Resident Evil 6?

Jesus christ, Im talking about Old RE vs. New RE, and youre pulling a TL;DR on the history of zombies and Romero's work, what even is this

Im trying to keep my complaints on the zombies in the RE universe and how theyve been in the RE games
Not movies, not television, not Romero's work...just how the zombies have progressed throughout the RE series
Basically, all Im saying is simply THIS:

Old RE utilized creepy atmosphere, more survival horror based gameplay, and trying to make a game with some scary/intimidating creatures. The zombies were slow moving, and because of smaller environments it worked really well in building fear and tension, and if the time ever came for a large area, there were more zombies to make up for it. The zombies were only able to attack you through physical means, and utilized groups in some cases to get damage done making up for their slow movements.
New RE uses massive environments too big to make any sort of scary atmosphere, ridiculous amounts of weaponry and supplies that kick the survival horror genre in the balls, and so much over the top action shit that would make a hardcore CoD player blush. The "zombies" are too fucking smart, wield AK's and chainsaws like fucking experts, and have no scare factor to them whatsoever. Their means of attack ranges from just about anything they can toss at you or bludgeon you with, and they almost always travel in massive hordes which in itself could be somewhat intimidating were it not for the fact that you always carry a small militia's worth of guns in your back pocket at all times. They run, jump and pilot fucking turrets, and have no weakness other than the fact that you have lots of big ass guns.

Like you said, a game that could get back into the roots of zombies, that would be fucking cool. This bullshit action packed garbage the pack with so much weaponry and Michael Bay-like effects is just insulting to see on the market. I played RE for scares, creepy atmosphere, and for some challenge. If I wanted to play a game where I could just gun down a fuckton of enemy drones with a multivariety of weapons, Id play fucking CoD, not RE. Hell, if I just wanted to mindlessly slaughter a horde of zombies, Id play fucking L4D because that game is twice as fun and twice as scary as any of these trash heaps theyre passing off as new RE installments.

Im just completely sick of Resident Evil, and I really have no desire to see anything they produce anymore. Im just going to buy RE3 at some point, and then just keep playing RE0-3 until Im dead.

Capcom gets no more of my money for their cheap products

Wolf-Bone is absolutely right.


Also



Resident Evil was HIGHLY based off of the NES game Sweet Home. It was never an original idea.

Sweet Home:

-a mansion
-lots of traps
-character dies forever if killed
-nightmarish monsters
-evil spirit


RE:
-a mansion
-lots of traps
-charatcer dies forever if killed
-nightmarish monsters
-corporate conspiracy



Most of Resident Evil's ideas weren't even its own.



And look at this shit. The zombies were and unintended accident. The Umbrella scientists decided to fiddle with them and see how advanced they could make them. Umbrella collaspes; data is leaked. Somebody else see this shit, and decides to push the research further.



LE GASP! Now it makes sense. And the game isn't even out yet, so cool your fusion reactors.

Yeah, how dare I make an actual argument using facts and logic to disagree with your assertion that Resident Evil as a series has somehow betrayed you personally by not being exactly what it was 10+ years ago. The world would be so much better if everyone just treated another's opinion as having as much worth as someone elses facts and precedents. Fuck off.

TL;DR I included a nice little bite-sized soundbite for the portion of your brain reserved for this crap, y'know, the part that isn't entirely devoted to base emotion and furfaggotry. Fuck off.

it's not about the idea's its ripped off, or justifying that fact with it not being an original series.

who the hell has even heard of sweet home? I can applaud the game for originally having the idea, but they didn't pull it off as well as resident evil. so in the end, it's not about who's idea it was. it's about who pulled it off best.

that's what made the franchise so popular. but when the only thing that fans have left to hope for, is a story that's MAYBE somewhat 10% on par with the original story; because god forbid, they bring back one single thing from the original games; you start to wonder how long you can remain a fan of the same series until you realize you're a fan (if that) of a completely different series now.

I like to think of these things as becoming another dragon ball z. you start off as a cute show with a little kid who can beat the hell out of a bad guy, and end off with a buffed out dude who can destroy an entire planet with the flick of a wrist.

I don't really have a problem with the way RE6 is shaping up to be (although the zombies with weapons thing... wut) in terms of being a gamer, but as a fan, I'm just gonna go "eh.... what could have been"

MiloTime wrote:

it's not about the idea's its ripped off, or justifying that fact with it not being an original series.

who the hell has even heard of sweet home? I can applaud the game for originally having the idea, but they didn't pull it off as well as resident evil. so in the end, it's not about who's idea it was. it's about who pulled it off best.

that's what made the franchise so popular. but when the only thing that fans have left to hope for, is a story that's MAYBE somewhat 10% on par with the original story; because god forbid, they bring back one single thing from the original games; you start to wonder how long you can remain a fan of the same series until you realize you're a fan (if that) of a completely different series now.

I like to think of these things as becoming another dragon ball z. you start off as a cute show with a little kid who can beat the hell out of a bad guy, and end off with a buffed out dude who can destroy an entire planet with the flick of a wrist.

I don't really have a problem with the way RE6 is shaping up to be (although the zombies with weapons thing... wut) in terms of being a gamer, but as a fan, I'm just gonna go "eh.... what could have been"

Believe it or not, quite a few people have heard of Sweet Home and have played it because of Resident Evil. Resident Evil is the series that got a lot of people into survival-horror, self included. And yes, in a sense, Resident Evil does at least one thing best, or better than most, and that's being Resident Evil. But as early as 1999, Silent Hill had become the more cerebral, atmospheric game. The Gamecube remake of RE 1 was something truly awesome for the time, nearly matching Silent Hill's atmosphere and sense of impending doom (mostly because of the graphics and music, but still). However, Alone In The Dark 4 (which is the series RE took the bulk of its design from) comes very close to that. Good luck finding a review of the lower budget game from the lesser known company that doesn't bother pointing out Alone In The Dark 4 is just doing what it's always done. Bonus points if you can find one that does, but makes the case that since Resident Evil did it better, it still counts as ripping off RE!

Honestly, as far as a lot of people are concerned, Resident Evil and Silent Hill are the only real survival horror series that matter, because all the game magazines and sites promoted them the most, because Capcom and Konami are two of the biggest companies. Those gamers couldn't be arsed to step outside their narrow confines. Y'know, the same folks who think Dead Space is some groundbreaking game because it's like those, In Space!

You don't have to look very far to stop seeing Resident Evil as the horror game everything needs to be measured against. It took me a while, sure, but ffs, I was still in high school by the time my status as a fanboy was coasting on the fumes of nostalgia. People need to move the fuck on already.

Wolf-Bone wrote:

People need to move the fuck on already.

imagine if mass effect gave this message to the fans. or even some hugely popular band I've most likely never heard of. (I dunno, just imagine your personal favorite band telling you to move the fuck on and tell us that doesn't piss you off in the slightest)

as much as you may call the fans whiny assholes who are never satisfied, it still comes down to the fact that you're doing it for the fans. and yes, the general gaming audience, but it's the fans that keeps a series together. it's fans that encourages game companies to create such a detailed universe in their games, and only expand further.

the only problem is that they sometimes go in the wrong direction. I'm a huge fan of RE, and honestly as much as RE5 sucked, that doesn't mean I hate RE now. I just think, if they're going to keep making games, you might as well stick to a single formula, or at most, expand on this one formula. (which I think they're doing with RE6.... again, except for the zombies with weapons. that's just ridiculous)

capcom even admitted themselves, they love adding in more history to the resident evil franchise. like adding lisa trevor in the REmake, or making the outbreak series to expand on the original series and create what-if scenario's. I admire that. but there's such thing as trying to fix what isn't broken (unless you take in the fact that resident evil could have easily ended at RE3)

fuck, I don't even know why I'm complaining. I'm actually looking forward to RE6 lol.

Well, actually some bands do all but say that, though they're usually more polite about it than that. I haven't really kept up with Alice In Chains in a while but I know they were getting "annoyed" with the accusations that they'd "replaced" the guy fans considered to be their lead singer (and they didn't - if anything the former backing vocalist moved to the foreground and the new guy is the backing vocalist for the most part - it was always a vocal tag-team of sorts). One of my favorite groups, Bone Thugs N Harmony, were massively successful and popular for a few years in the mid-to-late 90's. They were seen as everything from the successors to NWA to legit competition for Wu-Tang Clan. Then they just sorta imploded. They've all but let go of any aspirations to reclaim their former glory, and while they're still appreciative of the fans they have, they've repeatedly said the music they did in the past is in the past. I don't think it's at all unfair for game designers to have the same sentiment, especially since, at least for the time being, game development is as much tech-demo as art. They want to do new things with new tools and kinda have to.

As an aside, I don't get what people had against RE 5, and honestly think the people that've bitched about it here are the first I've heard who seriously disliked it. I'm sure there's various Resident Evil, survival horror and of course Capcom's own forums where people voice their opinions and reinforce each other's views, but I don't fuck with those.

Wolf-Bone wrote:

Yeah, how dare I make an actual argument using facts and logic to disagree with your assertion that Resident Evil as a series has somehow betrayed you personally by not being exactly what it was 10+ years ago. The world would be so much better if everyone just treated another's opinion as having as much worth as someone elses facts and precedents. Fuck off.

TL;DR I included a nice little bite-sized soundbite for the portion of your brain reserved for this crap, y'know, the part that isn't entirely devoted to base emotion and furfaggotry. Fuck off.

Cant really argue anymore because if I disagree some more, Wolf-bone will assume someones deliberately insulted him as usual.

Wolf is correct. All games should never be how they were 10 years ago. They should all conform to becoming mindless boring slaughterfests with nothing more to offer than about 5 minutes of enjoyment before becoming repetitive. When they have trademark qualities that make the series wht it is, they should always abandon them in the pursuit to become more generic and flashy. In fact, how about all the companies just come together to make one clusterfuck of every cliche ever and sell that as a game. Problem solved.

Fluttershy wrote:

Cant really argue anymore because if I disagree some more, Wolf-bone will assume someones deliberately insulted him as usual.

Just because I don't feel insulted doesn't mean you weren't intentionally being an asshole.

Fluttershy wrote:

Wolf is correct. All games should never be how they were 10 years ago. They should all conform to becoming mindless boring slaughterfests with nothing more to offer than about 5 minutes of enjoyment before becoming repetitive. When they have trademark qualities that make the series wht it is, they should always abandon them in the pursuit to become more generic and flashy. In fact, how about all the companies just come together to make one clusterfuck of every cliche ever and sell that as a game. Problem solved.

Resident Evil was already a mindless, repetitive, boring slaughterfest/puzzlefest/fetchquest by the time of RE 0. Oh right, that game had a guy whose fetish for leeches pervades every aspect of the game world's design, and not just the standard zombies and zombie dogs, but zombie bugs and monkeys, and of course, zombies and leeches in the same creature because (okay, admittedly those things were pretty sick). That stuff, along with the partner swapping and inventory system were about the only things they could come up with that were at all original within the formula they'd been working with up to that point. It wasn't very well received.

I think Outbreak could've been a good spin-off series to keep that style of RE game more or less alive while giving people a reason to keep coming back to it (the multiplayer, the new content in subsequent sequels) but that didn't live up to expectations either. And in fairness, I think if it were tried now instead of when you needed 2 expensive peripherals and to buy a whole new game for the new content instead of just releasing DLC like they would now, I think things would've been a lot different. But they weren't, it failed, so understandably, Capcom's not too keen on breathing new life into it (for now - if Capcom is cynical enough to rerelease RE 4 in HD after it's already had its run on Gamecube and Wii, I wouldn't put anything past them)

I also don't think it's fair to compare the direction RE has gone in recent year to CoD and the like. It might borrow very liberally from it in terms of visual style and vague themes of militarism, patriotism, terrorism, fighting for some greater good, etc. But it's just window dressing for what's essentially still a game that's about fighting for your life against monsters and some huge conspiracy out of a sci-fi movie. Personally, I feel a hell of a lot more comfortable with that angle being played in an overtly fictitious fashion, possibly bringing in fans of those other games and them getting their rocks off that way than playing stuff that's a blatant, shameless cash-in on real world conflicts and fears/prejudices. It's why the initial charges of "racism" in RE 5 were complete bullshit but the ones in Modern Warfare might not be.

how is it, that 2-D sidescrollers, puzzles, and indie games that combine pretty much every aspect of what "classic gaming" is; and even classic games like sonic the hedgehog, that went from classic, to modern, which did horrible, then went back to classic and started doing well again; is some of the most popular gaming today, yet the very THOUGHT of resident evil going to a more classical style is just ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS.

MiloTime wrote:

how is it, that 2-D sidescrollers, puzzles, and indie games that combine pretty much every aspect of what "classic gaming" is; and even classic games like sonic the hedgehog, that went from classic, to modern, which did horrible, then went back to classic and started doing well again; is some of the most popular gaming today, yet the very THOUGHT of resident evil going to a more classical style is just ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS.

Probably because games like Sonic were from the 16-bit era and Resident Evil was actually one of the earlier mainstream 3D games. In the era/genre Sonic dominated, there was no expectation of realism, 3D vs. 2D wasn't even a thing, and games were supposed to just be fun. An actual story was completely optional but never necessary. Resident Evil belonged to something very different. It borrowed very heavily from movies, was almost trying to be like one without becoming one of those shitty Sega CD "games", and helped usher in the school of thought that games are supposed to tell stories, create believable worlds, that they didn't just have to be fun and could be scary experiences too. So I think it was inevitable that people would expect it to go in a different direction over time whereas Sonic's been torn to bits as a franchise by its own unpleasable fanbase as much as Sega's ineptitude.

You gotta remember Sonic's owned by one of the few big name companies from that period who aren't still in the hardware market. So it shouldn't be at all shocking they only have slightly more a clue what to do with their games as they did with their consoles and handhelds.

It bugs me that Outbreak isnt being remade and sold, but instead we get Operation Raccoon and shit like that. Outbreak could be a great thing to create with the easily accessible WiFi of today's systems but theyre too preoccupied making more action sequels and spinoffs.

Fluttershy wrote:

It bugs me that Outbreak isnt being remade and sold, but instead we get Operation Raccoon and shit like that. Outbreak could be a great thing to create with the easily accessible WiFi of today's systems but theyre too preoccupied making more action sequels and spinoffs.

what I would give to play outbreak online again.

like I said before, it was quite literally, the first game I ever played online. so it's not only a fun game to play online, it has that nostalgia factor.

I'll post this up for anyone who hasn't seen this trailer

Eh, interesting I guess, but Im still not going to be sueded until Ive seen gameplay and have a chance to see the "zombies" I was told about

Also Sherri? Like, fucking RE2 Sherri? Shes an adult and is now helping Leon?
Where the hell did they ever pull that idea from, I didnt even like Sherri. Also, she looks like Ashley from RE4, I had to do some replays to make sure they didnt put Ashley back into the game. Had they done that I would have just immediately thrown my hands up and left.



I still have some hope that this game wont turn out to be a shitpile like RE5, so we will see
I mean even if its mediocre or just partially good like RE4 Id be fine

Kaizy wrote:

Eh, interesting I guess, but Im still not going to be sueded until Ive seen gameplay and have a chance to see the "zombies" I was told about

Also Sherri? Like, fucking RE2 Sherri? Shes an adult and is now helping Leon?
Where the hell did they ever pull that idea from, I didnt even like Sherri. Also, she looks like Ashley from RE4, I had to do some replays to make sure they didnt put Ashley back into the game. Had they done that I would have just immediately thrown my hands up and left.



I still have some hope that this game wont turn out to be a shitpile like RE5, so we will see
I mean even if its mediocre or just partially good like RE4 Id be fine

this trailer strikes me as one huge attempt to please every fan. I mean they did a good job of doing so, but it's kind of cheesy how hard they tried:

zombies
a possibly stronger version of t-virus
entrance of leon
entrance of ada
entrance of sherry
chris VS leon standoff
albert wesker's son to continue the wekser plots
ada still good guy/bad guy making you wonder whose side she's on

I'm impressed they did all of this in one trailer.

MiloTime wrote:

Kaizy wrote:

Eh, interesting I guess, but Im still not going to be sueded until Ive seen gameplay and have a chance to see the "zombies" I was told about

Also Sherri? Like, fucking RE2 Sherri? Shes an adult and is now helping Leon?
Where the hell did they ever pull that idea from, I didnt even like Sherri. Also, she looks like Ashley from RE4, I had to do some replays to make sure they didnt put Ashley back into the game. Had they done that I would have just immediately thrown my hands up and left.



I still have some hope that this game wont turn out to be a shitpile like RE5, so we will see
I mean even if its mediocre or just partially good like RE4 Id be fine

this trailer strikes me as one huge attempt to please every fan. I mean they did a good job of doing so, but it's kind of cheesy how hard they tried:

zombies
a possibly stronger version of t-virus
entrance of leon
entrance of ada
entrance of sherry
chris VS leon standoff
albert wesker's son to continue the wekser plots
ada still good guy/bad guy making you wonder whose side she's on

I'm impressed they did all of this in one trailer.

I saw no zombies in that trailer
I saw things spawn from this "C-Virus" but not a single regular zombie...hell they even gave the things a stupid name like the Plagas or Uroboros. As far as a stronger version of the T-Virus, thats been in like...every game. First the T-Virus, then the G-Virus, then whatever that one from Code Veronica was, then they replaced T-Virus for Plagas and then made a more powerful version of that. Its just how these games go. 4 games down the road, itll be the FU-Virus that is so powerful it makes the already ridiculously powerful monsters become twice as hard to kill, gives them the power to turn others within seconds, and nothing can stop it, so they nuke everything, launch the remaining virus into space, and then work on an RE title in space...or just throw their hands up and give the rest of the story to Visceral.

Um, the fuck they call the enemies? Guevaras? Conquistacabras? Burritodors? Gringos Los Bungholios?

Wolf-Bone wrote:

Um, the fuck they call the enemies? Guevaras? Conquistacabras? Burritodors? Gringos Los Bungholios?

Another stupid name for what should just be "zombies"

Im just gonna call them Plagas 3 for now

Kaizy wrote:

Wolf-Bone wrote:

Um, the fuck they call the enemies? Guevaras? Conquistacabras? Burritodors? Gringos Los Bungholios?

Another stupid name for what should just be "zombies"

Im just gonna call them Plagas 3 for now

don't you realize by now, it's uncool to actually SAY zombies. you know why in movies, they just refer to it as "them" or "those freaks" etc, is because saying "zombies" is SO 1980's

Uh not exactly. I'm pretty sure Resident Evil's never shied away from using the Z word. The not-zombies in 4 and 5 were named Ganados and Majini to distinguish them from the zombies in previous games. Leon and Chris both make it a point to say they're not zombies, but a lot of people call them zombies anyway because their definition hinges more on "mindless drone" than "walking corpse", which I'm fine with because the original, mythic zombies were actually closer to the former.

That they're giving whatever the predominantly featured enemy in RE 6 is an ominously foreign sounding name suggests to me they'll be closer to Ganados and Majini than zombies, but where they seem hell bent on trying to please everybody (judging by the trailer) I'm gonna guess they'll try to infuse some "zombie-like" features into them. I mean if you ever played the Siren games, the enemies in that are pretty disturbing because physically they're basically zombies, yet they talk, use tools, seem to have some kind of higher functions, and yet have no will of their own. And they mutate over time while retaining some of their distinguishing features. So later in the game you can encounter a zombie from earlier except now he/she looks even more fucked up and behaves even more bizarre.

I think something like that would work really well in an RE game, but the best we'll probably get is something like crimson heads that maybe can break through doors and scream "I'm going to eat your face!" in Chinese.

Wolf-Bone wrote:

physically they're basically zombies, yet they talk, use tools, seem to have some kind of higher functions, and yet have no will of their own.

This is what Im worried about. I dont find that creepy at all because thats what the Plagas/Uroboros creatures were. They were "zombie-like" but they had enough intelligence to wield weaponry (and RE5 had them using fucking AK's which is bullshit). Thats not scary, thats just stupid. I dont want things charging at me flailing melee weaponry and screaming in 6 languages, I want something creepy, mindless and terrifying that bellows an unnerving noise and hides in the dark, travels in large groups and actually poses a threat.

Also, if I get too many weapons/ammo or they dont go back to the attache case system, Im going to kill a bitch.

Kaizy wrote:

This is what Im worried about. I dont find that creepy at all because thats what the Plagas/Uroboros creatures were. They were "zombie-like" but they had enough intelligence to wield weaponry

Shibito (that's what the enemies in the Siren series are called) aren't quite like Resident Evil's Ganados/Majini though. They actually look undead, because they are. They're impossible to kill for good. I mean one guy Kurt Cobain's himself, and later on you have to deal with him when he turns, with the exit wound still prominently visible in the back of his head. Resident Evil 4 and 5 has these crazed humans infected with a parasite that at most look kinda sickly and possessed, but aren't really all that threatening except when they're armed or have you surrounded in large numbers.

Despite both being essentially survival horror, they're very different kinds of games, though. I just think one does some things really well and wish the other would borrow those elements as liberally as it does from games in other series and even other genres. Siren certainly borrowed pretty liberally from series like Silent Hill and Clock Tower and wasn't afraid to put a bit more emphasis on action in sequels, so I wouldn't mind a Resident Evil game that features a bit of stealth, psychological horror, enemies that can't be killed permanently (or at least not as easily if they can), etc.

The last one was kinda there in REmake and was one of the things that made it really stand out from the rest.

Kaizy wrote:

(and RE5 had them using fucking AK's which is bullshit). Thats not scary, thats just stupid.

I dunno. I think the way RE 5 did it was kinda wrong. It was one of several examples of the way they introduced a new mechanic part way through the game, didn't really implement it that well, and did it for really no other reason than to give it those "action thriller" set pieces they were going for, only to pretty much abandon it once that part of the game's over.

Thing is reviewers and a lot of gamers will slam something like Operation Raccoon City when they gave RE 5 glowing praise. Yet all the former really does is takes some of the elements from the latter and bases a game around them while pulling them off a bit better. At least in that there's an obvious and believable difference between the enemies shooting at you and the ones trying to maul you to death.

From RE 4 onward, the idea's been that where there can be a pretty thin line between intense, fast-paced action and fear, that's what should be aimed for, and I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing, but I think it's proven harder to really do right than either a really scary game or a really intense, balls-to-the-wall action game.

Kaizy wrote:

Also, if I get too many weapons/ammo or they dont go back to the attache case system, Im going to kill a bitch.

The reason they didn't stick with that was because a lot of people thought switching to an inventory screen in the middle of the action was distracting from the whole experience, but RE 5's system was really just as much a distraction with having to trade items and assign them to hotkeyed slots. It was just downright annoying to have to do it in the middle of battles. I don't think either system completely ruins the game, but it either has to be something like that, the dreaded item boxes, the even worse item dropping/swapping system of RE 0, or an extremely spartan inventory system like some games have where you can carry maybe one powerful gun, one sidearm, one melee weapon, and have a sub-menu for healing items and the like that opens in real time but is really easy to use.

But really, there's no good reason they can't have a system like Fallout where each item has a certain weight and you can assign different items to different D-pad buttons at different times. Either way, I think pretty much any game involving guns and ammo conservation needs some kind of limited inventory system, but the RE games' always seem to be really arbitrary.

The attache case was easily the best of those though because it was the most visual, was at least based on size/space if not weight and could be upgraded as the game progressed. I think even that really would've benefited from the option to hot-key weapons and healing items though.

Where I stand, the attache system was perfection, and theyve only gone backwards from that

Kaizy wrote:

Where I stand, the attache system was perfection, and theyve only gone backwards from that

So you don't think it would've been at all nice to be able to assign a shotgun to one d-pad button, a handgun to another, and a first-aid spray to another. Okay, whatever. I do think calling RE 5's setup a step backwards is kinda appropriate given the fact that you essentially go to a huge item box between levels to retrieve/store equipment.