Why are video game remakes so often uglier than the original games?

Except Pathologic 2 - despite the utterly attrocious decision about naming - is a remake, not a sequel. And for a game that was basically fucking deified among it's user-base, and surrounded by such massive nostalgia and rose-tinted glassess among the hardcore fanbase that it seemed genuinely impossible to ever deliver.
Plus, you have RE2 recently as well. And while I'm not usually taking interest in remakes, I think I could bring up a good couple of other good remakes and remasters in the past few years.

Frankly, 99% of the time people bitch about them, it's always the same example: the fucking Spyro game. Nothing else.

Feel free to prove me wrong, I'm actually open to changing my opinion. I'm just trying to question the very rusty logic around here. It's sometimes worth doing.

>Crash
>Shadow of the Colossus
>Pokemon ORAS
>Pokemon Lets Go
>Ratchet and Clank

OLD GOOD NEW BAD

Attached: 1532258082379.jpg (1430x808, 137K)

why is it so often good games that aged well that get remade? why don't rushed games get remade to be in line with their original visions?

the abe's oddysee remake was another really bad one

Attached: e82s01el2rk21.jpg (678x374, 85K)

>why is it so often good games that aged well that get remade?
That should really be fucking damn obvious, no?

Reignited looked fucking beautiful. Anyone who thinks otherwise has hardcore nostalgia goggles.
>inb4 retards post shitty low quality screenshots from youtube of elora mid animation

because in these cases remakes are outsourced to India studios for maximum profit

>Why are video game remakes so often uglier than the original games?

Attached: A85C0529-CF37-40C1-BBDC-2C48989C0876.png (736x1444, 274K)

Over-detailed, probably.
Personally, these remakes tend to be hit-or-miss as a whole for me. Some stuff I'll like, but some stuff I won't like.

Nostalgia. Really, when you're used to the look of something for 20 years and then it gets rehauled, it's just gonna look off in some form or fashion.

I only played shadow of the colossus for the first time this year and I think the original looks better than the remake

The means by which games are made has an impact on the end product, you don't need to be blinded by nostalgia to prefer the older games in most cases just like you don't need to be blinded by nostalgia to prefer music from decades ago to music nowadays. People seem to come at this question from the prespective that graphics are something that exist purely in degrees and that higher quality graphics are just better. This would be an absurd position if we were talking about any other medium but with games the idea that the graphical limitations of older hardware resulted in certain types of aesthetics which were genuinely visually appealing gets dismissed as nostalgia and has been for over a decade, why is this?

Attached: muh nostalgia.jpg (875x163, 37K)

They're usually made my people who either don't know or don't care about what made the originals look good, or they don't have the technical prowess to capture that essence on a more modern system. In the case of Spyro I'd say that it's a little bit of everything. Toys for Bob just weren't good enough to figure out how to implement things like the skyboxes or the 3D animated text/UI, so they instead tried to hide the skyboxes behind higher level boarders where possible, and replaced the old UI with some flat mobile game shit. Then there were the dozens if not hundreds of smaller "artistic liberties", unnecessary changes in enemy/character designs and level architecture that ultimately culminate into an overall inferior experience compared to the original.

Although they were at least able to keep the gameplay intact, which is more than what can be said about the Crash remake.

Attached: 1525394218969.jpg (1080x1400, 430K)

Because they think graphics will make up for everything.
Because the people who work on it usually have terrible taste.
Because they cant pay proper homage to the original
Because they refuse to acknowledge the original artistic vision and often take way too many liberties.
Because they want to pander to a wider audience because economic reasons, so they marginally change original aspects of the game in order to do so.

Theres a ton of reasons, you can´t just pin point one.
but if i could i would say its americans and american gamers.

Anyone have any of those cobblestone images that were floating around before the game's release?

Attached: 1533314675592.jpg (700x759, 73K)

agree with this user. I didn't hate the spyro remake, it felt like playing spyro, they nailed the movement and mechanics and the "gamefeel" of spyro. When you ram into an enemy there's still good feedback in terms of sound, when you glide and run and jump it is almost the same as old spyro. The problem is that the levels look and feel less mystical. The color palette is off, everything is more crisp which is what you'd expect from a modern game. but the color look of spyro always made it seem like colors were "melting" together. not trying to be cryptic it's just hard to explain. Toys for Bob did a good job but the originals still hold up gameplay wise so why bother with the remake

I hate nuSpyros face so much. Like what the fuck is with those cheeks.

Attached: 1540511780873.png (755x683, 498K)

only the fawn girl looks abysmal.

He's a little kid, isn't he? Still got them chubby cheeks.

SotC is a particularly weird instance because it was always an aesthetic triumph. The original remains gorgeous in its art direction and the PS3 remaster cleaned up the visuals and performance just enough to enhance that, other issues be damned. It's one of those games that never needed to be remade.

Remakes always look weird because the original games were designed with the original graphics in mind. If they had access to modern tech back then the levels would not look the same. So it’s weird to see modern graphics on clearly older level design, it just looks weird and an ill fit.

Remakes are just inherently soulless

I wish the Crash remake had more vibrant colors.
And get rid of the shitty fur texture

PC version can fix that, in Reshade and then in-game settings.
Only version that runs at 60fps too.

ARAGGAH
OLD THING GOOD
NEW THING BAD
ARGRGSHAHATAGAG
WHY CANT NEW THING BE LIKE OLD THING?!?!?!?!
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHH

Attached: 20190720_190930.jpg (1280x1280, 428K)

>take original game made by AAA devs
>get some literally who dev that has made cheap shovel ware at the most and expect them to recreate the same quality
thats the problem

oras is the weirdest remake in this regard since they kept the unnatural tile based layout even though the game doesn't use tiles

NO NEW THING MUST BE GOOD THAT ONLY ONE I CAN PLAY EMULATOR SCARY

lmao looks like hannah gadsby

But it's gorgeous

WHY CANT NEW THING NOT EXIST?!?!? OLD THING CAN STILL BE ACCESSIBL!?!?!? IT ONLY $1,000 FOR A COPY AND THE CONSOLE YOU CAN BUY ON EBAYYY!!!!!!
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHGAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHGAHAHAGAGAGAG

what the fuck you smoking even most mint sealed games wont go for any where close to 1k

Attached: 20190725_104833.jpg (1280x1280, 332K)

I've heard that when a seller on Amazon runs out of something, they increase the price by a tremendous amount rather than list it as "out of stock", because that apparently hurts their rating. That way, most people will just avoid it, but on the off-chance that some idiot DOES pony up the cash, they can use that to buy the item from someone else and kept the rest of the money.

you can get either of those for like 30 bucks

The Spyro remakes had nowhere even close to enough development time, and it shows, seems like a year for three full games. The gameplay mechanics are solid, and Toys for Bob definitely put in a lot of work, with Spyro 1 being the most detailed and closest to the original's vision, with the other two games being outsourced to meet a release date their aesthetics were nowhere near as close to being like the originals. Had the game been given a longer development cycle they probably could've been amazing visually, but lmao Activision.

TLDR: the games are good, capture the gameplay of the originals well, just needed more development time to get the aesthetics perfected.

Thats my point.
Most casual audiences prefer to buy a remake instead because a copy of the original games are expensive as hell, and hard to find. Plus its pretty natural for some to want convenience when it comes to anything.
Which is why some resort to just emulating games because scalpers exist. I blame scalpers personally.
It becomes laughable when you realize Microsoft is offering basically Banjo Kazooie but in HD for a WAY cheaper price.