re5 looks lame.

[Ack]

Honestly, I wouldn't call Resident Evil that difficult. At least, not overly moreso than 2 or 3. I'd say it and 2 are on par, with 3 only a little behind, but I believe the reason for that was because they put Nemesis into the game. Gotta throw fewer things in front of you to make it fair since you spend so much time worrying about the thing behind you. In general I felt 3 wasn't as scary as 1 or 2 either, but it still had moments that made me jump, like the first time a zombie climbed out of a car I was walking by. Seeing Nemesis plow his way through a wall then take two clips and keep coming, that got the adrenaline flowing. The remake of RE1 took the fear that the first game inspired and added more with the new additions. Coming into a hallway full of guys I've wasted previously only to see them get back up, and more powerful than before? I was in horror heaven. Sure, they experimented with other styles and I didn't mind. Gun Survivor was...forgettable, but Biohazard was a nice way to incorporate multiplayer...this is, until we'd memorized the layout of all the levels. Still creepy though. And then there was Gaiden. ...let's just move on from Gaiden, shall we? I know it's part of the main story, but...yeah. So anyway, in the official storyline, you now get Code Veronica. And the series starts getting into territory with Umbrella that I really wasn't interested in. I don't think I'm ever going to forget that one guy's laugh... The game still had some nice moments, like seeing stuff crawl under a building, and knowing it's going to grab you as you walk up the stairs, so you gotta psyche yourself up to simply take a step forward...yeah, that's good stuff.

And then there was Resident Evil 4. Ok, so they change the camera so I can see over Leon's shoulder. Nice touch, makes for a different game experience from the others, but I actually liked the old camera. Why? Do you know how many times I'd sit holed up at the end of a corridor because I knew something was at the end of this hallway but I sure as hell wasn't going to walk into it, I was gonna wait and let it come to me? The long, agonizing minutes as I wait for its ugly face to wander into camera view...and the worst were the big guys, who would actually block the camera when they stepped on screen for a moment, so I couldn't see where I was at all. I'd have to open fire and pray I was aiming in the right direction. Sure, the games featured auto-aim, but in those situations it could actually scare you. You enter a room, you think everything's fine, but you accidentally tap the button to raise your weapon, and the character spins around to look at something you had no idea was in there with you. And RE4 just didn't have it.

Instead, RE4 brought me babysitting quests and moments where I'd willingly waste ammunition on birds because I knew I was gonna get some money to put towards that rocket launcher I always wanted. RE4 brought me a laser sight to stick on everything's forehead, and the ability to stop entire crowds by popping one guy in the kneecap. RE4 let me shoot axes out of the sky, and there were only two moments in that game where I felt any sense of fear at all, the first time baghead with the chainsaw appears, and the first time a dog busts open into some tentacled freak, and all that lead me to say was "Well...that was unexpected."

Honestly, what Capcom probably needs to do at this point is just kill the series and create a new horror series for us to try. And I don't see the mainstream as wanting new and innovative games. They want their Resident Evil 5s and their Final Fantasy XIIIs and their Soul Calibur 4s. They want 3D remakes of FF7, and their HALO Wars, and whatever else series is popular. They don't care about innovations, they care about names. Look how well innovation did on Silent Hill 4. Heck, I mentioned Cold Fear earlier. It came out less than a month after Resident Evil 4, had the same control scheme and even more horror. What did it not have? "Resident Evil" branded on it.

Sure, I understand the point that ravenmgs is making, and it's a good point. Series do need to change and evolve, I understand. But there is something that the game industry hasn't figure out yet, and that is that sometimes, series need to end. I'm tired of walking into Gamestop and seeing the exact same titles for sale that I saw two years ago, just with different numbers behind them.

Now maybe Resident Evil 5 will scare me. Maybe it'll scare the crap out of me and bring me new levels of terror I never imagined. Its what I play those games for, to scare the crap out of me. But I just don't see it happening. Not yet, anyway.

And let me reiterate. I still liked Resident Evil 4. But I didn't get the same thing out of it that I got from the older titles.

[Gamerforlife]

Resident Evil 4 was a classic, period. Resident Evil 5 stands a good chance of being just as awesome. Though I think having a co-op mode is kind of stupid and I'm sure there will be some lame "play the game on co-op" achievement.

You want "classic" Resident Evil. Let's see, there's RE 1, a re-make of RE 1, multiple versions of RE 2, RE 3, RE: Code Veronica, Dino Crisis, do I need to go on?

Those were all fantastic games, but it's been done to death, it's old. RE 4 is how the series should be from here on out.

I like playing older games. That's why I like retro sites like this, but it's completely stupid to want a franchise to NEVER change. That's called stagnation, and it's why I'm less than thrilled about Megaman 9, but that's another topic entirely

[miked]

Hell we all know the the series died after 3 anyway.

[Zer]

it makes me feel like capcom just dummed down the gameplay to make it easier for the mass market to play and telling all of the people who have been buying and playing there games in the past 'tuff shit'. Crying or Very sad it's not fair

Resident Evil 4 is definitely not a dumbed down version of the previous games...is your brain working properly? I fail to see how item fetch puzzles and running through linear fixed backgrounds while shooting at slow-moving zombies is anything remarkable. Resident Evil 4 added much to the aging formula and that's why it worked out so well for Capcom. From their perspective, why would they even consider going back to the old style of gameplay when RE4 was such a huge success? I mean, it did well enough in sales to warrant three ports, so from a business perspective, it wouldn't be wise to regress to a previous style of gameplay just to appease a few whiny 'fans' who haven't even played the game before deciding to complain about it.

Don't assume so much. I beat it three times, so I'm pretty sure I "played" it. RE4 was indeed built from the ground up to be easy enough for the elementary crowd. It was also built from the ground up to be some generic action title Capcom knew would bomb if they didn't slap the RE name on it, and pitch in 3 or 4 extremely loose plot connections. The game has nothing to do with the series, let alone the survival horror genre. It has zero scares, zero suspense, zero challenge, and zero thought requirement. There is nothing to fear when you can RESPAWN like it's fucking Counter Strike.

And since when have sales equaled quality? That argument has no place here. Most chart topping games are mediocre, because most people are mediocre.

Exactly. The scariest part was the optic camo 'Novistadors', which just startled me since up to that point every thing I had seen was predictable and expected. The plot sucks, the action is average, the scares are such failures that it's almost funny, and the upgradable weapons make a already easy game easier. Ammo is fucking everywhere, and now I can make the guns into 1-hit kill cannons. I had so much ammo and grenades near the end of the game I had to sell a lot of them just to be able to carry stuff. The graphics are good to show that the GC is capable of some fairly nice graphics (though not photorealism, at least not to my eyes), but the game feels slow and clunky since every 5 seconds there's a crate or barrel for me to bust open.

If RE5 is going to be that set in Africa or something, why not just port RE4 to the 'Box and PS3 and add some new levels, because it'll be basically the same thing.

[Haoie]

Survival horror.

That's the key word here. Is RE4 a true survival horror game? Or just plain simple action?

If you go to Chris's Survival Horror website, you'll see there are really 2 sides of the debate about RE4.

[gradualmeltdown]

I'm in the middle. I don't care what anyone says I loved RE4. However I'm sort of underwhelmed by the fact that RE5 is essentially a prettier version of RE4 in different environments. Way less stoked for this now. Fallout 3 is about the only "big" mainstream game on my radar now.

[flop5]

Resi 5 looked terrible at the conference. You could have switched environments between Gears of War 2, MAG, Resistance 2, and Resident Evil 5 and I wouldn't have noticed. Each one had their own variety of 'monster,' that behaved just like the others. Hell, Resi 5's 'zombies' were using guns! Remember when Resident Evil still had a very distinct personality?

[Pulsar_t]

Resident Evil has been bastardised beyond repair. We'll have to wait for the new Silent Hill and the PS3 Siren is possibly the next step in the evolution of survival horror. I'm not saying RE4 is a bad game, far from it. However with those stiff controls (NO STRAFE?!) and lack of cinematic suspense it's just not RE anymore. People are divided about this issue but it seems most didn't mind the transition.

Oh and I found Cold Fear to be enjoyable despite its flaws.

[Ack]

Wow, a mention of Chris' Survival Horror Quest. Big fan of that site, it's lead me to some fun games.

I'm also excited about the remake of Siren, if only because it looks so good. To be honest, the first Siren pissed me off immensely, because I hate babysitting. Sneaking around, sure, I'd eventually get past a level, but when I had to guide someone else...screw it, give me a weapon, I'll plow my way through.

And yeah, Cold Fear had some issues, but I really liked it. I was wondering if anybody else had tried it...

[ravenmgs]

"RE4 has better controls." Uh, no, RE4 uses the same fucking controls. It's called tank movement. The camera is what's changed, which did nothing but substantially kill the cinematic quality of the game.

The camera swaps from the "cinematic" to the "gears of war" style very frequently. This makes it easier for a novist or new player to not run into walls or hit back when their going forward.. ect..

"RE4 has better graphics." No, it has full 3D graphics, not "better" graphics. REmake and RE0 actually look more impressive to me, damn near photo realistic at times.

This is hogwash dude and you know it. RE4 has higher texture resolution, higher poly count, deformations, lighting effects.. if you like pre-rendeered backdrops v.s. real time.. thats your personal aesthetic taste, not something you gauge the level of graphic prowess with.

"RE4 has innovative gameplay." I guess it's innovative to you if you've never played a 3rd person action game in the last 10 years. RE4 offers zero new gameplay mechanics.

/agree, it's dumbed down for jocks, GTA fan boys and all those sorts of mass market appeal segments.

"RE4 has upgradable weapons." Oh lovely. I can give my beretta the killing force of a .50 caliber M2, offering no visual or aural difference. Sure, that makes sense. Dig the laser sight on the shotgun, too.

Upgradeable weapons have been around since RE2.. but we have already established RE4 is about as original as a "your mom" joke.

"RE4 did away with save ribbons." Yeah, just what we needed; even less reason to fear death in a survival horror game.

The WHOLE game lost the "suspense" feel, it went from a suspense game to a "slasher" / "horror" flick, which is lame. Mostly
because there are no alternatives, the RE series was the alternative to Tomb Raider or Quake.. hell I think MGS4 has more suspense
in it then RE4.

Its NOT a resident evil game, period.