Do you count game remakes as replays or fresh completions?

One thing that confuses the hell out of me, is that on HLTB should remakes that are mostly the same game as the original but with "better" graphics count as fresh completions or replays? I class any of these kinds of games as replays since story and structure wise, it's the same game and when it comes to game beats, I like to "track" my completions by adding restrictions to make my fresh completion list seem more "impressive".

But with Silent Hill 2 remake, I'm not sure I should count as a fresh completion or a replay, since the story seems to be the same, but they just made the moment to moment getting from point a to b parts longer. This is one super annoying thing about remakes for me. Like if it's the Resident Evil remakes, Dead Space remake, Ratchet 2016, and Mafia 1 remake sitatution then yeah they are fresh completions but games that are mostly the same but with better visuals and gameplay improvements, I'm not sure should be a fresh completion or a replay. I count games like Shadow of the Collossus 2018, Destory All Humans 1 and 2 remakes and Crisis Core Reunion as "replays" since they are the same game and I'm not sure if gameplay improvements are enough to make the game seem like a whole new experience since the story and structure is the same.

Then there is stuff like Ape Escape on the Loose which, yes it's the same game and story but it's made for the PSP, has new voice acting and "better" graphics. Then again by this logic should games like Metal Gear Solid the Twin Snakes count as a replay? It's not 100% the same game as MGS1 on the PS1 despite it having mostly the same story and structure. The upcoming MGS3 Snake Eater Delta is going to do the same thing, is it the same MGS3 or is it a new game? I don't know.

I might be overthinking it but this is just so confusing to me. Stuff like remastered games are easy to follow since it pretty much is the same game but there might be some added content but you know it very much is the same game but with remakes are they the "same" or they 100% "new"? I can't tell half the time.

There is also stuff like the Final Fantasy 7 remake games which I haven't played but those games make it 100% obvious that they aren't the same game as the original and it's basically an original story with the same name. Those I get, since the distinction is clear in spite of the initial confusion with them having the same name.

This is basically a non issue if you have no prior knowledge of the original before playing the remake, but what if you want to go back and play the original, should playing the original count as a replay?

Then again this is pretty much the conundrum I have with remakes of any kind in general, it's just that with me, I just take gaming more seriously than most other mediums.

EDIT

You can probably say Silent Hill 2 remake is more like Mafia 1's remake which fair enough but with stuff like Crisis Core Reunion, Destroy All Humans 1 and 2, Shadow of the Collossus 2018, and the upcoming MGS3 Delta, and Soul Real Reaver 1 and 2, should they even count a fresh completion?

Like you said I think it depends on the game. The first game that comes to mind with this topic is Link's Awakening. The original and the remake are vastly different visually and somewhat mechanically, and yet they tell the same exact story with the exact same steps. I don't think I have played both an original and a remake for a single game, not even Link's Awakening, but I would personally catalogue it as a separate completion at least on HLTB. For review reasons I think cataloguing them separately is also good, sometimes remakes are worse or better than the original game and the original doesn't deserve a worse/better review just because the remake is good/bad, even for remakes that are very similar to the original.

Like you said I think it depends on the game. The first game that comes to mind with this topic is Link's Awakening. The original and the remake are vastly different visually and somewhat mechanically, and yet they tell the same exact story with the exact same steps. I don't think I have played both an original and a remake for a single game, not even Link's Awakening, but I would personally catalogue it as a separate completion at least on HLTB. For review reasons I think cataloguing them separately is also good, sometimes remakes are worse or better than the original game and the original doesn't deserve a worse/better review just because the remake is good/bad, even for remakes that are very similar to the original.

I do catalogue the original and the remake seperately but I wonder if I should put the "replay" mark on the remake if they are similar games. That's what mainly confuses me. I don't want to double my "fresh" completion list when the games are really similar. It kind of feels like cheating as really weird as that sounds. I want my completion list to be as honest as it can but remakes that are similar to the original adds such a grey zone regarding all of this, especially those that take the 1990s Psycho movie approach, it's why I even made this thread at all despite me never making a forum thread prior to this.

With stuff like the upcoming Soul Reaver remasters and MGS3 Delta? Maybe I should put the replay mark on them or maybe I shouldn't.

From the gameplay standpoint, remakes absolutely count as new games, especially Resident Evil games are drastically different from the original counterparts and so is the most recent Silent Hill 2 remake. I suppose you could add a barebones remaster as a replay since it's literally just upscaled graphics, but both the gameplay and the story remain 1:1 the same. I personally still log them as new completions, as long as there is anything new or different at all.

One thing that confuses the hell out of me, is that on HLTB should remakes that are mostly the same game as the original but with "better" graphics count as fresh completions or replays? I class any of these kinds of games as replays since story and structure wise, it's the same game and when it comes to game beats, I like to "track" my completions by adding restrictions to make my fresh completion list seem more "impressive".

But with Silent Hill 2 remake, I'm not sure I should count as a fresh completion or a replay, since the story seems to be the same, but they just made the moment to moment getting from point a to b parts longer. This is one super annoying thing about remakes for me. Like if it's the Resident Evil remakes, Dead Space remake, Ratchet 2016, and Mafia 1 remake sitatution then yeah they are fresh completions but games that are mostly the same but with better visuals and gameplay improvements, I'm not sure should be a fresh completion or a replay. I count games like Shadow of the Collossus 2018, Destory All Humans 1 and 2 remakes and Crisis Core Reunion as "replays" since they are the same game and I'm not sure if gameplay improvements are enough to make the game seem like a whole new experience since the story and structure is the same.

Then there is stuff like Ape Escape on the Loose which, yes it's the same game and story but it's made for the PSP, has new voice acting and "better" graphics. Then again by this logic should games like Metal Gear Solid the Twin Snakes count as a replay? It's not 100% the same game as MGS1 on the PS1 despite it having mostly the same story and structure. The upcoming MGS3 Snake Eater Delta is going to do the same thing, is it the same MGS3 or is it a new game? I don't know.

I might be overthinking it but this is just so confusing to me. Stuff like remastered games are easy to follow since it pretty much is the same game but there might be some added content but you know it very much is the same game but with remakes are they the "same" or they 100% "new"? I can't tell half the time.

There is also stuff like the Final Fantasy 7 remake games which I haven't played but those games make it 100% obvious that they aren't the same game as the original and it's basically an original story with the same name. Those I get, since the distinction is clear in spite of the initial confusion with them having the same name.

This is basically a non issue if you have no prior knowledge of the original before playing the remake, but what if you want to go back and play the original, should playing the original count as a replay?

Then again this is pretty much the conundrum I have with remakes of any kind in general, it's just that with me, I just take gaming more seriously than most other mediums.

EDIT

You can probably say Silent Hill 2 remake is more like Mafia 1's remake which fair enough but with stuff like Crisis Core Reunion, Destroy All Humans 1 and 2, Shadow of the Collossus 2018, and the upcoming MGS3 Delta, and Soul Real Reaver 1 and 2, should they even count a fresh completion?

I'm not sure where the confusion comes from, I believe you've created confusion in something that should be straightforward. Your own examples are all quite straight forward.

If the game has been changed (very few remakes are 100% exact) then it's a new game and should be treated as such.
If the game is a straight port, then it doesn't matter, as long as that port doesn't include additional content like bundled DLC (some games put their dlc in the middle of the game or integrate across the whole game).

The way the database is set up should really be your guide, (generally) games that include different or changed content have there own entries, games that are identical ports don't.

hen again by this logic should games like Metal Gear Solid the Twin Snakes count as a replay? It's not 100% the same game as MGS1 on the PS1 despite it having mostly the same story and structure.

Twin Snakes is 100% a different game. Even if you take the view that it's the same story and the same game, the game is well known for being completely broken by the MGS2 first person aiming feature they added to the game. You should not mark it as a replay. This is why MGS Delta's alternate camera has its own completely new dedicated difficulty. That is also a new game for your purposes.

I count games like Shadow of the Collossus 2018, Destory All Humans 1 and 2 remakes and Crisis Core Reunion as "replays" since they are the same game

SOTC is a remaster, it runs the ps2 code underneath (just like the ps3 port) with Bluepoint engine working as a translation engine to communicate between the original game code and the modern features. The art has all been replaced, but over the original maps. just like Demon's Souls (just like the Crash and Spyro Trilogy's). I believe there is an extremely minor addition that 99% of players don't even know is there which I don't think counts. CCR is borderline since it has a long list of quality of life features that change the game balance, but it is fundamentally the same game. You also mention Soul reaver which is just a remaster, it's the same game(s).

The question to ask is "does the rerelease have its own game page". If the answer is yes, then you should use that and not mark it as a replay. If it's just a straight port or a single game featured in a reissued collection, then use the existing page and tag as a replay.

I'm not sure where the confusion comes from, I believe you've created confusion in something that should be straightforward. Your own examples are all quite straight forward.

If the game has been changed (very few remakes are 100% exact) then it's a new game and should be treated as such.
If the game is a straight port, then it doesn't matter, as long as that port doesn't include additional content like bundled DLC (some games put their dlc in the middle of the game or integrate across the whole game).

The way the database is set up should really be your guide, (generally) games that include different or changed content have there own entries, games that are identical ports don't.

hen again by this logic should games like Metal Gear Solid the Twin Snakes count as a replay? It's not 100% the same game as MGS1 on the PS1 despite it having mostly the same story and structure.

Twin Snakes is 100% a different game. Even if you take the view that it's the same story and the same game, the game is well known for being completely broken by the MGS2 first person aiming feature they added to the game. You should not mark it as a replay. This is why MGS Delta's alternate camera has its own completely new dedicated difficulty. That is also a new game for your purposes.

I count games like Shadow of the Collossus 2018, Destory All Humans 1 and 2 remakes and Crisis Core Reunion as "replays" since they are the same game

SOTC is a remaster, it runs the ps2 code underneath (just like the ps3 port) with Bluepoint engine working as a translation engine to communicate between the original game code and the modern features. The art has all been replaced, but over the original maps. just like Demon's Souls (just like the Crash and Spyro Trilogy's). I believe there is an extremely minor addition that 99% of players don't even know is there which I don't think counts. CCR is borderline since it has a long list of quality of life features that change the game balance, but it is fundamentally the same game. You also mention Soul reaver which is just a remaster, it's the same game(s).

The question to ask is "does the rerelease have its own game page". If the answer is yes, then you should use that and not mark it as a replay. If it's just a straight port or a single game featured in a reissued collection, then use the existing page and tag as a replay.

I did say I was overthinking it.

With your SOTC example, I called it a remaster once and I got a lot of crap for not calling it a remake. I even called the Crash trilogy remasters and then I was told by many they were remakes. I normally try to avoid remake and remaster discussions due to stuff like this. It just never leads to anything.

Not sure where I'll go from here on out.

Pretty much what lowdefal said. This isn't really a question I deal with though because I don't think I've ever played both the original game and the remaster/remake since I signed up for this site. I'll just play whatever the newest version is at the time. In general though, remasters would be marked as replays and remakes would be marked as new playthroughs for me if the question ever does come up.

I personally count them as fresh completions since they are a different version of an already pre-existing game. For instance, with the Silent Hill 2 remake, I have almost spent as much time with it as I did with my first playthrough of the original and I only just reached Brookhaven. Most of the time with remakes, they do things a bit differently and thus I do think they are something different. It's definitely more debatable with remasters and ports however as sometimes they may just be the same thing with a minor bump in graphics, or worse performace.

I think my simple way to go about it is just to just think: "Does this remake give me a different experience compared to playing the original?" In some cases I think the answer is very clear, such as with FF7 but some others I think are less clear.

I played through the N64 versions of Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask for the first time this year and I decided to not count them differently, simply my experience was over 90% the same while playing them as the originals. You don't miss much by playing one over the other, despite the upgrades and downgrades that are featured. I think Link's Awakening is complicated, I'm unsure if I would count the original differently.

Generally I think I will mainly play the newest version and won't go back to the older version, but if the newer improved version releases later and is more than graphically different then I would include that one as well I think. I think the "vibes" of each remake are also totally valid to take into account when deciding this.

I did say I was overthinking it.

With your SOTC example, I called it a remaster once and I got a lot of crap for not calling it a remake. I even called the Crash trilogy remasters and then I was told by many they were remakes. I normally try to avoid remake and remaster discussions due to stuff like this. It just never leads to anything.

Not sure where I'll go from here on out.

With SOTC those people are wrong. The devs did a detailed account of how the game was built. The art replacement is very impressive but it's running the original game in the background. Which is fairly common.

As for Crash, it says on the front of the box that it is a remaster, at least in the UK and Europe.

With SOTC those people are wrong. The devs did a detailed account of how the game was built. The art replacement is very impressive but it's running the original game in the background. Which is fairly common.

As for Crash, it says on the front of the box that it is a remaster, at least in the UK and Europe.

This is pretty much what I mean. But I marked SOTC 2018 as a replay if it counts for anything. I always got the vibe that it wasn't really a remake.

I do catalogue the original and the remake seperately but I wonder if I should put the "replay" mark on the remake if they are similar games. That's what mainly confuses me. I don't want to double my "fresh" completion list when the games are really similar. It kind of feels like cheating as really weird as that sounds. I want my completion list to be as honest as it can but remakes that are similar to the original adds such a grey zone regarding all of this, especially those that take the 1990s Psycho movie approach, it's why I even made this thread at all despite me never making a forum thread prior to this.

With stuff like the upcoming Soul Reaver remasters and MGS3 Delta? Maybe I should put the replay mark on them or maybe I shouldn't.

In my case, since every completion goes to the complete list regardless, I don't sweat it.

Still if it's like... Ocarina of Time on 3DS, that got the replay mark since I played the n64 version and they are VERY similar. Same for Majora's. In the case of Link's Awakening, I would have put that mark if I finished the original, though it's like on the limit. FF VII remake? Get out of here, that's a different game

In my case, since every completion goes to the complete list regardless, I don't sweat it.

Still if it's like... Ocarina of Time on 3DS, that got the replay mark since I played the n64 version and they are VERY similar. Same for Majora's. In the case of Link's Awakening, I would have put that mark if I finished the original, though it's like on the limit. FF VII remake? Get out of here, that's a different game

I guess for me, I'm trying to distinguish between replays and fresh completions since I'm trying to make me beating 1000 games look "geniune" or at least as geniune as I can make it look. It's a me thing but I don't want to dilute the fresh completion with games that are already similar to each other since so many game remakes operate under the 1990s Psycho remake logic. It's one thing that always annoyed me about remakes of any kind but with games, it's causing me to overthink it like crazy.

To me the bare minimum change is something like Red/Blue to Fire Red/Leaf Green. Natures are added to Pokemon, special is now special attack and special defense instead of just one stat, the sevii islands intervention part of the main story is added and also more content to go through in general, post game additions for the islands that cover team rocket being beaten but not completely gone and some other mini quests, steel and dark types are now present where as the original games didn't have it, rematches, breeding, etc.

Even though the main story is like 98% the same, many things were added and changed the game mechanically, QoL features, as well as more content to play making it enough to count as a separate entry.

I feel the most important factor that marks a game completion as a replay or fresh completion is how well it represents a first time player's completion. I believe a lot people come to the website to get a gameplay playtime estimate of a "fresh" first time playthrough of a game they haven't played to help in deciding if they want to purchase and play it or not.

In terms of those remaster type games that are basically 1:1 in gameplay, level layout, etc. with the original + some QoL and a fresh coat of paint, those would definitely be a replay if you finished the original and played it like someone would on a second new game run. You know the gameplay and where exactly to go already, instead of exploring and lurking around like a first time player, so it's really just a replay (same for remaster to original). For remake type games though, where the gameplay is transformed and the levels are altered from the original (or even adding more levels/content that never existed in original), that's where it would be a fresh completion even for someone who played the original game.

Personally, I have marked games like Mass Effect Legendary Edition as replay despite playing for the "first time" because they are not that different from the original versions and I have played those so many times that my completion time would not be a good estimate for myself or a similar player's first playthrough time. On the other hand, I put some games like Last of Us Part 1 as a fresh completion due to not being able to fully recall the gameplay from my original playthrough to the point that it is almost like playing the game for the first time again.

At the end of the day though, logically if it has a new title, new storepage & ID, and costs a slick new game price again, it should count a fresh completion entry from a computer's perspective. But probably better to mark and add some notes for the humans looking at the completions I guess.