Wright said:
To recreate something with modern technology or different assets to enhance what was already there is a remaster per se. Gears of War Ultimate Edition is a remaster despite using a totally different (well, not totally, but the next-generation motor from the same company) engine; because the game itself is exactly the same as the original Gears of War 1 from 2006, but with reupdated graphics, for example. Both the developers and Microsoft consider it a remaster. The Nathan Drake Collection had the same code with they worked with, but the gameplay code got a total revamp, using variables from all three games to create a specific, same shooting system in all them; that was still a remaster, despite the gameplay changes. In this case, only the graphics are being worked upon. The rest of the game is exactly the same, hence there's no reason to consider it a remake: it's a remaster in the same vein. One could argue that they're giving a new control scheme I suppose, but so did Metal Gear Solid HD Collection and that was still considered a remaster, too. Sometimes assets have to be remade even if you're working on the original assets, and have to create new ones because the previous ones are problematic or give you issues. I think this was the case with Silent Hill HD, which is also a remaster (and one very bad remaster so stay the heck away from it). If I were to pinpoint a remake, that would be Resident Evil REmake. "It's the same experience" is a valid argument, but take a moment to examine what it did: not only it recreated with better graphics everything, but also fundamentally changed several things from the original game, such as the mansion layout, dialogues, cutscenes, puzzles, item location, bosses, enemy mechanics and endings. It's essencially a remake because it tries being faithful to the original while giving itself the benefit of adding new things and changing others which alters the original experience to a huge degree. This Shadow of the Colossus, everything we've seen and what Yoshida explains, is nothing but a remaster, even if the graphics are worked from scratch. It's literally the same experience as the PS2 but with fancier graphics. Same dialogues, same amount of colossi, same battles, same ending. Hence, remaster. A well-done remaster, but I do not see why the word "remake" applies here. You could argue the graphics were remade, but not the game. |
A remake does not require that the game be changed in anyway. When I say modern day sensibilities, it means that you would expect from a modern day game. All remake require is that something be recreated with modern technology and sensibilities. When elements are added to a remake its not justify it being a remake, but to freshen the experience for return players and/or to correct things (like connecting the game script to its prequel better or as an example). Your adding to many stipulations.
There are just certain prolific games that developers who were not initially involved in should not alter. They/SONY would catch hell if they butchered Shadow of the Colossus. That's too much pressure for grunt workers.
