• Welcome to the Resident Evil Community Forum!

    We're a group of fans who are passionate about the Resident Evil series and video gaming.

    Register Log in

Resident Evil 5 How would you change RE5's story?

Unknown

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2015
Messages
149
Reaction score
88
Points
9,455
Maybe focus on being less witty and actually say something instead of making lazy ass comments because you're bored and apparently intimidated by me with how hard you're trying to "challenge" me with nonsense. Take your own advice and "read better" seeing as you've completely deviated from the original discussion by being pedantic about a comparison I made in regards to Murderer Enshrined's theory about RE5's direction.

Translation: "I cannot refute a single word you said. Also, you are wittier than me"
 

Turo602

The King of Kings
Joined
Sep 4, 2013
Messages
2,594
Reaction score
2,928
Points
24,789
Easily the most boring troll this forum has ever had. What a shame.
 

Jonipoon

Professional Sandwich Consumer
Joined
Oct 7, 2018
Messages
1,065
Reaction score
1,214
Points
8,535
Age
31
Top marks for undoing your own argument. Well done.
I think what Turo meant is that RE2 being similar to RE1 isn't a bad thing because it continued the original's legacy. RE4 took a completely different direction and style and basically rebooted the series. The "copying" thing isn't the issue, the issue is what's been copied.
 

Turo602

The King of Kings
Joined
Sep 4, 2013
Messages
2,594
Reaction score
2,928
Points
24,789
I think what Turo meant is that RE2 being similar to RE1 isn't a bad thing because it continued the original's legacy. RE4 took a completely different direction and style and basically rebooted the series. The "copying" thing isn't the issue, the issue is what's been copied.
The thing is, I didn't make that comment to say there was an issue one way or another. Saying Resident Evil 5 copied Resident Evil 4 was simply because someone had claimed RE5 had taken this different direction because of the films. I was simply pointing out that it was an absurd assumption because RE5 was literally working off of RE4's formula, right down to the story beats.

I don't understand how Resident Evil 2 copying Resident Evil 1 was something I was supposed to take issue with based on a comparison between RE4 and RE5. Did I ever state that the games couldn't copy eachother?

Regardless, the guy is purposely being unclear and vague with half assed smug comments because he's being a troll so I wouldn't really pay it much attention anyway. It's just arguing for the sake of arguing.
 

Unknown

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2015
Messages
149
Reaction score
88
Points
9,455
I think what Turo meant is that RE2 being similar to RE1 isn't a bad thing because it continued the original's legacy. RE4 took a completely different direction and style and basically rebooted the series. The "copying" thing isn't the issue, the issue is what's been copied.

If that was his argument he didn’t do a good job of making it.

He tried to argue 5 "copying" 4 with negative connotations in his wording, so I simply made the RE1/2 comparison to make him see that it’s not "copying" so much as it is merely refining earlier work as sequels do.

But Turo didn’t mean it in this way. If he did, then he wouldn’t have followed it with this:

"Leon goes to Spain to find President's daughter, Chris goes to Africa in search of Jill. Leon's past comes back to haunt him, Chris' past comes back to haunt him. Crazy guy who wants to rule the world with parasites mutates and gets rocket in the face. It's literally the same exact structure and formula."

Turo tried to make out that 5 copied 4 by drawing these intentionally vague similarities, which only seem similar due to the wording he’s using whilst ignoring the many other factors that make them different.

He wilfully omits details to make this biased argument that 5’s story beats are based on 4’s.

His point that Leon goes looking for Ashely and Chris goes looking for Jill, therefore 5 copied, is stupid. I could say RE4 copied Code Veronica because Claire went looking for Chris, who later went looking for Claire, which was a copy of RE2 when Claire went looking for Chris… of course if I did this i’d be being extremely ignorant as i’d be willfully ignoring details to push a biased argument, as Turo did.

Turo’s argument was ignorant and that was why I challenged it.
 
Last edited:

Turo602

The King of Kings
Joined
Sep 4, 2013
Messages
2,594
Reaction score
2,928
Points
24,789
If that was his argument he didn’t do a good job of making it.
Wasn't my argument. Already covered this.

He tried to argue 5 "copying" 4 with negative connotations in his wording, so I simply made the RE1/2 comparison to make him see that it’s not "copying" so much as it is merely refining earlier work as sequels do.
But Turo didn’t mean it in this way. If he did, then he wouldn’t have followed it with this:

"Leon goes to Spain to find President's daughter, Chris goes to Africa in search of Jill. Leon's past comes back to haunt him, Chris' past comes back to haunt him. Crazy guy who wants to rule the world with parasites mutates and gets rocket in the face. It's literally the same exact structure and formula."

Turo tried to make out that 5 copied 4 by drawing these intentionally vague similarities, which only seem similar due to the wording he’s using whilst ignoring the many other factors that make them different.

He wilfully omits details to make this biased argument that 5’s story beats are based on 4’s.

His point that Leon goes looking for Ashely and Chris goes looking for Jill, therefore 5 copied, is stupid. I could say RE4 copied Code Veronica because Claire went looking for Chris, who later went looking for Claire, which was a copy of RE2 when Claire went looking for Chris… of course if I did this i’d be being extremely ignorant as i’d be willfully ignoring details to push a biased argument, as Turo did. Turo’s argument was ignorant and that was why I challenged it.
What negative connotations? You've literally fabricated this whole debate seeing as you're not even arguing with any point I've made, just droning on about what you think I meant, even though you can't point to anytime I made these claims you're "challenging" without cherry picking and making assumptions.

You don't look intelligent for pointing out the obvious even though it wasn't even being disputed. If I was speaking generally about the games and I wasn't making a completely different point about Capcom and Hollywood, you'd have a point. But you chose to make an ass out of yourself instead.

This is also the first you speak of "sequels merely refining earlier works." But funny how it took someone else to get an actual response from you instead of your minimalistic bullsh*t and cheap ass jabs.
 
Top