If you dont like the direction RE is going then just dont play it.

#1 Posted by Hebaphrenic (64 posts) -
Ive been an avid Resident Evil fan since RE1. As with any games that we have grown up with, the newer sequals will evolve with the generation of gaming. True RE5 did not have the "scare factor" that the previous games held, but it was still a fun game and added great canon to the story. RE4 was also fun (though i am not the biggest Leon fan). It did hold that scare factor and it was a nice evolution into different gameplay. I have high hopes for RE6, I think its going to be an outstanding game and a great new piece to the RE story. To all those who are complaining about the direction that RE went in its gameplay: Stop whining. This is the way it goes with anything. Video Games, Music, Movies, everything. It all evolves away from how it once was. If you dont like it, dont play it, dont post on forums about it. Game Over.
#2 Posted by AdaxWong (4 posts) -
I completely agree I have been an avid RE fan since RE1 and this new direction at first was a bit nerve wrecking to kind of get to know but at the same time it's kind of been an enjoyable ride to witness the change and how the characters evolve
#3 Posted by CondorCalabasas (637 posts) -
Stop whining. This is the way it goes with anything. Video Games, Music, Movies, everything. It all evolves away from how it once was. If you dont like it, dont play it, dont post on forums about it. Game Over.Hebaphrenic
You look so foolish saying that. "STOP HAVING OPINIONS ON FORUMS!" Really? You trying to make everyone laugh? Do you have any idea what a forum is? Its so people have their opinions. If you have problems with people sharing their opinions on a gaming forum, the only person who shouldn't be posting is you. I'd love to continue on a on, about how foolish you are for saying that, but I won't. I'll just explain how your point is wrong. I'll use Max Payne 3, and Deus Ex: Human Revolution to prove how you are wrong. Lots of people thought MP3 wouldn't be noir unless it was set in new york city. Thats called not knowing what the word noir means, because noir is not defined by its setting. People say MP3 is a cover shooter, just like gears of war. Thats called not playing the game the way its meant to be played. You cannot progress in the harder difficulties in MP3 by hiding behind a piece of cover. MP3 is meant to be a game that challenges you like the arcade games used to do way back when, its based around fast reaction time, and accuracy. Deus Ex: HR changed a lot from the first two games. A great majority of these changes were to improve the entertainment of the gameplay, and further balance it. One thing neither of these games changed was the formula. In Max Payne the same in the third iteration, as it was in the first. You shoot dodge, slow time, aim for the head, constantly on the move. The formula is the exact same, so in my opinion, they changed nothing from the first game. The same can be said for Deus Ex, you can still play stealthy, finding alternative paths, using hacking to your advantage, and go in guns blazing if you want. Both of those games have excellent stories, where things slowly unfold, and they aren't quite what they seem at first. Resident Evil on the other hand, went from a very slow moving, challenging survival horror game, where its about saving ammo, being accurate, and knowing when to run. And much like the two games above, it had an excellent story, slowly finding out more and more. Very immersive game, really made you feel like you were the character. Resident evil 5 is an action game, with a main bad guy boss, its about large groups of enemies coming at you, and you slaughtering them all like its a arcade shoot-em-up. Thats it, nothing more. No good story, no good characters, just a call of duty version of Resident Evil marketed towards the young and stupid. You aren't a Resident Evil fan, if you were, you'd respect other peoples opinions, who are.
#5 Posted by Hebaphrenic (64 posts) -

Ima keep this short.

Condor... I merely dont want people whining. Discussions of Pros/Cons is fine. But in all good RE discussions, there is ALWAYS innevitably that one guy who wants to whine and be destructive to the conversation.

Game Over! :)

#6 Posted by Mister_Zurkon (1316 posts) -

I feel the same way TC, I used to love Silent Hill, but it was really downhill after 3. 

But it seems like a waste of time to just complain about a series that will never go back to the way you want it to. Just suck it up and find something new.

It doesn't do any good to spend time pining over an Ex, it's certainly no different with games. 

#7 Posted by Hebaphrenic (64 posts) -

Staff Seargent used to say "The best way to get over one girl is to get under another". Sorry if this seems kinda crude, but its the same way with video games. I still enjoy the RE games and I like the way they have evolved. I just hope they bring the scare factor back a little bit more. My advice to the RE fans who have been following RE since PS1 is, if you dont like it, get under a new game. If you are an original RE fan like me who still enjoys the new RE games, then play on! Cheers!

#8 Posted by sy-bro22 (122 posts) -

 Condor you got alot of good points. But the whole thing is pointless imo. Nothing will come of it, if this were some board of us complaining about health care or sommthing then yea lets complain. But old re fans complaining about new re is like me watching youtube videos of an artist and complain on the boards about how good they used to be.

 

 I dunno lets say Eminem or somone. A bunch of people prefer the older stuff, but do you think hes going to go back to that because a certain group thinks its better? You can complain but I dunno I think people should be more productive with their time (As write on a video game fourm ahahahha) I mean It seems more destructive than constructive. To spend so much time hating somthing that you just cant change... I used to hate hate hate lady gaga, I would complain how shes not creative just a knock off... But shes not gonna take my advice,take off her wigs, play the piano and just sing songs now is she?

#9 Posted by CondorCalabasas (637 posts) -

 Condor you got alot of good points. But the whole thing is pointless imo. Nothing will come of it, if this were some board of us complaining about health care or sommthing then yea lets complain. But old re fans complaining about new re is like me watching youtube videos of an artist and complain on the boards about how good they used to be.

 

 I dunno lets say Eminem or somone. A bunch of people prefer the older stuff, but do you think hes going to go back to that because a certain group thinks its better? You can complain but I dunno I think people should be more productive with their time (As write on a video game fourm ahahahha) I mean It seems more destructive than constructive. To spend so much time hating somthing that you just cant change... I used to hate hate hate lady gaga, I would complain how shes not creative just a knock off... But shes not gonna take my advice,take off her wigs, play the piano and just sing songs now is she?

sy-bro22
Developers do read forums. How often, I have no idea so no its not entirely pointless. Yea actually. Take the Deus Ex series for example, the second game was not what fans wanted many complained, so Deus Ex: HR was a throw back to the first game. Same with Max Payne, the 2nd game got a lot of complaints, too easy, too much slow mo, etc. Max Payne 3 was a throw back to the first game. This is being productive with your time. The purpose of a forum is to discuss things, and opinions. Thats exactly what we are doing here right now. I didn't make that post so everyone would be like "CONDOR YOU ARE RIGHT, I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING" I was hoping that someone, if not everyone would disagree and tell me how I'am wrong. I find it entertaining, and educational in terms of the gaming industry. I like to know where people's heads are at, I like the hear the opinions of other gamers. You can learn quite a bit from a community of gamers. I don't hate, I don't have that strong of a feeling for any inanimate object. Because of Resident Evil 4, Resident Evil 5 was going to get amazing sales. It didn't matter what the game itself was, it could've been pong, people still would've bought it just because of how great Resident Evil 4 was. Now were in a good spot for class RE fans, people were very disappointed with Resident Evil 5, so its going to work the opposite now. Most people won't even consider buying RE6 just because of how disappointing RE5 was. If things work out the way I hope they do, and RE6 does terrible (for a RE game), the company will have to rethink how they are going to produce games. And most likely go back to their roots.
#10 Posted by Mister_Zurkon (1316 posts) -

Max Payne 3 was not a throwback to 1. 

#11 Posted by CondorCalabasas (637 posts) -

Max Payne 3 was not a throwback to 1. 

Mister_Zurkon
Yes, it was. Don't even bother trying to argue otherwise, I already know I know more about Max Payne than you do.
#14 Posted by omar-haq (686 posts) -
@Condor See, I agree with you on some levels, and I understand your frustration. Brothers In Arms has been a longtime franchise I've loved and the announcement of Furious Four made me flip a ****. Sometimes change is never a good thing, but sometimes it is. For example, you cite Deus Ex Human Revolution as a game that "changed" but didn't change at the same time. You say that Deus Ex remains the same mostly because the same gameplay "concepts" are still intact, but the game still plays very different. Third person cover, insta-kill melee, new energy system, regenerating health, much faster paced, less consequences for going full auto (in fact easier sometimes to do so), and the boss fights were in no way a throwback to Deus Ex 1, I'm sure you can agree with me on that one at least. But the core concepts are still intact, you can "stealth" through a place, you can "hack" through a place, you can "guns ablaze" through a place, and you can most certainly "non-lethal" through the place, but the one core concept that wasn't present in HR that was in the 1st Deus Ex was that you could completely avoid boss fights. What are Resident Evil's core gameplay concepts? Shooting Zombies, low ammo, free-roam, crazy monsters, and a sense of horror/thriller. As far as I can see from playing the RE6 demo is that you still shoot zombies, I ran out of ammo many many times with Chris and Leon (not Jake as much but that's because I went all hand to hand), there were some crazy monsters in Chris's story, and that Urgnak from Jakes, and a sense of horror/thriller in two of the three campaigns. The only thing that was not there that used to be in RE1-4 is free roam. So in my opinion, the core gameplay concepts are still intact but just has a new way of delivering it to you. Take the story into account here. Previous Resident Evil games took place in small places. Mansions, Downtown police HQ, Villages in Africa, Towns in Europe. These all took place at the start of the infection, and now we're at the height and we're in China. What Resident Evil 6 still nails undoubtedly is atmosphere and it does it extremely well by splitting the campaign up into different parts. Leon is a throwback to old RE games and similar atmosphere, he's still a normal guy and he's not trying to take on anything too big. Chris is a more action packed approach because he's part of a military unit, and the gameplay/atmosphere makes you feel like that, but the mutations of enemies still keeps you on your toes. Jake's deals with the crazy monsters Resident Evil is known for and has a very cool melee system. The core gameplay concepts are still intact. You shoot zombies, you will run out of ammo, you'll almost always want to aim for the head, and new monsters will terrorize you. Zombies are getting old now, you've dealt with them in the past 5 games, the new freshened up gameplay is what's going to keep the franchise going and I can guarantee you that this game will still sell extremely well. Operation Raccoon City did and it was complete trash. Also I don't think Max Payne 3 was a throwback to Max Payne 1, it was simply a sequel. Max Payne 2 was much more cinematic, had better set pieces, had better character development, presentation, and story. Difficulty and amount of slow motion is only a matter of tweaking so I think all in all MP3 was probably closer to MP2.
#15 Posted by Mister_Zurkon (1316 posts) -

[QUOTE="Mister_Zurkon"]

Max Payne 3 was not a throwback to 1. 

CondorCalabasas

Yes, it was. Don't even bother trying to argue otherwise, I already know I know more about Max Payne than you do.

 

I must have missed the Part of Max Payne that was a Cling to Cover shooter where you get bosses around by obnoxious cliche'd minority characters.

#16 Posted by Mister_Zurkon (1316 posts) -

*Bossed

 

On top of that, Max Payne 2 was very well recived by critics and fans. 

 

#17 Posted by CondorCalabasas (637 posts) -

[QUOTE="CondorCalabasas"][QUOTE="Mister_Zurkon"]

Max Payne 3 was not a throwback to 1. 

Mister_Zurkon

Yes, it was. Don't even bother trying to argue otherwise, I already know I know more about Max Payne than you do.

 

I must have missed the Part of Max Payne that was a Cling to Cover shooter where you get bosses around by obnoxious cliche'd minority characters.

I missed the part where you were supposed to play Max Payne on the most mind numbly easy difficulty settings. Because you can't hide behind cover like that on harder difficulty settings. And Max Payne 1 had just as much Max Payne hiding behind cover as Max Payne 3 did. You just don't know, because as I said I know more about the Max Payne series than you do. I guess you weren't paying attention in Max Payne 1. Max Payne 2 was not at all well received by fans. True fans hated that game. As I said, you know nothing about Max Payne, so I'm not sure why you even bothered.
#18 Posted by CondorCalabasas (637 posts) -
omar-haq
****There is a MP2 plot SPOILER in my post***** In terms of how you play the game, the overall experience, it is exactly like Deus Ex 1. The only exception is the boss battles, which the company apologized for, and mentioned that they were not in any way involved in making those boss fights. Well thats exactly what I think is wrong with the Resident Evil series today. No I have not played the demo, but I read reviews, and I watched all the gameplay. To me its a thriller, it looks like its a thrilling game to play. When I think of things I felt whilst playing RE1-4, dread is the first word that comes to mind. In RE2 (my fav) I feared every corner, I walked as slowly as possible so I wouldn't run right into a zombie. I aimed carefully, knowing even if I didn't miss, I was going to be very low on ammo. Which almost meant certain death, running around with that garbage knife was terrible in RE2, plus it added a fear aspect knowing you had to get close. You felt so alone in all those games, even in RE4 when you had ashley there, it still felt like you were alone. I don't deny the core gameplay concepts are intact, you are correct. I could say the same about Max Payne 2. But Max Payne 2 never felt like a Max Payne game, it felt like a B hollywood action movie. There wasn't a sense of a plot unfolding (figured out who the main bad guy was minutes in), there wasn't anything new and interesting to discover (cycling the same characters), and the gameplay itself was easy, that of all that I just mentioned is the worst offence. Playing through Max Payne 1 & 3 on the hardest difficulty settings, you have to be constantly running and gunning, and you won't get far unless you are getting those headshots constantly. "Zombies are getting old now" They aren't though, if you pay any attention to pop culture today, zombies are a bigger deal than vampires in our society. You shoot way more people than you do zombies in video games, but thats not getting old. It was equally cinematic, Max Payne 1 did it better though. Set pieces were worse, don't even play that game. Middle class apartment buildings vs crack den style apartment buildings, MP1 wins. Theme park vs Car garage, MP1 wins. Warehouse, vs Docks, MP1 wins. I could go on I'm sure. The character development was not better, as the characters were already developed in the previous game. Infact, I'd argue there was absolutely no character development at all in MP2. The presentation was far worse. And the story doesn't even compare. MP1, family is murdered massive conspiracy slowly unfolds as you chase after every possible lead. MP2, guy who would never cross you, because he knows exactly how dangerous you are, hence why he decided to work with you in the first place, turns his back on you. In MP1 & MP3, you aren't sure whether or not Max is actually going to survive, the entire game its a mystery, it feels like everything is against him, and there is no way he is going to come out on top. MP2 is the opposite, you know Max is going to win, you are fighting against a side character from the first game. The plot in MP2 is one the worst I've ever experience in a video game, it does not even remotely compare to the first or the third game. Finally, thats the thing, you couldn't tweak the amount of slow motion you get in MP2, it refilled as time went on. So no, the difficulty was not a matter of tweaking.
#19 Posted by Mister_Zurkon (1316 posts) -

Who are these fans?

Seriously, What are you talking about? You certainly don't speak for all the fans.

Go to any aggregated review site and see that the fan and critic reviews are overwhelmingly positive.

#20 Posted by Mister_Zurkon (1316 posts) -
And I mean Cling to Cover shooter wise-guy. Almost every shooter uses some sort of architecture you can hide behind.
#21 Posted by CondorCalabasas (637 posts) -
And I mean Cling to Cover shooter wise-guy. Almost every shooter uses some sort of architecture you can hide behind.Mister_Zurkon
Whats the difference? Wise guy. You think they designed all the crates in MP1 the exact size so that when you crouch behind them, you can still shoot over them, by accident? Its the same thing, it just looks differently. Who are these fans that say the opposite? Making an argument that can be flipped is no argument. Seriously, what are you talking about? You certainly don't speak for all the fans. And if you did go to any review site, you'd see the scores are lower for MP2 than they are for 1 & 3. I guess if we are basing this on fan and critic reviews, you've just proven you are wrong.
#22 Posted by Hebaphrenic (64 posts) -

@Condor

Id love to hear the definition of a "true fan". To my understanding a fan is anyone who likes a game... obviously. Lets use Mass Effect for example. Just because I liked all of the ME games but hypothetically one got bad reviews, does that make me any less of a fan just because some other people didnt like it? Nah, "true fan" is an ignorent term. A fan is a fan is a fan regardless of what reviews say.

#23 Posted by CondorCalabasas (637 posts) -

@Condor

Id love to hear the definition of a "true fan". To my understanding a fan is anyone who likes a game... obviously. Lets use Mass Effect for example. Just because I liked all of the ME games but hypothetically one got bad reviews, does that make me any less of a fan just because some other people didnt like it? Nah, "true fan" is an ignorent term. A fan is a fan is a fan regardless of what reviews say.

Hebaphrenic
That made no sense at all. You asked me what the definition of a true fan was, then you explained what you think a true fan was, and then you said there is no such thing as a true fan. Please, try again, this time in English, and this time make up your mind about what you want. And why on earth would what someone thought about a game you liked, have anything to do with your fandom?
#24 Posted by Hebaphrenic (64 posts) -

Apparently there is a difference to you in a "fan" and a "TRUE fan" get with it guy.

#25 Posted by Hebaphrenic (64 posts) -

You said earlier, "true fans" didnt like MP2 and you also refference the bad reviews from "true fans". Hence my question, of why just because someone likes MP2 are they not a "True fan" Seems like a dumb statement to me. I guess because i liked RE5 even though other fans dont like it im not a "true RE fan" according to what you say.

#26 Posted by Mister_Zurkon (1316 posts) -

The Reviews are lower by like... 2%

 

As aposed to Deus Ex: IW and RE5 that were like... 10% Lower than the predicessor. 

 

Hell, MP2 and 3 have about the same rating.

#27 Posted by B1uuu (7 posts) -

Ive been an avid Resident Evil fan since RE1. As with any games that we have grown up with, the newer sequals will evolve with the generation of gaming. True RE5 did not have the "scare factor" that the previous games held, but it was still a fun game and added great canon to the story. RE4 was also fun (though i am not the biggest Leon fan). It did hold that scare factor and it was a nice evolution into different gameplay. I have high hopes for RE6, I think its going to be an outstanding game and a great new piece to the RE story. To all those who are complaining about the direction that RE went in its gameplay: Stop whining. This is the way it goes with anything. Video Games, Music, Movies, everything. It all evolves away from how it once was. If you dont like it, dont play it, dont post on forums about it. Game Over.Hebaphrenic

I completely disagree, fans should make their feelings known especially with series like DMC and Silent Hill and Max Payne and so on who are getting screwed by publishers and taken away from what made them great in the first place this sit down and shut up while your favorite series is totally derailed attitude is just stupid, that being said I think RE is actually staying very strong and I loved Re4 and 5 especially compared to like alone in the dark and silent hill's attempts this generation

#28 Posted by HiroArka (640 posts) -

I am loving the way Resident Evil has evolved ( I even like Resident Evil Gaiden for GB Color ). I know most people are like " I want the classic style back ", but the way I see it is if I want to play Classic Style Resident Evil I will boot up my Gamecube and play the classics.

#29 Posted by Hebaphrenic (64 posts) -

I completely disagree, fans should make their feelings known especially with series like DMC and Silent Hill and Max Payne and so on who are getting screwed by publishers and taken away from what made them great in the first place this sit down and shut up while your favorite series is totally derailed attitude is just stupid, that being said I think RE is actually staying very strong and I loved Re4 and 5 especially compared to like alone in the dark and silent hill's attempts this generation

I understand, i worded that wrong, my main point as i stated earlier in the thread is that, it is ok to not like the way a game is developed. But all anyone wants to do is whine and bad mouth as oppose to having an chill intellectual pros vs cons conversation. Everyone is more conserned with who is a "true fan" and wants to completely trash a game. For example, lets say hypothetically i hated RE5 (Which i loved the game).
I could say "the graphics were cool but it lacked the free-style play that the old RE games were loved for and the puzzles arent challenging like they used to be." This would be a perfectly rational intellegent response. However, all anyone does now is "I hate the game" "The game isnt living up to the old RE games." "Its just CoD disguised as RE" etc etc etc.

I just want intelligent discussions for WHY people dont like the game. That is whats called a constructive response/conversation/etc. Too many people just wanna whine, moan, and go with the status quo of what everyone else is saying.

By no means am I saying that someone cant have an opinion. I just want constructive talk more than just the black and white "I hate this game, I think it is stupid" comments.

#30 Posted by radec69 (1 posts) -
Complaining that a game evolves is stupid. The classic games are already made, why make the same game repeatedly? The story has to advance if you didn't notice. If you want the old stuff, it still exists. Go play it. It makes sense that they play differently because the story dictates it to be different. In 5, Chris is in a miltary-type organization sent to countries to clean up potential bio-terrorists. So OBVIOUSLY it's going to be more action/shooter than walking around a mansion. As the story progresses, things change. It makes the story more believable. More real. I agree that RE has done somethings kind of stupid. I HATE that the bodies always bubble away or dissolve like you're playing some cheap arcade game. I don't like that it just hands you every gun immediately, so it's less of a struggle. I'm not going to complain however because things change. Complain all you want but there's a lot of us that still like the games. Most arguments against 5 and 6 that I've heard sound very nit-picky and fanboy-ish. Such as they don't like having an AI partner. I personally love that the partners are included, because it's one of the few really good games that you can still play good old couch co-op on. Another one is "oh look it's COD." In my opinion, that's just retarded. There are literally no similarities other than you use guns. Does that mean every game you use guns in is just like COD? Anyways, When it comes down to it, it's just a game guys.
#31 Posted by pauldevette (1 posts) -
The only one that should stop whining is Hebaphrenic. If you dont like people complaning then dont read the clomplaints. Forum's have always been about discussing and nagging about stuf. This is a game forum so i'm gonna complain RE has totaly changed and i dont like it. It was a great game but now it's just another one of those budget games you find at sales. I'm not paying for a full priced game just because its a RE. They are just decieving gamers by releassing games that cost little to make and earn millions on just the name. I truly hope they one day make a good RE again. But for now i wil keep my self busy on Banoi!
#32 Posted by Hebaphrenic (64 posts) -

Umm the point of a forum is to discuss, not nag and whine. Kids nag and whine, adults discuss. With that being said, the game is rated M so kids shouldnt be playin it anyway, act like an adult plz, thanks! :)

#33 Posted by Hebaphrenic (64 posts) -

Anyway, Radec, i agree that most of the complaints that people have sound very fanboyish. I was born in 88' and grew up on Mario, RE, Donkey Kong, Contra, Sonic, Kirby, Warcraft (Not WoW, but the strategy games), Tomb Raider, Megaman, Metroid, Portal, etc. What do all these games have in common? They were classic games that have... *Drum roll* EVOLVED! They are no longer the same as they once were. Over time, video games change. Which makes "The RE games are not the same as they used to be" an invalid arguement. Through time video games (even the classics) will change, there is no use fighting it, its just a matter of whether we continue playing the game or not.

Another example is movies. Take Star Wars for example, the original 3 movies were amazing. Then cinematics evolved, graphic use evolved, and what people look for in a plot has evolved. I love the originals but hate the new movies, so i just dont watch them. Same concept.

Music, look at all the ways that rock, rap, and country music have evolved from what they once were. Rap now is garbage (In my own opinion) but i like the old NWA, Public Enemy, etc type rap. Rap has evolved. Same with Rock and Country.

The point is that over time everything evolves into a new more 'hip' form. "Its not the same" is not valid reasoning for discussion because i have just shown you that its not ALWAYS going to be the same. Instead lets concentrate our efforts more on what can be changed to make it better and that sort of conversation which is more proactive and less destructive.

#34 Posted by RAD_RADIO (1361 posts) -

I don't see anything wrong with complaining/griping about a series of videogames slowly or suddenly going down a road that fundamentally rips apart any attachment to it's roots.

Let's examine what made Resident Evil 1 a good game, also why people became fans in the first place.

1 - Controls
Tank like controls from a third-person perspective. This further added tension to already tense moments, also adding a real sense ofanxiety when trying to defuse a situation, due to the limited ability to connect to the movement of the character on a true level. There is a certain synergy that exists between this and many of the other components such as the music, and survival style gameplay design.

2 - Characters
Characters that were so regular and seemingly incapable really gave the story telling and gameplay a believable feel through figurative vignette. Sure, the voice acting was bad... but let's face it, people arn't smooth in real life, nor are they all great at saying things that make sense, this sort of made the characters believable. Although, I'm sure even with good writing it could still have been effective.

3 - Graphics
Resident Evil adopted a graphic style of staticly rendered worlds of cramped proportion. There are at least a couple subtle things the art direction of the original game accomplished without really shoving it in your face. The first is the static worlds really gave a sense of isolation and loneliness, you can get the same effect by standing in a large dimmly lit house with no one home, suddenly the slightest unusual movements become creepy. Repetative movements such as the pendulum of a grandfather clock or the blowing of a curtain or gentle movement of a chandelier help to add a mild sense of tension to an otherwise silent and lonely environment. The second subtlety offered by the constrained environment is a sort of helplessclaustrophobic feel that also synergizes well with the survival style gameplay design.

4 - Music
Almost the entire soundtrack from the original game were mostly ambience and short clips of intense music played during only the craziest moments :P
Some say that the first couple resident evil games would be creepier without the music, I feel inclined to agree.


I could probably make a few other points, but frankly I'm getting pretty tired of typing this.

What my REAL point is, if you look at some of the basic gameplay fundamentals that made Resident Evil so damn scarey and fun to experience (not neccesarily play) was it's ability to make simply survival gameplay feel so deep. Like so many games of it's type that are so demanding of its aesthetic components, it really didn't need the deepest gameplay, and many many players of the genre get this, and also loved it for this.

That being said... take out almost all of these fundamentals I've described, and you've got yourself Resident Evil 5, of which with any other non-resident evil characters would be looked at as just another over the shoulder action game that went a little above the bar in terms of presentation and gameplay.

So my question is... why make an action adventure game, insert key RE characters then slap on the name resident evil 5? Capcom has about 50 development teams these days, why not make a true throwback game and stop calling these action adventures Resident Evil games?

I stand here and cry out with the heart of a gamer, FUNDAMENTALLY FUN GAMEPLAY DESIGN WILL NEVER GET OLD!

So... there's already 3 tank-style resident evil games, with critical acclaim so suddenly it's not fun? Where's the logic?

Thing's don't have to fundamentally change to progress.


edit - I forgot to comment on the posts about Max Payne 3 being a throwback to the originals (yes... Max payne 2 is one of the originals) by simple saying...

What the $#%^^$% ^$%$%%((^)) %$%#$#% are you snorting? I know some freinds that want some. Also... maybe this is a stupid question, but are you sure you were playing Max Payne 3... maybe you Accidently launched max payne 2. OR OR maybe you went 80 MPH on your way home from work and traveled back to the launch of Max Payne 2 in which you thought was max payne 3, then you went 80 MPH again on your way to work the next morning, traveled BACK to just after Max payne 3 launched, and by some crazy computer mistake max payne 2's and max payne 3's executables got switched, but still had the same name, so you played max payne 3 THINKING it was max payne 2...
... that explanation is somehow easier for me.

#35 Posted by Hebaphrenic (64 posts) -

Thank you Rad for contributing that post.

Although I enjoyed Resident Evil 5, I can respect your opinion on the matter because of your well put together and logical reasoning for disliking RE 5.

This is the main point I was trying to make with this thread, instead of people saying "Its COD with RE's name" "This game sucks" ETC. I want people to make valid reasoning for WHY they dont like it just like what you did in your thread. The unconstructive comments dont let the industry know anything about why we are dissatisfied with RE, it just lets them know that their game sucks. (Whether we believe it or not, gaming companies do in fact read forums and Gamespot is getting to be pretty large scale.) Its the constructive critisism and constructive conversations that let the companies see: "Oh, so they want the tightened corridors and suddle movements back" "Oh, they want to have to conserve ammo again" "oh they want this and that back"

All of this will help us get a more desirable game.