When a remake was announced 3 years ago, I was concerned. I was concerned with there being a remake because I felt like it was kind of a waste. Why make a remake of a game so legendary that 1. still holds up to this very day, 2. is available on every modern console, and 3. the remake had El Gigante sized boots to fill? RE:Village made things worse for me for reasons to be told later on. I was concerned until I saw the gameplay trailer of the village.

Instead of being a laser tight focused game like the original, RE4 Remake is a more loose kind of game. Not only in game design, but how Leon moves, how you control Ashley, and more. Crafting provides more flexibility with more decision making. Movement is more free flowing while aiming and you don't control like a tank. All analog movement. And yet the encounters feel designed around this control scheme the way tank controls did the original thanks to much more aggressive enemies while still maintaining that stop-go notion. Exploration is more emphasized in this version.

Let's change the subject to Resident Evil Village. This was supposed to be the spiritual successor to Resident Evil 4. As a video game, it's okay, but as spiritual successor to RE4, it is a huge disappointment. It's a more action focused game, it had the attache case, treasure hunting, the works. However, that game failed as a successor. It lacked variety in its combat encounters in terms of enemy placement, encounters, and arena design. The limb damaging system that made Resident Evil 4's combat special was only for ghouls which weren't the main enemies. Meat and mines (items that would take up space in the original if they existed) are stacked upon each other. Crafting materials took up no space in your case and can be stacked infinitely. It made for a very forgiving inventory system that lost a lot of the decision making that made Resident Evil games what they are. I bring up Village not only because it was supposed to be the spiritual successor to Resident Evil 4, but because it was the most recent Resident Evil game up until Resident Evil 4 Remake. It brings the question if Capcom learned from their missteps with RE4 Remake? And the answer to that is a big resounding yes. Every criticism I had with Village's design listed here has been rescinded in the RE4 Remake.

In the original game, there was only one sidequest in the game: a bit after the village fight, you were given a little sidetask to shoot 10 out of 15 blue medallions for the Punisher. Remake does that and more. There are more sidequests in the game. I get why there was only one in the original, even though, in retrospect, it may be weird. It was a fun little side thing and then after that, it's more laser focused than it already is. Exploration was supposed to be what makes the remake stand out from the original. I'm personally mixed on this. On one hand, they can provide for some nice backtracking; coming back to a previous area with a new encounter is always cool such as the stronger enemy sidequests. I like how some sidequests teach you some mechanics such as hunting animals for healing items or selling. On the other hand, some are as mundane as killing rats and some of that focus that made the original Resident Evil 4 the game that it is: lost here in the remake. Though one thing I really like about sidequests is that you can complete sidequests without reading the objectives. So if you know a sidequest on your replay, you can just do it before the game even tasks you.

For as cool, addicting, and well presented the expanded shooting gallery may be, I'd consider it to be what makes RE4 Remake a more loose game. You'd take a much longer break playing the shooting gallery than you would the 2005 version. Your reward for playing this and playing it well is better change for better gacha pods that give incremental boosts. This is an unobtrusive mechanic, but I find it unnecessary and antithetical to Resident Evil.

One thing I know for sure that the original RE4 has over the Remake is that it is a more polished game. Hit detection in the remake doesn't feel as good as in the original and hit reactions are all over the place. And that's due to the homogenization of modern RE games where most weapons have a crosshair instead of a laser sight. The laser sight in the original game communicated with the player what could be hit. If you saw a red dot aimed at the enemy, you knew that you were guaranteed a hit. Now the laser sight is relegated to only 2 weapons and my beloved Red9 can't use it. There could also be some glitches that would lead to death.

Did Resident Evil 4 need a remake? No. Does it live up to the original? Eh. Does it replace the original? Absolutely not. The 2005 version holds up so well. Not a single iota of that game's design has aged in the slightest. Instead, it stands alongside the original with its own take. I love the remake, but I love the original even more. Though if you were to ask me which one I'd be more likely to play, I couldn't give you a proper answer. That goes to show how Resident Evil 4 Remake still satisfied me as someone who adores the original.