By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
*Sound Of Rain said:
Mr_No said:

Fair enough. For me at least, that enemy was pretty scary because he would just keep crawling towards me in the narrow hallways. He couldn't be killed by conventional methods. To each their own. I guess I'm pretty biased because this was my first Resident Evil and it left a great impression on me.

That was your first RE? So you only got to play one great RE before the series went (even more) downhill? So sad :(

Unfortunately yes. And allegedly, the next Resident Evil is going to be the last, so I can't say I've enjoyed the series properly.



Around the Network
Mr_No said:

Unfortunately yes. And allegedly, the next Resident Evil is going to be the last, so I can't say I've enjoyed the series properly.

If that's true then good. They should have RE7 end the current characters and then either reboot the series going back to its roots or let it rest in peace. 



No chance that the next RE will be the last, not when Capcom need the money and the games sell north of 5 Million with each release

Im personally hoping that they look at the success of The Last of Us and take the franchise back towards survival horror and suspense.



                            

Carl2291 said:
No chance that the next RE will be the last, not when Capcom need the money and the games sell north of 5 Million with each release

Im personally hoping that they look at the success of The Last of Us and take the franchise back towards survival horror and suspense.

I agree with everything you said...although I'd rather have the series start over



ieatdragonz said:

Saint's Row? Or left 4 dead that game is fun as hell.

I have L4D2 on Steam and it's tons of fun! All the wacky mods make everything so much better!



                
       ---Member of the official Squeezol Fanclub---

Around the Network

*Sound Of Rain said:

The N64 is so old now that it has become increasingly rare to find one in great condition. Same with the games, which I don't really trust to be used...

it'd be like $100+ for some games.

 

*blink*

Wow!  That's impressive.  I mean, that's Australian-prices impressive!  Games down here are often $100 or more, but they're new games!  I can't believe an N64 game could cost that much today.  Maybe you would be best to see if it's available online for the Wii.  And if not, emulate... if you have something you can do it on.  Is the iPad all you've got?  Do you have a laptop or something?

 

Mr_No said:
*Sound Of Rain said:

That was your first RE? So you only got to play one great RE before the series went (even more) downhill? So sad :(

Unfortunately yes. And allegedly, the next Resident Evil is going to be the last, so I can't say I've enjoyed the series properly.

 

You can always go back and play the originals.  They are still great games (IMHO), as long as you understand that they aren't shooters.  If you prefer more action-oriented games then yeah, you'll be disappointed.  The focus of the classic series is on the survival, not the shooting.

Actually, this discussion between fans of the old and fans of the new has been quite illuminating for me.  In listening to both sides give the reasons they think their preferred games (new or old) are better, something has occurred to me.  One side says they took the horror out and the other says it was the perfect balance of horror and action.  Now, as a fan of the classic games, when I hear that, I think to myself, "But the perfect balance is no action!"... Or at least, minimal action.

Now, wait, I'm not ragging on action-oriented games - even action-oriented horror games.  What I'm saying is that I think I'm beginning to understand the divide between fans of the series.  It's not just that the classic games were less action-based; it's that the survival-based nature of the games actively discouraged it.  The mood, atmosphere, and rationing of ammo made you really apprehensive about facing enemies head-on.

Like, take the hunters, for example.  Those things were scary, man!  They could take your head off in one lob!  Whenever possible, you went out of your way to avoid them.  Now, of course, it wasn't always possible to avoid combat, but it was always preferable.  That's the nature of survival horror.

I think this is where a lot of the disagreement between fans comes from.  I can absolutely understand some people not finding the survival style of the older games very interesting.  And I can also understand some people (myself included) feeling that sneaking around trying to avoid combat at all costs is precisely what made those games great, and that when you have plenty of ammo and are encouraged to shoot everything that moves, you lose the whole point of the genre.

So, who is right and who is wrong?  Well, I swear I'm not just trying to be diplomatic here, but I think it's purely a matter of taste.  It entirely depends on what you like.  Resident Evil has evolved from survival horror to action horror, and while they have similar roots, I think they're two distinct genres.  That doesn't make one better than the other; it just makes them different.

Say you were to take Call of Duty and turn it into an RPG.  You can bet your stars that tons of fans would say you'd ruined the franchise.  But there would be those who never liked FPS's in the first place, who would love the COD RPG.  And I'm sure there would be some who liked both genres, who enjoyed the old COD but also liked the RPG, maybe even more than the older games.

So, does the new COD RPG suck?  Well, it depends on who you ask.  I'm sure a lot of the classic fans would think so.  But it may be a perfectly solid RPG.  And fans would defend it, saying the new COD is better than it ever was before.  While fans of the old would lament the elements the series had lost, fans of the new would say, "Good riddance!"  To them, these things were detriments that COD is better off without.  To the old-school fans, they were the whole point.

I guess what I'm getting at is that this is like comparing genres.  No one is really right or wrong; it's a question of what you're playing it for.  You don't play an RPG to have fast-paced firefights requiring keen accuracy and quick reflexes, and you don't play an FPS to deeply plan and strategize every attack.  These are different experiences, and both have their place.  I think that, in the end, everyone can agree on what the differences are between the old RE and the new RE.  But whether those differences are a good thing or not entirely comes down to what kind of experience you're looking for.

Ooooh... kaaay!  That was longer than intended.  Sorry about that.  I don't know how clear I was with all this but it was just an interesting thought that occurred to me while I was reading the discussion on here.

And upon re-reading it, I guess I am kind of stating the obvious.  Still, I'd never really thought about it in quite that way before.

 

Mr_No said:

To each their own. I guess I'm pretty biased because this was my first Resident Evil and it left a great impression on me.

 

I think that's true of a lot of things.  My first Resident Evil was RE2, and even though I think it may have been just edged out by Nemesis, it remains one of my favourite games of all time.

The original itself is seriously worth playing for the acting alone.  It's hilarious!  If you haven't seen it, here's the intro...

 



ColdFire - The man with no name.

Carl2291 said:
No chance that the next RE will be the last, not when Capcom need the money and the games sell north of 5 Million with each release

Im personally hoping that they look at the success of The Last of Us and take the franchise back towards survival horror and suspense.

Capcom is pretty damn clueless nowadays regarding everything, so don't be surprised if RE7 turns out to be another garbage Michael Bay style game... :-/



                
       ---Member of the official Squeezol Fanclub---

Carl2291 said:
No chance that the next RE will be the last, not when Capcom need the money and the games sell north of 5 Million with each release

Im personally hoping that they look at the success of The Last of Us and take the franchise back towards survival horror and suspense.

 

I for one would be all for that, and they certainly do need the money, but isn't that a bit of a catch-22 at this point?  I haven't heard anything lately but unless something has changed, by the time RE8 rolls around, there may not be a Capcom to make it.  Again, I'm a little out of the loop but the last I heard, things weren't looking too good.

 

*Sound Of Rain said:
Carl2291 said:
No chance that the next RE will be the last, not when Capcom need the money and the games sell north of 5 Million with each release

Im personally hoping that they look at the success of The Last of Us and take the franchise back towards survival horror and suspense.

I agree with everything you said...although I'd rather have the series start over

 

What did you have in mind?  There's already a remake.  Were you thinking of going that route again, or more like a reboot?  Just curious.



ColdFire - The man with no name.

said:

 What did you have in mind?  There's already a remake.  Were you thinking of going that route again, or more like a reboot?  Just curious.

I would personally want a total reboot with different characters, a new story, and gameplay going back to classic RE roots. Although, I've always wanted remakes of RE2 & RE3 but I don't think that'll happen. Plus, it's not needed as I think those games are great fun even today.



said
Mr_No said:
*Sound Of Rain said:

That was your first RE? So you only got to play one great RE before the series went (even more) downhill? So sad :(

Unfortunately yes. And allegedly, the next Resident Evil is going to be the last, so I can't say I've enjoyed the series properly.

 

You can always go back and play the originals.  They are still great games (IMHO), as long as you understand that they aren't shooters.  If you prefer more action-oriented games then yeah, you'll be disappointed.  The focus of the classic series is on the survival, not the shooting.

Actually, this discussion between fans of the old and fans of the new has been quite illuminating for me.  In listening to both sides give the reasons they think their preferred games (new or old) are better, something has occurred to me.  One side says they took the horror out and the other says it was the perfect balance of horror and action.  Now, as a fan of the classic games, when I hear that, I think to myself, "But the perfect balance is no action!"... Or at least, minimal action.

Now, wait, I'm not ragging on action-oriented games - even action-oriented horror games.  What I'm saying is that I think I'm beginning to understand the divide between fans of the series.  It's not just that the classic games were less action-based; it's that the survival-based nature of the games actively discouraged it.  The mood, atmosphere, and rationing of ammo made you really apprehensive about facing enemies head-on.

Like, take the hunters, for example.  Those things were scary, man!  They could take your head off in one lob!  Whenever possible, you went out of your way to avoid them.  Now, of course, it wasn't always possible to avoid combat, but it was always preferable.  That's the nature of survival horror.

I think this is where a lot of the disagreement between fans comes from.  I can absolutely understand some people not finding the survival style of the older games very interesting.  And I can also understand some people (myself included) feeling that sneaking around trying to avoid combat at all costs is precisely what made those games great, and that when you have plenty of ammo and are encouraged to shoot everything that moves, you lose the whole point of the genre.

So, who is right and who is wrong?  Well, I swear I'm not just trying to be diplomatic here, but I think it's purely a matter of taste.  It entirely depends on what you like.  Resident Evil has evolved from survival horror to action horror, and while they have similar roots, I think they're two distinct genres.  That doesn't make one better than the other; it just makes them different.

Say you were to take Call of Duty and turn it into an RPG.  You can bet your stars that tons of fans would say you'd ruined the franchise.  But there would be those who never liked FPS's in the first place, who would love the COD RPG.  And I'm sure there would be some who liked both genres, who enjoyed the old COD but also liked the RPG, maybe even more than the older games.

So, does the new COD RPG suck?  Well, it depends on who you ask.  I'm sure a lot of the classic fans would think so.  But it may be a perfectly solid RPG.  And fans would defend it, saying the new COD is better than it ever was before.  While fans of the old would lament the elements the series had lost, fans of the new would say, "Good riddance!"  To them, these things were detriments that COD is better off without.  To the old-school fans, they were the whole point.

I guess what I'm getting at is that this is like comparing genres.  No one is really right or wrong; it's a question of what you're playing it for.  You don't play an RPG to have fast-paced firefights requiring keen accuracy and quick reflexes, and you don't play an FPS to deeply plan and strategize every attack.  These are different experiences, and both have their place.  I think that, in the end, everyone can agree on what the differences are between the old RE and the new RE.  But whether those differences are a good thing or not entirely comes down to what kind of experience you're looking for.

Ooooh... kaaay!  That was longer than intended.  Sorry about that.  I don't know how clear I was with all this but it was just an interesting thought that occurred to me while I was reading the discussion on here.

And upon re-reading it, I guess I am kind of stating the obvious.  Still, I'd never really thought about it in quite that way before.

 

I know the Resident Evil focus was survival horror, but I felt lost at the first chapter and I didn't know what to do. I wouldn't have mind trying it out back in 98. The thing is, when I tried it a few years ago, they lost me with the camera positions. I guess I tried RE2 too late. I do have an affinity for fast paced action/adventure games, especially if they are third person. But I also like to take it slow sometimes with the stealth genre. In fact, I'd love to sneak thru a Resident Evil game with nothing more than a silenced Samurai Edge, a knife and minimal armor. I wouldn't mind if the series went back to survival horror again but without the cinematic cameras.

Hehe, and don't worry about your post. It's good to see someone replying with a long post that doesn't start a fight