Do You Like the Nerfed Combat of Resident Evil?

I believe Capcom made an overcorrection to the combat in the Resident Evil series. Yes, RE5, RE6, and other spinoffs were terrible. But none of these were true attempts at a RE game, like RE4 was. They were simply attempts to cash in on the action trend in gaming using the franchise name (shame on you, Capcom)

The new titles look amazing and are true to the foundations of the franchise, but I think they receive a lot of goodwill for that reason. If this was a brand new series, I think the people would be less forgiving of the tame combat.

The enemies here are really just obstacles, which I know was true of the original games. But that was also due to technical limitation at the time. I don't think they even needed to make the games more combat-heavy, they just could have made the zombies a little more daunting. The reaction to seeing a zombie should never be, "I need to get something on the other side of the room, but there are zombies blocking my path. Darn! I guess I'll just walk around them " You should be scared, and anxious to take them out. And I just never was. Also, it's fine that they don't react to headshots like human enemies. But I would like for skill to be rewarded in some way.

I hope the Resident Evil 4 Remake reintroduces the combat and gameplay as a grand part of the experience, rather than a means to an end.

Anyone who enjoys Survival Horror knows it's always better to run whenever possible.

However I always enjoyed combat in Survival Horror, it's usually optional, based on player choice and decision making. Splatting brain matter all over the place after firing a well timed shotgun round is very satisfying and remains so in modern titles worthy of note too.

Do agree Biohazard/ Resident Evil 5 & 6 are good examples of taking it too far on the action side but I don't think the quality of combat was the reason people don't enjoy them (maybe the melee). It's the quantity and resource handling for how the game is paced/ structured.

And if we be honest Resident Evil 4 also had a resource issue too (as well as a tad on the melee), the player could very easily become a god of death in Resi4.

It's a fine balance. Push it too far one way and it's Gears of War, a raw action game, and resource-management is all but pointless. At this point it's not a Survival Horror, any attempt to incorporate Survival Horror features and mechanics are lost.

Push it the other way, make ammo so rare/ in low supply to the brink of cruelty and you get The Evil Within; aka too hard for majority to enjoy, and can even seem mean-spirited (I like TEW but it's a required taste). The sequel balances this much better but the TEW2 has its own divisive offerings that leave it with some criticism as well.

Done correctly combat in a Survival Horror is reflecting the players choices, decisions needed to be made. Do you want to waste ammo on enemies or save resources for a bigger threat? what if you miss your shot & was your last shell? . .

Dead Space 2023 is teaching me (now playing on Impossible Mode) that the game while not finely tuned for resources, is probably better handled than I gave the OG 2008 game credit. I suppose the new version also randomly spawns in more enemies making resources even more dire than it was previously; which for me is a plus.

All-in-all this is why I praise Signalis so highly. I think it showcases that Survival Horror 'as a genre' has aged like fine wine. Only six slots for items, including self-defence items & keys. The game is so well balanced and finely tuned. It was built for Survival Horror fans.

What I'm getting at, it reads like you should check out Signalis.

The Resident Evil 2 and 3 remakes are overrated and so is 7. You can't tell me other wise.

Anyone can think anything is over or underrated. That's the beauty of opinions.

Remake 3 is divisive I feel, gets a lot of hate. Had a lot of fun with it personally yet it cannot be denied it was heavily cut down, missing entire sections and much of the third games identity scrapped for a quick release.

However yes 7 & 2R are well beloved games for people who enjoy Resident Evil when it's not pretending to be Gears of War.

I would say if you really like Survival Horror it's easy to appreciate those two games. Naturally it still may not tickle your fancy as they do have flaws. I much prefer 2R over 7 at anyrate, wish they didn't discard crow and spider enemies regardless.

No it wasn't.

@uninspiredcup: I agree, 5 in particular gets too much hate (and Zero deserves way more hate).

It maybe way more action than many fans wanted (for a few 4 already took it too far). It was simply a different time, no one wanted to do Survival Horror anymore, and Gears of War was the new hotness to embrace. 5 also has the unfortunate task of dealing with Weskers baggage across the entire series.

Character redesigns are debateable, gameplay-wise much of its combat is more refined and polished over 4. Enemy A.I. is also improved over 4. My only real problem in 5 for gameplay is coop A.I. (not an issue with other players) and the tile inventory system. Would have also liked a charismatic merchant for weaponry upgrades instead of a bland end-chapter-screen menu.

Despite all what fans didn't want and what I listed as flaws for the time this was the best selling Resi game (probably because it was multiplatform and coop)

I would argue Resident Evil 5 holds up very well. It's relevant if you want to understand the series. And you will have a good time if you just allow it. One just needs to look at it as an Action Shooter and embrace Chris's roidy muscles_

@RSM-HQ:

You're right. R3make is fun. I just don't understand why RE2make has to have such jank combat and bullet Spongey. Not even the original stuff like this.

"Resident Evil 7 is RE" No it is not. But at least it's trying to be scary.

Are the RE remakes good? I've got one of them, not sure if I have the other one.

Very good post overall but this particularly astute observation really stood out. Never really thought of it that way.

Many games have horror elements--Gears of War, Half-Life, and many others--but they don't feel like horror (well, except for the occasional level like Ravenholm) because as you said the resource management/survival aspect isn't there.

@Alexander2cents: I'm not a huge fan of first person in narrow hallways either or its heavily reliance on stealth, but I think 7 has a lot of classic Resi elements to it. I would have preferred it to be less on-rails and allow more exploration/ back-and-forth but outside that I think it does a fairly decent job. Well until we go past the greenhouse; that's when the game gets fairly bad.

Exactly, neither Bloodborne or CastleVania are Survival Horror but clearly hold horror elements.

Not my words but upon discussing with others who are fans I like the terminology that; enemies in Survival Horror are doors and bullets are keys.

Finite resources and a focus on item management is a key part to the genre. It is about knowing when to fire the shot and when to run and save for real danger, taking the risk of being hit to maintain your limited resources.

All this chat has reminded me that Alone in the Dark is getting a new game soon, I hope it follows the trend of Signalis and Dead SpaceR and less so previous AitD entries.

@RSM-HQ: I think I'm going to check out Signalis. Gave it about an hour or play a few weeks ago and liked it, but got stuck and had other stuff to play so gave up on it.

I liked what I experienced, though. Didn't realize it was a horror game.

@mrbojangles25: Play what you wanna play I say.

Getting stuck is common as it's a very puzzle focused game with a ton of backtracking and only six slots to carry any give item; clearly a call back to Chris Redfield in the original Resident Evil.

Depending on the difficulty Signalis can be pretty tricky. My only hint without spoiling things is reading the propaganda posters can make the game much easier. They're essentially gameplay hints that are useful throughout ツ