Board 8 > Is Super Castlevania IV a remake of Castlevania 1?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Justify your answer.
---

It's literally a redo of the original game, so yes it is a remake. Not sure what else there is to justify.
---

Shaduln posted...

It's literally a redo of the original game, so yes it is a remake. Not sure what else there is to justify.

---

no
---

I thought this was pretty common knowledge?
---

The counterargument:

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/8-gamefaqs-contests/77985950/929411526
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/8-gamefaqs-contests/77985950/929467433

---

Uhhh the level design is absolutely the same, just expanded on
---

Lopens argument there is basically saying that Mario Kart 8 Deluxe isnt a remake of Mario Kart 8
---

I consider it a reimagining
---

Not reading the counter argument, because here's what matters:

Both games tell the same story of Simon's encounter with Dracula in 1691. They could have had completely different gamestyles and it still would be a remake.
---

I ain't justifyin ****
---

ninkendo posted...

I consider it a reimagining

This might be more accurate.
---

Waluigi1 posted...

This might be more accurate.

what is the actual difference

---

I consider a remake to stick more closely to the source material and just look better

a reimagining takes the same premise and makes something entirely new out of it.
---

Also, Mario saves Princess Toadstool from Bowser is not the plot of any Mario game, it is the premise. There are differences in the plots of SMB 1 and 3 if you actually pay attention!

---

See, to me Lords of Shadow would be a reimagining. CV4 is absolutely a remake.
---

ninkendo posted...

I consider a remake to stick more closely to the source material and just look better

a reimagining takes the same premise and makes something entirely new out of it

Is SCV IV really entirely new?

---

ninkendo posted...

I consider it a reimagining

Do you call REmake REimagining?
---

it's harder to tell the difference between reimagining and remake anyway the older a game is. CV1 it's not like there's much there to begin with.
---

redrocket posted...

Also, Mario saves Princess Toadstool from Bowser is not the plot of any Mario game, it is the premise. There are differences in the plots of SMB 1 and 3 if you actually pay attention!

There are going to be differences in the plot of Final Fantasy VII and Final Fantasy VII Remake.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Uhhh the level design is absolutely the same, just expanded on

This is the only thing that matters. I'm not familiar enough with SCIV to say for sure.
---

Jakyl25 posted...

ninkendo posted...

I consider it a reimagining

Do you call REmake REimagining?

REmake is actually what I think about when I think of textbook definition of remake. It is still very much RE1 at its core. I don't think the same about Super Castlevania IV.
---

pjbasis posted...

There are going to be differences in the plot of Final Fantasy VII and Final Fantasy VII Remake.

I mean, those games are still telling the same story.

SMB 1 and 3 are explicitly different stories, albeit with a very similar premise.

---

My definition of "remake" is strict:

It's a retelling of the same story. A specific moment, within that game universe's history, is being retold.

By that definition, yes, it's a remake. It's literally the same moment in history (1700 something right?) in the castlevania game universe.

(Disclaimer: it also can't be a "port" at all. If it's a port, that disqualifies it from being a remake. It needs entirely new art assets, there can't be some copied over or up-ressed.)

-----

There are also situations where you can call a game "basically a remake". But I think you need the word "basically" in there.

"Basically a remake" means a shocking number of similarities in gameplay, setting, characters, levels, world design, etc.

But these are always very much a matter of opinion, and very arguable either way.

I would say Link Between Worlds is "basically a remake" of Link to the Past. But the plot is so different that I wouldn't say it "is a remake" straight up. I mean, look at that new merge-with-walls mechanic. That ain't no remake.

But it's "basically a remake".

Sonic 2 I could see the argument that it's "basically a remake" of Sonic 1, but it's not great.

Super Mario 3 I could totally see the argument that it's "basically a remake" of Super Mario 1.
---

Yeah I agree that SMB3 is ambiguous enough to make arguments either way

Even its the characters doing a stage play about SMB1
---

Jakyl25 posted...

Yeah I agree that SMB3 is ambiguous enough to make arguments either way

Even its the characters doing a stage play about SMB1

They are not doing a stage play about SMB1!

The plot of the play does not match up with SMB 1 except superficially! They are different events!

---

I mean, the Koopalings and the airships are enough for me to not call Mario 3 a remake.

You could make a better argument about Mario World being a Mario 3 remake, except with dinosaurs.
---

I don't understand why story is being given so much consideration.

Revisiting the story is not the motivation of the developers or the players for 8 and 16 bit platformers.

Furthermore, where do you draw the line between plot elements and gameplay elements. SCIV has new levels and bosses, are they not part of the plot? What about Vampire Killer and Haunted Castle? Same plot with very different gameplay.
---

Civil War re-enactments probably arent really that accurate either
---

Do smb1 and smb2j instead.
---

Heck galaxy 2 seems to treat galaxy as non-canon and restarts the premise. Its not a sequel after all!
---

pjbasis posted...

Revisiting the story is not the motivation of the developers or the players for 8 and 16 bit platformers.

It actually was one of the motivations for Konami doing SCIV
---

pjbasis posted...

Heck galaxy 2 seems to treat galaxy as non-canon and restarts the premise. Its not a sequel after all!

Nah, Galaxy 2 is a reboot. The ending of Galaxy 1 implies that the universe rebooted!
---

pjbasis posted...

Heck galaxy 2 seems to treat galaxy as non-canon and restarts the premise. Its not a sequel after all!

That was set up by the end of Galaxy 1 though
---

metaIslug posted...

While on this topic, definitely suggest playing CV Chronicles (another CV1 remake). Gets overshadowed by that other CV on PlayStation, but it's pretty good

I agree CV Chronicles is very good
---

Official Castlevania timeline calls it a remake and that's all the thought I'm willing to put into it so it's good enough for me
---

Haha I guess I don't remember Galaxy 1.

I never got all the Luigi stars though, is that a secret ending
---

I dont think so. I think all the Luigi stars get you is a new photo
---

Jakyl25 posted...

pjbasis posted...

Revisiting the story is not the motivation of the developers or the players for 8 and 16 bit platformers.

It actually was one of the motivations for Konami doing SCIV

"Ueno liked the original Castlevania for the Nintendo Entertainment System the most and wanted to make a pure action game that was similar to it.[11] Ueno only considers Super Castlevania IV a remake of the original Castlevania to some extent.[11] Early design documents depict the player-character in modern attire, since the setting was not decided at the time."

Doesn't seem to be the case?
---

To some extent!
---

Like, after the fact. I'm not surprised it could be sold as a remake (though the IV numbering implies they didn't even market it like that.) You literally said it was the motivation to create a remake, where'd you get that from?
---

The fact that its the same level layout as Castlevania 1 just with more of it

So my ass I guess
---

pjbasis posted...

Like, after the fact. I'm not surprised it could be sold as a remake (though the IV numbering implies they didn't even market it like that.) You literally said it was the motivation to create a remake, where'd you get that from?

The IV numbering is only the case in America. In Japan it shares its title (Akumajou Dracula) with CV1, no number involved.
---

But honestly, they were very cognizant of the series timeline even at that early stage.

Castlevania 3 is overtly set before CV, with Simons ancestor

Even the Castlevania Adventures on Game Boy are set with a different Belmont in a different time, as told in their manuals.

Explicitly retelling the story of CV 1, in the same setting, with the same main character, with the same ending, implies to me that at least by the time of release they were certain it was a remake
---

ninkendo posted...

metaIslug posted...

While on this topic, definitely suggest playing CV Chronicles (another CV1 remake). Gets overshadowed by that other CV on PlayStation, but it's pretty good

I agree CV Chronicles is very good

I remember watching my older brother playing it back in the day, but I never played it myself. My 6/7-year-old self was too scared to look at those bloody, cut-in-half bodies in the torture chamber. As a Castlevania fan myself, being used to the series' enemies' looks and settings' aesthetics, I think that game crossed the line.
---

I don't recall the actual level layouts in 1 vs. 4 being even remotely similar. Which levels in 1 are supposed to correspond to which in 4?

---

The people arguing no would seem to also say that neither RE2make nor FF7 Remake are remakes
---