• 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 2 (1998) Does anyone else miss the old fashioned ways of re?

I too miss the old Resident Evil games, by which I mean Resident Evil 1, 2 and 3. However, Resident Evil 4 and 5 are two of my favourite games from the last two console generations.

I have once gone back to the original game and also Resident Evil 2. In my view certain aspects of the game are certainly dated or have at least rightly beern removed from the series.

Setting the game in a mansion or police station is a great idea, with finding some escape the goal, but the nature of some of the puzzles is slightly ridiculous... Why would Jill even consider playing Moonlight Sonata as an escpae plan rather than taking on the couple of dogs out front? Or why collect this ruby or set that painting on fire etc... I'd like to see a game in a similar setting with less emphasis on the bizarre puzzles.

The most important thing to capture from the original games is the atmosphere. The only game on the current generation of consoles I have played which set a scary atmosphere was Dead Space, which was actually quite terrifying. So, a game with this kind of control system (a lot like Resi 5) set in a traditional Resident Evil location with zombies, which may need to either be quite fast or very resilient against anything other than headshots to maintain a reasonable difficulty, in my view would be the ideal.

I am not opposed to a game in the style of the originals in terms of camera angle. But I feel the puzzle element was not a strong point of the series, on reflection, and to have a decent combat system we probably need something more like Dead Space or Resi 5's controls and camera.

In a way I think Resident Evil 2 and 3 improved on the original in terms of the puzzle element of the game. It would be quite difficult in my view to top Resident Evil 2 as an overall experience, and there just isn't any kind of thirst for this sort of game at this time, where people don't want to be stuck, don't want the pain of conserving supplies including ink ribbons or the challenge of irregular saves on so on. I think the best Capcpm could do is a much improved version of the new games with an emphasis on survival horror and with, dare I say it, a few lessons learned from Dead Space in how to make an over-the-shoulder horror game.
 
RE2 had excellent puzzles. RE3's were horrible, tedious & obscure.

I haven't played Dead Space, nor do I intend to. RE5 didn't really have any scary locations...the atmosphere of seen in the Underground Garden was nice though.

RE4 had some scary atmospheric locations. At the very beginning, in the village, very eery.

You make some good points for sure. Some people get got up on saying how amazing the original games were, how awesome the puzzles were, how much it revolved around puzzles, when having really obscure ones for no reason, isn't very logical. I mean, the Moonlight Sonata one is cool, very memorable, classic thing to do in a big 'haunted' kind of mansion. Very Scooby Doo. If they were trying to escape though, perhaps they wouldn't have messed around with all kinds of little puzzles, finding keys, etc. Maybe they would try to stick together and just get out in a more logical and simplistic way.
 
^ Yes, many RE 3 puzzles were a bit awkward in terms of placement. There is little logic in placing a puzzle on the roads of Raccoon city. However I think that they are the most challenging of all the first three games. I can't remember a single puzzle from RE 2 because they were too easy to solve. For me the harder a puzzle is the better.

@kilo: I myself am a fan of puzzles and backtracking/searching and to me their absence in RE 5 was something more than noticable. But yeah I guess most people don't like puzzles those days. That's way adventures aren't that commercially successful anymore.

Now, if you are wondering how the hell does a character decide to play the moonlight sonata or pick one item instead of another that's something that all puzzle games have. I guess that you just don't like puzzles.
 
FalleN, RE2's puzzles were very easy...I typically make note, a little piece of paper, and put puzzles hints down on it, and slip it in the game case, but for RE2, this wasn't even close to being necessary.:)

RE5 didn't have much backtracking...in that you could go back through certain doors, once you and your partner go through one right? There were parts especially made for you to backtrack and search around for puzzle pieces...like in the Marshlands, or in the Temple. Having a constant partner definately took away a lot of key RE elements.
 
FalleN

I might have come across as being a little to opposed to the style of the original games. I thoroughly enjoyed all three games Resi 1-3 including the puzzles. I just wonder if they could perhaps be a little less obscure.

As I said, the open setting of a mansion os some other building is great. One of the most awesome things I remember from Resident Evil 1 was having this mansion which I could freely explore, upstairs or down, from the very start. Figuring out how to get around it was very rewarding and enjoyable. This was unlike any game I'd ever played and was just incredible to me.

I'd like to see Resident Evil 6 set in this type of location with that kind of freedom, with over-the-shoulder camera and combat. (What a pity that the games, as with so many others, have become incredibly linear as technology has developed.)

Maybe the balance between puzzles and combat would need to lean more towards the combat and with the puzzles being slightly more relevant to the mission. I'd say Dead Space nearly achieved this but failed with a combination of a fairly boring plot/ setting and with the objective locator mechanism.
 
I believe RE4 did a great job of mixing puzzles & action.

I would like to see a more free-roam kind of environment though, like Raccoon City(or if we should leave that one as it is, a pile of radioactive waste, and fallen buildings), perhaps like GTA, being able to roam around, and just encountering zombies, other BOWs, other UBCS, or RPD members, etc.
 
I absolutely enjoy every puzzle from 0 1 2 and 3. i like it all. obscure puzzles gives the games its compelling imagination. getting an item that you dont know what its for imediatly is cool. oh, and i want re/capcom to go back to the original format. its the best. its like a stanly kubrick movie setting. :D
 
I miss the old style RE games in just about every way especially some of the old monsters like Nemesis and Tyrant etc and the atmosphere I like the new style games RE 4 and 5 in there own way but if I had to choose between the 2 styles the originals would get my vote every time:cool:

bring back the old style RE games I say:)

come on capcom stop mucking about and get back on track:dry:
 
horror is the base of why resident evil is awesome lik when you get scared you get sucked deeper into the game because of all the adrenline and the puzzles kept you occupied ;D
 
GazSi;72191 said:
I was also dissapointed about the change,

silent hill never changes itself,

silent hill has changed alot actually as soon as 3 was done things started changing
 
codename: HUNK;86819 said:
Silent hill ****tered memories was almost as disappointing as Resident evil 4.

i liked ****terd memories good story good graphics solis gameplay it was great and RE4 wasnt bad it was game of the year and it was fun:dry:
 
icydeath7;86870 said:
i liked ****terd memories good story good graphics solis gameplay it was great and RE4 wasnt bad it was game of the year and it was fun:dry:

He means it was disappointing to RE fans.
 
codename: HUNK;86819 said:
Silent hill ****tered memories was almost as disappointing as Resident evil 4.

Well I haven't played the Silent Hill games, but if that ****tered Memories was as dissapointing as RE4, then surely ****tered Memories must be a great game, perhaps Game of The Year worthy?:)
 
Spike991;86895 said:
Well I haven't played the Silent Hill games, but if that ****tered Memories was as dissapointing as RE4, then surely ****tered Memories must be a great game, perhaps Game of The Year worthy?:)

I liked the series' the way they were. I think if they wanted to make RE4 and ****tered memories, they should have turned them into different series' instead of killing the already existing ones. I'm not a big fan of remakes and big changes to an already perfect game. Oh well.
 
codename: HUNK;86940 said:
I liked the series' the way they were. I think if they wanted to make RE4 and ****tered memories, they should have turned them into different series' instead of killing the already existing ones. I'm not a big fan of remakes and big changes to an already perfect game. Oh well.

Why would turn an RE game into a different series?

What did they kill with RE4? Nothing, that's what. RE4 is just another RE game, just like CVX, or RE3, or RE2.

So you are saying that every RE game prior to RE4, was the same, is that it? When was RE perfect, RE2? RE3? CVX maybe? There were tons of changes in all of those, so if you thought it was perfect in RE2, well there were changes in RE3.

So are you also saying you didn't like the REmake? Perhaps you could elaborate on the "big changes" that you claim exist in RE4.
 
Well some people say its the camera that changed RE4. But its not. The gameplay could be exactly the same with the OTS camera. But its not. The thing that really changed RE4 was the precision aiming. That changed the series a lot. It made the game more action oriented. You really don't have to worry about conserving ammo that much in RE4 because enemies drop it and you can do plenty of damage to them with melee attacks.

They really changed up the pacing of the game by adding precision aiming as a key element of the gameplay. In past RE games you had to do a lot of searching and item management. Not only that but you actually had to read the files to get past certain parts of the game. You are not required to read a single file in RE4 or RE5. Sure some might help a little, but there is no vital information for passing puzzles or obstacles.

RE4 had the same control scheme as the previous titles, but you used it very differently.
 
Spike991;86945 said:
Why would turn an RE game into a different series?

What did they kill with RE4? Nothing, that's what. RE4 is just another RE game, just like CVX, or RE3, or RE2.

So you are saying that every RE game prior to RE4, was the same, is that it? When was RE perfect, RE2? RE3? CVX maybe? There were tons of changes in all of those, so if you thought it was perfect in RE2, well there were changes in RE3.

So are you also saying you didn't like the REmake? Perhaps you could elaborate on the "big changes" that you claim exist in RE4.

very well... RE1,2,3, and CV are good games. RE4 sucks. How's that for a change?
 
codename: HUNK;86995 said:
very well... RE1,2,3, and CV are good games. RE4 sucks. How's that for a change?

Well how elaborate. Obviously you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

You have absolutely nothing logical to support your opinion, which is completely false I might add.

@T-kid, your right, the OTS shoulder didn't change anything, and the precision aiming didn't either. While we get caught up on the "precision" part, who was really precise when playing? Who is precise when playing? I like to think I'm pretty good with a pistol, or any other weapon you can find, but certainly when you first play RE4, your aim sucks, horribly, mine did, everyone's did, so it didn't make the gameplay any easier at first. Of course, with how the lock-on aiming worked with the camera angles, people got used to it and could utilize it to handle whatever the situation was.

That said, having enemies drop ammo, that is one thing that I think should be taken out. I mean at first it could have been nice, as I know I wasted tons of ammo missing when I first played with the OTS view, but I would rather just pick up what's lying around, or in boxes and such, not what enemies drop.
 
Back
Top Bottom