>>717331056
>As someone who played REmake first and then RE1 I really don't get what people think is better about it than the remake
Oldfag here.
The REmake was designed as the "NG++" for the old time RE fans. It is designed to surprise and challenge experienced players, all while demonstrating the striking improvement in visual tech.
I dig the REmake a ton, but it has a number of sheer downgrades that make it less replayable IMO.
This includes everything from the base gameplay feeling more floaty and clunky (characters kinda float as if in slo-mo, bullet hits have next to no impact on enemies until they drop...), to the very early game being super linear and restrictive compared to the 1996 OG, which allows you to explore most of W. and E. sides 1st and 2nd floors right off the bat.
The cuts extend to late game as well, with a huge number of alternative scenes and ways of meeting certain main characters being simply removed. The ending itself is also diminished to a couple A/B choices during the game.
I also honestly believe REmake is a bit too easy, with the game providing too many Ink Ribbons + the emergency weapons allowing you to avoid a lot of damage altogether.
But once again, I must stress that I adore REmake, and it is the type of re-make everyone has asked for rest of the RE games (and literally any other "retro" classic) since 2002. It's just easier to do 1:1 comparisons with the OG game since both are now easily available and ultimately so close to each other on a surface level (gameplay, story, progression method).
