It’s becoming increasingly obvious that remastering games isn’t enough anymore. Resident Evil 2 has been entirely rebuilt from scratch to meet modern standards – and it's brilliant.
No shit. No one claimed remasters are better than remakes.
I have a feeling Square Enix are going to really f*** up Final Fantasy VII. I pray they won't. But I feel like they don't know what fans want
Another issue I see being a problem for the Final Fantasy 7 remake is that the fans themselves seem to be divided. Seems half the fans want it to stay turn based and the other wants it to evolve into a full fledge action RPG like FF15.
They're taking their time with it. They might mess up, but I have some faith. They may not exactly deserve it... but I will give them the benefit of the doubt.
Do we even know what we want??
I've been thinking this almost since the reveal. The fact they're changing so much kind of says that too. I'm not anticipating it like other games
perfectly said, 2pacalypsenow. did we really need someone to write and article to tell us the obvious??
Does this writer not even know there already were remasters of RE2 along with RE1, 3 and 4? This is a remake not a remaster.
News to me. When did they remaster Resident Evil 2? I know they did 1 properly for the Gamecube then subsequent touch-up versions of that again for later consoles. I don't remember a Resident Evil 2 remaster though, just ports.
On what platform is this Resident Evil 3 Remastered Edition? Oh wait, there wasn't one. Nevermind Resident Evil 2, which we just got. Clearly, you have no clue what you're talking about, Darthv72.
RE1 was a remake on gamecube, then a remaster of the remake was released on PS3,PS4, X360, X1, and PC. RE2, 3 were ports of the original, no remaster were ever released for these games. RE4(PS4, X1 and PC) and code Veronica( PS3,X360)were remasters on modern consoles.
News to me and I've played all the main RE games
@all above, so you guys dont consider a port that has been cleaned up to be better than the original the same as a remaster? Do you think remasters can only exist on the same platform, ex: PS1 to PS2 or PS3? A remaster is usually any time something is re-released with improvements to the overall quality not so much major changes to the content. The DC ver of RE2 may be a port, considering it released not long after but the GC version would be considered a remastered port since it was re-released much later.
That doesn't mean that remasters are dead, though; there ARE cases, after all, where a remake turns out to be worse than its source material by not paying proper respect to it. Fortunately, the new version of RE2 avoided that pitfall, and it's all the better for it. In either case, though, I'm happy with both varieties of bringing older titles into the future. Both remakes and remasters have their place.
Yeah, and remasters and remakes can co-exist. Not every popular game from the past is going to be able to justify a budget of basically a triple A title.
It's also not enough like the original to be called a remaster. It's a re-imagining.
RE2 not a remaster, its a remake. For example, the movie Bladerunner is a remake of the original. We dont call it a remaster of the original.
Did you mean Bladerunner 2049?
Is there a remake of Bladerunner? Cos 2049 is a sequel.
There is no remake of Bladerunner.
Ok that was a bad example.
piece of sh*t click bait article. Running for traffic before friday huh?
I agree! The headline is very deceptive.
Has this guy not seen the amount of remasters that get made? Sure everyone would prefer remasters, but to say that remasters are dead is pretty ignorant.
Sometimes a game is just not popular enough to remake, or some games just can't be remade with modern sensibilities and still be the same game, there are a few cases where I'd rather have a remaster over a remake.
I don't mind remasters at all. Sometimes a remake takes away from what made the game great. I also think that sometimes a remake would be better off as a completely different game. Some remakes are good though and I'm sure this one is. The first game was great. FFVII? Not so sure
geez... ok, do people need a lesson on remasters and remakes? Here's something maybe they can follow: you know how they'll release a blu-ray of an old movie and the image quality is sharper and the audio sounds bette? Well that's a remaster. You remember how there was a Total Recall and Robocop "reboot"? Those are essentially the equivalents of a remake. So, to further break it down Code Veronica X HD = remaster. Resident Evil 2 Remake = Remake. So, with that in mind remasters are super quick cash grabs and remakes are expensive to produce. This gen has shown that people are willing to buy remasters, so until consumers don't purchase remasters they aren't dead.
I thought a remake stayed true to the source material but remade some things to improve where there were faults before. A remaster takes the source material and cleans it up, no major changes but a reboot is a complete from scratch re-imagining while keeping the source material as a guideline. Shadow of the colossus PS3 = HD remaster of the original PS2 game. Shadow of the colossus PS4 = remake of the original PS2 game. Ratchet and Clank PS3 = HD remaster of the PS2 game Ratchet and Clank PS4 = remake of the PS2 game Devil May Cry PS3 / 360 = reboot as everything else but the characters name had been done from scratch.
I'd consider Shadow of the colossus PS4 to be a remaster as well, a remake can be considered a re-imagining of a game to a degree, I more or less agree with your definition on remake/remaster/reboot though.
Great explanation this is how I see it as well as remake to me is like a reboot movie or television show take Netflix sabrina teenage witch (my girl clicked on it but it's really good) same charecter names similar to original but story arc does things original show didn't that's a remake aka reboot same exact game with fresh new coat of paint (graphics or fps) that's a remaster
I consider a remake just exactly what the name implies, a game remade with entirely new assets.
@FinalFantasyFanatic Shadow Of The Colossus ps4 doesn't have any assets from the ps2 original. Everything was recreated from the ground up. In other words, there was nothing to remaster. Its a straight up remake.
@ FinalFantasyFanatic "I more or less agree with your definition on remake/remaster/reboot though." Well you are wrong then. Remakes and remasters are not up for interpretation. They are what they are. Remasters use the old game and simply clean up the graphics and sometimes sound. Remakes are a complete remake of the game, from start to finish. Shadow of the Colossus on PS4 was a total remake. They created the game brand new from the ground up. It doesn't matter that they kept the story and pretty much everything else the same. It was still a complete remake.
@corndog, so then my examples would be correct. You just described, in a few more words, the same thing I did. SoTC on PS4 is a remake because they remade all the assets in the game but stayed true to the original story, characters and such. DMC on PS3 is a reboot because its only connection to the original is character name and concept. Everything else is from scratch. SoTC on the PS3 is a remaster because they took the original game and cleaned it up and updated the resolution.
It proves no such thing.
I'd add last years Shadow of the Colossus to that list as well!
And nsane trilogy
Well I've bought the Tales of Vesperia remaster nearly two weeks ago now and I'm going to buy the Trails of Cold Steel one after I've got my fill with RE2. I'd say they're far from dead. Some do seem a little pointless but for many, it gives people an opportunity to play certain games for the first time. I bet there are a fair few JRPG fans in the West who got to play ToV.
Hell nah give me mk9 and Shaolin monks remastered on ps4.
MK9 was the best one. My only complaints were cheesy combos like punch, dash, punch, dash, punch, special move, bad animations, and funky character models.
When it comes to remasters, COD:MW remaster is a good example of a modern remaster, imo.
Hopefully Capcom does the same to Dino Crisis and Onimusha.
Yes! An Onimusha remake would be awesome.
... and Parasite Eve
They're not the same thing. Remakes cost far more money to make, and are not always an option for this reason. Obviously a remake is going to be better, but implying that they'll replace remasters just says that you know nothing about the industry. I guess I shouldn't have expected much more from GQ though.
Can't believe i actually clicked on this clickbait of an article. DO QUALITY ARTICLES don't base your entire site on clickbaits.
We need REMAKES...Banjo Kazooie/Tooie remakes
Of course a remake is better, it is what it is. A remaster is for upgraded resolution and FPS. Games from last generation don't need remakes. It's only for games generations ago.
Useless article do not click.
Remasters still very much have a strong a valid space, if there's an old game i love, and the only chance of playing it again in HD (besides emulators) is a remaster rather than a remake i'm all for it. Hell if they released a remaster of GODHAND i'd preorder it as soon as it was announced, could i just find a PS2 copy? sure if i want to hunt one down in decent condition for about $55 (average sale price) but why not just have a remaster when A) it'll look better, B)it'll play better, and c) it'll most likely be cheaperc. Honestly i'd be a bit iffy if it were a remake as that game has a lot of quirks many people today wouldn't like that make it what it is.
Remasters are dead? No one claimed remasters were better than remakes. But it doesn't mean gamers don't enjoy remasters, either. It can be really enjoyable to go through an old game that has a new coat of paint on it, so to speak.
Umm...this proves nothing other than they made a good remake. Just because you remake/reimagine a game does not mean it will be better than the original. Sometimes just polishing up the original is 100% what fans want vs remaking and reimagining a game.
I'm almost done with Claire's scenario and all I can say is that this is one of the best survival horror games since the PS1 days.
Wrong. Both can be good.
This article isa joke right? the game has 9's in every review.
I’d think doing a remake and selling the game at the $59.99 price point would be worth it for developers. They already have the basic story/gameplay set, and it would be on a commercially-proven IP, so there is far less creatively that needs to be done compared to a brand new game - even a sequel. And far less risk as well.
Lol? For being dead there sure are a hell of a lot of them, FF7 remake is one of the most anticipated games of the last few gens
Not necessarily so.
“RE2 proves that remakes are better than remasters”
Even that isn't necessarily true. If you start with a brilliant game, and a mediocre team remakes it from scratch, you can end up with something that looks prettier and runs at a better frame rate, but totally misses what made the original a special experience.
it was never enough, especially with the disgusting practices of 99% of the developers, of charging full / almost full price for a title that had almost no upgrades past a cheap HD upscale. But to be fair, we gamers are to blame too. No matter how great a game was, we mustn't just accept paying full price for an old title. I'm reading that the 2d super mario port from the Wii U, 6y later, is at no1 position of sales in uk. At a full price! As long as we accept things like that, they will keep happening.
No, they are not. It's a major risk to remake a game from the ground up. Especially if it is a beloved game. Capcom remade this correctly, and now are reaping the benefits. A remaster or upgraded port is still a viable way to gauge interest, or to see if it still holds up. If Sega were to release a remaster of panzer dragoon saga, I would buy it in a heartbeat. If they remade it, it could be better or worse.
Resident Evil 1 remake is no different. There's so much new content in the first remake. Useless article.
Keep calling out the people who submit garbage articles like this! Sometimes it’s the author of the article doing it too!
Thanks Captain Obvious
Yeah... a remaster != a remake
In summary: remaster = dead rebuilt = brilliant
Too add to all the comments below remasters also are usually based off of newer games with better assets so adding HD textures and maybe a new model for the main character along with HD resolutions, etc can make the game look a lot better than it's original version. Resident Evil 2 is a 20 year old game...no amount of "remastering" it will give it a leg to stand on in todays graphics so, really, a REMAKE was the ONLY way to go.