Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
News Content Gallery About Donate Discord Contact
  • 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.

41 year old man plays Resident Evil games for the first time, mostly hates them

Joined
Apr 25, 2021
Messages
13
RE4 is fun until you start taking it seriously and realize you can just run around everything. Actually shooting the enemeies is mostly larping. So, you only need to fight bosses and do the QTEs. Not that there's anything wrong with the bosses, it's just there's a lot of pointlessly running past things to get to them.

You can pretty easily run past a majority of enemies in classic shooters too, and actually tend to be better off for doing so since you aren't letting the game eat up your finite health/ammo and potentially attrition you to death. In RE4 there's incentive to massacre every enemy since the goodies that they drop more often than not results in a net positive and helps in the long-term if you play optimally enough, even on professional difficulty where the dynamic scaling isn't present and it's instead cranked to always being frugal & brutal. Plus, it's just fun to shoot dudes and kick their heads so hard that they burst like melons slammed onto concrete.
 
Last edited:

spekkio

Arcane
Joined
Sep 16, 2009
Messages
7,911
If you want the "modern RA formula" done right (survival and shooter mixed in proper proportions), play Revelations 2. Probably the most underrated game in the series.
 

JDR13

Arcane
Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Messages
3,515
Location
The Swamp
I love when someone plays a 15+ year-old game for the first time and then proclaims that it's not as good as he heard it was.
 

downwardspiral

Learned
Joined
Mar 12, 2020
Messages
130
I thought the fun of RE4 is merc mode and melee move.
It is a bit like the melee finisher move in nudoom. Except that RE4 wasn't really a shooter much.

The fun in story mode is hoarding ammo and weapons.
Even in professional mode, if you use melee move alot, you will end up with excessive ammo that you need throw away.

To me. RE 4 is in similar genre like god hand but less good.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 28, 2011
Messages
3,476
Location
Chicago, IL, Kwa
I love when someone plays a 15+ year-old game for the first time and then proclaims that it's not as good as he heard it was.


You’re approaching a very strange and illogical fallacy. I’ve played games 35 years old that I found to be masterpieces, and well-reviewed titles released last year that I found to be utter wank. The age of a game generally has a direct impact on the UI/UX which is something I try to be conscious and forgiving of (hence stating that complaints about RE4’s control scheme are silly), but bad design is bad design, whether it’s from yesterday, a decade ago, or 40 years ago.
 

downwardspiral

Learned
Joined
Mar 12, 2020
Messages
130
Mikami saying something doesn't make it true. Real-time inventories has nothing to do with survival horror, just shitty design. Inventory sizes doesn't make something survival horror, either. Silent Hill has an unlimited inventory.

You can kill all enemies in RE4, but you can do that in every RE game. Even REmake gives you more than enough ammo to kill every single enemy in the game and still have some left over. The only way you're going to run out of ammo in an RE game is if you stand in the save room shooting at walls. It would be more accurate to say that the threat of running out of ammo is a hallmark of survival horror, without every really delivering on that threat - just the idea that you could run out of ammo in a crucial moment is enough. Survival horror is more smoke and mirrors than any other genre.

I remember after RE2, most of my bro who were into RE, treat it like action games. even RE remake is treated like action game after numerous play through,
Knife only run was like a thing many people will try in the past. I always suspect the reason why in later years, many horror games won't allow player to have any lethal weapons is because player will always turn any type of low damage weapons into killing machine.
 
Last edited:

Egosphere

Magister
Joined
Jan 25, 2018
Messages
1,595
Location
Hibernia
Inventory sizes doesn't make something survival horror, either. Silent Hill has an unlimited inventory.
Silent Hill hews more closely to pure psychological horror. Team Silent didn't even bother trying to create any sort of tension through resource depletion, apart from the 4th game, if I remember right

the third person camera(which in 2004 was still a novelty)

Splinter Cell had it in 2002 and Freedom Fighters in 2003. Wikipedia says RE4 came out in January of 2005, which would put them 2-3 years behind the industry. They were probably the first really big hit game to do it, though.
 

JDR13

Arcane
Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Messages
3,515
Location
The Swamp
I love when someone plays a 15+ year-old game for the first time and then proclaims that it's not as good as he heard it was.


You’re approaching a very strange and illogical fallacy. I’ve played games 35 years old that I found to be masterpieces, and well-reviewed titles released last year that I found to be utter wank. The age of a game generally has a direct impact on the UI/UX which is something I try to be conscious and forgiving of (hence stating that complaints about RE4’s control scheme are silly), but bad design is bad design, whether it’s from yesterday, a decade ago, or 40 years ago.

It's not a fallacy in the least that age affects your perception of things, and you're not fooling anyone but yourself by claiming that. Having enjoyed other games that were old doesn't change that.
 

Falksi

Arcane
Joined
Feb 14, 2017
Messages
8,810
Location
Nottingham
I played it around 2 years after it first came out, and just remember it being bang average, and enjoying the aftergame bonus where you play as the chinky tart who stars in it ,more than the original game because of the faster pacing.

I've had it for years and never gone back for a second playthrough, so it certainly didn't do much for me like Dead Space did.
 

JDR13

Arcane
Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Messages
3,515
Location
The Swamp
I've had it for years and never gone back for a second playthrough, so it certainly didn't do much for me like Dead Space did.

Yeah, Dead Space is a little more memorable than the average survival-horror game imo.
 
Joined
Feb 28, 2011
Messages
3,476
Location
Chicago, IL, Kwa
I love when someone plays a 15+ year-old game for the first time and then proclaims that it's not as good as he heard it was.


You’re approaching a very strange and illogical fallacy. I’ve played games 35 years old that I found to be masterpieces, and well-reviewed titles released last year that I found to be utter wank. The age of a game generally has a direct impact on the UI/UX which is something I try to be conscious and forgiving of (hence stating that complaints about RE4’s control scheme are silly), but bad design is bad design, whether it’s from yesterday, a decade ago, or 40 years ago.

It's not a fallacy in the least that age affects your perception of things, and you're not fooling anyone but yourself by claiming that. Having enjoyed other games that were old doesn't change that.


I mean, sure, some things age better than other things (I don’t disagree with that), but that does sort of inherently admit that they’re not all that “great”, in the classical sense, no?

For example: I consider Ultimate Underworld 1 to be one of the greatest video games of all time, despite it’s extremely clunky controls, ugly 3D environments, and absolute lack of any skill parity or balance. By contrast, my experience with RE4 thus far is that it’s basically a generic mid-2000s action-horror game. And yes, from my understanding you can fairly argue that it was pioneering in that regard, but I’m not particularly interested in praising a pioneer of mediocrity.

I’m well aware that I’m an old fart who is much more critical than he used to be, but one of the nice things about becoming an old fart is you tend to worry less and less that you’re wrong, and instead just start assuming that you’re right. :lol:

Anyways on the RE4 front: I’ve now played Chapter 3 and I liked it A LOT more than the village section. I still don’t think the game is amazing, but it’s at least fun and cheesy now. Salazar is a ridiculous villain and I can’t wait to drown him in a puddle. Honestly if the game had started with this tone and over-the-topness I would have been much more forgiving initially. It’s kind of baffling to me how differently the castle plays from the village.

I’ve also come to really enjoy the creature design. This is yet another area where the devs seem to have put their worst foot forward; there are some really cool looking monsters in this game, but for some reason the devs decided that the first half of the game should just be spent shooting the same 5 Spanish peasants over and over ad nauseum.
 

Ivan

Arcane
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
6,481
more great stuff to come
 

JDR13

Arcane
Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Messages
3,515
Location
The Swamp
Anyways on the RE4 front: I’ve now played Chapter 3 and I liked it A LOT more than the village section. I still don’t think the game is amazing, but it’s at least fun and cheesy now. Salazar is a ridiculous villain and I can’t wait to drown him in a puddle. Honestly if the game had started with this tone and over-the-topness I would have been much more forgiving initially. It’s kind of baffling to me how differently the castle plays from the village.

I’ve also come to really enjoy the creature design. This is yet another area where the devs seem to have put their worst foot forward; there are some really cool looking monsters in this game, but for some reason the devs decided that the first half of the game should just be spent shooting the same 5 Spanish peasants over and over ad nauseum.

This should teach you to at least wait until you've actually played most of the game before breaking out the Oldfag posts.
 
Joined
Feb 28, 2011
Messages
3,476
Location
Chicago, IL, Kwa
Anyways on the RE4 front: I’ve now played Chapter 3 and I liked it A LOT more than the village section. I still don’t think the game is amazing, but it’s at least fun and cheesy now. Salazar is a ridiculous villain and I can’t wait to drown him in a puddle. Honestly if the game had started with this tone and over-the-topness I would have been much more forgiving initially. It’s kind of baffling to me how differently the castle plays from the village.

I’ve also come to really enjoy the creature design. This is yet another area where the devs seem to have put their worst foot forward; there are some really cool looking monsters in this game, but for some reason the devs decided that the first half of the game should just be spent shooting the same 5 Spanish peasants over and over ad nauseum.

This should teach you to at least wait until you've actually played most of the game
:hmmm:

That's absolute rubbish that engages only with the pith of my rebuttal and none of the actual substance.
The fact though is that the game made me slog through four hours of content that was a fucking brown, drab mess aesthetically, narratively, and kinesthetically before it presented me with enjoyable content. That is not good design.

Or to put it another way: If someone shits in a glass and then, after a period of consideration, tops it off with distilled mineral water, the additive really doesn't matter to me; it's still a glass of shit.
 

JDR13

Arcane
Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Messages
3,515
Location
The Swamp
My opinion though is that the game made me slog through four hours of content that was a fucking brown, drab mess aesthetically, narratively, and kinesthetically before it presented me with enjoyable content.

I fixed that for you. We wouldn't want people thinking you're trying to pass your Oldfag opinion off as fact.
 

NoSoup4you

Educated
Joined
Mar 18, 2021
Messages
77
I don't consider RE4 a generation-defining classic like a lot of people do, but "piece of shit" is really reaching for cool points. Yeah, it's "decline" and I generally prefer the old tank control horror style - IN PRINCIPLE - but the exploding heads are weighty and satisfying, and it was damn fun. I actually rate RE5 higher and consider it unfairly maligned, but then again, I exclusively played that game with a friend on Veteran, and we had a fucking blast. I would deny that the series is even in a slump - well, I didn't play Village yet - but if you stop trying to care about the unironically retarded and lame story, the gameplay is good.

I will say though, over the shoulder camera was a mistake, and it bothers me to this day. I can trick my brain into forgetting about it, but I hate having this off-center slab of beef in my face at all times. It's like trying to ignore a stray hair in your eye.
 
Joined
Feb 28, 2011
Messages
3,476
Location
Chicago, IL, Kwa
My opinion though is that the game made me slog through four hours of content that was a fucking brown, drab mess aesthetically, narratively, and kinesthetically before it presented me with enjoyable content.

I fixed that for you. We wouldn't want people thinking you're trying to pass your Oldfag opinion off as fact.


I’m confused as to what your point is here. It seems to have started as:

“LOL. Why would you think critically about a game that is 15 years old?”

and then morphed to:

“It’s just your fault for not enjoying the game” (which btw is plausible)

followed-up by:

“See? I told you this game was good?”

and finally ending with:

“You’re old and that’s just, like, your opinion, man”, both of which, while undeniably true, are not particularly strong rhetorical arguments.

Look man, it’s cool that you enjoy RE4 and think it’s really good. I’m not trying to take that away from you; that’s really not my MO. I just personally don’t think it’s very good and am writing about why I think that is the case in terms of design, aesthetics, and narrative. If you want to argue and engage with me about that feel free to do so. Otherwise fuck off.
 
Last edited:

fork

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck
Joined
Oct 20, 2020
Messages
1,488
I love when someone plays a 15+ year-old game for the first time and then proclaims that it's not as good as he heard it was.

Yeah, this from a decline-enabling piece of shit such as yourself, why am I not surprised.

I play 10, 15, 20+ year-old games for the first time all the time, and while some of them are shit, most are better than recent games. And not just better as in 'I like them better, personally', but better as in 'feels like another medium' or 'doesn't even compare' better. RE4 is one of the games that paved the way to how aweful modern games are though, so it's one of the exceptions in that it's one of the most overrated 'classics' out there. It should be a classic example of bad game design, of what not to do, instead.
 

fork

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck
Joined
Oct 20, 2020
Messages
1,488
I generally prefer the old tank control

RE4 uses tank controls...

That's another thing: Tank controls are perfect for the fixed cam angels of the classics, because they allow consistent movement across multiple screens of changing perspectives. Just try by playing REmake with classic tank controls and then switching to the modern relative-to-cam control scheme. You will notice that the latter leads to problems such as entering and immediately leaving an unknown room again due to an unexpected cam angle change. Some retards who appear to be neurologically unable to grasp tank controls combined with fixed cam angles notwithstanding, they're simply superior for the kind of game the original REs are.

RE4 is not that kind of game though. With the subjective over-the-shoulder perspective, tank controls are not only some of the clunkiest shit possible, but also completely unneccesary, since they offer no advantage whatsoever with this perspective over, say, classic FPS controls or modern third person action game controls.
 
Last edited:

Lutte

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck
Joined
Aug 24, 2017
Messages
1,726
RE4 nostalgia is mainly "that was one of the first shooter I played on a console that didn't feel too horrible" rather than the game being genuinely something special. It's not the worst game in the world but it's not a particularly riveting game as an action game/shooter either. I can understand consolitis people who have never experienced decent shooters praising this stuff but PC gamers? come the fuck on.
 

fork

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck
Joined
Oct 20, 2020
Messages
1,488
The point is: It has nothing to do with Resident Evil. When a successor to an RPG just changes the art style, or something even less important, while keeping most of the defining gameplay characteristics intact, people on this forum start to lose their minds, and rightfully so.

RE4 changed everything that made Resident Evil great for the worse; everything! From beautiful prerendered backgrounds to ugly real time 3D OTS perspective. This change alone puts the sequel in an entirely different genre. But that wasn't enough: from non-linear, exploration- and puzzle-based game to completely linear action experience with loot and even vendors, Quick Time Events, and no atmosphere whatsoever. RE4 was the definining moment of decline of the franchise, and fucking Jews, journalists an retarded imbeciles praised (and keep praising) it like the second coming of Christ.

I hate everyone who pretends to like this piece of shit with a passion.
 

JDR13

Arcane
Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Messages
3,515
Location
The Swamp
My opinion though is that the game made me slog through four hours of content that was a fucking brown, drab mess aesthetically, narratively, and kinesthetically before it presented me with enjoyable content.

I fixed that for you. We wouldn't want people thinking you're trying to pass your Oldfag opinion off as fact.


I’m confused as to what your point is here. It seems to have started as:

“LOL. Why would you think critically about a game that is 15 years old?”

and then morphed to:

“It’s just your fault for not enjoying the game” (which btw is plausible)

followed-up by:

“See? I told you this game was good?”

and finally ending with:

“You’re old and that’s just, like, your opinion, man”, both of which, while undeniably true, are not particularly strong rhetorical arguments.

Look man, it’s cool that you enjoy RE4 and think it’s really good. I’m not trying to take that away from you; that’s really not my MO. I just personally don’t think it’s very good and am writing about why I think that is the case in terms of design, aesthetics, and narrative. If you want to argue and engage with me about that feel free to do so. Otherwise fuck off.

Oldfag is butthurt.

I never said the game was really good, but congrats on the projection there.

Now take your medication before you have an aneurysm.
 
Joined
Feb 28, 2011
Messages
3,476
Location
Chicago, IL, Kwa
My opinion though is that the game made me slog through four hours of content that was a fucking brown, drab mess aesthetically, narratively, and kinesthetically before it presented me with enjoyable content.

I fixed that for you. We wouldn't want people thinking you're trying to pass your Oldfag opinion off as fact.


I’m confused as to what your point is here. It seems to have started as:

“LOL. Why would you think critically about a game that is 15 years old?”

and then morphed to:

“It’s just your fault for not enjoying the game” (which btw is plausible)

followed-up by:

“See? I told you this game was good?”

and finally ending with:

“You’re old and that’s just, like, your opinion, man”, both of which, while undeniably true, are not particularly strong rhetorical arguments.

Look man, it’s cool that you enjoy RE4 and think it’s really good. I’m not trying to take that away from you; that’s really not my MO. I just personally don’t think it’s very good and am writing about why I think that is the case in terms of design, aesthetics, and narrative. If you want to argue and engage with me about that feel free to do so. Otherwise fuck off.

Oldfag is butthurt.

I never said the game was really good, but congrats on the projection there.

Now take your medication before you have an aneurysm.

That’s not the way aneurysms work. You either have one or you don’t. Roughly 10% of the population has aneurysms and very few of them will rupture. Additionally, jury’s out on whether or not medication is effective against preventing ruptures/hemorrhages, although there is slight evidence that vasodilators may be effective.

I know all this because I’m old. Guess age does have its perks!
 

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