/games/ - Games

>>10527
>Halo
The Combat Evolved remaster got completely shat on because of this (with 343 Guilty Spark being the best example of this), though H2:A more than made up for it.

The original still exists, and I find it interesting to compare and contrast the new product with the old one. The fact that they're made by different teams and so they have a different look and feel is the entire appeal to me. I don't really see where you're coming from on an artistic/integrity standpoint, other mediums aren't considered 'sacred' in that way. Books are rewritten, films are remade, theater plays are reimagined and songs are covered by new artists all the time.

Maybe there's an argument to be made against porky having to squeeze and wring every last drop out of an IP by rereleasing it with a graphical update, but even then the only thing they're really saving on is concept and design and those are not particularly large chunks of the budget.

>>10530
But Hollywood remakes are considered terrible. No one wants to see Black Christmas remade like what, 3 times by now? Nobody's gonna do Citizen Kane with new actors and shit. And good movie remakes are usually entirely different. For example, John Carpenter's The Thing vs The Thing from Another World. Completely different movies with similar ideas. This is more akin to Resident evil remakes, where everything is redone, new gameplay mechanics introduced. I guess I should've mentioned that I don't mind Resident Evil style remakes. My problem is with the games that are the same games with a new skin applied on top. If I was to play Shadow of the Collosus, I'd be like "wow they made that fur work on ps2? Holy shit!" and I was playing Sotc PS4 i'd be like "wow average ps4 graphics, that's okay i guess".

>>10531
>But Hollywood remakes are considered terrible.
Not always, that's more of a recent development with how shitty hollywood is now. Off the top of my head, The Fly and Little Shop of Horrors are considered to be at least as good if not better then the originals.

>If I was to play Shadow of the Collosus, I'd be like "wow they made that fur work on ps2? Holy shit!" and I was playing Sotc PS4 i'd be like "wow average ps4 graphics, that's okay i guess".
I can see where you're coming from, especially when they do a graphical 'reimagining' of a game that's only 1 or 2 generations old- something like SotC already looked fantastic, it doesn't really need or benefit from any improvements and it only detracts from the original technological achievement the game represented. But the game in your examples that stood out to me was Spyro- that one was so massively transformed by the updated art style that it basically feels like an entirely new game, and I don't mind seeing other things from the PS1/N64 era or before given this sort of intensive face lift. You're still losing the perspective on technology, since the original was a technical beast for the time but the new one is only on par with every other AAA game, but the radically re-imagined art style justifies its existence to me.

>>10532
I've never actually played Spyro but I brought it up because I've heard people complain about art style changes like this https://old.reddit.com/r/Spyro/comments/c9shl4/i_know_im_going_to_sound_nitpicking_and_unpopular/

Personally, If I was to get into the Spyro games today I'd definitely go for the original ps1 games first and probably not even touch remakes (like I did with yakuza but then it died sadly).

And the movies you brought up are similar to my examples with The Thing, as in, completely remade movies. Imagine if The Fly was a shot for shot remake with every single line of dialog remaining the same, every camera angle the same and the new actors trying as hard as they can to mimic the way old actors talked. That's how I perceive remakes of Demon's Souls, Halo, Sotc etc

>>10530
>The original still exists
I also wanted to make a point about this. The original doesn't always really exist. Like with Demon's souls. They remade it for the ps5 but only with new graphics. What if I want to play the original, I now have to go and get a console from 2006 and a copy of 12 year old game. And the digital store on ps3 won't always be available (they even shut it down earlier this year but restored it but it still means it could be gone at any time). And the servers for the game going to get shutdown at some point. Sure there's emulation but the answer to play the original version shouldn't be "like bro just acquire the copy somehow probably illegally and then an illegal copy of bios or dump it yourself". If they're doing these remake at least it would be great to have an original version as well (preferably patched to unlock fps and stuff too).

>>10527
the definition of soul/soulless