Personally, I am a yes, I want it so bad for the new consoles and Bioware wouldn't even need to do it, they could pass it off to a company like Bluepoint which specializes in remasters and has had a a lot of success with it.
-
If you mean remastered by not ruining the entire series with such shitty endings, then sure. Otherwise, no.
-
Id rather see bio ware work on a jade empire remade tbh
-
There are some games that should be remastered, and some that shouldn't. God of war 3? No. BioShock trilogy? Yes. Tomb raider? No. Mass effect trilogy? Yes. Gears of war? No. Twilight princess? Yes. Especially the mass effect trilogy, improved frame rates, and fix the combat in the first game. Mass effect and BioShock should be experienced by everyone
-
I mean they really don't need them, Mass effect one has aged, but it hasn't aged badly. And you know they try to change mass effect 1 knowing EA. It would get reload mechanics and remove items and all the things that made ME1 good. Mass effect 2 and 3 didn't age that much so they're fine overall.
-
Yea lets remaster games instead of making new ones.
-
To be honest everything after mass effect 1 was trash but hey that's my opinion.
-
Play it on a PC. Boom, remastered
-
No. Only remaster a game that actually needs a remaster.
-
I'd love it. switched from 360 to ps4 and the 360 is broken so I can't play them anymore
-
Edited by Heroic Vigilant: 3/12/2016 12:16:00 AMPoll is biased Should be Yes No Hell yeah it should, -blam!- all of you haters
-
I'd rather not see that ending again
-
The 3rd one is on the Wii U, so just missing 1&2 to be all on 8th gen XD
-
It's backward comparable on Xbox one. I don't really see a need to
-
Let's see , I have all three only PS3 , I have all three on my 360 and I'll probably have all three on my Xbox one through backwards compatibility , should they be remastered don't see the need but will probably buy it.
-
If they adapt the gunplay in the first one into whatever it will be in Andromeda, that would be fine for me.
-
Edited by Uuv: 3/11/2016 8:27:55 PMI don't necessarily [i][b]want[/b][/i] it to be remastered because I have the original trilogy on 360, and it'll be BC at some point, but I'd probably still buy the trilogy again remastered. So I voted no.
-
Edited by Noctis: 3/11/2016 6:57:34 PMNah. I just want to play as my Turian assassin in ME3 multiplayer. I'd like just having backwards compatibility.
-
Edited by Rylor Threev: 3/11/2016 8:07:34 PMBut there's the backwards system, no need to waste time in a remaster, let bioware focus on Andromeda [spoiler]I just hope they'll give us ME2 and ME3 on the compatibility, I still haven't played enough the DLCs and I have some unfinished challenges on the MP[/spoiler] But if they do it, I'll buy
-
I know it doesn't need remastered but you know what? I'd still buy it regardless
-
Edited by Darth Zannah: 3/11/2016 6:58:25 PMNo, backwards compatibility will do. No sense wasting time on this
-
Who the -blam!- would say no to this?
-
I would bare a child with whoever makes that happen. And I'm a man.
-
No. Not yet at least. Hasn't been that long yet
-
Well, EA will not publish a remaster, as they said it is stupid (or some other words like that). The only remaster of EA that comes to mind is Battlefield 1942. The games are good looking, play well (my favourite game play is with ME1). I bought the trilogy again on my ps3 and just went through it, I have not played since the Citadel DLC came out, on the 360. It is still good. I say no. No use for a remaster.
-
I'd rather have a new title than a remaster. Just make it backwards compatible and move to the next title
-
Don't see why it just can't come back with backwards compatibility