Polygon reviewed a PS2 game remake like nobody played the original

I would like to speak to whoever at Polygon decided that the appropriate way to review a remake of a twenty-year-old game is to describe it as if no one has ever played Metal Gear Solid 3 before. 'A pure remake that updates graphics and controls without altering the core' — you mean they did the absolute bare minimum? They took a beloved classic, applied a fresh coat of Unreal Engine 5, and charged seventy dollars? And this is praiseworthy?

The review praises the 'survival mechanics' as if eating snakes and treating injuries is a bold new innovation and not something we all did on the PS2 while our parents yelled at us to do homework. Polygon has reviewed this game like it exists in a vacuum where the original never happened, which is either dishonest or evidence that the reviewer was born after 2005.

Here's what the review should have asked: Does this remake justify its existence beyond nostalgia? Is seventy dollars reasonable for a game your audience has already played? What does Delta add that modders haven't already achieved for free? Instead we got 'the graphics are better and the controls are updated,' which is a product description, not a review. I've seen more critical analysis on the back of a cereal box. I want a refund on my expectations.