Resident Evil Is a Child, Capcom and Fans Are Its Parents
- Thread starter The Wooster
- Start date
I think that if this game WASN"T a resident evil game it would work better. Why? Resident Evil is a label that comes with a few things. Obviously RE6 fails the RE test.
If it wasn't an RE.. sure.. sound interesting. As an RE it just hurts the fans giving it less a chance to shine on its own.
If it wasn't an RE.. sure.. sound interesting. As an RE it just hurts the fans giving it less a chance to shine on its own.
That's an interesting way of looking at things. I haven't played the game yet, but the demo left me feeling a little down. Mainly because I couldn't figure out the controls. 1/2 a second on the loading screen to memorize all those buttons was not enough time. Also, the laser sight may as well not even be there because it's so faint.
You can move and shoot now though, which I seem to recall EVERYONE complaining about the lack of that feature in 4 and 5. Now though, the game's too action-packed. So...we go back to not moving and shooting then? Stand and shoot?
You can move and shoot now though, which I seem to recall EVERYONE complaining about the lack of that feature in 4 and 5. Now though, the game's too action-packed. So...we go back to not moving and shooting then? Stand and shoot?
This is way to silly not to role play!: "In that case I want a divorce Capcom! Do you enjoy screwing up our child telling him he should fit in with the in-crowd action games instead of being unique a horror game?! And you wonder why our Dante is a smoker! Its your fault! You ruined this family! D':<
Did I just read you right? The sales figures don't mean jack when determining the quality of a game. I'm not agreeing with 0.5 score either, but don't say that the sales figures tell the "true story" they don't. Sales figures will show that the game sold mostly/purely under the Resident Evil name, not because of its "evolution" of mechanics for the action gamer. I don't always agree with Jim Sterling, but his Destructoid review did have an interesting opinion or fact (call it what you may) which is, if the game was released under a new IP it would bomb at the same rate as games like "inversion" a generic third person shoot em up with a crap story.Kopikatsu said:
The RE label does come with a few things. BOWs, camp, and hilarious narm. RE6 meets all criteria. Happy day!masticina said:
I had some issues with the controls at first, but you get used to them. They're actually set up pretty well with the possible exception of cover (Never use it because your sensitivity like triples behind cover for some reason) and having to aim before dodge rolling (Not a huge deal). Of course, you have to relearn everything in Agent Hunt because playing as the monsters is so much different from playing as the Agents. The best tactic is to play dead in Grapple Mode, wait for an Agent to get close, then suddenly spring up and tear their throat out, because everything else (except for throwing your weapon, which only works once) is very slow and exaggerated...and the Agents can counter-kill you instantly if you try it with a weapon. Still really fun though. Especially when you get to play as a BSAA zombie (with helmet) that can shrug off bullets like they're particularly fluffy marshmallows.Sniper Team 4 said:
If the reviews don't determine the quality of the game, and sales don't determine the quality of the game, then what does? Reviews and personal opinion are subjective and therefore easily discounted. Sales are objective and reliable data.DrunkenMonkey said:
Edit: Let me put it this way: Sales will determine the future of the Resident Evil series (Not even whether it lives or dies, but what direction it goes in), not reviews.
Publishers/developers go where the money is. If RE6 sells well, then it'll continue on it's path to action-ville. If not, they may rethink it.
USER REVIEWS ONCE PEOPLE PLAY IT FOR A WHILE, sorry for the caps. Yes reviews and personal opinion are subjective, but you have to look at more than one review to determine that, read the comparisons between sites so as to avoid bias from just one site, if there is an overall consensus that the game is bad, then it's bad, read the user reviews after people actually play the damn game in its entirety to then further look at the quality. If the professional critics opinion doesn't convince you.Kopikatsu said:
Sales are objective and reliable data, but they only show if people bought it, not if they kept it. if you find return rates for the game that on the other hand is much more telling of its quality. Although I'm not sure that info is available, or even exists. More so a lot of people follow the herd instinct (ie Diablo 3 sales) when everybody is hyping a game up and the season is dry for popular games, people will most likely go with the popular choice if there is one.
Hell, if there was data that showed the trend that the game was bought at, that would also help. If a game is good then there is no reason for the sales to die down after one week. If people sing praises to friends, then sales should stay steady (not the preorder steady). On the other hand if the game is bad or mediocre then sales should literally slow down to a crawl or just plain die after that first week. If people collected sales over the course of a year or a few months you'd be able to see trends, but they don't so, we won't see it.
But as I said before sales do not indicate quality. COD keeps selling like hot cakes, but it is essentially just reskins of different guns, and more maps. If you call that quality, then that's fine.
It all comes down to the ultimate equalizer.... "we play the game for ourselves to determine its quality.
edit: just to clarify subjective opinions should not be easily dismissed due to its subjective nature, within every opinion there is a grain of truth. If 100 people say the controls suck, you can't exactly dismiss all those opinions can you, controls are a concrete mechanic that either works or it doesn't. If you want to go into more detail, you can scientifically prove it, by setting up experiments with randomized gamers and a decent sample size, but I think that goes beyond the practical for the purposes of deciding whether a game is bad or not.
How to see if an game reviewer is biased:
Average Game Review score: 66 out of 100
Average User Review score: 0.6 out of 10 or 6 out of 100
If a game reviewer is on the "positive" side of game review score: NOT TRUSTWORTHY
IGN: the game publishers self-esteem; "IGN, did I do well?" "Yes, Game Publishers; You've figured out that 2+2=9; good job; now where is my million dollars?"
Average Game Review score: 66 out of 100
Average User Review score: 0.6 out of 10 or 6 out of 100
If a game reviewer is on the "positive" side of game review score: NOT TRUSTWORTHY
IGN: the game publishers self-esteem; "IGN, did I do well?" "Yes, Game Publishers; You've figured out that 2+2=9; good job; now where is my million dollars?"
You know what's the best way to tell if a game has quality or is still relevant,DrunkenMonkey said:
check to see if it's torrent's Seed
eer ratio is any good; the lower it is; the worse and out-of-date it is; and it is an actual data point, which is Representative of how much people want to share their experience with other people, if an bunch of people are just leeching with no/little seeders; its no good as a product.
That's a younger version of Hohenheim. The intros for Brotherhood had me fooled too, that's what I thought it was xDantipunt said:
OT: I played 4 and 5, and the difference in game quality is staggering. It wasnt gradual, ALL fear was taken out of resident evil 5 and it was just a shooter. It was just gears of war, more or less. It was fun to play co-op, but my friend and I both agreed throughout that it was a bad game.
I can only imagine how bad 6 is. I played ORC too... *shivers*
Consider me convinced on that point, I don't have any counter argument except well sometimes people won't seed to cover their tracks because seeding is much more traceable and then actually downloading a torrent. But yeah your point does stand. Well to put it more bluntly people torrent because they want to try out a game like a demo sometimes, so that helps boost the download numbers. Anyway I've remembered that there was a game that actually defied your sales equate quality logic, and that's probably why I was so strong against that point. Planescape Torment was a failure in the sales department when it originally came out in the 90s, but guess what? after some time it garnered universal acclaim. Which only shows that quality can sometimes be determined after people chew on a game for a little while and let everything sink in so there is no knee jerk reaction like with what happened with mass effect 3. Anyways I don't feel like arguing anymore since your torrent point kinda convinced me, so cheersjamesbrown said:You know what's the best way to tell if a game has quality or is still relevant,DrunkenMonkey said:
check to see if it's torrent's Seed