Re-mastered games vs. original

[J-RAY]

I've played my fair share of re-mastered games after playing the original.
Uncharted, GTA5, Tomb raider, sleeping dogs, etc.

To me it only looks like they took the old game, spent 2minutes to added gloss to the graphics, then released it.
Since I love the games I just buy it anyway to re-play it.

Am I the only one who notices practically nothing different about them towards the new ones?

 

[Demon_Skeith]

This game:

needs that gloss you're talking about and its getting it:

it will be glorious and melt my eyes out from its beauty

 

[Gimgak]

It can be cool if done right. That being said, it's often just a poorly made cash grab. What's the point then? If there's no new features (or if it's just a lame graphics update) then no thanks.

 

[Demon_Skeith]

It can be cool if done right. That being said, it's often just a poorly made cash grab. What's the point then? If there's no new features (or if it's just a lame graphics update) then no thanks.

if done right is always the key.

 

[CM30]

I only care for 'remasters' where the original game is at least a good couple of generations old. I mean, look at that Final Fantasy VII remake. That's a significant overhaul, and that's the kind of remake I like.

Anything from the same generation or one before? Forget it.

 

[Gimgak]

if done right is always the key.

Yeah true, but then again I think it could be done really well but still be kind of useless if done too soon after the original came out. Only so much you can upgrade within a timeframe, even if it's a well put out release.