I don`t get it. Are trying to make a point or just object to my claims? Goldeneye did not age well at all. Even so, try telling someone that played Goldeneye at its released time that Rogue Agent or Quantum of Solace is much better.

RE 3 was shoter than any other in the series, had no option for a second character and did not have good replay value (epilogues and costumes are not enough to make you play through the game again). The plot was more of a side story. Nemesis was a crappy idea for a boss/enemy. He was more annoying than scary. You knew he was coming. The Tyrant from RE 2 was much better.

Strange that I do not quite remember RE4, but with games like RE2 and RE3 I really enjoyed having this big ugly dude chasing me around while I try to get things done. Nothing like walking out of a room thinking all is fine only to have this big ugly tank ready to swing those giant fists at me.

i've completed RE4 in 2:46, 7-8 hours is a decent time for any RE. adn RE3 is bad compared to all the other main series REs, but not as bad as the gun survivor series.

Most of your complaints just described Code Veronica, which came on more powerful hardware and a year later. So again, why is RE3 the worst? Plus, most people love Nemesis as an enemy. He makes a lot of top 10 lists of villains. I wouldn't even be bringing this up but you seemed to present "RE3 as worst ever" as basic fact, which it isn't.

Also about your Goldeneye example, those other games came on more powerful consoles and that has aided them in being better. Name me a James Bond game on 5th gen hardware that is better than Goldeneye.

7-8 hours only? If that turns out to be true I'm officially off the RE franchise for good. #4 was incredibly well done (played it on the GC so imagine my amazement when such a gem was found). I'd much prefer the game to be 40+ hours. Shooters are too short these days. :( I'll be sad if I kill anything short of 1k zombies at least (the average amount of zombies that got killzowned in #4)

Im a all time RE fan. But RE5 just feels wrong.

RE4 in my opinion, was as far they(capcom) could go action wise and still be considered a RE game.(RE is about horror, solitude, ammo saving)

They just tried to make a pure action game while still being RE. Massive amaunts of enemies and more open areas with controls that works well with few enemies on corridors and tight spots.

IF you want to make an action game go ahead but i don't want to bee stuck in a action game with survival controls.

Co-op and horror don't mix well.

It wont be a bad game, but this was supposed to be an instant classic.

I just played the demo but so far:
DeadSpace = new Resident Evil
Resident Evil 5 = new "army of two" with sucky controls

I wonder why, out of all the shitty games coming down the pike, people have picked this one, for years, to be the "game that is destined to suck" before most people have even played it. People want it to flop and I don't know why.

well...imo anyone who manages to play the game that long with those awful controls deserves a cookie.

I can't believe that DR costs 50M! That's impossible! GTA cost 100M and it's been under dev for a longer time with more people. DR = 20-25M at max!

7-8 hours? meh i remember beating RE 1-3 at much shorter times