MovieChat Forums > Baiohazâdo 6 (2012) Discussion > R.I.P. Resident Evil...next to die...Sil...

R.I.P. Resident Evil...next to die...Silent Hill


Having played 5 and 6, I DO enjoy them on their own. As Resident Evil games? Yeah I wouldn't say they hold a candle exactly. 4 was the step where they knew they had to change it, but also keeping it to it's roots. They achieved this by still having to figure out you're next move as opposed to just jumping in like Leroy Jenkins, which gun to use, puzzle solving that you even had to read notes to figure out, and kept the stressful state of continuing through the game once you were done with a challenge. RE5? Gears of Duty, and Michael Baying the crap out of the series. (Revelations was a decent addition however IMO) Anyways, I'll continue to play them just out of feeling like I need to having played the series since the first one on PS1, and just play the older ones instead of hoping for a new one that will satisfy fans, not casual gamers of shooters. Silent Hill is next to this having played the one on PSVita. But hey, Castlevania made changes majorly and succeeded with SOTN, but failed with Judgement(yes I know it was meant to just be a tournament fighter) so I'll hold out for Silent Hill. I will say this, it doesn't matter to me which games you like, but more importantly..why? Why do you like part 2, or 6 or even *gulp* Survivor? In the meantime, I'll just be counting the days for The Evil Within to be released! :D!!!!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enjoy life for you, and no one else.

reply

Nope: Resident Evil 4 is a disgrace to that which came before it.

---
It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing .

reply

Nope, it's not.

There...I can state OPINIONS as FACTS too. Great insight by the way.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enjoy life for you, and no one else.

reply

Indeed it is, and fans like you that praised/praise it as being the "best Resident Evil" are what led to the slow death the franchise started experiencing in 2004.

---
It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing .

reply

"Intellectual" people like you are the ones that pull words out of their rump as well as the inability to read. Show me where I said it was the best resident evil. Hell you even put it in quotes, show me where that is in my post. If the Resident Evil franchise needed a change to keep it fresh IMO 4 was a step in the right direction. After that, it went downhill. You don't have to be so friggin' conservative, change is good. I myself love the originals, but it would've gotten stale over time. It doesn't matter anyway, I'm clearly saying something direct here, but when you reply, you'll make it into something completely different to prove a point. Then again, I'm talking to someone that's so subtle about their love of the early franchise that they put their name and picture as Wesker. Basically talking to a brick wall who lives in a Utopian time period that never existed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enjoy life for you, and no one else.

reply

Resident Evil needed a change? Really? Even if that was the case, the series was and is fundamentally about survival horror. NOT action horror. What came from 4 onwards was action "horror". Yes, the horror part is very questionable: does a bevy of jump scares alone constitute horror? If so, the genre (at least in regards to video games) is in a sad state of affairs.

4 Resident Evil essentially has zero tension when it comes to resource management. The worst anxiety you are likely to experience is over arranging the veritable arsenal of weapons and healing items Leon has in his briefcase. Hell, BIRDS drop everything from gold to grenades! There's also a merchant that is never too far away.

Some change is good. In and of itself, change is not a virtue.

---
It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing .

reply

I didn't say it needed a change. If it did, then I felt 4 was a step in the right direction. I feel that if they kept making the same game the way they did before it would leave NOT ALL FANS but a good amount of SOME FANS wishing for a little bit different. I never saw RE4 really that much of an action horror other than the quicktime events and when you have the option to knock an enemy down after staggering them. As far as jump scares...well every Resident Evil game has them. Resident Evil 2 has several in the second scenario in the beginning. Lickers popping through glass galore, zombies coming out of the walls, dogs busting out of the cells. They all have them. I don't think it constitutes as horror, just like how they use it in film as well. Moments like being chased by the chameleon like creatures in the sewers, no music playing when an enemy is in the room (not knowing they are there), Verdugo himself, the Knight room, etc. It has plenty of moments that worked for ME that took me back to being stressed from what lied ahead. Is it easier because things are more accessible? Sure. It's more linear, and easier to pick up than the earlier ones. I agree highly that you say, SOME change is good. I don't think change is good, simply because it's different the same way someone thinks change is bad because it's different. The changes worked for me, but it didn't work for you and I can respect that. It's not for everyone. RE5 was IMO a quick and painful death to the franchise, they took too many liberties and tried to make it appeal to everyone rather than the Survival Horror fans turning this series into, as I said before, Gears of Duty. We can just agree to disagree, because we're both loyal fans that like them for the same reasons, I just happened to like one of the ones you didn't. It happens.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enjoy life for you, and no one else.

reply