Were old RE fans prefer short story and gameplay like RE1 - 3 and CVX with no Chapter selection? I know CVX a bit longer than 1-3.
All these old RE fans just list complaints over and over, they don't even see the improvements. I mean who wants to go back to play a game with horrible camera and graphics anymore after new gen ones. If they want, they can go back to dressing like pilgrims too.
edward18 posted...Nope, but can't imagine that it's worse.
C'mon, let it go already. We all know that you hate RE4. Great. The plot does indeed suck. But if you honestly think that RE6 is a better game than RE4 is (gameplay-wise, since that is what should matter in a video game), then please, feel free to say so. But I have a feeling that after you (eventually, possibly against your will) play RE6, you'll agree with me.
who know if the reboot happens, the return of the item box or pick and drop mechanic
I Found A Survivor. The B.O.W.s Got Her Though.
It headed the right direction and record shows it. And there are many action shooters but none of them are as skill based as modern RE.
That's the thing that I don't understand. The supposed old school RE vanguard would want you to believe that RE became a copycat braindead shooter when RE4 is actually the reason for most of the 3rd person shooter copycats.
Can anybody help find me another shooter that has melee (actual melee, not just executions like in Gears of War.), ducking, shooting from prone position, dodging, CQC, bobbing and weaving like Resident Evil 6 does?
The only game that comes to mind with a similar amount of maneuverability is actually MIkami's Vanquish.
Even the other two best shooters of the genre, Binary Domain & Max Payne 3 don't compare to RE6's combat depth.
Oh man that kills me. Some of these supposed "old school" fans can admit that RE6 at least has good play mechanics but then claim that's the only good thing about the game.
While I can agree to that statement, although I don't personally concur.
Shouldn't play mechanics be the only thing that matters? As was said earlier, a lot of us imbeciles who like RE6 actually like it for Mercenaries.
Why? Because the mechanics are that damn good. Crapcom should've went the Super Street Fighter 2 Turbo route and concentrated on perfecting the combat rather than that mislead scattershot focus of trying to appeal to the oldschool fanbase, who would seriously have you believe that Revelations played like the older Resident Evils.
That to me tells me that it isn't gameplay that the oldschool fans clamor for, what they want is atmosphere.
AKA, they want a feeling. Something that is abstract and can not be objectively measured like RE6's ruleset can, which is concrete.
Revelation's claustrophobic atmosphere is about the only trait that it had in common with the original RE games. Otherwise it played like an updated RE4 & 5, lol.
How do we define who is "old school" or not? I've been playing RE since RE1. RE1 was a game that everyone owned back in the day and RE2 was a system seller due to the movie like presentation until Metal Gear Solid came around and stole RE's thunder.
But if you honestly think that RE6 is a better game than RE4 is (gameplay-wise, since that is what should matter in a video game),
RE6 has better combat. What RE4 had is much better level design and a much more well thought out enemy layout. RE6 has the current gen disease where most enemy encounters are just random swarms that have no logic or reason to them other than being swarms.
What RE6 has in its favor other than a much more expansive moveset, is a much bigger bestiary which led to more combat variety and strategy.
Although this is only truly apparent in Mercenaries mode.
As was said before, RE6's campaign's lacked focus.
I recall that RE4's campaign felt like a steady build up in terms of skill & challenge progression.
RE6's campaigns were a scattered mess. Especially Ada Wong's. Her first three chapters were actually a lot more difficult than her final two chapters are.
The other three RE6 campaigns were just as erratic in terms skill & challenge progression.
I doubt you are old as you say you are otherwise the concept of replayability wouldn't be so far above you.
I replay RE6 all the time, to achieve a higher score. Uhoh, I'm probably not supposed to treat RE as if it were an arcade game because RE is supposedly something "higher" and much more "prestigious" than a simple arcade game.
I'm not saying that it is an arcade game (Although Mercenaries is.) but there definitely is a replayable appeal to RE6 that you won't find in games that actually are just simple shooters such as Max Payne 3.
I prefer replayability to be more of a test of skill rather than one that tests how well you can memorize prescripted item layouts, monster layouts and solutions to random ass puzzles.
One thing that I really like about Left 4 Dead. (which often felt like an outlash against "survival horror" .)
Is how that game is able to keep replays fresh because everything about the game's variables is randomnized saved for the actual level layouts.
I could actually understand how the original REs would still be relevant if the game actually randomized their enemy & item layouts for every playthrough like L4D does.
That would actually add to the terror of the RE games because you'd never know when you'd run into a licker or a tyrant until they jump you.
People just ignore them acting like they're true gamers
It's not that they ignore them. They simply can't perceive them because they view gaming more as an interactive medium rather than just a series of rules & variables.
Granted, this is more of a problem with the way that Resident Evil has always presented itself.
I wish RE were structured more like Metal Gear Solid in the sense that you can actually skip all of MGS's cinematics altogether and you will still be left with a gameplay portion that actually encourages you to experiment with the game's ruleset.
The problem with RE6 in general is that you could actually play the campaigns the same way you did RE4. Which is prolly what often leads to the boredom.
The enemy encounters are just not designed intelligently enough to force you to experiment with the game's ruleset.
Then again you could even beat Devil May Cry games by doing nothing but relying on the same basic combat loop over & over.
So perhaps the blame lay within the player's willingness to experiment.
I mean who wants to go back to play a game with horrible camera and graphics anymore after new gen ones. If they want, they can go back to dressing like pilgrims too.
They're just purer gamers who simply want the finer things in life.
They know exactly what's great for everyone else, or what is considered sophisticated.
Although it is hilarious trying to imagine grown men seriously acting as if RE1 is still a fun game.
Street fighter 2 is still fun to this day as all most other fighters from the oldschool Resident Evil era.
That's because well thought out rulesets never age.
What original Resident Evil had, was simply a formula of gimmicks that were relied on simply due to the technology of the time.
With the way RE fans describe RE, you'd be thinking that they were describing dungeon crawls or roguelikes. Ironically, Dead Rising plays like a pseudo roguelike and is much more like Resident Evil than the modern RE games are.
Or at least, Dead Rising would feel like oldschool RE (Outbreak) if the items were much more limited and the combat less diablo like.
Sure, I'll change my tune if Mikami's Zwei actually comes off like a true successor to RE1 but I doubt that. If anything it'll play more like a true successor to Siren 2.
Which played like a stealth based but much more horror focused RE4.
I just can't imagine Mikami dropping his gunplay innovations just to pull in a crowd who'd be more at home playing adventure games.
I'm just more annoyed at the constant bullying that oldschool RE fans resort to. Great, you like the way the games used to be fine. No one is stopping you from replaying them.
I honestly can't find another shooter out there that has the combat possibilities and options that RE6 has. Which is why I like RE6.
I'm sure sick and tired for having my own opinion and my own reasons as to why I like RE6.
Sure, I could just go to another shooter, but do tell? What other shooter? I've played them all and not a single one of them plays like RE6.
Metal Gear Ground Zeroes might be more in depth than RE6's gunplay but other than that, what?
Am I to play Call of Duty? Why? All you do is point, shoot and run for cover whenever your screen turns red.
Am I to play Gears of War? While that game does have a unique ruleset, it feels more like an arcadish version of a Tom Clancy game rather than the type of shooter that Resident Evil 6 is.
What kind of shooter is it? Hell if I know, because RE6 is actually the only shooter that I know of that plays like RE6.
Am I to play Ass Effect 3? That game stinks and isn't even worth discussing.
I suppose that the oldschool RE vanguard can come up with better suggestions but I'm much more sure that whatever crap they suggest would only reveal that they don't actually play shooters. So they don't actually know what they're talking about.
I can relate to how there aren't any games out there that play like classic survival horror. Good riddance to that because Siren 2 and the Fatal Frame series were the only good survival horror games anyway.
What needs to be said is that there aren't any shooters out there that play like RE6 either.
I guess it's safe to say that RE is a doomed franchise. No matter where they go with RE7 or even a reboot, Crapcom is guaranteed to lose a huge section of their fanbase because the playstyles of both old & new RE are so disparate yet so unique within the context of their own genre that Crapcom is going to eventually have to alienate one of the two, or both. They already alienated the old with RE6.
However I think that Crapcom would suffer a greater loss if they actually sacrificed their RE6 gunplay to appease the fans who didn't move on to Lone Survivor (Which admittedly plays more like Silent Hill.) or some other gaming equivalent that retains survival horror feel.
LOL, survival horror games are just crappy dungeon crawl lites for those who don't have what it takes to survive in Wizardry, Ultima underworld or even Dark Souls.
There are many who prefer a shorter more concise experience that is somewhat cohesive.
Ever played Vanquish? It's a very short game and doesn't have many unlockables but I still play it. I don't give a damn if MetalGear Rising is actually a 6-hour game, am still gonna buy it. Why? Because they are skill-based. And as long as a game requires more skills, you can play it over and over again no matter how long the campaign is. Because it gives you a sense of improvement.
Take RE6. I see many people online who keep spamming bullets COD/GOW style, die from low ammo, start again from the checkpoint with replenished health, finally beat the stage and complain the game's too repetitive. In the meantime, I counter an enemy, switch to a sniper rifle while headshot/melee kill another, shoot the sniper in the distance, roll, switch weapons as I get up, quickshot the enemy behind, CDG it and choose remote bomb at the same time, slide through a group of enemies setting up the bomb, boom! Yeah I walked out unscratched. Remember? It's a survival game and not meant to be played that way. I'm not a good player, took me forever to accomplish 150 combo in the mercenaries and struggled a lot to beat the normal mode in DMC1. Yet, I managed to unlock everything in old RE games without much trouble because they simply required memorizing. And that's why people got sick of them so easily.
I couldn't agree more Topdrunkee. If I had seen your posts, I wouldn't have posted above.
OMG this again...who is the bright person to copy my tread and change it up a bit.
Yet, I managed to unlock everything in old RE games without much trouble because they simply required memorizing. And that's why people got sick of them so easily.
I mostly get sick of new RE because it doesn't require a thought process. Like, even on the first playthrough.
also - lol @ someone suggesting RE6 has better gameplay than CoD/Gears. Half of the mechanics aren't necessary and the cover mechanic is horrible. The essence of "depth" is still the same as RE4, stun -> melee. This wouldn't be an issue if the series had gameplay that wasn't entirely focused on combat, but it no longer does.
For the people who believe that Capcom killed RE by going Nintendo-exclusive, then how do you explain their not porting REmake?
RE4 did will enough to be worth scaling down to the PS2. But apparently REmake did not justify the effort. As REmake was the epitome of a truly WONDERFUL remake, apparently old-school RE fans dropped the ball in supporting the game. (Or there weren't enough of them)
Add user to Ignore List after reporting