The Remake Boom

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT
 

stroopwafel:
there are only so many ideas that are original before they get recycled.

We reached that point where all stories are recycled thousands of years ago. All stories are a retelling of some concept or other from long ago. Some tell them better than others, and the fact remains that people are far more excited to see someone retell these 20 year old videogames again then they are with all the same old garbage the AAA industry keeps vomiting out.

Seth Carter:

Phoenixmgs:

What don't you get about general sayings?

"Your first Final Fantasy game is usually your favorite."

This is a very popular opinion that gets thrown around a lot. Is it true for you?

Just looking at the top replies, that thread doesn't seem to be doing much better on the hypothesis then this one.

As strictly FF goes:

I Played: 1 > 4 > 6 > 7 > 5 > 2 (DNF) > X > 8 > 12 (DNF) > 3 (DNF) > 9 > 13 (DNF) > 14 (and some off main series ones)
Ranking them, I'd go : 6 (3rd) > 9 (11th) > 4 (2nd) > 5 (5th) > X (7th) > 1(1st) > 8 (8th) > 7(4th) > 12 (9th) > 2 (6th) > 13 (12th)

Dropping off #3 which I barely played at the time (it was brief loan from someone else on DS), and 14 which is just sabotaged by godawul controls on the PS4, but might be a perfectly decent (for an MMO) game on the PC.

Again, I'm just saying that it's a "saying" as showed by the TC of that reddit thread. I realize your 1st played in a series isn't your favorite a majority of the time. I do believe it holds true to a point. Like if you have 100 people that all played 10 different FF games, I'm guessing more than 10% everyone's favorite will be the 1st one they played (which would be above average). That's really all I was saying.

stroopwafel:
Hence why we will never see better sci-fi or space horror than The Terminator and the original Alien.

Alien, maybe, but claiming that Terminator is the best sci-fi setting/movie of all time is a bit of a stretch. And I say that as someone who likes Terminator, even the post-T2 movies (bar T3).

Hawki:

stroopwafel:
Hence why we will never see better sci-fi or space horror than The Terminator and the original Alien.

Alien, maybe, but claiming that Terminator is the best sci-fi setting/movie of all time is a bit of a stretch. And I say that as someone who likes Terminator, even the post-T2 movies (bar T3).

Were there any notable time travel movies with cyborgs before 1984? The first Terminator had its flaws for sure, but I'm pretty sure those were pretty big ideas back then, and the story was told very convincingly with an appropriately gritty and dark tone, along with having a pretty modest budget.

hanselthecaretaker:

We?re there any notable time travel movies with cyborgs before 1984?

Dunno.

The first Terminator had its flaws for sure, but I?m pretty sure those were pretty big ideas back then, and the story was told very convincingly with an appropriately gritty and dark tone, along with having a pretty modest budget.

Yes, and?

Like I said, I like/love Terminator, I'm just dubious about calling it the best sci-fi property out there. Robot uprisings were old news by the time it was created - it was old news by the time of Isaac Asimov, which is why he set out to write a series that specifically wouldn't involve such a thing.

Hawki:

hanselthecaretaker:

We?re there any notable time travel movies with cyborgs before 1984?

Dunno.

The first Terminator had its flaws for sure, but I?m pretty sure those were pretty big ideas back then, and the story was told very convincingly with an appropriately gritty and dark tone, along with having a pretty modest budget.

Yes, and?

Like I said, I like/love Terminator, I'm just dubious about calling it the best sci-fi property out there. Robot uprisings were old news by the time it was created - it was old news by the time of Isaac Asimov, which is why he set out to write a series that specifically wouldn't involve such a thing.

"Best" is subjective. I'm sure it is considered as such to quite a few people, from both ends of the movie buff spectrum. But again, it's subjective and not even worth arguing about. People like what they like, and some things click more than others for a variety of reasons.

Hawki:

Like I said, I like/love Terminator, I'm just dubious about calling it the best sci-fi property out there. Robot uprisings were old news by the time it was created - it was old news by the time of Isaac Asimov, which is why he set out to write a series that specifically wouldn't involve such a thing.

I wasn't talking about the property, the property sucks because they never managed to recapture the magic that made the first two so special. The first one is my favorite sci-fi movie of all time because it combines suspense, action and enough ambiguity to keep you intrigued. It balances all those ingredients perfectly in what is basically a 'woman gets chased by evil robot' scenario but T1 elevates it by the industrial atmosphere and 80's setting that fits the narrative theme like a glove. It's like the stars aligned for that movie and why successive movies in the franchise never measured up. T1 managed to do something interesting with the time it was created; the popularization of computer technology, the advent of automation, the prophesied dangers of rogue science, legendary action scenes that are aped to this day and the iconic OST with it's deep bass and heavy synths that is also legendary to this day,

It's my personal favorite even if it popularized story elements from more unfamiliar sources. And like I said they are still trying to recapture that magic 40(!) years later but never will. The movie simply speaks to the imagination because it was a first.

Hawki:

stroopwafel:
Hence why we will never see better sci-fi or space horror than The Terminator and the original Alien.

Alien, maybe, but claiming that Terminator is the best sci-fi setting/movie of all time is a bit of a stretch. And I say that as someone who likes Terminator, even the post-T2 movies (bar T3).

Also, The Terminator is kinda a rip-off of a Harlan Ellison story. They were even forced to put it in the end credits because it was so similar. So yeah, it's not exactly original at all. Even Alien bares a striking resemblance to a sci-fi movie about alien vampires.

Phoenixmgs:

Again, I'm just saying that it's a "saying" as showed by the TC of that reddit thread. I realize your 1st played in a series isn't your favorite a majority of the time. I do believe it holds true to a point. Like if you have 100 people that all played 10 different FF games, I'm guessing more than 10% everyone's favorite will be the 1st one they played (which would be above average). That's really all I was saying.

I'd probably challenge that. And taking a stab, the most consistent alignment of favorite/first would be people who got FF7 on the playstation as their first console. By far and away the most advertised the series has ever been (and possibly the Patient Zero of bullshots/selling cutscenes as gameplay footage), and directly thrown in as a flagship title for a console.

From my side of the proverbial gaps in there, I'd take a guess that you'd have far more people playing 1 or 4, but then selecting 6. Availability could always throw that for a loop, but the SNES crew was probably seeeing 2/3 (or 4 and 6) side by side on the rental shelf, and few people would start with the latter inherently.

With the broader spacing, generally less hype, and not being included as launch sellers, a lot of the later generation of players are more likely to have picked up things in odd order. Probably X has the next biggest cycle of folks deeming it a favorite, but I'd wager a lot of those played 7 or 8 before hand, or went backward from 12.

Hawki:

Seth Carter:

Coming back to the original thread point, I don't know that we're particularly deluged with Remakes.

Capcoms spitting out REs, sure. And FF7's a thing.... and? Nintendo's chucked out Links Awakening, thats about it.

Crash Bandicoot Trilogy, Crash Racing, Spyro Reignited Trilogy, Warcraft III: Reforged, Command & Conquer Remastered, etc.

Maybe that's not a deluge, but it's noticable, especially with Activision stating they're going to be focusing on remakes in the short-term.

Were those actually remakes though, or Remasters. (The C&C one is just a remaster as far as anything I've seen on it).

Slapping some HD textures on and dropping out it otherwise unchanged isn't a remake.

Seth Carter:
[

Were those actually remakes though, or Remasters. (The C&C one is just a remaster as far as anything I've seen on it).

Slapping some HD textures on and dropping out it otherwise unchanged isn't a remake.

Fine, remasters, but if the source of the "remake boom" is nostalgia, then they're part of the conversation.

Hawki:

Seth Carter:
[

Were those actually remakes though, or Remasters. (The C&C one is just a remaster as far as anything I've seen on it).

Slapping some HD textures on and dropping out it otherwise unchanged isn't a remake.

Fine, remasters, but if the source of the "remake boom" is nostalgia, then they're part of the conversation.

Yeah, but the remaster boom is nothing new. It was creeping in last gen, even before the various reasons it became the constant barrage this gen.

Insofar as I know, REmake does switch things up significantly. Links Awakening definitely was a total overhaul. And FF7 from what I've heard has both its obvious gameplay overhauls and is altering the story somewhat (to mixed review).

By comparison for instance, the Dark Souls remaster was a flat remaster with minimal changes. To the point where a big detraction of it is that they didn't bother cleaning up the blatantly unfinished placeholder in Lost Izalith. Secret of Mana despite being billed as a remake (and granted, it was a higher level of remaster then many) had similar wobbles.

CritialGaming:
Jim Sterling dropped an interesting video this morning about Remakes and why they are not only so popular lately, but how they also seem to be overshadowing much of the "new" game releases that the AAA game's industry is pumping out like viscus pus.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZcHLliNjI4&t=0s

It got me thinking that maybe he is right. As you all are aware by now, I am unhealthily excited for the FF7 Remake. A big part of that is my decades long love for the game, but after watching Jim's video i looked through the rest of 2020's releases. Sure there are games I am interested in and games I want to play, but none of them are of a level of interest as even RE2 was last year let alone FF7.

Maybe I am excited for FF7 and RE3, more because the majority of game releases don't scratch those same itches that games used to scratch anymore. I mean, after playing the Demo, The remake is NOT the FF7 I know and love, but I can be sure that the game will hit that JRPG itch that not many other games can scratch.

So my question to ya'll is this.

Are you excited for one of these remakes? If so are you more excited for a remake over a brand new game or sequel? Why?

What other older games would you like to see remade? I'd like to see the legacy of kain series get a rework.

dscross:

What other older games would you like to see remade? I'd like to see the legacy of kain series get a rework.

Off the top of my head:

Parasite Eve
Xenogears
Old Persona games
Dino Crisis

It's an interesting question because you kind of have to pick a franchise that isn't still pumping out games that are basically the same as the originals. Like you couldn't ask for a Super Mario remake when Odyssey is a thing, or Zelda when Breath of the Wild is a thing.

The same goes for like old school fighters like Tekken, Street Fighter, and Mortal Kombat, because the new games in the series are exactly what you would get if you remade the old games.

I think the criteria should be two things:
1. Would the original game translate well with a modern game system?
2. Are the original games hard to play by legitimate means?

If both those answer yes, then it could be a candidate for a remake.

CritialGaming:

It's an interesting question because you kind of have to pick a franchise that isn't still pumping out games that are basically the same as the originals. Like you couldn't ask for a Super Mario remake when Odyssey is a thing, or Zelda when Breath of the Wild is a thing.

The same goes for like old school fighters like Tekken, Street Fighter, and Mortal Kombat, because the new games in the series are exactly what you would get if you remade the old games.

Idk that I'd put Odyssey as particularly similar to either iteration of Super Mario Bros. One of which didn't even have proepr levels, neither were a collectathon, nor did they feature any kind of puzzles or mechanical shifts.

BotW's separation from standard Zelda (other then not having dungeon levels, it would come out the most similar to 2, if anything) has been documented at length hither and thither of course. Granted, given Links Awakening popped up which leans heavily on it, we might get Link to the Past remade soon enough, which was in itself effectively the remake of Zelda 1.

Seth Carter:

CritialGaming:

It's an interesting question because you kind of have to pick a franchise that isn't still pumping out games that are basically the same as the originals. Like you couldn't ask for a Super Mario remake when Odyssey is a thing, or Zelda when Breath of the Wild is a thing.

The same goes for like old school fighters like Tekken, Street Fighter, and Mortal Kombat, because the new games in the series are exactly what you would get if you remade the old games.

Idk that I'd put Odyssey as particularly similar to either iteration of Super Mario Bros. One of which didn't even have proepr levels, neither were a collectathon, nor did they feature any kind of puzzles or mechanical shifts.

BotW's separation from standard Zelda (other then not having dungeon levels, it would come out the most similar to 2, if anything) has been documented at length hither and thither of course. Granted, given Links Awakening popped up which leans heavily on it, we might get Link to the Past remade soon enough, which was in itself effectively the remake of Zelda 1.

But ask your self this question.

If the original Mario or Zelda games were modernized. What would their gameplay look like, and would it be similiar to the current titles in the series?

CritialGaming:

Seth Carter:

CritialGaming:

It's an interesting question because you kind of have to pick a franchise that isn't still pumping out games that are basically the same as the originals. Like you couldn't ask for a Super Mario remake when Odyssey is a thing, or Zelda when Breath of the Wild is a thing.

The same goes for like old school fighters like Tekken, Street Fighter, and Mortal Kombat, because the new games in the series are exactly what you would get if you remade the old games.

Idk that I'd put Odyssey as particularly similar to either iteration of Super Mario Bros. One of which didn't even have proepr levels, neither were a collectathon, nor did they feature any kind of puzzles or mechanical shifts.

BotW's separation from standard Zelda (other then not having dungeon levels, it would come out the most similar to 2, if anything) has been documented at length hither and thither of course. Granted, given Links Awakening popped up which leans heavily on it, we might get Link to the Past remade soon enough, which was in itself effectively the remake of Zelda 1.

But ask your self this question.

If the original Mario or Zelda games were modernized. What would their gameplay look like, and would it be similiar to the current titles in the series?

Setting aside the arcade variation, original SMB was a 2d platformer. We're hardly lacking on those, albeit mainly on the indie scenes. Mario itself hasn't wholly shifted away from it either, as the various new SMB/Mario maker games have largely retained the concept. Odyssey was just the odd pick there. So the most current series game is a stark contrast, but sure, there's been MArio games which in themselves would serve as a solid picture.

Zelda is a different bag of walnuts of course. Let's say we consider the top down combat to have "evolved" into the 3d third person stuff. Although I'd certainly say the top down or even an isometricish combat would be more likely in a remake though.

Remaking Zelda into BotW is impossible because of the core structure though. BotW wanted to throw down the freedom to go anywhere concept. Zelda in all its other iterations has been structured around the idea that you can't go places, despite the open world presentation. You always needed to find the next Metroidvania gadget to unlock both progress and secrets. All the other little gameplay tics BotW yanked from various genres are a mild inconvenience compared to that departure, in considering it as an effective remake of Zelda's before.

Seth Carter:

Setting aside the arcade variation, original SMB was a 2d platformer. We're hardly lacking on those, albeit mainly on the indie scenes. Mario itself hasn't wholly shifted away from it either, as the various new SMB/Mario maker games have largely retained the concept. Odyssey was just the odd pick there. So the most current series game is a stark contrast, but sure, there's been MArio games which in themselves would serve as a solid picture.

Zelda is a different bag of walnuts of course. Let's say we consider the top down combat to have "evolved" into the 3d third person stuff. Although I'd certainly say the top down or even an isometricish combat would be more likely in a remake though.

Remaking Zelda into BotW is impossible because of the core structure though. BotW wanted to throw down the freedom to go anywhere concept. Zelda in all its other iterations has been structured around the idea that you can't go places, despite the open world presentation. You always needed to find the next Metroidvania gadget to unlock both progress and secrets. All the other little gameplay tics BotW yanked from various genres are a mild inconvenience compared to that departure, in considering it as an effective remake of Zelda's before.

Zelda also already got a remake in Link to the Past and several HD upgrades with Twilight Princess and Windwaker. So we've kind of seen this already happen to Zelda so it might be a bad example now that I think about it.

But Mario is certainly a pointless thing to Remake because even if you factor in a strictly 2D platforming style, we've already seen a modern version of that with Super Mario Deluxe World or whatever it was called on WiiU and Switch plus additional once on the 3DS.

I feel like my original point about choosing which games should be in the Remake discussion.

CritialGaming:

I feel like my original point about choosing which games should be in the Remake discussion.

Prettymuch anything in the 1997-2005 period.

Tons and tons of games that fell into a black hole of being half-versions because they couldn't produce their full vision in that newfangled 3d tech, or were plagued by the cludgy jank where we hadn't more or less figured out controls. They're also all pretty c=prime candidates for having awful graphics (like FF7) that have not stood any test of time.

From my personal bias, I'd like to see a remake of the Ultima 4-7 (1-3 can be left in the historical lore bin, as much of their details starts becoming out of place in the more time tested entries) and some sort of concluding entry that wasn't half unfinished nonsense that plagued 7 1/2, 8, 9. That is of course tied up by EA

CritialGaming:

dscross:

What other older games would you like to see remade? I'd like to see the legacy of kain series get a rework.

Off the top of my head:

Parasite Eve
Xenogears
Old Persona games
Dino Crisis

It's an interesting question because you kind of have to pick a franchise that isn't still pumping out games that are basically the same as the originals. Like you couldn't ask for a Super Mario remake when Odyssey is a thing, or Zelda when Breath of the Wild is a thing.

The same goes for like old school fighters like Tekken, Street Fighter, and Mortal Kombat, because the new games in the series are exactly what you would get if you remade the old games.

I think the criteria should be two things:
1. Would the original game translate well with a modern game system?
2. Are the original games hard to play by legitimate means?

If both those answer yes, then it could be a candidate for a remake.

It's interesting how two of those games you chose are very functionally similar to resident evil... Would you want them to be third person like RE2 remake?

dscross:

It's interesting how two of those games you chose are very functionally similar to resident evil... Would you want them to be third person like RE2 remake?

I think it would make sense for Dino Crisis. But Parasite Eve is an RPg that happens to use guns as weapons, so there are a lot of ways it could go with a modern remake, it doesn't really have to consider the same path the RE games took for a Remake.

I think the remake boom is just a safe play on the industry's side. In the shallow, "strike while the iron's hot" times we're in, when they're watching each other making money hand over fist with less and less effort, why be different and make something even quasi-new new (Anthem) when you can resurrect something from the past that's sure to sell on name recognition alone? Particularly when a good chunk of the work is already done: characters? Check. Story? Check. Marketing? Check. It's paint-by-numbers.

I'm not sure I like the idea of a remake craze. To me it symbolizes a complete lack of creativity. Why make a good new Resident Evil when you can just remake RE2 into a pretty decent okay one? I mean it feels like a quick-cash plan as if they're struggling to stay open. Make old games into generic 3rd person shooters, and get cash quick.
And where does it end? Is RE4 getting a remake? Its the game they're turning all RE games in to. It feels like this boom will rapidly come to an end. Maybe not anytime soon, but when it does remakes across the board will be postponed and cancelled.

Silentpony:
I'm not sure I like the idea of a remake craze. To me it symbolizes a complete lack of creativity. Why make a good new Resident Evil when you can just remake RE2 into a pretty decent okay one? I mean it feels like a quick-cash plan as if they're struggling to stay open. Make old games into generic 3rd person shooters, and get cash quick.
And where does it end? Is RE4 getting a remake? Its the game they're turning all RE games in to. It feels like this boom will rapidly come to an end. Maybe not anytime soon, but when it does remakes across the board will be postponed and cancelled.

Considering RE2 Remake was better than both RE7, RE6, and RE5, I think I prefer them remaking than making fresh ones for now.

Casual Shinji:

Silentpony:
I'm not sure I like the idea of a remake craze. To me it symbolizes a complete lack of creativity. Why make a good new Resident Evil when you can just remake RE2 into a pretty decent okay one? I mean it feels like a quick-cash plan as if they're struggling to stay open. Make old games into generic 3rd person shooters, and get cash quick.
And where does it end? Is RE4 getting a remake? Its the game they're turning all RE games in to. It feels like this boom will rapidly come to an end. Maybe not anytime soon, but when it does remakes across the board will be postponed and cancelled.

Considering RE2 Remake was better than both RE7, RE6, and RE5, I think I prefer them remaking than making fresh ones for now.

I'm sorta of the same. Though I found RE2Remake and Evil Within 2 better than RE4-7 & the Revelations games.

Just remake Code Veronica, and I'll call it even. I know RE8 is going to be first person with Ethan as the returning character according to rumor, so I am even less invested. Also, there are going to be werewolves? Since when did Capcom start taking ideas from their non-canon, Wild Storm Comics spin-offs? If 8 is an fps, just make 9 and have it go 3rd person and pick a new character.

CoCage:

Just remake Code Veronica, and I'll call it even.

Or...don't? CV certainly doesn't need a graphical upgrade, and we'd still have to deal with Steve. The best thing I could see coming from a CV remake is actually fighting Wesker rather than relegating it to a cutscene.

Also, there are going to be werewolves? Since when did Capcom start taking ideas from their non-canon, Wild Storm Comics spin-offs?

I'm guessing they're not literal werewolves, but BOW dogs that are either called that in-universe, or they're being called werewolves unofficially in development. I mean, we've had monster dogs before (the Cerberus, the Las Plagas variant), nothing to stop another type joining the roster.

just make 9 and have it go 3rd person and pick a new character.

I'm kind of at the point in RE where I feel Capcom is going to have to start making new characters, or bring back younger ones more (Sherry, Sheva, etc.) because their "big four" (Chris, Jill, Claire, Leon) aren't getting any younger.

Hawki:

CoCage:

Just remake Code Veronica, and I'll call it even.

Or...don't? CV certainly doesn't need a graphical upgrade, and we'd still have to deal with Steve. The best thing I could see coming from a CV remake is actually fighting Wesker rather than relegating it to a cutscene.

Also, there are going to be werewolves? Since when did Capcom start taking ideas from their non-canon, Wild Storm Comics spin-offs?

I'm guessing they're not literal werewolves, but BOW dogs that are either called that in-universe, or they're being called werewolves unofficially in development. I mean, we've had monster dogs before (the Cerberus, the Las Plagas variant), nothing to stop another type joining the roster.

just make 9 and have it go 3rd person and pick a new character.

I'm kind of at the point in RE where I feel Capcom is going to have to start making new characters, or bring back younger ones more (Sherry, Sheva, etc.) because their "big four" (Chris, Jill, Claire, Leon) aren't getting any younger.

If they make Steve likeable and written more realistic by comparison, I am all for it. If the remake does not happen, no big deal. Although I don't mind if we did get a CV Remake. Because then the CV remake would complete the Umbrella sequel trilogy. 2, 3, & CV.

If literal werewolves start appearing due to some obvious, new weird virus (that strengthens the lycorthepancy), the series will have truly gone off rails, (of a different color) and the near point of no return.

.....Neat.

EDIT:

If Capcom goes full vampires, then we've gone pass jumping the shark to nuking the fridge.

They're bringing back zombies, so it will be fun to deal with those in that viewpoint, again.

Casual Shinji:

Silentpony:
I'm not sure I like the idea of a remake craze. To me it symbolizes a complete lack of creativity. Why make a good new Resident Evil when you can just remake RE2 into a pretty decent okay one? I mean it feels like a quick-cash plan as if they're struggling to stay open. Make old games into generic 3rd person shooters, and get cash quick.
And where does it end? Is RE4 getting a remake? Its the game they're turning all RE games in to. It feels like this boom will rapidly come to an end. Maybe not anytime soon, but when it does remakes across the board will be postponed and cancelled.

Considering RE2 Remake was better than both RE7, RE6, and RE5, I think I prefer them remaking than making fresh ones for now.

That's...a very good point. I had not thought of it from that direction. I was thinking of it from 'they're not progressing the story with new ideas, but remaking old ones' instead of 'the remakes are better than any of the new ideas'.
Good point. I concede the debate. Do more remakes, but leave 4 allow. RE4 is...special. Its perfect as is.

CoCage:

If they make Steve likeable and written more realistic by comparison, I am all for it.

Well, yeah, but then he's not Steve "Shut the Hell Up You Whiner" Burnside." :P

Okay, I'm being harsh, but seriously, is there anyone asking for Steve? Does Steve have fans? Maybe he does, but it's been over 20 years since C V, with Wesker teasing his possible return, and I've never seen anyone actually ask for it to happen.

Because then the CV remake would complete the Umbrella sequel trilogy. 2, 3, & CV.

I know there's no official stance on how the storyline is grouped, but I think that's stretching things. If we regard 2, 3, and CV as a trilogy, then 3 is clearly the odd one out because while 2 flows naturally to CV, 3 doesn't. In contrast, I'll stand by the use of "Raccoon Trilogy" to describe 1-3, because each one of those games flows naturally to the next (also why I think RE3 still deserves the "3" title rather than C V.

If Capcom goes full vampires, then we've gone pass jumping the shark to nuking the fridge.

I could actually see pseudo vampires working, believe it or not. Someone's been infected by a virus, has to feed on 'healthy' DNA to keep the infection at bay, etc.

...why yes I AM borrowing ideas from the movies, how could you tell?

Silentpony:

Good point. I concede the debate. Do more remakes,

Or...don't.

Hear me out. RE1 Remake deserves its high regard, because in part, it completely updates RE1, which hasn't aged well at all. RE2, the original, has aged much better, which is why I was fine with its remake mixing things up. Some things the original does better, some things the remake does better. And as for RE3, while the best of the original trilogy IMO, I'm fine with it getting a remake to round out the trifecta.

After that though, is there a need to remake anything? Certainly not graphically. I'd say if they were going to remake a game, it would be Survivour (convert it to a more traditional experience), but that isn't going to happen. I've said that RE's story concluded naturally in RE5, which is part of the reason why I was disinterested in what came after, but remakes aren't going to sustain the franchise, especially when Zero and C: V arguably don't need them, but (in my experience) aren't as well regarded as the original games.

Or you could use that as justification for remaking them, I dunno.

Hawki:

CoCage:

If they make Steve likeable and written more realistic by comparison, I am all for it.

Well, yeah, but then he's not Steve "Shut the Hell Up You Whiner" Burnside." :P

Okay, I'm being harsh, but seriously, is there anyone asking for Steve? Does Steve have fans? Maybe he does, but it's been over 20 years since C V, with Wesker teasing his possible return, and I've never seen anyone actually ask for it to happen.

Because then the CV remake would complete the Umbrella sequel trilogy. 2, 3, & CV.

I know there's no official stance on how the storyline is grouped, but I think that's stretching things. If we regard 2, 3, and CV as a trilogy, then 3 is clearly the odd one out because while 2 flows naturally to CV, 3 doesn't. In contrast, I'll stand by the use of "Raccoon Trilogy" to describe 1-3, because each one of those games flows naturally to the next (also why I think RE3 still deserves the "3" title rather than C V.

If Capcom goes full vampires, then we've gone pass jumping the shark to nuking the fridge.

I could actually see pseudo vampires working, believe it or not. Someone's been infected by a virus, has to feed on 'healthy' DNA to keep the infection at bay, etc.

...why yes I AM borrowing ideas from the movies, how could you tell?

Silentpony:

Good point. I concede the debate. Do more remakes,

Or...don't.

Hear me out. RE1 Remake deserves its high regard, because in part, it completely updates RE1, which hasn't aged well at all. RE2, the original, has aged much better, which is why I was fine with its remake mixing things up. Some things the original does better, some things the remake does better. And as for RE3, while the best of the original trilogy IMO, I'm fine with it getting a remake to round out the trifecta.

After that though, is there a need to remake anything? Certainly not graphically. I'd say if they were going to remake a game, it would be Survivour (convert it to a more traditional experience), but that isn't going to happen. I've said that RE's story concluded naturally in RE5, which is part of the reason why I was disinterested in what came after, but remakes aren't going to sustain the franchise, especially when Zero and C: V arguably don't need them, but (in my experience) aren't as well regarded as the original games.

Or you could use that as justification for remaking them, I dunno.

Oh no, I don't want Steve to comeback to life. He's still gonna die, but I would actually weep for him, if they pulled it off.

As for the trilogy comment, that's just my own little thing. Nothing more. Plus, it works either way, because Umbrella is involved in all 4 games. In fact, let's call it, The Umbrella Tetralogy and be done with it. 0 I can deal without entirely, and I consider it non-canon despite whatever Capcom says. The same attitude goes for the Revelations sub-series. I acknowledge Revelations 2 as long as you ingnore that bit in the good ending where some form of Alex Wesker still exists in the girl. Another convoluted plot point/sequel hook never to be brought up again like in Revelations 1, and RE6.

As for taking ideas from the RE movies....

Though that one actually has some actual logic sense and thought put in to the idea.

CritialGaming:
Jim Sterling dropped an interesting video this morning about Remakes and why they are not only so popular lately, but how they also seem to be overshadowing much of the "new" game releases that the AAA game's industry is pumping out like viscus pus.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZcHLliNjI4&t=0s

It got me thinking that maybe he is right. As you all are aware by now, I am unhealthily excited for the FF7 Remake. A big part of that is my decades long love for the game, but after watching Jim's video i looked through the rest of 2020's releases. Sure there are games I am interested in and games I want to play, but none of them are of a level of interest as even RE2 was last year let alone FF7.

Maybe I am excited for FF7 and RE3, more because the majority of game releases don't scratch those same itches that games used to scratch anymore. I mean, after playing the Demo, The remake is NOT the FF7 I know and love, but I can be sure that the game will hit that JRPG itch that not many other games can scratch.

So my question to ya'll is this.

Are you excited for one of these remakes? If so are you more excited for a remake over a brand new game or sequel? Why?

If it's even a tenth as good as the previews have made it out to be the FF7 remake will be one of the very very few video games that I buy full price for the only reason anyone should ever buy anything full price. I want to encourage the rest of FF7 to get remade and Square-Enix to make more games like it. RE3 might do as well, but I'm not anywhere near as enthusiastic about it as I am about FF7.

On the topic of remakes, it's happening a lot these days because you've already got a fully made game to base everything off of so a large chunk of the development time is taken care of and then there's a fanbase ready to eat up the game the moment it comes out. It's a simple way to avoid risk and satisfy the fans at the same time. Especially when whatever entries in the series that have come before are significantly behind the times graphically and mechanically compared to now, such as the original FF7. It's also a nice way to spark interest and rekindle the fans in a series that hasn't had any entries in particular good entries that one intends to create new entries for.

What a good remake needs is this: It needs to contain all the content the original did with minimal changes (like a retranslation) to cause nostalgia, but it also needs to add new content to benefit new players that have no attachment and give old players reason to not just replay the original version again. The FF7 remake appears at this time to have an abundance of both, particularly the latter.

CoCage:
0 I can deal without entirely, and I consider it non-canon despite whatever Capcom says. The same attitude goes for the Revelations sub-series.

Why do you regard them as non-canon?

Did we go through almost 2 pages and not recognise Xcom as one of the best remakes? Because I'm doing that now

Silentpony:

Casual Shinji:
Considering RE2 Remake was better than both RE7, RE6, and RE5, I think I prefer them remaking than making fresh ones for now.

That's...a very good point. I had not thought of it from that direction. I was thinking of it from 'they're not progressing the story with new ideas, but remaking old ones' instead of 'the remakes are better than any of the new ideas'.
Good point. I concede the debate. Do more remakes, but leave 4 allow. RE4 is...special. Its perfect as is.

The most they should do with RE4 is allow BluePoint to give it the Shadow of the Colossus treatment. Tweek the controls just a tad to give Leon a strafe and maybe a quick-select, and finally fix the dam score mix, the HD versions really dicked that up.

Seth Carter:
Nintendo's chucked out Links Awakening, thats about it.

Technically Metroid: Samus Returns in 2017 was another remake that Nintendo threw us

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Posting on this forum is disabled.