Is it better to just play the updated versions of games?

[bloodybaron]

Not sure if anyone asked this before or not, but I played persona 3 and got like 20 hours in then I picked up Persona 3 FES by chance and decided to suck it up and just start over with FES for more content.  I'm glad I did because even in the amount I played I could see they really added a lot and it was a bit like a new game again.  My question is for example, is it better just to play something like Skies of Arcadia Legends right off the bat, or play the original and the updated one to see what they added and changed?  Or are additions usually miniscule so it's cooler just to know you played the original?  The main one I'm curious about right now is tales of symphonia.  I wanted to play it on the gamecube, but with the updated one on ps3 I'm not sure what to do.  I love added content, but I'm not sure if it's really worth it to always play the ones they changed.  Any opinions?

[maximo310]

I usually pick up either version depending on its price and if I have the console to play it on. Then I will pick up the other version later on to compare the changes made to the game.

[MJMaranan]

As for Skies Of Arcadia, I believe the original is more difficult because I couldn't grind as much as I wanted to in the original compared to the remake.  This puts a damper on my money-making efforts, which extends to my usual habit of collecting every weapon in my inventory considering how I play RPGs.  Quest-wise, they are about the same since certain quests were removed from the original to the remake and fitted with a few new ones.  Depends on what you think is good or bad.  In this case, I definitely prefer Skies Of Arcadia on the Dreamcast considering that Pinta's Quest on the VMU is a pretty cool mini-game which does supplement the income.

As for picking either or both versions, there's definitely some bragging rights to owning the original but then again, there are some fun added-content found on the remake of certain games.  Bionic Commando: Re-Armed and Strider HD, in my opinion, are worth picking up.  Kingdom Hearts HD I.5 Remix does give you the Final Mix version of the game, which was exclusive-only to Japan, from what I heard.  I was also a fan of the original Flashback: Quest For Identity but I heard the remake is horrible.

Sorry for rambling...  Hope you enjoy whichever choice you make.

[bobster]

As for Skies Of Arcadia, I believe the original is more difficult because I couldn't grind as much as I wanted to in the original compared to the remake.  This puts a damper on my money-making efforts, which extends to my usual habit of collecting every weapon in my inventory considering how I play RPGs.  Quest-wise, they are about the same since certain quests were removed from the original to the remake and fitted with a few new ones.  Depends on what you think is good or bad.  In this case, I definitely prefer Skies Of Arcadia on the Dreamcast considering that Pinta's Quest on the VMU is a pretty cool mini-game which does supplement the income.

I thought the only difference in combat was that the original's encounter rate was higher... like way higher.

Granted I don't own the Gamecube version so I have nothing to actually compare it to. I just remember getting into random encounters a ton.

[soera]

I havent played too many updated versions of games but one huge example comes to mind for me. Final fantasy NES vs any other version. I played the hell out of FF NES when I was younger. Probably beat the game 4-5 times over. Once it came out on another system (PS1), I bought it cause it also had FF2 on the same disk and really wanted to play that one as well. I eventually started up the PS1 version of the game and now that I did, I can not stomach playing the NES version anymore. Everything that was done wrong on the NES version was fixed on the re-releases. Since that time, Ive played through the entire game on the GBA and on the PS1 and will not look back. I remember trying out FFX on the PS2 when it released and it was a horrible time for me. I recently found the updated version on the PS3 for a deal I couldnt say no to and bought it. I want to give it a try to see if I was missing something the first time. I really hope I was.

To make a long story short, from my limited experience, its worth it to give the updated/enhanced versions of games a try.

[razorbeamz]

It depends on how much is changed in the update and why it's changed. HD remakes (for example, Shadow of the Colossus HD) are almost always superior, while complete re-imaginings are hit and miss.

[burningdoom]

If there's actually changes to the gameplay (and it's a game I enjoy, of course), I'll get the updated version (like Resident Evil Remake or Metroid Zero Mission), but just a straight port or simply a new coat of paint, nope, not paying for it again.

[dashv]

Competely depends on the game. I'm currently playing Ratchet and Clank HD remastered for the PS3.

I never owned the originals and now that I can play them upscaled on the PS3 in stereoscopic 3D I will definitely never bother with the originals.

[MJMaranan]

I thought the only difference in combat was that the original's encounter rate was higher... like way higher.

Granted I don't own the Gamecube version so I have nothing to actually compare it to. I just remember getting into random encounters a ton.

It's been different with my brother's and my playthrough of the game but then again, encounter rates aren't really the problem, it's the money.  Takes a bit of gameplay to actually start accumulating gold.

Also, I just remembered I bought Final Fantasy VI Advance a few years ago.  I enjoyed that the screen looked crisp rather than compared to the PlayStation port, but I still enjoy my PlayStation copy because I was don't prefer the rename of some Espers and some minor changes.

[desocietas]

I think it definitely depends on the game.

I've also heard that FES was better than the original 3, but I have also heard that the updated portable PSP version of FES isn't as good as the PS2 version.  It really depends on the player, I'd say.

I try to do a little research usually to see what the changes are in a game and see if I might benefit from playing one over the other.  Sometimes it's also just nice to play both and see the differences for yourself

I'm currently choosing to play the original Etrian Odyssey over the updated one (Untold) because I want to see how the series develops over time.  I plan on playing EO Untold after I play through all the others.

[abe]

I've also heard that FES was better than the original 3, but I have also heard that the updated portable PSP version of FES isn't as good as the PS2 version.  It really depends on the player, I'd say.

I actually enjoyed Persona 3 Portable. It is missing some things that FES has, but it does have a couple things that FES doesn't. In P3P you can choose the gender of the protagonist, which doesn't have a huge impact on the story but does change things noticeably. You also have full control over your party members' actions in battle. I believe that wasn't in either the original version or FES.

[disgaeniac]

Short answer = usually 

[dashv]

Super Mario All-Stars is another good example.

SMB 1 is no doubt better looking and sounding in SMAS. But you can't pull off some of the glitches like world -1 and small fire power Mario.

No way my collection will be missing either.

Kingdom Hearts 1 (CIB) I am actually about to part with on the other hand because I picked up a CIB copy of KH 1.5 HD Remix (from a fellow VGCollect member actually) and it's vastly superior to the original KH in every way.