Capcom didn't pay off reviewers for RE6, but they did for DmC...?

#101FireMage7777Posted 1/1/2013 8:35:07 AM
vgplaya89 posted...
DaAzureGrimoire posted...
FireMage7777 posted...
DaAzureGrimoire posted...
FireMage7777 posted...
RE6 some glitches and a HORRENDOUS story aside, wasn't that bad...but again HORRENDOUS story


It's not like we didn't see that coming though.
Even from the trailers and gameplay videos, we all knew the story was going to be bad.
The story of the series had been heading in a bad direction for some time now.


RE6 wasn't THAT long ago


....I don't think I said it was?
I was just saying the story had been going in a bad direction for a while prior to RE6.


are we implying RE had a good story to begin with?


Yes
---
It's sad that the best thing to come out of Capcom recently is a fan made game
NOTE: I don't do no damage runs. -MrStarKiller *cough casual cough*
#102Ether101Posted 1/1/2013 11:22:46 AM
HellFire-Bahamu posted...
Ether101 posted...
kingrat2314 posted...
Whenever a game gets reviews that people agree with, it's fair. When a game gets a good review that people don't agree with, it's paid off. If you get a bad review that people don't agree with, it's "you can't spell ignorant without IGN", or some other variation of hate.


I know there are games that I like that have gotten good reviews that I don't agree with. I know for a fact that there are games that I like that most of it's 'fans' only like it because somebody told them too. Look at OoT, that game is good but it completely fails in the categories that people praise it for.


Could you please explain your disdain for Ocarina of Time. I'm just not understanding


OoT is a prequel to an origin story that completely ignores stated origins to the point that they need a few plot twist ham fisted into the ending to try make work. The problem is that those twist come out of nowhere and conflict with the motives of given in the game that they had to relay on the manga to explain them away which it kind messes things up even further.

If Link couldn't wield the Master Sword as a child then he would be seen as unworthy and not been able to remove it from the pedestal. This means that OoT's plot stops working right there.

We know that even at their best the Seven Sages are collectively weaker then Agahnim, who's weaker then ALttP Ganon, who's weaker then Link. Ganon is the physical embodiment of the Triforce in ALttP and he's still weaker then Link so Ganondorf should have been walk in the park for Link in OoT.

Link's goal in the game was to kill Ganondorf not seal him away. That element of the ending came about because they forgot that the game was supposed to be a prequel until that got to that point.

The second twist, sending Link back in time and forcefully creating a split in reality, also happens because they remembered that it's supposed to be a prequel at the last second. This twist seems to happen for no real reason other then an attempted to give Zelda redeeming moment for her tactically sound decisions not working out the way she hoped they would. Not only is that a pointless gesture that sends the wrong message it also undermines everything thought and meaningful thing she said to him over the adult arc. Especially her last speech about owning up to her mistakes as she's throwing Link away so she doesn't have too.

Link and the Master Sword were the only things keeping the forces of evil at bay in the adult reality by taking them out of the equation Zelda had completely undone her seven years of hard work.
---
Gamers have lost their pride.
Complacency can be a sin.