The release of Uncharted: The Nathan Drake Collection marks yet another addition to the long line-up of video games that are undergoing the remaster/HD collection trend that started all the way back in 2009 with the God of War Collection. Since then, more developers have pushed towards remastering games from the last generation with current generation technology.
On one hand, these old games can be experienced with improved resolution and performance, and can also be played by gamers who may have missed out on them the first time. On the other hand, the frequency of these remasters have become a source of criticism, either for their lack of value compared to HD collections with only one remastered game sold at a high price, or for only offering mild upgrades that do not offer much of a benefit to those who have already played the original game.
With so many franchises getting the remaster treatment, I think it would be a good idea to detail the history of these remasters – the good and the bad – and explore what makes a good remaster.
Console limitations may also come into play here. I'm thinking particularly of the Metal Gear Solid HD Collection for the Xbox 360. The controller lacks the pressure sensitive buttons of the Playstation 2 controller, meaning the developers had to come up with a new, clunkier way of being able to put down a weapon while aiming. – ODude7 years ago
I think remasters also have a lot to do with cashing in on a franchise. Final Fantasy X/X-2 (which I love, by the way) can only be remastered so much. It has now been remastered three times, and people have been rolling their eyes. I personally don't mind remasters because they usually have some kind of bonus content (i.e. the Kingdom Hearts HD Remixes), and I also like having as many of my games as possible on the same console. But I do have to admit that the frequency of remasters can be annoying because it is an obvious cash-in, and it also means we have to wait that much longer for a new, original title. – Christina7 years ago