Should a Remake be just the original game with updated graphics?

In arts remakes are supposed to be new works based on previous work. An another take basically

>ratchet and clank on ps4

In vidya shit is weird brah, Remasters are in reality ports 95% of the time maybe with a shit filter added while Remakes are usually the true Remasters when they dont change a lot of the game obv

Yes, if they're going to change stuff might as well just make a new game entirely.

It's not a remake if they change the story and use the same characters and environment.

That's called a reboot.

Here’s how I can see

You can do the Grim fandango and offer so much as a literal button to switch Between new and old graphics

You can be CTR which brings back all that good shit plus extra

Don’t be ratchet and clank 2016.

I’m not a final fantasy fan but I’ve been hearing so much mixed shit that I don’t know what’s valid and what’s not excusable by the FF7 fan base.

what if the story is almost the same/very similar ?

Remake makes are the original with new ideas added to it and retold in a new way

a remaster is the same thing just looking modern

I wish people would learn the difference

>the original game with updated graphics?
That's called a remaster.

A remake needs to upgrade everything it can AND has the right to change the game entirely, as it is being reMADE. That's why FFVII Remake's plot goes a little different than the original FFVII. Remasters' stories should stay exactly how the original are, only getting the visuals/sound/etc to "today's" standards (the best quality possible at the time of the remaster) and fixing whatever problems the game may have. Changing the story would make it a remake.
>What type of remake do you enjoy more?
Honestly it depends on what game it is. Sometimes I prefer playing through a new version of the game entirely, sometimes I just want to relive the same experience but in high quality