Sources have told VGC that Sony is reportedly working on a Horizon Zero Dawn remaster for the PlayStation 5. Originally released for the PS4 in 2017 Guerilla Games’ epic post-apocalyptic open world title went on to be released on PC in 2020 with some added features such as DLSS/FSR and support for high refresh rate displays but was believed to have reused the original assets.
The next installment, Horizon Forbidden West, was released in 2022 for both PS4/PS5. The PS5 physical edition became the 2nd highest game launch for Sony in the U.K. and the Horizon Zero Dawn remaster could see visuals such as lighting, animations, and character models updated to match those created for the PS5 version of Horizon Forbidden West. The suggestion that improved lighting is on the table could mean that the remaster may make use of the PS5’s ray tracing ability. It is also believed there will be added accessibility features, gameplay, and quality of life improvements added to the game. These could include more graphics mode options since the PC version launched with only partial ultrawide support and the PS5 recently received support for 1440p.
This would not be the first time that Sony Interactive Entertainment has done a remaster to upgrade a game for its newest console. VGC has reached out to SIE for comment and PC players are no doubt curious as to if a remaster would find its way over the same way that Spider-Man Remastered did. PC players are of course also eagerly waiting to see if/when the next installment will cross over.
More Horizon projects are in the works
Meanwhile, Sony and Guerilla Games are said to be expanding the Horizon franchise. From a multiplayer project to a television series, there are multiple projects believed to be in the works, not to mention the current series of games is a planned trilogy so there’s still one more game left to complete the current story.
Source: VGC
Discussion (9 replies)
Join Discussion →Probably to bring it closer to what the pc could do.
Aren't you getting tired of "remasters" ? I know I am.
Have to admit, I kinda am.
I think remasters of those 15-20+ year old games are ... acceptable, depending on how it's done. But one that's 5 years old? There's not a generation between what it was originally developed on and what it's being remastered for.
Now, if they just wanted to provide a patch that improved graphics for folks, a big PS5 update -- I'd even be willing to accept a modest charge for something like that -- $5 or 10 maybe. But to remaster it, for what I am almost certain will jack back up to retail price, with no consideration for previous owners -- that's just a money grab.
FFXV got a high resolution texture pack for free - and I know it's not the only one, just the only one I can think of off the top of my head. Many games got PS5 edition upgrades for either $10 or free.
I kind of like them, if they're priced decently. Upgrade the visuals for new hardware, give you a reason to playthrough again (if it's a game you liked), and so on.
Nope, but maybe that's because they don't remaster much that I actually play, only ones that come to mind for me are last of us remaster, and I never played the original as I did not get a PS3.
And some version of spioderman for the PS5 I got with miles morales for an extra 10€
Remasters were never a thing before the PS4, you didn't see a bunch of PS2 games "remastered" for PS3.
It's only last gen they realized they can squeeze more money without zero creative risks.
If it's a game that you haven't played in a few years the remaster won't seem all that better, since your memory of the original is an idealized version. I felt this all the way back when I played my first remaster I can remember: Chronicles of Riddick. I couldn't tell that I'm playing an updated version, it seemed like the same old game. Of course after launching the original I realized there is actually a huge difference, but it wasn't apparent until then. Same with ME:Legendary edition. It was at least 5 years since I last played the triology so when I got the remaster I could barely feel any upgrade.
That is why I'd rather game devs put all their resources into new and exciting projects, let the past be the past. Unless it is a remake, like RE2 / RE3 that is completely rebuilt from the ground up with new gameplay, I'm not interested.
I think remasters should be a free upgrade for owners of the original game or at least a minimal-charge option. I do think the label is being overused though. @Brian_B reminded me how yeah, it used to be we might see a texture upgrade here and there, and then we moved on and it didn't necessarily trigger a remaster release. Metro trilogy, Skyrim (not talking about all the re-releases that came after the texture pack), Shadow of Mordor, and FF were all examples of this along with more that I can't remember. It was a nice bonus when those happened. Occasionally a new build was rolled out, or something similar, again Metro Exodus, the last 2 Tomb Raider games, and then all of the recent Resident Evil games had significant changes years after their first release to update them to newer hardware. If I remember correctly all of those were free for owners of the original games or at least heavily discounted.
Now granted Sony/GG may be planning to also update the character models and animations along with some added features which is a bit more than just a new texture pack. However, should it be considered a full-blown remaster? Probably not and I do agree it's a bit more of a double dip but I still would want them to do it. As I've constantly upgraded my rigs it's nearly always been nice to replay a game and see it take advantage of tech that came out years later but on the flipside you're always going to have opposing views with some who liked it before and some who prefer the new.
I also agree that it's probably wiser for devs to focus more on new projects since most studios have very limited resources but I also feel these days that there's so much going on that it's nice for a fan of a game to feel supported as new tech comes out but it shouldn't always be at the expense of a full-priced new purchase. From RT to now three different upscale methods which then have generational support issues, two UW aspect ratios, HDR and 3-D audio, direct storage or whatever special Intel/AMD/NV/DX related features, and who-knows-what other bells and whistles there is a lot to cover these days for hardware support that people can nitpick over and as consoles get closer to PC it's also becoming more of an issue with newer console launches.
Nintendo has been milking that cow for .. ever basically.
Well, there is a reason I consider nintendo the worst of the worst. People bash EA and Ubisoft, but I think Nintendo is way worse. And I never were a fan of their IPs anyway.