Rock And Roll
Member
Short playtime shouldn't be a surprise as the original games were always short. Cutting major locations and stuff though is a bit of a bummer. I think I'll wait for 50% off, money is tight right now anyway
If Capcom ever remakes RE4 I hope they improve the castle (by making it shorter) and remove the island (but keep the regenerators and Iron Maidens).theres no shitty castle/military island to drag it down like RE4 for example.
But the original game also contains more areas, more enemy types, more bosses, more choices through live-selections, multiple endings, randomized enemy/item locations, 8 epilogues for major RE1 and RE2 characters, and Mercenaries.Some people don't know that the original game was only 6 hours long.
Ok, you like playing the same game over and over, and that justifies it how exactly? The content in RE3 sounds a bit shit to be honest..So people are shocked by the length?? RE2R is 6-7 on a first play through and 5 for a second run.
It's the pacing which makes both this game and the original fun to go through multiple times, theres no shitty castle/military island to drag it down like RE4 for example.
I finished RE2R more the 3 times in a row and i'm going for a 4th run now before RE3R is here.
This is the kind of replayablity i like.
Is that actually what happened or is it speculation because it would make a lot of sense.Looks like this was done by the B team while 2 was worked on by the A team.
It was both. Problem isn't the action though."Resident Evil 3 is the franchise's best action-driven entry since the glory days of Resident Evil 4. "
Because that's what we want from a horror game! And fuck off anyone who says the original was action. It was survival horror.
Is that actually what happened or is it speculation because it would make a lot of sense.
Honest question have played the original? Or RE2R/Original RE2?Ok, you like playing the same game over and over, and that justifies it how exactly? The content in RE3 sounds a bit shit to be honest..
I doubt they will remake it, at least any time soon.If Capcom ever remakes RE4 I hope they improve the castle (by making it shorter) and remove the island (but keep the regenerators and Iron Maidens).
Also, make the village longer.
Honest question have played the original? Or RE2R/Original RE2?
RE2R 2nd Run wasn't equal to the original's B route and was shorter than the 1st run.This game is shorter than RE2R though.
And I don't think there are multiple endings? You just get new game plus.
Well no effort, I don't know about that... this not shitty remaster.Remake per year, easy money no effort.
This is the future of resident Evil.
Actually both PS1 RE, RE2 and RE3 are my favorite, with REmake was pretty fantastic, but nothing come close to the original RE1 for PS1. Just the mansion beat all in the climax departament.The original PS1 Resident Evil games are among my favorite games of all time. I actually enjoy the short lengths as I find them highly replayable.
As far as I know that was a plan. But then RE3 takes longer time, probably due to some shitty MP.Filthy business model all I can tell, RE2 remake I liked a lot, but it's also on the edge of justifying 60$ price tag(2nd run is trash and don't make sense in my opinion), this is looks to be dlc type of content for...again 60$.. They should've just merged 2 and 3 into one game like the initial idea was.
No one asked for it, no one really needs it, kids are busy playing fortnites and apexes or some other stupid f2p BR, RE fans want single player experience. Pretty sure it'll die sooner than later.As far as I know that was a plan. But then RE3 takes longer time, probably due to some shitty MP.
But the original game also contains more areas, more enemy types, more bosses, more choices through live-selections, multiple endings, randomized enemy/item locations, 8 epilogues for major RE1 and RE2 characters, and Mercenaries.
R3make has none of that.
Anyone who expected 2 different 90+ Metacritic remakes from Capcom only a year apart were smoking that crack pipe. Game development is hard, and at some point publishers are going to want to cash in on the wave of hype around how good RE2 Remake was. Not surprised by this reception, but I am surprised they cut locations from the original game.
Can someone who knows the locations from the original that were cut possibly explain Capcom's logic here?
RE2R 2nd Run wasn't equal to the original's B route and was shorter than the 1st run.
Again of you played both of the original recentally both the PS1 games weren't known for their length, but their replay value and fantastic pacing.
3 was just as divisive as it’s Remake back then too.
Everything about this game screams like a 40 dollars at most standalone dlc game like Lost Legacy was. Even then Lost Legacy was probably longer, lol.
The 6 hour time... I think it's because a lot of reviewers were just running through it, not exploring everything. I play survival horror games very slowly (my first clear of The Evil Within was 24 hours, where as most completed it in half the time). Also, I think I previously posted this in another thread, the original IGN review for RE5 had a 6 hour clear time. Not too worried, Shadows of the Damned length I reckon.
On the plus side I keep hearing that Nemesis is underused - good, he was the worst thing about the demo - and that there are more zombie heads to pop. Still day one for me, can't wait.
The short length is not the main disappointment here. Cutting two very important and iconic locations from the game without replacing them is.
No clock tower, no park, no Dead Factory.Didn't they cut the Dead Factory as well?
Surprisingly, reviewers are actually calling Capcom out on the cut content. I hope Capcom takes this to heart.