By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Remasters, Remakes, and Ports.....

AZWification on 20 August 2015
d21lewis said:

One more:  Super Mario All-Stars: Exact same gameplay, glitches, etc.  Different graphics and sound.  What is it?

Oh, one thing I didn't mention in the OP:  Every game in this thread so far is a game I actually owned and still own (both versions) right now at this very moment.

It's definitely a remake. Remasters didn't really exist in the early 90s anyway.



                
       ---Member of the official Squeezol Fanclub---

Around the Network
Aeolus451 on 20 August 2015
AZWification said:
d21lewis said:

One more:  Super Mario All-Stars: Exact same gameplay, glitches, etc.  Different graphics and sound.  What is it?

Oh, one thing I didn't mention in the OP:  Every game in this thread so far is a game I actually owned and still own (both versions) right now at this very moment.

It's definitely a remake. Remasters didn't really exist in the early 90s anyway.


That's a lot of double posts. haha.



TruckOSaurus on 20 August 2015

An interesting case is Resident Evil 4, it kinda shows that "remaster" is a recent term.

There's the original GameCube version
The PS2 version is considered a port (although it has the additional Assignment Ada missions)
The Wii version was also called a port but I think it would fit today's remastered definition (slightly better graphics, new controls, has the Ada missions)
The PS3/360 version that was called RE4 HD (still no remaster although that tag would fit even better than for the Wii version)



Signature goes here!

jonathanalis on 20 August 2015

i really didnt get the difference about TLOU beging a remaster and AC4, GTA5 are just the PS4 versions of ps3 games.
I consider them as crossgen games, so i dont think that remaster can be applied here.



Nem on 20 August 2015
Michelasso said:
Nem said:

Remaster isnt a thing. Thats a fancy term they came up with to sell you the game. A remaster is a port. Like, no one was calling the DC version of MK4 and Soul Reaver "remasters" even though they were clearly superior to the PS1 counterparts.


Wrong. You can have a port without having a remaster. Take "Oddworld: New 'n' Tasty!". It has been first (re)made (because it is a remake) for PS4 and then ported to PS3 at a lower resolution. Or FF VII for iOS. It's a port of the Steam version for PC, the graphics assets should be identical. Another good example is Dark Souls for PC. It was basically the same game, even at the same resolution. It was even still stuttering in Blighttown . It needed a mod to go above 720p30fps.

In order to have a remaster there is the need to have some assets... remastered indeed. Starting with the graphics. FF VII is a good example because technically the Steam version has been remastered. The problem is that it has been one of the crappiest remasters ever. If it was properly done the remaster itself could have been close to the "remake" the nostalgic of turn based combat were dreaming of.

Hopefully SE is fixing that on the PS4 version. 


Wrong to your wrong.  You can have a port that isnt a remaster, its still called a port. A remaster is a port aswell. Theres no distinsction besides the one fed to us this gen to make it look like more than what it is.

You cannot have a term for these enhanced ports that isnt retroactive. The port of Soul Reaver for DC had better textures, more poly's. But, no one remembered to call it a remaster back then. It was a port. Just like today's "remasters" are ports aswell. Ports can go both ways in terms of quality, but what keeps them together as one term is the fact that its the same game touched up or down to fit a different system.

Remaster is a clever term invented by the marketing department to boost the perception of the value of the title and get your money. :)



Around the Network
Dgc1808 on 20 August 2015
SvennoJ said:
Dgc1808 said:

There was a discussion about this in another thread. Some one wanted to point out that late PC ports almost always release with presentation and visual enhancements. So should they be considered remasters? The concensus at the end was "YES". They do fit the definition because they were made after the original and improvements were made on what was already there. In vast majority of cases, "port" and "remaster" are synonyms. (And lets be honest, if TLOU wasn't a popular game we probably wouldn't be seeing the labeled 'remaster' being discussed so much... Then again, people would still be talking/complaing about 'definitve' editions XD)

Are all ports remasters though? I would argue no. The word "remaster" implies some improvement which isn't always the case. Dark Souls PC is an excellent example. Locked at 720p30, same visual and performance hits that were present on the console version. No improvements were made. Same goes with FFXIII PC, FFIV PC (port of the DS game and even has battles locked at 15fps...) Bioshock PS3 (had some bugs that result in visual downgrades compared to other versions) and some other games I just can't think of at the moment.

It happens with movies too. The early blu-ray releases were pretty bad (pre h.264, single layer mpeg-2 discs, upscaled DVD ports) and it still happens now and then. One notorious bad example is The blair witch project. http://www.blu-ray.com/movies/The-Blair-Witch-Project-Blu-ray/13876/ They don't call them remasters though. And sometimes remasters lose some charm of the original, same with games.

When is a port a remaster? It seems the game industry likes to use the word for ports from one gen to the next. It has little to do with enhancements for better or worse. It's simply the new term for HD editions, sounds better than The last of us full HD. The term is mostly used by the press and marketing anyway, Nathan drake collection and Gears Ultimate edition, no mention of remastered in the titles there. The press doesn't know what they mean either: Gears of War remastered coming to PC, playable at 4K resolution
The remake of the original Gears of War is coming to computers
Which is it?

Totally agree that the way marketting teams play around with 'remastered' and '[awesome word] Editions' makes defining these terms confusing. The movie industry, as you pointed out, just adds more to the confusion.

From what I understand, and what seemed to be the consensus in that thread I mentioned earlier, it's totally fine to label Gear Ultimate and Nathan Collection as remasters. 



4 ≈ One

Maraccuda on 20 August 2015

Port: Straight copy released on a different console with no enhancements and only the DLC added.
Nothing but a cash grab.

Remaster: The same game but with better slightly better details/graphics and some new stuff.
Nothing but a cash grab.

Remake: Remade from the ground up. Looks, sounds vastly different and sometimes plays a little differently too.
Worthy if the game is older than 1 gen.



Australian Gamer (add me if you like)               
NNID: Maraccuda              
PS Network: Maraccuda           

 

Platina on 20 August 2015
Xxain said:

A Remake is when the game is remade from scratch: FF7, Twin snakes, Wild Arms Alter code F

A Remaster is a touch up to a old game: DMC3/4, Wind Waker, Uncharted

A Port "may" have a few new features but otherwise completely untouche: Valkyrie Profile PSP, Chrono Trigger DS

 

I noticed people have problems distinguishing between these.


This



NintenDomination [May 2015 - July 2017]
 

  - Official  VGChartz Tutorial Thread - 

NintenDomination [2015/05/19 - 2017/07/02]
 
          

 

 

Here lies the hidden threads. 

 | |

Nintendo Metascore | Official NintenDomination | VGC Tutorial Thread

| Best and Worst of Miiverse | Manga Discussion Thead |
[3DS] Winter Playtimes [Wii U]

AZWification on 20 August 2015
Aeolus451 said:
AZWification said:
d21lewis said:

One more:  Super Mario All-Stars: Exact same gameplay, glitches, etc.  Different graphics and sound.  What is it?

Oh, one thing I didn't mention in the OP:  Every game in this thread so far is a game I actually owned and still own (both versions) right now at this very moment.

It's definitely a remake. Remasters didn't really exist in the early 90s anyway.


That's a lot of double posts. haha.

I really don't know what the hell happened there.. >_>



                
       ---Member of the official Squeezol Fanclub---

CladInShadows on 20 August 2015
Dgc1808 said:
SvennoJ said:
Ports and remasters are pretty much the same thing, only different by the time that separates them.
Many multi platform games have differences in assets, resolution, frame rate and effects. We only call them remasters when they come out a lot later than the rest. 

It's the same with movies, the first batch on dvd and blu-ray are ports from the movie basically. Second time and onwards it's called a remaster. The process is the same, only technology has improved.

I wonder if Rise of the Tombraider PS4 will be sold as a remaster or a port? It will be a year later, probably with some extras and a few enhancements, If Tombraider definitive was a remaster, I guess Rise of the tombraider will be too?

Are all ports remasters though? I would argue no. The word "remaster" implies some improvement which isn't always the case. Dark Souls PC is an excellent example. Locked at 720p30, same visual and performance hits that were present on the console version. No improvements were made. 

Even before the mod made the whole 720p thing irrelevant, the performance hits were never an issue in the PC version.  If your computer is powerful enough, there were no performance hits.  Blight town? Ran at a solid 30 frames per second for me.