I was thoroughly tired of and done with vidya remakes by the time Mario All Stars originally came out. 20+ years later I remain done with them. Give me sequels/new games or frick off.
steady but extreme decline of Disney since the 90s. when this remaster came, out we thought they didn't care, but people in the company actually hate the old stuff.
Pretty much. People need to realise that the vast majority of people who leech off others' work, ie people who make remakes, do not like the original work, do not like the original creators, and do not like the people that like the original work. They frick with it out of spite and smugly think they are "fixing it"
The TRULY sad thing about this is that there is no one alive with the technical skill required to redraw a movie like The Sword in the Stone, or ever made a new one for that matter.
American animation collages like CalArts do not teach traditional animation skills nor ANY of the basics needed for competent animation, like proportions, perspective and proper linework. The reason is that everyone know knew these skills passed away and there was never any incentive to pass the skills on because animation was moving in the direction of CGI only.
At CalArts you learn that everyone can make a cartoon show with zero practical skill, as long as they know the right people. There is no work, no passion and no real committent to the thing you create because it is simply a product and the majority of animation will be left to Asians anyway. But it's still sad as frick knowing that the industry is genuinely irrevocably dead and these "remasters" isn't a result of laziness.
It's a result of it being the absolute best a modern animator in the US can do.
No, they're still around, I know a few of them, they're a bunch of old fricks and no one pays them any mind.
You know why?
Because the studios are only concerned about making something on the cheap, Cal Arts style is designed to be as cheap as possible to make the most money with the least cost.
However, you may not be entirely aware of this yet, but the same thing is happening in 3D animation. If you go back to old 3D animation of let's say Devil May Cry 1 or even something as odd as Space Channel 5. You will immediately notice that the characters movement have weight to them, a weight which nearly all modern 3D animation lacks.
This is the opening to Devil May Cry 1, notice how Dante throws his sword or how he takes that kick to the face. You will never see anything with that sort of weight to it today. You won't see it in games, you won't see it in movies, you definitely won't see it in the MCU, this cost cutting nonsense and lack of skill is bleeding into everything.
By being so scared of the possibility that society will reject postmodernist sophistry and start judging you fairly (which doesn't necessarily mean kindly) that you reject all rationality in favor of screaming leftist dogma about the biggest threat to their horseshit (the objective success of classically liberal Christian nations) at the top of your lungs.
I got nothing against people making art like that, but if that's what they "teach" you in higher education, then you got fricking scammed. That kind of art was meant to be about breaking the rules, how the frick can you do that if they never teach you the rules in the first place?
This is a huge part of it, yes. Art that went completely against the conventions of the time but was still good wasn't like that because the artist went "Frick school!", it was like that because the artist understood contemporary art well and decided to twist it into their own thing. Ironically the equivalent of doing that now would be realism or some shit like that.
It's explicitly stated there that the rich kids just want to decorate shit rather than learn to be an accomplished draftsman like the school used to be known for. Williams reached a revelation that he doesn't know where to look for aspiring draftsmen to take under his wing because the institutions themselves don't educate them in that manner anymore.
2 years ago
Anonymous
yeah but thats one school, there's still people learning to draw well
2 years ago
Anonymous
Well, Williams has passed away without ever finishing the definitive Thief and the Cobbler with several great animators actually working on that alongside Williams.
Richard Williams is perhaps my favourite animator of all time but reading this time and time again made me realize that we're never ever going to realize a renaissance of animation ever again.
Several factors I believe, ranging from companies not wanting to take on the financial risk and the ubiquitous success of the adult comedy TV animation.
2 years ago
Anonymous
It can't take off in the current era sure, but that doesn't mean it can't happen. It's unlikely, but not impossible.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Not only is it unlikely, it's even more unlikely with the odds only getting a bit fairer if it were to be tie-in of another successful billion dollar IP.
Tbh, all of those art-related crap were always like this.
Nowadays it is just easier for people from outside to see all the crazy shit because of the social media and internet
Of course, all this crazy stuff was blowing up the same time as the golden era of animation.
But that goes against the simplistic narrative to make people angry so shush.
Williams has stated in that excerpt that that school specifically churned out skilled draftsmen. Realistic drawing just wasn't and still isn't in vogue.
I choose to blame this on the fact that the US has no decent frickin 2D animated shows/movies to get people interested in serious study of 2D animation
Even in yesteryear before digital animated schlock, you had to fend off Hanna Barbera's funny land of mass produced shite. And EVERY cartoon is just a comedy. Not something you'd treat as a serious artform.
It is just not creatively inspiring.
Disney were the last ones doing 2D animated movies and then they stopped putting effort into them, the movies flopped and they said "Well clearly no one wants these, scrap them".
Another thing I read once was that apparently a lot of adults preferred going to see 3D animated movies because, and I'm being serious here, they looked a bit closer to live action (since they have depth and shit) and so they felt less embarrassed seeing them because they felt they weren't as "for kids" as 2D animation. Not sure how much stock I put into that since I can't even remember where I read it, but with how most people see animation it wouldn't surprise me that much.
Disney didn't get animators ready-made from an art school either. He had to build up his talent; art lessons, figure studies, rotoscoping, etc. A lot of the technical knowledge was entirely internal to Disney and you wouldn't learn it at a school anywhere. It's the same with any great organization, once it's gone the ambient knowledge is just lost and you have to rebuild it from scratch.
The talent 100% exists. I've seen nobodies on YouTube make hand drawn animations better than giant movie studios. The problem is it takes too long, it takes too much work, and its expensive. Most studios no longer care about the best possible quality they want serviceable quality that will make them enough money
It's even worse in film. There are tons of "4k" "remasters" coming out now that look like absolute shit. The second LotR film is so ruined with DNR that everyone turns into fricking waxwork statues if they move at all, it's insane. And all because some moronic director went "uh can we get rid of some of this grain I don't like it".
Games are probably the place remasters make the most sense, by which I mean they make absolutely zero fricking sense but I can at least understand the concept of remaking something. The problem is that with the exception of REmake 1, every other remake has been absolute garbage with no reason to exist. And even then, half the reason REmake is decent is because they redid all the awful voice acting and translation work.
A few proper remakes/remasters exist out there for games at least and I think a proper attempt is a superior choice in the present day over the original, since the original may be suffering from technical issues that have since been solved, may be incompatible with modern shit or is just outright inferior from a technical point of view. If these problems can be solved in a good remake then it's the way to go. Generally speaking, if I already played a game that's being remade I will probably not bother with the remake, after all I'm already done with the original. For games I haven't played yet, I would theoretically prefer a good remake if it does exist.
A lot of remakes/remasters are just awful though and either make unnecessary and unwanted changes or simply frick up at the technical level, which is exactly what they were supposed to address in the first place. These are terrible and not worth it.
Holy frick, somebody turned the waifu2x noise removal up to 11.
I don't see the issue. Her dress is more blue and the carpet is more red. Who cares. I can understand some of the complaints with DeS remake because the redesigns directly contradict lore reasons for why things look a certain way. But I really don't understand the seethe towards cosmetic changes that don't affect anything else.
>I don't see the issue
If you are 100% genuine, then you should go get your eyes checked. There's so much detail that's completely gone on the right side. Also, keep in mind this is literally just ONE frame in a movie with probably 150k frames. Imagine all the detail that's lost in every single frame across the entire movie.
Company who doesn't give a shit about animation, doesn't have anyone at the top who cares about animation, and nobody supervising the release and clean up cares about animation. Disney only cares about their parks, merch, and ticket sales for CG movies.
That's pretty terrible imo, she lost all the details and became an amorphous blob.
For Demons, they added a lot more detailed models, while changing the art style in certain places, so it's both a step ahead and to the side.
Why is the modern Sailor Moon anime cited as a remake? It isn't a remake, its pretty damn close to a direct adaptation of the manga as you'll get out of an anime. The original SM anime was extremely loosely based on the manga at best.
If you think its shit then you must think the same of the manga. In which case why would you ever have given a shit about the franchise in the first place?
If you think its shit then you must think the same of the manga. In which case why would you ever have given a shit about the franchise in the first place?
>its pretty damn close to a direct adaptation of the manga
Manga is shit. Anime carried over the franchise.
the art style is shit and the animation is shit
can't comment on the story because I couldn't get past the first episode but you don't watch these shows for the story lol
c&c remasters are the only example of a proper remake, and they only turned out as good as they did because they had direct input from the community as well as original devs
They made a Dune game recently, but it's woke just like the movie so who cares?
At least the books had the decency to wait until the fifth entry to go full moronic.
Remakes are only good if they add gameplay refinements and/or content from later games in the series. Otherwise, there's simply no point.
CTR had perfect gameplay already, but the remake adds Nitro Kart content (and a bunch of new content) to the game to make the package more than just "the same game again" and give tracks from the inferior sequel a chance to shine. THPS1+2 took the classic levels from the first two games and made them play like a midway point between THPS4 and THUG, which is the series' sweet spot. These two were stellar examples of remakes, and should be the industry standard.
Because there are people who refuse to play games that are older than 10 years. I have a friend like this, he refuses to play any game made before 2012 or so. Even game series, he'll always start with the newest one and never play any of the others. He'd never play RE4 unless they remake it. He's basically the opposite of "old = good, new = bad".
They're gonna get fricked with that one. So many people played RE4 and it holds up so well that even non-nostalgiagays are going to be disappointed with the remake stripping charm out of the game.
RE2 and RE3 didn't have that issue because the only people remembering and holding them in high regard were boomers anyway
Zoomers like me, and alphoids I presume, are incapable of touching a game if it looks too old, no matter how good it's said to be.
Because there are people who refuse to play games that are older than 10 years. I have a friend like this, he refuses to play any game made before 2012 or so. Even game series, he'll always start with the newest one and never play any of the others. He'd never play RE4 unless they remake it. He's basically the opposite of "old = good, new = bad".
homosexuals don't want to deal with tank controls and QTEs in 2022. guarantee those will be on the chopping block with the merchant and cheesy dialogue when the remake rolls around.
I'm very very much in favor of going back to the classics and updating them. After all, iterative design is the most obvious way to achieve greatness and while it makes sense at times to go back to the basics and try something new, at point where we are talking about something along the lines of remakes it is usually the case that that "something new" was in fact worse and the answer to explore-exploit dilemma is to exploit the proven design some more. It is almost universally the case that even the classics have some low-hanging fruit that could be improved, and identifying such potential avenues for improvement ought not to be difficult because people have played these games for possibly decades.
The thing is, there are basically no remakes/remasters/reboots that do anything like this. Well, that's if we are talking about games/updates branded as such. For example, the community patches for games like Heroes of Might and Magic 3 are exactly the kind of improvements I would expect to see: people who have actually played the games notice use-cases for features like splitting single stacks of units so they add such features for the HD mod. And it's not like companies are completely ignorant: it wasn't until their last expansions when Civ 4/5/6 respectively were fully coming to their own and I have faith that if they had gotten one more expansion each, they could have been a whole lot better. Or, indeed, if Civ 4 remake or something along those lines included an expansion's worth of stuff.
So, in my opinion there's no problem whatsoever in "remaking" games. That's what people should be doing! My favorite game Dominions 5 earns that spot precisely because the developers have stuck around with the original thing and continued working on it. The problem is that almost all remakes are lazy cash grabs and if they do anything of note at all (other than maybe fricking things up, like WC3: Refunded), it's usually graphics on games that already looked fine as it is.
Yeah, I think fans are the ones that have a better idea of how to upgrade things into "HD", as much as people like to joke about the old SweetFX and AI upscaled texture stuff.
>top row is remake, remaster, recolour >bottom row is remake, recolour, art restoration
stupid moron
also, even if I shit on Black Mesa a lot it's actually a pretty good remake of the original
I was so fricking annoyed black through the Xen parts of Black Mesa. The Gonarch fight is a perfect encapsulation of the end of that game with how overly drawn out and unsatisfying it is. Just let me fight the goddamn thing, they make you scurry around those tunnels for like an hour it feels like.
It felt like they were trying to justify the glacial development schedule more than actually trying to create a well paced conclusion to Half Life.
actually, i think the Gonarch fight was one of the best highlights in the Xen campaign. I liked the back and forth between you and the boss, it was pretty nice though I guess some of the scripted sequence could have been removed and streamlined.
Interloper can go frick itself though, i hate the constant plug puzzles
Remakes are soulless, either enjoy the original and engross yourself in how the developers wanted for you to enjoy it/experience it or placate to new iterations/sequels. You can never recapture the essence in which the artpiece was made for the time and spicing it up to make younger homosexuals/zoomers like them is equally cringe, and if old homosexuals ask for it they are speaking out of an opinion of never having a beloved devotion to the work. The art is also usually the way the artists/developers were able to achieve/circumvent their vision by either limited technologies or how comics were printed, ala PlayStation games replicating shadows/depth by darkness the edges of their graphics.
Let's be honest, remakes are not to spice these masterpieces/artworks, it's fricking corporatism.
I have to agree since now all of you Black person """artists""" are being wiped out by AI.
I will die happy knowing this coom riddled, weebcucked poisoned, trannie tarnaged, media will finally end when AI will not just replace it, but actively make neo normies move on from it because AI will always produce any animated lewd instantaneously, and thus no wagey could ever compete, but because it's so accessible people will move on and finally go back to pre internet times and not become obsessed coomer freaks that treat it like a personality.
>those first instances of animation where the thing is contorting and shuddering all over the show
There was something about early CG that was fricked to look at initially compared to how smooth some of it is now. Kinda like how stop motion has the staggered movements that come from having to do everything by hand.
Is no one gonna point out some of those are just shitty hd remasters instead of remakes?
Why do we always have to go over this every single fricking time why is it so hard for Ganker to learn the difference, they both suck but for different reasons
because everyone is scared to even look as if they're defending a remake by proxy so you can't even correct someone out of fear it'll come across that way
There are loads of pieces of classical literature that were originally published as serialized chapters that later got packaged together as a novel or expanded from a short story.
The Hobbit. Tolkien rewrote the whole book to make it more mature, as well as to give it more connective tissue to what would be LotR. For example, in the original Gollum is just a friendly mountain spirit.
Eh I can take it or leave it for the Killing Joke, and I hope.none of you dumbasses think the color choice was supposed to be metaphorical or something we know from the artist it wasn't
Are we talking remakes or remasters? There are remasters that bring a classic up to run seamlessly on modern hardware like Nightdive’s release of System Shock 1, their great work on Quake, and the StarCraft HD remasters.
I don’t know if I’ve ever bought a remake and I don’t have much of an opinion on them anyway
>Games
That's a remake >Film
That's a remaster >Comics
That's a remaster >Anime
That's a Remake >Cartoons
That's a remaster >Art
Remaster but since the artist did her own shit, i'd call it a sloppy remake
If you're literally remaking something and only using the original as a guide, that's a remake. If you're touching up something so that it looks better, that's a remaster.
Video games, especially old ones, were full of novel technical innovations making everything click properly. Remakes almost never implement all of these things properly. Statistically speaking, how could all the things that went right to make a bestselling game function as a piece of highly engineered software go right a second time? That's why remakes always seem like polished turds. Especially those times they just opt to port everything to Unity so they can just use the out of the box rendering engine to get an automatic graphical "upgrade" at the cost of everything else being more janky and taking longer to load.
For all people complain about the remake, they sure are stupid because you can literally make it look like the bottom if you frick with the settings. It has a color grading filter that makes it look closer to the original PS3 game.
They're pointless bullshit cashgrabs. I don't know a single one that isn't worse than the original. Even the Sierra VGA remakes are worse than the EGA originals.
If you ever want someone to kill themselves, don't say "kys" or something. Just tell them in a concerned or smug fashion that there's a chance they could die before their favorite game gets a remake and if they have any sense they'll jump through a noose to make sure of it
what if they tell you that if remaking a video game is enough to make you want to have a nice day then you might as well do it now before you experience actual grief
But WHY is everything terrible now? There must be some sinister force behind it, but for what purpose? I'm still chocked after watching the trailer for the upcoming Monkey Island game last night, like how can anyone present trash like this with a straight face? Right pic is from the upcoming game and in the same location as the two other pics in case you can't tell.
the perspective is fricking my brain, that chair and table in the background make no sense compared to the pirates on the front and the door, and everything else. And why does the window have legs
It's like they tried to capture DoTT's surrealist angles and geometry, but failed to make something cohesive. The image on the right feels more like "Picasso makes a videogame".
Modern games require more people working on them, and as each person's role is diminished, the end product winds up becoming more and more soulless. It's the epitome of too many cooks spoiling the broth.
You also have a lot fewer creative types working now, they're replaced by monkeys with no drive because they'll work for less and produce exactly what the bean counters ask for without whining about how everything looks like shit and the game doesn't make any fricking sense. At the same time, the only higher ups who have survived are the ones who focus on profit above all else and are completely unwilling to take any risks, because a risky failure can get you fired while a "safe" title that makes back half its ad budget can be spun as "the start of a new IP" and "a loss leader".
>commie loon needs to chime in
Did capitalists also built those oppressive blocky neighborhoods?
This is the state of every society that rewards he incompetent socialites.
Companies cheap out on everything and people buy it anyway. Most people have no idea what resolution or aspect ratio or color grading means so they basically can't identify whether a remaster is better or worse than the original.
Cash grabs that are pretty much never made for any reason other than squeezing extra money out of morons. But they'll get praised for it anyway because sycophants can't help themselves
>"Frick bros when will these reboots end" >The monkey's paw curls >Remasters become industry norm
tragic.
As for remakes, I can't think of one noteworthy remake until RE2.
Tomb Raider was a full on reboot when those were in fashion, and other than SFM porn of Nu-Lara, completely unremarkable.
For early 1990s games,a remaster to take out the clunk and sharpen up the graphics is more beneficial than an outright remake that would probably just simplify down and cinematize up the gameplay
My stance is that if you are doing a remake you might as well go all out, and if you are going all out, why artificially limit yourself and not do an original setting/characters while you are at it.
Devs who remake games and never go beyond the remake itself, never introduce new ideas and never even reintroduce cut content are unfit to be human beings.
It seems you are lucky if a remake project has even a couple of the original devs, otherwise they just seem to end up being streamlined casualizations in most cases, and fans of original are not always the answer as thats a good way to get pure unfiltered fanfiction being passed as baseline story.
A good remaster is devs getting a couple months extra and cleaning up a previous project, fixing stuff cut and rushed for time, maybe even expanding on some concepts dropped for size, lot of pre-digital era games had to often be cut down because of disk size limitations, not a problem now.
A good remake is devs going back to a project years old with new tech and experience, ideally doing things now that they could not do then because of previously implied technologies limitations or lack of experience
I don't think you can do a good reboot unless you take some esoteric path and go full experimental with gameplay and story, but that backfires more often than not
Pathologic 2 acknowledges the first game, although that's probably only because they didn't have time to implement the Bachelor and Changeling routes so they had to jam the story in there somehow.
Also, it contextually makes sense for that game to be remade instead of having a traditional sequel.
A big part of why Pathologic 2 is good is simply because it had the same devs. 99% of remakes are made by some literally whos that just make shovelware otherwise.
That is also true. In theory, it should be impossible to frick up a remake since all of the design, writing, storyboards and concept art are already done, but here we are.
We’re getting to the point where remakes are redundant. In the past they made sense due to tech limitations but from the ps2-3 onward I feel like the games all mostly hold up and are actually fricked over with remakes. A lot of games really only need ports to newer consoles.
I sadly don't have that one. Reignited obscures the sky a lot anyway because it doesn't want you to see how unremarkable it is compared to OG, which is why you can't fricking see it in any of the remake screenshots in the post you're replying to
I'm sick of this fricking argument. Some remakes are pure shit because the devs didn't give a shit and ended up ruining the whole thing (like the GTA DE & XIII).
But the moment there is a good one like the DeS remake or schizos like this and this
I sadly don't have that one. Reignited obscures the sky a lot anyway because it doesn't want you to see how unremarkable it is compared to OG, which is why you can't fricking see it in any of the remake screenshots in the post you're replying to
then the fattest morbidly obese americ**ts get on here and complain about "OMG SOUL VS SOULLESS!".
Is this what gayolas argue about these days? the fricking skybox of MUH VIDYA GAYMES rather than the actual gameplay and the like.
This isn't an argument, this is just fat schizos arguing over pointless shit. Either don't play the fricking game or stop acting like an internet badass for brownie points going on about the "SOUL VS SOULLESS" shit.
Stick to your INTERCONNECTED WORLD in Dark Souls 1 and stay there
Well, yeah. When Dark Souls 1 released there was one game in the series with an interconnected world and one without it (Demon Souls).
Dark Souls 2 was the tie breaker so to speak and since then every Fromsoft game has had a disconnected world.
>most remakes are liquid diarrhea, but some of them are solid pieces of shit that show the devs really ate a lot of fiber, stop complaining and eat them
>I only tolerate maybe like two of them
curious which ones you tolerate? I cant think of a single remake/remaster I tolerate but since I avoid them like the plague I dont play most of them
REmake as is typical and Crash Team Racing Nitro Fueled on a personal basis. Aesthetically I much prefer the original but the remake added significant content as well as a more refined version of an obscure mechanic so despite other hiccups and Activision shitting the bed by not providing online servers or a PC port, I enjoyed my time with it
I always see people praise the RE and RE2makes, I just played through the originals for the first time a week ago and was looking at the remakes. Does the REmake keep all the music from the original? I was put off by the 2nd one gutting all the original music and having the audacity to sell the original OST for 3 fricking dollars.
RE1 remake and RE2 remake are worlds apart in respecting the source material. RE1 is arguably a gold standard for remakes. The remaster of the remake messed with some of the music playback (2x pitch and speed) but if you play it on PC there's a patch that can easily fix that.
REmake as is typical and Crash Team Racing Nitro Fueled on a personal basis. Aesthetically I much prefer the original but the remake added significant content as well as a more refined version of an obscure mechanic so despite other hiccups and Activision shitting the bed by not providing online servers or a PC port, I enjoyed my time with it
And might I add the Spyro remakes censored tons of shit in the games, from guns to the mooning enemies to Bombo's name and Moneybags' line about flirting with fauns
Probably the best remakes I've played, inserting some new content here and there to help fill some gaps and more or less building on the core gameplay of the originals while never intending to replace them wholesale.
As far as remasters go, that essentially intend to replace the original? AoE II DE is one of the very few I've found being worth a shit by also actually adding in new shit.
I mean, they can be good. But in most cases, why not just make a new game? It feels like even in the cases where they're good, they do something unnecessary that harms the final product. Etrian Odyssey Untold 2 is a much better and more entertaining game than the original 2, but they also dumbed down quite a few dungeon layouts instead of improving them and added annoying tutorials.
tbf the one on the right is actually the mobile port, which does indeed look aids compared to the SNES version. Left looks fantastic and you're a blind homosexual.
If you're gonna do a remake, then make something different that don't take away from the original version.
FF7 Remake is a good example IMO. It's basically a game that's inspired by the original but largely does its own thing, for good and for bad. But at least it's not just a case of making the graphics better/worse or slapping a 60fps patch on it or something.
>Complete change of story >Complete change of gameplay >Complete change of art direction >Even the fricking victory fanfare is taken away, and is sometimes sing by Barret >"Hurr Durr, FF7 takes away nothing from the original"
Frick off, you moron.
Yes, that's what I meant by doing its own thing, moron. It's clearly not a standard remake contracted to some indian studio where all they do is AI-enhance the graphics and ruin it. It's a whole different game.
>don't take away from the original version >It's a whole different game.
Just so your moronic single atom size braincell understand, this 2 concept contradicts each others.
moron
>Even the fricking victory fanfare is taken away, and is sometimes sing by Barret >Characters engage in metagame
Sorry bub, but that's SOVL right there.
We are not talking about if it's soul or not.
We are talking if it represent >don't take away from the original version
2 years ago
Anonymous
How do those contradict each other? The original playstation version is still intact, or just as intact as it was after Crisis Core, Dirge, Advent Children and all that. Are you literally so dumb you can't grasp that there's room for both and you can safely ignore the remake if it's not up to your standards?
2 years ago
Anonymous
Is there a single remake or remaster that exists that takes away from the original then?
The original version for every single game is still intact
2 years ago
Anonymous
Basically no. OP's picture is false and doesn't work for video games since usually the original versions are still available, whereas something like movies, music and sometimes books are often replaced by the new updated version and the original becomes harder to find.
>Even the fricking victory fanfare is taken away, and is sometimes sing by Barret >Characters engage in metagame
Sorry bub, but that's SOVL right there.
Unless the original was heavily flawed but good, a remake is inherently shit because all it does is "modernize" (dumb down) a game and make it palatable to morons who wouldn't like it in the first place. If the original is perfectly playable with maybe a little bit of jank, it doesn't need to be remade. Ever.
Hellsing Ultimate was closer to the manga than the original Hellsing, but I still felt the original had a better tone with a down to earth secret vampire war than Ultimate's secret nazi experiment london genocide with a hint of italian catholicism jealousy
>if done right like DeS or RE2 remake
Both of those games were incredibly poorly done by morons who had absolutely no understanding of the originals.
This is the problem with remakes in general. It creates people like you who are absolute fricking morons, and now when I want to talk about Resident Evil 2, someone like you will pop up and talk about a completely different game with a superficial resemblance at best.
>Both of those games were incredibly poorly done by morons who had absolutely no understanding of the originals.
RE2 remake is literally better than the original game have a nice day.
>Mr. X no longer campaign exclusive and is just another Nemesis >Overall campaigns being more similar (A and B scenarios) >Missing monsters and areas from the original >No new monsters >Expanded zero on the story and the lore >Streamlined alligator fight >No extreme battle mode >WHERE THE FRICK IS THE MUSIC
For me, the worst part is the environments being completely soulless husks, I was disgusted in every single new area. And that they removed the fricking moth, which was the peak of the original game.
I'm still flabbergasted at how hard they shafted the design of the end lab area. The original design would've looked amazing in the remake.
2 years ago
Anonymous
Wondering what the lab looked like is all that kept me going through the atrocious sewer section, I think that's why it hurt so much to see fricking Wall-E garbage. I've never even bothered doing a B run, I hear there's basically no difference between the campaigns anyway.
2 years ago
Anonymous
There basically isn't any difference other Mr. X showing up as soon as you get to the RPD main hall and the end.
>if done right like DeS or RE2 remake
Both of those games were incredibly poorly done by morons who had absolutely no understanding of the originals.
This is the problem with remakes in general. It creates people like you who are absolute fricking morons, and now when I want to talk about Resident Evil 2, someone like you will pop up and talk about a completely different game with a superficial resemblance at best.
I never understood the appeal. I'm fine just playing the old game on a different system if need be. It's why I was happy that FF7R wasn't an actual graphical remake and is it's own stand alone game.
The music in the CD versions is way better, but man, the graphics are infested with dithering. You really have to play it on a CRT with original hardware for it to be bearable.
Don't really care for them. Most of the time they're just glorified remasters as the only thing being remade is assets, music, etc of a game barely 10 years old post 2009.
I was thoroughly tired of and done with vidya remakes by the time Mario All Stars originally came out. 20+ years later I remain done with them. Give me sequels/new games or frick off.
why is modernity synonymous with soullessness?
How the frick does this happen what the hell
steady but extreme decline of Disney since the 90s. when this remaster came, out we thought they didn't care, but people in the company actually hate the old stuff.
>but people in the company actually hate the old stuff.
Because it mogs the shit out of them?
Pretty much. People need to realise that the vast majority of people who leech off others' work, ie people who make remakes, do not like the original work, do not like the original creators, and do not like the people that like the original work. They frick with it out of spite and smugly think they are "fixing it"
A.I. DNR, it's in a ton of shit, it basically just erases lines at this point because they turn it up to max.
Also, OP forgot the worst offender and the one most similar to vidya.
The TRULY sad thing about this is that there is no one alive with the technical skill required to redraw a movie like The Sword in the Stone, or ever made a new one for that matter.
American animation collages like CalArts do not teach traditional animation skills nor ANY of the basics needed for competent animation, like proportions, perspective and proper linework. The reason is that everyone know knew these skills passed away and there was never any incentive to pass the skills on because animation was moving in the direction of CGI only.
At CalArts you learn that everyone can make a cartoon show with zero practical skill, as long as they know the right people. There is no work, no passion and no real committent to the thing you create because it is simply a product and the majority of animation will be left to Asians anyway. But it's still sad as frick knowing that the industry is genuinely irrevocably dead and these "remasters" isn't a result of laziness.
It's a result of it being the absolute best a modern animator in the US can do.
No, they're still around, I know a few of them, they're a bunch of old fricks and no one pays them any mind.
You know why?
Because the studios are only concerned about making something on the cheap, Cal Arts style is designed to be as cheap as possible to make the most money with the least cost.
However, you may not be entirely aware of this yet, but the same thing is happening in 3D animation. If you go back to old 3D animation of let's say Devil May Cry 1 or even something as odd as Space Channel 5. You will immediately notice that the characters movement have weight to them, a weight which nearly all modern 3D animation lacks.
This is the opening to Devil May Cry 1, notice how Dante throws his sword or how he takes that kick to the face. You will never see anything with that sort of weight to it today. You won't see it in games, you won't see it in movies, you definitely won't see it in the MCU, this cost cutting nonsense and lack of skill is bleeding into everything.
I've always loved the character animations in dmc1 but couldn't figure as to why.
I was never an animation kind of guy, but at least from a 101 class I took, stuff like weight and shit was something emphasized.
Unironically Fortnite has animations better than that
Jesus Christ.
I don't know how you can see shit like this and believe people who say "Oh things aren't worse now, you're just old and jaded."
By being so scared of the possibility that society will reject postmodernist sophistry and start judging you fairly (which doesn't necessarily mean kindly) that you reject all rationality in favor of screaming leftist dogma about the biggest threat to their horseshit (the objective success of classically liberal Christian nations) at the top of your lungs.
>If only you knew how bad things really are
I refuse to call these people master, that is an insult to master engineers, mathematicians and whatever
Bro masters are meaningless nowadays. I got a masters in management by paying 10k and putting maybe 50h of work total over a year.
thats pretty sad
I got nothing against people making art like that, but if that's what they "teach" you in higher education, then you got fricking scammed. That kind of art was meant to be about breaking the rules, how the frick can you do that if they never teach you the rules in the first place?
Correct.
This is a huge part of it, yes. Art that went completely against the conventions of the time but was still good wasn't like that because the artist went "Frick school!", it was like that because the artist understood contemporary art well and decided to twist it into their own thing. Ironically the equivalent of doing that now would be realism or some shit like that.
do any of those people want to animate though?
It's explicitly stated there that the rich kids just want to decorate shit rather than learn to be an accomplished draftsman like the school used to be known for. Williams reached a revelation that he doesn't know where to look for aspiring draftsmen to take under his wing because the institutions themselves don't educate them in that manner anymore.
yeah but thats one school, there's still people learning to draw well
Well, Williams has passed away without ever finishing the definitive Thief and the Cobbler with several great animators actually working on that alongside Williams.
Richard Williams is perhaps my favourite animator of all time but reading this time and time again made me realize that we're never ever going to realize a renaissance of animation ever again.
Why not?
Several factors I believe, ranging from companies not wanting to take on the financial risk and the ubiquitous success of the adult comedy TV animation.
It can't take off in the current era sure, but that doesn't mean it can't happen. It's unlikely, but not impossible.
Not only is it unlikely, it's even more unlikely with the odds only getting a bit fairer if it were to be tie-in of another successful billion dollar IP.
Tbh, all of those art-related crap were always like this.
Nowadays it is just easier for people from outside to see all the crazy shit because of the social media and internet
Of course, all this crazy stuff was blowing up the same time as the golden era of animation.
But that goes against the simplistic narrative to make people angry so shush.
Williams has stated in that excerpt that that school specifically churned out skilled draftsmen. Realistic drawing just wasn't and still isn't in vogue.
Jesus christ, no wonder they can't find jobs
I choose to blame this on the fact that the US has no decent frickin 2D animated shows/movies to get people interested in serious study of 2D animation
Even in yesteryear before digital animated schlock, you had to fend off Hanna Barbera's funny land of mass produced shite. And EVERY cartoon is just a comedy. Not something you'd treat as a serious artform.
It is just not creatively inspiring.
Disney were the last ones doing 2D animated movies and then they stopped putting effort into them, the movies flopped and they said "Well clearly no one wants these, scrap them".
Another thing I read once was that apparently a lot of adults preferred going to see 3D animated movies because, and I'm being serious here, they looked a bit closer to live action (since they have depth and shit) and so they felt less embarrassed seeing them because they felt they weren't as "for kids" as 2D animation. Not sure how much stock I put into that since I can't even remember where I read it, but with how most people see animation it wouldn't surprise me that much.
Disney didn't get animators ready-made from an art school either. He had to build up his talent; art lessons, figure studies, rotoscoping, etc. A lot of the technical knowledge was entirely internal to Disney and you wouldn't learn it at a school anywhere. It's the same with any great organization, once it's gone the ambient knowledge is just lost and you have to rebuild it from scratch.
lots of great 2D animators in japan
god bless japan
It's a socio-cultural difference, the West is predominantly built on criticism and deconstructionist thinking while Asia still values traditionalism.
The talent 100% exists. I've seen nobodies on YouTube make hand drawn animations better than giant movie studios. The problem is it takes too long, it takes too much work, and its expensive. Most studios no longer care about the best possible quality they want serviceable quality that will make them enough money
fricking souless man
It's even worse in film. There are tons of "4k" "remasters" coming out now that look like absolute shit. The second LotR film is so ruined with DNR that everyone turns into fricking waxwork statues if they move at all, it's insane. And all because some moronic director went "uh can we get rid of some of this grain I don't like it".
Games are probably the place remasters make the most sense, by which I mean they make absolutely zero fricking sense but I can at least understand the concept of remaking something. The problem is that with the exception of REmake 1, every other remake has been absolute garbage with no reason to exist. And even then, half the reason REmake is decent is because they redid all the awful voice acting and translation work.
I have no fricking clue why homosexuals try to remove film grain when it inevitably just makes the thing look worse despite putting more effort in.
?t=739
A few proper remakes/remasters exist out there for games at least and I think a proper attempt is a superior choice in the present day over the original, since the original may be suffering from technical issues that have since been solved, may be incompatible with modern shit or is just outright inferior from a technical point of view. If these problems can be solved in a good remake then it's the way to go. Generally speaking, if I already played a game that's being remade I will probably not bother with the remake, after all I'm already done with the original. For games I haven't played yet, I would theoretically prefer a good remake if it does exist.
A lot of remakes/remasters are just awful though and either make unnecessary and unwanted changes or simply frick up at the technical level, which is exactly what they were supposed to address in the first place. These are terrible and not worth it.
Holy frick, somebody turned the waifu2x noise removal up to 11.
"Yeah, I use Super2xSai, frick scanlines"
I don't see the issue. Her dress is more blue and the carpet is more red. Who cares. I can understand some of the complaints with DeS remake because the redesigns directly contradict lore reasons for why things look a certain way. But I really don't understand the seethe towards cosmetic changes that don't affect anything else.
If you watch both of those side by side being played you would see the issue goes beyond color grading.
clean the grease from your glasses and notice the complete removal of her outline and pleats in the dress
>I don't see the issue
Anon legitimately you need to get your eyes checked, i'm not kidding see a doctor
>I don't see the issue. Her dress is more blue and the carpet is more red
Shading gone, detail gone, depth gone. Are you blind?
The lack of detail on the dress is a decent redflag to start with.
>cries about DeS having more detail
>like the reduced detail of the cartoon
seek help schizo
make me psycho
>I don't see the issue
If you are 100% genuine, then you should go get your eyes checked. There's so much detail that's completely gone on the right side. Also, keep in mind this is literally just ONE frame in a movie with probably 150k frames. Imagine all the detail that's lost in every single frame across the entire movie.
For the first time I feel like the npc meme has a point.
I'm pretty sure that anon just has a legitimate problem with his eyes.
This guy is so blind he has to be a Dark Souls player
It's not even redrawn they just ran it through a filter and lost details in the algorithm. It's as lazy as you can get.
Exactly my reaction
Company who doesn't give a shit about animation, doesn't have anyone at the top who cares about animation, and nobody supervising the release and clean up cares about animation. Disney only cares about their parks, merch, and ticket sales for CG movies.
thats not nearly as bad as the other stuff though
That's pretty terrible imo, she lost all the details and became an amorphous blob.
For Demons, they added a lot more detailed models, while changing the art style in certain places, so it's both a step ahead and to the side.
it's worse than all the others, yes including the picture of Jesus at least that tried to keep the detail of the shadows on his shirt
Why is the modern Sailor Moon anime cited as a remake? It isn't a remake, its pretty damn close to a direct adaptation of the manga as you'll get out of an anime. The original SM anime was extremely loosely based on the manga at best.
because its shit probably
If you think its shit then you must think the same of the manga. In which case why would you ever have given a shit about the franchise in the first place?
>its pretty damn close to a direct adaptation of the manga
Manga is shit. Anime carried over the franchise.
Nta but I liked the manga because I am a cute little girl.
Meh, it has its moments like Rei not being a massive c**t
like Dragon Ball, its a popular franchise that was literally never good
This. It was monster of the week shonen shit but with a female cast. It appealed to both boys and girls
the art style is shit and the animation is shit
can't comment on the story because I couldn't get past the first episode but you don't watch these shows for the story lol
there are only 3 remakes in that picture
c&c remasters are the only example of a proper remake, and they only turned out as good as they did because they had direct input from the community as well as original devs
all other remakes can frick off
>still haven't brought back Dune or C&C Generals yet
They made a Dune game recently, but it's woke just like the movie so who cares?
At least the books had the decency to wait until the fifth entry to go full moronic.
Just call them reboots, like before. There're close to none differences between the two.
>calling remaster a "remake"
Why people are still so moronic?
Worse without exception.
RE1make
Metroid Zero Mission
AM2R
All of these are objectively better than their originals.
waste of time and resources, but unfortunately the profit margins are too high for publishers to ignore
Remakes are only good if they add gameplay refinements and/or content from later games in the series. Otherwise, there's simply no point.
CTR had perfect gameplay already, but the remake adds Nitro Kart content (and a bunch of new content) to the game to make the package more than just "the same game again" and give tracks from the inferior sequel a chance to shine. THPS1+2 took the classic levels from the first two games and made them play like a midway point between THPS4 and THUG, which is the series' sweet spot. These two were stellar examples of remakes, and should be the industry standard.
on the topic of remakes, im sitting here wondering why the frick people are excited about the resident evil 4 remake.
its absolutely unnecessary.
Dunno. I first played RE4 two years ago and it seems to have held up just fine. I had a great time.
This. If anything needed a remake it should've been Code Veronica
Because there are people who refuse to play games that are older than 10 years. I have a friend like this, he refuses to play any game made before 2012 or so. Even game series, he'll always start with the newest one and never play any of the others. He'd never play RE4 unless they remake it. He's basically the opposite of "old = good, new = bad".
They're gonna get fricked with that one. So many people played RE4 and it holds up so well that even non-nostalgiagays are going to be disappointed with the remake stripping charm out of the game.
RE2 and RE3 didn't have that issue because the only people remembering and holding them in high regard were boomers anyway
Zoomers like me, and alphoids I presume, are incapable of touching a game if it looks too old, no matter how good it's said to be.
This basically
homosexuals don't want to deal with tank controls and QTEs in 2022. guarantee those will be on the chopping block with the merchant and cheesy dialogue when the remake rolls around.
Because its the safest cashcow they probably have.
Man, technology seemed more interesting back then.
I'm very very much in favor of going back to the classics and updating them. After all, iterative design is the most obvious way to achieve greatness and while it makes sense at times to go back to the basics and try something new, at point where we are talking about something along the lines of remakes it is usually the case that that "something new" was in fact worse and the answer to explore-exploit dilemma is to exploit the proven design some more. It is almost universally the case that even the classics have some low-hanging fruit that could be improved, and identifying such potential avenues for improvement ought not to be difficult because people have played these games for possibly decades.
The thing is, there are basically no remakes/remasters/reboots that do anything like this. Well, that's if we are talking about games/updates branded as such. For example, the community patches for games like Heroes of Might and Magic 3 are exactly the kind of improvements I would expect to see: people who have actually played the games notice use-cases for features like splitting single stacks of units so they add such features for the HD mod. And it's not like companies are completely ignorant: it wasn't until their last expansions when Civ 4/5/6 respectively were fully coming to their own and I have faith that if they had gotten one more expansion each, they could have been a whole lot better. Or, indeed, if Civ 4 remake or something along those lines included an expansion's worth of stuff.
So, in my opinion there's no problem whatsoever in "remaking" games. That's what people should be doing! My favorite game Dominions 5 earns that spot precisely because the developers have stuck around with the original thing and continued working on it. The problem is that almost all remakes are lazy cash grabs and if they do anything of note at all (other than maybe fricking things up, like WC3: Refunded), it's usually graphics on games that already looked fine as it is.
Yeah, I think fans are the ones that have a better idea of how to upgrade things into "HD", as much as people like to joke about the old SweetFX and AI upscaled texture stuff.
>top row is remake, remaster, recolour
>bottom row is remake, recolour, art restoration
stupid moron
also, even if I shit on Black Mesa a lot it's actually a pretty good remake of the original
I was so fricking annoyed black through the Xen parts of Black Mesa. The Gonarch fight is a perfect encapsulation of the end of that game with how overly drawn out and unsatisfying it is. Just let me fight the goddamn thing, they make you scurry around those tunnels for like an hour it feels like.
It felt like they were trying to justify the glacial development schedule more than actually trying to create a well paced conclusion to Half Life.
actually, i think the Gonarch fight was one of the best highlights in the Xen campaign. I liked the back and forth between you and the boss, it was pretty nice though I guess some of the scripted sequence could have been removed and streamlined.
Interloper can go frick itself though, i hate the constant plug puzzles
Remakes are soulless, either enjoy the original and engross yourself in how the developers wanted for you to enjoy it/experience it or placate to new iterations/sequels. You can never recapture the essence in which the artpiece was made for the time and spicing it up to make younger homosexuals/zoomers like them is equally cringe, and if old homosexuals ask for it they are speaking out of an opinion of never having a beloved devotion to the work. The art is also usually the way the artists/developers were able to achieve/circumvent their vision by either limited technologies or how comics were printed, ala PlayStation games replicating shadows/depth by darkness the edges of their graphics.
Let's be honest, remakes are not to spice these masterpieces/artworks, it's fricking corporatism.
"Art" is a meaningless term for pretentious morons.
Still doesn't detract from a project made out of SOUL and passion from the inception of its vision, to SOULLESS moneybanking from nostalgia.
As an artist, I agree.
There is no functional difference between "art" and entertainment, and the term is useless for communication.
Then you're not an artist. You're a corporate prostitute with no creativity.
I am
The very basis of art is expression and application of creative skills and imagination. Sounds like you lack these traits based on your post.
I have to agree since now all of you Black person """artists""" are being wiped out by AI.
I will die happy knowing this coom riddled, weebcucked poisoned, trannie tarnaged, media will finally end when AI will not just replace it, but actively make neo normies move on from it because AI will always produce any animated lewd instantaneously, and thus no wagey could ever compete, but because it's so accessible people will move on and finally go back to pre internet times and not become obsessed coomer freaks that treat it like a personality.
Can't fricking wait.
kys
you first
Art is just a work with passion of a creator.
Games being "art" is bad.
Why? It's a conglomeration of people putting together artistic skills to make dreams and visions into reality.
Based and true. Remakes are a bastardization of the original and they are only made because of the profit it will bring.
>Remakes are soulless
why would you lie on the internet?
You should post The Thing 2011. Would be more fitting.
That's not a remake it's a prequel.
>they tossed out all of their already made physical props for CGshit
wew
>those first instances of animation where the thing is contorting and shuddering all over the show
There was something about early CG that was fricked to look at initially compared to how smooth some of it is now. Kinda like how stop motion has the staggered movements that come from having to do everything by hand.
stop motion can look very good and even better than CGI when done right. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-QKsDevAx8
You're right but it's pretty hyperbolic to say there aren't remakes that don't supersede their original counterparts.
name one. not doubting you, but personally nothing comes to mind.
I simply dont play them. Shit, i dont even play 'spiritual successors' ie remakes with a differant name and coat of paint.
It -can- be done well.
>let's you fallback to the original games visuals and music if you don't like the new artstyle
based
It also solved the difficulty issue by adding an optional easy mode, rather than reconfigure a classic for today's toddlers.
And they have the save codes that work with the original game still in there, which is just bonkers.
It's the power of a true fan spending time reverse engineering the entire compiled code.
>let's you fallback to the original games visuals and music if you don't like the new artstyle
Yeah, I love that shit too.
Romastered
Nice.
Microids has done a surprisingly good job with the Asterix license in recent times, we even got a new 2D beat 'em up. Can't complain too much on that.
Is no one gonna point out some of those are just shitty hd remasters instead of remakes?
Why do we always have to go over this every single fricking time why is it so hard for Ganker to learn the difference, they both suck but for different reasons
It's far more than just Ganker. The meanings have been skewered beyond repair. People are just mega morons about it for some reason.
No-one is going to point that out because it isn't true for all the images.
Two are actual remakes, two are AI HD upscales, one is a botched fresco restoration, and the last is a recolored comic panel.
>read post again
Sorry for
We find ourselves in agreement.
I thought you were talkinag about all of them.
because everyone is scared to even look as if they're defending a remake by proxy so you can't even correct someone out of fear it'll come across that way
It's an anonymous image board why is anyone so cowardly even here.
One of the sites greater mysteries these days. Used to be about honesty, even if your honest opinion was contradictory or shit.
just because you don't have an outward identity doesn't mean you're not still attaching your ego to your own posts
I dunno the Blue Rays for a lot of 80s classics are objectively the best looking version.
pity the normies whose only exposure will be to the modern garbage version
if they remake Deus Ex they better leave the dialogue intact, otherwise they'll move the virus lab out of Hong Kong
Are there remakes of literature? Official remakes not fanfic bullshit
Publisher asking a contemporary writer to re-write a good book that doesn't sell anymore?
Sure, it's not terribly uncommon.
There are loads of pieces of classical literature that were originally published as serialized chapters that later got packaged together as a novel or expanded from a short story.
Yeah it's called religion.
The Hobbit. Tolkien rewrote the whole book to make it more mature, as well as to give it more connective tissue to what would be LotR. For example, in the original Gollum is just a friendly mountain spirit.
>in the original Gollum is just a friendly mountain spirit
>"Tee hee hee, stop fooling around and give me my ring back"
welp.. looks like the antichrist was A.I. all along, who would have thought
1% of remakes aren't shit but you still shouldn't pay for them.
Eh I can take it or leave it for the Killing Joke, and I hope.none of you dumbasses think the color choice was supposed to be metaphorical or something we know from the artist it wasn't
I want Disney to remake the original Star Wars trilogy.
They already did.
i meant genuinely remake the originals, not rehash
what's wrong with you?
Demon’s Souls Remake actually looks way better than original.
>Demon’s Souls Remake actually looks way better
Graphics: YES
Art direction: NO
Are we talking remakes or remasters? There are remasters that bring a classic up to run seamlessly on modern hardware like Nightdive’s release of System Shock 1, their great work on Quake, and the StarCraft HD remasters.
I don’t know if I’ve ever bought a remake and I don’t have much of an opinion on them anyway
>Games
That's a remake
>Film
That's a remaster
>Comics
That's a remaster
>Anime
That's a Remake
>Cartoons
That's a remaster
>Art
Remaster but since the artist did her own shit, i'd call it a sloppy remake
If you're literally remaking something and only using the original as a guide, that's a remake. If you're touching up something so that it looks better, that's a remaster.
Only needed if the game being remastered was bad/heavily limited by the hardware it was made on.
Remakes are fine if I can't play the original on a modern system
Otherwise they're pointless
Video games, especially old ones, were full of novel technical innovations making everything click properly. Remakes almost never implement all of these things properly. Statistically speaking, how could all the things that went right to make a bestselling game function as a piece of highly engineered software go right a second time? That's why remakes always seem like polished turds. Especially those times they just opt to port everything to Unity so they can just use the out of the box rendering engine to get an automatic graphical "upgrade" at the cost of everything else being more janky and taking longer to load.
As long as they add some QoL changes to bring them up to modern standards, they're fine. 1:1 remakes are pretty pointless though.
which one is the best?
First one by a mile.
For all people complain about the remake, they sure are stupid because you can literally make it look like the bottom if you frick with the settings. It has a color grading filter that makes it look closer to the original PS3 game.
Does it change all the shitty WoW reject redesigns back to the originals too? No? Then shut the frick up.
Bloom is one of the dumbest graphical settings in the industry. Fricking worthless
you have autism
The real problem with DeS remake isn't the art changes, it's the fact that they copied the gameplay 1:1, down to the horrible bosses and bugs.
>remake is too close to the original so it sucks
>remake changes too much so it sucks
must be rough having to do a remake, you can't win.
Honestly, it's more of a port with extensive graphical mods then a remake.
Real remakes are a more along the lines of RE2 and FF7.
The real problem is that camera behavior. This why you don't trust artists with game design.
Literally the only one that looks good there is Cinderella.
They're pointless bullshit cashgrabs. I don't know a single one that isn't worse than the original. Even the Sierra VGA remakes are worse than the EGA originals.
If you ever want someone to kill themselves, don't say "kys" or something. Just tell them in a concerned or smug fashion that there's a chance they could die before their favorite game gets a remake and if they have any sense they'll jump through a noose to make sure of it
what if they tell you that if remaking a video game is enough to make you want to have a nice day then you might as well do it now before you experience actual grief
anons were holding off suicide for TPP and look how that turned out kek
But WHY is everything terrible now? There must be some sinister force behind it, but for what purpose? I'm still chocked after watching the trailer for the upcoming Monkey Island game last night, like how can anyone present trash like this with a straight face? Right pic is from the upcoming game and in the same location as the two other pics in case you can't tell.
the perspective is fricking my brain, that chair and table in the background make no sense compared to the pirates on the front and the door, and everything else. And why does the window have legs
It's like they tried to capture DoTT's surrealist angles and geometry, but failed to make something cohesive. The image on the right feels more like "Picasso makes a videogame".
God, that's hideous. The original game was so beautiful, and the remaster is so soulless.
Just look at the fricking water flowing out of the pipes in the first minute.
Why does this look like a middle school math homework illustration.
>middle school math homework illustration
what? Is there something I don't know about public education?
Middle pirate looks like he's about to lecture Guybrush on transphobia and male privilege.
>But WHY is everything terrible now?
Women and israelites
i have no idea why anyone would choose to play that new version when it looks that bad.
What a huge steaming turd.
>swords don't even hit most swings
how did they frick up this bad
Modern games require more people working on them, and as each person's role is diminished, the end product winds up becoming more and more soulless. It's the epitome of too many cooks spoiling the broth.
You also have a lot fewer creative types working now, they're replaced by monkeys with no drive because they'll work for less and produce exactly what the bean counters ask for without whining about how everything looks like shit and the game doesn't make any fricking sense. At the same time, the only higher ups who have survived are the ones who focus on profit above all else and are completely unwilling to take any risks, because a risky failure can get you fired while a "safe" title that makes back half its ad budget can be spun as "the start of a new IP" and "a loss leader".
Come the frick on. I'm going insane from this shit, this would have been a punchline 5 years ago.
>But WHY is everything terrible now?
You know damn well why.
This is going to sell like hotcakes, isn't it?
>But WHY is everything terrible now?
You asked for capitalism and you got it. Don't call it a grave, it's the future you chose.
>commie loon needs to chime in
Did capitalists also built those oppressive blocky neighborhoods?
This is the state of every society that rewards he incompetent socialites.
All the good videogames were made under capitalism, except tetris
>implying that games are gonna be made under communism
Companies cheap out on everything and people buy it anyway. Most people have no idea what resolution or aspect ratio or color grading means so they basically can't identify whether a remaster is better or worse than the original.
the sailor moon one was suppose to be closer to the manga, but still was poorly done
The Killing Joke one hurts so much
Cash grabs that are pretty much never made for any reason other than squeezing extra money out of morons. But they'll get praised for it anyway because sycophants can't help themselves
>"Frick bros when will these reboots end"
>The monkey's paw curls
>Remasters become industry norm
tragic.
As for remakes, I can't think of one noteworthy remake until RE2.
Tomb Raider was a full on reboot when those were in fashion, and other than SFM porn of Nu-Lara, completely unremarkable.
For early 1990s games,a remaster to take out the clunk and sharpen up the graphics is more beneficial than an outright remake that would probably just simplify down and cinematize up the gameplay
My stance is that if you are doing a remake you might as well go all out, and if you are going all out, why artificially limit yourself and not do an original setting/characters while you are at it.
Devs who remake games and never go beyond the remake itself, never introduce new ideas and never even reintroduce cut content are unfit to be human beings.
It seems you are lucky if a remake project has even a couple of the original devs, otherwise they just seem to end up being streamlined casualizations in most cases, and fans of original are not always the answer as thats a good way to get pure unfiltered fanfiction being passed as baseline story.
A good remaster is devs getting a couple months extra and cleaning up a previous project, fixing stuff cut and rushed for time, maybe even expanding on some concepts dropped for size, lot of pre-digital era games had to often be cut down because of disk size limitations, not a problem now.
A good remake is devs going back to a project years old with new tech and experience, ideally doing things now that they could not do then because of previously implied technologies limitations or lack of experience
I don't think you can do a good reboot unless you take some esoteric path and go full experimental with gameplay and story, but that backfires more often than not
Didn't they remake the original game as Anniversary
I believe the reboot was more high profile than Anniversary.
I just named it as an example from late 2000s early 2010s when reboots were the big thing
Pathologic 2 is a good remake. Well a third of one.
Pathologic 2 acknowledges the first game, although that's probably only because they didn't have time to implement the Bachelor and Changeling routes so they had to jam the story in there somehow.
Also, it contextually makes sense for that game to be remade instead of having a traditional sequel.
A big part of why Pathologic 2 is good is simply because it had the same devs. 99% of remakes are made by some literally whos that just make shovelware otherwise.
That is also true. In theory, it should be impossible to frick up a remake since all of the design, writing, storyboards and concept art are already done, but here we are.
Depents
We’re getting to the point where remakes are redundant. In the past they made sense due to tech limitations but from the ps2-3 onward I feel like the games all mostly hold up and are actually fricked over with remakes. A lot of games really only need ports to newer consoles.
I love remake threads because I hate remakes so goddamn much. Out of the hundreds that plague this industry I only tolerate maybe like two of them
This is nitpicking. The remake was great.
Shut the frick up moron
Post the skybox comparisons. Those are always good depression material.
I sadly don't have that one. Reignited obscures the sky a lot anyway because it doesn't want you to see how unremarkable it is compared to OG, which is why you can't fricking see it in any of the remake screenshots in the post you're replying to
>mobile game UI
>orb appears in a unity loot crate particle flash
jesus christ
>Casual toss to Spyro and Spyro watches it bounce its way towards him
>A fricking star goes supernova in front of Spyro and he doesn't even react
I'm sick of this fricking argument. Some remakes are pure shit because the devs didn't give a shit and ended up ruining the whole thing (like the GTA DE & XIII).
But the moment there is a good one like the DeS remake or schizos like this and this
then the fattest morbidly obese americ**ts get on here and complain about "OMG SOUL VS SOULLESS!".
Is this what gayolas argue about these days? the fricking skybox of MUH VIDYA GAYMES rather than the actual gameplay and the like.
This isn't an argument, this is just fat schizos arguing over pointless shit. Either don't play the fricking game or stop acting like an internet badass for brownie points going on about the "SOUL VS SOULLESS" shit.
Stick to your INTERCONNECTED WORLD in Dark Souls 1 and stay there
This game is probably what started the argument
Well, yeah. When Dark Souls 1 released there was one game in the series with an interconnected world and one without it (Demon Souls).
Dark Souls 2 was the tie breaker so to speak and since then every Fromsoft game has had a disconnected world.
>But the moment there is a good one like the DeS remake
Opinion discarded
>most remakes are liquid diarrhea, but some of them are solid pieces of shit that show the devs really ate a lot of fiber, stop complaining and eat them
I think you have it backwards, you shit lead when you don't have enough fiber.
That's really hard shit, but fiber shits are solid while still being pliable enough to get squeezed out without issue. They're not diarrhea.
I see, this is truly a remake thread when one of the topics is actual, literal shit.
rude newbie
>I only tolerate maybe like two of them
curious which ones you tolerate? I cant think of a single remake/remaster I tolerate but since I avoid them like the plague I dont play most of them
Not him but REmake.
I always see people praise the RE and RE2makes, I just played through the originals for the first time a week ago and was looking at the remakes. Does the REmake keep all the music from the original? I was put off by the 2nd one gutting all the original music and having the audacity to sell the original OST for 3 fricking dollars.
RE2 remake has more problems than REmake, but REmake has its own soundtrack. It does at least have a soundtrack though unlike RE2make
RE1 remake and RE2 remake are worlds apart in respecting the source material. RE1 is arguably a gold standard for remakes. The remaster of the remake messed with some of the music playback (2x pitch and speed) but if you play it on PC there's a patch that can easily fix that.
REmake as is typical and Crash Team Racing Nitro Fueled on a personal basis. Aesthetically I much prefer the original but the remake added significant content as well as a more refined version of an obscure mechanic so despite other hiccups and Activision shitting the bed by not providing online servers or a PC port, I enjoyed my time with it
Two other actually worthwhile remakes off the top of my head are Odin Sphere and Tales of Destiny.
Half-Life had the best spyro remake though
And might I add the Spyro remakes censored tons of shit in the games, from guns to the mooning enemies to Bombo's name and Moneybags' line about flirting with fauns
>Bionic Commando Rearmed
>Metroid ZM
Probably the best remakes I've played, inserting some new content here and there to help fill some gaps and more or less building on the core gameplay of the originals while never intending to replace them wholesale.
As far as remasters go, that essentially intend to replace the original? AoE II DE is one of the very few I've found being worth a shit by also actually adding in new shit.
I mean, they can be good. But in most cases, why not just make a new game? It feels like even in the cases where they're good, they do something unnecessary that harms the final product. Etrian Odyssey Untold 2 is a much better and more entertaining game than the original 2, but they also dumbed down quite a few dungeon layouts instead of improving them and added annoying tutorials.
"Film" doesn't look so bad
Some dumb frick really did decide the Joker had too much color.
I love video game remakes. There’s just something magical about them.
Gonna preorder both Resident Evil 4 Remake and FFVII REBIRTH for my PS5.
Yall may continue to whine and seethe 🙂
>SOUL
>SOUL, NOW IN HD
Both look horrible
tbf the one on the right is actually the mobile port, which does indeed look aids compared to the SNES version. Left looks fantastic and you're a blind homosexual.
The artwork looks great, but the colors are washed out. Hopefully there will be mods to tone down the bloom and fix the color grading.
Unnecessary.
I like her remake. I also like her original game.
Both are worthy of playing, and Trials of Mana is what all remakes should aspire to be.
If you're gonna do a remake, then make something different that don't take away from the original version.
FF7 Remake is a good example IMO. It's basically a game that's inspired by the original but largely does its own thing, for good and for bad. But at least it's not just a case of making the graphics better/worse or slapping a 60fps patch on it or something.
>make something different that don't take away from the original version.
>FF7 Remake is a good example
?????
Are you moronic?
No. Explain how FF7 Remake takes away from the original version then.
>Complete change of story
>Complete change of gameplay
>Complete change of art direction
>Even the fricking victory fanfare is taken away, and is sometimes sing by Barret
>"Hurr Durr, FF7 takes away nothing from the original"
Frick off, you moron.
Yes, that's what I meant by doing its own thing, moron. It's clearly not a standard remake contracted to some indian studio where all they do is AI-enhance the graphics and ruin it. It's a whole different game.
>don't take away from the original version
>It's a whole different game.
Just so your moronic single atom size braincell understand, this 2 concept contradicts each others.
moron
We are not talking about if it's soul or not.
We are talking if it represent
>don't take away from the original version
How do those contradict each other? The original playstation version is still intact, or just as intact as it was after Crisis Core, Dirge, Advent Children and all that. Are you literally so dumb you can't grasp that there's room for both and you can safely ignore the remake if it's not up to your standards?
Is there a single remake or remaster that exists that takes away from the original then?
The original version for every single game is still intact
Basically no. OP's picture is false and doesn't work for video games since usually the original versions are still available, whereas something like movies, music and sometimes books are often replaced by the new updated version and the original becomes harder to find.
>Even the fricking victory fanfare is taken away, and is sometimes sing by Barret
>Characters engage in metagame
Sorry bub, but that's SOVL right there.
Unless the original was heavily flawed but good, a remake is inherently shit because all it does is "modernize" (dumb down) a game and make it palatable to morons who wouldn't like it in the first place. If the original is perfectly playable with maybe a little bit of jank, it doesn't need to be remade. Ever.
Sailor Moon Crystal is closer to the manga than the Ranma-tized 90s anime. Not saying that's an improvement, but it's probably not the best example.
nobody cares anitroon
anime site
Hellsing Ultimate was closer to the manga than the original Hellsing, but I still felt the original had a better tone with a down to earth secret vampire war than Ultimate's secret nazi experiment london genocide with a hint of italian catholicism jealousy
People say something similar about Full Metal Alchemist.
the only remake i consider good is the original resident evil
everything else have been a demake
those are nearly all remasters
>list remasters while b***hing about remakes
Donkey
if done right like DeS or RE2 remake they are good. I hate rereleasing games more like Rockstar or Nintendo does more.
Demons souls remake is shit, kys homosexual.
frick off moron the remake is good.
>Both of those games were incredibly poorly done by morons who had absolutely no understanding of the originals.
RE2 remake is literally better than the original game have a nice day.
>Mr. X no longer campaign exclusive and is just another Nemesis
>Overall campaigns being more similar (A and B scenarios)
>Missing monsters and areas from the original
>No new monsters
>Expanded zero on the story and the lore
>Streamlined alligator fight
>No extreme battle mode
>WHERE THE FRICK IS THE MUSIC
No it isn't.
For me, the worst part is the environments being completely soulless husks, I was disgusted in every single new area. And that they removed the fricking moth, which was the peak of the original game.
I'm still flabbergasted at how hard they shafted the design of the end lab area. The original design would've looked amazing in the remake.
Wondering what the lab looked like is all that kept me going through the atrocious sewer section, I think that's why it hurt so much to see fricking Wall-E garbage. I've never even bothered doing a B run, I hear there's basically no difference between the campaigns anyway.
There basically isn't any difference other Mr. X showing up as soon as you get to the RPD main hall and the end.
>if done right like DeS or RE2 remake
Both of those games were incredibly poorly done by morons who had absolutely no understanding of the originals.
This is the problem with remakes in general. It creates people like you who are absolute fricking morons, and now when I want to talk about Resident Evil 2, someone like you will pop up and talk about a completely different game with a superficial resemblance at best.
please have a nice day michael
WHY DID THEY HAVE TO MAKE IT GLOW
I never understood the appeal. I'm fine just playing the old game on a different system if need be. It's why I was happy that FF7R wasn't an actual graphical remake and is it's own stand alone game.
Aside from REmake, I can't think of a single remake that I enjoy more than its original.
Closest is maybe the Lunar games, but I still prefer the original Sega CD games at the end of the day.
The music in the CD versions is way better, but man, the graphics are infested with dithering. You really have to play it on a CRT with original hardware for it to be bearable.
I love dithering though.
I know of another one: Ys I & II.
Don't really care for them. Most of the time they're just glorified remasters as the only thing being remade is assets, music, etc of a game barely 10 years old post 2009.
Diablo 2
Shadow of Colossus (unpopular opinion)
and Crash Bandicoot were great remakes imo
>Shadow of Colossus (unpopular opinion)
For a very good reason too, have you seen the animations side to side?
Dread. Most remakes are half-assed or trash. It's very rare that a remake actually does the thing justice.
If its the original team and director remaking their game? Thats cool. But very rarely is that the case