I think that the remakes besides from 1 are both good and bad for the same reason. With the age of the originals, both game and console being out of the current market (ie in stores not counting old games stores and resellers) (aka you can’t buy them new) and the price of them going up a bit with age its a good way for amazing games to get a good light from a modern audience of players. With remakes however they are Changed and deviate from the originals. Many modern players are not going to buy a ps1 and the copy of the original just to play it die hard fans will (mostly) but the average player won’t so they will never truly experience what the popularity was about. That being said the remakes are just that remakes not remasters they are meant to change and improve the original . Not sure if my comment makes sense lol and I’m a new fan of yours and have watched all of you new videos and I’m subscribed. Good job on these and I’m surprised you’re not already at 1 thousand subscribers
That was the point of the remake of re1. The whole reason they remade that game was because it hadn't aged well by the time of re2 3 and code veronica. And most if not everyone regards re1r the standard for a remake. And i don't think you realize that these RE engine games are still replacing the Originals. Why do you think capcom charges full price, has cut content, and they won't put the original games on modern platforms.
I understand that was the point of RE1R, it's just not how I personally like to see a remake be handled. This entire video is just an opinion piece, and probably an unpopular one at that. I like for games to try new things (I'm kind of against remakes in the first place) so if a game is going to be remade, I prefer if they try something new and different with it instead of just improving whatever the original was. Definitely not how most people feel a remake should be handled, but that's my opinion. As far as Capcom trying to replace the originals with the remakes, I can't really say on that. Why Capcom does anything is a mystery to me (like how most of their games from their GFWL era can no longer be bought on steam and people have been asking for over 2 years to fix them and complete silence lol). I'm sure they would rather people buy the remakes instead of the originals though, because like you said, they can reasonably charge full price for it and make more money that way. Just makes sense from a business point of view, so I don't disagree that they're probably pushing that. Regardless of Capcom's intent though, many people still take interest in the original games over the RE Engine games but you don't really see that same level of debate with RE1 vs RE1R. RE1R pretty much replaced RE1 both for Capcom and fans alike. Appreciate you for voicing your thoughts! I love Resident Evil and enjoy hearing how other fans feel about the direction of the series over the years :)
@@zeroredox8018 i mean true but you gotta think the reason people don't care about re1 1996 isn't because of the remake neccesarily but the fact that the game aged poorly which makes sense with it being the first game in the series. I'm of the opinion that the originals except for re1 are better than the remakes as they are the true form of the game whereas the remakes always cut content except once again in the re1 remake besides one area. The RE engine games just feel shallow in comparison to what the originals had probably because of the more realistic approach.
@@Lips0fDeceitliterally none of that is true, there’s a difference between cut content and just never planned on having it to begin with. For example people say wahhhh they “cut” the lava room, no they didn’t they just never wanted it in there because it was stupid. The remakes are not meant to replace the original, only RE1 That remake was made because Mikami wanted to put out what his true vision is for what he wanted RE1 to be, 2-4 are meant to be true remakes in that they are almost totally different from their original counterparts. For me I’ll take the original RE3 any day, RE2 I’m torn I love them both equally, and RE4 remake blows the original out of the water.
@@Weapon-EX6018 well then that depends on what your definition of a remake is. My definition is what re1r did where it kept everything the original had while adding more. None of the RE engine games do that. Theh cut content and change parts of the game for whatever reason and I'll give you that the story and the mechanics of re4r are better than the original, to say it blows it out of the water is kinda crazy and i completely disagree with that. The originals will always be better just in the fact that those are the better games like they just are. The remakes may have better controls and graphics but they cut way too much of what made the orginals so good. Idc if you like the remakes but i will never call them better overall
@@Lips0fDeceit MOST replacements are direct improvements in terms of gameplay and have been for the better in the 4remake. For example The part that played horribly with a bad QTE segment. Instead, it has been replaced with a much better statue section where it spews fire and can be destroyed. Almost every area that was removed were rail sections or gimmick sections OR QTEs that don't even require any skill. Removed areas also help the game's pacing work much better with the added exploration and Metroidvania-styled backtracking. Pretty much every part that was removed was a chore to play through. U3 is a garbage boss. The first part of the fight is literally running from it. Then you shoot it from outside range and then you shoot him at close range. It's mechanically bad. And RE4 also doesn't need to be any longer than it already is. Removing U3 was a good decision as well, the boss sucked. Instead, we got 3 new bosses all of which are great; the knight being excellent in particular. Laser Sight being in every weapon never worked well with the balancing of OG RE4. Laser Sights in non RE4 games are not comparable here as Pre RE4 games used a completely different camera and RE5/6 were action TPS games with VERY aggressive enemies. A laser sight on Red9 would completely break the entire arsenal's balance in the remake. Removing laser sights was a better call. Weapons are much more balanced now and you can't just snipe everything with every other hard-hitting gun anymore.
Resident Evil 4 vs Resident Evil 4 Remake Resident Evil 4 has laser sighted weapons. Resident Evil 4 > Resident Evil 4 Remake. I know. It's a style choice. But it's one that matters in my opinion.
Yeah, no. The presentation of Re4 is completely tossed aside to provide an experience that's as cookie cutter as they come. Re4 was a game that wore its B-movie influences on its sleeve and had gameplay that held up perfectly and aged up in a fantastic way, plus, many mods and texture packs that brought it up to par with modern graphics. The remake was completely unnecessary and chosen as a remake due to the staggering popularity of the original, and then proceeded to strip it of its humor, tone, and many details that made it special. I'd much rather have had a remake of Code Veronica, a game that didn't age gracefully and was middling at best, so it could've been a great Resident Evil experience.
that and they totally shifted the gameplay from a more action-focused horror game to a more horror-focused action game. i didn't like the change from tank controls to a modern style with crouching and stealth, it just felt off. quit after four hours and went and played the original, had so much fun.
The way I see it
RE1R3make
RE4
I agree with this man!
Soooo am I the only one SUPER hyped about a 5 remake!?!
Please god give Chris his trailer Bob’n’weave moves and RE4Remake/Revelations 2 movement
Totally agree 👍
I think that the remakes besides from 1 are both good and bad for the same reason. With the age of the originals, both game and console being out of the current market (ie in stores not counting old games stores and resellers) (aka you can’t buy them new) and the price of them going up a bit with age its a good way for amazing games to get a good light from a modern audience of players. With remakes however they are Changed and deviate from the originals. Many modern players are not going to buy a ps1 and the copy of the original just to play it die hard fans will (mostly) but the average player won’t so they will never truly experience what the popularity was about. That being said the remakes are just that remakes not remasters they are meant to change and improve the original . Not sure if my comment makes sense lol and I’m a new fan of yours and have watched all of you new videos and I’m subscribed. Good job on these and I’m surprised you’re not already at 1 thousand subscribers
You’re back!!
0:56 Yes.
Oh wait I'm sorry 😂I mean yes!
That was the point of the remake of re1. The whole reason they remade that game was because it hadn't aged well by the time of re2 3 and code veronica. And most if not everyone regards re1r the standard for a remake. And i don't think you realize that these RE engine games are still replacing the Originals. Why do you think capcom charges full price, has cut content, and they won't put the original games on modern platforms.
I understand that was the point of RE1R, it's just not how I personally like to see a remake be handled. This entire video is just an opinion piece, and probably an unpopular one at that. I like for games to try new things (I'm kind of against remakes in the first place) so if a game is going to be remade, I prefer if they try something new and different with it instead of just improving whatever the original was. Definitely not how most people feel a remake should be handled, but that's my opinion.
As far as Capcom trying to replace the originals with the remakes, I can't really say on that. Why Capcom does anything is a mystery to me (like how most of their games from their GFWL era can no longer be bought on steam and people have been asking for over 2 years to fix them and complete silence lol). I'm sure they would rather people buy the remakes instead of the originals though, because like you said, they can reasonably charge full price for it and make more money that way. Just makes sense from a business point of view, so I don't disagree that they're probably pushing that. Regardless of Capcom's intent though, many people still take interest in the original games over the RE Engine games but you don't really see that same level of debate with RE1 vs RE1R. RE1R pretty much replaced RE1 both for Capcom and fans alike.
Appreciate you for voicing your thoughts! I love Resident Evil and enjoy hearing how other fans feel about the direction of the series over the years :)
@@zeroredox8018 i mean true but you gotta think the reason people don't care about re1 1996 isn't because of the remake neccesarily but the fact that the game aged poorly which makes sense with it being the first game in the series. I'm of the opinion that the originals except for re1 are better than the remakes as they are the true form of the game whereas the remakes always cut content except once again in the re1 remake besides one area. The RE engine games just feel shallow in comparison to what the originals had probably because of the more realistic approach.
@@Lips0fDeceitliterally none of that is true, there’s a difference between cut content and just never planned on having it to begin with. For example people say wahhhh they “cut” the lava room, no they didn’t they just never wanted it in there because it was stupid.
The remakes are not meant to replace the original, only RE1 That remake was made because Mikami wanted to put out what his true vision is for what he wanted RE1 to be, 2-4 are meant to be true remakes in that they are almost totally different from their original counterparts. For me I’ll take the original RE3 any day, RE2 I’m torn I love them both equally, and RE4 remake blows the original out of the water.
@@Weapon-EX6018 well then that depends on what your definition of a remake is. My definition is what re1r did where it kept everything the original had while adding more. None of the RE engine games do that. Theh cut content and change parts of the game for whatever reason and I'll give you that the story and the mechanics of re4r are better than the original, to say it blows it out of the water is kinda crazy and i completely disagree with that. The originals will always be better just in the fact that those are the better games like they just are. The remakes may have better controls and graphics but they cut way too much of what made the orginals so good. Idc if you like the remakes but i will never call them better overall
@@Lips0fDeceit
MOST replacements are direct improvements in terms of gameplay and have been for the better in the 4remake.
For example The part that played horribly with a bad QTE segment. Instead, it has been replaced with a much better statue section where it spews fire and can be destroyed.
Almost every area that was removed were rail sections or gimmick sections OR QTEs that don't even require any skill. Removed areas also help the game's pacing work much better with the added exploration and Metroidvania-styled backtracking.
Pretty much every part that was removed was a chore to play through.
U3 is a garbage boss. The first part of the fight is literally running from it. Then you shoot it from outside range and then you shoot him at close range. It's mechanically bad. And RE4 also doesn't need to be any longer than it already is. Removing U3 was a good decision as well, the boss sucked. Instead, we got 3 new bosses all of which are great; the knight being excellent in particular.
Laser Sight being in every weapon never worked well with the balancing of OG RE4. Laser Sights in non RE4 games are not comparable here as Pre RE4 games used a completely different camera and RE5/6 were action TPS games with VERY aggressive enemies. A laser sight on Red9 would completely break the entire arsenal's balance in the remake.
Removing laser sights was a better call. Weapons are much more balanced now and you can't just snipe everything with every other hard-hitting gun anymore.
Resident Evil 4 vs Resident Evil 4 Remake
Resident Evil 4 has laser sighted weapons.
Resident Evil 4 > Resident Evil 4 Remake.
I know. It's a style choice. But it's one that matters in my opinion.
Yeah, no. The presentation of Re4 is completely tossed aside to provide an experience that's as cookie cutter as they come. Re4 was a game that wore its B-movie influences on its sleeve and had gameplay that held up perfectly and aged up in a fantastic way, plus, many mods and texture packs that brought it up to par with modern graphics. The remake was completely unnecessary and chosen as a remake due to the staggering popularity of the original, and then proceeded to strip it of its humor, tone, and many details that made it special. I'd much rather have had a remake of Code Veronica, a game that didn't age gracefully and was middling at best, so it could've been a great Resident Evil experience.
that and they totally shifted the gameplay from a more action-focused horror game to a more horror-focused action game. i didn't like the change from tank controls to a modern style with crouching and stealth, it just felt off. quit after four hours and went and played the original, had so much fun.