|Wasn't a gun a staple of Resident Evil from the off?|
_ _ _
Pageof 28 First / Last
|Wasn't a gun a staple of Resident Evil from the off?|
_ _ _
Of course it was. If you remove all the horror trappings and the term survival horror from the game, change the zombies to say fantasy skeletons and give the hero a bow and arrow with everything else still the same, Resident Evil would have been classified as an action adventure game with a heavy emphasis on the action as its appeal. |
Said action would have been notable because prior to Resident Evil games had not been that strict or hard in terms of limiting ammunition, chances to save or getting yourself stuck in situations with no health or ammunition. That's where the survival aspect comes in.
It would be highly unusual and strange to claim that the appeal of Resident Evil was in its puzzles.
However, when you add in the horror elements, suddenly atmosphere becomes a big part of the appeal. Exploration, backtracking and puzzle solving slow down the pace of the game, allowing dread to build up.
Last, but not least, because Capcom likes to label all of their games with genres like monster hunting action or courtroom battle, so Resident Evil was called survival horror. Unlike most of their creations, in terms of etymology, this one stuck.
Thus, you have plenty of people who come up with what they think survival horror should be, point to the originator of the term as the only valid definition of what it could be and proceed to shit on a new generation of horror games because of that. A defining trait about these types of people is that they usually can't argue well.
Resident Evil 4, the game changer, and Resident Evil have around the same ratio of exploration and puzzle-solving to action. This is not debatable. It can be quantified with numbers if you really want to go that far. The way they manage to implement what people call survival horror -- yet what can actually just be called an action adventure in terms of pure game mechanics -- changed.
Change is okay. Change is good. Let us not forever be troglodytes who cannot accept change because we hold incorrect assumptions about what games 20 years ago were all about. Silent Hill and Clock Tower were always the more cerebral type of horror games, Resident Evil (and stuff like Dino Crisis) was always shlockier and more action-packed. Which you found scarier is entirely subjective. There is no objective way to measure which was scarier. Personally I found Resident Evil scarier precisely because of all the action and gun play in it.
Edited by JinTypeNoir at 04:49:51 22-04-2013
JinTypeNoir wrote:No. They don't. Please, prove it with numbers though.
Yes, it does.|
I'm not going to, because I'm not that invested in the argument. When I said "if you want to go that far," I meant it not in the case of "I'll do it, should you ask me," but if somebody went through the trouble of doing it, they would find that out.
If you are asking me how I came to this conclusion it is because I have played through the original so many times, I can remember all the steps from memory and there was a time in my life where the people I lived with played Resident Evil 4 all the way through over and over again nearly every day and I remember one time comparing the pacing of the two games while I sat and watched and being astonished how close the ratio was.
But the gist of it is this: It is too difficult to compare how much time should be considered the average time to win Resident Evil and Resident Evil 4, but Resident Evil 4 is much longer than Resident Evil. Everyone can agree on that. In order to win both games though, if you were to compare the pacing of sequences from start to finish, its the same basic ratio. However, both combat sequences and environments are larger in Resident Evil 4 so both exploration/puzzle-solving and combat take longer. 4 has a lot more puzzles and exploration sequences than the original, not just combat. What you remember being the emphasis is purely subjective.
I've played both plenty, and recently too, and you're wrong. There's more combat, and the pacing and structure are different. RE4 didn't cut out puzzles, but it did simplify them. No storage box or ink ribbons, and key items being kept outside of the attache case being obvious examples. There were less locked doors, and the keys for the ones that were locked were always found close by.|
If you play 1, 2, 3, then 4 in order you can see the series changing into something more action heavy and linear as it goes along. Code Veronica, for whatever reason doesn't fit, but it was rubbish, so who cares.†
Edited by King_Edward at 07:52:55 22-04-2013
Listen a minute to what you're saying and I'm saying. I said the ratio of puzzles/exploration to combat is the same. You're saying that the puzzles in RE4 are simpler and that it does not have key items in the attache case, a storage box or ink ribbons to support that the ratio is different. That Resident Evil 4 does not treat its save system the same, and does not handle items the same as Resident Evil is evidence for that.|
You also claim that it is more linear and became so after the first game, except for Code Veronica, which doesn't count because you don't like it. That the pacing and structure are different is a no duh claim. That Resident Evil 4 had more puzzles is true. That they were easier feels true, but is hard to say. Getting keys to get through doors was perhaps a puzzle and exploration mechanic fused together in the old games. In 4, you do an awful lot more exploring of larger and more intricate spaces to move the plot forward. There are not as many locked doors because Shinji Mikami wanted to do something different. Obviously, they are not the same game. That's okay. You can still have a game with the same ratio of mechanics that uses entirely different mechanics to get to that ratio.
Would you like to explain to me how changing how the mechanics work changes the ratio of how much exploration and puzzle solving there is compared to combat? And would you like to give a real assessment of how much action there was compared to puzzle solving in 2 and 3, other than "it got more linear because I say so, except for Code Veronica, which doesn't count, because I don't like it?" Because it sounds an awful lot like you seeing the changes in mechanics, and automatically equating that to less emphasis on exploration/puzzle-solving.
I see why people don't like arguing with you. |
I brought up pacing because it dictates the amount of combat in the game. The original RE has quite a flat pace. There's never really a point where the combat ramps up (maybe when the hunters come in, but only a little).
RE4 starts you off in a heavy combat area (with the villagers), then drops off, before consistently ramping it up from there, but with a long area of down time in the middle (the castle). The different combat mechanics were brought in so that they could have a lot more combat.
I absolutely adore RE4 btw.
|Hope itís a return to Resident Evil / Silent Hill style games. I want a pistol, but I want to find about 3 bullets in the entire game so have to beat people down with a packet of quavers and a johny filled with pebbles.|
|@lukejones Glad I'm not the only one|
King_Edward wrote:Ha ha, the really weird thing about this is that I don't like 4 as much as you do and we've had a similar discussion in a different thread.
Cover from the latest issue of Famitsu magazine reveals main character Detective Sebastian|
A slightly different screenshot from the same issue
Edited by Breakage at 11:25:38 25-04-2013
Edited by Breakage at 11:29:28 25-04-2013
Really looking forward to the game and have high hopes it balances action and the survival aspect. Hope it leads the way for a return of real survival horror games as they all become shooter heavy|
Recently replayed the RE4 HD, it was good to play it again but it was easy to see the worst bits they added (too much QTE, boss fights being a bit annoying etc) and then you just ramped them up for 5 and 6. 4 made a welcome change from the usual RE formula as it still had decent atmosphere.
E3 Interview and first gameplay video|
Not much gameplay shown, but it does look good so far and some of the details from the short interview sound positive.
Okay, I'd been operating on the basis that this would most likely be shit after those first few non-game trailers were so limp, but the new trailer from TGS actually looks pretty interesting. Comes across as a cross between old-style Resi and Silent Hill.|
Hopefully he's learning more from The Last of Us than he is from any of the more 'traditional' survival horror games of recent times.
|A few days after my birthday and before Destiny. If I don't pick up a PS4 (or Xbox One) sooner I will see this as the point I definitely do.|
^-That looks nice and ominous
|This screams to be played on a new machine, I might just have to get a one for this.|
Stone me, What a life!
I'm really excited by this.|
I started off little unsure, but it looks right up my street.