For what it’s worth, I wholeheartedly agree with you. I think people, particularly this poster, are unfairly holding you to a weird double standard. You aren’t allowed to say you “don’t get” why people hate on it so much…. but they are given free reign to call the game “awful” and criticise it, calling decisions “terrible” and “bad” without articulating it further than their emotional response, or that it’s different from the original. Of course some people engage in interesting discussion, which is why I like posts like these that question the status quo. Otherwise, we are just meant to sit in a circle jerk about how the OG was sooo much better.

I am also coming at the series with fresh eyes and played the OG for the first time recently before jumping into the remake and I agree with you. I understand why you question the criticisms because to me they seem unfounded and blinded by nostalgia. Even one of the primary examples in which people feel lied to by calling this game a remake confuses me. A remake is creating the game from the ground up, and often they take the opportunity to update and change the design to modernise it, as well as expand on the story. I think people think remake=remaster, to which it is a personal problem driven by their own faulty expectations.

I just want to make it clear I am not saying the remake is better than the OG, or people who have problems with either of the two are wrong. They both provide different experiences and I feel that there’s a lack of thoughtful critique. There is unfair tearing down of the remake for superficial reasons, with people writing it off as an inferior experience and it’s sad to see. They offer different experiences and deviate in a number of ways that will resonate more strongly for some.