Originally posted by Smasandian👆 I thnk CliffyB can fix the controller issues and would improve the action sequences. The rest of the RE team can handle the story and whatever.
So I'm getting that you think CliffyB would do a better RE?I think he would. Gear's and Unreal are really well made. Since RE4, there hasn't been a RE game. That's when the director/producer of the series left.
At least CliffyB would make the action sections really well.
Indeed. The action and fluidity issues would probably disappear.
Beyond that, though, I'm not sure how he can improve the series. His mantra for games seems to be "giant monsters and explosions", which is something RE already has. To "fix" Resident Evil, I would assume the implication is to take it i a new direction, or return it to its routes. I don't know if CliffyB has the ability to do that.
Originally posted by Smasandian
I only played the demo so I cannot say the I wouldn't get used to the controls but controls should be something that you get a hang of really quickly. This especially important for shooters/action games.
Originally posted by Tzeentch._
Eh, the game's controls are kind of shit and it was too dark in the demo.Dunno if it's changed in the vanilla game, but you do get used to it eventually, though it's still a flaw.
Originally posted by Zack Fair
People saying CliffyB would make the series worse don't know what they are talking about.Of course CliffyB was cocky and annoying. He always is. He is like the guy that made DOA/NG(forgot his name sue me) in that they think they are rockstars.
Still if I was them I would be every bit as cocky as them.
And I know how Cliff's attitude usually is. Doesn't mean we have to like it.
Originally posted by Zack Fair
👆 I thnk CliffyB can fix the controller issues and would improve the action sequences. The rest of the RE team can handle the story and whatever.
Originally posted by Tzeentch._
Beyond that, though, I'm not sure how he can improve the series. His mantra for games seems to be "giant monsters and explosions", which is something RE already has. To "fix" Resident Evil, I would assume the implication is to take it i a new direction, or return it to its routes. I don't know if CliffyB has the ability to do that.
A developer can do something different?
Look at Valve, created Half-Life, Portal and Left 4 Dead series. All three series are in the FPS, shooter mostly but have a different feel throughout each game.
Who is to say CliffyB could help RE. I think he can. At least in the mechanics, which RE has always needed help in.
Started playing this today.
So far I'm not seeing anything to warrant the hate the game's gotten. That said there are some unfortunate flaws that would be very easy to fix.
The most annoying and frustrating one for me is that apparently each check point doesn't save the game. So you can't stop playing after each checkpoint, instead you have to wait for a special checkpoint that will save the game so that you can stop playing. Not sure what the reasoning for this was, but it's stupid on every level. Every checkpoint should also save the game. There is no reason for them not to.
The controls are really awkward, particularly the cover system. Not sure why they made it tied to the Left trigger as opposed to just mapping it to A like most games. Strangely you still have to push the A button to take low cover, just making it feel clunky on top of being awkward if you are trying to take low cover.
Also during Chris' campaign, which is the only one I've played thus far, they made ammo too scarce considering that it's supposed to be a shooter. They made everything similar to that of an action shooter except the amount of ammo for whatever reason. Feels like an oversight rather than an actual decision.
And I see they still shoehorn QTE's into every cinematic. This isn't surprising as it's something they've been doing since RE4 and don't seem interested in scaling them back. I wish they would, though. It makes it difficult to enjoy the story when I have to sit there and wait for the obnoxious quicktime event that will inevitably pop up during each cinematic.
Lastly, not having a proper pause button is just stupid.
None of these are that major, though. So far it's pretty fun.
I found out that you have to go into offline mode in order for pause to be a thing. One of many bewildering choices they made while developing this game.
I finished Chris' campaign last night. It was very strange, indeed. An odd and unnecessary mishmash of Gears of War, Call of Duty with the crappy controls of Resident Evil. I just don't get what they were going for. In RE5 people complained about the weird actiony bits towards the end and the cover system, so they made a whole campaign like that. Don't get me wrong, they did a better job of it in 6 than 5, but if I wanted to play Gears of War, I'd play Gears of War, because Gears of War does Gears of War better than Resident Evil does Gears of War.
A problem with this game is I feel it cheats in order to seem "difficult". It doesn't achieve difficulty through AI or level design - which I feel are just about the only valid ways to achieve difficulty, but though throwing a random and oddly placed QTE at you and making you revert several minutes if you fail. The part near the end of chapter 4 of Chris' campaign is exemplary of this, where you have to disarm the missile on the boat. You have a series of quick time events to do, while timed, and while things are shooting at you. Even more frustrating was that I beat that level, but I did it while just a fraction of a second before the big monster thing stomped me, so I still failed it because his stomping animation had already started.
I also think they need to completely get away from this stupid idea that you should have a partner with you at all times. The final boss of Chris' campaign was a pain in the ass. I was playing as Piers and had to shock the boss over and over and wait for my AI controlled partner to shoot the right spot. It got tiresome. I don't know what the fascination with this forced co-op/partner thing is in games recently, but it needs to end.
That said Chris' campaign was still pretty fun, despite being deeply flawed. I began Leon's last night and finished his first chapter and thought it was outstanding. Being a throwback to RE2 was brilliant and fighting normal zombies rather than zombies with guns is so much more fun. It's nice feeling like I'm playing a normal Resident Evil game again. Hopefully they don't screw up in the coming chapters with Leon.
Originally posted by Impediment
I just thought that Leon's entire campaign was too recycled. Simmons, however, was a better final boss than RE 4's Saddler.Wesker was just lame all around as a final boss in 5.
Jake's campaign felt like a sci-fi movie directed by John Woo. It was a lot of fun.
Wesker was fine up until PISland was in full effect with the volcano part. RE5 Wesker was best as a boss in the Lost in Nightmares DLC though. The music, atmosphere, and everything of the fight was just fantastic.
That it was.
Originally posted by BackFire
Started playing this today.So far I'm not seeing anything to warrant the hate the game's gotten. That said there are some unfortunate flaws that would be very easy to fix.
The most annoying and frustrating one for me is that apparently each check point doesn't save the game. So you can't stop playing after each checkpoint, instead you have to wait for a special checkpoint that will save the game so that you can stop playing. Not sure what the reasoning for this was, but it's stupid on every level. Every checkpoint should also save the game. There is no reason for them not to.
The controls are really awkward, particularly the cover system. Not sure why they made it tied to the Left trigger as opposed to just mapping it to A like most games. Strangely you still have to push the A button to take low cover, just making it feel clunky on top of being awkward if you are trying to take low cover.
Also during Chris' campaign, which is the only one I've played thus far, they made ammo too scarce considering that it's supposed to be a shooter. They made everything similar to that of an action shooter except the amount of ammo for whatever reason. Feels like an oversight rather than an actual decision.
And I see they still shoehorn QTE's into every cinematic. This isn't surprising as it's something they've been doing since RE4 and don't seem interested in scaling them back. I wish they would, though. It makes it difficult to enjoy the story when I have to sit there and wait for the obnoxious quicktime event that will inevitably pop up during each cinematic.
Lastly, not having a proper pause button is just stupid.
None of these are that major, though. So far it's pretty fun.
Had no problems with the cover system, but it might've been because of the controls being the same as the parts that you were able to take cover in RE5, with Left trigger to take cover and A to crouch or un-crouch. Slightly different controls for covering =/= being clunky though.
The shortage of ammo I never noticed in Chris's campaign, and I was Piers the first time so I didn't have a knife to fall back on or anything.
Yeah, quicktime events have been too overused by Capcom in general lately.
Originally posted by BackFire
I found out that you have to go into offline mode in order for pause to be a thing. One of many bewildering choices they made while developing this game.I finished Chris' campaign last night. It was very strange, indeed. An odd and unnecessary mishmash of Gears of War, Call of Duty with the crappy controls of Resident Evil. I just don't get what they were going for. In RE5 people complained about the weird actiony bits towards the end and the cover system, so they made a whole campaign like that. Don't get me wrong, they did a better job of it in 6 than 5, but if I wanted to play Gears of War, I'd play Gears of War, because Gears of War does Gears of War better than Resident Evil does Gears of War.
A problem with this game is I feel it cheats in order to seem "difficult". It doesn't achieve difficulty through AI or level design - which I feel are just about the only valid ways to achieve difficulty, but though throwing a random and oddly placed QTE at you and making you revert several minutes if you fail. The part near the end of chapter 4 of Chris' campaign is exemplary of this, where you have to disarm the missile on the boat. You have a series of quick time events to do, while timed, and while things are shooting at you. Even more frustrating was that I beat that level, but I did it while just a fraction of a second before the big monster thing stomped me, so I still failed it because his stomping animation had already started.
I also think they need to completely get away from this stupid idea that you should have a partner with you at all times. The final boss of Chris' campaign was a pain in the ass. I was playing as Piers and had to shock the boss over and over and wait for my AI controlled partner to shoot the right spot. It got tiresome. I don't know what the fascination with this forced co-op/partner thing is in games recently, but it needs to end.
That said Chris' campaign was still pretty fun, despite being deeply flawed. I began Leon's last night and finished his first chapter and thought it was outstanding. Being a throwback to RE2 was brilliant and fighting normal zombies rather than zombies with guns is so much more fun. It's nice feeling like I'm playing a normal Resident Evil game again. Hopefully they don't screw up in the coming chapters with Leon.
Play the campaign on Professional or No Hope Left though then and then tell me the game doesn't achieve difficulty through AI. The AI's insane on there. And there are actually some parts of the game (no so much Chris's campaign) that can be difficult through level design, like Jake's chapter 2. If you're having that much trouble with quicktime events then I would recommend having the Breakout skill perk, as it makes them much easier to do.
As far as co-op, what they should probably do in the future is have it all like Ada's campaign where there's an optional partner like the agent guy (who was a free DLC) and if you're not playing with someone, it'll be single player. That much I liked. The game in general though is more enjoyable with a friend, especially that final boss of Chris's campaign, who by the way can be damaged by Chris's knife; he doesn't need a gun to do it. The ending of Chris's campaign was definitely my favorite as well, 'sides make Jake's.
There are still some zombies with guns in Leon's campaign though, namely the zombie cops. But other than that, yeah. I like how Leon's story really took you back.
The cover system is clunky because it isn't different for a good reason, it's different because they were too stubborn/lazy to make the cover system as good as it could have been. There is literally no reason why taking cover should occasionally be 2 buttons when it could just as easily be one. Having to hit the Left Trigger and then hit the A button is clunky in itself, but it's made worse by the fact that if you're moving at all you will often hop over the piece of cover that you are attempting to duck behind. It's not game breaking or anything, but it was an annoyance and was like that without reason.
I am seeing valid difficulty in Leon's campaign which is nice. But, I'm not really having problems with QTE's, usually they're fine. I just think they're way over done and don't serve much of a purpose anymore. They were an interesting novelty in RE4 and increased the tension a bit because they were new, but now they're just a crutch. It wouldn't be a problem on its own, but it becomes one when paired with a poorly placed checkpoint - if I fail a QTE, I have no problem with the concept of redoing that particular QTE until I succeed at it, what I have a problem with is having to sometimes revert several minutes and redo significant section's that I've already completed because there wasn't a checkpoint right before a QTE. There should be a checkpoint right before every QTE, as there is in the Walking Dead game. Capcom should study how that game used QTE's. They were well used, there.
I too played as Piers and definitely am glad I did, it made the ending of Chris' campaign a lot better and more powerful than it would have been had I played as Chris.
While RE4 probably made the best use of them, I didn't think they were all that even in that game, and felt there were at least a couple parts that could've done without them. When replaying RE4 they just got as repetitive to me after awhile as in RE5 and 6. Oddly though, other Capcom games like Lost Planet 2 didn't use them nearly as much which I was pleased by.
But yeah, they should definitely take notes on how the Walking Dead game did QTEs.