Ports that Pretend to be Remasters/Remakes

[vanguard333]

A port of a game is an old game modified to run on a new system, a remake is a reconstruction of an old game from a modern lens, and a remaster is something in-between. However, in recent years, I've been ever-increasingly noticing something I think should be considered a fourth category: a reskin.

Basically, it occurs when a game is developed in the hopes of getting the profile and profit of a proper remake or remaster, but it only puts in the effort of a port, and to hide that fact, the game is given just enough superfluous changes that the marketing can call it a remake or a remaster, even though the game may as well just be a port. These superfluous changes being mostly visual, and usually never actually a visual enhancement; just a visual change, is the reason I thought "reskin" would be a good name for this.

 

What do you think? Do you think it deserves its own label? Can you think of any particular examples?

 

Also, if anyone has an idea for a better title for this topic, please let me know.

[joevar]

this whole conversation can be summarized or answered using FF franchise alone. from remaster, to remake, and even reskin like you said, all happening to this love-or-hate franchise.

and if someone think i will use FF7 as prime example (yes it counts too ofc), im actually thinking of FF4. its been ported from Nintendo system to Sony system and Windows system , remastered with higher pixel , remade using 3D model in PSP,  and lastly reskin of original with pixel remaster.

i would say reskin fall into lazy remaster. while good remaster should not only upscale the graphic but also squash some known old bugs/harmful glitch, having some extra or added stuff into the game is bonus depend on the devs. while remake should spare no effort to make it look and feel like a new game using new technology.

port is just making sure the game playable in other system. everything left intact like before, is fine

[lenticular]

I don't think thaty we really benefit from having even more terms for what is largely the same concept. Yeah, there's definitely a continuum from "literally just the original code plus an emulator for the original hardware" to "basically a completely new game, but taking inspiration from the original", but I don't think that it's helpful to try to define exact boundary points along that continuum. It's too fuzzy. Where exactly the boundary between an enhanced port and a lazy reskin? Is there one? Probably not. No matter what terminology we end up using, we're going to have to add a lot of description if we want to understand the nuance of exactly what we're looking at. And no matter what terminology we end up using, we can also guarantee that game marketing is going to exaggerate and overhype to make their games sound better than they  actually are.

[Armchair General]

Can't really name anything off the top of my head, mostly because I stay away from this kind of stuff.

All I've ever seen is some guy on YT who occasionally reviews poorly done asset flips on the Switch and how bad Liberty City Stories ran on my PSP. Speaking of the PSP, I noticed that half of the 3D games that I got for it wasn't really that great with the graphics, for some reason.

[ciphertul]

I think it does, after what happened with Akiba's Trip's "remaster" which really was just a port. After hearing it was a remaster I did expect some QoL updates that didn't happen.

[Zapp Branniglenn]

I would suggest developers ought to be more honest about what their remaster really entails. Side by side shots of the graphical enhancements is the most we ever get, and they rarely do that much. But I think the lack of info is pretty deliberate some of the time. Publishers know that if we knew what was actually different about the game, people would reconsider buying it, or remind themselves that the version they have is already pretty great without enhancements, or is at least cheaper to buy from a second hand seller. Being honest is quite the gamble when you're a salesman. Heck, these days the original version is often still available in some digital format. A remaster of Dead Space for instance could never hope to be as valuable as a remaster of Fire Emblem Path of Radiance. Those grand theft auto games were available in seasonal sales a few bucks each for years before Rockstar took them down permanently to keep you from making that alternative choice. Nintendo did the same thing with its Switch Deluxe versions of Wii U games, even though very few people are willing to dust off their Wii Us!

There's also the sales you can earn from generally misinformed buyers as well. To use one example, when I was a kid I bought Pokemon Leafgreen, not knowing what a "remake" was. It was a pre internet age for me still and I just didn't know games occasionally did that without say, putting that on the box somewhere. The original pokemon games would have been a few shelves down from this new GBA release. I assumed it was a sequel! Whatever was going through my head, I was pretty displeased from the first ten minutes. God help all the parents trying to shop for their kids with all these remakes. Then you've got consumers that make wrong assumptions. Like, say, buying that new pokemon game thinking "oh, the added Platinum content is for sure in there, we just haven't seen it yet". Nintendo gotcha.

[henrymidfields]

I don't know if this is entirely correct, but Link's Awakening feels more like a reskin /re-port. Apart from some graphic upgrades and maybe some QoL, it's hardly any different from the original.

[vanguard333]

3 hours ago, henrymidfields said:

I don't know if this is entirely correct, but Link's Awakening feels more like a reskin /re-port. Apart from some graphic upgrades and maybe some QoL, it's hardly any different from the original.

I don't think that one really counts, simply because of the huge amount of detail that went into the new art style, audio, etc.

I think one infamous example would be the Secret of Mana remake.

[Original Alear]

On 12/31/2021 at 6:24 PM, henrymidfields said:

I don't know if this is entirely correct, but Link's Awakening feels more like a reskin /re-port. Apart from some graphic upgrades and maybe some QoL, it's hardly any different from the original.

I think something about the physics/mechanics/hit boxes were very different, I found the port much harder than the original.