I'm a sellout (and revoking my Survival Horror Fan card)

Posted by Jeust (10334 posts) -

Dear Survival Horror Fan Club,

I finished Resident Evil 6, and love it!!! Sure the boss recycling is annoying and the boss battles became exasperating and monotonous, and there were some less polished sequences, but overall I found the game awesome.

Resident Evil 6's graphics, complimented by a nice quantity of zombies and mutated foes, great enviroments (like Tall Oaks and China), some heart wrenching moments, a serviceable and creative gameplay, and plenty of emotions in its rollercoaster ride style of pacing, provided me a great time!

I played it in singleplayer, with the AI companion, and for the first time in a Resident Evil game, I can say it didn't deter me from having fun, unlike Sheva did. To be fair Sheva was only part of my problem with RE5, being the rest of my complains centered around the severely miniscule inventory and the cooperative focused boss battles.

For the first time I can get behind this direction for the Resident Evil franchise. Of course I would love that the game was slower paced, scarier, and zombie-centric, but I'm not displeased with the new direction.

Survival horror was awesome, at the time it was invented and florished, but... right now I don't have the patience to either survive through the long hours to wrap my head around the puzzles, or consult a faq each five minutes of playing.

So, without further ado, I hereby surrender my Survival Horror fan card.

Love,

J

#1 Edited by ShaggE (5980 posts) -

I'm with ya. But then, I never thought RE was particularly scary, so I don't miss its survival horror roots that much. Modern RE is fun and stupid in the best way. (that said, I mostly hated the Chris campaign... Gears of Notzombies doesn't interest me at all. Leon and Jake's stories were far more fun. Ada's wasn't bad either.)

#2 Posted by Brodehouse (9370 posts) -

Technically you're abdicating, surrendering or resigning your fan card. I don't think self-revoking is strictly possible.

I actually kind of liked RE5 a lot, even if the story is nonsense the gameplay was still awesome, and they perfected the controls from 4. But 6... even if the story was great, even if the set pieces worked and the inventory system worked and all that other shit... the controls are so borked that I can't even just play it for the gameplay. RE4-5 is maybe my favorite third person shooting handling, and they botched it completely.

#3 Posted by Sackmanjones (4609 posts) -

I am also in the club. Now I love horror games and survival horror as well. This is not a survival horror game at all. You could maybe say it is horror action but even that is pushin it. Game had issues, mainly the boss fights but after learning the combat system and playing co op I had a ton of fun with this game. It looked nice, was well voice acted and like I said, I think the combat system of rolling and dodging was unique and cool. It's not my favorite resident evil but I thought it was a solid game.

#4 Edited by Colourful_Hippie (4281 posts) -

Shit controls and lazy QTE's are considered to be creative gameplay?

lol ok

#5 Posted by Nekroskop (2786 posts) -

RE6 is a clusterfuck of epic proportions. I remember buying Dragon's Dogman just for the demo, but ended up liking that game more than the final product.(RE6) Never once have I returned a game faster than RE6.

#6 Posted by Yummylee (20559 posts) -

Shit controls and lazy QTE's are considered to be creative gameplay?

lol ok

Seriously. You can like RE6 as much as you want, but to claim its gameplay is creative in any way is laughable.

Also, Sheva, not Sheeva.

#7 Posted by vikingdeath1 (902 posts) -

I enjoyed RE6 more than most, but it certainly had some Core problems.

Those controls weren't As shitty as the quicklook makes them seem (stupid Brad didn't even know how to quickshot!) but the movement and shooting in general just felt so... I can't remember. Were they as bad as I think?...... well shit, looks like I have to play RE6 again to find out!

I remember Chris's campaign being stupid though.

And FUCK Jake's stealth sections.

RE5 is a Great game though, That I remember.

#8 Posted by geirr (2377 posts) -

I'm glad you found some golden nuggets in this shitpile of a game.

#9 Posted by ArbitraryWater (11001 posts) -

Listen man, I will defend RE6 to a point (inasmuch as I sort of enjoyed myself), but in no uncertain terms do I think that it's a good game. Jake and Ada's chapters are filled with enough terrible set pieces (often riddled with insta-death QTEs) that I can't in good conscience recommend it to regular human beings who I'm not intending to troll. I even think the shooting in that game is fine once you get used to it, but everything surrounding it is indicative what is wrong with "AAA" game design.

And whatever, I like those old Resident Evil games just fine. This is so disconnected from those that I don't even care about the name anymore. Assuming those modders actually deliver on their attempts to release RE 1.5, that's all the classic survival horror (whatever the hell that nebulous term actually means) I'll need for the future.

#10 Edited by Jeust (10334 posts) -

@yummylee said:
@colourful_hippie said:

Shit controls and lazy QTE's are considered to be creative gameplay?

lol ok

Seriously. You can like RE6 as much as you want, but to claim its gameplay is creative in any way is laughable.

Also, Sheva, not Sheeva.

I like the way the zombies can grab you and you fight for your life, or even crouch in your directions. As well as some of the set pieces, that while annoying have some great ideas to it. Things like

  • the rolling, sliding, dodging and shooting laying in the ground;
  • the choice Piers makes in the last boss fight, and the way he helps in the fight;
  • the last encounter between Ada and her copycat, with the idea of shooting the canisters;
  • the way the three campaigns intertwine;
  • shooting up the President was an awesome twist too.
#11 Posted by Scroll (589 posts) -

I don't hate this game, that would require more energy than it deserves. I hate what Capcom have done to Resident Evil since RE5.

#12 Posted by Scheds (456 posts) -

I can't say I'd outright recommend Resident Evil 6 to someone, but I agree to the point that I didn't think it was the worst. Had some pretty alright times with Leon's campaign, in particular.

#13 Posted by Colourful_Hippie (4281 posts) -

@jeust said:

@yummylee said:
@colourful_hippie said:

Shit controls and lazy QTE's are considered to be creative gameplay?

lol ok

Seriously. You can like RE6 as much as you want, but to claim its gameplay is creative in any way is laughable.

Also, Sheva, not Sheeva.

I like the way the zombies can grab you and you fight for your life, or even crouch in your directions. As well as some of the set pieces, that while annoying have some great ideas to it. Things like

  • the rolling, sliding, dodging and shooting laying in the ground;
  • the choice Piers makes in the last boss fight, and the way he helps in the fight;
  • the last encounter between Ada and her copycat, with the idea of shooting the canisters;
  • the way the three campaigns intertwine;
  • shooting up the President was an awesome twist too.

You're listing things that happen in the game, not the mechanics that drive those actions.

The part where you're making those things happen with your controller is the part that's shit, just a big ole pile that makes you lower your standards for gameplay mechanics in order to be at a level where you can start to "appreciate" the game. That shit needs a flush along with another courtesy flush to get rid of the remains.

I can only think of this game in terms of poop analogies because they're fitting.

#14 Posted by Jeust (10334 posts) -

@jeust said:

@yummylee said:
@colourful_hippie said:

Shit controls and lazy QTE's are considered to be creative gameplay?

lol ok

Seriously. You can like RE6 as much as you want, but to claim its gameplay is creative in any way is laughable.

Also, Sheva, not Sheeva.

I like the way the zombies can grab you and you fight for your life, or even crouch in your directions. As well as some of the set pieces, that while annoying have some great ideas to it. Things like

  • the rolling, sliding, dodging and shooting laying in the ground;
  • the choice Piers makes in the last boss fight, and the way he helps in the fight;
  • the last encounter between Ada and her copycat, with the idea of shooting the canisters;
  • the way the three campaigns intertwine;
  • shooting up the President was an awesome twist too.

You're listing things that happen in the game, not the mechanics that drive those actions.

The part where you're making those things happen with your controller is the part that's shit, just a big ole pile that makes you lower your standards for gameplay mechanics in order to be at a level where you can start to "appreciate" the game. That shit needs a flush along with another courtesy flush to get rid of the remains.

I can only think of this game in terms of poop analogies because they're fitting.

The rolling, sliding, dodging and shooting laying in the ground is gameplay.

#15 Edited by Colourful_Hippie (4281 posts) -

@jeust: A small addition in an overall poor package. I don't care all that much about rolling, sliding, shooting while on the ground when the actual shooting part and character control are pretty poor.

#16 Posted by Yummylee (20559 posts) -

@jeust said:

@yummylee said:
@colourful_hippie said:

Shit controls and lazy QTE's are considered to be creative gameplay?

lol ok

Seriously. You can like RE6 as much as you want, but to claim its gameplay is creative in any way is laughable.

Also, Sheva, not Sheeva.

I like the way the zombies can grab you and you fight for your life, or even crouch in your directions. As well as some of the set pieces, that while annoying have some great ideas to it. Things like

  • the rolling, sliding, dodging and shooting laying in the ground;
  • the choice Piers makes in the last boss fight, and the way he helps in the fight;
  • the last encounter between Ada and her copycat, with the idea of shooting the canisters;
  • the way the three campaigns intertwine;
  • shooting up the President was an awesome twist too.
  • Yes, you can roll/slide/ ect, but it's not creative. It's there, but there also plenty of others games out there that allow you those actions. Plus, the camera often suffers for it when you are sliding all over the place, so RE6 didn't even implement it all that well anyway.
  • Yeah, it's kinda neat that Piers is controllable in his J'avo state, but considering that the boss battle itself is complete garbage, it doesn't matter.
  • Again, that's not related to actual creativity. Killing a boss by shooting a bunch of canisters is hardly original. Though the actual aesthetic of the boss is at least creepy looking, that much I can admit.
  • That's related to the design of the game, not the gameplay itself. Though while it is interesting from a narrative stand point, from a gameplay perspective it doesn't lead into much besides the occasional 4-player boss battle. Well, that and an annoying amount of boss battle repeats.
  • And that's just a cutscene.

#17 Edited by Jeust (10334 posts) -

@yummylee said:

@jeust said:

@yummylee said:
@colourful_hippie said:

Shit controls and lazy QTE's are considered to be creative gameplay?

lol ok

Seriously. You can like RE6 as much as you want, but to claim its gameplay is creative in any way is laughable.

Also, Sheva, not Sheeva.

I like the way the zombies can grab you and you fight for your life, or even crouch in your directions. As well as some of the set pieces, that while annoying have some great ideas to it. Things like

  • the rolling, sliding, dodging and shooting laying in the ground;
  • the choice Piers makes in the last boss fight, and the way he helps in the fight;
  • the last encounter between Ada and her copycat, with the idea of shooting the canisters;
  • the way the three campaigns intertwine;
  • shooting up the President was an awesome twist too.
  • Yes, you can roll/slide/ ect, but it's not creative. It's there, but there also plenty of others games out there that allow you those actions. Plus, the camera often suffers for it when you are sliding all over the place, so RE6 didn't even implement it all that well anyway.
  • Yeah, it's kinda neat that Piers is controllable in his J'avo state, but considering that the boss battle itself is complete garbage, it doesn't matter.
  • Again, that's not related to actual creativity. Killing a boss by shooting a bunch of canisters is hardly original. Though the actual aesthetic of the boss is at least creepy looking, that much I can admit.
  • That's related to the design of the game, not the gameplay itself. Though while it is interesting from a narrative stand point, from a gameplay perspective it doesn't lead into much besides the occasional 4-player boss battle. Well, that and an annoying amount of boss battle repeats.
  • And that's just a cutscene.

True to much of that, but:

  • I liked that Piers J'avo sequence, although the boss battle really is bothersome.
  • I thought the actually originality about the boss wasn't so much in shooting the canisters, but destroying enough of the ever regenerating limbs to make a chance for a well placed shot.
  • The President shooting was just a cutscene, and I just got in here because it was a bold scene.
#18 Edited by XenoNick (1367 posts) -

There was some moments in RE6 I found enjoyable but that is heavily out weighed by the issues I had with the game.

First the positives:

  • The game has amazing production values and looks outstanding.
  • I enjoyed Sherry returning and seeing how she reacted to the G-Virus.
  • Mercenaries mode was still pretty fun.
  • The start of Leons' campaign is strong.
  • Ustanak being a major foe is Jakes' campaign (similar to Nemesis.)
  • No babysitting the A.I.

Ok and now the negatives:

  • The game felt spread way to thin. RE6 has a lot of content but it is a bit of a slog to get through.
  • Chris' campaign in it's entirety.
  • The moments the storyline crossed. If it wasn't the boss fights being repeated it would've been more tolerable.
  • Awkward cover system.
  • The controls felt way to lose. (I hoped they'd have just adapted the style from Dead Space 1&2.)
  • The abundance of QTES. Also not explaining at any point that rocking both analogue sticks worked.
  • Enemies having forced, un-skippable animations even after they've died. In chapter 2 with Leon in the graveyard 60% of the time I'd kill a zombie for it to still take a flying leap and take a chunk out of me. (This may have only been an issue for me.)
  • Pointless new characters. Helena and Pierce. Apart from two scenes Deborah for Helena and Pierce dying. There is no reason they could have been replaced with Claire and Jill. You could have had a nice reunion moment with the RE2 cast. Jill not being in RE6 really annoys me. In Revelations she is worried sick that Chris has vanished. In RE6 he buggered off and Pierce had to go find him. Wasn't Jill concerned? Jill isn't even mentioned in RE6.
  • The god-awful multiplayer. Good god why did they not learn after RE5 VS mode? The rumors of single player DLC added some hope but it never became anything. At least RE5 redeemed the shit MP was some good SP DLC.

The amount of time, effort and money that was put into RE6 I had my hopes incredibly high. 2011-2 saw three new Resident Evil games and only one of them felt like a worthwhile purchase and that was Revelations and the HD version this year improved on it quite well. I hope RE7 turns things for the better.

#19 Edited by Yummylee (20559 posts) -

@jeust: Well, Vanquish first comes to mind. Now there's some actual innovation, as it helped turn the Gears of War formula on its head by giving you a refreshing amount of flexibility to move around the environments at an incredible speed. Max Payne 3 also of course allows you to dive around and go prone if need be, as do the Ghost Recon games too, I believe.

For RE6, diving into prone usually didn't serve much practical purpose besides to make you look cool, which was again often in conflict with the camera in keeping up with the action. Rolling out of the way from an attack at least served an actual purpose within the gameplay, but that doesn't mean RE6 should be praised for including a mechanic that only scratches the basics of a third-person shooter.

#20 Posted by Humanity (7946 posts) -

I've been playing it currently with a friend, kind of on and off.

It's like they kept the design team locked up in some dark vault for 15 years and told them to design an RE game with todays advanced tools. This is a modern looking game that is very tragically hampered by archaic game design. As much as it gets right, there are so many things it gets so horribly wrong.

The biggest offender in RE6: what happened to death by headshots? A series that cemented the rule of 1 to the head or several to the body is redefining a core gameplay mechanic that shouldn't even be tampered with. I understand you could have Wesker as the hand to hand specialist; maybe he isn't that great at shooting so his headshots only daze zombies, but he can suplex them into dust all day. But to have all the characters do this? Forcing the player to constantly run up and tackle zombies..you know creatures that infect you by bites and scratches?? Who thought this wrestling approach was a good idea?

The bosses are just a whole different category. Granted, some of them are pretty neat, but to keep putting you into scenarios where you're just dumping ammo into these sponges that give very little indication of how much life they have left, in a game where ammo scarcity is a big thing - I mean it's baffling. I won't even get into the whole zombie-transformer boss that is ridiculous beyond all words. At least towards the end it is so completely outlandish and over the top that it's hard not to laugh at the absurdity of the whole situation.

Resident Evil 6 shares the same problems as Ayn Rands "Atlas Shrugged." At heart, they are both interesting and contain some really good content, but at the same time both are in DIRE need of a completely ruthless editor. Much like Rand's over 1000 page long novel that beats the reader over the head with the same message throughout the entire story, Resident Evil is a game that should be 9-10 chapters long AT MOST.

They should really remaster the entire game, cut out all the superfluous chapters like Leons adventures in the underwater caverns, cut it all up into one seamless campaign that transitions to different characters during storyline intersections, and add a few hotfixes here and there like shortening boss encounters, making headshots actually count, making the weapon select more functional than stylish etc etc - release the whole thing as Resident Evil 6 Remastered Gold Edition with a bunch of skins or whatever.

#21 Edited by Yummylee (20559 posts) -
@humanity said:

I've been playing it currently with a friend, kind of on and off.

It's like they kept the design team locked up in some dark vault for 15 years and told them to design an RE game with todays advanced tools. This is a modern looking game that is very tragically hampered by archaic game design. As much as it gets right, there are so many things it gets so horribly wrong.

The biggest offender in RE6: what happened to death by headshots? A series that cemented the rule of 1 to the head or several to the body is redefining a core gameplay mechanic that shouldn't even be tampered with. I understand you could have Wesker as the hand to hand specialist; maybe he isn't that great at shooting so his headshots only daze zombies, but he can suplex them into dust all day. But to have all the characters do this? Forcing the player to constantly run up and tackle zombies..you know creatures that infect you by bites and scratches?? Who thought this wrestling approach was a good idea?

Uh, that's precisely how RE4 & RE5 worked for the most part. Difference is of course RE4 and RE5's controls are really tight and responsive, as opposed to the slippery mess in RE6. But anywhoo, that was a pretty core tactic even in the older shooters of the series; it was a great way to deal with crowds (specifically with Leon's roundhouse kick in RE4) since you'd be invulnerable during the animation. Plus, it helped you reserve ammo, though that only really factored in the early stages of RE4...

There are a myriad of complaints to levy against RE6, but complaining that enemies don't die with 1 shot to the head isn't one of 'em. In fact even less for RE6, since it was clear they were trying to design the game as some sort of brawler/shooter hybrid, so the idea was to force you to get up close and start kicking stuff, hence the ammo shortage and the fact that enemies couldn't be killed with a single bullet to the head. Though of course, that very ammo shortage most definitely begins to falter when put against the bosses--one of the most critical complaints I've often brought up when it comes to discussing RE6--whom all require you to dump an insane amount of bullets into them.

#22 Posted by Humanity (7946 posts) -

@yummylee said:
@humanity said:

I've been playing it currently with a friend, kind of on and off.

It's like they kept the design team locked up in some dark vault for 15 years and told them to design an RE game with todays advanced tools. This is a modern looking game that is very tragically hampered by archaic game design. As much as it gets right, there are so many things it gets so horribly wrong.

The biggest offender in RE6: what happened to death by headshots? A series that cemented the rule of 1 to the head or several to the body is redefining a core gameplay mechanic that shouldn't even be tampered with. I understand you could have Wesker as the hand to hand specialist; maybe he isn't that great at shooting so his headshots only daze zombies, but he can suplex them into dust all day. But to have all the characters do this? Forcing the player to constantly run up and tackle zombies..you know creatures that infect you by bites and scratches?? Who thought this wrestling approach was a good idea?

Uh, that's precisely how RE4 & RE5 worked for the most part. Difference is of course RE4 and RE5's controls are really tight and responsive, as opposed to the slippery mess in RE6. But anywhoo, that was a pretty core tactic even in the older shooters of the series; it was a great way to deal with crowds (specifically with Leon's roundhouse kick in RE4) since you'd be invulnerable during the animation. Plus, it helped you reserve ammo, though that only really factored in the early stages of RE4...

There are a myriad of complaints to levy against RE6, but complaining that enemies don't die with 1 shot to the head isn't one of 'em. In fact even less for RE6, since it was clear they were trying to design the game as some sort of brawler/shooter hybrid, so the idea was to force you to get up close and start kicking stuff, hence the ammo shortage and the fact that enemies couldn't be killed with a single bullet to the head. Though of course, that very ammo shortage most definitely begins to falter when put against the bosses--one of the most critical complaints I've often brought up when it comes to discussing RE6--whom all require you to dump an insane amount of bullets into them.

I don't remember headshots being an issue in RE5 at all. Or at most it took 2 shots from an upgraded gun. Unless you're using the magnum or a shotgun from up close then zombies can take 4-5 shots to the head in RE6. See in contrast to your complaints I don't actually think the controls are an issue here at all, as for the most part I had no issues with them. If anything they give you much greater mobility than RE5 (RE4 is not even worth mentioning in that regard). It's the rubbery zombies that seem impervious to serious damage that are behind all of my woes.

It's clear that they were going for a weird hybrid when you actually start playing the game, but why would the reason to go in this direction is not very clear at all. Among the many issues this otherwise average title has, the complete dissonance between series heritage and the questionable hand to hand bias in combat lends itself to one of the games biggest shortcomings.

As I said though, if you cut down each duo's campaigns to 3 meaningful chapters, making it 9 total, with one condensed Ada bonus section in the end - that would go a long way in "fixing" another core issue with RE6 which is it's length.

#23 Edited by Yummylee (20559 posts) -

@humanity: There's a difference between mobility and tight controls, though. While RE6 of course gives you more movement possibilities, I found it all to feel really loose, and stuff like trying to get into cover is so needlessly obtuse, as is diving/rolling about so awkward. When it comes to RE4 in particular, however, I feel they were spot-on in giving you exactly all you needed to take on the opposition. Not being able to move & shoot gave the game a very deliberate and methodical pacing to it all, and to this day RE4 can still stand as a generally unique style of shooter.

As for RE5, I guess you could eventually start blasting fools if you so choose, as your guns got more powerful and the ammo all the more plentiful, but that wasn't for me, and I primarily chose to play it just like RE4. I even stuck to the 'classic' RE4 control style, which removed my ability to strafe. That style of play was specifically what i liked about RE4, and it's why I never found the appeal of playing the game again with all of my buffed up weaponry and cleaning house, because it was frankly just sorta boring for me. RE5 is a generally rather easy game, even without your guns being at their maximum. As such, I would always use any following RE5 playthroughs as an excuse to then use completely different weaponry.

But yes, point is, thinking back I imagine it's true that enemies in RE5 would eventually be reduced to fodder and could be killed pretty hastily.

#24 Posted by Icemael (6269 posts) -

@yummylee said:

For RE6, diving into prone usually didn't serve much practical purpose besides to make you look cool

You regenerate stamina much faster when lying down, which is very useful considering any decent play will involve a lot of stamina-consuming moves like tackles, kicks, quick-shots etc.

I feel like most of the complaints about RE6's mechanics come from people who have no understanding whatsoever of the systems and controls. The game's certainly no masterpiece (Leon's campaign is the only I could whole-heartedly recommend), but once you get used to the controls and get a feel for what you can do the combat is fast-paced, intense and usually quite a bit of fun. It's certainly far quicker, deeper and more interesting than the combat in, say, Uncharted or other third-person shooters with similarly bland combat systems.

In a way, it tries to do for RE4 and RE5's melee-focused combat what Vanquish did for cover shooting: more speed, more mobility, more potential for cool technical play. Now, it's not nearly as successful as Vanquish, but it's certainly not bad, and a lot of the people who dismiss it seem to do so for the same reason a lot of people dismissed Vanquish as nothing but a mediocre Gears of War clone: a complete inability to learn and adapt when presented with systems that deviate from the norm.

#25 Edited by Yummylee (20559 posts) -

@icemael said:

@yummylee said:

For RE6, diving into prone usually didn't serve much practical purpose besides to make you look cool

You regenerate stamina much faster when lying down, which is very useful considering any decent play will involve a lot of stamina-consuming moves like tackles, kicks, quick-shots etc.

I feel like most of the complaints about RE6's mechanics come from people who have no understanding whatsoever of the systems and controls. The game's certainly no masterpiece (Leon's campaign is the only I could whole-heartedly recommend), but once you get used to the controls and get a feel for what you can do the combat is fast-paced, intense and usually quite a bit of fun. It's certainly far quicker, deeper and more interesting than the combat in, say, Uncharted or other third-person shooters with similarly bland combat systems.

In a way, it tries to do for RE4 and RE5's melee-focused combat what Vanquish did for cover shooting: more speed, more mobility, more potential for cool technical play. Now, it's not nearly as successful as Vanquish, but it's certainly not bad, and a lot of the people who dismiss it seem to do so for the same reason a lot of people dismissed Vanquish as nothing but a mediocre Gears of War clone: a complete inability to learn and adapt when presented with systems that deviate from the norm.

Well, considering that the game does an extremely piss-poor job of explaining a lot of its systems, it's a fair point that a lot of people actually don't understand them. That said, I had already played the demo many times before the full release, so I was privy to how (most) of the game functioned.

And it still sucked. The only action I felt truly confident in pulling off was the quick-shot thing; everything else from the roll/dive thing, taking cover, using melee attacks, is flawed in some way. Like the awkward and stiff flow of the melee attacks, and how you could potentially miss (because of a j'avo lamely strafing to the side a little as they tend to do; also, camera genocide) leaving you kicking thin air. Or how I would sometimes duck instead of performing a forward roll.

Plus the shooting just feels really weak; there's usually very little feedback when it comes fighting certain enemies, like the blood shot zombies and those giant tubby ones in particular, and RE6's shotguns were just so... limp. I can't even really explain it, but using a shotgun in that game never gave me the satisfaction that it should all things considered.

Leon's campaign is at least tolerable (though I still wouldn't say it's, like... good, or anything), however. But even then I'm only specifically referring to the first two chapters.

#26 Posted by dudeglove (7250 posts) -

I thought people revoked their card the moment they saw the logo was a woman giving a giraffe a blowjob?

#27 Edited by Fredchuckdave (4479 posts) -

RE6 is a good game at least if you consider RE5 a good game since its better in most regards. Doesn't hold a candle to RE4 but there's like 3 games ever that do so that's not saying much.

#28 Edited by Jeust (10334 posts) -

@dudeglove said:

I thought people revoked their card the moment they saw the logo was a woman giving a giraffe a blowjob?

Is that what you see in it, is it now? Interesting...

#29 Posted by TheUndyingPigeon (6 posts) -

I thought people revoked their card the moment they saw the logo was a woman giving a giraffe a blowjob?

Oh... Well okay then.

#30 Posted by dudeglove (7250 posts) -

@jeust said:

@dudeglove said:

I thought people revoked their card the moment they saw the logo was a woman giving a giraffe a blowjob?

Is that what you see in it, is it now? Interesting...

#31 Posted by ProfessorK (797 posts) -

@jeust said:

@dudeglove said:

I thought people revoked their card the moment they saw the logo was a woman giving a giraffe a blowjob?

Is that what you see in it, is it now? Interesting...

Can't unsee...

#32 Posted by GunstarRed (4729 posts) -

Some in depth thoughts on Resident Evil 6 and its creative gameplay.

#33 Posted by Flappy (2034 posts) -

The only good campaign was Leon's.

#34 Posted by Jeust (10334 posts) -

@dudeglove said:

@jeust said:

@dudeglove said:

I thought people revoked their card the moment they saw the logo was a woman giving a giraffe a blowjob?

Is that what you see in it, is it now? Interesting...

Can't unsee...

X_X

#35 Posted by Jeust (10334 posts) -
@yummylee said:

@icemael said:

@yummylee said:

For RE6, diving into prone usually didn't serve much practical purpose besides to make you look cool

You regenerate stamina much faster when lying down, which is very useful considering any decent play will involve a lot of stamina-consuming moves like tackles, kicks, quick-shots etc.

I feel like most of the complaints about RE6's mechanics come from people who have no understanding whatsoever of the systems and controls. The game's certainly no masterpiece (Leon's campaign is the only I could whole-heartedly recommend), but once you get used to the controls and get a feel for what you can do the combat is fast-paced, intense and usually quite a bit of fun. It's certainly far quicker, deeper and more interesting than the combat in, say, Uncharted or other third-person shooters with similarly bland combat systems.

In a way, it tries to do for RE4 and RE5's melee-focused combat what Vanquish did for cover shooting: more speed, more mobility, more potential for cool technical play. Now, it's not nearly as successful as Vanquish, but it's certainly not bad, and a lot of the people who dismiss it seem to do so for the same reason a lot of people dismissed Vanquish as nothing but a mediocre Gears of War clone: a complete inability to learn and adapt when presented with systems that deviate from the norm.

Well, considering that the game does an extremely piss-poor job of explaining a lot of its systems, it's a fair point that a lot of people actually don't understand them. That said, I had already played the demo many times before the full release, so I was privy to how (most) of the game functioned.

So technically there is some creativity in the gameplay. :p

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.