Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Crispy™ Games with Unrelenting Undead

Jack_Deth

Augur
Patron
Joined
Dec 13, 2002
Messages
266
Insert Title Here
Beach Head 2000
 

DJOGamer PT

Arcane
Joined
Apr 8, 2015
Messages
7,352
Location
Lusitânia
The best way to adapt RE2 to a new camera and controls would be making the enemies more capable. A 14 years old game called RE4 did this but Capcom today doesn't know to make good games anymore.

The objective of these games are quite different.
In RE4 you're supposed, and rewarded, to kill as many enemies as possible.
In the old RE games trying to play that aggressively is a bad idea as the game is not geared towards that playstyle. REmake 2 adapts this very well, since like in the original you're better off evading them - only spending ammo when absolutely necessary.

And Capcom lately as made great games - Megaman 11, Monster Hunter World, REmake 2 and the excellent DMC5.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 1, 2011
Messages
584
I don't recall the old RE games punishing good players by increasing the zombie's HP.

The best way to adapt RE2 to a new camera and controls would be making the enemies more capable. A 14 years old game called RE4 did this but Capcom today doesn't know to make good games anymore.
You realise RE4 had even stronger rank, right? RE4 scales fucking everything with how well you're doing. Your damage/enemy damage/enemy aggression/amount of enemies all get modified. Item drops too, but they're just based off what you're carrying rather than having a persistent counter going on.
I mean, I don't really like rank either (the game has a difficulty select at the start, isn't that enough?), but it's funny that you bring RE4 up in regard to it.
 

Wunderbar

Arcane
Joined
Nov 15, 2015
Messages
8,809
Return to the roots they said
when it comes to pacing and level design - they absolutely did.

The best way to adapt RE2 to a new camera and controls would be making the enemies more capable. A 14 years old game called RE4 did this but Capcom today doesn't know to make good games anymore.
making zombies more capable will require devs to rework levels to be more open-ended and rework character to be more agile. Making levels more open-ended and player character more agile will stray the game even further away from original RE2, so your solution is wrong.

RE2 remake doesn't punish good players. It gives players an opportunity to make a decision whether it is safer to kill zombie so he would not pose a threat later on, or to kneecap him. Pistol is good at kneecapping, shotgun is reliable enough to instakill on headshots.
 
Last edited:

Tehdagah

Arcane
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
9,235
The objective of these games are quite different.
In RE4 you're supposed, and rewarded, to kill as many enemies as possible.
In the old RE games trying to play that aggressively is a bad idea as the game is not geared towards that playstyle. REmake 2 adapts this very well, since like in the original you're better off evading them - only spending ammo when absolutely necessary.

And Capcom lately as made great games - Megaman 11, Monster Hunter World, REmake 2 and the excellent DMC5.

This is a no brainer. Killing zombies grants no rewards and they are easy to avoid so why waste time fighting them? 'Old RE' never punished the players for chosing the easiest path. Sometimes a tyrant will chase you in a place with zombies but you can take your time on the inventory menu (it pauses the game) and pick the right weapon to blast the zombies away.

You realise RE4 had even stronger rank, right? RE4 scales fucking everything with how well you're doing. Your damage/enemy damage/enemy aggression/amount of enemies all get modified. Item drops too, but they're just based off what you're carrying rather than having a persistent counter going on.
I mean, I don't really like rank either (the game has a difficulty select at the start, isn't that enough?), but it's funny that you bring RE4 up in regard to it.
Yes, but the ganados were never HP bloated. They are also more fun than zombies.

when it comes to pacing and level design - they absolutely did.

making zombies more capable will require devs to rework levels to be more open-ended and rework character to be more agile. Making levels more open-ended and player character more agile will stray the game even further away from original RE2, so your solution is wrong.
So? Leon suplexing zombies isn't necessary but Capcom could've at least included a sidestep button, a stamina bar, zombies that can spit acid, zombies with bulletproof vests and helmets (they only exist in the extra modes), crimsons heads, different types of mutated plants, spiders, crows and slighty more open levels.

RE2 remake doesn't punish good players. It gives players an opportunity to make a decision whether it is safer to kill zombie so he would not pose a threat later on, or to kneecap him. Pistol is good at kneecapping, shotgun is reliable enough to instakill on headshots.
Again, no brainer. Pistols for the zombies, shotgun for an ocasional headshot, medium weapons for medium enemies and the best weapons for the bosses. These games are very simple, even the Project REsistance beta was more engaging.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom