I'm sorry i live under a rock for NOT KNOWING ABOUT DELTARUNE ...... Just downloaded it. thanks for saying the name xD. Have exams so wont comment as frequently. But call me Taha ^^
Because it wasn't THAT successful back then. see remastering the Spyro trilogy makes sense because Spyro is a household name, the three games were incredibly successful and made tons of cash. This game on the other hand? Not so much. Remastering something that wasn't that successful in hopes of it now being successful it, to me, the definition of madness. But that's just me
Don't confuse remaster with remake xx2 is remaster spyro reignited trilogy is a remake plus people love this game on steam it's shows already 91 positive reviews
I think you're the one confusing. Spyro Reignited is a REMASTER of the three games, not a REMAKE. They didn't re made the games, they re mastered them, bringing them to the new generation. And again that makes sense for a game or series that was already successful to begin with. this on the other hand i see it as a waste
Remaster would simply bumb resolution, maybe add few additional effects, improve interface etc. Meanwhile what they actually do with Reignited trilogy is they build the entire game from scratch using a completely different engine. This is definitely beyond what remasters aim for. And i see on your comments what kind of asshole you are
First of all i'm only an asshole to the people who are assholes back to me. Second of all, let me put it to you this way: Calling it a remake would imply it's a new attempt at making the game from the same concept - like Pokemon Red vs Pokemon FireRed. The Pokemon remakes always add in a lot of stuff besides the new graphics, and the battle system has a different feel every time, with different speed, vastly different animations, etc. FireRed and LeafGreen in particular also have an entirely new section of the story set in a group of entirely new islands. The N. Sane Trilogy and Reignited Trilogy, however, are (barring some Quality of Life improvements) trying to be exactly the same game as the original but with better graphics and smoother controls. So yes, they're more than remasters, but to call them remakes outright is to disregard the term's meaning as established by previous remakes.
Don't confuse remake with a reboot! The point of remake is modernize the game by adding facial animation, new graphics, etc And i don't see a sense that calling a game a remake will hurt developer or an artist somehow
Have exams so wont comment as frequently. But call me Taha ^^
yummy name btw xD
surely they did this remaster specially for the switch version
is this more open world and beat em up like?
this game is good and on never hardware it doesn't work anymore without dances so it should have been remastered
Meanwhile what they actually do with Reignited trilogy is they build the entire game from scratch using a completely different engine. This is definitely beyond what remasters aim for.
And i see on your comments what kind of asshole you are
Calling it a remake would imply it's a new attempt at making the game from the same concept - like Pokemon Red vs Pokemon FireRed. The Pokemon remakes always add in a lot of stuff besides the new graphics, and the battle system has a different feel every time, with different speed, vastly different animations, etc. FireRed and LeafGreen in particular also have an entirely new section of the story set in a group of entirely new islands.
The N. Sane Trilogy and Reignited Trilogy, however, are (barring some Quality of Life improvements) trying to be exactly the same game as the original but with better graphics and smoother controls. So yes, they're more than remasters, but to call them remakes outright is to disregard the term's meaning as established by previous remakes.
The point of remake is modernize the game by adding facial animation, new graphics, etc
And i don't see a sense that calling a game a remake will hurt developer or an artist somehow