• 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 7 Make RE7 scary - please...

Dead Space for sure has been going strong with horror, although DS3 was a little too much action, but nonetheless, a great game.

I would personally love to see RE regain the survival horror elements, but I don't think expecting them the please the fans in healthy. The fans are a pretty small portion of the people who bought the game and I would dare to venture an educated guess and say that the majority of people who played RE5 and 6 were not fans or at the very least didn't play all of the classic ones. They want to appeal to a broader audience because it makes more money. That's especially present in 6 where they tried to please the horror fans, the action fans, and the mix fans, while actually pleasing nobody in the end.

I've said it before in other threads. Take a lesson from Dead Space, a game that literally copied RE4. Action and horror can be mixed well, so it's really sad to see Capcom failing at what they were once pioneers of.
 
ROCKMAN X said:
That's impossible that would mean they would have to abandon everything RE4 introduced.
Click to expand...

No they wouldn't. Believe it or not, RE4 didn't introduce mindless action. It was actually very well paced and reasonably difficult. Perhaps it wasn't AS frightening as the Classic RE1, 2, 3, and Veronica, but it made my heart race and had a lot of tense moments which is what RE is really about.

Dead Space proved that taking the over the shoulder camera angle didn't ruin the atmosphere and it's more than possible to have a frightening and atmospheric game while ditching the fixed camera angles and tank controls.
 
AdaWait said:
No they wouldn't. Believe it or not, RE4 didn't introduce mindless action. It was actually very well paced and reasonably difficult.
Click to expand...
nah.. RE4 was a shooting gallery just because it was well designed doesn't mean it isn't mindless action.. the enemies in RE4 are basically cannon fodder you mow them down like nothing and they literally drop ammo&points.. i'm sorry RE4 is a far cry from a survival horror game where your resources are supposed to be limited and your enemies are supposed to be stronger..
 
AdaWait said:
No they wouldn't. Believe it or not, RE4 didn't introduce mindless action. It was actually very well paced and reasonably difficult. Perhaps it wasn't AS frightening as the Classic RE1, 2, 3, and Veronica, but it made my heart race and had a lot of tense moments which is what RE is really about.

Dead Space proved that taking the over the shoulder camera angle didn't ruin the atmosphere and it's more than possible to have a frightening and atmospheric game while ditching the fixed camera angles and tank controls.
Click to expand...
Thank you Ada. Haters gonna hate.
 
ROCKMAN X said:
nah.. RE4 was a shooting gallery just because it was well designed doesn't mean it isn't mindless action.. the enemies in RE4 are basically cannon fodder you mow them down like nothing and they literally drop ammo&points.. i'm sorry RE4 is a far cry from a survival horror game where your resources are supposed to be limited and your enemies are supposed to be stronger..
Click to expand...

You're not making a good case. It's not just a shooting gallery. By your definition, any RE game is a shooting gallery. I could kill every zombie in RE1, 2, and 3 no problem on any difficulty. Does that mean it's a shooting gallery?

They drop ammo and points based on a system that randomizes drops based on what you need. If you have ammo piled up, they won't drop much. That's fine because now you have more enemies and more chances to miss with the new aiming system. Not to mention collectibles, treasures, puzzles, etc. You need more ammo simply by the inherent design of the game and there is nothing wrong with that. It doesn't take away from survival horror and you haven't provided a legitimate reason as to why that would be. As a player, you're still not sure what will come next. New enemy types, new monsters, new atmosphere. It all created a feeling of wonder and novelty which made my heart beat like crazy when I first played the game. It put me on edge and I'm sure many people felt the same way.

The in game currency was obviously needed for upgrades which I see nothing wrong with. Not only do enemies get stronger as the game progresses, you're also thrown in to situations where you need the edge of upgrades.

I'm not saying RE4 is the same as the older classics, but that doesn't automatically default it to be completely different and mindless. It's a different kind of horror and it works. As long as it puts you as a player on edge, there is value in that. The reason RE5 was such a flop is because we already saw the same virus in RE4 so it wasn't new to us. Plus you had an AI partner, and there were plenty more stupid things RE5 did that I don't feel like discussing.
 
AdaWait said:
You're not making a good case. It's not just a shooting gallery.
Click to expand...
That's what i call it anyway.. a 3rd person shooter with a creepy atmosphere plus it also has unlimited saves.
By your definition, any RE game is a shooting gallery.
Click to expand...
Except there are not many zombies on screen they are bullet sponges and they don't drop sh!t and you can't just break designated barrels&boxes to get ammo you have to scavenge for ammo and if you try to shoot your way through everything you run out of ammo very quickly.. melee attacks were also not overpowered like in RE4.
I could kill every zombie in RE1, 2, and 3 no problem on any difficulty. Does that mean it's a shooting gallery?
Click to expand...
and i can play the game WITHOUT killing a single zombie.. in RE4 YOU MUST clear the area of enemies to progress after mowing down hordes&hordes of enemies the game loses any&all sense of tension the enemies are the ones who are "Surviving" the onslaught of leon's radical melee attacks and various guns.

the gameplay in RE4 is clearly a 3rd person shooter and RE series was never really a shooter it was an off-shoot of exploration based adventure games its inspiration from alone in the dark makes it clear.
>They drop ammo and points based on a system that randomizes drops based on what you need.
They shouldn't drop ANYTHING! seriously that just gives me more courage&incentive to kill them Survival horror should STRIP resources from you NOT feed them to you.
>Not to mention collectibles, treasures, puzzles, etc.
There are not many puzzles in RE4 even though its a massive game and the treasures? i don't need them at all.. red9 pretty much does quick work of regular enemies and broken butterfly maxed out kills all bosses&mini-bosses.
>New enemy types, new monsters, new atmosphere.
if by "new enemies" you mean new skins for the same cannon fodder ganados that you mow down by the thousands then yes.
>The in game currency was obviously needed for upgrades.
Why is there a need for upgrade? why can't you just find parts of guns and upgrade it yourself? NOW THAT is what i call a "Treasure".
>Not only do enemies get stronger as the game progresses
they get stronger? not really except for breakable wooden shields and helmets they all are the same ganados re-skinned... though you DO get stronger as you upgrade your armoury and increase your "lifebar" whatever happened to the "fine/Caution/danger" status screen.
>It's a different kind of horror and it works.
If RE4 is horror then Gears of War is also horror.
The reason RE5 was such a flop is because we already saw the same virus in RE4 so it wasn't new to us
Click to expand...
*PARASITE.. mind-controlling parasite.. this is another thing that bugs me about RE 4&5 you're basically killing normal mind controller humans.. not freaks of nature like walking corpses&giant spiders just regular people who have mind control parasites inside them.

the tension&atmosphere pretty much tapers off after the village section when you meet the merchant and get used the game's linear 3rd person shooter design.
 
Last edited:
Now that you've better defined your "shooting gallery" comment I'll grant you some credit.

The only problem is that you're treating RE4 as if you think it should have been RE2 without the fixed camera angle. It's nonsensical to attempt to directly compare.

For one. Unlimited saves is not an issue. Neither were ink ribbons in previous RE games. I remember even as a first time player I never ran out of ribbons. I'm sure it's possible, but running out of ribbons would not be your primary concern. I'll admit that since you're saving using typewrites in RE4, it would have been a cool little detail to add ink ribbons if they took up a square of space in the inventory even. I suppose on harder difficulties ribbons might become an issue, but I haven't encountered it. I don't know, maybe I'm just that hardcore.

Melee attacks were next to nonexistent in previous RE games and that's actually something I welcomed in RE4. Not only were they effective, but they also made sense. You're telling me that Jill or Leon, or Claire could not push or kick zombies? It's more realistic and I don't think it's overpowered at all. The game does a pretty good job of counteracting overuse of head shots and suplexes by giving enemies the second mutated head.

I'll grant that in the classic older games, you could avoid most zombies, although it's impractical and you really would have to go out of your way to not kill any. It's much more practical to just kill them and on my usual play throughs I kill most zombies. RE4 had more areas where it was mandatory to kill all or most enemies, but not all sections. Many times you could just run to the next area. So I think you're polarizing it too much.

Of course RE was never a shooter, but my point, which you keep willfully ignoring, is that it made that transition in RE4 quite well, only to drop the ball with the subsequent games, which once again, isn't fault of the over the shoulder model, but rather the direction they took the series. As stated before, you can have a scary tense game using RE4 style as proven by Dead Space.

Bullet drops are just another way of delivering ammo, and although it might psychologically encourage you to kill everyone, the drop generator will do a good job of supporting your even if you do not kill everyone. If your problem with it is that it makes the game easier, you aren't required to pick up drops or kill all enemies. Drops also drop variable amounts of ammo, which are not usually as large as the ones you find in the environment in the older games like RE2 for example. RE2 had tons of ammo "hidden" in the environment and any experienced player would find more than enough to dispose of all enemies. It's not that big of a change in mechanics and it was more a design decision based on pre-rendered backgrounds and game assets. Though I will grant that treasures and money may have been a step too far, but you need to upgrade somehow and I find the money model better than just earning points or something.


"There are not many puzzles in RE4 even though its a massive game and the treasures? i don't need them at all.. red9 pretty much does quick work of regular enemies and broken butterfly maxed out kills all bosses&mini-bosses."

There were plenty of puzzles. Amount of puzzles relative to size of game and playtime is a subjective value judgement as well as the judgement about the difficulty. Were most puzzles easier? Sure. But there are a few that still take me a minute or two, for example the "puzzle" puzzle you have to put together as Ashley always takes me a few minutes. The option graveyard puzzle is something you could probably eventually figure out by accident if you don't realize the grave hints. If comparing to old games, I don't think RE1, 2 puzzles were necessarily harder. RE1 and 2 were a lot more puzzle-like through backtracking and it took a while to memorize which keys go where and sometimes it took some time to figure out what item to use where, but that was more a happy accident through attempt to lengthen the game using conventional developer tricks.

You're not required to buy new weapons or even upgrade, so your argument would rely on the psychological nature of wanting better things, which is true, but being a hardcore vet, you could do the whole game with the first handgun if you'd like. You can make the game as hard as you want for yourself.


"if by "new enemies" you mean new skins for the same cannon fodder ganados that you mow down by the thousands then yes."

No. By new enemies, I mean villagers that throw things, use weapons, eventually get stronger at night and mutate heads which double their health and do massive damage, throw dynamite, castle robe monks who shoot crossbows, use shields, grow mini enemies out of their head, use RPGs, island enemies with Gatling guns, more shields, armor, etc.

There are plenty of different enemy types. Sure they might have only a few different skins, but they also use a decent variety of weapons.




Finally. RE4 is not even close to Gear or War, so while a facetious comparison, still pretty silly. I would assume you dislike RE3 as well since most of your criticisms would apply to that game as well?
 
People have different definitions of scary. You can't really say "Make a game scary!" and assume they're gonna make it your kind of scary. My friend thought Jeepers Creepers wasn't scary at all and while she watched House of Wax she was so scared she literally almost cried, while it was the other way around for me (other than the crying).
 
Maddy7 said:
People have different definitions of scary. You can't really say "Make a game scary!" and assume they're gonna make it your kind of scary. My friend thought Jeepers Creepers wasn't scary at all and while she watched House of Wax she was so scared she literally almost cried, while it was the other way around for me (other than the crying).
Click to expand...
Seriously why do people think being scary is all that survival horror is about? its much more than than.

I don't really find any survival horror game to be all that "scary" but i do find them tense,atmospheric,unnerving and they all have that feeling of claustrophobia&helplessness which is the exact opposite of RE4 where i feel like arnold schwarzenegger that is where it stops being a survival horror game.

People say "its subjective" but i call B.S on that! a GREAT survival horror plays with your head.. 80% of the time you're just wandering around in a desolated city/mansion in both Resident evil&Silent hill and there isn't really all that many jump scares yet they're the 2 games that define the genre which proves my point that Survival horror isn't about being scary.

If being "scary" is all that mattered then Five nights at Freddy's is the epitome of the Survival horror Genre LOL
 
AdaWait said:
It's nonsensical to attempt to directly compare.
Click to expand...
Why? its a sequel so i'm going to compare it to its predecessors if there's a Mario Galaxy 3 i'm going to compare it with Mario galaxy 1&2.

>Unlimited saves is not an issue.
Well it is.. it takes away the tension from the game.. you can easily just keep saving without caring in older RE games you to made sure not to die or else you would lose all progress.. using ink ribbons was about thinking ahead and strategizing.. sure you never ran our of ribbons but it still wasn't infinite and it still made you think twice before saving and that's basically why its significant.

Heck if RE6 wasn't pre-occupied with action scripted events and had a slower pacing with non-linear game design and limited saves it would've actually gone back to the series's roots!

>Melee attacks were next to nonexistent in previous RE games and that's actually something I welcomed in RE4.
Lol wut? you do know that Knife only run exists right? there are people who can kill the nemesis with a knife! the melee in RE4 is cartoony and overpowered leon's attacks belong in God hand not in a resident evil game..

Besides how the am i supposed to feel vulnerable&helpless when i can do this:-

ibx4GiTvqseVy4.gif

and this :-
tumblr_nf7edzwBDK1tfwp79o2_400.gif

and this :-
tumblr_m04qlo4wST1qeftwfo1_500.gif


But i'll admit i only like leon because he was such a badass action hero in RE4... in RE2 he's just a wuss.

>It's more realistic and I don't think it's overpowered at all.
Have you ever tried kicking anything in real life? i'm pretty sure nothing goes flying away when you kick or punch someone and neither should melee attacks stun the horde which is attacking you and yet that is what happens in RE4.

If that's how real life works then i'm going to start kicking people from now on! they will all go flying away like a pinata right? in older RE games it took a Shotgun to stun a group of zombies not a kick to the face.. heck your handgun NEVER stopped the zombies in RE4 you can shoot ganados and they will cower in pain.. am i supposed to fear them or pity them?

>Many times you could just run to the next area. So I think you're polarizing it too much.
Well why would you avoid enemies in RE4? killing them is rewarding it gives you more points&ammo&herbs!

>is that it made that transition in RE4 quite well
What "transition" exactly? RE4 is a completely different game it has nothing to do with old RE games.

and please don't blame RE5&6 they are a natural progression of RE4 they merely expanded on what RE4 did why blame RE5&6 for what RE4 did? is it because RE5&6 are not as good of a 3rd person shooter? in that case i agree but aside from that neither of them are survival horror games.
>you aren't required to pick up drops or kill all enemies.
But you need to kill them to get points and upgrade your weapons! you are literally swimming in ammo and your enemies feed you more why would you not just shoot away? give me one reason why!

In RE1-3 i had to search for every nook and cranny for ammo i didn't want to waste it on enemies that soak bullets waste my time and don't drop anything! there's virtually no incentive to kill the zombies.
>but you need to upgrade somehow
Why can't you just find gun parts and upgrade it yourself? it makes much more logical sense because it encourages exploration as opposed to action.
>You can make the game as hard as you want for yourself.
I can say the same for call of duty.. don't buy any weapon or upgrades.
>By new enemies,I mean villagers that use RPGs,Gatling guns,shields, armor
But they're still easy to kill so they're not stronger.. they're not like the bullet sponge zombies who didn't drop anything and didn't stop when you shot them.. all ganados had about the same amount of health&weaknesses the parasites were also easy to kill given that you had a flash grenade or a shotgun handy.

and why the hell am i even fighting enemies with RPG&Gatling guns anyway? am i playing a war game or something?
>RE4 is not even close to Gear or War.,I would assume you dislike RE3 as well since most of your criticisms would apply to that game as well?
Almost everyone knows RE4 inspired Gears of war and no RE3 is my fav RE game.. and i don't know how my criticism apply to RE3 it takes everything about RE1&2 and makes it better.
 
ROCKMAN X said:
Why? its a sequel so i'm going to compare it to its predecessors if there's a Mario Galaxy 3 i'm going to compare it with Mario galaxy 1&2.

>Unlimited saves is not an issue.
Well it is.. it takes away the tension from the game.. you can easily just keep saving without caring in older RE games you to made sure not to die or else you would lose all progress.. using ink ribbons was about thinking ahead and strategizing.. sure you never ran our of ribbons but it still wasn't infinite and it still made you think twice before saving and that's basically why its significant.

Heck if RE6 wasn't pre-occupied with action scripted events and had a slower pacing with non-linear game design and limited saves it would've actually gone back to the series's roots!

>Melee attacks were next to nonexistent in previous RE games and that's actually something I welcomed in RE4.
Lol wut? you do know that Knife only run exists right? there are people who can kill the nemesis with a knife! the melee in RE4 is cartoony and overpowered leon's attacks belong in God hand not in a resident evil game..

Besides how the am i supposed to feel vulnerable&helpless when i can do this:-

ibx4GiTvqseVy4.gif

and this :-
tumblr_nf7edzwBDK1tfwp79o2_400.gif

and this :-
tumblr_m04qlo4wST1qeftwfo1_500.gif


But i'll admit i only like leon because he was such a badass action hero in RE4... in RE2 he's just a wuss.

>It's more realistic and I don't think it's overpowered at all.
Have you ever tried kicking anything in real life? i'm pretty sure nothing goes flying away when you kick or punch someone and neither should melee attacks stun the horde which is attacking you and yet that is what happens in RE4.

If that's how real life works then i'm going to start kicking people from now on! they will all go flying away like a pinata right? in older RE games it took a Shotgun to stun a group of zombies not a kick to the face.. heck your handgun NEVER stopped the zombies in RE4 you can shoot ganados and they will cower in pain.. am i supposed to fear them or pity them?

>Many times you could just run to the next area. So I think you're polarizing it too much.
Well why would you avoid enemies in RE4? killing them is rewarding it gives you more points&ammo&herbs!

>is that it made that transition in RE4 quite well
What "transition" exactly? RE4 is a completely different game it has nothing to do with old RE games.

and please don't blame RE5&6 they are a natural progression of RE4 they merely expanded on what RE4 did why blame RE5&6 for what RE4 did? is it because RE5&6 are not as good of a 3rd person shooter? in that case i agree but aside from that neither of them are survival horror games.
>you aren't required to pick up drops or kill all enemies.
But you need to kill them to get points and upgrade your weapons! you are literally swimming in ammo and your enemies feed you more why would you not just shoot away? give me one reason why!

In RE1-3 i had to search for every nook and cranny for ammo i didn't want to waste it on enemies that soak bullets waste my time and don't drop anything! there's virtually no incentive to kill the zombies.
>but you need to upgrade somehow
Why can't you just find gun parts and upgrade it yourself? it makes much more logical sense because it encourages exploration as opposed to action.
>You can make the game as hard as you want for yourself.
I can say the same for call of duty.. don't buy any weapon or upgrades.
>By new enemies,I mean villagers that use RPGs,Gatling guns,shields, armor
But they're still easy to kill so they're not stronger.. they're not like the bullet sponge zombies who didn't drop anything and didn't stop when you shot them.. all ganados had about the same amount of health&weaknesses the parasites were also easy to kill given that you had a flash grenade or a shotgun handy.

and why the hell am i even fighting enemies with RPG&Gatling guns anyway? am i playing a war game or something?
>RE4 is not even close to Gear or War.,I would assume you dislike RE3 as well since most of your criticisms would apply to that game as well?
Almost everyone knows RE4 inspired Gears of war and no RE3 is my fav RE game.. and i don't know how my criticism apply to RE3 it takes everything about RE1&2 and makes it better.
Click to expand...

RE 3 is more like 4 than 1, really.
What 1 and 3 have in common...
Scarce ammo, fixed cameras, limited saves.
What 3 and 4 have in common...
Action, melee type moves, 180 degree turn, multiple weapon upgrades, no personal items, more areas, item drops, one main campaign...
 
5 ways to make it scary:
1.stuck in tight corners when groups of zombies are coming at you and you have to fight your way out
2.sneak attacks
3.sneak attacks when you open the door
4. zombie noises behind you or when there is no one around
5.Running zombies

Watch out for resident evil 7 the storyline.
 
There was some sort of server error over the weekend and all of the posts made between Saturday and Monday across the forum have been lost. I'm assuming that the system was rolled back to before the server error occurred. That's why your posts are gone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom