Page 1 of 2 [ Search found 14 matches ]
Author Message
Posted: Feb 08, 2010 15:09

A lot of tasty info about this is starting to emerge now, there's a blitz coming this month, so now's as good a time as many to start the thread! Most of the stuff that follows is taken from various magazine leaks.

First, some pictures, all scanned. Blatant copy and pasting will follow immediately after, it's all good shit!

There is an optional hardcore mode, the character needs to drink water, ammo has weight, healing isn't instant etc. Normal mode is more similar to Fallout 3 gameplay.

The storyline is focused on the New California Republic vs. Caesar's Legion vs. New Vegas residents.

You are not a vault dweller but are given a Pip-Boy by someone who is one.

There is a screenshot of a vault suit as well.

There is an assault rifle looking like the M4, as well as a new big gun with a backpack, held like a minigun.

There are special moves for melee weapons in VATS - specifically a move for a golf club called "Fore" which seems to be a groin shot.

The Hoover Dam is in the game and is supplying electricity to the city.

There is a quest to rescue a ghoul from some super mutants. The ghoul can then become your companion

The Geckos are back.

There are both dumb and intelligent super mutants, including the elite Nightkin.

Some super mutants look similar to the ones in Fallout 3, while others are new. There is e.g. a female super mutant with a 1950s hairstyle who apparently is one of their leaders.

Screenshots include a guy with a beard and straw hat, a ghoul an NCR Ranger

The only picture of New Vegas itself is concept art and not a screenshot

Some location screenshots include a huge model dinosaur advertising a hotel, some satellite dishes, an array of solar panels

A character generation shot showing a "vigour machine" instead of the skill book

NCR base is the McCarran Airport, Caesar's Legion is based in the Vegas Strip, while super mutants are based in a place called Black Mountain. There is also a town called Fremont and another called Primm. A topless reuve is mentioned as being in the latter. Area 51 also appears.

NCR Ranger armor is similar to a brown combat armor with sleeves, there are concept arts of a Ranger

Skils have a bigger effect on conversation choices. E.g. someone with a high Explosives skill may be able to have a coversation about explosives where appropriate.

There is a Reputation system in adition to Karma.

First-person action RPG with the same engine as Fallout 3 (sorry, Van Buren fans).

Set in the Mojave wastelands. Vegas didn't get many nukes. More intact buildings, as well as desert vegetation. Vegas itself is mostly intact.

You don't play a Vault Dweller (or descendant of one) but a courier, left for dead and saved by a friendly robot.

The overarching story is a struggle between the locals, Caesar's Legion (a faction of slavers from the east) and the New Californian Republic. Vegas itself is mostly intact.

Both karma and reputation are tracked. If I'm reading it right there's separate reputations for each of the settlements, as in 1 and 2.

All dialogue options are shown to all players, regardless of whether you have the stats to succeed or not, though there's no punishment for failure.

Bartering is not just lower prices but negotiating for better rewards.

VATS returns, and melee weapons have special moves in it. The golf club has "Fore!", which is a shot to the golf balls (so to speak) that knocks the opponent down. Weapons also now have knock-back upon death, with shotguns sending mans flying.

Super Mutants return, but in two varieties - the smarter ones from Fallout 1, and the idiot ones from Fallout 2. On at least one occasion you can convince them to fight amongst themselves.

New weapons include what appears to be an M4 and a grenade machinegun.

Followers can be managed through a context-sensitive menu, with orders like "follow", "stay" or "attack".

Hardcore Mode! In this mode, Stimpacks heal over time (as opposed to instantly), combat is tougher, ammo has weight and you can suffer dehydration, so keep some water on you!

One of the screenshots has a Super Mutant with a blonde wig and pink heart-shaped glasses.

You're a courier, wounded and left for dead in a shallow grave. A friendly robot, Victor, digs you out, and his doctor owner Mitchell patches you up. You take a "vigour test", which is some sort of electric parlour game. This decides who you are and sets up SPECIAL. You can also take some Rorschach tests, but the mag says this is for fun. The Doc then gives you a Pipboy as he was once a Vault dweller.

Hoover Dam", and "Helios" (a solar plant, confirmed by the mag to have been built by Poseidon) are fought into and then you can direct the power to wherever you choose. In the case of Helios you can also keep the plant for your self use the energy to call down a powerful laser, or even try to distribute to all equally, however there is a risk of overloading the reactors.

There is a "reputation system", in which all three factions (NCR, Ceasar's Legion and the locals) will either see you as good or bad toward them individually.

There is a screenshot of three Capital Wasteland mutants running toward the player, who is wielding what *looks* to be a heavy incinerator, but has a TV screen and no flamer fuel tanks. He's also wearing NCR combat armour, which is in gold/mustard colours.

There are two separate screens of supermutants that look to be more local, grey skin, and the two are wearing very different clothes. One is Tabitha, who is hearing a blonde wig and love heart glasses. The mag implies she's "not all there".

One that quest, you rescue Raul, a ghoul who Tabitha kept alive to fix her favourite robot. He appears to be a follower, as the mag says you can give him items, and also commands, such as "stay, follow or attack", and also tell him to switch to melee, in which case he'll mutter "sure, I'll put away my rather effective gun, and switch to this piece of um, metal tubing here".

From what I read, the "all dialog" thing seems to imply there will be failures for skill checks as well as speech checks, though, as the mag states, there is no penalty for failing a skill check. In fact, the mag gives an example: A woman who the player tried a Sneak skill attempt on in conversation failed when convincing her an ambush would help the town be rid of a gang of raiders. She simply says ""Good luck with your, uh, ambush"

And then if all this wasn't enough, there's a little more clarification on some of it...

JE Sawyer on dialogue skills :

This is how it works. Each skill-based dialogue option has two different texts: one for high skill (which will result in success) and one for low skill (which will result in failure). If you do not meet the required threshold, you see the latter.

Jason Bergman on Area 51 :

The Area 51 thing was pure speculation on PC Gamer's part. We did not show it or confirm whether or not it's in there. PC Gamer put it in because it's Nevada, and they think that means it will be in there. I'm not saying it is or isn't, just that we haven't said either way.

More JE Sawyer on dialogue :

There are a few reasons for including this: * In the same way that a locked safe beyond your Lockpicking skill indicates, it lets the player know that there's an option here. * Some of the NPC responses to low skill checks can be pretty entertaining. I also do want to clarify what is meant by "no penalty for failure] All it means is that you won't wind up in a worse position than you were before selecting it. If a dude bursts in and is intent on killing you, he's still going to want to kill you if you fail the Speech check to talk him out of it.

Josh on hardcore mode :

It's true that a lot of people have modded in those features, but a lot of the things in Hardcore mode are also things that I personally wanted to play the game with. I realize not everyone does, but it's the only way I play it.

And apparently people are worried about how much money all the dialogue is going to cost :

When taken in the context of all of the VO that needs to be recorded for the game, alternate responses for low-skill dialogue checks account for a very small percentage of lines. F3 also (often) had alternate lines for failed skill checks; they just originated from the same player line. Player lines aren't voiced, so there's no real increase there.
Posted: Feb 17, 2010 17:16 

Everyone seems satisfied enough. It's nothing spectacular by any means but a worthy addition. A few new files enhance the plot a little but there is nothing groundbreaking. We already know how events play out so there isn't any major spoiler as such.
 Post subject: Re: Desperate Escape Review
Posted: Feb 20, 2010 0:34 

Desperate Escape (DE) is Biohazard 5’s second downloadable chapter, following Lost in Nightmares (LiN). While LiN is an obvious throwback to the original Biohazard in terms of environment and pacing, DE sticks much closer to the main game, pairing a recently freed Jill Valentine and Josh Stone, who has returned after recruiting an escape chopper. Taking placing chronologically after Chapter 5-3 of the main adventure, Jill and Josh are tasked with catching up to Chris and Sheva in order to assist them in their showdown against Wesker.

Jill, who players will use first, plays exactly as she does in The Mercenaries. She is easily the fastest character in the game and very agile, using back flips and knee drops to finish enemies off. Jill’s speed and agility might remind players of Biohazard 4’s Ada Wong. Josh, who is available after beating the game once as Jill, is a slower powerhouse character, using his physical body strength to overwhelm stunned enemies. Compared to Chris and Sheva, they’re both equally competent agents who can hold their own in combat.

Jill begins the game with a Submachine Gun, while Josh begins with a Handgun, but of course, they can swap weapons at anytime, and there are more to be found throughout the stage. They can both use their Combat Knives as well, with Jill going for quick forward-stabs while Josh slashes enemies. At times, the enemy count is indeed overwhelming, so there is much tension to be felt in ways that I felt were lacking in the main adventure. There is no final boss, but a timed final showdown.

Progression of the game is quite similar to Chapter 4 of Biohazard 4’s Separate Ways. There are seemingly limitless numbers of Majini to face off against. Generally, a locked door must either be unlocked with a randomly-located key, unlocked from behind by giving Jill and Assist Jump, or literally blown up with conveniently placed, but enemy controlled canons. All of the mini-boss enemies from the main adventure return, such as the Chainsaw Majini or the Executioner, but they are slightly weaker and explode upon defeat. As in LiN, there are stars pieces to collect rather than money, which determine the amount of points you earn at the end of the scenaro.

Desperate Escape is considerably longer than LiN, and on par with the longer chapters of the main adventure. The chapter can be completed quickly if you speed through the game and ignore enemies, but that would defeat the purpose of this scenario, which is for heavy action more than anything. There are no puzzles to solve, underscoring the difference in direction between DE and LiN. Still, as with all Biohazard games, once you learn the game, it will begin to go by quickly. In that sense, DE can still be considered a bit short, but it is an inexpensive chapter at only ¥500 as downloadable content.

Lost in Nightmares was touted by Capcom as a chapter which “Respects Biohazard 1.” However, whether Capcom intentionally meant to or not, Desperate Escape also respects a previous Biohazard game: Biohazard 4. DE and Biohazard 4 share similar set pieces that made the latter game very memorable. Many complained that while Biohazard 5 played well and looked beautiful, the set pieces were nowhere near as memorable as its predecessor’s. Desperate Escape, like the main adventure, does borrow some elements from Biohazard 4 directly, such as blowing up large doors and being slammed with exploding canons, but I feel DE’s set pieces work so well because of the tension felt from the overwhelming enemies. Also, the name of the chapter certainly ties back to the subtitle of Biohazard 3. Whether Capcom explicitly intended for DE to honor Biohazard 4 is not clear, but signs point to it having been Capcom’s intention.

DE’s biggest weak point is its setting and environment. While LiN is meant to inspire moments of nostalgia with its Rebirth-inspired locations, DE’s locations are not exactly memorable. They look similar to the other industrial portions of the game, although some may be reminded of Chapter 5-3 (and Separate Ways Chapter 5) from Biohazard 4. There is nothing in DE that will make gamers stop to admire the locale, even for a few moments, while gamers may spend hours walking around LiN’s Spencer Estate to see what similarities they can catch. This decision was of course deliberate and necessary, so Capcom cannot be faulted too much for it.

Lastly, DE's production values are high and notable. LiN had no real ending cutscene and an FMV version of one of the main game's cutscenes, which was visibly of less quality. Desperate Escape contains a full introduction, well-done midpoint cutscenes, and then a satisfying ending. New gamers to Biohazard 5 may not realize that DE was developed long after the main game. Unlike LiN, which had very little new story elements, DE does add a plot point that was unknown to gamers before. This plot point, too, is a nod to Biohazard 4 in many ways.

Desperate Escape might very well end up being the favorite part of the complete Biohazard 5 package for many fans and gamers alike. It certainly has become my favorite segment of the game because it feels so much like the end of Biohazard 4 in terms of pacing and progression, and that was one of the best parts of that game. It is tragically short in a sense that I was left wanting more, especially since it has been a long time since Biohazard 3 (excluding Umbrella Chronicles). The Biohazard fans that have become disillusioned with the gameplay style introduced in Biohazard 4 will find nothing to like here, and should stick to LiN instead.

Overall Score: 9/10
Posted: Mar 09, 2010 1:52 

Its near impossible to talk to you because as Archelon has already stated, its as If you decide when an opinion is valid and when it isn't. Ill try though. It seems when i state something involving consensus, you reiterate how a lone opinion is still as meaningful, and then when i state my lone opinion, you decide it is illogical...i don't get where the logic goes.

Ikari, for god sakes, again i reiterate i am not arguing what the 'point' of the scenario is, and what its point was is also an opinion mind you. The simple fact is, Dvader and I found small faults in it and discussed it, and perhaps we felt the hectic desperate rush wasn't as well done as a 10/10, but more a 8.5/10. The point doesn't mean that we necessarily love it. Its like Saying if a horror movie has horror in it, don't pick on it because the horror isnt as good as you want..which makes no sense. Yes, Desperate Escape was a tense scenario, I just found it might not have worked as planned and the rush became a little tedious and could have used some pacing just to break it up.

I'm not comparing it to the Re 4m mike section. I didn't say that, take it up with someone else. Regarding your Annette and excella comparison, you're only half right really. Look at it like this, Resident Evil 5 lacked horror...and that was a very common complaint among reviewers, fans, and pretty much the entirety of people who played it. Therefore, reviewers tallied that as a negative by your logic they're idiots because they missed the point right? Resident Evi l5 was designed to be an action shooter, and it is, but by your logic tallying against it because it lacks horror is wrong. You have to realize there are opinions that can say it could have used horror. Its not that people are comparing directly saying Excella should have been Annette. No, they are saying Excella seemed to lack depth perhaps, and could have been more like Annette in the fact that she has more ( hypothetical scenario). So i don't see a point to this, It seems by your logic you can only place value on what the game attempted, and never on what it didn't.

Its not a matter of having your 'cake; and eating it too. You act as if its one or the other, and again its as if you believe you set the parameters on what the game could have done and couldn't. It seems like you would be the person to argue why having had zombies in LIN would have taken away from the 'point; of the scenario, because its about solitude and creepiness, not enemies. That kind of thinking is much too black and white Ikari, games can combine aspects ( IE. intense odds & pacing) without having to choose one or the other,its not as if one cancels the other out, which is why complaints exist, because one could potentially see a need for more of something or less compared to what was actually received.

First off, im not sure its fine for you to safely say the vast majority of people were introduced to Re4. Second that is entirely your opinion that a bond is created and thus a game cant live up to its predecessors, so again its as if you decide when an opinion means something and when it doesn't. Im a huge mass effect fan, the first game i thought was incredible, it wast he first of its kind id ever played and made a huge impact on me from the start. Mass Effect 2 came along, and i was blown away even more, because it was that good. Therefore, it seems like your making an excuse that those who don't like Re5 as much as Re4 is because they were touched by Re4. That could be true for some, but in no way can you argue all. I play games with no bias, which is why my collection and rankings are diverse in studio, genre, and title. To me Resident Evil 5 was decent, just not very good at all in any respect aside from visuals and Voice actors.

So that already makes your 'consensus' a large group of very BIASED individuals.

You're talking as if you have a sheet which lists the exact numbers and statistics of those who hate Re5 because it didn't live up to Re4. That is entirely opinion based with no number, math, or real backing to it. Its purely your opinion and my opinion completely disagrees with it. So basically, this was a wasted sentence because it is entirely your opinion.

Now you have these Biased individuals complaining about a sequel to their beloved game not living up to 'their' standards and expectations, completely ignoring the expectations of the series in of itself and thus the series or genre now has to evolve to meet the demands of the new audience while alienating previous fans.

And so it sentence which claims an opinion is fact creates more opinions equaling fact. Im not sure you understand the idea of a consensus. Why did i use that word, because it can be proven that there is a consensus of Luke-warm reception to the game in comparison to its genre and its predecessor. I never once stated facts, just mass opinions and reviews, now you seem to not understandhat.

Ikari, you seem to act as if you know exactly what the series 'expectations' are and what was needed. Im not sure I have ever heard someone so blatantly act that way.

Look at FF7, ff7 fans complained and rallied so much over ff7 (which is not even THAT great of a game to begin with, a good game yes, but, still)

LoL okay...again you seem to downplay others opinions and such but decide to put your own in a manner to suggest you have the answers? Final Fantasy 7 isn't one of the greatest games ever and loved and praised so highly because of nothing, you may think so...but you're outnumbered greatly. You have all the right to stay in your own world and believe that, but when you venture into the world of humanity where the majorty does in fact rule, prepare to be pounced on. Sad, maybe, but just how life is. If i said Uncharted 2 was one of the worst games ever made...sure its an opinion...but its laughable because there again is a consensus which breeds a 'concept' the game is. Therefore, i can say that...but its not part of what the general public sees it, and therefore perhaps not true.

The same happened with RE5. After RE4 opened up a new audience of RE fans, large expectations were involved from that audience about how RE5 should play, including petty things like Leon should be the star again etc. When these expectations weren't met, RE5 was panned by these people as being inferior.

This is a petty argument, you act as if every poster here and around hated the game because Leon wasn't in it or because the sun was too bright. You really think all the people who played it think in that way? Do you think the reviewers did? Do you think I did or dvader or the majority people here did? No...we all found very common complaints and ideas on why it wasn't as good, and commonality is useful because it often tells us the 'consensus' also agrees. I wont go through why it wasnt as good to many, because its been said and done and you already know, but your inability to grasp the importance of a consensus is a problem that i cant change and will affect an intelligent conversation.

So again, we have a 'consensus' of largely overtly biased people. Yet, I and others are to take the opinions of these BIASED individuals to heart and hear their opinions and try to understand them despite the FACT these individuals on large do not try to understand or care about the opinions of anyone else or try to understand the series in of itself and simply cater to their expectations based on RE4 and nothing more?

Well don't take it too heart then, i dot and no one should? Billy joe who gives it a 0/10 on gamefaqs because there wasn't enough explosions is not part of the consensus, and therefore getting heated about him is your own fault man. When a careless idiot strolls by and bumps into me, too get mad is futile because they lack an understand the majority does. But when people present legitimate complains, arguments, theories, and opinions, and many others share that, its ridiculous not to see a 'value' and trend in that.

And think they're biased, you don't have proof, and the reviewers likely aren't all biased. In fact if anything, many complain here because Re 5 was like Re4 on steroids, and they wanted less of that and didn't like how Re4 handled somethings.

That is exactly why 'consensus' or 'majority opinion' means little.

Wow...don't know what to say on that. Actually I do...that is a stupid comment.
The majority opinion is what life is based on Ikari, and its the only way of....well anything. In fact, there isn't anything but. Law, school, everything is based on it. Go look at the top 100 games on any site...see a pattern? You think they got there on accident? Games like OoT, Ff7, Mass effect 2, metal gear etc. are largely common on all lists because the system works works because aggregate scoring reveals something. You dont have to agree 100%, but very very often its there and it makes sense.

Because even in society, 'majority opinion' relies heavily on what 'so and so' says is popular and cool, thus everyone else likes it as well. Same with opinions. Someone less knowledgeable or even less intelligent hears someone else make a comment or criticism about a game, movie, whatever, regardless of whether it is factually true or not, but, now this person goes along and states that opinion as if it was original and their own and pronounces it as a testament. This goes on and on until you have a great majority of people all spouting the same exact criticisms and opinions despite whether those criticisms have been or can be debunked or are factually incorrect.

Okay...i don't agree, but lets say its true. Where do we go from here Ikari? in other words...what is this argument based on then? the funny thing is often times i find myself retracting statements and agreeing based on others opinions because i have learned from them, or understood something i might not previously have. I don't understand what you want don't agree with....a group of peoples opinions....and yet you find it perfectly suitable to pronounce your own as something more...suitable then thousands of others? I don't get it

That's why opinions are opinions. It doesn't matter if 400 people all agree with one opinion, as long as one single person disagrees, it is still individual opinion and the weight of the 400 can't force their opinion to be factual or disprove the opinion of the one unless there is indeed factual evidence to support it being fact and not opinion.

I never said you were factually wrong man. But again, common sense is bred in a consensus, because the sensible often outweigh the ridiculous. Its why ET is not one of the top ten games of all time and OoT is. Its why when we have a chance for a consensus, we take it because it breeds an opinion that is much MORE unbiased then an individual. You are forgetting something Ikari...and that is

You are biased.
So am I.

So is everyone to an extent, we are shaped in ways and even we dont see in what ways and how we are biased sometimes because we just cant. Some are worse then others, which is why a consensus is not only meaningful, but vital. Without it we have dictatorships and bad decisions are mad, in the game world it is why the best games are ranked the best, corruption and idiots have their say sometimes, but the majority and consensus shines through and is correct.

A majority and consensus is indeed valid and holds true weight because it provides the best and most efficient manner of providing a group opinion which will in turn almost always send the sensible to the top because we are more sensible then the other species among us. Of course you hear of sickening acts of humanity when the sensible and consensus didn't shine through , like Kitty Genovese, but we live here in the west in a relatively safe world because the consensus is often sensible.

Its like if I asked you Ikari, is murder okay? And im sure at one point we as humans asked ouseleves this seeing as the majority don't murder. And our sensibility said to it isn't. And we took a consensus, and the glaring majority said it isn't, with a minority saying it is. So a consensus made a decision..and i ask how you can argue with that? Sensibility cant be measured, but it still exists because we aren't killing and murdering. So If i said, well its my opinion its would lie if you said that opinion is completely valid, imagine a president who decides the majority doesnt rule and a consensus doesn't would be freaking anarchy.

i think i have made my case and not sure its arguable in terms of logic, despite your opinion. Majority rules and does so for a reason, and a consensus has tremendous value as I outlined, too argue that is very odd indeed.

p.s. sorry this topic got a little off track, but it was impossible to reply relating solely to Resident Evil in light of the direction the discussion turned, but it still has relevance to Desperate Escaopa and some opinions on it.
Posted: Mar 11, 2010 17:19 

There were certainly complaints regarding Resident Evil 4's control scheme, and many to this day wish you could move and shoot at the same time, or, at the very least, strafe like you can in RE5. I think the difference, however, is that RE4 was the first of its kind. It didn't invent the over-the-shoulder aiming system (I believe it was actually Splinter Cell that pioneered that particular viewpoint), but it most certainly popularized it. Also, you also have to consider what came before RE4. Many gamers disliked the fixed camera angles and tank-style controls from the previous Resident Evils.

While the tank-style controls didn't change drastically with RE4 aside from being a bit smoother and faster in execution, the change in the camera view made a world of difference. I believe this is why so many people feel that RE4's controls were so different from previous RE's, even though they shared essentially the same set up, aiming aside. Another thing to consider is that while countless games have since used the over-the-shoulder aiming system, few, if any, have used it for the same kind of region-specific combat that RE4 and RE5 do. This, coupled with the melee system, is something that is still very much unique to RE4 and RE5.

Now, here's a key difference. Even with its increased action and tempo when compared to RE4, RE5 is still much slower paced than your typical third person shooter, and the aiming/melee system has a lot to do with that. One of the bigger complaints regarding the enemy AI in RE4 was that while, generally speaking, the enemies were faster and more intelligent than the previous games' zombies, they were still not as intelligent as they could have been. Despite sprinting across an area towards you, they would stop just a few feet away and then slowly approach you.

This was a game balancing mechanic that allowed players to be able to more precisely aim at a specific part of the enemy's body. It also helped to compensate for the fact that you could not move and shoot at the same time. It is very much the same with RE5. However, I believe the reason you hear more complaints about it in regards to RE5 is because, as I said, RE4 was very much the first of its kind, so people were generally more willing to overlook little gameplay quirks like these back then than they are now, especially when you consider how many games have been released since then that borrowed and, in many ways, improved upon the basic template laid forth by RE4.

Now, much like RE4 before it, RE5 is not meant to be played like a traditional third person shooter. However, certain concessions that were made by Capcom have led more people to believe that it should be than there might have been had Capcom not made said concessions. To appeal to as broad of an audience as possible, Capcom implemented a more traditional third person shooter-style control scheme, but you still cannot move and shoot at the same time. Essentially, this comes across as only going halfway. Many people do not understand why Capcom would not simply go all the way and let you move and shoot at the same time.

But herein lies the rub. The enemy AI is designed specifically with the player's inability to move and shoot at the same time in mind. This is why so many of the enemies' attacks are only in a straight line, for example, with no way for them to change direction or compensate for a player moving out of the way. It is much more difficult to dodge an enemy attack using the classic control scheme than it is the TPS-style scheme. With the TPS scheme, you can simply step to the side of an enemy attack, and they will miss you completely. In fact, many attacks that require a QTE to dodge can be bypassed entirely simply with a sidestep.

If Capcom had added the ability to move and shoot at the same time, but left RE5's core design as is, it would utterly break the game. Capcom would have to go back in and completely retool all of the enemies' AI, behavior, and attack patterns to compensate for this new ability. At such a late stage in development, this would obviously be an impossibility without further delaying the game by a substantial amount of time. Or, if you want to be cynical, you could say it had more to do with laziness on the developers' parts than anything, but obviously that's not something we can know one way or the other.

Now, Dead Space gets brought up a lot in these types of discussions, due in large part to its control scheme. As I've already explained, simply implementing such a control scheme into RE5 would not have solved the problem, but still many people believe that Dead Space demonstrated that a survival horror title need not be bogged down by certain, shall we say, "hallmarks" of the genre in order to be successful at scaring people. In this case, the inability to move and shoot at the same time. Personally, I think Dead Space would have actually worked better with RE5's control scheme, as most of the enemies in it share much the same behavior as RE5's, but that is neither here nor there.

But again, this is why RE5 is held to a much higher standard than RE4 seemingly is. One common counter-argument is that previous games in the series did little to change or improve upon their predecessors, but no one complained about that. Well, first of all, people did complain about that. A lot. But that is not the key point to be considered here.

Earlier games in the series were released within a year to two years time between each title. So it was a little more understandable, even forgivable, that the games were so remarkably similar with each subsequent release. Also, the first real competitor didn't appear until, what, 1999? 2000? However, blatant copycats and games inspired by RE4 appeared almost immediately, and now, just about every third person shooter and survival horror game takes at least one or two cues from RE4's basic design. Heck, even games in entirely different genres (RPGs, platformers, open world games, etc) take some inspiration from RE4.

This, ultimately, I believe is why people may have been disappointed with RE5, or seem to judge it more harshly than they did RE4, or even previous games in the series. RE5 was in development for four years. In that time, we've seen countless big name releases like Gears of War, Dead Space, Uncharted, etc, that share some similarities with RE4, but each found some way to adapt or improve upon its basic design. Many expected something similar with RE5. What they got was essentially RE4 in HD and with co-op. Is that necessarily a bad thing? Of course not.

However, for many, it felt like Capcom was playing catch up after having set the standard themselves back in 2005. Instead of setting a new standard, Capcom was seemingly settling for less, even resting on their laurels. I believe that, had RE5 been released within a year or two's time, perhaps even three years, people would be much more forgiving of its apparent "play it safe" mentality. But after waiting for four years, I think a lot of people expected more, especially after the resoundingly positive response that initial trailer back in 2007 received.

I believe, and I think many will agree with me, it showed a much more daring approach to the game than the final product. But again, this is just my opinion.

As an aside, I'm still interested to find out just how much of the originally planned mechanics (the light/shadow dynamic, the more aggressive and intelligent enemies, fully destructible environments, etc) were scrapped solely as a result of the implementation of co-op, and how many of them were scrapped because they simply didn't work. I certainly hope it's the latter and not the former, because I would have happily taken those over co-op.
Posted: Jun 09, 2010 20:32 

What he means by that is that he couldn't really share his ideas with the game developers, production team etc. because (and I see where he is going with this) most of the time ideas from fans would take quite alot of time and/or capital to implement into something. But to be frank, still giving them ideas may help out some, they could work the game around some of the ideas that you pitch. All in all it doesn't hurt to speak your peace though.
Posted: Sep 06, 2012 4:24

Once again this year, Biohaze will be reporting live from Tokyo Game Show. Staff member and contributor cvxfreak (myself) will be bringing us the details as they happen via the show floor. Live feed, media and summaries will all be presented.

Stay tuned! Tokyo Game Show 2012 will be from September 20 to September 23.
 Post subject: Re: Biohazard 6 Impressions
Posted: Oct 24, 2012 18:53 

My god dvader, that review was great.
Posted: May 14, 2013 14:41 

Mr. Rod wrote:
When did Stu become such a sour grape?! :
It's hardly a recent development! haha

Sent from my Sega Dreamcast using it's expensive dialup internet connection.
Posted: May 09, 2013 14:30 

Site has been posted by the official Tango / Bethesda Facebook page for the game. Pretty neat to see. :smile:
 Post subject: Do not use TinyPic
Posted: Jan 09, 2014 22:55 

Just a little heads up for everybody: I recommend NOT using the TinyPic service when submitting news or when uploading any other image outside the "Submit News" thread.

Tinypic has been proven to recycle URL's and randomly replace images that have been up for a while. I personally recommend
Posted: Jun 15, 2016 15:29 

That would suggest they're giving fans the finger in a significantly different way than before.
Posted: Jun 27, 2016 5:15 

Series Spoilers

First off, if you have the time I'd like you to take a moment and watch this video from The Gaming Brit Show:

Now that you've seen it, I thought it would be a great time to reflect on the series up till now because this body of work is the foundation for which RE7 hopes to continue off of.

Some years back, I was sprung with a question by a fan of these games that pondered where the series could go past RE6. My answer may or may not shock you depending on your thoughts of RE6 but I opted for a complete series reboot.

My justification was simple: RE6 was Capcom blowing their wad. It was building on the action laid out in RE4, the co-op of RE5, and took it to its most extreme level with more quick time events, more melle prompts, and more explosions that literally start from beginning to end.

I couldn't see any hope of a return to form, and unless the next game took place in outer space I also couldn't see how Capcom could further the action in a positive manner that would satisfy critics and fans alike.

It's more than just the gameplay style though. Because these characters that I've grown to love are now fully trained combatants to BOWs world wide, I saw no point in exploring further adventures unless some stakes were raised like main characters dying which I didn't see happen anytime soon.

Spin offs like Revelations 2 were good fun, and not as action packed as RE6, but it didn't feel like we were approaching any kind of new ground with these kinds of titles. It felt at times like corners were cut to make a smaller scale low budget game that could sell just enough to get by. And the story was already reaching in extremes. Fan favorite character, Albert Wesker was dead in a book end conclusion, and so apart from reviving him again (which may still be in the cards apparently) we were given other Wesker characters to fill that void in some capacity. A wise cracking rogue of a son looking to get rich, and a sibling imprinted into the body of a child living under the Burtons' care. No matter whether or not you were entertained by these characters or plots, the ideas of where each one will end up in later releases leave little room for building up the kind of fear and horror you'd expect from the earlier games.

So why a series reboot? Simple. I wanted a game that went back to the mansion. Back to mystery, exploration, and survival in the most desperate of times. I wanted to be scared, but also find surprises in the formula again. I wanted Residemt Evil to come back to square one and not rely on extremes in the story or gameplay to sell its latest installment.

Enter RE7. A game that baffles me given Capcom's stance on who they wanted to target the series towards, and how games like Umbrella Corps continue to encourage their desire to rake in sales from the Call of Duty multiplayer crowd.

RE7 wasn't at all what I expected it to be. I'm not talking about a first person game cause a part of me always expected that to eventually come to fruition at some point, especially if they were to heighten the action even further. Why not go full FPS? It would certainly link to Call of Duty by that point. And yet we have a game focused on atmosphere, exploration, and mystery. Combat seems to be there, but to what extent? Will the action ever heighten to RE6 levels at any point in the game?

You see, the devs made it pretty clear that this was a sequel and not a series reboot. It will follow after RE6, and frankly... As excited for this game as I am, and regardless of how much I want to believe it will be as good as RE1... I'm skeptical of how this will be implemented. This game, even the teaser demo that stands on its own, is part of the same world that shares The Wesker Children, dinosaur/fly c-virus mutations, parasites planted in human hosts that tried to take over the White House at one point. It may wish to go back to the basics of the first three games, but it has to also be a part of the world that followed in RE4-6 as well.

Considering the number of outbreaks and BOWs reported, I'm wondering why anyone would wonder if a house was haunted or if there were strange sightings without just sending out the BSAA to investigate and neutralize. That could be where this game is going, but the implication was that we would be playing someone unlike Chris Redfield who wasn't some super strong BOW punisher. We'd be playing a vulnerable person new to this experience. Part of what made RE1 great was that even though Chris and Jill were part of a SWAT like team, they were all unaware of BOWs. The threats weren't known and studied around the globe. They were kept secrets let out and uncovered by you. Now the world of Biohazard has seen it all, so while you may be playing as someone new to the experience, it doesn't detract from the world's perspective. In America alone at the time of RE6, over 70,000 people died including the US President. It's hard to acknowledge this game in the series as a continuation of that and be a smaller scale concept by people who don't have the slightest idea of what to expect and are oblivious to current events.

Do you feel that Resident Evil can convincingly and successfully connect with the lore? Or do you feel a reboot is inevitable in spite of RE7 choosing to stick to the series as a sequel?
Posted: Jan 20, 2017 19:01 

In short: It's very good. It's not revolutionary but feels very different than the earlier games, while maintaining elements of the old and new. Treat it as its own thing so don't go in with Capcom's PR at the back of your mind proclaiming "it's RE1 inspired".

Technically, the game feels so solid and polished like the pre-RE6 games. About the only annoyance is Id Tech style pop-in as textures steam on the PS4, just like the demo basically.
Page 1 of 2 [ Search found 14 matches ]

Jump to:  
Powered by
phpBB © 2000-