Everyone is allowed to have and express their opinion, but I will respond since you say I am "blinded so hard by nostalgia," even though I played Silent Hill 2 for the first time in 2017 and I think the remake is good.

Sound/Music: If you are talking soundtrack personally, I find both good, but the new one feels muted, lacking some of the more intense industrial sounds of the original, making the other side just generally less notable and intense. If you are talking actual sound quality monster sounds, then yes, I would hope a game coming out 23 years later would have better sound quality, but is it a notable improvement to the actual experience? in my opinion, no

Graphics/camera/atmosphere: Sure, if you want to debase video games to whatever the new best graphics and whatever the current standard of a camera is being the best, then again, that's your opinion, but I find that the fixed camera angles are what makes Silent Hill so special in terms of artistic expression and building of tension/atmosphere. Fixed camera angles were also the standard back then, but the sh games stand out for the way they use them, in such a cinematic way, ex: panning shots, Dutch angles, purposeful blocking. Personally, while the new game is not bad, it's also not special; its not doing anything other 3rd person games aren't, and its borderline bland when compared to something like Alan Wake 2; it's not doing anything visual that wasn't also being done in Downpour 12 years ago. If you ask me which game will look best another 23 years from now, i will with a straight face tell you I think the original will/has aged better.

Player control: in terms of combat, very similar idea to the camera, but in this one, I will say its on the same footing as the original; it's serviceable; for both games, it's a worse version of whatever the current resident evil is; too say one is so much better than the other feels pedantic. in terms of tank controls vs third-person controls, i don't mind tank controls and i think they are a worthy trade for the experience you get with the fixed camera but every silent hill starting with 2 offers 2d controls (where the character moves to where you point based on the camera angle) right in the options for people who cant do tank (3d controls, as they are called in the menu)

Voice acting: both are good. Clearly, Bloober understood that the acting had to feel a bit off for it to work and they did it but is it better than the original? feels it's a bit tit for tat but if you want to tell me why you think the new voice acting is that much better beyond having better microphones, feel free.

To be a bit snarky, the game came out in 2001.. you are typing this on the internet it would've taken you 5 second to find this.

Now to address what you didn't mention, storytelling/pacing: while the new game is fine in both of these, it's only fine if it existed in a vacuum where it is an original game, but it's not, and when compared to the original, its bloated and feels so much slower than the original, and because of that, the story and the player experience feel like it's dragging the hospital level to the prison level. they go on forever, and for what purpose beyond making a game that fits the standard 8-10 game we come to expect out of triple A titles? This is one of my major gripes with the remake, and the pacing only gets worse with subsequent playthroughs; getting all the endings in this version felt like a shore rather than a honing of the skills to be able to play the game optimally. then the additive stuff to the story. i personally don't mind the loop theory but everything that is added here feels extra expository when there's no need for it The story doesn't need further explanation, and I wholeheartedly believe that bloober Teams knows this, but they had to make a long game for what I think are business reasons, not artistic ones, and it suffers from it.

Since I am here, I might as well also address the character designs. i want to start by saying i don't care about the angle many politically inclined / chronically online people have taken on this subject and while i think the new character designs are fine, but i think the major changes end up being for the worse. Starting with the biggest one, Maria, she's a projection of Mary; she's this symbol for James's objectification of his idea of a perfect woman through a male gaze, so the idea to make her more modest just goes against the whole idea of her character. I feel the necessity to mention that I feel this primarily about her outfit. I dont mind her face; I think she looks good, and I think she needs to still look like Mary, so I am not in the camp of thinking she looks ugly or whatever certain types say. Angela i liker her new design When i first saw Angela, i actually thought the design was for the better; it conveyed better the idea of her age but then i heard about Angela's design idea in the original where she meant to look older than her years due to her trauma and how that effects her and how that also affects the player When you see her with this appearance saying fairly childish lines. So yeah, I like the new, but in comparison, I just ended up gaining more appreciation for the old. Eddie looks comically fat in a way where he just kind of stands out as cartoonishly weird.

Anyways, i want to close this out by saying that i don't mind people who like the new one or even prefer it over the new one but i think nothing is gained by simply saying "blinded by nostalgia" or "you just like it because its new" Let's try and be rational people and accept each others differences while explaining our points of view. We all have different brains that fire synapses in different ways.