Support NeoGAF

[FukuDaruma]

Just wanted to clarify, me taking a stab at identifying the artist’s intent, isn’t me defending them here. I know that there are a lot of flag planters on this forum who like to take extremely strong stances on sides of a fence but I’m not one of them. I will point out a flaw when I need to even if I really like the game, and honestly I think anyone who truly feels strongly towards any game should also be accepting of it’s flaws.

A great example is that I said Elden Ring is my 2022 GoTY, but still think Elden Ring’s balancing was poor in the last 5th of the game and it was also a bit too long due to the northern areas being less meaningful. It needed pacing and balancing fixes but the biggest fans on this forum didn’t want to acknowledge this and think the project is completely perfect from front to back, regardless of examples brought forth.

I am agreeing that the rain lacks…something, and it’s being done wrong to make up for this.

However it’s also very clear, to me at least, from the interviews and how they’re using the rain that they’re attempting to make it extremely heavy to obscure vision and provide claustrophobia, especially in some of the more cramped scenes where things tend to pop up around corners and make the situation way more chaotic. I think the intent is a good idea, but the execution needs work.

I do think that Batman video you posted shows a potentially better way of doing things. It’s also not too late for Capcom to see the feedback online and patch it up. Regarding the torches, I need more evidence of that in other environments and settings to see if that is a rare issue or a consistent one, because some fires like the gif posted above look incredible.

Agree on everything. Elden Ring was great but yeah, the last part was not as good and the performance was shit. Also, they said there would be Raytracing in a patch. One year later and no raytracing to be found or any word about it...

Back to RE4 remake... the torches may be even worse than the rain:

I mean... what kind of artist and/or Art Director could see this and go "yeah, those torches look good"...

RE VIllage torches...

Uncharted 4...

 

[Obsidian Ball]

Some of these side quests seem really interesting. This is of course optional. But with how hard the road ahead may become, it may be wise to attempt at least a few of them.

There's no reward without risk.

I wish these typos I make were optional. Bloody hell.

 

[CGNoire]

Everything looks painfully last gen, but it looks good last gen

But at $10 more?

 

[shiru]

Back to RE4 remake... the torches may be even worse than the rain:

I mean... what kind of artist and/or Art Director could see this and go "yeah, those torches look good"...

Fire and rain are far superior & much more tasteful in the original. Looks so good still.

 

[Ultra Donny]

Looks fun, but I must say the rain really drags down the visuals.

 

[Madflavor]

It's not about muh graphics or technical aspects. Art and visual direction sucks. That rain effect is incredibly jarring and distractingly bad. So is the lighting/color grading. If it's going to look worse than the original, then this remake is pointless.

What if the gameplay, story direction, additional features, areas, enemies, weapons, etc are better than the original? Would it still be pointless because “much graphics”?

 

[shiru]

What if the gameplay, story direction, additional features, areas, enemies, weapons, etc are better than the original? Would it still be pointless because “much graphics”?

The original didn't falter in those areas, and I already told you visual critcism isn't merely about the technical aspects. We're only judging what we see, not ridiculous what ifs.

 

[Madflavor]

The original didn't falter in those areas, and I already told you visual critcism isn't merely about the technical aspects. We're only judging what we see, not ridiculous what ifs.

Not saying it did, but if the Remake succeeds in giving us more than the original, I don't see how it's pointless. A remake would be pointless if the does the absolute minimal amount of effort just to make a quick buck. This game is clearly doing enough to make it stand on it's own. If it's great, there will probably be a lot of people who may prefer it over the original. I loved the original but there are things about it that don't hold up well today. A modern interpretation of the game made almost 20 years later has it's place, regardless of whether or not some people like it's visual style.

 

[deeptech]

that typical stealth mode where you crouch and come behind enemies, press takedown button and kill them is a pinnacle of video game design, i love it so much but this is a joke so no i don't

 

[shiru]

Not saying it did, but if the Remake succeeds in giving us more than the original, I don't see how it's pointless. A remake would be pointless if the does the absolute minimal amount of effort just to make a quick buck. This game is clearly doing enough to make it stand on it's own. If it's great, there will probably be a lot of people who may prefer it over the original. I loved the original but there are things about it that don't hold up well today. A modern interpretation of the game made almost 20 years later has it's place, regardless of whether or not some people like it's visual style.

It's pointless as RE4 didn't need a remake, especially not such an ugly one. The original plays perfectly well. The "flaws" some people bring up aren't really flaws, but their own incapacity/unwillingness to let go of their preconceived notions about control/shooting mechanics. This remake is about making money for capcom, plain and simple, not "updating" or "improving" the original.

 

[hemo memo]

lol what the

 

[March Climber]

The original didn't falter in those areas, and I already told you visual critcism isn't merely about the technical aspects. We're only judging what we see, not ridiculous what ifs.

It's pointless as RE4 didn't need a remake, especially not such an ugly one. The original plays perfectly well. The "flaws" some people bring up aren't really flaws, but their own incapacity/unwillingness to let go of their preconceived notions about control/shooting mechanics. This remake is about making money for capcom, plain and simple, not "updating" or "improving" the original.

Alternate take: I think the Remake series is an attempt at synergy amongst their entire Resident Evil story. I also have a big theory that it’s possible remake of 1 is coming after 4, then CV.

Here’s why…Think of this new remake series like a TV show for new audiences for a minute. If this were a TV show, we’ve been introduced to Leon and Claire as sort of a cold open into the world of RE. Then RE 3 Remake tells the alternate side of things regarding Jill and a small glimpse at the militaries and umbrella. As a new fan, you’ve seen and heard hints of potentially important characters: Wesker, Chris, Rebecca, Billy Cohen, and Barry.

If this remake of 4 ends where the original does, that’s a hell of a cliffhanger that introduces the big bad for new audiences. On a TV show, this would be where they would connect the dots and have a full flashback episode starring that character and his team(Resident Evil 1) and then Code Veronica, to show the audience how we got to this point. Then 5 would be the final part of this 3-part arc, connecting the past with the present and retelling the full story.

 

[Nickolaidas]

So basically:

The original, compared to the remake:
- looks better
- sounds better
- feels better
- controls better
- plays better

And if you think it doesn't, it's your fault for being close-minded.

Alternate take: I think the Remake series is an attempt at synergy amongst their entire Resident Evil story. I also have a big theory that it’s possible remake of 1 is coming after 4, then CV.

Here’s why…Think of this new remake series like a TV show for new audiences for a minute. If this were a TV show, we’ve been introduced to Leon and Claire as sort of a cold open into the world of RE. Then RE 3 Remake tells the alternate side of things regarding Jill and a small glimpse at the militaries and umbrella. As a new fan, you’ve seen and heard hints of potentially important characters: Wesker, Chris, Rebecca, Billy Cohen, and Barry.

If this remake of 4 ends where the original does, that’s a hell of a cliffhanger that introduces the big bad for new audiences. On a TV show, this would be where they would connect the dots and have a full flashback episode starring that character and his team(Resident Evil 1) and then Code Veronica, to show the audience how we got to this point. Then 5 would be the final part of this 3-part arc, connecting the past with the present and retelling the full story.

Honestly, I can't wait for the Resident Evil 1 ReREmake.

 

[Madflavor]

It's pointless as RE4 didn't need a remake

Whether or not something "needs" a remake is irrelevant. If it's done well, and it's fun, people will enjoy it. That's all that matters.

Especially not such an ugly one.

Doesn't look ugly at all. The rain looking bad is the only thing I'll agree on. We don't know how early of a build they're playing, so it's best to reserve judgement until launch. I heard people calling Elden Ring ugly, and bitching endlessly about how it ran when it released. Didn't stop it from being a beloved game and one of the biggest success stories in gaming. I also recall plenty of complaining about how the Dead Space Remake looked in previews. People need to relax over a game they haven't played yet.

The original plays perfectly well. The "flaws" some people bring up aren't really flaws, but their own incapacity/unwillingness to let go of their preconceived notions about control/shooting mechanics.

I'm not going to say RE4 is "flawed" because some things haven't aged well. But the tank controls are harder to tolerate in 2023. Not saying you can't get used to them, but it's not going to be as smooth as say the controls in the RE2 remake. I also think certain elements of the game were stupid then and they're stupid now. That's part of why a remake has it's place. They've said they're taking different approaches to some of the story and level design.

This remake is about making money for capcom, plain and simple, not "updating" or "improving" the original.

Whether or not it improves remains to be seen, but you're arguing it's not updating it? Of course it's updating it. It's updating it with modern controls and design philosophies and techniques. It's been 20 years, what are you even talking about with that one? The game's not even out and you've already made up your mind about it. Even if you hate it on launch, if the game is received well it's just going to come down to taste. If the game is good, you'll probably find plenty of people disagree with you.

 

[Mikey Jr.]

Yeah, just in terms of graphics, this looks worse than re 2 remake?

I think it just might be the environment?

Or maybe youtube just doesn't like constant rain effects on screen, so thats why it looks a bit bad? I dunno. I'm just kinda surprised how mehhh the graphics look on this.

 

[shiru]

Whether or not something "needs" a remake is irrelevant. If it's done well, and it's fun, people will enjoy it. That's all that matters.

Whatever. The original is perfectly acceptable to play today is what I was getting at. Especially the HD Project which fixes capcom's botched port and properly remasters the game.

Doesn't look ugly at all. The rain looking bad is the only thing I'll agree on. We don't know how early of a build they're playing, so it's best to reserve judgement until launch. I heard people calling Elden Ring ugly, and bitching endlessly about how it ran when it released. Didn't stop it from being a beloved game and one of the biggest success stories in gaming. I also recall plenty of complaining about how the Dead Space Remake looked in previews. People need to relax over a game they haven't played yet.

It looks ugly to me and lot of people. One of the biggest reason for a remake are improved art and visuals, which this only does on the technical surface. The art direction is lousy and doesn't respect the original vision. That's a big strike against it.

I'm not going to say RE4 is "flawed" because some things haven't aged well. But the tank controls are harder to tolerate in 2023. Not saying you can't get used to them, but it's not going to be as smooth as say the controls in the RE2 remake. I also think certain elements of the game were stupid then and they're stupid now. That's part of why a remake has it's place. They've said they're taking different approaches to some of the story and level design.

No harder to tolerate now than in 2005. That is to say, there were never any issues with its controls. It's how it was deliberately designed to play and it worked. There is no shortage of generic third person shooters for people to play if they prefer to whine about it.

Whether or not it improves remains to be seen, but you're arguing it's not updating it? Of course it's updating it. It's updating it with modern controls and design philosophies and techniques. It's been 20 years, what are you even talking about with that one? The game's not even out and you've already made up your mind about it. Even if you hate it on launch, if the game is received well it's just going to come down to taste. If the game is good, you'll probably find plenty of people disagree with you.

Reading comprehension. I said the reason this remake exists and got greenlit is to fill capcom's pockets, not because they wanted to re-envision the game or had any reason to. This isn't anything like REmake where the original game undoubtedly would benefit from a remake.

 

[Nickolaidas]

No harder to tolerate now than in 2005. That is to say, there were never any issues with its controls.

Wrong. Being able to move the camera around and having it STAY there wasn't a thing back then, which is why people didn't have any mainstream game to compare it to - and thus didn't complain.

Same thing with no 'aim and walk'. It wasn't a thing back then, which is why people didn't complain that RE4 couldn't do that. But when RE5 came out and they STILL wouldn't allow you to walk and aim (while many other shoulder-view shooter games by then allowed that), THEN people were pissed and accused RE5 of being gameplay-backwards because by then gaming had evolved and RE5 was still a dinosaur.

RE4 has controls which are annoying in this day and age. The reason people didn't complain back then was because there was nothing more refined and evolved to compare it to, not because it's some sort of pinnacle of game design. Not saying the game is unplayable, but it DOES have its frustrations unless you're willing to be extremely lenient and forgiving. So yeah, the controls could definitely use an upgrade.

 

[shiru]

Wrong. Being able to move the camera around and having it STAY there wasn't a thing back then, which is why people didn't have any mainstream game to compare it to - and thus didn't complain.

What the fuck am I reading
How old are you

 

[Nickolaidas]

What the fuck am I reading
How old are you

43. You?

 

[TGO]

Nobody questioned why this is called Chapter 5 when it's chapter 2

 

[Lux R7]

Nobody questioned why this is called Chapter 5 when it's chapter 2

i expect some new content (the beginning seems different in the first trailer), i guess this can be chapter 5 in the new version
we'll see

 

[shiru]

43.

Oh
Anyways, dual analog movement/moving while shooting was such a basic and familiar concept in 2005 that I'm sure Mikami knew about, and people did bitch about the original's controls at release, so this idea that people liked it out of ignorance is pure revisionism. As is the point about RE5 dissapointing players back then due to "archaic controls". That just didn't happen at all.
Still, holy shit at this

Being able to move the camera around and having it STAY there wasn't a thing back then

 

[Field]

Resi 3 and Village were both average at best so cautiously optimistic about this one.

 

[Nickolaidas]

Anyways, dual analog movement/moving while shooting was such a basic and familiar concept in 2005 that Mikami would certainly know about, and people did bitch about the original's controls at release, so this idea that people didn't complain out of ignorance is pure revisionism.

So, if I understand you correctly, you are saying that the camera system in shoulder-view shooters back in 2004 worked like in Dead Space, and Mikami decided do it differently in Resident Evil as a way to do something unique to his vision? Then, could you be a sweet and tell me five mainstream shoulder-view shooter games which used the camera like in Dead Space, RE2make and the like?

Because it sure sounded like RE4 was the first mainstream shoulder-view shooter and its camera view was pretty revolutionary.

https://www.gamedeveloper.com/busin...ze-the-impact-of-i-resident-evil-4-i-s-camera

Still, holy shit at this

In case I didn't make myself clear, I was referring to the camera controls where you're not in combat, just exploring. The camera goes where you move the stick, and immediately re-calibrates itself to Leon's back once you don't hold the right stick anymore. This is something that changed (evolved) in latter games (not just RE, all shoulder-view shooters). Wherever you directed the camera, it stays there when you release the stick. What's so 'holy shit at this' about it?

As is the point about RE5 dissapointing players back then due to "archaic controls". That just didn't happen at all.

https://www.destructoid.com/serious...in-resident-evil-5-but-here-are-your-options/

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/929198-resident-evil-5/48252285

https://www.giantbomb.com/app.php/resident-evil-5/3030-20569/forums/aiming-and-shooting-227558/

Yeah, sure it didn't.

 

[shiru]

So, if I understand you correctly, you are saying that the camera system in shoulder-view shooters back in 2004 worked like in Dead Space, and Mikami decided do it differently in Resident Evil as a way to do something unique to his vision? Then, could you be a sweet and tell me five mainstream shoulder-view shooter games which used the camera like in Dead Space, RE2make and the like?

Because it sure sounded like RE4 was the first mainstream shoulder-view shooter and its camera view was pretty revolutionary.

https://www.gamedeveloper.com/busin...ze-the-impact-of-i-resident-evil-4-i-s-camera

No doofus, I'm saying moving and aiming simultaneously in a game wasn't some foreign concept to gamers or developers back then, the over the shoulder camera view has fuck all to do with movement and wasn't your original argument.

In case I didn't make myself clear, I was referring to the camera controls where you're not in combat, just exploring. The camera goes where you move the stick, and immediately re-calibrates itself to Leon's back once you don't hold the right stick anymore. This is something that changed (evolved) in latter games (not just RE, all shoulder-view shooters). Wherever you directed the camera, it stays there when you release the stick. What's so 'holy shit at this' about it?

Holy shit you're retarded.

https://www.destructoid.com/serious...in-resident-evil-5-but-here-are-your-options/

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/boards/929198-resident-evil-5/48252285

https://www.giantbomb.com/app.php/resident-evil-5/3030-20569/forums/aiming-and-shooting-227558/

Yeah, sure it didn't.

Wow, a tiny minority. People knew since the reveal trailer about its controls. It didn't detract from it becoming the best selling Resident Evil game ever at the time, or getting positive reviews. It retaining the control scheme from RE4 goes against the idea they were devised out of ignorance or incompetence.

 

[Nickolaidas]

No doofus, I'm saying moving and aiming simultaneously in a game wasn't some foreign concept to gamers or developers back then, the over the shoulder camera view has fuck all to do with movement and wasn't your original argument.

I made two different arguments. Wonky camera controls (that's one example/argument) and aim and walk mechanics (that's the second one).
How the camera works has EVERYTHING to do with the shoulder-view perspective because the camera had to accomodate a revolutionary for its time shoulder-view perspective. There were no mainstream games which had such a camera angle, and Mikami had to create camera controls for the first time. And since there wasn't a template, some kind of precedent, Mikami used the controls the game ended up having.

And those controls are archaic and frustrating today, because they have been surpassed. There is something better to compare them to now, which back then, there wasn't, because there weren't shoulder-view shooters with walking/exploration segments.

Wow, a tiny minority. People knew since the reveal trailer about its controls. It didn't detract from it becoming the best selling Resident Evil game ever at the time, or getting positive reviews. It retaining the control scheme from RE4 in 2009 goes against the idea they were devised out of ignorance or incompetence.

Hey, man - I'm just handing out receipts to shoot down your argument. Many people were disappointed about that design choice, but they bought it nonetheless. Just like people will buy, play and love the REmake of 4 despite some odd rain effects.

You said that never happened, I proved to you that it did. Perhaps you were too young to use the internet back then, but there were complaints.

 

[shiru]

I made two different arguments. Wonky camera controls (that's one example/argument) and aim and walk mechanics (that's the second one).
How the camera works has EVERYTHING to do with the shoulder-view perspective because the camera had to accomodate a revolutionary for its time shoulder-view perspective. There were no mainstream games which had such a camera angle, and Mikami had to create camera controls for the first time. And since there wasn't a template, some kind of precedent, Mikami used the controls the game ended up having.

Of course not. It was a simple thing where the camera was closer to the player character than typical. That's it. It doesn't dictate or influence gameplay mechanics or camera behavior in any way. There are no developer claims or interviews substantiating your argument. "Tank controls" and stop and shoot were simply how Resident Evil games always worked.

And those controls are archaic and frustrating today, because they have been surpassed. There is something better to compare them to now, which back then, there wasn't, because there weren't shoulder-view shooters with walking/exploration segments.

Look, stop pretending you have any idea why people liked it (and still do after all these years despite being "surpassed").

Hey, man - I'm just handing out receipts to shoot down your argument. Many people were disappointed about that design choice, but they bought it nonetheless. Just like people will buy, play and love the REmake of 4 despite some odd rain effects.

You said that never happened, I proved to you that it did. Perhaps you were too young to use the internet back then, but there were complaints.

How pedantic.

 

[Nickolaidas]

"Tank controls" and stop and shoot were simply how Resident Evil games always worked.

Yes, until they were replaced with superior controls, updated controls, evolved controls. That's my whole point. Now that the RE games had their controls evolved, tank controls feel clunky, archaic and obsolete, especially in the shoulder-view cam and the now faster paced gameplay. Imagine RE9 being shoulder-view cam and having stop-to-aim controls. Do you seriously believe people won't consider that two steps backwards in terms of game design? The only people who applaud tank controls are gamers who played the originals, fell in love with them (rightfully so) but are stuck in the past and refuse to acknowledge change.

Look, stop pretending you have any idea why people liked it (and still do after all these years despite being "surpassed").

Why? I was around back then and I remember what the community talked about. Why should I pretend otherwise? Nostalgia is a powerful thing, and people like you prove it. There is a guy here who claims RE4 has superior animations to the Last of Us 2. THAT's how powerful nostalgia can be. Resident Evil 4 is a great game, but it's an old game, and it was the FIRST shoulder-view shooter - the FIRST. 25 years later, there have been numerous improvements to the formula. RE4 could benefit from many QoL improvements. Claiming otherwise is just being naive.

How pedantic.

Oh, so when you are using hyperboles to make an argument it's fine, but when I call you out on your bullshit I'm being pedantic? Okay.

 

[shiru]

Yes, until they were replaced with superior controls, updated controls, evolved controls. That's my whole point. Now that the RE games had their controls evolved, tank controls feel clunky, archaic and obsolete, especially in the shoulder-view cam and the now faster paced gameplay. Imagine RE9 being shoulder-view cam and having stop-to-aim controls. Do you seriously believe people won't consider that two steps backwards in terms of game design? The only people who applaud tank controls are gamers who played the originals and are stuck in the past.

Ok, but all this has fuck all to do with the reason RE4 controls how it did. Keep up with the discussion.

Why? I was around back then and I remember what the community talked about.

Again, prove that people only liked the game due to ignorance. You can't. Because you're talking out of your ass. You can't speak for me.

Why should I pretend otherwise? Nostalgia is a powerful thing, and people like you prove it.

Oh stfu. You have no idea.

Oh, so when you are using hyperboles to make an argument it's fine, but when I call you out on your bullshit I'm being pedantic? Okay.

What am I being hyperbolic about? What the fuck are you even talking about? What a clown.

 

[Nickolaidas]

Ok, but all this has fuck all to do with the reason RE4 controls how it did. Keep up with the discussion.

If RE4's controls weren't in need of improvement, all the later RE titles that used shoulder-view cam would've kept the RE4 controls. They didn't. They improved them. Why? Because RE4's controls weren't perfect and they needed tweaking.

Again, prove the point that people liked the game due to ignorance. You can't. Because you're talking out of your ass. You can't speak for me.

I'm not talking out of my ass, but rather you are putting words into my mouth. I never said people liked the game back then due to ignorance. I'm saying that people TODAY say that RE4 is perfect and in no need of improvements because of nostalgia.

Oh stfu. You have no idea.

You are literally making my case, though ...

What am I being hyperbolic about? What the fuck are you even talking about? What a clown.

You claiming that RE5 never got any complaints about its controls is a hyperbole.

Heck, this entire convo is due to a hyperbole (claiming that RE4 is in no need of a remake because it's perfect - even today).

 

[Dutchy]

Rain looking like my first ever attempt at using Particular in After Effects rofl

 

[Madflavor]

It looks ugly to me and lot of people. One of the biggest reason for a remake are improved art and visuals, which this only does on the technical surface. The art direction is lousy and doesn't respect the original vision. That's a big strike against it.

I think you're overestimating the amount of people who actually give a shit. Nobody complained about the look of the game until we saw the rain in the last preview. Once something like that happens, gaming enthusiasts will start being hyperfocused on the visuals for every preview moving forward. People are still very excited for the game. Even if some areas of the visuals are lackluster, most Graphic Enthusiasts are PC Gamers anyway, and they'll mod the shit out of the visuals. I know I'm a broken record but Gameplay > Graphics. If the game is fun, nobody will ultimately care about the visuals, and those who do will mod them anyway.

No harder to tolerate now than in 2005. That is to say, there were never any issues with its controls. It's how it was deliberately designed to play and it worked. There is no shortage of generic third person shooters for people to play if they prefer to whine about it.

Of course it is. RE4 pioneered the Over The Shoulder view when it came out, and games that have followed view since then allowed for free movement.

Look, stop pretending you have any idea why people liked it (and still do after all these years despite being "surpassed").

A lot of people complained about the tank controls of RE4 and RE5 back in the day. And I mean a lot. I was in High School and College when those games came out, using GameFaqs, IGN , Youtube Comments and Gamespot forums as we did. Tank Controls were the #1 complaint about Resident Evil games back then. By RE5 it was especially loud because it was 2009 and fans simply had enough.

Again, prove the point that people liked the game due to ignorance. You can't. Because you're talking out of your ass. You can't speak for me.

He never said that. People liked RE4 back in the day because of a lot of reasons, but the tank controls were an often discussed issue people had.



Nobody here is saying RE4 is a bad game, or was heavily flawed back in the day, or any of that. Any sane person recognizes that it's one of the best games every made and was groundbreaking for it's time. That doesn't mean every aspect of the game has aged like fine wine, nor does it mean we dislike it not because of it. You can still play RE4, be annoyed at the old controls, but recognize it's a product of it's time.

 

[Nickolaidas]

Nobody here is saying RE4 is a bad game, or was heavily flawed back in the day, or any of that. Any sane person recognizes that it's one of the best games every made and was groundbreaking for it's time. That doesn't mean every aspect of the game has aged like fine wine, nor does it mean we dislike it not because of it. You can still play RE4, be annoyed at the old controls, but recognize it's a product of it's time.

For RE4 in particular, I will always feel bitter about it, because while a great game, a pioneer - as you've said -, it was a bad RE game because it was the beginning of RE going from Survival Horror to Action Horror. Then RE5 came and utterly ruined the few scraps of actual horror that RE4 had kept (Regenerators). And then RE6 came and, well, it put the IP's main entries on ice for ... I dunno, half a decade?

One can make the case that the removal of Survival Horror had began since RE0, but that's a completely different conversation.

At any rate, RE4make seems to be trying to find the perfect balance between Action Horror (RE4 original) and Survival Horror (RE2make, RE8, etc.). Whether it will succeed or not remains to be seen, but holy hell ... I cannot WAIT to see the regenerators on this one, and how tense and stressful the first encounters with them are going to be.

Superficial complaints like Ashley's ears, or Leon's nose, or Salazar's chin are just noise by people who are literally yelling at clouds.

But yeah, the rain could use a patch.

 

[shiru]

If RE4's controls weren't in need of improvement, all the later RE titles that used shoulder-view cam would've kept the RE4 controls. They didn't. They improved them. Why? Because RE4's controls weren't perfect and they needed tweaking.

Holy shit again? This has nothing to do with the reason RE4 controls were designed how it did.

I'm not talking out of my ass, but rather you are putting words into my mouth. I never said people liked the game back then due to ignorance. I'm saying that people TODAY say that RE4 is perfect and in no need of improvements because of nostalgia.

Yes you did. We're talking specifically about the controls. You said the reason people didn't complain back then and were fine with how it played was because they had nothing to compare it to and didn't know any better. aka talking out of your ass.

You are literally making my case, though ...

You have no case. You're nuts.

You claiming that RE5 never got any complaints about its controls is a hyperbole.

Except I never said that. Posting a minority of complainers to imply the game dissapointed players IS hyperbole in the face of the largely positive reception it got. The sales speak for themselves.

Heck, this entire convo is due to a hyperbole (claiming that RE4 is in no need of a remake because it's perfect - even today).

Please, you don't know what hyperbole means. Hyperbole is claiming the original is horrendously obsolete and in need of this piss poor remake.

 

[Madflavor]

For RE4 in particular, I will always feel bitter about it, because while a great game, a pioneer - as you've said -, it was a bad RE game because it was the beginning of RE going from Survival Horror to Action Horror. Then RE5 came and utterly ruined the few scraps of actual horror that RE4 had kept (Regenerators). And then RE6 came and, well, it put the IP's main entries on ice for ... I dunno, half a decade?

One can make the case that the removal of Survival Horror had began since RE0, but that's a completely different conversation.

At any rate, RE4make seems to be trying to find the perfect balance between Action Horror (RE4 original) and Survival Horror (RE2make, RE8, etc.). Whether it will succeed or not remains to be seen, but holy hell ... I cannot WAIT to see the regenerators on this one, and how tense and stressful the first encounters with them are going to be.

I can agree with that. RE4 is in a weird place for me as a fan, because while it is one of my favorites, it laid the foundation for a lot of problems we would see in future games, culminating with RE6. I hope they do a good job blending Action and Survival Horror with the remake, so far it looks like they are.

 

[Nickolaidas]

Holy shit again? This has nothing to do with the reason RE4 controls were designed how it did.

Okay, so, by your logic, there was a specific reason the camera worked the way it did in RE4, but it had nothing to do with the fact that it was the FIRST shoulder-view shooter.

So what was the reason the camera was working the way it did in the original RE4?

Yes you did. We're talking specifically about the controls. You said the reason people didn't complain back then and were fine with how it played was because they had nothing to compare it to and didn't know any better. aka talking out of your ass.

Look, man. If we're to have a legitimate discussion, you cannot take responses about sentence A and claim the responses were about sentence D. You quote me about me saying why people claim RE4 is perfect, and you take this explanation and use it on a different statement about the controls. Conversations do not work this way and I'm starting to believe you're using misdirection on purpose because you have no arguments.

You have no case. You're nuts.

I've literally lost count of how many times you've insulted me, instead of my arguments.

Except I never said that.

This you?

As is the point about RE5 dissapointing players back then due to "archaic controls". That just didn't happen at all.

Is this a hyperbole? Or an actual statement?

Yeah, RE5 sold well. So? You seem to think that a gameplay annoyance is enough to put down a game which has a solid overall package.

Please, you don't know what hyperbole means. Hyperbole is claiming the original is horrendously obsolete and in need of this piss poor remake.

It's not hyperbole when it's true (talking about RE4 needing QoL changes, not about being horrendous)

 

[Gorgyles]

ASD has taken over every re4 remake thread. I can't keep up with this.

 

[Madflavor]

Holy shit again? This has nothing to do with the reason RE4 controls were designed how it did.


Yes you did. We're talking specifically about the controls. You said the reason people didn't complain back then and were fine with how it played was because they had nothing to compare it to and didn't know any better. aka talking out of your ass.


You have no case. You're nuts.


Except I never said that. Posting a minority of complainers to imply the game dissapointed players IS hyperbole in the face of the largely positive reception it got at reveal and launch. The sales speak for themselves.


Please, you don't know what hyperbole means. Hyperbole is claiming the original is horrendously obsolete and in need of this piss poor remake.

Just throwing out a blanket response here, but you've been overexaggerating his points multiple times now, and you're quite clearly taking this personally judging by the amount of insults you've tossed his way. It's not a good look, and I think you should just cool it at this point.

 

[shiru]

I think you're overestimating the amount of people who actually give a shit.

This thread proves otherwise.

Nobody complained about the look of the game until we saw the rain in the last preview.

Not true. I and others didn't like its visual style at it's reveal.

Once something like that happens, gaming enthusiasts will start being hyperfocused on the visuals for every preview moving forward. People are still very excited for the game. Even if some areas of the visuals are lackluster, most Graphic Enthusiasts are PC Gamers anyway, and they'll mod the shit out of the visuals. I know I'm a broken record but Gameplay > Graphics. If the game is fun, nobody will ultimately care about the visuals, and those who do will mod them anyway.

We're not nitpicking a tiny rock texture or whatever. The game looks egregiously ugly in a lot of ways.

Of course it is. RE4 pioneered the Over The Shoulder view when it came out, and games that have followed view since then allowed for free movement.

No it's not. There was never a time were RE4 didn't have complainers about the way it controled.

A lot of people complained about the tank controls of RE4 and RE5 back in the day. And I mean a lot. I was in High School and College when those games came out, using GameFaqs, IGN , Youtube Comments and Gamespot forums as we did. Tank Controls were the #1 complaint about Resident Evil games back then. By RE5 it was especially loud because it was 2009 and fans simply had enough.

Yes about RE4. I don't remember much, if any complaints about RE5. It wasn't terribly common by that point.

He never said that. People liked RE4 back in the day because of a lot of reasons, but the tank controls were an often discussed issue people had.

Uh yes. He did imply that. He claimed people didn't complain about the controls back then, which is false, because at the time nobody knew that you could move a character and aim at the same time, which is patently ridiculous.

Nobody here is saying RE4 is a bad game, or was heavily flawed back in the day, or any of that. Any sane person recognizes that it's one of the best games every made and was groundbreaking for it's time. That doesn't mean every aspect of the game has aged like fine wine, nor does it mean we dislike it not because of it. You can still play RE4, be annoyed at the old controls, but recognize it's a product of it's time.

Nah, some people are trying to force the idea the game has become obsolete and unplayable by modern "standards", and I'm saying that's bullshit.

 

[Madflavor]

This thread proves otherwise.

Not true. I and others didn't like its visual style at it's reveal.


We're not nitpicking a tiny rock texture or whatever. The game looks egregiously ugly in a lot of ways.


No it's not. There was never a time were RE4 didn't have complainers about the way it controled.


Yes about RE4. I don't remember much, if any complaints about RE5. It wasn't terribly common by then.


Uh yes. He did imply that. He claimed people didn't complain back then about the controls, which is false, because nobody knew at the time that you could move a character and move at the same time, which is patently ridiculous.


Nah, some people are trying to force the idea the game has become obsolete and unplayable to modern "standards", and I'm saying that's bullshit.

Alright dude.

 

[Nickolaidas]

No it's not. There was never a time were RE4 didn't have complainers about the way it controled.

Nah, some people are trying to force the idea the game has become obsolete and unplayable to modern "standards", and I'm saying that's bullshit.

Google 'Resident Evil 4 has horrible controls'. You'll see tons of people complaining about the controls in recent years, but you won't find articles complaining about the controls back then.

Let's see what the main reviewing sites back then had to say.

NINTENDO LIFE (review from 2006)
*What about the notoriously clunky controls that make you feel like you are controlling a tank, rather than a special forces operative, that have plagued the series? They are still here, but the new view makes them work. Tweaked to be more instinctive, with the combat knife always available on the L trigger, for close encounters, it’s up there with Nintendo’s best when it comes to hardware/software harmony.*

GAMESPOT (review from 2005)
*Despite Resident Evil 4's unique controls and perspective, it's easy to come to grips with how the game is played. In fact, it might leave you wondering why it took someone so long to pull off a game in this fashion, because the controls and perspective work so well.*

TRUSTED REVIEWS (review from 2005)
*Controlling Leon’s movement with the left analogue stick is simplicity in itself, while the right analogue stick allows you to look around. You still have to press the B button to sprint, but this doesn’t feel as antiquated as it did on previous games for some reason.*

NINTENDO WORLD REPORT (review from 2005)
*The controls are relatively unchanged, but now work much better due to the new camera angle.*

HONEST GAMERS (review from 2007)
*Even though the controls are technically unchanged from previous titles, the new camera angle makes it much easier to get around and far less disorienting when moving about quickly.*

IGN (review from 2005)
*Same as it ever was. Also, in our play experience with the game it became abundantly clear that many of the battles would have benefited from a dodge or strafe function, which Capcom has chosen not to include. And yet, despite all of this, the process of controlling Leon is far improved thanks to a combination of a flexible new camera that shoots the action from behind the character's back and a new action button that enables context-sensitive functionality.*

All those sites in the majority basically say that the controls were fine, or refined due to the camera, or never felt better. I don't see anyone calling the way the game controlled back then as a 'minus'. The exception is IGN who admittedly feel the controls could use some refinements even back then.


But read recent reviews of the PS4 era HD ports, and you'll see people complaining about how archaic the controls feel, or outdated. How old and outdated the aim and stop mechanic feels, or how obsolete the camera works in today's standards.

This proves my point that the game (in terms of controls) didn't age well. And that's perfectly reasonable.

 

[OCASM]

Fire and rain are far superior & much more tasteful in the original. Looks so good still.

Yep, best fire effects of its generation:

Wrong. Being able to move the camera around and having it STAY there wasn't a thing back then, which is why people didn't have any mainstream game to compare it to - and thus didn't complain.

Same thing with no 'aim and walk'. It wasn't a thing back then, which is why people didn't complain that RE4 couldn't do that. But when RE5 came out and they STILL wouldn't allow you to walk and aim (while many other shoulder-view shooter games by then allowed that), THEN people were pissed and accused RE5 of being gameplay-backwards because by then gaming had evolved and RE5 was still a dinosaur.

RE4 has controls which are annoying in this day and age. The reason people didn't complain back then was because there was nothing more refined and evolved to compare it to, not because it's some sort of pinnacle of game design. Not saying the game is unplayable, but it DOES have its frustrations unless you're willing to be extremely lenient and forgiving. So yeah, the controls could definitely use an upgrade.

The only people who complained about the controls, now and back then, are those who want every shooter to play the same.

 

[Strider Highwind]

I should have held off on beating the vr edition again in the fall/winter, feels like its too soon to replay it

 

[Gorgyles]

I dont care how free controls are.
I don't need Leon Triple jumping into a Cappy toss and then dive-bouncing off of cappy into an endless somersault.

What I do need is for the controls to be intuitive and for any limitations to increase the quality of the game.
Mikami is an utter master of game design. One of the best to ever do it, honestly.
RE4 is his magnum opus.

Do I trust a bunch of C-Rate schlubs from modern Capcom to go toe-to-toe with Mikami as they remake his classic?
Not even a little. Why should any of us expect that?

And yes, these flames
and this lightning
looks better than the REMAKE

 

[semiconscious]

Resi 3 and Village were both average at best so cautiously optimistic about this one.

i only wish. if this was true, triple-aaa gaming'd be in much, much better shape than it is at this point...

 

[Madflavor]

Do I trust a bunch of C-Rate schlubs from modern Capcom to go toe-to-toe with Mikami as they remake his classic?
Not even a little. Why should any of us expect that?

I mean RE2 Remake is considered to be one of the best entries in the series, and that same team worked on this. I don't know why you'd think they're C-Rate schlubs.

And I'm sorry, I love what Mikami did for Survival Horror, but The Evil Within was fucking rough.

 

[Field]

i only wish. if this was true, triple-aaa gaming'd be in much, much better shape than it is at this point...

I guess they are still slightly above average haha. I just found them both disappointing after RE2 and 7.

 

[SlimySnake]

Agree on everything. Elden Ring was great but yeah, the last part was not as good and the performance was shit. Also, they said there would be Raytracing in a patch. One year later and no raytracing to be found or any word about it...

Back to RE4 remake... the torches may be even worse than the rain:

I mean... what kind of artist and/or Art Director could see this and go "yeah, those torches look good"...

RE VIllage torches...

Uncharted 4...

Man, RE8 is a gorgeous looking game. Went back to see the lighting and was blown away by some of my shots.

RE4 seems to be cranking everything to 11 which is making everything stand out a bit more. I definitely see some upgrades over RE8. Tesselation is way better. Weather effects are way better. Lighting is far more accurate even if Rain and torches seem to stand out a bit more. Hair looks stunning. I think overall it will look better. I love how atmospheric this feels with all the wind, smog, and yes rain effects.

 

[Gorgyles]

I mean RE2 Remake is considered to be one of the best entries in the series, and that same team worked on this. I don't know why you'd think they're C-Rate schlubs.

And I'm sorry, I love what Mikami did for Survival Horror, but The Evil Within was fucking rough.

Because this is a team dedicated to remakes.
The core ideas and core gameplay structure aren't theirs.
And the lead artists on this RE4 remake is making choices that I disagree with deeply.

Could this remake team create their own game from scratch to stand up to Mikami's best?
I don't think so, but it remains to be seen. They have a lot to prove.

Man, RE8 is a gorgeous looking game. Went back to see the lighting and was blown away by some of my shots.


RE4 seems to be cranking everything to 11 which is making everything stand out a bit more. I definitely see some upgrades over RE8. Tesselation is way better. Weather effects are way better. Lighting is far more accurate even if Rain and torches seem to stand out a bit more. Hair looks stunning. I think overall it will look better. I love how atmospheric this feels with all the wind, smog, and yes rain effects.

I just could not disagree more on lighting, including the rain and torches.

The lighting flashes aren't casting shadows.
The hero light is illuminating the rain constantly making it look like an overlay.
There are multiple scenes in this clip where characters should be casting shadows and aren't.
The torches look like flares or something.

I'll be glad if I'm wrong, but the mainline team is doing a much better job than the remake team.

 

[Madflavor]

Because this is a team dedicated to remakes.
The core ideas and core gameplay structure aren't theirs.
And the lead artists on this RE4 remake is making choices that I disagree with deeply.

Could this remake team create their own game from scratch to stand up to Mikami's best?
I don't think so, but it remains to be seen. They have a lot to prove.



I just could not disagree more on lighting, including the rain and torches.

The lighting flashes aren't casting shadows.
The hero light is illuminating the rain constantly making it look like an overlay.
There are multiple scenes in this clip where characters should be casting shadows and aren't.
The torches look like flares or something.

I'll be glad if I'm wrong, but the mainline team is doing a much better job than the remake team.

I mean they proved it to me already with the RE2 Remake, and the footage of the game looks awesome. I don't care about fire effects, I really don't. It's crazy how bent out of shape some people get over the smallest things. The rain I can understand because it's in your face and distracting, but the fire? If you never saw a single preview of the game, and you happened to notice the fire effects in real time while you're playing the game, you would maybe stop for a couple moments to be disappointed, and then go right back to enjoying the game. But the game's not out, so there's nothing better to do than to hyperfocus on every bit of detail in the footage.