Resident Evil 4 It Is The WORST Resident Evil To Date!

[Veniamin_Sasha]

Resident Evil 4 has to be the most ridiculous one to date. It was all wrong, it died not have anything special. I do not see why it was chosen as such a revolutionary installment. The bosses were horrible and the atmosphere was even worse.

I did not like the puzzles in the least and the Ganado's were so incredibly tedious. I did like RE5 though and a lot at that. It had Chris instead of Leon. Mr. Kennedy, is cool, however Redfield is far better.

 

[DarkJackal]

I think RE4 was a great game. I do agree some of the bosses were ridiculous, like Salazar and saddler, they seem like something out of a scifi story, rather than what RE was, just kinda cheesy and not really serious.
Although I think RE4 is a great game. Story wise I dislike it. I feel it broke the RE storyline.

RE1-3 were somewhat continuous, 2 introducing Leon and Claire in the events after the mansion in the infected Raccoon City. RE3 was around the same time but Jill's events. RE4 Just feels like it started a whole new story with all new stuff, the only connection to RE being Leon and a mention of Umbrella.
I think things could have been a lot better if they didn't keep making up and changing characters and stuff. RE4 could have been about Leon and Claire after they escaped but with more about Umbrella and the T/G viruses, no Las Plagas stuff. 5 Could have been a cool coop game but with Chris and Jill, I think that would have been cooler having them going after their former team leader together. 6 Could have then brought Jill and Chris together with Leon and Claire, and maybe bring back Barry and Rebecca for that third campaign? Iuno, might be some characters better suited, but they are original characters that feels like they were just discarded.

/rant

 

[Veniamin_Sasha]

Yes, Saddler was sheer stupidity, however I Salazar was interesting. How was Salazar out of a sci-fi story? He kind of reminded me of the Napoleonic Era based upon his clothing, this was the first thing that came to my mind.

Resident Evil 1 was a groundbreaking landmark and is and still will be highly regarded as one of the greatest games ever made. What was so fascinating was the areas: The Arklay Mountains, Spencer Mansion, Guardhouse, Catacombs, and finally the Laboratory. I always thought the Lab was all too short though, and they focused too much on the Mansion. It went from the Mansion to the Guardhouse and back to the Mansion, Catacombs, and finally the Laboratory.

Resident Evil 2 is personally my favourite of the series. It just seemed to have gone by faster (time and fps wise). The evolved it and incorporated brand new characters, in particular Claire. It was fascinating to see that Chris had sibling and that there was actually depth involved. I also loved the Police Station vs. the Mansion, it had better and more solid framework to it.

I thought that Resident Evil 3 was pure **** and they just wanted a quick buck. I did not like the Mercenaries and this was one of the biggest contributing factors. They invest in Carlos Oliveira, Mikhail Victor, and Nikolai Zinoviev of whom are to never been heard of again. The could at least do a separate game w/ the them, if the can add new characters to 6.

I totally understand where your coming from with the character aspect. They introduce these minors: Jake Mueller, Helena Harper, Piers Nivans, Ingrid Hannigan...etc. They are probably never going to heard of again.

I want to see a campaign where Chris and Barry team up or Chris and Hunk. I would also like to see better enemies. The Serpent (RE1) was classic along with The Lickers (RE2).

 

[Turo602]

Resident Evil 4 has to be the most ridiculous one to date. It was all wrong, it died not have anything special. I do not see why it was chosen as such a revolutionary installment. The bosses were horrible and the atmosphere was even worse.

I did not like the puzzles in the least and the Ganado's were so incredibly tedious. I did like RE5 though and a lot at that. It had Chris instead of Leon. Mr. Kennedy, is cool, however Redfield is far better.

Being revolutionary isn't something that's chosen for a specific game... it either is or isn't. In Resident Evil 4's case, it was. Your dislike or preference of the atmosphere, puzzles, bosses, and characters don't take away the fact that the game had excellent design, control, and camera which is evident in all the copycats and great work that has released since its debut. I also don't get how you can dislike any of those things and still praise Resident Evil 5 when it further tarnished the Resident Evil name and was basically Resident Evil 4 with co-op... If any game is the worst its Resident Evil 6.

 

[Veniamin_Sasha]

Resident Evil 6 was decent. Resident Evil 5 just brought back the Lickers and it had more to do w/ the actual story. It introduced the BSAA which I thought was interesting because it shows what Chris has been doing since Code Veronica. Leon and Ada should of just stayed in Raccoon City instead of Europe and Peseta.

I do not like that fact that it had unrealistic weapons and had no real names for them and the customization was absurdity. RE5, had real weapons and what I liked so much was the fact that you could actually get guns like the S&W M500 which is real-life gun. The Hydra was cool as well.

 

[Turo602]

Resident Evil 6 was decent. Resident Evil 5 just brought back the Lickers and it had more to do w/ the actual story. It introduced the BSAA which I thought was interesting because it shows what Chris has been doing since Code Veronica. Leon and Ada should of just stayed in Raccoon City instead of Europe and Peseta.

I do not like that fact that it had unrealistic weapons and had no real names for them and the customization was absurdity. RE5, had real weapons and what I liked so much was the fact that you could actually get guns like the S&W M500 which is real-life gun. The Hydra was cool as well.

Those complaints are very trivial and say nothing about the actual experience of the game. Earlier, you complained about the puzzles, bosses, atmosphere and enemies in RE4 yet those things were carried over to RE5 and were even dumbed down for co-op. The atmosphere in RE5 was by far the worst in the series as the game mostly took place in the daytime. The gameplay was more action focused. The puzzles were just as uninspired and the enemies were basically the same and Lickers, weapon names, and story really make that much of a difference?

Your opinions appear to be very contradictory especially when you call Resident Evil 6 decent in relation to RE4 being the worst when that game shares just about the same number of complaints you've made about RE4 and then some.

 

[AdaWait]

I don't see any warranted criticism apart from "I didn't like it because nyyaaaahhhh."

If you're going to call it the worst installment, have objective reasons. For example, I think the story was pretty weak and full of plot holes when it comes to plausibility. There are some sequences that made no sense such as the helicopter pilot part and the fact that the agency didn't send anyone to investigate why they lost contact with Leon.

Asset wise, the game could have used a little more variety in enemy skin types. Villagers were varied enough, but after a while kind of blend together. The robes at the castle were a clever way of cutting down on skins though.

The inability to move and shoot was kind of puzzling, although the game isn't significantly harder without it.

There is a complete absence of any survivors beside Luis and Ada who are not really locals. It's a little suspicious that the virus would infect with 100% efficiency. Although you could assume that they killed everyone who didn't become infected anyway.

Some level designs are downright bizarre and some sequences like running away from Salazar's statue, the giant truck thing, the lava room, hanging crates with tunnels and buttons, etc. There are no logical explanations for some of these levels/areas, but it's a video game. You could nitpick all day, that depends on how much suspension of disbelief you have. Things like surviving an axe to the head, carrying a metal case full of guns and ammo, jumping 20 meters down a ladder, etc etc. There are plenty of unrealistic things about video games. That's not the point.

For a subjective opinion, what really matters is the feeling the game gave you. Most people who played RE4, whatever feeling it gave then, must have been a great feeling. We can theorize as to why people enjoyed it, for example, the voice acting was pretty decent, the characters were written pretty well, the gameplay was fun and varied enough to keep you engaged, it complete reinvented RE, but still stuck grounded in the same feeling of horror, it was familiar to fans, blah blah blah.

We all have our reasons for liking it, and they might not be rational, but when you make objective claims like it sucks, you need to be able to back them up.

 

[Venomous Oddball]

Yes, Saddler was sheer stupidity, however I Salazar was interesting. How was Salazar out of a sci-fi story? He kind of reminded me of the Napoleonic Era based upon his clothing, this was the first thing that came to my mind.

Resident Evil 1 was a groundbreaking landmark and is and still will be highly regarded as one of the greatest games ever made. What was so fascinating was the areas: The Arklay Mountains, Spencer Mansion, Guardhouse, Catacombs, and finally the Laboratory. I always thought the Lab was all too short though, and they focused too much on the Mansion. It went from the Mansion to the Guardhouse and back to the Mansion, Catacombs, and finally the Laboratory.

Resident Evil 2 is personally my favourite of the series. It just seemed to have gone by faster (time and fps wise). The evolved it and incorporated brand new characters, in particular Claire. It was fascinating to see that Chris had sibling and that there was actually depth involved. I also loved the Police Station vs. the Mansion, it had better and more solid framework to it.

I thought that Resident Evil 3 was pure **** and they just wanted a quick buck. I did not like the Mercenaries and this was one of the biggest contributing factors. They invest in Carlos Oliveira, Mikhail Victor, and Nikolai Zinoviev of whom are to never been heard of again. The could at least do a separate game w/ the them, if the can add new characters to 6.

I totally understand where your coming from with the character aspect. They introduce these minors: Jake Mueller, Helena Harper, Piers Nivans, Ingrid Hannigan...etc. They are probably never going to heard of again.

I want to see a campaign where Chris and Barry team up or Chris and Hunk. I would also like to see better enemies. The Serpent (RE1) was classic along with The Lickers (RE2).

I know this is from a while ago, but... Hunnigan never heard of again? She was in 4, Damnation, 6, and DSC...

 

[ROCKMAN X]

Resident Evil 4 has to be the most ridiculous one to date.

Resident evil 6 says HI!

I do not see why it was chosen as such a revolutionary installment.

Simple Logic.. 3rd person shooter Pew pew pew makes way more money than the slow-paced survival horror games.

I did not like the puzzles in the least

There were puzzles in RE4? lol

and the Ganado's were so incredibly tedious. I did like RE5 though and a lot at that.

Now that makes you a hypocrite RE5 is worse than RE4.. entire RE5 felt like a tedious shootfest.. at least there was this gradual sense of progression in RE4.. RE5 just throws that out of the windows for this chapter selection crap.

It had Chris instead of Leon. Mr. Kennedy, is cool, however Redfield is far better.

I don't think so.

 

[AdaWait]

0:58 OOOOOOOO RIGHT IN THE DICK.

 

[AgentZero]

Okay. So RE4 is by far, not my favorite RE in the series. How ever, Gaiden and Surviror 2: Code Veronica. Nuff said.

 

[AdaWait]

I don't understand how you could think RE4 is the worst in the series. Almost everything about RE5 apart from graphics is objectively worse. RE6 takes it into even worse waters. Outbreak games were pretty despicable. Good concepts, but many fatal flaws.

Operation Raccoon City was also regarded as terrible. I can see why some people would not like RE4, but it can't see how it would be considered worse than any other RE game. That would require willful ignorance of literally the same mechanics in the next games.

So you would say that RE4 is worse than RE5?

 

[AgentZero]

I don't understand how you could think RE4 is the worst in the series. Almost everything about RE5 apart from graphics is objectively worse. RE6 takes it into even worse waters. Outbreak games were pretty despicable. Good concepts, but many fatal flaws.

Operation Raccoon City was also regarded as terrible. I can see why some people would not like RE4, but it can't see how it would be considered worse than any other RE game. That would require willful ignorance of literally the same mechanics in the next games.

So you would say that RE4 is worse than RE5?

What were wrong with the Outbreak games in your opinion?

 

[Venomous Oddball]

I don't understand how you could think RE4 is the worst in the series. Almost everything about RE5 apart from graphics is objectively worse. RE6 takes it into even worse waters. Outbreak games were pretty despicable. Good concepts, but many fatal flaws.

Operation Raccoon City was also regarded as terrible. I can see why some people would not like RE4, but it can't see how it would be considered worse than any other RE game. That would require willful ignorance of literally the same mechanics in the next games.

So you would say that RE4 is worse than RE5?

What was so bad about 5, 6, and the Outbreaks?

 

[AdaWait]

5 was mundane, repetitive, and weird. The atmosphere didn't feel tense at all mostly due to having an AI partner and having the setting during the day for a large portion of the game. Having an AI partner meant more enemies. Coming from 4, there wasn't much new that was actually positive or a good idea. Chris was way too buff. Villains had no real reason to being villains. The only good thing to come out of 5 is some expansion to the lore by dealing with Wesker, but we could have done without 5 and it would have been for the better.

6 was a nightmare of indecision. Way too much action and way too many ridiculous set pieces. Capcom tried pleasing everyone by doing "classic" style with Leon, clearly scarier, in the dark, slower paced, actual zombies, etc. Still wasn't like the classics. Then Chris with his straight up Call of Duty style story. Jake with the new monster/nemesis type scenario, and Ada with the secret ops style. None if it performed well in what it was trying to do. Too many useless mechanics like the stamina bar, herb to pill conversion, weird melee combat, overuse of quicktime and button prompts, co-op partner mechanics, etc. I have a bias towards Leon, so I enjoyed his story the most, but it was riddled with way too much ridiculous **** that is way over the top. I don't have a problem with action, but I'm going to keep repeating myself when I say that over the shoulder gameplay is not the issue that plagues Resident Evil and it is possible to make a tense and scary game, much like Visceral Games did with Dead Space.

I have a fairly limited experience with Outbreak. I only had the first game on PS2 and I was about 13 when I played it the most. From my recollection, it was very hard to the point of impossibility. The difficulty was mainly due to limited items like health and weapons. Inventory space was also terrible which was counteracted by the ability to share items, but as far as I recall, the AI wasn't the smartest around. The infection timer was also a pain in the ass and a cheap way to increase re-playability on an already hard game. I only ever recall finishing the bar scenario, the Hospital and Mansion ones I never got too far into. Perhaps it would have been a great game online, but I never got the internet working with my PS2. As far as atmosphere, the game nailed it 110%. It really did feel like a struggle to survive, but just too damn hard. To me it felt like a wasted opportunity. It wasn't TERRIBLE, but a squandered potential.

 

[AgentZero]

5 was mundane, repetitive, and weird. The atmosphere didn't feel tense at all mostly due to having an AI partner and having the setting during the day for a large portion of the game. Having an AI partner meant more enemies. Coming from 4, there wasn't much new that was actually positive or a good idea. Chris was way too buff. Villains had no real reason to being villains. The only good thing to come out of 5 is some expansion to the lore by dealing with Wesker, but we could have done without 5 and it would have been for the better.

6 was a nightmare of indecision. Way too much action and way too many ridiculous set pieces. Capcom tried pleasing everyone by doing "classic" style with Leon, clearly scarier, in the dark, slower paced, actual zombies, etc. Still wasn't like the classics. Then Chris with his straight up Call of Duty style story. Jake with the new monster/nemesis type scenario, and Ada with the secret ops style. None if it performed well in what it was trying to do. Too many useless mechanics like the stamina bar, herb to pill conversion, weird melee combat, overuse of quicktime and button prompts, co-op partner mechanics, etc. I have a bias towards Leon, so I enjoyed his story the most, but it was riddled with way too much ridiculous **** that is way over the top. I don't have a problem with action, but I'm going to keep repeating myself when I say that over the shoulder gameplay is not the issue that plagues Resident Evil and it is possible to make a tense and scary game, much like Visceral Games did with Dead Space.

I have a fairly limited experience with Outbreak. I only had the first game on PS2 and I was about 13 when I played it the most. From my recollection, it was very hard to the point of impossibility. The difficulty was mainly due to limited items like health and weapons. Inventory space was also terrible which was counteracted by the ability to share items, but as far as I recall, the AI wasn't the smartest around. The infection timer was also a pain in the ass and a cheap way to increase re-playability on an already hard game. I only ever recall finishing the bar scenario, the Hospital and Mansion ones I never got too far into. Perhaps it would have been a great game online, but I never got the internet working with my PS2. As far as atmosphere, the game nailed it 110%. It really did feel like a struggle to survive, but just too damn hard. To me it felt like a wasted opportunity. It wasn't TERRIBLE, but a squandered potential.

I would definitely give outbreak another shot. I need too myself. I haven't played those since I was like 10.

 

[KevinStriker]

I would definitely give outbreak another shot. I need too myself. I haven't played those since I was like 10.

PRO-TIP: Outbreak File #2 is better than Outbreak.

 

[AdaWait]

I mean, I could be wrong, but for what I remembered even back then I thought it had a good idea, just fell short of what it was trying to do.

 

[Bilbo]

I find RE4 to be an absolute masterpiece and probably my favorite in the series. Even though overall I prefer the classic style of RE games, 4 is an exception because of how well done it was in all aspects. First of all, I love how huge the scale of the adventure feels. Aside from the cut scene where ada takes you to the island, you're on foot going from one place to the next the entire time. And that, I think, really makes the whole experience more immersive. One of my biggest problems with 5 and 6 were all these transitional cut scenes that take you from one place to the next and don't let you make your own way there at your own pace.(i.e. In 5 it would have been cool to board the ship and make your way through that rocky sea cliff and take down the guards instead of just ending up on it at the beginning of the next chapter.) Throughout the whole adventure, each location, especially the castle, really inspires that sense of "place" just as the spencer mansion from RE1, or the police station from re2. Usually i'm not crazy about super linear games, but RE4, regardless of its linearity, didn't feel like I was going in a straight line like 5 and 6 made me feel. There were always other little paths to explore and items and treasures to be found and a few times you would return to previous areas and new paths would then be open. So it definitely still felt like an old RE game in that sense. The way the music works with the game is BRILLIANT, probably the best in the series. The soundtrack is extremely unique. Instead of your more hollywood action movie esque score like 5 and 6 had, you get an experimental modern classical esque soundtrack full of hellish dissonant and atonal melodies that evoke fear and anxiety. I've honestly never heard another soundtrack like it. especially in a game. I think its actually one of the most overlooked qualities of the game and deserves more credit. Anyway, i could keep on going on about why i love the game but I'll stop there before this turns into a full on review. I have too many good things to say about this game. But yeah...worst in the series? I don't understand.

 

[Agent Spike]

Resident Evil 4 has to be the most ridiculous one to date. It was all wrong, it died not have anything special. I do not see why it was chosen as such a revolutionary installment. The bosses were horrible and the atmosphere was even worse.

I did not like the puzzles in the least and the Ganado's were so incredibly tedious. I did like RE5 though and a lot at that. It had Chris instead of Leon. Mr. Kennedy, is cool, however Redfield is far better.

The most ridiculous? No way. I fell in love the first time I played it. Maybe because of the revolutionary camera angle?

The bosses and atmosphere were worse? Oh my... I'm sorry but I must defend this game. Have got to the part you fight Verdugo? <-- best boss and how about the Regenerator in the cell room for atmosphere?

I do agree with the puzzles though. They were lame. The best one is the "Ashley Puzzle"