Quote Originally Posted by kupomogli View Post
So yeah. Excuse me if I don't have faith or give a rats ass what sort of permission that these directors give games. It's the development teams behind the directors, a good director will only guide the game to be a bit better than it would be otherwise.
This is true too.

The more I think about it, the more I just don't see the point of full-on remakes (which just to be clear, I hold as being different from a port or an HD upscale). They're almost kind of offensive since they tend to carry the implication that the original is "obsolete," which then is like telling those teams that made the original "ha ha your hard work was for nothing!"

In fact, one thing I wish would become a law of sorts is that remakes/reboots should always include the original game, at the very least as bonus unlockable content, much like the Splatterhouse remake or Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time did (although Sands of Time wasn't a remake per say, more like just a new game in a long-running series, but it still did well by including the original POP as an unlockable bonus).

My big problems with remakes is usually they tend to just be chasing modern trends. This might not be a popular thing to say, but Nostalgia Critic (of all people) nailed it in his review of the Live-Action Cat in the Hat: "By seeking to modernize it, you make it more dated, and by seeking to 'improve' it you show you don't respect the source at all." I can't remember the full line, that's from memory, but I remember it being one of the few things he ever said that I agreed with wholeheartedly. The original Robocop is still a good movie because it wasn't following trends, it was just being its own thing. The 2014 Robocop was just "let's take the basic premise and do what a modern filmmaker would do with it," which wound up being an insult. Similarily this is part of why I don't like the Resident Evil remakes and how they took originally campy and silly games and went all edgedark on them because, ya know, that's what all the other horror games do... pretty much the equivalent of the comic book trend in the 1990s of making everything gritty and edgy, even characters like Superman who have no place being done like that.

Then of course, most time "remakes" end up just being all new games anyway, so why not just market them like that? (Yes I know the real reason is name-brand recognition, but I've never understood most corporate logic, most of which seems to be superstition. Like I'm pretty sure the Tomb Raider reboot would've sold just as well if it was called "Tomb Raider: A New Beginning" or something to distinguish it).