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.
__________________
"The Daemon lied with every breath. It could not help itself but to deceive and dismay, to riddle and ruin. The more we conversed, the closer I drew to one singularly ineluctable fact: I would gain no wisdom here."
Fair enough, and I got used to the controls pretty quickly when starting to play the actual game as opposed to the demo. Dunno why.
Compared to the demo, I would say the lighting for the rooms you were in did change for the actual game. Then again, my memory on the demo isn't as good now.
It's just opinion either way, whether people think he would make the series better or worse. There's certain things I don't want him to do to the series that I know he could do, but I'd welcome him adjusting the worst things of RE6 like say the Agent Hunt mode, or improving the action segments of the campaigns in whatever way he can, though the action sections in like Chris's campaign alone were already a lot better than RE5's. Other things like the mercenaries I'd probably want him to leave alone.
And I know how Cliff's attitude usually is. Doesn't mean we have to like it.
What controller issues exactly? If you mean something like not being able to have a real steady aim like in the demo, that's something that can be upgraded in the actual game with skill points.
Kinda doubt he does. Then again, the first Gears did have some degree of horror elements with certain parts and the kind of dark atmosphere the campaign had, compared to that of Gears 2 and 3.
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.
Thought the game wasn't as good as 4 and yet Leon's was your least liked out of the RE6 campaigns? Odd , but good order of favorites still. RE6 blew both RE4 and 5 out of the water for me though, personally.
Registered: Nov 2001
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Moderator
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.
__________________
Last edited by BackFire on Jan 2nd, 2013 at 08:47 AM
Registered: Nov 2001
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Moderator
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.
__________________
Last edited by BackFire on Jan 4th, 2013 at 10:47 PM
Now that you mention it, Leon's campaign was too recycled, and that includes Simmons especially. Or maybe it just felt to me like some of the parts with him were more dragged out than they should've been. But yeah, he was still a better final boss than the last couple main RE games.
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.
Agreed on the checkpoint bit. Every checkpoint saving would've made it much easier to farm for skill points in particular.
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.
Fair enough on the first bit.
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.
__________________
Last edited by Ridley_Prime on Jan 5th, 2013 at 07:48 AM
Registered: Nov 2001
Location: Huntington Beach, CA
Moderator
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.
I remember in RE4, most QTE's had a checkpoint right before they happened.
I liked QTE's in RE4 because it happened occassionally and I especially liked them during boss battles because it gave the fight a very cinematic and exicting flair to it.
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.
QTE's in Walking Dead only worked because of consequences of failing them. The story changed around them if it was successful or not. If you let a person die because of a failed QTE, you really felt like you screwed up.
Oct 31st, 2012 08:17 PM
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.
, but good order of favorites still. RE6 blew both RE4 and 5 out of the water for me though, personally.
