Is Bloodborne the Resident Evil game we deserve?

HardkorSB

New member
Mar 18, 2010
1,477
0
0
Resident Evil is a slow horror themed puzzle game with action elements (yes, I'm aware that 4-6 were action games but to me, those never seemed like RE, more like a completely different game series with the same title).
Bloodborne is a hack and slash action game with a gothic-type art design.
 

DementedSheep

New member
Jan 8, 2010
2,654
0
0
Do you mind if I hijack your thread for sec to ask a question that doesn't need it's own thread?

Dose anyone know if RE: Revelations 2 would be confusing to someone who hasn't played much of the RE games? I have heard that despite the 2, it's self contained from RE: Revelations but it dose have recurring characters from other games. Also is the RE remaster worth playing for reasons other than nostalgia?
 

Evonisia

Your sinner, in secret
Jun 24, 2013
3,257
0
0
Your comparisons seem a bit broad if I'll be honest. However since I've not played the early Resident Evil games I can't personally say whether they're tonally or aesthetically similar (maybe REmake looks like Bloodborne because the original certainly does not), and they don't seem to be gameplay wise.
 

Fox12

AccursedT- see you space cowboy
Jun 6, 2013
4,828
0
0
DementedSheep said:
Do you mind if I hijack your thread for sec to ask a question that doesn't need it's own thread?

Dose anyone know if RE: Revelations 2 would be confusing to someone who hasn't played much of the RE games? I have heard that despite the 2, it's self contained from RE: Revelations but it dose have recurring characters from other games. Also is the RE remaster worth playing for reasons other than nostalgia?
Revelations 2 doesn't require any prior knowledge of the story to play. It does have in jokes and easter eggs for the long time fans, but it's pretty much a self contained narrative. Besides, they do a pretty good job explaining who everybody is. As far as gameplay goes its a pretty solid third person shooter, and for $25 it's a bargain. They fixed the multiplayer aspects if you care for such things, but the single players pretty solid as well.

RE:make is incredibly solid. The art style and graphics hold up really well, and I would argue that it's (arguably) the best game in the series. It's basically the quintessential RE experience. However, I will warn you that it's very different from current RE games. The series completely changed after RE 4. All the games since 4 have been third person shooters set in a "horror" environment. However, most of them are not that scary, and tend to focus on the action. There's tons of ammo and healing items available as well, and you can sometimes loot corpses. RE:make, on the other hand, is a full on horror title. That means that there are tank controls, which you may not be used to. It also means that there's limited ammo and healing items. The games encourages you to avoid fighting as well, so you'll be fleeing enemies in order to conserve ammo. Once you run out your basically defenseless until you find more. As a result you'll have to carefully decide which enemies you want to kill and which ones you want to simply avoid, since you can't usually kill all of them. RE:makes focuses on the horror, while RE revelations focuses more on action. Both are good, but different. If you want to get both, I would recommend playing RE:make first as Jill, but it's not necessary to understand revelations. .
 

Fox12

AccursedT- see you space cowboy
Jun 6, 2013
4,828
0
0
White Lightning said:
No. Bloodborne has Aliens in it. Resident Evil doesn't. They're nothing alike.
Well...



But that's beside the point. They're obviously not the same thing, but I still think bloodborne captures all the best aspects of action horror, a genre that was, until recently, quite stagnant. A genre that I would say still hasn't caught up to its glory days.

There's more to horror, though, then monsters and aesthetics. There are ideas. There were definitely horror aspects to dark souls, and I would argue that the same holds true for bloodborne, perhaps even more so. The constant allusions to 1800's gothic horror stories doesn't hurt, of course, but there's more to it then that. I would argue that bloodborne is more of a horror game then most recent actuall horror games.
 

White Lightning

New member
Feb 9, 2012
797
0
0
Fox12 said:
White Lightning said:
No. Bloodborne has Aliens in it. Resident Evil doesn't. They're nothing alike.
Well...



But that's beside the point. They're obviously not the same thing, but I still think bloodborne captures all the best aspects of action horror, a genre that was, until recently, quite stagnant. A genre that I would say still hasn't caught up to its glory days.

There's more to horror, though, then monsters and aesthetics. There are ideas. There were definitely horror aspects to dark souls, and I would argue that the same holds true for bloodborne, perhaps even more so. The constant allusions to 1800's gothic horror stories doesn't hurt, of course, but there's more to it then that. I would argue that bloodborne is more of a horror game then most recent actuall horror games.
I don't think Las Plagas were Aliens, were they? I thought they just found them in the ground. I haven't played any of the new RE games so I don't know.
 

Fox12

AccursedT- see you space cowboy
Jun 6, 2013
4,828
0
0
White Lightning said:
Fox12 said:
White Lightning said:
No. Bloodborne has Aliens in it. Resident Evil doesn't. They're nothing alike.
Well...



But that's beside the point. They're obviously not the same thing, but I still think bloodborne captures all the best aspects of action horror, a genre that was, until recently, quite stagnant. A genre that I would say still hasn't caught up to its glory days.

There's more to horror, though, then monsters and aesthetics. There are ideas. There were definitely horror aspects to dark souls, and I would argue that the same holds true for bloodborne, perhaps even more so. The constant allusions to 1800's gothic horror stories doesn't hurt, of course, but there's more to it then that. I would argue that bloodborne is more of a horror game then most recent actuall horror games.
I don't think Las Plagas were Aliens, were they? I thought they just found them in the ground. I haven't played any of the new RE games so I don't know.
It was strange, I think there was a meteor or something. I get what you were trying to say, though.

Aliens in bloodnborne huh? Ugh. I love the game, but I'm still pretty early in. I'll admit, that sounds a tad bit silly, given the setting.
 

White Lightning

New member
Feb 9, 2012
797
0
0
Fox12 said:
White Lightning said:
Fox12 said:
White Lightning said:
No. Bloodborne has Aliens in it. Resident Evil doesn't. They're nothing alike.
Well...



But that's beside the point. They're obviously not the same thing, but I still think bloodborne captures all the best aspects of action horror, a genre that was, until recently, quite stagnant. A genre that I would say still hasn't caught up to its glory days.

There's more to horror, though, then monsters and aesthetics. There are ideas. There were definitely horror aspects to dark souls, and I would argue that the same holds true for bloodborne, perhaps even more so. The constant allusions to 1800's gothic horror stories doesn't hurt, of course, but there's more to it then that. I would argue that bloodborne is more of a horror game then most recent actuall horror games.
I don't think Las Plagas were Aliens, were they? I thought they just found them in the ground. I haven't played any of the new RE games so I don't know.
It was strange, I think there was a meteor or something. I get what you were trying to say, though.

Aliens in bloodnborne huh? Ugh. I love the game, but I'm still pretty early in. I'll admit, that sounds a tad bit silly, given the setting.
That's what I said but as you find moar lore stuffs it starts to make sense, and even, dare I say, ENRICHES the setting. I don't know how to spoil stuff though so I won't tell you the super secret Alium stuff. I'll give you a hint though, don't let the women die.
 

Casual Shinji

Should've gone before we left.
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
17,450
1,647
118
Fox12 said:
Aliens in bloodnborne huh? Ugh. I love the game, but I'm still pretty early in. I'll admit, that sounds a tad bit silly, given the setting.
It is silly, but in a good way. Just like the mushroom men in Dark Souls it's the kind of thing that should feel out of place, yet it kind of fits in considering the other creatures you'll walk into.
 

Therumancer

Citation Needed
Nov 28, 2007
9,909
0
0
My opinion is that despite scary monsters and an oppressive atmosphere the "Souls" formula games are not really survival horror games. They basically remind me of old school arcade "quarter munchers" with a dark atmosphere, and of course a one time fee for entry as opposed to actually making you pay a quarter (or 50 cents, or a dollar) to continue.


The thing that made games like "Silent Hill" and "Resident Evil" work is that while the protagonist could be rather tough, the game encouraged evasion as much, or more, than fighting, since like a relentless hoard the monsters will wear you down as there are more of them than there are resources (and perhaps even infinite monsters). Thus you have the whole "survival" aspect of whether you want to use your weapons for a specific situation or find another way around it, and of course you always know you need to make sure you have enough stuff saved up for the inevitable boss fights. Oddly the thing about RE and SH is that it became a sort of badge of honor early on to talk about how much stuff you had left when you got to the end.

In a lot of atmospheric action games despite how it might seem you effectively have massive, or even limitless, resources, and while it might be difficult, it's all about killing everything.

The "Souls" series is sort of like "Dead Space" when you get down to it, albeit harder. It comes down to surviving fairly linear environments full of enemies, and overcoming nasty battle set pieces with the tools you can assemble. I think Critical Miss sort of pointed out the problem with this kind of "horror" game when it made fun of "Dead Space" by showing Issac respawn right before a nasty fight, walking past one of the hallucinogenic monsters a bunch of time, he starts out find it scary, and towards the end as he keeps walking past it to try the fight again it's giving him advice on how to proceed like they are old buddies. In "Souls" and similar games it doesn't matter how freaky something is, odds are you'll spend so many times tromping past it, that it will get boring. I mean look at the original Demon's Souls (I think it was) you had a prison level where you had these mind-flayer type things with tentecles coming out of their hoods and lamps, they could be very dangerous and were intimidating looking, until you've pretty much sat there twiddling your thumbs for the 47,000th time watching their patrol pattern so you can remove them to proceed. In some respects I don't think a horror game can have a truly punishing level of difficulty since repetition is going to play itself out. It's like this you can walk into a maternity ward and wind up facing a vaguely humanoid mass of stillborn babies sewed together trying to kill you, you show up and will sit there and go "wow, that is just so wrong and F*cked up" but after you've seen it 40 times due to dying even that is going to stop being freaky and become more annoying than anything. Frustration can ruin pacing that horror relies on, and really that is why I think the "Souls" series can never really be horror, especially when part of the point is to frustrate you so you keep making mistakes. Bloodborne looks like a good game, and a good spiritual addition to that stable of games, but as freaky as it looks I imagine it more continues the trend of "grimdark atmosphere for a really hard customizable action game". I honestly can't really consider them RPGs either because I've always felt maintain their difficulty by forcing you down very specific paths, while there are multiple ways to play doing things like say limiting the use of magic (which Bloodborne doesn't even have) prevents you from playing as a dedicated mage, at the end of the day you do need to go in there and play the whole melee game at least part of the time, and while there are multiple builds, it seems at the end of the day it all comes down to the same basic types of things, which is part of why it's a big deal that in Bloodborn there apparently aren't shields like there were in Souls since at the end of the day hiding behind a massive shield was how a lot of people played the game because it was designed to work that way.
 

Fappy

\[T]/
May 1, 2020
12,010
0
0
Country
United States
I can actually navigate the UI and menus effectively! It can't be survival horror!
 

Somekindofgold

New member
Feb 24, 2015
67
0
0
No resident evil has always been shit. For Bloodborne to be the 'Resident Evil we deserve' it would need terrible combat, clunky controls and a UI that makes you want to pull your hair out.

Comparing Bloodborne to Resident Evil is an insult to Bloodborne.

Fox12 said:
Aliens in bloodnborne huh? Ugh. I love the game, but I'm still pretty early in. I'll admit, that sounds a tad bit silly, given the setting.
Trust me its not silly, its extremely disturbing. Its not 'scary' because you can kill the things but the aliens, what they represent and how they interact with the story can be sickening at times, and they're incorporated into the lore so well you instantly buy that your gothic horror monster hunter game became a cosmic horror monster hunter game without any questions.

Miyazaki dropped a gallon of acid and listened to Lovecraft on tape when he was making this. I wouldnt call it survival horror because you can (and will) fight back and eventually win against your foes, but its definitely the most unsettling game in a long time.
 

hybridial

New member
Feb 24, 2015
71
0
0
No the Souls games have always been shit. Comparing Bloodborne to Resident Evil is an insult to Resident Evil.

Man that was easy.

Also using Lovecraft is easy, using the ideas is easy, using them well, using them appropriately is another matter altogether and Bloodborne is no Siren. The plot is very generic and tries to make up for that by invoking literature that people instantly think is cool.

Because yeah, it is. But it's still a trite thing to do.

Bloodborne is nothing like Resident Evil. It's not a survival game. Resident Evil completely lost it's way at 4 but the games before then had distinct themes regarding body horror and scientific research gone wrong. It's drawing more from Frankenstein than any other work, but it actually did it well fundamentally. The idea of it's gameplay is about resources and fight or flight, with the controls being designed as they were for reasons that could still do with examination today. There's a way to employ the advantages of it's style and still give players more flexible controls, but RE4 didn't even try and because of that, it's largely an ignored avenue in horror games now, and now they're all first person or over the shoulder.

It's also not a horror game because of reasons very well laid about by Therumancer and I salute him for taking the time to spell out things that should be patently obvious to anyone who's ever played horror games. If the purpose of the thread is to compare Bloodborne to survival horror... well Nightmare Creatures is survival horror.

... actually it wasn't, and neither is Bloodborne.
 

Story

Note to self: Prooof reed posts
Sep 4, 2013
905
0
0
*reads the comments*
Wow glad to see I'm not the only one to disagree with Jim here.
 

DementedSheep

New member
Jan 8, 2010
2,654
0
0
Fox12 said:
DementedSheep said:
Do you mind if I hijack your thread for sec to ask a question that doesn't need it's own thread?

Dose anyone know if RE: Revelations 2 would be confusing to someone who hasn't played much of the RE games? I have heard that despite the 2, it's self contained from RE: Revelations but it dose have recurring characters from other games. Also is the RE remaster worth playing for reasons other than nostalgia?
Revelations 2 doesn't require any prior knowledge of the story to play. It does have in jokes and easter eggs for the long time fans, but it's pretty much a self contained narrative. Besides, they do a pretty good job explaining who everybody is. As far as gameplay goes its a pretty solid third person shooter, and for $25 it's a bargain. They fixed the multiplayer aspects if you care for such things, but the single players pretty solid as well.

RE:make is incredibly solid. The art style and graphics hold up really well, and I would argue that it's (arguably) the best game in the series. It's basically the quintessential RE experience. However, I will warn you that it's very different from current RE games. The series completely changed after RE 4. All the games since 4 have been third person shooters set in a "horror" environment. However, most of them are not that scary, and tend to focus on the action. There's tons of ammo and healing items available as well, and you can sometimes loot corpses. RE:make, on the other hand, is a full on horror title. That means that there are tank controls, which you may not be used to. It also means that there's limited ammo and healing items. The games encourages you to avoid fighting as well, so you'll be fleeing enemies in order to conserve ammo. Once you run out your basically defenseless until you find more. As a result you'll have to carefully decide which enemies you want to kill and which ones you want to simply avoid, since you can't usually kill all of them. RE:makes focuses on the horror, while RE revelations focuses more on action. Both are good, but different. If you want to get both, I would recommend playing RE:make first as Jill, but it's not necessary to understand revelations. .
Thanks!

Being more of a survival horror with limited resources and encouraging avoiding fighting rather than a shooter with zombies is more what I'm looking for though I don't mind if it's just a good TPS either. What makes me wary of the RE:make is the clunky controls and nonsensical puzzle that you seem to get in older games like that but I'll probably pick them both up.
 

Fox12

AccursedT- see you space cowboy
Jun 6, 2013
4,828
0
0
DementedSheep said:
Fox12 said:
DementedSheep said:
Do you mind if I hijack your thread for sec to ask a question that doesn't need it's own thread?

Dose anyone know if RE: Revelations 2 would be confusing to someone who hasn't played much of the RE games? I have heard that despite the 2, it's self contained from RE: Revelations but it dose have recurring characters from other games. Also is the RE remaster worth playing for reasons other than nostalgia?
Revelations 2 doesn't require any prior knowledge of the story to play. It does have in jokes and easter eggs for the long time fans, but it's pretty much a self contained narrative. Besides, they do a pretty good job explaining who everybody is. As far as gameplay goes its a pretty solid third person shooter, and for $25 it's a bargain. They fixed the multiplayer aspects if you care for such things, but the single players pretty solid as well.

RE:make is incredibly solid. The art style and graphics hold up really well, and I would argue that it's (arguably) the best game in the series. It's basically the quintessential RE experience. However, I will warn you that it's very different from current RE games. The series completely changed after RE 4. All the games since 4 have been third person shooters set in a "horror" environment. However, most of them are not that scary, and tend to focus on the action. There's tons of ammo and healing items available as well, and you can sometimes loot corpses. RE:make, on the other hand, is a full on horror title. That means that there are tank controls, which you may not be used to. It also means that there's limited ammo and healing items. The games encourages you to avoid fighting as well, so you'll be fleeing enemies in order to conserve ammo. Once you run out your basically defenseless until you find more. As a result you'll have to carefully decide which enemies you want to kill and which ones you want to simply avoid, since you can't usually kill all of them. RE:makes focuses on the horror, while RE revelations focuses more on action. Both are good, but different. If you want to get both, I would recommend playing RE:make first as Jill, but it's not necessary to understand revelations. .
Thanks!

Being more of a survival horror with limited resources and encouraging avoiding fighting rather than a shooter with zombies is more what I'm looking for though I don't mind if it's just a good TPS either. What makes me wary of the RE:make is the clunky controls and nonsensical puzzle that you seem to get in older games like that but I'll probably pick them both up.
The puzzles are pretty simple, and boil down to "place whatever passes for a key here." The controls are unusual, but not bad, and you get used to them pretty quickly. If you want a slow, atmospheric horror game then REmake is a fantastic choice. I would recommend it, and it's pretty readily available.

If you want a real mindfuck of a horror title then you should evuentually try Silent Hill 2, it's probably the best game the genre has to offer.
 

jhoroz

New member
Mar 7, 2012
494
0
0
I will say that the Forbidden Woods is a better homage to RE4 than the entirety of Evil Within, which is ironic considering it was made by the creator of RE4. But no I wouldn't say it's survival horror due to the action and ability to absolutely destroy your enemies. I will say that Bloodborne has disturbed me and horrified more than any RE game released to date, which is less I can say for some of the more pretentious folk in this thread who worship it to the point of having their head up their ass when it comes to the "horror" in RE games.
 

hybridial

New member
Feb 24, 2015
71
0
0
jhoroz said:
I will say that the Forbidden Woods is a better homage to RE4 than the entirety of Evil Within, which is ironic considering it was made by the creator of RE4. But no I wouldn't say it's survival horror due to the action and ability to absolutely destroy your enemies. I will say that Bloodborne has disturbed me and horrified more than any RE game released to date, which is less I can say for some of the more pretentious folk in this thread who worship it to the point of having their head up their ass when it comes to the "horror" in RE games.
And the way I see it, most people have their head up their asses worshipping Bloodborne.

I just think this thread asks a stupid question (and if it came from Jim Sterling I'm not surprised) and deserves a stupid answer.
 

Augustine

New member
Jun 21, 2012
209
0
0
Get yourself a strong Bloodtinge build, Evelyn, Cannon and you got yourself "Resident Evil: Cthulu Revelations"