Capcom going back to survival horror roots for RE7

#111GigerSupremePosted 8/26/2013 1:53:53 AM
DarkD3stiny posted...
GigerSupreme posted...
DarkD3stiny posted...
In the directors opinion he screwed up. IMO he did not. See thats the thing about opinions, they all differ. Many of my friends like re6 but some do not. Some artists regularly state their art wasn't what they wanted and sucks while others see their art as really good. You can never prove that re6 is rubbish because to others it is not. There are no facts stating that re6 is rubbish just as there are no facts stating re4 is the greatest game ever. It all just boils down to peoples opinions.


ofcourse i can prove its rubbish. im in the middle of making a documentary and the subject is why re6 is the biggest dispointment in videogames.


Thats your opinion. Opinions are not facts and you will never convince people who like re6 that its rubbish same as I can never convince people who think re6 is rubbish that it is not.



im not in the bussiness of opinions, i aim to dissect the reason why re6 was a dissapointment to millions of fans and to capcom themselves.
#112DarkD3stinyPosted 8/26/2013 2:07:24 AM(edited)
Hmm Giger you just stated opinions. It was dissapointing to millions of people because in THEIR opinion they did not like it. In mine and others opinions we did like it. Yours and others opinions are no better than mine or anyone elses. Also claiming Capcom says re6 is a dissapointment without providing links makes you look daft. Maybe some of Capcom do and some dont but claiming all of them is daft as you are just speculating.
---
http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/605603-resident-evil-6/66535556
#113GigerSupremePosted 8/26/2013 3:32:30 AM
DarkD3stiny posted...
Hmm Giger you just stated opinions. It was dissapointing to millions of people because in THEIR opinion they did not like it. In mine and others opinions we did like it. Yours and others opinions are no better than mine or anyone elses. Also claiming Capcom says re6 is a dissapointment without providing links makes you look daft. Maybe some of Capcom do and some dont but claiming all of them is daft as you are just speculating.




"In addition, we believe there was inadequate organizational collaboration across our entire company with regard to marketing, promotions, the creation of plans and other activities. We will have to examine these results from several perspectives. We will reexamine our internal operating frameworks in order to identify areas that need to be improved concerning development as well as sales and administrative operations," the publisher concluded.

http://www.shacknews.com/article/77763/capcom-analyzing-resident-evil-6s-disappointing-sales


and this-


“With Resident Evil 6 specifically, we probably put too much content in there, there were comments from consumers that said it felt bloated. The Leon missions went down very well, and because we did Resident Evil Revelations on 3DS, there was a cry out for us to focus our attention on survival horror, rather than be too many things to all people. You’ll find where we go next will likely be more targeted at our core fanbase."

http://www.vg247.com/2013/08/15/resident-evil-6-devs-cant-ignore-mixed-reaction-next-one-will-return-to-roots-says-capcom/


people can have their opinions. but know it is possible to have uninformed opinions and or to like something that is legitmately bad or good or whatever.

i personally like the game Brutal Legend, but i awknolege that it is a terrible game. it is entirely possilemto like things that are bad. believe it or not, some people like Aliens Colonial marines for some reason...

but for the sake of my documentary, i wish to focus why re6 just dosent work. irrelevent if you liked it.
#114DarkD3stinyPosted 8/26/2013 6:20:49 AM(edited)
Good for you for providing links but they didn't say they were all dissapointed with re6 thats just one person at Capcom saying fans were dissapointed not Capcom. I remember when revelations came to ps3 and xbox 360 and how many people complained about it yet people say "its what people want". Re6 is not a terrible game, thats your opinion on re6 not fact. Stop trying to make opinions look like facts. I can see flaws in re6 but a terrible game? lol no. If you think re6 is a terrible game then why are you here?
---
http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/605603-resident-evil-6/66535556
#115SSJ_JinPosted 8/26/2013 6:27:06 AM
.....Wow. Why did this topic turn into another ridiculous debate? Why did anyone try to amuse Goldie with what survival horror is? Me mentioning the classics was enough. His argument is stupid. Point blank. "Survival horror...is opinions!"

..................

I guess MGS isn't stealth, it never was. Just opinions. Fighting games? What are those? Seem like action games to me. What's an RPG? I thought they were seen as board games. First person shooters? No, that's not what that is. That's actually survival horror.

Funny thing is, now that I think of it I guess his antics rubbed off on other users. Because I recall people saying how RE3 was an action game and a sign of things to come....lol

But this is GFAQs, so I'm not surprised.
---
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7KDXVEOqj8
http://antir.site90.net/
#116XxAxem_BlackxXPosted 8/26/2013 6:31:35 AM
Goldsickle posted...
Personally, I have realized that it's hard for me to get scared, because I've become desensitized with horror games.
If I were to judge a horror game based on how much it scared me, it would be hard to be pleased.
The least I can do is recognize it's "horror effort".


That's what I meant. Whether you are scared by Silent Hill or not you can admit it gives you a great horror experience.

Yeah, I can make up my own genre and lists down games that supposed genre's based on just to make it look like it exists.


If you designed those games and your fans accept the title you gave to them that's all that counts. If you make a bunch of games and call them "super awesome horror" and you gain a fanbase for those games, that's all that matters. You would have just created a new video game genre whether it had a concrete definition or not. All those games I mentioned are considered survival horror by the developers who created them and the fans who play them. They get to decide what they are called.

If we're gonna go back to the debate over definitions though then define what makes an rpg. I know you won't be able to do that since you couldn't before.

Plus, remember that with technology these days, genres are blurring and becoming less relevant.


Yeah you said that before and I didn't agree with it back then. Genres aren't blurring at all. You still have shooters, fighters, action-adventure, survival horror, racers, puzzle games, rpgs, and more. Some games borrow things from another genre but they always did. That's not a new thing.

Based on your last description ("slow-paced and horror themed"), I guess Luigi's Mansion is "Survival Horror".


Luigi's Mansion might be survival horror based on its gameplay but because the developers didn't call it that it wasn't known as that. If they had and if the fans of that game accepted the title of survival horror then that's what it would be known as.
---
www.morbid-obsession.com
#117DarkD3stinyPosted 8/26/2013 6:42:19 AM
I hope Capcom does make a old re game like re1. Then we will see people complaining and wishing Capcom had stuck with the re4, re5 and re6 route. I dont know about following TLOU though, I think whatever Capcom does fans wont be happy as re6 put most of the stuff the old re games had but fans complained because Capcom appealed to action fans too. Thing is the old re fans didn't support RE enough so I dont think they will support RE enough in the future either but if Capcom makes another re1 type game then Im done with RE. Those games were good back then but that was back then. Capcom could try something like fleshing out LINs and making a full game out of that but with more enemies and more environments but even revelations got complained about quite a lot which revelations is like the old re games. Maybe a TLOU makeover or LINs makeover may help Capcom.
---
http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/605603-resident-evil-6/66535556
#118skermac(Topic Creator)Posted 8/26/2013 6:59:33 AM
This is the official definition. Unless a game follows the definition it is not survival horror. Easy right?


Definition: Survival horror is a subgenre of the action genre, normally taking the form of a third-person shooter, that seeks to provoke intense fear reactions in the player. In a survival horror game, a human player character is put in a perilous situation, cut off from the outside world, and given little means of self-defense. In dark, atmospheric environments, the player faces constant threats from supernatural or occult forces that pop out at random.
---
To the edge of the universe and back, endure and survive
#119DarkD3stinyPosted 8/26/2013 7:08:12 AM
Btw Ive just read what Edward said about Goldsickle. If thats true Goldsickle stop your bullying. Edward is correct in that doing drawings of little girls in bondage is sick. He gave you constructive criticism so learn to accept it then move on instead of bullying anyone who goes against you.
---
http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/605603-resident-evil-6/66535556
#120GoldsicklePosted 8/26/2013 7:45:16 AM
SSJ_Jin posted...
I guess MGS isn't stealth, it never was. Just opinions. Fighting games? What are those? Seem like action games to me. What's an RPG? I thought they were seen as board games. First person shooters?

The idea of "genre" is blurring these days.

Back then, genres mostly existed because technology and capacity only allowed one or the other.

But fighting games? That format is still very easily distinguishable, now that you mention it.
However, it depends on whether the format can maintain it's shape over the years.

XxAxem_BlackxX posted...
Whether you are scared by Silent Hill or not you can admit it gives you a great horror experience.

But I also recall other "requirements" like "it must scare you".
Certain people disqualify REmake as a "Survival Horror" because they don't personally feel scared of it.
Like I said, a variety of conflicting opinions.

If you designed those games and your fans accept the title you gave to them that's all that counts.

The thing is whether it's "accepted" or not is mixed.
I'm seeing a lot of conflicting thoughts to whether or not RE4 is "Survival Horror".

About the RPG thing, I already made it clear that I am not concerned about other genre's having a solid definition.
Plus, asking me to define an RPG to prove my point is pretty much a fallacy.

Genres aren't blurring at all.

Action-adventure now has a bit of shooters, shooters now has a bit of RPG, RPGs now have a bit of action and so forth.
It's blurring.

Luigi's Mansion might be survival horror based on its gameplay but because the developers didn't call it that it wasn't known as that. If they had and if the fans of that game accepted the title of survival horror then that's what it would be known as.

The problem is that there's no reliable way of knowing if the majority of the fans consider it "Survival Horror".

You're flip-flopping between "definition" and "let the majority decide", which is contradictory.
Can't you settle on one method to address your argument?
---
My thoughts about Bioshock Infinite:
http://tinyurl.com/mn5ll4x (WARNING: CONTAINS SPOILERS)