Resident Evil 4

[gizmo1990]

Yes I would have to agree. Playing the original games on hard was a completely different ball game and experience. To say it's not tactical in some way is well, ignorant in itself surely?

Anyway one thing I will argue with you about Sketcz is your preference for the original over the remake! You're mad mate!

I've found my zero discs btw, now I just have to convince the girlfriend to play through it with me, wouldn't be the same without her!

[Strider]

Not tactical? I'll give you ****ing tactical, ROMOXON. Step into my war room for a moment while I debrief you on the situation.

I am a veteran of every RE game apart from Zero and 5, and those Survivor spin-offs. I've re-read my post, and everything I said was absolutely true.

In every RE game I would view each corridor situation and judge if I could manoeuvre through without engaging, or if zombie presence was too high I'd make a decision on the minimum I'd need to drop to guarantee safe tactical passage through their ranks - after expending the minimum of ordinance I'd plot my way through them to the next corridor zone.

In every RE game my modus operandi is to use only the bare minimum of resources, and the knife if possible. I always end up with a stockpile at the end, but you just never know. It's a battle of attrition after all. I am absolutely 100% of the time micro-managing everything, each bullet, each shell, each rocket, each grenade, each ribbon, each spray, each herb, each step of my feet on those pre-rendered backgrounds is micro-managed and carefully planned out tactically.

I also spend lengthy "campaign planning" sessions in my safe room. I check the cartography for the area, pouring over every detail of the map, count the number of corridor zones, open-spaced rooms, make a calculation on the likelihood of restricted (locked) areas, the likely number of zombie insurgents in each area, the tactical opportunities to avoid them based on terrain, and the likely amount of ordinance I need should I end up engaging. For me an RE game is 50% planning strategies in the safe room - godamn I love planning my strategies down to the last shotgun shell.

Then I go to my weapons cabinet and dish out specific amounts of ammo for each of my many, beautiful guns. Such beautiful guns. A lot of people will just combine all their clips and shotgun boxes into one giant whole, but this is wrong since it necessitates an extra inventory slot and you can't drop and ditch in an emergency. I like to keep each and every ammo container separate, and normally head out with one full mag and one in reserve, that way if I expend what's in the chamber I can reload and gain an extra inventory space - it's all ****ing tactical, all the ****ing time when in that godawful nightmare.

The same with save ribbons, people will combine them all into a giant whole, whereas I use them individually until I end up with a dozen single-use ribbons. Because I remember once, back in '97, I was pinned down behind enemy lines, low on ammo, low on meds, low on morale. Stuck in some library deep in the depths of hell, and you know what I saw ROMOXON? A typewriter. But there was no supply box to get the ribbons, meaning to use it I'd have to carry a ribbon all from HQ deep in that hotzone. Problem was, RMOXON, I didn't have any single use ribbons, only double use, which meant if I took it with me, and I used it once, I would not have the necessary space afterwards to complete my mission. So I'd have to use it twice, and waste one, but I was running low and I couldn't afford to waste one. If only I'd kept them separate as one-use items! Every since that harrowing day, I have always kept a large supply of single-use ribbons, just in case I get caught in a situation that requires I use one and have free inventory afterwards.

When I play an RE game, I play it superhardcore in my military garbs with peaked cap. Damn right it's tactical.

You know it's just a game right John?

[rmoxon]

You should try playing it on something other than easy. Because on hard, the game truly is a "survival horror" game, where tactics are necessary.

And Sketcz: Truly awesome, and very true.

Umm, no. For a start the original resident Evil didnt even have difficulty levels (unless you count playing as Chris as "hard"), but if you mean the remake or the other games in the series then playing on hard just makes the older RE games have less ammo and you die from less hits.

If you are just running past all the enemies it makes no difference what difficulty you play them on.

Yes I would have to agree. Playing the original games on hard was a completely different ball game and experience. To say it's not tactical in some way is well, ignorant in itself surely?

Why is it ignorant? for me a game thats tactical needs you to actualy think tacticaly. and i dont belive you need to think tacticaly to play the early RE games, so I'm not being ignorant Im stating my opinion.

Im not a very tactical person (its why Im rubbish at RTS games) but I can complete the early resident evil games blindfolded (and yes thats on hard). The games were all about backtracking, so there was never a big need to worry about managing your inventory that much, becuase you were never that far away from seeing another chest anyway, and as Ive already said there was certainly nothing tactical about running past zombies (or indeed just shooting them if you felt like it).

Now Im not saying you couldnt play them tacticaly, you could plan out your route through the entire length of the games with maps and pie chats designed for rationing ammo if you wanted (as Im sure Skectz does). But then you could probabaly do that for the video game of Kung Fu Panda too so it doesnt mean much. My point was that for me they arent tactical experiences becuase you dont NEED to play them with a tatical mindset.

If they were tactical games you would need to think tactical to play them. The truth here though is that if you do play them with a tactical frame of mind you are over analyzing things by a fair bit, which I think we can all agree that Skectz seems to have been doing.

[Kit]

Great post, Sketcz. Had me loling all the way through. ;p

Resident Evil 3 was a steaming turd of a game and it actually put me off the series for a few years. It was a horrid game which felt rushed.

Actualy alot of the game is like RE, for a start it has characters from the series

*Must? resist.. urge? to go on... another? resi rant!?*

Id be happy too what game did you have in mind?

There you go, amigo.

Enjoy.

[Sketcz]

if you do play them with a tactical frame of mind you are over analyzing things by a fair bit, which I think we can all agree that Skectz seems to have been doing.

Oh, I wasn't denying that. I over-analyse everything. Games, books, films, that pain in your left knee which is inevitably a sign of impending leg failure. Sometimes I even get paid to analyse.

You know it's just a game right John?

Daz old chum - you do realise you're talking to the guy who turned a mini-caravan into a Steel Battalion cockpit, right?

[prinnysquad]

Oh, I wasn't denying that. I over-analyse everything. Games, books, films, that pain in your left knee which is inevitably a sign of impending leg failure. Sometimes I even get paid to analyse.

That's an amusing rant on the lack of author credit in GamesTM.

[rmoxon]

There you go, amigo.

Enjoy.

You actualy want me to review that? or is it really just an atempt to get me to kill myself?

Talking seriously though I'm actualy sure it would be quite fun to review, its one of the most broken games ever made, there would be plenty to write about.

[gizmo1990]

Just popped zero into the wii, only to discover that the classic controllers don't work! I take it this is the case with all cube games, I never knew? And that I'll need to use a cube controller? I am outraged.

[Kit]

Wasn’t a huge fan of Zero. Felt like they were trying to force new ideas into areas where they weren’t necessary - frogmen, giant centipede thing, frogspawn, what was wrong with using the traditional enemies instead of unimaginative ones? They were really reaching to make the game seem different which is not what I was after.

Would have much preferred Zero if it had been more of a crossover with the events of the first, following Bravo team as they enter the mansion etc… Some of my favourite parts were the crossover sections where you used the underground platform and elevators from Resi 2. ;p

You actualy want me to review that? or is it really just an atempt to get me to kill myself?

Talking seriously though I'm actualy sure it would be quite fun to review, its one of the most broken games ever made, there would be plenty to write about.

Nah, it’s not that bad. I think it would be a good idea to review as you could draw parallels with the changes made for Resi 4.

Just popped zero into the wii, only to discover that the classic controllers don't work! I take it this is the case with all cube games, I never knew? And that I'll need to use a cube controller? I am outraged.

Check out the re-released Wii version as they added 480p support. Sure the backdrops look extra stunning at that res. ;p

[Party boy]

Well, they were damned if they do and damned if they don't with regards to mixing things up. They all served a purpose though, so it was all good in my book.

Oh, and the bits from other Resi games were some of my favourite bits in the series!

[gizmo1990]

Check out the re-released Wii version as they added 480p support. Sure the backdrops look extra stunning at that res. ;p

Bah I was only gonna play it since I'd already gone to the trouble of having it. Nintendo were dicks for not allowing the classic controller to work with cube games. Rubbish.

I'm either gonna have to buy a wavebird or the reissue, for a game I already own and I'm too skint for either.

[Kit]

Well, they were damned if they do and damned if they don't with regards to mixing things up. They all served a purpose though, so it was all good in my book.

The two player idea was nice and for the most part well implemented, but the setting and new enemies lacked imagination; they seemed to be just going through a list of animals and randomly picking ones to turn into zombies.

Also, felt like a missed opportunity not including one of the original team as the secondary character - instead of Billy. Would have loved to have seen them expand on the events that led certain characters to get lost in the mansion e.g. the body of the guy from Bravo team Chris discovers in the opening moments of the first game. ;p

Oh, and the bits from other Resi games were some of my favourite bits in the series!

Yes, loved how they tied the games together that way. Like when you had to revisit the RPD station in Resi 3 to use the radio/ watch Brad get obliterated by Nemesis.

The crossover parts in Zero were ace too, but they were too much of a tease. You’re running through the backdrops they would have used had they continued to remake the entire series - which was promised. I think at one point you have to look into the same monitor Leon checks when Mr X crushes the camera in RE 2.

If Zero had been more along those lines, with you running around different parts of the mansion/the underground, while encountering members of your team frequently/finding out how they died, the game would have been a worthy prequel.

[Party boy]

Yeah, that would have been cool in fairness, but then it'd almost be more a remix of the original since they all died in the mansion, I thought it was cool the way they left it at the end, but I suppose a Zero two or some such could be very cool, where you play as one or more survivors, ie Rebecca... Obviously they didn't do very well though, so you wouldn't get to kill much!

They could make it set mostly in the area in front of the mansion, between there and where the end of Zero takes place, then see most of them finally succumb in the Mansion itself, use the zero/remake graphics and sell it for about £20 or so.

[rmoxon]

Nah, it’s not that bad. I think it would be a good idea to review as you could draw parallels with the changes made for Resi 4.

It really is that bad, it has many parts that are broken to the point of being unplayable.

Plus how could you possibley draw parallels with the changes made for RE4? For a start RE4 is a sequel to RE3/Code Veronica. Survior is just a cheaply made and poorly executed cash in that I can only presume was made just make money off of the Resi name.

RE4 is at a basic level just like all the other RE games, it just doesnt really have any fetch quest/puzzels to speak of and the camera is over the shoulder rather than fixed. Regardless of what some people will say, RE4 still feels like a Resident Evil game, thats one of its many great strengths, it turned the series on its head and reinvigorated its gameplay while still remaining true too to alot of things that made the series what it was (and in fact if you read the earlier posts in this first play thread you'll see people getting all excited about all that).

Survior is a lightgun game (that incidently doesnt even work properly with light guns). You cant really compare changes that they made from Survivor to RE 4, becuase they didnt make RE4 with Survivor in mind. Im not even sure why you thought anyone would want to do that as they are completely different. Plus on a slightly different note, RE4 is one of the best games ever made and Survivor is one of the worst, Im pretty sure even Capcom dont like admiting it exists, especially as its name links it to one of their flagship series.

[Sketcz]

RE4 is at a basic level just like all the other RE games

Apart from infinite saves and the ability to buy more ammo - two things which were absent from previous RE games and were two key, defining aspects of them.