Search

Saturday, March 10, 2018

FACT: Resident Evil 2 was the first Resident Evil Game to be more actionized

  1. Boards
  2. Nonstop Gaming - General
  3. FACT: Resident Evil 2 was the first Resident Evil Game to be more actionized
Unlike the first game, Resident Evil 2 had plenty of bullets for your weapons. You never ran out of ammo if you saved your weapons for every enemy that came your way. 

There are many who accused Resident Evil 4 of being more action-packed. But it was Resident Evil 2 that started the trend.
We may have lost the battle for Net Neutrality, but we haven't lost the war. 
Go to https://www.battleforthenet.com/ for more information.
FACT: when people talk about "actionized", they are not talking about RE2 having a bit more ammo

not to mention you've also completely ignored why people call RE4 more actionized because of a specific unrelated potential scenario

cmon man, are you doing this just to bait him?
Lord_Diablo13 2 days ago#3
MrMegaPhoenix posted...
FACT: when people talk about "actionized", they are not talking about RE2 having a bit more ammo

not to mention you've also completely ignored why people call RE4 more actionized because of a specific unrelated potential scenario

cmon man, are you doing this just to bait him?


Yes.
We may have lost the battle for Net Neutrality, but we haven't lost the war. 
Go to https://www.battleforthenet.com/ for more information.
Lord_Diablo13 posted...
Yes.

that's naughty

isn't there enough times people accidentally trigger him that there isn't a need to deliberately do it? ;(
Legends Kuja 2 days ago#5
Honestly, he kinda deserves it if he's going to keep spouting his opinion like it's the only correct one.
I pledge allegiance...
To Queen Fragg, and her mighty state of hysteria...
LaManoNeraII 2 days ago#6
RE being actionized is Devil May Cry

RE 4 isn't action, RE5 isn't action, RE 6 isn't action, RE 2 isn't action. And none of them are "survival horror" either because that's just a buzzword Capcom created to market the original RE. Same BS Konami used for MGS being a "tactical espionage action"
Suspiria 2 days ago#7
Nope. That's still RE4.

You can come back to me when RE2 has gameplay solely focused on shooting and nothing else, overpowered button melee attacks, intrusive quick time events, running away from a giant walking statue molded after a midget, enemies dropping supplies upon death left and right, and a merchant in the police station selling items.

Why do you guys repeatedly, repeatedly, repeatedly continue to churn out the same tired, shitty arguments that have been debunked I don't know how many times already? Do you never learn?

Your arguments always boil down to trying to belittle and make the old RE games look 'bad' in order to doll up the newer games (particularly RE4).

Except it doesn't work because when you take that approach and really get down to it, you realize the game design is largely in old RE's court instead of RE4's.

As I've stated, you guys don't understand the Resident Evil premise nor do you understand game design.

If you guys DID understand game design you would realize how fucking stupid it is to make a TPS game where you cannot move and shoot simultaneously, cannot control the camera freely, cannot use 3D style controls, and cannot have aiming mapped to the right stick.

The Suffering is a horror shooter that doesn't have any of those issues and beats the fucking shit out of RE4 being a horror shooter. Primarily because, well, it actually remembers to have horror unlike RE4.

"B-b-b-b-b-but RE4 does all those stupid game design descisions intentionally and to be more tense and blah blah blah!"

Kid, please. The Suffering doesn't do any of that shit and still feels leagues more intimidating and has a more oppressing horror atmosphere than RE4. Nor does it make the game feel easy.
(edited 2 days ago)reportquote
Suspiria posted...
Why do you guys repeatedly, repeatedly, repeatedly continue to churn out the same tired, shitty arguments that have been debunked I don't know how many times already?

he answered that. its cos he literally wants to troll you

cmon man, stop falling for the bait. we either don't give a fuck about what RE4 did to the series or we do care and we do know exactly what you mean

imo
Savoots 2 days ago#9
I know this is a bait topic, but RE has never been on short supply of weapons and ammo, even in the very first PS1 game.

I remember back in the day when I would try to leave the mansion, text would come up saying how it's too dangerous to go outside.

But how was it too dangerous when I had fully loaded weapons full of ammo, and plenty of recovery items?

RE was never survival horror. The first Dino Crisis, Alone In The Dark, and Silent Hill were survival horror.
Don't hate anyone because they're different. Variety is the spice of life.
Suspiria 2 days ago#10
Lord_Diablo13 posted...
MrMegaPhoenix posted...
FACT: when people talk about "actionized", they are not talking about RE2 having a bit more ammo

not to mention you've also completely ignored why people call RE4 more actionized because of a specific unrelated potential scenario

cmon man, are you doing this just to bait him?


Yes.

And no shit it's bait. Congrats on stating something everybody and their mother knows.

However, I know how the lot of you are in regards to your RE4 fanaticism. You guys just cannot stop when that game gets any shred of criticism especially if it's criticism you just cannot refute.

I have to continue to laying down the law and explaining why it's a bad Resident Evil game. Because you guys like to consistently put on this facade people only hate it 'cuz trhing tuh be edgee!' or 'blinded by teh noestallguh!' BS.

And I'll be honest: I love the fact that I can effectively construct these sound criticisms of RE4 and that you guys cannot ever for the life of you refute them.

Oh, you guys try your damndest by recycling the same arguments over and over. But it's always hilarious watching people try and then giving up and ending it with a generic insult or crying 'blinded by nostalgia/not open to change/whatever' just because they're frustrated they can't debate Resident Evil game design worth a shit.

So to that I say - bring the baiting on, schmucks.
Suspiria 2 days ago#11
MrMegaPhoenix posted...
Suspiria posted...
Why do you guys repeatedly, repeatedly, repeatedly continue to churn out the same tired, shitty arguments that have been debunked I don't know how many times already?

he answered that. its cos he literally wants to troll you

cmon man, stop falling for the bait. we either don't give a fuck about what RE4 did to the series or we do care and we do know exactly what you mean

imo

People make RE4 topics to bait me to respond to them?

No wai.

Next you're going to tell me iGen makes anti-Nintendo topics to get people to respond.
Suspiria posted...
People make RE4 topics to bait me to respond to them?No wai.Next you're going to tell me iGen makes anti-Nintendo topics to get people to respond

yeah but that's igen's gimmick. TC doesn't have baiting you as a gimmick, so that's not kewl ;(

at the very least, why don't you just make a topic on an older RE4 game board so that when people bait you, you can just copy and paste the same thing (cos you do say the same stuff) and just watch nobody refute your point? at least you would save time imo?
Lord_Diablo13 2 days ago#13
YOu know what would really be funny? If Resident Evil 2's remake was done in the style of Resident Evil 4. As a matter of fact, that may be the case.

https://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/gaming/911557/Resident-Evil-2-remake-news-capcom-rumour-camera-gameplay
We may have lost the battle for Net Neutrality, but we haven't lost the war. 
Go to https://www.battleforthenet.com/ for more information.
Suspiria 2 days ago#14
Lord_Diablo13 posted...
YOu know what would really be funny? If Resident Evil 2's remake was done in the style of Resident Evil 4. As a matter of fact, that may be the case.

https://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/gaming/911557/Resident-Evil-2-remake-news-capcom-rumour-camera-gameplay

Who cares? REmake established how you remake a Resident Evil game correctly.

You guys focus on all the wrong things when it comes to Resident Evil. Like repeatedly.
Lord_Diablo13 2 days ago#15
Suspiria posted...
Lord_Diablo13 posted...
YOu know what would really be funny? If Resident Evil 2's remake was done in the style of Resident Evil 4. As a matter of fact, that may be the case.

https://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/gaming/911557/Resident-Evil-2-remake-news-capcom-rumour-camera-gameplay

Who cares? REmake established how you remake a Resident Evil game correctly.

You guys focus on all the wrong things when it comes to Resident Evil. Like repeatedly.

Ahh, but how would you react if it went over the shoulders for its camera instead of a fixed camera?
We may have lost the battle for Net Neutrality, but we haven't lost the war. 
Go to https://www.battleforthenet.com/ for more information.
Lord_Diablo13 posted...
YOu know what would really be funny?

"it'd be funny to completely ruin a remake just to spite one user on NGG"

what the fuck man?
Boge 2 days ago#17
Resident Evil 4 completely changed the story as well as the gameplay. That's why it's criticized so much.
With deeper knowledge and experience, everything becomes more shallow.
Savoots 2 days ago#18
Fuckin' Christ.

I knew that this was a troll topic. But even then I came in hoping that there would at least be some decent discussion to be had.
Don't hate anyone because they're different. Variety is the spice of life.
Synbios459 2 days ago#19
Suspiria posted...
Lord_Diablo13 posted...
MrMegaPhoenix posted...
 show hidden quote(s)


Yes.

And no shit it's bait. Congrats on stating something everybody and their mother knows.

However, I know how the lot of you are in regards to your RE4 fanaticism. You guys just cannot stop when that game gets any shred of criticism especially if it's criticism you just cannot refute.

I have to continue to laying down the law and explaining why it's a bad Resident Evil game. Because you guys like to consistently put on this facade people only hate it 'cuz trhing tuh be edgee!' or 'blinded by teh noestallguh!' BS.

And I'll be honest: I love the fact that I can effectively construct these sound criticisms of RE4 and that you guys cannot ever for the life of you refute them.

Oh, you guys try your damndest by recycling the same arguments over and over. But it's always hilarious watching people try and then giving up and ending it with a generic insult or crying 'blinded by nostalgia/not open to change/whatever' just because they're frustrated they can't debate Resident Evil game design worth a shit.

So to that I say - bring the baiting on, schmucks.

Dude, so long as the gameplay itself is good that's what matters. I loved Phantasy Star Online even though it was vastly different than the other PS games.
3DS Friend Code: 4914-3099-5529
Synbios459 posted...
Dude, so long as the gameplay itself is good that's what matters. I loved Phantasy Star Online even though it was vastly different than the other PS games.

thats not the case for everyone.

what if someone loved what the first four PS games were like? Online won't necessarily appeal to them, even if its good.

i mean, it should be obvious here, but people like different things. "good gameplay" is nowhere near as important to a player as "what kind of game it is".
Romaji 2 days ago#21
RE2 managed to be more mainstream without compromising its roots.
Generic Signature
este914 2 days ago#22
This topic is full of 💩💩💩
--
-
Suspiria 2 days ago#23
Romaji posted...
RE2 managed to be more mainstream without compromising its roots.

Kind of like how Monster Hunter: World became mainstream without making any tryhard efforts to grab mainstream eyeballs like turning into a shooter or whatever.

Gee, what do ya know?
Suspiria 2 days ago#24
Lord_Diablo13 posted...
Suspiria posted...
Lord_Diablo13 posted...
 show hidden quote(s)

Who cares? REmake established how you remake a Resident Evil game correctly.

You guys focus on all the wrong things when it comes to Resident Evil. Like repeatedly.

Ahh, but how would you react if it went over the shoulders for its camera instead of a fixed camera?

That would be fucking stupid because why would you do that when you already have a pre-existing showcase of how to perfectly remake a Resident Evil game.

Plus, it would be stale. You know those 'muh changes' fanboys who want all sorts of arbitrary changes crammed in just for the sake of 'not having things be stale'.

Well, after having ten years of over the shoulder games, over the shoulder, going by their logic, is stale now.
Suspiria 2 days ago#25
Synbios459 posted...
Suspiria posted...
Lord_Diablo13 posted...
 show hidden quote(s)

And no shit it's bait. Congrats on stating something everybody and their mother knows.

However, I know how the lot of you are in regards to your RE4 fanaticism. You guys just cannot stop when that game gets any shred of criticism especially if it's criticism you just cannot refute.

I have to continue to laying down the law and explaining why it's a bad Resident Evil game. Because you guys like to consistently put on this facade people only hate it 'cuz trhing tuh be edgee!' or 'blinded by teh noestallguh!' BS.

And I'll be honest: I love the fact that I can effectively construct these sound criticisms of RE4 and that you guys cannot ever for the life of you refute them.

Oh, you guys try your damndest by recycling the same arguments over and over. But it's always hilarious watching people try and then giving up and ending it with a generic insult or crying 'blinded by nostalgia/not open to change/whatever' just because they're frustrated they can't debate Resident Evil game design worth a shit.

So to that I say - bring the baiting on, schmucks.

Dude, so long as the gameplay itself is good that's what matters. I loved Phantasy Star Online even though it was vastly different than the other PS games.


1. It doesn't matter if the gameplay is good (which it isn't by the way because of inability to move while shooting, not using 3D style controls, not having a fully rotatable camera, not having aiming mapped to the right stick, and having stale, repetitive gameplay) if the gameplay doesn't fit with the Resident Evil premise. That's like turning RE8 into a kart racer and instead of focusing on the fact that RE shouldn't even be a kart racer, you defend it by saying 'but it's a really well made and fun kart racer!'

Who the fuck cares? It's not supposed to be a kart racer. Just like how RE is not supposed to be a shooter regardless of how 'good' you think its clunky TPS game design is.

2. RE4 coiuld 'had good gameplay' just the same by being its own separate IP completely removed from Resident Evil. It had no business being part of the series.
Savoots 2 days ago#26
Romaji posted...
RE2 managed to be more mainstream without compromising its roots.


Roots?

It was the second in the series, what roots would it have to compromise?
Don't hate anyone because they're different. Variety is the spice of life.
Vegeta1000 2 days ago#27
I've said this all the time. RE2 was piss easy compared to RE1 (especially the original with no auto aim) because of the large amount of ammo and healing items you get. Not only that, but the characters in RE2 have more health than the characters from RE1. Also, the first RE with a side pack (hold up to 10 inventory space), upgradeable weapons, sub-machine guns, and a bow gun. It only more action packed from there. RE4 has scaling difficulty depending on how you're fairing in the game so the better you the less drops you get and vise-versa.
"Just remember ALL CAPS when you spell the man name!" - MF DOOM
Vegeta1000 2 days ago#28
Anyways, I don't I've ever seen a single RE topic on NGG without Bars getting involved. The guy is obsessed.
"Just remember ALL CAPS when you spell the man name!" - MF DOOM
Suspiria 2 days ago#29
Vegeta1000 posted...
I've said this all the time. RE2 was piss easy compared to RE1 (especially the original with no auto aim) because of the large amount of ammo and healing items you get. Not only that, but the characters in RE2 have more health than the characters from RE1. Also, the first RE with a side pack (hold up to 10 inventory space), upgradeable weapons, sub-machine guns, and a bow gun. It only more action packed from there. RE4 has scaling difficulty depending on how you're fairing in the game so the better you the less drops you get and vise-versa.


This stupid excuse again?

How many times must it be repeatedly explained to you that you're not going to know where all that 'lots o' ammo' is on your first playthrough? You're not going to know which rooms have them, which rooms have enemies, which rooms are locked, etc. unless you're using a walkthrough. You have to investigate your surrounding to even find 'the large amount of ammo and healing items'. You don't have enemies frequently dropping them upon death left and right and you don't have a merchant in the police station selling them to you.

Now once you've beaten the game and learned where everything is? Then sure it's easy to stockpile supplies because you've already played through the game to know better. That doesn't matter in RE4 because the game isn't designed in that sort of way.

And RE4's 'scaling difficulty' makes no difference because the player is still overpowered enough to mow down anything in their way due to dumb, easily exploitable enemy AI, having access to overpowered, button prompt melee attacks that level whole crowds, enemies dropping supplies for you all the time, and having a merchant. Even the so called 'Professional' difficulty is a joke as you're just using the same tactics you've used in the game before except enemies just hit harder and you don't get the Tactical Vest. Whoopee doo.

How many times does the 'b-b-b-but the older games had lots o' ammo!' argument have to get shot down before you realize it's a terrible argument?

And difficulty doesn't make something Resident Evil. RE6 has plenty of annoying sections due to enemies that can knock you down and the intrusive QTE sequences. And RE5's Professional mode has plenty of instances where one hit can put you in DYING status. None of that changes the fact they're still mindless shooters and they don't feel like Resident Evil games.

You guys are doing a really shitty job of trying to disprove the notion that you don't understand game design and you likewise don't understand the elements that make for a Resident Evil game.
(edited 2 days ago)reportquote
TheCurseX2 2 days ago#30
Lmao 

RE4 was way easier than RE2 on a first playthrough. 

Give me a fucking break.
As a Level 37 Sage, I expect to be treated with proper respect and acknowledged for my dedication to the GameFAQs Message Board Community as a whole. Thank you.
shiva 2 days ago#31
Yeah, I recall some interview of Shinji Mikami back in the day, speaking about the game's more Hollywoodesque tone.

Bullets everywhere, almost no puzzles compared to the first. It's hilarious to read the typical anti-RE4 zealotry speaking of 4 as the first to go action - I guess contradicting the series' creator is a running theme...

A failed experiment, too, not only because the lack of bullets was the only aspect giving the first some sense of dread when confronted with enemies, not to mention the terribly clunky, hands-off shooting that consists of standing in place and holding two buttons. The last thing such a game needed was an action shift. 

I'm glad 3 decided to have Nemesis, as that's the first game that actually caused a sense of panic with an enemy (*that* moment where you see him far away in a corridor, and he starts dashing towards you), and even if people claim 3 has as much action as 2 (which I agree with), it introduces the quick turn ability and timed dodging, minoring the clunkiness of the previous titles, and it still balances it out with the most challenging puzzles of the original trilogy, whereas 2 is a joke there. 

4 made the sense of dread become the enemies themselves, you're actually forced to kill the enemies to be able to leave the areas (marking the end of jogging-simulator RE), and makes the action part actually engaging and not a mere formality with its satisfying gunplay+melee combo, standing as one of the more successful franchise changers ever. No wonder everyone sees it as one of the greatest games of all time. The Regenerators in particular may be my pick for greatest RE creature. Congratulations to whoever handled sound design in RE4, as that disturbing breathing sound, and the music track that accompanies it, is the stuff of nightmares.
#1 gaming dream? Online-enabled rerelease of Power Stone/Power Stone 2! Standing for all I cherish about video games.
Suspiria 2 days ago#32
Except it is the first RE game to go full blown action.

And reading your comments, it's the same story - your focus is all on the combat and nothing else. Combat isn't supposed to be the focal point of Resident Evil's gameplay. That's the first sign that you don't understand Resident Evil's game design.

So you're essentially bashing the older Resident Evil games (hence the stupid jogging simulator comment) by not focusing on something that was never even supposed to be the primary focus of Resident Evil to begin with. You realize how stupid your mindset seems?

You may as well go into Tekken complaining how they don't let you jump on platforms like Smash Bros. when that's not the point of Tekken's gameplay.

Moreover, adopting the whole 'swarming you with enemies' approach RE4 goes for is actually what kills the tiny chance those enemies could have ever had to be intimidating. By constantly throwing waves at the player in a lazy fashion, you make individual encounters with enemies that less meaningful and lacking in pacing. Especially when the player is overpowered enough to mow them down regardless of the mobbing approach due to enemies dropping supplies for you, the shop system, the enemy behavioral patterns are repetitive and easily exploitable, and the player having access to overpowered melee attacks via button prompt.

So your praise of RE4 carries no weight to it because you're praising it for things that have nothing to do with what makes a Resident Evil game. All you want is combat out of a franchise that was never built on the gameplay focus being combat. That's idiotic.

The game is a joke. As a Resident Evil. Or as a mere TPS game. The Suffering stomps the fuck out of RE4 when it comes to sense of dread, creature design, locales, music, and overall fear factor.

The Suffering also accomplishes that WITHOUT removing the ability to move and shoot at the same time, removing 3D style controls, having tank controls, and without removing the ability to freely control the camera.

So the 'b-b-b-b-ut they made RE4 a clunky piece of shit TPS game on purpose for muh tenchun!' excuse can kick rocks because The Suffering doesn't have to do any of that shit to instill horror.

And no, 'b-b-b-but Mikami said this or wanted to do this!' is no excuse either. Just because a creator loses touch with what made their creation good to begin with is not justification for franchise sabotage.

Otherwise, we would have to pretend George Lucas's prequel films were the least bit acceptable just because he created Star Wars. They aren't.

If Mikami was that bored or wanted a shooter that much, he should have handed Resident Evil over to a different team and make a new IP dedicated for whatever little Hollywood and/or shooter crap he wanted to do. You don't take a pre-existing franchise that has nothing to do with that and gut it just to satiate that need.

And lastly, if RE4's bland, repetitive, clunky TPS gameplay design is "one of the more successful franchise changers ever", then why did Capcom abandon that with RE7?
(edited 2 days ago)reportquote
Suspiria 2 days ago#33
And since NGG is all about tossing around fast food tier insults whenever they're successfully cornered in an argument, I'll expect shiva to forego having an actual counterargument in favor of samey, predictable, boring retorts of 'lol you just butthurt', 'oh, you're just blinded by nostalgia', 'oh, you're just a hater/contrarian', and various other tail between the legs, counterargument dodging fluff.
Manticore 2 days ago#34
When people talk about when the series being "actionized" they are talking about removing the fixed camera angles, tank controls and puzzles, not the amount of bullets in your inventory or how many zombies you have to kill. So yes, RE4 was the first game to "actionize" the series.
GameFAQs lurker/poster since the early 2000s
Lord_Diablo13 1 day ago#35
Vegeta1000 posted...
I've said this all the time. RE2 was piss easy compared to RE1 (especially the original with no auto aim) because of the large amount of ammo and healing items you get. Not only that, but the characters in RE2 have more health than the characters from RE1. Also, the first RE with a side pack (hold up to 10 inventory space), upgradeable weapons, sub-machine guns, and a bow gun. It only more action packed from there. RE4 has scaling difficulty depending on how you're fairing in the game so the better you the less drops you get and vise-versa.


Exactly.
We may have lost the battle for Net Neutrality, but we haven't lost the war. 
Go to https://www.battleforthenet.com/ for more information.
Suspiria 1 day ago#36
Lord_Diablo13 posted...
Vegeta1000 posted...
I've said this all the time. RE2 was piss easy compared to RE1 (especially the original with no auto aim) because of the large amount of ammo and healing items you get. Not only that, but the characters in RE2 have more health than the characters from RE1. Also, the first RE with a side pack (hold up to 10 inventory space), upgradeable weapons, sub-machine guns, and a bow gun. It only more action packed from there. RE4 has scaling difficulty depending on how you're fairing in the game so the better you the less drops you get and vise-versa.


Exactly.

Still ignoring arguments that disprove your assertions I see. Typical.
Vegeta1000 1 day ago#37
Not even gonna bother with Bars repeating the same repetitive shit.

Manticore posted...
When people talk about when the series being "actionized" they are talking about removing the fixed camera angles, tank controls and puzzles, not the amount of bullets in your inventory or how many zombies you have to kill. So yes, RE4 was the first game to "actionize" the series.


RE4 has tank controls and puzzles. RE4 has more puzzles than RE2. RECV got rid of fixed camera angles.
"Just remember ALL CAPS when you spell the man name!" - MF DOOM
Suspiria 1 day ago#38
Vegeta1000 posted...
Not even gonna bother with Bars repeating the same repetitive shit.

Manticore posted...
When people talk about when the series being "actionized" they are talking about removing the fixed camera angles, tank controls and puzzles, not the amount of bullets in your inventory or how many zombies you have to kill. So yes, RE4 was the first game to "actionize" the series.


RE4 has tank controls and puzzles. RE4 has more puzzles than RE2. RECV got rid of fixed camera angles.

Aw shut up with the 'same repetitive shit' bullshit excuse. You're just saying because you've got no counterargument to muster. We both know it. So quit trying to put on a front.

No, RE4 doesn't have an emphasis on puzzles. And having tank controls is what makes RE4 a terrible TPS game because tank controls DO NOT work in TPS game design at all.

They work in pre-RE4 games because they are not, contrary to whatever mental gymnastics you proclaim, trying to be TPS games. Combat is not the focal point of their gameplay in the least.

Again, this why The Suffering is the superior game. It's a TPS that doesn't have the clunky ass game design RE4 does and still manages to have a far more intimidating atmosphere.

And no, RE4 does not have more puzzles than RE2. And no, Code Veronica did not get rid of fixed camera. You still have fixed camera perspectives. The camera just follows you along those fixed camera perspectives is all. Which worked just fine.

Over the shoulder does not, however, work or fit in Resident Evil. If you want that shit, that's why you make a new IP for that. You don't cram it into a series where it has no business in.

As usual, you demonstrate pitiful grasp of basic game design and equally pitiful grasp of the Resident Evil premise.
(edited 1 day ago)reportquote
metaIslugg 1 day ago#39
I bet if someone made "what was your first RE?" survey, Re4 would crush
(edited 1 day ago)reportquote
swagtile 1 day ago#40
metaIslugg posted...
I bet if someone made "what was your first RE?" survey, Re4 would crush

Yep. Same could be said of Final Fantasy 7.
linkin80 1 day ago#41
I like like RE4, but what is interesting is that it gets a pass for really being a different genre then the originals. When something like metal gear solid survive does it, everyone craps on it because it's "not metal gear solid". They just slapped the name on it to sell more copies, which is basically what RE4 did. 

Then again RE4 probably gets the pass because the end product is enjoyable to most people while MGS survive is trash.
Goldsickle 1 day ago#42
Shinji Mikami said years ago that RE2 was "targeted at the mass market" and we all know that Hideki Kamiya hated horror, despite being RE2's director. 

While RE2's intention as an action game wasn't so clear, it's a bit more direct with RE3, where Shinji Mikami said that RE3 is dedicated to "hardcore gamers who love action".
My thoughts about Bioshock Infinite:
http://tinyurl.com/mn5ll4x (WARNING: CONTAINS SPOILERS)
The OP is right in that Resident Evil 2's team admittedly and blatantly increased the action focus of the series. Only the world's most incompetent players had any difficulty finding a prodigious stockpile of ammo on a first playthrough.

And Savoots is right in that even the original Resident Evil had a larger action bent than the game it most closely copied, Alone in the Dark. Keeping with its Lovecraft theme, AitD has a number of enemies that can never die. In RE, on the other hand, you don't face anything that can't be gunned down. It punctuates every section with that favorite of Japanese game design, the boss fight.

Shinji Mikami posted...
I wanted the player to be able to blow the enemy to pieces!
Canon: the juvenile's way of looking at fiction.
Vegeta1000 1 day ago#44
Okay Bars, I'll entertain your bullshit just for this time. 

Aw shut up with the 'same repetitive shit' bullshit excuse. You're just saying because you've got no counterargument to muster. We both know it. So quit trying to put on a front

You never had an argument to begin with.

No, RE4 doesn't have an emphasis on puzzles. And having tank controls is what makes RE4 a terrible TPS game because tank controls DO NOT work in TPS game design at all.

Have you played the fucking game? The village area alone has at least four puzzles including one inside and outside the church. RE4 has more puzzles than RE2 by far. You can't shit talk RE4 for not having puzzles then praise RE2 which doesn't even have half the puzzles RE4 had. As far as the tank controls go, RE4 having tank controls was fine because it's not a Third Person Shooter. Play Gears of War if you want to know what a TPS looks like. 

They work in pre-RE4 games because they are not, contrary to whatever mental gymnastics you proclaim, trying to be TPS games. Combat is not the focal point of their gameplay in the least.

Despite the fact that you can run past most enemies in RE4 with no problems which you continue to ignore. How many areas in the game were you required to kill every enemy? I thought so. RE4 is so action packed when I can easily run past 70% of the enemies in the village with no problems. 

And no, RE4 does not have more puzzles than RE2. And no, Code Veronica did not get rid of fixed camera. You still have fixed camera perspectives. The camera just follows you along those fixed camera perspectives is all. Which worked just fine.

RECV has full 3D environments so even if the fixed camera angles are still there it provides less tension since you can clearly see enemies around the corner unlike in RE1-3. 

Over the shoulder does not, however, work or fit in Resident Evil. If you want that shit, that's why you make a new IP for that. You don't cram it into a series where it has no business in.

It worked just fine in RE4. 

As usual, you demonstrate pitiful grasp of basic game design and equally pitiful grasp of the Resident Evil premise.

Because I'm not someone that's stuck in 1996. That shit you want back is never coming back. Fixed camera angles, slow ass zombies, limited saves, and fetch quests is not what the series is about. Outdated gameplay mechanics are gonna get tossed aside eventually. RE4 was the natural evolution of the series because it improved the gameplay significantly while still having the atmosphere and tension of the old-games. It wasn't until RE5 when the series truly went too far into the action category. Old-school RE is never coming back. Either get with the program or find another series to bitch about.
"Just remember ALL CAPS when you spell the man name!" - MF DOOM
Vegeta1000 1 day ago#45
metaIslugg posted...
I bet if someone made "what was your first RE?" survey, Re4 would crush


Considering RE2 sold 5 million on the PS1 alone (not even counting the Dual Shock Edition) you're probably wrong. That's just a copout excuse RE4 haters uses (same with Final Fantasy VII haters).

linkin80 posted...
I like like RE4, but what is interesting is that it gets a pass for really being a different genre then the originals. When something like metal gear solid survive does it, everyone craps on it because it's "not metal gear solid". They just slapped the name on it to sell more copies, which is basically what RE4 did. 

Then again RE4 probably gets the pass because the end product is enjoyable to most people while MGS survive is trash.


RE4 isn't a different genre. All of the RE games are action-adventure. It's just not straight up survivor horror however, the only true survival horror RE game (before RE7) was RE1. RE2, RE3, and RECV you get too much ammo for anything to be a threat (besides Nemesis encounters) and RE0 you get to have a partner follow you throughout the entire game. It's still very much a Resident Evil Game where as Metal Gear Survive is just Metal Gear in name only.
"Just remember ALL CAPS when you spell the man name!" - MF DOOM
Suspiria 1 day ago#46
Vegeta1000 posted...
*a bunch of stupid bullshit in typical Vegeta fashion*


So much bullshit of Veggie's to sort through here.

1. Your refusal to acknowledge an argument does not equate to a person not having one. I've successfully debated and cornered you in many debates on this series, and you've never been able to keep up.

2. No, merely flipping a switch or putting something in a hole doesn't mean RE4 has a lot of puzzles. You're bullshitting in order to doll RE4 up to be better than it actually is, and you know it.

3. No, Code Veronica's moving camera doesn't mean you can see enemies around every corner. If you actually played the game (which makes your RE4 claim ironic), you would know this. Again, you're bullshitting to try to make the older games look bad.

And when you have actively lie about things in the older games just for the sake of making them look bad just in some futile effort to elevate RE4 above them, you lost the argument.

4. Yes, RE4 is a different genre. Lying about it and making herculean efforts to come up with excuses to justify it does not change the fact it is very clearly a different genre than the previous games.

5. No, over the shoulder doesn't work in RE4 especially without having a fully controllable camera. Again, this is why The Suffering is the superior TPS game. It doesn't rely on stupid shit like over the shoulder.

6. For the umpteenth time, 'stuck in 1996' isn't an argument. Not everything modern equates to being good and despite whatever mental gymnastics you employ, there are absolutely many examples out there of older games having better game design than newer games.

Old Resident Evil absolutely being one of those examples.

You're just recycling the same tired, frequently debunked excuses over and over. It's all you ever do. Your debating style is as clunky and stale as RE4's gameplay.

7. No, there's nothing 'natural evolution' about turning a survival horror franchise into a third person shooter.

As usual, Vegeta has terrible arguments (the same ones he always has). And again, he fails to understand game design or Resident Evil.
Suspiria 1 day ago#47
Splatterhouse5 posted...
The OP is right in that Resident Evil 2's team admittedly and blatantly increased the action focus of the series. Only the world's most incompetent players had any difficulty finding a prodigious stockpile of ammo on a first playthrough.

And Savoots is right in that even the original Resident Evil had a larger action bent than the game it most closely copied, Alone in the Dark. Keeping with its Lovecraft theme, AitD has a number of enemies that can never die. In RE, on the other hand, you don't face anything that can't be gunned down. It punctuates every section with that favorite of Japanese game design, the boss fight.

Shinji Mikami posted...
I wanted the player to be able to blow the enemy to pieces!

Dude, even if that was their intention, they failed at it miserably. Because RE2, 3, & CV don't feel like action games or third person shooter games. That wasn't until RE4 that became true.

And if they wanted action THAT badly, that's why you make a separate IP specifically for that. Worked just fine for Devil May Cry after all.
(edited 1 day ago)reportquote
uffbulle 1 day ago#48
RE4 just didn't make you feel like you were controlling someone disabled or a robot (no offense to robots or disabled people), but to make up for this there was much more pressure from the enemies.
Suspiria 1 day ago#49
uffbulle posted...
RE4 just didn't make you feel like you were controlling someone disabled or a robot (no offense to robots or disabled people), but to make up for this there was much more pressure from the enemies.
It failed in that regard.

It's a third person shooter with so many clunky game design decisions. Again, look at The Suffering. It doesn't feature the same bad game design RE4 implements and it embarrasses RE4 when it comes to trying to convey a horror atmosphere.

And their method of 'trying to have more pressure from enemies' was by making combat the focal point of the gameplay (which is serious no no since that's not the point of RE's gameplay) and just lazily, consistently throwing waves of enemies at the player.

And the wave after wave of enemies approach only decreases the tension because it doesn't take long to see what the enemies have to offer in terms of behavioral patterns and the methods of dealing with them due to their easily exploitable AI and the player just generally being too overpowered for them to really pose much of a threat.

And the pattern I keep repeatedly seeing on this board, is this idea of 'tension' through combat.

That's how you can tell this board doesn't understand Resident Evil. Tension in Resident Evil never came from just combat. You also have other elements that contributed just as much if not more to that than the combat such as the mood setting music, the things you'd see in the environment (maybe a shot of some sort of creature in a test tube you can't make out, a dead body that makes you wonder how the hell they died a certain way, a blood stain in an area with no enemies that makes you wonder how did it get there, etc.), world building (such as reading memos), having to investigate the environment for supplies while not knowing which rooms will have them and which rooms will have enemies, inventory management (no, RE4's shitty attempt at it doesn't count), and so on.

But here...all everyone focuses on when it comes to Resident Evil is just combat. They don't give a shit about any of the other elements that make up a Resident Evil game.

And if you all care about or focus on is combat in Resident Evil, then you don't grasp the Resident Evil concept.

People can cry 'oh, that's elitist!' all they want, but it's a fact. Resident Evil was never about combat. It was there, yes, but it was never the selling point or the focal point of the gameplay. Nor should it ever be.
(edited 1 day ago)reportquote
swagtile 1 day ago#50
I've said it before, but I side with Bars on this one. However, I'm not going to keep beating this dead horse.
  1. Boards
  2. Nonstop Gaming - General
  3. FACT: Resident Evil 2 was the first Resident Evil Game to be more actionized
    1. Boards
    2. Nonstop Gaming - General
    3. FACT: Resident Evil 2 was the first Resident Evil Game to be more actionized
    Lord_Diablo13 1 day ago#51
    I feel like saying this, but when I played Fire Emblem on the GBA, I didn't feel alot for the game. IT was recently that I played a Fire Emblem spin-off on the Switch called Fire Emblem Warriors. That was where I finally found my groove with Fire Emblem.

    Just because a game is different from other games doesn't mean it's bad. Sometimes you connect with it, and sometimes you don't.
    We may have lost the battle for Net Neutrality, but we haven't lost the war. 
    Go to https://www.battleforthenet.com/ for more information.
    Suspiria 1 day ago#52
    RE4 could have been 'different' as its own separate IP and not as part of Resident Evil.

    Besides, we've already seen the correct way of how to add new ideas to Resident Evil without throwing the RE premise out the window. It's called Resident Evil: Outbreak.

    RE4 and RE7 never tried to do anything new or different. All they did was chase trends. RE4 chasing the shooter trend and RE7 chasing the tryhard, gritty first person horror trend.

    Besides, RE4 wasn't treated as a spin-off. It was treated as the next big numbered installment and replaced the RE premise with a shooter format. That's not the same as being a one time spin-off. That's outright gutting your franchise to turn it into something else in order to chase sales when you could have chased the sales from the shooter demographic by making a separate geared specifically towards shooter fans.

    Just like how DMC was created since its gameplay was deemed unfit in Resident Evil and it appealed to fans of hack and slash style action games.

    You don't take one franchise intended for a very specific demographic and try to make it a one size fits all, jack of all trades, master of none Frankenstein monster trying to appeal to as many demographics as possible
    (edited 1 day ago)reportquote
    Goldsickle 1 day ago#53
    Suspiria posted...
    Besides, we've already seen the correct way of how to add new ideas to Resident Evil without throwing the RE premise out the window.

    That also includes stuff like charging melee, melee on command, evade on command, melee combo, guarding, walk-while-shooting, weapon-crafting and 4-player co-op. 

    I don't have a problem with any of these but I keep hearing from other classic fanboys on how some of these "don't belong in an RE game".
    My thoughts about Bioshock Infinite:
    http://tinyurl.com/mn5ll4x (WARNING: CONTAINS SPOILERS)
    Goldsickle posted...
    Suspiria posted...
    Besides, we've already seen the correct way of how to add new ideas to Resident Evil without throwing the RE premise out the window.

    That also includes stuff like charging melee, melee on command, evade on command, melee combo, guarding, walk-while-shooting, weapon-crafting and 4-player co-op. 

    I don't have a problem with any of these but I keep hearing from other classic fanboys on how some of these "don't belong in an RE game".

    Well, you have to look at how melee attacks work in that game. In the Outbreak games, melee attacks are used to get you out of a tight spot and make a quick escape. It's not really the same as the action games where melee attacks are capable of knocking down a group of enemies and even killing them if done enough times.
    Goldsickle 1 day ago#55
    Discomancer posted...
    Well, you have to look at how melee attacks work in that game. In the Outbreak games, melee attacks are used to get you out of a tight spot and make a quick escape. It's not really the same as the action games where melee attacks are capable of knocking down a group of enemies and even killing them if done enough times.

    I am actually indifferent to the idea that kicks and punches can shatter a zombie's head. 
    But you still have to consider certain melee actions that can deal real damage, such as neck snap or stabbing a knife through a heart (like the Lickers in RE5). 
    Kicking/pushing a zombie off the ledge should be considered as well. 

    In Outbreak, I can stomp a zombie to death and do it sometimes to save ammo.
    My thoughts about Bioshock Infinite:
    http://tinyurl.com/mn5ll4x (WARNING: CONTAINS SPOILERS)
    TheCurseX2 1 day ago#56
    Lord_Diablo13 posted...
    I feel like saying this, but when I played Fire Emblem on the GBA, I didn't feel alot for the game. IT was recently that I played a Fire Emblem spin-off on the Switch called Fire Emblem Warriors. That was where I finally found my groove with Fire Emblem.

    Just because a game is different from other games doesn't mean it's bad. Sometimes you connect with it, and sometimes you don't.


    That just means you fell for the dipshit dumbing down that the gaming industry has been doing since the mid 2000s and kicked into overdrive during the PS3/360 era. 

    If you don't like survival horror then you're not going to like Resident Evil, that should've always been the outlook. Changing the series to try and appeal to more people while thinking the dedicated fanbase you already built up and fell in love with the original idea is going to be fine with it is some major fucked up thinking. 

    I know you guys love to Bars bait with these topics but every three days there's a new RE topic and it's time to set things straight: RE hasn't been good since the early 2000s because that was the last time it was properly Resident Evil. It went from being a series that always turned heads when a release was coming to forgettable dogshit that comes and goes. When a series comes and goes and is given little to no fanfare, that's when your experiment sucked. That's the confirmation. 

    And then you have something like MHW becoming Capcom's golden goose and look at that: didn't change its formula drastically, remained what Monster Hunter is about, people took to it. Dark Souls is another example. 

    You don't change what works unless your name is Castlevania. 

    And brudda, RE4 is no Symphony of the Night.
    As a Level 37 Sage, I expect to be treated with proper respect and acknowledged for my dedication to the GameFAQs Message Board Community as a whole. Thank you.
    TheCurseX2 1 day ago#57
    Goldsickle posted...
    I don't have a problem with any of these but I keep hearing from other classic fanboys on how some of these "don't belong in an RE game".


    Well, yeah. Melee should always be the absolute last resort and the most sub-optimal way to combat an enemy. The fucking enemies are either complete monsters that can rip your head off or zombies that you definitely don't want touching you period because they are diseased. 

    I don't think you guys realize this but the whole idea of the original RE is that you're a normal person that's against things that are easily capable of ruining your shit. You're not Blade or some shit. It's where part of the 'survival' comes from in the genre. You're up against intimidating odds. 

    Keep some amount of melee in RE, but using it may as well be prolonging the inevitable. No german suplexes or roundhouse/flip kicks, please.
    As a Level 37 Sage, I expect to be treated with proper respect and acknowledged for my dedication to the GameFAQs Message Board Community as a whole. Thank you.
    Synbios459 1 day ago#58
    Suspiria posted...
    Splatterhouse5 posted...
    The OP is right in that Resident Evil 2's team admittedly and blatantly increased the action focus of the series. Only the world's most incompetent players had any difficulty finding a prodigious stockpile of ammo on a first playthrough.

    And Savoots is right in that even the original Resident Evil had a larger action bent than the game it most closely copied, Alone in the Dark. Keeping with its Lovecraft theme, AitD has a number of enemies that can never die. In RE, on the other hand, you don't face anything that can't be gunned down. It punctuates every section with that favorite of Japanese game design, the boss fight.

    Shinji Mikami posted...
     show hidden quote(s)

    Dude, even if that was their intention, they failed at it miserably. Because RE2, 3, & CV don't feel like action games or third person shooter games. That wasn't until RE4 that became true.

    And if they wanted action THAT badly, that's why you make a separate IP specifically for that. Worked just fine for Devil May Cry after all.

    Dude, if RE4 was sooooooooooooooooo bad then why did it get so many GOTY awards, so criticality acclaimed to this day, people with your views are in the very much minority?
    3DS Friend Code: 4914-3099-5529
    Suspiria 1 day ago#59
    Synbios459 posted...
    Suspiria posted...
    Splatterhouse5 posted...
     show hidden quote(s)

    Dude, even if that was their intention, they failed at it miserably. Because RE2, 3, & CV don't feel like action games or third person shooter games. That wasn't until RE4 that became true.

    And if they wanted action THAT badly, that's why you make a separate IP specifically for that. Worked just fine for Devil May Cry after all.

    Dude, if RE4 was sooooooooooooooooo bad then why did it get so many GOTY awards, so criticality acclaimed to this day, people with your views are in the very much minority?

    Ha Game of the Year awards mean nothing.

    MGS4 got some of those too despite being a glorified interactive movie. GTAIV got those as well despite removing a lot of things that were fun about the earlier GTA games, having shitty driving physics, and a narrative taking itself waaaaay too seriously.

    Hell, Overwatch won those despite basically just being Team Fortress 2 - Waifu Edition. And I say that as someone who plays the game.

    Praise and/or Game of the Year awards only carry as much weight as the merits they're built on. If they're very weak, poorly justified merits that demonstrate a lack of understanding about a particular franchise, genre, etc.,\ and involve downplaying or flat out ignoring a game's flaws, then no, they mean nothing.

    Kind of like how Skyrim got a bunch of GOTY awards primarily from people who got into Elder Scrolls through Skyrim or Oblivion. People who were ignorant to how much Skyrim stripped down and dumbed down the Elder Scrolls format.
    (edited 1 day ago)reportquote
    TC's right. RE2 was reworked to be more cinematic.
    http://i.imgur.com/DKNJbBm.jpg
    What a terrifying thing to happen. I'm not sure why but I have this big fear of going blond - Zurkon
    Suspiria 1 day ago#61
    EverDownward posted...
    TC's right. RE2 was reworked to be more cinematic.

    It expanded the storytelling, sure. But it didn't go over the top Hollywood action like some buffoons are trying to falsely proclaim.
    Suspiria posted...
    EverDownward posted...
    TC's right. RE2 was reworked to be more cinematic.

    It expanded the storytelling, sure. But it didn't go over the top Hollywood action like some buffoons are trying to falsely proclaim.

    No, it didn't. But it's still considerably more action oriented than the first game.
    http://i.imgur.com/DKNJbBm.jpg
    What a terrifying thing to happen. I'm not sure why but I have this big fear of going blond - Zurkon
    Suspiria 1 day ago#63
    EverDownward posted...
    Suspiria posted...
    EverDownward posted...
     show hidden quote(s)

    It expanded the storytelling, sure. But it didn't go over the top Hollywood action like some buffoons are trying to falsely proclaim.

    No, it didn't. But it's still considerably more action oriented than the first game.

    Yes, it did expand the storytelling. And no, it is not 'considerably more action oriented' than the first game. Don't be ridiculous.
    Vegeta1000 1 day ago#64
    So many misinformed opinions. Pretty funny.
    "Just remember ALL CAPS when you spell the man name!" - MF DOOM
    shiva 1 day ago#65
    The extent of the lies of the anti-RE4 zealotry is uncanny. Random nobodies online try to deny Shinji Mikami, only the series creator, displaying their mental institution worthy state of delusion.

    Now Resident Evil 2, one of the easiest games ever made, was somehow more challenging than RE4. Please. Surviving for five minutes in that first area with the ganado mob was more challenging than the entirety of 2. 

    As for puzzles, yes, RE4's are very easy. RE2's are somehow easier, to the point where they barely exist beyond that library shelf moving moment. Everything else is 'insert object here'. That's not a puzzle. If you want to talk puzzles vs 4, at least talk puzzles concerning a title that has them. Any other RE would've been a credible argument vs 4 on the puzzling aspect. 3, in particular, features several great ones. Nope. They bring up the one RE title almost without them.

    Vegeta1000 posted...
    Because I'm not someone that's stuck in 1996. That shit you want back is never coming back. Fixed camera angles, slow ass zombies, limited saves, and fetch quests is not what the series is about. Outdated gameplay mechanics are gonna get tossed aside eventually.

    Give someone today Guardian Heroes, a game from 1996, and they'll probably be surprised that a game that fluid, that controls so perfectly and is such a blast to play, is so old. It feels as fresh in 2018 as it did in 1996. It's a game where gameplay is king. In this sense, even I can be considered someone who would wish to have 1996 back. It's very possible to go play a game from 1996 today and be amazed.

    Resident Evil is clearly not one such case. It used cinematic camera angles to the detriment of gameplay. It felt clunky then, let alone now. In that sense, I feel like you hit the nail on the head via the bolded portion. To desire for archaic conventions to remain the same forever shows how little one understands of game design.
    #1 gaming dream? Online-enabled rerelease of Power Stone/Power Stone 2! Standing for all I cherish about video games.
    (edited 1 day ago)reportquote
    Suspiria 1 day ago#66
    Can you get out of this little 'creator knows all and is infallible!' mindset of yours? Yes, it is in fact possible not only for a creator of a property to lose sight with what made it great in the first place, but it's also possible for the fans themselves to have a better grasp on it than the creator.

    Case in point: Sonic Mania

    Sonic Team and Sega had churned out shitty game after shitty game. And it finally took people quite literally known for doing fan hacks of Sonic games to finally put out a respectable Sonic game after years of mediocrity.

    Besides, Mikami has his share of stupid mistakes. He was the guy who pushed for NIntendo exclusivity for Resident Evil in the first place which ended up hurting the series' sales.

    I mean why would you take a franchise that gained the majority of its popularity and fanbase on PlayStation and put its exclusively on a Nintendo system at a time when Nintendo systems, aside from the odd exception, didn't fare well in terms of third party games selling well.

    Hell, Fatal Frame is stuck in that same rut right now.

    I give Mikami all the credit he deserves for the good he did with the series. However, he also deserves all the criticism he gets for the glaring mistakes he made with the series.

    Just because you created a franchise doesn't mean you've earned a Get Out of Jail free pass for making bad decisions with said franchise.

    It's also hilarious seeing the 'waah outdated' brigade bashing the old games yet at the same time turning around and making all sorts of excuses to defend RE4's clunky design as a TPS game when you compare it to the far superior The Suffering.

    And stop trying to doll up the 'puzzles' in RE4. You're just embarrassing yourself. RE4 has quality in its puzzles the same way that Madden has quality in its car racing mechanics.

    And you still have fuck all grasp on the game design of Resident Evil and continue bashing it for things it's not supposed to even be focusing on.
    (edited 1 day ago)reportquote
    Goldsickle 1 day ago#67
    Suspiria posted...
    Can you get out of this little 'creator knows all and is infallible!' mindset of yours?

    It's not that the "creators are infallible". 

    It's "don't act like you are better than the creators". 
    Especially when you know nothing of game development. 

    And again, you are bringing up Sonic Mania, because it was developed by a fan, in a desperate attempt to indirectly validate your own words. 
    The big difference between you and Christian Whitehead is that he's a full-fledged game developer who has created his own game engine. 
    You're just a s***poster who has never been in game development. 

    Companies like Sega and Capcom would be willing to entrust their IP to people like him but not to ignorant Luddites like yourself. 
    So keep bringing up Sonic Mania all you want, in the end, you're still just a forum troll.
    My thoughts about Bioshock Infinite:
    http://tinyurl.com/mn5ll4x (WARNING: CONTAINS SPOILERS)
    Suspiria 1 day ago#68
    I mean seriously...here's how it goes here:

    RE4 fanboys: Uuuuugh OMG fucking nostalgia blinded fanboys! The old games are SO dated and clunky and bad! Why do you keep latching onto 1996 and being stuck in the past!

    Other person: Uh, dude RE4 is a pretty clunky third person shooter. Let's not pretend like its gameplay design isn't dated compared to TPS games from back in that time period.

    RE4 fanboys: B-b-b-b-but that's different! The camera and controls in RE4 are intentionally designed that way!

    Other person: And the same can't be said for the games before RE4!

    RE4 fanboys: That's different! The old games are stale and dated! RE4 is one of the best shooters ever made!

    Seriously, that's all it ever comes down to. These same people hypocritically cry about the old games being clunky and dated yet turn around and make all sorts of excuses to justify RE4's clunkiness as a TPS game when compared to the TPS games we saw back then.

    The Suffering doesn't use tank controls. It doesn't take away the player's ability to move and shoot simultaneously. It allows full camera control. It has aiming mapped to the right stick like it should be. And it easily bests RE4 in terms of delivering an immersive horror atmosphere.

    So the 'b-b-b-but it's intentionally made that way!' defense for RE4's clunky game design carries no merit.

    In fact, the 'clunkiness' is worse in RE4 than it is in the old games because the older games are, as has been repeatedly explained to the hard headed people on this board, an evolution on point and click games of that time period. It made perfect sense for those games to have the type of controls, combat, and camera that they did.

    RE4 is a TPS game. A game concept based on frenetic gameplay. It has no excuse to have such slow and clunky controls and camera designs.

    Again, The Suffering adheres to the standard of how TPS games are supposed to be made, and it doesn't forget to bring the horror atmosphere with its music, its creature design, its lore, locales, etc.

    So what's RE4's excuse when you have another example of a horror shooter that does the job better without any of the so called 'intentionally designed' handicaps that RE4 presents?
    Hyyr 1 day ago#69
    Suspiria posted...
    a merchant in the police station selling items.

    Wait- there was a SHOP in this game? 

    Who ever heard of a Resident Evil game with a shop in it?

    Oh that's right, this wasn't really a Resident Evil game except in name (and even that was wrong)....
    Goldsickle 1 day ago#70
    Suspiria posted...
    Let's not pretend like its gameplay design isn't dated compared to TPS games from back in that time period.

    It wasn't deemed "dated" yet at the time it was released (2005). 
    You could find other games that have more functional 3rd person control scheme during that time period but the general public hasn't put up specific standards yet. 

    That's why it "got away" with such a control scheme. 
    I have made this clear to you many, many times but you don't have a response for this. 

    Bringing up RE4's control scheme is really plain desperation.
    My thoughts about Bioshock Infinite:
    http://tinyurl.com/mn5ll4x (WARNING: CONTAINS SPOILERS)
    Suspiria 1 day ago#71
    http://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/179835-resident-evil-2-remake/75900636

    And the entirety of that topic is why you do not respond to Goldsickle's inane corporate shill shitposting. He's basically the dollar store version of Savott.
    (edited 1 day ago)reportquote
    Goldsickle 1 day ago#72
    Suspiria posted...
    And the entirety of that topic is why you do not respond to Goldsickle's

    And you said it yourself:
    G4VtbGm

    If someone fails to respond, it means they have no counterargument. 
    By your logic, I am good at arguing. 

    So infuriating that I was able to tear apart your favorite gimmick response, Luddite?
    My thoughts about Bioshock Infinite:
    http://tinyurl.com/mn5ll4x (WARNING: CONTAINS SPOILERS)
    Suspiria posted...
    EverDownward posted...
    Suspiria posted...
     show hidden quote(s)

    No, it didn't. But it's still considerably more action oriented than the first game.

    Yes, it did expand the storytelling. And no, it is not 'considerably more action oriented' than the first game. Don't be ridiculous.

    I meant "no, it didn't" as an agreeing to your comment on the game not being 'over the top Hollywood action.' That didn't happen until...well, the intro of Code Veronica is pretty goddamn action packed, but game wise it'd be RE4.

    But yes, yes it is more action oriented. Tone, atmosphere, the amount of ammo you have, the sort of weapons you can find, the story. It plays out more like a sci fi action tale than the suspenseful, mystery laden opus of the original game. There's no mysterious mansion out in the middle of the woods to tip toe through this time, now it's a city in chaos and peril. Action fits right in this time. That's not to say that it's not a horror game, because it is. It's way more of a horror game than RE3, or any later entry (save for REmake). But I digress.
    http://i.imgur.com/DKNJbBm.jpg
    What a terrifying thing to happen. I'm not sure why but I have this big fear of going blond - Zurkon
    (edited 1 day ago)reportquote
    TheCurseX2 22 hours ago#74
    shiva posted...
    Now Resident Evil 2, one of the easiest games ever made, was somehow more challenging than RE4. Please. Surviving for five minutes in that first area with the ganado mob was more challenging than the entirety of 2.


    There is zero part in RE4 where the game seems remotely difficult. It's so fucking on-rails it's ridiculous. I have no idea how anyone could ever die more than three times in that game.
    As a Level 37 Sage, I expect to be treated with proper respect and acknowledged for my dedication to the GameFAQs Message Board Community as a whole. Thank you.
    Lord_Diablo13 21 hours ago#75
    TheCurseX2 posted...
    Lord_Diablo13 posted...
    I feel like saying this, but when I played Fire Emblem on the GBA, I didn't feel alot for the game. IT was recently that I played a Fire Emblem spin-off on the Switch called Fire Emblem Warriors. That was where I finally found my groove with Fire Emblem.

    Just because a game is different from other games doesn't mean it's bad. Sometimes you connect with it, and sometimes you don't.


    That just means you fell for the dipshit dumbing down that the gaming industry has been doing since the mid 2000s and kicked into overdrive during the PS3/360 era. 

    If you don't like survival horror then you're not going to like Resident Evil, that should've always been the outlook. Changing the series to try and appeal to more people while thinking the dedicated fanbase you already built up and fell in love with the original idea is going to be fine with it is some major fucked up thinking. 

    I know you guys love to Bars bait with these topics but every three days there's a new RE topic and it's time to set things straight: RE hasn't been good since the early 2000s because that was the last time it was properly Resident Evil. It went from being a series that always turned heads when a release was coming to forgettable dogshit that comes and goes. When a series comes and goes and is given little to no fanfare, that's when your experiment sucked. That's the confirmation. 

    And then you have something like MHW becoming Capcom's golden goose and look at that: didn't change its formula drastically, remained what Monster Hunter is about, people took to it. Dark Souls is another example. 

    You don't change what works unless your name is Castlevania. 

    And brudda, RE4 is no Symphony of the Night.


    And this is why I think gamers need to follow William Shatner's advice and GET A LIFE!

    I mean, for crying out loud, it's just Video Games. I mean, the way some people act over a simple hobby, it's as if someone kicked their favorite puppy down the street, turning a favorite past time into a colossal waste of time.

    There's a whole world out there just waiting to be filled, even if it has gone to hell. Hell, the reason why I'm still optimistic because I'm proud of the people protesting the wrongs of the world. So for goodness sake, don't let Video Games take control of you, because judging by the amount of obsession by some fans, it's starting to.
    We may have lost the battle for Net Neutrality, but we haven't lost the war. 
    Go to https://www.battleforthenet.com/ for more information.
    swagtile 19 hours ago#76
    TheCurseX2 posted...
    That just means you fell for the dipshit dumbing down that the gaming industry has been doing since the mid 2000s and kicked into overdrive during the PS3/360 era. 

    If you don't like survival horror then you're not going to like Resident Evil, that should've always been the outlook. Changing the series to try and appeal to more people while thinking the dedicated fanbase you already built up and fell in love with the original idea is going to be fine with it is some major fucked up thinking. 

    I know you guys love to Bars bait with these topics but every three days there's a new RE topic and it's time to set things straight: RE hasn't been good since the early 2000s because that was the last time it was properly Resident Evil. It went from being a series that always turned heads when a release was coming to forgettable dogshit that comes and goes. When a series comes and goes and is given little to no fanfare, that's when your experiment sucked. That's the confirmation. 

    And then you have something like MHW becoming Capcom's golden goose and look at that: didn't change its formula drastically, remained what Monster Hunter is about, people took to it. Dark Souls is another example. 

    You don't change what works unless your name is Castlevania. 

    And brudda, RE4 is no Symphony of the Night.


    Agreed 100%

    TheCurseX2 posted...
    shiva posted...
    Now Resident Evil 2, one of the easiest games ever made, was somehow more challenging than RE4. Please. Surviving for five minutes in that first area with the ganado mob was more challenging than the entirety of 2.


    There is zero part in RE4 where the game seems remotely difficult. It's so fucking on-rails it's ridiculous. I have no idea how anyone could ever die more than three times in that game.


    "Press/mash button to not die" QTEs. Such compelling gameplay design...
    Splatterhouse5 18 hours ago#77
    "Hold R1, press X, everything is automated."
    Canon: the juvenile's way of looking at fiction.
    Vegeta1000 12 hours ago#78
    TheCurseX2 posted...


    There is zero part in RE4 where the game seems remotely difficult


    You can stop trying to act cool. You probably died when you got to the village. 

    It's so fucking on-rails it's ridiculous. I have no idea how anyone could ever die more than three times in that game.


    How in the hell is RE4 on-rails? You don't know what that statement means. RE4 has plenty of exploration and even has some optional areas. Do you trolls even try?
    "Just remember ALL CAPS when you spell the man name!" - MF DOOM
    TheCurseX2 12 hours ago#79
    Lord_Diablo13 posted...
    There's a whole world out there just waiting to be filled, even if it has gone to hell. Hell, the reason why I'm still optimistic because I'm proud of the people protesting the wrongs of the world. So for goodness sake, don't let Video Games take control of you, because judging by the amount of obsession by some fans, it's starting to.


    Lmao, what the fuck is this midlife crisis tier rant about? We're on a video game forum on a video game centric site, of course we're going to talk about it and criticize things within it. Sorry if telling you that Resident Evil hasn't been Resident Evil for awhile but here's the facts: the RE games that worked under the old school, classic, by-the-book RE formula are hailed as classics and are fondly remembered. The RE games that have since taken their inspiration from RE4 are pigfeed by comparison. Oh yeah, who could forget such classics like RE6 and Operation Raccoon City. LOL 

    You can like it all you want but there's no denying that RE4 is where the decline began. 

    Vegeta1000 posted...
    You probably died when you got to the village.


    The only feasible way you can die in that section is if Dr. Salvador gets you which you'd have to be genuinely stupid to let happen. It's pretty great how you mention "the village" and acting like they didn't repeat that same fucking sequence over and over again. Oh wow, an area with a lot of enemies! That's some compelling gameplay! Thank God we slaughtered the series' identity so it can be a mediocre game with good graphics. 

    Vegeta1000 posted...
    RE4 has plenty of exploration and even has some optional areas


    LOL

    That's all I will say. 

    If RE4 has exploration, House of the Dead 2 could be Skyrim.
    As a Level 37 Sage, I expect to be treated with proper respect and acknowledged for my dedication to the GameFAQs Message Board Community as a whole. Thank you.
    linkin80 12 hours ago#80
    TheCurseX2 posted...
    Lord_Diablo13 posted...
    There's a whole world out there just waiting to be filled, even if it has gone to hell. Hell, the reason why I'm still optimistic because I'm proud of the people protesting the wrongs of the world. So for goodness sake, don't let Video Games take control of you, because judging by the amount of obsession by some fans, it's starting to.


    Lmao, what the fuck is this midlife crisis tier rant about? We're on a video game forum on a video game centric site, of course we're going to talk about it and criticize things within it. Sorry if telling you that Resident Evil hasn't been Resident Evil for awhile but here's the facts: the RE games that worked under the old school, classic, by-the-book RE formula are hailed as classics and are fondly remembered. The RE games that have since taken their inspiration from RE4 are pigfeed by comparison. Oh yeah, who could forget such classics like RE6 and Operation Raccoon City. LOL 

    You can like it all you want but there's no denying that RE4 is where the decline began


    You can deny that RE4 was " the start of the decline" by the fact that it's regarded as one of the best of the series, up there with REMAKE and RE2 by the majority of RE fans. If anything, RE5 is when the decline started. At best people felt mixed about it.
    Suspiria 11 hours ago#81
    RE4 has focus on exploration the same way Forza has focus on platforming.
    Suspiria 11 hours ago#82
    linkin80 posted...
    TheCurseX2 posted...
    Lord_Diablo13 posted...
     show hidden quote(s)


    Lmao, what the fuck is this midlife crisis tier rant about? We're on a video game forum on a video game centric site, of course we're going to talk about it and criticize things within it. Sorry if telling you that Resident Evil hasn't been Resident Evil for awhile but here's the facts: the RE games that worked under the old school, classic, by-the-book RE formula are hailed as classics and are fondly remembered. The RE games that have since taken their inspiration from RE4 are pigfeed by comparison. Oh yeah, who could forget such classics like RE6 and Operation Raccoon City. LOL 

    You can like it all you want but there's no denying that RE4 is where the decline began


    You can deny that RE4 was " the start of the decline" by the fact that it's regarded as one of the best of the series, up there with REMAKE and RE2 by the majority of RE fans. If anything, RE5 is when the decline started. At best people felt mixed about it.

    Except it's not the best in the series because it doesn't even try to be a part of the series. It just wears the name and opts to be a shooter.

    And you can't sit there blaming RE5 for being actiony while giving RE4 a free pass when they have the same fucking core game design. No, RE4 not having co-op doesn't change the fact the emphasis of the gameplay is still on roundhouse kicking, shooting, suplexing, and QTEing the hell out of everything.
    Suspiria 11 hours ago#83
    Legends Kuja posted...
    Honestly, he kinda deserves it if he's going to keep spouting his opinion like it's the only correct one.

    And who said I'm the only one who has this opinion?

    There are others who recognize the newer games for failing to live up to the RE name.

    Of course NGG likes to pretend those people don't exist and brush them off as 'just a minority of nostalgia blinded haters' because of the board's fanaticism towards RE4, but they still exist all the same.
    (edited 11 hours ago)reportquote
    Goldsickle 10 hours ago#84
    Suspiria posted...
    And who said I'm the only one who has this opinion?

    There are others who recognize the newer games for failing to live up to the RE name.

    A bunch of people believing that the earth is flat doesn't validate that point of view.
    My thoughts about Bioshock Infinite:
    http://tinyurl.com/mn5ll4x (WARNING: CONTAINS SPOILERS)
    Lord_Diablo13 10 hours ago#85
    Suspiria posted...
    Legends Kuja posted...
    Honestly, he kinda deserves it if he's going to keep spouting his opinion like it's the only correct one.

    And who said I'm the only one who has this opinion?

    There are others who recognize the newer games for failing to live up to the RE name.

    Of course NGG likes to pretend those people don't exist and brush them off as 'just a minority of nostalgia blinded haters' because of the board's fanaticism towards RE4, but they still exist all the same.

    Careful. You may jinx it with RE2Remake being like RE4/RE:R
    We may have lost the battle for Net Neutrality, but we haven't lost the war. 
    Go to https://www.battleforthenet.com/ for more information.
    TheCurseX2 10 hours ago#86
    Lmao, remember that time in RE2 when you walked into what you thought was another room in a police station only to be met by a fucking zombie cop using a gigantic turret gattling gun maniacally? 

    Oh, that didn't happen because that'd be stupid as shit. But guess which game does have that happen, only replace 'zombie cop' with 'chanting robed cultist.'
    As a Level 37 Sage, I expect to be treated with proper respect and acknowledged for my dedication to the GameFAQs Message Board Community as a whole. Thank you.
    Lord_Diablo13 10 hours ago#87
    TheCurseX2 posted...
    Lmao, remember that time in RE2 when you walked into what you thought was another room in a police station only to be met by a fucking zombie cop using a gigantic turret gattling gun maniacally? 

    Oh, that didn't happen because that'd be stupid as shit. But guess which game does have that happen, only replace 'zombie cop' with 'chanting robed cultist.'

    Careful. Capcom may add that in the RE2Remake.
    We may have lost the battle for Net Neutrality, but we haven't lost the war. 
    Go to https://www.battleforthenet.com/ for more information.
    Goldsickle 10 hours ago#88
    @LaManoNeraII
    LaManoNeraII posted...
    And none of them are "survival horror" either because that's just a buzzword Capcom created to market the original RE. Same BS Konami used for MGS being a "tactical espionage action"

    Other genres made up by Capcom: 

    Gothic Horror
    Zombie Paradise Action
    Free Running RPG
    Stylish High Action
    Panic Horror
    Survival Gun Shooting
    Warring States Survival Action 

    Without using Google, can you guess which games uses these genre description?
    My thoughts about Bioshock Infinite:
    http://tinyurl.com/mn5ll4x (WARNING: CONTAINS SPOILERS)
    TheCurseX2 10 hours ago#89
    I've zero hope for the RE2 Remake, I'm keeping the most low of expectations because it'll probably suck due to reasons that RE4 was the genesis of. 

    Bars may have the occasional fucked opinion like Vigilante 8 > Twisted Metal, but when it comes to RE4 being the downfall of RE he's completely correct.
    As a Level 37 Sage, I expect to be treated with proper respect and acknowledged for my dedication to the GameFAQs Message Board Community as a whole. Thank you.
    TheCurseX2 10 hours ago#90
    Gothic Horror/Fiction is a "made up genre" now. 

    When you reach so far that your shoulder dislocates.

    Horace Walpole would, and should, come haunt your house for saying such a stupid thing.
    As a Level 37 Sage, I expect to be treated with proper respect and acknowledged for my dedication to the GameFAQs Message Board Community as a whole. Thank you.
    (edited 10 hours ago)reportquote
    linkin80 9 hours ago#91
    Suspiria posted...
    linkin80 posted...
    TheCurseX2 posted...
     show hidden quote(s)


    You can deny that RE4 was " the start of the decline" by the fact that it's regarded as one of the best of the series, up there with REMAKE and RE2 by the majority of RE fans. If anything, RE5 is when the decline started. At best people felt mixed about it.

    Except it's not the best in the series because it doesn't even try to be a part of the series. It just wears the name and opts to be a shooter.

    And you can't sit there blaming RE5 for being actiony while giving RE4 a free pass when they have the same fucking core game design. No, RE4 not having co-op doesn't change the fact the emphasis of the gameplay is still on roundhouse kicking, shooting, suplexing, and QTEing the hell out of everything.


    I said it's one of the better games in the series, along with REMAKE and RE2, not the best. I also don't agree with the thinking that because RE4 was different and more action focused that we blame the crappier entries that came after all on RE4, just because RE4 is what changed the formula. RE4 could have been what it was and they could have easily decided to take the best of the originals and RE4 to make RE5 and 6. But they decided to double down on the action part instead.
    Goldsickle 9 hours ago#92
    TheCurseX2 posted...
    Gothic Horror/Fiction is a "made up genre" now.

    Would make sense if it was a movie or something. 

    As a video game genre, it feels made up. 
    What makes "Gothic Horror" different than "Survival Horror" or "Panic Horror"? 

    Even if you cherry-picked Gothic Horror, it won't change that all the other random "genres" are made up.
    My thoughts about Bioshock Infinite:
    http://tinyurl.com/mn5ll4x (WARNING: CONTAINS SPOILERS)
    Vegeta1000 9 hours ago#93
    I wonder how many alts Bars has. 

    TheCurseX2 posted...


    The only feasible way you can die in that section is if Dr. Salvador gets you which you'd have to be genuinely stupid to let happen. It's pretty great how you mention "the village" and acting like they didn't repeat that same fucking sequence over and over again. Oh wow, an area with a lot of enemies! That's some compelling gameplay! Thank God we slaughtered the series' identity so it can be a mediocre game with good graphics.


    Because mowing down slow ass zombies with auto aim was sooooooooooooooo much harder (*sarcasm*)! If you really think every area of the village is like that then you either didn't play the game or is just a terrible troll. Classic RE purist are flat out pathetic. 

    TheCurseX2 posted...


    LOL

    That's all I will say.

    If RE4 has exploration, House of the Dead 2 could be Skyrim.


    So in otherwords, you have no counterargument? Thought as much.
    "Just remember ALL CAPS when you spell the man name!" - MF DOOM
    (edited 9 hours ago)reportquote
    Goldsickle 9 hours ago#94
    Vegeta1000 posted...
    Because mowing down slow ass zombies with auto aim was sooooooooooooooo much harder

    This really. 

    None of the Luddites are ever able to give any logical reasons on how the auto-aim mechanic is "better" for horror, challenge or tension, when compared to actually needing to manually land shots and make your ammo count. 

    As seen in Operation Raccoon City or the Chronicles games, Capcom has warmed up to ideas like hitting Birkin in the giant eyeball to stun him, Mr. X's trench coat being bulletproof so you can only damage him with head shots or how shooting a Tyrant in the exposed heart can increase damage. 
    It's very likely for Capcom to implement pinpoint aiming for the RE2 remake.
    My thoughts about Bioshock Infinite:
    http://tinyurl.com/mn5ll4x (WARNING: CONTAINS SPOILERS)
    Vegeta1000 8 hours ago#95
    Goldsickle posted...
    Vegeta1000 posted...
    Because mowing down slow ass zombies with auto aim was sooooooooooooooo much harder

    This really. 

    None of the Luddites are ever able to give any logical reasons on how the auto-aim mechanic is "better" for horror, challenge or tension, when compared to actually needing to manually land shots and make your ammo count. 

    As seen in Operation Raccoon City or the Chronicles games, Capcom has warmed up to ideas like hitting Birkin in the giant eyeball to stun him, Mr. X's trench coat being bulletproof so you can only damage him with head shots or how shooting a Tyrant in the exposed heart can increase damage. 
    It's very likely for Capcom to implement pinpoint aiming for the RE2 remake.


    Yeah, these clowns don't realize that in RE4 you can't just blindly shoot at enemies like you can in the Pre-RE4 games. You got enemies coming in all directions and you gotta decide where to hit them at. Some enemies are easier to deal with shooting them in the head while others might be easier shooting them in the arm or leg. Then some enemies are shielded so you have to find a weak spot on their body. RE4 enemies are very aggressive so you gotta think fast especially when you have to deal with a bunch of enemies at one time. In old-school RE, there wasn't any real strategy in taking zombies down since as long as you had some distant they couldn't get near you. Then if you had a shotgun, you just had to aim up and boom they're dead.
    "Just remember ALL CAPS when you spell the man name!" - MF DOOM
    Goldsickle 8 hours ago#96
    Vegeta1000 posted...
    Yeah, these clowns don't realize that in RE4 you can't just blindly shoot at enemies like you can in the Pre-RE4 games.

    It's not just about shooting, it's about how you can't stop time to reload, you can't just press X at every single door to reset enemy position or how performing actions like turning cranks occurs in real-time, leaving you vulnerable. 

    And as the series progress, the game takes away more invincibility from you, like prompting you to heal in real time (which can be interrupted as of Revelations 2 and 7) or how you are vulnerable while climbing ladders. 

    In classic RE, I can just run past enemies, press X at a the nearest door or ladder to completely bypass combat and just interact with puzzles that plays out in a cutscene, so enemies can't interrupt you when you're unlocking padlocks, turning cranks or inserting medals.
    My thoughts about Bioshock Infinite:
    http://tinyurl.com/mn5ll4x (WARNING: CONTAINS SPOILERS)
    Suspiria 7 hours ago#97
    linkin80 posted...
    Suspiria posted...
    linkin80 posted...
     show hidden quote(s)

    Except it's not the best in the series because it doesn't even try to be a part of the series. It just wears the name and opts to be a shooter.

    And you can't sit there blaming RE5 for being actiony while giving RE4 a free pass when they have the same fucking core game design. No, RE4 not having co-op doesn't change the fact the emphasis of the gameplay is still on roundhouse kicking, shooting, suplexing, and QTEing the hell out of everything.


    I said it's one of the better games in the series, along with REMAKE and RE2, not the best. I also don't agree with the thinking that because RE4 was different and more action focused that we blame the crappier entries that came after all on RE4, just because RE4 is what changed the formula. RE4 could have been what it was and they could have easily decided to take the best of the originals and RE4 to make RE5 and 6. But they decided to double down on the action part instead.

    You can't be the best in the series if you don't even try to be a part of the series. RE4 is not a Resident Evil game. And you don't blame RE5 or 6 for something RE4 started. It's nonsense to do so.
    Suspiria 7 hours ago#98
    Vegeta1000 posted...
    Because mowing down slow ass zombies with auto aim was sooooooooooooooo much harder
    Ah, there's the problem. You're making the mistake of focusing on the combat in a franchise where combat isn't supposed to be the focal point of the gameplay. Again.

    That's a really bad habit with this board. Combat is all you guys ever focus on when it comes to Resident Evil.

    And it's not about mere difficulty either. It's about being a Resident Evil game. And being a TPS game is not being Resident Evil regardless of what mental gymnastics you employ to proclaim they're not TPS games when they very clearly are.

    And stop criticizing the old games for not focusing on something that isn't supposed to be the focal point of the gameplay. Complaining about lack of tactical combat in Resident Evil is like complaining about the lack of realistic driving in Mario Kart.

    If you want more combat mechanics THAT much, why not go play a different franchise geared toward that sort of thing?
    (edited 7 hours ago)reportquote
    Suspiria 7 hours ago#99
    And regardless of whether or not Capcom made up the term 'survival horror' as a marketing gimmick or whatever, it's an official genre name now whether you like it or not. So people are going to continue to use it. People will just have to get used to it.
    Lord_Diablo13 7 hours ago#100
    Suspiria posted...
    And regardless of whether or not Capcom made up the term 'survival horror' as a marketing gimmick or whatever, it's an official genre name now whether you like it or not. So people are going to continue to use it. People will just have to get used to it.


    Survival Horror existed long before Resident Evil. One early example is Alone in the Dark.
    We may have lost the battle for Net Neutrality, but we haven't lost the war. 
    Go to https://www.battleforthenet.com/ for more information.
    1. Boards
    2. Nonstop Gaming - General
    3. FACT: Resident Evil 2 was the first Resident Evil Game to be more actionized
      1. Boards
      2. Nonstop Gaming - General
      3. FACT: Resident Evil 2 was the first Resident Evil Game to be more actionized
      TheCurseX2 7 hours ago#101
      Vegeta1000 posted...
      Because mowing down slow ass zombies with auto aim was sooooooooooooooo much harder (*sarcasm*)! If you really think every area of the village is like that then you either didn't play the game or is just a terrible troll. Classic RE purist are flat out pathetic.


      Oh there it is: "you didn't really play the game!" Unfortunately I did and after the initial 'new RE game' high wore off and I replayed it over the years the more it became apparent that this was one goofy fucking entry that began the snowball of garbage that RE is today. 

      Nobody gives a flipping fuck about "skillful gameplay" when it comes to how you shoot your gun. The gun isn't the focus of a classic RE, it helps you out but it's never the focal point in which everything is designed around. RE is supposed to be at the core about survival and finding your ways out of a dire situation. And let's be real, what the hell is so 'skillful' about RE4's gunplay when nearly every enemy reacts the same to where you shoot them? Shoot, shoot, wait for stun animation, walk in and use suplex/roundhouse kick and repeat. Uh oh, one of them became Species 3, use a grenade. 

      As said, RE isn't about its combat as the focus. It's the atmosphere, the ambiance, the sum of its parts. Walking down narrow corridors and hearing the sound of shuffling but never knowing if it's around the next corner. The weaponry is what gives you a fighting chance, but you're not supposed to be Rambo. 

      RE4 turned the series into an action shooter which if it were a spin-off game ala RE: Survivor wouldn't have been a big deal, but this was an official entry into the series and has haunted it ever since it reared its ugly head. 

      It's when I read about how RE4's combat was so much better than previous entries that I laugh because it becomes clear that was your first true exposure to the series as a whole. If it takes a series to rewrite its entire identity to get someone like you to try it, then that series should leave your ass behind.
      As a Level 37 Sage, I expect to be treated with proper respect and acknowledged for my dedication to the GameFAQs Message Board Community as a whole. Thank you.
      Goldsickle 6 hours ago#102
      Suspiria posted...
      You're making the mistake of focusing on the combat in a franchise where combat isn't supposed to be the focal point of the gameplay.

      And these are the kind of responses you Luddites are limited to: abstract and subjective drivel. 

      You are completely incapable of coming up with a logic, sound argument about how auto-aim is better for challenge, tension or horror, so you take on the angle that pinpoint aiming "doesn't belong in an RE game", despite the fact that you're not an authority who can decide what is or isn't RE. 

      And regardless of whether or not Capcom made up the term 'survival horror' as a marketing gimmick or whatever, it's an official genre name now whether you like it or not.

      You Luddites can't even explain what "Survival Horror" is. 

      When you hipsters are incapable of thinking for yourself, the best you can do is Google other articles about the definition of "Survival Horror", written by people who are either not in game development or not so well-known developers who have never created their own horror games.
      My thoughts about Bioshock Infinite:
      http://tinyurl.com/mn5ll4x (WARNING: CONTAINS SPOILERS)
      Vegeta1000 5 hours ago#103
      Suspiria posted...
      Ah, there's the problem. You're making the mistake of focusing on the combat in a franchise where combat isn't supposed to be the focal point of the gameplay. Again.


      Stop the bullshit. They wouldn't have increased the ammo pickups, character's health, or enemy count if they weren't trying to make combat a focus. It's no surprise that each RE game after RE1 became more and more action packed leading to what RE4 eventually became. They even gave the survival knife a significant buff in RECV which was carried over to RE4.
      "Just remember ALL CAPS when you spell the man name!" - MF DOOM
      Vegeta1000 5 hours ago#104
      TheCurseX2 posted...

      Nobody gives a flipping fuck about "skillful gameplay" when it comes to how you shoot your gun. The gun isn't the focus of a classic RE, it helps you out but it's never the focal point in which everything is designed around. RE is supposed to be at the core about survival and finding your ways out of a dire situation


      So increasing the character's health with each game, increasing ammo pickups, adding weapon upgrades, creating ammo (RE3), a sub-machine gun, assault rifle, mine thrower, and a side pack was just added for shits and giggles? Whatever helps you sleep at night.

      And let's be real, what the hell is so 'skillful' about RE4's gunplay when nearly every enemy reacts the same to where you shoot them? Shoot, shoot, wait for stun animation, walk in and use suplex/roundhouse kick and repeat. Uh oh, one of them became Species 3, use a grenade.


      For starters, have to actually pinball the laser to shoot unlike Pre-RE4 when you can just fire away with no care in the world because the enemies will always be hit due to auto aim. Zombies won't ever get near you as long as you have enough ammo. 


      As said, RE isn't about its combat as the focus. It's the atmosphere, the ambiance, the sum of its parts. Walking down narrow corridors and hearing the sound of shuffling but never knowing if it's around the next corner. The weaponry is what gives you a fighting chance, but you're not supposed to be Rambo.

      RE4 turned the series into an action shooter which if it were a spin-off game ala RE: Survivor wouldn't have been a big deal, but this was an official entry into the series and has haunted it ever since it reared its ugly head.

      It's when I read about how RE4's combat was so much better than previous entries that I laugh because it becomes clear that was your first true exposure to the series as a whole. If it takes a series to rewrite its entire identity to get someone like you to try it, then that series should leave your ass behind


      Pretty much all of this was proven wrong in earlier post. Just stop embarrassing yourself along with Bars.
      "Just remember ALL CAPS when you spell the man name!" - MF DOOM
      Suspiria 5 hours ago#105
      Vegeta1000 posted...
      Suspiria posted...
      Ah, there's the problem. You're making the mistake of focusing on the combat in a franchise where combat isn't supposed to be the focal point of the gameplay. Again.


      Stop the bullshit. They wouldn't have increased the ammo pickups, character's health, or enemy count if they weren't trying to make combat a focus. It's no surprise that each RE game after RE1 became more and more action packed leading to what RE4 eventually became. They even gave the survival knife a significant buff in RECV which was carried over to RE4.

      Nope, and bullshit nothing. None of that changes the fact that the gameplay was not focused on combat until RE4 came along.

      If you have a problem with people who don't like combat taking center stage in Resident Evil, that's too bad. It's what the franchise was built on, and that's part of its identity. Combat is there, yes, but not the point of the gameplay design.

      As I've stated, you don't understand Resident Evil. You can proclaim elitist all you want, but that's just the reality of the situation.

      That's why things like 'skillful aiming' are completely irrelevant and beside the point to Resident Evil's premise. You're looking for things that don't belong in Resident Evil and bashing the older games for not focusing on things that don't fit into the gameplay premise of the series to begin with.

      It's an ignorant viewpoint to hold, and you've had this repeatedly explained to you.
      (edited 5 hours ago)reportquote
      Goldsickle 5 hours ago#106
      Vegeta1000 posted...
      For starters, have to actually pinball the laser to shoot unlike Pre-RE4 when you can just fire away with no care in the world because the enemies will always be hit due to auto aim.

      No worries about recoil or muzzle jumps when you're using burst-fire or full-auto weapons. 

      Back in RE2, Leon can juggle the dogs in mid-air with all three shots. 
      If you're firing a sub-machine gun into a group of zombies close to each other, no bullets are wasted. 
      When one zombie drops, the bullets magically veer into the next zombie, provided they are in the gun's area of effect, which is kinda wide. 

      Even shotguns are affected. 
      In the more recent titles, you have to manually control how the pellets are distributed and consider the spread radius of your shotgun. 
      No worries about that for auto-aim. 
      Shotguns for those titles will almost evenly damage 3 enemies (4 if upgraded in RE2) as long as they are within the shtogun's effect radius. 

      I can go on about how the classic style combat is cheap, gimmicky and doesn't help with horror or tension. 
      All the dumb Luddites can do is come up with some abstract bulls*** such as "what RE is all about" or "what belongs in an RE game".
      My thoughts about Bioshock Infinite:
      http://tinyurl.com/mn5ll4x (WARNING: CONTAINS SPOILERS)
      (edited 5 hours ago)reportquote
      Synbios459 4 hours ago#107
      @Suspiria I am curious, given how well RE4 sold how can you say it is bad? Look at it from their perspective. Do you think it's better to release a game that may not be as "true to the series" as you want but sell boat loads or release something very similar that is more "true to the series" but sell awful?

      They went through four different iterations of RE4 and stuck with what we got that no matter how much you may hate it, ended up being a very wise choice.
      3DS Friend Code: 4914-3099-5529
      Suspiria 4 hours ago#108
      We're going back to the 'sales=quality' defense again?

      Dude, come on now.

      Call of Duty still sells truckloads but is no way a good representative of competent FPS gameplay.

      Moreover, you're adopting this whole 'it needs to have an inflated AAA budget and chase casuals to sell!' mindset.

      You can generate a profit without gutting your franchise to chase after mainstream eyeballs.

      Stuff like Dark Souls has been doing just fine by refusing to make itself more accessible and stick by its mantra of 'being difficult'.

      Then you have stuff like Persona 5 which doesn't make any tryhard efforts to cater to a casual audience and became Atlus's fastest selling game ever.

      Resident Evil can likewise generate a profit without going all shootery or chasing mainstream eyeballs.

      Just develop your game competently, don't go fucking crazy with the budget, actually market and advertise worth a shit and don't expect to rely on word of mouth alone, don't do something stupid like put it exclusively on a Nintendo system (which is what caused REmake and RE0 to not sell as much), don't release it during a packed month with Red Dead Redemption 2 or something and there you go.

      And if you're a smart publisher, you would want to develop more projects like that. You can't put all your eggs into the "AAA budget and casual audience or bust!" basket. That type of business model isn't sustainable and has killed off many studios since last gen.

      Plus, if you want a property to chase after the shooter market, then make a separate IP for that purpose. You don't try to take on franchise intended for a specific targeted demographic and try to force it to appeal to everybody.
      (edited 4 hours ago)reportquote
      Synbios459 3 hours ago#109
      Suspiria posted...
      We're going back to the 'sales=quality' defense again?

      Dude, come on now.

      Call of Duty still sells truckloads but is no way a good representative of competent FPS gameplay.

      Moreover, you're adopting this whole 'it needs to have an inflated AAA budget and chase casuals to sell!' mindset.

      You can generate a profit without gutting your franchise to chase after mainstream eyeballs.

      Stuff like Dark Souls has been doing just fine by refusing to make itself more accessible and stick by its mantra of 'being difficult'.

      Then you have stuff like Persona 5 which doesn't make any tryhard efforts to cater to a casual audience and became Atlus's fastest selling game ever.

      Resident Evil can likewise generate a profit without going all shootery or chasing mainstream eyeballs.

      Just develop your game competently, don't go fucking crazy with the budget, actually market and advertise worth a shit and don't expect to rely on word of mouth alone, don't do something stupid like put it exclusively on a Nintendo system (which is what caused REmake and RE0 to not sell as much), don't release it during a packed month with Red Dead Redemption 2 or something and there you go.

      And if you're a smart publisher, you would want to develop more projects like that. You can't put all your eggs into the "AAA budget and casual audience or bust!" basket. That type of business model isn't sustainable and has killed off many studios since last gen.

      Plus, if you want a property to chase after the shooter market, then make a separate IP for that purpose. You don't try to take on franchise intended for a specific targeted demographic and try to force it to appeal to everybody.

      I agree with some. But at the end of the day, you can't blame them for doing what works. It's certainly a good thing you aren't head of management, otherwise you'd rather see your company go under all while screaming "But at least the series is how I like it!!!!" than make something that will sell.
      3DS Friend Code: 4914-3099-5529
      Suspiria 3 hours ago#110
      You just don't like it when people are able to construct effective arguments against you.

      Also, if the shooter gameplay design is as 'high selling' as you carry on about, then surely it could have sold just as fine without having to leech off of the Resident Evil name, right?

      So then it doesn't even need to part of Resident Evil. It could have and should have been its own separate IP.
      TheCurseX2 2 hours ago#111
      Vegeta1000 posted...
      So increasing the character's health with each game, increasing ammo pickups, adding weapon upgrades, creating ammo (RE3), a sub-machine gun, assault rifle, mine thrower, and a side pack was just added for shits and giggles? Whatever helps you sleep at night.


      Isn't Jill apart of some elite police force? Her being able to make ammo is a lot different than "hey look this village/castle that has extremely primitive tools is casually rocking a fucking shotgun in the middle of a house." 

      Oh, yeah, ammo pick-ups increased. I'd kind of expect to have more ammo in a fucking police station.

      I'm 95% sure you played RE2 on one of those scrub modes where you start with a sub machine gun with infinite ammo.
      As a Level 37 Sage, I expect to be treated with proper respect and acknowledged for my dedication to the GameFAQs Message Board Community as a whole. Thank you.
      1. Boards
      2. Nonstop Gaming - General 
      3. FACT: Resident Evil 2 was the first Resident Evil Game to be more actionized

No comments:

Post a Comment