Insert-Credits.com

Right… This WILL be easy… I’ll break you down, paragraph by paragraph…

[quote]The Fanboyism needs to END NOW. It’s a disgrace to anyone who calls themselves a gamer for a few fanboys to defend a game that hasnt changed in 12 years. I bought a Playstation JUST to play Resident Evil and I was totally in love with it…the year is now 2009 (not 1996) and were still having to deal with the “tank” – like controls. The devs argue that not being able to move and shoot at the same time adds “tension” and “suspense” and I agree to some extent but that doest mean that the entire game has to suffer for it![/quote]

This, I don’t get. Fanboys are literally all over the place so why are Resident Evil fanboys being called out? What’s so disgraceful about defending a series you’ve followed since it’s inception, only for action junkies to come along and expect that controls get changed for them? I mean, I’ve been playing the demo since it came out and I’ve had no problems at all staving off the Majini in any degree. Yeah there’s no tension or suspense any more, but that isn’t why they’re there – the controls are there to restrict you, to make the game at least FEEL like Resident Evil. Are you really saying you want Resident Evil to become just another generic third person shooter? That’s all it’ll become, y’know.

[quote]In my opinion the limited controls arent the only thing keeping this game from being AMAZING, its a combination of things: You can shoot at a zombies head over and over and over again but his head won’t pop. But by then you’ve run out of ammo which leads you to open up the god-awful clunky inventory system while the zombie is still walking towards you as you to hastily close the inventory and do what any highly trained special ops soldier would do…yep, you guessed it-turn around and run…[/quote]

Again, very strange argument there – I’d say the only thing keeping this game from being amazing is the horrible cast and the Co-Op system, but whatever. I should probably note that heads don’t “pop” when you shoot them and it will often take a few shots to achieve that (many people have survived being shot in the face, as well, I’m told). Considering these aren’t normal humans, either, it comes to reason that they won’t be so easily put down… Anyway, are you actually complaining that they’re too hard to kill? Have you tried, y’know, shooting them in the knee before meleeing them? That’ll kill them off quicker and you’ll conserve ammo. I should also probably note that there’s only one occasion in the demo where I’ve had to turn 180 degrees and run, and that was against the Chainsaw Dude, so I don’t know what you’re doing wrong (aside from playing the game like a generic third person shooter, anyway).

[quote]Let’s not even talk about the melee system, wow, what an epic fail, first of all when you unsheath your knife the camera snaps back leaving most of Chris’ body to block almost half of the screen so you can’t see what your slashin’ and hackin’ at. Not only can you not see what your trying to stab, but remember you can’t move either, which means you have to stand there and wait for the enemy to come at you! Talk about lame.[/quote]

This I can’t disagree with… I hate the exaggerated melee attacks you initiate with Square and the knife system sucks worse than it ever has… It’s even worse that you seem to take a step backwards when readying the knife. My only advice? Stick to using the knife to kill Majini on the other side of the window to stop them climbing through and for quick kills. Oh, and for those flying whateverthefuck they are that attack you on the second mission.

[quote]This reminds me of the latest DOOM game, they remade the old DOOM with amazing looking graphics but kept the same-exact-monsters-in-closets gameplay, why? Because if its not broke dont fix it. BULLSHIT. Games must innovate, they have to always be a step ahead because innovation is what separates video games from other types of entertainment (movies, music, books). We’ve seen inventory systems that are a breeze to use, we’ve seen controls for 3rd person shooters improve drastically in the last few years, so why the fuck do devs feel like they needs to reinvent the wheel for things that do work? It’s time for us as gamers to take our fanboy glasses off for 20 minutes and take a good look at these games we defend so dearly.[/quote]

My only problem here is that you’re purposefully singling out the people who never wanted this series to use a third person camera, let alone a Co-Op game. Yeah, games should innovate and whatever, but the Resident Evil series practically invented the Survival Horror franchise and it has consistently “innovated” with every passing game… Sure, it isn’t using the most up-to-date third person shooter control method or the best inventory system (I prefer the RE4 inventory “suitcase”, to be honest), but why does it have to? It’s Resident Evil, so the last thing anyone wants is the game to leave everything that makes it Resident Evil behind to appease the idiots who buy the same sports games every damn year – when said sports games never even actually improve enough to be worth the asking price.

So I applaud Capcom for not listening to those idiots and sticking to the formula that hooked millions of gamers the world over since ’96. If you want to play a generic third person shooter, go play Gears 2 or something. Do us all a favour and leave the Resident Evil series to the people who actually appreciate it, eh?

“…because that’s what the topic is about?”

For one, I wasn’t talking to you so I don’t know why you’re piping up like you have any say in it. I’m fed up of all the moronic fanboys and the only ones who are actually normal are getting called out because they like Resident Evil the way it is.

“There’s nothing disgraceful about defending the series, so long as you don’t go about it in the manner blahblah86 has. If you’re OK with RE5, then groovy–I’m glad someone likes it.”

Blahblah86 is just a fool, there’s no other way of putting it. But you, and the author, are both acting like all fans of Resident Evil are like that. The rest of us know the faults of the game and they don’t begin and end with the controls, as many seem to think.

“As for your hypothetical question: Well… yes. I, for one, would like it to become “just another generic third person shooter,” because it’s the year 2009, and RE5’s controls feel archaic. It feels like RE because they’re the same as the preceding game, for better or for worse. As a medium, games are unique in that they evolve and innovate much faster than any other medium. It’s only been four years since RE4 came out, but in those four years, games like “Dead Space” and “Gears of War” took the ideas in RE4 and improved on them. RE5 seems like it wants to compete–the type D controls are obviously based on GoW–but it does so half heartily by simply throwing those controls into RE4’s engine. It feels lazy to me.”

Well then, there’s little to be said other than… If you want to play a generic third person shooter, go and play Dead Space or Gears of War. Leave Resident Evil to the people who will appreciate its “archaic” controls – obviously the game isn’t for you, is it? Yeah, the game would greatly improve with the ability to walk whilst firing – assuming that one had to still hold L1 to aim before they could fire and doing so reduced their pace and turning speed – but you know as well as I do that such a thing would still never be enough. There’d just be another article on this blog with the author going nuts about how you can’t aim from the hip or something stupid like there’s no auto aim. People are already complaining that things are too hard to kill and there’s too many enemies… I mean, come on! When does a game HAVE to do everything that everyone wants?

“I think it’s fair to assume that a headshot will be a one-hit kill, being as that’s the case in damn near every other shooting game on the planet.”

Heh… The funny thing? Resident Evil isn’t like “every other shooting game on the planet” and that’s why the fans like it as much as we do.

“I agree as well. The knife system was never particularly great to begin with, but it still feels cumbersome to use. Again, it’s been four years–they couldn’t think of a way to improve this?”

Oh, chances are they could have easily improved it. But why should they? All games retain things that make no sense. I mean, why don’t FPS games allow me to equip knives like weapons? Killzone 2 does, so why doesn’t Call of Duty 4 or Resistance 2? Why am I restricted to pressing R3 for a melee attack, which is cumbersome and useless? We can always nitpick about things like that, but where does it get us?

“I disagree. Until 4, the series saw an extreme lack of innovation, with each game more or less being the same as the one before it. Sure, the graphics got nicer with each passing game, and the story developed, but the gameplay, from the first one in ‘96 all the way up to RE0 on the GC, had remained identical. If the series hadn’t rethought itself with RE4 in an effort to stay relevant, I think the series would be in the same place the Tomb Raider franchise is now–a joke that appeals to an increasingly more selective fanbase. RE5 doesn’t build on 4’s promise, and I feel like the series is falling back into old habits. I didn’t wait four years just to play the same game with prettier graphics.”

The thing is, there are countless other series of games like this in the same boat. Compare, for a moment, the Disgaea series with the Final Fantasy one. The Disgaea series is considered a niche title, just as Final Fantasy was. Disgaea is a wholly unique title that never really changes much with each passing game, only adding more of what we love. The Final Fantasy series, however, has constantly changed and “innovated” from the very beginning. Guess what? Disgaea still has all its fans and the fanbase is growing because of how great everyone perceives the series. Final Fantasy? Yeah, it’s fanbase is growing. But how many of those are the original fans any more? Everyone who I knew as fans of Final Fantasy have all but left it behind because of how badly it has changed to appeal to more casual gamers to artificially increase its fanbase. Resident Evil will only go the same way if it were to listen to anything you lot are spouting. Yeah, it’d make all of you happy that it’s a generic third person shooter. But what about the true fans? Are we really that expendable? Do our opinions matter so little that the opinions of people who don’t even appreciate the game are of greater importance?

“Also, I’m not sure what sports games have to do with anything.”

Has everything to do with it – people, such as the author of this article, buy the same sports game every single year without any kind of improvement between each title. You’ll get a roster update and maybe a new gimmicky ability to use in the game. What right does he have to say about Resident Evil never innovating when he’s funding the yearly releases of easily the biggest piles of crap on the planet? If he’s happy buying the same game every year, why is he having a go at us for wanting Resident Evil to retain at least something of what makes it Resident Evil? Kind of hypocritical, don’t you think?

“You’ve got to be joking. Nearly every aspect of the previous RE’s formula was done away with for 4 in order to make the series relevant again. Gone were the zombies, the clunky controls, Umbrella, Raccoon City, pre-rendered graphics, awkward camera angles, the sparse distribution of ammunition, the esoteric puzzles, and the item chest system. Whereas 1-3 were survivor horror games, RE4 is essentially an action game. RE4 succeeded because it DID change the formula, and the game was all the better for it. Is it really asking too much for 5 to do the same, especially where there’s such a long gap between games?”

At least Resident Evil 4 still felt like a Resident Evil game. The changes that the author wishes to be made, and the changes all the various people on various forums I’ve seen want done, would change Resident Evil into a generic third person shooter. It wouldn’t BE a Resident Evil game any more because it wouldn’t feel like one. Yeah, Resident Evil 4 got rid of the fixed camera angles and gave us a new chapter in the saga. Yeah, it replaced the overly stupid puzzles that made no sense at all with puzzles that at least had some semblance of reason behind them. But the game was still creepy. It still had enclosed corridors and creepy monster-like enemies and incredible bosses. It still left you on your own against unrelenting enemies and, even though it gave you more ammo than ever before, you still needed every single bullet. The game still had that atmosphere because you couldn’t just shoot from the hips. The controls still meant you couldn’t just circle the El Gigante whilst constantly filling him with lead. You needed clear shots, you needed to constantly think of where you were going to stand… Just like you had to against Nemesis or one of the Tyrants.

Change Resident Evil in the ways that many people seem to want it to change and the series will have lost everything that made it what it was. Do that and Resident Evil won’t go the way of Tomb Raider, it’ll go the way of Final Fantasy. And guess what? That happens, and Capcom will lose every single person who stood by them through all their other games. Why? ‘Cause we’d much rather just play Gears of War than just a Gears of War clone with zombies.