/v/ - Video Games

That still doesnt make any sense to me.

>>15434336

Most likely they are doing the PS4 version first, then they'll put it on steam for full price just to be kikes.

>>15434336

Sony contract/pressure.

RRRRRRRRREEEEEEEEEE

MASTERED

Ehat an..odd thing to remaster

>>15434369

it's a good game with flaws, could be a great decision

>>15434369

It can be thought of what FF12 could've been, and even used a lot of similar engine tech. Makes sense.

it will surely have denuvo aswell, there wasn't really anything wrong with the original

>>15434376

I'm curious abut it and checked it out a bit and the gameplay looks nothing like FF12 at all.

What the fuck do you mean by that. Did you mean FF13?

>>15434324

>take it off steam

the game sucks so I don't care

>>15434378

By original you mean the 360 version, or the remastered version that came half a year later on PC?

>>15434378

>there wasn't really anything wrong with the original

aside from not actually having the army size it advertised, the fucked up leveling system and how it interacted with the fucked up sidequests (don't fight so you can optimize stat ups, but you'd better somehow grindfarm hundreds of mundane drops), the leader limit on armies hamstringing you, certain spells and weapons performing so poorly as to be completely useless, and a generally boring and convoluted story?

>>15434417

almost forgot, and even the pc port "remaster" stuttering when you put the actual advertised number of soldiers into a battle?

It's a "remaster" compared to PS3 version.

PC version as already what this remaster is, if not better.

So there you fucking goyim.

Buy the same game again for 3 times as expensive.

>>15434339

What are they remastering for PC, though? Wasn't the game already able to achieve 1080p60fps? What's there left to add?

>>15434653

Absolutely nothing.

wasn't this a total commercial failure? why would a remaster do any better?

>>15434657

So why take it off of Steam, then?

Surely that's going to end up giving them pretty bad press if a "remaster" shows up to replace the previous version and it isn't much different from the original .

>>15434363

>Sony contract/pressure.

There is this implication that the dev or publisher (or both) arent trying to make a profit of a remaster by their own decision

>>15434672

>Surely that's going to end up giving them pretty bad press if a "remaster" shows up to replace the previous version and it isn't much different from the original .

Thats what every remaster is already

>>15434708

Most remasters aren't released on the same platform with minimal, if any, modifications to the original game. DS remaster is the only example I can think of of a game being removed to make room for the remaster, and at least that one offered native support for 1080p60fps which the original natively didn't.

Most remasters are ports of older console games for newer consoles with higher resolution textures and/or higher rendering resolutions, or consoles ports for PC at 1080p60fps. This game already did 1080p60fps. It doesn't make sense even in remasters' standards.

>>15434716

>Most remasters aren't released on the same platform with minimal, if any, modifications to the original game

You're right, they are usually worse than the original game.

BioShock: The Collection comes to mind

>>15434716

This happened with Sleeping Dogs, the "Definitive" version was worse than the original, which they removed from the store along with its individual DLC.

>>15434662

It has become a "cult classic" and "underrated gem".

>>15434653

It will probably end up worse in some way going by most remasters. Likely end up with more potato shit textures than the original.

>>15434722

>BioShock: The Collection

It's a shame that it's as shit as it is, it has some really neat features such as including all the previously exclusive PS3 DLC, scaled HUD and an FOV that went up all the way to 120. I believe it even added 60fps rag dolls to BioShock 2 which is something that modders weren't able to do.

>>15434369

No, it actually makes perfect sense.

>gen 7, so minimal work required

>code most likely still in tact

>just got in the headlines for being taken off steam so it's not completely unknown

They're trying to remaster as many of the easier games as they can before they're either forced to remaster games that would actually take effort, like FF7 or whatever, or the next generation comes out and they can bribe Sony for no backwards compatibility so they can do it again.

>>15434336

Are you retarded? It's about money. It's always about money.

>take the game off for purchase for all countries for the PC in August/September

>make a PS4 digital remaster that will only be out in Japan on December 6th

For their sake SE better announce that the game is coming back to the PC soon, otherwise this was just retarded. The PC doesn't even have that big of a market share there.

>>15436442

Is this an attempt by Sony to pretend they have games?

>>15436778

They've been doing this for 4 years now anon, and some brand loyal retards here are actually falling for it.

Well, remastering one of the last very good JRPGs isn't a terrible thing. I am more interested in why there hasn't been anything very good since then.