Why remakes suck

[Tetsuya the Azure Blade]

Now I've played LOADS of game remakes. Most SUCKED. Ya see when these big-time devs remake one of thier older games they HARDLY change ANYTHING. Oh sure they SOMETIMES make the graphics "better" or they change one or two NPC's into PC's, SOMETIMES they give you a new dungeon\level to play through and they MIGHT have some new equips in said game. BUT they almost NEVER rework the plot or the story of the game. Come on you dumbass developers do something DIFFERENT in your game remakes! They're SUPPOSED to be REMAKES, PLEASE change the game around otherwise we, the gamers will be PLAYING THE SAME DAMN GAME WE PLAYED TEN YEARS AGO. WHY do ya think people like us hack ROMS, it's 'cause big-time game devs ARE TOO DAMN LAZY TO DO IT THEMSELVES.
Now, here's some games that have remakes.

Breath Of Fire 1&2.
every GBC\GBA\DS Pokemon game (the remakes are yellow, crystal, fire\leaf, emerald, platinum and hg\ss)
Rockman.EXE1 (the remake is called Rockman.EXE shooting star operate)
Final Fantasies 1 thru 6 (3&4 have two)
Chrono Trigger
Tales of Phantasia (I dunno if the other Tales games were remade)
AD&D Eye of the Beholder
Sonic the Hedghog
Super Mario Bros

There are HUNDREDS of remade games, but I'm NOT listing them, I don't wanna, see ya ^-^

[Sajin]

The Final Fantasy one and two remake for the GBA it's actually very good. Oh, and FF 3 only has one remake on the DS. But on the rest I agree. 99% of the remakes suck and are almost exactly the same as the original.
They just "remake" to sell some more games without almost no work, I bet... Is it really that much to ask for more and new contents?

[Tetsuya the Azure Blade]

You're right Sajin, game devs NEED to FOCUS on the QUALITY of the game they're making and NOT on how much money they make out of selling teh game. geez, IS IT SO MUCH TO ASK THAT THEY MAKE BETTER QUALITY GAMES. damn those greedy [insert swear word here]s. They DON'T FOCUS on the FREAKING GAMES BUT they DO FOCUS on MAKING A FEW QUICK BUCKS. Those damn money hungry FOOLZ!

[Sajin]

Exactly.
For example, Breath of Fire 2 for the GBA. Why not add a couple of extra dungeons? And more equipment? Extra bosses? Or maybe a Hard mode possibility? They didn't add anything. It's the same as in the SNES... I bet it wouldn't be too hard to all that.

[Tetsuya the Azure Blade]

It seems that MOST PROGRAMMERS MAKE THEIR SOFTWARE A BIT HALF-ASSEDLY (me included, dja know how long it took me to make my Asteroids based game. NINE MONTHS 'cause I HAVE to SHARE the pc with my brother. And there's STILL some bugs I need to work out)

[Atrius (He/Him)]

The idea of a remake is to port the game from an outdated console to a new one so that the younger generation of gamers who may not have had a chance to play it before can enjoy it.  Personally I prefer that they remain mostly the same, there's no sense in ruining a classic after all.

[leaf]

Nero: The thing you don't seem to understand is that the point of a remake is not to get the same people to buy the same game again. No. It's to get new players to play a game that they missed due to not having been gamers at the time of its release. Yeah, older players will buy the remade game. Yeah, they're counting on that as part of their sales, especially for when they do put in new dungeons and such. The nostalgia factor is definitely a drawing point for these games. But if you haven't noticed, the almost universal response on remakes is "if you didn't get a chance to play the original, get this now." They don't rework the plot because that's not the point of the remake. A remake takes an older game and brings it up to more modern standards of prettyfulness. When you change the plot, you're no longer making a remake; you're making a game set in a parallel universe.

[Ninja Steve]

Video game remakes can be quite terrible. (The GBA remake of Sonic the Hedgehog comes to my mind...) However, The first chance I had to play Final Fantasy VI, one of my favorite games ever, was it's own GBA remake. I've since gone back and played the SNES game, and I can't say my appreciation of either has changed significantly. (The music is noticeably different in quality, but I can't say I mind much.)

Even remakes of games I've already played haven't bugged me so much. The GBA remakes of the Mario games were pretty good, at least in my opinion. But yeah, the entire point is to be the same game as before.

[Tetsuya the Azure Blade]

Ohh, but it COULDN'T hurt to EXTEND the game's fun-ness (I know it's lame) by adding extra stuff like: Make TWO main heroes, one a boy and the other a girl (so that the gamer-chicks won't be pissed off about being forced to play a male) Or mini-games,possibly a harder difficulty with better equips, maybe a few optional bosses OR have added some new spells and other moves/abilities. Perhaps a boss/enemy-rush mode or TINY story tweaks. I  KNOW SOME OF THESE CAN BE PUT INTO A REMAKE. They can ATLEAST TRY to make the remake BETTER THAN THE ORIGINAL. Make it the SAME GAME but with new features.    

[Charon]

The idea of a remake is to port the game from an outdated console to a new one so that the younger generation of gamers who may not have had a chance to play it before can enjoy it.  Personally I prefer that they remain mostly the same, there's no sense in ruining a classic after all.

I agree - every remake that I`ve played that kept everything the same I enjoyed as much as their previous incarnation. Even the addition of new features is welcome (as in the case of Pokémon FR/LG) as long as it doesn`t ruin what made the original great. Go beyond those limits and you run a huge risk for the game and even the one that inspired it - changing things not only makes the game different, but unfortunately usually removes the spirit and feel of the original, making it feel stale.

Remakes are volitile ground... stuck between the ground of keeping everything the same to retain the original`s feel, or to generate new material to be innovative and appeal to current fans -_-

[Kain]

You wanna know a great remake?  Final Fantasy IV.  Sure, it's been remade from Super to PSone to GBA to DS but guess what?  It's gotten great over time.

The PSone remake had better wording and fixes on some glitches that were visible in the Super version.  GBA was probably the best one so far.  Not only was the game remade for a portable system and it stayed true to the story, but it had ADDED content.  Once you beat the game, you could keep playing.  Not only that, it opened up two new dungeons and the ability to switch party members.

Cecil, Kain, Rosa, Rydia and Edge were the normal ending team.  But you could swap them (excluding Cecil) at any time with Palom, Porom, Cid, Yang and Edward.

At Mt Ordeals a new cave opens up with a special ultimate weapon for the five new characters.  THEN on the moon itself a new dungeon opens up.  Each floor is random, filled with tough monsters at times, has NEW ultimate weapons for the characters, new Dark summons, each floor has a door that is special for each character that can only be accessed once that character has participated in beating Zeromus, and at the very end of the cave is Zeromus EG, a new boss character that you can fight for no reason other than EXP.

The DS remake not only made the game 3D like FF III, but it's fully voiced, has cutscenes and new set ups where you don't need to navigate your White Magic menu to find a spell, but rather you can put the spell right on your actions palette and use it instantly.  Also, characters can be given new abilities and even leaving partners can give you abilities.  Palom and Porom give you the item Twincast.

Now I agree here, remakes are just that.  Re-made for up to date systems so the gamers of today can enjoy the games of yesterday that they never got to play.  Fine example is on my 360.  I LOVED TMNT Turtles in Time, but I myself never got to own the game and could only play it whenever my friend would bring it over.

Bought it on the 360 and while the graphics are nice, the game still plays the same as it did back then and that's good enough for me.

[Sajin]

The idea of a remake is to port the game from an outdated console to a new one so that the younger generation of gamers who may not have had a chance to play it before can enjoy it.  Personally I prefer that they remain mostly the same, there's no sense in ruining a classic after all.

I'm aware of that but adding more things isn't hard and it actually adds up in gameplay. The best example is Final Fantasy I&II Dawn of Souls. They remade them with new graphics and added medium~hard optional dungeons that didn't appear on the original. Square actually made it interesting for new players and old ones as well.

[Rolina]

WOW.  You claim that FF3, a game NEVER RELEASED OUTSIDE OF JAPAN, has had two remakes.  Well, while I go over there and laugh my @#$% off, I will leave you with this:

Remakes offer people to continue to play their favorite games on new hardware that doesn't support the old software.  It's got a fresh coat of paint so it looks nice, not to mention the added expansion pack that comes with it as a treat to the loyal customers (nowadays, you have to pay PSN or XBL for that additional content!), as well as the occasional games that rebalance the gameplay to be less broken.  Of course, sometimes there are times when these tweaks are actually detrimental to the game (I'm looking at you, FF3DS.  Way to make non-support mages useless!), but usually this is for the better, and actually adds onto the playing experience (I'm looking at you, FF4DS.  Nice touch with the added customizability!).  Of course, your mileage may vary - you could just be tired of playing a game you've already played.  Or the game may lack the same charm that you remember it had, even if you blow off the added content.  A lot of this is nostalgia not living up to its name.

In the end, though, remakes and ports are a good thing.  Also, remember... Don't confuse remakes with PORTS!  A remake is a game that's actually been remade, from the graphics engine to the gameplay mechanics, to even (in some cases) how it's played - a port is just higher resolution, added goodies, and fixed bugs (compare FF4 with FF4A and FF4DS.  FF4A is the port, FF4DS is the remake).

[Sajin]

In the end, though, remakes and ports are a good thing.  Also, remember... Don't confuse remakes with PORTS!  A remake is a game that's actually been remade, from the graphics engine to the gameplay mechanics, to even (in some cases) how it's played - a port is just higher resolution, added goodies, and fixed bugs (compare FF4 with FF4A and FF4DS.  FF4A is the port, FF4DS is the remake).

Role is right. I was talking about ports but saying remakes  Thank you for clearing that up Role.
Than I guess Nero means that PORTS suck. Not remakes...

[Rolina]

I still disagree.  Ports are important so that the newer generation of gamers is able to experience classic games.  The older consoles and games are scares, so it's hard to play them without breaking the law and getting it via emulator.  This gives them a legit way to play the games and to see exactly why classic games are vastly superior to modern ones.

And so that they understand why we're laughing at them when they call modern games 'hard'.  Honestly, you don't know hard until you've experienced Nintendo Hard, and heck, even Touhou Hard above that.

[Tetsuya the Azure Blade]

Man, Modern videogames are a bit screwed up aren't they?

[Charon]

I honestly prefered the PS2 era of gaming =-=

Remakes should be judges as individual games and not compared with the source material, and if that is done, it shouldn't play a major role in your opinion of such a game.