I don't approve of a single change either, but for me we might be at the point where I just replay the original instead. It's a shame, though, as the new framerate and textures still look good and are so enticing.
Game of Thrones moved from being a book to being a TV show. The mediums are entirely different. It literally had to change. MM3d is not at all the same situation, as demonstrated by the perfectly respectful treatment of its sister game, OoT.
Couldn't agree more. The fact that there are people who think the game was tedious in any way amazes me, and the fact that Nintendo has catered to these people rather than the fans saddens me. The ice arrow change shows exactly who this game is for.
"Having fun with the tools given to you in video games is sad"
Anyway, there's definitely an argument / thread to be made about what a remaster is supposed to be. I've always thought the idea was the hew as closely to the original as possible. A remake is something entirely different. Resident Evil and Zero Mission are remakes. The Last of Us PS4 was a remaster. GTAV might be the best remaster I've ever played. OoT3D was a remaster.
I wonder if they'd removed ammo scarcity in TLOU would people have had an issue with it? "Jeeze guys, it makes the game more accessible, and you can use whatever weapon you actually like now. Options are good, if you don't like it, don't pick up the extra ammo. 95% of the game is still the exact same, it's still TLOU." To me it would be a travesty, it'd be a different game and therefore a poor remaster.
If this is the purist argument, then mark me down as a bonafide purist. If they wanted to remake the game, I wouldn't mind (but would still be disappointed with the changes), but for a remaster this just doesn't seem right. I'm amazed at how unpopular this viewpoint seems to be in this thread, I really am.