Re-make, Re-master, Re-gret

[ATenderLad]

This might ruffle some feathers but if I'm being honest, I kind of hate what this remake/remaster trend has done to the perception of older games. Don't get me wrong, I love seeing classic games being brought back but there's something about the way these games are being brought back that bothers me.

Whether it's a full remake or a remaster, I feel like there's this widespread mindset amongst both developers and players that older games don't have value as they are and need to be updated whether it be graphically or mechanically to fit modern standards in order to justify re-releasing them.

I feel like a lot of games would benefit greatly from just a resolution bump, an improved frame rate and better load times but for a lot of people that doesn't seem to be enough so instead we get all these projects that completely overhaul the graphics and sound or change the gameplay in some way. At a certain point when you make so many changes I feel like you start to lose something.

I'm half-interested in remakes, if only because Capcom is good at it, but certainly the major problem is that all these old games are leveraged as IP for potential revenue streams, with no official preservation effort to speak of.

There was this weirdly cool moment, when all the major movie streaming services started up, where they all offered a repository of sorts for most of their films. Paramount Plus had shit I'd never seen, and hundred year old films like some of the Frank L Baum production company Wizard of Oz movies. (I mean, they weren't good, but still!) It only took a few months for them all to realize they weren't making money, and panicked and had to start licensing out all of their content to anyone who would buy it, but what a vision of the future that felt like.

We'll never see a library or repository like that for games for about the same reason, no profit incentive, but it's more painful in this case; old gaming hardware breaks down and the software designed for it can't be transferred or adapted without serious effort, as opposed to watching film the same way we always have. (Or at least, since the nickelodeons on the boardwalks fell out of vogue.)

 

[Kesolr]

i'll be perfectly fair with remakes and discuss both ends of the equations.

I Believe that despite all the additions in terms of content and adapting the combat of Zero (which is one of the best of the series) Yakuza Kiwami is a very bad remake over-all in terms of quality and how much it bends over backwards to re-write the game's story just to make the player enjoy the Majima Everywhere system (which gets old very fast once you get the upgrades), it feels more like an expansion pack for Zero (and by its original price point of 29.99, it might as well be) that an actual remake, it doesn't help every single moveset for the bosses is re-used from previous boss fights from the whole series, i won't deny RGG Studio is very well known for reusing content to keep their development pace reasonable, but it honestly felt way lazier that their usual output, which i guess it makes sense since they adapted the original game so to get newcomers up to speed.

you could argue is good to keep newcomers welcomed, but the original PS2 games has its unique vibes and charm while also making its combat had a great escalation from going from a weak Kiryu, to basically able to block bullets if you take your time with your game and do most of its content, which is why i usually recommend emulate the original game above playing Kiwami, Kiwami feels like just another part of Zero, albeit with more annoying progression and with some overtuned boss fights that are way harder that the original game (Jingu).

On the flip side, there are Remakes that not only pay tribute to the original, they right down look it with reverence, which leads me to discuss the System Shock remake, i play the original before even digging the remake, which i already loved despite being extremely old (hacking being hard to see or the music giving me a headache as minor issues), it felt like a timeless game even with its unique control scheme, you could easily see how it is the foundation to most immersive sims, so, the remake had extremely gigantic shoes to fill, but Nightdive knew the job and they deliver it, Citadel Station is so vibrant and full of life, while also keeping the cool hidden secrets from the original, gameplay wise, it felt like a culminations of every innovation previous immersive sims have done, coming together for this remake, recycle materials for your benefit, upgrading weapons, unique puzzles to deal with and revamping the hacking into something else entirely, they even gave SHODAN a more unique boss fight to give more finality to the game.

if i could nitpick it, I'll admit i preferred Edward Diego being this smarmy car salesman being way over his head with SHODAN over this generic evil CEO who becomes a true believer of SHODAN's plight, but in exchange, he actually became an actual boss fight instead of an easy to miss enemy.

You win some, you lose some with remakes, its all a matter whenever the dev team is full immersed on doing an impactful game or just a quick buck to get the newcomers up to speed.

(Also REmake 3 is really bad, how did you fuck up Nemesis when all you had to do was model swap Mr. X, jesus christ capcom, you really just wanted to get to REmake 4 and fast)

 

[Pockets]

This would feel truer if the games didn't consistently review and sell well. The unfortunate truth is that if Capcom just rereleased Resident Evil 2 it would not have made as much money as the remake did. Same for FF7R, same for MGS3 or Silent Hill 2.

Hell, if you just poke around gaming spaces online you just see people constantly complaining about dormant IPs or begging old IP to come back. While our shitty market incentives definitely drive companies to want to make franchises out of everything, that's mainly because consumers unfortunately signal with their wallets and words over and over again that what they really want is just for every franchise they love to be an infinite sequel mill. Every few years they just want another entry in whatever they grew up loving. A franchise ending or - even worse - being a one-off thing is seen as some sort of betrayal. People will ignore the reality that there are far more IP in existence than there are talented dev studios willing to take these games on or even time in the year to release them all without them cannibalizing each other.

And I don't think they really care, because really, they just want moremoremore!

It is depressing as an attitude but it also extends to remakes and remasters. There are countless games that people will refuse to play even if it is available because it looks to old or the controls are "out of date" or the game has "aged bad" (a phrase I think is never true fwiw). They don't wanna play a fixed camera horror game with tank controls or intentionally janky combat. They want a Silent Hill 2 remake that is over the shoulder and plays just as smoothly as every other over the shoulder action game released in the last decade. Now that they have it, they'll ignore the original 2 even harder. It is truly a shame.

This 100%.

There's a tendency for people to just look at something and say it's too old without even taking the time to engage with it. These remakes and remasters are often viewed as replacements for the originals in the eyes of many. Ask anyone how you should play the Yakuza games and they'll always tell you Kiwami 1 and 2, then 3. They never say to play the originals because they're seen as "old and clunky" and they're inaccessible.

I wouldn't mind as much if there was a decent effort to keep these old versions available but there usually isn't and often times I'd much rather just have new games in their place.

I love RE7 and 8, and I think the RE2 and 3 remakes are good games but compared to the originals I feel they do a lot of things worse. RE2 is missing like half the content and the zapping system that justified the existence of the multiple scenarios. I might be in the minority on this but I actually found myself enjoying RE3 a lot more than RE2. I still found myself disappointed when comparing it to the original (especially with how they botched Nemesis), but I feel like because it was so different I was able to enjoy it more as it's own thing.

Ultimately, I feel like all the effort that goes into these remakes would've been better spent on entirely new projects that could be judged entirely on their own merit. Instead of all these remakes we could be getting iterative sequels or spin-offs every few years that improve on things gradually similar to how it was back with RE1, 2, 3, Code Veronica and so on.

At the very least I wish these remakes were seen less as replacements for old games and more as a new take on or a supplement to the original. Like for how much I'm bashing remakes I don't entirely hate them and can have fun with them.

 

[Somnia]

I think the industry has evolved with remakes. There are far less "HD remasters" and I think many forget just how bad they were back in the day. Devil May Cry HD Collection wasn't that great. Most were rushed and lazy ports. God of War Collection for Vita was atrocious. All of the HD ports of Jak & Daxter and Ratchet & Clank ran terribly on the Vita. Many were just "upscale this to 720p/1080p and call it a day". Poor optimization, no extra content, and with no excuse. We have come a long way.

It is certainly true that in many ways it could be worse, but I do think that comparing dumpster fire Vita ports isn't the fairest way to make the point. Definitely true that many PS2 games struggled to get decent conversions on the PS3/360 due to the ports being lazily handled though. The biggest shame is that many of these games simply aren't properly preserved even today. Silent Hill 2 was remade but the original remains out of reach in a decent state unless you use mods for the PC version (which afaik can't be legally acquired either). RE2 is locked to older systems unless you buy the /finally/ released PC version via GOG that actually runs well. I could go on.

Ideally, every remake would come with the original as part of the package or would be available on modern hardware via ports. I'm annoyed but ultimately way less bothered by MGS3's remake because MGS3 has been well preserved throughout multiple generations of rereleases. It makes the remake feel less like an intended replacement and more like an arbitrary cash grab.

Ultimately another thing I hate about remakes is the opportunity cost. If a remake is gonna suck, why did we bother trying to update a classic in ways that aren't necessary in the first place? If it is gonna be a masterpiece, why are we sending some of the most talented dev teams in the industry away for 3-4+ years to remake a perfectly good game when those teams could have used that time to make a brand new masterpiece?

All so that someone who wants to play Silent Hill 2 but doesn't wanna deal with tank controls can play it in a more modern way? Feels like a misguided use of the blood, sweat and tears a team has to pour into that kind of project to make it great.

 

[tigg]

know I will be burned for saying this but... I did not like Silent Hill 2 Remake.

To me they took a game that was GREAT, had everything that you look for in a horror game and turned it into a Death Stranding meets Silent Hill. There was so much empty walking around that I just lost the whole build up of "there is something that might jump out at me around this corner", it just ruined it for me. Yea it looked nice, but after awhile if you seen one boarded up house, or long hallway of locked doors, you've seen them all.

Now, let the flaming begin.

 

[BinaryMessiah]

know I will be burned for saying this but... I did not like Silent Hill 2 Remake.

To me they took a game that was GREAT, had everything that you look for in a horror game and turned it into a Death Stranding meets Silent Hill. There was so much empty walking around that I just lost the whole build up of "there is something that might jump out at me around this corner", it just ruined it for me. Yea it looked nice, but after awhile if you seen one boarded up house, or long hallway of locked doors, you've seen them all.

Now, let the flaming begin.

Death Stranding? It's not anything like Death Stranding. There isn't a single molecule of gameplay that's the same. Death Stranding also isn't aimless wandering. It's not for everyone, but it's not bad either. Neither game is for everyone. I played the fan-made remastered mod before the remake came out, and there's the same aimless wandering around too, especially if you don't know where to go. The remake at least tells you where to go, and I never really got lost. I think the remake was a great choice. The fan-made "remaster" is available. Like I said in my post earlier, the original games aren't erased from history. The remake was brilliantly made. It could have been bad. Imagine that?

I honestly don't want the exact same game remade. I like having new ideas as long as they're good and done well. If I wanted to play the exact same game with prettier visuals, I'd download a mod or HD texture pack or something. I 100% guarantee people would bitch and flip out if someone remade a game 1:1 just like the original. People would cry out, "What was the point?!" "Why bother?!".

You can't win them all. I can understand wanting a 1:1 remake, but it would just be prettier visuals and quality-of-life improvements. You have to understand that from a financial perspective, no company will greenlight a 1:1 remake of an old game with tank controls and a AAA budget. No one would really buy it except the most die-hard fans. And there aren't enough fans that would buy it to pay the cost back. It just won't happen.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. I wouldn't have complained about a 1:1 SH2 remake, but we also have to stop shitting on the good remakes if we want new sequels or games from said franchises. This is the climate we are in. If the game sells well more will come.

Post automatically merged: Jan 7, 2025

Ultimately another thing I hate about remakes is the opportunity cost. If a remake is gonna suck, why did we bother trying to update a classic in ways that aren't necessary in the first place? If it is gonna be a masterpiece, why are we sending some of the most talented dev teams in the industry away for 3-4+ years to remake a perfectly good game when those teams could have used that time to make a brand new masterpiece?

All so that someone who wants to play Silent Hill 2 but doesn't wanna deal with tank controls can play it in a more modern way? Feels like a misguided use of the blood, sweat and tears a team has to pour into that kind of project to make it great.

You have to understand that for many companies reviving old franchises, they need to make a profit. They remake these games to test the waters and see if people want it. For smaller companies, like Nightdive Studios, it might be to see if there's enough public interest in a small remaster to bother making a full sequel. Look at Turok. We're finally getting a new game. I'm pretty sure the success of the three remasters helped with that. Instead of seeing these in a negative light, think of it as a possibility that with success there will be new games. There are a lot fewer bad remakes/remasters than there used to be as well. They're getting better.

The industry is in turmoil right now. Everyone wants to make a profit. We're used to older franchises being made for the love of the craft rather than profit. It's not like that anymore. Games are insanely expensive to make these days. Even indie devs need some kind of profit and return on investment to justify moving forward. You can't make a large game with 20 people in a year and call it a day. I think a lot of people forget that.

I honestly think we need another video game crash and have the entire industry reset. We're on the path to that at least.

 

[Patches]

Death Stranding? It's not anything like Death Stranding. There isn't a single molecule of gameplay that's the same. Death Stranding also isn't aimless wandering. It's not for everyone, but it's not bad either. Neither game is for everyone. I played the fan-made remastered mod before the remake came out, and there's the same aimless wandering around too, especially if you don't know where to go. The remake at least tells you where to go, and I never really got lost. I think the remake was a great choice. The fan-made "remaster" is available. Like I said in my post earlier, the original games aren't erased from history. The remake was brilliantly made. It could have been bad. Imagine that?

I honestly don't want the exact same game remade. I like having new ideas as long as they're good and done well. If I wanted to play the exact same game with prettier visuals, I'd download a mod or HD texture pack or something. I 100% guarantee people would bitch and flip out if someone remade a game 1:1 just like the original. People would cry out, "What was the point?!" "Why bother?!".

You can't win them all. I can understand wanting a 1:1 remake, but it would just be prettier visuals and quality-of-life improvements. You have to understand that from a financial perspective, no company will greenlight a 1:1 remake of an old game with tank controls and a AAA budget. No one would really buy it except the most die-hard fans. And there aren't enough fans that would buy it to pay the cost back. It just won't happen.

Post automatically merged: Jan 7, 2025

You have to understand that for many companies reviving old franchises, they need to make a profit. They remake these games to test the waters and see if people want it. For smaller companies, like Nightdive Studios, it might be to see if there's enough public interest in a small remaster to bother making a full sequel. Look at Turok. We're finally getting a new game. I'm pretty sure the success of the three remasters helped with that. Instead of seeing these in a negative light, think of it as a possibility that with success there will be new games. There are a lot fewer bad remakes/remasters than there used to be as well. They're getting better.

For all the wrong Square does these days they have been doing a lot of preservation and I have to imagine the sales are doing decently for them to keep going. I do think the pixel remaster six pack is a bit bold to be priced at $80 though.

 

[BinaryMessiah]

For all the wrong Square does these days they have been doing a lot of preservation and I have to imagine the sales are doing decently for them to keep going. I do think the pixel remaster six pack is a bit bold to be priced at $80 though.

I'll agree with that. I did buy it for PS4 anyways because I want a physical copy I can always go back to. Square is also bold for charging the prices they do on mobile platforms as well. Even 15 years ago they were charging $20 for Chaos Rings on iOS. Current games are like $25-30.

 

[ThirdEidolon]

I'm not a fan of the updated graphics but you can switch those off, obviously you can emulate the game for free so I hesitate to recommend it to anyone around here. For fans of the series though I do think it's a love letter, the lady that helped advise the team is a fairly well known mega fan of the game. Quite a lot of content that was cut from the base can be viewed under the bonus content options. As far as I'm aware the changes are toggleable, I can't comment on the control scheme but knowing Aspyr they almost certainly haven't done anything silly. The game has been very competently ported to modern systems.

I've actually played the remaster now. It's good. Got a few bugs, but the cut content is interesting, to see what they would have done, if they'd had the time.

It's interesting and depressing now knowing the ending wasn't supposed to take place in the time chamber, though.

Shame we didn't get Kain's fortress.

 

[tropicalavera]

i think Link Between Worlds on the 3ds is a decent game, but it's almost unrecognizable as a link to the past remake.

Maybe because A Link Between Worlds was never pitched as a remake?

 

[Auriiya]

Restoring Tomb Raider: The Angel of Darkness Remastered

Restoring Tomb Raider: The Angel of Darkness Remastered

www.tombraider.com

 

[tigg]

Maybe because A Link Between Worlds was never pitched as a remake?

agreed it was always pitched as a sequel or successor

 

[wilddogsdivorce]

Maybe because A Link Between Worlds was never pitched as a remake?

terrible opinion and i wont give it the dignity of a proper response

 

[tropicalavera]

terrible opinion and i wont give it the dignity of a proper response

Legend of Zelda: A Link Between Worlds announcement refers to it as a 'new game'.

"Whilst this game is set in the world of Link to the Past. it features an original storyline and entirely new dungeons. Also in this game Link can become a drawing!"

Iwata Asks interview with ALBW team highlights how the game began life as an experiment with the ability to turn into a drawing/mural - and the choice to utilise Link to the Past's world was a suggestion from producer Aonuma as a means to overcome challenges they were having with the game's perspective - whilst also taking inspiration from a suggestion Miyamoto had from years earlier about remaking aLttP with stereoscopic 3D features.

Iwata Asks - The Legend of Zelda: A Link Between Worlds - Page 1

Read the in-depth interview conducted by former Nintendo Global President Satoru Iwata.

iwataasks.nintendo.com

"Iwata: That was when A Link to the Past first came into the picture?
Tominaga: Yes. And right after Aonuma-san said, "What if we base it on A Link to the Past, and try pairing entering walls with a point of view looking down from directly overhead?"
Iwata: So you based it on A Link to the Past because of suggestions from Miyamoto-san and Aonuma-san?
Tominaga: Yes.
Aonuma: Actually, Miyamoto-san had been challenging me to do something ever since the Nintendo 3DS came out. He suggested making a 2D Zelda game like A Link to the Past playable in stereoscopic 3D.
Iwata: Oh.
Aonuma: But simply taking a 2D game and making it 3D isn't interesting at all."

Kotaku article featuring an interview with game's producer Eiji Aonuma following the game's showcase at E3. Subheading reads:
"The upcoming 3DS Zelda game, A Link Between Worlds, shares much of the same terrain with the classic Super Nintendo game The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past. But the game's lead creator tells Kotaku that there are key map changes in this sequel."
https://kotaku.com/the-world-of-a-link-to-the-past-has-changed-in-the-new-513424187
Aonuma himself states "It's not a direct sequel in the sense that it's the same Link and Zelda. The world is the same and it might be a different generation of Link and Zelda."

Inteview with Shigsy in which he mentions having some ideas for a remake of Link to the Past for the 3DS utilising stereoscopic 3D.

Shigeru Miyamoto: 'I'm the person who saw things differently'

Shigeru Miyamoto, the creator of Donkey Kong and Super Mario Bros, tells Chris Schilling about his future plans at Nintendo

www.theguardian.com

"Are there any plans to adapt other older Nintendo games for the 3DS console?
Not really. We would like to create more new titles."

Interview with Aonuma for Wired in which he explains that Shigsy had suggested remaking a LttP early on but that he was quick to shoot the idea down in favor of making a new game.
Archived via waybackmachine
"he actually gave me a mission: To work on a 3-D A Link to the Past. But I didn’t want to make a remake. I wanted to make a new title"

ooooo you want to dignify my terrible opinion (facts) with a proper response soooo badddd oooooo :3ccc

 

[AnonymousCookieMonster]

However Aspyr and Saber Interactive, Did a Great job on the Soul Reaver 1 & 2 Remake.

I Have played and Loved the Series since Blood Omen on PS1. and aside from fixing some Jank from the OG One, and Updating it. it still feels the same, and Well you can Switch to OG Graphics if you miss the look.

I think the updated graphics on 1 was good, and it was somewhat improved. Intro video i think was upscaled, and Kain actually has his mouth moving when you talk with him at the end of the first game.

The intro of the second game was upscaled and interpolated as a number of the frames look totally wrong.

Seems more like an update rather than remake, as there are far too many old artifacts in the game, like the spiral shards not lining up right and a lot of the old textures didn't seem updated/improved. A few more updated textures and models might have been nice.

Then the camera jankiness...

The only problem i had was the game crashed on me once, and another one when getting the fire upgrade (you know, the original released demo of the game, that level) for some reason the door timing is wrong if you don't pass through the first time after opening the doors and you have to go to the ethereal realm to move by before they slam shut. The second attempt they continue to close as you're dissolving and are too close together you can't slip through. Had to restart/reload in order to pass through the first time.