What are you currently playing? 4.0

[Foggle]

This chapter and the one after it.

Yeah, Wesker is seriously badass in this game. But it's kind of sad when cutscenes and QTEs are more interesting than actual gameplay. I remember Lost In Nightmares and Desperate Escape being far better than the main story, so I can't wait to reach those missions. The former is actually a pretty decent attempt at crafting a horror game with the new RE style while the latter does action a lot better than the normal campaign. Also, Jill's knifing style is absolutely hilarious. i.e. SHANK SHANK SHANK HAHAHAHA

I honestly take back everything bad I ever said about 0 and Code Veronica. They're masterpieces compared to 5.

[talonmalon333]

This chapter and the one after it.

Yeah, Wesker is seriously badass in this game. But it's kind of sad when cutscenes and QTEs are more interesting than actual gameplay. I remember Lost In Nightmares and Desperate Escape being far better than the main story, so I can't wait to reach those missions. The former is actually a pretty decent attempt at crafting a horror game with the new RE style while the latter does action a lot better than the normal campaign. Also, Jill's knifing style is absolutely hilarious. i.e. SHANK SHANK SHANK HAHAHAHA

I honestly take back everything bad I ever said about 0 and Code Veronica. They're masterpieces compared to 5.

Ah, I do remember that section. It was pretty cool.

I haven't played Desperate Escape yet, but Lost In Nightmares was brilliant, even though it's main monster was just a reskinned Executioner.

I think another one of RE5's problems is that it has all the right material for a decent story (it's tying up loose ends of plotlines that have been around since RE1, after all). But it resolved the story so terribly. I mean, RE4's story wasn't extremely relevant to the main series, but it's told quite well.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

Damn, you guys are talking about RE5 likes its one of the worst games ever.

While I wouldn't be that harsh based on what I've played of it, I definitely don't think it comes anywhere close to RE4's level of creativity and brilliance. That said I don't necessarily think its a bad game. Maybe the later stages of the game are really terrible or something, but I did genuinely have fun playing through the first 2 chapters of the game with my brother on co-op. I just feel that its a passable action game on its own but probably a bad RE game when compared to the standards of the series as a whole, from the previous games.

Its pretty much the same deal with how NG3 is turning out. As an NG game it looks horrible. As a regular hack n' slash game, though, it just looks average, but not necessarily bad (well, OK, parts of it look bad to me, but it doesn't look like a terrible game compared to some other games in the genre, if that makes any sense). Though in this case it'll be an even worse action game than something like RE5 because at least that game didn't stupidly limit you to one weapon-time throughout the entire game....

[Foggle]

Yeah, RE 5 is worth buying for Lost In Nightmares alone if you can find the Gold Edition for $10 or less.

The worst part is that the story is actually kind of promising and starts off fairly well, but then it goes straight down the crapper as soon as you leave the oil fields. As far as secondary villains go, Irving is laughable (worst boss fight in RE history IMO), while Excella is just downright lame. And anyone could see the twist about Bird Lady coming from a mile away. That whole subplot was so obviously phoned in...

In fact, the story plays out like a sequel to a previous game; one with a cliffhanger ending, at that. Utter tripe.

I have just been made aware that RE 6 will have co-op. If they handle the single-player mode like Revelations -- your partner has unlimited ammo, can't die or kill enemies, and doesn't get attacked often -- or F.E.A.R. 3 -- you play the game solo but your partner pops up in cutscenes -- then I'll be fine with it. But if it ends up being like RE 5, I really don't know if I'll even want to play it.

Damn, you guys are talking about RE5 likes its one of the worst games ever.

What can I say, we both love hyperbole!

While I wouldn't be that harsh based on what I've played of it, I definitely don't think it comes anywhere close to RE4's level of creativity and brilliance. That said I don't necessarily think its a bad game. Maybe the later stages of the game are really terrible or something, but I did genuinely have fun playing through the first 2 chapters of the game with my brother on co-op.

Barring chapter 2-3, the first two episodes are actually quite good despite being kind of generic. Episode 4 and the DLC episodes are also great. But the rest of the game is pretty bad IMO.

[talonmalon333]

Damn, you guys are talking about RE5 likes its one of the worst games ever.

Human beings just like to bitch. It's how we're made.

But I still like the game though. The DLC is awesome, the multiplayer is fun, and main villain is awesome. There's just too much that keeps it from the rank of the greats. Probably has a lot to do with Shinji Mikami, series creator, leaving the team.

Yeah, RE 5 is worth buying for Lost In Nightmares alone if you can find the Gold Edition for $10 or less.

I had to unlock those missions as DLC, as I didn't wait for the Gold Edition. Back in the day RE5 was one of my most anticipated video games, so I ended up snagging it as soon as I could.

The worst part is that the story is actually kind of promising and starts off fairly well, but then it goes straight down the crapper as soon as you leave the oil fields. As far as secondary villains go, Irving is laughable (worst boss fight in RE history IMO), while Excella is just downright lame. And anyone could see the twist about Bird Lady coming from a mile away. That whole subplot was so obviously phoned in...

Another thing about the plot of the game is that it introduces new story elements, but it treats them as if they're long established. They go on talking about Tricell and Uroborous, but we barely even know them. They just act like these things have been around for a while, when all they really did was make a tiny foreshadowing to Tricell in Dengeration.

I have just been made aware that RE 6 will have co-op. If they handle the single-player mode like Revelations -- your partner has unlimited ammo, can't die or kill enemies, and doesn't get attacked often -- or F.E.A.R. 3 -- you play the game solo but your partner pops up in cutscenes -- then I'll be fine with it. But if it ends up being like RE 5, I really don't know if I'll even want to play it.

I like how they aren't saying much about RE6. Makes things better that way.

They do say that it's "a giant stride forward in the evolution of the series". Whether that's "action RE meets horror RE" or something else, it should be interesting.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

If they are going to force co-op on this game as well, they should at least take mercy on the people who want to solo the game and make their computer controlled partner invincible, though at the same time not too overpowered so as to not make the game too easy. Either that or they can do one of those things that most other co-op games do, where if you're partner takes enough damage they'll go down but not die, giving you a chance to either try and revive them (at the risk of getting attacked by enemies yourself), or leave them there until you finish the battle yourself, at which point they will automatically be revived. There are plenty of good co-op systems that Capcom could utilize that are easily MUCH better than what they had going in RE5. Just please, for the love of god, don't let the computer AI have ANY control over their inventories, or at least don't force the players to have to use their inventories to store items on single-player mode. I just can't deal with having to trust the computer AI with ammo or items that they will surely expend before we really actually need them.

Personally, I think that the best kind of co-op that would actually be very fitting for an RE game would be something similar to what DOOM 3 did with its co-op, where you and your partner split up and go through slightly different routes and meet up at other points. That way you'll be working with your partner but you'll still be alone in various rooms by yourself to help with the scare factor. It can also create some interesting moments where you both run in on each other and give each other a little startle and probably pull off a few shots at each other until you realize that you aren't enemies.

That said, the one problem would be that if one person died then the game would be over, but they could alleviate that by making it so that you were never too far off from your partner so that if need be they could move over a few rooms to get to you and revive you. It might make things too easy and a little less scary, but it would stop the game from being too frustrating, as well.

Anyways, that's just me throwing some ideas out there. Personally I'd prefer a solid single-player experience, with maybe some co-op specific missions outside of the main game (like how many other action games seem to handle co-op, these days), but if Capcom is going to insist on forcing co-op on players, I do at least think that this is a better way to implement it for an RE game.

[talonmalon333]

If they are going to force co-op on this game as well, they should at least take mercy on the people who want to solo the game and make their computer controlled partner invincible, though at the same time not too overpowered so as to not make the game too easy. Either that or they can do one of those things that most other co-op games do, where if you're partner takes enough damage they'll go down but not die, giving you a chance to either try and revive them (at the risk of getting attacked by enemies yourself), or leave them there until you finish the battle yourself, at which point they will automatically be revived. There are plenty of good co-op systems that Capcom could utilize that are easily MUCH better than what they had going in RE5. Just please, for the love of god, don't let the computer AI have ANY control over their inventories, or at least don't force the players to have to use their inventories to store items on single-player mode. I just can't deal with having to trust the computer AI with ammo or items that they will surely expend before we really actually need them.

Personally, I think that the best kind of co-op that would actually be very fitting for an RE game would be something similar to what DOOM 3 did with its co-op, where you and your partner split up and go through slightly different routes and meet up at other points. That way you'll be working with your partner but you'll still be alone in various rooms by yourself to help with the scare factor. It can also create some interesting moments where you both run in on each other and give each other a little startle and probably pull off a few shots at each other until you realize that you aren't enemies.

That said, the one problem would be that if one person died then the game would be over, but they could alleviate that by making it so that you were never too far off from your partner so that if need be they could move over a few rooms to get to you and revive you. It might make things too easy and a little less scary, but it would stop the game from being too frustrating, as well.

Anyways, that's just me throwing some ideas out there. Personally I'd prefer a solid single-player experience, with maybe some co-op specific missions outside of the main game (like how many other action games seem to handle co-op, these days), but if Capcom is going to insist on forcing co-op on players, I do at least think that this is a better way to implement it for an RE game.

I think as a whole, I'd prefer the the whole game being coop-able rather than purely single-player. But like you say here, it really has to be done right. I like the idea that your partner is invincible but also not overpowered. That's kinda how Luis was in RE4, when you're both held up in that cabin.

[Spark Of Spirit]

I played the demo of RE5. I died twice, one was from my partner getting stuck and the other was from me getting stuck. I might as well have been playing Gears 1 during that charging sequence. That's pretty much what it felt like.

[Foggle]

Yeah, 5 is basically just Gears with worse AI and bad controls. 4 and Revelations (from what I can tell) are far, far better.

[Rynnec]

Since we're currently on the subject of RE, I thought that this would be an interesting article to link to.

Not sure why they decided to use RE if they wanted to attract the CoD crowd.

[Foggle]

Thankfully, they're only really talking about ORC in that article, which is a straight-up shooter and a spin-off. It also looks bloody awful. Say what you will about them, but the CoD games are at least mechanically solid if not exceptional. ORC's shooting looks extremely loose and unsatisfying, it has some of the worst AI I've ever seen (both enemy and friendly), and its graphics are on par with vanilla Fallout 3 (yet it still has frame rate issues and screen-tearing out the ass).

[Foggle]

Oh my fucking god level 5-3.

Capcom Employee A: OH MAN I JUST HAD A GREAT IDEA FOR RESIDENT EVIL 5
Capcom Employee B: Really, what is it?
A: Okay, so... you're on a constantly spinning platform.
B: Yes?
A: And people are sniping at you.
B: Uh huh.
A: From, like, 500 yards away.
B: Go on.
A: And they stand behind cover so there's only a couple of pixels open for you to shoot.
B: Right.
A: And you have to kill all of them to move on with the level.
B: And you still can't move and shoot at the same time?
A: Yeah!
B: And you expect people to do this with a console controller and no aim assist?
A: Of course!
B: .....
A: .....
B: You're fucking brilliant! Put that shit in!
A: It's gonna' be GOTY!

[talonmalon333]

Oh my fucking god level 5-3.

Capcom Employee A: OH MAN I JUST HAD A GREAT IDEA FOR RESIDENT EVIL 5
Capcom Employee B: Really, what is it?
A: Okay, so... you're on a constantly spinning platform.
B: Yes?
A: And people are sniping at you.
B: Uh huh.
A: From, like, 500 yards away.
B: Go on.
A: And they stand behind cover so there's only a couple of pixels open for you to shoot.
B: Right.
A: And you have to kill all of them to move on with the level.
B: And you still can't move and shoot at the same time?
A: Yeah!
B: And you expect people to do this with a console controller and no aim assist?
A: Of course!
B: .....
A: .....
B: You're fucking brilliant! Put that shit in!
A: It's gonna' be GOTY!

You guys really need to install the option to "Like" posts on this forum.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

LOL!

The sad thing is that somebody clearly must have thought that was a good idea if it made it into the final version of the game.

That said, I honestly don't think the use of a console controller is what makes the control in RE5 bad. After all, I have played tons of TPS games on consoles and they control just fine, including RE4. I think its just the fact that Capcom ripped the control-scheme straight out of RE4 in a game that was clearly meant to be played a lot more like Gears of War or some other generic action shooter than a Resident Evil game. That's why the controls feel so poor. If they were going to insist on not allowing you to move and shoot at the same time, they shouldn't have made RE5 into a straight-up action shooter.

[Foggle]

My bad, guys; that was level 6-1, not 5-3.

EDIT: Never mind, it really was 5-3. Don't know why I second-guessed myself.

That said, I honestly don't think the use of a console controller is what makes the control in RE5 bad. After all, I have played tons of TPS games on consoles and they control just fine, including RE4.

Oh no, I just think it's ridiculous to expect people to be able to hit tiny pixels from far away on a spinning platform without the precision of a mouse or Wii-mote/light gun. RE 4 and Vanquish are some of my favorite shooters, but they're console exclusives (PC version of RE 4 doesn't count), and they definitely have great controls. I'm sure Max Payne is good with a controller, as well.

Unlike RE 5, those games are built for and around their respective control schemes.