I really think that those who are complaining about Resident Evil 6 in comparison with past games should really replay those to remember how much they're the same. Even concerning dumb, bombastic, Michael Bay-ish stuff. I mean, RE4 had a giant stone statue-robot-thing pursuing Leon for god's sake!

I get that most people dislike it on it's own and some never did enjoyed RE4 and/or 5 in the first place, and that's fine. It's really weird, though, when comparisons are made to previous games, and how wonderful and perfect they were, as basis for criticizing RE6 when they're so much alike: the feel of the shooting, production values, tone of the story, obnoxious Quick Time Events... Or has everyone forgotten those awful "running away avoiding traps" parts of 5?

Yeah, it's probably bad that a 2012 game plays that much like 2005 and 2009 ones, and maybe those little sins aren't as easy to overlook today, but I was really shocked to see that Brad gave RE5 a perfect score. Have things changed that much since then? RE6 is probably worse for it's lack of focus, reworked melee system, contrived story and perhaps uneven pace, but not THAT much worse.

I personally am just waiting for Resi to go back to its horror/survival roots. But instead its becoming more and more simpler and action focused. Resi 4 did a good combo, but ever since there's been more action and less horror/etc.
 
And people just get spoiled easily, but I just dislike seeing a game trying so hard to be everything at once when its so far removed from the genre it started (and became big) in.

I've played through 4 relatively recently, and the biggest difference besides mechanics is level design. You just had a lot more freedom in how you played. 4 also had a different tone from 6, you fight a midget in a medieval castle, I'm pretty sure Capcom was aware how ridiculous that is. I got no impression Capcom was aware of how ridiculous RE6 was. It isnt the bile that Brad made it out to be but it doesnt even come close to 4. Never cared for 5 honestly.

@BoOzak said:

I've played through 4 relatively recently, and the biggest difference besides mechanics is level design. You just had a lot more freedom in how you played. 4 also had a different tone from 6, you fight a midget in a medieval castle, I'm pretty sure Capcom was aware how ridiculous that is. I got no impression Capcom was aware of how ridiculous RE6 was. It isnt the bile that Brad made it out to be but it doesnt even come close to 4. Never cared for 5 honestly.

That is true, both 4 and 5 had more open level design. It's hard to tell how aware of the ridiculousness they are, though, but in my experience, the best ridiculosness is the unintended kind.

I actually did replay 5 recently and it was just as good as i remember it. While it was very action heavy, it had some pretty tense moments. The beginning area with the shanty towns was great, then the boating area where you encounter the tribes men and the crocodiles was kinda scary, at least to me.

After that it becomes more of an action game but it still has some pretty tense moments.

@zombie2011 said:

I actually did replay 5 recently and it was just as good as i remember it. While it was very action heavy, it had some pretty tense moments. The beginning area with the shanty towns was great, then the boating area where you encounter the tribes men and the crocodiles was kinda scary, at least to me.

After that it becomes more of an action game but it still has some pretty tense moments.

That's what I mean. I still love RE5, almost just as much as I'm loving 6. Both games are pretty comparable in the amount of tense moments and jump scares to me, very little of both. But that's not necessarily what I come to those games for, so that's fine.

Resident Evil 4 is amazing and so is Resident Evil 5, Resident Evil 6 is just a bad game.

You should play 4 again but I wouldn't recommend 5. 5 was the beginning of the end for me. I guess it's alright for a laugh in coop but man I did not like that game.

Forgetting the horror/lack of horror aspect of it, RE4 and 5 were works of beautifully balanced mechanics and design. The gameplay of RE6, however, is completely disharmonious on every level.

@Maajin said:

@zombie2011 said:

I actually did replay 5 recently and it was just as good as i remember it. While it was very action heavy, it had some pretty tense moments. The beginning area with the shanty towns was great, then the boating area where you encounter the tribes men and the crocodiles was kinda scary, at least to me.

After that it becomes more of an action game but it still has some pretty tense moments.

That's what I mean. I still love RE5, almost just as much as I'm loving 6. Both games are pretty comparable in the amount of tense moments and jump scares to me, very little of both. But that's not necessarily what I come to those games for, so that's fine.

Liking action in RE games in fine and I personally really enjoyed RE5 despite being an absolute sucker for the old horror style. But surely, if you've played 4 and 5 recently, you can see the differences in how the systems feel? Most people I've spoken to don't dislike RE6 because it has QTE's and is action-like. Like you say, that just describes RE5. It's how it feels. It feels clunky and awkward (much more so than the previous games, despite the addition of moving and shooting), loads of the game is spent in corridors and, yes, the constant QTE's suck balls. The inventory is worse, the scares are non existent, the art direction is just bland (RE4 and 5 both emote so strongly with their sense of settings and characters)... these are just a few of the things that, personally, have sprung out at me so far. I don't think it's as simple as "RE4 and 5 had similar systems, so you should like RE6 the same". It's the nuances. I think if people play RE4 and 5 now (as many have) those points kind of jump out even more.

@StarvingGamer said:

The gameplay of RE6, however, is completely disharmonious on every level.

I think this is a great way of putting it.

I didn't really care for RE4, but i loved RE5. For me it's the gun upgrades feature im missing, that made co-op fun for me and my friends. ( i guess i dont like RE4 because there's no co-op, so that doesn't really count. )

The thing is RE4 and 5 are great examples of good game design. Point to any aspect of those games and I can tell you why it was a good decision.

Sure things were ridiculous, but thats Resident Evil. It's always been weird. You ran away from a giant statue, but at least that is memorable, almost every scenario in RE4 feels well crafted, thought out and different.

Also a statue like that fits Salvador's character.

I could play RE4 another 15 times and still enjoy it every time through, interesting combat scenarios + semi-random loot. It's a linear game but doesn't feel like you're restricted to tight paths which is clearly an issue in 6 and was in 5 as well. Fighting the two Garradors without using a Magnum is always thrilling.

RE4 and 5 had pitch-perfect gameplay. The game had a simple set of mechanics and everything around it fed into it. They also had some extremely good level design (moreso in the earlier areas of both games). Even the originals couldn't say that. RE6 is a systemic mess. All the elements of that game work against each other.

RE4/RE5 are significantly slower and more methodical games than RE6. In the previous era, you stood still and then took your aim, shooting in the necessary area to then run in and do a melee attack. And while in RE6 that's still possible, it just doesn't feel (bad way to put it, but that's just how it is for me) as satisfying nor is it barely necessary. In RE6 it's all about pop-pop-pop-pop because the handguns fire much faster, and Chris' campaign gives you assault rifles right from the start and you can generally just tear right through enemies if you're not already wailing on them. RE6 is a significantly easier game than both priors, and the times when I died was most often during surprise QTE's.

Besides, it's not the general shooting as to why believe RE4/RE5 is vastly superior to RE6. The level design is significantly better in the previous games, with more open areas, and while they're strictly linear, RE5 still opens up for a lot more exploration and hidden goodies. The cave sections were pretty great as you scour around, avoiding traps and uncovering hidden treasures and so forth. RE6 more often than not drags you down a straight line, and the previous games also don't feature shit where you're flying a fucking jet -- there's a turret sequence in a humvee, but the Jet thing--and the sports bike, snowmobile, attack-chopper to go along with another lame humvee section--is just on a whole other level. Plus saving up for new guns and new gun upgrades > lame skill sets.

RE5 still isn't the be all end all, though, and I've always had plenty of reason to complain about it - it's just that RE6 is so bad in some key areas that even I've actually started to look back fondly on RE5. The Wesker boss battles aren't all that great (though they're still better than any boss found in RE6) and once even RE5 turns into some quasi-third-person-shooter, that's when it really started to lose me. RE5 also too has some lame QTE's in there, but RE6 is a much bigger game and by comparison, RE5's QTE's are barely even noticeable. RE5 (and of course by extenstion RE4) also has a much better opening than RE6 that actually still resembles how an RE game might look and the sort of atmosphere you'd expect. That prelude in RE6 were you're running away from a bunch of exploding cars and then flying a helicopter into a skyscraper is fucking stupid even by RE standards. And I love how they even retconned that segment when you return, almost like in Killzone 3.

Of course the series has been going downhill (in tone and general gameplay design) since RE4 for me anyway so I was never going to be entirely happy with RE6. However, at least I can come away from RE5 (and especially RE4) thinking parts of the campaign were well paced and that the shooting felt gratifying. And while I still think it's OK, RE6 mercenaries mode just doesn't carry the same addiction as it did in RE5 nor even RE4.

Leon's earlier campaign chapters are at least sort of comparable and I've been completely open in admitting that I enjoyed them, but even they are just so linear and are strictly corridor crawls. And stupid shit like how you can't shoot the 'corpses' on the floor, even though you just know they're going to getup and jump at you, are some impressively pathetic attempts at inserting scares into the proceedings. The family home segment where you have to collect the key was at least somewhat tense and even a little sad. And just to add another bullet point, RE6 has terrible villains--as was the whole campaign story frankly--Simmons in particular, who made Irving look to be like the equivalent of a classic Bond Villain he was so rubbish.

In short, as far as the action RE's go, RE4/RE5 drastically > RE6, and it downright depresses me to see people actually comparing them.

EDIT: Goddamn, that's a lot of me repeating ''RE4, RE5, RE6''...

The key difference between RE4 and the last two is that RE4 is campy and fun, while the most recent RE games have been over-wrought and convoluted.

Eh, I consider RE4 to be one of the best games of all time, and I've never bothered to pick up and play RE5. It just seemed like a pale imitation of RE4 with the things I liked stripped out. I'm becoming more interested in 6, but I'll likely only play it via co-op.

I have played 4 and 5 recently, and just started playing 6.

While I don't think it's the flaming pile of hot turd that everyone seems to think it is, it's a worse game than either 4 or 5, it just FEELS kinda off.

I tried replaying RE4 after RE5 and had a horrible, horrible time. And I LOVED RE4.

I'm not going to touch RE6 til its on Steam for $10.

As mentioned in last week's GTtv's Invisible Walls, the problem with the bad press with this is the lack of consistency.

People downright dislike this because it's not their idea of what RE should be about. People want scares, yet RE hasn't been scary since RE1.

People don't like QTE's, yet there's roughly the same amount of QTE's than in RE5.People don't like the over the top action sequences, yet that's what represents modern RE games. Even the 4th title. I remember back in the days how we praised its amazing weapons and combat scenarios.

But hey, I think it's totally fair to dislike RE6 because, hey, opinions are opinions. I personally don't like the game all that much, but I don't call it an horrible mess either since it has a lot of qualities.

@Rafaelfc said:

I have played 4 and 5 recently, and just started playing 6.

While I don't think it's the flaming pile of hot turd that everyone seems to think it is, it's a worse game than either 4 or 5, it just FEELS kinda off.

This is exactly how I feel about RE6, I'm actually playing through RE5 again now to re-unlock no mercy mode on PC since my data disappeared. And it plays much better than 6 does, the combat has a rhythm to it which I feel is missing in RE6. The combat feels very un-refined and random in spots.

I just replayed RE5 last week. It's still awesome. I'm currently playing RE6. It's still a bad game.

@Zippedbinders said:

Eh, I consider RE4 to be one of the best games of all time, and I've never bothered to pick up and play RE5. It just seemed like a pale imitation of RE4 with the things I liked stripped out. I'm becoming more interested in 6, but I'll likely only play it via co-op.

If that's why you didn't play 5, then don't play 6. 5 was just RE4 but a little bit more action-packed, but 6 is mechanics for the sake of mechanics and none of the understanding. RE6 is put together in a way that seems like someone just described RE4 and RE5 to the developers, and then left them to try and re-create the systems in it.

As soon as you tell me you can't upgrade guns in RE6, I'm out. That was easily my favorite part of RE4 and RE5, which are the only games in the franchise that I've played.

Resident Evil 5 gets a bad wrap. It's a good game.

I agree I don't think all of those games are entirely dissimilar to each other. I do think the series HAD to change and honestly I'm completely supportive of it. I still don't get why people boo-hoo about linear level design. Honestly, anymore I think Id rather have just that it gives me a set goal and a focus. I think RE6 has been my favorite RE since Code Veronica. I hope they do more. I like how they handled the partner stuff with A.I. partners not dying. I like how they changed the inventory system and I like how they overhauled the the combat to give you more options.

Sure. People should replay them because they're good games, but not as some kind of weird justification for your love of 6.

I could go into detail of many different things, talk about how the games and game systems/mechanics themselves feel different from each other, but a lot of things are already being said here.

Let's just throw this in though; I think it says a lot about the kind of direction RE6 took. I outran an explosion on foot in the first five minutes. Come on.

@Maajin: You literally just read my mind. Remember in 4 when you had ran away from the boulder and died one million times. there is a whole boss fight with that fish that is literally just qtes. Its like everyone talking about 6 only heard about 4 and 5 but never played them. They play the same exact 6 is a better shooter.

6 is bad, to the extent that the story is lame cause it was over in 5. But its exactly the same, game-play wise as 4 and 5. in fact, when you get better with the melee stuff, the way 6 controls makes you able to pull off some pretty slick moves. and is pretty satisfying.

@Getz said:

The key difference between RE4 and the last two is that RE4 is campy and fun, while the most recent RE games have been over-wrought and convoluted.

I'm not sure about this sentiment. RE in general was campy because the translation was bad and because they were deathly serious in trying to make an earnest horror game. you can't recreate that. That said at the beginning of the 6 you shoot the zombie president. so...

@RenMcKormack said:

when you get better with the melee stuff, the way 6 controls makes you able to pull off some pretty slick moves. and is pretty satisfying.

This is very true. Running up to a dude, kicking him in the face, dodging out of the way of a jumping zombie and returning fire while on the ground on your back, almost as satisfying as dodging Imp fireballs in DOOM.

I haven't played RE6 yet, but I don't know if I will after all the hate. I loved RE4 to death. Playing RE5 was a strange experience. It played like RE4, but I didn't like it. It just felt wrong. I was so confused, that I actually booted up my Gamecube to play RE4 again, in fear that the game I loved so much may actually suck. It didn't, and I ended up playing through RE4 again. With time, and a co-op partner, I ended up enjoying RE5, though not nearly as much as 4. Looking back on the franchise as a whole, it really needs to re-re-define itself. The market has plenty of action games, while independent developers are the only folks making survival horror. I want a next gen game which forces to to worry about whether or not it's a good idea to use my only three bullets, or use my last ink ribbon to save. The tension that made RE fun is gone.

@BoG: The problem is these cost millions of dollars to make and the Ink Ribbons concept in a 2012-2013 game would go over like a lead balloon. Look how people bitched about the save points in Dead Rising. Also, decide for yourself about RE6 there is an equal amount of praise for the game on the flip side don't just listen to one side of the argument on this.

@Yummylee said:

RE4/RE5 are significantly slower and more methodical games than RE6. In the previous era, you stood still and then took your aim, shooting in the necessary area to then run in and do a melee attack. And while in RE6 that's still possible, it just doesn't feel (bad way to put it, but that's just how it is for me) as satisfying nor is it barely necessary. In RE6 it's all about pop-pop-pop-pop because the handguns fire much faster, and Chris' campaign gives you assault rifles right from the start and you can generally just tear right through enemies if you're not already wailing on them. RE6 is a significantly easier game than both priors, and the times when I died was most often during surprise QTE's.

Besides, it's not the general shooting as to why believe RE4/RE5 is vastly superior to RE6. The level design is significantly better in the previous games, with more open areas, and while they're strictly linear, RE5 still opens up for a lot more exploration and hidden goodies. The cave sections were pretty great as you scour around, avoiding traps and uncovering hidden treasures and so forth. RE6 more often than not drags you down a straight line, and the previous games also don't feature shit where you're flying a fucking jet -- there's a turret sequence in a humvee, but the Jet thing--and the sports bike, snowmobile, attack-chopper to go along with another lame humvee section--is just on a whole other level. Plus saving up for new guns and new gun upgrades > lame skill sets.

RE5 still isn't the be all end all, though, and I've always had plenty of reason to complain about it - it's just that RE6 is so bad in some key areas that even I've actually started to look back fondly on RE5. The Wesker boss battles aren't all that great (though they're still better than any boss found in RE6) and once even RE5 turns into some quasi-third-person-shooter, that's when it really started to lose me. RE5 also too has some lame QTE's in there, but RE6 is a much bigger game and by comparison, RE5's QTE's are barely even noticeable. RE5 (and of course by extenstion RE4) also has a much better opening than RE6 that actually still resembles how an RE game might look and the sort of atmosphere you'd expect. That prelude in RE6 were you're running away from a bunch of exploding cars and then flying a helicopter into a skyscraper is fucking stupid even by RE standards. And I love how they even retconned that segment when you return, almost like in Killzone 3.

Of course the series has been going downhill (in tone and general gameplay design) since RE4 for me anyway so I was never going to be entirely happy with RE6. However, at least I can come away from RE5 (and especially RE4) thinking parts of the campaign were well paced and that the shooting felt gratifying. And while I still think it's OK, RE6 mercenaries mode just doesn't carry the same addiction as it did in RE5 nor even RE4.

Leon's earlier campaign chapters are at least sort of comparable and I've been completely open in admitting that I enjoyed them, but even they are just so linear and are strictly corridor crawls. And stupid shit like how you can't shoot the 'corpses' on the floor, even though you just know they're going to getup and jump at you, are some impressively pathetic attempts at inserting scares into the proceedings. The family home segment where you have to collect the key was at least somewhat tense and even a little sad. And just to add another bullet point, RE6 has terrible villains--as was the whole campaign story frankly--Simmons in particular, who made Irving look to be like the equivalent of a classic Bond Villain he was so rubbish.

In short, as far as the action RE's go, RE4/RE5 drastically > RE6, and it downright depresses me to see people actually comparing them.

EDIT: Goddamn, that's a lot of me repeating ''RE4, RE5, RE6''...

After adjusting the aiming to laser-sight and messing with the sensitivity, the "feel" was just like Resident Evil 5. But I guess that's just me... And it seems that can be said about most of the game.

I'll give you that buying and upgrading guns is way better than skill sets, and I still need to finish Jake's campaign... But I'm truly loving the game thus far, and that includes level design, bosses, cheap scares and flying a fucking jet.

RE4 and 5 both have sections that allow a bit of exploration and non-linearity (like the village hub in RE4 and the lake/swamp in RE5) that are missing in RE6 (if you don't count those key-hunting segments), but there are some pretty cool scenarios like the fight against two giants, fending off zombies while moving up the building, and goddamn if I wasn't on the edge of my seat and nearly in tears during the whole last part of Chris' campaign!

When I think of RE4 I have a lot of good memories, but what always stops me from wanting to go back is remembering what a pain Ashley was and that awful, boring, long as hell Castle. RE5 does a way better job at that, but also drags a bit with the tribal Majinis and the whole Tomb Raider thing. I feel like in RE6 you're always doing something different (or maybe the same thing in a different context) every 30 minutes or so. Some of those things are definitely worse than others (the humvee was pretty bad, albeit totally harmless), but the game always kept me guessing what it had in store while moving it's simple, silly, but really enjoyable story and with a whole bunch of fanservice to back it up. Also, I don't know how you can call Simmons a rubbish boss, it was exactly what I expect of a good Resident Evil villain, just like Irving and Wesker and William Birkin.

I guess RE2 will always be my favorite and the one I'll come back to every year. But I don't think the series started going downhill with RE4, and maybe that's the whole difference in our points of view. I can appreciate what they're going for, even with all of the flaws of RE4, 5 and 6.

Sorry for depressing you with my post, but I wrote it because I was quite depressed myself with all the undeserved bashing the game is getting.

Edit: Also, people are saying it was put together without care... I don't see that at all. The fanservice, nods to other games and previous events... And the pacing is pretty well thought out, guys. Totally by the book, sure, but you can bet after a boss or huge wave of enemies, you'll have a slower, chattier, exploration-based part.

I still don't like RE4 that much. Horribly paced, one of the worse this generation in that regard. Really liked RE5. RE6(now having finished Leon and Chris, still waiting on Jake and Ada) is easily one of my top two contenders for GOTY. The other shoe just isn't dropping for me. I'm still baffled by the complaints.

@Maajin said:

@Yummylee said:

RE4/RE5 are significantly slower and more methodical games than RE6. In the previous era, you stood still and then took your aim, shooting in the necessary area to then run in and do a melee attack. And while in RE6 that's still possible, it just doesn't feel (bad way to put it, but that's just how it is for me) as satisfying nor is it barely necessary. In RE6 it's all about pop-pop-pop-pop because the handguns fire much faster, and Chris' campaign gives you assault rifles right from the start and you can generally just tear right through enemies if you're not already wailing on them. RE6 is a significantly easier game than both priors, and the times when I died was most often during surprise QTE's.

Besides, it's not the general shooting as to why believe RE4/RE5 is vastly superior to RE6. The level design is significantly better in the previous games, with more open areas, and while they're strictly linear, RE5 still opens up for a lot more exploration and hidden goodies. The cave sections were pretty great as you scour around, avoiding traps and uncovering hidden treasures and so forth. RE6 more often than not drags you down a straight line, and the previous games also don't feature shit where you're flying a fucking jet -- there's a turret sequence in a humvee, but the Jet thing--and the sports bike, snowmobile, attack-chopper to go along with another lame humvee section--is just on a whole other level. Plus saving up for new guns and new gun upgrades > lame skill sets.

RE5 still isn't the be all end all, though, and I've always had plenty of reason to complain about it - it's just that RE6 is so bad in some key areas that even I've actually started to look back fondly on RE5. The Wesker boss battles aren't all that great (though they're still better than any boss found in RE6) and once even RE5 turns into some quasi-third-person-shooter, that's when it really started to lose me. RE5 also too has some lame QTE's in there, but RE6 is a much bigger game and by comparison, RE5's QTE's are barely even noticeable. RE5 (and of course by extenstion RE4) also has a much better opening than RE6 that actually still resembles how an RE game might look and the sort of atmosphere you'd expect. That prelude in RE6 were you're running away from a bunch of exploding cars and then flying a helicopter into a skyscraper is fucking stupid even by RE standards. And I love how they even retconned that segment when you return, almost like in Killzone 3.

Of course the series has been going downhill (in tone and general gameplay design) since RE4 for me anyway so I was never going to be entirely happy with RE6. However, at least I can come away from RE5 (and especially RE4) thinking parts of the campaign were well paced and that the shooting felt gratifying. And while I still think it's OK, RE6 mercenaries mode just doesn't carry the same addiction as it did in RE5 nor even RE4.

Leon's earlier campaign chapters are at least sort of comparable and I've been completely open in admitting that I enjoyed them, but even they are just so linear and are strictly corridor crawls. And stupid shit like how you can't shoot the 'corpses' on the floor, even though you just know they're going to getup and jump at you, are some impressively pathetic attempts at inserting scares into the proceedings. The family home segment where you have to collect the key was at least somewhat tense and even a little sad. And just to add another bullet point, RE6 has terrible villains--as was the whole campaign story frankly--Simmons in particular, who made Irving look to be like the equivalent of a classic Bond Villain he was so rubbish.

In short, as far as the action RE's go, RE4/RE5 drastically > RE6, and it downright depresses me to see people actually comparing them.

EDIT: Goddamn, that's a lot of me repeating ''RE4, RE5, RE6''...

After adjusting the aiming to laser-sight and messing with the sensitivity, the "feel" was just like Resident Evil 5. But I guess that's just me... And it seems that can be said about most of the game.

I'll give you that buying and upgrading guns is way better than skill sets, and I still need to finish Jake's campaign... But I'm truly loving the game thus far, and that includes level design, bosses, cheap scares and flying a fucking jet.

RE4 and 5 both have sections that allow a bit of exploration and non-linearity (like the village hub in RE4 and the lake/swamp in RE5) that are missing in RE6 (if you don't count those key-hunting segments), but there are some pretty cool scenarios like the fight against two giants, fending off zombies while moving up the building, and goddamn if I wasn't on the edge of my seat and nearly in tears during the whole last part of Chris' campaign!

When I think of RE4 I have a lot of good memories, but what always stops me from wanting to go back is remembering what a pain Ashley was and that awful, boring, long as hell Castle. RE5 does a way better job at that, but also drags a bit with the tribal Majinis and the whole Tomb Raider thing. I feel like in RE6 you're always doing something different (or maybe the same thing in a different context) every 30 minutes or so. Some of those things are definitely worse than others (the humvee was pretty bad, albeit totally harmless), but the game always kept me guessing what it had in store while moving it's simple, silly, but really enjoyable story and with a whole bunch of fanservice to back it up. Also, I don't know how you can call Simmons a rubbish boss, it was exactly what I expect of a good Resident Evil villain, just like Irving and Wesker and William Birkin.

I guess RE2 will always be my favorite and the one I'll come back to every year. But I don't think the series started going downhill with RE4, and maybe that's the whole difference in our points of view. I can appreciate what they're going for, even with all of the flaws of RE4, 5 and 6.

Sorry for depressing you with my post, but I wrote it because I was quite depressed myself with all the undeserved bashing the game is getting.

I actually tried with the laser sight first, and frankly I thought it was terrible and I found it very hard to aim with. It's also why I never liked having to use Ada's crossbow because it can only be used with a sort of laser sight.

And that two giant boss battle was rubbish. You can't even kill it and you're instead meant to just follow Finn around as he blows up the anti-air guns, while J'avo continually spawn in every direction, with that one sniper who always managed to catch me off guard and knock me to the ground. That's generally a problem I have with all of the boss battles. Most of them all are designed to require so much ammo or trial by fire, that they'll actually just throw in an endless amount of lesser enemies for you to kill just so you can find additional ammo. The Derek boss battles in particular went on for bloody forever and don't always necessarily telegraph what it is you're supposed to do, like Leon's end boss. Stuff like Ustanak also barely reacts to your bullets at that and shooting him didn't feel satisfying at all, nor was it particularly intense as I just roll out of the way when he charges - rinse, repeat.

Don't get me wrong, though, RE6 was barely ever what I would consider a difficult game, but it was a frustrating one at points. EDIT: Oh, man, like those helicopter boss battles during Chris' campaign. Fuck.That.

As for Chris' ending

And Simmons... he was just so generic. Wesker was a well established villain and even while he became a little ridiculous in RE5 (his wardrobe was just ugh), he's undoubtedly one of the best the series has. Someone like Irving is just fucking hilarious and pathetic, and it felt good to shut that fucker up. Simmons.. you barely even know what his motivations are without reading the additional files which are kept in a completely separate menu outside of the main game. And he's also barely around... he makes like, two short on-screen (besides a cameo in Helena's flashback) appearances before then turning into a William Birkin knock-off. He was utter rubbish, and the recurring boss battles against him one after another (Leon's chapter 5 is essentially just Simmons boss battles) left me exhausted and ''killing'' Simmons had no impact. Sure, most RE bosses go through multiple transformation, but they usually put some time inbetween each other to really throw home how more and more they keep degenerating into mindless monsters.

Speaking about fanservice, that is the one element where RE6 could have won me over to some degree. There's some in there (Oh hey, Sherry and Jake namedropping William and Albert - cool, I guess), but it didn't go far enough. I've been saying for a while that RE6 should have been the MGS4 of RE's considering how high the scale has reached. Just have every character left popping up out of the woodwork - Barry, Billy, Rebecca, Carlos, Jill, Claire. And there's just no finality to it all. As I've said earlier, I wanted this game to finally have some consequence; I wanted Chris and Leon to potentially die, or at the very least, I wanted this drawn-out Leon & Ada arc to end. Something. The only advancement RE6 made is the possibility of Jake Muller becoming the new leading man, and, well, no... Just no. Actually I almost kinda want that to happen, because then it'll make it all the easier for me to throw in the towel and finally give up on this shit-show of a series.

Anywhoo I also want to apologise if it appears that I'm being aggressive at all in my post. I actually think RE6 is by and large just mediocre, but the amount of disappointment of what this game could have been in some regards (notably the story) amplifies the amount of criticisms I want to discuss.

@Demoskinos: Among the many voices telling me to be or not to buy, my wallet is the loudest. And it's screaming "DON'T BUY!"

@BoG: Heh, that would be a good reason.

@Yummylee said:

@Maajin said:

@Yummylee said:

RE4/RE5 are significantly slower and more methodical games than RE6. In the previous era, you stood still and then took your aim, shooting in the necessary area to then run in and do a melee attack. And while in RE6 that's still possible, it just doesn't feel (bad way to put it, but that's just how it is for me) as satisfying nor is it barely necessary. In RE6 it's all about pop-pop-pop-pop because the handguns fire much faster, and Chris' campaign gives you assault rifles right from the start and you can generally just tear right through enemies if you're not already wailing on them. RE6 is a significantly easier game than both priors, and the times when I died was most often during surprise QTE's.

Besides, it's not the general shooting as to why believe RE4/RE5 is vastly superior to RE6. The level design is significantly better in the previous games, with more open areas, and while they're strictly linear, RE5 still opens up for a lot more exploration and hidden goodies. The cave sections were pretty great as you scour around, avoiding traps and uncovering hidden treasures and so forth. RE6 more often than not drags you down a straight line, and the previous games also don't feature shit where you're flying a fucking jet -- there's a turret sequence in a humvee, but the Jet thing--and the sports bike, snowmobile, attack-chopper to go along with another lame humvee section--is just on a whole other level. Plus saving up for new guns and new gun upgrades > lame skill sets.

RE5 still isn't the be all end all, though, and I've always had plenty of reason to complain about it - it's just that RE6 is so bad in some key areas that even I've actually started to look back fondly on RE5. The Wesker boss battles aren't all that great (though they're still better than any boss found in RE6) and once even RE5 turns into some quasi-third-person-shooter, that's when it really started to lose me. RE5 also too has some lame QTE's in there, but RE6 is a much bigger game and by comparison, RE5's QTE's are barely even noticeable. RE5 (and of course by extenstion RE4) also has a much better opening than RE6 that actually still resembles how an RE game might look and the sort of atmosphere you'd expect. That prelude in RE6 were you're running away from a bunch of exploding cars and then flying a helicopter into a skyscraper is fucking stupid even by RE standards. And I love how they even retconned that segment when you return, almost like in Killzone 3.

Of course the series has been going downhill (in tone and general gameplay design) since RE4 for me anyway so I was never going to be entirely happy with RE6. However, at least I can come away from RE5 (and especially RE4) thinking parts of the campaign were well paced and that the shooting felt gratifying. And while I still think it's OK, RE6 mercenaries mode just doesn't carry the same addiction as it did in RE5 nor even RE4.

Leon's earlier campaign chapters are at least sort of comparable and I've been completely open in admitting that I enjoyed them, but even they are just so linear and are strictly corridor crawls. And stupid shit like how you can't shoot the 'corpses' on the floor, even though you just know they're going to getup and jump at you, are some impressively pathetic attempts at inserting scares into the proceedings. The family home segment where you have to collect the key was at least somewhat tense and even a little sad. And just to add another bullet point, RE6 has terrible villains--as was the whole campaign story frankly--Simmons in particular, who made Irving look to be like the equivalent of a classic Bond Villain he was so rubbish.

In short, as far as the action RE's go, RE4/RE5 drastically > RE6, and it downright depresses me to see people actually comparing them.

EDIT: Goddamn, that's a lot of me repeating ''RE4, RE5, RE6''...

After adjusting the aiming to laser-sight and messing with the sensitivity, the "feel" was just like Resident Evil 5. But I guess that's just me... And it seems that can be said about most of the game.

I'll give you that buying and upgrading guns is way better than skill sets, and I still need to finish Jake's campaign... But I'm truly loving the game thus far, and that includes level design, bosses, cheap scares and flying a fucking jet.

RE4 and 5 both have sections that allow a bit of exploration and non-linearity (like the village hub in RE4 and the lake/swamp in RE5) that are missing in RE6 (if you don't count those key-hunting segments), but there are some pretty cool scenarios like the fight against two giants, fending off zombies while moving up the building, and goddamn if I wasn't on the edge of my seat and nearly in tears during the whole last part of Chris' campaign!

When I think of RE4 I have a lot of good memories, but what always stops me from wanting to go back is remembering what a pain Ashley was and that awful, boring, long as hell Castle. RE5 does a way better job at that, but also drags a bit with the tribal Majinis and the whole Tomb Raider thing. I feel like in RE6 you're always doing something different (or maybe the same thing in a different context) every 30 minutes or so. Some of those things are definitely worse than others (the humvee was pretty bad, albeit totally harmless), but the game always kept me guessing what it had in store while moving it's simple, silly, but really enjoyable story and with a whole bunch of fanservice to back it up. Also, I don't know how you can call Simmons a rubbish boss, it was exactly what I expect of a good Resident Evil villain, just like Irving and Wesker and William Birkin.

I guess RE2 will always be my favorite and the one I'll come back to every year. But I don't think the series started going downhill with RE4, and maybe that's the whole difference in our points of view. I can appreciate what they're going for, even with all of the flaws of RE4, 5 and 6.

Sorry for depressing you with my post, but I wrote it because I was quite depressed myself with all the undeserved bashing the game is getting.

I actually tried with the laser sight first, and frankly I thought it was terrible and I found it very hard to aim with. It's also why I never liked having to use Ada's crossbow because it can only be used with a sort of laser sight.

And that two giant boss battle was rubbish. You can't even kill it and you're instead meant to just follow Finn around as he blows up the anti-air guns, while J'avo continually spawn in every direction, with that one sniper who always managed to catch me off guard and knock me to the ground. That's generally a problem I have with all of the boss battles. Most of them all are designed to require so much ammo or trial by fire, that they'll actually just throw in an endless amount of lesser enemies for you to kill just so you can find additional ammo. The Derek boss battles in particular went on for bloody forever and don't always necessarily telegraph what it is you're supposed to do, like Leon's end boss. Stuff like Ustanak also barely reacts to your bullets at that and shooting him didn't feel satisfying at all, nor was it particularly intense as I just roll out of the way when he charges - rinse, repeat.

Don't get me wrong, though, RE6 was barely ever what I would consider a difficult game, but it was a frustrating one at points. EDIT: Oh, man, like those helicopter boss battles during Chris' campaign. Fuck.That.

As for Chris' ending

SPOILER WARNING: Click here to reveal hidden content.

Eh, you clearly must be more easily swayed than I am, because while I thought it was... surprising, Piers was quite literally only introduced so CAPCOM could kill a character without it being anyone significant. Now if Chris Redfield died (which I had hoped he would. Hell, I wanted both him and Leon to die heroically together) that would have moved me.

And Simmons... he was just so generic. Wesker was a well established villain and even while he became a little ridiculous in RE5 (his wardrobe was just ugh), he's undoubtedly one of the best the series has. Someone like Irving is just fucking hilarious and pathetic, and it felt good to shut that fucker up. Simmons.. you barely even know what his motivations are without reading the additional files which are kept in a completely separate menu outside of the main game. And he's also barely around... he makes like, two short on-screen (besides a cameo in Helena's flashback) appearances before then turning into a William Birkin knock-off. He was utter rubbish, and the recurring boss battles against him one after another (Leon's chapter 5 is essentially just Simmons boss battles) left me exhausted and ''killing'' Simmons had no impact. Sure, most RE bosses go through multiple transformation, but they usually put some time inbetween each other to really throw home how more and more they keep degenerating into mindless monsters.

Speaking about fanservice, that is the one element where RE6 could have won me over to some degree. There's some in there (Oh hey, Sherry and Jake namedropping William and Albert - cool, I guess), but it didn't go far enough. I've been saying for a while that RE6 should have been the MGS4 of RE's considering how high the scale has reached. Just have every character left popping up out of the woodwork - Barry, Billy, Rebecca, Carlos, Jill, Claire. And there's just no finality to it all. As I've said earlier, I wanted this game to finally have some consequence; I wanted Chris and Leon to potentially die, or at the very least, I wanted this drawn-out Leon & Ada arc to end. Something. The only advancement RE6 made is the possibility of Jake Muller becoming the new leading man, and, well, no... Just no. Actually I almost kinda want that to happen, because then it'll make it all the easier for me to throw in the towel and finally give up on this shit-show of a series.

Anywhoo I also want to apologise if it appears that I'm being aggressive at all in my post. I actually think RE6 is by and large just mediocre, but the amount of disappointment of what this game could have been in some regards (notably the story) amplifies the amount of criticisms I want to discuss.

Don't get me wrong, I do think Wesker is miles away from anyone in the series as a villain, but I really enjoyed that Simmons was kind of a 24 villain in a world with bio-organic weapons. His motivations are very flimsy, sure, but so are Wesker's when you really think about it. I didn't thought of him as William Birkin knock-off so much as a nod to those classic Resident Evil bosses that just don't know when to quit. And his final death scene? Amazing! Also, what he did to Helena and Deborah was reason enough for me to really want to kill him. I guess I'm really that easily swayed, huh?

About the giant bosses, I don't know if you're playing The Walking Dead games, but I think in both games the illusion of what you doing is perhaps an important factor to consider. I may not REALLY be "tailoring the experience" with my choices in TWD, but if the game makes me believe I am, that's enough. Are the RE6 bosses a series of scripted events that lead to a scripted finishing move? Yeah, most of them. But I was thrilled by the spectacle while I was fighting, so it doesn't really matter.

I can understand expectations ruining a game, it took me like a whole year to be able to really appreciate Brutal Legend for what it was. I hope in the years to come some of this bad rep over RE6 dissipates and people see it as just a lesser game than RE5 but a pretty good one still. Or maybe I'll be proven the crazy one.

I already did. I recently finished RE 4 HD on 360 and I'm almost done with the PC version of 5 and I decided to rent 6 just so I can experience it myself...and fuck that game, I returned it the next day. The methodical pace of the past 2 games is way more preferable to the clumsy inaccurate mess of a control system that RE 6 has and fuck that camera....ugh. Such a disappointment.

I played the demo of RE6, so I can't speak for the entire game, but I thought it was bad. Not Daikatana bad, more like Dragon Age 2 bad, in that it has some redeeming aspects that some may like but there are fundamental issues that cause it to be a far worse game than its predecessors, namely controls. Now, you might go and say "RE4 and 5 had clunky and bad controls", but I don't think that's true. I just think that RE4 and 5 have controls that are made for a much slower paced, more methodical game and RE6 tried to be Gears of War without really understanding anything about Gears of War. It all comes down to the feel of those games, and RE4 and 5's controls "felt" really good. You had to keep track of where you and enemies were, had to smartly position yourself in the best ways to take enemies down, you had to think about how you were going to do something before doing it, etc.

In short, the demo of RE6 illustrated to me that its developers really have no understanding of the mechanics and ideas that made RE4 and 5 so good, and the reasons why those games are so different from Gears of War and more fast-paced action games in general.

Again, though, those are impressions from the demo, but when something like the controls simply don't feel right in a demo, how can I expect them to be any better in the full game?

@believer258 said:

Again, though, those are impressions from the demo, but when something like the controls simply don't feel right in a demo, how can I expect them to be any better in the full game?

Don't worry, you're right. It plays just as awkardly as the demo.

Resident Evil 6 is a great game. Complainers will complain. But this game, although frustratingly hard on normal difficulty, is an entertaining game, with much play time. It expands on the univers in an interesting way. RE stoped being a point-and-click survival horror game after RE 0. Those games stille exist if anyone want to play them. I like the old games, I like the new games. And RE6 is great in many ways.

@AndyAce83 said:

RE stoped being a point-and-click survival horror game after RE 0.

lol wut

@bibamatt: On an unrelated note your dp shows that you have some really really good taste, yes I realise you've had it for a while.

@L44: What's dp? Thanks!

I'd happily play 4 again, but would have to skip on the B-movie BS that is 5 & 6. I could never play either of those shit games again.

5 & 6 are terrible games, terrible because it's very easy to wonder what Shinji Mikami and others could do with such a sizable budget.

@bibamatt said:

@AndyAce83 said:

RE stoped being a point-and-click survival horror game after RE 0.

lol wut

Resident Evil was more like adventure games, with ammo, until RE0. I called it point-and-click survival horror. Now its more "lack of ammo with strong opponents" survival horror. There are few puzzles etc. RE4, 5 and 6 are more action orientated I like them and I like the old ones. I enjoy RE6 for its innovating co-op, its action oriented story and all kinds of things to open and expand. People who miss the looking for keys in a mansion (instead of just knocking down the rotten piece of wood) story could go back to RE 1, 2, 3, CV and 0. That was what I meant. I love them all.

@Hizang said:

Resident Evil 4 is amazing and so is Resident Evil 5, Resident Evil 6 is just a bad game.

This is was I've been telling all the people I know.

RE6 is not bad because they made Resident Evil an action game, it's just a bad game. Even if it didn't have the RE name on it, it would still be bad & people would just forget about it & move on. But this is Resident Evil, & for game this big & with so much money behind it, these flaws should not be here.

Edit: To give you an idea of where I come from with RE,

I love the old RE games, RE4 is one of my old time favorite games of all time, & In looking back I like RE5 because it still at least plays well.