Remake gameplay and purpose

[Disgaean]

They have fundamentally different game design from their original counterpart (gameplay being my focus when playing a game), for example in resident evil 4 remake you can move and shoot at the same time while in the original you can't, and that ends up creating large modifications in other points of the gameplay such as them having to make stagger not a guarantee on knee and headshots.

Anyway I think remakes are on a case by case basis, the recent remakes of the natsume games by tengu project are amazing, the resident evil remake by Shinji Mikami, as amazing as these remakes are they still don't replace the original experience.

And that's the final point I want to make, maybe the secret aspect that is required on an excellent remake, the original director wanting to genuinely improve their work such as the previously mentioned tengo project being the original developers of the natsume games with new skills, new tech and new ideas.

A few examples: Ninja Gaiden Black, Resident Evil (NGC), Shadow of the Ninja Reborn, Ghosts and Goblins Resurrection (although not a remake, it features enough old level rehashes where you could call it a sort of remake).

Can you guys give any other examples?
Do you disagree? If so can you give some reasons why?
What are your thoughts?

 

[BrawlMan]

the resident evil remake by Shinji Mikami, as amazing as these remakes are they still don't replace the original experience.

They do for me when it comes to RE3R, RE4R, and RE1R. The only time it's not the case, is the DS version of RE1, but that's about it.

, the recent remakes of the natsume games by tengu project are amazing,

I will give you Ninja Saviors, but Wild Guns Reloaded is a worse version of the original, improved graphics and animations aside. Even the Switch version, while better, is still not as good as the original. Even then, Tengo makes these weird or dumb design decisions/changes that either hurt the replay value somewhat, or overall experience. Ninja Saviors, their best game and remake, gets rid of the scoring system (time attack/speed run only), both players share the same life bar on two player mode, and there is no boss rush mode for whatever reason. Even Final Vendetta has a Boss Rush mode.

Dead Space Remake I pretty much prefer over the original. Issac is an actual character, thus has more control and independence over his actions. The Ishamura is a legit a metroidvania place in terms of level design, and the remake is even more like System Shock 2 now. Backtracking has a purpose, and you are rewarded for upgrading the levels on your security clearance and doing optional side quests. You either get items/weapons, expanded stories/lore/characterizations/development, or sometimes all of the above. The 0 gravity sections are exactly like Dead Space 2's and I am all for it. The original's made me sick and nauseated, because of the quick snapping and zoomed in view. You couldn't control Issac much, other than guessing where to land. The only thing the original has over the remake are the characters Dr. Kyne and Dr. Mercer. The originals are much better, but I am more so referring to Kyne. The one in the remake is way too kind, too young, and might as well be a different character. The OG Dr. Kyne I found the most fascinating side/supporting character in the game. The man scream ambiguously untrustworthy and partially unhinged. The actor from the original knew how to sell it.

few examples: Ninja Gaiden Black

You mean Ninja Gaiden II Black. Ninja Gaiden Black/Sigma are just upgraded versions of the first game.

II Black I do prefer over the original and Sigma 2. It fixed every issue I had with either version of the game, and will not be going back to either much. Aside from some of Sigma 2's bonuses IIB even lacks.

 

[Kovlak]

Nier Replicant Version 1.2244... is a good example. And a good step up.

 

[Disgaean]

You mean Ninja Gaiden II Black. Ninja Gaiden Black/Sigma are just upgraded versions of the first game.

II Black I do prefer over the original and Sigma 2. It fixed every issue I had with either version of the game, and will not be going back to either much. Aside from some of Sigma 2's bonuses IIB even lacks.

No. I mean the original Ninja Gaiden Black, as that one was made under Tomonobu Itagaki, Black II was made with the remnants of the team ninja that worked with Itagaki, and I guess its not a remake but it was an example of an developer going back to a finished project with the purpose of improving it and succeeding.

I will give you Ninja Saviors, but Wild Guns Reloaded is a worse version of the original improved graphices and animations aside. Even the Switch version, while better, is still not as good as the original. Even then, Tengo makes these weird or dumb design decisions/changes that either hurt the replay value somewhat, or overall experience. Ninja Saviors, their best game and remake, gets rid of the scoring system (time attack/speed run only), both players share the same life bar on two player mode, and there is no boss rush mode for whatever reason. Even Final Vendetta has a Boss Rush mode.

That's why they still don't replace the original experience. I fucking love Shadow of the Ninja Reborn but the NES original had different levels, systems and character designs that someone might prefer, but the scoring system, and new systems in general are really sick for replayability.

I only beat the SNES Ninja Warriors Again on normal gotta go back and tackle hard mode, but missing scoring on the main run seems wack, especially when the scoring system on Shadow of the Ninja Reborn is so good, and I only touched Wild Guns (SNES) so can't even argue with you there on the gameplay department, in fact I should go for a 1CC in all of the natsume SNES games, they are so sick.

 

[BrawlMan]

No. I mean the original Ninja Gaiden Black, as that one was made under Tomonobu Itagaki,

That's not a remake though. Upgraded version of the same game.

Black II was made with the remnants of the team ninja that worked with Itagaki, and I guess its not a remake but it was an example of an developer going back to a finished project with the purpose of improving it and succeeding.

I know, but that's an actual remake of Sigma 2 in the UE5 Engine. Thus it counts as an actual remake. It brought back the gore, but the improved design of Simga 2 when it comes to levels, enemy encounters, and removal of shitty bosses, and improving on okay or good bosses. Most of them. The final boss still kind of sucks, but is the best final boss by NG standards until NG4.

EDIT: Ninja Gaiden II (2008) itself is a remake, story wise, of the first Ninja Gaiden on NES.

I only beat the SNES Ninja Warriors Again on normal gotta go back and tackle hard mode, but missing scoring on the main run seems wack,

Other than spawning in a few more enemies and removing some health items, there is not much difference. Saviors does a similar thing, but throws in even more enemies and those annoying drones

I only touched Wild Guns (SNES) so can't even argue with you there on the gameplay department,

Yep. Stick with that.

in fact I should go for a 1CC in all of the natsume SNES games, they are so sick.

Have fun!

 

[DayBreak_Illusion]

They do for me when it comes to RE3R, RE4R, and RE1R. The only time it's not the case, is the DS version of RE1, but that's about it.


I will give you Ninja Saviors, but Wild Guns Reloaded is a worse version of the original, improved graphics and animations aside. Even the Switch version, while better, is still not as good as the original. Even then, Tengo makes these weird or dumb design decisions/changes that either hurt the replay value somewhat, or overall experience. Ninja Saviors, their best game and remake, gets rid of the scoring system (time attack/speed run only), both players share the same life bar on two player mode, and there is no boss rush mode for whatever reason. Even Final Vendetta has a Boss Rush mode.

Dead Space Remake I pretty much prefer over the original. Issac is an actual character, thus has more control and independence over his actions. The Ishamura is a legit a metroidvania place in terms of level design, and the remake is even more like System Shock 2 now. Backtracking has a purpose, and you are rewarded for upgrading the levels on your security clearance and doing optional side quests. You either get items/weapons, expanded stories/lore/characterizations/development, or sometimes all of the above. The 0 gravity sections are exactly like Dead Space 2's and I am all for it. The original's made me sick and nauseated, because of the quick snapping and zoomed in view. You couldn't control Issac much, other than guessing where to land. The only thing the original has over the remake are the characters Dr. Kyne and Dr. Mercer. The originals are much better, but I am more so referring to Kyne. The one in the remake is way too kind, too young, and might as well be a different character. The OG Dr. Kyne I found the most fascinating side/supporting character in the game. The man scream ambiguously untrustworthy and partially unhinged. The actor from the original knew how to sell it.

You mean Ninja Gaiden II Black. Ninja Gaiden Black/Sigma are just upgraded versions of the first game.

II Black I do prefer over the original and Sigma 2. It fixed every issue I had with either version of the game, and will not be going back to either much. Aside from some of Sigma 2's bonuses IIB even lacks.

You forgot that they gutted Hammond. Made him a novice or someone who has no authority. Unreal when the original made him a hard ass with control. Even characters like that bitch Kendra knew when to shut up when he talks. Shame they couldn't get Peter Mensah to voice and model him again, would make the remake good imo. For some reason they removed him in Hydroponics in the remake. They took to much liberties on the remake, should be called reimagining. Its really a different game all together.

 

[BrawlMan]

Made him a novice or someone who has no authority.

He still has authority. Kendra just undermines him a lot more subtly and unsubtly, and while Issac respects him, it's clear they (I am mainly referring to Issac and Hammond here) want to work together, rescue Nicole, and to get off the ship. When Hammond doesn't know something engineering wise or doesn't have a deep enough expertise, he's not afraid to ask Issac's input on what they should do. A leader can't know everything nor is an expert in all fields most of the time. So him asking is taking charge, but letting the people who are expertise with their craft, and he doesn't get in their way. It is a sign of respect as well. I admit this Hammond is more vulnerable, but it makes sense given the characterization for the remake. I like both about the same, and it boils down to personal preference.

I would still call this a full on remake, considering you could not explore all of the Ishamura, and there was little reason to backtrack. A "re-imagining" is an outright lie here. Especially with all of the effort put into this, and so many neat little bonuses/extras the original lacks or is given better/deeper context. If everything was exactly the same, some of those same people would yell: "it's the same, now it sucks!"m or something else stupid. I appreciate the change ups overall.

 

[DayBreak_Illusion]

He still has authority. Kendra just undermines him a lot more subtly and unsubtly, and while Issac respects him, it's clear they (I am mainly referring to Issac and Hammond here) want to work together, rescue Nicole, and to get off the ship. When Hammond doesn't know something engineering wise or doesn't have a deep enough expertise, he's not afraid to ask Issac's input on what they should do. A leader can't know everything nor is an expert in all fields most of the time. So him asking is taking charge, but letting the people who are expertise with their craft, and he doesn't get in their way. It is a sign of respect as well. I admit this Hammond is more vulnerable, but it makes sense given the characterization for the remake. I like both about the same, and it boils down to personal preference.

I would still call this a full on remake, considering you could not explore all of the Ishamura, and there was little reason to backtrack. A "re-imagining" is an outright lie here. Especially with all of the effort put into this, and so many neat little bonuses/extras the original lacks or is given better/deeper context. If everything was exactly the same, some of those same people would yell: "it's the same, now it sucks!"m or something else stupid. I appreciate the change ups overall.

For me it IS a reimagining. I rather they went out and do a complete reboot of the series which was there initial strategy if they went with a sequel. We probably wouldnt get a true remake of 2 if that were the case. I would be fine if they reimagine Extraction and made it more like the 3 games instead of a rail shooter.
They couldn't even bother adding the weapons FROM Extraction if they wanted too. Dead Space doesn't have backtracking unless you count the times you return to previous areas to grab a part but you can't freely explore the ship so it shouldn't count as backtracking. The remake just adds backtracking to pad gametime imo. I've beaten Dead Space 2008 this weekend again and will try the remake and see how much they could possibly mess it up.

 

[BrawlMan]

he remake just adds backtracking to pad gametime imo.

The best part is that it doesn't feel like padding at all. The backtracking legit works. It's one of the few games where I really enjoy backtracking and you're rewarded properly for doing so. Also, enemies and environment conditions are randomized when backtracking to previous areas for whatever reason.

For me it IS a reimagining.

Only for certain characters, if we're really stretching and going there. As far as I and most others are concerned, it's a full blown remake. Sucks we won't get that remake of 2. Fuck EA!

 

[Lokgamer]

A remake makes sense when it fix gameplay in some way. Old versions use to age bad or just can be improved by current standards and if a remake does it, it worth it for me.

btw I love your profile picture lmao