Link's Awakening Remake is fun, but not worth 60 bucks due to lack of content

[Amiablepercy]

Demand dictates everything. I still can't understand why so many gamers still think corporations are their friends and should make pricing decisions based on their consumers wants rather then what their internal research departments have determined the target audience will pay.

 

[Zetta]

Completely agree and honestly after all the framerate issues I couldn't even finish it. I was hoping on a patch to fix at least some of it but I guess thats never going to happen.

 

[Efejota]

I remember some people complaining that the extra seashells, bottles and heart containers just felt like padding, so I guess the best route would have been a second playthrough like you suggested. The Eternal Night idea seems interesting as it could have made everyone have different dialogues alluding to it, or even lead up to a different final battle (like the connected Oracle games).

As for the dungeon builder... it would have been awesome if they explored Skyward's idea of a dungeon that you needed rearrange to progress, but using existing rooms and not being able to share them online seems like a waste.

 

[Deleted member 5127]

I loved the game, I thought its length was fine, not every game needs to be a 50 hour campaign.

It's just 60$ for everything with Nintendo. 3DS games were 40$ and many Switch games still feel like they are in that price range, yet they just charge 50% more because people buy anyway.

Click to shrink...

3DS was a super low resolution console which resulted in cheaper to produce graphics/art assets.

 

[Issen]

They didn't even bother to patch the glitchy framerate.

Click to shrink...

This is what actually bothers me about the remake, not the content to price ratio.

 

[Cudpug]

I wouldn't question the price from a content point of view - it's a fine game and a complete adventure.

Where I would question the price is with the frame rate, which many have mentioned and really has no right being as bad as it is. With BotW running as well as it does, Link's Awakening's performance is pretty embarrassing. I do expect better from Nintendo, especially on a flagship franchise like Zelda.

 

[olimpia84]

It's a full game with remade graphics and minor additions to the original. I see nothing wrong with this being a $60 game.

 

[Aprikurt]

It's so well done though. Like it could have performed a little smoother, but it's a really nice remake.

 

[Gold Arsene]

It's a full game with remade graphics and minor additions to the original. I see nothing wrong with this being a $60 game.

Click to shrink...

Not even when the original was a very short game from a handheld three gens ago?

 

[Lord Azrael]

I haven't played the remake, just the original, but... it's still like a 15 hour game isn't it? That seems perfectly fine length to me. But I agree that it should not be anywhere close to full price on account of being a remake that barely adds anything new

 

[HouseAR]

that is a very bad remake for me as well, including tech details like framerate.

 

[Nickerous]

Links Awakening is one of my favorite Zelda games, but I agree. The Dampe stuff isn't enough to justify the $60 price tag

 

[Raiden]

People talking about this remake like they just had to copy paste some code and add a HD filter.

I'll agree with the shameless Wii U ports not being worth 60, but this one I felt was justified.

 

[olimpia84]

Not even when the original was a very short game from a handheld three gens ago?

Click to shrink...

I can't remember but I think I clocked between 10 to 15 hours to finish the game on the Switch (closer to 15 from what I remember). Not sure what you consider short but I've paid full price and played many games much shorter than this one.

 

[Gold Arsene]

I can't remember but I think I clocked between 10 to 15 hours to finish the game on the Switch (closer to 15 from what I remember). Not sure what you consider short but I've paid full price and played many games much shorter than this one.

Click to shrink...

When it's direct competition is BotW and Hyrule Warriors for the same exact price, yeah I think it's short.

 

[spicynun]

*Nintendo ports three Mario games for collection*: "Not worth, they should've remade it from the ground up"

*Nintendo remakes Link's Awakening from the ground up*: "Not worth, needs more content"

 

[JuniperAndSage]

This isn't a coin-operated horsie ride. You're not paying by the minute.

 

[Gold Arsene]

*Nintendo ports three Mario games for collection*: "Not worth, they should've remade it from the ground up"

*Nintendo remakes Link's Awakening from the ground up*: "Not worth, needs more content"

Click to shrink...

Different people value different things, who knew?

For the record I'm mostly fine with 3D All-Stars pricing.

 

[CNoodles]

I really enjoyed the game and got about 15 hours out of it. I think it's worth it. It's a remake of an old ass game boy game, u know what your getting there is no excuses.

 

[The Real Abed]

I got it for $50 from Walmart. Beat it three times. Once normally, once without dying and once on Hero Mode. Maybe 4 times? I don't remember because last fall was like 20 years ago. I did enough of the Dampé stuff in my first play through to get the rewards. That's all I needed. I want to play again but I'll have to delete one of my saves and I'm sad.

 

[Beamerball]

I was fine with the scope of the game but I just wish wish wish it ran more smoothly.

 

[Zool]

I paid 60 euro with love. The effort was enough. Of course it could be longer, but in the end I spend 30 hours with the game which is really cheap entertainment.

But.... on the other side the Mario collection brings more hours but with absolutely no effort. Therefore I won't spend 60 on that abomination.

 

[thomasmahler]

It's worth 60$ due to quality.

 

[demondance]

I'd defend this game as a complete product if it wasn't for the framerate. That's unacceptable.

$60 later the definitive version of this game should not be a GBC remaster.

 

[dabri]

It's a great game. Not $60 great especially with its problems.
They should have just stuck with the screen transitions if it meant not having the horrible loading issues

 

[Kcoe27400]

I have no problem paying $60 when the game is really good. Ive bought more than enough bad games eith tons of content for $60 . So at this point if the games good im fine. I enjoyed my time with this enough to justify the price, but yeah compared to the most recent 2d zelda link between worlds this was ontop of being short didnt have as much extra stuff to do. Wish they had added more side stuff outside of that bad dungeon maker.

 

[Mauricio_Magus]

The only problem I have with the game is the horrible peformance.

 

[Deleted member 32005]

jesus, not every game needs to be always-online open-world 200 hour campaign GaaS titles.

i for one enjoy games that you can beat. 15h is plenty. i can beat uncharted two, metroid prime, and halo CE quicker than it took me to beat LA. relax.

 

[Nickerous]

But, then again, I didn't pay $60 for it. There are options to get games for less than $60 at launch. Hoping to get Mario all stars and hyrule warriors age of calamity for $50 each.

 

[Deleted member 42484]

This conversation was beaten to death from announcement up until release, but it's worth noting still. It might be the most egregious cost Nintendo has charged, moreso than the Mario collection and all the higher priced WiiU remasters.

My main issue though is the framerate. My hope is that it is unlocked so that the Switch Pro will run it at a clean 60fps, but I still think it needed a locked 30 mode or something.

 

[JoelStinty]

It's a great remake of a great game. 15 hours is fine and I wish more games were that length, means I'm more likely to replay them. Never felt short changed with it.

 

[Worldshaker]

I paid $55 at launch for it because it's the best Zelda game, and one of my personal favorites of all time. There was no way I was going to wait.

That being said I do feel like it was lacking some polish, and I understand people thinking it wasn't worth full price.

 

[Deleted member 13091]

It was worth every penny. I enjoyed it much more than botw, which wastes a lot of time with filler.

 

[purseowner]

They didn't even bother to patch the glitchy framerate.

Click to shrink...

This is the real problem.

 

[Forerunner]

I had no problems paying $60 for it, I enjoyed it thoroughly. It's quite obvious that a lot of work went into it and it wasn't just a cash grab.

 

[Leo]

*Nintendo ports three Mario games for collection*: "Not worth, they should've remade it from the ground up"

*Nintendo remakes Link's Awakening from the ground up*: "Not worth, needs more content"

Click to shrink...

Now that the work is done, they should remake the Oracle games in the same engine and sell them as a double pack for 60 dollars, that would be good value.

But I have a hunch they won't.

 

[BaconHat]

Now that the work is done, they should remake the Oracle games in the same engine and sell them as a double pack for 60 dollars, that would be good value.

But I have a hunch they won't.

Click to shrink...

That would be the best thing ever.

 

[60fps]

So Link's Awakening is on sale for 39,99 on US/EU eShop now. This is an appropriate price in my opinion and you should buy it.

The game is good and pretty fun while it lasts. But it's a one and done affair. It feels small and constrained, because it is a classic handheld game after all. It doesn't last long and once you finished it one time, you have seen pretty much everything it has to offer.

They did a good job of remaking every aspect of it imo, except the music. The tracks are few, short and get stale fast. It's one of the weakest Zelda games in terms of music.

 

[Vitet]

So Link's Awakening is on sale for 39,99 on US/EU eShop now. This is an appropriate price in my opinion and you should buy it.

The game is good and pretty fun while it lasts. But it's a one and done affair. It feels small and constrained, because it is a classic handheld game after all. It doesn't last long and once you finished it one time, you have seen pretty much everything it has to offer.

They did a good job of remaking every aspect of it imo, except the music. The tracks are few, short and get stale fast. It's one of the weakest Zelda games in terms of music.

Click to shrink...

I really appreciate the approach of the game music, 8-bit Music Theory explains it very well:


But it's true that it seems there's not much music added.

And as I said already ITT, if they would patch the framerate problem, I for sure would replay it again, but I don't think they will do it.

 

[Marcus Aurelius]

Also that framerate.....Unforgivable for a game like that which isn't graphically intensive at all.

 

[Forkball]

I love Link's Awakening and playing the remake last year made me realize that the design doesn't feel outdated at all. That said, it takes about 15 hours to 100% it which is pretty short for a full priced title. I like to at least get 20 hours for a game I pay $60 for although this is just an arbitrary rule of mine. Though I used the voucher so I only paid $50. Though going by my preference I should get one hour per $3... which means LA should be $45 not $50. I got ripped off!

 

[Bucéfalo]

Generally speaking, I don't care if a game costs 20, 40 or 60 bucks. If there is a game I want to play, I'll buy it. I also played the original Link's Awakening back then.


That said, after finishing Link's Awakening Remake, this was the only game in years from which I thought its price is simply too much.

The game is rather short, but that's absolutely fine. It lacks content however. This is a very linear one-and-done kind of game. Once the credits rolled I felt like I have seen the whole deal. No replay value whatsoever. The few variables that are there (collectibles, bonus dungeon, dungeon editor, hard mode, special ending) are either short or don't offer anything meaningful to change that. Link's Awakening feels very small-scale to me. And of course it does; at its core this is a handheld game from 27 years ago. The new look, sound, controls don't change that.

While it lasts the game is good fun, with sweet graphics, a mysterious story and fluid, polished gameplay (soundtrack feels limited and gets stale, though). But it doesn't last long, and when it's over it doesn't give you incentive to keep playing or to start over. Breath of the Wild or Xenoblade Chronicles 2 are also 60 bucks games but offer completely different dimensions of content.

I feel they could have easily added a few variables to improve replayability, though. Off the top of my head:

• New Game Plus with mixed up content like different enemy or treasure placement
• A mirrored world
• A "dark mode" where the whole game happens at night and new spooky, ghost-type enemies invade the island
• Time trial options with ranking systems to encourage speedruns
• Rewards based on your completion time
• Maybe some rogue-like mode

As it is however, I feel like for this kind of game - small scale, short, linear - 40 bucks would be just right.

TL;DR:
At its core, Link's Awakening feels like a linear, small-scale handheld game, and the remake doesn't feature enough content compared to what you might be used to for 60 bucks. Not every game has to be long, but even short games can offer different kinds of content to increase replay value to give you more for your money.

If you have 60 bucks to spend and want only decent bang-for-your-buck, this game is not a good choice.

Click to shrink...

Link's Awakening DX is my favourite GB/GBC/GBA game (along with Oracles), and I couldn't agree more. If you already played the OG there is virtually nothing new that this remake has to offer, it is an actual 1:1 remake. The only change was replacing the camera guy with one of the most boring minigames I remember.

I ended up selling it and just played it on my PC, since I was able to get locked 60FPS and remove the blur effect. The frame drops in the Switch were atrocious.

 

[giapel]

Just my 2 cents on the length argument:
I can replay a short game with no padding multiple times if the core gameplay is fun.
I struggle to replay lengthy games with extra bloat. So in the long run, a short game may provide more value.
Please don't ask developers to pad their games to justify full price.

 

[sanstesy]

The game takes 15-20 hours to finish/complete which is completely normal for a lot of $60 games out there. Some, like Resident Evil 2, are even shorter and that's still completely fine.

 

[Plasma]

The length was fine for me, it was the frame rate I had issues with.

 

[Farmboy]

I was hoping for a detour partway through (like the colour dungeon in DX, but more substantial) or some sort of post-game twist where you go off and do more stuff ala Donkey Kong '94, but alas.

I can't even say it's the definitive Link's Awakening experience because of the technical problems.

It's not bad, it just feels like a wasted opportunity, especially as a full price release.

Click to shrink...

That's actually not a bad comparison as Link's Awakening is older now than Donkey Kong was in '94.

In 1994, they recognized that full price games had moved on, and so added a ton of stuff. The least they could have done is lower Link's Awakenings price.

I do realize the comparison falls flat as Link's Awakening has aged far better than Donkey Kong ever did. It's still one of my favorite Zelda's! But in an age where games like Hollow Knight and Ori cost a third of the price, it's hard to justify.

 

[jdawg]

Didn't realise so many people consider 15 hours to be short for a game. Generally speaking I don't want games to be longer than that. Certainly don't want them to pad games to reach an arbitrary number.

 

[KernelC]

Also that framerate.....Unforgivable for a game like that which isn't graphically intensive at all.

Click to shrink...

the worst part is they didn't even bother to patch it, one year later and still nothing

 

[Jon God]

I have no problem paying full price for a remake of a short game....

But I already own Link's Awakening and I didn't really see anything here that made me want to rebuy it. The art style was... what it was. It didn't speak to me. The dungeon creation was.... there...

And then there's technical issues. I'll stick to the DX version on GBA via the eShop on 3DS for now.

 

[60fps]

The game takes 15-20 hours to finish/complete which is completely normal for a lot of $60 games out there. Some, like Resident Evil 2, are even shorter and that's still completely fine.

Click to shrink...

RE2 is a cinematic blockbuster with different player characters, bonus modes, unlockables, New Game Plus and lots of replay value. Link's Awakening is a small scale handheld game. Which is absolutely ok - but not for 60 bucks. It's of the exact same scale as A Link Between Worlds, a classic 40 bucks handheld game.

Just my 2 cents on the length argument:
I can replay a short game with no padding multiple times if the core gameplay is fun.
I struggle to replay lengthy games with extra bloat. So in the long run, a short game may provide more value.
Please don't ask developers to pad their games to justify full price.

Click to shrink...

I don't think the features I proposed (without giving them much thought) would bloat the game in any way to distract from the base experience:

• New Game Plus with mixed up content like different enemy or treasure placement
• A mirrored world
• A "dark mode" where the whole game happens at night and new spooky, ghost-type enemies invade the island
• Time trial options with ranking systems to encourage speedruns
• Rewards based on your completion time
• Maybe some rogue-like mode

Click to shrink...

If you don't like the options, just ignore them. People here tend to say "Options are good", right?

Especially "Mirror Modes", they did them for several Zeldas now. Would have been a no-brainer in my opinion.

Completely agree and honestly after all the framerate issues I couldn't even finish it. I was hoping on a patch to fix at least some of it but I guess thats never going to happen.

Click to shrink...

I feel like the framerate has very predictable dips, but is mostly smooth 60fps. It didn't bother me at all (and look at my username).

Didn't realise so many people consider 15 hours to be short for a game. Generally speaking I don't want games to be longer than that. Certainly don't want them to pad games to reach an arbitrary number.

Click to shrink...

Not talking length but lack of content, see above.