wow.. re4 is really bad. this game was x100 better

#101orangeneePosted 12/19/2013 7:59:18 AM
Waited long enough, now I'll post this to reinforce your point.

I await your reply in January.
---
How to divide by Zero: Find person named Zero, get him/her to divide something.
GT/PSN:Hellsteeth30
#102Sega9599Posted 12/21/2013 4:15:42 PM
GigerSupreme posted...
Goldsickle posted...
GigerSupreme posted...
no they arent.

Lara Croft's boobs was caused by a slip of the mouse:
http://uk.ign.com/articles/2008/03/01/ign-presents-the-history-of-tomb-raider

Grand Theft Auto started out as a racing game and a psycho police glitch changed the game's direction:
http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/6274/the_replay_interviews_gary_penn.php?page=2

Space Invader's difficulty increase was unintentionally caused by the hardware's processing. The only citations available are in books but Wikipedia mentions it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_invaders

The development team of Street Fighter II weren't aware of combos in their own game until players made use of them:
http://www.1up.com/features/essential-50-street-fighter-ii

One of Gradius's developer inserted the Konami code into the game to make testing the NES version easier but accidentally left it in the final release:
http://www.techrepublic.com/article/geek-trivia-the-cheat-goes-on/


none of these are examples of features being added to a game accidentally. this is just stuff that happened during the prototype/alpha development or is a glitch not a feature.

keep goin. this is funny.



What are you talking about? I think you're just splitting hairs here, and trying to say a 'feature' is a fully finished fully functional addition to the game. Well of COURSE nothing like that has ever made it by accident, because by extension you are saying no optional game modes or vehicles, or 'feature highlights' of a game that were accidentally programmed, made it into the game.


Next you'll claim that nothing that was written and not added into a book, was added into a book. Just silly word games. Giger you're one of these people who probably should find a little corner of the board to hide and call yourself the Rat King.
---
Oh, for a new 'proper' Shining Force..and a new Panel de Pon game and a new english release of Puyo Puyo....
#103singhellotakuPosted 1/6/2014 9:16:25 PM
6 is one of the worst games i've ever played
#104sadiq2010Posted 1/13/2014 6:47:54 AM
singhellotaku

resident evil 6 is much better.

resident evil 4 and 5 are both trash and garbage.
#105Mariofan15Posted 1/13/2014 11:40:34 PM
sadiq2010 posted...
singhellotaku

resident evil 6 is much better.

resident evil 4 and 5 are both trash and garbage.


Lol,no. 4 is for sure better then 6.
---
Pokemon White 2 FC:1121-2453-7393
National Dex Completed:9/26/2013
#106BassVenturaPosted 1/15/2014 2:05:06 PM
I'm enjoying this game. It's nothing close to 4, but it's a completely different type of game.

Co-op it's fun, mercenaries, again was better in 4.

I'm enjoying it for the action game it is and not the survival horror game, I was expecting it to be.

The way multi-player is implemented, is awesome.

I would love for this or 4 to be made for the PS Vita.
---
PSN - WhereIsMyBanana
Hook me up on PSN for PS Vita games of SFxT, UMvC3, Dive Kick, Blazblue, MK and Killzone (sometimes others too)
#107kaminekokittehPosted 1/21/2014 8:39:05 AM
yeah, the way people go on and on about 4 you'd think it changed gaming forever or something.

oh wait, it did. six was an alright action experience, but going back through for the emblems really felt like work by the end. after i got the last one i felt like i never wanted to see any of those people ever again. i never felt that way on repeat playthroughs of 4, or even 5. well, maybe on 5 a little. initially getting the heart of africa on single player while sheva's AI kept dashing headlong into jill's smg fire.... yeah.

i still play 5 and 4 sometimes. there is no way i'll be playing 6 in a few years. it's an above average action game with fantastic production values, but there's no magic in it.
#108buzzsawgr81Posted 1/22/2014 3:39:10 PM
I'm actually playing RE6 at the moment and just played a bit of RE4 yesterday and I have to say that anyone who says that RE4's controls were good have their nastalgia goggles on so tight that it's cutting off circulation to their brain.

when RE4 came out we accepted the horrid tank controls because at the time we didn't have a better example of great controls in horror games, we had the survival horror tank controls. now we have horror games with these great controls like dead space, RE: R, and RE6, showing us that we don't need the crappy and dated tank controls in our survival horror games. if RE4 and 5 had the same controls as, let's say, dead space, would the games be any different? not really, other than they'd be even better games and you'd be spending more time fighting the bad guys than the clunky controls.

the ability to move freely while aiming is very important. in RE: R if you aim and your shot is slightly blocked you just sidestep and BOOM!, shot is clear. but in RE4 if your shot is slightly blocked you have to drop your aim, turn, walk forward, turn back toward your target, and aim again hoping that your shot isn't still blocked. way too much work to just slightly adjust your aim. are the tank controls doable? sure. but are they acceptable? no, not anymore.
---
Peter Capaldi has now become the new Doctor. A new era begins!
#109GoldsicklePosted 1/22/2014 10:10:57 PM
buzzsawgr81 posted...
when RE4 came out we accepted the horrid tank controls because at the time we didn't have a better example of great controls in horror games, we had the survival horror tank controls. now we have horror games with these great controls like dead space, RE: R, and RE6, showing us that we don't need the crappy and dated tank controls in our survival horror games.

That's too bad. Now that you've said the same things I said, people will label you as either a bad guy or my alternate account.

if RE4 and 5 had the same controls as, let's say, dead space, would the games be any different?

You can test this out in Mercenaries 3D for the 3DS.
They imported the same stages and enemies from 4 & 5 but you can walk and shoot or reload while running.
I've asked around if these features made the game "too easy" but I got feedback about how it's "just enough mobility without ruining the challenge".

So yeah, all those talk about how "walk-and-shoot will ruin RE" are nothing more than utter bulls***.
The series needed it.

the ability to move freely while aiming is very important. in RE: R if you aim and your shot is slightly blocked you just sidestep and BOOM!, shot is clear. but in RE4 if your shot is slightly blocked you have to drop your aim, turn, walk forward, turn back toward your target, and aim again hoping that your shot isn't still blocked.

I like you already.

I thought about drawing a diagram to show how RE4 & 5's controls takes more steps to execute a simple move but you seem to get it.

There's no "personal opinion" about controls being bad or not.
If they take more steps or made in a way where you need to 'stop-to-think' and not be able to react instinctively, then they are bad controls.
---
My thoughts about Bioshock Infinite:
http://tinyurl.com/mn5ll4x (WARNING: CONTAINS SPOILERS)
#110sadiq2010Posted 1/23/2014 1:59:39 AM
Mariofan15

LOL, you are very naive.

resident evil 6 is much better, than the trash and garbage resident evil 4 and 5 are.

so stop trolling, #deal with it.