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

Machocruz

Arcane
Joined
Jul 7, 2011
Messages
3,792
Location
Hyperborea
For an action game, it felt too long. That was my biggest gripe from day one. Generally enjoyed it, but it didn't have the complexity, depth, or variety to warrant it's length. Unlike 1, 2, and 3, I never bothered replaying it, the juice was not worth a second squeeze. And I don't give a fuck about Las Plagas, TnG Virus Squad fo' life nigga . But it's one of the few games that made grenades feel hella useful, and the shoot-limb-to-melee mechanic was and is brilliant.

As far as the direction of the series after that, it's irrational to place blame on inanimate objects. It's the choices of the humans that produced the product and the majority preferences of the market that are at "fault" if anything. No one held a gun to Capcom's head and forced them to take the series in that particular direction, or to continue after that. No one forced the mongoloid masses to have shit taste or not be able to grasp anything beyond monkey button pushing. Or you can look at it as RE4 being reverting to their true nature, which is being an action game developer first and foremost. They can't help themselves, original RE was an anomaly. This is why you can count on an "actual" "survival" RE being followed by several shooting galleries.
 
Last edited:

Deflowerer

Arcane
Joined
May 22, 2013
Messages
1,943
RE4 still creating butthurt years after the release. Truly magnificent.

Other then that, I replayed it recently and it's just such a fucking blast to play. Definitely the best 3rd person shooter.
 

JDR13

Arcane
Joined
Nov 2, 2006
Messages
3,515
Location
The Swamp
Other then that, I replayed it recently and it's just such a fucking blast to play. Definitely the best 3rd person shooter.

There are lots of better third-person shooters.

If you mean in the survival-horror genre, Dead Space 1 & 2 are still better.
 

vota DC

Augur
Joined
Aug 23, 2016
Messages
2,008
RE4 still creating butthurt years after the release. Truly magnificent.

Other then that, I replayed it recently and it's just such a fucking blast to play. Definitely the best 3rd person shooter.
Seems too long to replay, also 1/4 of the game Is babysitting the girl that require patience and gets old the second time you do It. I am trying to finish Ada side story that give me a freaking armor for the girl so I can Explore and enjoy with my own pace.

I don't like much the horde minigame, It seems counter intuitive (spelling???)
 
Joined
Feb 28, 2011
Messages
3,476
Location
Chicago, IL, Kwa
And I finished it.

I think "kinda shit" is a pretty fair assessment of the game.

The Good:

+ Chapter 3 is largely great. I wish the whole game was like this. I love shooting weird bug monks in a Gothic castle with a creepy inversion of Little Lord Fauntleroy taunting me.
+ One of the least annoying implementations of an escort system I've ever seen (this does deserve serious props).

The Meh:

) Enemy dispersal is lacking. There are actually a decent number of monsters present, but their placement is very weak. 9 times out of ten you're fighting villagers, monks or soldiers all of whom are just slightly buffed versions of their predecessors. There are even pretty cool monsters (the wolves) that only show up in one(!) single room. Very weird, and seems like bad asset management.
) Gunplay is uneven, but much better in the second half of the game.

The Bad:

- The story is shit. I don't know how anyone can defend this. There's a brief moment in the middle of the game where it stops taking itself seriously and it seems plausible that it might redeem itself, but then it immediately pivots back to self-serious-nonsense. Also whoever was claiming earlier in this thread that Leon is an 80s action hero on-par with Sly and Arnold should be forced to watch 80s action movies on loop with their eyelids taped open.

-The first third of the game is shit. The basic gameplay loop of the entire village section is awful. "Headshot...pause for 'reactive' animation... headshot... pause for 'reactive' animation... headshot..." ...you get the idea.

-The last third of the game is also shit. The Mine and The Island are even more linear then the rest of the game. They're entirely reliant on set-pieces and rail-sequences, and completely eschew any sense of exploration. Not to mention that The Island is one of the most hilarious examples of thematic jumping-the-shark that I have ever seen in a videogame.

-Saddler is a terrible villain. "Mwahahaha! I have many evil plans, let me tell you about them and... hey, why have you fallen asleep?"

-QTEs. Fucking QTEs.


So yeah, that's basically what I've got. It's not total shit, but it is definitely partial shit, and calling it one of the greatest games of its generation is fucking nuts to me.
 

Ash

Arcane
Joined
Oct 16, 2015
Messages
4,741
Now play again on professional difficulty, fagit.

calling it one of the greatest games of its generation is fucking nuts to me.

Bro...mid 2000s. It is a masterpiece in comparison to most trash of the latter half of that decade. That is the dawn of decline decade.

I also think you're trying to save face. You recognize it's pretty cool for what it is but got to keep up appearances.

Yes the story is trash. Who the fuck cares? It is good to laugh at so not without value. Yes the combat is slow, restrictive and somewhat clunky, yet they still managed to make it pretty fun despite its survival horror roots. It's cool because level design is constantly throwing new challenges of a wide variety at you (even when it sadly becomes a bit overly linear in the third act), weapon customization and overall weapon design is quite solid for what it is, grid inventory management is always a nice addition, and enemy diversity placement and scripting is pretty good regardless of what you claim...so what if the dogs are rarely used (more than once for the record)? They're kinda not that fun to fight anyway, but the first time is tense regardless. And lastly it offers an acceptable level of challenge (like I said, try professional difficulty now).

It's a shit Resident Evil game (though far superior to the many games claiming to be resident evil since then, holy shit). Even judged as a shooter it's kind of fucked because of how incredibly restrictive movement is, but it manages to be something quite unique on its own, and for sure great for what it is and the time it was released. It's mostly good because the level design, while not considerably open, doesn't forget it is a game despite realistic architecture and graphics, and is a rollercoaster of cool and interesting challenges. Therein lies its true monocle.

Well done for recognizing the escorting of Ashley being notable design too, as far as escort quests go. She doesn't behave in annoying (except the goddamn squealing) or inconsistent ways, she is vulnerable which makes for more engaging and tense combat when she's around, and again they do interesting gameplay stuff with her from time to time in relation to the level design, and also make her fuck off when she starts to outstay her welcome. Best extended escort quest there ever was.

-The first third of the game is shit. The basic gameplay loop of the entire village section is awful. "Headshot...pause for 'reactive' animation... headshot... pause for 'reactive' animation... headshot..." ...you get the idea.

No, I don't. You're being completely disingenuous or are unobservant. Yeah, the combat is quite straightforward here, but the game is not just combat and even then you're simplifying it. there is no "loop", because they're constantly mixing things up and throwing new shit at you. Multiple bossfights each rather different from the last, there's some exploration and secrets, there's puzzles for variety basic as they may be, managing ashley is a unique aspect of the game in of itself (and here it is the tutorial phase), there's a few bits of side content like unlocking the punisher handgun by shooting the medallions, there's a variety of ways they mix up the villager combat such as making them swarm you in a house which you have to defend, and so on. Still, you're right in that the castle is the best part of the game. Castle > Village > Island is probably right, but they're all fun.

Lastly, why are you "pausing for reactive animation" when you headshot them? When in the stagger state you're supposed to be running up to them and kicking them for crowd clearance, dealing damage to multiple enemies at the same time or knocking them off cliffs, not wasting the bullets in your limited magazine before needing to be vulnerable for a reload and so on. Donut.
 
Last edited:

Alphons

Cipher
Joined
Nov 20, 2019
Messages
1,956
Firstly, I am a longtime RE veteran. Having played games, such as. RE 1, RE 2, RE3, RE REVELATIONS, RE5 and of course RE6. So when I say I am fairly well versed in the quality and merits of what makes a GOOD "RE". Rather then, what make an RE infact utter tripe.

When I was a young lad. I played this game that has henceforth been known as RE4. Firstly I was shocked, apalled, nay, even dsigusted by the lack of role playing experience in this game. The whole of the game seemed to assume, that as an educated gamer and RE veteran. I would be content with simply traversing the barren hellscape of the land known as spain. At first as I stepped out the cop car and realized there was no true RE system in this game. I was disgusted. Nevertheless I decided to press onward through the opening village. However, Every locatiom I happened across had almost no population. The world was completely static and desolate.

Each character I encountered had so artistic soul or creativity into their personality. They were simply empty shells there for text exposition. Nevertheless I pushed forward into this "game" of sorts. When I happened upon a chance combat encounter. I quickly discovered to my horror how awful the combat system truly was. You simply spam! Of course how genius!. This coupled with the general poor inventory system, coupled with the absolutely dreary world. In my expert opinion this game is clearly of poor quality and value.

In conclusion; I find it extremely fitting that the game world is covered in giant castles. Castles of course grow in shit, if anyone is unaware of this. Is there perhaps anyone willing to debate or challenge this game based upon its true virtues? Or are RE4 fans only capable of reacting with emoji's. It's quite comincal indeed that this absolute tripe of a game has such a simple minded following.

As I have said before; Resident Evil 4 is UTTER Tripe.
 

DJOGamer PT

Arcane
Joined
Apr 8, 2015
Messages
5,333
Location
Lusitânia
Gunplay is uneven, but much better in the second half of the game.

That's not what 'Gunplay' means


There's a brief moment in the middle of the game where it stops taking itself seriously

You're being disingenuous, the entire game doesn't take itself serious (and the further the game goes the more this becomes apparent)


-The first third of the game is shit. The basic gameplay loop of the entire village section is awful. "Headshot...pause for 'reactive' animation... headshot... pause for 'reactive' animation... headshot..." ...you get the idea.

>the first act of the game is awful
>proceeds to talk about the combat instead of the actual levels in the village

The village is pretty diverse in regards to what each level has as a challenge to the player

Also are you saying that you would headshot enemies, then wait for them to recover?


-Saddler is a terrible villain. "Mwahahaha! I have many evil plans, let me tell you about them and... hey, why have you fallen asleep?"
calling it one of the greatest games of its generation is fucking nuts to me.

Nah
RE4 is a great shooter, and one of the best of it's generation
You're clearly incapable of having fun
 
Last edited:

DJOGamer PT

Arcane
Joined
Apr 8, 2015
Messages
5,333
Location
Lusitânia
Even judged as a shooter it's kind of fucked because of how incredibly restrictive movement is

Nah the movement is fine

Gameplay should be judged not only by how well it respects the core fundamentals of it's genre, but also most importantly how well it "captures" a certain experience intended by the devs

Case in point, that's why not every platformer has the same 'jumping arc' and degree of 'air control', because not every platformer would benefit from it, this is something that needs to be tailored for the game in question
And all gameplay mechanics are like this, even something as apparently "bad" as 'regenerating health' can work wonderfully when the rest of the game is crafted in such a manner that would benefit from the inclusion of such mechanic
The point I am making for this situation is that not every shooter needs Quake's movement speed to be good

And RE4 is definitively a game that wouldn't be improved by a more traditional control scheme and faster movement speed
It's levels might be mostly enclosed and tight, but they are filled with multiple "escape routes", cover and connections to more "open" areas
The enemy count might be relatively high, but all enemies move in very simple and direct manner, and their attacks are highly telegraphed with big wind-ups and recoveries

Remove the tank controls and give Leon the permanent speed of an olympic sprinter, and the game would lose all challenge and fun
 

Ash

Arcane
Joined
Oct 16, 2015
Messages
4,741
I agree with everything. However what I mean by "fucked when judged as a shooter" is the movement is so damn restrictive (no strafe, no moving while aiming, no crouch, no jump) that it makes for a pretty low skill ceiling. Nonetheless there is certainly unique skill in working with RE4's limitations, there is definitely still notable skill ceiling and a lot of worthwhile challenge to partake in. Lastly the game knows its weakness here and plays more into strategic positioning, shooting projectiles out of the air, using the right weapon given the situation, target prioritization, and the stagger and melee mechanics.
 
Last edited:

Ash

Arcane
Joined
Oct 16, 2015
Messages
4,741
At the time, there was nothing quite like RE4. And there still isn't, maybe RE5. Dead Space comes close but it fails to recognise (or chose to ignore to retain survival horror, tension and immersion) what made RE4 so cool: all the level design and event scripting. DS still has a bunch like every game, but RE4 is just vastly different on a per room basis, while still involving the core gameplay in most instances. One minute you're riding a minecart with chainsaw dudes jumping you, the next an explorative segment, the next defending ashley while she turns cranks, then climbing a clock tower with puzzle elements while being sniped by monks, hide and seek with blind mini-bosses, the next optionally picking up soldiers with a mechanical arm and dumping them down the garbage disposal. I mean, loads of great games have varied design like this and it is pretty traditional game design, but RE4 really is just non-stop new shit unlike any other. Every room is different. Goes all-in and elevates the core gameplay mechanics, which lets be honest, are good but not great.
 
Joined
Feb 28, 2011
Messages
3,476
Location
Chicago, IL, Kwa
Ash, I'll address some of your points further down since I think you and DJO are making a couple of the same arguments, if you disagree feel free to extrapolate and I will respond at some point.
Now play again on professional difficulty
I'm surprised to see you say this. It's possible that I'm misremembering, but I thought you and I were very much of a mind that the whole "force a player to go through the game on easy mode before letting them play through on the real difficulty" was shit design. Regardless though, while I generally enjoy a steep difficulty in games, the sections of RE4 that I did enjoy (which again, I really enjoyed) were not particularly difficult. They were just silly, schlocky fun with cool-looking monsters, big boomsticks, and cheesy set design that would feel right at home in a Hammer movie if a Hammer movie actually had a budget; that is: the enjoyment wasn't coming from the difficulty.




I also think you're trying to save face. You recognize it's pretty cool for what it is but got to keep up appearances.
I'm really not. At this point in my life I give close to zero fucks about what people think of me outside of my cats, my family, and my boss. I greatly enjoy the Codex as a place to do some armchair design/criticism and talk a little bit of shit, but uhm, yeah I really don't care what anyone here thinks of me (except MCA of course. I hope he likes me!). Anyways, I think "cool for what it is" is a fair statement, but I would say that, when viewed as a complete package, "what it is" is a mediocre game. And in my vernacular "mediocre" is a synonym for "kinda shit". Is it the worst thing ever? By all means no. Like I said, I played through the whole damn thing, which clearly means I had some fun. But I've also watched all 17 seasons of Stargate SG-1 and its various spinoffs, and while I undeniably had some fun doing so, overall I would still describe the franchise as "kinda shit". I'm a Dad and I spend a lot of mental energy throughout the day engaging with my son, and sometimes at the end of the day I want to do something that requires zero critical thinking, but that doesn't mean I can completely shut-off the part of my brain that engages in critical thinking. Perhaps that's a personal flaw though. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Yes the story is trash. Who the fuck cares?
I respect you, but I loathe this argument. The absolute most generous way I can view it is as a misguided apologia for poor craftsmanship. A creative work, which I think games are, should strive to be perfect (obviously none will ever achieve this and very, very few will ever come close), otherwise why the fuck are you trying to make art ?! Certainly games with shit stories and great gameplay (for example Ultima Underworld) can be great and games with shit gameplay and great stories (for example PS:T) can be great, but is anyone seriously making the implied argument that PS:T wouldn't be better with gameplay as engaging as UU's or vice versa?
Yes the combat is slow, restrictive and somewhat clunky, yet they still managed to make it pretty fun despite its survival horror roots.
TBH didn't mind this at all after the first two chapters. As I said in my OP, complaints about the control scheme are bullshit imo; the game controls just fine.
It's cool because level design is constantly throwing new challenges of a wide variety at you
:what:

The game throws cinematic QTE after cinematic QTE at you and occasionally mixes it up with an on-rails sequence. I honestly don't get what you're talking about here.

weapon customization and overall weapon design is quite solid for what it is, grid inventory management is always a nice addition,

Agreed.

and enemy diversity placement and scripting is pretty good regardless of what you claim...so what if the dogs are rarely used (more than once for the record)? They're kinda not that fun to fight anyway, but the first time is tense regardless.

Disagree, and are you sure about the doggos? I only remember fighting them in the garden.


That's not what 'Gunplay' means

You're obviously correct. I meant gunfeel. It was late and I had a couple glasses of wine in me.



You're being disingenuous, the entire game doesn't take itself serious (and the further the game goes the more this becomes apparent)
I don't think I'm being disingenuous on this, but de gustibus non est disputandum; I will say that I certainly wasn't taking the game seriously by its end, but it seemed to me that the game generally was, excepting the Castle segment. Perhaps this is just a flaw in my perception, but if we're (as someone earlier in this thread was) comparing RE4 to, say, Commando, RE4 comes off as much more self-serious to me.


>the first act of the game is awful
>proceeds to talk about the combat instead of the actual levels in the village

The village is pretty diverse in regards to what each level has as a challenge to the player
That's not my memory of it at all, and seeing as I just played through it a week ago I'm inclined to believe myself. The village consists primarily of:
A: Arenas where you either are on a survival timer or just have to murder everyone
B: Linear paths where you push forward killing mooks, and incrementally get ambushed by enemies coming from the rear.

Sure there are the occasional boss battles, but none of them are particularly inspired. I'm pretty sure that one of them (lake monster) is impossible to die to outside of QTEs, one of them (El Gigante) is a pretty basic, "shoot it in the face until it's stunned and then mash X", and the last (Village Chief) just amounts to "Unload everything you have and run around the environment in a circular pattern". Perhaps it was unique at the time (I will freely admit that I don't play many third-person shooters), but they all strike me as fairly drab design.

Also are you saying that you would headshot enemies, then wait for them to recover?
Yes, that is largely how I was playing in the village. I think there's probably a kernel of truth to your and Ash's implication that my playstyle is an unfun one, but at the same time it was what I felt the game was incentivizing me to do, and I'm also somewhat leery of "You're playing it wrong" as a rhetorical defense of game design.


RE4 is a great shooter, and one of the best of it's generation
This may be true, but I find it dubious. RE4's generation is one of my least sampled eras of gaming. I was in my early 20s when it came out and I was doing a lot of partying and skirt-chasing at the time, but relatively little gaming. Out of the games that I have sampled from that time though, I found the first two Metroid Primes far, far superior.


You're clearly incapable of having fun
Incapable? No, but certainly less and less capable with each passing year. :negative:
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 28, 2011
Messages
3,476
Location
Chicago, IL, Kwa
In other news I started playing the Remaster of Resident Evil 1, and I am finding it...

very, very, good. I'm only about halfway through Jill's campaign, but I could see myself anointing it as a masterpiece if the quality level keeps up through to the end of both campaigns.
 

Morpheus Kitami

Liturgist
Joined
May 14, 2020
Messages
1,799
Nooo not the remaster/remake! The original OG 1996 release goddamn it. I'm in the minority here on the codex in this belief though, apparently. The belief that they ruined it. Makes me wonder how many actually played the OG release to completion.
Out of curiosity, for what reasons? From my perspective just playing through the games years ago, I liked the enemies that show up later in the remake more than the enemies that show up later in the original. Some of the enemies in the original felt like out of place fantasy creatures, rather than anything approaching horror.
 

Biscotti

Arbiter
Patron
Joined
Nov 24, 2015
Messages
494
Location
Belgium
Nooo not the remaster/remake! The original OG 1996 release goddamn it. I'm in the minority here on the codex in this belief though, apparently. The belief that they ruined it. Makes me wonder how many actually played the OG release to completion.
Out of curiosity, for what reasons? From my perspective just playing through the games years ago, I liked the enemies that show up later in the remake more than the enemies that show up later in the original. Some of the enemies in the original felt like out of place fantasy creatures, rather than anything approaching horror.

Yeah I'd say there's a certain campiness to RE1 that REmake lacks, no thanks to the intro that feels like it came straight out of some poorly acted B-movie, it has a certain charm to it. Also, I suppose some of the creative liberties REmake took in redesigning certain areas and puzzles can be seen as a negative too. For both these reasons, I think the original sets itself apart enough to also warrant a recommendation from me to people who are more than fine with trying out both. Overall though, I like the changes REmake makes and the content it adds, so to me it's just the best RE made even better. As far as remakes go that's the absolute highest praise possible.
 

Ash

Arcane
Joined
Oct 16, 2015
Messages
4,741
Nooo not the remaster/remake! The original OG 1996 release goddamn it. I'm in the minority here on the codex in this belief though, apparently. The belief that they ruined it. Makes me wonder how many actually played the OG release to completion.
Out of curiosity, for what reasons? From my perspective just playing through the games years ago, I liked the enemies that show up later in the remake more than the enemies that show up later in the original. Some of the enemies in the original felt like out of place fantasy creatures, rather than anything approaching horror.

Not sure what creatures you are referring to. REmake has the same creatures as the original, it just adds crimson heads. Also Fantasy? What?

The reasons are:

1. Unbelievable, monochromatic art direction that sucks a great deal of visual variety out of the game in a lame attempt to be spookier. Kind of like how Human Revolution made Deus Ex orange because reasons. Works to some extent, but the original was already plenty spooky and they really went all-in on this to an overbearing degree making it feel like a haunted house in a theme park rather than something believable like the original, instead of what they should have done: subtle spookification and additional details rather than sucking all color from the game. They also made the mansion have an element of decay and stagnation, like it has been unkempt for a long time, yet there were people living in the mansion until the outbreak very recently. Spooky haunted house would work if this were a supernatural horror game, or the plot had a reason for the decay, but it's supposed to a recent viral outbreak and somewhat grounded in reality.

2. Soundtrack. Much like with art direction there's a reduction of elements that happened. In short, they removed basslines, melodies, and presence. sometimes even turned excellent blood curdling tension-building music into simply ambient noise. I hate that remasters and remakes always insist on ruining perfectly fine music.

I like that there's a few gameplay additions, such as crimson heads, defense items or 180 quick turn, but it's not much and not worth shitting on the original for. They'd have to improve the gameplay a little more than they did for me to abandon the original. I'm not particularly bothered that the "campiness" of the original is gone, as while I like the unintended charm and humour, that stuff obviously can break immersion which is relatively important to classic Resident Evil. Yet at the same time it does make things feel very strange or weird, which can counter-intuitively ADD to the immersive horror experience, because strange and weird. Depends how the person experiencing it all absorbs it.

Also, I suppose some of the creative liberties REmake took in redesigning certain areas and puzzles can be seen as a negative too.

Yes, a few instances of this too. Though some are better designs.
 
Last edited:

Morpheus Kitami

Liturgist
Joined
May 14, 2020
Messages
1,799
Not sure what creatures you are referring to. REmake has the same creatures as the original, it just adds crimson heads.
Looking it up, I think I'm referring to the change in art direction between games for the Chimeras? I remember something in the original around the tunnels/lab looking like a cartoon gremlin, rather than some spooky, something I don't remember seeing in the remake.
Still, I understand the rest of what you said. I've had feelings in the past about the mansion looking too run down, but I always just brushed past that. Most of the stuff you mention is actually stuff back when I last played it I brushed off as generational differences, or in the music's case, horror usually having poor music in general. Definitely something I'll consider the next time I sit down to the series.
 

Ash

Arcane
Joined
Oct 16, 2015
Messages
4,741
Dunno, the Chimeras were perceived by me as sci-fi, bio-engineered and did the trick for me. The scared the fuck out of me when I was 10...obviously I have nostalgic ties to the original, but I don't think I am wrong about things they should have done differently e.g tamer art changes, leave soundtrack alone or extend only. Music in particular can be rather subjective, but see for yourself the differences. Mansion Basement is an obvious butchery. It is barely music in the remake.
 

Raskens

Learned
Patron
Joined
May 7, 2020
Messages
113
RE4 is a masterpiece. Great gameplay and pacing. Fun B-movie story with cheesy dialogue and villains. Leon in this game is like Bond or Schwarzenegger with his one liners, except all of them are lame - it's kind of endearing. The RE formula had become stale by around the time of Code Veronica, so it was worth trying something new. It's more action oriented, but definitely still survival horror. I think the retards bitching about it may be confusing it with RE5, because that's where the series really shifted into just being a third person shooter with some horror themes.

RE5 and onwards are shit, yes, but you shouldn't hold that against RE4. Blame Capcom for not understanding what made RE4 good.

Anyway OP is a tryhard faggot.

This whole nonsense that RE5 actually started the shift towards the action genre is complete bullshit. If we are going to be completely honest it took a babystep towards the action route at RE2, but the big step was from zero to RE4.

- OTS perspective
- Completely linear and no exploration on a bigger scale
- Ammo drops
-QTEs

All of that made it way more action focused. The only thing I remember RE5 doing is introducing some on rail sequences.
 

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