Aspyr's Tomb Raideemaster updates scenery and textures with attention to detail, but ultimately falls into the common trap of recreating mobile game aesthetics. Despite a noticeable effort, the final product lacks the nuance and flair of a truly innovative approach. This highlights the difficulties of updating classic IP while staying true to its spirit. While some developers may succeed in reinventing old characters, others risk sacrificing the essence of the original. The line between respect for heritage and innovation is fine, and Aspyr's work serves as a reminder that not all remasters are created equal.
Key Points
What are the implications of remastering classic games, and how can developers balance respect for the original with innovation?
Can a well-done remaster truly do justice to the original game, or is it always a compromise?
How do different approaches to remastering (e.g. reboot vs. faithful recreation) impact the player experience?
Advertisement
Original Article
There's something uncanny about dipping "classic" games in a tub of HD paint for the purposes of a remaster. A reboot can completely reinvent an old character, intriguing players in the same way an adaptation of Macbeth might excite a theatre dweeb. But remasters often feel like someone has plainly yet painstakingly rolled over every inch of the original with linoleum. The worst remasters bring to mind the Spanish pensioner who butchered a fresco of Jesus Christ. As acts of restoration go, Aspyr's work on Tomb Raider (and Soul Reaver) isn't quite that egregious. Hard work has gone into updating the scenery and textures. Basic vine sprites become handsome twirls of plantlife. Egyptian reliefs are given form. But there's a limit to this unfurling of digital lino. The results ultimately evoke the look common in mobile games when smartphones were becoming ever more powerful. This is Lara Croft if she were designed by Gameloft in 2011.
Comments