RTS Game Remakes vs Originals: Which Do You Prefer?

[Blitz]

The latest trends in RTS is massive number of remakes, I wonder – which do you like more – the new versions or the classics?
For me, I see a lot of improvement in the Age of Empires II remake.

However, some people believe that originals are unbeatable. Maybe it's for the nostalgic feelings or for the gameplay.

Share your thoughts!

 

[Legion]

For me, it's the originals all the way. It is always fun to get a glimpse of the real thing in a game. The peculiarities, the problems, the memories, all these are the components of a true game . It means that a remake changes the magic sometimes. This is illustrated in Command & Conquer. One thing which cannot be easily copied is the realistic appearance of the original. I think, less graphics, and old school tunes are alright by me.

 

[Havoc]

I have a slight preference towards the originals because of all the memories I have with them and amount of time I have invested in them. However, I also play remastered versions to see how far the technology has come and if the developer has chanced any part of the game. However, no remake can outdo the value of a great original game.

 

[Alpharius]

As long as the remakes are better upgrades of the original RTS games, I'm all in support of it. Where it's going to irk me would be when the developer tries to change the game's narrative from what it used to be. At that point, it's no longer a remake.

 

[IronFist]

To be honest, I feel that most remakes fall short of expectations. For example, I wasn't impressed with the remastered versions of the Command and Conquer game. It simply didn't live up to modern standards.

 

[MX75]

I'm all in for the remakes. It give a fresh twist to the iconic game that are decades old.
Warcraft III: For instance, came with stunning visuals and enhancement in the mechanics while keeping the essence of gameplay intact. It also has the advantage of drawing new players to the classics.