These past couple of months have seen two of the most beloved titles from the Gamecube resurrected in modern form.

Interestingly though, the two take polar opposite approaches to doing so.

Metroid leaves the core gameplay and design intact and faithful, but completely remakes the graphics up to current standards, and adds modern control options.

RE4 on the other hands redesigns the entire experience, from the mechanics, to the levels, to the story.

Which approach do you prefer or think works better, and why?

I haven't played these games yet, but I'm sure Remakes are better. Resident Evil 2 and Final Fantasy VII were both amazing remakes because they have a ton of new content, and it feels like a brand new experience due to incredible cinematics and updates on the plot and gameplay.

I gave up on Kirby Return to Dreamland Deluxe because the new graphics weren't enough for me.

I enjoyed all the remakes I've played because it felt like a new experience. Most remastered I didn't enjoy as much and some I couldn't bother finish because it felt the same. I bought the last of us remastered day 1 and still haven't finished it same with mafia 2, shenmue and many other remastered took me much longer to finish

I don't like comparing the two since they are so different. RE4R removed Robo Salazar Statue and I don't like that. Tho it did make a lot of cool improvements. I don't think RE4R replaces the original as some things I like better in each version. Where Prime Remake perfected on near perfection of a game. All they needed to do was a visual overhaul and new controls. What they did and it's great. There is zero need to ever play the Gamecube game ever again. I can't say the same for the original RE4.

I prefer full remakes if done well, but it's a lot riskier, both from a publisher perspective (requires a lot more investment and higher sales expectations) and fan perspective (much more potential to screw up). That was probably why Metroid Prime was a remaster and not a remake.

Resident Evil 2 and 4 really benefitted from a complete overhaul and the fan base in general seems very open to them doing this with the series, so long as it's 1) high quality, and 2) retains many of the best gameplay and story beats. Here Resident Evil 3 apparently fell short. I hadn't played the original, so I enjoyed it, but it felt very short and there was obviously missing bonus content. RE4 Remake is also missing extra content that's obviously going to be added as paid DLC, which is annoying, but the main story has been extended to such an extent that I didn't miss it as much as I expected to.

Even remakes should vary in scope and scale. If, for example, Bluepoint had done a RE4 Remake to Shadow of the Colossus and changed everything I would've been absolutely disgusted. It's a beloved game that borders on being an art piece, so it'd be like someone having the audacity to re-write a classic novel (which, while I'm on the subject, is also a trend I find reprehensible and Orwellian). I'm sure people would have felt the same about The Last of Us Part 1. In those cases a subtler hand is required.

I'm picking up metroid tomorrow, currently playing re4 remake and loving. Though it's punishing at times, it's amazing how great this game is. I played it years ago, but I completely forgot about certain sections of the game, and i'm not sure if what I'm playing is new.

Every moment in this game is one epic setpience encounter after the next. There is never a dull moment. This game truly was ahead of it's time when it released. The pacing and game design is so good, this may be the best horror game ever made. And certainly one of the best made games overall.

I prefer when they change things up. Gives me reason to still play the original for a different experience.
I feel RE4 needed to change things up more than other games since the original game has been released so many different times on so many different platforms. If you had not experienced it by now another release of basically the same game would not win over a new crowed.

I enjoy both approaches, although some remakes (sometimes "reboot" would be a more exact term) tend to take too much liberties, making me feel that I got robbed from experiencing a more faithful modern recreation of said game. I don't know if it's the case of RE4, but FF VII Remake comes to mind. We'll never get to experience the original PS1 story with more fleshed out characters, modern graphics and new gameplay.

I haven't played either one yet but I do know that I prefer the REmake approach in the vast majority of cases. Most games have room for improvement in more than just the graphics department, including Prime imo.

Neither approach is inherently better, it's just a question of what fits the project in question. Obviously, a full remake is much more expensive to do, so that's something that needs to be taken into account. In general, it depends on how well the original has aged, and whether it needs more than just a straightforward graphical upgrade to bring it in line with modern sensibilities.