Is the Resident Evil series any good?
Posted 08-12-2009 at 11:01 AM by December Man
Updated 05-05-2010 at 08:50 AM by December Man (bugfixes ;p)
Updated 05-05-2010 at 08:50 AM by December Man (bugfixes ;p)
Note: I haven't played RE5 yet. I'm waiting for the PC release which is due in September. When I complete the game, I'll post an addendum on the subject.
It's kind of embarrassing, since I consider myself a survival horror fan, that I hadn't played any of the RE games except the 4th one. Well now I did my homework and completed the original trilogy of the games. Mind you, my opinion on RE4 changed(I was very harsh towards the game), so keep on reading.
About the original trilogy. I have to respect the games, since it was them that created the gameplay used by all representatives of the survival horror genre, linking together ideas from Alone in the Dark and other older games.
However now, when compared to the likes of Silent Hill or Fatal Frame, literally everything, maybe except elements of the gameplay, falls incredibly short. I'm not going to pick on the voice acting, since all of the them have bad VA. What is a mess is the simplistic, straightforward story; no tension, only very few(5 throughout all 3 games) working jump scares; light atmosphere(whereas SH and FF have it so thick you could slice it with a knife) and somewhat very frustrating moments(RE1 and RE3). The puzzles are fun, I have to admit. To sum it up, the trilogy is very overrated as survival horror games. What is fun, is the decapitation of zombies with the shotgun and killing them in general. You know where I'm heading with this.
I considered RE4 poor, mostly because I thought that the previous games are supposed to be masterpieces along with SH and FF. "RE4 is not scary and is mostly an action game" - roughly my words. Fortunately, having played the original trilogy I changed my mind completely. Capcom couldn't have made a better design approach with RE4.
Why? Capcom knew that survival horror was, and still is, a very niche genre. Throughout the years massive competition has sprung about in the form of the mentioned SH and FF, which were a lot better at scaring people and Capcom knew it. "We don't have much chances within the genre, so let's go mainstream; let's leave the fun part(blowing zombies' heads) and guide it towards action". - they thought.
And it worked. RE4 is an action game with gameplay elements of survival horror. Brilliantly innovative aspects were added like Quick Time Events(which were the explication of the Live Selection Mode from RE3) or the over-the-shoulder camera. It's the best what could've happened to the series. A next purely survival horror title would've(IMO) killed the series.
I have just finished my 3rd playthrough of RE4. This time with High Res mods worth almost 4 gigs and gameplay enhancers. It was a lot of fun. I expect RE5 to be more of the same, just with few changes and better graphics.
I expect to do the same short summary of Silent Hill games in some time and then maybe a comparison of all 3 series. Stay tuned.
It's kind of embarrassing, since I consider myself a survival horror fan, that I hadn't played any of the RE games except the 4th one. Well now I did my homework and completed the original trilogy of the games. Mind you, my opinion on RE4 changed(I was very harsh towards the game), so keep on reading.
About the original trilogy. I have to respect the games, since it was them that created the gameplay used by all representatives of the survival horror genre, linking together ideas from Alone in the Dark and other older games.
However now, when compared to the likes of Silent Hill or Fatal Frame, literally everything, maybe except elements of the gameplay, falls incredibly short. I'm not going to pick on the voice acting, since all of the them have bad VA. What is a mess is the simplistic, straightforward story; no tension, only very few(5 throughout all 3 games) working jump scares; light atmosphere(whereas SH and FF have it so thick you could slice it with a knife) and somewhat very frustrating moments(RE1 and RE3). The puzzles are fun, I have to admit. To sum it up, the trilogy is very overrated as survival horror games. What is fun, is the decapitation of zombies with the shotgun and killing them in general. You know where I'm heading with this.
I considered RE4 poor, mostly because I thought that the previous games are supposed to be masterpieces along with SH and FF. "RE4 is not scary and is mostly an action game" - roughly my words. Fortunately, having played the original trilogy I changed my mind completely. Capcom couldn't have made a better design approach with RE4.
Why? Capcom knew that survival horror was, and still is, a very niche genre. Throughout the years massive competition has sprung about in the form of the mentioned SH and FF, which were a lot better at scaring people and Capcom knew it. "We don't have much chances within the genre, so let's go mainstream; let's leave the fun part(blowing zombies' heads) and guide it towards action". - they thought.
And it worked. RE4 is an action game with gameplay elements of survival horror. Brilliantly innovative aspects were added like Quick Time Events(which were the explication of the Live Selection Mode from RE3) or the over-the-shoulder camera. It's the best what could've happened to the series. A next purely survival horror title would've(IMO) killed the series.
I have just finished my 3rd playthrough of RE4. This time with High Res mods worth almost 4 gigs and gameplay enhancers. It was a lot of fun. I expect RE5 to be more of the same, just with few changes and better graphics.
I expect to do the same short summary of Silent Hill games in some time and then maybe a comparison of all 3 series. Stay tuned.
Total Comments 5
Comments
-
Posted 08-13-2009 at 03:39 PM by Damien_Azreal -
Posted 08-13-2009 at 05:53 PM by December Man -
Posted 08-13-2009 at 08:47 PM by Damien_Azreal -
Posted 08-14-2009 at 11:58 AM by ZuljinRaynor -
Posted 08-14-2009 at 02:06 PM by December Man