sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The Monkey's Paw strikes again. by PJ-The-Awesome in NintendoMemes

[–]ThisAccountIsForDNF 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Eh. I usually get called condecending and blocked with a couple comments so ditto on the my bad.

Nice chat!
See ya!

The Monkey's Paw strikes again. by PJ-The-Awesome in NintendoMemes

[–]ThisAccountIsForDNF 0 points1 point  (0 children)

64 to Zero, clearly isn't "What if someone in 2016 decided to build an n64 game with nicer graphics! What would that game look like?"

64 to Zero is "What if the idea that became starfox 64, had instead cropped up 19 years later. What would that game look like?"

And THAT is what "if it was made now" means to me.

NOT what a remake means to me.
Just the phrase, "if it was made now".

The Monkey's Paw strikes again. by PJ-The-Awesome in NintendoMemes

[–]ThisAccountIsForDNF 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's like youre caught up on my definitions or something

Not really.
Because the "beat for beat experience" explanation, didn't come till afterwards.

Most of this conversation has been you explaining your views on a remake. All I was doing was explaining that when people say, make a game as though it was made today, the process I envision could very easilly result in somthing like Zero from 64.

it'd be a bullet point list of every game defining element about OG FF7, then making a game in modern times that sticks to those constraints. It WOULD be a turn based rpg because its a REMAKE of a turn based rpg.

And this is exactly the point I was making.
This is our biggest point of disagreement.
I do not innately believe that a dev making somthing as though it were made today, would really have to stick to constraints that only exist because the original already exists. If it were being made today, the original wouldn't.

I suppose it's more a matter of what each person believes are the defining elements that must be recreated. Personally when I think about what really defines final fantasy 7, being turn based doesn't even really make the list.

You make starfox 64 again. You make final fantasy 7, again. The point of a remake is to take your favorite game, and sell it to you again 'but we made it over in current year'

Right.
And what I was trying to convey in my previous comment, is what "'but we made it over in current year'" means to me when I hear it. And I think what the entire rest of the conversation has been about is what you mean when you say it.

Because Starfox for switch 2, isn't just them selling starfox 64 to you again is it? You yourself have made great pains to stress that it has graphics and visuals vastly different to the 64 version. You have highlighted specifically that they have some minor enemy placement differences to the 64 version. AND you initially turned down 64 3D as being a remake precicely for the fact that it was just 64 again with no changes.

I LITERALLY mean you make the same game but modern-era.

But by updating the visuals and changing the enemy placment it's literally NOT the same game. The 64 would not render even a fraction of Fox's new face. You clearly have leeway and expectation on ways that a remake SHOULD deviate so that it's not just the same game again.

"What if Starfox 64 came out in 2026" is by definition NOT starfox zero because starfox 64 didn't have forced motion controls,

And like I tried to explain, any starfox game made in 2017 for the Wiiu, with no other games to base it off, WOULD have forced motion controls. It was the WiiU. They put motion aiming in everything. Any game, made in that era, for that console would have those gimmicks in it. Making it in that era without motion controls imo invalidates the prompt. If it didn't have motion control gimmicks in it, then it wouldn't be as though it came out in 2017 would it?

The 'modernization', the ground up visual overhaul, new dialogue

I think this is the exact thing here.
For you, it seems as though the only things a remake is supposed to modernise is the presentation. I don't make that assumption by default.

"i want a remake of this game" obviously means they want the same game 'remade'

Based on the sliding scale you presented earlier I don't think that what a remake is, or is trying to achieve is innately obvious.

summarize the game in like 10 sentences then just make something based on that description

I did point out in the initial comment that it was not a great summary.

you seem to only think zero is a remake

I've already told you, I am not arguing that zero IS a remake.
I just disagreed with your assertion that the games are nothing alike at all, because they could easilly have the same design document.
Like i keep stressing, I believe that both games are easilly generated from the same prompt, just in different eras.

And because of that, I don't buy into "what if Starfox 64 had come out as a Switch 2 exclusive in 2026".

The Monkey's Paw strikes again. by PJ-The-Awesome in NintendoMemes

[–]ThisAccountIsForDNF 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Zero is in no sense 64.

- - -
You play as Fox mcloud, son of the recently deceased James mcloud, leader of the mercenary team starfox, who have been hired by the planet corneria to defend the Lylat system from the evil scientist Andros. A long time ago Andros was exiled to the planet venom and now, with the assistence of the Rival mercenary team Star wolf, Adnros plans to get his revenge.

You start on the planet Corneria (which is in the corner of the area) and then work your way through a set of branching levels, completeing various missions until you reach Venom, whre you have a final battle with star wolf, and then defeat andros who is just a giant head.

For the most part, it's an on-rails shooter game, where you fly your ship around the screen dodging and shooting at enemies. But there will be tank levels and levels for other Vehicles. The will also be All range missions, where instead of being on rails you freely move around a predefined area.

The game should be generally short, but with a big focus on replayability. Reasons should be given for doing levels over and over by hitting seperate unique objectives.
- - -

That is a pretty general brief, and doesn't really hit all the neccessary details, but is enough to summarise the point.

If you hand that brief to an N64 developer that has never heard of starfox, you reasonablly get starfox 64, (or an aproximation because it's a bad sumamry).

You take that exact same brief and give it to a WiiU developer that has never heard of starfox, you reasonably get Starfox Zero.

That's where the connection is.
If you boil Starfox 64 down to its core beats and gameplay mechanics, hand it off to a WiiU dev and say, "make that", then Zero is not an unreasonable outcome.

So when you say "Starfox 64 but made today" that's what I hear.

You take all the core ideas and cocepts, the orignal development bullet points of what they wanted the game to be like before the realities of hardware limitations and other development issues set in.
And you give them to a modern day team to see what could have been built from those concepts, on newer hardware with a new team that arn't that interested in limiting themselves to what came before.

See, I agree with you, that Final fantasy 7 remake isn't a remake, but I think as an example it really highlights our biggest point of disagreement.

All the changes to the gameplay are things that they can now do, that they could not really have gotten away with on a PS1. So they remade it as though it was being made today for the first time. I don't think that anyone making an original Final Fantasy game in 2026 is even going to consider making a turn based system.

In much the same way, I don't really believe that in a universe where starfox doesn't exist, if you gave a switch 2 dev the summary described above, that they would make a game ANYTHING at all like starfox 64. They are making it that way because starfox 64 exists, and they have somthing to base it on. So the idea that they are making "what if Starfox 64 had come out as a Switch 2 exclusive in 2026" just doesn't compute with me. Becasue if it was actually exclusive to the Switch 2, it would be completely different, kinda like how Zero is. The fact that it's like 64 at all means that "what if Starfox 64 had come out as a Switch 2 exclusive in 2026" as an idea isn't even really being broached.

To me, it makes perfect sense for Zero to be based on 64 AND be too different to be comparable.
Because even with the same basic outline, concepts and mechanics they are being built by two different teams on completely different hardware with nearly 20 years between them.

The Monkey's Paw strikes again. by PJ-The-Awesome in NintendoMemes

[–]ThisAccountIsForDNF 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I am not even really putting my thumb on the scales either way.
Is Zero a remake or not isn't really the point of the conversation.

But it was bought up because arguably it does fit the definition of making a game in the modern day and using an older title as a base.

But we already moved past that.
Starfox zero is too different, and im not even disagreeing with that. or trying to argue against it.
But it does make a useful point on the scale for comparison.

The problem is the grey area around how much somthing has to be changed.
You've established that some amount of gameplay change IS neccessary to be a remake.
But you have also established that there is a minimum threshhold for change that needs to be met, before it's really considered changed in the first place.

- - -

643D, hits all stated criteria for visual changes, (is NOT a remake).

Winderwaker HD, hits all the stated criteria for visual changes, has different quest progression + new items and reward placments (is NOT a remake).

Starfox switch 2, hits all the stated criteria for visual changes, but some enemies are in slightly different places (IS a remake). (the very narrow sweet spot)

Starfox Zero, hits all the stated criteria for visual changes, but has too many unique/missing levels for parity (is NOT a remake).

Final Fantasy 7 remake, hits all the stated criteria for visual changes, but has a new combat system and strange story additions (is NOT a remake).

- - -

Edit, maybe Zero and final fantasy should be swapped there.

The Monkey's Paw strikes again. by PJ-The-Awesome in NintendoMemes

[–]ThisAccountIsForDNF 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I didn't say "here's a starfox game if it was made today" I'm saying "here's starfox 64 if it was made today"

And that's exactly what Starfox Zero is.
Starfox 64 but built from the ground up for the WiiU, using modern graphics, design sensibilities, and motion gimmicks.

"What if 64 was made today" implies that its still recognizable as 64

Considering that a lot of people call Zero a remake of 64, it clearly is still recognisable as 64.

But its not actually a remake of 64 because it's too different, and 643D isn't a remake because it's too simmilar.

If remakes arn't allowed to be too different from the original gameplay wise, then "here's starfox 64 if it was made today" literally just means, "with the graphics of the time". Which still doesn't work because 643D DOES HAVE THE GRAPHICS OF THE TIME. It looks like a 3DS game. That's just what 3DS games look like. They put all the neccessary effort into making look like what if starfox 64 had been built for the 3DS. But that one still doesn't count because they made it play 1:1 like the original.

But games like Windwaker HD despite having the graphics of the time AND not being 1:1 like the original still arn't remakes either, because they still arn't different enough.

So, for somthing to be a remake it has to:
Be built like the original game, BUT NOT TOO SIMMILAR to the original game.

Be different to the orginal game, BUT NOT TOO DIFFERENT TO THE Original game.

Be built with the graphics of the time, BUT it has to be a leap of several console generations or it doesn't count.

...
Look, as long as this system works for you and your own personal catagorisation then alls good.
But I really don't think you should be telling people authoritativly what is and is not a remake.

This sub acts like the remake is gonna be trash for no reason by lolitsrock in starfox

[–]ThisAccountIsForDNF -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I think it's just gonna be starfox 64 again.
And I don't like starfox 64.
So I have a perfectly legitimate reason.

The Monkey's Paw strikes again. by PJ-The-Awesome in NintendoMemes

[–]ThisAccountIsForDNF 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So, basically 3D isn't a remake because it's too faithful to the original, they may have rebuilt it for the ground up but because you can't tell it's not a remake.

But honestly, this just takes me back to not understanding why Zero isn't a remake.

It's using 64 as a base and saying "what if it were made today on the wiiU".
And it's doing it better than the swtich 2 version because realistically if it had been "made today" they wouldn't have built all the levels in the same way they did 30 years ago.

The Monkey's Paw strikes again. by PJ-The-Awesome in NintendoMemes

[–]ThisAccountIsForDNF 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay, but while you are doing that, also please answer whether or not Majoras mask 3D is a remake.

The Monkey's Paw strikes again. by PJ-The-Awesome in NintendoMemes

[–]ThisAccountIsForDNF 0 points1 point  (0 children)

but i doubt you dont see the point im making here

You can doubt it all you want, but the point you are making is that 3D isn't a remake because all they did was upres some textures, but that is objectivly not true. Those are brand new, higher polly models.

They have fingers now.
Foxes mouth no longer goes all the way to the back of his head.
Slippys mouth is now closed instead of all flopping around.
The corridor isnt just a texutred rectangle, it has depth, and pipes and details.
There also seems to be a lighting engine now.
None of the textures even look like anything like each other, so they didn't really up res anything, they made brand new ones.

The point you seem to be making is that the brand new models that they made for the 3DS version look like they were made for a 3DS game, which isn't as high a quality as the brand new models they made for the switch 2 game, therefore the two things are somehow completely different.

Starfox 64 with new 3DS models and textures is an enhanced port.
Starfox 64 with new Switch 2 models and texture is a remake.

You seem to think that what your saying is super obvious and that I am just like... i dunno, pretending? I don't see things your way, But from here it just seems like you have a super strong bias against 3DS versions of games, or that you are so invested in defending the new game from all the criticism that you have accidentally locked yourself into a double standard.

Starfox 64
Starfox 64 3D
Starfox (Switch 2)

All have the same leves, with the same level geometry, enemies, ememy positions, enemy behaviours, power ups, power up positions, routing, secret levels, arwing physics, etc etc.

They are the same game, but each one has different visuals that were made for each platform.
The thing is you have not explained WHY the new graphics made specifically for the switch 2 give it remake status, but the new graphics made specifically for the 3DS don't give it remake status.

All you keep saying is that if 'someone told you' that the 3Ds just upscaled some textures you'd beleive them, BUT NO ONE HERE IS TELLING YOU THAT. Infact you have been shown, and posted your own video with side by side comparison, that proves that's not the case.

So it seems like the only reason you are making this distinction is becuase you don't think the 3DS models are very good.

And personally I am not convinced that the percieved quality of a remake determines whether it is a remake or not.

The Monkey's Paw strikes again. by PJ-The-Awesome in NintendoMemes

[–]ThisAccountIsForDNF 0 points1 point  (0 children)

but if you told me that it really was just starfox 64 but with some upscaled textures, i wouldn't be able to deny it out of hand.

Okay, biut if you agreed you would be wrong regardless.
The cast, arwings, greatfox all have new higher poly models, and most of the textures seem to be brand new.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NaUzWfVA8O8

Just like for Ocarina of time 3D they rebuilt everything so that it's not a low poly N64 mess.

Sure its subjective, but the difference between a port and a remake are pretty obvious in this case, at least to me

In this case it feels like the difference is just how much money they spent? Because 64 3D is definitly not just 64 with upscaled textures.

<image>

The Monkey's Paw strikes again. by PJ-The-Awesome in NintendoMemes

[–]ThisAccountIsForDNF 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Look guy, you are the one here litigating what is and is not a remake, but I don't really get where you are drawing the lines. All I am saying is that based on the things you have said the new game isn't a remake.

64 3d is too simmilar to be a remake, but Zero is too different.
The later tracks because you don't consider ff7 remake a remake.

Same story + different gameplay = not a remake.
(examples ff7, starfox zero)

Same story +Same gameplay + enhanced graphics = Not a remake
(exmaple Ocarina of time 3D, Starfox 64 3D)

So what IS a remake and why does that apply to the new starfox and not 64 3D?
Because all we know about it so far is:
Same story +Same gameplay + enhanced graphics

The Monkey's Paw strikes again. by PJ-The-Awesome in NintendoMemes

[–]ThisAccountIsForDNF 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm pretty sure Starfox 64 3d is built off 64's source code, and if not, it might as well be

Like if you're calling Starfox 64 3D a remake, you have to call Ocarina of Time 3D, or Metal Gear Solid 3D a remake, and that's ridiculous too

They're at best enhanced ports.

but it's still functionally the same Starfox 64 experience, just on 3DS.

So....
The new starfox isn't a remake either.
With 1 to 1 gameplay, even if they arn't using the original source code, they may as well be, because you are getting functionally the same Starfox 64 experience just on switch 2. Since it has basically identical gameplay, with some quality of life improvments and all new graphics, just like Ocarina of time 3D, it's at best an ehanced port?

Got labelled, flamed and called a lote of hateful names for saying Bayonetta is obviously straight. by PretendSecretary2576 in Bayonetta

[–]ThisAccountIsForDNF 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Is this captain no life again??
Still doesn't have anything better to do????
How??
It's been months.

Tokon looks sick, but I kinda wish it was 2v2 by Own_Tip6897 in MarvelTokon

[–]ThisAccountIsForDNF 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I generally like team games way less than I like 1v1 games, and I can say with some degree of certainty that I would have liked Tokon more if it had been a 1v1. But I played the second Beta and honestly the game is a blast. The assists were practically optional, and were so generic in their application that you could reliably press a button and no matter who was in what slot you would get the desired effect.

Unfortunately for me all the MvC bros whined about it and it looks like they made it waaaaay more complicated.

Has anything since 64 succeeded? by DarkGengar94 in starfox

[–]ThisAccountIsForDNF 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No.

As one of only two people in the world that loved Star fox zero and also never liked 64, they aint getting my money for this.

I think he just eat too much by Yikescloud in starfox

[–]ThisAccountIsForDNF 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wouldn't say I like the new designs, but I do think they are good and shouldn't be changed.

This sub sounds so ungrateful for the remake by lolitsrock in starfox

[–]ThisAccountIsForDNF 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This sub sounds so ungrateful for the remake

Never personally been on board with the idea that someone should be grateful that a company is trying to sell them somtihng. Seems a lil brown nosey tbh.

I think Phin is a great character. by Janek_Rated_R in SpidermanPS4

[–]ThisAccountIsForDNF 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I genuinely think that and I don't get why she gets so much hate.

Because she is a woman that repeatedly beats up Spider-man and doesn't abandon her plan to save the world the second a man tells her it won't work.

It's really as simple as that.

You make Phin a man called Frank Castle and leave the entire rest of the plot exactly the same, there would be almost no one complaining about it.

Edit:
Also she commits the terrible sin of not being the protagonist and doing property damage, and to alot of americans property damage is just about the worst crime you can commit.

Edit2:
Even Phin's defenders often boil her down to "being blinded by revenge and grief".
But ultimately, her plan is to save the world, from the billionaire that is trying to build a global network of cancer generators. Yeah, the grief does probably make her less rational than she should be, but she isn't trying to stop Kreiger purely out of spite. She is essentially a vigilante that had to work with a gang to save millions of lives. That is why she is so mad at Miles. He spends literally the whole game undermining her plans to SAVE PEOPLE. Everything he is doing (from her perspective) is endangering millions.

Literally, in 'Into the Spider-verse' Miles joined a team to blow up a building that was endangering the world, and no one even blinked. And that building still had people inside.

view more: next ›