Regarding your point about preservation, the video game industry is the worst when it comes to preserving classics. What's worse is that a lot of game developers and even gamers have this mindset that once a remake comes out you don't have to bother with the original. The idea that a remake should or even could just replace the original is really bad for video games as an art form because it devalues them into content to be discarded as soon as the new shiny replacement comes out. The same thing applies to other forms of media, but in the gaming industry this kind of mindset is more celebrated than elsewhere and it is depressing. Imagine movie buffs telling you not to bother with the iconic original Cape Fear and instead just watch the new shiny remake.
Relax, no one will tell anybody to watch Cape Fear or Psycho's remake over the first one, or The Thing's, roms aren't going nowhere just as downloading old movie won't, relax because remakes are not shadowing the originals unless it's for people that would've never cared to try/learned about the old version without the new. Pd: If you find remakes depressing, man I envy your lack of real world awareness.
@@greatrulo you just missed his point entirely. Nobody would tell you to skip the original Cape Fear, but people would tell you to skip the original RE2. That's his point, in gaming this mindset is accepted much more readily than in the film community.
@@greatrulo Except they are. Emulation is an option on PC, on dedicated hardware, or on hacked devices, and all require a fair degree of trust, dipping into potentially dangerous space, and at least a little more hardware familiarity than a lot of people feel comfortable getting. Learning how to tweak emulator launch settings on the steam deck was enough familiarity with bash scripts and . Dedicated storefronts and unhacked consoles don't give you that option. Most online services let you watch the originals of old movies, but old games get forgotten. The original Demon's Souls is a lot harder to access or even find info on because of the new one, the original RE trilogy is inaccessible on most platforms, and the Metroid Prime Remaster, one that everyone is raving over, has the massive defect that it doesn't restore any of the speedrunning tricks of the NA GC 1.0 edition, leaving the most open and free ways to play the game inaccessible to people who either have the original disk and a gc/wii, people who are emulating that version, or people who are emulating the switch version with hacks. On top of that, companies don't like emulation. They frame it as piracy, to the extent that the two often get conflated. There's also stuff that doesn't make sense to emulate. In the case of stuff like WarCraft III, fans have to use hacky servers to play something that feels closer to the original, and that's a lot of unreliability to have to rely on as a fan, if you even realize that's an option. Remasters do supercede the originals in the eyes of their publishers and the eyes of online content creators, and that does suck for people who want to enjoy some of the original's features.
Man, anyone with a potato laptop can emulate nearly any video game previous to the PS3 in a manner of minutes, if they can't then they wouldn't even bother with a 30 year old niche game with tank controls, stop gatekeeping, newcomers to franchises benefit from remakes as without them, they wouldn't have known/cared to try the series.
@@onceyougozach2607 because for one the remake is better and more user friendly, and for another unless you're a hardcore horror gamer you'd never try the originals on your own, and if you are, emulation is not stopping you. 😁 I propose that you all either stop going wah wah wah and instead donate to modders working on HD mods to support gaming preservation, or talk with your wallet and buy all the remasters and collections of the franchises you enjoy, Capcom always listens to feedback and I'm sure the only reason that they haven't released a horror collection is because their HD Collections always do poorly despite having a lot of work put into them.
I do think preservation should be a bigger deal in the gaming sphere. Right now, for a lot of gaming's history, your only option of enjoying it is through piracy and emulation. And with some games not even working with that, or being too unpopular to be preserved, a lot of gaming's history is slowly vanishing. I know a part of not releasing older content for players on modern systems is issues with who holds the rights for certain things in the games, but there has to be a way. For now we have to rely on piracy and gray zones..
For sure, this is one of the hardest issuesto solve with gaming and hopefully there's progress. Gaming doesn't really have any unifying bodies that can help guide stuff like this yet. Hopefully we see that and the other thing we need, game dev unions.
That's why I really like it when companies do something like XBox game pass. There are games from the second console generation on there. I really appreciate virtual console tbh.
Glad you made the game preservationist pitch, as that's ultimately the most important. Companies keeping *both* versions of their game easily playable like Capcom with RE4 and Square with FF7 are unfortunately the exception rather than the norm. And then you have companies like Nintendo that hold back emulated versions on modern hardware (as with SM64 and Link's Awakening) until their unnecessary remastered/remade versions get their year or two of exclusive sales.
I mean, Capcom is smooth, fast, and loyal to their fans. Square took forever to release the first part of a remake, and we still have no clue when the second part is coming out. Don't get me started on Nintendo ww will be here for the whole day
Nintendo doesn't just hold them back, they released Mario 3D All Stars for a limited time only to take advantage of customer FOMO, so that those who chose to wait "learn their lesson" and buy on release the next time.
Not sure why this clown is acting like capcom cares about preservation so much. RE4 is the exception, they are perfectly content with trying to memoryhole the entire classic RE trilogy though
Square and preservation in the same sentence tho. Just the worst joke EVER. Are we talking about the same company that lost the code to untold games ? Most of the Final Fantasy franchise even tho it's such a money maker for them ? Why do you think they went to do the Pixel Remasters recently purely from art of the games back then ? And why do you think they've only done FFX-HD and FFXII HD ? They're one of, if not the worst company at doing preservation of their back catalog
I am still so incredibly bummed how the RE3 remake turned out. RE3 was my starting point in the series when I was a kid. It’s what got me hooked. The remake wasn’t terrible, but when compared to the RE2 and RE4 remake it feels like a free DLC than an actual remake. I really hope they revisit RE3 again sometime in the future, as Nemesis is still one of the biggest standout villains in the series.
Re3 remake is and always considered to be the worst one in the series. Nemesis and Jill was probably the most done dirty. Both of them treated with disrespect with Jill being a snobby bitch and Nemesis being a laughing stock of a threat. Serving as a npc that is trying to figure out what crayola pens look like, and Jill thinking she’s got it all good yet everything is fucked. Nemesis is a failure within the story bc he forgot his one task. Jill is a failure due to non logical thinking that one puny, kinky looking fluid can cure an entire city yet the missile was already hitting the city. Also Barry was excluded. The legendary quipster was excluded from the ending. Consider this sandwich to be garbage worthy
i think the worst part is how re2 was hinting towards re3 in the gameplay, foreshadowing nemesis, however u play re3 n its just drops? in quality like.. i know it was a separate team working on them but they completely scrap clues n ideas of nemisis created in re 2 in re3 which makes it less exciting,
Yakuza Kiwami is a notable example in my opinion because it's not just a remaster with touchups, like most remakes, it's a complete *remake*. The story and dialogue are the same, sure, but the combat is completely different, there's way more side content, and of course there's Majima Everywhere. Thank you also for making the preservation pitch. It's a downright crime that piracy is the best way to play games released more than 10 years ago.
I find Kiwami to be really interesting from that standpoint, because it does shot for shot remasters of scenes from the original, but also blatantly (and clumsily imo) inserts new content. I still love the game for all the yakuza goodness, but it is hella awkward.
On the other hand, Kiwami is just a downgraded version of 0 with lesser and not so interesting side content and not so amazing story though the latter is more on the subjective matter. For reals though, I feel like the actual charm of Yakuza 1 was in its absolutely brilliant English Dub and some of the OSTs were also better
@@sharjeelahmed7913 Zero had the better side content and I agree the story was better, but the combat tweaks and inclusion of Majima Everywhere make Kiwami almost as good an experience
Yakuza Kiwami is a re-imagining then, if it adds or changes content. remakes just remake the game. but I think that piracy is by far the best way to preserve games. not only do you not pay to people that have got nothing to do with the creation of the game, but you also get stuff for free. the only better version is free releases
Kiwamis are also two absolutely BUTCHERED de-makes, that water down and ruin the intended, original atmosphere, characters and feels. Even outright censor stuff out of existence to deliver a more "hihii hahaa so whacky!" comedic experience, where as the OGs take their stories and cast really seriously and have some heavy hitting content. The only good part about K1 was the added backstory flashbacks for some of the MCs, but everything else's a clear downgrade. Majima Everywhere system itself not only ruins his character, but also shits up the pacing of the game by implementing an unnecessary, RNG-based extra layer of grinding.
I really do think one of the best compromises is when updated remakes include the unaltered original as a bonus feature. Especially considering how much smaller older games are there really is almost never any excuse not to do so.
That makes me think about the remasters like Halo Anniversary or Wonder Boy III: The Dragon's Trap, that are just the original game with a (toggable) new render on top. It truly seems that *emulation* is the sincerest form of flattery.
Not a remake necessarily but this made me think about how wild it was when Donkey Kong 64 included an in game playable arcade cabinet of the original Donkey Kong.
Great example Castlevania Dracula X chronicles for the PSP. a remake of "Dracula X: Rondo of Blood" that includes both the original rondo of blood (not originally released in the west) and because why not it also included Symphony of the night which tbh was the main attraction of that collection
Rights issues are to blame, mostly. Sometimes it's not clear who is allowed to release a game, sometimes a piece of music or art is not licensed anymore. Even Rockstar are not excempt from this as you can not get older versions of certain GTA games with the full soundtrack they released with anymore because of rights issues.
For me the "Capcom remake philosophy" is perfectly captured in the section of RE4REMAKE were you free yourself from chains and have to retrieve your equipment. It perfectly plays with your memory of the OG, while teaching you a new mechanic (stealth), changing the order of things in a more "realistic" and sensical manner, and right when you have accepted that you can't rely on your memories this time, it throws you a bone and rewards you with the exact same treasure (decorated mask) in the exact same position it was in the OG. Then the game proceeds to play with you by making you face a gauntlet in an old stage (the windy canyon) but with a new layout, and so on and so on... I really felt a kid again while playing RE4REMAKE, it was THAT good, and I have to thank Capcom for making me experience, again for the first time, one of my favorite games ever!
I like the idea of remakes keeping the same spirit as the previous game, promising and delivering the same experiences, but going further and doing the concept more justice than they ever had the opportunity to do with the original.
I constantly found myself saying “I don’t remember this…” but it never felt alienated from my memories, needless to say I loved every second of it. Ashley in particular had me devoutly WANTING to help her because she was just so supportive and resilient, in a real and believable way. The actress that played her did an amazing job for an industry so ridden with bad voice overs (more than I can say for Ada but I digress). I’d love to see more companies do remakes in this style.
The biggest problem with Ada is not her VA but the fact that she sounds like she's recorded on an old dictaphone. I don't understand how they pushed this into release.
It's so strange to me. I never played the original, so I went into the remake completely blind. Ada sounded as good as every other character. It wasn't until I saw everyone bullying the VA for Ada that I went "did we play the same game? she sounded fine to me". I did go back and listen to what she sounded like in the original, and I gotta say I can see how different they are but I mean they cut back a lot of Leon's lines and made him more serious, yet I don't see anyone getting annoyed with how he's portrayed. Gamers are the worst honestly.
@@gindamusic1296 I'd say the opinion regarding Ada's RE4R VA and Leon's came from different parts of the fanbase. Apple and orange case of sorts. First of all, I have to say that your comparing between Ada's 4 and 4R voice is perfectly valid, but unfortunately incorrect. Thing is, Ada has a completely different VA between _2R_ and 4R. Her performance in the former was more... well, I don't wanna say it's _better_ per se, but she sounds much livelier in 2R. On the other hand, Leon's VA is the same as the one from RE2R, and the issue in this particular case is that Capcom cut some of the lines that were in the original. Regardless, it's interesting to see things from the perspective of someone who's new to the series.
The point on preservation of older games is a major factor and worth being discussed more. There needs to be some handling of it like how Scorsese has committed to preserving old films.
That last point about game preservation really hit home. I think it's great when remakes try new things...as long as the original is still widely accessible. If it's not playable, then the widely different remake, by its existence, crushes any chance the publisher will ever go back and ensure that the original is available to play. I would've LOVED to see a Demon's Souls HD Remaster come out first, so that the remake could've added/changed up things a bit more(6th Archstone anyone?)
I'd argue for a #4, the remakes retcon the story to fit with future games. Game writers aren't usually preparing stories for games with games 2-4 entries later in the series in mind, so these decades-long series build up a body of lore that tends to get tangled and messy as future games have to either fit within- or change- pre-established series history. Remakes give the devs some room to smooth out the kinks and retcon in a narrative foundation for future plot events that makes those developments feel more natural. RE4 retconned Luis' story to make him a connecting element that ties RE4 back to RE2 and 3 (*), and used Ada's story as a bridge to the story of RE5. . . . (*) Luis was retconned to have been born in the village and had lost his grandfather to a Las Plagas infection. Because of that experience with the parasite, they also expanded his role at Umbrella to make him part of the Umbrella team that developed the Nemesis Parasite, bringing his experience with Las Plagas to the team.
The Dead Space remake for example didn't just update things, it happily took both plot and design elements from the second and third games. In a way creating the Dead Space that people remembered instead of the one that actually existed, if they hadn't played the original recently.
what future games? the original fits just right with everything in the series, up untill the new remakes evrything kind of works, there no crazy plot holes or big incoerences. Even the new information about spencer and other miranda meeting in the past doesn't really go agaisnt anything from previous games, if i remember well.
There _is_ one game series where its writers DO prepare stories for games with 2-4 entries later in the series in mind - the Trails/Kiseki series. There are a lot of plot elements where I just found myself dumbfounded at how they were able to foreshadow them literally mutliple games ahead, and plot points that get touched on for multiple games despite the main party changing every time. The only "retcons" the series has ever had was to add two characters from later games as minor characters in the rerelease of one of the games to have consistent alibis with the later entries and even that was a relatively minor change.
@@rickymeggs9853 Was he? I may have missed that. Regardless, they definitely expanded on his childhood in the village and established that Chief Mendez knew him and his family in the remake.
In particular, I appreciate when remakes or re-masters introduce quality of life improvements. To borrow a non-capcom example, the Spiro trilogy remake added an ability to Sparx where he'll point in the direction of loose treasure if you hit a button combination. It's an optional feature, so you don't need to use it, but it's there for those moments when you're one gem shy from 100%, while still being unobtrusive. Another example, this one a Capcom game, is the Devil May Cry 3 HD remaster for the Switch. DMC 3 classic introduced styles to the game, a system of perks that you could equip Dante with at the start of each level. The issue was, experimentation was kind of discouraged due to you being locked into a style for a whole level. Pick gunslinger when you're on a tight map and enemies are right next to you? Pick Royal Guard on a boss that's very hard to time blocking correctly? Tough luck. In the remake, tho, they switched to what later entries in the series did, allowing you to shift between styles on the fly. While it does kind of make Dante a bit more broken, part of the cool factor of the series has been being a nigh-unstoppable badass, so I personally didn't feel like it diminished things. Plus, it's an optional feature you can turn off if you absolutely need the classic inputs.
Man that Warcraft 3 one gets me right in the feels. I was going to download the original, as it had been years since I played it, but I needed to save some cash at the time. So when I was a bit more flush the next month, it was gone in preparation of the remake. Missed it by that much!
Working on remastering a popular Flash game series with a dedicated community really emphasizes the importance of knowing where to make changes and where not to. How do you balance much needed improvement of various systems with fans' nostalgia and expectations? Some fans will want the games as close as possible to the originals, which is totally valid. Other fans will want novelty and stronger replay value, which again is totally valid. In the end, you put it well - recapture the core *feeling* of the game, even strengthen it where possible, but don't be afraid to make informed changes to *mechanics* as long as they don't interfere with that feeling.
This Capcom style is exactly what I aimed to achieve with my remake of Sonic Triple Trouble. I redid the Game Gear game as if it was a Mega Drive game, like the AM2R of Sonic remakes. I tried a "graphics only" take and it sucked. Recreating "feel" not mechanics proved way better.
Awesome. I always enjoy fan games more than remakes. Companies have been riding the "nostalgia" wave by just porting the game to a new system for a quick cash-grab without understanding why it was great "in the moment".
About Psycho's 1998 remake, you should know that some of the original film fans actually have a lot of esteem for it. OG Psycho has the most detailed analysis in film history. Now I'm not the biggest fan of Psycho out there but it's arguable that remaking a film with that many icons could only be interesting if made seemingly so similar while deviating from it in only a few key ways : details. There's also the political implications in being able show things differently nearly 40 years after and the possibility to observe different reactions from the audience. In other words, it's a film that begs for over-interpretation, which I didn't bought in myself but the point being that hopefully people reading this will be curious enough to watch more of Gus Van Sant's films because there's definitely worth seing for the most part. I'd mostly recommend Drugstore Cowboy (1989), My Own Private Idaho (1991), To Die For (1995), Elephant (2003), Last Days (2005) and Paranoid Park (2007). He also directed Good Will Hunting (1997) which I'm not really fan of but still putting here because it must be it's most well known film.
Sums up the feelings I had playing the Demon's Souls remake. As pretty as it is, it's sort of halfway between a remaster and an entirely new remake. It leaves the game in a weird place going forward, where there are two versions of basically the same thing. I prefer the Capcom and Square approach, as both companies have made at least some effort to bring their older titles to newer hardware, and make the remakes new things.
Yeah, DeS PS5 was mostly for newfound FROM fans who never tried the original. As one of those people, I loved it (and really appreciated how beautiful it was, adding background scenery detail in a lot of areas). But the keeping the bosses the same was... a choice. I think it's a choice I appreciated, as being disappointed with the Dragon God boss fight seems like a core part of the experience lmao. And I'd always heard people describe DeS as a game where the levels were the bosses, not the bosses themselves - so making those fights more difficult a la Dark Souls 3-era Fromsoft boss design would definitely throw off the balance. But then I'm appreciating this *game* for its historical accuracy value, which as Mark pointed out is quite an odd thing when shot-for-shot I could just be playing the original instead (though I do like the more subtle balance changes Bluepoint made with 8-directional rolling, lizard behavior, and health grass weight). Bluepoint remakes have always put me in a sort of uncanny valley with appreciating them though - they're so fantastically done but so eerily a facsimile of the original.
Yeah, the problem with the Demon's Souls remake, it's not been done by the original studio. Bluepoint just have muscle power. They are technically great but they haven't done one single video game from ground up before. Their entire catalog is remakes, remasters, ports and collections. And Fromsoft games are quite heavy in terms of game design. So I think it was right decision from them not to change game drastically. Also this overlaps with Sony's strategy. Their entire strategy is graphics, graphics and more graphics.
I think the main problem with video game remakes is that a "shot-for-shot" remake is for many the only option for getting to experience an older game. A movie can easily be watched on modern technology no matter how it was originally created. But a 10 year old game often cannot be experienced on the latest technology that everyone has. And so in many instances the only way to experience it is either to hunt down the old machinery (often easier said than done), be a _pirate_ to get it (but that has it's own shortcomings, not including the potential moral one), or hope it's remade as a near-exact copy so you can experience it as originally intended. But the 1:1 remake can be especially irritating to those who _bought_ the game originally. Because games are more expensive than movies, and to buy it again just to see a _nearly_ exact duplicate is generally not worth it (unless you're a simpleton who believes video game companies will go extinct if you don't buy everything they put out). I'm old enough that I've typically experience most of the big and popular games that have come out and would rather have a re-imagining than a 1:1 remaster/port. Video games are also interesting in that the technological improvements are far more noticeable than they are for films. So in some instances, a modern remake can't be 1:1 if what it's remaking is old enough. Just increasing the resolution and adding in some dynamic lighting isn't going to work. Overall, though, we need better solutions for access to older games. The companies who make them are generally completely divorced from the individuals who _cared_ about making a given game at the time it was made and so preservation just doesn't matter. In fact, some companies have a negative view of it as cutting in to their entitled profits. They'd rather old games disappeared from existence until when and if they decide to release them for sale again (Nintendo). This way of doing things directly impedes the efforts of the people with talent (not the CEOs, Presidents, shareholders, etc) in doing something new and interesting with a remake -- to do it as a reimagining.
I think there is definitely room for both shot-for-shot remakes and reimagining (of any degree) remakes in the video game space. I just wish that it was always incredibly clear from the packaging and marketing which a game is. I dislike that "remake" and "remastered" (and other "re-" terms) are not super useful to me in trying to figure out the scope of changes, and that I frequently have to either find out from friends or actually play myself to learn what was done.
Remasters will always be the original game because they are literally just the original game, but they went in and remastered the media files (sounds/textures/etc.). Remakes are entirely new games which can be a carbon copy of the original with new tech like Demon's Souls or something new entirely like Resi 2. The only other relevant 're' term I can think of is reboot which is almost always a complete redesign and may or may not retell the original story.
And then you have the many, many games that don't even use _either_ term in their marketing, and instead tack on some cutesy term like "Rearmed", "Reignited", or "Rehydrated".
I haven't actually played any of these most recent RE remakes and only played RE2 out of the originals back in the day, so I was kinda hoping you'd reference the Final Fantasy VII remake a bit in this video to help with context for people like me. But I still enjoyed the video, overall.
glad you mentioned re3 remake, it was such a solid game back in the ps1 and now we will have to bear with it never getting it's rightful remake for possibly decades
As a Pokémon fan, the discussion what goes into a remake and what makes remakes good or bad is something that’s always fascinated me, so I’m very glad this is a topic Mark is talking about In terms of what I personally like in a remake, if it’s a reimagining type of remake, I like something like Pokémon ORAS, while if it’s going to be more faithful, Pokémon Mystery Dungeon DX is my go to example, but Xenoblade Definitive is also good
@@mewwww17 I see a lot of criticism towards BDSP. Had I followed the route of the long(er) term fans, then I'd probably join in their chorus. However, my last game was Sapphire (no, not Alpha) before returning to the franchise last year. Brilliant Diamond struck a perfect chord for me with the nostalgic top-down sprite vibe, but intertwined with more modern twists like the 3D'ish battle elements and the character customization. It was a bridge for me that spring-boarded me into the newer games. All in all, the reasons as to what makes a good remake really boils down to the eye of the beholder. And probably the target demographic of the developer (older fans vs drawing in newer ones).
It's bizarre seeing how good FRLG and especially HGSS were as remakes, then seeing how disappointing both ORAS and BDSP were. I feel like Game Freak hasn't really put their heart and soul into any of the mainline games since B2W2.
@@Celis.C To be fair, I'm not surprised you had a positive experience with BDSP. They are remakes of Diamond and Pearl which were great games, after all. As a long-term fan, I was disappointed by the lack of the improvements that were added in Platinum, such as the Battle Frontier, the extended Sinnoh dex and Gym Leader/Elite 4 teams, the enhanced Cyrus story, lack of connectivity with SwSh, etc. Aside from the improvements to the Grand Underground, it felt like the developers wanted to make the absolute bare minimum of what could be expected in a remake of D/P.
Well, now I'm going to spend the rest of my day thinking about all the different Pokémon remakes to compare them with each other and good remakes of other games
I absolutely love the Link’s Awakening remake on switch, which was extremely faithful while making a bunch of almost imperceptible changes under the hood that really stacked up to something special. I think that’s because it was such a tightly designed experience already. The core of it has barely aged. There was very little that needed changing beyond quality of life stuff (and to be fair, those QoL changes do make a massive difference to the experience). It was such a joy to play, had me grinning from ear to ear the entire time… and wondering what the last 25 years of games were for, haha.
I think the QoL features should have been even better in the remake. There are still unused buttons. Why not use them for even more item shortcuts? The copy-paste-approach to trees and walls felt pretty lazy, too. Of course, it was necessary in the original but they could have done a way better job in the remake. Though, I agree that the original still holds up incredibly well. The core design of LA is timeless. And that's why the remake is still a good game. It just could/should have been even better in my opinion.
I think the remake of Link's Awakening is pretty much a more advanced remaster rather than a remake. The game's practically the same. I must say that Zelda games in general hold up very well. Just look at the ALTTP Randomizer community. Just the core game (a specific early Japanese version of the game to accommodate for fun bugs), plus the randomized content.
I had the opposite experience. I never played the original (started with LttP and played all the games since then) and the LA remaster felt far too subtle and unhelpful in its hints. I spent a couple hours trying to figure out how to get into the desert area, for example, before I finally caved and looked up a walkthrough. It was a stark contrast from every other zelda game I've played, and the inconsistent 30fps, frequent switches to side on, and world that never really opened up stacked up to make me bounce off this one.
Nintendo is missing out by not doing more of these. I'm new to the Zelda franchise (BOTW, and now LA) and playing LA makes me want to go see what the rest of the series is about (TWILIGHT PRINCESS, MAJORA'S MASK, WIND WAKER--I'm interested in all of them). Except I can't buy them to play them. Oh, Nintendo! I appreciate the QOL updates to LA but designwise LA still feels like it's "from its time" and I like that.
@@AnotherDuck interesting, I always thought of Links Awakening as a remake as my reasoning is that it’s totally remade from scratch (albeit identical almost to the GBC version gameplay wise) a remaster to me is like a version with upgrades more for the technology, such as Mario 3D world on the switch, upgraded resolutions, frame rates etc, minor cosmetic upgrades. LInks Awakening was so good just a shame about the odd frame rate stutter in the swamps and busier areas but it looked great and played well.
You are totally right!!! I tend to say that RE Remakes are more of a Retelling, leaving any ambiguity out for new players or experienced players. I saw those games came out in the 90s and it's a part of my gaming essence in general. Of course for me the originals are "timeless", however, the retellings are Superb!
@@Ihatevideogames334 You have every right to hate them. Next time tho, simply say I hate them. You're wasting time and energy! Go play something else 😋
I really like when remakes/remasters let you toggle between the old and new. For example, in one of the Cave Story ports, you could swap between the original 8bit sound track and the updated soundtrack. I've seen games that let you swap between the old and new graphics. I think finding a way to have both the original and the updated version in the same package is a good way to have your cake and eat it too.
I'm reminded of a few remasters that are straight ports under the hood (that is, the original software or a 1:1 recreation thereof, updated to run on different hardware and/or under a different OS), but have updated graphics available as an overlay. I know both Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary Edition and Wonder Boy: The Dragon's Trap did this.
I must have played through re4 (2005) about 30 times over the years, no exaggeration. I love it and still play it on steam. The remake is exactly what I wanted, considering I still have access to RE4 ; A similar experience that is also very different.
No this is true, my brother has done the same. He was just a baby when playing that first one, heck I had to read all the files for him because English is not our first language... He was like 9-10. It's got this insane replayability aspect about it, almost addictive. And that's the reason why I have not played it again because once you let yourself go... Lol it's gonna be hard to stop. But I'm so familiar with the original because my uncles and cousins played it too whenever we went to visit so it's like this beautiful nostalgia pit that I definitely wouldn't mind experiencing again... Heck I loved experiencing it again. Must have seen it get played like 40-50 times lol but playing the remake still managed to be both fresh enough to keep me engaged, and familiar enough to give me the feels.
I am so glade that you addressed the desire and need for preserving the original versions and making them accessible today. Personally, I feel like there is a room not just to port or emulate the original game, but also in making remaster versions that polish it. I do like playing games like the remastered Day of The Tentacle, which have the original gameplay, looks and music but only with the option of polishing them - non-pixelated accurate recreation of the graphics, uncompressed better quality versions of the original audio and music and a more modern interface that plays more or less the same and let me reply the game I love, but with the option to add some features of modern convince. Ultimately the question is what do you want - do you want to have a convenient access to the original game and perhaps some modern additions to polish the experience? Or do you want to revisit the game with a new perspective and offer something new? Both are valid, but we need to understand that they are not the same thing and it isn't necessarily a question of either one or the other.
Notice how he never mentioned how RE2 and 3 are not available in modern systems? So much for "preservation" when they cannot even properly replace these games
One thing I wanna add is that you're still making decisions when it comes to aiming your gun in RE4R. While you can move out of the way now while aiming, you're also losing access to your big defensive option: your knife. You can't parry while aiming your trusty handgun, so if the local doctor is threatening to chop your head off, and you're holding your gun up, you better be 100% certain that you're gonna stun him with that shot; you're not gonna move out of the way in time.
You can actually still parry while aiming your gun in RE4R, there's even an accessibility option to allow you to press the fire button to parry even while aiming.
I hope developers starts picking up the fact that games get remade in the RE way are actually what we want. All of the remakes have critical reviews, in a good way of course.
We, spea for yourself these remakes aren't anything more than shallow money making schemes and the lowest of ppl eat it up. Games don't need remakes, they are what they are flaws and all, they should be putting all this energy into new original ideas built off of their past outings not just reheating yesterday's leftovers
@@brya9681 While I see your argument to the comment, do keep in mind that there are probably games that are stuck in their respective consoles, which are great games either narratively, mechanics-wise, or other things such as rebalancing previously difficult bosses or sections in a game. Sure, a remake can be purposed as a way to increase availability of the game in general, especially where there is alack of game preservation for older titles or just poor business practices these days. But when done right, a "Remake" or "Remaster" can be a really good thing, and i believe it can be used as a tool for the developers to learn and establish the "core pillars" of a series or franchise. Take for example, the team behind Metroid Prime 4, whom all of a sudden released Metroid Prime Remaster. Since Metroid Prime is a franchise who have been waiting for a new installment since an entire decade (and do keep in mind the game has switched studios, and Nintendo stated that its starting from the ground up), I'm quite sure its not just a game to hype up Metroid Prime 4 and whatnot. Besides, A company would probably rather have remasters / remake sell on multiple consoles, and them getting the money rather than piracy. That way the developers can also figure out if there is a market audience for a possible sequel and whatnot.
Excellent video as always! I played RE4 only once around the time it came out and loved it. Playing the remake was such a perfect blend of reminding me why I loved the original while also feeling like a brand new, modern game. Before playing the RE4 remake, I played the Dead Space remake, which was my first time with any Dead Space game. It looked beautiful and was often fun, but it still felt clunky and frustrating due to what they didn't bother to update, which made it a strange mix of both modern sleekness and things brand new games would never do (forcing you to watch an unskippable cutscene every time you have to retry a boss fight, for example).
I think you really nailed "The Problem with Remakes" section. I've never played Resident Evil, but it's really cool to learn what the devs kept and changed. Although a part of me is always sad because of these changes make the original even more lost to time due to the lack of preservation.
I think it's also very important to say that Capcom is actually remaking their games and not remastering, which is a huge difference that they have from others such as TLOU and DS. They are actually adding value to their games, not only graphically, and in gameplay, but story wise.
I think the edge between remaster and remake is probably Link's Awakening. It's either one of the most faithful remakes, or one of the most advanced remasters.
Are you counting the Megaman Remakes too? They were low-effort, ports of the originals, that's all. I have more options and upgrades on old Emulators than in those remakes. Mods made by fans are more interesting than what Capcom has ever done with those remakes. You can play as different characters, unique weapons and upgrades. Mix and match robot masters. All you get in the Capcom remakes are Art and Music unlocks.
When I heard Leon still made the bingo joke after the village siege in RE4 Remake, that's when I fully realized Capcom knew EXACTLY what they were doing.
Though according to Leon's VA they originally didn't have it in. But when they were recording that scene they felt that what they had didn't work, so the VA suggested they try the old bingo line, and it just worked better.
I can't remember where I heard this (possibly Arlo's video on Link's Awakening remake?), but one thought that has always resonated with me is that proper remakes should not only try to capture the spirit or feel of the original, but also expand on it. Change it. Explore the concepts and mechanics and story of the original game in ways that simply couldn't have been done at the time of the original. Final Fantasy 7 Remake shines as a great example of this description of the "remake." It takes the original, makes significant story changes like RE, and also looks like Advent Children. Plays like what you think an Advent Children game would play like. It takes FF7 and makes something truly new from it. THAT, to me, is what something claiming to be a remake should aspire to. I haven't played the original Resident Evils, but the differences are night and day. I agree - Capcom are king here.
I would say Capcom's Megaman Remakes were NOT that good. They were low-effort, ports of the originals, that's all. I have more options and upgrades on old Emulators than in those remakes. Mods made by fans are more interesting than what Capcom has ever done with those remakes. You can play as different characters, unique weapons and upgrades. Mix and match robot masters. All you get in the remakes are Art and Music unlocks.
The RE 4 remake is what we hoped for as kids when we envisioned our favorite games in the future. Bluepoint remakes are premium remasters. It's the safest dish you can order at a restaurant. I many ways i think bluepoint subtracts from the originals, shadow of the collosus has a deeply and carefully crafted ps2 aesthetic and the new one is just a good looking game in a sea of other good looking games.
@@linhba1574 i'm arguing that they should (if they can) play both. because you can't remove something from it's context. Og Resi 4 can only exist as a gamecube designed game. i see the point in doing a demon's souls type of remake. From a dev stand point, they can serve as a learning experience for a new team. Remaking something gives you the opportunity to see why the design choices were made in the first place and then can be applied to a new game. See Crash Bandicoot 4 for a good exemple. But, as a player they give you only the gameplay without it's context wish is a shame. Imagine watching Blade but instead of techno music from the 90s, it has dub step.
capcom is one of the few companies I still have respect for, they were the first game I released a mod for which later helped me get into game development, im just an amateur but capcom is one of the few places i'd like to work if I could.
Honestly I prefer Capcom's (and even SE's with FF7R) approach to remakes. As much as I love certain games that get remade, playing the exact same game with a new coat of paint serves only to satisfy the fleeting sense of nostalgia which I would argue, is better serviced by playing the original game itself. Playing the original game can be difficult sometimes for the reasons you described which is unfortunate, but there is options like emulation out there. In recent years, when I've played some of the remakes of my beloved games, its been mixed. Demon's Souls was excellent but they ruined the soundtrack imo. It plays pretty much exactly the same and after I finished it the first playthrough, I didn't feel like playing it again because I've already played the original so many times. Conversely, when I played FF7R and more recently RE4R, those remakes are so new and refreshing that I was much more engaged. I'll say that FF7R was the weaker remake since it wasnt the complete game and a lot of the side quests just felt like padding. But it was extremely refreshing to see these beloved characters interact in a brand new game where you arent sure exactly how the story will play out. RE4R I think achieves that feeling even better. It starts you out with the familiar but it does things differently every other step and and changes or adds or cuts things in places in a way that services the new vision. The gameplay has the same considerations and the key there was they kept the heart of what made the original SO fun. With that foundation in place, a fan of the original like myself had given trust to this new remake's devteam to take me on a "remade" ride and it paid off in spades.
I think the main difference is that RE2+4 focused much more on remaking the same experience, while FF7R focused more on expanding the game (which is even more obvious if you know how it differs from the original). Aside from both games doing a great job at modernising everything in the games.
I am playing the Dead Space remake right now, after having just beaten the RE4 remake, and I gotta say, the contrast is remarkable. Even though I haven't played the original Dead Space in ages, it feels all too familiar, whereas RE4 and its remake feel meaningfully different enough so as to be enjoyed on their own merits. I could probably go back to the original RE4 and feel like I'm playing something totally different, in a good way.
I believe it's important for people to know when a game is a remaster and when it is a remake. I also think that both methods of game "re-release" should be used for preserving the media we so love. And a small hot take I think that offering the two simultaneously is better than just releasing a remake and just unlist a remaster. For example re4. They just released the remake but they still offer the remaster on every platform for players to experience if they want.
Thank you for this. Capcom indeed is killing it with these 3 remakes. They're all really good with RE3 being the weakest of these 3 but I still enjoyed it And this is me having played the original 2, 3 and 4 a lot of times throughout the years. Resident Evil 2,3 and 4 remakes are personally among the best remakes we got in these recent years along with Live A Live, Final Fantasy 7, Dead Space, Diablo 2, Demon Souls and remasters like Metroid Prime, Crisis Core, FF Pixel remasters and The Last of Us Part 1( I consider it a glorified cashgrab remaster, not a remake. still good visuals though). But with these awesome remakes and remasters, there are bad ones too like.. yeah... GTA Trilogy. It honestly gave me a headache when I played it. And the most prominent bad remakes for me are the remakes made by this company Forever Entertainment. Just bad. Especially Front Mission 1st remake is just plain bad. It was already a timeless game. If you watched this video and played the original and remake of Front Mission 1st, you'll understand why this video was made in the first place.
It would be really awesome if Capcom released the original version of 1, 2 and 3 on modern platforms, but the remakes of 2 and 4 are incredible. I think a good remake would have the stuff that makes it special while removing or changing what people didn't like about it (with exceptions of course), and modern additions.
MediEvil's PS4 remake included a new, mysterious side objective towards the end of the game that, if completed, adds a new option to the main menu: under "New Game," you find an "Old Game" button. When selected, the PS1 bootup screen starts and the original version of MediEvil is launched. I was elated, because as much as I enjoyed the remake, there is no way to play the original without a working PlayStation. I thought it was a really clever surprise, and I really hope they remake the second game. I never got a chance to play it, though I won't hold my breath, since it's a miracle PlayStation even acknowledged the existence of the original.
Knife play is actually a REALLY interesting change in RE4 Remake! I've would love to ask the developers if this is what they noticed too, after replaying the original it was surprising how tense and exciting close range combat became! One thing you kind of implied but didn't elaborate on is that games are inherently influenced by available technology! This is a young medium, a LOT of things changed between the original and the remake of RE4. A game in the form of RE4 Remake just couldn't exist before!
Yeah they mentioned in an interview about that. The knife mechanism apparently was designed initially only for the Krauser fight since they want to remove QTE, and then they made it, tested it, thought it was actually pretty damn good, and expanded the use for the whole game instead of just the one section. It's the most impactful change they made for the game tbh.
There's literally nothing new nor special about the RE4 demake. All its design tropes are already old as fuck, proven and generic AAA design choices that started plaguing the industry ~15 decades ago. Meh and predictable as hell, total lack of soul or even originality.
The best and most succulent way I’ve heard how a remake should be done is “The job of a remake is to recreate a game the way players remember playing it originally.” As time goes on norms for game design change, what’s accepted or standard shapes how we approach any new game we play. That makes certain things really dated just by comparison with olde Thames. If you took those dated parts of the experiences (dialogue, framing, UI, etc.) and put them in a brand new game it wouldn’t invoke those same memories you had when you first played it. There’d be too much internal conflict going on in a player’s head between the clear and faithful recreation of older parts of the games, and their brain expecting modern conveniences and evolutions in current releases. I imagine finding that balance for cult classics and landmark releases is really hard and stressful to do. It’s impressive when the perfect medium is found. Also, the one remake in recent memory I can think of that’s pretty substantial and should be talked about is funny enough, SpongeBob: Battle for Bikini Bottom: Rehydrated. That game is as close as possible to a 1:1 remake you can get just updating modern graphics. They went so far into making sure this happened that they even talked to speed runners of the game and had them play test to make sure glitches and skips that occurred in the OG release happened in the remake too. Never heard of that happening before and I think that’s really cool.
A trick about the original RE4 that makes you think about Ashley differently. At the very least, in Chapter 1 and 2, Ashley is the perfect bait. You advance a bit, tell her to stay and move behind her and let enemies go to the grab her. While the enemy is taking Ashley, you shoot at their legs, making them fall to the ground. Rinse and repeat. Extra points if she wear armor, but it is not really necessary.
Honestly, as far as an escort mission character, she was actually pretty decent for the time. She did stay mostly out of the way, and you didn't have to babysit her too much.
@@AnotherDuck In my experience, the main problem with Ashley was "Cutscene Incompetence." When she was under your control you could make her hang back or hide in a cupboard, but every now and again the plot required that she be captured so that Leon could rescue her, and she would do whatever it took for her to be captured.
“Little incentive to come back” *shows DeadSpace remake* Come on now that gave every reason to come back it was a genuine upgrade and when you actually play it. It feels like a whole new game with nostalgia riding behind it. It was brilliant
RE4 remake I think is my favorite Resident Evil now, even above Village. I have played the OG RE4 too which was my favorite. They really did strike the right balance between keeping the old and introducing the new.
It's like a better writer got their hands on the script, fine tuned the heck out of it, and then the director was given a blank check to make the final product. It's how you imagined it would be when you were playing as kid, but somehow even better. Capcom has done a fantastic job.
I’ve seen many argue that they much prefer the original script because it has “soul” with its flaws and all. There’s charm even in the weak parts That’s what I see people say constantly. Any changes are “soulless” which demerits the amount of effort developers put into a game. But people also don’t know how much effort it takes to make a game. They just “Criticize” anything they don’t like even ignorantly
I fell in love with the SotC remaster. I own a ps3 but it's falling apart. Having the game available on ps4 allowed me to play it and become mildly obsessed with it. I had always heard great things about it and feel like the core sense of amazement and curiousity is captured in the ps4 version.
When it comes to a remake that changes too much, or changes too little - I'll usually take the latter if the game is old enough. Like, say, Resident Evil 2 (2019) vs Spyro Reignited. Because I think there's something to be said about how remakes should be considered enhancement projects first (like extra years of development time with the luxury of new tech), and a fresh experience second. It's more important to get all the pieces of the OG game in place first before you start making changes or additions - otherwise remakes can end up feeling incomplete, or like something was lost, even if they end up being an overall improvement from their source material. That said, additions and expansions too are extremely important and effective, and what elevates something from a great remaster to a great remake.
“Old games get stuck on disintegrating hardware.” This hits hard. This is something that I hate so much, though I realize nobody in particular is necessarily at fault. But as a lifelong collector of books, movies, music, games, and gaming consoles, it tears me up to know that by the time my four year old will be old enough to appreciate some of the classic games and media on their original consoles. I mean you’d have to keep everything shrink-wrapped and never touch it for years if you pulled it out one day looking to play an old title. I mean shite, I take GREAT care of my games and there is STILL a level of wear and tear that comes from simply moving the game from its case to the console and back, it’s just inevitable. And finding adaptors for some of these older consoles to work with modern televisions and such also gets progressively more difficult over time. That line you uttered just has a lot of weight behind it for someone like me. Perhaps you could make a video about that someday… I’ll subscribe in the hopes that you will
Pokemon HGSS is probably one of the best remakes of a game I have played, if we go by the metrics mentioned in this video (other than accessibility maybe) and how much the game improved upon the original version. They added a lot of new things (and cut a few) but nothing felt out of place. It is probably one of the most liked game in the series by the whole community.
Yeah few games have ever been fronting their “what could’ve been” pitch right in front of everyone to see like Gold & Silver. A diorama version of Kanto, but nonetheless recognizable and a playable, was begging for an expanded version, when the tech was there.
Even over Leafgreen + Firered? I don't if I can agree completely. HG+SS were fantastic remakes, but man Leaf and Fire were perfect (for what it was when it came out).
@@matthewo.7156 that’s probably because Red/Blue is so weirdly janky and beta-feeling. Crap UI, massively unbalanced move and type pools. Gen 3 is really when Pokémon became just polished enough without losing the charm and intangible stuff.
Johto pokemons like Houndour and Murkrow are still only available in Kanto even in HGSS just like the original games so I don't think it's that good of a remake, but I will pick ORAS over Ruby/Sapphire and BDSP over Diamond and Pearl any day
Both types of approach - remakes that mix it up compared with remakes that are more one-to-one - have their place, it really depends on how much the original still holds up today in terms of design that determines how much a remake will need to change or modernise.
Depends a one to one RE4 remake would be disappointing since the original is available in every single platform and getting it with just upgraded controls and graphics would be disappointing.
Because why not play a remake? What's the big mystery qnd issue with wanting a remake of your favorite games and franchise. Again you're not an re fan so you wont understand.
The System Shock remake. Yea, I kind of forgot that was even supposed to be a thing. It better be the best game released in whatever year it comes out or it's just going to fizzle after so many delays.
I certainly pressed the auto sort button on Re4R whenever I check the atache case close to moments of high stress, and it was more of an inconvenience because it messed up the order I already had... but once I let go of that tetris complex from the original, I started to use it more since it was somewhat convenient when I wanted to pick certain items when the case was almost full... you can also do that when you have enough squares but they are scattered whith the item on the outside....
While I wish AAA companies were less risk-averse and came out with awesome new IPs, I also wish I could replay old games with higher resolutions and modernised game controls. I adored the Jak & Daxter trilogy but man have the camera controls aged poorly 😅 Also stuff like adding more frequent checkpoints would be great on old games. Most modern games are a lot more forgiving and if I just want a trip down memory lane I don't necessarily want the high difficulty.
@@JuanLeon-oe6xe Both Bravely and Octopath sold well enough to get sequels and the Setsuna devs made enough to develop more games. Not all games need to be blockbuster mega-hits, they just need to make enough money to develop more games. There are new AAA IPs that have sold well recently, namely Elden Ring and Deathloop, but most AAA publishers are too scared to try new stuff
It's a totally different approach, but my favourite remake has to be Kirby Super Star Ultra. Same game, remade assets, improved controls, and like 50% _more_ content in the form of four new postgame modes and a couple more subgames. When a _remake_ introduces a recurring character (Galacta Knight) and starts a series tradition (the True Arena) you can start to see why Kirby players list remakes as separate games in the series. Same deal with the recent RTDLDX straight-up resolving an unanswered question in the original (how did Magolor survive) by adding an entire postgame.
I believe remakes should be primarily faithful as a form of rereleasing an old game if that old game isn't widely available already, then you can do whatever you want. Because games need to be constantly ported to modern platforms and hardware in order to remain accessible, rereleases are an inherent part of preservation, and for some publishers remakes is the only way they'll do it.
Great video, really hits the nail on the head about why the remakes of 2 and 4 worked so well, and why 3 didn't. But please don't hold up Nightdive as an example of doing things right without mentioning the issues with development, and the awful way they've treated disillusioned backers on Kickstarter.
The Remake of RE2 shouldn't be used as an example of a good remake, it cuts way too much content from OG and many of it's elements are a downgrade. And it's even worse as a replacement, If you're gonna remake an old game without even bothering to preserve the Og game you are obligated to make the remake as faithful as possible, RE1 did that and for that reason it's not an issue if OG re1 is missing from modern stores. Calling this a good remake when it's worse than the vast majority of remakes that came before(especially in it's own franchise) is laughable
How I look at remasters/remakes - Re-release - Remasters - Redux (remasters with content changes and/or significant balance change) - Remake (near shot-for-shot) - Reimaging (new game with structure/concept from the original)
I know there's a million remaster / remakes, but I'm surprised you didn't mention Pathologic. The dev team went to remaster the game, realized it was a bit of a train wreck (though a bizarrely delightful train wreck), and so decided to simultaneously work on a remaster and a remake. They both turned out fantastic, though I never played the original.
That “super easy barely an inconvenience” nod to Pitch Meeting was incredible
wowowow
wow
TIGHT
Oh really?
incredible? It was a fun nod
@@Crowbar incredible nod
Regarding your point about preservation, the video game industry is the worst when it comes to preserving classics. What's worse is that a lot of game developers and even gamers have this mindset that once a remake comes out you don't have to bother with the original. The idea that a remake should or even could just replace the original is really bad for video games as an art form because it devalues them into content to be discarded as soon as the new shiny replacement comes out.
The same thing applies to other forms of media, but in the gaming industry this kind of mindset is more celebrated than elsewhere and it is depressing. Imagine movie buffs telling you not to bother with the iconic original Cape Fear and instead just watch the new shiny remake.
Relax, no one will tell anybody to watch Cape Fear or Psycho's remake over the first one, or The Thing's, roms aren't going nowhere just as downloading old movie won't, relax because remakes are not shadowing the originals unless it's for people that would've never cared to try/learned about the old version without the new.
Pd: If you find remakes depressing, man I envy your lack of real world awareness.
@@greatrulo you just missed his point entirely. Nobody would tell you to skip the original Cape Fear, but people would tell you to skip the original RE2. That's his point, in gaming this mindset is accepted much more readily than in the film community.
@@greatrulo Except they are. Emulation is an option on PC, on dedicated hardware, or on hacked devices, and all require a fair degree of trust, dipping into potentially dangerous space, and at least a little more hardware familiarity than a lot of people feel comfortable getting. Learning how to tweak emulator launch settings on the steam deck was enough familiarity with bash scripts and . Dedicated storefronts and unhacked consoles don't give you that option. Most online services let you watch the originals of old movies, but old games get forgotten. The original Demon's Souls is a lot harder to access or even find info on because of the new one, the original RE trilogy is inaccessible on most platforms, and the Metroid Prime Remaster, one that everyone is raving over, has the massive defect that it doesn't restore any of the speedrunning tricks of the NA GC 1.0 edition, leaving the most open and free ways to play the game inaccessible to people who either have the original disk and a gc/wii, people who are emulating that version, or people who are emulating the switch version with hacks.
On top of that, companies don't like emulation. They frame it as piracy, to the extent that the two often get conflated. There's also stuff that doesn't make sense to emulate. In the case of stuff like WarCraft III, fans have to use hacky servers to play something that feels closer to the original, and that's a lot of unreliability to have to rely on as a fan, if you even realize that's an option. Remasters do supercede the originals in the eyes of their publishers and the eyes of online content creators, and that does suck for people who want to enjoy some of the original's features.
Man, anyone with a potato laptop can emulate nearly any video game previous to the PS3 in a manner of minutes, if they can't then they wouldn't even bother with a 30 year old niche game with tank controls, stop gatekeeping, newcomers to franchises benefit from remakes as without them, they wouldn't have known/cared to try the series.
@@onceyougozach2607 because for one the remake is better and more user friendly, and for another unless you're a hardcore horror gamer you'd never try the originals on your own, and if you are, emulation is not stopping you. 😁
I propose that you all either stop going wah wah wah and instead donate to modders working on HD mods to support gaming preservation, or talk with your wallet and buy all the remasters and collections of the franchises you enjoy, Capcom always listens to feedback and I'm sure the only reason that they haven't released a horror collection is because their HD Collections always do poorly despite having a lot of work put into them.
I do think preservation should be a bigger deal in the gaming sphere. Right now, for a lot of gaming's history, your only option of enjoying it is through piracy and emulation. And with some games not even working with that, or being too unpopular to be preserved, a lot of gaming's history is slowly vanishing. I know a part of not releasing older content for players on modern systems is issues with who holds the rights for certain things in the games, but there has to be a way. For now we have to rely on piracy and gray zones..
Blue Point does it much better
For sure, this is one of the hardest issuesto solve with gaming and hopefully there's progress. Gaming doesn't really have any unifying bodies that can help guide stuff like this yet. Hopefully we see that and the other thing we need, game dev unions.
If GOG can do it then so can the big boys, just takes a bit of effort.
What I don't like is that the RE remakes are supposed to replace the original trilogy...
That's why I really like it when companies do something like XBox game pass. There are games from the second console generation on there. I really appreciate virtual console tbh.
Honestly Capcom just deserves an award for releasing games that work on launch
VERY underrated comment.
should be standard, no one should be rewarded for sticking to standards.
Dude no wtf. That should be standard.
No they deserve to be shutdown because they are out of ideas
Glad you made the game preservationist pitch, as that's ultimately the most important. Companies keeping *both* versions of their game easily playable like Capcom with RE4 and Square with FF7 are unfortunately the exception rather than the norm. And then you have companies like Nintendo that hold back emulated versions on modern hardware (as with SM64 and Link's Awakening) until their unnecessary remastered/remade versions get their year or two of exclusive sales.
I mean, Capcom is smooth, fast, and loyal to their fans.
Square took forever to release the first part of a remake, and we still have no clue when the second part is coming out.
Don't get me started on Nintendo ww will be here for the whole day
Nintendo doesn't just hold them back, they released Mario 3D All Stars for a limited time only to take advantage of customer FOMO, so that those who chose to wait "learn their lesson" and buy on release the next time.
They kept both versions with the C&C remake.
Not sure why this clown is acting like capcom cares about preservation so much. RE4 is the exception, they are perfectly content with trying to memoryhole the entire classic RE trilogy though
Square and preservation in the same sentence tho. Just the worst joke EVER.
Are we talking about the same company that lost the code to untold games ? Most of the Final Fantasy franchise even tho it's such a money maker for them ?
Why do you think they went to do the Pixel Remasters recently purely from art of the games back then ? And why do you think they've only done FFX-HD and FFXII HD ?
They're one of, if not the worst company at doing preservation of their back catalog
hi, I’m mark brown and THIS is a pretzel from wetzels pretzel *hands u a pretzel*
Goddamn my boi Jakey subbed to GMTK as well
I am still so incredibly bummed how the RE3 remake turned out. RE3 was my starting point in the series when I was a kid. It’s what got me hooked. The remake wasn’t terrible, but when compared to the RE2 and RE4 remake it feels like a free DLC than an actual remake. I really hope they revisit RE3 again sometime in the future, as Nemesis is still one of the biggest standout villains in the series.
It’s a great game but it’s a lackluster remake. I think that’s the best way to put it
@@MR.__G The OG RE 3 isnt an important game for Capcom. Its lackluster compared to OG 1,2, and 4.
Re3 remake is and always considered to be the worst one in the series. Nemesis and Jill was probably the most done dirty. Both of them treated with disrespect with Jill being a snobby bitch and Nemesis being a laughing stock of a threat. Serving as a npc that is trying to figure out what crayola pens look like, and Jill thinking she’s got it all good yet everything is fucked. Nemesis is a failure within the story bc he forgot his one task. Jill is a failure due to non logical thinking that one puny, kinky looking fluid can cure an entire city yet the missile was already hitting the city. Also Barry was excluded. The legendary quipster was excluded from the ending. Consider this sandwich to be garbage worthy
i think the worst part is how re2 was hinting towards re3 in the gameplay, foreshadowing nemesis, however u play re3 n its just drops? in quality like.. i know it was a separate team working on them but they completely scrap clues n ideas of nemisis created in re 2 in re3 which makes it less exciting,
I hope they focus on Code Veronica instead.
Yakuza Kiwami is a notable example in my opinion because it's not just a remaster with touchups, like most remakes, it's a complete *remake*. The story and dialogue are the same, sure, but the combat is completely different, there's way more side content, and of course there's Majima Everywhere.
Thank you also for making the preservation pitch. It's a downright crime that piracy is the best way to play games released more than 10 years ago.
I find Kiwami to be really interesting from that standpoint, because it does shot for shot remasters of scenes from the original, but also blatantly (and clumsily imo) inserts new content. I still love the game for all the yakuza goodness, but it is hella awkward.
On the other hand, Kiwami is just a downgraded version of 0 with lesser and not so interesting side content and not so amazing story though the latter is more on the subjective matter.
For reals though, I feel like the actual charm of Yakuza 1 was in its absolutely brilliant English Dub and some of the OSTs were also better
@@sharjeelahmed7913 Zero had the better side content and I agree the story was better, but the combat tweaks and inclusion of Majima Everywhere make Kiwami almost as good an experience
Yakuza Kiwami is a re-imagining then, if it adds or changes content. remakes just remake the game.
but I think that piracy is by far the best way to preserve games. not only do you not pay to people that have got nothing to do with the creation of the game, but you also get stuff for free. the only better version is free releases
Kiwamis are also two absolutely BUTCHERED de-makes, that water down and ruin the intended, original atmosphere, characters and feels. Even outright censor stuff out of existence to deliver a more "hihii hahaa so whacky!" comedic experience, where as the OGs take their stories and cast really seriously and have some heavy hitting content.
The only good part about K1 was the added backstory flashbacks for some of the MCs, but everything else's a clear downgrade. Majima Everywhere system itself not only ruins his character, but also shits up the pacing of the game by implementing an unnecessary, RNG-based extra layer of grinding.
I really do think one of the best compromises is when updated remakes include the unaltered original as a bonus feature. Especially considering how much smaller older games are there really is almost never any excuse not to do so.
That makes me think about the remasters like Halo Anniversary or Wonder Boy III: The Dragon's Trap, that are just the original game with a (toggable) new render on top. It truly seems that *emulation* is the sincerest form of flattery.
Not a remake necessarily but this made me think about how wild it was when Donkey Kong 64 included an in game playable arcade cabinet of the original Donkey Kong.
Great example Castlevania Dracula X chronicles for the PSP. a remake of "Dracula X: Rondo of Blood" that includes both the original rondo of blood (not originally released in the west) and because why not it also included Symphony of the night which tbh was the main attraction of that collection
in a perfect world every remake/remaster should include the original
Rights issues are to blame, mostly. Sometimes it's not clear who is allowed to release a game, sometimes a piece of music or art is not licensed anymore. Even Rockstar are not excempt from this as you can not get older versions of certain GTA games with the full soundtrack they released with anymore because of rights issues.
For me the "Capcom remake philosophy" is perfectly captured in the section of RE4REMAKE were you free yourself from chains and have to retrieve your equipment. It perfectly plays with your memory of the OG, while teaching you a new mechanic (stealth), changing the order of things in a more "realistic" and sensical manner, and right when you have accepted that you can't rely on your memories this time, it throws you a bone and rewards you with the exact same treasure (decorated mask) in the exact same position it was in the OG. Then the game proceeds to play with you by making you face a gauntlet in an old stage (the windy canyon) but with a new layout, and so on and so on...
I really felt a kid again while playing RE4REMAKE, it was THAT good, and I have to thank Capcom for making me experience, again for the first time, one of my favorite games ever!
8:59
GMTK : This wrecked the balance and made the game super easy, barely an inconvenience
Me : Ohhhh!! Wrecking the balance in a remake is tight!!!
And then he did a back flip, snapped the bad guy’s neck, and saved the day!
Leonardo Dicaprio *Points*
Glad I'm not the only one who heard that in their head
"Super easy, barely an inconvenience" seems to be slowly becoming more widespread, and idk how I feel watching a meme breach containment.
Yea yea yea！
I like the idea of remakes keeping the same spirit as the previous game, promising and delivering the same experiences, but going further and doing the concept more justice than they ever had the opportunity to do with the original.
I constantly found myself saying “I don’t remember this…” but it never felt alienated from my memories, needless to say I loved every second of it. Ashley in particular had me devoutly WANTING to help her because she was just so supportive and resilient, in a real and believable way. The actress that played her did an amazing job for an industry so ridden with bad voice overs (more than I can say for Ada but I digress). I’d love to see more companies do remakes in this style.
The biggest problem with Ada is not her VA but the fact that she sounds like she's recorded on an old dictaphone. I don't understand how they pushed this into release.
@@loganreed23 It also feels like she's zoned out of her mind
Die alles
It's so strange to me. I never played the original, so I went into the remake completely blind. Ada sounded as good as every other character. It wasn't until I saw everyone bullying the VA for Ada that I went "did we play the same game? she sounded fine to me". I did go back and listen to what she sounded like in the original, and I gotta say I can see how different they are but I mean they cut back a lot of Leon's lines and made him more serious, yet I don't see anyone getting annoyed with how he's portrayed. Gamers are the worst honestly.
@@gindamusic1296 I'd say the opinion regarding Ada's RE4R VA and Leon's came from different parts of the fanbase. Apple and orange case of sorts.
First of all, I have to say that your comparing between Ada's 4 and 4R voice is perfectly valid, but unfortunately incorrect. Thing is, Ada has a completely different VA between _2R_ and 4R. Her performance in the former was more... well, I don't wanna say it's _better_ per se, but she sounds much livelier in 2R.
On the other hand, Leon's VA is the same as the one from RE2R, and the issue in this particular case is that Capcom cut some of the lines that were in the original.
Regardless, it's interesting to see things from the perspective of someone who's new to the series.
The point on preservation of older games is a major factor and worth being discussed more. There needs to be some handling of it like how Scorsese has committed to preserving old films.
That Ryan George reference was tight
yeah, I was all wow wow wow wow.... wow.
But why did he make such a reference?
"Because."
@@Egurius3 "Works for me"
So you have a new GMTK video for me?
@@zankarne Yes, sir, I do.
9:00 i was NOT expecting a pitch meeting reference in a gmtk video holy crap that was amazing
That last point about game preservation really hit home.
I think it's great when remakes try new things...as long as the original is still widely accessible. If it's not playable, then the widely different remake, by its existence, crushes any chance the publisher will ever go back and ensure that the original is available to play. I would've LOVED to see a Demon's Souls HD Remaster come out first, so that the remake could've added/changed up things a bit more(6th Archstone anyone?)
“Right now, we are in the age of the remake”
Me, rebuilding a favorite Flash game from the ground up in Unity out of sheer love and passion:
@@Ihatevideogames334 I do not care
I'd argue for a #4, the remakes retcon the story to fit with future games. Game writers aren't usually preparing stories for games with games 2-4 entries later in the series in mind, so these decades-long series build up a body of lore that tends to get tangled and messy as future games have to either fit within- or change- pre-established series history. Remakes give the devs some room to smooth out the kinks and retcon in a narrative foundation for future plot events that makes those developments feel more natural. RE4 retconned Luis' story to make him a connecting element that ties RE4 back to RE2 and 3 (*), and used Ada's story as a bridge to the story of RE5.
.
.
.
(*) Luis was retconned to have been born in the village and had lost his grandfather to a Las Plagas infection. Because of that experience with the parasite, they also expanded his role at Umbrella to make him part of the Umbrella team that developed the Nemesis Parasite, bringing his experience with Las Plagas to the team.
You're right, but it is important to note he was from the village in the original too.
The Dead Space remake for example didn't just update things, it happily took both plot and design elements from the second and third games. In a way creating the Dead Space that people remembered instead of the one that actually existed, if they hadn't played the original recently.
what future games? the original fits just right with everything in the series, up untill the new remakes evrything kind of works, there no crazy plot holes or big incoerences. Even the new information about spencer and other miranda meeting in the past doesn't really go agaisnt anything from previous games, if i remember well.
There _is_ one game series where its writers DO prepare stories for games with 2-4 entries later in the series in mind - the Trails/Kiseki series. There are a lot of plot elements where I just found myself dumbfounded at how they were able to foreshadow them literally mutliple games ahead, and plot points that get touched on for multiple games despite the main party changing every time. The only "retcons" the series has ever had was to add two characters from later games as minor characters in the rerelease of one of the games to have consistent alibis with the later entries and even that was a relatively minor change.
@@rickymeggs9853 Was he? I may have missed that.
Regardless, they definitely expanded on his childhood in the village and established that Chief Mendez knew him and his family in the remake.
In particular, I appreciate when remakes or re-masters introduce quality of life improvements. To borrow a non-capcom example, the Spiro trilogy remake added an ability to Sparx where he'll point in the direction of loose treasure if you hit a button combination. It's an optional feature, so you don't need to use it, but it's there for those moments when you're one gem shy from 100%, while still being unobtrusive.
Another example, this one a Capcom game, is the Devil May Cry 3 HD remaster for the Switch. DMC 3 classic introduced styles to the game, a system of perks that you could equip Dante with at the start of each level. The issue was, experimentation was kind of discouraged due to you being locked into a style for a whole level. Pick gunslinger when you're on a tight map and enemies are right next to you? Pick Royal Guard on a boss that's very hard to time blocking correctly? Tough luck.
In the remake, tho, they switched to what later entries in the series did, allowing you to shift between styles on the fly. While it does kind of make Dante a bit more broken, part of the cool factor of the series has been being a nigh-unstoppable badass, so I personally didn't feel like it diminished things. Plus, it's an optional feature you can turn off if you absolutely need the classic inputs.
“Super easy, barely an inconvenience” - looking forward to that Pitch Meeting and GMTK collaboration in the future!
Came here to say the same thing!
Man that Warcraft 3 one gets me right in the feels. I was going to download the original, as it had been years since I played it, but I needed to save some cash at the time. So when I was a bit more flush the next month, it was gone in preparation of the remake. Missed it by that much!
Working on remastering a popular Flash game series with a dedicated community really emphasizes the importance of knowing where to make changes and where not to. How do you balance much needed improvement of various systems with fans' nostalgia and expectations? Some fans will want the games as close as possible to the originals, which is totally valid. Other fans will want novelty and stronger replay value, which again is totally valid.
In the end, you put it well - recapture the core *feeling* of the game, even strengthen it where possible, but don't be afraid to make informed changes to *mechanics* as long as they don't interfere with that feeling.
1:43
Not sure if it was on purpose, but I like that you say: "... I've used these remakes to catch up on titles I've *MYST* upon release."
"This makes the game super easy, barely an inconvenience"
Oh wow wow wow!
wow!
Even mentioning re5 remake makes me and my roommate so fucking happy. We were 14 playing though re5 and 6 such memories
9:00 I see Mark is a fan of pitch meetings.
This Capcom style is exactly what I aimed to achieve with my remake of Sonic Triple Trouble.
I redid the Game Gear game as if it was a Mega Drive game, like the AM2R of Sonic remakes.
I tried a "graphics only" take and it sucked. Recreating "feel" not mechanics proved way better.
Awesome. I always enjoy fan games more than remakes. Companies have been riding the "nostalgia" wave by just porting the game to a new system for a quick cash-grab without understanding why it was great "in the moment".
If we talking sonic remakes I wouldn’t mind using the Capcom style for unleashed
The remake of the first RE1 is still one of the most incredible games to me. Seeing that in 2002 must be like seeing Half-Life 2 but in 1998 instead.
RE1 remake is my favorite.
About Psycho's 1998 remake, you should know that some of the original film fans actually have a lot of esteem for it. OG Psycho has the most detailed analysis in film history. Now I'm not the biggest fan of Psycho out there but it's arguable that remaking a film with that many icons could only be interesting if made seemingly so similar while deviating from it in only a few key ways : details. There's also the political implications in being able show things differently nearly 40 years after and the possibility to observe different reactions from the audience. In other words, it's a film that begs for over-interpretation, which I didn't bought in myself but the point being that hopefully people reading this will be curious enough to watch more of Gus Van Sant's films because there's definitely worth seing for the most part. I'd mostly recommend Drugstore Cowboy (1989), My Own Private Idaho (1991), To Die For (1995), Elephant (2003), Last Days (2005) and Paranoid Park (2007). He also directed Good Will Hunting (1997) which I'm not really fan of but still putting here because it must be it's most well known film.
Sums up the feelings I had playing the Demon's Souls remake. As pretty as it is, it's sort of halfway between a remaster and an entirely new remake. It leaves the game in a weird place going forward, where there are two versions of basically the same thing. I prefer the Capcom and Square approach, as both companies have made at least some effort to bring their older titles to newer hardware, and make the remakes new things.
Yeah, DeS PS5 was mostly for newfound FROM fans who never tried the original. As one of those people, I loved it (and really appreciated how beautiful it was, adding background scenery detail in a lot of areas). But the keeping the bosses the same was... a choice. I think it's a choice I appreciated, as being disappointed with the Dragon God boss fight seems like a core part of the experience lmao. And I'd always heard people describe DeS as a game where the levels were the bosses, not the bosses themselves - so making those fights more difficult a la Dark Souls 3-era Fromsoft boss design would definitely throw off the balance. But then I'm appreciating this *game* for its historical accuracy value, which as Mark pointed out is quite an odd thing when shot-for-shot I could just be playing the original instead (though I do like the more subtle balance changes Bluepoint made with 8-directional rolling, lizard behavior, and health grass weight). Bluepoint remakes have always put me in a sort of uncanny valley with appreciating them though - they're so fantastically done but so eerily a facsimile of the original.
Yeah, the problem with the Demon's Souls remake, it's not been done by the original studio. Bluepoint just have muscle power. They are technically great but they haven't done one single video game from ground up before. Their entire catalog is remakes, remasters, ports and collections. And Fromsoft games are quite heavy in terms of game design. So I think it was right decision from them not to change game drastically. Also this overlaps with Sony's strategy. Their entire strategy is graphics, graphics and more graphics.
Comments like this are a huge bummer for the industry, you're actually praising this rehas culture...
If bluepoint remade Bloodborne with Miyazaki overseeing the project I think I could die happy.
@@HuskyandStarch Probably he is very busy with pumping a goty every 2-3 years.
I think the main problem with video game remakes is that a "shot-for-shot" remake is for many the only option for getting to experience an older game. A movie can easily be watched on modern technology no matter how it was originally created. But a 10 year old game often cannot be experienced on the latest technology that everyone has. And so in many instances the only way to experience it is either to hunt down the old machinery (often easier said than done), be a _pirate_ to get it (but that has it's own shortcomings, not including the potential moral one), or hope it's remade as a near-exact copy so you can experience it as originally intended.
But the 1:1 remake can be especially irritating to those who _bought_ the game originally. Because games are more expensive than movies, and to buy it again just to see a _nearly_ exact duplicate is generally not worth it (unless you're a simpleton who believes video game companies will go extinct if you don't buy everything they put out).
I'm old enough that I've typically experience most of the big and popular games that have come out and would rather have a re-imagining than a 1:1 remaster/port.
Video games are also interesting in that the technological improvements are far more noticeable than they are for films. So in some instances, a modern remake can't be 1:1 if what it's remaking is old enough. Just increasing the resolution and adding in some dynamic lighting isn't going to work.
Overall, though, we need better solutions for access to older games. The companies who make them are generally completely divorced from the individuals who _cared_ about making a given game at the time it was made and so preservation just doesn't matter. In fact, some companies have a negative view of it as cutting in to their entitled profits. They'd rather old games disappeared from existence until when and if they decide to release them for sale again (Nintendo). This way of doing things directly impedes the efforts of the people with talent (not the CEOs, Presidents, shareholders, etc) in doing something new and interesting with a remake -- to do it as a reimagining.
I think there is definitely room for both shot-for-shot remakes and reimagining (of any degree) remakes in the video game space. I just wish that it was always incredibly clear from the packaging and marketing which a game is. I dislike that "remake" and "remastered" (and other "re-" terms) are not super useful to me in trying to figure out the scope of changes, and that I frequently have to either find out from friends or actually play myself to learn what was done.
Remasters will always be the original game because they are literally just the original game, but they went in and remastered the media files (sounds/textures/etc.).
Remakes are entirely new games which can be a carbon copy of the original with new tech like Demon's Souls or something new entirely like Resi 2.
The only other relevant 're' term I can think of is reboot which is almost always a complete redesign and may or may not retell the original story.
And then you have the many, many games that don't even use _either_ term in their marketing, and instead tack on some cutesy term like "Rearmed", "Reignited", or "Rehydrated".
@@ghostderazgriz That's what they *should* be. Nate's grumbling that the terminology isn't used consistently.
@@stevethepocket "Reforged." 🙄
They need to knock that shit off.
@@stevethepocket And quite often, those terms are used for sequels or just the same game again, but with all the dlc.
I haven't actually played any of these most recent RE remakes and only played RE2 out of the originals back in the day, so I was kinda hoping you'd reference the Final Fantasy VII remake a bit in this video to help with context for people like me. But I still enjoyed the video, overall.
8:59 "Super easy, barely an inconvenience"
Ryan George reference?
Once I heard it, I was like: "Oh really?"
When did this become pitch meeting? 😂
glad you mentioned re3 remake, it was such a solid game back in the ps1 and now we will have to bear with it never getting it's rightful remake for possibly decades
As a Pokémon fan, the discussion what goes into a remake and what makes remakes good or bad is something that’s always fascinated me, so I’m very glad this is a topic Mark is talking about
In terms of what I personally like in a remake, if it’s a reimagining type of remake, I like something like Pokémon ORAS, while if it’s going to be more faithful, Pokémon Mystery Dungeon DX is my go to example, but Xenoblade Definitive is also good
ORAS and HGSS are both fantastic examples of remakes that both preserve and improve past titles. They really dropped the ball on BDSP
@@mewwww17 I see a lot of criticism towards BDSP. Had I followed the route of the long(er) term fans, then I'd probably join in their chorus. However, my last game was Sapphire (no, not Alpha) before returning to the franchise last year. Brilliant Diamond struck a perfect chord for me with the nostalgic top-down sprite vibe, but intertwined with more modern twists like the 3D'ish battle elements and the character customization.
It was a bridge for me that spring-boarded me into the newer games. All in all, the reasons as to what makes a good remake really boils down to the eye of the beholder. And probably the target demographic of the developer (older fans vs drawing in newer ones).
@@mewwww17ORAS needed battle frontier
It's bizarre seeing how good FRLG and especially HGSS were as remakes, then seeing how disappointing both ORAS and BDSP were. I feel like Game Freak hasn't really put their heart and soul into any of the mainline games since B2W2.
@@Celis.C To be fair, I'm not surprised you had a positive experience with BDSP. They are remakes of Diamond and Pearl which were great games, after all.
As a long-term fan, I was disappointed by the lack of the improvements that were added in Platinum, such as the Battle Frontier, the extended Sinnoh dex and Gym Leader/Elite 4 teams, the enhanced Cyrus story, lack of connectivity with SwSh, etc. Aside from the improvements to the Grand Underground, it felt like the developers wanted to make the absolute bare minimum of what could be expected in a remake of D/P.
Final Fantasy 7 is another remake that came to mind, it drove me to purchase a PS4 at that time and boy was it an amazing experience
Saying Zelda Boss Eiji Aomuma sounds like he is one of the dungeons bosses you have to defeat 😂
Well, now I'm going to spend the rest of my day thinking about all the different Pokémon remakes to compare them with each other and good remakes of other games
I absolutely love the Link’s Awakening remake on switch, which was extremely faithful while making a bunch of almost imperceptible changes under the hood that really stacked up to something special.
I think that’s because it was such a tightly designed experience already. The core of it has barely aged. There was very little that needed changing beyond quality of life stuff (and to be fair, those QoL changes do make a massive difference to the experience).
It was such a joy to play, had me grinning from ear to ear the entire time… and wondering what the last 25 years of games were for, haha.
I think the QoL features should have been even better in the remake. There are still unused buttons. Why not use them for even more item shortcuts?
The copy-paste-approach to trees and walls felt pretty lazy, too. Of course, it was necessary in the original but they could have done a way better job in the remake.
Though, I agree that the original still holds up incredibly well. The core design of LA is timeless. And that's why the remake is still a good game. It just could/should have been even better in my opinion.
I think the remake of Link's Awakening is pretty much a more advanced remaster rather than a remake. The game's practically the same.
I must say that Zelda games in general hold up very well. Just look at the ALTTP Randomizer community. Just the core game (a specific early Japanese version of the game to accommodate for fun bugs), plus the randomized content.
I had the opposite experience. I never played the original (started with LttP and played all the games since then) and the LA remaster felt far too subtle and unhelpful in its hints. I spent a couple hours trying to figure out how to get into the desert area, for example, before I finally caved and looked up a walkthrough.
It was a stark contrast from every other zelda game I've played, and the inconsistent 30fps, frequent switches to side on, and world that never really opened up stacked up to make me bounce off this one.
Nintendo is missing out by not doing more of these. I'm new to the Zelda franchise (BOTW, and now LA) and playing LA makes me want to go see what the rest of the series is about (TWILIGHT PRINCESS, MAJORA'S MASK, WIND WAKER--I'm interested in all of them). Except I can't buy them to play them. Oh, Nintendo!
I appreciate the QOL updates to LA but designwise LA still feels like it's "from its time" and I like that.
@@AnotherDuck interesting, I always thought of Links Awakening as a remake as my reasoning is that it’s totally remade from scratch (albeit identical almost to the GBC version gameplay wise) a remaster to me is like a version with upgrades more for the technology, such as Mario 3D world on the switch, upgraded resolutions, frame rates etc, minor cosmetic upgrades. LInks Awakening was so good just a shame about the odd frame rate stutter in the swamps and busier areas but it looked great and played well.
"Super easy, barely an inconvenience"
Having a pitch meeting reference in a video talking about video games remakes is tight!
You are totally right!!! I tend to say that RE Remakes are more of a Retelling, leaving any ambiguity out for new players or experienced players. I saw those games came out in the 90s and it's a part of my gaming essence in general. Of course for me the originals are "timeless", however, the retellings are Superb!
There is no depth in the OGs if we are being honest. Only the files build up the lore that makes it compelling.
@@Ihatevideogames334 You have every right to hate them. Next time tho, simply say I hate them. You're wasting time and energy! Go play something else 😋
I really like when remakes/remasters let you toggle between the old and new. For example, in one of the Cave Story ports, you could swap between the original 8bit sound track and the updated soundtrack. I've seen games that let you swap between the old and new graphics. I think finding a way to have both the original and the updated version in the same package is a good way to have your cake and eat it too.
I'm reminded of a few remasters that are straight ports under the hood (that is, the original software or a 1:1 recreation thereof, updated to run on different hardware and/or under a different OS), but have updated graphics available as an overlay. I know both Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary Edition and Wonder Boy: The Dragon's Trap did this.
I must have played through re4 (2005) about 30 times over the years, no exaggeration. I love it and still play it on steam. The remake is exactly what I wanted, considering I still have access to RE4 ; A similar experience that is also very different.
But I hated that they took away Ada Wong's iconic china dress with a sexy slit and heels and I hated the new voice actor
No this is true, my brother has done the same.
He was just a baby when playing that first one, heck I had to read all the files for him because English is not our first language... He was like 9-10.
It's got this insane replayability aspect about it, almost addictive. And that's the reason why I have not played it again because once you let yourself go... Lol it's gonna be hard to stop.
But I'm so familiar with the original because my uncles and cousins played it too whenever we went to visit so it's like this beautiful nostalgia pit that I definitely wouldn't mind experiencing again... Heck I loved experiencing it again.
Must have seen it get played like 40-50 times lol but playing the remake still managed to be both fresh enough to keep me engaged, and familiar enough to give me the feels.
I am so glade that you addressed the desire and need for preserving the original versions and making them accessible today.
Personally, I feel like there is a room not just to port or emulate the original game, but also in making remaster versions that polish it. I do like playing games like the remastered Day of The Tentacle, which have the original gameplay, looks and music but only with the option of polishing them - non-pixelated accurate recreation of the graphics, uncompressed better quality versions of the original audio and music and a more modern interface that plays more or less the same and let me reply the game I love, but with the option to add some features of modern convince.
Ultimately the question is what do you want - do you want to have a convenient access to the original game and perhaps some modern additions to polish the experience? Or do you want to revisit the game with a new perspective and offer something new? Both are valid, but we need to understand that they are not the same thing and it isn't necessarily a question of either one or the other.
Notice how he never mentioned how RE2 and 3 are not available in modern systems? So much for "preservation" when they cannot even properly replace these games
@@frozenvoltz6739He literally says it in the last part of the video
One thing I wanna add is that you're still making decisions when it comes to aiming your gun in RE4R. While you can move out of the way now while aiming, you're also losing access to your big defensive option: your knife. You can't parry while aiming your trusty handgun, so if the local doctor is threatening to chop your head off, and you're holding your gun up, you better be 100% certain that you're gonna stun him with that shot; you're not gonna move out of the way in time.
You can actually still parry while aiming your gun in RE4R, there's even an accessibility option to allow you to press the fire button to parry even while aiming.
My favorite bit is when Mark low key dropped a Pitch Meeting reference in there like we wouldn’t notice
I hope developers starts picking up the fact that games get remade in the RE way are actually what we want. All of the remakes have critical reviews, in a good way of course.
We, spea for yourself these remakes aren't anything more than shallow money making schemes and the lowest of ppl eat it up. Games don't need remakes, they are what they are flaws and all, they should be putting all this energy into new original ideas built off of their past outings not just reheating yesterday's leftovers
@@brya9681all the new original ideas are garbage, as long as the OG is readily avaiable like re4 the remakes are fine
@@brya9681 While I see your argument to the comment, do keep in mind that there are probably games that are stuck in their respective consoles, which are great games either narratively, mechanics-wise, or other things such as rebalancing previously difficult bosses or sections in a game. Sure, a remake can be purposed as a way to increase availability of the game in general, especially where there is alack of game preservation for older titles or just poor business practices these days. But when done right, a "Remake" or "Remaster" can be a really good thing, and i believe it can be used as a tool for the developers to learn and establish the "core pillars" of a series or franchise. Take for example, the team behind Metroid Prime 4, whom all of a sudden released Metroid Prime Remaster. Since Metroid Prime is a franchise who have been waiting for a new installment since an entire decade (and do keep in mind the game has switched studios, and Nintendo stated that its starting from the ground up), I'm quite sure its not just a game to hype up Metroid Prime 4 and whatnot. Besides, A company would probably rather have remasters / remake sell on multiple consoles, and them getting the money rather than piracy. That way the developers can also figure out if there is a market audience for a possible sequel and whatnot.
@@stylesheetra9411 what do you mean “all the new original ideas”? There’s a bunch of new ideas that will succeed
@@brya9681 Clearly you have not played them if you think that.
9:00 didn't expect a Pitch meetings reference, but im all here for it
Excellent video as always! I played RE4 only once around the time it came out and loved it. Playing the remake was such a perfect blend of reminding me why I loved the original while also feeling like a brand new, modern game.
Before playing the RE4 remake, I played the Dead Space remake, which was my first time with any Dead Space game. It looked beautiful and was often fun, but it still felt clunky and frustrating due to what they didn't bother to update, which made it a strange mix of both modern sleekness and things brand new games would never do (forcing you to watch an unskippable cutscene every time you have to retry a boss fight, for example).
I think you really nailed "The Problem with Remakes" section. I've never played Resident Evil, but it's really cool to learn what the devs kept and changed. Although a part of me is always sad because of these changes make the original even more lost to time due to the lack of preservation.
I think it's also very important to say that Capcom is actually remaking their games and not remastering, which is a huge difference that they have from others such as TLOU and DS. They are actually adding value to their games, not only graphically, and in gameplay, but story wise.
This is true, their games are ground up remakes... Not reskins with graphic improvements and some mechanic improvements.
I think the edge between remaster and remake is probably Link's Awakening. It's either one of the most faithful remakes, or one of the most advanced remasters.
Are you counting the Megaman Remakes too? They were low-effort, ports of the originals, that's all. I have more options and upgrades on old Emulators than in those remakes. Mods made by fans are more interesting than what Capcom has ever done with those remakes. You can play as different characters, unique weapons and upgrades. Mix and match robot masters. All you get in the Capcom remakes are Art and Music unlocks.
8:59
He said it "super easy barely an inconvenience"
The crossover we don't deserve but what we wanted.
When I heard Leon still made the bingo joke after the village siege in RE4 Remake, that's when I fully realized Capcom knew EXACTLY what they were doing.
Though according to Leon's VA they originally didn't have it in. But when they were recording that scene they felt that what they had didn't work, so the VA suggested they try the old bingo line, and it just worked better.
They didn't include "forget your makeup or something?" And that really made me sad
I love everything about this video, but the nod to Ryan George’s pitch meetings especially made me smile. 😊
"super easy, barely any inconvenience"
I see what you did there
I can't remember where I heard this (possibly Arlo's video on Link's Awakening remake?), but one thought that has always resonated with me is that proper remakes should not only try to capture the spirit or feel of the original, but also expand on it. Change it. Explore the concepts and mechanics and story of the original game in ways that simply couldn't have been done at the time of the original. Final Fantasy 7 Remake shines as a great example of this description of the "remake." It takes the original, makes significant story changes like RE, and also looks like Advent Children. Plays like what you think an Advent Children game would play like. It takes FF7 and makes something truly new from it. THAT, to me, is what something claiming to be a remake should aspire to. I haven't played the original Resident Evils, but the differences are night and day. I agree - Capcom are king here.
So in essence: Capcom deserves praise because they are among the first to take "Remakes" _seriously._ Clearly, revelatory stuff here XP
It's not the norm unfortunately
I would say Capcom's Megaman Remakes were NOT that good. They were low-effort, ports of the originals, that's all. I have more options and upgrades on old Emulators than in those remakes. Mods made by fans are more interesting than what Capcom has ever done with those remakes. You can play as different characters, unique weapons and upgrades. Mix and match robot masters. All you get in the remakes are Art and Music unlocks.
Just wanted to say I love the thumbnail on this video. It's so simple yet sharp looking. Looks like it could be a poster or ad for the game.
The RE 4 remake is what we hoped for as kids when we envisioned our favorite games in the future. Bluepoint remakes are premium remasters. It's the safest dish you can order at a restaurant. I many ways i think bluepoint subtracts from the originals, shadow of the collosus has a deeply and carefully crafted ps2 aesthetic and the new one is just a good looking game in a sea of other good looking games.
Exactly. Demon's Souls 2020 is a very impressive, beautiful game, but it feels wrong in its art direction.
remake aren't only target people that already played the old game
@@linhba1574 i'm arguing that they should (if they can) play both. because you can't remove something from it's context. Og Resi 4 can only exist as a gamecube designed game.
i see the point in doing a demon's souls type of remake. From a dev stand point, they can serve as a learning experience for a new team. Remaking something gives you the opportunity to see why the design choices were made in the first place and then can be applied to a new game. See Crash Bandicoot 4 for a good exemple. But, as a player they give you only the gameplay without it's context wish is a shame. Imagine watching Blade but instead of techno music from the 90s, it has dub step.
capcom is one of the few companies I still have respect for, they were the first game I released a mod for which later helped me get into game development, im just an amateur but capcom is one of the few places i'd like to work if I could.
Honestly I prefer Capcom's (and even SE's with FF7R) approach to remakes. As much as I love certain games that get remade, playing the exact same game with a new coat of paint serves only to satisfy the fleeting sense of nostalgia which I would argue, is better serviced by playing the original game itself. Playing the original game can be difficult sometimes for the reasons you described which is unfortunate, but there is options like emulation out there.
In recent years, when I've played some of the remakes of my beloved games, its been mixed. Demon's Souls was excellent but they ruined the soundtrack imo. It plays pretty much exactly the same and after I finished it the first playthrough, I didn't feel like playing it again because I've already played the original so many times. Conversely, when I played FF7R and more recently RE4R, those remakes are so new and refreshing that I was much more engaged. I'll say that FF7R was the weaker remake since it wasnt the complete game and a lot of the side quests just felt like padding. But it was extremely refreshing to see these beloved characters interact in a brand new game where you arent sure exactly how the story will play out. RE4R I think achieves that feeling even better. It starts you out with the familiar but it does things differently every other step and and changes or adds or cuts things in places in a way that services the new vision. The gameplay has the same considerations and the key there was they kept the heart of what made the original SO fun. With that foundation in place, a fan of the original like myself had given trust to this new remake's devteam to take me on a "remade" ride and it paid off in spades.
I think the main difference is that RE2+4 focused much more on remaking the same experience, while FF7R focused more on expanding the game (which is even more obvious if you know how it differs from the original). Aside from both games doing a great job at modernising everything in the games.
8:59 Super easy, barely an inconvenience! Thats a reference to Pitch Meeting! So fun to catch that.
I am playing the Dead Space remake right now, after having just beaten the RE4 remake, and I gotta say, the contrast is remarkable. Even though I haven't played the original Dead Space in ages, it feels all too familiar, whereas RE4 and its remake feel meaningfully different enough so as to be enjoyed on their own merits. I could probably go back to the original RE4 and feel like I'm playing something totally different, in a good way.
But RE4 Remake is trash anyway & I prefer Dead Space Remake much better
@@OnikageShindou5463Review scores and sales says otherwise lmao
Did Mark Brown just quote Ryan George? Wowwowwow wow.
I believe it's important for people to know when a game is a remaster and when it is a remake. I also think that both methods of game "re-release" should be used for preserving the media we so love. And a small hot take I think that offering the two simultaneously is better than just releasing a remake and just unlist a remaster. For example re4. They just released the remake but they still offer the remaster on every platform for players to experience if they want.
I lived to see someone mentioning Gus Van Sant's Psycho when talking about RE remakes!!!! It warms my heart when I listen to intelligent people 😊
Thank you for this. Capcom indeed is killing it with these 3 remakes. They're all really good with RE3 being the weakest of these 3 but I still enjoyed it And this is me having played the original 2, 3 and 4 a lot of times throughout the years.
Resident Evil 2,3 and 4 remakes are personally among the best remakes we got in these recent years along with Live A Live, Final Fantasy 7, Dead Space, Diablo 2, Demon Souls and remasters like Metroid Prime, Crisis Core, FF Pixel remasters and The Last of Us Part 1( I consider it a glorified cashgrab remaster, not a remake. still good visuals though).
But with these awesome remakes and remasters, there are bad ones too like.. yeah... GTA Trilogy. It honestly gave me a headache when I played it. And the most prominent bad remakes for me are the remakes made by this company Forever Entertainment. Just bad. Especially Front Mission 1st remake is just plain bad. It was already a timeless game. If you watched this video and played the original and remake of Front Mission 1st, you'll understand why this video was made in the first place.
Great point about game preservation, and I really like that they are separate entries
It would be really awesome if Capcom released the original version of 1, 2 and 3 on modern platforms, but the remakes of 2 and 4 are incredible. I think a good remake would have the stuff that makes it special while removing or changing what people didn't like about it (with exceptions of course), and modern additions.
They did with resident evil 1 but only on ps4/5.
MediEvil's PS4 remake included a new, mysterious side objective towards the end of the game that, if completed, adds a new option to the main menu: under "New Game," you find an "Old Game" button. When selected, the PS1 bootup screen starts and the original version of MediEvil is launched.
I was elated, because as much as I enjoyed the remake, there is no way to play the original without a working PlayStation. I thought it was a really clever surprise, and I really hope they remake the second game. I never got a chance to play it, though I won't hold my breath, since it's a miracle PlayStation even acknowledged the existence of the original.
Knife play is actually a REALLY interesting change in RE4 Remake! I've would love to ask the developers if this is what they noticed too, after replaying the original it was surprising how tense and exciting close range combat became!
One thing you kind of implied but didn't elaborate on is that games are inherently influenced by available technology! This is a young medium, a LOT of things changed between the original and the remake of RE4. A game in the form of RE4 Remake just couldn't exist before!
Yeah they mentioned in an interview about that. The knife mechanism apparently was designed initially only for the Krauser fight since they want to remove QTE, and then they made it, tested it, thought it was actually pretty damn good, and expanded the use for the whole game instead of just the one section. It's the most impactful change they made for the game tbh.
There's literally nothing new nor special about the RE4 demake. All its design tropes are already old as fuck, proven and generic AAA design choices that started plaguing the industry ~15 decades ago. Meh and predictable as hell, total lack of soul or even originality.
The best and most succulent way I’ve heard how a remake should be done is “The job of a remake is to recreate a game the way players remember playing it originally.” As time goes on norms for game design change, what’s accepted or standard shapes how we approach any new game we play. That makes certain things really dated just by comparison with olde Thames. If you took those dated parts of the experiences (dialogue, framing, UI, etc.) and put them in a brand new game it wouldn’t invoke those same memories you had when you first played it. There’d be too much internal conflict going on in a player’s head between the clear and faithful recreation of older parts of the games, and their brain expecting modern conveniences and evolutions in current releases. I imagine finding that balance for cult classics and landmark releases is really hard and stressful to do. It’s impressive when the perfect medium is found.
Also, the one remake in recent memory I can think of that’s pretty substantial and should be talked about is funny enough, SpongeBob: Battle for Bikini Bottom: Rehydrated. That game is as close as possible to a 1:1 remake you can get just updating modern graphics. They went so far into making sure this happened that they even talked to speed runners of the game and had them play test to make sure glitches and skips that occurred in the OG release happened in the remake too. Never heard of that happening before and I think that’s really cool.
A trick about the original RE4 that makes you think about Ashley differently. At the very least, in Chapter 1 and 2, Ashley is the perfect bait. You advance a bit, tell her to stay and move behind her and let enemies go to the grab her. While the enemy is taking Ashley, you shoot at their legs, making them fall to the ground. Rinse and repeat. Extra points if she wear armor, but it is not really necessary.
Oh yeah. I did that trick quite a number of times.
Honestly, as far as an escort mission character, she was actually pretty decent for the time. She did stay mostly out of the way, and you didn't have to babysit her too much.
@@AnotherDuck In my experience, the main problem with Ashley was "Cutscene Incompetence." When she was under your control you could make her hang back or hide in a cupboard, but every now and again the plot required that she be captured so that Leon could rescue her, and she would do whatever it took for her to be captured.
“Little incentive to come back” *shows DeadSpace remake*
Come on now that gave every reason to come back it was a genuine upgrade and when you actually play it. It feels like a whole new game with nostalgia riding behind it. It was brilliant
Making Ryan George references are tight
RE4 remake I think is my favorite Resident Evil now, even above Village. I have played the OG RE4 too which was my favorite. They really did strike the right balance between keeping the old and introducing the new.
It's like a better writer got their hands on the script, fine tuned the heck out of it, and then the director was given a blank check to make the final product.
It's how you imagined it would be when you were playing as kid, but somehow even better.
Capcom has done a fantastic job.
I’ve seen many argue that they much prefer the original script because it has “soul” with its flaws and all. There’s charm even in the weak parts
That’s what I see people say constantly. Any changes are “soulless” which demerits the amount of effort developers put into a game. But people also don’t know how much effort it takes to make a game.
They just “Criticize” anything they don’t like even ignorantly
2023 has truly been the year of the remakes. Dead Space, Resident Evil 4 and Metroid Prime were all incredible.
I fell in love with the SotC remaster. I own a ps3 but it's falling apart. Having the game available on ps4 allowed me to play it and become mildly obsessed with it. I had always heard great things about it and feel like the core sense of amazement and curiousity is captured in the ps4 version.
Oh that easter egg though was 🔥🔥 the Mike Pickleseller would be proud.
When it comes to a remake that changes too much, or changes too little - I'll usually take the latter if the game is old enough. Like, say, Resident Evil 2 (2019) vs Spyro Reignited. Because I think there's something to be said about how remakes should be considered enhancement projects first (like extra years of development time with the luxury of new tech), and a fresh experience second. It's more important to get all the pieces of the OG game in place first before you start making changes or additions - otherwise remakes can end up feeling incomplete, or like something was lost, even if they end up being an overall improvement from their source material. That said, additions and expansions too are extremely important and effective, and what elevates something from a great remaster to a great remake.
Waiting on your Re4 remake broooo!!! Love your vids ❤❤❤
“Old games get stuck on disintegrating hardware.”
This hits hard. This is something that I hate so much, though I realize nobody in particular is necessarily at fault.
But as a lifelong collector of books, movies, music, games, and gaming consoles, it tears me up to know that by the time my four year old will be old enough to appreciate some of the classic games and media on their original consoles. I mean you’d have to keep everything shrink-wrapped and never touch it for years if you pulled it out one day looking to play an old title. I mean shite, I take GREAT care of my games and there is STILL a level of wear and tear that comes from simply moving the game from its case to the console and back, it’s just inevitable. And finding adaptors for some of these older consoles to work with modern televisions and such also gets progressively more difficult over time.
That line you uttered just has a lot of weight behind it for someone like me. Perhaps you could make a video about that someday… I’ll subscribe in the hopes that you will
Pokemon HGSS is probably one of the best remakes of a game I have played, if we go by the metrics mentioned in this video (other than accessibility maybe) and how much the game improved upon the original version. They added a lot of new things (and cut a few) but nothing felt out of place. It is probably one of the most liked game in the series by the whole community.
Yeah few games have ever been fronting their “what could’ve been” pitch right in front of everyone to see like Gold & Silver.
A diorama version of Kanto, but nonetheless recognizable and a playable, was begging for an expanded version, when the tech was there.
Pokemon DS games are absolute peaks of the mainline franchise imo.
Even over Leafgreen + Firered? I don't if I can agree completely. HG+SS were fantastic remakes, but man Leaf and Fire were perfect (for what it was when it came out).
@@matthewo.7156 that’s probably because Red/Blue is so weirdly janky and beta-feeling.
Crap UI, massively unbalanced move and type pools.
Gen 3 is really when Pokémon became just polished enough without losing the charm and intangible stuff.
Johto pokemons like Houndour and Murkrow are still only available in Kanto even in HGSS just like the original games so I don't think it's that good of a remake, but I will pick ORAS over Ruby/Sapphire and BDSP over Diamond and Pearl any day
Both types of approach - remakes that mix it up compared with remakes that are more one-to-one - have their place, it really depends on how much the original still holds up today in terms of design that determines how much a remake will need to change or modernise.
Depends a one to one RE4 remake would be disappointing since the original is available in every single platform and getting it with just upgraded controls and graphics would be disappointing.
I've never played resident evil and have always wondered why people kept playing new remakes. Great video and topic, as always!
Because why not play a remake? What's the big mystery qnd issue with wanting a remake of your favorite games and franchise. Again you're not an re fan so you wont understand.
The System Shock remake. Yea, I kind of forgot that was even supposed to be a thing. It better be the best game released in whatever year it comes out or it's just going to fizzle after so many delays.
I certainly pressed the auto sort button on Re4R whenever I check the atache case close to moments of high stress, and it was more of an inconvenience because it messed up the order I already had... but once I let go of that tetris complex from the original, I started to use it more since it was somewhat convenient when I wanted to pick certain items when the case was almost full... you can also do that when you have enough squares but they are scattered whith the item on the outside....
"Super easy, barely an inconvenience"
"*Gasp* That's the thing from the other thing!"
"You know it is, sir."
"Wow wow wow wow... ... wow."
While I wish AAA companies were less risk-averse and came out with awesome new IPs, I also wish I could replay old games with higher resolutions and modernised game controls. I adored the Jak & Daxter trilogy but man have the camera controls aged poorly 😅 Also stuff like adding more frequent checkpoints would be great on old games. Most modern games are a lot more forgiving and if I just want a trip down memory lane I don't necessarily want the high difficulty.
If only naughty dog would do a Jak game next. It would be god tier I swear.
But it's not like they're doing bad for themselves 😊
@@JuanLeon-oe6xe Both Bravely and Octopath sold well enough to get sequels and the Setsuna devs made enough to develop more games. Not all games need to be blockbuster mega-hits, they just need to make enough money to develop more games. There are new AAA IPs that have sold well recently, namely Elden Ring and Deathloop, but most AAA publishers are too scared to try new stuff
It's a totally different approach, but my favourite remake has to be Kirby Super Star Ultra. Same game, remade assets, improved controls, and like 50% _more_ content in the form of four new postgame modes and a couple more subgames. When a _remake_ introduces a recurring character (Galacta Knight) and starts a series tradition (the True Arena) you can start to see why Kirby players list remakes as separate games in the series. Same deal with the recent RTDLDX straight-up resolving an unanswered question in the original (how did Magolor survive) by adding an entire postgame.
I believe remakes should be primarily faithful as a form of rereleasing an old game if that old game isn't widely available already, then you can do whatever you want. Because games need to be constantly ported to modern platforms and hardware in order to remain accessible, rereleases are an inherent part of preservation, and for some publishers remakes is the only way they'll do it.
Great video, really hits the nail on the head about why the remakes of 2 and 4 worked so well, and why 3 didn't.
But please don't hold up Nightdive as an example of doing things right without mentioning the issues with development, and the awful way they've treated disillusioned backers on Kickstarter.
The Remake of RE2 shouldn't be used as an example of a good remake, it cuts way too much content from OG and many of it's elements are a downgrade. And it's even worse as a replacement, If you're gonna remake an old game without even bothering to preserve the Og game you are obligated to make the remake as faithful as possible, RE1 did that and for that reason it's not an issue if OG re1 is missing from modern stores.
Calling this a good remake when it's worse than the vast majority of remakes that came before(especially in it's own franchise) is laughable
Remakes made by capcom are tight.
Yeah yeah yeah
I love and hope that the “super easy, barely an inconvenience” line was a little thing added from pitch meeting videos.
Where is my Minish Cap remake?
How I look at remasters/remakes
- Re-release
- Remasters
- Redux (remasters with content changes and/or significant balance change)
- Remake (near shot-for-shot)
- Reimaging (new game with structure/concept from the original)
I know there's a million remaster / remakes, but I'm surprised you didn't mention Pathologic. The dev team went to remaster the game, realized it was a bit of a train wreck (though a bizarrely delightful train wreck), and so decided to simultaneously work on a remaster and a remake. They both turned out fantastic, though I never played the original.
Capcom Resident Evil Remakes are tight