Back when it came out it was hailed as the savior of the Resident Evil franchise, a much needed update to a stale and aging formula, and I believe it was more or less considered game of the year. It was definitely considered one of the best games on the Gamecube.
Personally, I loved it. Really, it's one of the few Resident Evil games I've enjoyed. No, I was NEVER a fan of the tank controls of the old games, so I'm biased in that way. But the game still had horror elements (there where many moments of the game that scared the crap out of me, and those writhing grey creatures with the worms inside them......ugh), the game still had back tracking, puzzle solving, all that stuff. I remember it had that stuff because I didn't ike any of that stuff as much as the action-y areas.
That you even have to ask that question tells me that some people blame it for what happened to the series afterwards, right? Personally, I think that's a silly thing to do. RE4 wasn't the game that turned Resident Evil into an action franchise. Heck, you couldn't even move while shooting (something which became another pretty big criticism by RE5). The game that ought to be blamed for RE6 is....RE6. That's the game that introduced most of what people hate about RE6. Simply introducing over-the-shoulder aiming isn't what killed RE. What killed RE is the industry RE6 was developed in, where AAA games are becoming increasingly homogenized. Capcom wanted to turn RE into Call of Duty, because that's the kind of game that's selling really well right now.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
