• We've completed one of the biggest updates to our forums in years and have pushed the update live! New forum structure that's all inclusive, prefix system categorizes topics per game title. More thread options such as articles, questions, deep dives, etc. Read more in the pinned thread!

General Are remakes the new normal?

Seriously...

Not a month seems to go by any more without some rumoured remake being the talk of the town.

The Last of Us.
Silent Hill 2.
Resident Evil 4.

That's $35,000,888 you could have used to make a new game, folks. People will always play these remakes, knowing they'll never topple the originals. The 2002 RE remake being about the only one that achieved this rare feat...
 
The 2002 RE remake being about the only one that achieved this rare feat...
I dont think remake is as good as og re1 either. I used to think that but eventually ı've grown appreciation for og game while growing more issues for remake instead.

But yeah; ı'm also not interested in any more re engine reimaginings. Except maybe dmc1 in the style of dmc5 if there's even a possibility for it.

Re7 and revillage dont catch my interest that much either so ı'm also not looking forward to future sequels. I'll just quickly read their summary and move on when they get released.
 
Seriously...

Not a month seems to go by any more without some rumoured remake being the talk of the town.

The Last of Us.
Silent Hill 2.
Resident Evil 4.

That's $35,000,888 you could have used to make a new game, folks. People will always play these remakes, knowing they'll never topple the originals. The 2002 RE remake being about the only one that achieved this rare feat...
I'd honestly prefer a new game as well, remakes have kinda taken over video games and even movies/tv shows. (In the form of reboots) It really limits creativity to an extent. It's insane that The Last of Us is already getting a remake, that game is not old enough to get one imo.
 
It seems the video game industry has come full circle like Hollywood and remaking everything, even games that don't really need it. I am still puzzled why EA doesn't make a Dead Space 4. I understand the hiatus after the negative backlash of DS3 but they really need to jump on that soon. The only reason I can see Naughty Dog wanting to remake TLoU is to add more woke to it and Abby backstory. Silent Hill 1 definitely needs a remake, it is still one of the scarier games to date despite it graphics, so it has a lot of potential to scare the crap out of modern gamers.
 
Yep. Every year, another remake is announced of... something.

I hate how they can reboot something (maybe more than once) and you can tell it's nowhere as good as the original. The 2003 TCM movie is still rather good, because some remakes are effective in telling a similar story, without blatantly copying the original too much. So they can be enjoyable in their own right. But at the end of the day, they could have just named it something else. There are a lot of copycat films out there anyway. They just like to use the name of something established, as it's a household thing among genre fans.
 
It's essentially lowering risk, but it comes off as cheap. "People liked our older games, so let's release them again, but change them." Why make a new game that might not be recieved well, when you could remake a beloved game that's sure to sell because of nostalgia.
 

Yama

Owner
1996...
I wouldn't say TLOU won't top the original, as it seems to be built from the ground up with the sole purpose of being nearly 1:1 but also achieving things not obtainable in the original due to inferior hardware. It seems to be as true to the original as any remake I've ever seen, very few liberties if any at all, just incredibly higher fidelity.
 
I don't see them cutting out much, as RE8 was a similar game. So things will probably be carried across. If anything, they may make the village slightly shorter, but that's about it.
 
I think what he meant though, was that all of the games suffer the same fate of having cut content, because there is missing enemies and so on, from the originals. Of course, we know that already. So I know not to go in feeling disheartened. There will be things that are the same. Things that will be changed, or gone completely.
 

Yama

Owner
1996...
I think what he meant though, was that all of the games suffer the same fate of having cut content, because there is missing enemies and so on, from the originals. Of course, we know that already. So I know not to go in feeling disheartened. There will be things that are the same. Things that will be changed, or gone completely.
To be fair there's RE:2 where things are simply design choice and liberties and then there's RE:3 where they simply missed the mark content wise. I have full faith in RE:4 and the original is perhaps the best preserved title in the series with HD Project, so I'm fine with it being it's own thing.
 
I'm more accepting of the move towards horror. RE4 was always a great game, but not as scary as it could have been. Hopefully weapons upgrades will be more expensive, as I don't want to be too oversaturated with artillery early on. Like, I recall in the original, you could get a rocket launcher and kill some bosses with one hit. It had little of the atmosphere from the PS1 games, but was the one with the most commercial appeal, I guess it would be fair to judge it by.

It does pick up here and there. I did like the castle section and the part where you had to use the special scope to see the parasites. But in general, I hated the game for basically cancelling the build up from the old RE games, in one opening speech. I've also considered RE5 to be a better sequel for the story, as it has more ties to the series. But 4 is probably the better one for the gameplay. However, I do think if people enjoy 4, it's only right that 5 should be appreciated as well.
 
It’s strange people who love RE4 but hate on RE5 despite the lack of horror, it’s like most gamers don’t remember how militaristic the game becomes in the latter half. I remember all the criticism that RE5 and RE6 ‘took themselves too seriously’ but now fast forward to RE Engine games and they are also serious games, yet they are not met with the same criticisms. Even OG games of RE2 and RE3 were more serious in tone compared to RE1 back then, so I really don’t understand where these criticisms came from.

This is why it’s impossible to please everyone and they should focus on having a vision instead to catering to fans who have no idea what they want from this franchise. They should also keep their products in house instead of westernizing everything but that’s my opinion.
 

Yama

Owner
1996...
It’s strange people who love RE4 but hate on RE5 despite the lack of horror, it’s like most gamers don’t remember how militaristic the game becomes in the latter half. I remember all the criticism that RE5 and RE6 ‘took themselves too seriously’ but now fast forward to RE Engine games and they are also serious games, yet they are not met with the same criticisms. Even OG games of RE2 and RE3 were more serious in tone compared to RE1 back then, so I really don’t understand where these criticisms came from.

This is why it’s impossible to please everyone and they should focus on having a vision instead to catering to fans who have no idea what they want from this franchise. They should also keep their products in house instead of westernizing everything but that’s my opinion.
I do prefer the set pieces and tone in RE4 to RE5, but your point is completely valid. In addition the game looked beautiful in the MT Framework visual engine and the gameplay engine was quite literally a more advanced RE4 with a ton more depth.
 
I enjoyed Revelations 2 more than 5 and 6. I think it had the right balance of horror and action. Even with all of your gear, some enemies were a genuine threat. And the storyline was actually good, Barry was included, and this made it all the more enjoyable. Even has a lab section. So it's certainly RE, as we remember it.

Yet the game remains so unappreciated.
 
Top Bottom