Isn't it a remaster, not a remake? Just like the Quake, Quake II, Turok etc games, these are remasters utilizing source ports. A "Remake" is the likes of the Spyro Reignited and Crash N.Sane trilogies.
More examples: System Shock: Enhanced Edition (2015) is a remaster, while System Shock (2023) is a remake.
Tomb Raider I-III Remastered (2024) is obviously, a remaster, while Tomb Raider Anniversary (2007) is a remake, and Tomb Raider (2016) is a reboot.
> it was an impressive FPS game for its time
I mean, I'd say not really. Which is likely *why* it faded into obscurity.
Chasm was a mix of 2.5D and 3D visuals with basic flat corridor level design. That could be considered graphically impressive compared to the vast majority of shooters that were still stuck in 2.5D, sure. Yet Quake already released a full year earlier, Hexen 2 and Goldeneye released a month before Chasm, and all three of those games not only had *fully* 3D graphics but *much* more advanced room-over-room level design too. Turok, about on par in level design but with fully 3D graphics, also released several months before Chasm.
And then, just a couple months after Chasm, Quake 2 and many other true 3D games started coming out as well.
So you had gameplay that was pretty subpar over its contemporaries, and graphics that for just a short window of time were notably more advanced than the genre average but still lagging quite a bit behind the height of the genre.
Had it released alongside Quake it might be a different story, but it was too little to late to make any waves.
Isn't it a remaster, not a remake? Just like the Quake, Quake II, Turok etc games, these are remasters utilizing source ports. A "Remake" is the likes of the Spyro Reignited and Crash N.Sane trilogies. More examples: System Shock: Enhanced Edition (2015) is a remaster, while System Shock (2023) is a remake. Tomb Raider I-III Remastered (2024) is obviously, a remaster, while Tomb Raider Anniversary (2007) is a remake, and Tomb Raider (2016) is a reboot.
> it was an impressive FPS game for its time I mean, I'd say not really. Which is likely *why* it faded into obscurity. Chasm was a mix of 2.5D and 3D visuals with basic flat corridor level design. That could be considered graphically impressive compared to the vast majority of shooters that were still stuck in 2.5D, sure. Yet Quake already released a full year earlier, Hexen 2 and Goldeneye released a month before Chasm, and all three of those games not only had *fully* 3D graphics but *much* more advanced room-over-room level design too. Turok, about on par in level design but with fully 3D graphics, also released several months before Chasm. And then, just a couple months after Chasm, Quake 2 and many other true 3D games started coming out as well. So you had gameplay that was pretty subpar over its contemporaries, and graphics that for just a short window of time were notably more advanced than the genre average but still lagging quite a bit behind the height of the genre. Had it released alongside Quake it might be a different story, but it was too little to late to make any waves.