You are welcome to look at the talkback but please consider that this article is over 11 months old before posting.
Forum - View topicNEWS: Yasuhiro Anpo: Capcom to Announce More Resident Evil Game Remakes
|
Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Vercinto
Posts: 116 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
Every time any kind of remake is announced I am happy.
If it was up to me everything that ever existed from the beginning of time would get a remake every 5 years. |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Kusakabe
Posts: 110 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
Woof. L take. People like you are why nothing lasts anymore. |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
MFrontier
Posts: 13789 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
I feel like Code Veronica could use a remake more than, say, RE5 does but they teased RE5 quite a bit in the RE4 remake.
All the same RE5 without Roger Craig Smith and DC Douglas feels wrong. |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
Greed1914
 Posts: 4631 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
I've been saying Code Veronica should have gotten the remake treatment before RE4, and I stand by that with the prospect of RE5. As much as they teased it, though, I do expect RE5. The big question I have with it is whether it will still be a co-op game. That part had plenty of criticism, but quite a bit of the overall concept would have to be reworked to remove it. I suppose the use of plural "remakes" makes it possible that an RE5 remake and Code Veronica could both be happening. RE3 remake came out as quickly as it did after RE2 at least in part because it was also in development, even though Capcom had only announced RE2 at the time. |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Vercinto
Posts: 116 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
funkfoot
Posts: 84 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
If most remakes weren't objective downgrades I might agree, but until we reach the point where that isn't the case that just sounds like repeated diminishing returns and uncreativity. The remakes for RE2, 3, and 4 are all worse than the original games because they have objectively less content and value. The bare minimum for any remake should be to have just as much content as the original. Ideally, it would have more and the entire reason you're remaking it is to improve upon something already good and add to it. The first Resident Evil remake for the Gamecube did this perfectly. Super Mario RPG is a recent one that is more along the lines of a barebone remake that keeps all the content of the original, but it did throw in a few bonus features and new things. I'd hesitate to even call 2, 3, and 4 remakes as much as I would say they're reimaginings given how different they are. They're not FF7R levels of reimaginings, but it's clear when someone is talking about the remakes or the original versions of the games in conversation. |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
TheSleepyMonkey
Posts: 954 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
The first two lines instantly derail any argument you could have. First of, "most remakes are downgrades" is not an "objective" idea, that's your own subjective opinion. "RE2 and RE4 remakes are worse than the original".... Seriously?? |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
BadNewsBlues
Posts: 6291 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
You mean “subjective”. While there have been remakes that weren’t as good as the original this isn’t true for all.
The original PS Resident Evil games could be beaten in under five hours and didn’t have a dearth of content in them that made them endlessly replayable. So them having more value is also subjective.
Does this account for content cut from the original versions of these games? Which can be whole segments, weapons, dialog, modes, or even an ending?
Which is weird since the original game was pretty basic to start with. Nor has it stopped people from insisting the original game is better despite being virtually a 1:1 remake.
You wouldn’t keep all the content of the original if people if A. Players themselves didn’t like some of the content in question B. The developers themselves didn’t like the content in question C. There’s something involving the content that was specifically problematic. Such as a poorly conceived bit about certain groups
They’re remakes though just because they axed a few unimportant elements while tweaking/streamlining other aspects doesn’t not make them remakes. |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
funkfoot
Posts: 84 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
Absolutely. That's not to say the remakes are unplayable or even bad, but they're not up to the quality of the originals. On their own they're fine games, but the originals are still the best way to play 2 and 4, not to mention the actual 'canon' games to the rest of the series and supplemental material. Culturally, we've already seen most people move on from the remake of 4 despite it coming out this year. Everyone's already back to quoting and referencing the original version with story points, dialog lines, and mechanics that weren't present in the remake so I doubt it's going to be anywhere close to reaching the pop culture relevance that the original has.
And they still had more content than the remakes. I mean, 2 alone had the completely different scenario A and B for Leon and Claire that the remake basically turned into the same thing for both of them outside a few item placements and the starting area, while in the original they felt like they took place at the same time and had alternate paths. Plus the zapping system that connected the two together. It had a lot more replayability.
Ideally it would. I know SaGa Frontier's remaster added in the Fuse scenario, even though it wasn't 100% of what was cut since all that stuff was lost, but it was certainly a nice treat to see. Star Ocean The Second Story R also adds in a few things that were cut from the original game, mainly a reference to Ashton's hometown. It's great when remakes and remasters can go back and add stuff that was originally left on the cutting room floor, but I don't consider that a requirement for them to be good.
That depends on the complaint. Aesthetic preferences will always be a thing and some people will never be pleased. I've seen people call the UI in the remake stale. But in terms of actual content it has more than the original.
C sounds a bit too specific to just be a random point. Are you referencing something in particular? As far as A and B, that depends what we're talking about. A would be far to easy to abuse because a handful of people not liking something would ruin it for the rest of the people. As far as B goes, most of the time the original developers don't work on these kinds of remakes so it's not exactly their call to begin with. As far as I'm aware Hideki Kamiya and Shinji Mikami had zero involvement in RE2make. But again, it does depend. If you got a creator who wants to go full George Lucas his creation and change things then I think it's fair to not be happy with it. Although I'm not sure how often that actually happens. It's usually the opposite where the original creator not being involved is why people feel they can completely change everything.
I'm speaking in terms of actual story and events. There's a bit too many changes that don't follow the established canon to really consider them remakes rather than AUs. Whether you played the SNES or Switch version of Super Mario RPG, you can cite and talk about what you liked in that game and anyone would know what you mean regardless of the version you played like the Marrymore hijinks with Bowser and Booster kissing Mario, stuff like that. If the remake cut out Marrymore entirely like how the Resident Evil remakes removed sections of the original, then you couldn't. |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Vercinto
Posts: 116 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
BadNewsBlues
Posts: 6291 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
The game literally came out in March. Many of these people have moved on likely because of the fact they’ve beaten the game numerous times since release and plowed through all of the material. In addition to the likely fact that there have been other games to come out this year they probably jumped to. Same way people who plowed through all versions of the original game moved on days/weeks after they played through the game multiple times just to eventually come back to the game before too long as evidenced by the numerous rereleases of that game. This doesn’t mean whatever you think it means.
The game has sold 5.5 million copies as of October and has made close to half billion dollars I don’t think Capcom cares about this.
A couple of Extra but superfluous rooms, unimpressive boss fights/enemy engagements, obnoxious puzzles,poorly written (& acted) dialog, and looking up skirts isn’t much content.
While I will admit that having Mr.X show up in both versions of both routes was an obnoxious thing I can overlook that especially as he’s eventually killed off in Claire’s route. I don’t miss however Nemesis in the remake showing up everywhere in the streets like the original game.
No but it does happen sometimes as writers or developers may come to the realization after the fact that something that was originally in a game would feel out of place or be outright offensive which may have been the case when it was put into the orignal product. Should of course not be in a remake of the game.
Which I haven’t seen a legitimate instance of.
True but even in those cases many of them tend to not publicly repudiate these changes and in rarer cases they might acknowledge the change was good.
And even in that context they’re still more or less same thing as the original games. The remakes for Resident Evil 2,3,&4 while making the odd deviation here and there is literally telling the same stories involving much of the same events. Just because Jill in the remake doesn’t fight Nemesis wielding a rocket launcher at a clock tower after doing a bunch weird shit to summon a rescue helicopter which he then promptly shoots down. Does not change the fact that Jill still fights him in a similar area and just like the original game gets infected during the fight.
The funny thing about canon is that in addition to everything not being set in stone due to writers tending to add things as they go along which can at some point contradict something they already established or not fully explaining things because they forget, can’t, or don’t know how to. Is that you as the writer can outright disregard something that was already established whether you wrote it originally or it’s a new writer is taking over for you. This also extends to fans who will often disregard certain elements in the stories they follow for both good and (not) good reasons. |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Lord Geo
Posts: 2675 Location: North Brunswick, New Jersey |
|
|||||||||||||||||
Sure, but that also doesn't mean that decades old originals no longer have any relevance simply because remakes for them exist. Personally, that's my biggest issue with Capcom when it comes to Resident Evil: Remakes Effectively Replacing the Originals. Aside from (some version of) RE1: Director's Cut being in the PS1 Classic & being made available on PS5 as part of PS Plus (but only for those who pay Deluxe or higher), Capcom hasn't offered a pre-REmake mainline Resident Evil game in any "new" way on modern hardware in over 10-15 years. The last "new" release for OG RE1 was on the DS back in 2006. OG RE2? Also 2006, but only for PC & only in Japan; before that was GameCube in 2003. OG RE3? Same exact situation as RE2. Code:Veronica? 2011 on Xbox 360 & PS3 (though the 360 version is at least BC on Xbox One & Series). Capcom doesn't even offer any of those four games' old PC ports via Steam or GOG. Yes, those games are "decades old", but they're still great games (C:V to a more mixed reception, admittedly) & it's wild that Capcom hasn't given them any sort of modern remaster or even just a simple re-release, instead acting like the remakes are effectively the replacements for them. |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
Vercinto
Posts: 116 |
|
|||||||||||||||||
That's how relevant they are. |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group