Support NeoGAF

[dragonzdogma]

I know now how RE1-3 & Veronica fans felt when they played RE4 and didn't like it and continued to suffer all they way to the RE6 series.

The reason I say this, is because of how far RE7 looks like from anything I enjoy or the series offers.

Going from fixed camera views to a behind the back TPV is like going from TPV to FPV IMO.

I just hope that we get another TPV Resident evil game somewhere long the line.

But I sorta blame capcom to be honest,
We should have only two type of RE series named
Resident evil classic (Fixed camera views horror) & and Resident evil (TPV action horror)
Now the've added FPV into the mix

Good luck capcom,
I really do hope this turns out like DMC in the end, but I cant even say that since DMC 5 isn't even out yet

 

[Jawmuncher]

Fans don't know what they want at this point,RE7 seems to be the closest thing to his original roots but it's not third person so it's not a RE game.
Time will tell but i'm very optimistic since they've addressed many issues i've been complaining for a long time.

Fans know what they want, the issue is at this point there's two big groups of fans. Since I never count those of us who will just play anything with a RE name on it.

 

[TheSpoiler]

Fuck y'all I like both styles. Even 6 is enjoyable.

 

[gelf]

I'll admit I haven't played the original Resident Evil, so maybe it's different?

But I literally played REmake for the first time (and second time, because I immediately replayed it upon completion) a couple months ago and while it has moments of action, it doesn't come close to defining the game. It's mainly about exploration and puzzle solving. In fact, in most situations, it's better to not engage enemies and simply avoid them (which in many cases is a puzzle itself). So, unless "running around" is considered "action", I would disagree.

Again, maybe the original version is different. And RE2 is definitely more action heavy from what I recall.

I'd say the original is pretty much the same as the remake in terms of the gameplay balance. Some versions of the original are even tougher in terms the resources to monsters ratio like the rearranged mode in Directors Cut.

For me I always liked RE more as a horror themed adventure game then a shooter. That's what drew me to the originals as the actual shooting mechanics in them were very basic and thus more about resource management. That itch has not been satisfied at all for a long time so I've long been crying out for it.

 

[MoonFrog]

Man, I wish you hadn't cherry picked that one statement from my post and responded to the main points I made.

Since you didn't, I'll just assume you don't have a rebuttal, which means I'm fairly confident in calling the first Resident Evil a game with less of a focus on action than its other elements.

4 was a great revolution in controls and amount of enemies, which completely changed RE. That said, 2 and 3, especially 3, were already steps towards a more action-y game.

 

[Pwnedkiller]

RE7 is going down the right path I think. They have always been about Horror that is what Resident Evil based off of from its roots. You cannot change that, I would say the action side is the minority here. Nothing can ever stay classical things change with time and we have to learn to love change and see ways to enjoy it. I love the old RE games but I am so glad they are going with something like this. It has me more excited and wondering what new mechanics they will throw at me. Whereas if they went classical then I would know what to expect from them.

The same could be said for franchises like MGS, I absolutely loved the open world and it was simply a dream come true. So many new ways to play were introduced that I did not ever expect whereas if they went off the classic roots I would of already known what to expect and not be as excited.

 

[Crazy Diamond]

I don't know if it ever will. There are so many people I know who haven't touched the series since 4 because they weren't willing to accept the kinds of transitions that have been made. Honestly, I think that the way Capcom handles Resident Evil is the way franchises like it should be handled. Even if one isn't necessarily a fan of Resident Evil 6 (for example), there is always hope for them that they can enjoy Resident Evil 7 because of how drastically these games change from one to the next. Fortunately, I've just so happened to be a fan of everything they've done with the series, from main series to spinoff. With each game, Capcom adds something new to the mix that becomes what I associate with Resident Evil. I consider myself as much a fan of Resident Evil 5 as I do REmake. They're both what make Resident Evil to me, for completely different reasons.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

4 was a great revolution in controls and amount of enemies, which completely changed RE. That said, 2 and 3, especially 3, were already steps towards a more action-y game.

Yeah, I can believe that. I haven't played 3 but from what I remember of 2, it seemed a bit more combat-focused.

 

[joms5]

Although there is a divide between those two genres of games, I don't think it's fair to say that there is a war among the fans. Rather is just that people don't like bad games.

For example, I'm in the group that loved the classic survival horror roots of RE. I would rather take a RE1 than a RE4. Having said that I loved 4 and thought it was a fantastic game. Action focused but had a number of interesting systems that had the DNA of survival horror integrated within them. Look no further than the attache case (which was one of the biggest mistakes for RE5 and 6) or the vendor.

For me it comes down to the fact that RE5 and 6 are both bad games. They just are. Now if they're played coop with a partner they might be tolerable but pale in comparison to what they had done with RE4. But as a single player experience they are trash, and in some areas exercises in frustration.

So when you ask me where should Resident Evil go? I say back to survival horror. Firstly because i'm biased and prefer that genre, but more importantly we've had about 6 action focused RE games with more than half of those being poor to absolute shit.That tells me that Capcom developers are not capable of making a good RE action game. Which blows my mind considering they had the template with RE4 in front of them all this time.

I should say that if they came up with the idea to make another RE game like 4, I'm all for it.

 

[Mupod]

I like the old REs and the new ones, at least up through 5. 5 in particular I'm torn on, because it obviously is lacking something in its direction but at the same time its shooting/melee mechanics are perfect and it's one of the best co-op experiences ever. I like action horror games, Dead Space and FEAR are some of my favorites. But when it comes to RE, I miss the old style more because so few (no?) games these days even attempt that kind of resource management survival horror.

To me the defining parts of RE were never just that it was scary, or that it had zombies, but the survival aspects. Meaning it was all on you to scrounge and manage the limited resources in the environment. This means you could either end up in a desperate tense situation or you might have a momentary advantage over the enemies due to superior firepower or extra healing. I really love that dynamic but modern horror games either swing to the 'defenseless' route or just become pure action games. I had high hopes for Evil Within, and I did enjoy most of it, but it swings more towards the latter. I almost feel like RE7 and RE2make are our only hope for the kind of game I'm looking for. The resources and expertise needed to properly make that kind of game are beyond a low budget indie studio.

As for RE7, whether it ends up being an Amnesia/Outlast/Slender wannabe is unclear but it really bothers me how many were rejoicing about the return to 'classic RE' when I've yet to see it show the elements of RE that I'm actually looking for. And yes, defense force, I fucking know what they've SAID about the game. I also don't believe anything that comes out of marketing. Until we know exactly what we're dealing with my expectations are 0.

 

[Bl@de]

Never. All hail RE1 on release day. After that it was downhill and trash.

Spoiler

As long as it's a good game I'm fine with it, even if I prefer the horror entries. But with everything I hear about RE7 it seems like I will get my fix again.

 

[Gai Murakumo]

Fuck y'all I like both styles. Even 6 is enjoyable.

Agreed. I do not know why RE 6 gets so much flak. I still enjoyed it immensely. Plus the old school games pre RE 4 were excellent as well.

 

[kamineko]

TBH, I think a lot of fans just like Resident Evil, period, and are pretty open to new styles of play in the franchise.

I don't think new vs. old vs. new 2.0 sectarians are as common as you might guess--they just like talking a whole lot more than everybody else. A lot of that debate ends up feeling more like edgelord trash talk than actual discussion. I mean, why treat randoms like shit over Resident Evil?

(some sectarians are cool, of course, and don't act this way, but we've all seen the shitty side of it)

I can honestly say I've found something to like in every mainline game, even if I have preferences. As we've discussed in community, I think it's great that we are seeing separate gameplay pillars emerge to cater to a wide range of tastes. It does look like Revelations 3 will have to up its melee game (it needs to at least have the satisfying crunch of RE5 moves) to satisfy action fans, and I really hope that is Capcom's direction. Ideally the franchise can offer something for everyone.

Me, I'll play them all.

 

[Jawmuncher]

RE7 is going down the right path I think. They have always been about Horror that is what Resident Evil based off of from its roots. You cannot change that, I would say the action side is the minority here. Nothing can ever stay classical things change with time and we have to learn to love change and see ways to enjoy it. I love the old RE games but I am so glad they are going with something like this. It has me more excited and wondering what new mechanics they will throw at me. Whereas if they went classical then I would know what to expect from them.

See I disagree with this idea, 4-6 were successful in their own ways. There is a big fan base there. 4-6 are some of their highest selling titles of all time. So I wouldn't say they're a minority. Roots are important but can also adapt. I would say that in a sense 4-6 all used horror to some degree. Just like earlier games used action. . Much like you said games need to change, but I still feel you can cater to older fans in other ways.

 

[Waddle Dee]

It's basically just like the Sonic the Hedgehog fandom at this point. People are always arguing because neither series has a "definitive" gameplay style. Some love the classic games, other love the modern games.

Just like with Sonic, I enjoy Resident Evil in general, as long as it stays true to itself. I really don't get that vibe from RE7 so far though, which is why I'm disappointed by it.

Even RE6, as high octane as it was, still had lovable goofball characters, crazy memorable moments, and demanded players to learn it's ins and outs in order to get good. That's what matters to me.

 

[Neff]

Man, I wish you hadn't cherry picked that one statement from my post and responded to the main points I made.

Since you didn't, I'll just assume you don't have a rebuttal, which means I'm fairly confident in calling the first Resident Evil a game with less of a focus on action than its other elements.

It seemed like most of the point of your post came down to the part I quoted, which is why I quoted it. My point is that a sense of action is important to Resident Evil as a franchise, because it was clearly there in the first game. But like I said, horror is important, too.

Regarding RE1 vs REmake, it's not that different. It's a lot goofier. Movement is a bit faster. You can increase the speed of your character in REmake by de-equipping a weapon, but the PSone game has the slight edge. It's also slightly shorter and faster-paced, but the exploration, puzzles and map are very similar.

Fuck y'all I like both styles. Even 6 is enjoyable.

I'd also like to say that I enjoy all of the mainline titles. Even Revelations, which is easily my least favourite, has its moments.

 

[Sir Ilpalazzo]

Man, I wish you hadn't cherry picked that one statement from my post and responded to the main points I made.

Since you didn't, I'll just assume you don't have a rebuttal, which means I'm fairly confident in calling the first Resident Evil a game with less of a focus on action than its other elements.

The action is still essential in RE1 (both versions). Yes, the combat is much simpler than it is in later games, but the tension-relieving feeling of being able to let loose and blow your opponents away from time to time (especially in the endgame, where you will always be totally decked out unless you completely failed at resource management throughout the game) is a very vital element of RE's formula. Based on that alone I would say that Neff is right; Resident Evil's action elements have always been just as important as its horror theme.

And RE1 is still a very mechanically sound game. The (moderately) precise evasion and aiming the game asks you to perform only work because the game's action elements are fundamentally sound.

 

[agentofatlas]

Played RE from 1-5. The only RE that I consider in the "horror" genre was the first one. 2-5 were more action oriented games. Especially 3 to present.

Anyways, my point is resident evil always had that action DNA stemming from the second game and it's probably one of the only franchises gives us "action horror". Hopefully the new game has some good action set pieces because it becoming a pure horror franchise sucks for me.

 

[Garlador]

Yeah, I can believe that. I haven't played 3 but from what I remember of 2, it seemed a bit more combat-focused.

I've played every single Resident Evil game.

Combat has always been in the games, but the NATURE of the combat has shifted. The balance of power for the player versus the environments and enemies shifted.

"Combat" alone, I would argue, doesn't make something an "action" game. Dead Space has a ton more action than some Resident Evil titles, but it's also scarier than those same Resident Evil titles (to me) and I classify it strongly as "survival horror". I've played a lot of horror games with lots of action, but it's handled with a balance and execution that leaves little doubt that the odds are almost always against the player, that they're the vulnerable ones.

Resident Evil, especially the earliest entries, spent the majority of their time with the odds stacked against the player and designed their games in a way - deliberately - that robbed the players of agency, whether it was with forced camera angles that only showed players what the developers wanted, limited resources (even the ability to save) which made every stretch from typewriter to typewriter a balance of when to record progress, limited ammo and health items that were easily depleted, and a general, prominent, constant sense of the unknown around every corner, a pervasive uncertainty that you had the resources to make it to the next save room or that something big and scary beyond your abilities couldn't jump out at you from any window or around any hallway.

No matter the action, Resident Evil walked this balance very well. Even RE4 -the "beginning of the end" - still did this so many times, even contrasted against its ridiculous plot and fearless hero ("Regenerators"... *shiver*).

The balance of power shifted from the game world and enemies to the player over time. All the limits disappeared. All the restrictions were ebbed away. Controls were streamlined. Camera control was given to the players. Enemies began to drop health and ammo. Ink ribbons became obsolete and save rooms gave way to checkpoints. The enemies grew in number, but so too did the weapons and their destructive power to clear them away. Isolation gave way to online cooperative multiplayer.

EVERYTHING that defined the horror of those older games was eaten away. Capcom has, to their credit, revisited SOME of those elements, here and there, but never really fully, entirely embraced the tone or style of those original classic games.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

It seemed like most of the point of your post came down to the part I quoted, which is why I quoted it. My point is that a sense of action is important to Resident Evil as a franchise, because it was clearly there in the first game. But like I said, horror is important, too.

Regarding RE1 vs REmake, it's not that different. It's a lot goofier. Movement is a bit faster. You can increase the speed of your character in REmake by de-equipping a weapon, but the PSone game has the slight edge. It's also slightly shorter and faster-paced, but the exploration, puzzles and map are very similar.

Thank you. I genuinely appreciate your response. I would agree that action is certainly an important element of every Resident Evil title, though I believe its emphasis changes from game to game.

The action is still essential in RE1 (both versions). Yes, the combat is much simpler than it is in later games, but the tension-relieving feeling of being able to let loose and blow your opponents away from time to time (especially in the endgame, where you will always be totally decked out unless you completely failed at resource management throughout the game) is a very vital element of RE's formula. Based on that alone I would say that Neff is right; Resident Evil's action elements have always been just as important as its horror theme.

And RE1 is still a very mechanically sound game. The (moderately) precise evasion and aiming the game asks you to perform only work because the game's action elements are fundamentally sound.

I've played every single Resident Evil game.

Combat has always been in the games, but the NATURE of the combat has shifted. The balance of power for the player versus the environments and enemies shifted.

"Combat" alone, I would argue, doesn't make something an "action" game. Dead Space has a ton more action than some Resident Evil titles, but it's also scariest than those same Resident Evil titles (to me). I've played a lot of horror games with lots of action, but it's handled with a balance and execution that leaves little doubt that the odds are almost always against the player, that they're the vulnerable ones.

Resident Evil, especially the earliest entries, spent the majority of their time with the odds stacked against the player and designed their games in a way - deliberately - that robbed the players of agency, whether it was with forced camera angles that only showed players what the developers wanted, limited resources (even the ability to save) which made every stretch from typewriter to typewriter a balance of when to record progress, limited ammo and health items that were easily depleted, and a general, prominent, constant sense of the unknown around every corner, a pervasive uncertainty that you had the resources to make it to the next save room or that something big and scary beyond your abilities couldn't jump out at you from any window or around any hallway.

No matter the action, Resident Evil walked this balance very well. Even RE4 -the "beginning of the end" - still did this so many times, even contrasted against its ridiculous plot and fearless hero ("Regenerators"... *shiver*).

The balance of power shifted from the game world and enemies to the player over time. All the limits disappeared. All the restrictions were ebbed away. Controls were streamlined. Camera control was given to the players. Enemies began to drop health and ammo. Ink ribbons became obsolete and save rooms gave way to checkpoints. The enemies grew in number, but so too did the weapons and their destructive power to clear them away. Isolation gave way to online cooperative multiplayer.

EVERYTHING that defined the horror of those older games was eaten away. Capcom has, to their credit, revisited SOME of those elements, here and there, but never really fully, entirely embraced the tone or style of those original classic games.

I appreciate your thoughts as well. Good stuff!

 

[Gator86]

The Revelations games aren't really up to the quality standards set by 4, 5, or even 6.



Don't play 5 (or 6) with the AI partner. They are co-op games meant to be experienced with other humans. Playing them solely with the AI is like playing a fighting game or MOBA or whatever with the AI and trying to make judgements of quality based on that experience.

Nope. That is your explanation and not anything intrinsic about those games. You can't just pick parts of games and declare that is the only way it can be judged. I would rather play Rev 1 and 2 than the trash that is 6. I don't think the issue is with RE going too far one way or another. The issue is whether the games are good. If they're good, most people will be fine.

Also, RE6 was shit.

 

[Stilton Disco]

They need to just create three lines:

Main series: full on Horror.

REmakes and (hopefully) eventually fixed camera original games: Classic Survival Horror.

Revelations: Co-op Action Horror.

Everyone wins, and we can all get what we want.

 

[GurgleBot20]

Can't we all just band together and admit that all styles and elements of Resident Evil have dropped in quality ever since Mikami and his followers left?

 

[Sir Ilpalazzo]

Nope. That is your explanation and not anything intrinsic about those games. You can't just pick parts of games and declare that is the only way it can be judged. I would rather play Rev 1 and 2 than the trash that is 6. I don't think the issue is with RE going too far one way or another. The issue is whether the games are good. If they're good, most people will be fine.

Also, RE6 was shit.

It is pretty obvious. The combat scenarios in those games are built around multiple intelligent humans cooperating. The AI partners, which are pretty poor in both games (too weak in RE5, too strong in RE6) simplify and warp the interactions of combat to such a degree that it's clear that the games were balanced around being tackled with another human. Of course it's arguable that it is a failing on Capcom's part to have balanced the AI partners poorly, but really I'd say that they just shouldn't have been in the games period.

 

[Daingurse]

it will never end. The Resident Evil fanbase is fragmented, just like Sonic fandom. All of you will never be happy.

 

[Gator86]

It is pretty obvious. The combat scenarios in those games are built around multiple intelligent humans cooperating. The AI partners, which are pretty poor in both games (too weak in RE5, too strong in RE6) simplify and warp the interactions of combat to such a degree that it's clear that the games were balanced around being tackled with another human. Of course it's arguable that it is a failing on Capcom's part to have balanced the AI partners poorly, but really I'd say that they just shouldn't have been in the games period.

Perhaps true, but that doesn't change the fact that the games shipped with single player as an option and is how I, and many others, played through the game. I've played games with co-op where the single player experience wasn't garbage. Regardless, my point is still that the quality of the games supercede that. People complained about 5 being too much action, but it was pretty good so it blew over. No one likes 6 except for a handful of people on GAF.

 

[Neff]

Can't we all just band together and admit that all styles and elements of Resident Evil have dropped in quality ever since Mikami and his followers left?

RE definitely lost something in Mikami's absence, but there's still a lot of incredibly talented people at Capcom, and there have been several fine RE games released since RE4.

 

[Cubed]

The mixture is extremely heavy handed in RE4. It's most apparent in the final area. One room might be a battlefield with tons of cannon fodder, while the next room might all of a sudden be completely isolated from that part of the game to provide a 5 minute low key regenerator sequence. After entering the next door, overblown music backdrops kick in again for next grand battlefield, as if you had just entered a completely different world. It's blatant where the leftovers from the horror beta of RE4 are.



Revelations 2 is the best RE since the gameplay change and by far the best compromise between modernization and old traditions yet.

I pretty much agree with all of this except Rev 2 being better than 4... but it is better than 5, 6, and Rev 1.

 

[The Boat]

How many more lives will this senseless conflict take?

 

[strafer]

Can't we all just band together and admit that all styles and elements of Resident Evil have dropped in quality ever since Mikami and his followers left?

What quality game has Mikami done since?

 

[ArgyleReptile]

Revelations: Co-op Action Horror.

I really don't want forced co-op anymore. I'd rather we go back to solo action.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

What quality game has Mikami done since?

Vanquish
The Evil Within

Possibly Shadows of the Damned but I haven't played it and it wasn't a game he directed anyway.

Edit - oh wow I forgot God Hand

 

[strafer]

Vanquish
The Evil Within

Possibly Shadows of the Damned but I haven't played it and it wasn't a game he directed anyway.

Vanquish I haven't played and The Evil Within was disappointing.

 

[Sir Ilpalazzo]

Perhaps true, but that doesn't change the fact that the games shipped with single player as an option and is how I, and many others, played through the game. I've played games with co-op where the single player experience wasn't garbage. Regardless, my point is still that the quality of the games supercede that. People complained about 5 being too much action, but it was pretty good so it blew over. No one likes 6 except for a handful of people on GAF.

Most of those games (that can be cleanly played as both single-player and multiolayer experiences) aren't designed from the ground up as co-op games. That's a unique trait of RE5 and 6 and is partly why they stand out so much.

Your statements towards RE6 are oddly dismissive. The game is certainly very flawed but it is also very obviously not devoid of quality, and I think it's also pretty obvious that more than just a small handful of people recognized what quality was there.

 

[Manu]

Can't we all just band together and admit that all styles and elements of Resident Evil have dropped in quality ever since Mikami and his followers left?

No.

And it's blanket statements like this why the bullshit will never stop.

 

[OrbitalBeard]

Vanquish I haven't played and The Evil Within was disappointing.

Parts of The Evil Within disappointed me, but overall, I found it vastly superior to every Resident Evil game post RE4.

 

[Peter Ian Staker]

They need to just create three lines:

Main series: full on Horror.

REmakes and (hopefully) eventually fixed camera original games: Classic Survival Horror.

Revelations: Co-op Action Horror.

Everyone wins, and we can all get what we want.

Sure if you are ok with anything but the main series being a low budget affair.
Capcom isn't going to give all of these games a decent budget.

It should be:
1) Main series: Full horror. Resident Evil the way the cultural zeitgeist remembers it. A true AAA horror game.
2) Cheap mercenaries spin off for action fans. There are plenty of high budget third person shooters if they want something more high budget.

 

[Fisty]

RE7 is going down the right path I think. They have always been about Horror that is what Resident Evil based off of from its roots. You cannot change that, I would say the action side is the minority here. Nothing can ever stay classical things change with time and we have to learn to love change and see ways to enjoy it. I love the old RE games but I am so glad they are going with something like this. It has me more excited and wondering what new mechanics they will throw at me. Whereas if they went classical then I would know what to expect from them.

The same could be said for franchises like MGS, I absolutely loved the open world and it was simply a dream come true. So many new ways to play were introduced that I did not ever expect whereas if they went off the classic roots I would of already known what to expect and not be as excited.

The difference there though is that zombies didn't get the same upgrade MGS's guards did, that series was a more logical progression as far as gameplay and technology goes. Handing a zombie a hatchet or crappy pistol but giving your character the ability to back-flip scissor-kick 4 zombies in half at once, it makes 60%+ of the encounters feel like you're just going through the motions.

Try this sometime: incite the wrath of the largest horde you can find in RE6 and fight your way out of it. After that, load up Ground Zeroes, head into the base, and fight your way out of an alert. It's night and day.

 

[Blackleg-sanji1]

They'll come together around the same time final fantasy fans decide on what makes a final fantasy

Spoiler

So never

 

[Neff]

Mikami is credited as creative producer on Shadow of the Damned, and you can definitely see his contributions, right down to a love of God Hand-esque surreal, trashy whimsy. Fun game.

But yeah, Vanquish is his post-RE4 masterpiece, and The Evil Within was a wonderful experience for me. The man can do no wrong in my opinion.

 

[staticneuron]

The Resident Evil franchise is an interesting beast. I can't think of any other mainline series that has the same legacy and drastic changes Resident Evil has had. It's especially interesting the divide it caused between it's fanbase. While simplifying it to just Horror vs Action doesn't cover everything. These two groups seem like the biggest piece of the pie.

Using the last two games as an example. With RE6 you had a breaking point of a lot of people being tired of action at that point. Feeling RE6 was ramping it too far up and losing the horror. While with RE7 you have a lot of people feeling it doesn't have enough action (from what has been shown) and relying too heavily on horror for it's appeal. What doesn't help matters is that both groups having very strong feelings towards their preferred style.

I think you have worded is incorrectly. Horror doesn't have anything to do with action or gameplay type. I think iirc the arguments are between Survival elements and the ability to defeat everything in your path. Some people are under the mistaken impression that if you have a gun, that means the game losses horror elements. Or if you can control your character better (not fighting with control schematic) it removes horror.

Imo, removing frustration doesn't negate horror. Dead space is a good example of this. So what if you have an agile character, if the enemy can move better than you, or outnumber you. So what if you have a gun, if bullets only deter enemy not stop them, or there simply to many enemies for you to stop with the bullets you have.

So multiple ways of playing a game and fitting in a genre is possible. The biggest mistake capcom is making, is DRASTICALLY changing what people expect to play in a numbered sequence. For spin offs it is more expected to have these variances but people feel to compelled to continue numbered entries for stories. The difference between the older resident evils, the current ones and the new one to be released are fairly large, and that is what causes such contention over the franchise.

 

[ZeroCDR]

I love both styles, RE4 was a nice breath of fresh air. At that point we had 6 classic formula games, the bottom of the barrel had been clawed through. If you weren't getting sick of it, more power to you, but it had already been done and done exceptionally.

I think that's also the trap RE5 and RE6 fell into, because RE4 already elevates the action style to a point they could just never reach consistently. RE5 at least is a worthy successor to RE4 in a lot of ways, not nearly as many shortcomings as RE6.

I'm willing to let mainline RE try new things, it's mostly worked out for them, RE7 looks much better to me after the latest news.

 

[Jawmuncher]

I think you have worded is incorrectly. Horror doesn't have anything to do with action or gameplay type. I think iirc the arguments are between Survival elements and the ability to defeat everything in your path. Some people are under the mistaken impression that if you have a gun, that means the game losses horror elements. Or if you can control your character better (not fighting with control schematic) it removes horror.

Imo, removing frustration doesn't negate horror. Dead space is a good example of this. So what if you have an agile character, if the enemy can move better than you, or outnumber you. So what if you have a gun, if bullets only deter enemy not stop them, or there simply to many enemies for you to stop with the bullets you have.

So multiple ways of playing a game and fitting in a genre is possible. The biggest mistake capcom is making, is DRASTICALLY changing what people expect to play in a numbered sequence. For spin offs it is more expected to have these variances but people feel to compelled to continue numbered entries for stories. The difference between the older resident evils, the current ones and the new one to be released are fairly large, and that is what causes such contention over the franchise.

I was trying to use Horror and a umbrella term for survival horror and all that. Though I could have explained that better.

 

[Sir Ilpalazzo]

2) Cheap mercenaries spin off for action fans. There are plenty of high budget third person shooters if they want something more high budget.

Those high-budget TPS games don't excel in the same unique ways that RE4, 5, and 6 do. They are not a replacement for them (and small Mercenaries spinoffs wouldn't be either).

Making mainline RE games like how most players kind of vaguely remember them (maybe the route RE7 is going?) would be really disappointing. The series needs to stay mechanically solid, systems-driven, and (at least moderately) complex - there's no sense in regressing to something like Soma or Amnesia (even if those games do at least have some merit).

 

[Zero-ELEC]

I like both styles! I like all RE games! Even the bad ones. (Looking at you Gun Survivor) But to me RE was never horror. It was always super fun. I do not find horror games fun at all.

They need to just create three lines:

Main series: full on Horror.

REmakes and (hopefully) eventually fixed camera original games: Classic Survival Horror.

Revelations: Co-op Action Horror.

Everyone wins, and we can all get what we want.

I want more RE6 and less REv1/2, tho.

Anyways, people are entitled. They feel they're way is the best and only correct one. They are emboldened by the online and they are ratified and vindicated by the sizeable amount of people who agree with them. And they are emboldened and they will tell you how wrong you are.

 

[RoyaleDuke]

I like RE4 as a game.

But RE5 and 6 are trash, and what little I've seen of RE7 doesn't inspire confidence.

But hey, we are getting REmake 2(hopefully 3 and maybe an outbreak remaster/remake/new game).

So, I can be happy and let people have bad taste.

 

[KDC720]

I've enjoyed pretty much every game in the series, old and new alike. I'm excited for 7 but everything they've shown so far has been somewhat underwhelming imo.

"Crazy southern murder family" doesn't really do much for me. I want to see some proper monsters.

Also I have little to no interest in VR at the moment, which they seem to be pushing super hard with RE7.

It's an argument that has been happening since RE4, and I doubt it's going to end anytime soon. RE has worn so many faces over the years that it's kind of hard really pinpoint what it even is anymore. We went from crazy Japanese Micheal Bay soap opera in 6 to Texas Chainsaw Massacre the VR experience in 7, its a big shift.

 

[Paradox me]

The Resident Evil franchise is an interesting beast. I can't think of any other mainline series that has the same legacy and drastic changes Resident Evil has had. It's especially interesting the divide it caused between it's fanbase.

I think Final Fantasy has Resident Evil beat as far as divided fanbases go. Being much more into FF and interacting with its community for longer... things don't bode well for RE. FF has gone through three fairly distinct phases (I-VI, VII-IX, X-present) and it's brought in new fans as the old have jumped ship. It's a mess. RE has had the survival horror era (1-CV), action (4-6) and RE7 could be seen as the start of a new phase. I can only imagine RE7 dividing fans further.

Anyway, unless playing on harder difficulties, RE has felt like an action game to me since RE2. RE4 was just the first game that got the action right, and there's a reason that it's my favorite in the series. Honestly, I have no desire to return to its survival horror roots. As long as the story is stupid, the horror aspect remains and the gameplay is good, I'm happy.

 

[NathanDiego]

Won't never end
I just want a good game,no matter if it's horror or action,RE6 is pure trash and I have no faith in RE7 :/

 

[Peter Ian Staker]

Those high-budget TPS games don't excel in the same unique ways that RE4, 5, and 6 do. They are not a replacement for them (and small Mercenaries spinoffs wouldn't be either).

Making mainline RE games like how most players kind of vaguely remember them (maybe the route RE7 is going?) would be really disappointing. The series needs to stay mechanically solid, systems-driven, and (at least moderately) complex - there's no sense in regressing to something like Soma or Amnesia (even if those games do at least have some merit).

Re5 and Re6 didn't excel in anything but the combat system.
That's why I am proposing a mercenaries spin off.

If RE7 is regression to you what do you think is progression?