alt view

It is 2025, we have Metal Gear Solid Delta: Snake Eater somewhere on the horizon; a remake of the 2004 classic Metal Gear Solid 3 (MGS3). This is interesting to me as, although not the original version, the HD collection version of MGS3 via the Metal Gear Solid: Master Collection is available basically everywhere. Why are we remaking a game that is already beloved when it can be played by all? But then more interestingly, why was I looking forward to it if I thought it wasn’t needed?

I have yet to play MGS3, along with the other games on my large backlog. I am young, I haven’t been alive long enough to get around to many classics. And with each passing year, more of these games seem to release again for modern audiences: The Last of Us, Silent Hill 2, Metroid Prime, The Last of Us again. But, at least with Silent Hill 2 and Metroid Prime, these games weren’t available to play for a long time providing a reason for them to exist. When I first thought myself, I was furious. What reason does any art need to exist? NONE, it exists and that is the purpose of it. That’s when I got to thinking what it means to remake art.

I’ll be looking into this with a collection of essays comparing remakes and remasters against their original counterparts, both as they are and how they are seen in public perception; this essay being an introduction and a way to set goalposts. It will be good to properly define remakes and remasters, and then also look at why they are made and why people want them to be made. Next, I’ll look at my own ideas surrounding these reasons and my initial ideas of how they exist as art, not just as games. This will give us the baseline we need as I begin to look at different remakes in future essays.

DEFINITIONS

Let’s define what a remaster and a remake is in terms of video games. A remaster takes the original game and gives it a bit of a face lift. This is limited to the audio and visuals, taking the original and updating it to more modern standards. This often includes increased resolution and updated textures. Occasionally it can also include new assets like models. Importantly, it leaves the underlying story and mechanics the same, only improving the skin of the game. Even with new models, the collision and level design are left mostly the same. The clearest example of this is Halo: Combat Evolved (Halo). 10 years after its release in 2001, an anniversary version of Halo was released with updated audio and visuals. This required new models to be created where they couldn’t be reworked from Halo 3. As only the visuals were updated and the level geometry was the same, it is possible to actually switch between versions in game, allowing the remaster to be easily compared to the original. 

Halo Aniversery (top) and Halo (bottom) in direct comparison

A remake differs from a remaster in that it reproduces the entire game, not just the audio and visuals. This includes the codebase as well as level and game design. Sometimes the narrative is also altered, but this is much rarer. Doing this allows the game to appeal to more modern design sensibilities and run natively on modern hardware. Silent Hill 2 (SH2) falls into this category, a 2001 game with a 2024 remake. With SH2 being for the PlayStation 2, and the remake for the PlayStation 5 it was required for the game to be remade from the ground up. Design-wise, the game also had large changes. A new camera system, and more noticeably, an overhauled weapon system. This brings the game more in line with the design sensibilities of today, allowing ease of access to modern audiences. The audio and visual upgrades are very obvious.

SH2 (top) and SH2 Remake (bottom) in direct comparison

WHY THEY ARE WANTED

With definitions out of the way, we can look at why remakes are wanted by the audience. The most obvious of these being how most games are inaccessible for various reasons. Compared to today, games were not hosted on online stores in the past and could only be accessed through physical means on those specific consoles. Now, as those games and their consoles get older, they get misplaced, damaged, and even if they can be found on sites like eBay, are absurdly expensive. Even today, being unable to buy games is difficult as older online storefronts are shut down (like those for the 3DS and Xbox 360), removing access to a large number of games only available there. Even the PC, a dedicated ‘system’ to play games on for decades, has issues with accessibility. Games made only two versions of windows ago can have issues, and considering how long windows has been around, there are so many games that just cannot run on modern systems anymore. Of course audiences want these games to be remade, otherwise they just cannot play them at all.

Another reason is that the games feel and look too old. With modern advancements in graphics, audio, game design, UI, and more, playing older games is made more difficult. Video games are still very young, and a certain language in design, controls, and UI has only recently been somewhat standardised. Older games don’t have this shared language or are using a much earlier version of it. Because of this difficulty getting into older games, many people want a remake so they can experience the game in a way they can more easily understand from the outset. Graphics and audio also play into this, where more dated looking graphics and crunchy audio can turn people off of games as they have expectations for how games should look and sound to them. This creates a want for remakes as otherwise some people just won’t play the game.

VALIDITY OF THESE REASONS

But are these reasons valid, or do they harm the way in which games are interacted with as art? Accessibility has a simple answer, yes, it is valid. Not being able to play games is terrible and if the only way to access them is through a remaster or remake, then of course wanting one makes sense. I will mention emulation here, because although emulation has come a long way and is relatively easy to setup nowadays, it isn’t an answer to this problem. People don’t want to jump through hoops to get a game running, they’d rather just press buy, then install. But then, why remakes? Why not ask publishers to instead make these games available through storefronts instead, ready to go on modern hardware? I believe this is for two reasons. The first being that publishers have shown that they don’t want to for the most part, so asking is a waste. The second being that older games often look and feel too old.

What about the shared language older video games do not have compared to today then? I find this reason for wanting remakes bad. Video games are an art form, they have a time they were made which informs all decisions made about it, just like every other art form. The way this shared language has changed over time is integral to the history of the medium, and wanting something that removes this is anti-art. They may be harder to play and get into, but by meeting it on its own terms you can truly experience the game. A remake often sands off the history leaving nothing but a flat, featureless road behind, nice to drive on but ensures that the bumpy road of the original is less travelled.

Then there’s the reason that games look too old to play, and this one really rustles my jammies. Not playing a game because the art style doesn’t appeal to you, I can understand that to an extent. But not playing it because it’s too old and not even seeing if the style is worth it is horrific. Games are made with the capabilities of the time, trying to make the best experience they can with as little as they have. Its like not watching a movie before the digital camera because you don’t like how they look, its nonsense. By remaking the game with new graphics, you have the chance to accidentally misunderstand what was done originally and change the art direction, and therefore the message and themes of the game. On top of this, some ‘improvements’ to visuals can result in a game looking worse. Even a game with old or poor looking graphics is worth exploring, even if it ends up being bad.

One argument you hear in favour of remakes is that the remake doesn’t replace the old game, you can still play it. While this is true, what happens to the original game in culture? People that haven’t played it before are more likely to go to the remake, never touching the original. Eventually, it becomes the game people think of first destroying the original in the process by it barely being thought of anymore. On top of this, by changing things in the game, like making the game design more modern, the message and themes may be changed resulting in an erosion of the art.

Now, I will say that I am looking at worst case scenarios here to some extent. Many remakes are made with reverence to the original work, but these things can still happen even then. And I understand these reasons to an extent. No one likes sucky controls or a lack of accessibility options. On top of that, most of the time people want remakes of their favourite games because they are their favourite or because they can’t access it anymore. Having this game get more attention and being able to experience it the same but new, I get this. However, I still believe it takes away from the original. We should instead be pushing for publishers to provide access to their older games without having to fall back on emulation (yes, I know publishers would just provide emulators to run the old games, but they’d be on storefronts). We should also be pushing for games that are directly inspired by these older games, be they sequels or something new. This would create similar experiences that can be expanded upon with modernised features and allows the older games to exist without influence from a remade replacement.

CONCLUSION

Video games are a strange art form. Unlike most art, games are interactive requiring large computing power. This has resulted in games becoming more and more technologically advanced over time and made older games look completely ‘obsolete’. This is made more obvious when comparing. Let’s look at the movies The Fifth Element (1997) and Tenet (2020) compared to Final Fantasy 7 (FF7) from 1997 and its remake from 2020. The movies do look quite different with both effects and camerawork having advanced, but they both feel very similar, they both feel like movies still. We can watch either and have no want to have The Fifth Element modernised, as the language of film was matured by this point, even if it has evolved since then. Looking at FF7 and its remake is different, they are so radically different that they feel almost unrelated. There’s an extreme graphical difference and the gameplay and UI are leagues apart with the remake using the shared language we now have. We want these older games to be like what we already know.

The Fifth Element (left) and Tenet (right)

FF7 (left) and FF7 Remake (right) in direct comparison

However, wanting to change these games so we can experience them better is anti-art. Changing the game to better suit the times is how we lose our history, as those older games will no longer be played. Changing the game to better align with modern design principles removes the original intent and changes what the art originally meant. Updating the graphics can result in style changes that change the game for the worse. So we should be pushing for sequels and spiritual successors instead.

But then why am I still looking forward to the MGS3 remake? Especially when the original creative leads aren’t working on it. This is what I will explore going forwards by analysing and comparing different games with their remakes in future essays. Am I wrong about my ideas of remakes, or is there nuance that I am yet to find that sets different remakes apart?

08-02-2025 – jam-alade