Is it really hard for people to understand the difference between remaster and a remake?
- Thread starter hwarang
- Start date
Literally the first "official" use of the term from the game industry. Take a look at the gameplay footage in that trailer. Does it look like it shares any code with the NES original?
Remastered tells me to expect the same game only prietter, does this have extra content or changes to the game?
Yeah, never got the confusion. Obviously, some people will intentionally try to downplay a remake as a remaster if they either A) feel like it's a poor remake or B) don't want to acknowledge the praise said game has been getting.
I'm generally indifferent to the idea of a remaster, but will perk up if it's a remake.
I'm generally indifferent to the idea of a remaster, but will perk up if it's a remake.
Port
When a game is brought to a new platform with minimal improvements, usually of the kind that don't involve the creation of any new art. Increased resolution rendering, higher res shadows, better texture filtering, etc.
For example: Super Mario™ 3D All-Stars
Remaster
Like a port, but with a wider range of improvements that transform the game more dramatically. Might include all of the improvements of a port, while also featuring new art assets, i.e. new textures, improved models, remastered sound etc.
For example: Mafia 2: Definitive Edition
Remake
When a game is made again, essentially. Usually this means wholly new visuals, sound, UI, etc, though sometimes the original game logic might still be running underneath.
For example: Crash Bandicoot N.Sane Trilogy
Re-imagining
Essentially an entirely new game that draws heavily from an older game. May stick closely to the original source in some areas while diverging strongly in others.
For example: Final Fantasy VII Remake
When a game is brought to a new platform with minimal improvements, usually of the kind that don't involve the creation of any new art. Increased resolution rendering, higher res shadows, better texture filtering, etc.
For example: Super Mario™ 3D All-Stars
Remaster
Like a port, but with a wider range of improvements that transform the game more dramatically. Might include all of the improvements of a port, while also featuring new art assets, i.e. new textures, improved models, remastered sound etc.
For example: Mafia 2: Definitive Edition
Remake
When a game is made again, essentially. Usually this means wholly new visuals, sound, UI, etc, though sometimes the original game logic might still be running underneath.
For example: Crash Bandicoot N.Sane Trilogy
Re-imagining
Essentially an entirely new game that draws heavily from an older game. May stick closely to the original source in some areas while diverging strongly in others.
For example: Final Fantasy VII Remake
OP
OP
If that game was originally on the NES, I don't why in the world they'd officially term it as a remaster. So confusing.
I voted yes because there is an undefined middle category. For example, Shadow of the Collosus for PS4 falls somewhere between a remaster and a remake.
Now to read this thread to see if anyone has a name for this.
Now to read this thread to see if anyone has a name for this.
For me remastered is "we cleaned up the textures and upped the resolution in a notable way" and remake is essentially making a new game but with the mechanics and structure of the original. But there's some middle ground and it gets confusing when publishers step in and say one thing when in reality it's another. The Crash trilogy is clearly a remake although it's often labeled as a remaster. If we are going by "they didn't add anything new" then would Link's Awakening Switch be a remaster? No one would call it that. And what about Xenoblade Switch? Is that a remake or remaster? The content is the same but the graphics are completely different.
Not to be outdone, Square steps in and literally calls their game Final Fantasy Remake despite it being 1/4 of the original title with complete overhauls to the game and even story.
In short Crash has ruined everything.
Not to be outdone, Square steps in and literally calls their game Final Fantasy Remake despite it being 1/4 of the original title with complete overhauls to the game and even story.
In short Crash has ruined everything.
Entirely new levels, new bosses, incorporates control options from DuckTales 2 (like the easy pogo jump) voice acted cutscenes... it's a remake in every sense of the word, which makes it really weird that they officially billed it as a remaster in the title. Even funnier, I remember the PR for the game referring to it as a remake too, muddying things even more, lol
i gues since tha other poster said if it was the "first" maybe they thought "remastered" sounded catchy enough
A remake to me is when they upgrade the whole game and not just an uprez and higher frame rates, almost like a new vision of the game. But I am sure some blurred the lines between remake and remaster.
In the end it comes down to the consumer is a lot more willing to pay for a remake than a remaster.
In the end it comes down to the consumer is a lot more willing to pay for a remake than a remaster.
exactly my point, the naming sets your expectations.
at least for me. lol
I could see that, yeah. IIRC, this was around the time that HD Remasters (stuff like the Tomb Raider HD trilogy, Devil May Cry HD Collection, etc.) really started getting popular during that generation, so maybe they thought using that specific verbiage would be beneficial.(The game apparently sold better than they expected, it worked out for better or worse)
Even people in this thread have different meanings for these 2 terms. I like the range of terms somebody mentioned above:
- Port
- Remaster (e.g. Last of Us Remastered)
- Remake (e.g. Crash Bandicoot N.sane Trilogy)
- Re-imagining (e.g. Final Fantasy VII 2020)
- Port
- Remaster (e.g. Last of Us Remastered)
- Remake (e.g. Crash Bandicoot N.sane Trilogy)
- Re-imagining (e.g. Final Fantasy VII 2020)
Yes it's hard, because companies use the the terms interchangeably. It's not worth arguing about, or being patronizing if somebody doesn't 'get' it (or rather, doesn't get what you think the definitions happen to be).
I personally find it easiest to see the remaster term as implying publisher or developer intention, and not trying to set expectations for any specific technical changes. Things obviously will have changed, but it's flexible exactly what will change. If a company calls it a remaster, they're only telling us that they want us to see it as the newest or best version of the same game. It could be that they remade 90% of the game from the ground up, or it could be that they just added small quality of life changes and bumped the resolution. If you don't agree with the publisher/dev labeling i.e. "not my <remastered_game_name>!" ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
If a company wants to use the term remake, they're making no claims about this being the same game or a remaster. They're just saying they remade it.
I personally find it easiest to see the remaster term as implying publisher or developer intention, and not trying to set expectations for any specific technical changes. Things obviously will have changed, but it's flexible exactly what will change. If a company calls it a remaster, they're only telling us that they want us to see it as the newest or best version of the same game. It could be that they remade 90% of the game from the ground up, or it could be that they just added small quality of life changes and bumped the resolution. If you don't agree with the publisher/dev labeling i.e. "not my <remastered_game_name>!" ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
If a company wants to use the term remake, they're making no claims about this being the same game or a remaster. They're just saying they remade it.
Yeah, I like that range too, but I also feel that a re-imagining can be a remake (in the case of Final Fantasy 7 or Goldeneye on Wii), for reasons that are probably obvious.
I will say this, though - based on what we know about Crash N.Sane Trilogy's development, I'd say it's somewhere exactly between a remaster and a remake, and I don't know what to call it as a result. It's not built atop the original game and doesn't use any of the original game's code - instead, level geometry and assets from the OG were used as a starting point, and the gameplay experience of the original games was kind of reverse-engineered from there. Vicarious Visions called it a 'Remaster +' at one point, and it's probably the best of its kind if it is to be considered a remaster, so it can be hard to know where to draw the line between remaster and remake when it comes to cases such as these.
Most of the time when publishers do this they call it a remaster.
Yep, and I've always felt that was dumb. The word "remaster" to me has always implied taking an existing thing and restoring it; restoring in the same sense as you would restore a classic car. Remastered audio recordings are just that, not entirely new recordings.
The definition of "remake" couldn't be simpler; it means to make again.
Very comprehensive. That's how I define it!
I'd like to add on more between Remaster and Remake
REDUX
Remasters with improved (or altered) graphics/assets/sounds AS WELL AS appreciable-to-significant gameplay changes or balance tweaks for QoL improvements or to cut on original products faults
For example : Metro 2033 Redux
