. It's much more creative and different than most titles being released as of late, that's for sure.
[...]I imagine we will never see that kind of platforming return, but I think a hybrid of analog movement for regular navigation and a grid mode for platforming could be interesting. Kind of like how Transistor blended real-time with semi-turn-based combat [...]
Richard Moss: ...The grid [in Classic TR] meant that players would always know that if they jumped forward, backward, or sideways from a standing start, they would finish exactly one block [one unit] away. Likewise, three steps forwards or backward were equal to the length of one block [one unit], as was hopping backwards, while a running jump took three steps to prepare and traveled a distance of two blocks [two units] forward. And you knew that you could execute a running jump, without fail, by walking to the edge of a block, hopping back, running, and jumping...
How Tomb Raider's grid-based level editor shaped the early series' design and identity (part 1) | The Life & Times of Video Games
Every aspect of the original Core Design Tomb Raider series (and by extension the franchise's success post-Core) comes back to the grid that lies beneath it — the majority of the puzzles; the platforming; the cavernous chambers and ruins and outdoor areas that provide a sense of isolation, of...lifeandtimes.games
Stella's Classic Tomb Raider Tips and Strategy
LEARN TO JUDGE DISTANCE. You can save a lot of time if you know how far Lara can go with each move. The game environment is built on a simple system of blocks. All the terrain is divided into these blocks, and each of Lara's moves covers a different number of blocks. If you learn these basics, you'll rarely misjudge a jump when it counts.
Death Stranding - Odradek Terrain Scanner - UE4 case study
"...I finished playing DS recently and thought 'how could I get this scanning effect in UE4?' and so I decided to try reconstruct it myself, so I'll share here with you how this is going and what I discovered during this adventure. (1) Scanning wave effect. (2) Outline around scanned objects. (3) Little colored symbols appear in superposition to indicate terrain steepness/danger... Find a way to detect harsh terrain/colliders somehow (no idea how to do that yet)... Set up object collision detection (probably a second render target, will see)... Finally got the collision/object detection working... Improve the original terrain grid and take steepness into account..."
It really comes down to automated platforming versus one that requires patience and skill. It's a problem these specific types of games haven't really solved. I can understand why some folks might find the originals clunky but they require a lot from the player in order to succeed and simply climbing a tall structure can be quite thrilling once you get the hang of it. In the modern games, climbing is basically busy work - there is no skill involved and no real challenge. It's just empty space between puzzles and combat. I'd like to see some sort of middle-ground solution.
[...] I feel there's two types of players when it comes to Death Stranding. Some will get an objective, and then just push up on the stick until they reach their destination. They'll get in bikes and trucks, and try to ram their way through rocky terrain because it's faster that way and they're carrying too much stuff anyway. The Dunkey way. DS is pretty casual and not very punishing, so you can get through the story like this. Then another player will get an objective, and start by looking at the map. What path should I take? What obstacles are on that path? What should my loadout be, so I have what I need but I'm not losing my balance? And on the way, maybe they'll stop to upgrade someone else's bridge. They'll build a postbox to stash their deliveries while they raid a MULE camp. And then using those resources from the camp, they'll construct roads. They'll measure the distances between mountaintops to determine optimal zipline placements. They spend time doing some standard deliveries, so they have important upgrades later on, and so on and so forth. [...]
[3m49s] ...if Sam starts to tip over you will see a little button prompt on the screen telling you to pull either the right or left trigger to lean right or left respectively by making Sam grab one or even both of his backpack straps. So here's the tiniest little fundamental tip that I can think of: these button prompts are not a QTE. Death Stranding is not inventing its backpack strap grab mechanic inside that exact instant that that tutorial tip pops up. You can grab your backpack straps -- left, right, or both -- even when the game is not telling you to. You can use the triggers to predict and preemptively compensate for accidental leaning that hasn't even happened yet. You're meant to be feathering on and off of each or both triggers throughout every foot journey...
Sure thing! :) In relation to the "is it just nostalgia" debate, I just wanted to highlight one thing that More_Badass noted, in his OP:
I'm also reminded that Dark1x of Digital Foundry weighed in, on the third page of More_Badass's thread:
Incidentally, Dark1x also had some positive comments on Death Stranding's handling of movement and traversal (also in his DF videos, here and here):
The Guitar Hero reference in the Bunnyhop video ("...my eyeballs are visually processing a chronological flow of gameplay information that looks like a completely natural and organic landscape...") is also pretty interesting.
In any hybrid grid mode, I imagine that enhancing the 'readability' of a more geometrically-complex, organic environment might be part of the challenge. Death Stranding has an interesting approach:
In any hybrid grid mode, I imagine that enhancing the 'readability' of a more geometrically-complex, organic environment might be part of the challenge.
yah i actually didn't get very far in it so I cant remember the exact changes but I know they took away some of the tension and consequence but i still remember thinking the quality of life improvements were worth itReally? It's the first time I hear something about this.
Occasionally I read about people complaining about the way the 3D version implemented the swim mechanic when in Zora form, but other than that nothing.
But despite that, I'd say the pros are way more than the cons.
i don't know if chrono trigger on ipad counts as it's really essentially a port but it's the version of the game that makes me realize I'll never need to plug in my super nintendo ever again. It's absolutely the best version of the game.
Thank you for your efforts in collating that information. I hadn't even thought of the Death Stranding comparison, but it makes so much sense. The idea that these games are "Tactical Action games" in the vein of Turn Based JRPGs is a lucid observation. That comparison works especially well with Death Stranding because of its "preparation" and "loadout" structure, evoking JRPGs. Each unit of traversal in Tomb Raider's grid system and platforming is like a turn in a JRPG.
I was still in the mood for more Tomb Raider after finishing Shadow and decided to check out the originals since I had never played them. [...] I totally get now what people were saying about the movement and jumping being grid-based. It sounded weird on paper but it is really intuitive in practice. It gives the platforming this technical structure that is unlike any other platformer I've ever played, the kind of methodical pacing that the Souls game crafted for its combat or a game like Duskers provided by having you control movement with command lines. As someone who has grown up playing N and Super Meat Boy, PoP: Sands of Time and Mirror's Edge, Tomb Raider 1's approach to platforming feels utterly unique[...]
[...]The grid-based system feels like it is to typical platforming what turn-based design is to real-time combat, Much like how turn-based systems turns combat into a game of tactical positioning and balancing of numbers, the grid-based traversal turns what is usually automatic and fast and makes it precise and deliberate. Now I want some modern games to attempt this grid-based movement system. I'm honestly surprised that there are no modern indie games that have attempted to create a spiritual successor to classic Tomb Raider's movement, considering so many other classic styles of gameplay have been revived. We've had resurrections of 90s shooters, 3D platformers, CRPGs, point-n-clicks, arcade racers, and so on[...]
It's been fun adjusting to this. The fundamentals of the platforming turns the question of reaching secrets and other areas from "where is the route", the route that you then follow, but "how do I get there". You know the limits of your movement, study the landscape, measure gaps by eye, okay I think I can go that way and make those leaps. The movement and level design really captures that feeling of poking and prodding in these unknown places, carefully planning your next move, gamifying the caution and observation of an Indiana Jones or other adventurer, rather than simply having you fluidly race along obvious routes.
This is a spot on comment. I've always intuitively known this, but I could never quite describe it in words. I love your use of the word "readability". I think perhaps the word "tangibility" comes in as well. Readability for the level design's visual design and Tangibility for the actual interaction with the level design.
Gavin Rummery: [0m20s] "...becuase [the grid-based Level Editor I created] was so easy [for the Level Designers] to use... that's what made Tomb Raider [as] intricate as it was for the time, because the levels could be modified so easily... in some ways I do feel that's been lost... I love games like Uncharted and whatnot but you can tell that – I've looked into how they're doing it – and you can see that they have to just kind of design the path through the level and where you're going to be able to grab onto and where you're not, up front, and then the artist then just [makes] these fantastic-looking environments, but they're kind of restricted to what's been decided already... having that kind of easy way of building environments is obviously just not possible anymore..."
Richard Moss: [27m50s] "...the Tomb Raider Level Editor was released for free with the PC version of the 5th game, and it's still used by a passionate community of fan creators today, many of whom are involved in the level editing community because they don't see any other games that can scratch the same itch as the old-school Tomb Raider. And with their custom modifications and extensions to the editor, it's actually able to produce some incredible levels, and remarkably organic-looking environments, all while still adhering to that grid, that preserves the game's internal logic..."
...Each room [in Classic TR] has two types of surface geometry — rendered and collisional. The former are what is seen, while the latter control how objects collide and interact with the world. Furthermore, these two types are specified separately in the room data — each type is completely independent of other, i. e. collisional geometry shouldn't exactly match visible room geometry. While this distinctive feature was never used in originals (collisional room "meshes" fully resembled visible room "meshes"), it is now extensively used by level editing community...
Room Geometry [TRWiki]
trwiki.earvillage.net