You Don't Know What a Remake Is | Let's Talk Episode 33.5

[@Th3Birdman]

Long, long overdue. I've been wanting to talk about this topic for literal years, and I could have gone on forever about this topic, with many examples that prove the point (and plenty that muddy it up, too ) I'm aware that there are other games out there that may be better examples, but I am a Resident Evil fan, so this is kind of my wheelhouse. Anyway, enjoy the talk, and leave your thoughts below. Click the Join button or join here: kzbin.info/door/r9dAaPfxCBJS1oaeJWDtaQjoin Everything Wrong With CinemaSins: Blue Beetle kzbin.info/www/bejne/iXqseJ2Fp7Rko9ksi=aeXPQ25WqeNhq88a Twitter: twitter.com/Th3birdman15 Instagram: instagram.com/Th3Birdman15/ Discord Invite Code: nQZRn5m Subreddit: reddit.com/r/Th3Birdman

[@The_great-grocey]

Memes aside do you believe cinemasins ruined how people engage in media, because I've seen some insane takes from creators like, synthetic man, critical drinker, etc I honestly believe media literacy is dead

[@jacksoncogburn4816]

Finally someone else calls it out. I was goin nuts seeing how many people were defending this crap from naughty dog. It's a remaster.

[@camiloiribarren1450]

🎵Duck Tales! Whoo! 🎶

[@josuemassa2027]

These are necessary, the whole, remake, re-imagined, remastered confusion and arguments are becoming a problem. Specially with all the remakes we've been getting.

[@Chuck_EL]

Love the Dawn of the Dead theme playing in the beginning Rip George Romero

[@Regibump37]

I remember someone a few years back (I don’t remember the channel) took an attempt to tackle the Remake/Remaster debacle, and ended up deciding to use a 5 tier bar system to determine what a game is like: Port: The exact same game 1 for 1 Enhancement: Retains the exact same music, graphics and gameplay as the original, but throws in some additions either cut from the original or weren’t completed until that point (Sometimes even containing the DLC from the original for free, like Mario Kart 8 Deluxe) Remaster: Same game as the original under a new coat of paint, to put it up to scale of the current games at the time of release (Like the first RE remake or Metal Gear Solid: the Twin Snakes) Remake: Rebuilds the original game with quality of life changes and alterations/additions made to the overall experience while still retaining what made the original game iconic in the first place (Example that comes to mind is Metroid: Zero Mission) Reimagining: Essentially a game that changes so much from the original game that it essentially is a different game (Kinda like Star Fox 64 and Zero both being retellings of StarFox on the SNES) Again just some core examples, and I’m willing to admit if I was wrong about some of these examples, but this was I'm just going how that was suggested from that idea.

[@josesanchezrodriguez1783]

The first RE Remake really shouldn't be considered a Remaster (it has a Remaster released in 2015 but it's a Remake of a 1996 game) as it's completely remade from the ground up, it's not just the same game with better graphics.

[@seppemeulemans1755]

You could be thinking of Scott the woz. Im 99% sure he has a video like that

[@RatedMforMeenie]

for pokemon players... port: virtual console GB games Enhancement: yellow, crystal, emerald, etc. remaster: doesnt really translate BDSP is an in between of this and 'remake' remake: LGPE, FRLG, HGSS, ORAS, etc reimagining: PLA (and maybe PLZ-A, we'll have to wait and see) i think this list is accurate, could be interpretting it wrong though

[@Regibump37]

@@RatedMforMeenie Considering that BDSP was advertised as a *faithful* remake, remaster fits that game quite well for that placement, along with the rest of those placements. Edit: Only difference I’d say is that the Let's Go games better fit the idea of a reimagining over the Legends games, as the former have the same setting and roles for the overall story but completely the execution is completely different with a let’s go inspired catching mechanic and a simplified yet more complex battle system. Legends meanwhile only share the same setting, but treat themselves more as a sequel/prequel than a reimagining (some indications that your player is Lucas/Dawn from the original games).

[@KionKamon]

I don’t agree with calling Twin Snakes a remaster either. It’s a bit more than a coat of fresh paint to it. The cutscenes are different from the original and the dialogue is different from the original as well. And it has gameplay from Sons of Liberty

[@destructo-pizzatv2263]

Day 200 of telling th3birdman I appreciate his content

[@grantpowell4135]

Im picturing you with a physical calendar marking x's like your waiting for Christmas. Lol

[@StonayBalogna]

Don’t eva stop❤

[@modmaker7617]

I find it strange that the words remake and remaster are colloquially interchangeable in the context of videogames despite having a clear distinction in other mediums

[@B_Squar3d]

I think the issue comes down to people thinking “remake” in terms of food, not media. I make a plain grilled cheese sandwich. It’s got bread, butter, and cheese. I remake a grilled cheese. It’s got bread, butter, and cheese. That’s what people expect. They don’t expect caramelized onions added. Or cheddar instead of American. So on and so forth

[@redlox2]

Huh I think this video will be a nice one to have as a reference for the future! Aka happy for more Birdman content as usual!

[@YahhSirio]

Love when u discuss topics like this, you should really do these more often

[@kibatgrenbuku]

Honestly, this helps me out in more ways than one BirdMan, so thank you.

[@RockBeliever-g3i]

In my opinion, there's no argument about this as the definition is quite straightforward. Let me explain: Remaster = Same technical source, enhanced (regardless of the method) Remake = Different technical source (regardless of the similarities) Let's take this video by The3Birdman as an example. The one we're watching here is 1080p, uploaded from assumedly a 1080p video file (also known as a 'master'). Say 10 years later when 1080p has phased out and The3Birdman wants to re-upload this video in higher quality. He would go back to his source project file and re-export it in 4K. The resultant 4K file (with maybe some improvement tweaks done to the sound and video clips upscaled) would be a REMASTER. Same technical source, enhanced. However, in the same scenario, instead of re-exporting his original work in 4K, he decides to redo the video with the exact same script but with his vocals re-recorded and the video edited with different clips (he can also reuse the same clips but just not edited in similar sequence), the resultant video will be a REMAKE as it is no longer the same technical source. Therefore... Resident Evil (1996) is the Master and every other console re-release is a Remaster (including the recent 2024 GOG one). Resident Evil (2002) is a Remake as it is no longer the same game on a technical level, even if it has similarities or is based on the 1996's blueprint. Lion King (1994) is the Master (the first video file exported from the software they used at the time) and every other LaserDisc/VCD/DVD version is assumedly derived from the same master. In 2011, it was Remastered for Blu-ray and 3D Blu-ray (with maybe/maybe not controversial tweaks which you can read up on). In 2018, it was remastered yet again for 4K Blu-ray. All from the same source, just tweaks here and there essentially. Lion King (2019), however, is a Remake. It may be shot-for-shot or following the exact same script (I haven't seen it), but it is not the same technical entity as the 1994 version. In regards to Resident Evil 3, the 2020 game is definitely a Remake, no ways about it. I think the general consensus for the fans of the original 1999 game is not so much they were expecting a Remaster (that comes on GOG soon though so that's for yall), but they probably wanted all the scripted content from the original to be included in the 2020 remake as well. They want to play that same 1999 game from a content standpoint, but with the new technology and designs envisioned for the 2020 Remake (there are also those who insist a remake isn't necessary but for you guys, the OG is always available). Hope this clears things up! Th3Birdman is also right to say that the term 'Remaster' stems from music, but with music there are also other terms like 'Remix' and 'Restore' but that's a whole other thing.

[@danavixen6274]

Interesting that we both love Blade (1998) and Blade Runner (1982)! 🥰

[@Devilsblood]

I liked the remake of resident evil 1, but I didn't care for its most popular features; Lisa Trevor and the crimson heads.

[@Th3Birdman]

Haha, I can understand that. The Crimson heads forced you to leave zombies alive, lest you had to fight super powered versions of them. They are definitely annoying, but I love the lore behind V-ACTs

[@Th3Voltergeist]

A remake is something that’s presented differently than the original; in other words it’s a reimagining. It’s honestly not that hard to understand.

[@jlev1028]

A remaining is something like how Yooka Laylee was to Banjo Kazooie or how Mighty No. 9 was to Mega Man. It's a different story and characters but with the same archetypes and theming.

[@KionKamon]

@@jlev1028those were spiritual successors that missed the mark though, especially Might No. 9.

[@troy7243]

Big bro cooked another one again🤙🏾🤙🏾

[@UnwantedGhost1-anz25]

I'd label the new category, "Deluxe." The best & worst of both worlds. Regardless, I appreciate your in-depth differentiation of "remaster" and "remake." 👍🏼

[@baneofdan]

Can't believe people still care the game didn't have a rubbish worm/caterpillar fight (because those are always good...) or an end sequence of a bland park into what looked like a garden shed. The choices in the old game made as much difference as the choice at the end of Mass Effect 3 so I didn't miss them too much either.

[@KevinTriforce]

I think it has to do with is what content was cut from the original RE 3 when remaking the game.

[@supersaiyanbino]

I love that they put in what happened to the officer in part 2 and how things tie in with 3

[@White927]

The perfect response, well done.

[@Yumi_Jay]

Got to love how when you started talking about the definitions of remake and remaster you have in the background Ducktales. Good choice.

[@White927]

Might be late, and also the perfect response for all the haters in the series. Keep up the good work Birdman! (I had you as a subscriber but somehow you disappeared from my list, now you're on).

[@uncanny-hector-1906]

4:50 Julia Voth was already replaced and succeeded by Amra Silajdzic as Jill's face in 2012, starting with Resident Evil Revelations. Capcom always changes their RE characters faces.

[@real_szop4692]

I always look at it like: if a game is the same with better graphics and improvements its a remaster but when its made completely from scratch (even if it is 100% truthfull to the original) then its a remake so: kingdom hearts final mix - remaster crash bandicoot N-sane trilogy - remake

[@Drazil232]

Ye, there is nothing more annoying than game companies & critics using Remaster & Remake interchangably... Also honestly: i like it when remakes actually change stuff about the game, if I wanted to play exactly the same thing again... that version already exists. It's cool if i get a polished version of a cool game, but it's even cooler if i get an old game, but retold with changes, to make it feel more fresh. Are the changes always good? Definetly not, but just complaining that it isn't exactly the same is honestly stupid

[@intergalactic92]

Remaster is what you want when the original version is inaccessible for any reason e.g. released on a console that isn’t available anymore. Then it’s the closest you can get to an authentic experience.

[@ajerqureshi6411]

To be fair, the easiest way for me to think of a remake vs a remaster is whether or not the whole game had to be built from the ground up again vs if they just provide simple updates to the already existing game. Mass Effect's Legendary Edition is a proper remaster because they simply updated the original game's source code on Unreal Engine 3...meanwhile Dead Space remake had to be rebuild from the ground up on an entirely brand new engine.

[@scolioreset]

I think the word “reimagining” is also a term we could use to define a game that significantly changes from its inception title. RE2 and 3 are altered this much that I personally label them as reimagining, not remakes. Samus Returns, the official retelling of Metroid II, is this close to being a reimagining because many portions are altered from the original and the added mechanics are also contributing to that fact. However, Zero Mission is much closer to a remake because of one major addition while adding several gameplay elements. Some people even label remasters as remakes because the code of paint is that good or different enough. Well, if one labels Halo Anniversary as Remake like The Last of Us Part 1 but Metroid Prime is still labeled as Remastered, then our discussion on definitions and labels won’t end anytime soon.

[@Th3Birdman]

The word "reimagining" is synonymous with remake. They literally mean the same thing, that's what's tripping people up. www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reimagine You'll see this word has the exact definition of remake, which I showed on screen. Here it is again: www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/remake

[@TheSaiyanSOLDIER]

Thank you for this video. I had an argument with my roommate about RE4 because he didn’t classify it as a remake for being so different.

[@josesanchezrodriguez1783]

Capcom has said the RE Remakes (except the first one) are actually Reimaginings because of how different they are.

[@frankkennedy6388]

​@@josesanchezrodriguez1783Still feels like that's been a scapegoat to avoid Remake criticism.

[@randomt800kiddo2]

@@josesanchezrodriguez1783 remakes *are* reimaginings, it has to be clarified because people are so brainrotten they think remake means remaster lol

[@MrEffectfilms]

It all comes down to one thing at the end of the day, whether or not people like it. I personally really liked RE3make but it's important to note that A. I'm not someone who gets angry over changes I don't like as seeing the differences between remakes and originals is part of the fun of experiencing them. B. I'm not someone with a lot of emotional connection to RE3 Nemesis in the first place so they could make it as different as they wanted and I would have been okay with it as long as the game itself was good and in my opinion it was. Length was a non issue for me since every single RE game is actually quite short once you know where to go and what you're doing but I think many people tend to forget that about older games and so when we get the remake and it's on average about 4-6 hours your first time through everyone gets mad, not realizing that the real problem wasn't it's length it was the replayability. Re1make and RE2make both let you play as two different characters, and in the case of RE2 you even get to play separate scenarios that slightly change how the events play out so there was always plenty of replay value for both of them. RE4 has just as much replayability as the original if not more so and that's not including the mercenaries mode or the Separate Ways dlc both of which turned out great. This is where RE3MAKE fell short, it has easily the least amount of replayability of all the remakes thus far and so by comparison it seems much shorter than the others despite actually being around the same length.

[@ldw_sparky]

While I agree that RE3R has the least amount of replayability in terms of extra content, I personally find it to be the most replayable RE game of all time. It doesn't outstay its welcome, has good and tight gameplay and the pacing is superb! There are no super annoying areas either, especially when playing casually. It actually gets even better once you know what you're doing!

[@prizrak420]

The question I have is at what point do we no longer call something a remake? I don't think people would call Lion King a remake of Hamlet, but they do follow same story line.

[@Th3Birdman]

It's an interesting topic for sure, but in this case, I would simply say that The Lion King is more or less inspired by Hamlet, but very obviously deviates from that story, and doesn't use the same characters or setting.

[@ImpulseEvan37]

As someone who hasn’t yet played the original RE3 (but will very soon) I do still find it weird that they didn’t include one of the most popular parts of the original game. But with that being said, I do enjoy the RE3 remake. It’s not my favourite RE game by any means but I don’t think it’s a bad game, even if it’s not a great remake according to most people. I don’t mind it being short, tho I think its full price is a bit high for the amount of content there is. But at the same time, the game is also available in a bundle with RE2 remake that, when on sale, is under $20, which is where I got the game, so overall I don’t mind RE3 remake as much as others do, even if I do think it’s a step down from RE2

[@Pops-bh4nz]

I randomly thought about that RE3 video you made and went to see the most recent comments. I was surprised people were still complaining in the comments. Now we get this lol

[@heppuplays9125]

I agree with most of the video. Your points only consist of what the objective definition is when video game remakes are more of a wide spectrum other than what the literal definition of a remake is. What counts as "a remake" by the definition you gave, a remake is "to make anew or in a different form." Your definition of a remaster is "the original source code of paint or enhanced in some fashion," but what counts as a different form? What if you create something 1:1 with the original game but didn't use the original source code and made new one from scratch. Would that count as a remake? Or is what makes a remake the fact that it was completely rebuilt on a new engine with new code? Could that be considered a "different form"? Like Crash Bandicoot N Sane trilogy. Are those Remakes or remasters? they are 1:1 but they are still rebuilt from the ground up on a new engine and code. To be near perfect imitations of what the Original games were? Remember the very defintion you gave also uses OR it is "to make anew OR in a different form". not specifically " To make anew in a different form". Because is it stands Videogame remakes Are a Spectrum rather than a Single definitive Thing. I don't think the criticism over the Clock Tower in RE3R is invalid since the definition of the word is so broad. Sure, How much of a difference from the original counts as "different form". And does that justify just blatantly removing a huge chunk of the source material it's trying to remake? But that's just how I feel. I'm curious to see what you think."

[@Th3Birdman]

"Your points only consist of what the objective definition is when video game remakes are more of a wide spectrum other than what the literal definition of a remake is" That's entirely the problem: no they're not. This is exactly why Naughty Dog got away with calling TLOU Part 1 a "remake", when it was by definition a remaster. You either are or you aren't something. Even games like RE1 Remake are still technically remakes, because they are fundamentally different in some fashion, and the "technically" is what's being argued. This is one of those instances where a binary actually exists: it's either a remaster, or its a remake; within the boundaries of "remake", I agree there is a spectrum: it's being very different or very faithful to its source, with varying degrees within that boundary. "Your definition of a remaster is "the original source code of paint or enhanced in some fashion," but what counts as a different form? What if you create something 1:1 with the original game but didn't use the original source code and made new one from scratch" It doesn't have to; you missed where I said "in general". This means that this is what it is most of the time, but there are exceptions. The part that's always true is a remaster will be the same game/movie with enhancements. The story will not change, the actors will not change, the two versions will exactly line up with each other when synced (unless a scene was cut, for example), etc. This is not hard, I very specifically gave you two movie examples of a remaster and a video game analogue in The Last of Us. "Remember the very defintion (sic) you gave also uses OR it is "to make anew OR in a different form"" That is a clarification "or" not an alternative "or". In other words, they were explaining what "anew" meant in that definition. The definition was not giving you two different definitions in one entry lol. That's not how dictionaries work; if they wanted to give you multiple entries, they would have given you a second definition with a different meaning. Anew ALSO means "different" www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anew

[@WH0__IS]

Great video birdman

[@ThundagaT2]

A remake doesnt have to be different though. The definition says "or in a different form" emphasis on "or". I always use the Crash Bandicoot N.Sane Trilogy as an example. None of the original source code or engines were used, none of the original assets, or music was used either. They were all recreated to be like the originals from scratch. Thats also what a remake can be. What remaster meant was taking the original game and enhancing the resolution and adding things like 16:9 aspect ratio, and possibly other gameplay features. But otherwise its still the same game as the original underneath because all the same code is there. Take the Jak & Daxter, Sly Cooper, and Ratchet and Clank HD Remasters on Ps3 for example. Unless the meaning of remaster changed since then, i dont get why people refer to something thats completely new code wise counts as a remaster just because it doesnt do anything differently than the original.

[@Th3Birdman]

"A remake doesnt have to be different though" By definition, it does. You're arguing with Merriam-Webster and Oxford, not me. "The definition says "or in a different form" emphasis on "or" " No, that 'or' is a clarification/simplification 'or' (i.e., "she was schizophrenic, or a person that's hearing voices") , not linking an alternative (i.e., "would you like coffee or tea?"). The adverb "anew" (which was the word being simplified in that definition) ALSO means to make something differently: Anew: "in a new or different form" www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anew "None of the original source code or engines were used, none of the original assets, or music was used either. They were all recreated to be like the originals from scratch. Thats also what a remake can be" No, that's a remaster, too. You don't **have** to use the original source, that was something said in the video that references how this word was originally used, and for simplification purposes. As I go on to explain, these words are pliable in the sense that their colloquial usage is what's causing the confusion. You can definitely produce a product "from scratch", but if it's fundamentally the same game, then it's a remaster that was done from scratch. A remake implies something fundamental about the game has changed. Yours is exactly the kind of opinion that necessitates this video.

[@DwayneTheeAvatar]

Remember when people thought The Thing 2011 was a remake? -_- Aaaaaaaaah, good times -.-

[@xianom3436]

The perfect answer to the worst criticism. Well done.

[@oziel11132]

Im a simple man birdman speaks i listen

[@Johnny_JD]

9:31 That’s not True, in the new version the enemy and companion AI has been greatly upgraded, some of the level design changed as well as a bunch of features from Part II were brought over to Part I

[@Th3Birdman]

"That’s not True, in the new version the enemy and companion AI has been greatly upgraded..." You are literally describing enhancements, something I specifically stated was one of the defining features of a remaster. Upgraded AI does not change the game's story-- it's an upgrade. Tell me: what's the second entry on this page? www.thesaurus.com/browse/upgrade "some of the level design changed as well as a bunch of features from Part II were brought over to Part I" You are exaggerating. The level design "changes" amounted to aesthetic changes, not completely different level design. Also, please name those "bunch of features" that are not explicitly enhancements, and be specific. You can't come on this channel and claim I'm wrong, and then be vague about what I'm wrong about. Specificity is the name of the game here. If you fail to do this, I will ban you for liking your own comments, something I warn you people about on the daily. Fair?

[@oneyplayes465]

@@Th3Birdman You are right bro! The game is a straight remaster. Plain and simple.

[@camiloiribarren1450]

This is why I love Th3Birdman, the logical and more just view of films, games and series are good. Almost as if he’s a teacher, maybe that’s a new one: Professor Birdman

[@justincase4063]

I wonder if that means the versions of RE2 and 3 that were released on the gamecube are also in that murky gray area.

[@josesanchezrodriguez1783]

They are Remasters, plain and simple

[@lordraiden7533]

Gotta disagree with you on 1 point. The experience is also different in the Last Of Us Part 1 remake. They stalkers are no longer just mindless running around they are smart like they are in part 2. Clickers now use the echo location from part 2. The weapons upgrade system is different, there is additional exploration in it. It's not necessarily a 1:1 to remaster with higher fidelity

[@cedbanani]

Mmm, I don't really agree with that. I don't think those are strong enough changes to consider it a remake. The strongest example that you presented is the weapons upgrade system. The rest, however, are just enhancements.

[@Th3Birdman]

Yet another person describing ENHANCEMENTS. For the anal retentive, yes, in the technical sense, an enhancement is a "change", in the sense that something is different/better than before, like better audio quality or even enemy A.I. However, in the context of a remake, a change means something fundamental to the experience or story. For example, you brought up the Clickers; a remake-change would be is if they changed Clickers into a completely different enemy type. Instead of clicking, they howl, and grow furry fungus on their heads instead of fleshy mushroom growths. Instead of being humanoid, they appear more dog-like, running on all fours and while still blind, can smell you instead of having advanced hearing. Do you see how fundamentally this would change a Clicker? This is what a remake does. Now, the reason this game is a remaster is because it's explicitly using the original source code for the original PS3 game, as I showed in the video. The animations, voice acting/actors, blocking, framing are EXACTLY THE SAME. This is because it is using the original game's framework. A game like Resident Evil 3 remake does none of those things, because it's a bespoke game telling a different (albeit similar) story to the original game. I literally synced up TLOU PS3 and Part 1 in this video for you, and they are identical.

[@ShinobiPhoenix-YT0]

Before I watch the whole video, I will say from a developer POV, Devs and MARKETING use the words "Remake" and "Remaster" very differently. "Remaster" for a dev usually means keeping most of the original source code and changing assets (including text boxes) and doing even more bug fixes and attempting to get quality of life changes in (such as new control systems that fit modern gaming sensibilities). This often why remasters retain some bugs and exploits. "Remake" is usually an entirely new source code. Panzer Dragoon Saga would need the source code reverse-engineered back out because Sega famously discards source codes. So PDS would only really return as a remake from scratch because a Remaster is nearly impossible. It's also different from HD Ports where typically they are just upraised BACK to higher resolution closer to the original source files for more powerful machines; Castlevania Lords of Shadow Mirror of Fate is a big example. (all games are compressed down to work on their target hardware). Marketing of course isn't thinking about any of this and the terms get muddled.

[@TeamTowers1]

My personal view is that a remake is trying to recapture what the original was while a reboot is taking the concept and putting an original (updated) spin on it. So to that end a remake should at least follow the basic plot beats of the original (although) not necessarily be exactly the same) while a reboot should only take the base concept and core of the characters, while largely doing it's own thing. None of that is to hate on the RE3 remake mind you.

[@expendableindigo9639]

Okay, yes, marketers definitely got lazy with the interchangeability of both terms… But you knew the real argument was that there was less content overall in the remake, and that new things should be as substantive as old things.

[@Th3Birdman]

As I explained, in the original video I was addressing very **specific** talking points. It wasn't a general catch-all for every piece of criticism out there. And frankly, you need to rewatch this video. I already explained that "less content overall" (this is untrue, by the way) is expressly what makes it a remake in the first place. Conversely more content overall would also make it a remake, but I digress. The point is that IT IS DIFFERENT THAN THE ORIGINAL GAME. You final sentence is something you made up, so no need to address it. That's only true to you.

[@brenyatta]

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is an example of something mislabeled as a Remake, when it’s actually another adaptation of a source material. The writers were even instructed NOT to use the Gene Wilder movie for inspiration, given how much Roald Dahl DESPISED the movie when he was still alive

[@Achieme]

I always thought remake means do the same thing but add and change a few things to make it interesting

[@santinogoring8860]

Silent Hill 2 music nice

[@jesusrox4u]

This is a good topic for discussion since it’s true that some folks don’t know what a remake actually is like how people think Tim Burton’s “Charlie and the Chocolate Factory” is a “remake” of “Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory.” No it’s not. They’re two different film with Burton going out of his way to adapt the book. In fact, when making the movie, he told the writers of the film to not watch “Wonka and rhetorical Chocolate Factory” since it might lead to “Charlie” unintentionally being compared to a movie it was never trying to be. Sadly it didn’t work due to the doofuses who still claim “Charlie” is a remake of “Wonka” when it isn’t. The recent “Wonka” film is more of a “remake” and that was a prequel.

[@jackjax7921]

Birdman still hasnt made an Re 4 Remake review. 😂😂 Im always looking forward for your reviews about Resident Evil.

[@Tillyard86]

There are a couple of other types of films I've come across that people mistake for remakes, films adapted from books that have already had adaptations (such as Red Dragon from 2002, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory from 2005 or IT from 2017) and films adapted from musicals or stage plays, that themselves were adapted from films (such as The Producers from 2005 or Mean Girls from this year).

[@KevinTriforce]

I agree completely with this video about what is a remake and remaster you are 💯 right on that part.

[@zeldafan1315]

Was that opening a duck tales remix?

[@applehack97]

a good example for this would be Call Of Duty: Modern Warfare. The original game was released in 2007. In 2016 it was remastered as part of special editions of Infinite Warfare and then in 2019 the MW series was remade with a completely new story and gameplay

[@villainousTCG]

I wholeheartedly agree,while I would have preferred a Remaster of RE3 the remake did improve on alot. Personally it would have been nice to have a "remaster-make" as I call it. Do the original game, but add some of the new story beats from the remake into it. As well as alot of the character changes. Like keep the Luis R.P.D. section, but instead of nemesis or a licker have a Mr.X style tyrant there instead. One that keeps you moving. Umbrella unleashed legions of B.O.W.'s into RC so it can make sense. Overall RE3make could've been better. But for a remake it wasn't bad.

[@grantpowell4135]

Someones in the kitchen with Th3Birdman Someones in the kitchen i know wow wow o Lol

[@OldWorldBlues86]

I really wasn't aware of the necessity to explain such a relatively basic and popular concept... But while you're at it: Maybe you can also explain the term 'retcon' to the loud minority of Fallout 'fans' that are currently flooding the website, claiming that the Amazon Show completely butchered the lore.

[@intergalactic92]

In a similar vein Pokemon has this trend for remaking their games every few years and following a strong remaster vibe to how they do it. Base stories remain the same, battles are often the same, but with mechanics and graphics updated to bring it inline with the modern mainline games. This worked fine up until it came for them to remake gen 4. The problem here was that there was very little updating that was necessary so they didn’t. BDSP (Brilliant Diamond/Shining Pearl) is much more of a remaster than it is a remake. The map and character models are identical except with a new shiny coat of paint), but admittedly they do add some new features and update movement controls in a way that means I will grudgingly accept remake as a valid description (movement controls are not compatible with the OG map layout but that’s another thing), but would be more inclined to call it a remaster myself. To be fair to Game Freak, when it was announced they did call it a demake, rather than a remake, so I guess they knew it was more of remaster themselves.

[@pax_aurum_nightlord]

Hey Birdman, were you ever able to get in touch with Tony Tetris since the RE3 Remake, or did he just disappear from the Internet?

[@Th3Birdman]

I haven't, unfortunately. If anyone has any contact with him, let me know.

[@pax_aurum_nightlord]

@@Th3Birdman I have tried before, but but unable to myself. I really think he just left, but if I happen to see him, I'll let you know

[@ToonyTails]

I’m surprised you didn’t bring up Ducktales Remastered despite using its music and its footage here. That game is clearly a remake with brand new music, art design, voice acting and using 3D models for various objects.

[@Th3Birdman]

Haha. That's literally WHY I put it in the video. Trust me friend, if it's in my video, it's there for a reason.

[@ToonyTails]

@@Th3Birdman Ah! Figured as much. Just thought you’d actually point that out.

[@CatKingultra]

Personally, I didn’t like re3 as a remake because I don’t think it added enough stuff to cover what they didn’t put in. I also disliked some other aspects including jills character and the stronger focus on action, but I agree with all your points

[@Doomness87]

I really liked this video thanks for making this birdman only one thing im surprised u didn't mention reboot because for some reason that is also used interchangeably and I think you would've had even more chances to call people dumbasses if you bought it up LOL

[@Th3Birdman]

Haha. I know it has the prefix "re" but it's a different concept altogether. Interestingly, if you wanted to call RE1/2/3/4 Remake a series of reboots, it would technically fit, since they all changed the lore of their respective original. Fun conversation.

[@thelaughingrouge]

I agree, the term remake is very misunderstood and misused, hell Final Fantasy 7 remake wasn't even a remake, it was a straight up sequel.

[@Mollinator6]

I feel like the Spyro Reignited Trilogy that Toys4Bob made a few years back falls under your final point. The story, characters, locations, things you do in them are all the same, it does have a few lines of dialog in it that are different and the way the characters are drawn are very different from the original.

[@solvseus]

More of a sequel, but are you considering covering X-Men '97? I had my doubts, especially after they rushed through the Madeline Pryor stuff, but episode 5 was nuts! And apparently that's just the warmup. Still not over that ending... 🥺

[@HoustonUchiha]

Yessir instant click

[@Just_Shaun]

I love the remake/ remaster debate, games are games doesn’t really matter if you’re enjoying it. Though that said, there is always a flaw in each sides argument. A remake by defined as makes something anew, so by definition a sequel would be a remake. Or in a different form so by definition a spiritual successor could be classed as a remake of an original game. In that sense every platformer is a ‘remake’ of Super Mario, every fps game is a ‘remake’ of doom. It’s not so clear in general, many games that release years after the original game could be classed as a remake, doom 64 for example, technically by definition a remake. It doesn’t really matter anyway.

[@worstwordmonger]

I’ve had to have this conversation with people with pokemon remakes

[@disgaealikerasapOG]

I originally deleted my comment because I see you addressed the point already. I will concede if we are _just_ going by the *dictionary* definition you are correct. I will argue that people have a new definition of remake/remaster however.

[@Willb10250]

So for the vocal minority who probably understood nothing, or chose not to listen despite clicking on the video, If it's rebuilt from the ground up with stuff in there that wasn't before(examples: RE3 and Final Fantasy 7, rebirth included) it's a remake. If nothing changes except for the graphics (Example: the stuff people complain about not happening in RE3 for some dumbass reason), it's a remaster.

[@Drazil232]

the issue comes when remasters do make smaller changes tho, it's sometimes hard to say when it's a remake and when just a remaster

[@Willb10250]

@@Drazil232 Then you look for whether or not the cutscenes in the remake/remaster or exactly like how they originally were. Like the dialogue when Leon and Ashley met Luis in that house pretty much classify as remade

[@Maharvel]

I have to constantly explain this to people with Final Fantasy.

[@bryansnaylor]

woo

[@cloudshines812]

Hey Th3Birdman, I would like to ask what you feel your stance on Final Fantasy VII “Remake” is? Is it an honest to god Remake of the 1997 original, or a reimagining, or a full on sequel/alternate take with its multiversal approach. Its been an agonizing discussion for a long time to really consider the Remake trilogy as a “Remake” of the 1997 original Final Fantasy VII

[@neilstone3656]

I prefer the term reboot for thay gray area where things are for the most part the same as in a remastered version, but maybe it adds a few things like new enemies, or a new suit thay weren't in the original. So reboot the story is almost exactly the the same with maybe a few tiny changes such as different enemies

[@CHESS-MAN2491]

Gabagool Boosting algorithm time!

[@furrybproductions]

I think when developers think of remasters they think of taking the existing models from the original game and increasing the polygon count of the character models but usually maintaining the rest of the level geometry with improved textures. Once you get into rebuilding maps, it's a remake because you have to remake things largely instead of make changes to existing things imo.

[@jlev1028]

I'd still say a remake has generally the same plot but adds detail and characterization. The new Final Fantasy 7 games go beyond that, however, by meta referencing the old game but choosing to subvert key plot points in order to present a new timeline. Calling them remakes is inaccurate. They're reboots, pseudo-sequels inaccessable for anyone who hasn't played the original.

[@magnatcleo2043]

Nah. A reboot is more like that Devil May Cry game that nobody liked, where you completely ignore all prior entries of a series and build something entirely unrelated. A remake is trying to be an altered or expanded version of an existing entry.

[@juanb3449]

I was just asking for some birdman. No diddy

[@unofficial_computer]

Maybe we could call the Dead Space example you brought up a 'Redux?'

[@Uiselmo]

I’ve been arguing the difference for awhile now for me the biggest one is Pokémon brilliant diamonds and shinning pearl the fans labeled it as a remake but it was never really intended to be that it was a remaster. 3D graphics with the same story and some tweaks to certain battle mechanics.

[@holygrail8524]

Thank you ❤❤❤❤❤❤

[@magnumsteel9770]

Would it be fitting to call the games that fall in the middle a Redo? It's giving basically the same story but has added some things gere and there and made some quality changes. I think it fits

[@Th3Birdman]

Yeah. Redo is a synonym of remake, actually. They share the same definition.

[@Stealth7596]

Revamp should be a term

[@1classicgamer]

I kinda regret getting The Last of Us Part 1. It’s like they didn’t even try with that game. Also I know this is such a minor thing but they advertised that game and made us think the enemy AI was gonna be smarter. But they weren’t. I played it on Grounded and the AI is still stupid. Naughty Dog needs to stop fucking lying to people in their promos. I swear.

[@johnsimth6587]

Man, if you just said adaptation once I'd have been happy. Do one on those next, the amount of people who don't understanding changing mediums changes the art... eh.

[@pax_aurum_nightlord]

if anyone wants to see a remake, Final Fantasy 7 is an example. It has the familiar story beats, yet has changes that flushes out the world more and adds content to certain scenes.

[@TheWeeabooKid]

FF7R isn't a remake its probably the first ever video game Requel.

[@jdottdeestv8149]

Can you remake this explanation to explain what an explanation is? Many thanks.

[@ex_cathedra4237]

I'll repeat what I said on Birdman's video response to Tony Tetris. Regarding RE3 Remake, they made the game they wanted to make. Take it or leave it. On its face, it's a solid experience that has good gameplay and a far more consistent and entertaining story than the remake of RE2. And a lot of the true qualities of RE3 Remake are unappreciated. Better soundtrack, better writing, better world building/files, and the expansion of the hospital is not talked about enough. People are praising the wrong game, IMO. As time goes on, I am starting to prefer the RE3 remake to RE2 because of the major story/character problems.

[@brent4tight]

thanks again for this explanation. lot of idiots criticize sa re3 remake. i love the remake i have no problem with re3 remake

[@FrankenpantsYT]

Thank you for this! So many ppl don't get the difference! For those "gray area" titles that fit both criteria, i vote we call them "re-masked", combining both remaster and remake.

[@KevinTriforce]

RE3 was panned by more than the vocal minority as well.

[@Th3Birdman]

That's not what the screenshot said...

[@KevinTriforce]

@@Th3Birdman True i still enjoyed it.

[@KevinTriforce]

@@Th3Birdman Got it I apologize I double checked you were right.

[@stevenakins9388]

Thank you! Resident Evil 3 doesn't deserve the hate it gets.

[@Lex_Lupus85]

RE3 Nemesis on the good old PS1 is what got me to enjoy the series. It was the same with Metal Gear as I played Snake Eater and didn't enjoy the first ones. I did try and play some RE1 but didn't enjoy it at the time and I have never played OG RE2, only the 2019 remake, so in that sense I can understand how it and RE3 Remake can "bother" some people as I suspect the majority that played the original in their youth has plenty of fond memories and was looking for the same level of emotion again. Sadly it almost never will. That being said, I am almost in my 40's and my youngest sister is 15, and she asked me a while back about the difference with Remake and Remasterd.. So many Thanks to Th3Birdman for this video that sums it up perfectly. Her first RE game was RE4 Remake and it's a bit fun and weird to talk about the old games vs new games with her as I, obviously, had a very different introduction and experience compared to hers, so the only rational solution was to purchase the new ones and the old and play through them together.. I did warn her about RE6, but she was adament that we have to.. Wish me luck! Looking forward to future content!

[@deedr1234]

It’s actually depressing how far naughty dog has fallen. At one point putting out banger after banger, to now putting out actual jokes of “remakes” and sequels to games.

[@thatguyfromA6915]

i still think what they did to nemesis is terrible I HATE how they made him a weird dog thing and how his boss fight is so boring and you have to do it twice i stil think this remake could have done alot of thing better but thats just because RE2 remake was so damn good and the RE4 remake was just as good if not better

[@Th3Birdman]

That form is from the original game: shorturl.at/ijmsB

[@thatguyfromA6915]

@@Th3Birdman yeah but that was at the end of the game i really dont like the fact that he turns into that in like the half way point of the remake

[@Th3Birdman]

Please don't like your own comments. And that's what a remake is, as explained in this video. Sometimes, things get changed around. RE2 Remake had arguably more changes to characters/creatures/events and people accepted those. RE3 Remake is a beacon of hypocrisy, from what I've seen.

[@thatguyfromA6915]

@@Th3Birdman maybe its that people already did not like the original and where expecting the remake to be everything from the original and then some and when it was not they just say how much they hate the remake idk man the internet is so stupid

[@RestrictedAudiencesOnly]

RE2make had changes people accepted & appreciated. That’s the difference. Diehard Nemesis (game not character, but I guess character too) fans, HATED almost every change made in R3make

[@daredevilmurdock7490]

Naughty dog calling the ps5 version of the last of us a “remake” is an insult to all remakes

[@whambulance8607]

Remakes have no reason for existing

[@jeremyrichmon3504]

Bro out here having to teach people English. The problem I have with TLOU "remake" is that they did it already. They are selling the same exact game in 2 PARTS that you will need to buy to have the full story. However they remastered the game when porting it to ps4. to me it is just a poor way to milk a series the don't know how to continue. But that's just my opinion

[@Cinemabu11]

Funny enough, the TLOU show can be considered a remake considering some of the changes it made. But it's similar to RE1 Remake where it borders on remake and remaster.

[@ajerqureshi6411]

TLOU show for all intents and purposes doesn't count as a "remake", but rather an adaptation...because they are translating elements from one medium to a different medium. Now there was actually a Last of Us game remake titled Last of Us Part 1...much like RE1, this is another example of a game that borders on the line between remake and remaster, as it does feature alot of the original elements from the original game. But it was rebuilt from the ground up using Naughty Dog's newest game engine (the one that powered LOU Part 2) and they also added in a bunch of new gameplay and accessibility features that weren't in the original game.

[@jlev1028]

Remakes only apply to works of the same medium. Otherwise, they're adaptations.

[@Timelord411]

Oh my goodness, YES. I hate how people try to "remake" movies and games with some kind of woke agenda. "PUT A CHICK IN IT! AND MAKE HER LAME AND GAY!"

[@alexandredelarge1901]

I think remake is when the company wants to squeeze 60 dollars out of you, remaster is when they can charge only 40

[@mackdaddydeathjam]

Its exactly like dead rising the game lol🔥

[@peng1luver259]

I think that the in-between of a remake and remaster should be called a enhanced edition, as it adds content without changing the main story, much like DLC