• We've completed one of the biggest updates to our forums in years and have pushed the update live! New forum structure that's all inclusive, prefix system categorizes topics per game title. More thread options such as articles, questions, deep dives, etc. Read more in the pinned thread!

General Random Thoughts: Biohazard/Resident Evil edition

Something funny happened.

I have analyzed all the information I have received recently and made a reasoned theory based on the few data we have. After that, I decided to share the theory on the Resident Evil subreddit, which I usually always do.

And my theory was blocked by moderation. I thought it was a mistake because it had never happened before, so I published the theory again. It was blocked again by moderation.

I understand that there may be different reasons, but does this mean that I have found something?
 
I really want to know the release date for Resident Evil Village, as I want to save up for a PS5 early next year. ?

But don't rush things, Capcom. Take your time. Give fans a quality game!
 
Speaking of Resident Evil 2, I often hear about how Capcom developers are lazy because they cut content from the original.

I believed and still believe that such an opinion cannot claim to be objective and is rather a primitivization of complex development processes to the level of a convenient and immature narrative.

First of all, a small team of developers worked on the original. It took a lot less people, a lot less resources, and even a lot less time to create the game than it did for the remake.

Back then, the geometry of the levels was very simple, so developers could re-use the enemies from the previous game without the risk that their intelligence would conflict with the environment. This is what happened with spiders and crows: they were literally borrowed from the first game. Their intelligence, animations, textures, and even sounds were not changed. This was done in order to artificially increase the content.

Second, the combat system and animations have become much more difficult to implement. Now you don't just have to choose the direction to hit the enemy: now you need to develop a quality impact that depends on the point where the damage was done, and other factors.

You should also think about how characters and enemies interact with the environment. In addition, developers need to develop an immersive environment, binaural sound, and other things that were never in the original due to the primitiveness of the technology. In the original, all locations are divided into strict segments, and instead of a deep sound design, there was music. To create sounds in modern games, you need a lot of people, and for music, you need at least one composer.

There is a popular opinion that games are easier to make in modern days. They say that earlier technologies were more primitive, so developers were constrained in their capabilities, but now it seems that nothing restricts them.

Well, this is partly true, but it is also a big misconception. To make a modern game, now you need a lot more specialists, time and money. If in the original cutscenes were simple, and complex emotions were expressed through screams and gesticulations, now there is a whole group of specialists who work with the actors and make motion capture. Then there is another team of specialists who edit the material. Perhaps someone did not know, but in modern cutscenes, as in movies, the lighting changes individually for each angle.

So when someone says that developers are cutting out content, think carefully, is it reasonable for the company to make an expensive game even more expensive because the original had crutches like scenarios and enemies that artificially increased the content? I think not. I would like the remake to be bigger, but now, when we especially talk about big games, there are always compromises.

This doesn't mean you have to like the remake. This also doesn't mean that you have to agree to different creative solutions. However, if you are trying to call someone lazy and greedy simply because you did not like the game and you do not try to understand the question, then personally I am unlikely to take this opinion into account. But those who have interesting criticism, and who do not try to expose the greed of unknown people, I will listen with pleasure.
 
Last edited:
I understand that there may be different reasons, but does this mean that I have found something?
There are a lot of these Resident Evil fanboys who live in denial to the truth.

And you are screwed if one of them becomes a moderator.
That was kind of what I experienced in Capcom Unity.
They would lock threads that are "spreading rumors" but the mods themselves will spread misconceptions that they believe in.
 

mert20004

Mert_BIO_6
I'm not sure if this is the best place to say this but am ı the only one who doesnt like awesome games wiki and crappy games wiki sites?

I used to like them actually; they allowed me to create a page for re6 at agw in the past but they decided to delete the page for unknown reasons and create one at cgw instead. I asked this to them multiple times but unfortunately ı was banned from the site for having an opinion. The admins there are rude as hell. One of the admins never even played the game ( According to his own words; " I never played any re games. " ) and he's basically riding the hate bandwagon for the game. I dont think it deserves to be at cgw but whatever; ı dont care for those 2 garbage sites anymore.

This is the page:


" Just like Resident Evil 4 and Resident Evil 5, it focuses too much on action (even more than Resident Evil 4 and 5) and not on horror. "

What's wrong with action? Every re game focuses on action. Plus each mainline entry ( excluding remake, re0 and rerev entries. ) focuses on action more than the previous one. ( Re2 focuses on action more than re1, re3 and recv more than re2. ) I agree that the horror aspect could have been done better but it still has its moments. ( Though ı dont think any re game in the series is scary. )

" Some pretty dumb moments like when Helena saves a dead pilot, doing a QTE when looking for car keys, or when Leon and Helena take an infected girl with them. "

I agree about the pilot and the qte. As for liz though; why wouldnt they take her with them? If they shot her and her dad instantly, that would be out of character for them.

" For whatever reason, the game has limited resources, which doesn't work since the game is more action packed then any other Resident Evil game. This is especially egregious when you consider that the previous games that were more action focused (Resident Evil 4 and Revelations) don't have this problem. "

What's wrong with limited resources? They add to the challenge aspect of the game. Besides re4 and re5 also focus on action more than horror and they have limited resources. Rerev games are middle ground; ı wouldnt call them action focused.

" Way too many QTEs. Much to their merit though, some of them can be disabled through options menu and a skill can be equipped to make them execute easier. "

I agree with this.

" Too many vehicle, turret, and running segments for a Resident Evil game. "

Again, agree with this.

" While the game having high variety is a good thing, it makes the game seem like it has an identity crisis seeing as how it has elements of stealth, horror, third person shooting, driving, puzzles, and ect. "

Re4 and re5 also have multiple gameplay elements and yet they dont suffer from identity crisis for a reason?

" The skill system while itself isn't a bad idea, a lot of skills seemingly do nothing aside from the most obvious like how you can get more bars for stamina. There's also limitations. You can't equip more than 3 skills at a time unless you change the skill set which disables the previous equipped set. "

They improve your stats, how is that " seemingly do nothing " ? I agree that the limitations are lame but on pc; you can change between sets quickly with f1-8 buttons. They also work in all 4 campaign unlike re5 jill dlcs.

" The camera sometimes can't be controlled and is locked instead. "

Agree with this.

" A lot of the slower scenes of the game, despite having good atmosphere, are very bland and boring especially at the first level of Leon's campaign since you mostly just walk slowly through hallways. "

Well you can at least skip some chapter sections in re6 unlike in re4 and re5. ( For example; you cant skip del lego or cant skip straight into wesker boss fights. )

" The 6 logo design isn't liked by some fans. A common joke made about it is "A person sucking a giraffe's penis". "

Never understood this joke. I think it looks like a 6 made from webs. It's supposede to represent the campaign connecting aspect of the game.

" The prologue level doesn't teach some of the gameplay mechanics to the player. "

Agree with this.

" While the game does look good, there are many areas that have low quality textures. Some are so bad they look like .jpg images, which the game attempts to cover up by hiding them in very dark places. "

Agree with this.

" It's too over the top for a Resident Evil game with a lot of action movie clichés and "jumping the shark" moments like explosions and characters surviving attacks that would normally kill someone due to plot armor. "

Re was always campy and over the top; it adds to the charm.

" NPC animations (mainly the BSAA soldiers in Chris' campaign) are bad. "

Agree with this.

" Agent, who is the coop partner for Ada and doesn't exist in the plot, is badly designed in Ada's campaign. He can't open doors, interact with most items and automatically teleports to Ada's side when a key event happens. "

At least he's optional. Still agree with this.

" Even though campaigns connecting to each other is a good thing; in some cases, it causes the player to fight the same boss again. "

Still better designed than re2 2019. ( The scenarios dont connect to each other in that game and yet it's on agw. )

" You can't drop items from your inventory like in Resident Evil 0 and there's no item box or storage system from Resident Evil 5, so the only way to free space in your inventory is to discard items. "

Agree with this.

" The stealth is flawed as enemies can't hear characters' footsteps, for the most part, and the "silent" takedowns make more noise than they should. "

At least gunfire alerts enemies unlike certain section in re5. Plus crossbow is a silent weapon. ( Normal arrows. )

" Some of the enemies are scripted in some parts. During these parts, the enemies don't react to getting shot. "

Agree with this.

" The puzzles are very easy. "

Ada's campaign has good puzzles; it took me some time to figure them out.

" The player can't share items with their partner. (Unless the game is being played on split-screen.) "

Never played split-screen but fine.

" There are no unlockable weapons nor costumes unlike other main Resident Evil games. "

Well there's infinite ammo unlockables and there are costumes though the variety could have been done better. Still better than re7's unlockables.

" Siege, Onslaught, Predator and Survivors modes are still sold by money. "

Dont care about these modes except onslaught.

" The two new characters Jake and Helena are two dimensional at best and are forgettable. "

How are they forgettable? I think they are more interesting than re4 and re5's new characters. I can understand some hate for helena though since she " replaces " claire but what's wrong with jake? I think he has good character development throught the game.

" The vehicle controls feel slippery, especially when driving, as it feels like the car is driving on ice. "

I dont get it; they are better designed than re4 and re5's vehicle sections. Controls are fantastic.

" Most of the bosses are forgettable. "

How so?

" A lot of combat can get pretty repetitive after a while and its even worse when fighting enemies with weapons as it plays more like a generic third-person shooter (this is especially apparent in Chris' campaign). "

It doesnt play generic ever since it combines melee and gunplay very well and it has the best and most complex combat in the series. If it's getting repetitive; play something else.

" The game's tone is inconsistent since it constantly switches back and forth between solemn and serious to balls-to-the-wall action. This also affects the pacing of the game. "

Every re game is like that. I dont get the problem about pacing; it's fine most of the time.

" The inventory system is very clunky due to the horizontal and vertical layout, which makes switching between weapons tedious since the inventory is done in real time. "

I agree that weapon shortcuts can help but you can switch between weapons fast ( You can even switch places. ) so it's not tedious.

" There are sections in each campaign that require to search for three objects, which feels more like busy work. "

Re4 and re5 also have sections like these and yet it's only a problem for re6 for some reason? I like these sections personally; it's better designed than reorc.

" The game doesn't have much in terms of replay value because of how long most of the levels are. "

It has more replay value than other re games; ı've spent thousands of hours on the game.

" Derek Simmons is a forgettable antagonist. "

How is he forgettable exactly? He has nice backstory within files. Plus his mutations are insane. I think he's more interesting than re4's and re5's villains. ( Except wesker obviously. )

" While of the concept of the plot is interesting, it's bland and forgettable. It's also really dumb when you realize that all this started because Derek was rejected by Ada and tried to recreate Ada. "

" Interesting " and " Bland / forgettable " contradict themselves; which one? As for the backstory between simmons and ada; ı personally found it tragic for carla. ( The game is a dramatic horror experience. ) I think re6 has better story than other re games. I think re4 and re7 have dumb stories as well as reimaginings.

" There are certain mechanics that are crucial when playing the game that aren't told to the player at any point, like being able to quick mix herbs, paint targets for partners, quick recovery, and more. "

Well re4 and re5 dont tell every gameplay mechanic either; it's part of the fun to discover things by yourself. It feels rewarding.

What ı dont understand is dead aim is recently put to agw ( The only good thing about that game is the controls. It has better controls than re4. Everything else isnt good plus stupid gender changing morpheus ruins the game . ) but the fact is it has worse reception than re6.

I also dont like how re7 is on agw.

But anyways; just wanted to say this, thanks for reading.
 
I recently played Resident Evil 6 and I can say that I don't really like this game.

The story is not good, although I like the cinematography of the cutscenes. I think if the authors weren't so obsessed with pleasing fans with fan service, we might get a better story.

I also don't like game design. Especially the implementation of levels and the balance of pace.

The graphics got even worse over time. While some older games still look pretty (and some games like Grim Fandango don't even get outdated), Resident Evil 6 wasn't good enough even in 2013. I believe it's because of the direction. If developers were thinking about quality rather than quantity, they would be able to focus on certain stages, which would make them better.

To be honest, I have a lot of complaints about this game. I think, describing it, I would say that it has much more potential than the quality itself.

I'm really glad the series has changed direction.
 
What's wrong with implementation of levels exactly?

Some of them are just OK, but there are situations when they are unnecessarily claustrophobic, which creates discomfort in the gameplay and makes it clumsy. I also don't like that they are a background for gameplay, so there's really nothing to explore and nothing to remember. Most of them look generic, impersonal and you really don't want to wonder why there is an arcade lever in the Chinese market.

Also what do you think about dead aim?

Not a big fan, to be honest. I like the controls, some of the music tracks, but the writing is ridiculously bad.
 
Last edited:

mert20004

Mert_BIO_6
I like the levels personally despite having barely any exploration; especially compared to re5's levels. I think re5 is more disappointing than re6 which imo improves a lot from re4 and re5 and is extremely underrated.
 
Здравствуйте!
чтобы вам стало проще управлять доступом к своим данным
мы сделали поправки для сохранности вашей конфиденциальности.
Общие положения размещены на одной странице.

тык
 
I'm not sure if this is the best place to say this but am ı the only one who doesnt like awesome games wiki and crappy games wiki sites?
Don't even bother with it.
It's just someone's opinion and isn't someone with authority.

Any one of us can make our own "wiki", "encyclopedia" or even some YouTube channel full of rant videos of games we hate.

Especially the implementation of levels and the balance of pace.
I actually prefer if levels aren't visible, so the game feels longer.
Even in classic RE games, all the progress can be segmented into levels or chapters, it's just you don't see them.

However, segmenting into levels and having a chapter select feature makes it easier to enjoy the co-op gameplay.

Resident Evil 6 wasn't good enough even in 2013. I believe it's because of the direction.
That's something I noticed as well.
For some reason, the graphics of RE5 looks better than RE6 to me.
Something to do with a certain filter or texture details in RE5.
Theoretically, I think it may have something to do with accommodating the 4-player campaign intersections and lowering the graphic quality to make it all work but I have no confirmation.
 

mert20004

Mert_BIO_6
I think the graphics in re6 look good but ı agree that the low textures are lame. Re4 and re5 also had them though.

Honestly umbrella corps' graphics are worse. The graphics of that game arent as good as re5, rerev, re6 and rerev2.
 
I actually prefer if levels aren't visible, so the game feels longer.

For me, it works strictly backwards. For example, the first time I completed Leon's campaign in 9 or 10 hours, because I played slowly and tried to explore everything. However, the game encourages you to play quickly and not pay attention to such things, because they really have poor quality. If the game has some touches, they are shown as clearly as possible so that the player notices it without breaking the pace.

The remake of the third game is also short. Like Leon's campaign, people complete it in 5 or 6 hours. However, I completed it in over 25 hours because the game has a good environment. I was glad to find a mention of Albert Lester and a mention of White Umbrella, which was very well hidden.

But I understand that this is an incorrect comparison. Resident Evil 6 has not one campaign, but four. Moreover, both games are still designed differently.

I am sure that the poor quality of the environment is due to the design of the game and the amount of content. If the game is not focused on the environment and is very large, you are unlikely to want to spend time on something that is not a priority. This is not even laziness, but just optimization of production. And I just want to say that this does not correspond to my personal preferences.

Even in classic RE games, all the progress can be segmented into levels or chapters, it's just you don't see them.

It's true. Even Resident Evil 7 is literally divided into chapters that have their own titles. However, this is not the same, because the level design of classic games is close to the open world in the sense that you can freely move around locations and choose routes. Games in the series like Resident Evil 5 are more like a linear chain of arenas connected by corridors, along which you need to move, but only move forward. This makes sense, since these games are action-focused, so they're not designed in such a way that you need to do backtracking and think about whether it's worth fighting the enemy at all. You just shoot and punch them in the face, lol. And the game encourages you for this with resources, currency or points, motivating you to kill more enemies.

Speaking of Resident Evil 6, this game has a very good combat system and a fast pace. However, locations sometimes seem dark, poorly lit, and claustrophobic. This is something I particularly felt about Chris's campaign: running fast through the narrow corridors sometimes made me feel uncomfortable. And the cover system really sucks. It seems to me that this is why The Mercenaries reveal the combat system better, since they give you an open arena and do not limit your movements. I feel that the locations of the two previous games are better designed and have a great pace for this kind of design. And I also really like the environmental storytelling in Resident Evil 5. Especially the Ndipaya Kingdom.

But, to be honest, I'm not the best shooter (I genuinely hate the shooting chapters in Resident Evil 5 and Revelations, when you need to shoot and someone else controls the transport, and these games still take into account the percentage of shooting accuracy) and I play very few action games. I'm more of a person who likes to meditatively explore locations, search for items, solve puzzles, and read files. I even grew up playing games like Necronomicon: The Dawning of Darkness. If you've played this game, I think you'll understand perfectly why I prefer the remake of the first game and Resident Evil 7 more than any other approach to the franchise.
 
Top Bottom