Games as products

With Google coming out with their version of cloud gaming with Stadia, they really went all-out with selling multiple concepts as something completely new despite in reality most of them being already existing. For example, they were selling a Share button as something new, despite the PS4 controller already having it. The function and connection might be unique to Google and how it’s tied to Youtube and such, yet at the core it is all about the whole sharing pictures or video with whatever social media or video site you use. Another example of course is the whole concept of gaming on demand itself. Vortex has offered this sort of service for some time now without any separate consoles or devices needed. OnLive officially launched with a tiny receiver console back  in 2010, and closed its doors when Sony acquired its patents in 2015. Sony did the same thing for Gaikai 2014, and PlayStation Now is supposedly a thing. NVIDIA’s GeForce NOW and NVIDIA GRID are both offering cloud gaming to users. Microsoft already told us last year about Project xCloud that it’d be some sort of cloud gaming service. Even EA has its fingers in the model as well with upcoming Project Atlas. France has Shadow by Blade SAS Group, which spread into 19 US states and at least intended to spread further. LOUDPLAY is another gaming on demand model that was showcasing 5G in partnership with Rostelecom and Huawei, and mostly seemed to stay in Eastern Europe.

The only true difference with Stadia and all previous models is that Google has more money to throw at it, probably a better infrastructure to make streaming games a better experience. However, what Google and all these other companies want to sell you is the idea of games as a model of service rather than product. They’re of course mixing the language a bit here, as a product is whatever you sell to the consumer. A product can be goods or a service. Nevertheless, all that money thrown at the infrastructure will probably mean it’ll be the best kind of gaming on demand to date, that’s their ticket to make themselves stand out. Even with this they still need games for people to play, games that they can’t play anywhere else. Well good thing Google announced their own game studio, as it seems to struggle to get other companies on-board. All we know that it’ll have an Assassin’s Creed game and the upcoming Doom Eternal, both of which you can play on other platforms as well. You don’t sell a service without content. What Google is doing is selling you a really nice looking string and nail for you painting, promising that there’s gonna be a really well made frame and picture later on.

As much as the recent debacle of Epic Game Store doing stuff to get exclusives to their platform, exclusives still are lifeline for different platforms. While many think that if you need PC to play a game, then it is a PC game. Of course this isn’t the case, Epic Games Store is as much a digital console as Steam is. Real PC gaming wouldn’t need to be tied to either one of them to any extent. Nevertheless, while there has been a kind of cold war between GOG and Steam, Epic has made it heat up. There are numerous people who don’t use Epic because their game library and friends are on Steam, and they don’t want to begin using a new service. This is brand loyalty at its core though, as if there was no limitations with PC gaming any and all services would already see people logging in. If PC Gamer is to be believed, about 40% of Epic Game Store’s users don’t have a Steam account.

The PC gaming market is a market space of its own, separate from the console space. The differences are not only in methods and software, but in business models and devices as well. GOG, DLSite, Steam and Epic are all in this one space battling each other, with the likes of Vortex doing something different, but I doubt many have even heard of Vortex. Stadia’s entering this space with bold new steps and they’ve got nothing to show for. Technology will take you only so far. Even in console space the device with the least power of the major players has seen the most sales, and often the largest library. While some will argue against this with saying the Mega Drive was weaker than the SNES, they always forget the X32 and Sega CD exist. Then you get to a debate whether or not you only count base consoles only or if add-ons are applicable. For the sake of argument, and reality, all the updates and upgrades should be taken into account for the most whole picture possible.

Nevertheless, what will decide the success of any of the platforms, be it in console or computer space, is the games. Your service will be worth jackshit nothing if it doesn’t have anything to offer. Hyping Stadia because you could be playing games anywhere with Chrome and Google devices? At this point in time, you only have two options. Certainly there will be more in the future, but without a doubt most options will be the same as on other platforms. Stadia, in order to succeed over its competitors in computer space, requires to offer content you can’t find anywhere else.

That’s the rub though. Not the games or the like, but that it requires Chrome or a Google device. Google exclaimed to high how this product is for everyone, putting down all consoles and their games, but not all people use Chrome. Chrome may have the largest market share at 65%, but that’s excluding all the people who still use IE, people who mainly use FireFox or its forks like me, Edge, Safari or Opera. There’s also Brave Browser, which you really should check out if you’re into data safety. Their bold claim for this product to be for everyone rings hollow, as with cloud gaming all the cards and choices are in Google’s hands. I guess people are willing to give complete and total power over the goods and services they buy nowadays to the provider, and have effectively very little in return. You can expect for exclusive games to appear on Stadia in the future, and after their license has expired in a way or another, they’ll vanish altogether, never to be played any more. Digital-only will always meet that fate, and we’ve already lost more than enough games  to this.

Selling with sex

So Dead or Alive 6 got released with some limited fanfare, and it hasn’t really made an impact. For all the PR lip service it made for it and its direction to become more serious in visual tone was just that. It is getting sixes and sevens out of ten, which doesn’t really mean much nowadays seeing most games get sixes or sevens. Reviews range from utterly baffling (Eurogamer wants to make sure there’s some sort of agenda in there by name-dropping the Trumps) to somewhat competent but failing due to having an idea that isn’t exactly true (like Destructoid‘s review, where the reviewer thinks we’re living the most experimental era of fighting games.) Most Western reviews of course will tote the whole thing about sex appeal. While that is certainly an element of the series, there’s significant lack of mentioning the chiseled bodies and female-fantasy level physiques to direction or another at offer. The old saying Sex sells hasn’t ever been as true as people might make it, but in this case it is true. All these people are making their money on speaking about sex. Like that Eurogamer writer, who apparently thinks having a nude model for Resident Evil 2 remake’s Mr. X would be the best thing since corn. They may not realise it themselves, but whenever these sources make a hullabaloo about skimpy outfits or sexualised content to any direction, they’re selling their content with a sexual boost. They’re no better, or worse, than the people they may criticise.

Does this make me hypocritical, seeing I talk about sexualised content at a rather decent rate? I’m not selling you anything, and the stance on the blog has always been pro-sex for wherever applicable and designed into the product.

The whole thing about Dead or Alive and its sex appeal is more or less old news. It warrants no real criticism at this point anymore. Everyone and their mothers have effectively covered it, but its the easiest topic to discuss. It is also always topical, as different sections if different cultures have completely different ideas and standpoints where respective culture, worldwide or local, should stand in terms of body representation and sexualised content. None of them are inherently negative or positive, though all sides might argue otherwise. Then again, humanity has always admired the shape of a body in sculptures, paintings, songs and writing, almost mirroring their respective eras. Sometimes the bodies are idolised, sometimes they’re represented in a more natural state. The 3D models in Dead or Alive, or in any game that in any way tries to achieve some sort of elevation of a human shape, be it via clothes or body shape, is closer to statues of old representing the same core idea. Of course, sexualising men and women is largely different in nature. The whole procreation and nature of women as the birthing side in the two sexes of mankind serves a strong drive, whereas women value athletic bodies and social positioning. The small stubble, somewhat pronounced square chin, slo-mo motions of the camera and actors you always see in certain commercials are to hit this spot with the women in the audience. These too are tied to eon old genes, but everyone has their quirks, and some deviations are more common than others. Like the people who’d rather fuck cars.

While the whole discussion whether or not certain Western Christian traditions are the reason why parts of the world has become rather prudish when it comes to the nudity and sex business, there is a point there. Excess use and availability of something does devalue the matter, like what would happen to money if it was shared around to everyone willy nilly. The value of money would plummet, and maybe in certain ways the access to perfectly shaped bodies, fictional or not, take away something from the value of having a perfectly shaped body here and there. Unhealthy living is an issue though, and being a fatass is not only detrimental to oneself and making a dent to the value, but also promotes rising costs and risks to the society. I’ve discussed to death how more and more items like beds and chairs need to be designed to take account the increasing weight and body mass people have in Western nations, especially in the US. Crematoriums catching fire have become an issue as well, as cremating overly obese bodies raises the risk of starting a grease fire, like what happened in Ohio few years back. There’s no value in increasing costs like this. In this sense, promoting the idolised bodies to strive for could be seen as a very positive thing. After all, as long as go for it, it doesn’t really matter if we achieve a perfect body. Some people just can’t due to genes, but we shouldn’t let genes to decide such a thing. In the end, our bodies is the best thing we can put money into and take care of, as my shoulder currently reminds me of.

Dead or Alive or any other IP with human body idolised, but not necessarily sexualised, will always get scrutiny. It’s a never-ending issue, which seems to change hands from time to time. Before the current climate of progressive stack and political movements driving this whole agenda to censor sexual content from pretty much everything, it was the puritanical and zealous Christians. I wonder when it’ll exchange hands to some other group and for what reason. It’s an eternal hot topic that each generation will have to deal with their own way. Make no mistake, sex does sell, but only when it has been applied properly. After all, it makes money, and in an era where clickbaiting and outrage culture produces positive financial results, it’s an extremely easy subject to keep tackling over and over again. It’s a cycle that a lot of these sources that seem to be mad about how culture portrays something would lose a significant element from their usual roll. Then again, there are people who can’t be pleased to any extent, so you shouldn’t even stoop down to try.

Music of the Month; Shubi-Beam Explosion

I recently managed to fuck up shoulder and neck muscles, preventing me to do a lot stuff I usually do. Work has been bit of a hell because of this, and sitting in front of a computer and typing something down just makes it worse. I’ll probably have to skip next week’s posts because of this, I don’t want this to get worse. This is a reminder for all of you that you should remember to stretch and warm up your muscles more often, especially if your work is in the office or requires heavy lifting or unusual working positions.

The music’s the for the month overall is PC-Engine. That’d be the console that became Turbografx-16 in the West. I recently obtained a PC-Engine Duo-R, modified with a region switch and RGB output. The seller pitched an Everdrive to the mix as well, which allows ROM files to be put on a SD Card. While I just discussed the nature of all the games on a single card, I’ve already made preparations and decisions on this. Just like with the Everdrive N8, which I have an old review up, the Everdrive won’t be an issue when it comes to collecting. It’ll just help me to keep the Hu-Cards in better condition. I just need to find some kind of solution to house the loose cards, either by creating a separate box for them, or custom make some sort of sleeve for a binder. Like trading cards.

While I’m still rooting for the previously planned stuff, that might have to take backseat until my shoulder’s in proper condition. This also means I’d rather do something easier and quick that doesn’t require me to sit in front of the computer and doing any graphical editing or whatnot.  However, doing stuff like reviewing the PC-E’s Avenue 3 controller I got with it should be doable, as most of the stuff is done away from the computer. Fiddling with the controller to take photos of the insides and seeing what makes it tick, all that relaxing stuff. I’d also like to take a look at the library of games PC-E had to offer, mostly some of the more famous titles. Well, I say famous but in reality I mean titles that have solidified themselves into the sub-cultural background of the console. Like how NES had Mega Man, the PC-E had Kaizou Choujin Shubibinman. Everybody knows about the shooting games, but there is a healthy amount of interesting titles of varied quality that more or less represent the best the console has to offer. Whether or not that is on the same level as its competitors of the time is another thing altogether, but seeing it came in third place in the sales race against Nintendo and Sega, you can probably guess how the quality overall was.

 

For now, enjoy the music. I need to slap some Voltaren on my shoulder and take some pain killers.

A library of all

Here’s a question I had to ask myself when I loaded games unto TurboEverdrive; Is this all of the value? This needs some opening. What I mean by that is that we all have the direct and straight access to all software of previous generations via the Internet. Let’s ignore the whole issue with piracy and whatnot. A product needs to have a value, and often that value comes in form of the work paid for it as well as the materials put into it. That’s the basic core elements. The rest come afterward; its rarity, its quality (which can drop the overall value), its demand and so on. ROMs move most of these points away, and all you’re left with is the end result, the raw core product that is the game. For an Everdrive, this is largely the same. You got access to everything at once.

As a sidenote, an Everdrive is an unofficial product that allows the usage of ROM files via SD card on real hardware.

This probably is a complete non-issue to someone who has grown up and largely use digital-only solutions. After all, a ROM is effectively just that, a stripped version of a physical game cart (or cassette, if you want to use the Japanese term.) There are numerous people with large Steam libraries filled with games, free or purchased, that they have never played. They’re just there, filling space. It’s collecting digital dust. There is an effect, where when you have a large amount of something available to you without any limitations, be it whatever media, you grow bored of it fast. You got everything there, right now and none of it really attracts attention. You have time to check everything, there’s no reason to hurry and spend time to go through each thing one by one through and through. Well, time’s limited and you’ll probably never be able to finish everything before you die if your personal library is too large, but that’s an existential issue we shouldn’t think about now. When you have so much stuff in your hands, rather only one or two pieces, it tends to become mundane. Something that’s just present there without much value attached to it.

There is a generation that likes to create a game library on their shelves. Hundreds if not thousands of games just sitting there. Does their amount kill their value too to the owner? This might be the case. When you have one or two games for a system, you play those games only. You have no other options. You lack quantity of titles. Quality might be an issue, but you’ll get through that. That’s how you kept playing some terrible games when you were a child, you had no other real options. You learned how to play them, how to get around their weak design and mastered them for good measure. You have more time per title. It could even be argued to some extent that the more time you spend on a title gives more value. It doesn’t matter if its content repetition. You die and lose over and over again, picking up the remains of your character’s equipment, restart the game because you ran out of Lives and Continues, do it all over again before you get skilled enough to get through the hard part. You learn patterns and get pass the spot that held you back that one weekend. Then the next stage comes and puts up a fight again. The cycle repeats until you’ve finished the game. If it’s the only game you have, you go back in and enjoy it further. You try new things, try beating the game better, faster. You’ll find the value and the intentions from the game, and perhaps even become to like that piece of shit software after few months of trying to finish it. With limited game library at your hands, you really don’t have other choices. Of course, you could go outside and play ball with friends and trek through the local forest, but that’d be going outside.

Nothing else prevents this scenario from happening at an adult age. Except we tend to have more stuff available to stuff. Even more so if you happen to be a collector of sorts. Emulators and an Everdrive breaks this. Why spend time on one game that doesn’t attract you, doesn’t hold your interest at first when you can directly jump to another title? The money and the work the consumer has to put into obtaining the product is gone and it is extremely easy, if not preferable, just to play the best of the best. Then you get a bit bored, jump one game to another. Nothing stops you from just flicking between the games. There is no natural drive of sorts to keep one title on, unless it hits the right spot. In this light, perhaps value is the wrong term to use. Appreciation would be more accurate. We appreciate the things we have, and the less we have something, the more we tend to appreciate it. It’s like health, where we don’t really appreciate us being healthy until we’re sick. The amount of health suddenly diminished and is replaced with its absence and sickness. Collecting a library you’ll never really play through is, in all honesty, a rather terrible thing to do. You’re ending up a waste of space, digital or not, and nothing really gets done by them. However, the nature of collecting sidesteps this more often than not and concentrates on other aspects. The thrill of the hunt, the accumulation of goods and completing a set of something. Simply having something in your hands that you can physically touch, read, look and admire are often enough. Of course, there are those who will feel smugness for owning something others don’t.

Incidentally, the library of a game console that is possible to own, as in the amount of games available for a platforms, is completely the opposite. It needs to be large, extremely so. The larger the library, the more games there are to choose from and the wider selection there is. Something for someone. There will be truckloads of shovel games, but if the library ends up being small, limited, then it’ll end up having nothing but shovel games. A gem here or there won’t keep your console afloat. Still, if you got nothing else, a cheaper shovel title may end up becoming the shining beacon of high personal value, and that’s all that matters in the end.

Ever increasing competition

The video game market is in a point where we are getting more games released every month. More games are being released year by year. More and more people want to get into the industry and realise their dream game, but end up working on a some mobile cashcow title instead. I haven’t managed to keep up with what games are being released at what point and by whom, or who has been developing them for some time. To be completely straight, all the little insignificant titles that get the indie label fall between the rather large gaps. It takes money and position to have your game advertised out there, especially in the extremely fierce Red Ocean market. In market, where expansion is less a concern than making the next big thing. Very few game or platform shakes the market nowadays, and despite the Switch being relatively successful console as a hybrid console, there hasn’t been anything like the Wii. The market has of course changed, and replicating the NES-Wii type phenomena has become increasingly more challenging if not for the changes in the macro-economics but also in within the industry and market as well. Expansion is an issue, as there will be a plateu as some point, where the Red Ocean can’t maintain itself any further. Well, not exactly. The Video game Crash of 1983 happened due to lack of sales. The modern electronic game consumer isn’t like that. We have people who would keep buying games even after their quality had dropped through the floor and was digging itself through the basement floors. Lifelong fandom has become such a driving force that companies are solely banking on that to make success of some of their games despite willingly releasing them in less than half-finished state. It’ll sell, the brand has a good reputation and a strong fanbase. It’ll sell, unless you overtly attack your consumers and tell them not to buy it if your political views are different.

The whole human resource question with this as well. Blizzard recently laid off a lot of its staff despite making a record breaking year, but these two are not necessarily related. A company making large profit probably already knows how much of that profit will be lost on the long run, if the people at higher levels are able to do their job right. Profits don’t just end up as cold cash in someone’s pocket. Capcom, for example, has their fingers in so many things from internal Research and Development to encouraging local businesses and industries in Japanese cities that might, for example, require more tourism. Not all companies do this, of course, and companies like Konami has other venues of revenue outside of video games to the point of gaming probably being one of the lesser ones. A single human tragedy is more or less lost to the sea of people working in the industry, and not to put a much fine point to this, the people don’t really matter. Sure, none of these companies would be successful without the people working hard for their goods, but just as well they wouldn’t be working if there weren’t people buying these goods. There are people trying to enter the workforce all the time, and ultimately nobody is irreplaceable. Even goods can be changed for an equivalent at a whim, and despite entertainment being relatively unique in this sense, especially in gaming where game systems can be extremely unique for one series alone (e.g. Mega Man Battle Network), this happens all the time. Sometimes the superfluous elements are enough, like how yours truly could change between fantasy RPGs on a whim just because they’re so goddamn boring most of the time, systems be damned.

How many times we do really think about the people working in any industry in the end? I doubt anyone has thought the hundreds of people who worked on the car you drive. The people who made the nuts and bolts, the people who coated those nuts and bolts, the people who made the windshield, the people who designed the windshield, the people who milled the steel for the chassis, the people who cut the steel and bent the steel in its shape so it can be put together with thousands of components. A single car is not a work of one man, but the end result is the work of one company, the one whose logo is on it. We don’t care about these ‘little people’ who work on everything we use daily for hours on end. The only face that matters, in the end, is who is selling it to us and for how much. With Internet, even that is gone to a large extent. How many of us really think about the feelings or ongoings of the store clerk we buy our groceries from? Not much I’d bet, unless you’re a frequent customers and get to know them, at which point you’re close. You begin to care, because on the surface you know these people.

The nature of competition determines a lot of things. It requires effort and skill to make a product that would beat most other products on the market. However, this doesn’t mean your product has to be the best. Best is often extremely costly, extremely premium. A product that hits the best middle spot and is regarded as good enough, but “better” than its competitors often gets golden trophy. Or in case of Monster Hunter, the total lack of any real competition means you’re competing with yourself and with the idea of the brand. It’s not exactly something that drives the quality through competition. After all, the amount of people and money going in and out is limited, and if the industry doesn’t want to expand, it will stagnate and break.

More and more games are coming out, and more and more games effectively being lost to the sheer numbers. Some games on mobile phone App stores have single digit downloads, and I dare argue some indie titles on multiple platforms have the same fate. Large games cost more and more to produce, and to make sure they make their money back, they get ever more expensive marketing campaign. All the media outlets understandably want their share of this, be it via clicks or some other way. Corruption in the game media isn’t anything new, it’s laughably transparent and at times driven by politics. At this point companies might a well begin do direct marketing and news coverage themselves. A digital version of Nintendo Power, if you will. However, as long as the industry keeps getting bigger and bigger, the competition and everything that it entails will get sharper and more gruesome. There has been no more than three consoles on the market for almost two decades now, despite at one point around five was the standard. Even the three we have now might become two, and for a competition that’s too low a number. However, the consumer culture keeps changing, and the industry has to keep up. If television has become streaming services and alternative media, where will video games ultimately go? Maybe hybridisation is the route to take or something else. VR it an’t for now.

A Rude (re)Awakening

Just as I have a say about remakes and remixes, and manage to say that Nintendo doesn’t usually do traditional remakes, they come out from the woodwork and announced the Link’s Awakening is getting a full-blown remake, for whatever reason. The thing is, this is one of those cases where we can justify a remake. The Game Boy has stupid amount of great games that could use a full-blown remake, as the GB in itself was rather sorry little device. Not to fault it, according to history the machine with less power has come at the top in success and game library. However, why this game? Why not build on the world that Breath of the Wild gave to the player with its more direct-to-the-matter approach and stripped off some of the unnecessary baggage the series has seen since, well to be frank, since Eiji Aonuma got in. After all, he is the man driving the franchise and IP, has been since Majora’s Mask essentially.

To find an answer to this question we need to go back to an Iwata askswhere Aonuma directly states that Zelda titles didn’t have a plot before Link’s Awakening. This of course is horse shit and shows how Aonuma mistakes how games tell their stories naturally through the game’s play. A story of a game is more of the player’s action, the FMV sequences and such are just a framing device for the player to make up how they advance, even if it were in a strict manner. Furthermore, The Legend of Zelda and Link’s Adventure both excel in indirect world building, which is one of the best ways games can tell a story, by including settings and character the player has to interact with to a level. LoZ didn’t only make the player collect the pieces of the Triforce, but also introduced the setting, the main players and some of the most important settings of the world. Link’s Adventure went even further and expanded the map, named numerous towns and characters that would later appear in the series in various forms as well as introduced the third piece of the Triforce. Most of this in many ways were introduced in manner that didn’t require the player to stop and look at a story sequence for five minutes, as all of it was weaved into the fabric of the game. Aonuma’s direction for Zelda has always been away from this, as he has claimed to like the adventure games on PC more than action games on a console. Knowing Japanese PCs at the time, it’s somewhat safe bet he was “playing” one of those VNs on a NEC PC-98 with no pants on. Wouldn’t blame him, the dot graphic work in those is glorious.

However, Aonuma doesn’t care about those two, he barely even recognizes A Link to the Past. In 2004, he called Link’s Awakening a quintessential isometric Zelda game, two claims that can be argued very harshly. One would be if Zelda games are actually isometric, as oblique projection would be more accurate, and the second would of course be if Link’s Awakening is as quintessential as Aonuma claims. Of course, seeing Aonuma has a very heavy bias towards the game he himself has worked on and has been very dismissive on two first games in the series, something that has harshly rubbed off to the fandom to a point of revisionism, we can’t take his word for granted. Yes, Link’s Awakening is a popular title in the series and saw a colour remake in 1998, but as a whole it’s influence is relatively minor. Most it did was tweaked what A Link to the Past had done with some hefty points taken from The Frog Whom the Bells Toll, which shared an earlier engine with Link’s Awakening. In a game series like Zelda, with most of the entries celebrated in a way or another, almost all entries can be claimed to be important in a manner or another, be it by setting up the lore, setting up the story, setting up the structure and so on. It’s effectively empty air to throw at journalists for some positive PR points. However, we do know how Aonuma views the game, and considering he made an absolutely terrible Zelda game with trains just because his kid liked ’em, it’s not exactly a far-fetched view to see how Aonuma just wanted to bring this all-important classic back to the masses, so a new generation can appreciate what an important game it is.

So yes, Link’s Awakening is getting remade because it has a story, and apparently it’s something that drives Aonuma more than advancing Zelda as a game series.

Not really sure if he realises how shit the game looks. I know, I shouldn’t take sides and just analyse stuff as is within the persona angle, but in this case I just won’t even try. If you look at how Capcom remade both Resident Evil and Resident Evil 2, they took everything they could to make the game work and look better than the original. The little we’ve seen about Link’s Awakening, it’s mostly a face lift, and it doesn’t look exactly great. You can argue all day long that the simplistic designs work and how its faithful to the original game, but at this point I’d rather enjoy the original game rather than play a remake with its edges bloomed with soft focus to hell. I’d rather not ruin my eyes. I’ve got a proper backlit GBA after all. Arguing over plants looking plastic and being glossy to convey how unnatural things are in a dream is loads of bullshit. This design world is that of toys. Certainly when asked about it, someone at Nintendo probably has a readily made answer that expands the whole thematic content like no other, but in reality probably had nothing to do with it. This remake looks like a LEGO set. A LEGO set that seems to replicate the original game to a tee rather than trying be its own thing or improve on the original. Aonuma didn’t have to stick with a super deformed look, but that’s what the original game was and you can’t steer away from pre-established things. The RE remakes are faithful to their original counterparts, RE:make perhaps to a fault, but they didn’t limit themselves to a similar look. They improved. This Link’s Awakening remake already fails as a remake because it doesn’t improve on the original visual, but instead opts to recreate them in 3D. That’s not enough. If your remake is effectively interchangeable with the original source material, it’s failed miserably. Remakes should always aim to obsolete the original, as should sequels, and thus adhering to the visual like this will hurt the game. There’s going to be people having nostalgia rush for it and argue that Zelda always used super deformed characters, which is true, but doesn’t really take into account that this game doesn’t need to. It could make better use of the hardware, create something new and interesting and still be visually familiar.

That’s the crux, isn’t it? This isn’t anything new. Nintendo doesn’t revisit old games like this too often, but every time they do, it’s not because there’s a consumer demand. It’s because the developer wants to, in this case Aonuma. He doesn’t want to recreate A Link’s Awakening the game, but A Link’s Awakening the story. Truth to be told, so very few game developer concentrates on making a game anymore, it’s all about the story. This remake probably doesn’t have the same budget as Breath of the Wild, but it is still largely a waste of resources. The recycle machine never stops. 2D Zelda still sells, there’s no question about that, so why didn’t they put their heads together and craft a completely new 2D Zelda that didn’t adhere itself to a past game? This is a pattern though, as A Link Between Worlds was effectively A Link to the Past 2. Seeing that was relatively popular and sold some decent units, might as well strike another familiar title while you’re at it, right? Half of the work’s done already, just grab the old design documents and go town.

If another company would make an action-RPG like The Legend of Zelda and use Terada Katsuya’s Zelda illustrations as a source of inspiration, they’d make bank.

The core of a Zelda is not in cutesy grass-hacker, but in the atmosphere of being on an adventure, exploring caves and forests, with all the dangers and perils it brings. Zelda is not about the story, that’s irrelevant. It’s about the adventure and the world

Sony has (almost) no classics

Is that a hyperbole enough? Should be, as by now it’s more or less clear that Sony has no idea why Nintendo’s Classic consoles have sold out like hot cakes and occasionally still vanish off the shelves. Well, mostly because they’re not Nintendo and the Sony has no classics. PlayStation as a console as definitive classics, but Sony as a company really has jack shit.

Let’s put aside the fact that the PlayStation Classic’s hardware is rather terrible and emulation is spotty at best, but people can put those things aside for a long time. Just look at the people who are still using ZSNES. Sony has no Mario or Sonic. You’d think the whole thing with mascots is so 1990’s, but outside the era slowly coming into fashion (can’t wait to see shit in colour again) the whole mascot wars did at least one or two things right. First, companies had a face other than a human. You couldn’t separate a game console from its mascot. Now, you have such cute mascots as Sakurai attached to Nintendo instead. Nobody cared who or what made our games back then to the same extent, video game developers were not rock stars, which was only a good thing. Secondly, in order to beat the other furry mascots and whatnot you had back then, you had to have quality. Tells you how much quality you ended up having when the only ones that are still relevant today are effectively Mario and Sonic. Sony never had a mascot, not an official one. No, Polygon Man doesn’t count as they dropped its ass faster than your ice cream melts in the sun and it never had any games around it. Sony had all these unofficial mascots that the company liked to tote around like and Sony wanted to keep close to their heart. That was a problem, because that changed from time to time. Both Spyro and Crash were the faces for the kiddies, while Solid Snake and stuff from Twisted Metal served for the adulties. Hell, Kojima even favoured PlayStation for Metal Gear titles and probably would’ve loved to see it stay Sony exclusive to the end of time, which we all agree would’ve been bad because Ghost Babel really is the best Metal Gear game. At times you saw Cloud’s potato LEGO face when talking about RPGs, though Phantasy Star did the whole killing-a-waifu thing first. No, Sony and PlayStation never had anything of their own, and they were largely dependent on whatever shit the platform saw.

The hell are you getting at? I hear Charlie asking in the third row. Well, if we’re completely honest, PlayStation games that were most requested and wanted on the Classic couldn’t be included. Spyro and Crash had their remakes just on the side, so including those would’ve fought against sales. Metal Gear Solid has been re-released digitally to death at this point and anyone who wanted the game already probably had it. Original GTA is pretty shit. But it’s not about the game library, not really. It’s about the sales. It’s always about the sales. And the game library.

Nintendo’s Classics didn’t only sell to people who wanted to play the games and scalpers, they sold to people who wanted their kids to play these older games that had no modern equivalents. There is a certain code standard to NES and SNES titles, a sort-of must play coda that was shared between the Western nations. Not so much in Japan, they had their own groove. Better to think the Famicom library as a whole another thing altogether. PlayStation is a modern console with most of its games having some sort of modern equivalent. It’s not that people wouldn’t love to play PlayStation games now, because they are. It’s not just via PSN, but with through remakes, sequels and remasters. Tekken 3 might be the last good Tekken or the first bad Tekken, depending who you ask, but do you really expect people to jump unto a game that is eclipsed by its own sequel everybody plays, especially when its running on a terrible hardware and Toshinden next to it? I too have a strange nostalgia boner for Toshinden thanks to the PC version I used to play like no other, but holy shit it’s not a classic title in any regard that deserves this spot. Then again, what should take its spot? Street Fighter II is a tied to the 16-bit consoles more, Sega had Virtua Fighter. Legitimately does the PlayStation have another game series outside Tekken that can be argued to be a stone engraved classic to end of times? No, it doesn’t. Guilty Gear got its status only with GGXStreet Fighter Alpha 3 had superior ports on the Saturn and Dreamcast, Dead or Alive was all over the place and didn’t get the attention until tits hit Dreamcast and PlayStation 2.

Wouldn’t that mean it was about bad game choices and thus about the library? What are the core PlayStation games people most remember, and how many of those still exist? The PlayStation nostalgia is not the like nostalgia for the NES and SNES. The PlayStation was, for all intentions, the first console that was cool to own. Mega Drive aimed for the adult audience and the NES had lots of adult players for the sports games, but the PlayStation had incredible success with the whole cool factor. Hell, WipeOut alone was like a drug gold mine with the European trance club culture of the time. Would you buy a Classic console to play WipeOut when there are so many sequels out there on other Sony consoles and a remake that make this version obsolete?

Nostalgia for the PlayStation is a large part of the console’s successors in various forms that do not exist on the Nintendo platforms from the get-go when it comes to the Classic Era of consoles. If Nintendo is to make N64 Classic, it’ll have the same problem and will face the fact that N64 classics are counted with one hand. It’ll be consisting of titles that either have been ground to halt or are just terrible choices. At least Nintendo doesn’t need to rely on third-party support and have licensing problems, which without a doubt was a major problem with some of the developers and publishers. The consumer population doesn’t have the same affection for the PlayStation as it does for the NES and the SNES. That is not to say there isn’t one or that’s some kind of negative. It’s just different by a different generation.

Sony has often followed what Nintendo does without really realising why Nintendo does things or why they’ve been successful with some of their things. The PlayStation Classic was going to war with trumpets lambasting, but with no weapons carried. Hardware and software are an issue where Sony failed like a dead fish in bed, and the game version choices were weak at best, but those honestly are rather small compared to the problem that Sony completely mistook what made the original PlayStation a hit and didn’t understand the system’s nostalgia. PlayStation nostalgia is hard to capture, because it’s like Xbox nostalgia in that it never really went away, just like 3D Mario.