I’m sure this conversation has happened a million times, but I do wonder if the of guidelines surrounding what constitutes a ‘remake’ vs a ‘remaster’ need tightening in the future?
For example, I feel that the ‘Remake’ definition absolutely applies to Metroid Prime Remastered and ‘Remaster’ to The Last of Us Part I; however they are the other way around (presumably because of an intuition to categorise a game with ‘Remastered’ in the title as a Remaster).
But I personally feel that the definitions should be detached from how the games are marketed and should more concern the level of differences from the original game — I think both Metroid Prime Remastered and The Last of Us Part I are remasters in that they are fundamentally enhanced presentations of the same game, whereas the same cannot be said for Resident Evil 2/3, Final Fantasy VII Remake or Metroid Zero Mission, for example (probably because these lean more toward being reinterpretations of the original gameplay/setting).
The line gets blurrier with games like Link’s Awakening, Dead Space (2023) and the Crash Bandicoot Trilogy, so I think some arbitrary line needs to be drawn between the two definitions (I would personally say where there are significant graphical recreations such as 2D -> 3D, this favours ‘remake’ more than updated assets).
What are everyone’s thoughts? Is there a chance these change in future?