Double Flame Spray > Everything Else.

When RE5 was released last year, I was very disappointed I surrendered to the hype and after playing the game it just wasn't equal to my hype level. The changes to the characters I know and love were unacceptable to me. For one I was expecting Sherry as the tube girl not a bleach blonde Jill. Initially I was focused on the story aspects and could not enjoy the game for what it is. I was only concerned with what was wrong with it and how Capcom ruined the series.

My opinion on RE5 has changed drastically, not solely because of the DLC, a few months ago I went back to it. I cleared my previous thoughts on the game from my mind and went into it with a clean slate no expectations. The second time through the game was a joy, I came to really appreciate how Capcom built on the foundation laid by RE4. Its funny how my experiences and opinions on RE5 mirror my thoughts on RE4. It took me half a year and 2 playthroughs of RE4 to really get past my gripes and angers and enjoy the game for what it is.

Prior to DLC, RE5 would rank a solid 8.5/10 adding in LiN (I haven't toyed with DE or Mercs REunion) jumps that to 9 not only does LiN jump the awesomeness factor of RE5 it drastically improves Capcom's cred and my respect for Capcom. Since lately I haven't thought much of them or the stuff they put out. Hopefully DE does not detract from the greatness of RE5.

DLC is better than the entirety of the original game.

Wow...these are very very high scores you guys are giving it, I did like Resident Evil 5 but thought it had so much more to offer..I mean 9.0-9.5/10 is putting it right next to games like Fallout 3, Mass Effect 2...Uncharted 2...and hats just gamest his generation. I just cant do that no matter how much of a fan I am, there was too much to be left wanted after completing the game and seeing the dust settle.

But I do admit the DLC does add to it, especially LIN. Overall, it does add to the package, but to me....it doesn't really change what i felt was a lesser experience overall in Resident Evil 5. LIN was a terrific throwback and it was proof that a system put in place by Resident Evil 4 can still be used as survival horror, and add tension, atmosphere, and fear into it, as long as that is what is aimed for. there were still problems..again voice acting and character depth has never been Capcom's strong point, and in the full game it suffered for that, as well as in these two dlc. It felt like so close..but yet again so far away, but I give it a solid 8.5 because of its beautiful attempt and its showing of classic survival horror elements.

Desperate Escape was one I was pleasantly surprised at. Yes it was much more akin to the regular game, but it added an intensity and non linear approach to the survival the main game only promoted once ( assembly place). There was an actual fear of dying in these levels, the intensity would have definitely been well placed in Re 5's action centric approach..in fact it made Resident evil 5 seem like a lame attempt in intensity after playing. As some have noticed, it had glaring faults too. It was not properly placed in many areas, it often felt like you were just thrown into an area with enemies of all sorts and types just spawning randomly..not near the beautiful amazing pacing areas in Re 4 had ( the shack, separate ways, etc.) Again though, it was an odd route they took, a far more interesting one then the bulk of the main game, so i give it another 8.5/10.

The main game though, i give an 8/10...and much of that is attributed to the high production values actually. I mean..I really really wanted to love this game... I truly did, im a Resident Evil fan and it just didn't mesh well, even compared to Re4. I mean, positive points I could find are few and far between, aside from the beautiful visuals and art direction, terrific replay value, and the slight improvement of the Resident Evil 4 system...there's not much I can sum up that stood out to try and make it a terrific game. It had its moments, but not enough, and in the wrong spots. Its a good game and addicting, but not a great game.

I would after all is said and done give the game somewhere in between an 8.0-8.5..maybe an 8.3. A solid score, and i think anything higher imho would be making it out to something it isn't.

The DLC in fact is the shining moments, its better than anything and everything the game offered. But that's the thing isn't it? Adding a few scenarios after the game is released, you cant just continually give the game more points, its an overall look at the game and what it did and accomplished, if they released 10 new scenarios, that wouldn't automatically make it a 10/10..its still the same game with a new layer on it. So even though the DLC added to it, i would only go so far as giving it a few more points, just as Separate Ways did add to Re4, but not in hugely monumental ways, it still is the game it is.

At 1st the game was a 8.5 for me but the dlc adds 2:30 to 3 hours of gameplay and dont forget reunion and versus, its a solid 9/10 now.

RE5 was already a 9/10 for me and it remains a 9/10. I don't believe in giving stuff 10/10 in most cases because nothing is without fault. But, yeah. The new scenarios were wonderful but I can't boost the score to 10/10 because of them for the above mentioned reason.

And to the person who said Rebecca is useless in Mercenaries. Head shot plus Flame spray = instant FAST kill. It makes her EXTREMELY powerful and useful. Her Jail Breaker is nearly fully upgraded as well which makes taking down plagas and bosses ridiculously simple. She also comes with enough ammo to get her through an entire map without ever needing to pick anymore up, as well as two First Aids.

The only downside to Rebecca is her other melee's are weak, but, again, you shouldn't be using those. Flame Spray is an instant kill and will kill anything that gets in it's path as well. So if you head shot one majini and 2 are next to it when you use flame spray, all 3 die. And the melee comes out and recovers so fast it's incredibly easy to wrack up +5 seconds constantly. Rebecca is up there with Excella, Business Sheva and Barry for being beasts in Reunion.

Too bad i cant use her on versus =(

Resident Evil 5 was a solid 7.0, maybe a 7.5, when it was released, and while I enjoyed the two new scenarios, they don't really improve the experience as a whole for me. To be fair to Resident Evil 5, there was no way it was going to live up to the monumental hype. From that standpoint, it had two things going against it. It was the sequel to one of the most critically acclaimed games of all time, but, perhaps even more of a contributing factor was the fact that Capcom spent more money on the marketing campaign than the actual game itself. In addition, they tried to market it as something very different than what it actually was (the whole "Fear You Can't Forget" tagline and whatnot).

To their credit, this time around they made no bones about precisely what Lost in Nightmares and Desperate Escape were going to be. Having bought into the hype for Resident Evil 5 (and was ultimately left extremely unsatisfied with the final product as a result), I went into both LiN and DE with decidedly low expectations. This proved beneficial, as I was pleasantly surprised by both scenarios. And while I initially enjoyed both scenarios more than the entirety of Resident Evil 5, I feel that the main reason for that was because I had such low expectations. Both are solid, if not spectacular, additions to what was a pretty forgettable experience the first time around. They certainly help to elevate Resident Evil 5, but they by no means save it.

My biggest fear at this point is, if this is what we have to look forward to from the future of the franchise, the series will fall into the very state of irrelevancy Resident Evil 4 almost single-handedly saved it from five years ago. While, as I said, Resident Evil 5 and the new scenarios were solid efforts, they were not enough to compete with the other current heavy hitters in their respective genres (third person shooter, survival horror). Generally speaking, Resident Evil 5 failed to satisfy fans of either genre, and moving forward from here, Capcom will really need to sit back and decide just what they want to do with this series. LiN and DE show two distinct possibilities, but without visionaries like Shinji Mikami or Hideki Kamiya to take over the reins, I suspect the series will languish much like it did in the period between CODE: Veronica and 4.

May I ask exactly where all your information and 'facts' come from? You state they spent more on their marketing than on the game itself, can you prove this?

You also state that RE5 and it's new scenarios were not enough to compete with other current heavy hitters etc. Can you prove this? Because figures would say otherwise. AE was the number 1 selling game in Japan on release, Resident Evil 5 was the number one selling game at it's release, it's sold truckloads. It was in the top 10 on gamefaqs for more than half a year and still worms it's way back into the top 10 from time to time which means it's still in the top 20 a year later. It was in the top 10 most played online games on xbox live for 2009. Etc.

So again I ask where these claims of yours are coming from? If you can provide the evidence to prove these claims I'd appreciate it. Because as it is, outside of your OPINION that RE5 did not do well, it actually did in fact do extremely well and has competed with the other 'heavy hitters' quite well.

As I stated, Resident Evil 5 and Biohazard 5 were on the top 10 (even top 5) list of most played xbox live games of 2009. That's both the US and Jap versions making the list, not just one or the other. They also remain being one of the top played games on xbox live currently.

LiN and DE also both sold so well that Sven on Unity stated there is a high chance of future DLC content because interest and support was so high for the current DLC.

So in the future, it'd be nice if you didn't let your 'opinion' be presented as factual and try to make unfounded claims to try and pretend your opinion is widely accepted, thank you.

It was a joke. Calm down.

All I was saying was that Capcom spent an inordinate amount of time and money on the marketing campaign for this game. Was it more than what they spent on the actual game itself? Probably not, but my point still stands.



Hoo boy, where do I start?

First of all, I feel it is necessary to point out that you yourself claimed that just because a large number of people believe Final Fantasy VII is the greatest game of all time does not make it a fact. Similarly, just because Resident Evil 5 sold gangbusters does not mean that it held its own against other similar titles. Financially, yes, it obviously did, and in several cases, it far exceeded the sales of its competitors. However, financial success does not equal critical success.

I was not referring to sales. I was referring to the critical reception and the reception by the gaming community at large. I thought this was fairly obvious, but apparently not. In the future I will make sure to distinguish between financial success and critical success when I claim that a title is unsuccessful in appealing to a particular fanbase or the gaming community at large. As I said, I didn't think something like that needed to be delineated, but for your benefit, I will be sure to do so.

Now, moving on to your accusation that I have presented my opinions as fact, I believe the above explanation I have offered should serve as a sufficient rebuttal. However, to offer further clarity, it can be difficult to quantify a game's success from a critical standpoint, yes. Certainly more difficult than when viewing it from a strictly financial perspective. And even then, many will disagree for the simple fact that we are, in fact, dealing with individuals' opinions.

Resident Evil 5 received a relatively lukewarm response from gaming media when it was released. It only received a few of what could legitimately be considered "bad" reviews, but it didn't exactly light up the charts with overtly positive reviews, either. It certainly didn't receive the same glowing reviews its predecessor did, but then, few games have. The general consensus seems to be that it was a solid experience, but it wasn't anything spectacular, and the gaming community at large seems to agree with this.

If you go to any video game forum out there, and it's best to visit ones that are not dedicated to the Resident Evil series so as to limit the fanboy factor as much as possible, you will find that a vast majority of gamers consider Resident Evil 5 to be an inferior product to its competitors, and certainly when compared to Resident Evil 4. Does this make it fact? No, of course not. But as I said, it's difficult to establish "facts" when you're dealing with opinions. Even so, opinions drive this industry. Perhaps not as much as sales, but they do factor greatly into the equation when a new game is being developed, whether it is a new IP or a new entry in a storied franchise.

You would be hard pressed to find an individual who would argue that Resident Evil 5 is a better horror game than, say, Dead Space, just as few would argue that Resident Evil 5 is a better third person shooter than, say, Gears of War. Why is this? Well, for many, it's the simple fact that Resident Evil 5 does not commit itself to one genre over another. Dead Space is clearly a game entrenched within the survival horror genre. Gears of War, on the other hand, is a third person shooter to the fullest extent. Resident Evil 5 attempts to straddle these two genres, and as a result, many people were disappointed, because they either went in expecting a survival horror experience or a full blown third person shooter, and RE5 is quite clearly neither of these.

And this is precisely why it is necessary to remove the fanboy factor. While there are certainly exceptions, generally speaking when you have an individual who is not a fanboy/girl review a game, or at least offer their take, whether it be in an official or unofficial capacity, he/she will judge the game on its merits independent of any personal bias he/she may have for that particular series. There is nothing wrong with fans reviewing or sharing their thoughts about games from their favorite franchises. It just makes it more difficult to determine what is objective (or, at least, as objective as an opinion can be) and what is more subjective.

For example, fans of the Resident Evil series generally will not have a problem with the fact that you cannot move and shoot at the same time, because that is the way it has always been. This is pretty much a given. However, fans of third person shooters like Gears of War or Uncharted will take issue with this particular gameplay mechanic, because of how restrictive it feels compared to other shooters. Now, one could argue that Resident Evil 5 is not meant to be played like a traditional third person shooter, and in many cases, this person would be correct.

However, Capcom gives the illusion of playing a more traditional third person shooter with the addition of a cover system, more traditional third person dual analog controls, and even enemies who use guns. The game was even billed by several members of Capcom USA as a third person shooter more than a survival horror or action horror title. It certainly doesn't help that so many third person shooters have taken inspiration from Resident Evil 4's basic design template, so what was once unique to the Resident Evil series, if only for one game, isn't so unique anymore.

Now, let's look at it from the viewpoint of a fan of the survival horror genre. Resident Evil 5 is an installment in a series known for its survival horror trappings. The game is even marketed as being a survival horror title, and many members of the development team apparently still considered it very much a survival horror title. It certainly maintains some of the vestiges of its survival horror heritage with the aforementioned inability to move and shoot at the same time and the inventory management.

However, similar to a third person shooter, it is set in a decidedly un-survival horror setting, the characters are loaded for bear, and there are no puzzles to speak of. Given the choice, most survival horror fans would pick something like Dead Space over this. In fact, look at just about any article posted regarding Resident Evil 5 on any video game website, and inevitably in the comments would will find people comparing it to Dead Space or claiming Dead Space is a better horror game or something of that nature. For many, the Resident Evil series has been dethroned in one fell swoop by a young upstart.

Resident Evil 5 has also appeared on several "Most Disappointing Titles of 2009" lists, including from websites and publications that gave it a favorable review score. And as I'm sure you'll no doubt point out, that does not make it fact. Of course it doesn't. But no one was arguing it as fact. I certainly was not. Or do I need to start putting "IMO" after everything I type?