Granny Remake is Disappointing

Overview

The video argues that “Granny Remake” (by Ferret Labs) is a disappointing—and potentially unethical—“upgrade” of DV Loper’s original mobile horror game “Granny.”

While the original is praised for its sound-reactive stealth gameplay and recognizable low-poly visual identity, the remake is criticized for breaking key design consistency, feeling repetitive, and removing what made Granny’s character and atmosphere memorable.

Copyright / Ethical Concerns (Major Issue)

The video raises several allegations and inconsistencies:

• The creator states the remake was developed and published on Steam for profit without DV Loper’s permission.
• DV Loper is allegedly not credited, even though the game is a remake.
• Steam users claim deleted developer threads rejected infringement accusations based on the claim that “the game is too different,” which the video says is untrue.
• The author says the developer’s claim (“we will continue to change”) conflicts with the game being on long-term support, implying there are no meaningful updates.

What Made the Original Granny Great

The video highlights two core strengths:

1. Gameplay Loop (sound + fear + map navigation)

   • Granny can hear nearly all player actions: dropping items, stepping, using items, and falling.
   • Players must manage inventory carefully, since having one item means dropping it can alert Granny.
   • The map is easy to navigate, featuring a recognizable layout, shortcuts, and strategic lure possibilities.

2. Aesthetic Identity (visual clarity + charm)

   • Low-poly models and a recognizable DV Loper visual style.
   • A tone that’s “scary but not too serious,” while keeping objects readable and distinct.

Where Granny Remake Falls Short

Core positives acknowledged

The video credits the remake for keeping several familiar aspects, including:

• Preserving the overall loop: hide from Granny, pick up items, solve puzzles, escape
• Returning familiar endings, items, and sound-triggered investigation behavior
• Adding some spawn/wakeup variation (respawning in different locations based on how many times the player is knocked out)
• Including a heartbeat sound when Granny is near
• Graphics that look good at first glance

Major cons

1. Sound mechanic is inconsistent

   • The idea remains that Granny hears sound and investigates, but the remake changes it so:
     • Not all loud sounds alert Granny.
     • Many floors don’t register noise when dropping items.
   • This removes the original’s reliability and leads to frustration (e.g., dropping a key on concrete not making noise).
   • The video also claims contradictory examples where some loud/critical objects do or don’t trigger Granny even after hints/text.

2. Car escape is worse and more repetitive

   • The car escape requires more items than the original (9 instead of 7).
   • Getting four separate wheels is criticized as boring and tedious.
   • Refueling requires multiple gas canisters, adding repetition.
   • The author argues the changes increase risk near the front/garage, making the escape harder to pursue.

3. Unusable or meaningless pick-up items

   • The remake includes objects that seem collectible but have no real gameplay purpose—including decorative props that can be picked up and other small items that are effectively worthless.

4. Map design problems (attic + basement)

   • Attic second floor
     • Access requires a difficult shooting mini-game.
     • The space is limited in usefulness and may allow Granny into a narrow area where escaping becomes nearly impossible.
   • Basement
     • Criticized as confusing and less rewarding because:
       • Rooms look too similar
       • Random steel doors add confusion without blocking critical access
       • Lack of item spawns (lockers rarely contain anything)
       • Too few shortcuts and a more linear layout that can trap the player during chases

5. Visual / UX issues that undermine item usefulness

   • Even if graphics are “nice,” the video claims dropped items become nearly invisible because they blend into the environment.
   • Items rarely contrast with surfaces, causing runs to need resetting.
   • The remake is compared unfavorably to the original, which uses clearer item feedback (e.g., sparks).

6. Identity / character changes for Granny

   • The video’s biggest emotional criticism: Granny doesn’t look or feel like Granny anymore.
   • Visual redesigns (eyes, mouth, hair/structure) are described as “soulless,” and some classic elements (such as a referenced bat) are removed.
   • Animation and jump-scares are criticized as worse:
     • Walking looks “floating”
     • Jump scares use harsh audio/visual effects
   • Voice lines and ambience music are removed, stripping personality and atmosphere.
   • Ending presentation is criticized for lacking the original’s short escape cutscenes (with only the car escape arguably getting one), reducing motivation and payoff.

Overall Conclusion

The reviewer argues the remake disguises weaker identity and design choices behind improved environments and graphics. They don’t hate the developers personally and acknowledge effort, but conclude the remake is disappointing due to:

• Infringement concerns
• Inconsistent mechanics
• Repetition
• Confusing map changes
• Poor item visibility/contrast
• Loss of Granny’s recognizable personality

They hope a “Granny Remake 2” improves on these issues.

Presenters / Contributors

Presenter / narrator

• (Not named in the subtitles)

Mentioned community contributors / creators

• DV Loper — original “Granny” developer
• My Sis the Cat — credited for the Granny/Granny House model used in the video
• Veil Pro 79 — credited for the Granny Remake model used in the video
• Buttery Sandakes — community figure who wrote an essay about the remake

Referenced entities

• Ferret Labs — Granny Remake developer mentioned
• Slendrina / “Slendrina” end screen — ending style referenced