A Glossary Of Terms: Remakes, Reboots, Remasters
A great harm has been committed upon the Discourse. When people use the term Remake, everyone is saying different things - and as a result, contempt for the practice has been brewing over the years. In this essay, I hope to establish some clear definitions in the hopes of clarifying what the point of a Remake is supposed to be.
37 Games
The term Remake was originally coined to refer to reproduction of a work to modernsize the source material.
"Modernizing" these works was valuable because of how rapidly technology developed early in video game history, especially for early 3D games.
This suggests the focus is on liberating a work from hardware constraints, which also necessitates that there is (probably) a disparity in a works age.
Its important to note that, while the nature of remakes requires that drastic changes be made, the goal of a remake is to stay as faithful to the source material as possible.
In my opinion, Demons Souls Remake is an example of a reproduction that makes a few distasteful and undue changes to the source material.
And while Last Of Us Part 1 technically meets all the conditions of a remake, this is a shallow opportunistic excuse on Naughty Dogs part to continually cash in on Last Of Us' brand.
Sometimes a remake goes in an odd direction but I think theres room for interpretation so long as its in the spirit of the original
This is almost never as good as just making a true authentic recreation of an old game tho. Faithfulness is an exceedingly key element.
None of these should be mistaken for Remasters tho, which refers to a republishing of a work with enhancements and adjustments that take advantage of improved hardware.
This term comes from music production so its intent is unmistakable - music goes through a "mastering" (tuning and adjusting) process, remastering means doing that process again.
For video games that means making adjustments that improve performance and resolution, as well as Quality of Life (QoL) passes and sometimes extra features.
Following that, it means the original assets are usually not changed but merely reprocessed in some fashion. If assets are changed, its targeted and probably minor.
It must be said: remasters tend to be the most abused method outlined here due to being relatively cheap and simple to conduct - so the concept is often overrun with releases like the GTA Trilogy.
There are also weird edge cases that sit between remaster and remake as well, such as Halo Combat Evolved Anniversary which has an entire second set of graphics you can toggle between in real time.
Reboots are a different thing entirely. A reboot is a redevelopement meant to reset a property so that the brand can be taken in a different direction.
This time borrowed from the film industry, reboots are usually (not always) a business decision vs an artistic one, with brand recognition being one of the few things publishers care about.
What this means is, the goal of a reboot is to do something new with an established property. By its very nature it almost always wants to deviate in significant ways from the source material.
Sometimes, this is a way to try to get out from under a lackluster release, or maybe attempt to take a second stab at a bad release with a lil bit of a tailwind to start with.
In many cases tho, a series has run long enough that simply making another sequel would be a very difficult task on the writing and continuity side of things.
Reboots dont always have to be full narrative resets tho, and this is often called a "soft reboot". The important thing is mostly that a series is undergoing major changes free of regard for the previous entries.
That doesnt mean that reboots throw away every single element of their base properties. Usually reboots take a few key aspects and attempt to reinvent and recontextualize them.
Despite having "Remake" in the title, Final Fantasy 7 Remake actually meets the criteria of being a reboot more than it meets the criteria of being a remake - and this has had profound impact on the language of remakes in the game industry.
The use of "Remake" and "Remaster" was already occasionally confused, treating these terms as interchangable despite the very distinct difference between the two.
Developers can be to blame here as they sometimes make strange decisions with their properties and set out to make unorthodox changes that land somewhere between remaking and remastering.
It doesnt help either that Final Fantasy 7 Remake itself is an incredibly strange project in general, unprecedented in its scope and aggravated by its supreme cultural reach.
The games industry has a problem with "versioning" at large, with arbitrary designations of Directors Cuts and Definitive Editions for things that are being released as part of other unrelated business strategies.
(Just to be thorough: Directors Cuts are when a game is rereleased with new and/or revised content. A Definitive Edition is when a game is rereleased bundled with previously released DLC and addons.)
Nintendo has also been doing their own brand of bastard shit with the concept of remaking their property, recreating their games for entirely self-serving purposes.
I think this is a huge shame because its clear that some games benefit an immense amount from a serious, sincere reproduction for modern audiences.
Ethically speaking I know the largest concern of remakes is the element of revisionism - that the old work feels replaced by the new work and that the old work and all its quirks and nuance could be lost to time.
I sympathize with that because the experience of a work is impossible to separate from its conditions, they will never feel exactly the same unless they /are/ the same and this has a sanitizing effect on the industry.
The solution to me is to have both. The value of the original and the value of a remake do not have to be mutually exclusive and I think the prescription should be that both are made available (the classy move would be to package them together)
The case for both is supported by the practice of Demakes, which have the converse goal to remakes: instead of a reproduction that modernizes a work, it "retro-fies" the work under older hardware constraints.
Demakes are becoming more and more serious ventures as time goes on but they are an inherently valuable creative exercise for hobbyist developers trying to hone their artistic interests.
Sometimes even devs of popular games will dabble in the exercise, and its demonstrative that there is no concern over the potential revisionism of having 2 versions of the same game when its moving in this direction. Something to think about.
In conclusion, I think companies are the ones that have poisoned the well in terms of what value remakes, remasters (and in a more limited extent, reboots) can provide to games culture.
I feel that the criticism should be held towards poor remakes specifically, and not necessarily the concept of remakes themselves.
Thank you for your time.
Thank you for your time.
18 Comments
Great list idea!
I've always thought of FFVII Remake as a reimagining... I also despise it for it.
I've always thought of FFVII Remake as a reimagining... I also despise it for it.
Super cool format for this type of thing tbh, really great stuff
Fantastic list, really good work. I can honestly say that this cleared up a little bit of my own confusion lol.
@TheQuietGamer @FallenGrace @NOWITSREYNTIME17 @MrWarm
I appreciate the response to the idea, Ive had this format kicking around in my head for a while and I get really fixated on this topic whenever it comes up lul. It sort of came together in a fugue state but Im glad its actually effective at making the point I was making.
I appreciate the response to the idea, Ive had this format kicking around in my head for a while and I get really fixated on this topic whenever it comes up lul. It sort of came together in a fugue state but Im glad its actually effective at making the point I was making.
FFVII Remake was a marketing ploy to hide the fact it was a sequel, and this in itself has done harm to the name, suggesting that any remake should hit at least the levels of change that the game presents. There is a large scope of difference between some remakes, from Shadow of the Colossus, which runs on the same engine, to Resident Evil, which completely rebuilds the games design philosophy from scratch to present the game in a new light. Unfortunately we are in a medium that demands revitalization of old games due to the nature of forgotten hardware, although it would be great if we could just play everything, until that happens I'm more then happy to see remasters to reintroduce games to new audiences but there is always a worry that a remake will present the wrong picture of what you love/hate about an original piece with their changes.
As far as I like to categorise them. Remasters are the original game with enhanced fidelity, and possibly quality of life changes. A Remake is a game that attempts to enhance the original experience. With tinkering and A Re-imagining is a celebration of a game, by attempting to re-design it in a new light. Anything else is just a new game.
You can't trust devs to categorise themselves correctly because expectations come with the terms remaster and remake, and so you need to evaluate these things yourself. See https://www.backloggd.com/games/the-mummy-demastered/
As far as I like to categorise them. Remasters are the original game with enhanced fidelity, and possibly quality of life changes. A Remake is a game that attempts to enhance the original experience. With tinkering and A Re-imagining is a celebration of a game, by attempting to re-design it in a new light. Anything else is just a new game.
You can't trust devs to categorise themselves correctly because expectations come with the terms remaster and remake, and so you need to evaluate these things yourself. See https://www.backloggd.com/games/the-mummy-demastered/
@bitterbatterdog
yeah its true, something I thought about including but couldnt find the right beat for was how Ports play into it all. Sometimes simply making a port can be a partial or total "rebuild" of a game, but its clear thats not quite the same thing as a "remake" - and really the issue with the term is "make". Almost everything you do "makes" the game. Thats why I tried to make associations with secondary terms - remakes are "reproductions", reboots are "redevelopments", and a ports sometimes include "rebuilding", etc etc.
And then yeah, Mummy Demastered comes in using a term as a synonym for "retro" to confuse everyone involved.
yeah its true, something I thought about including but couldnt find the right beat for was how Ports play into it all. Sometimes simply making a port can be a partial or total "rebuild" of a game, but its clear thats not quite the same thing as a "remake" - and really the issue with the term is "make". Almost everything you do "makes" the game. Thats why I tried to make associations with secondary terms - remakes are "reproductions", reboots are "redevelopments", and a ports sometimes include "rebuilding", etc etc.
And then yeah, Mummy Demastered comes in using a term as a synonym for "retro" to confuse everyone involved.
I know it was already stated that FF7R is it's own odd thing, but I disagree with it being more of a reboot than a remake. Because while it does have the meta/kinda sequel stuff, the majority of the game is still faithful enough to the original in most ways (characterization, designs, locations, etc). I don't think it's nearly as different as something like DmC or Tomb Raider 2013.
@MrHoodie
I regret not having enough space to make this clarify this point in the list, but the way I see it is Final Fantasy 7 Remake is a reboot of Final Fantasy 7 - but instead of taking it in an entirely different direction, they chose to take it in a parallel direction. Its unprecedented, unusual, unorthodox, and probably not something other companies will try too much - but I think it still entirely qualifies as a reboot. The argument might be that its an unnecessary reboot when people would have been entirely happy with just a true blue remake - and especially when this reboot redevelopment has made them feel the need to make it some 3 game long saga. Time will tell if it was "worth it" but I dont think it could categorically be called a remake at all, we'd be ruining the intent behind both "remakes" and "reboots" by blurring this line between them.
I regret not having enough space to make this clarify this point in the list, but the way I see it is Final Fantasy 7 Remake is a reboot of Final Fantasy 7 - but instead of taking it in an entirely different direction, they chose to take it in a parallel direction. Its unprecedented, unusual, unorthodox, and probably not something other companies will try too much - but I think it still entirely qualifies as a reboot. The argument might be that its an unnecessary reboot when people would have been entirely happy with just a true blue remake - and especially when this reboot redevelopment has made them feel the need to make it some 3 game long saga. Time will tell if it was "worth it" but I dont think it could categorically be called a remake at all, we'd be ruining the intent behind both "remakes" and "reboots" by blurring this line between them.
@_YALP I see what you mean, it definitely could be considered a reboot in that sense. But I think I still disagree. I think it's just like RE2 Remake to where it's just reimagining of the original (not including the meta stuff) but still stick within a certain framework of the original. I feel like you could argue RE2R "reboots" itself in a similar way but that isn't dismissed a remake.
@MrHoodie
Im not as familiar with RE2R and from my understanding its unique in its deviation compared to the other RE remakes - it could be the case that its just a poor remake in terms of their stated goal (and by that I dont mean its a poor game, people seem to view it more favorably than RE3R for whatever thats worth)
At the end of the day, this is merely my assessment - but I think an argument Id put forth to make my case is: could someone skip Final Fantasy 7 and just play Final Fantasy 7 Remakes and get comparable experience to the people who have played both? If the answers no, then it seems the need of "Final Fantasy 7 but with modern QoL and presentation" is still unmet and there would still need to be a regular remake after the FF7R project concludes.
I appreciate the pushback tho, I was hoping to get alot of perspective on this in case its missing something.
Im not as familiar with RE2R and from my understanding its unique in its deviation compared to the other RE remakes - it could be the case that its just a poor remake in terms of their stated goal (and by that I dont mean its a poor game, people seem to view it more favorably than RE3R for whatever thats worth)
At the end of the day, this is merely my assessment - but I think an argument Id put forth to make my case is: could someone skip Final Fantasy 7 and just play Final Fantasy 7 Remakes and get comparable experience to the people who have played both? If the answers no, then it seems the need of "Final Fantasy 7 but with modern QoL and presentation" is still unmet and there would still need to be a regular remake after the FF7R project concludes.
I appreciate the pushback tho, I was hoping to get alot of perspective on this in case its missing something.
@_YALP RE2R keeps the locations, characters, and general outlines of the story but takes it in a new direction with a completely different gameplay style, atmosphere, and characterization. It's not like the first remake which had a mix of being faithful and doing its own thing. It's no replacement for the original but it's a good game in its own right. RE3R got pushback because it's in this awkward middle ground to where it's missing so much of what people liked about the original RE3 but doesn't need anything new or interesting to make up for it. So it's just very meh as a remake and as a new game.
I think a way of looking at it is like this, remakes like RE2R or FF7R aren't meant to be played in place of the original or like a remake with QoL that needs to be met, but more so just new takes on older games, some deviate more than others in ways and some are more faithful in other aspects. They exist alongside the original instead of in place of them.
I played the og FF7 before playing remake so I'm a bit biased on that, but I've had people tell me either way. You probably can play FF7R without playing the original and still get a lot out of it outside of the meta elements. This of course doesn't mean it replaces it though.
Also np, this list has been very interesting, and I agree on it for the most part aside from a few entries. Looking forward to more of these lists.
I think a way of looking at it is like this, remakes like RE2R or FF7R aren't meant to be played in place of the original or like a remake with QoL that needs to be met, but more so just new takes on older games, some deviate more than others in ways and some are more faithful in other aspects. They exist alongside the original instead of in place of them.
I played the og FF7 before playing remake so I'm a bit biased on that, but I've had people tell me either way. You probably can play FF7R without playing the original and still get a lot out of it outside of the meta elements. This of course doesn't mean it replaces it though.
Also np, this list has been very interesting, and I agree on it for the most part aside from a few entries. Looking forward to more of these lists.
YALP front page hype
Decompilations are an interesting case too. They can be seen as fan-made remakes
@NOWITSREYNTIME17
Lul the front page queue is a mystery to me (and maybe its better that way)
@Moister
Honestly I think theres a whole essay that could be written about fan works but it hasnt quite come to me how to tackle that one yet.
Lul the front page queue is a mystery to me (and maybe its better that way)
@Moister
Honestly I think theres a whole essay that could be written about fan works but it hasnt quite come to me how to tackle that one yet.
This is super helpful, but I’m confused as to whether you’re referring to the remake of Super Mario RPG as “bastard shit” or using it as an example of a good remake that modernizes a classic.
Also, I’d recommend throwing in something about ports, too.
Also, I’d recommend throwing in something about ports, too.
@Dunebot72
Im def trying to make a positive association there - although more generally Nintendos issue is that they keep their remakes confined to their isolated systems, so renovating old games for new audiences has a limited effect since both versions of a game could end up on sunset hardware, like the Punchout remake on the Wii for example.
And yeah, I had an addendum planned for Ports but I just havent penned it yet.
Im def trying to make a positive association there - although more generally Nintendos issue is that they keep their remakes confined to their isolated systems, so renovating old games for new audiences has a limited effect since both versions of a game could end up on sunset hardware, like the Punchout remake on the Wii for example.
And yeah, I had an addendum planned for Ports but I just havent penned it yet.
TheQuietGamer
2 months ago