@Liquidus: Fair Enough@Loose said:
@BubbleBobble said:Just to add to this extensive post a little - I love the Resident Evil series, but frankly when it jumped to the GameCube it began to flounder. This is coming from someone who thinks Resident Evil 0 is awesome and one of the best in the series. I remember when Resident Evil came out, but more importantly when Resident Evil 2 hit. That was huge at the time! It was during that whole PlayStation craze of my early teens. Not to sound like an elitist prick but that was a real turning point for games in general and if you're old enough to remember that then you'd see what I mean.You keep making comparisons to franchises that were changed in ways that failed to meaningfully benefit them. The Megaman and Sonic developers made gameplay transitions that were ultimately met with either apathy or disdain from veteran players, newcomers and critics alike. The developers of RE were smart enough to realize that the style of gameplay and, more specifically, the controls of the traditional RE experience wouldn't necessarily hold up in a then-modern gaming environment and took the franchise in a direction that has been met with significant praise from the vast majority that have experienced it. RE4 is a landmark achievement in game design/development and has become one of the definitive games of its generation of consoles, perhaps even a definitive game of the 3D generation. I also don't think returning to an "old-skool" format is necessarily of creative benefit to a franchise, or more specifically, the progression of game development as a whole. Retreading traditional territory for a series of games can potentially deliver an enjoyable experience for purists and some newcomers but it does little for the creative development for the medium; frankly I'd rather that developers/publishers focus on new IPs when old ones fail to evolve in any meaningful way. The early RE games would also be particularly difficult to recreate as they were primarily defined by their atmosphere and batshit crazy story. The primary criticisms for those games, even when they were new, largely centered around the core gameplay or janky controls. Megaman and Sonic were games that were largely defined by and praised for their simply-yet-refined 2D gameplay which makes them easy experiences to recreate compellingly, whereas most early 3D games like RE don't offer compelling gameplay experiences when compared to 3D games that are currently available.@Loose said:
@BubbleBobble
said:But Resident Evil was not changed that drastically. As @Liquidus pointed out in a separate post, RE4 maintained many of the tropes and root concepts that defined other games in the series but the creators chose to move the gameplay in a direction that was both more creatively challenging and rewarding. You can accuse fans of the more "modern" RE games of being elitist, but ultimately the problem with the old-school RE purists is that they're discouraging creative progression from a game developer. The idea that we should stifle the creativity in order to appease a niche audience is absurd as it is ultimately detrimental to the developer's success and hurts the evolution of the medium as a whole.
@Loose
said:Imagine if Starcraft turned into an FPS (which it almost did) That is kind of what I feel about RE4. But there is some elitism in it because the community has split. Most people who love RE4 did not like the previous RE's. They say that they had "broken controls" & was "boring". This is the general consensus I've been recieving, & this is also elitism. However if you like both the old RE games + RE4, that's rare, yet I'll try to be more optimistic about the future of RE. The thing is, the community surrounding a video game is almost as important as the video game itself, well that's how I feel. But I'm a little biased I admit, because most of the community I grew up with has left, while new RE fans take their place. It's nothing personal, but like other franchises like Spyro & Crash Bandicoot, it would be hard for me to see Resident Evil die.
@BubbleBobble
said:The problem with the whole "it's not Resident Evil enough" assertion is that it plays into that whole "hipster elitism" thing that I mentioned earlier. There's a much more significant barrier of entry for the early RE games than RE4 and that's largely because the developers realized that they had to drastically improve the gameplay in order to ensure a quality experience for as many players as possible. The group that was "alienated" by the changes in RE4 were those who wanted that barrier of entry in order to keep the uncool kids out of their sandbox. It doesn't make sense for a developer to pander to a niche audience that loves even the most functionally retarded aspects of their games, at least not from a creative standpoint. Any individual involved in a creative medium should strive to make the most compelling experience possible, which the creators behind RE4 did. The game was consequently a landmark achievement in overall game design, they were rightfully praised for their accomplishments and its surpassed its predecessors in terms of impact/influence on the medium.
@Liquidus
said:There were many attributes that seperates RE4 from its original fans. One, that you could buy items from a merchant. This is almost Taboo for this to occur in a survival horror game. There were some instances in "Sweet Home" & previous RE's where you traded stuff, but collecting treasure chests is going a little too far. Conservation didn't exist in RE4, & I think that was more damaging than the "over the shoulder" stance. RE4 is a good standalone game, but as a "Resident Evil" game, it lacks.
@BubbleBobble
said:
@Loose said:But that didn't happen with RE4, I know many people who were fans of the RE before RE4 and still enjoyed their time with RE4 and even so, RE4 was actually a fantastic game. Modern third person action games owe a lot to RE4 something that can't be said about either MK4 or Sonic Adventure. These were good changes for the series. Just because it differed from the series doesn't inherently make it bad. RE4 is had a terrific atmosphere and the horror element was definitely present. Sure, they up'd the action and downplayed the survival horror elements but why should that be held against it? It's not like it became guns blazing like a CoD or what have you. The way Loose described it was pretty well imo.I feel like the RE series is like some independent rock band that hit it big with a great a record and all the "hardcore" fans of the early games are like hipster elitists using the whole "I liked them before they sold out" mentality and disavowing what is generally considered the seminal material because it's "too accessible" or whatever.Whenever you change a franchise drastically, you risk alienating your original fans. It happened with Mortal Kombat when MK4 came out, & Sonic when he went 3D.
Building upon roots is different than changing them. While RE4 & RE5 were somewhat faithful to the characters, what made Resident Evil so good in the first place was it's unique gameplay mechanics, atmosphere & bizarre story. When Newcomers say that this stuff was broken, it doesn't make me think too highly of them.
Take the Megaman Franchise for example, another Capcom one. There is a reason why Mega Man 1, 2, & 3 are looked at as classics, & Megaman X6, & X7 aren't. 1, 2, & 3 were hardly looked as classics when Megaman X came out. Everyone was heavily looking foward to Mega Man in 16-Bit, (MM7 too), yet as time went on, there was just too much addons & stuff to the game that it wasn't fun anymore.
So Capcom made Mega Man 9, going back to its roots and it was successfull. Why did they do this? Because the new ones weren't selling.
Hell Sonic generations is even going old-skool again. RE4 & RE5 may not be at that point in time yet, since they are younger than Mega Man, but history tends to repeat itself. Straying too far from a formula is not always a good thing. You're right that RE4 & RE5 haven't strayed as much as they could stray in the future.
MY POINT IS -- Resident Evil was once a juggernaut, this massive franchise that was unlike anything else. And then it started to die off ... to the point where it was almost irrelevant. Resident Evil 4 brought the series back. It took what made the game good, modernised what held it back and created one of the most influential games of the last decade. That over the shoulder camera angle alone was extremely innovative at the time. For the first time in a long time Resident Evil meant something again. And Resident Evil 5 was proof that Capcom weren't like other Japanese developers at the time - they took a successful franchise and added to it in a meaningful way. Yes, in many ways it's a iteration on previous success, but the co-op mode was a real gamble for that series. If you personally don't like Resident Evil 5 that's fine, but I love it. It's easily one of my all time favourite games. And the fact that it moved the series forward a little, and I believe re-invigorated co-op gaming as much as Gears of War did, says a lot about it.
So you want old-school Resident Evil? Fine. It's still there. Go back to it again and again. But the reality is not enough people wanted it bad enough to buy a GameCube and buy a ton of the remakes. I'm sure they were successful, but RE4 and 5 successful? I seriously doubt it. It's the same with most old school games. You want old X-Com back? Go play it. But don't expect developers to gamble millions of dollars and people's jobs on your desire to play isometrical strategy games when nobody buys them any more. Innovation in a franchise drives creativity, repetition kills franchises. Final Fantasy XIII may have been a success in many ways, but it wasn't what Final Fantasy VII was back in the day. And it won't be again if they don't take some risks next time around.
On a side note, I should point out I do like the current slate of remakes, so titles like Metal Gear Solid HD Collection will be a day one purchase for me. But if Metal Gear Solid 6 is the same game as 4, count me out. That's not a slam against 4, it's just that series needs new life. You can see already that won't be the case though with Kojima admitting he wanted Peace Walker, a great game and a big step forward for the series, to be called Metal Gear Solid 5. He know the series needs to evolve or die. That;s the same with all franchises in all mediums. Evolve or die.
Wow, what a rant.
Log in to comment