At some point in our lives, we all recall to a specific game and/or genre that influenced our initial step into the world of game design. Something that affected you in such a way, forever more, your sole purpose was to create something of equal or greater acclaim. We all had to start somewhere, and for me it was Mega Man X. Since then, I've dedicated time, effort and energy to educate myself about the entire franchise and company who produced it. But after years of learning so much about one franchise and numerous attempts to re-motivate oneself to create something of its magnitude, it tends to become somewhat stale and requires a change of scenery, so to speak.

I've looked into many different types of games and the archetypes from whence they originated; currently, the one that fascinate me the most right now are tactical, strategy-based RPGs. I've already played through the most well known one of them all, Fire Emblem, and I posed myself a crucial question: I want to make something like this, but should I pursue to create a remake or a completely different game with this as its influence?

The problem here is not whether you can or cannot, its with what resources you have that allow you if you can or cannot. Obviously, all the resources to make something that's been done before are readily available at the click of a mouse. Databases are already filled up with information and resources about the game: literature, game mechanics and formulae, character/class info, images, sprites/models, maps, and so on. Basically, all the pieces are there, they just have to be put together coherently in a form that stays true to the original gameplay style. People tend to abuse this; just because they want to make something based on it or something with it in the name, they automatically assume that people will like it. That, in itself, irks me to no end. They either take no time to publish a half-assed attempt and slap a name of a well known franchise and call it their own, or they take their time to follow through with a completely new idea but end up losing motivation somewhere in the middle will a relatively decent piece of work, albeit incomplete and/or unpublished.

Of course there are always those exceptions to the rule, but even if a game is absolutely ingenious there is always that chance that it gets overlooked while all the other inept attempts get all the attention. Its awkward the way it works, but it happens to even the best of games and that is why I pose the question.

Should one pursue to remake a well known game while adhering to the rules set forth by its previous incarnations, have little to no flexibility in change of style of gameplay and have a decent game that you know people will play, or should one pursue to create their own with little to no resources and with endless possibilities, potentially having the game completely overlooked in the event of completion?

My thought is that you won't know until you try, but I'm eager to learn of your opinions.
Just go buy the game then.
In response to EGUY
...did you even read the post?
In response to ArcaneDragonX
From how you go about, it seems like your mind is already made up.

If you're just going to remake a game shot for shot trying to live up to Platonic Form of the original, then just buy it and save yourself the trouble. At that point it's just connect the dots with more forums posts to Developer How-to/Code Problems/Classified Ads. Therefore, at least change it up.

I think it's fine to make something influenced by a previous example since it's rather hard to just come up with an idea in a 'thought vacuum' where nothing before it can affect it.

Ultimately, I don't think the reason you initially enjoyed your favorite game is that it was trying to emulate a previous game.
Well, I'm currently working on remaking Zelda: A Link to the Past, but with online multi-player. (Not through BYOND)

The artwork is there, just that I have to port them to a format that I can use, which is taking the most of my time rather then having to write code.

In the end it just depends on how much time you can spend in development.

Want to develop a game fast? Then remaking a pre-existing one is a most likely option as most of the artwork is done for you, as well as other assets. (If the game's popular enough)

Making one from scratch with originality, most of the time would be spent into making it original rather than the art.
Completely different game.

You wouldn't like Fire Emblem if it was an exact copy of an earlier game. The reason you like it is because it was original. It was genuine and well designed, not a fan-game or remake of something else.

Don't follow the trend - start your own. Think about what would have made Fire Emblem better, and then include that in your tactical RPG. Make a game so good that people will want to make a remake of YOUR game. Make a game that'll make people say "Why didn't I think of that?", because apparently that won't happen if you make an exact copy of Fire Emblem.

Just remake the game give it a different name and change any names of things that could be trademarked. Same goes for Megaman, call it Minorman or something. Then most people will be some what tricked into thinking it's a new game when it's really just a clone. This is how most new console games are now a days.
In response to Ulterior Motives
Only problem with Megaman is that Megaman took all the good designs. If you screw around and draw a robot that looks exactly like one in Megaman and try to say its "yours", then you're in violation of some copyrights. Unless you're doing a spoof or something.