If you’ve been following the video game industry for the past few years, you’ve probably noticed the dramatic rise of video game remasters and remakes. While there is legitimate criticism for retreading old ground, I’ve personally been enjoying the chance to revisit video game classics whether they be remakes or remasters. However, with this rise, I’ve noticed that there’s been plenty of confusion between the two. Therefore, I thought it worth looking at the differences between video game remasters and remakes and where the confusion may stem from.
First, let’s start with what a video game remaster is. A remaster uses the original content of the game but might allow the game to run in a higher resolution, perhaps with higher frame-rates, improved textures and gameplay and UI tweaks. An excellent example is the upcoming Total War: Rome Remastered which has seen a variety of graphical and gameplay upgrades but is running on the original game engine with a lot of the original scripting.
In contrast, a video game remake rebuilds the game from the ground up. Typically, none of the assets or coding from the original game are used in this version although they may be examined extensively to serve as inspiration for the new game. The gameplay can sometimes be dramatically overhauled although remakes that are quite loyal to the original game do exist and, I think, are to blame for the confusion between remasters and remakes.
Personally, I blame the marketing campaign that surrounded the Crash Bandicoot N. Sane Trilogy release for confusing the difference between a remaster and a remake. As much as I enjoyed playing the Crash Bandicoot N. Sane Trilogy, collecting crystals, gems and time relics, the word that I kept seeing in the marketing again and again was how this release was a “remaster” of the original trilogy. I understand the logic behind this campaign, the gameplay of the game is nearly identical to the originals, but that doesn’t take away the fact that these games were rebuilt from the ground up on a different engine, different physics, new coding etc. This, to me at least, leaves no doubt that these games should be referred to as remakes, not remasters.
This, unfortunately, has led to many situations where people have completely unrealistic expectations for remastered games. I remember distinctly when Dark Souls Remastered was announced, people began to discuss the possibility that the game would remake the first Dark Souls in the Dark Souls III game engine. It soon became clear that that was not the case and many people were disappointed. I, however, had not interpreted the Dark Souls remaster as a remake and was quite surprised when I heard how others had interpreted the announcement.
I understand that it can difficult sometimes to tell if a game is a remake or a remaster, as seen with the confusion surrounding Nier Replicant ver.1.22474487139… where the consensus that it’s a remaster only seemed to be determined soon after its release. However, it’s important that people understand the difference between the two so that they can set their expectations realistically. Otherwise, the disappointment that some people had with the Dark Souls remaster is destined to repeat itself.
Let me know your thoughts on the difference between video game remasters and remakes, whether you agree or disagree with anything I’ve said, how you define the difference between a remake and a remaster and any additional information you might have on the topic.
Thanks for reading and if you wish to seek any of the titles I mentioned, don’t hesitate to use amazon.co.uk or amazon.com for all of your needs! Also feel free to follow my curator page on Steam “JRPG Reviews” for thoughts and opinions on any JRPGs that I play and my YouTube channel “Victory Achieved Gaming” where I guide my friend through challenging games.