gaming What is your best/worst port of any game?

[Fiery Shadow 109]

Name:

First platform release:

Ported to:

Why you think it's the best/worst port of this game:

 

--------------------

me for example

 

Name: Bejeweled 2

First platform release: PC

Ported to: PSP

Why you think it's the best/worst port of this game: because they made practically no changes to the game. they literally just ported the entire game over to your psp. all 8 gamemodes are still there. and the controls are perfect.

 

 

Name: Halo 2

First platform release: XBox

Ported to: Windows vista

Why you think it's the best/worst port of this game: it was practically a PC port to the classic halo 2. you got fluent pc controls, an online multiplayer with a server roster, and microsoft dropped a bomb by saying that your GFWL account is also your xbox live account. which meant you didn't have to spend money for a second live subscription. which shows that microsoft ain't always greedy for money.

 

 

[PROJECT: Simon 3,955]

Assassin's Creed Brotherhood

 

Windows

 

Mac

 

Too much lag now, can't even activate it properly T^T 

[Envy 6,183]

Okay, sorry, I have to say something now: Why do you have to make everything all complicated with this format? It's just a forum post for goodness sake, not a college research paper!

 

The worst ports for me have been Ocarina of Time 3D (3DS), Majora's Mask 3D (3DS), and The Wind Waker HD (Wii U).

 

I dislike all three of them for the exact same reasons: They're overpriced remastered ports. All you have to do is look at the way they've remastered and released Kingdom Hearts games and it puts everything into perspective. (Although I didn't even need that to feel like I wasted all of my money on OOT3D, as it came out long before KH1.5 HD). Kingdom Hearts 1.5 HD REmix and 2.5 HD REmix both contain two FULL games, are remastered to no less of quality than TWW HD, have fully REMADE OSTS for KHI and II played by real - not synthesized - instruments, and cost less than WWHD ever did.

 

Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask deserved better. The Wind Waker didn't even need it, it still looked fine today.

 

But when the fans don't hold a company up to standards, this is what they will do, happily.

 

But if you want your little format, I'll try:

 

Worst:

The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time 3D

Nintendo 64

3DS

 

The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask 3D

Nintendo 64

3DS

 

The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker HD

Gamecube

Wii U

 

Should be the standard (for remastered ports)

Kingdom Hearts 1.5 HD REmix

Playstation 2

Playstation 3

 

Kingdom Hearts 2.5 HD REmix

Playstation 2 and PSP

Playstation 3

 

EDIT: My apologies if I was rude. Sometimes I get like this... D:

Edited October 11, 2015 by Envy

[Codelyy 1,286]

. Hey there . Since the subject of your topic relates to games, i'm moving it to the media discussion forum.

[Megas 27,749]

Best:

- Resident Evil 2

- from the PS1

- To the N64

- This was like programming wizardry, as they were able to fit 2 entire discs worth of content into the tiny N64 cartridge with everything in tact

 

Worst:

- Almost every modern PC port and almost every console port of arcade games(that aren't Sega consoles

- PC ports nowadays are often inexcusably buggy and messy, being nearly impossible to play at launch, and just shows how little most publishers/devs care about the PC market. Console ports of Arcade games, mainly PS1 and SNES ports, are often the result of those consoles not being as strong as the arcade machine, and thus the devs usually had to cut key features and content from the rerelease(like SNES Final Fight cutting out a character and an entire stage)

[Guest]

Okay, sorry, I have to say something now: Why do you have to make everything all complicated with this format? It's just a forum post for goodness sake, not a college research paper!

 

The worst ports for me have been Ocarina of Time 3D (3DS), Majora's Mask 3D (3DS), and The Wind Waker HD (Wii U).

 

I dislike all three of them for the exact same reasons: They're overpriced remastered ports. All you have to do is look at the way they've remastered and released Kingdom Hearts games and it puts everything into perspective. (Although I didn't even need that to feel like I wasted all of my money on OOT3D, as it came out long before KH1.5 HD). Kingdom Hearts 1.5 HD REmix and 2.5 HD REmix both contain two FULL games, are remastered to no less of quality than TWW HD, have fully REMADE OSTS for KHI and II played by real - not synthesized - instruments, and cost less than WWHD ever did.

 

Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask deserved better. The Wind Waker didn't even need it, it still looked fine today.

 

But when the fans don't hold a company up to standards, this is what they will do, happily.

 

But if you want your little format, I'll try:

 

Worst:

The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time 3D

Nintendo 64

3DS

 

The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask 3D

Nintendo 64

3DS

 

The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker HD

Gamecube

Wii U

 

Should be the standard (for remastered ports)

Kingdom Hearts 1.5 HD REmix

Playstation 2

Playstation 3

 

Kingdom Hearts 2.5 HD REmix

Playstation 2 and PSP

Playstation 3

 

EDIT: My apologies if I was rude. Sometimes I get like this... D:

 

While I agree re-releasing games at a higher price is often a crappy thing to do I have to disagree with a few of your points. KH 1.5 and 2.5 while including two full games had a lot of things they did inferior o Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask 3D. KH 1.5+2.5 were pretty much just graphically upscaled ports of the Final Mix games, which was great because we never had access to them legally before this, but they are fairly lazy ports. The LOAD times on those games are atrocious and inexcusable. Birth By Sleep's insane PSP load time is almost unchanged in the superior PS3 version. Graphic wise the games are just a touch up, whereas OoT 3D was a complete rebuild:

 

http://i.ytimg.com/vi/HsqgKmjKkCc/maxresdefault.jpg

 

They rendered 2D environments in 3D now, redid the character models and environments in a higher polygon count, redid the textures on everything, not just upscaled them. Included the Master Quest mode which previously was only available in a limited quantity, redid the sound, and made the game portable while making the graphics better. I would argue these insane levels of improvement make the game worth the $40 it cost when released.

 

KH 1.5 and 2.5 they kind of just did the minimal amount of work necessary to qualify as a "remaster" and then sold them. OoT is a complete reMAKE. They rebuilt the entire game from the ground up. Wind Waker HD though, yeah it didn't need an HD remake, but it definitely looks better on the Wii U.

 

However I can DEFINITELY agree, a full HD remake of OoT and Majora's Mask are still desired by me.

[Envy 6,183]

While I agree re-releasing games at a higher price is often a crappy thing to do I have to disagree with a few of your points. KH 1.5 and 2.5 while including two full games had a lot of things they did inferior o Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask 3D. KH 1.5+2.5 were pretty much just graphically upscaled ports of the Final Mix games, which was great because we never had access to them legally before this, but they are fairly lazy ports. The LOAD times on those games are atrocious and inexcusable. Birth By Sleep's insane PSP load time is almost unchanged in the superior PS3 version. Graphic wise the games are just a touch up, whereas OoT 3D was a complete rebuild:

 

http://i.ytimg.com/vi/HsqgKmjKkCc/maxresdefault.jpg

 

They rendered 2D environments in 3D now, redid the character models and environments in a higher polygon count, redid the textures on everything, not just upscaled them. Included the Master Quest mode which previously was only available in a limited quantity, redid the sound, and made the game portable while making the graphics better. I would argue these insane levels of improvement make the game worth the $40 it cost when released.

 

KH 1.5 and 2.5 they kind of just did the minimal amount of work necessary to qualify as a "remaster" and then sold them. OoT is a complete reMAKE. They rebuilt the entire game from the ground up. Wind Waker HD though, yeah it didn't need an HD remake, but it definitely looks better on the Wii U.

 

However I can DEFINITELY agree, a full HD remake of OoT and Majora's Mask are still desired by me.

 

Well let me state that Nintendo always advertised OOT3D, MM3D, and TWWHD as REMAKES. Kingdom Hearts 1.5 HD and 2.5 HD were never advertised as remakes, they were always advertised as remastered.

 

I was never bothered by any load times in either Kingdom Hearts remaster collection, and was always impressed by the upscaling they did. Kingdom Hearts I, for example, felt like an entirely different game to me this time around. It also helped that they added a controllable camera as opposed to the version on the PS2.

 

Again, it helps that Kingdom Hearts 1.5 and 2.5 were as advertised. And the remade soundtracks. I can not reiterate enough how major that is for me. Playing through OOT3D and MM3D and hearing the same old music from the originals is just insulting. How dare they call those two games a 'remake', when KH got remasters with fully remade music.

 

Maybe Nintendo likes to think that OOT and MM have such legendary OSTs that they can't be touched. That's so very arrogant of them. They were great for their time, but when you're releasing a new version of them and calling it a remake, you don't get a pass from me no matter how good the original arrangements were.

 

I've seen where OOT3D and MM3D differ visually from the originals, but aside from Link's models, it's like they rebuilt everything to look like it's just as ugly as the original OOT and MM just with Twilight Princess-like textures pasted over them. I can not imagine why someone would go through so much trouble to make it look so much like the original. I mean, the picture you posted just demonstrates this. It may be 'remade', but it's still just as ugly... Save for Link's model!

 

Again, I can give KH 1.5 and 2.5 a pass here where I can't give OOT3D and MM3D. It's because KH 1.5 and 2.5 are as advertised. I don't expect brand new textures from them. They are remasters, they were always labeled as so, and PRICED as so. And I found so much more value in KH1 and KHII in their remastered forms because they had completely remade soundtracks... Yet 'remakes' like OOT3D, MM3D, and WWHD didn't.

Edited October 11, 2015 by Envy

[Guest]

 

 

Well let me state that Nintendo always advertised OOT3D, MM3D, and TWWHD as REMAKES.

 

Shy of Wind Waker though, they were remakes... :I

 

 

 

I was never bothered by any load times in either Kingdom Hearts remaster collection,

 

It was a fairly common complaint. The load times on the PS3 version of KH 1 and 2 are significantly higher than the PS2 version.

 

 

 

And the remade soundtracks. I can not reiterate enough how major that is for me. Playing through OOT3D and MM3D and hearing the same old music from the originals is just insulting. How dare they call those two games a 'remake', when KH got remasters with fully remade music.

 

They did redo the music... The music for the N64 version was compressed as all hell. The new ones were completely redone.

 

 

 

I've seen where OOT3D and MM3D differ visually from the originals, but aside from Link's models,

 

Every single character model was redone. Not to mention 2D environments were redone in new textures and in 3D.

 

 

 

it's like they rebuilt everything to look like it's just as ugly as the original OOT and MM just with Twilight Princess-like textures pasted over them.

 

To be fair the remake was for a low powered handheld. For a handheld with such little under the hood, what they have done is impressive. 

 

 

 

Again, I can give KH 1.5 and 2.5 a pass here where I can't give OOT3D and MM3D. It's because KH 1.5 and 2.5 are as advertised. I don't expect brand new textures from them. They are remasters, they were always labeled as so, and PRICED as so.

 

 

So was OoT and Majora's mask though. They were advertised as remakes, and they were. The music was redone, 2D environments were completely redone in 3D, render distance was increased significantly, enemies redesigned, mechanics fine tuned, lots of glitches fixed, every single model redone, textures redone, music redone (though sounding similar they did new recordings), consolidating features from other versions of the games, and even some new content thrown in.

 

They were 100% full remakes and they were actually about the same price they were when they were made. For a remake, you pay more because you're not just getting a touch up, you're getting a complete rebuild.

[Envy 6,183]

They did redo the music... The music for the N64 version was compressed as all hell. The new ones were completely redone.

I have the OSTs of the original OOT and OOT3D right here in front of me. I can not hear a difference aside from maybe...volume?

 

 

Compare that to:

 

 

 

Every single character model was redone. Not to mention 2D environments were redone in new textures and in 3D.

 

 

To be fair the remake was for a low powered handheld. For a handheld with such little under the hood, what they have done is impressive.

The models were all remade very blocky, as if they were on the N64. I don't want to hear any excuses, because the 3DS is supposed to be oh-so-powerful. It's supposed to be able to run GCN level games or better. The GCN could have done so much better. 

 

OOT3D and MM3D are very tacky looking. When playing through OOT3D it looked like I was just playing the N64 version with pasted TP-textures. Not worth my money at all.

Edited October 11, 2015 by Envy

[Megas 27,749]

In the end of the day, OoT 3D and MM 3D's visuals were completely redone from the ground up, so in the end of the day they technically(key word) are remakes

 

But I agree with Envy in that they definitely don't feel like it, and whether they're worth full retail price is up to debate. The thing with those two is that Nintendo didn't want to change anything because they wanted to preserve the core game, so they simply redid the visuals, but kept everything else in tact. So in that regard I can understand why some would just consider them remastered ports rather than full-blown remakes(personally a remake should try to feel different from the original game while still preserving the core game, like Resident Evil REmake, Megaman Maverick Hunter X, or the Pokemon remakes)

 

Though to say they're some of the worst ports ever with all I said considered is still a bit too much, considering there are many more ports that are just flat out unplayable

Edited October 11, 2015 by Megas75

[Envy 6,183]

In the end of the day, OoT 3D and MM 3D's visuals were completely redone from the ground up, so in the end of the day they technically(key word) are remakes

 

But I agree with Envy in that they definitely don't feel like it, and whether they're worth full retail price is up to debate. The thing with those two is that Nintendo didn't want to change anything because they wanted to preserve the core game, so they simply redid the visuals, but kept everything else in tact. So in that regard I can understand why some would just consider them remastered ports rather than full-blown remakes(personally a remake should try to feel different from the original game while still preserving the core game, like Resident Evil REmake, Megaman Maverick Hunter X, or the Pokemon remakes)

 

Though to say they're some of the worst ports ever with all I said considered is still a bit too much, considering there are many more ports that are just flat out unplayable

 

They redid the visuals so conservatively that - combined with every thing else left so identically to the originals - it's barely even noticeable until you put them side by side.

 

I've never played any ports that are unplayable, so OOT3D, MM3D, and WWHD in all of their overpricedness (I made a word! lol) are by far the worst I've ever dealt with.

 

If they had been cheaper/in bundles, it would have been harder for me to see them that way, but instead they were marketed as full remakes and released individually full price. When I'm more impressed by a Kingdom Hearts port in a bundle, we have a problem.

 

I DID get WWHD for free, but that's only because they gave it for free with a MK8 deal. For that game to be released individually for $60 was a rip-off.

[Kenshiro 13,493]

worst port game to the pc is batman arkham knight i guess

[baba_booey 4,303]

Best: It's probs tied for me.

Sonic CD

Sega CD

PC

It managed to fix a few of the issues with the original port like the spin dash, plus gave it widescreen, 60FPS and interchangeability between the 2 soundtracks.

 

Super Mario Bros. 3

NES

GBA

Had a nice remix of the soundtrack, better saving (than the SNES version), and the interesting e-Card feature.

 

Worst:

Sonic the Hedgehog

Sega Genesis

GBA

Was glitchy, laggy, had huge framerate drops and a mediocre remixed soundtrack.

[Envy 6,183]

Super Mario Bros. 3

NES

GBA

Had a nice remix of the soundtrack, better saving (than the SNES version), and the interesting e-Card feature.

 

Just in case you didn't know... The visuals and music in Super Mario Advance 4(?): Super Mario Bros 3 (as well as the original Super Mario Advance which was Super Mario Bros. 2/USA) are taken directly from the SNES Super Mario All Stars.

[baba_booey 4,303]

Just in case you didn't know... The visuals and music in Super Mario Advance 4(?): Super Mario Bros 3 (as well as the original Super Mario Advance which was Super Mario Bros. 2/USA) are taken directly from the SNES Super Mario All Stars.

I know, but the original port of SMB3 was the NES version, so I put that instead.

[Envy 6,183]

I know, but the original port of SMB3 was the NES version, so I put that instead.

 

Oh right... You even mentioned the SNES version in your first post. >.<

 

You just threw me for a loop when you mentioned the soundtrack had been remixed. I don't remember it being any different in SMA4 from the SMAS version.

Edited October 11, 2015 by Envy

[Magic Note 2,748]

Best port for me: Chrono Trigger for the DS. An already great game now has the cutscenes from the PS1 version, it has a whole swathe of new content, a bestiary, a music player that's updated when you listen to songs for the first time, and it has the cutscenes from the PS1 port!

 

Worst port for me: Sonic the Hedgehog Genesis for the GBA. There are loads of glitches that make this game unplayable. You're familiar with how speed is important to the Sonic games? Well here, because they thought basing the port on the Sonic Advance engine was a good idea, the game has an atrocious frame rate as a result. Moreover, those glitches that were introduced were never in the original Sonic the Hedgehog to begin with!

[Celtore 2,770]

Elf bowling from pc to DS is one of the dumbest and worst ideas ever.

 

"so here's the pitch, marketing heads! We take our free, prehistoric shockwave game, put it on the DS and sell it for 20 bucks. We wont add any new features, make any upgrades or put in any effort, we'll just come right out of left field, shit this on store shelves and leave as fast as we appeared. Then, we work on the movie, which will clearly be a big hit and revive our franchise!"

 

As for the best, I'm not entirely sure. Mario 64 DS comes to mind, particularly because of how much level overhauling they did, the four character selection, the minigames they added and the multiplayer stuff.

[Radiance64 7,053]

Bayonetta Wii U and Ace Attorney Trilogy 3DS are probably the best I've played recently(tho tbf it's been my first time through those games). Xenoblade N3DS as well, how the hell that was even pulled off as well as it is I'll never comprehend.

[Guest]

 

 

I have the OSTs of the original OOT and OOT3D right here in front of me. I can not hear a difference aside from maybe...volume? Compare that to:

 

 

KH sounds pretty similar as well. Plus music being redone a remake does not make. Basically your argument thus far is music and music alone. While music may be important to you, it is only part of the overall score. Plus if the soundtrack really WAS great to begin with (which popular opinion agrees that Ocarina already had great music) there was no reason to redo it. The quality of the music is still excellent, so it's not like it was terrible shit quality that made your ears bleed.

 

 

 

The models were all remade very blocky, as if they were on the N64. I don't want to hear any excuses, because the 3DS is supposed to be oh-so-powerful. It's supposed to be able to run GCN level games or better. The GCN could have done so much better. 

 

Where did Nintendo claim the 3DS could produce gamecube level graphics? I've never heard that. The graphics are a HUGE improvement from the N64, and no where did Nintendo claim they could produce Gamecube level of graphics. To top that off, they are squeezing a HUGE game onto a small cartridge. You have to make compromises to make that happen. Nintendo wanted a more smooth experience rather than graphic powerhouse with insane load times. It's a handheld the load times need to be TINY in order for it to be successful. If they bumped the graphics up to Gamecube level you would be looking at long loads for the game.

 

For what the system is capable of, and compared to the original, it's an excellent remake.

 

I'm sorry it wasn't worth your money, but it is by no means a terrible port, in fact many people agree that it is the definitive port of the game, while KH 1.5/2.5 are still being debated. Many people argue that the longer load times (significant) with nothing really added beyond trophies from the Japanese Final Mix games make them inferior versions. 1.5 and 2.5 DEFINITELY are not loved by the speed run community for that reason. There was no excuse for them to be that slow on a system that was far more powerful than the PS2, near the end of its lifespan when the kinks were worked out.

 

KH 1.5 and 2.5 are moderate ports at best, but to say that OoT 3D is trash and praise 1.5 and 2.5 like they are gold? That's preposterous.

 

 

 

In the end of the day, OoT 3D and MM 3D's visuals were completely redone from the ground up, so in the end of the day they technically(key word) are remakes   But I agree with Envy in that they definitely don't feel like it, and whether they're worth full retail price is up to debate. The thing with those two is that Nintendo didn't want to change anything because they wanted to preserve the core game, so they simply redid the visuals, but kept everything else in tact. So in that regard I can understand why some would just consider them remastered ports rather than full-blown remakes(personally a remake should try to feel different from the original game while still preserving the core game, like Resident Evil REmake, Megaman Maverick Hunter X, or the Pokemon remakes)   Though to say they're some of the worst ports ever with all I said considered is still a bit too much, considering there are many more ports that are just flat out unplayable

 

Majora's Mask had a LOT that was different. A whole new side quest added, bosses were completely reworked to add new elements to the fights. Locations of fairies in dungeons were moved. Some puzzles where completely reworked. Visuals were completely redone, new save system was added that was more convenient. The mechanics of how the song of time works was changed. Two new fishing areas were added. Mechanics of zora swimming were reworked.

 

There was a LOT changed in MM. OoT was probably just trying to play it safe, but still there was enough changed to where I can at the very least say they are respectable remakes and well worth $40. Considering if you were new to those games that's what you would have paid back then too.

 

 

 

They redid the visuals so conservatively that - combined with every thing else left so identically to the originals - it's barely even noticeable until you put them side by side.

 

 

I noticed right away. I did not need a side by side like I do when comparing PC to console games. Plus it's a Nintendo console and it's a handheld. I think you're being too harsh on the game. Are you more upset that it didn't get a Wii U HD port? Because if so I can totally understand being disappointed in the game.

 

 

 

I've never played any ports that are unplayable, so OOT3D, MM3D, and WWHD in all of their overpricedness (I made a word! lol) are by far the worst I've ever dealt with.

 

At least none of them were priced at a full price game. OoT was $40, MM  was $40 and Windwaker HD is $40. $60 is the average price for a new game, so really they are selling them at a big discount. Even the Resident Evil 1 Remake was sold at $60. $20 off is a pretty good price for a remake.

 

 

 

If they had been cheaper/in bundles, it would have been harder for me to see them that way, but instead they were marketed as full remakes and released individually full price. When I'm more impressed by a Kingdom Hearts port in a bundle, we have a problem.

 

Yet those games did not sell that well. Square Enix literally only ported those because they were getting close to bankruptcy and they needed money. 2.5 Remix did not do as well as Square Enix had hoped, nor did 1.5, and 2.5 did worse than it.

 

 

 

I DID get WWHD for free, but that's only because they gave it for free with a MK8 deal. For that game to be released individually for $60 was a rip-off.

 

It never was! It was $50 upon release and it went down to $40 very quickly.

 

 

 

Best port for me: Chrono Trigger for the DS. An already great game now has the cutscenes from the PS1 version, it has a whole swathe of new content, a bestiary, a music player that's updated when you listen to songs for the first time, and it has the cutscenes from the PS1 port!

 

The DS version is by far the best version (even if it removes Frog's accent). It gets those cutscenes without the terrible load times of the PS1. 

[Megas 27,749]

Majora's Mask had a LOT that was different. A whole new side quest added, bosses were completely reworked to add new elements to the fights. Locations of fairies in dungeons were moved. Some puzzles where completely reworked. Visuals were completely redone, new save system was added that was more convenient. The mechanics of how the song of time works was changed. Two new fishing areas were added. Mechanics of zora swimming were reworked.

 

There was a LOT changed in MM. OoT was probably just trying to play it safe, but still there was enough changed to where I can at the very least say they are respectable remakes and well worth $40. Considering if you were new to those games that's what you would have paid back then too

I actually never played MM3D, so I didn't know about the extra stuff they added(I went with what I knew from the trailers, it was looking the same as OoT3D), So my argument for MM3D can be discredited  . But my point still stands for OoT 3D though

 

If we're talking about price, while some people who bought the original game on the N64 appreciate the remake for being cheaper(though good luck finding it below $50 now), nowadays you have the option of playing the original OoT on the Wii/Wii U for $10(which was how I first got to play it). The updated visuals are nice and all and while I agree it's the best version of the game, to me it was too similar that I didn't feel it was worth shelling out an extra $30 for(same goes for SF643D, which I felt had similar issues).

 

 

At least none of them were priced at a full price game. OoT was $40, MM  was $40 and Windwaker HD is $40. $60 is the average price for a new game, so really they are selling them at a big discount. Even the Resident Evil 1 Remake was sold at $60. $20 off is a pretty good price for a remake.

First off, WWHD and REmake were both $50 at release

 

Again I feel the biggest problem with the Zelda games for some is that they didn't feel like they were worth their price. In WWHD's case, its $50 for one remastered game, which can be disappointing considering there are several HD remasters that are released with multiple games for $40 or less(MGSHD, DMC HD, Hitman HD, among others). And compared to OoT 3D, I felt REmake was different enough to stand out on its own and justify it's price point. It felt like a completely different game, which I can't say the same for OoT3D

Edited October 11, 2015 by Megas75

[Envy 6,183]

KH sounds pretty similar as well. Plus music being redone a remake does not make. Basically your argument thus far is music and music alone. While music may be important to you, it is only part of the overall score. Plus if the soundtrack really WAS great to begin with (which popular opinion agrees that Ocarina already had great music) there was no reason to redo it. The quality of the music is still excellent, so it's not like it was terrible shit quality that made your ears bleed.

Disagree, disagree!

 

Yes, the remade KH OSTs do sound somewhat similar, but if you listen they are played by live instruments, as opposed to the MIDIs used in the originals. It's very easy to hear in the clarinet from this piece, among other things.

 

It sounds similar, but that's because it is supposed to. The games aren't remade, so you won't find drastically different arrangements like in the Pokemon remakes. The fact that they are played by LIVE instruments now is a HUGE deal for me. Not every track sounds as amazing as the originals in the every way, but in the end, it's all a matter of effort.

 

Again, I don't care that OOT and MM have amazing, timeless soundtracks. When you choose to make a REMAKE of them, you have to REMAKE the OST. No excuses.

 

Likewise, it wouldn't have been impossible to do a similar close-to-the-original remake of the OSTs of OOT and MM, and not even necessarily use live orchestra/instruments. Just look at this remake of the Hyrule Field theme from Super Smash Bros. Brawl:

 

 

Where did Nintendo claim the 3DS could produce gamecube level graphics? I've never heard that.

Well, that might just have been fan-hype.

 

 

The graphics are a HUGE improvement from the N64, and no where did Nintendo claim they could produce Gamecube level of graphics. To top that off, they are squeezing a HUGE game onto a small cartridge. You have to make compromises to make that happen. Nintendo wanted a more smooth experience rather than graphic powerhouse with insane load times. It's a handheld the load times need to be TINY in order for it to be successful. If they bumped the graphics up to Gamecube level you would be looking at long loads for the game.

 

For what the system is capable of, and compared to the original, it's an excellent remake.

Disagree!

 

Besides, I've dealt with playing The Sims 2 on a PC that could barely handle it. Loading times on consoles are so small in comparison. I think I could have taken a little more loading time if it had only made OOT3D and MM3D look better than some awkward N64/TP hybrid that still looks like it belongs on the N64.

 

I'm sorry it wasn't worth your money, but it is by no means a terrible port, in fact many people agree that it is the definitive port of the game, while KH 1.5/2.5 are still being debated. Many people argue that the longer load times (significant) with nothing really added beyond trophies from the Japanese Final Mix games make them inferior versions. 1.5 and 2.5 DEFINITELY are not loved by the speed run community for that reason. There was no excuse for them to be that slow on a system that was far more powerful than the PS2, near the end of its lifespan when the kinks were worked out.

 

I didn't even notice the loading times or slowness, so...

 

KH 1.5 and 2.5 are moderate ports at best, but to say that OoT 3D is trash and praise 1.5 and 2.5 like they are gold? That's preposterous.

 

You're misunderstanding me a bit here. I'm saying that KH 1.5/2.5 are great as remastered ports, while OOT3D/MM3D are a very poor standard for remakes.

 

Remastered ports and remakes are two completely different things... Yet here we have remastered ports that delivered where so-called remakes didn't. It puts things into perspective.

 

KH 1.5/2.5 aren't 'gold', but they were worth my money. OOT3D most certainly wasn't by any standard.

 

 

I noticed right away. I did not need a side by side like I do when comparing PC to console games. Plus it's a Nintendo console and it's a handheld. I think you're being too harsh on the game. Are you more upset that it didn't get a Wii U HD port? Because if so I can totally understand being disappointed in the game.

First of all, your use of "HD port" is weird. I absolutely would not want an HD port of an N64 game. I would want a remake, otherwise it would look terrible. lol

 

Second of all, when OOT3D came out and I bought it (day one) the Wii U IIRC hadn't even been announced yet. An remake in HD was not even on my mind. I was just happy to have a 3DS game (I had none before OOT3D) and a version of OOT to play on handhelds, as OOT had always been one of my favorite games.

 

My disappointment came as I played the game and thought - save for the model of Link and a few landmarks here and there it looked exactly like OOT on the N64 with Twilight Princess-like textures pasted on it. The music wasn't remade. The game controlled and felt exactly like it was on the N64. It felt as if I was playing the original and not playing a remake. I already owned OOT three times over - on the N64, the MQ WW-preorder bonus for the GCN, and the Master Collection on the GCN. I did not need to be spending $40 (which was all of the money I had for myself at the time) on a game I already owned three times over.

 

I thought that the amazingness of OOT would have that covered either way, but I was wrong. It failed, and I still wish I could have that $40 back.

 

At least none of them were priced at a full price game. OoT was $40, MM  was $40 and Windwaker HD is $40. $60 is the average price for a new game, so really they are selling them at a big discount. Even the Resident Evil 1 Remake was sold at $60. $20 off is a pretty good price for a remake.

Later in this post you detail that WWHD started out at $50, meaning it was only a "$10 discount" in reality. Not at all worth it. Especially considering back when WW was released, it cost $50 itself day one.

 

Your claim of none of them being priced as a full price game is utterly false. 3DS games default at $40. That ran true for Pokemon X/Y, Super Smash Bros. 3DS, etc., etc. So they were full-priced, and as far as I know still are.

 

It never was! It was $50 upon release and it went down to $40 very quickly.

My mistake, but still $40 is way too much for it.

[Guest]

 

 

It sounds similar, but that's because it is supposed to. The games aren't remade, so you won't find drastically different arrangements like in the Pokemon remakes. The fact that they are played by LIVE instruments now is a HUGE deal for me. Not every track sounds as amazing as the originals in the every way, but in the end, it's all a matter of effort.

 

So sound track is a big point for you, however most Zelda fans agree that the sound tracks are perfect the way they are. If they remade them, everyone would have complained that they "ruined it". Etc.

 

 

 

Again, I don't care that OOT and MM have amazing, timeless soundtracks. When you choose to make a REMAKE of them, you have to REMAKE the OST. No excuses.

 

Well that's your opinion I suppose, however it's not a requirement.

 

 

 

Likewise, it wouldn't have been impossible to do a similar close-to-the-original remake of the OSTs of OOT and MM, and not even necessarily use live orchestra/instruments. Just look at this remake of the Hyrule Field theme from Super Smash Bros. Brawl:

 

A lot of people in the smash community and in general hated brawl. Any kind of reminder of it might not have been the wisest choice. But we have reached a matter of opinion here, because not everyone cares about music in a game as much as you do, and it seems to be at least 50% of your reasoning.

 

 

 

Well, that might just have been fan-hype.

 

So we establish now that the Gamecube graphics claim is discredited.

 

 

 

Disagree! Besides, I've dealt with playing The Sims 2 on a PC that could barely handle it. Loading times on consoles are so small in comparison. I think I could have taken a little more loading time if it had only made OOT3D and MM3D look better than some awkward N64/TP hybrid that still looks like it belongs on the N64.

 

I study the video game industry regularly, and console specs. I am certified to work with computers and know what they are capable of. There are numerous reasons why a PC could not run a game that do not have to do with not having X or Y being fast enough. That being said, Nintendo wanted the game to be a smooth experience. Pushing too much graphics into the game would have created longer loads and on a handheld every second for loads counts. Loading times are VERY important on handhelds because of the class of gamer they target. The 3DS processor and graphics chip set was literally almost pushed to its limits with Majora's Mask. Why do you think Nintendo released a New 3DS with a faster processor? They were already pushing the limits of the original.

 

 

 

I didn't even notice the loading times or slowness, so...

 

It was a problem created from poor optimization and could have been resolved by not cramming the set onto a single disk or delaying the game a little longer to decrease those loads. What's worse is 2.5 remix actually had worse loads. Just because you didn't notice them doesn't mean there aren't tons of people who complained about them. It was an inexcusable action because a simple solution was right in front of them.

 

 

 

You're misunderstanding me a bit here. I'm saying that KH 1.5/2.5 are great as remastered ports, while OOT3D/MM3D are a very poor standard for remakes.   Remastered ports and remakes are two completely different things... Yet here we have remastered ports that delivered where so-called remakes didn't. It puts things into perspective.   KH 1.5/2.5 aren't 'gold', but they were worth my money. OOT3D most certainly wasn't by any standard.

 

Except those remasters didn't really deliver. Are you certain your perspective does not come from disappointment that Zelda was not released on a home HD console?

 

 

 

First of all, your use of "HD port" is weird. I absolutely would not want an HD port of an N64 game. I would want a remake, otherwise it would look terrible. lol

 

HD remake. I.e. a complete rebuild upon the Wii U.

 

 

 

Second of all, when OOT3D came out and I bought it (day one) the Wii U IIRC hadn't even been announced yet. An remake in HD was not even on my mind. I was just happy to have a 3DS game (I had none before OOT3D) and a version of OOT to play on handhelds, as OOT had always been one of my favorite games.   My disappointment came as I played the game and thought - save for the model of Link and a few landmarks here and there it looked exactly like OOT on the N64 with Twilight Princess-like textures pasted on it. The music wasn't remade. The game controlled and felt exactly like it was on the N64. It felt as if I was playing the original and not playing a remake. I already owned OOT three times over - on the N64, the MQ WW-preorder bonus for the GCN, and the Master Collection on the GCN. I did not need to be spending $40 (which was all of the money I had for myself at the time) on a game I already owned three times over.   I thought that the amazingness of OOT would have that covered either way, but I was wrong. It failed, and I still wish I could have that $40 back.

 

Okay, I can understand your disappointment then. Personally I feel your standards might be a bit high though, I mean I am known as one of the hardest people to please and I would say that OoT 3D is a solid 7.5/10.

 

 

 

Later in this post you detail that WWHD started out at $50, meaning it was only a "$10 discount" in reality. Not at all worth it. Especially considering back when WW was released, it cost $50 itself day one. Your claim of none of them being priced as a full price game is utterly false. 3DS games default at $40. That ran true for Pokemon X/Y, Super Smash Bros. 3DS, etc., etc. So they were full-priced, and as far as I know still are.

 

Full priced in comparison to their original release which was 50-60 if I recall. It's been a while since I saw them new in the store.

 

 

 

My mistake, but still $40 is way too much for it.

 

I agree there since it is a remaster and not a remake. Fortunately I got it free. None the less I think this all stems more from the fact that you expected more than the console was capable of doing and a remade soundtrack that Nintendo did not want to risk pissing fans off with. 

[Redacted321 105]

This should be fresh in a lot of peoples memories.

 

Batman Arkham knight for the PC, while the console release's were perfectly fine (from my knowledge) the PC port saw a lot of hard crashing, lag, glitches and bugs making it next to unplayable, we should have learned from the last crappy Warner brothers game port.

[Envy 6,183]

So sound track is a big point for you, however most Zelda fans agree that the sound tracks are perfect the way they are. If they remade them, everyone would have complained that they "ruined it". Etc.

 

And I'll just be blunt and say "So what?" Do you know exactly how many different ways someone can acquire the original OOT/MM with the original OST in tact, even on the modern consoles?

 

If someone can't tolerate such things, than they have no business playing a remake of the game. The original version of the game is right in front of them and incredibly easy to purchase and play.

 

And then think of this: When Gamefreak released Pokemon HG/SS - remakes in every sense of the word - the original G/S/C weren't and still aren't easily available. In fact, my G/S/C cartridges don't work anymore, due to a glitch that is widespread and has made most cartridges for the game unsavable.

 

They changed many things, overhauling the OST in ways that people might not like... But even still, Gamefreak has not had people at their doorstep with pitchforks over it. Some people may have been disappointed, but they move on... Because it's a remake.

 

A lot of people in the smash community and in general hated brawl. Any kind of reminder of it might not have been the wisest choice. But we have reached a matter of opinion here, because not everyone cares about music in a game as much as you do, and it seems to be at least 50% of your reasoning.

 

I'm one who was very disappointed with Brawl. The fact that Brawl is a disappointing game has absolutely nothing to do with the validity of the arrangement I posted. It's just an arrangement of OOT's Hyrule Field made for the game.

 

 

Why do you think Nintendo released a New 3DS with a faster processor? They were already pushing the limits of the original.

 

Money. Because Nintendo has a legion of fans who will buy every single rehashed handheld they dish out, regardless of whether it adds anything worth it or not. (And no rehash has done so since the GBA SP, if you ask me)

 

It's been out for a while now... And all it has to its name is a port of a Wii game? Meh.

 

But then again, a port of a Wii game. Curious how the increase in the 'processor' in between the 3DS and New 3DS could supposedly take it from below a GCN to a Wii.

 

 

Except those remasters didn't really deliver. Are you certain your perspective does not come from disappointment that Zelda was not released on a home HD console?

 

They delivered plenty in my mind. Two full games in each, remade OSTs for KHI/II, some other details such as a controllable camera added to KHI. I liked KHI so much more this time around than I ever did on the PS2. Nothing about OOT3D made me like it better than the original... Because it's the same thing, through and through. Again, funny how I got a little more out of a straight up remastered port, than a 'remake'.

 

I don't know why you keep running to that when I just explained to you in detail how I regretted my decision to buy OOT3D before I even thought of a real remake of it on a home console.

 

 

Full priced in comparison to their original release which was 50-60 if I recall. It's been a while since I saw them new in the store.

 

To me, that's irrelevant. Today they are full-priced. It wouldn't have looked right for them to price them at $50 when no 3DS game has been priced like that, right? So that's just not really any kind of point to make.

 

 

I agree there since it is a remaster and not a remake. Fortunately I got it free. None the less I think this all stems more from the fact that you expected more than the console was capable of doing and a remade soundtrack that Nintendo did not want to risk pissing fans off with.

Again... If people don't want remade OSTs, they have the originals right in front of them. When you buy a remake, and you get ticked off that things were actually remade, it's on you.

 

Synthesized tracks from the late 90s just won't cut it in a modern game. Funny how every other company seems to understand this when making remakes. But Nintendo thinks too highly of themselves, I guess.

 

They were great when released, and I still listen to the OST from time to time... But when a remake is made, you remake things. Period. No excuses.

Edited October 12, 2015 by Envy