I agree with you so hard here. While RE4R is a pretty good game in a vacuum, the remake culture surrounding it and all these other recent remakes drives me up a wall. Peoples most hyped up games are remakes instead of new ideas, and they treat every deviation away from the original and towards this homogenous blob of modern design sensibilities as some "objective" improvement. They talk about original games as if they're "outdated" now. I thought for so long that video games were art, but if people are willing to toss out an original the second a slightly shinier and newer version of it comes out, then it ain't art: It's a disposable toy.

The "stop to shoot" mechanics were baked into RE4's gameplay, they were not a bug, they were a feature.

I have noticed that compared to other mediums, gamers tend to disrespect their classics much more. They don’t accept concepts like authorial intent and act as if game designers back in the day were cavemen banging on rocks until someone invented the wheel. They talk about games like they're made of swappable car parts and view the entire medium as an endless chase for a new toy. If you prefer and old game over a new one (such as preferring the original over its remake) they will quickly dismiss your opinion and accuse you of being “blinded by nostalgia.” It's okay for our classics to be classics, to be examined with historical lenses instead of treated as machines in need of repair. Imagine movie buffs telling you not to bother with the iconic original Cape Fear and instead just watch the shiny remake. I honestly don’t believe that video games “age” as common as people think they do. I think what most people mean when they say that a game is “dated” is that it’s not homogenised. The original RE4 today is just as well designed as it was 18 years ago. Same thing with games like Super Metroid and Super Mario Bros. Good game design never dies.

Gamers seem to have practically zero respect towards the classics of their medium, or they can only recognize such things as a "stepping stone" leading towards (current era). Authors don't do this, and nobody in cinema gets excited for remakes. But gamers? They eat this up, thinking "finally, now I can enjoy this thing I enjoyed 10yrs ago - but for REAL this time!" And then 10yrs later they'll buy the remake of this remake and call it a masterpiece too. Infinite tolerance for regurgitated franchise slop.

All RE4R did was show me that people didn't really like RE4 and apparently disliked most of it.

The original RE4 honestly didn't need a remake imo.

Alien Resurrection on the PS1 was critically panned at release for its "absurd" controls - you used the left stick to move and the right stick to aim.

It's pretty gross that IGN painted the OG as unplayable. I've never been a huge fan of RE4 because I grew up with the classic games and just preferred that style. I still play through RE4 once a year though, the game is timeless. Too many talking heads lost the ability to play old games. Some of us never stopped, and can pick up and play these games with ease.

Beat RE4 Remake on hardcore and it just made me want to play the original even more. The Remake isn't a bad game, but the original is much better.

I still felt like I was sacrificing my flank when I went to shoot, I got hit in the back or pressured a lot in the remake. I often would kill what was in front of me and run forward to reposition just like the old game.

What really is absurd is seeing how many people are saying RE4R is the best remake when the RE1 remake exists. That game is so faithful, so respectful and improves so much on the original it became the standard for RE remakes before this new age of remakes that cut content arbitrarily, and people are forgetting that just because RE4R is more fluid and prettier.

It's odd how something like Doom 2016 was seen like a modern homage to the original whilst RE 4 remake is being hailed more like a perfect replacement. RE 4 was never meant to be replaced

Even the devs said it didn't need a remake. RE4 it's a timeless classic

I think the issue is that games are being remade not to improve or revitalize an entry, but to simply milk the fanbase and reimagine old projects to fit in line with modern development teams.

Jed Pressgrove, in his "Game Bias" blog, recently made a series on remakes. He prefaced it with the talking point that "audiences of other media groan when a remake is announced but gamers are excited?" and then proceeded to review several historically disappointing remakes. Even if a remake's good, it has no reason to exist if it isn't as good as the original. And it should never outright replace the original.

REmake is still the greatest example of a video game remake. It was made by many of the original team who did the game it’s based on, and with the express goal of “we have more experience, better tools at our disposal, and we don’t have to cut corners this time. Let’s make the game we really wanted to make back in 1996!” That’s how you do a remake.

Largely agreed. I don't want a remade SH2 with outsourced developers and dodging mechanics just because it's 'in'. 🙃

I'm glad that you highlighted the fact that one of the consistent problems with this 'remake culture' mindset is that devs are too afraid to remake a product that was bad or mediocre. There's something irritating about the arrogance that sometimes comes from people who make claims that a revolutionary game like RE4 is now outdated; blown out by a remake. The reality is that Capcom stood on the shoulders of giants and these games now feel like glossier replacements for the old RE system of "decent numbered game, worse spin-off title." The exception here is REmake, which did improve RE1 in ways it probably needed. The remake deserves praise and particular focus should be given to the areas where innovation and actual originality strike, but a real test of these devs would be to remake the troubled games; update them, make them proud additions to the franchise. Why not remake Code Veronica? Or maybe even RE0? Unlike RE4, there's a better argument to be made that these games _deserve_ remakes. Will they really do RE5 as some have postulated? Will we get an RE7 remake within 10 years? The rate that they've pumped out the last three is pretty crazy.

I thought the Remake was better until I actually played it. One thing I wanna add is that the original RE4 had a "show don't tell" approach, and the REmake just hand holds the player through everything. The voice acting in the original to me is better & so is the castle. The castle is my favorite part, its so unsettling, engaging, etc. In the REmake its just...there

The art in the original is better, I wouldn't even say the remake looks better because of the graphical improvements, the art style is so glaringly different it's impossible to ignore

I remember being so scared every time I played through the sewers area with the bugs in the original game, truly a masterpiece of atmosphere.

The thing with the remake culture tells us 1 thing, that the gaming industry of today is not capable of producing good games anymore, its either bland, soulles jank, a "movie" game, or some multiplayer game monetized to hell and back to make as much money as possible. So they need to remake 20-30 year old games. Sad.

When I first played the original I was taken back by the wierd tank controls. Then after like an hour or two of learning I got used to it. Shockingly, playing the game to get better at the game, takes time.

I'd like to point out one ridiculous change they've made too, due to you being able to run away more easily. I don't know if you've tried Professional yet, but enemies on Professional now have absolutely insane stagger resist, at least in the early game. We're talking like 4 pistol bullets to even get a melee prompt. Remember the original where all Professional changed was the amount of damage enemies did and loot drops? I miss those days. Oh, you can also see their attack animations are sped up. Like, stupidly so.

While I feel both games stand on their own and like each individually. Its nice seeing people care about the gameplay and actually go in depth on why the original is so good without trying to compromise and tell people, "It was good for its time" arguments like that is why no one takes origonal 4 seriously.

One of my favorite stupid design issues with the remake is how they paint everything yellow, training the player to stop proactively looking around, but then they don't paint the bear traps (because that would defeat the point) so then EVERYONE steps on EVERY bear trap and I guess in testing they caught this so they just made the bear traps do no damage.

i noticed that too, character design and innovation even in the simplest way directly thrown out of the window and lazily recreated without even looking at it twice, how people can mess up characters so bad? not even the most complicated ones...

The original was made in an era of linear games. The remake was made in an era of open-world games, leeching mechanics from other games that don't exactly fit into an already great game. Spices that work great for some recipes are not guaranteed to work in every dish. We've just gotten used to the open-world style of things so much that a lot of games really don't have their own style of play anymore.

Oh my god, the point about trendy mechanics and parrying specifically is so good that it hurts. I'm glad to find someone who actually agrees. I liked parrying in Devil May Cry 1 and 3, be it clashing weapons with enemies or using royal guard, but they were supplemental mechanics you could choose to use or not, that also made sense in context. They worked for those games. In a lot of modern games though, not only is parrying a predictable inclusion, but it almost feels like I'm making a mistake in some games, if I don't choose to parry, and yet the timing doesn't tend to be as tight as something like royal guard, but unlike royal guard, parrying often results in massive damage just for timing a single button press a lot of the time, which occasionally seems really overpowered and unearned. I think you're dead on about remakes in general btw. I think it's a sign that the artform of computer games isn't really taken seriously just yet - that remakes are propped up the way they are. Who would adamantly defend, let's say, a remake of Citizen Cain, just because it's widescreen and in color?

I agree with you 100%. I saw this as a fanfiction. I would show comparative cutscenes of og vs remake to old people who never played games. They thought the OG is way better and entertaining - and wonder why they don't simply copy the entire script instead of changing it. Re4 OG felt fair. If I get hit, it's my fault. Remake is not. You cannot parry and dodge everything... also levels requires a lot of preknowledge.

The main problem with movement in modern games is the realism imo. It's closer to people actually walking, running and coming to a halt after running but that doesn't mean it's more fun. I stopped playing The Witcher 3 after a few hours because of the movement. The second time (a few years later) I tried the game again and found the option where you could disable the "realistic movement" stuff and the game immediately felt 10 times better. More realism isn't always better, I want to play a videoGAME after all.

I've never played RE4 but totally agree with the broader thesis of this video. This notion that contemporary games are somehow just inherently better-designed than older games is rampant through games journalism and interviews with developers, and is totally infuriating. You'd never see a film critic insinuate that the MCU has made the godfather obsolete, or a fine art critic claim that Banksy is inherently better than Dali, but it's just rife throughout video game culture.

"that's the most artistically valid goal of a remake, is the intention to replace it. to improve it so much that the original version is just garbage" Dear lord, just wait until this dude finds out about horror movie remakes like The Thing(1982), The Fly(1986), or Invasion of the Body Snatchers(1978). And just wait until he finds out they were considered masterpieces alongside the original. But oops, they didn't replace them or make the original versions look like garbage. Guess they aren't as "artistically valid" to exist.

So I'm not the only that noticed how dark the game is it's ridiculous how i had to increase the brightness way higher just to see around in the castle

Among all the existent languages in the world, this man chose to speak the language of FACTS

Your critic of game devs shoving in popular mechanics really hits home for me. It's really frustrating to see every mainstream game becoming more and more like every other. I also agree that remakes are just fanfics most of the time. The AAA industry is probably in the worst state it's ever been in.

Reasons on why Resident Evil 4 (Original) plays like a light gun shooter. 1- When you shoot you cannot move while the enemies aproaches to you, they run fast when they are at long range, they slow down when they get at least aproximately 2 meters to give the player a chance to shoot them, just like light gun games where the enemies slows down giving you time to react without moving. 2- Where you shoot the ganados and other types of enemies matters, you shoot their head, you make a kick, if you shoot their legs you perform a back kick (depending on what you call it) like most light gun shooters, is not about just shooting the enemy, it's about the location on where you shoot them. 3- The movement is smooth, like most light guin games, movement after clearing each gunfight it's smooth, can be fast or slow but smooth on the feel, Resident Evil 4 nailed the movement making it feel like a light gun shooter. Even better than dead aim IMHO. 4- The enemy attacks has a delay before hitting the player, giving Leon a chance to shoot them in order to hitstun them or move away. 5- Ladder climbing is very smooth and fast, like most light gun shooters, the pacing must have a flow where you get this almost uninterrupted movement before closing towards enemies, so even climbing ladders is very smooth and takes little time, dropping from one floor to a lower floor feels fluid making the game feel like a trancition even though is a drop animation the original developers really outdid themselves with the obstacle animations, making them smooth, not realistic, jumping from the window feels like a good transition from fixed cameras to third person perspective making it feel like a light gun shooter even though the camera while dropping from the window skips rather than move towards Leon in a transitional way to third person view. 6- You can deflect arrows by shooting at them, you can also deflect any throwable before reaching you, like most light gun games as a defensive mechanic, also some hitscan enemies takes a moment of delay before shooting at the player, again giving the player a chance to shoot them before they start shooting or hide. 7- While it plays like a light gun shooter, it also plays like a katana on rails slasher, since your knife can deflect arrows and can cancel the enemy attack by hitstunt. Like the arcade games tsurugi and Mazan, etc. 8- The barrels that has items on them and crates while not necessarily you have to shoot them, by shooting them it kinda gives you a light gun shooter feel to it even though you have to collect them. 9- The gameplay contains trigger discipline like most light gun shooters, your tmp for example, can be really accurate but shooting continously can affect your aim. 10- The boss fights, while they have QTEs, most of them have attacks that takes time to hit the player, giving the player a chance to cancel their attacks before it hits the player. Also, the bosses have weak points that requires mostly shooting precisely, some bosses like Sadler requires the player to shoot his weak points that moves constantly as well giving the player the tracking aspect of the game. 11- The laser aiming gives it more precisión, might look like a gimmick at first but the laser aiming actually serves its pursose rather than having a big crosshair ( like Dead Aim) the laser's dot only shows up when aiming at the enemies and destructable objects, it has a similarity of light gun games hit spark aspect where in most light gun shooters, you get a bigger hit spark when shooting at enemies and destructible objects. 12- Reloading mechanic is about timing the reload, like some light gun shooters where you reload by shooting or just aiming outside of the screen, the reloading is turn based aspect and the fact that you must aim in order to reload really enforces the idea of reload timing during combat. 13- The shooting gallery minigames from the trader, while being optional, it really nails the light gun shooter aspect since the shooting gallery works like a charm for this gameplay aspect, thanks to it's precision based shooting. 14- The level design is more linear than the previous games, making the flow of the game faster than it's predecessors (Not including spin offs even though Dead Aim does feel linear sometimes). 15- The cover mechanic makes you invulnerable to even grenades, like some an extremely popular light gun game series such as Time Crisis, but at the same time you can also reload while taking cover. Unlike most third person shooters that you tend to be vulnerable to grenades. 16- Shooting jewels to collect them and get rewards is similar to shooting high valued items in light gun shooters, in RE4 despite being a third person shooter, you mostly collect some jewels by shooting at them when they are at higher heights than the player, without collecting them by running at them. 17- Grenades can mow down most ganados and high damage other types of enemies, they do high damage like light gun shooters but nerfed in comparison since you get more grenades in the game than light gun shooters. 18- When Ashley gets caught, the player has to shoot the ganado before going to the door. The player cannot shoot Ashley, making it a gameplay aspect where the player has to shoot precisely in order to save her. Like a light gun shooter. Never played the remake but it looks like a typical third person shooter for what you described on the video, rather than a third person shooter with light gun shooter aspects.

Just finished playing thorugh re4 remake and Im glad someone else was also able to escape the hype train and see the problems this game has. God the amount of fanboys bashing crowbcats video for instance... Its like theyre all ganados at this point and capcom is saddler lol

It is also important to notice that most influencers don't speak or go into detail as to why some scenes in the OG are better, in addition to the game launching without mercenaries and Separate Ways, because they don't want to lose that CAPCOM sponsor and viewers. Wanting to have a DLC for a game is fine, when is something new. Like you said they are not putting in much effort when creating and developing this game since they and we, know what they are going to do.

Older games do often have weird controls from a modern perspective, but people don't seem to understand that your interface with the game is part of the game. Tank Controls have a specific job. They create tension and alter the player's strategy. If a shmup lets you shoot left and right, or aim with the mouse, then it is a different game. I am a huge fan of coupling movement and shooting. They are fine as separate actions when the situation calls for it, but when your movement affects shooting, and your shooting affects movement, your strategy will change. Think of run and guns where your shots go in the direction of movement, or are restricted to 4 or 8 directions. They force you to move and position in different ways. The inclusion of kiting or circle strafing should not be a given, they are tools that should be applied intentionally. Internet discourse has confused a decent generalized solution for a standard expectation. Thankfully there is still a lifetime worth of good stuff to try already. Heck, I bet RE4 Remake is a good time. But it is a little insulting when companies release something and market it as though to say "Hey, that thing you like? It actually sucks and you are a dumb boomer for liking it."

The majority of people don't think of video games as art, they think of it of a disposable product that you get into the hype for to be part of the scene, then move on to the next big thing. This is of course, not a new thing, as the majority of people always treated motion pictures that way, too. Which is why remakes have been going on there since like the 30s and have been just as big a plague. As with film, only people with a deep interest in the medium are going to care about (or even be able to distinguish) actual quality, or even be able to appreciate something more than 10 years old, because they are actually interested in the fad, not the art. Now obviously motion pictures are nothing like video games, despite the best of efforts of decades of hack developers, but I think the comparison is apt. However, we aren't in the dark days of the 360 era anymore; one can completely ignore major publisher games. And one can certainly ignore IGN.

Remakes should absolutely be reserved for bad games that had a lot of potential, basically giving them a second chance. I literally don't see any Goddamn reason to remake a game that's still great today.

I found the Remake to be rather insulting. The first flaw was that they tell you Hardcore is for veterans of the original game. I don't know what veterans they talked to because the game does not play the same at all. The gameplay focus on knife-parrying rather than gunplay was stupid as all hell - it's THE thing RE4 does amazingly well, and this Remake sidelines the hell out of it for the dinky knife. I can't stand the knife focus at all. Nor can I stand how damn talkative all the characters are. I swear, someone needs to give these guys a nice glass of Shut The Hell Up. I don't need to hear "Sorry, must have slipped" after every kick. It's a perfect example of fixing what wasn't broken.

It seriously baffles me that there's so many people out there that aren't willing to play old games due to the controls

I'm not an overly nostalgic person when it comes to games, despite constantly playing older games alongside new ones, but I fully agree it's weird there's this idea we seem to be stuck in at the moment that modern mechanics are always better than older ones. What necessarily could be interesting about taking a game that defined an era of gaming and whose influence is felt today, and making it lose its unique attributes to just become like every other modern day cinematic 3rd person shooter? Wouldn't it be more interesting to expand upon and further push the original mechanics rather than strip them out?

Toppest rated games this year are a remake of Metroid Prime and RE4. The film adaptation of Super Mario Bros is the highest grossing animated movie period. I'm genuinely starting to feel bad for gen z and a in this regard. Feels like 70 percent of their media are just hand me downs from the prior gens.

I replayed RE4 Demake after not touching it for months. I was absolutely shocked at how bad the controls/feel of the game is. The artificial difficulty annoyed the hell out of me. Capcom is lazy. Don't balance your games. Just keep pumping out more and more demakes.

None of the RE remakes besides Mikami's remake of 1 properly replaced the original. Code Veronica and re0 are the ones most in need of remakes. And I still wouldn't want them to do it at this time. Not with how these devs seem to see these games. To get a proper remake, we need people who recognize the games strengths, not people who just hate their weaknesses. And fixed cameras are not a weakness. Being able to use actual cinematography in a horror game provides the potential for artistic elevation like no other camera can provide. All without getting in the way of gameplay. Not that I would want to see re4 remade with fixed cameras. That's not the originals style. Let the thing be what it is, not a list of second guessed mechanics, which all the remakes have been since re2r

I was like “am I the only one that thinks this game straight up looks worse the the og?” Thanks for explaining what I was feeling. Ye the art direction kinda really sucks on this one. The direction in general tbh.

I would love to see a DMC 2 remake. Considering even the devs said that they don't acknowledge that game as a dmc title.

One thing that should be mentioned about remake are cheap spawns! Very apparent in first red zealot fight arena, and goat head bridge ambush I.e, when you drop the chandelier on the second floor, immediately run top left corner of the 2nd floor, there will always be 3 zealots spawn into existence right in front of you. That's how Remake keeps giving you cheap shots.. they'd spawn enemies on your blind spot even though you know you cleared that area.

Watched this after the comparison videos. Some downgrades are downright shocking. It's obvious a lot less love and effort was put into the remake. The character design, some enemy designs like the goofy zombie dogs, death animations, missing ambient sound... And that's just some of the audiovisual stuff. The list goes on and on. Your analysis makes perfect sense. All I want to do is play the original once again.

I had a friend who got upset with me because i had zero enthusiasm for this remake. He took it personally, calling me a misanthrope for not being on the hypetrain for initially ignoring all the reveal videos.. He also insinuated that not being impressed with an unnecessary remake was a sad, contrarian position. Dude was hurt like I'd stamped on his dreams. You're going to make a lot of other children cry with this video and I think that's great.

"Modern" controls, where you feel like you're puppeteering a mannequin through quicksand.

I really despise modern gamer discourse. it has literally never been as toxic as it is now. And you can't spell Ignorance without IGN.

It really tells you something when some of the best received games this year have been remakes of games that are more than a decade old. Shows you that even at best the medium has been stagnant, when people would rather look forward to a dolled-up version of a game that already exists rather than any attempt at innovating or creating something fresh.

In film, remakes can offer the opportunity for genre reset. Consider Werner Herzog's 1979 remake of FW Murnau's 1922 film Nosferatu. By the time of Herzog's remake, the vampire genre was defined by hokey B-movie horror from Hammer Studios. Herzog repudiated what were then the dominant conventions of the vampire genre by going back to the original, effectively saying: we need to start over and do something completely different. Herzog then offers an alternative vision of the genre's evolution: instead of being about cheap thrills and jumpscares, vampire films could be about loneliness and seduction and the struggle (thematically and visually) between light and dark. And it worked: the big budget vampire films of the 90s (Bram Stoker's Dracula, Interview with the Vampire) took the themes and visual compositions of Herzog's Nosferatu as their starting place, completely ignoring the Hammer horror conventions. By contrast, video game remakes tend not be genre resets by genre surrenders. They look at how genre conventions have changed and then revise the original to comform to those changes. Xenoblade-style action role-playing has eclipsed the popularity of turn-based role-playing, so Square will "update" FF7 to play like Xenoblade, discarding the fundamental mechanics of the original. Video game critics also expect this, angrily criticizing remakes that don't conform to current trends (a good example is the various Dragon Quest remakes, which critics mark down for maintaining the fundamental mechanics of the originals instead of chasing action RPG trends). Imagine if film critics reviewed Herzog's Nosferatu the way video game critics review game remakes. Wait, why isn't Christopher Lee playing Dracula? Where are all the jumpscares? Where are all the shrieking damsels with their tops falling open? Why is this film asking me to think about longing and loneliness instead of how scary foreigners are? Herzog completely failed to update the 1922 original to meet modern sensibilities. 3/10

I completely agree with how painful it is that they ripped out the core gameplay mechanics. This may seem silly, but the simple fact that the red dot sight isn't standard on the pistol turned me off of ever playing remake. Stop and shoot along with the red dot sight were two of the most iconic things about OG in my opinion. I mean come on aiming with the red dot instead of a reticle added so much immersion. You are right there with Leon aiming and feeling his shaky grip on the pistol. Taking that away kind of removes the player from that close connection. Its just a generic 3rd person shooter now. The red dot aiming along with stop and shoot added so much tension along with a unique perspective.

I still have had so much fun with the remake, although I still have no doubts about preferring the original. What really disgusts me was how quickly people were to treat the original re4 like unplayable janky trash. This was a game we all loved and treasured as a timeless and important classic, up to the point of the remake coming out.

You touched on it but "commercial remakes" are paradoxical in nature, both games and movies. If something was successful enough that there's demand for a remake then it likely doesn't need one, and if something is flawed enough to need a remake then it likely isn't popular enough to justify having one made financially

There needs to be general focus across all media to move away from remakes, reboots, and remasters, and to put effort into creating new stories and concepts. Calling this all fan fiction is very accurate, and where I used to be passive about it, it's become pervasive and disgusting. Also, they'll remake Dino Crisis next.

Nobody shits on the craftsmanship of the cistine chapel simply because of Andy Warhol’s modern art era. I will never understand why people don’t approach old video games with the same mindset. The fact that more creative freedom of expression is afforded by newer hardware, and more techniques have been developed since release, doesn’t mean that older video games somehow lose their masterpiece classification.

At this point, I'm completely over remakes. The only good remake is RE1 remake.

as much as I love the RE4 remake i can't help but feel that all these remakes are because game devs are out of ideas. Either that or publishers don't want to fund a "risk"

You make some good points. Games are--and always were--defined and limited by the technology they ran on. It's absurd to say that all retro games are outdated now, because they are a product of their time, and the developers had to use real creativity and skill to get the most out of the hardware. I dislike this new remake culture's mentality too, because they are trying to make us believe that the original is a just a shitty product of yesterday, and basically worthless now because they've ''updated'' it, and smoothed down all the rough edges to make it palatable to our tasteless modern sensibilities. Basically what you say, ha :)

A good comparison here is Metal Gear Solid 1 vs Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes (TTS); TTS being a GameCube remake of the original, running in the MGS2 engine. Some fans will tell you TTS is just a graphical upgrade to the franchise and improves on the game. However, MGS1, having been built for the PS1 for a controller WITHOUT thumbsticks, had unique fixed camera angles with no first person shooting elements (not including fixed aimed weaponry). This meant the maps were designed with this in mind. Enemy patrol paths were placed with this in mind. Boss fights were built with this in mind. With the developers placing the game in the MGS2 engine - by adding first person shooting elements - COMPLETELY changes the pace & flow of the game, into something it shouldn't be.All the voice actors were asked to come back and re-record their lines for TTS. Sadly, the majority of their performances are sorely lacking compared to the original. With Story, the grounded, serious and thought provoking adventure of Solid Snake is sadly bastardized in TTS, because most cutscenes are remade with Matrix level absurdity. Snake is doing backflips, Neo levels of CQC, slow-mo diving on and around missles, bullet time etc. The Psycho Mantis boss fight is a laughing stock compared to the original jaw drop. Sadly, just like with the RE4vsREmake 4 debate, there is a bloc of people who don't really care about what's lost along the way.

So I'm not the only person who found Remake Leon to be really clunky. Huh. Yeah, moving around feels somewhat like a chore. I know this is likely because it uses the same movement as the RE2R and RE3R, and I suppose it works fine for those games due to how much tighter the spaces are. But in RE4R, there are much more wide open spaces, and I don't feel good moving around as Leon anymore. Sure, in the OG, I had some trouble getting used to the tank controls. But once I figured them out, I really didn't have an issue navigating around the space. I guess I wasn't able to put it into words, but yeah, Remake is pretty darn clunky, despite having more modern controls.

Regarding art direction I actually like the way the characters look in the original better, especially Ada and Ramon.

4:52 Something tells me IGN doesn't understand "turn based combat" or "tactical" games, and, it is weird you could describe OG RE4 as "tactical combat", but that really is what it is, since you have to tacticfully think about when/where you're going to stop to shoot and what/which targets you're going to shoot with what weapon. It was beautiful once you mastered the flow, but I can also see why it would be frustrating to someone who's used to being able to move/shoot at the same time.

I was born in 2000, so naturally I never got to play RE4 in it's early days (2005). In fact I never got into the RE franchise until RE2 remake came out and it looked like something that I'd enjoy. And indeed I really liked that game, smooth controls, good visuals, nice plot and superb gameplay. So after that I decided to play RE4 after hearing so much about it. I got it on PC, without any mods. Surely, I should find that old game to be outdated and clunky, right? Nope, by the time I reached the first village I was already used to the "outdated" control scheme (on KBM even), and 2 hours after that I was already enjoying it a lot more than RE2 Remake. The "tanky" controls are completely and utterly irrelevant. You'd have to be incredibly dense to complain about RE4's controls. They were just fine and since the entire game was built around them, they never felt restricting or ''clunky''.

I hate the fact that they're probably going to remake Resident Evil 5 before Dino Crisis. And if they do remake Dino Crisis, it won't be along the line of REmake, it will be more like the RE2 or RE3 remakes.

modernized aka it plays exactly like any other AAA console game

Actually I was shocked to find out they removed the U3 fight.

24:58 - 25:46 You are correct. Most people are super casuals. Not being mean, it's true. They don't prioritize the importance of game mechanics i.e hitboxes, staggers, delayed inputs. I love how good Leon feels in OG Re4! It's no surprise I did an re4 no dmg run on my channel way back 😁. Like you said: story, characters and some gimmicky "hook" is all that (most) people care about. It lowers the quality of gaming. Great vid btw.

I feel this review justified Crowbcat's take on the Soul vs Soulless RE4 video. I'm glad he linked this to further drive the message. When I watched his video, scrolling through the comments, a lot of people defending the remake by stating it's a different game of itself with different theme or direction. When I go through your videos, the detailed and philosophical artistic design beyond the shield of mainstream hype and bandwagon made me see why artistic integrity is important. The remake culture major problem is the idea of remodeling the old games into conforming to 'modernize standards'. As another comment pointed out in film critics on Werner Herzog's 1979 remake of FW Murnau's 1922 film Nosferatu. There's no more risk or artistic passion. Only cashing in the quick buck just and avoiding more risky titles like RE5/6. Instant gratification that appeals to the zoomers with millenial mindset in developing games nowadays.

What you said about most people not really caring about gameplay and just talking about story or politics really hit home. You clearly care a lot about actual game design and I respect that.

Congratulations, you "remastered" the IGN review😅 The lost design knowledge due to the disappearance of the arcades is an extremely interesting topic. However, this whole 'games are art' debate is tricky because obviously most AAA developers/publishers don't really see it this way. Sure, every design process has its artistic intention but to Capcom their games are more like cars than paintings or books. They reiterate a successful model every time they see a lucrative opportunity. It's a cash grab, like you said. Sales show that it's welcome.

I appreciate your take on the re-make, especially considering the backlash from the droves of NPCs (who mindlessly laud every modern release as a 10/10 MASTERPIECE) who've taken a dislike to any form of critique of it.

Completely agree with your points. I always thought while playing RE4 Remake: "Hell, this doesn't feel quite like the original". I am the most sad for the loss of atmosphere, as I loved the campiness of the original characters way more than the seriousness of the remake ones.

I played through RE4 remake without reading any reviews or seeing anything beyond what was in the demo and my verdict when it was all said and done was that it's a masterpiece. Nothing to do with a hype train for me, and I say this as someone who has loved RE4 since its original Gamecube release and was fully expecting to be disappointed. I do agree that an RE4 remake wasn't needed, but I can't be mad that we've now got two amazing games instead of one.

I'm not fan of RE4 OG or RE4R, but the way you describe it and feel about is identical to how I felt with RE2R x original and I'll tell you one thing, capcom didn't needded to remake any old game to bring in these new gameplays, everything that is praised is new material and everything that is loved about the originals remains in the originals. It's a fraudulent way to get attention. But I'm glad this is happening with newer games and more popular, so more people will see what the original RE2 fans saw and were ignored

I'm so confused why video game journalism is still a thing

Need more people like you on KZfaq. Everyone's so afraid of speaking their mind if it doesn't follow the zoomer hive mind. Zoomers consume and they never know why things are good because they weren't around for the originals. Literally pretend gamers that only care about things like graphics😂

The reason games and what makes a good game change over time is because gamers themselves change over time. As you said gamers nowadays care more about aesthetics, politics, and story. Gamers in the day of the original RE4 valued mechanics more. This is why you will always hear that "modernizing" a game is objectively good. Because it removes things the last generation enjoyed and adds things the current generation enjoys. Any complaints about how previous games were better gets looked at as "old man complains about kids these days". Trust me, as someone who loves classic JRPGs and constantly hears how all the core mechanics of those games are "old" and "outdated". You'll never reach the current generation with this message. No matter how valid your points are.

Great take on the remake. Both the OG game and the remake are probably two of my favorite games. Though I have 6 chapters left in the remake, so will see if it continues to hold up. These videos are always entertaining since you really back up your views. Even when I disagree I can see your perspective. Its good to get different takes on shit. I did feel like there was alot of polish added to the remake but I dont feel that these remakes are ever a straight replacement for the original games. I see it as another take on the game, which is very cool to see. Though I think I may enjoy the gameplay in this one even more with the modern controls, better sound and visuals, etc. I do understand that the OG game was designed the way it was with a purpose in mind though too. So I can see where youre coming from. I do like the extra atmosphere added with dolby atmos, since I have a ceiling speaker set up for that and looks sharp on the OLED. I wouldve liked to see a true current gen remake of the game, but we are still getting that PS4 crossover effect, but with sharper visuals, not new textures, etc. Gameplay is king of course. RE4 already nailed gameplay for me , so for this I was more into seeing technical improvements and maybe some tightened up control. Which is pretty much what I got, plus some extra. Capcom is never at the top of the hill when it comes to visuals these days, even if they do stop supporting last gen games. I feel like the game is balanced well around the more nimble movement and ability to parry. As a result some areas felt harder than I remember them being in the original. Will definately be playing through Pro mode and mercenaries as I did back then. It doesnt feel like they slapped on the new control scheme and left the enemy AI and placement the same. It feels like its all balanced around that, and enemies do feel more aggressive and faster than I remember. Ill have to replay the game to see if the extra areas, like the boat, interrupt pacing. This was a huge issue for me in the new God Of War (walking sequence with the Yak, shitty story elements made me not want to revisit hardest mode). Theres not alot that I can see them really changing, except maybe not following some of the old layouts so closely. I would rather some areas like the castle be a little different. Even in the OG game, the village was my favorite part. RE6 is definately one that would need a remake. That game was super tedious. Bad games and older games will benefit the most from a modern remake. When you have a game that is already one of the best, theres not a hell of alot to add or change. Dino Crisis is another one that would benefit. Game design definately hasnt evolved in a perfect line upwards. If that was the case I wouldnt play games from all time periods. Theres alot of bullshit thats been added to modern games. Tons of filler and an overall lack of the challenge we once got. Now you need to play these games on the hardest modes to even have a chance of replicating that. I think the smaller hitboxes and some of the weapon sway and movement awkwardness will start to fuck with me on pro and merc modes. Normal has not been much of a challenge, but the harder modes are where flaws really stand out for me in games. I do notice the sway you mentioned, which fucks up my ability to pop off quick accurate shots. Also sometimes my head shots do not trigger a melee prompt, which is real fuckin weird. Im pretty sure they connected. Headshots also have to be more centered because that hitbox does feel smaller. I had to actually ditch the fuckin elite controller and use my brook adapter to use a Scuff Reflex PS5 controller. The deadzones were too much on the elite for this game, for me. Great points. We did lose that singleplayer quality after things peaked maybe between 2004-2005 with these 3D games. Games like God Hand ,NG and RE4 never really came out again after that. We had the rare Vanquish but it was very rare. There was that maybe 1 year window where some incredible games came out that were never really replicated again. Halo 2 was one of those gmaes for me too. Was hoping it was a new trend at the time. Keep KILLIN THAT SHIT !!

Based. I feel like so much of the issue is trying to take an action game and turn it into a survival horror forcfully. Throws off the balance. It's difficult to get people to understand the issues because "its not a bad game and see look they kept this location in"

Not wanting to write an essay here, its clear: Its not about the fans, its about the funds....

When talking about trends in gaming and how professional games criticism plays into them, it's important to remember that the gaming media has a vested financial interest in the continued health and success of the games industry, because obviously if people stop caring about games then the media that reports on them is collectively out of a job. So if the industry is focusing on remakes, you'd better believe that every media outlet is going to be cheerleading for how great those remakes are, because they want people staying hyped, spending money, and continuing to participate in what one might regrettably call "gaming culture".

I'm so tired of endless remakes. No matter whether they are good or bad.

I would like to see these IGN reviewers actually walk and shoot with ANY amount of accuracy.

People used to complain about remakes. Now, they’ve accepted them wholesale. Like everything else.

I'm so tired of remakes. it's all just indicative of how the industry is even more averse to risk. Just grab onto anything proven and remake it, it'll definitely work and be an easy cash grab. I just can't believe anybody can look at the shooting feedback (or lack of) of the remake and not see the problem. The game absolutely falls apart on higher difficulties because the feedback to shooting is so outrageous, you can shoot an enemy in the face 3 times in a row that's climbing a ladder, and they won't fall down. That encapsulates the problem with the remake. I'm like convinced people who think this game is a masterpiece must be playing it on the lower difficulties, or they just have some seriously low standards to the point where all they can think about is just being able to move and shoot is the most amazing thing in the world. Too many people think about the "I can't do this" of things like controls when it comes to older games like the original and not the "But I can"s. Like you've pointed out, even though there are restrictions, sometimes those restrictions are what allow things that can't be done with modernized controls or cameras, and it's recognizing those and adapting to them that is what makes older games still as fun as they were in the past fun today. But people today just don't want to tackle any learning curves or have any time learning something different, they just want it to play like everything else. All those idiot game journalists who think the original was clunky aren't bright enough to realize that enemies and combat encounters never make you feel like you need to be able to move and shoot to be able to succeed, they are always asking you to do something that is perfectly possible within those game limitations, but if you're some dumb blogger or game journalist, you're too dumb to realize those kind of nuances, and you just think new = better.

Excellent video. The two statements that most resonated with me are "most people don't care about game mechanics" and "throwing a bunch of trendy mechanics into a blender is not great design". It's so true and so sad. As long as the remake is wearing the original game's skin, it wouldn't matter to a lot of people if say, they re-remade RE1 into a roguelite twin-stick shooter or God Hand into a God of War-style game. People don't seem to get that restrictions themselves aren't necessarily outdated or inferior, it depends on what the game does with those restrictions. Hell, I still play Galaga and in that game you can only move left and right, there are no bombs, shot types, or any of the things added in shmups afterwards. And yet it's still fun because the designers knew what they were doing and made an experience that was engaging and rewarding. Also, your rant about parrying helped me articulate exactly why I hate that mechanic. It throws balance and design in the trash and turns the experience into a pseudo rhythm game.

The last of us has had a really harmful effect on games. This stupid remake not only controls and plays like it (stealth and running around included) but it even has the same interface for some unholy reason. Not only this LToU damage God of War, but now also RE.

The new one is absolutely soulless. The dialogue, in battle dialogue and music, clunky controls, bad face design, and horribly glitchy explosives and melee attacks make the game far from a masterpiece.

I always hate it when modern remakes seem to have such a disdain for the games they are remaking. They think these classic games are an insult and need to be corrected. When I think of the best remakes (RE1, Pocky and Rocky Reshrined, Tales of Destiny DC, Firered, Ys Chronicles, etc) they are always games that not only love the original, but also understand it. They dont remove anything from the original or change the gameplay, they solely set out to improve what made the original game good. Modern remakes dont do that. Recent game devs not only dont like these older games but also dont understand why these classics are considered classics to begin with. These remakes are hateful products. I dont understand why book rewrites and movie remakes are universally considered bad but a game remake is so sought after. I feel like the people who like game remakes dont see video games as an art form. If they did see games as art, they wouldnt want to change them.

I'd actually would really like to hear your opinion on first The Evil Within title, one of my favorite Shinji Mikami games, and probably the best survival horror game of the last decade. Not sure if you've played it, but it's what I consider the spiritual successor to the original Resident Evil 4.

Crouch to stealth in every modern 3rd person action game really annoys me as a bitch who loves the stealth genre. You can truly just run as fast as possible behind any enemy in this game and just get the stealth kill

35:19 its funny, because my favorite part of the remake castle is the second main hall that has the chimera statue (also the gallery room), and a big part of that is because of how more brightly lit and beautiful that part looks lol

I think a lot of the hype is from the popularity many of the RE speedrunners have and the pull they have with so many people, and capcom for sure has realized this. Which is funny bc one popular RE player talks about how "dogs***" new mechanics are (walk, parry, gunplay, evasion, hit boxes, etc.) But also says "he doesn't know how anyone could think the original is better than the remake." Pretty much everyone who falls in line with the safe current opinion of "re 4 remake > re 4 original" go on to complain about these same issues that the original didn't have. But somehow it's better and it's "nostalgia goggles" to think otherwise ? Unfortunately this isn't limited to RE or just remakes. Another bad trend is making 5th, 6th, or even 7th games in franchises, that quite frankly, need to be put to rest.