It’s a question as old as time, but one that a lot of players still can’t seem to agree upon: what is the difference between a reboot, remaster, and remake? Whenever a classic PlayStation game is revived in some way, the cultural conversation surrounding it always begins by trying to determine what level of new treatment the publisher has given it. However, before filing it into any box, it’s always a good idea to have clear definitions of all three of these categories. With technology always advancing, the lines are becoming ever more blurred.
Trying to discern what separates a reboot from a remaster or remake is the subject of today’s video, in which Aaron uses specific examples and illustrations to try and overcome any potential or possible confusion in the future. With much beloved franchises and characters only being utilised for nostalgia bait more and more, now is as good a time as any to settle the debate for good.
[source youtu.be]
Comments 51
When it comes to Disney and Star Wars they're all the same thing pretending to be sequels. Shots fired!
Reboot is self explanatory, Tomb Raider 2013 is a reboot of the franchise and bears no similarity to Tomb Raider 1996 for example. A remaster is the original game with just enhancement's, ie. higher framerate, higher resolution etc., an example would be the Last of Us Remastered. A remake is telling the same plot with an brand new game made from the ground up. Goldeneye on the Wii was a remake, FF7 on PS4 was a remake, etc. Nothing to it really.
Games like xenoblade chronicles definitive edition are kinda in between
Price. That's it
Remaster: near identical game but improved in some way (lazy devs just make them HD)
Remake: same story overall but completely reworked and often more detailed
Reboot: start from scratch with a different story.
@Ultrasmiles XC a great remaster. Identical game, but improved in almost every way. I wouldn't call it a remake since nothing has changed in the story, combat system, maps or monsters. Just a lot of QoL. It's very similar to FF7 integrade or for ghost of Tsushima director's cut
@PegasusActual93 yeah. It doesn't take much explaining. The words themselves are pretty clear to understand/self-explanatory
@TheMadRabbid meaning some hit 😊
Ratchet and clan ps4 remake.crash bandicoot n sane trilogy remake.ni no kuni wrath of the white witch remastered. Uncharted the nathan drake collection remastered. Etc.etc.word up son
Despite how easy it is to draw these lines between each meaning, these words get (incorrectly) interchanged frequently.
Remake-Resident Evil 2.
Remastered-Alan Wake.
Reboot-Final Fantasy VII.
@PSXDave Pretty sure Final Fantasy VII Remake is a remake, mate 😉
I never really thought these words were all that confusing to be honest. It's not the fault of the word "remastered" that everyone thinks that every future remaster is going to be more like a remake, despite the fact that none of the past ones have been
If you want to get into really murky words, let's talk about "Definitive Edition" and what that means?
@Broosh and yet it's actually more of an alternate universe sequel, than either of those things
@danlk1ng It does make you wonder how different the overall plot will be considering the vagueness of part 1's ending...
It doesn't help that all we have to compare is Midgar vs og Midgar 😕 Though "FFVII Alternate Universe" would have been a banger title 😆
@Broosh "FFVII Alternate Universe Intergrade" sounds better/doesn't sound as silly as the actual name too
It should be self explanatory - but the confusion comes from 'inconsistent' marketing- particularly the 'remake/remaster' tag.
A Remaster is taking the original code, the original assets etc and bringing them 'up to date' for modern hardware. That is not the same as 'porting' the entire 'game and assets' up to new hardware and tweaking a few Graphical settings (like increasing the output resolution, increasing frame rate caps, turning up shadow quality etc - things that were 'dialled' down to run on weaker hardware). That's just a 'Port' as far as I am concerned but often marketed as a Remaster.
As soon as they have to start remaking some assets, replacing all the textures for 'high' res versions or 'adding' to the game engine to add in RT for example its a 'remaster'. They have had to go in and actually re-do things because the 'OG' codes/assets etc were not up to the required standard and wouldn't hold up with just an increase to resolution.
A Remake is just that, the game is built from scratch on a 'new/up to date' engine but also has the same story, same game-play etc. The old game is the 'template' that is being copied - great examples are the Shadow of Colossus and Crash Bandicoot as both were 'remade' (I believe).
A Reboot is taking those OG IP's and doing something 'different' to what the earlier games offered. Tomb Raider 2013, God of War 2018 are examples.
Too often, we see 'Remaster' applied to just Ports, actual Remasters and Remakes too so its no wonder its confusing...
Make master new boots or no play
@Integrity Almost the same thing just more PC/woke.
What's the difference ?
About 20 quid.
Can we throw port into the mix? The real issue is that these terms are not mutually exclusive. A game could theoretically be a port, a remaster, a remake, and a reboot all at the same time. For example, if they ported the original code, remastered it with new assets, and then added additional all new gameplay (remake), but then also the release negates past sequels and an all new sequel takes the series in a new direction (reboot).
The lines blur a bit but generally
I think Bluepoint's Shadow of the Collosus and Demons Souls are the two that blur the lines the most. They still use the underlying old game, so it's remaster right? But they also run their own Bluepoint engine over the top and re-do all art assets. It's a hybrid between a remake and a remaster.
It's pretty self explanatory I'd have thought:
ReMASTER - Same thing with better visuals or frame rate - MGS HD collection.
ReMAKE - Take what was initially there, and rebuild it following the same basic framework that was already existing (N Sane Trilogy/CTR/Spyro)
ReIMAGINING - FF7 Remake. Take the story, rebuild it from the ground up, do things different but pay homage to the original.
forgot ReBOOT - Tomb raider 2013 trilogy. Same characters but completely different to initial games.
@PegasusActual93 You managed to explain it less than 20 seconds what whoever did the video took 13 minutes to do.. (didn't watch it no need after this)
Perfect no nonsense explanation.
Give this guy a job PSquare.
The issue with FF7 Remake is that it is not only a remake, but an alternate universe title.
It could almost be considered false advertising to people who buy with the expectation that it is the same story as the original, but with a new engine.
@tatsumi As long as it hasn't got the mutiple random battles of the original then it's all good.
@PegasusActual93 I agree but I think it's also a little more complex. With remakes, it seems to split into two camps.
You have your remakes that are largely faithful to the source; ones that don't change the core structure, just redo the exact experience with new engine/visuals and a few quality of life improvements. The second camp is more of a re-imagining, taking the source as inspiration to craft an entirely new experience.
So I'd say games like MGS: Twin Snakes, REmake, Demon's Souls, Shadow of the Colossus, Link's Awakening etc are the first camp.
Then games such as RE 2 Remake, FF7 Remake, Mafia etc are in the second.
The question is... which will RE 4 Remake be.
@JB_Whiting
A remake is redoing the game from the ground up with a new engine, visuals, minor plot changes etc. Whether the remake is faithful to the originals gameplay or changes it significantly is irrelevant, it is still a remake.
Nobody should confuse a remaster and a reboot - they're at the opposite ends of a spectrum, with the remake in between.
The confusion between a remaster and a remake comes when you look at how big the changes are, and how they're achieved. If it's just some new higher-resolution assets or streamlining to the code, it's a remaster. If it's new code being written, it's a remake. Generally, if it's a new game engine, then it's probably a remake rather than just a remaster, unless the game engine can mostly run the code from the prior version...though the more they use the original assets, the more it's a remaster.
The confusion between a remake and a reboot comes in how much they tinker with the original. If it's the same characters but a wholly new game that will be unfamiliar to those who played the original, it's clearly a reboot. If it's the original just rebuilt in a new engine, but if you' played the original you'll feel like you're playing it all over again, then it's a remake. But when they tinker with the formula a lot, add in new content or change up the story, it's fair to argue the difference between a remake and a reboot. The more different it is, the closer to a reboot it becomes, though I'd argue a proper reboot requires a reimagining of something - a new version of the characters (like a new Bond actor) or a new plot or setting.
At some point, they're all arbitrary categories.
I rather had a visual update with some simple gameplay updates with some extra's this takes way to long and they somehow always make their physical FF release incomplete even with the PS5 rerelease that had to put in a download voucher. So im waiting a decade (or two if im lucky) for the complete edition on disc or ill probably skip it.
You forgot to add "intergrade" to the title. Intergrade means we can't come up with new rivals to match our pre-FFVII days so we are continuing rehash old ones, like most of the rest of the industry. The more you know...
@hypnotoad Its easy to show the mobs on the map.
@tselliot I think it sucks i could have been playing FF7R the full game years ago. At this speed the game wont be complete before in 80 and thats a waste and to be honest i really dont care about it that much anymore. The nostalgia is gone it takes way to long this is just milking it the biggest red flag was exclusive Materia with insanely expensive editions.
@themightyant I prefer the Bluepoint way it takes way less time and it looks fantastic with modern gameplay.
FF7 is a Remake but also needed a LOT of padding to it as the original Midgar only took a few hours to finish on FF7.
Anything that seemed to be on Wii U and appeared on Switch is a remaster
Reboot is something like God of War, refreshing the series by switching from Greek to Norse Mythology
@hypnotoad Whats woke about the game are her boobs more realistic? She looks better then in the original and im a massive fan she wears a bra how horrible it must have been for her to fight all these years.
@Flaming_Kaiser Definitely my favourite. For the right games where you don't want to change the core gameplay. But the Bluepoint way takes a LOT more time that a standard remaster but perhaps less time than some remakes. Shadow and Demons each took 2+ years and they have around 70 employees. That's a lot of effort. But the results are astonishing.
@PegasusActual93 the tomb raider series gets more into whats a hard reboot and a soft reboot i guess. because its more of a origin story since the games all take place before the ps1 games in her younger years. a hard reboot would be like taking the whole story and throwing it out and completely starting over ignoring everything vs a soft reboot which is more like starting over , but it still takes place in the same universe.
@BAMozzy - "That is not the same as 'porting' the entire 'game and assets' up to new hardware and tweaking a few Graphical settings (like increasing the output resolution, increasing frame rate caps, turning up shadow quality etc - things that were 'dialled' down to run on weaker hardware). That's just a 'Port' as far as I am concerned but often marketed as a Remaster."
I'd have to disagree there. Any visual improvements like that should really classify as a remaster, because you're still bringing them to a new platform generation, which is the entire point of remasters.
Ports, by comparison, are usually games transferred from one platform to another within the same generation (e.g. Metal Gear Solid 2 on Xbox), or to a later one with similar or lesser specs (e.g. Xenoblade Chronicles on 3DS). They're not trying to 'update' the game's visuals, just release it on more platforms.
That's how I see it anyway.
Any seasoned gamer know the answer to this. It’s obvious.
-Remasters are ‘cleaned up’ or upscaled versions of older games.
-Reboots are current games which are new versions of old games which don’t necessarily follow the gameplay and narrative of the original game.
I have absolutely no idea how this is a question.
I think maybe we could throw an extra phrase in for titles like Shadow of the Colossus and Crash Bandicoot. Something like Rebuild. Maybe not in the title, but when asking what it is: Is it a Remake, Remaster, Reboot or a Rebuild.
A house being remastered, is a coat of paint and some repairs, replace the lights and plumbing, et cetera.
A house remake is demolishing the old house and basing the new build on the original house.
Reboot the house is a new house, with the base idea of the old house, but may end up looking different.
And a rebuild could be building the house exactly the same, but with new materials to make it look like a house that was built for today.
Just a thought anyway, might not be best description and not sure if it sounds right, but I've typed it now, so...
@nookie_egg I like your addition of 'Reimagining'. Though it complicates things by adding yet another option. Good call.
@FullMetalWesker Simply porting a game over and not tweaking the settings is basically making it back compatible. Using the settings they already had built in to the engine to adjust things like output resolution, frame rate cap etc is no different from a PC player buying a new GPU and then turning up the Graphical settings in game.
Its simply 'porting' the game to a new system and adjusting the setting for that hardware - the same as whether its ported 'up' a generation, ported down a generation or even ported to another platform. Its still a PORT - not a remaster. The Devs are just ensuring the game runs properly and adjusting the settings to optimise it for that hardware, but they have NOT remastered anything - the entire game, all the assets etc are untouched, they have not been 'remastered' at all.
A remaster takes the original and literally cleans up and/or improves on the original source material. Just outputting them at 'higher' resolution is not improving on the Source material - the source is still the same. It has not been improved, its the Hardware that has 'improved' so now you get to see more of the original artwork at higher res, play the game at faster frame rates because of the Hardware - not because the game has been 'remastered'
Would you call Assassin's Creed Valhalla or CoD: Vanguard 'remasters' on PS5 because they run at higher visual settings than on PS4? No because they are 'ports' that have just had the settings dialled in for the Hardware. Whether it releases at the 'same' time or years apart, porting a game to the hardware and 'dialling' in the built in settings to suit the hardware is NOT a Remaster.
@themightyant Demons Souls and SotC are remakes as they were built from the ground up and in the case of DS has many new features and QoL stuff, it looks and plays like a PS5 game and not a PS3 game with nicer visuals.
@WallyWest Yes AND No. If you watch a "the making of" video for either of these games you will see that Bluepoint are unique in that they run TWO game engines together.
1) The original game engine that handles most of the gameplay etc. you ARE playing the old game code in many ways.
2) Their Bluepoint engine which is a layer over the top. Mostly they rebuild the whole art pipeline, add new lighting, streaming etc. on this one but they also hook into the original engine to add additional code for other QoL and new features.
It's a fascinating way of doing it that, to my knowledge, is unique. You get the best of both worlds. You get to play the old games as we know and love with gameplay MOSTLY unchanged (it can be updated too) but with a shiny modern graphics etc. layer on top. Plus they add QoL features.
Hence a hybrid of remaster and remake. Digital foundry article on their process below. For me this method only works if the gameplay stands up today otherwise you need a complete remake.
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2018-shadow-of-the-colossus-tech-interview
@themightyant I see it like respect for the original while making it more of this time.
@Flaming_Kaiser 100% best of both worlds. Exact same classic gameplay (unless they want to tweak this) with a completely brand new graphical engine layer and QoL features.
As I said above, probably only works on games who's gameplay is a more-or-less as good today as it was then. They can tweak and update it a little (as I understand they did with Demon's) but on the whole you ARE playing the old game with completely new shiny modern layer of fidelity.
Blessing and Janet were having this conversation on KFGD a few weeks back, so I took it upon myself to use basic common sense and context clues to come up with a list of all possible readings/definitions of the terms thrown around, with examples.
*Reboot - Clean slate, ignores ALL previous entries or iterations of the IP, often re-tells a similar story with many major changes. Generally meant to start a new series.
Examples: Wolfenstein: The New Order, DmC: Devil May Cry, Ghostbusters 2016, Friday the 13th 2009
*Remake - Similar to reboot, but largely keeps the same story beats/characters of the original with minor or no variations.
Examples: Shadow of the Colossus PS4, Resident Evil 2 Remake, Metroid Zero Mission, Final Fantasy 7 Remake
*Soft Reboot - Acknowledges certain aspects of previous iterations while ignoring things that didn't work or weren't well received to keep a series going.
Examples: Superman Returns, Bumblebee, Thor Ragnarok, Mortal Kombat 9
*Remaster - Same game, same assets, minor enhancements to make it easier on the modern eyes.
Examples: Okami HD, Resident Evil 4 HD, Dark Souls Remastered, etc., etc. Generally any low effort re-release with "HD" or "Remastered" in the title.
*Legacy Sequel - Picks up many real world AND in-fiction years after the last entry, but retains the same continuity and characters.
Examples: Blade Runner 2049, Tron Legacy, Ghostbusters Afterlife (not many of these in the gaming space)
*Direct Sequel - Same characters and same continuity as all previous entries, even if the new entry looks/feels different.
Examples: God of War 2018, Metroid Dread, Resident Evil 7
@BAMozzy - Sorry, but I have to continue to disagree here.
"to adjust things like output resolution, frame rate cap etc is no different from a PC player buying a new GPU and then turning up the Graphical settings in game."
First off, PC’s are a completely different beast to consoles. Where consoles are mostly limited in their options, PC’s have much greater flexibility due to PC not really being a single console, but an entire line of them that don’t really have nearly as many technological barriers. That said, changing the settings in a PC game doesn't really count, because those options are still baked in the original release.
"Its simply 'porting' the game to a new system and adjusting the setting for that hardware - the same as whether its ported 'up' a generation, ported down a generation or even ported to another platform. Its still a PORT - not a remaster. The Devs are just ensuring the game runs properly and adjusting the settings to optimise it for that hardware, but they have NOT remastered anything - the entire game, all the assets etc are untouched, they have not been 'remastered' at all."
You do realise the entire point of remasters, is to simply make them playable on newer systems, right? That’s literally their only purpose. Sure, good remasters go a little further to fix up graphical or other problems, update the assets so they look better on newer systems, but the bare minimum a remaster needs is to make the game playable on a newer system. See the PS3 HD Collections that literally started the remaster trend. All they did was up the resolution, slap on some trophies, and called it a day. They were bare-bones remasters, sure, but they were still remasters because they updated the resolution for newer systems.
"Would you call Assassin's Creed Valhalla or CoD: Vanguard 'remasters' on PS5 because they run at higher visual settings than on PS4? No because they are 'ports' that have just had the settings dialled in for the Hardware.
I wouldn't call them remasters because they were released simultaneously. Ports, Remasters, and Remakes are all re-releases after the initial launch, so a game that launches on two systems simultaneously wouldn't count as any of them.
@FullMetalWesker Of course if an 'engine' or the 'devs' only built the assets for '1080p' and/or 30fps, and raising the 'in-engine' graphical settings are NOT going to look or run right, then it becomes a remaster because the dev has to make new Assets, new animations, new CGI cutscenes etc.
Just because Sony called their 'HD' ports a 'remaster' does not technically make them a 'remaster' in truest sense of the word - they are 'borrowing' the term from Movies/Music because the 'end' result is a 'better' looking game but its still technically a port because they haven't 'remastered' anything - its just Marketing
Don't get me wrong, its still 'work' and 'time' to get the 'older' engine working properly on newer hardware with newer API's. Still takes time to go through and tweak settings to ensure a 'smooth' performance - you can't [always] just Port the game, turn all the Graphical settings up to Max and expect the game to run 'flawlessly' throughout. A Port still takes time, money and effort to get it 'running' properly on 'newer' hardware but the difference is that you are still seeing 'ALL' the work of the 'original' devs on the original Engine running at 'higher/highest' settings showing exactly what the Original devs created before they had to dial back the settings to run on the much weaker/older hardware.
A true 'remaster' would be required if they have to do anything to the engine, assets etc to overcome some of the 'issues' (like low res textures that don't hold up at higher res) and/or 'add' to the experience (like adding a new lighting model that allows for 'God Rays', more objects (vegetation, trees etc and I don't mean the procedurally generated vegetation that is controlled in-engine and when turned up, adds more - as you see in games like Elden Ring between XB1 (which has a low vegetation setting) compared to PS5 (which has a higher setting) - look at the ground - the amount of grass, small bushes etc and how far off in the distance it draws - that's ALL in-engine.
A Dev hasn't spent 'months' putting in more 'grass', bushes etc for the 'next' gen versions - its in engine. If an old game hasn't got that option, and a dev has to go into the Original source code and 'add' more vegetation, make new 'vegetation' etc, it becomes a 'Remaster' not a Port.
Whether released 'Simultaneously' or NOT, the entire principal is the same. The entire 'source' code is ported to the consoles and then all the settings are 'tweaked' to try and get the most 'balanced' performance for the hardware.
The whole point of my initial post was about the 'confusion' between 'Ports', 'Remasters', 'Remakes' & 'Reboots' because the Publishers themselves don't use these 'accurately' and it helps with marketing too. Its 'easier' to market and sell a 'remaster' - especially for 'full' price than to just call it a 'Port'! So that's why you get them using 'Remaster' a LOT! Some also use 'Remaster' instead of 'Remake' because they don't want people to think that remaking it will 'lose' something that made the original great or 'add' their own 'personal' take on it but its still a 'remake'
You have to separate yourself from the Marketing BS and actually look at what the Dev's have done. In the case of a lot of so called 'Remasters', they are 'just' ports to better hardware and are 'labelled' 'remaster' for Marketing purposes - not because the Devs 'remastered' any of the OG content/engine at all...
@PegasusActual93
Clapping
This person got it on point.
Tap here to load 51 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...