- Aug 12, 2009
It all depends on what you view to be 'survival horror.' For me, it's the low chances of survival in a horrific situation. I have enough ammo to keep my nervous in RE6, but you can change that by increasing the difficulty. It's an oppressive world, to be sure, but I admit that it's not as well paced as Resident Evil 4.chadachada123 said:I...had basically completely forgotten the absurdity of it all in RE4. Or at least, it makes a hell of a lot of sense...in context...I guess...or something.Sheo_Dagana said:Does everyone forget about the parts in Resident Evil 4 where Leon ran about a battle field while a helicopter rained missle-death down upon enemies in your way? Or ran from boulders? Did they forget about the chain guns and the invasive QTE's that do little more than kick you back five seconds into the cutscene you were performing them in if you failed? Did they forget you had to fight a kooky cult of ne'er-do-wells who's ultimate purpose was flat and uninteresting? Did they forget you had to fight fucking Napoleon? Yet people are surprised at RE6's content?
That said, I loved RE4 and still enjoy RE6. No, it's not better than the classics and it's not better than 4, but I still don't feel like it's the weakest game in the franchise. Resident Evil hasn't been survival horror for a long time now, depending on what your definition of 'horror' is. This whole thing comes up every time a new Resident Evil comes out. "It's too much like a shooter now!" RE4 felt like an action/shooter game to me and I knew it was going this way for a while now.
RE6 IS a functional game, so it's not worthy of the scores it's getting. People are just being babies. If nothing else, be grateful that YOUR favorite Capcom franchise didn't get quietly swept under the rug.
And yet...the first 5/6 of the game (RE4) is pretty tense, pretty survival horror, especially in first-playthroughs where ammo is actually kind of scarce. For the most part, only the last fifth/sixth of the game goes awesome-action. The first third/halfish of the game is grounded pretty hard in survival-horror reality, with the middle 1/3-ish being pretty rough with those damn dogs and blind-wolverine-guys. Oh, and don't forget the invisible acid-spewing bugs that pop out from nowhere. And the right-hand guy of Napoleon who is weak to liquid nitrogen but is completely optional.
At the very least, compared to RE5 and (presumably) RE6, the pacing is far better in RE4, with it building up slowly and only turning truly action-shooty with no pretense of survival horror in the final act of the game and not the preceding 5/6 of the game.
I just see no way for Resident Evil 6, given my demo playing of it, to even come half as close to making me fear for my safety as a repeat playthrough of RE4 would. Every time I restart RE4 (and I have bought it 3 separate times, on GCN, on Wii, and on 360), I feel the same nostalgic tensing/fear that just isn't felt when replaying RE5 levels or while touching the RE6 demo.
Whatever you're seeing...I just don't see it, brah.
Also, I wouldn't say anyone in Resident Evil 3 wasn't prepared for what was going on. It was Jill's second bout with the zombie menace and the game's other characters were Umbrella operatives that had an idea of what to expect (just not the volume.) Resi 3 was about the time I starte getting bored with the series. I outright hated Code Veronica and feel that it's the weakest game in the series, right next to 5.
I'm not saying anyone has to like 6, it just irks me when people put 4 up on a pedestal when it was a pretty whacky game from start to finish. The first time I roundhouse kicked someone's head and made it explode, I burst out in joyful laughter and kept trying to do it again.