There is no prerequisite that one must play the original game before doing a review of a remake because they must be able to compare it and judge it so that they can figure out the final score. It's being reviewed for a mass audience, not Resident Evil fanboys. It's being rated as a product and not from the point of view of a fanboy with strange preferences and gripes no one cares about. Movies are timeless and remakes are treated entirely differently than video game remakes which are catered to a brand new audience who is still invested in an ongoing property due to lack of accessibility of older hardware and software.Īcknowledging the work something is based on isn't the same as judging the work on its own, judging it in comparison to the original, and then weighing the 2 and finding the medium like you did. That's not the topic nor is it relevant to how people rate video games. No one is arguing about the quality of remakes. I'm sure if I dug around this forum alone I could find examples of you saying stuff negative about remakes because that's what we do here is talk pop culture.īut back to the main point since you keep droning on and on about film remakes just to avoid admitting that you made a terribly hyperbolic sh*t take. You know flat out that remakes are often considered bad. Which means they have a preconceived notion of the source material, and that notion is going to influence their review one way or the other. Pull up ANY film review of a remade movie, and in 85% of them, the reviewer is going to acknowledge it's a remake. You also stated "no one judges remakes like that," which is bogus.
Resident evil 3 remake jill mod update#
You console update argument still holds no water because technology update as a whole is still present when doing film remakes. So why can you not use the same set of base rules for judging them? Obviously judging games is going to have a bit MORE rules because it's an interactive medium, but the base rules are still gonna be the same. Despite the fact that they're newer, shinier, and employee better technology, just like game remakes. Most film remakes are widely considered bad.
But can HONESTLY say that's the rule, not the outlier. You listed ONE remake that's better than the original. Resident Evil 3, nor the majority of film remakes, do either of these things, or at least don't do them effectively. That's the case for both film AND video games, technology not even being incorporated yet. Or make an entirely new story based off the original source material that is told much better, with new and interesting ideas that still capitalize off of the ideas of the original. Keep the content for the original, but expand upon it. That means you need to do one of two thing, if not BOTH things for a successful remake. If you are going to remake something, you already have a groundwork for the product. It's a (nearly) shot for shot remake, but also now in color. Psycho is another good example you brought up, that shows how remakes are usually worse.
I said by having LESS content, and I assumed you would know the obvious point of "if the content is changed, but it still worse people don't like that either." It's obvious enough that I figured it didn't need stated. But I never made that claim to begin with. Hence why I started off by saying "the vast majority." Obviously not every remake is automatically worse by virtue of having different content.
Yes, Little Shop of Horrors is amazing, and it's a remake. And it's that the change in technology is what makes us judge remakes of games differently than films. Please come up with a better argument for how video game remakes and film remakes differ when talking about how we judge them.Ĭlick to expand.I read your comment. So no, in that regard, film and video games are no different. That reasoning is the EXACT same as your updated console mentality. It was considered "bad" by a vast majority despite the updated technology. Why do most people hate King Kong 78 over the original from the 30's, despite the fact that the 70's has color, better visual effects, etc? They remade it. But better technology does not inherently make something better. Movies were made with old and outdated technology, and are remade with today's comparatively remarkable technology. And? That's EXACTLY what remakes tend to do. And Yes, Video games are for outdated consoles, so the remake takes advantage of those. You're being obstinate to stick to your point rather than admitting I'm right. You KNOW most remakes are considered garbage. Total Recall, Robocop, Rat Race, Clash of the Titans, etc. First of all, the vast majority of remakes are considered bad lol.
0 kommentar(er)
