In 2003, Nintendo announced a remake of the 1998 gaming classic “Metal Gear Solid,” originally directed by legendary auteur Hideo Kojima. The announcement shocked audiences — the remake, called “Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes,” would be headed by Canadian studio Silicon Knights while Kojima stepped back into an advisory producer role.

One of Kojima’s inputs was for the new cutscene director to reimagine the original’s cutscenes in an over-the-top action style. These changes were controversial among fans, with some claiming they didn’t align with the game’s tone, while others pointed to the series’ existing campy elements in its defense.

This year, another Metal Gear Solid remake was released, this time of the 2004 “Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater.” Titled “Metal Gear Solid Delta: Snake Eater,” this version makes a point to stay as close to the original as possible.

However, one major problem arose. The game attempted to apply the latest high-tech, realistic graphics, creating a look that didn’t match the original’s more unrealistic story moments or player actions. Some felt that the new style ruined the game’s tone, replacing the original’s color grading and interesting stylistic choices with realism.

Both of these remakes have their flaws, but I much prefer the oddities of “Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes,” as its new cutscenes create an entirely new experience from the original. In contrast, the new style of Delta only serves as a poor imitation of its predecessor.

In other words, Metal Gear fans have a reason to play both the original Metal Gear Solid and its remake, while those who have played Snake Eater will see nothing new in Delta; the only reason to play the latter is if you have never experienced the original. The Twin Snakes presents itself as a new artistic experience, while Delta only copies an existing one.

The increasing prevalence of video game remakes indicates that gamers consider certain essential classics as crucial to the medium, much like we regard essential films and TV shows. This demand incentivizes publishers to remake classic games with modern technology. But that raises an important question — does remaking games respect the originals as art? Or are video game remakes soulless endeavors that turn unique classics into unremarkable nostalgia products?

That’s not to say that all video game remakes must be transformative works of art. Many video game remakes are made to give their originals a fresh coat of paint and expose them to a new audience. For example, acclaimed remakes like “Demon’s Souls” and “Shadow of the Colossus” intentionally adhere closely to the games they are based on, modernizing only the graphics and control systems.

I will not deny the appeal of this type of remake, as it’s fun to see an old favorite be refreshed and given another chance in the limelight. For instance, the horror classic “Dead Space” benefited greatly from a fresh coat of paint, as the highly detailed graphics systems of today immerse players in the game’s cold, rusted and decrepit spaceship setting, enhancing the horror.

But modernization can be a double-edged sword.

The remake of the legendary horror classic “Silent Hill 2” altered the original’s unique perspective, which was more focused and limited the player’s view to enhance the horror, for a traditional over-the-shoulder third-person view commonly seen in numerous modern action and horror games. In doing this, the game removed much of the separation between the player, protagonist, and game that had enhanced the original’s psychological horror and driven its unreliable narrator twist.

To create a successful video game remake, the creators must understand what made the original game work and carefully adapt this vision in the remake.

A prime example of this is the “Final Fantasy VII Remake” trilogy. The original contains a plot twist almost ubiquitously known among gamers. To preserve the surprise in the second remake game, which was split into three parts to expand on the original’s story, the writers end the first remake game by sending the characters to an alternate dimension with altered plot beats and an uncertain future.

As such, both new and old fans were on the edge of their seats in the lead-up to the second part because they didn’t know what was going to happen. The new game preserves the tension present in the original story for both old and new fans, while also introducing new elements that make it a unique work.

Video games already face difficulty being considered art, with many dismissing them as trivial toys or a waste of time. The games I’ve mentioned here are all excellent, featuring moving stories and complex themes that rival those of any novel or film. If video game creators want the respect they deserve, the worst thing they can do is attempt to replace the original by following modern trends at the detriment of what made the original special.

At the same time, a video game remake can and should artistically hold its own against its predecessor. The key is to provide a new experience to players, even with many of the original artistic components remaining the same, focusing instead on modernizing the plot.

All of the lauded remakes I have mentioned focus on differentiating themselves from the games they are based on through either story or gameplay. These remakes can stand on their own in the critical conversation, offering a new and even better artistic experience, with unique ideas and emotions they evoke in the player.

Kevin O’Connell is a sophomore majoring in political science.

Views expressed in the opinions pages represent the opinions of the columnists. The only piece that represents the view of the Pipe Dream Editorial Board is the staff editorial.