Anonymous
10/31/2025, 9:29:39 AM
No.724621143
[Report]
>>724622650
>>724623215
>>724623287
>>724623516
>>724623658
If a remake ends up being a good game then what's the problem?
>>724621143 (OP)
>If a remake ends up being a good game then what's the problem?
When it's the wrong game. A remake that works just fine as a game is worse than a bad sequel that doesn't work if it's fundamentally designed wrong. If Sony suddenly licensed out Gran Turismo, the racing simulator series to some studio and they then made Gran Turismo 9 as a perfectly competently made walking simulator, that would not be acceptable. A sequel or a remake has expectations. It isn't acceptable for it to just pick a completely different design philosophy and make a game that has nothing to do with the design of its predecessors. ARMA 4 shouldn't be a dating sim visual novel. Candy Crush Remake shouldn't be a skateboarding arcade rail shooter. Age of Empires 5 shouldn't be a high fantasy soulslike. Even if those games would be designed well, they would still be wrong and that would make them worse than a 0 out of 10 because you'd be sacrificing intellectual property to cater explicitly to those who don't care about it. It's borderline malevolent.
>If a remake ends up being a good game then what's the problem?
When it's the wrong game. A remake that works just fine as a game is worse than a bad sequel that doesn't work if it's fundamentally designed wrong. If Sony suddenly licensed out Gran Turismo, the racing simulator series to some studio and they then made Gran Turismo 9 as a perfectly competently made walking simulator, that would not be acceptable. A sequel or a remake has expectations. It isn't acceptable for it to just pick a completely different design philosophy and make a game that has nothing to do with the design of its predecessors. ARMA 4 shouldn't be a dating sim visual novel. Candy Crush Remake shouldn't be a skateboarding arcade rail shooter. Age of Empires 5 shouldn't be a high fantasy soulslike. Even if those games would be designed well, they would still be wrong and that would make them worse than a 0 out of 10 because you'd be sacrificing intellectual property to cater explicitly to those who don't care about it. It's borderline malevolent.
