Remake vs Remaster vs Reboot

[DaniPoo]

Hello people,

Im gonna rant a bit because it triggers me that noone seems to know the difference, not even game developers.

Remakes
Remakes are really similar to remasters from a user-perspective in that they are often prettier versions of an existing game.
However remakes are made from scratch often in a more modern game-engine.
EXAMPLES: crash bandicoot n sane trilogy, The Pokemon remakes and Final Fantasy 3 & 4 for NDS.

Remasters
Remasters usually use already existing code but upgrades the assets like textures and sound,
they usually also modify the code to render the game in higher resolution and add graphical effects like lighting, shadows and posteffects. Sometimes they even add small gameplay features.
But in essence it's a mega-evolved game port.
EXAMPLES: Zelda Windwaker HD, Final Fantasy X/X-2, Ratchet and Clank trilogy

Reboots
Reboots are usually an attempt to reimagine what a game could be if it was made today.
They are usually sharing story elements from the original game but can otherwise be a very different experience.
EXAMPLES: Ratchet and Clank 2016, Final Fantasy VII (the new one), Silent Hill: Shattered Memories


I hope this clears up some confusion and that you find it helpful, start a war if you disagree (but please keep a good language)

P.S. Ladies im single

 

[FAST6191]

A reboot can also happen within a franchise if a story gets too convoluted, or you just can't be bothered and want to run with the settings. Granted that usually gets called a story reboot or franchise reboot but eh.

The line between remaster and remake is also going to get increasingly blurred as time goes one and code reuse becomes more of a thing -- it is a massive pain in the arse to take your assembly (albeit commented and whatnot) from the 16 bit era and do something useful on the 360, far more easy to take late stage PS2 C++ and go to the xbox one. You have some lua on something and a lua interpreter on a newer system and all bets are off. Similarly what goes if you take your assembly, which is just an expression of a mathematical function (say https://www.dragonflycave.com/mechanics/gen-i-capturing ), and recreate the same thing with the same stats in a higher level language?

There is some merit in what you said but at the same time I would say the words have been so abused that they are meaningless these days.

 

[Byokugen]

Silent Hill: shattered memories is not a rebot if you ask me, canceled Silent Hills was going to be be one.
I have to agree with @FAST6191
,now those words are abused, you have a lot of reboots, and many just destroy the meaning that the original game had, but on the other hand you have those that brought great new and welcoming changes. One of the great examples is Chrono Trigger, the last DS port/remake/remaster was awesome!
Final Fantasy VII is one of mine top games, I still have the final save on ps1 mem card, although my game is lost and am unable to get another copy, i keep the card and cherish it. Great childhood memory

 

[Sonic Angel Knight]

I can think of one thing that needs a reboot. PHANTASY STAR 2, actually all 4 GAMES, Phantasy star HD remaster for $40, i buy that. Easier difficulty, faster movement and progression and easier navigation. Just saying, sega if you're seeing this.

Few others come to mind are by konami, castlevania the (METROID VANIA) series, Contra, Sparkster rocket knight, and even Gradius, Ganbare Goemon, and Parodius. To be fair, Paroduis never was released in America from what i learned so that be nice.

Sometimes is hard to know the difference, with the names the people give the games in all. For example, Blaster Master Zero is probably a Remake/Reboot/Remaster... but why? Well it plays like the original game and is completely based off it, just is called BLASTER MASTER ZERO.... Usually having zero in the title indicates the story takes place at a earlier time, common practice in japan. Street fighter alpha in Japan is known as street fighter Zero, Before a official translation of the NES Mother game It was called Earthbound zero, before nintendo made it Earthbound Beginnings, and star fox zero is somehow related to star fox 64 and the unreleased star fox 2. While some of the titles i listed don't seem like a remake/remaster/reboot variety, it still bugs me that blaster master zero has the title it does when it doesn't seem like it takes place any specific time to make it is own game, is similar to metroid Zero mission on GBA, a Remake of the NES Metroid. So i suppose that could be a comparison.

 

[Byokugen]

Oh, I forgot, Konami loves remakes. He remakes games as f%#*π÷g Pachinko Machines :-)

 

[FAST6191]

I can think of one thing that needs a reboot. PHANTASY STAR 2, actually all 4 GAMES, Phantasy star HD remaster for $40, i buy that. Easier difficulty, faster movement and progression and easier navigation. Just saying, sega if you're seeing this.

Just in case you have not seen it maybe consider the phantasy star generation version. Going by the review you wrote it probably won't do that much for you but might be worth a look.

 

[Sonic Angel Knight]

Just in case you have not seen it maybe consider the phantasy star generation version. Going by the review you wrote it probably won't do that much for you but might be worth a look.

Oh, someone saw that? Usually i didn't think people care to read my reviews. Now i suddenly feel interesting. But i guess i will try and find this game you speak of. I was hoping for some kind of rom hack but that seem outta the question.

 

[Jayro]

I prefer remakes, because it shows the best devotion of love and care, starting from scratch to bring the best updated material from the source material, and is actually optimized for the current hardware. Twilight Princess HD is a good example of a "Lazy Remaster", since it used the GameCube version of the game with it's retextured low-poly models running at a measely 720p on a console that was capable of doing 1080p. Besides the slightly better textures, it's a messy port, rather than a true remaster.

(I swear, if Capcom fucks up the Resident Evil 2 remake...)

 

[Spider_Man]

remasters to me (if done correctly) is the same game with improvements, take Resident Evil and Resident Evil 0 HD remasters, these brought a new screen mode and to me the HD resolution is nothing really because Dolphin ran them in HD.

the textures were not that much improved, but i havent completed RE yet but have 0 and it included wesker which wasnt in the origional versions.

most remasters are just cash cows, the same game ported claiming HD remaster yet all its doing is looking slightly better because its taking advantage of better hardware so it can output at a higher resolution.... textures/models are still the same quality that was from the orignional and if you take RE4/5 you can clearly see pixelated textures that are stretched.

remakes in a sense could be considered the same, most games are just lazy ports, but then theres the likes of Crash Bandicoot that has been remade from scratch.

Reboots i somewhat like, but then some fail and make you wish they never did it, take DMC, tho the game was OK, personally i thought DMC4 was far better, graphics to me looked far better and its gameplay/story brought the franchise back to what made it so great (DMC1 which is my all time fave).

 

[s157]

I like remakes if they stay true to the original content. Slightly iffy about the FF7 remake, as the original FF7 had one of the better turn based combat systems (or I think they called it RTB or ATB).

Reboots run a risk of angering the original fanbase of the game they're rebooting, notably DmC. While I lean towards the side of irate fans (as I am upset at the FF7 battle system being action oriented though I should be more lenient as if I'm not mistaken it's the same director as the Kingdom Hearts games, which are fun albeit easy games), I fully welcome reboots as having a fresh look on a series is always a nice breather, even if you disagree with it.

Remasters are lazy, but some people who want a game from a console from a previous generation have no other options.

 

[Byokugen]

I like remakes if they stay true to the original content. Slightly iffy about the FF7 remake, as the original FF7 had one of the better turn based combat systems (or I think they called it RTB or ATB).

Reboots run a risk of angering the original fanbase of the game they're rebooting, notably DmC. While I lean towards the side of irate fans (as I am upset at the FF7 battle system being action oriented though I should be more lenient as if I'm not mistaken it's the same director as the Kingdom Hearts games, which are fun albeit easy games), I fully welcome reboots as having a fresh look on a series is always a nice breather, even if you disagree with it.

Remasters are lazy, but some people who want a game from a console from a previous generation have no other options.

The @Retroboy said it, Resident Evil remaster of a remaster of a remaster is great! I love the original, firat game on Ps1 I finished, I was 10

 

[DinohScene]

P.S. Ladies im single

There are no girls on the internet.

 

[Xiphiidae]

I've found that terms such as Remake, Remaster, Rerelease, and even [Enhanced] Port are used so ambiguously and vaguely (and sometimes interchangeably) that the lines between them have become so non-existent that there's not much use in attempting to actively distinguish their use. I've heard Reboot to refer primarily to the concept of making a new game in a series that reuses or rehashes old concepts, particularly when there hasn't been game in said series for a long time or when the new game ignores old canon. Like the others, I've found Reboot to be a vague term and I prefer not to use it.

The OP just seems to be using their own personal definitions of terms and claiming that they're the true or proper definitions. @DaniPoo, feel free to use those definitions yourself, but understand that many people may understand these terms differently, and may hence use them to refer to very different things.