what RE roots?

#91zombiabsolPosted 2/3/2013 3:11:27 PM
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
#92edward18Posted 2/3/2013 3:30:57 PM

pokemon has changed things in the main series, they add a whole bunch of new pokemon each generation, the introduce brand new characters while bringing old ones back.


Just like RE's added and brought back characters.

the controls are the same, but they define how pokemon plays and it doesnt grow old and annoying

Same with RE's old games.

they also added new features as the games progressed: a day and night sytem, pokemon ribbons, seasonal changes, battle mechanics became heavily changed.

...when did they heavily change?

thats why pokemons gameplay isnt outdated, and it is one of the only franchises that can compete with call of duty sales.

Oh shut the **** up about sales. Sales have no part in a discussion about what people think a series should be like.

they add new stuff to the gameplay.

ANY RE game has done that.

its not just the same battle system anymore with the same pokemon in each game. each game feels like it stands on its own, because they evolve the franchise in a good way by constantly adding new things, but keeping it the same.

...they all seem to be the same to me.
---
Before you die you see the Tails Doll---Backdrop Observer of the Metroid: Other M board
Apparently Edward: Wise Old Sage of Korodai
#93zombiabsolPosted 2/3/2013 4:05:48 PM(edited)
Just like RE's added and brought back characters.

And? Re characters dont bring new type/gameplay advantages with them that heavily affect the gameplay. in numbered re games, your not picking your character out because they bring something new to the series, your forced to play as whatever characters they have set IF you want to play through the storyline. When pokemon games bring in a new pokemon , that pokemon itself actually changes how you play, not just a new mechanic like jills dodge.

Same with RE's old games.

well im not going to argue with your opinion.

...when did they heavily change?

ivs were introduced, certain types effectiveness against other types were changed,double triple and rotation battles came in, as well as abilities and new items , which all HEAVILY determine if you will win a battle or not.

Oh shut the **** up about sales. Sales have no part in a discussion about what people think a series should be like.

Sure, but while im at it STFU about how gameplay shouldnt change in a numbered series.
anyways, i dont think sales do either, i simply meant that pokemon kept its basic controls and gameplay while evolving them, and manages to still compete with a best selling franchise

ANY RE game has done that.

nowhere near the same depth as pokemon has.

...they all seem to be the same to me.

they aren't.
---
(PSN:zombiabsol3) RE6 and PASBR <3
"Thanks for the escort. Heres something to remember me by!"~Carla Radames
#94DaimeocaraPosted 2/3/2013 4:01:48 PM
@ Edward18

I brought up the fact that the characters were novices to begin with, because that gave you more of a sense of vulnerability, fear, and gave you the reason to run from most creatures, because you're character wasn't prepared for the zombies or B.O.W.s (Combat, armor, gun, or ammo wise.). For that it was more realistic and relatable for the player. It was like you were trying to survive just as much as the main characters.

The B.S.A.A. most likely have advanced combat training that S.T.A.R.S. lacked. Instead of oops I'm out of ammo, I'd better run... You are able to at least try to fight back when possible. Occasionally losing their gear is fine as long as it doesn't catch the "Metroid Syndrome" and make it happen on every game. Those who aren't a part of the B.S.A.A. could adhere to the semi classic style (Like Leon could for example.), but Chris, Jill, Sheva, and Parker do have that training. To a certain extent, the combat needs to evolve to deal with the new B.O.W.s that come along. Otherwise they wouldn't stand a chance against the more advanced creatures. You can't be stuck in hallway gameplay forever. I'm just looking for a nice balance between classic and new.

By more like Anime than horror, I meant that the over the top action and stylized characters (The swarm in a human shape, the monster transformer, the living ship, punching the B.O.W., and Jake's extra ending.) and events that you'd see in Anime like Fullmetal Alchemist, Naruto, Soul Eater, Devil May Cry( Mini Anime series), etc.. in other words, it is more like their awesome action cartoons than the scary ones.
#95zombiabsolPosted 2/3/2013 4:04:07 PM
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
#96edward18Posted 2/3/2013 4:08:14 PM

And? Re characters dont bring new type/gameplay advantages with them that heavily affect the gameplay.


Chris carrying more items, Jill getting different stuff, ect.

ivs were introduced, certain types effectiveness against other types were changed,double triple and rotation battles came in, as well as abilities and new items , which all HEAVILY determine if you will win a battle or not.

And it's still just "enter an RPG battle" like the originals. RE is unrecognizable gameplaywise nowadays.

Sure, but while im at it STFU about how gameplay shouldnt change in a numbered series.

How come? That's my opinion. Sales have no place in an argument of opinions.

nowhere near the same depth as pokemon has.

...is that bad?

I brought up the fact that the characters were novices to begin with, because that gave you more of a sense of vulnerability, fear, and gave you the reason to run from most creatures, because you're character wasn't prepared for the zombies or B.O.W.s (Combat, armor, gun, or ammo wise.). For that it was more realistic and relatable for the player. It was like you were trying to survive just as much as the main characters.

Yeah, we sorta want that.

The B.S.A.A. most likely have advanced combat training that S.T.A.R.S. lacked. Instead of oops I'm out of ammo, I'd better run... You are able to at least try to fight back when possible.

Doesn't mean the gameplay should allow you to do that.

Occasionally losing their gear is fine as long as it doesn't catch the "Metroid Syndrome" and make it happen on every game.

And yet Metroid is near perfect for its kind of game in almost every game thus far...

Those who aren't a part of the B.S.A.A. could adhere to the semi classic style (Like Leon could for example.), but Chris, Jill, Sheva, and Parker do have that training. To a certain extent, the combat needs to evolve to deal with the new B.O.W.s that come along.

There's no excuse for gameplay changing. They could say that crap in files or something, but you shouldn't be able to fist-fight monsters.

Otherwise they wouldn't stand a chance against the more advanced creatures.

Yeah you could...

You can't be stuck in hallway gameplay forever.

...yes you could...
---
Before you die you see the Tails Doll---Backdrop Observer of the Metroid: Other M board
Apparently Edward: Wise Old Sage of Korodai
#97ZeeDoggePosted 2/3/2013 4:17:38 PM
Nemeksis posted...
ZeeDogge posted...



ITT: We have never played a sandbox game

This just makes me sad for this generation


If you take all the optional stuff in a sandbox game the only thing left is the main quest, which then is entirely linear. Some, like the bethesda games you seem to love, try to employ a pretty terrible binary moral system where you're either the devil incarnate or jesus' second coming. This moral system doesn't make it less linear though because mostly the outcome is so similar it doesn't matter and has no impact on the rest of the game.


Non linear does not mean sidequests, it means that there are multiple ways to do everything and you aren't boxed in down into a linear path or item sequence. Choosing whether or not to do a specific part at all, instead of doing it a different way, is not what being non linear is about. Maybe you should play Deus Ex 3 and see how many ways any objective is possible to do
#98NemeksisPosted 2/3/2013 4:28:59 PM
ZeeDogge posted...
Nemeksis posted...
ZeeDogge posted...



ITT: We have never played a sandbox game

This just makes me sad for this generation


If you take all the optional stuff in a sandbox game the only thing left is the main quest, which then is entirely linear. Some, like the bethesda games you seem to love, try to employ a pretty terrible binary moral system where you're either the devil incarnate or jesus' second coming. This moral system doesn't make it less linear though because mostly the outcome is so similar it doesn't matter and has no impact on the rest of the game.


Non linear does not mean sidequests, it means that there are multiple ways to do everything and you aren't boxed in down into a linear path or item sequence. Choosing whether or not to do a specific part at all, instead of doing it a different way, is not what being non linear is about. Maybe you should play Deus Ex 3 and see how many ways any objective is possible to do


Non linear means anything that isn't a line, multiple ways to do something would be non linear, different orders to do the levels would be non linear, anything that creates a branch in the progression, optional content included.
#99DaimeocaraPosted 2/3/2013 4:31:37 PM
I do agree that you shouldn't be able to fist fight monsters. It would be like trying to fight a grizzly bear or a tiger (Or a raptor. This is for pure example, but you get it.) with your bear hands. You could at least punch a few zombies or at least snap their necks. I don't see why you couldn't fight the wimpier more human level ones though.
#100edward18Posted 2/3/2013 4:32:05 PM
Post 100!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fo7xerhsfYc
---
Before you die you see the Tails Doll---Backdrop Observer of the Metroid: Other M board
Apparently Edward: Wise Old Sage of Korodai