I have seen many people dismiss game rereleases as simply a way for game companies to squeeze the most amount of profit from their previous titles. While this may be true for a certain extent, they have more purpose than that.
However, these gamerereleases start to become upsetting if they're repeated way too often. Fans start wondering if their favorite franchise is dead and if it will ever come back with fresh material.
In spite of this, rereleases prevent the loss of a game. If a game was released on an older console and is hard to get, it greatly increases the likelihood of it disappearing forever, and that's never a good thing since it makes people unable to experience some masterpieces that were released before their time.
Game rereleases should not be released as frequently as I've seen some companies do before, they swarm their releases with rereleases and keep clinging to past games instead of moving on and creating new ones. It's still hard tosatisfy the majority of people with rereleases since they tend to view them generally as a bad thing when in reality it's often not. A wayto get around this dissatisfaction is by introducing retro compatibilityin consoles, that way you can reduce the number of rereleases that are produced, the only downside to this is that most likely the bugs present in those games are gonna stay.
Game rereleases are one of those things that should only be made in healthy quantities, they shouldn't be inexistent nor too abundant.
The re-release of Crash and Spyro titles were golden. Used to play these games all the time. Of course, they're going to want to "squeeze some profit" from it.
SirLulz Wrote: The re-release of Crash and Spyro titles were golden. Used to play these games all the time. Of course, they're going to want to "squeeze some profit" from it.
I think you're mixing up remasters with rereleases, rereleases just are the original games for the most part with some small tweaks and bug fixes. I'm not talking about remasters, we could definitely use a lot more of those.
