What are some video game myths that people still parrot despite plenty of evidence that points towards the opposite?

>Digital Foundry: So thinking of that, let's say you start a new project. You get this original codebase and you do a lot of work with Japanese games. I mean, is this all commented out in Japanese? Are you working in assembler code for PS2? Or what kind of languages are these titles written in?
>Peter Dalton: It's a little funny that one of our most prized pieces of technology is to basically take all of the comments that are in the C++ code and convert them to English. That tool has paid for itself more than once.
eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2018-shadow-of-the-colossus-tech-interview
This fragment implies that they use it in a regular basis:
>That tool has paid for itself more than once.

Source code doesn't have a resolution:
>"We always try to get the data from the retail disc [and] reverse engineer the formats," says Thrush. "That way, we have a 100% known data set that we can use to replicate the original game." Source code archives, he explains, often don’t match the final shipped assets. One need only look at the problems encountered by Konami during production of the Silent Hill HD Collection for a demonstration of these risks; the archived code with which the team worked came from an incomplete, buggy beta.
>Last minute changes made on local drives or build machines often escape the backup process, making the retail data an attractive starting point. If the original studio can supply higher-resolution assets, the remastering team can match these up and swap them in later.
polygon.com/features/2015/11/30/9790028/video-game-ports-remasters-the-last-of-us

>recompile source code with zero changes
>remake assets with cookie cooker art station front page aesthetic
>sell for full price, drive original onto the gray market
Another slam dunk from Bluepoint! Thank you for all you do good sirs!

I mean these definitely say they use source code at times but it doesn't really prove that they always do. I'm not trying to be difficult here but i don't really think this disproves what I said. I do appreciate the sources though.

>recompile source code with zero changes
To be fair, compiling old console source code can be a fucking bitch. Comparing the archived assets with the retail assets is also not an easy work.

I've never heard anybody say that before

There's one guy in this very thread.

>"Bluepoint Games reverse engineers retail copies instead of using the original source code".
That's a thing?

Its super common knowledge and hasn't been refuted.

No. Reverse engineering PS2-era games is extremely fucking hard, especially if you don't have debug symbols. Exceptions to this are games that are 90% scripted instead of compiled.

It has been. They literally said in the Polygon interview that they only extract the assets. Source code does not have a resolution, assets do however.

>Digital Foundry: What was the extent of the core material you had to work with from Naughty Dog?
>Marco Thrush: We had the shipped disk images, access to all source code and all source data that still remained available at this point.
eurogamer.net/digitalfoundry-2015-the-making-of-uncharted-the-nathan-drake-collection

Attached: 313789-uncharted-the-nathan-drake-collection-playstation-4-front-cover.jpg (800x800, 97.27K)

Bluepoint is based

No I mean people believing that.

Yes.

>>"We always try to get the data from the retail disc
>data
Unless you just didn't put it here that implies a lot more than just "assets".

despite that they still fucked up
amazing

>Unless you just didn't put it here
I post the sources for a reason.

>If the original studio can supply higher-resolution assets, the remastering team can match these up and swap them in later.
>higher-resolution assets
Like I said before, source code does not have a resolution. It is exclusively about graphical assets.

>if they can
>if
That doesn't sound like a requirement.