Id like to argue Resident Evil 5, best in class of 2009?

RE5 to me is a great game...but not as great as its predecessors (RE1-3 and the REmake)

Cool as an action game, but kinda short. The AI sucks especially in Pro mode. And besides the Co-op and graphics upgrade, it didn't had any much changes since RE4.

The game's good, but I can't say it's one of the best in 2009.

[QUOTE="SilverChimera"][QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

On a side note, is it just me or does it seem that everyone hates RE5 because it wasn't RE4?

Phoenix534

I'm getting that feeling too. I don't understand it. They're both incredible games.

Its a generic co-op shooter. I only enjoyed it when playing with friends. I dislike the fact that there is absolutely no horror in the game.

Zerocrossings

Why, its not in any way shape or form trying to be a horror game. Its an action game.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

On a side note, is it just me or does it seem that everyone hates RE5 because it wasn't RE4?

SilverChimera

RE4 was better than RE5 but it seems like people who enjoy 4 somehow think 5 is just complete garbage. It was a solid game, I don't see what is so hard to understand or accept about that. Its not like it was getting the same scores as 4 either.

[QUOTE="Zerocrossings"]

Its a generic co-op shooter. I only enjoyed it when playing with friends. I dislike the fact that there is absolutely no horror in the game.

ActicEdge

Why, its not in any way shape or form trying to be a horror game. Its an action game.

Which is why it fails.

Its a good game but I do not find as great as the TC does.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

[QUOTE="Zerocrossings"]

Its a generic co-op shooter. I only enjoyed it when playing with friends. I dislike the fact that there is absolutely no horror in the game.

Zerocrossings

Why, its not in any way shape or form trying to be a horror game. Its an action game.

Which is why it fails.

It fails because it isn't what it's not trying to be? I don't get it. RE 4 wasn't really a horror game either, yet it get praised like crazy.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

[QUOTE="Zerocrossings"]

Its a generic co-op shooter. I only enjoyed it when playing with friends. I dislike the fact that there is absolutely no horror in the game.

Zerocrossings

Why, its not in any way shape or form trying to be a horror game. Its an action game.

Which is why it fails.

That makes no sense, elaborate. A game not trying to be a horror game fails because it didn't try to be what it wasn't?

[QUOTE="Zerocrossings"]

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

Why, its not in any way shape or form trying to be a horror game. Its an action game.

Phoenix534

Which is why it fails.

It fails because it isn't what it's not trying to be? I don't get it. RE 4 wasn't really a horror game either, yet it get praised like crazy.

RE4 got praised, true..but not everyone who enjoyed the previous games.

[QUOTE="Zerocrossings"]

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

Why, its not in any way shape or form trying to be a horror game. Its an action game.

ActicEdge

Which is why it fails.

That makes no sense, elaborate. A game not trying to be a horror game fails because it didn't try to be what it wasn't?

It didnt stay true to its roots.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

[QUOTE="Zerocrossings"]

Which is why it fails.

Zerocrossings

That makes no sense, elaborate. A game not trying to be a horror game fails because it didn't try to be what it wasn't?

It didnt stay true to its roots.

And? Games are not obligated to stay true to their roots. Games are graded and based off of how well theyaccomplish what they are trying to execute. Hating what RE has become does not make it fail. Its not even valid discussion in terms of the game.

[QUOTE="Zerocrossings"]

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

That makes no sense, elaborate. A game not trying to be a horror game fails because it didn't try to be what it wasn't?

ActicEdge

It didnt stay true to its roots.

And? Games are not obligated to stay true to their roots. Games are graded and based off of how well theyaccomplish what they are trying to execute. Hating what RE has become does not make it fail. Its not even valid discussion in terms of the game.

Couldn't have said it better myself. We should judge games on how they are, not by what past games in the series were.

[QUOTE="Zerocrossings"]

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

Why, its not in any way shape or form trying to be a horror game. Its an action game.

Phoenix534

Which is why it fails.

It fails because it isn't what it's not trying to be? I don't get it. RE 4 wasn't really a horror game either, yet it get praised like crazy.

RE4 did attempt to be scary. It was in RE5 that they completely ditched horror. And like the guypreviously said, there are people who did not like the change in RE4. I liked it though, the controls of older RE games has aged.

I feel like this game, although recieved well by both critics and fans, kinda got safted this year. So, im gonna argue a couple perks of this game that I believe rank it amungst the best of 09.

1. Graphics. Um, Perfect. Can anyone find a flaw, a single flaw in the graphical presentation of this game? didn't think so. Buttery smooth framerate and wonderful animation. AND Ohhhhh, those cut scenes... brilliant.

2. Co-op. Again, perfect. Not only was the game concieved around co op, but it actually makes you involved in what the other player is doing. It makes you stick close, it makes you cover your buddies back. Ive played a lot of co-op games where its a "you go your way, ill go mine" type of thing, but Resident Evil 5 seemlessly makes you strategize and care about the other controller. And oh, by the way, have you ever seen such competant A.I.? I hope all those Ubisoft R6V type games took note.

3. The Carrot. Anyone who didnt just play the game for its 10 hour campaign and shelve the game know wxactly what Im talking about. The games extras were like waving a carrot in front of a stick. You're always within reach of something. Upgrades, treasure, bonus's, BSAA symbols... whatever. The game paces out the extras in a way where a second, third and fourth playthrough are almost a give in.

Im not suggesting that RE5 is perfect. The controls are still a little clunky at times, though once you get in a grove you dont feel inhibited often and the story is eh, not bad, but not Mass Effect. All in all, however, I'm standing by this game as being in the top 5 of 09'. I didn't create this thread to attack any other game, but if you disagree, why?

TheEroica

[QUOTE="Zerocrossings"]

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

That makes no sense, elaborate. A game not trying to be a horror game fails because it didn't try to be what it wasn't?

ActicEdge

It didnt stay true to its roots.

And? Games are not obligated to stay true to their roots. Games are graded and based off of how well they accomplish what they are trying to execute. Hating what RE has become does not make it fail. Its not even valid discussion in terms of the game.

Thats where i disagree. Games are obligated to stay true to their roots. Especially if its one of the main games in the series. Its like releasing Halo 4 but its a puzzle game.

Guilty Gear 2 Overture anyone?

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

[QUOTE="Zerocrossings"]

It didnt stay true to its roots.

Zerocrossings

And? Games are not obligated to stay true to their roots. Games are graded and based off of how well they accomplish what they are trying to execute. Hating what RE has become does not make it fail. Its not even valid discussion in terms of the game.

Thats where i disagree. Games are obligated to stay true to their roots. Especially if its one of the main games in the series. Its like releasing Halo 4 but its a puzzle game.

Guilty Gear 2 Overture anyone?

I know how you feel about it. But if a game changes pace yet receives a good recognition then it's not a failure.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

[QUOTE="Zerocrossings"]

It didnt stay true to its roots.

Zerocrossings

And? Games are not obligated to stay true to their roots. Games are graded and based off of how well they accomplish what they are trying to execute. Hating what RE has become does not make it fail. Its not even valid discussion in terms of the game.

Thats where i disagree. Games are obligated to stay true to their roots. Especially if its one of the main games in the series. Its like releasing Halo 4 but its a puzzle game.

Guilty Gear 2 Overture anyone?

If Halo 4 was a puzzle game, then I would judge it as such.

[QUOTE="Zerocrossings"]

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

And? Games are not obligated to stay true to their roots. Games are graded and based off of how well they accomplish what they are trying to execute. Hating what RE has become does not make it fail. Its not even valid discussion in terms of the game.

Phoenix534

Thats where i disagree. Games are obligated to stay true to their roots. Especially if its one of the main games in the series. Its like releasing Halo 4 but its a puzzle game.

Guilty Gear 2 Overture anyone?

If Halo 4 was a puzzle game, then I would judge it as such.

I see where you guysare coming from. To me, RE5 indicates that the series no longer desires to be horror, and I do not like the direction it is going. As such, it failed to deliver an RE experience. I do think its a solid action game. (Only with co-op though)

And glitchspots not letting quote 2 things at once. This is a response to Jyuusandaimeas well.

It's a great game, but not GOTY for me.

Sheva being forced on you was a terrible mistake. She got in the way all the time and was of little if any help. The game was way too short and too similar to RE4.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

[QUOTE="Zerocrossings"]

It didnt stay true to its roots.

Zerocrossings

And? Games are not obligated to stay true to their roots. Games are graded and based off of how well they accomplish what they are trying to execute. Hating what RE has become does not make it fail. Its not even valid discussion in terms of the game.

Thats where i disagree. Games are obligated to stay true to their roots. Especially if its one of the main games in the series. Its like releasing Halo 4 but its a puzzle game.

Guilty Gear 2 Overture anyone?

I don't know where it says games are obligated to stay true to their roots but I think that is a completely lacking rule if it is one. Games can be whatever the hell that want, theywere not created to be set to such restrictions. As far as Halo 4 being a puzzle game. Let me ask you, why on earth would you judge a Halo puzzle game on the merits of an FPS? Does that make any sense? Its clearly going for a different appeal, why judge it like it isn't?

[QUOTE="Phoenix534"]

[QUOTE="Zerocrossings"]

Thats where i disagree. Games are obligated to stay true to their roots. Especially if its one of the main games in the series. Its like releasing Halo 4 but its a puzzle game.

Guilty Gear 2 Overture anyone?

Zerocrossings

If Halo 4 was a puzzle game, then I would judge it as such.

I see where you guysare coming from. To me, RE5 indicates that the series no longer desires to be horror, and I do not like the direction it is going. As such, it failed to deliver an RE experience. I do think its a solid action game. (Only with co-op though)

And glitchspots not letting quote 2 things at once. This is a response to Jyuusandaimeas well.

Ok. I'm glad to hear you thought of it as a solid action game. You came off like you couldn't stand it because it wasn't horror.

[QUOTE="TheEroica"]

[QUOTE="bobbetybob"]1. I can find problems, namely the insane bloom at times, a lot of enemies looked like they were made of tin foil. But yes the graphics are some of the best around. 2. Hell No. The co-op is far from perfect, try playing with a friend offline and then tell me its perfect. Online was good, but it was just like any other co-op game, the covering a buddy was fine but also ruined the difficulty in some places, just staying right next to each other meant you could just constantly stop each other dieing. 3. 10 hour campaign, try 8 max, and I do agree that the collectibles and achievements were addictive, hence why I got 1000/1000G on it. BUT, and this is a humongous, massive, J-Lo sized BUT, I completed RE4 around about 13 times, and not once did I do it for collectibles, I did it because the gameplay was amazing, the story was amazing, everything about the game was amazing, it's my favourite game of all time, and everytime I went back to RE5 to get some gamerscore I couldn't help but feel that if it didn't have achievements I wouldn't have completed it more than twice.bobbetybob

Fine, with the graphics, if you're comparing it to real life. As far as where video games have taken us, RE5 is incredible.

I played with a friend offline once and while it is clearly not the best way to play, it didnt bug me that much.

I say 10 hour because well, thats how long it took me. I admit, I am a "search every nook and cranny in the room" type player though.

Sounds like you really like the game brother.

I can respect that... hell, Im thrilled Im having a real conversation with someone on system wars. Im glad I started this thread. I have one ace in the hole reason why I may have enjoyed RE5 to such an extent. I did not play RE4. Still havn't. im getting a wii for xmas and I will shortly. In all honesty though I think we have an ability to look into the games we like deeper, because we know them so well...

Horrible game, and extremely disappointed with it. I can make a list of what I didn't like, but I think a major reason was that I am a hardcore RE fan, and this game was a complete joke. Ive never seen a game that has that many mainstream, bubble-gum cliche's. I don't understand how any gamer can like this game. I don't understand how it even got that high of a score. Anyone care to explain what I didn't see.

Horrible game, and extremely disappointed with it. I can make a list of what I didn't like, but I think a major reason was that I am a hardcore RE fan, and this game was a complete joke. Ive never seen a game that has that many mainstream, bubble-gum cliche's. I don't understand how any gamer can like this game. I don't understand how it even got that high of a score. Anyone care to explain what I didn't see.

mexicangordo

well it certaintly wasnt scary by any stretch, but it had very fun elements to it. I like your sig BTW, Gish is a great album... I was in high school in the early 90's and the Pumpkins were huge.

[QUOTE="mexicangordo"]

Horrible game, and extremely disappointed with it. I can make a list of what I didn't like, but I think a major reason was that I am a hardcore RE fan, and this game was a complete joke. Ive never seen a game that has that many mainstream, bubble-gum cliche's. I don't understand how any gamer can like this game. I don't understand how it even got that high of a score. Anyone care to explain what I didn't see.

TheEroica

well it certaintly wasnt scary by any stretch, but it had very fun elements to it. I like your sig BTW, Gish is a great album... I was in high school in the early 90's and the Pumpkins were huge.

Well, I dont consider gongi through short levels and mowing down the same robotic enemies as fun. And don't even get me started about the horrible pacing of the game... Or the zero exploration...or the flawed idiotic story....Beh, Im getting carried away. :P

And Gish is a great album, when I was in high school The Pumpkins were still huge, though not a lot of the new generation cares for them. But yes, amazing band indeed. ;)

It was a good game. Besides the forced co-op which was really dumb. RE is meant to be a SP experiance. IF capcom wanted co-op make it optional not forced. Also its a bad RE game. RE went from survival horror to a full blown action shooter. Im all for changing up a series,but not its genra. If they want to change it up make it a spin off or another universe.

Is not the best of 09 but it was really good

Not even close, there's just too many better games this year. I liked RE5 but the many flaws kept it from being great.

It was a good game. Besides the forced co-op which was really dumb. RE is meant to be a SP experiance. IF capcom wanted co-op make it optional not forced. Also its a bad RE game. RE went from survival horror to a full blown action shooter. Im all for changing up a series,but not its genra. If they want to change it up make it a spin off or another universe.

finalfantasy94

Is it safe to say then that one of the reasons I enjoyed it so much is because I could give a rats a$$ about the RE lineage of games? I mean I like them but theyre in no way my favorite series out there. I happened to think that RE5 was excellent and IM still playing it 8 months later.

Horrible game, and extremely disappointed with it. I can make a list of what I didn't like, but I think a major reason was that I am a hardcore RE fan, and this game was a complete joke. Ive never seen a game that has that many mainstream, bubble-gum cliche's. I don't understand how any gamer can like this game. I don't understand how it even got that high of a score. Anyone care to explain what I didn't see.

mexicangordo

[QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

It was a good game. Besides the forced co-op which was really dumb. RE is meant to be a SP experiance. IF capcom wanted co-op make it optional not forced. Also its a bad RE game. RE went from survival horror to a full blown action shooter. Im all for changing up a series,but not its genra. If they want to change it up make it a spin off or another universe.

TheEroica

Is it safe to say then that one of the reasons I enjoyed it so much is because I could give a rats a$$ about the RE lineage of games? I mean I like them but theyre in no way my favorite series out there. I happened to think that RE5 was excellent and IM still playing it 8 months later.

Im a huge RE fan so iv seen the series change and I dont like the way its been headed. RE was one of my favorite series thats been changing though. Unless capcom cahnges it up for the next game. I still enjoyed RE5 I plat the game. I just didint like it as a RE game.

I don't really see why everyone's so up in arms about RE5. The story? It's Resident Evil. This is the series that gave us classic writing, such as "You were almost a Jill sandwich." No Resident Evil game has had a story that could be considered great by any stretch of the imagination. Maybe the series had a great story overall if you completely took out all the bad writing and the awful way it's presented, but as is? No way.

I agree with all those who are bashing the AI, or at least Sheva's. Playing by youself was like forcing a dull railroad spike through your head. Sure, you got something done, but you felt like you'd lost something important after you did it. The enemy AI didn't bother me. Zombies aren't that smart, and I really don't expect them to be.

I didn't have problems with the pacing, either. Could someone who did point out an example of what they had a problem with?

As for the whole "the controls are outdated" arguement, I like them fine. It forces you to aim and be smart about how you play. A resident Evil with run and gun controls would be awful, imo.

Overall, it was a great game, and I had more fun playing it on co-op than I did playing RE4, which was also a significant departure from the roots of the series. And yet it doesn't get bashed nearly as much.

[QUOTE="Zerocrossings"]

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

And? Games are not obligated to stay true to their roots. Games are graded and based off of how well they accomplish what they are trying to execute. Hating what RE has become does not make it fail. Its not even valid discussion in terms of the game.

ActicEdge

Thats where i disagree. Games are obligated to stay true to their roots. Especially if its one of the main games in the series. Its like releasing Halo 4 but its a puzzle game.

Guilty Gear 2 Overture anyone?

I don't know where it says games are obligated to stay true to their roots but I think that is a completely lacking rule if it is one. Games can be whatever the hell that want, theywere not created to be set to such restrictions. As far as Halo 4 being a puzzle game. Let me ask you, why on earth would you judge a Halo puzzle game on the merits of an FPS? Does that make any sense? Its clearly going for a different appeal, why judge it like it isn't?

Of course staying true to the roots is not an official rule, I never said it was. This is a personal opinion.

And people judge games based on the series they are from. This does make sense.

I don't really see why everyone's so up in arms about RE5. The story? It's Resident Evil. This is the series that gave us classic writing, such as "You were almost a Jill sandwich." No Resident Evil game has had a story that could be considered great by any stretch of the imagination. Maybe the series had a great story overall if you completely took out all the bad writing and the awful way it's presented, but as is? No way.

I agree with all those who are bashing the AI, or at least Sheva's. Playing by youself was like forcing a dull railroad spike through your head. Sure, you got something done, but you felt like you'd lost something important after you did it. The enemy AI didn't bother me. Zombies aren't that smart, and I really don't expect them to be.

I didn't have problems with the pacing, either. Could someone who did point out an example of what they had a problem with?

As for the whole "the controls are outdated" arguement, I like them fine. It forces you to aim and be smart about how you play. A resident Evil with run and gun controls would be awful, imo.

Overall, it was a great game, and I had more fun playing it on co-op than I did playing RE4, which was also a significant departure from the roots of the series. And yet it doesn't get bashed nearly as much.

DarkLink77

Actually it did. Its just RE5 turn since its the most recent.

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]

I don't really see why everyone's so up in arms about RE5. The story? It's Resident Evil. This is the series that gave us classic writing, such as "You were almost a Jill sandwich." No Resident Evil game has had a story that could be considered great by any stretch of the imagination. Maybe the series had a great story overall if you completely took out all the bad writing and the awful way it's presented, but as is? No way.

I agree with all those who are bashing the AI, or at least Sheva's. Playing by youself was like forcing a dull railroad spike through your head. Sure, you got something done, but you felt like you'd lost something important after you did it. The enemy AI didn't bother me. Zombies aren't that smart, and I really don't expect them to be.

I didn't have problems with the pacing, either. Could someone who did point out an example of what they had a problem with?

As for the whole "the controls are outdated" arguement, I like them fine. It forces you to aim and be smart about how you play. A resident Evil with run and gun controls would be awful, imo.

Overall, it was a great game, and I had more fun playing it on co-op than I did playing RE4, which was also a significant departure from the roots of the series. And yet it doesn't get bashed nearly as much.

finalfantasy94

Actually it did. Its just RE5 turn since its the most recent.

[QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"]

I don't really see why everyone's so up in arms about RE5. The story? It's Resident Evil. This is the series that gave us classic writing, such as "You were almost a Jill sandwich." No Resident Evil game has had a story that could be considered great by any stretch of the imagination. Maybe the series had a great story overall if you completely took out all the bad writing and the awful way it's presented, but as is? No way.

I agree with all those who are bashing the AI, or at least Sheva's. Playing by youself was like forcing a dull railroad spike through your head. Sure, you got something done, but you felt like you'd lost something important after you did it. The enemy AI didn't bother me. Zombies aren't that smart, and I really don't expect them to be.

I didn't have problems with the pacing, either. Could someone who did point out an example of what they had a problem with?

As for the whole "the controls are outdated" arguement, I like them fine. It forces you to aim and be smart about how you play. A resident Evil with run and gun controls would be awful, imo.

Overall, it was a great game, and I had more fun playing it on co-op than I did playing RE4, which was also a significant departure from the roots of the series. And yet it doesn't get bashed nearly as much.

DarkLink77

Actually it did. Its just RE5 turn since its the most recent.

Mostly by the same people who love RE5. Thats what I see anyway.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

[QUOTE="Zerocrossings"]

Thats where i disagree. Games are obligated to stay true to their roots. Especially if its one of the main games in the series. Its like releasing Halo 4 but its a puzzle game.

Guilty Gear 2 Overture anyone?

Zerocrossings

I don't know where it says games are obligated to stay true to their roots but I think that is a completely lacking rule if it is one. Games can be whatever the hell that want, theywere not created to be set to such restrictions. As far as Halo 4 being a puzzle game. Let me ask you, why on earth would you judge a Halo puzzle game on the merits of an FPS? Does that make any sense? Its clearly going for a different appeal, why judge it like it isn't?

Of course staying true to the roots is not an official rule, I never said it was. This is a personal opinion.

And people judge games based on the series they are from. This does make sense.

Ok, I can't argue with your opinion (even if I think its kinda strange)

On the second part though I was asking whther what I was stating was logical. not what people judge. If halo 4 is a puzzle game, it would be reviewed as a puzzle game. Reviewing it or even judging it for not being an FPS makes no logical sense at all. None what so ever.

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

Actually it did. Its just RE5 turn since its the most recent.

finalfantasy94

Mostly by the same people who love RE5. Thats what I see anyway.

[QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"] Did it? Everywhere I look, RE4 is being hailed a one of the great masterpieces of video-gaming. DarkLink77

Mostly by the same people who love RE5. Thats what I see anyway.

Talking about the orginals I just rebought RE2 and playing on my psp.

[QUOTE="Zerocrossings"]

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

I don't know where it says games are obligated to stay true to their roots but I think that is a completely lacking rule if it is one. Games can be whatever the hell that want, theywere not created to be set to such restrictions. As far as Halo 4 being a puzzle game. Let me ask you, why on earth would you judge a Halo puzzle game on the merits of an FPS? Does that make any sense? Its clearly going for a different appeal, why judge it like it isn't?

ActicEdge

Of course staying true to the roots is not an official rule, I never said it was. This is a personal opinion.

And people judge games based on the series they are from. This does make sense.

Ok, I can't argue with your opinion (even if I think its kinda strange)

On the second part though I was asking whther what I was stating was logical. not what people judge. If halo 4 is a puzzle game, it would be reviewed as a puzzle game. Reviewing it or even judging it for not being an FPS makes no logical sense at all. None what so ever.

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"][QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

Mostly by the same people who love RE5. Thats what I see anyway.

finalfantasy94

Talking about the orginals I just rebought RE2 and playing on my psp.

[QUOTE="Zerocrossings"]

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

I don't know where it says games are obligated to stay true to their roots but I think that is a completely lacking rule if it is one. Games can be whatever the hell that want, theywere not created to be set to such restrictions. As far as Halo 4 being a puzzle game. Let me ask you, why on earth would you judge a Halo puzzle game on the merits of an FPS? Does that make any sense? Its clearly going for a different appeal, why judge it like it isn't?

ActicEdge

Of course staying true to the roots is not an official rule, I never said it was. This is a personal opinion.

And people judge games based on the series they are from. This does make sense.

Ok, I can't argue with your opinion (even if I think its kinda strange)

On the second part though I was asking whther what I was stating was logical. not what people judge. If halo 4 is a puzzle game, it would be reviewed as a puzzle game. Reviewing it or even judging it for not being an FPS makes no logical sense at all. None what so ever.

I find your opinion weird too. :P You wouldnt mind if a series completely deviated from what it originally was? Weird.

And i guess i misunderstood your 2nd point. I know what you are trying to say and i do agree with it. Games should be judged for what they are and not the series they are in right? Well, to me, if a series starts heading into completely new direction, i might voice dissatisfaction even if the game itself is good because it no longer provides the same experience.

Like i said, i thought RE5 was a solid co-op action game, but i do not appreciate what it has done to the series.

[QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

[QUOTE="DarkLink77"] Huh. In all honesty, I really don't see what was so great about RE4. I mean, it was a fun game, and I enjoyed playing it, but after 2 playthroughs I have no desire to ever play it again. Still, the originals were the best. I think that Re5 would have been an awful game if there was no way to play it in co-op.DarkLink77

Talking about the orginals I just rebought RE2 and playing on my psp.

I bought it from PSN. I bought RE1 directors cut duelshock edition,RE2 duelshock edtion and RE3 just went up. You can play on psp or the PS3.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

[QUOTE="Zerocrossings"]

Of course staying true to the roots is not an official rule, I never said it was. This is a personal opinion.

And people judge games based on the series they are from. This does make sense.

darkmoney52

Ok, I can't argue with your opinion (even if I think its kinda strange)

On the second part though I was asking whther what I was stating was logical. not what people judge. If halo 4 is a puzzle game, it would be reviewed as a puzzle game. Reviewing it or even judging it for not being an FPS makes no logical sense at all. None what so ever.

Wrong. It would bereviewed for what it was, apuzzle game. There is no arguing other wise. The fans hating it for being a puzzle game are another issue. Completely ridiculous for hating a game that was never trying to be what they wanted. They can whine and be immatuure about it but ultimately, if its a puzzle game, the only logical way to look at it is as a puzzle game. Anything else and you're now being an emotional gamer, that is, one who is not worth listening to. Don't get me wrong and think I'm saying you cannot be disappointed. That's fine. However you cannot simply hate it for not being what it wasn't trying to be, its like hating my friend for being a basketball player when he's playing baseball. What sense does that make.

[QUOTE="darkmoney52"][QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

Ok, I can't argue with your opinion (even if I think its kinda strange)

On the second part though I was asking whther what I was stating was logical. not what people judge. If halo 4 is a puzzle game, it would be reviewed as a puzzle game. Reviewing it or even judging it for not being an FPS makes no logical sense at all. None what so ever.

ActicEdge

Wrong. It would bereviewed for what it was, apuzzle game. There is no arguing other wise. The fans hating it for being a puzzle game are another issue. Completely ridiculous for hating a game that was never trying to be what they wanted. They can whine and be immatuure about it but ultimately, if its a puzzle game, the only logical way to look at it is as a puzzle game. Anything else and you're now being an emotional gamer, that is, one who is not worth listening to. Don't get me wrong and think I'm saying you cannot be disappointed. That's fine. However you cannot simply hate it for not being what it wasn't trying to be, its like hating my friend for being a basketball player when he's playing baseball. What sense does that make.