There is an Edit button under your own posts that allows you to change and expand that post. It's not, to my knowledge, an actual rule here, but it's generally considered good nettiquette to use that feature, rather than making multiple posts.

Anyway... i disagree with your entire premise. I've been a PC gamer since the early 90's, and i've never once encountered a person who instantly expected an older game to be better, performance wise or graphically, when they upgraded hardware. You accept the game within the temporal window in which it exists. If you expect a 10 year old game to suddenly and magically keep pace with a brand new title, well... You're world-view is unfortunately damaged.

All Remasters are is an attempt to feed off nostalgia and a gullible consumer market. If you love an older game, PLAY that older game, you don't need someone to dangle a slightly prettier version of it in your face while they raid your wallet. Every time a studio does one, regardless of what that studio is, they waste time that could be better spent on making new content, new games, or at least ripping off old ones and PRETENDING to be creative. They're a lazy waste of effort and resources.

Just because there's a market for something doesn't mean it's good for consumers, good for developers, or good for society. There's a market for used underwear, that doesn't mean it should be encouraged in any way, shape or form.

Whereas things like Micro-transactions, Subscription Fees, Pre-Orders, Paid-Modding, Day One DLC etc. all have some legitimate benefit to Gaming (though admittedly how beneficial the are depends on their execution) Remastering old titles does nothing to advance gaming.

Remasters are a blight on gaming. Period. But that's just my opinion, of course.

I respect your opinion.Used under garments and remasters of current gen games are not really good examples of eachothother.Also I didn't say I suddenly exspect remasters of all games to meet current gen.I said those that have a large enough userbase and had a demand.Also while oblivion is closer to ten years.Skyrim relealesed in 2011 maybe check your math comprehention perhaps your logic is damaged aswell sir.You also seem bias toward consoles as you state that your a pc gamer from the 90s.Odd dont pcs require alot of updates and upgrades?Anyways it seems you completly generalized all remasters as a cash grab thats your opinion.Its not fact.Infact as remaster are popular and those that are in demand are bought in the millions atleast my damaged sense of reality is backed by well numbers and reality.I also didn't chose to both go for a cheap shot and generalize a subject like remasters by saying they have zero worth without any true facts.I see your comment as both simple minded and not really worth consideration as you went straight for a insult to me personally without any thought.Thats the behavior of a child in my opinion and frankly odd coming from someone sighting etiquiette.

No more so than consoles. I run Skyrim and earlier games on a PC I built in 2006. I can get away with this because the games were made to run on 2005-era console technology. Now that Bethesda has moved to next-gen consoles with Fallout 4 I finally need to upgrade my PC. And when I do, I expect it will last another eight to ten years, as the last one did.

PC users can certainly upgrade more often than that (many of them do) if they wish to, but it is not essential to do so.

Modderator.I apologize I did try to delete this post,but i'm very unfamiliar with this website and its tools.Can you please delete this post at your time of veiwing thank you.

Please understand that this post comes from a love for bethesda games and my personal opinion.This post wasn't entended to make anyone angry,but was a question for and aimed at the console crowd that would love to see a port or remaster come to current gen.This is just one mans opinion and not fact.I love bethesda games and hoped I could find fellow fans and freinds here.I see now both were pointless,so I'll be leaving as it were.

I apologise on behalf of the forums (i'm going to assume that i speak for the majority in this particular regard...) about any hostility, it certainly wasn't the intent to drive you off.

Most of us still love Bethesda and their games, and can more than understand the passion you have... We just prefer that the investment of resources be towards making new games and (hopefully) improving the series, rather than updating the look of older games in a never ending struggle to keep them looking 'Current Gen'. There's nothing stopping us from still enjoying those old games as it is, after all.

The curt response from many of us, i think, stems from the fact that the notion of Remasters comes up a great deal with new posters and there's a great deal of regular repetition. That can quickly get frustrating and responses can become a little more harsh than we may otherwise intend.

While we may not see eye to eye on the subject of remasters, that doesn't mean that your interaction with those of us here isn't something to be valued. I for one rather like having dissenting opinions, and people who are willing to stand up for their opinions. Vehk knows i've had some rather heated arguments with many of the board members.

Don't call it quits just yet. Spend some time in other threads, http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1601828-official-beyond-skyrim-tes-vi-79/page-2 and http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1601186-tes-vi-location-and-setting-speculation-31/page-5 in particular, before you make that decision. Just because we disagree on this point doesn't mean there's not common ground to be found on others.

I would actually quite like a remake (from the ground up) of Morrowind.

Imagine for a second that alongside Fallout 4, they worked on a Morrowind remake for PS4/PC/Xbox One, with a release this year or next. It would be a perfect opportunity to try out new mechanics for the TES series in anticipation of TES6. If a mechanic is disliked enough, they can change it for TES6.

Remakes are something else entirely. I rather like the idea of Remakes (though their execution has been... not stellar) as it allows you to re-examine and idea with new insight, different technical capabilities, and more power. A Remake can ultimately offer a very different experience, even if telling the same story with the same characters, as the original...

But a remake is a something very distinct in terms of work involved and end product than a Remaster. A Remaster is a new coat of paint. A Remake is an entirely new house.

i second this

I can see the backlash already.. "why did they remove my dice-roll combat!", "Noo, my hud now has a quest marker!", "hes supposed to wear just one glove!", "this guy only has 2 plates on his table, its supposed to be 3, 3 i tell you! game ruined!"

There is a Morrowind fan remake in the works, but it won't be out for a while. It's called Skywind. Do not talk about the other related projects, Skywind is the only one we're allowed to talk about because they're using entirely new game assets rather than porting Bethesda's models, textures, and so on. I'm actually pretty excited for it.

Let me clarify that I do like remakes like Lach does and for basically the same reasons. Remasters and HD re-releases are a bit different. I don't terribly mind them, but if my original disk still works then I'm probably not going to bother. I already have a functioning disk for Fable: The Lost Chapters, why do I need Fable Anniversary? This isn't a hypothetical question, either; just a couple weeks ago I had a gift card that I got for my birthday and saw Fable Anniversary and the Tomb Raider reboot. I chose the reboot because I was interested in the new take on the series and my old Fable disk still runs just fine.

That said, I still don't think Bethesda will ever remaster any of their games. They still sell just fine as is, so why bother? There's also the fact that they still haven't done it once, despite two of their games no longer running on modern systems. Instead, they just put them up for free and included them in the Anthology with DOSBox pre-prepared. Basically, it would be out of character for Bethesda.

I have no strong personal inclination for or against, but obviously if it were to be done they'd outsource it to another studio under Zenimax (or, potentially, to their new 'B team' in Montreal). BGS would provide a bit of informal counsel, as they did with TESO and Legends, but that'd be all really.

There is certainly a gap in the market for it - Zenimax hasn't quite been able to capitalize on the TES brand outside of the core games despite trying very hard to do so, and something like this would have the advantage of appealing to series devotees and new players equally, plus it would have the air of being a 'legitimate' TES game (which is where games like TESO seemed to fail). Plus it could synergize with Legends just as Fallout: Shelter did with Fallout 4, compounding the marketability of both. And remasters have been faring well financially over the past few years. So from their perspective it'd be a good way to tide over impatient fans for a while.

I'd give a remaster a shot if it looked polished enough, but I don't overly care if it happens or not.

I can understand it if it was a late-gen title that really should have been a next-gen title. GTA V was a perfect example, and you can tell the game really was meant to be a next-gen title just by playing the two different versions. The other case can be made for games that were late-gen titles, and perfectly fine on that gen, but could really really really benefit for the next-gen (The Last of Us is a perfect example of this). That or a really popular series or game that could be easily done and would benefit from not being upscaled. The 2013 remaster of FF7 on Steam, which has made it's way to consoles, was very nice to have with upgraded resolution because playing the original version on HD tv's is worse than playing it on SD tv's.


Those are good reasons to have a remaster.


A Remake though? It's a much wider possibility. Taking you to Final Fantasy 7, it is essentially going to be a new game. Same story, but with much more depth and a more detailed and interactive world. It truly will be a game that practically stands on it's own, at least that it is the concept anyways. Remakes are really though for games that can't be truly remastered anymore and allows a developer to really revision the old game.


Remakes and remasters are not anything new. I play a remaster on my phone all the time. It's called Risk.

I still stand by my earlier post, I don't need a remake, just backwards compatibility. I live in a small combo so multiple game systems are a pain. I don't need a patch or enhanced graphics either.