View Full Version : What happend to Zombies
Every time a new RE is about to come out i beg to see zombies back in the game.. What happend to the orginal story?? if you ask everyone about RE they probly going to say its a game with zombies but not anymore. That was the fun of this game.
Are we ever going to see zombies in RE again or what? the game to me looks like a different game now.. more action then horor, it feels like playing Gears of War. Comon bring back the zombies plz, you guys created a new game out of RE, am n't saying what you made is bad or anything wrong with and its a great game but i still love to see the zombies back in the game. :confused:
thezombiemessia
19-03-09, 12:15
So Zombies equals Horror?
Or Zombies equals Resident Evil?
We've had this discussion so many times now...and although I'd like to see them come back, I'll never agree with the claim that the Zombies are the main point of a Resident Evil game.
Resident Evil 4 and 5 are still RE games, especially 5. They both focus on a Biohazardous Outbreak of some kind, both involve various B.O.W's, and all cover sinister plots by evil people that want to rule the world/mankind or live forever.
Yes, Resident Evil has moved away from Survival Horror and is now an Action Adventure with a mild Horror theme/setting, but it doesn't mean it isn't Resident Evil anymore.
All these arguments can prove is that:
1 - Resident Evil no longer has Zombies in it.
2 - Resident Evil is no longer Survival Horror.
What these arguments have yet to prove:
1 - Zombies make the series what it is.
2 - The series is no longer Resident Evil.
They have evolved into harder enemies. We all love the zombies, but they weren't exactly any challenge, were they?
If you were to include the Crimson Heads, as the evolved form of a zombie, then you could argue that the Majini and Ganados have this equivalent in the "plagas heads".
If you remeber the remake of resident evil 1 on game cube when you used to kill them and after some time they come back alive (if you dont shoot the head) more agressive and run after you which was a change to make them harder.. Well everyone remembers Resident Evil as Zombies which made it different to other games. But now its like other Action game like Gears of War, am a big fan of RE but the way the story is changed and zombies are gone...they can always make it to 2 different series.
I never said they are the main point but it was the point to make the game unique and interesting. I seen it all over the internet people saying what happend to zombies. I personally knew RE as the best Survival Horror game but now i see it as a normal Action games, that people folow to know the story.
But I always love to see them to bring back the zombies and I hope we do see it one day.
thezombiemessia
19-03-09, 13:49
I'm failing to see what your argument is exactly.
You're saying that the Zombies don't make Resident Evil, but you would still want them back?
It's already been discussed that Zombies don't offer any sort of challenge anymore. Crimson Heads do offer a challenge, yes, but filling a game with Crimson Heads would offer nothing more than a skin change to the Ganados/Majinis. In other words, the enemies would differ in appearances only.
So your topic isn't focused on the Zombies, but the move towards an action game...which is an understandable complaint, but is nothing new considering how long it's been since the release of Resident Evil 4.
People that complain about the lack of Zombies seem to completely misunderstand the series. Zombies made the series famous, correct...but they certainly aren't what makes the series what it is.
As I have said, the only argument that people really put forward that has any strength behind it is that the genre has changed...
Look the point here is how the game is changed... from Survival Horror to an Action game, I also love to see the zombies back but wouldnt that make people comfused? As you said the only thing is changed are enemys which replace the zombies only a skin, and i still dont find them hard. They could of made the zombies harder with new types of them (involving to something differen). The point here is RE is changed and its like a new game isnt it?
Im sure most of the fans want to see zombies back in the game to change the game gener back to what it was, basically i havnt seen any games that changes the game story like this. what you saying is they changed the game just to make the game harder? but then what about the classic RE? when people never knew whats coming next??
thezombiemessia
19-03-09, 14:23
Im sure most of the fans want to see zombies back in the game to change the game gener back to what it was, basically i havnt seen any games that changes the game story like this. what you saying is they changed the game just to make the game harder? but then what about the classic RE? when people never knew whats coming next??
Once again you've fallen back on yourself.
You are stating that the Zombies are what create the genre...but they aren't. The Zombies were not and are not an integral part of the Survival Horror genre.
What is integral is Survival and Horror, whether you fight against Ghosts, Zombies, Frogs or killer Mushrooms...aslong as there is a Survival and Horror, you have a Survival Horror game.
And, as I have said, I agree that Resident Evil was at its best when it was Survival Horror, not Action Adventure...but this aspect of the series isn't going to ever come back again...or at least not for a long time.
And you are twisting my words. I didn't say that Capcom changed the game to make it harder, I said that Zombies offered no challenge.
The enemies had to change somehow to offer a different style of gameplay, because people knew what to do and expect with every installment of the series.
Admittedly the change to Ganado or Majini isn't that great, they COULD have come up with a way of just evolving the Zombie, but still keeping them as Zombies...but they didn't, haven't, and probably never will do...so there is little that can be done to change that.
You say "when people never knew what was coming next" but also forget that by the time it got to Code Veronica, we did know what was coming next...we were going to fight Zombies and other, slightly faster, enemies..but we would eventually be equipped with the weaponry to defeat them.
The enemies aren't the important thing in this instance, it is the setting and theme that is what created the Horror and Suspense of the series. The enemies were just a nice addition.
If RE1 had contained Majini instead of Zombies, the games feeling would be no different, because the setting was perfect.
Once again I say the argument here is the change of Genre, not of enemy.
Zombies are what created RE... right?
The differences stem from technology.
Back in the day, the limitations meant that they could not create the games as intended, resulting in what we know and love as Resident Evil, However, given the advancements of technology they could begin to produce the games as originally intended.
Given the chance, they would have kept the zombies, however, since they where slow and shambolic, combat with them would have been extremely easy, so they introduced enemies that are technically zombies (no free will) but are much smarter and faster.
I'd say that they did all the could with the old system and it's controls, given that the remake of Resident Evil 1 and Resident Evil 4 where both on the same console, I think we would all be a bit sore if RE5 was RE0 with bells on, even with the release of RE0 people started to find this method of control a bit repetitive.
True, the recent games are flawed due to action over horror, however, If it's true that they are making a new series of Resident Evil games, they should eventually overcome these flaws and we'll have a series on par with the originals.
thezombiemessia
19-03-09, 14:41
Zombies are what created RE... right?
Simply put, no.
Zombies are what people remember from the game, and they are what the game is remembered for...but they certainly didn't make the game what it is.
As I say, if the enemies had been something else, it would have still been the same...because in the long run it is the setting and theme of the series that kept it going.
Well I see the story changed the game changed.. as long as I remember I heard bell is coming back on RE5 but... Well they rathered making new enemys to change the game. But I hope we see zombies back on the series one day.
Well personally I think if RE didnt start with zombies thn it would of been just like normal games and not much of story in it, same as I see now I dont undrestand the point of it. the only hard thing about the new enemys are is that they gang you and are abit smarter.. but if they did the same thing with zombies where you get a gang of zombies running after you it would of been much more intresting just like the movie. one more thing i saw on the internet was they maiking a movie for RE5 and thay might be one of the reason they changed the story line cause we seen enough of zombi movies.
xxgeordieliamxx
19-03-09, 15:31
heres a good question Why not use both???
make zombies faster and more resiliant to firearms but stupid and beef up the ai of the majujus
I think the problem here is they are called Majini.
So they could reskin the enemies to look more dead, remove the majni animations and call them zombies and it would be ok?
The majini supplies you with a multitude of enemies and variations to kill so there's not a huge difference.
There is a big difference, the game is not horror as you play and never knew who you facing next or never know whats coming next, just bring back zombies but make them like movies when every time you face them its not just 4-6 of them it could be like 15 of them and some smarter ones like the ones in RE1 when they died and came back much stronger and faster which some times did make me run off or die cause they were much stronger and faster.
if we do a poll probly most of the people want the classic RE but would it be possible?
More zombies? No thanks. Play one of the other 100 Resident Evil games. Saying there's no horror in RE5 is ridiculous. You seem to be confusing "horror" with "cheap Hollywood panic scares".
Member_of_STARS
19-03-09, 16:25
Im sorry, angry villagers with pitchforks and torches? See my signature for just how much "horror" it is.
Zombies work much better, but they need the support of level design, background story (immersion and association) and clever gameplay. Just because CAPCOM dropped the ball with them, doesnt mean they dont work. A slimy, decaying corpse thats hugging you and going for your arteries, is scary. A guy cursing at you in Spanish or some dialect, is not scary.
Dont confuse horror with tention. And speaking of tention, I got more of it in Vegas 2 at "Realistic" setting, with a rookie partner, than I got from the whole 20+ hours ive invested in RE4 during the last 4 years.
Simply put, no.
Zombies are what people remember from the game, and they are what the game is remembered for...but they certainly didn't make the game what it is.
As I say, if the enemies had been something else, it would have still been the same...because in the long run it is the setting and theme of the series that kept it going.
I would say otherwise,
I dont believe people would have played this if it wasnt zombies you were fighting, lets say it was Majini, then it would just be another shoot-em-up back in the day, thusly the game wouldnt have assisted Alone in the Dark and Silent Hill in creating the Survival Horror genre, therefore saying, a lot of the Survival Horror games that are around now, may not have been if Resident Evil was like this in the old games, this game has a legacy which it needs to keep, if they change the whole game around, it will just become another Version of Call of Duty or Gears of War and will forgotten in the history pages xD
I would say otherwise,
I dont believe people would have played this if it wasnt zombies you were fighting, lets say it was Majini, then it would just be another shoot-em-up back in the day, thusly the game wouldnt have assisted Alone in the Dark and Silent Hill in creating the Survival Horror genre, therefore saying, a lot of the Survival Horror games that are around now, may not have been if Resident Evil was like this in the old games, this game has a legacy which it needs to keep, if they change the whole game around, it will just become another Version of Call of Duty or Gears of War and will forgotten in the history pages xD
I have to agree with TZM on this one.
Zombies have a huge background in horror movies and comics, hence, the minute you see them, you think of "horror" - and they were one of the symbols of RE.
No matter how you look at them, they are always horrorfying because they are falling to pieces and only want to eat you - even if you dropped a couple of them armed with axes, they would've been "horror".
Now, they could've been replaced by something else, something faster, deadlier and maybe a tad smarter - but ganados & pals aren't that new breed it was needed to refresh the series while keeping it scary. And the minute they pick up crossbows, tnt & firearms while talking plus driving trucks or bikes, they are action game enemies. The fact they're supposedly infected with a parasite seems just an excuse to have them in the Resident Evil world.
Even Nemesis had a weapon and sometimes talked ("S.T.A.R.S.!!!!"), but he was a freaking monster and, above all, was freaking scary!
I think it's a fair argument that Zombies alone didn't make Resident Evil what it is; on it's own that is.
However, they were an integral part of a series of factors that made Resident Evil what it is.
The first I'd say would be dramatic tension, that inescapable gut feeling that something may be just around the corner; or perhaps a room or corridor being empty, yet looking like something may well burst through (The dog corridor in 1 is a real example of building dramatic tension INTO a jump out scare that still to this day never fails to make you jump.) or be lurking just behind a door. The door opening loading screens added to this with great effect, and was never better than the scene in RE2 when you try to go back into the street, only for two zombies to INTERRUPT the door opening scene by coming through when you open it. An absolute CLASSIC moment.
The next would be I'd say the feeling of being trapped. The only objective to Resident Evil 1, 2, 3 and Outbreak 1 and 2 was to escape- nothing more. There is no greater enemy to try to escape from than the shambling hordes of the undead- they never sleep, never stop, never tire, and the thing that's always been great about zombies is that when they're individual, they're simple to avoid, they're too slow and seem powerless- but when massed, they're a force that advances like an inescapable wall. The second you got sent into Infected areas to 'Investigate' or 'Eliminate' you become removed from the purpose of escape and instead become acclimatised to the idea that you're in a situation that is under your control.
The general use of sound, lighting and visual themes in order to create atmosphere is also another thing that helped Resi be what it was; Darkness, lightning, damaged areas from what has gone before, shadows; all things that are used to great effect. The general feeling that you're in the middle of something you can't explain, and that excellent penchant the Racoon City series had for strewing dead bodies, broken vehicles, destroyed sections of buildings and other such remnants of things that have happened BEFORE you got there help to build the atmosphere and setting.
Maybe the argument is more potent when you make it about genre, in that the genre encompasses so much more than simply the one element- the use of Zombies in this case.....however, I believe Resident Evil owes more to the use of zombies that you're giving it credit for. it was the first mainstream video game of the 3D generation on a home console to employ the classic B movie Zombie as an antagonist; at that time, they were a very new antagonist in interactive media. Games like 'Zombies ate my Neighbours!' used them in a comic fashon, but never before had they been treated in such a mature light.
When it comes down to it, when you see Resident Evil (Even Umbrella chronicles, a recent title) you think automatically zombies; you don't think certainly 'Parasites and stunted Napoleon wannabes' and you certainly don't think 'People chasing you with guns and the ability to ride dirtbikes.'
Maybe from a plot standpoint Capcom can justify that particular enemy type in the fact that UMB were always trying to create bio weapons, but to make the shift from Zombies to Majis and Ganados was to lose intrinsically the most ICONIC element certainly of Resident Evil, and perhaps even to lose part of the essense of what it's all about- in that making the enemies resemble human beings in actions and thinking, it removes alot of the dramatic tension caused by the supernatural element to zombies, and that 'Fear of the unknown' element. It may well, I think it could be argued, have served to desensitise us to the danger of this particular new enemy.
Yes, the game mechanic is less complex and more simplistic, and yes, zombies being slow may make it harder to justify keeping them; but a little more lateral thinking and some clever level design could always make them work- especially on these current gen machines that can render many zombies at once, rather than a maximum of 10 like it used to be.
I don't think the argument 'Zombies weren't current gen' can be applied here, because an enemy is only as good as its setting and programming.....any enemy can be scuppered by poor level design, the same way a poor enemy can be enhanced with it.
I believe a compensation point for having many zombies, rather than a few of these Manjinis is that it creates more tension, more anxiety and perhaps instead of having that murderous yet strangely subdued feeling that the Manjis and ganados give off, the fact that zombies only want to eat you certainly gives rise to more anxiety.
I really do believe that Resident Evil may not 'need' zombies persé, but it certainly does feel poorer for the experience in my honest opinion.
I have to agree with TZM on this one.
Seems like some people have forgoten about how RE started, even tho there is much difference btween Action and Horror.
Megatron well said but what would the sound and lighting do anything when you dont have zombies to give it that push for the jump? i know what you trying to say and it is right.
seriously do you get scared of some angry villagers?? all they have is the red eye and I dont see any agression in the game as all you have to do is shoot them up... or stand in one place take you knife out and keep knifing them but can you do that with zombies NO!!! im not sure if its just me but when you come cross group of zombies in a game you dont rly think about standing in one place and shotting them, and thats what it was about RE and I have never seen it in any other horror games.. as Megatron made a greate point there
The next would be I'd say the feeling of being trapped. The only objective to Resident Evil 1, 2, 3 and Outbreak 1 and 2 was to escape- nothing more. There is no greater enemy to try to escape from than the shambling hordes of the undead- they never sleep, never stop, never tire, and the thing that's always been great about zombies is that when they're individual, they're simple to avoid, they're too slow and seem powerless- but when massed, they're a force that advances like an inescapable wall. The second you got sent into Infected areas to 'Investigate' or 'Eliminate' you become removed from the purpose of escape and instead become acclimatised to the idea that you're in a situation that is under your control.
The thing right now is the game is changed and for me the fun of RE is gone, its a new game with a different gener more like Gears of War where you are forced to kill kill and kill with out the horror bit.
seriously do you get scared of some angry villagers?? all they have is the red eye and I dont see any agression in the game as all you have to do is shoot them up... or stand in one place take you knife out and keep knifing them but can you do that with zombies NO!!!
Stand in one place and knife them? Come on now. Angry villagers? And here I thought they had a parasite in them and they were busting out tentacles and aliens everywhere, and all it was due to was a little aggression! I think you're being intentionally vague to get some sort of point across, that isn't working. I mean, lets face it, most of the ganado type enemies aren't all that different from zombies anyhow.
Seems like some people have forgoten about how RE started, even tho there is much difference btween Action and Horror.
Not me I have been re-playing all the Resi games recently.
I enjoy both types of set up and I won't forget where Resi came from and I never will.
I guess we pretty much all agree on what's wrong here - too bad no-one will take our points...
Actually, I think zombies would work FANTASTIC on the new consoles - and the aiming system from RE4 would perform excellently in an old-fashion RE game - it could actually make the survival even harder: with the possibility of precise aim, you could be given LESS ammo. And maybe some new features (borrowed from other games actually), could be introduced, like a tension\fear\stress level that can affect your aiming for example (maybe to be cured with a drug, like the diazepam in MGS or morphine in CALL OF CTHULHU: DARK CORNERS OF THE EARTH).
Maybe, plot-wise, always having zombies could be a bit lame: I mean, how stupid are the Umbrella scientists to always let the damn virus slip from their lab? Unless you could use a new setting, like some terrorists using the T-Virus...imagine Hunk and Chris forced to work togheter to survive and clean the mess...ok, too much geeky fan-fiction here...I apologize...
I guess we pretty much all agree on what's wrong here - too bad no-one will take our points...
It's all about opinion nothing more, I don't agree but that does not mean I don't take yours or anyones eles opinion or points into account as everybody has the right to that.
It's all about opinion nothing more, I don't agree but that does not mean I don't take yours or anyones eles opinion or points into account as everybody has the right to that.
Indeed.
I just don't see how changing from zombies, or increasing the pace of the game can be a bad thing inherently.
In my opinion it equates to the movies:
Old RE games: ALIEN
New RE games: ALIENS
And then there's that inherent contradiction. Of the people here clamoring for a return to the old RE, I'm willing to bet that most of them conversely prefer ALIENS over ALIEN.
All respect i dont even count RE4 and RE5 as RE series.. What comes in mind when you use the word Resident Evil? Horror? scary? Zombies? do we see that in RE4 and RE5?
Braindead:
Maybe, plot-wise, always having zombies could be a bit lame: I mean, how stupid are the Umbrella scientists to always let the damn virus slip from their lab?
isnt that what is happening with RE4 and 5? someone else always gets the virus? and uses it on a village insted of a city... Well when i opened this threat my main point was to the game which changed and its not horror anymore which i see the game as complete new game, which should even be name to something else. beside seeing a great Horror game sliping away its something else.
They can always bring the Classic RE back as a different series like how Parjay called them ALIEN one side and ALIENS on other.
And with the knife thing yes it does work specially when you playing co-up which I keep running out of bullets.
thezombiemessia
19-03-09, 22:35
All respect i dont even count RE4 and RE5 as RE series.. What comes in mind when you use the word Resident Evil? Horror? scary? Zombies? do we see that in RE4 and RE5?
This is really starting to bug me now...because what you associate with Resident Evil is not what makes Resident Evil.
Resident Evil is a series based around bad science. It is based around humans fighting against non-humans in an outbreak of somekind.
It is the human race fighting for survival on either a large or small scale against things that were once human, or things that have been created specifically with the intention of death to humanity.
Zombies are one of many things in Resident Evil.
Survival Horror it may not be, but Resident Evil 4 and Resident Evil 5 are Resident Evil games.
They do not include Romero style Zombies, nor does it involve a traditional sense of Survival Horror.
What they do include is another version of a Zombie (look it up, and you'll find that the Ganado and Majini closely resemble the traditional Zombie, whilst the T-virus Zombies from earlier games are based on the Romero type of Zombies which didn't appear in Print or Cinema until Romero focused so heavily on them), and horror themes.
Yes, Resident Evil 4 or 5 don't have the traditional RE horror feeling...it offers a different sense of fear and tension.
I once again state that what the argument is here is not one of enemy change, storyline change or game change, it is one of Genre change.
People are angry that the new RE games focus more on Action rather than Survival Horror.
If you shoved Zombies into Resident Evil 4 or 5, they would not make the game any more or less scary than it/they already are/is.
Indeed, it's also worth while pointing out that the Japanese original title is BIOHAZARD for good reason.
wwll for you they might be in my point of view they do make the game scary. I do get the point with the gener change and thats how the game has changed.
thezombiemessia
19-03-09, 23:00
wwll for you they might be in my point of view they do make the game scary. I do get the point with the gener change and thats how the game has changed.
How do you know that Romero style Zombies would make Resident Evil 4 or 5 scary?
You've missed my point. I'm not talking about their effect in the original games...that is clear.
What I am saying is:
Stick Romero style Zombies into Resident Evil 4 or 5, and these games will not miraculously turn into Survival Horror games...they will still remain Action Adventure.
This just goes to show that Romero Zombies do not a Survival Horror make.
Triple Seven
19-03-09, 23:11
So Zombies equals Horror?
Or Zombies equals Resident Evil?
We've had this discussion so many times now...and although I'd like to see them come back, I'll never agree with the claim that the Zombies are the main point of a Resident Evil game.
Resident Evil 4 and 5 are still RE games, especially 5. They both focus on a Biohazardous Outbreak of some kind, both involve various B.O.W's, and all cover sinister plots by evil people that want to rule the world/mankind or live forever.
Yes, Resident Evil has moved away from Survival Horror and is now an Action Adventure with a mild Horror theme/setting, but it doesn't mean it isn't Resident Evil anymore.
All these arguments can prove is that:
1 - Resident Evil no longer has Zombies in it.
2 - Resident Evil is no longer Survival Horror.
What these arguments have yet to prove:
1 - Zombies make the series what it is.
2 - The series is no longer Resident Evil.
Can you prove that it still is Resident Evil and if so, please do.
The title of the game pretty much clears that one up, Triple :P:P
Triple Seven
19-03-09, 23:22
The title of the game pretty much clears that one up, Triple :P:P
Good. So in your - "alleged" - opinion a cart racer called Resident Evil 6 would still be a Resident Evil game.
Whoaaaa dude, there was two tongues in there, I wasn't serious of course!
Triple Seven
19-03-09, 23:32
Whoaaaa dude, there was two tongues in there, I wasn't serious of course!
I know. But I guess one could argue that way.
I know. But I guess one could argue that way.
LOL true, but they'd have to be batcrap insane!
I've always thought of ammo conservation, story, characters, music and the bigger enemies (the Ashfords, Wesker, Salazar) when I've thought of Resi. Of course zombies enter your head, but only when you think of the older games of the series. Zombies are in the games, but the Lickers and Hunters were much more interesting and scary.
Like I said earlier, Crimson Heads (the returned zombies) are scary and hard, but so are the Ganados and Majini when they have ye olde Plagas popping out of their heads.
They are both scary and both have interesting backgrounds. The viruses inside of them are both interesting to read about and help the plots to move forward. Let's face it, it's the story that's the best thing about resis, anyway.
Member_of_STARS
20-03-09, 01:25
This is really starting to bug me now...because what you associate with Resident Evil is not what makes Resident Evil.
Except that you dont even know what is making RE or whats associated with it. And that bugs me, a lot.
Resident Evil is a series based around bad science. It is based around humans fighting against non-humans in an outbreak of somekind.
Heres the fundamental clause. RE4 and 5 are not based around bad science. Dissect it. All of the other REs are based on genetic manipulation, pure science which is occasionally and partially based on real world. You can take anything and everything and for the most part, you could associate it with either modern science or how we think nature works. For example, theories like Project Omegas view on why the Tyrants had claws (simplified- in order to create blood to run that massive body), or why I think the bodies decompose so rapidly (tissue and cells breaking down into energy source for the body because the metabolism isnt functioning).
This is science. RE has always had its roots in the techno thriller genre.
There is not a question about it when I say RE4 and RE5 do not. Magical parasites is the key aspect that takes away from it.
It is the human race fighting for survival on either a large or small scale against things that were once human, or things that have been created specifically with the intention of death to humanity.
Heres the problem. Were not fighting "inhuman" enemies. Were fighting infected people who act, think and maneuver like humans. Theres not a single shred of evidence of them being "Inhuman". The only time they do become inhuman, is when the parasite bursts out of them but for the most part that doesnt happen.
You know its all semantics, dont you? If they were zombies, you wouldnt need to explain yourself.
Zombies are one of many things in Resident Evil.
Accoording to you (RE being about bad science), zombies are an integral part of RE. Im not delusional. Lets take the original idea of RE into account.
A) It was a first person shooter (on paper)
B) It was about you chasing down ghosts in a mansion
So, by taking out these two aspects, whats left? Claustrophobic tention, horror, level design that supports it (and not necessarily the theme), and neither RE4 or RE5 have these.
Survival Horror it may not be, but Resident Evil 4 and Resident Evil 5 are Resident Evil games.
No they are not. The only similarity you can draw is the characters. And if you think its the characters that make RE...
What they do include is another version of a Zombie (look it up, and you'll find that the Ganado and Majini closely resemble the traditional Zombie, whilst the T-virus Zombies from earlier games are based on the Romero type of Zombies which didn't appear in Print or Cinema until Romero focused so heavily on them), and horror themes.
So what are you saying? That RE got it "wrong"? That we now somehow must think that RE4 and RE5 OpFors are now "zombies" because their description matches voodoo zombies? Youre missing the point. Were not talking about zombies in Oxfords English Dictionary sense. Were using it to describe mutated and mangled, walking living dead. And if the Ganados have anything to do with that... Its amusing, its almost like with religion. Deep down you know youre wrong, but you have to convince yourself that "facts say otherwise".
Yes, Resident Evil 4 or 5 don't have the traditional RE horror feeling...it offers a different sense of fear and tension.
The fear and tention? And that somehow makes it a RE game? Considering RE was supposed to be an FPS with ghosts in tight spaces, you know which games fit the bill more than 4 and 5 do? Original FEAR and its two expansion packs.
Funny. That game offers fear and tention too, different from original RE4 suspense and horror-flick genre scares, but still.
I once again state that what the argument is here is not one of enemy change, storyline change or game change, it is one of Genre change.
Youre simply deluding yourself. The games have changed around completely. Whether or not "technically" certain aspects have stayed the same, upon closer inspection, they are completely different.
The plot device is altered, techno thriller concept has changed into fantasy
The gameplay is changed
Level design is changed
Enemies have changed
The atmosphere and impression/emotion has changed
Only thing left are characters
If you shoved Zombies into Resident Evil 4 or 5, they would not make the game any more or less scary than it/they already are/is.
People dont usually take their time to create fullblown detailed posts so this doesnt give you the right to underuse your own intelligence and dumb them down. Of course RE4 and 5 wouldnt work with zombies, but who says they would? The way I see it, those of us who support the idea of zombies in new gameplay, are talking about a lot of fixes to the games to make them fit. From level design to ammunition and weapon balance, efficiency.
In my opinion it equates to the movies:
Old RE games: ALIEN
New RE games: ALIENS
And then there's that inherent contradiction. Of the people here clamoring for a return to the old RE, I'm willing to bet that most of them conversely prefer ALIENS over ALIEN.There's definately some validity in what you're saying, I can definately see where you're coming from; in that the original trilogy of Resi games were a slower, better built up (In terms of tension and suspense.), pacier affair than the latter games; however in the case of Alien and Aliens, you can notice a clear paralell, certainly clear links anyway between the two films.
I feel that Aliens is a better film intrinsically BECAUSE it takes the best elements from the original and simply adds more of an action vibe to the original well paced, tense, atmospheric and horror based nature of the first film. When you think about it though, really look at the two films, see them back to back (I've just watched both Alien and Aliens in their extended Directors Cut format) you can notice that both films are incredibly similar save for the marine corps squad;
One of the great testaments to Aliens credentials as both an action film AND as a tense horror Sci-fi however is the fact that there is no action for at least 40 minutes- it's all build up, character development, visual cues and part of the horror of that film is the fact that they immerse you into the story of that squad, the fact that they manage to draw you in and believably set the scene of what happened before on LV426 without giving too much away; and then when it all kicks off, it actually matters to you when people are killed, that the operation is a botch job, it matters when the ship goes down and the sentrys are firing. That's what in a nutshell the latest Resident Evils miss in accordance to this comparison- that believability and pacing that makes a transition from horror to action, and then back again. Lets face it, if a chopper pilot goes down in Resi 4 or 5, how much do you care? Certainly not as much, I presume anyway if you like the film as much as I do, as you care when Apone or Frost go down in Aliens, that's for damn sure IMO.
Maybe I'm reading into it too much, partly because I'm buzzing after watching Aliens again last night,but I do find it interesting.
As far as I'm concerned, and this is only what I think, Resident Evil's sudden change of pacing and genre is not really akin to anything we've seen in film franchises so far.....certainly shift haven't been as extreme anyway to my mind.....apart possibly from the Matrix perhaps? I'd say that if I was hard pressed to give an answer I think. I'm talking first and third films especially here; in that it sharply goes from Sci-Fi Fantasy, to Sci-Fi Action for their endgame. Resi 5 in becoming exclusively an action game, sortof sheds the pacing, atmosphere and tension or the originals; but I don't think I could insult the new titles by lumping them with Alien Resurrection on the 'Sequels that not only missed the point, but dropped anchor and stalled the series entirely' category. Matrix seems the fairer choice.
Definately an interesting comparison.
thezombiemessia
20-03-09, 11:28
Can you prove that it still is Resident Evil and if so, please do.
Although Resident Evil could originally be defined by its genre, this is no longer the case. RE covers far too many genres to say "to be a Resident Evil game it must be Survival Horror."
This may be upsetting to many people, but the change has happened and that's that.
So what makes RE4 and RE5 Resident Evil games is the fact that they connect fully with the other Resident Evil games. Yes, you can take certain aspects away from them and they will have no connection whatsoever, but if you took certain aspects out of Resident Evil 2 you could link it with Dead Rising.
Resident Evil 4 and 5 contain the characters from previous games and build on them. They both contain mentionings of Umbrella (even if briefly in the original GC version of RE4), and the follow up plans of Wesker.
Resi 5 especially covers extensively the history of Umbrella, its rise and fall, and the plans of Spencer, along with information on other global companies such as Tri-Cell.
Resident Evil 5 alone contains the Progenitor Virus and other variants of it.
Both games, whilst far off the mark when it comes to the genre, are Resident Evil games.
Except that you dont even know what is making RE or whats associated with it. And that bugs me, a lot.
I guess all of that can be put down to Opinion then.
Heres the fundamental clause. RE4 and 5 are not based around bad science. Dissect it. All of the other REs are based on genetic manipulation, pure science which is occasionally and partially based on real world. You can take anything and everything and for the most part, you could associate it with either modern science or how we think nature works. For example, theories like Project Omegas view on why the Tyrants had claws (simplified- in order to create blood to run that massive body), or why I think the bodies decompose so rapidly (tissue and cells breaking down into energy source for the body because the metabolism isnt functioning).
This is science. RE has always had its roots in the techno thriller genre.
Perhaps I used the wrong phrase when I described it. When I say Bad Science I mean the kind of Science that you see in a Sci-Fi film, or a Science Thriller. Something that can easily be based in reality, but has been twisted and melded to create something that is un-real and entertaining.
At the end of the day, the Tyrant was given a claw to make it menacing and so it culd kill people in spectacular ways. Fans have since used real science to explain why, in the real world, it would have grown a claw.
But even so, in the real world, the chances of a Tyrant being grown is slim-to-none. So, Bad Science/Science Fiction/Science based in Reality but twisted for entertainment purposes.
There is not a question about it when I say RE4 and RE5 do not. Magical parasites is the key aspect that takes away from it.
Resident Evil 4 and 5 still contain genetic manipulation to some degree. Yes, it uses Parasites instead of Viruses, but I see no reason why this is a problem?
In real world science, a parasite cannot lead to this sort of mutation, but this is twisted science...created for entertainment purposes.
Plus, people seem to forget that Nemesis and Lisa Trevor both have parasites in them that work in almost identical ways.
On top of this, the parasites are said to work in the same way as things like Bee Hives and Ant Colonies.
In the Resi Universe, it is not hard to come to the conclusion that a parasite evolved the same ability as a Bee Hive or Ant Colony to help it spread faster.
Through genetic manipulation of these parasites, Saddler was able to create what we see in RE4. Through further experimentation, we get what we see in RE5.
Heres the problem. Were not fighting "inhuman" enemies. Were fighting infected people who act, think and maneuver like humans. Theres not a single shred of evidence of them being "Inhuman". The only time they do become inhuman, is when the parasite bursts out of them but for the most part that doesnt happen.
The scarring on their bodies, the tentacles coming from their mouths, the ability to jump about 5-7 feet into their air, the ability to take more than 1 bullet and still be standing, the change in body shape (for instance, the Tall Majini seen in the Marshlands), the damage to the facial area of all Majini, the willingness to just run into battle, etc.
I believe they show a lot more in-humanity than you give them credit for.
Sure, they are still closer to humans than a rotting corpse or a Hunter or Licker, but they are still inhuman.
You know its all semantics, dont you? If they were zombies, you wouldnt need to explain yourself.
Ofcourse I wouldn't have to explain myself...because nobody would be whining.
Accoording to you (RE being about bad science), zombies are an integral part of RE. Im not delusional. Lets take the original idea of RE into account.
How are Zombies itegral to Resident Evil? Where did I say this?
A) It was a first person shooter (on paper)
B) It was about you chasing down ghosts in a mansion
So, by taking out these two aspects, whats left? Claustrophobic tention, horror, level design that supports it (and not necessarily the theme), and neither RE4 or RE5 have these.
Correct, because overall it is a genre change. As I have already said. RE4 and RE5 rely on different things entirely.
No, it doesn't pull of Claustrophobia in the overall level design, it pulls it off in the onsalught of a seemingly unstoppable enemy.
It creates tension in the build up of storyline, and the build up of enemy types.
Resident Evil 4 and 5 rely on entirely different things from the original games, but this does not mean they are not Resident Evil games.
No they are not. The only similarity you can draw is the characters. And if you think its the characters that make RE...
I think it is the Characters, storyline and overall theme that make a Resident Evil game. Ditch these and the game is no longer a Resident Evil title.
So what are you saying? That RE got it "wrong"? That we now somehow must think that RE4 and RE5 OpFors are now "zombies" because their description matches voodoo zombies? Youre missing the point. Were not talking about zombies in Oxfords English Dictionary sense. Were using it to describe mutated and mangled, walking living dead. And if the Ganados have anything to do with that... Its amusing, its almost like with religion. Deep down you know youre wrong, but you have to convince yourself that "facts say otherwise".
The fear and tention? And that somehow makes it a RE game? Considering RE was supposed to be an FPS with ghosts in tight spaces, you know which games fit the bill more than 4 and 5 do? Original FEAR and its two expansion packs.
Funny. That game offers fear and tention too, different from original RE4 suspense and horror-flick genre scares, but still.
Youre simply deluding yourself. The games have changed around completely. Whether or not "technically" certain aspects have stayed the same, upon closer inspection, they are completely different.
The plot device is altered, techno thriller concept has changed into fantasy
The gameplay is changed
Level design is changed
Enemies have changed
The atmosphere and impression/emotion has changed
Only thing left are characters
Due to time constraints I'm having to reply to this quickly.
I'm not deluding myself...Deep down I don't know that I'm wrong. I have said time and again that the argument in this thread was not about the fact that Zombies have been taken from the series, but the fact that the games have turned from Survival Horror into Action, and other arguments have slowly been brought in to completely twist everything around.
Resident Evil 4 and 5 still contain the Bad Science/Twisted Science/Techno-Thriller Science/Entertaining Science of the previous titles, even if they are different in look, style and feel of the originals...it is still there.
People dont usually take their time to create fullblown detailed posts so this doesnt give you the right to underuse your own intelligence and dumb them down. Of course RE4 and 5 wouldnt work with zombies, but who says they would? The way I see it, those of us who support the idea of zombies in new gameplay, are talking about a lot of fixes to the games to make them fit. From level design to ammunition and weapon balance, efficiency.
The entire first part of this topic was about why Capcom took away the Zombies, and why RE4 and RE5 were/are crap because they don't have Zombies.
I simplified my argument by saying 2 things:
1 - There are 2 arguments going on here. Zombies not in series anymore. Genre has been changed.
2 - To back up what I just said, and to show that the removal of Zombies is NOT the major argument, try shoving Zombies into RE4 and RE5, and see what you get.
Because the genre of RE4 and RE5 is completely different, Zombies would not make the game anymore or less scary.
So, this further backs up that people are more angry at the change in Genre than they are the change of enemy types.
My whole reason for this argument is because in the very first post of this topic, the Original Poster seems to force the connection between Zombies being removed and Genre change.
If Zombies were in the games, they would still be Survival Horror. Which is not true. Zombies do not a Survival Horror make.
THIS is what is bugging me over anything else. You can all hate RE4 and RE5 as much as you want, and your arguments are valid if you want to compare gameplay styles or genre styles, but at the end of the day RE4 and RE5 are still clearly RE games because they share the right storyline and character elements and plots.
No, a kart racer with RE stuck to it wouldn't be RE because it isn't about the rise or fall of a pharmaceutical company, it isn't about humans fighting genetically modified or inhuman enemies, it isn't about the fight for humanity, or anything of the such.
Member_of_STARS
20-03-09, 13:21
Although Resident Evil could originally be defined by its genre, this is no longer the case. RE covers far too many genres to say "to be a Resident Evil game it must be Survival Horror."
Survival Horror as a genre didnt exist until it was created (as a term) to describe games like Resident Evil (and SH, and others after and before them). The departure from the genre, core plot drives and constant changes of characters (which might, depending on ones opinion, undermine their value and importance) means that the new games do not have almost anything in common with the older games. Now, this is not a debate wether the new direction is good or bad, or if the new games are solid or poor, this is purely a factual comparison between two directions and finding limited to no connection between them. You may like them, but you certainly dont like them for the same reasons you liked the old games.
So what makes RE4 and RE5 Resident Evil games is the fact that they connect fully with the other Resident Evil games.
One could argue that RE5 connects with the old games purely character-wise, but claiming that RE4 connects to old games is certainly silly. Theres 3 elements that connect the game to the old ones, make that 4, three of those elements make a total of 2-3 minutes of total viewtime.
Yes, you can take certain aspects away from them and they will have no connection whatsoever, but if you took certain aspects out of Resident Evil 2 you could link it with Dead Rising.
Thats exactly what youre doing ;). Youre taking a few aspects out of the games and connect them to the old ones saying they "fully connect".
Resident Evil 4 and 5 contain the characters from previous games and build on them. They both contain mentionings of Umbrella (even if briefly in the original GC version of RE4), and the follow up plans of Wesker.
Resi 5 especially covers extensively the history of Umbrella, its rise and fall, and the plans of Spencer, along with information on other global companies such as Tri-Cell.
Does this mean Gaiden is a proper Resident Evil release? It looks to me like youre not really giving solid arguments, just technical excuses.
Resident Evil 5 alone contains the Progenitor Virus and other variants of it.
The Progenitor virus mentioned in RE has nothing to do with Progenitor virus established in REmake and RE0.
Bottomline, same names for some characters and a mention of a few connecting elements does not mean the games "fully connect". Why else to you think the community is polarized when it comes to the new direction?
I guess all of that can be put down to Opinion then.
Perhaps I used the wrong phrase when I described it. When I say Bad Science I mean the kind of Science that you see in a Sci-Fi film, or a Science Thriller. Something that can easily be based in reality, but has been twisted and melded to create something that is un-real and entertaining.
Which is why I specifically used the terms "fantasy" and "science fiction". When it comes to the fantasy genre, there is no need to connect the plot or plot device to real world. Science Fiction is defined by its connection to real world. So, a virus based on certain possibilities in this world and a full variety of antagonists build on scientific principles is completely different than a parasite that appears out of nowhere and does anything and everything without the need for explanation. The way the plot device works is fundamentally different.
At the end of the day, the Tyrant was given a claw to make it menacing and so it culd kill people in spectacular ways. Fans have since used real science to explain why, in the real world, it would have grown a claw.
Thats the beauty of science fiction. You can take the impossible apart and connect it to what we take for granted today. Afterall, science fiction is all about the possibilities of tomorrow.
We cant clone dinosaurs, but with modern science we can explain how it would theoretically be possible to. I love Chrictons JP, its like "the" example of proper techno-thriller and science-fiction where science dominates.
Resident Evil 4 and 5 still contain genetic manipulation to some degree. Yes, it uses Parasites instead of Viruses, but I see no reason why this is a problem?
Youre once again purposefully dumbing it down. I can think of a reason why it is so, and that would be the limited debates on Resident Evil science in Capcom-Europe.
Plus, people seem to forget that Nemesis and Lisa Trevor both have parasites in them that work in almost identical ways.
Again, dumbing it down. Parasites never changed Nemesis on a genetical level and when it comes to Lisa Trevor, the parasite could have easily been just a catalyst to the changes brought up by the years of experimentation. They cant be used as a comparative example.
On top of this, the parasites are said to work in the same way as things like Bee Hives and Ant Colonies.
Which leads us to what? This is just a description, not an explanation. A sci-fi-esque explanation would be explaining the principle on how the hive works.
Through genetic manipulation of these parasites, Saddler was able to create what we see in RE4. Through further experimentation, we get what we see in RE5.
And yet it has no trait of neither tech-thriller nor sci-fi in it.
The scarring on their bodies, the tentacles coming from their mouths, the ability to jump about 5-7 feet into their air, the ability to take more than 1 bullet and still be standing, the change in body shape (for instance, the Tall Majini seen in the Marshlands), the damage to the facial area of all Majini, the willingness to just run into battle, etc.
Adrenaline in combat has magical effects, theres more cases than you can count, where a person has been critically wounded and noticed hes been hit only after the immediate danger/combat was gone/done. Jumping 5 feet into the air is no feat for a person, so an additional 2 feet while perhaps a little odd, is in no way "inhuman" enough to make you feel "oh schnap!". The damage to the face is a gameplay element. They werent resistant to bullets, they were just not feeling pain or the attack command took priority in all senses. RE4 nor 5 wouldnt work if you had 1 shot kills to the head. And I assure you, you will get your brains splattered across the wall once that bullet passes your nostrils :P
I believe they show a lot more in-humanity than you give them credit for.
Theres a reason why Megatrons face was changed in Transformers movie, to something inrecognizable. It takes far more than 2 feet higher jumps to create an inhuman foe.
Ofcourse I wouldn't have to explain myself...because nobody would be whining.
The mere fact that there is a massive number of people who think new REs have little to do with old REs, puts the matter to the rest. Youre just taking a few small elements and youre trying to put together a case.
How are Zombies itegral to Resident Evil? Where did I say this?
I summed up your whole post where you started with saying RE was about humans fighting nonhumans and ended up with showing examples of different variations of zombies in our culture (that Romeros version are not *the* zombies actually).
Correct, because overall it is a genre change. As I have already said. RE4 and RE5 rely on different things entirely.
So if they rely on different things entirely, its safe to say that they are entirely different from older games. So why claim they are fully connected? Why not just admit that its a leap forward? If youll try to convince me that RE4 and RE5 are just as much RE as the legacy games, its a futile attempt unless you bring in non-debatable facts/arguments :P
No, it doesn't pull of Claustrophobia in the overall level design, it pulls it off in the onsalught of a seemingly unstoppable enemy.
And RE has never been about that, ignoring Outbreak 2s Desperate Times scenario. New games are entirely about the killing and the tention of facing multiple enemies. Its an entirely different gameplay.
Resident Evil 4 and 5 rely on entirely different things from the original games, but this does not mean they are not Resident Evil games.
That is exactly what it means.
I think it is the Characters, storyline and overall theme that make a Resident Evil game. Ditch these and the game is no longer a Resident Evil title.
Fair enough. RE4.
Rookie cop transformerd into government agent. Only similarity: the name
Main antagonist: instead of a faceless corporation and science gone wrong we have a religious madman and magical bugs that turn you into agressive Spaniards with no apparent explanation
Setting: instead of claustrophobic level design, we have a fairly open battleground and lots of weapons with oomph, the sound and level design are also less intimidating
Theme: from technothriller to fiction/fantasy
It goes pretty much the same for RE5, except that theres a number story tie-ins with the older games which thankfully flesh out the characters and protagonists a lot better.
So, this further backs up that people are more angry at the change in Genre than they are the change of enemy types.
Like I said in the end of my post, youre oversimplifying what they are meaning. Its not about change in the enemies and genre alone. One, in terms of RE, makes the other.
If Zombies were in the games, they would still be Survival Horror. Which is not true. Zombies do not a Survival Horror make.
Correct, but saying that zombies wouldnt work in the new genre is also false. Level design and ammunition availability, aswell as enemy numbers and variety would keep the new gameplay fully enjoyable.
No, a kart racer with RE stuck to it wouldn't be RE because it isn't about the rise or fall of a pharmaceutical company, it isn't about humans fighting genetically modified or inhuman enemies, it isn't about the fight for humanity, or anything of the such.
What if the cart racer takes place in a post apocalyptic world where evil pharmaceutical corporations are sponsors of these events, where you get to kill zombies and race in abandoned cities, with carts? :D
Its not 2 arguments its one, if you bring back the zombies the genre goes back to Horror... wouldn't it? I Completely disagree with what you saying there, what connection do you see from classic RE to this new version? only characters..
Have you guys played Cold Fear??? give it a go see what you notice, its like Same RE from 4 and 5 but just in a ship... Look what the old fans are arguing here is that The old horror scary bits of the game is gone and instead we have infected humans running at you with guns and booms or axes which seriously sounds nothing close to what RE is about.
We ALL accepted RE as a horror and terrifying game which we haven't seen for few years now, which seriously has to come back to alive. I was reading some articles on the forum and i saw something about rebot of RE.. and how it might start in london, when london comes in mind horror does too specially at night as it will be the perfect place on south east of london (i'm from london myself), i hope this happends :rolleyes: .
I got RE 5 yesterday and i played for few hours im not saying it s a bad game but its just like all other Action game u kill and kill and dont feel anything else, But if you think about RE 1 the remake or even on ps1 the troubles and fears you went through the jumps the scenes that you knew something is coming and when it does.. I personally think that was what made RE different to other game and now it's gone. If we are the Fans and argue for it if think it could be possible for it to come back. For now we have to follow the story if we don't then we might miss something big.
(sry if i made spelling mistake i got to go work, am late)
Its not 2 arguments its one, if you bring back the zombies the genre goes back to Horror... wouldn't it?
Wouldn't it be scary, to see zombies wandering around in the sun? Falling over chickens and cows? It would take more than zombies to make 4 and 5 scarier. The zombies would just look funny, with their chicken-feather eating ways :D
This topic seems way too serious, I reckon :nod:
THIS is what is bugging me over anything else. You can all hate RE4 and RE5 as much as you want, and your arguments are valid if you want to compare gameplay styles or genre styles, but at the end of the day RE4 and RE5 are still clearly RE games because they share the right storyline and character elements and plots.
It's a valid point in terms of the storyline canon, but by your logic based on what you have been arguing, that one part being intrinsically still Resident Evil doesn't prove that the game as a whole is still Resident Evil, in as much as that one part of Resident Evil (Zombies) doesn't prove that the game as a whole isn't Resident Evil.....it in all honestly is the same argument. Of course, I'm sure you believe zombies to be a less important factor than story, and I wouldn't deny you that, however many people identify zombies as being a defining if not essential part of what makes Resident Evil, Resident Evil. I'm afraid that while your points have been valid, and I understand you are pressed for time so I may not have the whole picture, it would seem as though your argument to counter that of the O.P is that because the storyline canon is preserved, Resident Evil is still preserved. That's still just one facet of Resident Evil as the sum of many parts however.
While it can be argued (And I think your argument works to a degree) that the storyline canon is the main factor in a series; I think it always has to be remembered that this is a series of Games that we're talking about as opposed to books and film. Interactive media differs from static media, in that a player/reader/user is in control of the events to a certain degree most especially the experiences of the ploughs and troughs of the intermitting periods between the beginning of a chapter (Opening cutscene) and the end of a chapter, where usually static cut-scenes would take over and tell the story in a similar way to film.
Wheras in film, the storyline is the overall over-riding factor towards getting the point across to a user, with many smaller factors enhancing that main part; in Video Games it can be said that the Gameplay aspect is just as important.
Just a case in point, but the 'Legacy of Kain' and 'Soul Reaver' series of games are renowned among enthusiasts as some of the best examples of straight storytelling in videogaming. While that is true, it was also true that the games didn't score particularly highly or set the world on fire in terms of sales due to the gameplay mechanic feeling quite sluggish. I loved the games, and am proud to have them in my collection- Legacy of Kain was a dark, sprite based top down Action Adventure Hack and Slash game, with one of the best gaming storylines I had ever experienced at the time.....the gameplay for that title at the time was also fantastic- the transition to next Gen though (PS2 and X-BOX) was fairly unkind, and while the sequel featured an epic storyline, it never quite reached the heights of the original.
The storyline canon therefore in this case, is one of a number of different factors that blend to make Resident Evil what is was/is; and it has to be remembered and respected that the gameplay aspect of a videogame is just as important as the storyline canon as we're talking about a Video Game as opposed to static media.
In that respect, many people have concluded that Resident Evil as the series we know, love and have played over the last 13 years has come to an end, and to some, it came to an end a few years ago with the introduction of Resident Evil 4. Not just because of zombies being dropped, (You've certainly a valid point on this.) but because the genre that encompassed what Resi was all about, and was created BY Resi in the first place has been dropped alltogether in favour of Western Action Adventure in the flavour of Gears of War.
I think on balance, you're certainly right in the assertion that the change of genre is the main argument, mainly because changing the genre was how they changed the majority of the smaller and more subtile details that helped to define Resident Evil as a series; but since the change of genre dropped zombies from this franchise, I wouldn't deny anyone the opinion that Resident Evil is poorer for it.
So yes, the argument that you present that putting zombies in Resident Evil 5 certainly wouldn't work is correct on the assumption that the genre remained action and the game remained the same otherwise. (I'm not so sure about 4 however personally.)
Just to speak on a point you've made real quick, you reminded another poster regarding the genre shift in your last post 'This may be upsetting to many people, but the change has happened and that's that.' so if you'll forgive me for ploughing the reaches of the hypothetical, perhaps since the change has already happened, people are talking about what could have been, rather than what could be done? In that case, is it wise to assume that the people arguing here today aren't talking hypothetically on what they'd have liked to have seen; and that the possibility exists that maybe, just maybe the people arguing the case of the Zombies didn't want merely to plant zombies into the exact level design, setting and gameplay style of Resident Evil 4 especially?
I don't think you should get so frustrated with it mate. :)
Member_of_STARS
20-03-09, 13:48
I actually wish RE community still had skilled modders in abundance. It could be quite interesting to reskin Ganados in RE4 PC version, to crimson heads, tinker a little with the animation and see if they work out in some parts of the game (like the castle). Could make for an interesting experiment on whether or not its all about the visuals...
thezombiemessia
20-03-09, 16:29
I actually wish RE community still had skilled modders in abundance. It could be quite interesting to reskin Ganados in RE4 PC version, to crimson heads, tinker a little with the animation and see if they work out in some parts of the game (like the castle). Could make for an interesting experiment on whether or not its all about the visuals...
I'll admit that this is something I'd also like to see. Along with many other things...
But anyways.
Simply put, I have always said that I prefer the original games over the new ones. I love Survival Horror, and have been a fan of the genre for many years. Always trying my hardest to find a new Survival Horror game.
But as many people who know me can surely attest (even you yourself MoS if you remember the good old days), I have always put Storyline first and formost over everything.
I love a game with a good or interesting storyline, and I love a series that will have an over-arching storyline.
This is what I find to be the redeeming feature of 4 & 5, that they do tie in with the other RE games and work with them.
Ok, if we think about everything as a whole, say that RE must consist of certain things*:
- Storyline
- Certain gameplay elements
- Horror
- Survival
- Tension
Then I'll maybe agree that Resident Evil 4 and 5 do not fit the whole sum.
But as a wholyl biased point of view, from loving the storyline alone, I still say RE4 and RE5 are RE games.
When it comes down to it, the whole issue is an issue of contention. 50% love it, 50% hate it. This whole move into a new genre has split the fanbase in so many ways.
But at the end of the day, I still bought and liked RE4 (to a degree) and RE5, and still consider them to be integral to the series, etc.
*Note I am aware that more goes into this list than I have put, but I couldn't be bothered to list everything.
Triple Seven
20-03-09, 18:46
I love a game with a good or interesting storyline, and I love a series that will have an over-arching storyline.
This is what I find to be the redeeming feature of 4 & 5, that they do tie in with the other RE games and work with them.
Pretty low standards you got there. Resident Evil 4's story is neither good nor interesting, in my opinion. 5 isn't much better. And the over-arching storyline, as far as it is relevant to the latest games, - is weak. Instead of offering depth you got the virus/parasite X, Y, Z thing all over again. None of the locations impressed me, there's little to no style or unique features. And the series is turning into Gears of War (by the way, take a look at Chris's physique). It's becoming bland and very generic. Key aspects of what made the series stand out have been removed. Of course you can argue that it's still Resident Evil. After all, it still got the name and hasn't turned into a turn based cart racer yet. Part 5 may very well be the last game of the series I've played.
Member_of_STARS
21-03-09, 02:28
Pretty low standards you got there. Resident Evil 4's story is neither good nor interesting, in my opinion. 5 isn't much better. And the over-arching storyline, as far as it is relevant to the latest games, - is weak. Instead of offering depth you got the virus/parasite X, Y, Z thing all over again. None of the locations impressed me, there's little to no style or unique features. And the series is turning into Gears of War (by the way, take a look at Chris's physique). It's becoming bland and very generic. Key aspects of what made the series stand out have been removed. Of course you can argue that it's still Resident Evil. After all, it still got the name and hasn't turned into a turn based cart racer yet. Part 5 may very well be the last game of the series I've played.
This.
TZM, I do remember you treating storyline above everything else. Way back in 2004 I think, when I moved off from CE, I remember liking the same aspects. Its the story of a genetically engineered biological weapons that got me into RE in the first place, and when I moved in to smaller, more focused groups, the games, science behind them and stories were dissected, explained with modern science and the games made sense on a completely new level. You missed a good chunk of that and I had a taste of it when the communities were dying off.
Now the key aspects are gone. Genetic manipulation and modern sci-fi aspects. Almost "regular" characters who are fighting against the odds, against a faceless global threat. Comraderie in and outside of games (STARS and various videos of Raccoons finest last days). And a lot more which would make new REs connect with the old.
I wont argue with people who "liked" the games. But drawing a connection based on false arguments is not right.
I agree with TZM here, where an interesting story is important in a game. However, I think that the characters are what make a story interesting. 4 and 5 have don't have any dull characters that I can think of. Hell, Ashley was annoying, but she was also interesting and necessary. 5 got close to having a dull character (with Josh) but he didn't hang around for long anyway.
That was just my little opinion on the stories, as I saw it mentioned when I skimmed through :rolleyes:
Triple Seven
21-03-09, 20:44
I don't disagree with the premise - story and character development are very important to me. But that's about it - Ashley an interesting character? She's the President's daughter. Period. And Chris in RE 5? - other than through the use of steroids there is no character development.
thezombiemessia
22-03-09, 00:08
When it comes to the new Resident Evil games, I treat them like I treat something like Die Hard or some other action movie.
Stories are great, but they are just brain off "I don't have to think about this" things.
I still choose storyline over everything, but if I only picked the greatest storylines of them all...where would I be? I'd have no fun and no experience.
I'd miss out on things like Doom, Zelda, GTA, etc. Stories which, for the most part, are repetetive and steal so much from other places.
I still stick by what I've said. I've already said that I much prefer the original games and the original direction, but I live with what I've got.
i hope we see the old stories come back... i pefer them much more then RE4 and RE5 but for now i still have to support the game as a Fan.