Stealth Moose
Umbrella Elite
Originally posted by Nemesis X
Depends which predecessors you're talking about. If all of them, I call BS.
I can be excited about firing up RE 6, even if it's just to do a few Merc rounds or play co-op with friends. I haven't touched RE 5 except to benchmark in a year, and RE 4 even longer. I haven't touched RE 1/CV in years as well, even though I have readily available copies of each. They just don't have the fun value outside of the initial impact.
I will agree gameplay is a lot smoother.
Absolutely.
Clearly you didn't play Outbreak.
Reading is your friend. I have played Outbreak 1 but not 2. In any case, that's irrelevant; MP has been effectively disabled on both games for years. They also lacked VO support.
Thank god for that at least.
👆
To get some of those pain in the ass achievements that require to replay the first three stories more than a dozen times, indeed.
Ignoring the serpent emblems (which I didn't bother to get all of), I can't say I have replayed the entire campaign more than twice in total and gotten pretty much all of the non-Mercs/Versus achievements.
Maybe ur doin it wrong bro.
Originally posted by Arachnid1
I disagree too. A lot of your questions boil down to personal opinion.
Everything does. But at least my opinion is bringing up something more concrete than "I don't think it's a good RE game cuz I don't"; I'm pointing out ways in which it surpasses the previous titles, something a lot of fans want to ignore because it "isn't survival horror anymore".
Was RE 6 more fun to play than its predecessors?
No, it got stale pretty quickly.
Disagreed. As I said, much more replay value than any title beforehand. Outbreak would get an exception, if it was still playable anymore.
Was RE 6's story bigger in scope than the previous games and built a foundation for future games?
Yes. Bigger in scope doesn't equal better story though. RE has never had an award winning story, but RE6 was new levels of low.
I'm not sure I can agree with this at all. Overall, the story was entertaining, the characters were likable, and the action was intense. RE has been a B-movie horror plot since 1996; if anything, the production values and dramatic impact of RE 6 eclipse previous titles quite a bit. RE 5 is the only one that comes close, and let's face it - that story was boring as hell once you found out Wesker was alive.
Was RE 6 more comfortable to play?
Agreed on this. Easier to play, but I felt RE5 felt tighter. Something about RE6 just came off as sloppy.
I can't say the same. I can execute a great deal of moves, respond more fluidly, and do a bit more with 6. Perhaps you never overcame the initial learning curve.
Did RE 6 feature the best multi-player experience in the core series to date?
The multiplayer was lame, with the exception of normal mercs which was the dead same as the previous two games.
Erm, no. The campaign was much better fleshed out. More variety in action, less gritty Black Hawk Down nonsense from RE5. Mercs and Versus have a lot of variety, from free for all, slayers, point races, Ustanek mode, etc. It's like comparing the multiplayer of Goldeneye to Timesplitters III. I don't even see how you could so readily write it off as "dead same" when it's not.
Did RE 6 include tons of mundane puzzles?
No, not tons. It did have puzzles though. Stupid, easy puzzles that really had no place in the game. If your going to do puzzles, do it right.
Item fetching doesn't quite count as puzzles. I'm not anti-puzzle, but I am anti-stupid puzzles.
Did RE 6 include horribad voice acting?
No, but neither did 5. RE4 voice acting was fine too, except for the occasional cheesy line.
RE 4 was pretty painful in hindsight.
Did RE 6 have tons of replayability?
I actually disagree. After playing through on the hardest difficulty, there wasn't much point besides achievements and pointless collectables. The gameplay was already pretty boring after the first playthrough.
K.
RE6 has the lowest collective reviews of any game in the entire series. Theres a reason for that.
"It's not survival horror"?
I didn't realize the initial impressions of the majority were indicative of a product's merits. If that is indeed the case, many cult classics outright suck because they were panned initially.
Its fine if you prefer it to the rest of the games, but don't try to pass it off as better than the rest when it was clearly the worst in the series.
Better overall = a little stretching it.
More fun and enjoyable with longevity and playing depth beyond the other titles = absolutely.