Meet our Editor of the Day!
So... what do you think re: RE5?
helava says,
So, the game's been out for a week or so, and I know some of the people here have been playing it (as have I). What do you think?
For me, I'm still not a fan of the controls. I get why the designers made the controls clunky, but it feels really outdated - if they wanted to give the player a sense of fear, and that enemies could be approaching from everywhere, and that you're not superhuman, there are many other (better) ways to do that.
It also loses a lot, atmosphere-wise, because it's a two-player game and you've got a sidekick. It's nice that it is a two-player game, but if you go back to the core of what Resident Evil *is*, the question is, is it about running around shooting stuff, or is it about being terrified?
Because if it's running around shooting stuff, the controls suck. If it's about being terrified, having a sidekick around all the time makes things a lot less scary.
I appreciate the co-op nature of the game. It looks fantastic, the setting is interesting (questions or race issues aside), and the production values are through the roof.
But I don't think this should have been Resident Evil 5.
Article excerpt from metacritic.com —
"Stars indicate the most critically-acclaimed games.
8.6
The biohazard threat has not ended: Just when it seemed that the menace of Resident Evil had been destroyed, along comes a new terror to send shivers down players' spines. Chris Redfield, returning Resident Evil hero, has followed the path of the evil literally around the globe....
Read the full article at metacritic.com »
Read the full article at metacritic.com »
Posted 3 years ago
Yeah its totally not what RE is at heart. But in reality that's been happening ever since RE2, but much more subtly.
But the controls, I personally don't get why people are so upset about them. Military personnel and police personnel both lock in, per say, when firing.
Anyway, I do understand why its more "actiony" nowadays. Apparently, ironically, Capcom didn't want to make the same game twice. I guess it would have made more sense if they stuck with the name "Biohazard" since it doesn't neccesarily mean zombies or horror, just biohazards.
And I guess as soon as they decided to have human-esque targets and over the shoulder view, making it more like the original REs was not an option. Since the originals was a matter of how many times shot since you could not aim specifically, and over-the-shoulder allows for head shots, there would be too much excess ammunition anyway, or too much frustration. (*headshot* wat *headshot* wat *headshot* wat *headshot* dead)
But anyway, I like RE5 for what it is, though I long for old-school RE.
Plus, gattling gun = no fun without excessive enemies. Amirite?
But the controls, I personally don't get why people are so upset about them. Military personnel and police personnel both lock in, per say, when firing.
Anyway, I do understand why its more "actiony" nowadays. Apparently, ironically, Capcom didn't want to make the same game twice. I guess it would have made more sense if they stuck with the name "Biohazard" since it doesn't neccesarily mean zombies or horror, just biohazards.
And I guess as soon as they decided to have human-esque targets and over the shoulder view, making it more like the original REs was not an option. Since the originals was a matter of how many times shot since you could not aim specifically, and over-the-shoulder allows for head shots, there would be too much excess ammunition anyway, or too much frustration. (*headshot* wat *headshot* wat *headshot* wat *headshot* dead)
But anyway, I like RE5 for what it is, though I long for old-school RE.
Plus, gattling gun = no fun without excessive enemies. Amirite?
Posted 3 years ago
What happen to survival horror? I'm not scared or even remotley creeped out by any of the newer Resident Evil games, The original scared the hell out of me, I miss the zombies as meh said i miss oldschool resident evil. dont get me started on the movies....
Posted 3 years ago
Yourlasthope said:
The movies... Argh.
It had so much potential. But of course, directors always think that something was missing from the game. (read: Uwe Boll).
It had so much potential. But of course, directors always think that something was missing from the game. (read: Uwe Boll).
Posted 3 years ago
Did you SEE House of the Dead? That movie's problem wasn't that Boll thought something was missing from the game - he thought the movie needed footage FROM THE GAME. So bad it was hilarious. If only Boll's other movies had been as spectacularly awful.
Posted 3 years ago
I concur. Also (read: Max Payne)
That one was much more relevant.
That one was much more relevant.
Add your comment:
Anonymous
About helava
S H
Oakland, CA
36, Male
Joined: January 24, 2008
Level: Level 9
Points: 163,920
Lifetime Interest: 3246, 86%
Today's Interest: 0, 0%
↓
Following: 18
Followers: 23
