Resident Evil 5 Review

Toastngravy

New member
Jan 19, 2009
213
0
0


The Resident Evil Series has focused on Fear as it's main factor over it's lifespan. While it's been going fine with that, the newest installment appears to have tied "Fear" up, pushed it out of a plane at thirty thousand feet landing in the middle of the ocean, before letting oil burn on top of it's landing location.

[font color="Red"] Expect Spoilers. You have been warned.[/font]

The above being nothing more than a visual aid for those of you that aren't very creative. Where the other games have actually held a level of horror to it, Resident Evil 5 does not. Please keep in mind by no means am I even saying the game is bad, it just doesn't follow the traditional route the other games in the series follow.

This installment plops you down in Africa as Chris Redfield (The fellow with Biceps larger than his own head, with the ability to stretch and move as well as anyone.) or your new partner Sheva (Not racist). Did I just say 'or'? Yes I did. This game features co-op that allows you to play online or split screen with a friend. On the subject of Co-Op let us go over some things. Co-Op with the NPC is not recommended at all. The NPC uses ammo unsparingly, uses any blasted weapon it wants even if you give it one, gets in your way now and then, requires extra effort to be able to complete certain points in the game, etc. While some things aren't really "bad" it all just ends up being one major pain in the behind that shouldn't have to be dealt with. The online play is actually pretty fun and I enjoyed it to a pretty good extent.



Your lovable inventory has also been slapped across the face, with only 9 spaces per character this time around. It also isn't accessed through pausing the game, you do everything in it real time. Which isn't too much trouble until you find out changing weapons takes as much time as it does for a zombie to bite your face off. Oh by the way. They aren't zombies anymore. That's right. Resident Evil 5 even took the Zombie aspect out of it. It is arguable that they are still zombies but in the general term, zombies they are not.

The weapons range from OK to use to "why am i using anything else?". By the time you unlock unlimited ammo for weapons you upgrade all the way, there isn't too much of a point of using anything else. Magnums tend to blow things away in one shot. There are character specific weapons you can unlock (gatling gun for Chris, Bow for Sheva....Not racist). The bow is enjoyable but doesn't make much sense. I can understand it not having a laser sight like every other weapon. What I can't understand is a bow and arrow doing the same if not more damage than a magnum doing. The bow takes things down in one shot for the most part.

The story isn't too long but it is long enough to last a few days on the first play through and if you play it casually. The enemies range from the generic drones that just rush at you from the start to other things. There are a few white people thrown into the horde now and then (Not Racist) to mix things up a little. That goes great until you get to the grass skirt wearing, tribal mask shield/wearing, spear chucking African areas (Still not racist). At least I got a chuckle out of that.

Through out the entire story you are slapped with voice acting that isn't needed. Some times it's much more enjoyable to just do your own voice overs along with the actors."Wo! I know this game is rated M but come on!" I exclaimed as Jill Valentine ripped open the top of her skin tight suit. "What's that thing on her chest?" Asked Sheva while looking at the things on Jill's Chest. "Breasts!" I exclaimed in my mic hoping some common sense would reach the Character inside the game that HAS THEM TOO. "We need to get it off!" Said sheva. "You want to take her clothes off?" I questioned to my Co-Op partner whom of which I assumed was controlling Shevas every action.

Speaking of Jill, remember Dom from Gears of War? Well this game some what reminds me of that. Chris is crying about finding Jill, just not to the extent that Dom cries about his wife. Why are the big muscular men the babies in games these days? It sets a bad example.



Below includes game ending. Don't continue reading unless you want it to be given away.
Finishing up, the ending is the most cliche/horrible thing I have ever witnessed. After the plane you are on crashes into a volcano. You go through the final boss fight sequence, ending with the main evil character falling into said volcano (of course). When that happens Jill and the Black guy who managed to actually survive the game (Not Racist) come with a Helicopter to rescue you. Before you can fly away, a giant tentacle arm grabs part of the helicopter (gasp! he isn't dead!). You and Sheva grab the Rocket Launchers and blast a final shot at him and killing him through the use of a quick time event.. Then you fly off into the sunset. The game ENDS with a quick time event. No game should EVER end with a quick time event. That just isn't right. I also should have mentioned. The game has a lot of quick time events.


Recommendation: Buy it. Despite the negatives it's still a good game with quite a large number of un-lockables and re-playable story (well, mostly to help friends).
 

seamusotorain

New member
Dec 14, 2008
391
0
0
Good review, but the spoilers are a bit unnecessary. I know you warned us, but giving away the ending was a kick in the teef.
 

brtshstel

New member
Dec 16, 2008
1,366
0
0
Yeah, I'm fed up with people bitching about the game. Yeah it has its shortcomings, but I have had enough of Gears fanboys complaining about things it lacks that Gears has.

Your review is good.
 

Mask of 1000 Faces

New member
Feb 28, 2009
207
0
0
brtshstel said:
Yeah, I'm fed up with people bitching about the game. Yeah it has its shortcomings, but I have had enough of Gears fanboys complaining about things it lacks that Gears has.

Your review is good.
Agreed. Although in future, try to talk about the games mechanics a little bit more and less about the story, it helps cover everything under the games hood, and I personally look very hard to controls diagnostics, its a big thing for alot of people, and is worth including, no matter how small.

Bonus points for pictures!

Cheers!
 

Toastngravy

New member
Jan 19, 2009
213
0
0
I try and keep the reviews a little small.
I missed a lot of things I wanted to touch on in the process. I also usually don't like to Edit more than once. It's been a bad habit for years, especially back in highschool it caused a problem.

None the less, things I wanted to add but didn't.
 

ladytech

New member
Mar 23, 2009
23
0
0
Thanks for the review I have been considering purchasing this game and this is the kind of information I have been looking for.
 

Alucadrian

New member
Jan 29, 2009
44
0
0
A lukewarm review, friend, since it seems to be deliberately looking for game idiosyncracies to complain about. Some of the "weaknesses" listed here are the result of player error, not systematic flaw. Others seem to be distinctly twisting game elements either to sound worse than they are or, worst of all, just to provide an easy platform for a mediocre joke. At no time did I feel any balance that told me you liked the game more than you disliked it (which is what your recommendation at the end concludes); what I did clearly get was that you think you're funny in writing and want to share that with us, which is fine, but not really sufficient foundation for a review by itself.

Some examples of what I mean:

1. Setting weapons or items in primary directional slots allows them to be accessed via a single press of the relevant direction on the control pad, making switching weapons quick and easy with a barest minimum of ability in equipment organization and planning (and without five-minute pause sessions of OCD attache organizing a la Leon in RE4). Also, eighteen inventory slots is more (by as much as a factor of three) than any player had at his fingertips in RE, RE2, RE3, or RE:Outbreak, while returning to a far more familiar style per the series.

2. Your NPC, like every AI-controlled NPC in every game ever, is following a set structure of programming rules. Just like meeting a new person in life and learning what their tendencies are, the AI will develop a pattern of actions. They will, for example, tend to use whichever weapon you give them that has the highest firepower per shot (maximizing damage with minimum ammo expenditure, a very logical action), even if that's just a handgun. The AI does include scripts that will cause Sheva to fight with a handgun, then pull out a magnum when a miniboss enemy is nearby, and then return to the handgun after the boss falls all with no input necessary from the player (I have seen this happen consistently enough to accept it as a programming pattern), so if you've done even the most basic observation of what you're criticizing beforehand you can't really call it substandard AI. I mean, seriously... have you ever played Dead Rising? Complaints about follower AI in that game are at least worth sympathy. Watch, learn, regulate, and give commands intelligently; it is a poor commander who blames the basic inadequacy of a soldier instead of seeing his own responsibility to make effective use of what and who he has.

3. Resident Evil 5 didn't "take the zombie aspect out of it." Resident Evil 4 was the first full-game title to feature Plaga-infected humans as the primary enemy, without a walking corpse from intro to credits. I thought at first you might have simply missed playing or owning that (Greatest Hits, Game of the Year, top-selling Capcom) title, until I remembered you referencing the "beloved inventory management" unique to that game. So you did play it... yet chose to ignore it and claim that this game was guilty of the shift you wanted to complain about. That's not sloppy thinking, it's deliberate deception, and that's bad journalism at best and laughable writing the rest of the time.

In addition, I was actually enjoying your sense of humor a little bit, until I tripped over the fourth snide "(not racist)" insertion and had to pause a moment. We get from the entire rest of your review's content that sarcasm is the tool by which you choose to point out negatives, and I don't disagree that it can be an effective method for doing just that... IF it's done cleverly, skillfully. This was being done with a sledgehammer, and it only made me take the author less seriously overall. Nowhere was there any cohesive discussion on the presence of racist over- or undertones in the game, no intelligent discussion... just these jarring speedbumps of sarcasm posing as wit, but coming off as overly simplistic labeling and sheep mentality. Is it racist (or not racist) because you think it is that way for your own specific, intelligent reasons? Or is it just easy to joke about because you've read in the news that many people think it is? And if these aren't questions you want to answer for fear of beginning a morality flame war like so many of the other threads on here concerning RE5 have, then you don't need to be mentioning it at all... much less five separate times. Adds nothing, leaves much desired.

You're not a bad writer overall, friend, but in my opinion you are trying a bit too hard in some of the wrong directions. Try working on solid foundational content first, and then retool it to include humor afterward, and I bet your natural sense of humor (which you do have, and can be funny) will shine through much more effectively by enhancing your work, instead of distracting from it.

- Adrian out.
 

dragoniv1

New member
Mar 19, 2009
54
0
0
I love the game, has alot of replay value as well, Only thing though that I may have not caught is..is this the end has everything been scored? I myself think not b/c O what was it Bio Tech or was it Tricore something like that funded the bsaa and you run into all that stuff along with umbrella?? hmm
 

Toastngravy

New member
Jan 19, 2009
213
0
0
To the fellow above(Well ok two above). Your opinions matter not to me. That is the purpose of a review. Giving ones own opinion. While posting it here I do expect feedback, that does not require me to actually care about anything anyone posted here has said (Even if the first fellow did make a good point that I didn't think about at the time of posting).

That said, I can understand your third point at assuming that I didn't consider the 4th game. This was pointed out to me, and I already realized people will take the obvious route and assume I missed out on four for what ever reason. I never really stated it was the first game to take out the zombies, but more so meant it as the general zombies are still gone. While the way I worded it wasn't quite the best, I decided to leave it as is.

I also didn't want to stay on the negatives. I actually enjoyed the game to a great extent. During the writing I unwillingly stuck with the negatives and by the time It was as long as I wanted it to be, I didn't have space for anything I actually wanted positive wise. That was a personal error, which could be changed but I didn't go about doing it. The only way around that is going against my short review rule and make it a tad longer.


Delta Assault said:
How are the controls? Are you able to shoot your gun at any time?
The controls took some getting used to on my part. That isn't the games fault though, it happens to me inbetween playing different games.
You can't shoot the gun at any time, you have to stop and aim to shoot. So I guess technically yes you can shoot it at any time but in a Halo or Gears of War (or [Insert Other popular First or Third Person Shooters that have a move while shooting style. Which is a large amount]) sense you can't. It's mostly there for some what forced strategic play. It allows enemies to sneak up behind you if all you do is stand locked looking in one spot. Adds some fun to it.