Resident Evil 3 Remake

[Otherworld]

You know, I have no idea why this game gives so many people so many issues. I mean, this is a modernized version of the game. If you remember, the clock tower is a pretty nonsensical part of the game. Sending the characters to the hospital after Jill is infected makes SO MUCH MORE SENSE.

Does Carlos take Jill to the hostipal or a clock tower when she needs medical attention....

I thought it improved the game IMO.

[Annin_Tofu]

Nemesis mutated too early...

Yeah. He changed his form in the original too, but he still looked mostly the same up until he has the acid bath.

Also, how can he go through ceilings? When he gets tired of following Jill, he just goes through the roof.

[Xuchilbara]

I loved the remake for 3. But I found the clock tower to be filler. I did love the atmosphere though. I don't understand why the remake for 3 gets so much hate.

[Annin_Tofu]

It has a lot of cut content. Then again, so does RE2. If you play RE2, the second (B) scenario is really just the same as the first run. At least from what I remember. The only thing they really bothered to change was the solutions to some puzzles. The rest of it is just the same scenes, enemy encounters, and that's odd, giving the separate feel of the original 1998 game.

There's also a lot of enemies they left out, like the crows and the spiders. The original weeds are gone too. They put in their place the more human shaped ones in the lab, which didn't look right to me.

One thing I find unforgivable about RE3, is that they forgot to include Barry Burton in the ending. That's always been the canon ending. He saved Jill.

I know remakes can remove all of that stuff, since it is a remake. But meh. Why did they do that? Jill didn't go to the police station either.

[Xuchilbara]

It has a lot of cut content. Then again, so does RE2. If you play RE2, the second (B) scenario is really just the same as the first run. At least from what I remember. The only thing they really bothered to change was the solutions to some puzzles. The rest of it is just the same scenes, enemy encounters, and that's odd, giving the separate feel of the original 1998 game.

There's also a lot of enemies they left out, like the crows and the spiders. The original weeds are gone too. They put in their place the more human shaped ones in the lab, which didn't look right to me.

One thing I find unforgivable about RE3, is that they forgot to include Barry Burton in the ending. That's always been the canon ending. He saved Jill.

I know remakes can remove all of that stuff, since it is a remake. But meh. Why did they do that? Jill didn't go to the police station either.

Yeah, the Barry reference was a downside to 3. Also, in 2 they removed the secret lab room that takes both characters to open. Loved that area.

[Annin_Tofu]

The first remake kept everything mostly the same. So it was lauded for this.

For the most part though, remakes usually don't copy everything scene for scene, to make it precisely the same game, or movie. Sometimes there are remakes that may do this, but it's rarely the case that things are exactly how they were. Although The Hills Have Eyes was a repeat of the original film.

I think the atmosphere was spot on with the first remake, so I believe fans were hoping that was going to be the same with the RE2 remake. But it was still a good enough game, despite the changes they made.

Now CV, I no longer have any hope for a remake, and even if it was remade someday, they would likely remove a lot of things to trim it down. Rendering it crap.

RE4 looks incredible, yet don't be too surprised if there's many missing bosses. RE4 had tons of boss battles. It's quite likely at least a handful of them could be removed or altered. But some will be the same, like the final battle with Saddler and the village chief in the barn, no doubt.