Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Resident Evil: Racoon City [PS3/Xbox 360]

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Resident Evil: Racoon City [PS3/Xbox 360]

    Ok I'll bite.
    You've certainly heard about the duff scores this has been getting from the associated press, and the like. Well they're not far off, but it's certainly not quite the shambles they lead you to believe.

    On the first mission where you have to escort

    Hunk, as he tries to retrieve the T-Virus from William Birkin

    you have to escape the the mini boss sequence. Whoever thought it was a good idea to have a boss who will hit you multiple times whilst you are on the ground with no form of quick roll/ quick recover from a knocked downed state deserves a shoeing. Only Ninja Gaiden can get away with this sort of unfairness. Also there's a lack of direction during that particular boss fight, as there's a segment where you have to "escape" from that boss. So I thought, "ok, I'll turn around and run away".

    No.
    I constantly tried to turn my character around, but couldn't, as you are locked into a 120 degree radius, always looking at your target.
    What you have to do, is you have to face the boss whilst walking backwards, and at the same time trying to slow it down by shooting it. During the 3rd attempt i figured this out. At no point during this it mentioned that you couldn't actually run away in regular terms. You have to play this sequence on their terms, which wasn't signposted better.

    The AI path finding is atrocious. During one of the early segments, there's a part where you're attacked by a swarm of

    Lickers, during your escape from City Hall

    , and part of the building goes into fire. Whilst trying to navigate through the burning building, your squadmates will do their best at catching themselves on fire and getting downed as a result. After the forth attempt at trying to revive Beltway & Vector I gave up and carried on.

    There is no squad commands, so you're subjected to whatever moronic AI you're given.

    /facepalm

    The actual gameplay isn't that bad, it's just nothing particularly engaging, you do the arbitrary 'go to this checkpoint/ hit this switch/ find this keycard to open this door' you know, the regular staples of Resident Evil.
    The shooting and cover mechanics aren't too bad, but you have to be quite precise with the stick to cover, as you have to move to a wall/ box and you'll go to cover automatically. There's no option to vault over small obstacles like in Gears of War/ Mass Effect 3 and also there's no option to move from one edge of cover to another in one swift move. Seems they've missed the trick on this one.

    If you're getting it for the single player, well you might as well throw your money away, as it's not that good.
    Multiplayer maybe somewhat salvageable in terms of trying to justify this mess of a game, but I've not had a chance to delve into this yet, as after a couple of hours of the single player campaign made me want to switch the system off. Since this was originally meant to be released last November, part of me thinks why did they even bother releasing it, if its in this state.

    Another thing about this game is that it's dark. Not in a macabre Silent Hill way. More in terms of gamma as that on default is set to the lowest. During some of the early segments it was virtually pitch black.

    For all this talk about western devs having the edge over their Japanese counterparts this generation of games consoles wise, it sure hasn't worked out in Capcoms favour, as they've picked some right doozys in the form of Grin/ Slant Six and to a lesser extent Blue Castle games. I wonder who advises Capcom Japan on deciding who to destroy their storied franchises.

    (Prays for Devil May Cry...)
    Last edited by jimtendo; 25-03-2012, 09:37.

    #2
    I think Capcom give games to western devs becuase all their Japanese rescources go towards making the latest 25 versions of Street Fighter 4.

    They cant do everything you know!

    Comment


      #3
      Been playing campaign co-op and competitive multiplayer for the last week or so, and I'm (shock horror) enjoying it.

      It's pants if you're playing campaign on your own, as the AI is atrocious. However, get together with 2 or 3 other human players to tackle the campaign and it's fun. For fans of the series, there are some nice little throwbacks to the previous entries in the series, which I thought was kinda cool. Cover system is a bit hit and miss though, as you get into stuck behind objects when you don't need or want to quite a bit. That's mainly down to the action being assigned to a push of the left stick rather than one of the face buttons (A).

      They need to sort out the matchmaking when you're with a squad, but some of the competitive multiplayer modes are quite decent too, especially Biohazard (kind of like capture the flag) and Survivor (team deathmatch that turns into a free-for-all when the helicopter turns up). Heroes (ORC's take on protect the leader) is cool too, allowing you to play as famous characters from the Resident Evil series. Also, I like the idea of the matches being littered with other threats apart from human opposition, including zombies, hunters and tyrants. Level system is quite well done, but it would be nice if you had some more active and passive abilities for each character class.

      It certainly isn't going to win any game of the year awards, but it's far from a 3/10 (well, for me anyway). Maybe a 6 or 7 is more apt, as I'm (surprisingly) enjoying it.

      Comment


        #4
        Didn't have a problem with the walking backwards bit myself at all, it was pretty obvious. Also during the pullback sequence, as opposed to the door hold moments, it does actually go into a little QTE where you can roll away from his swings. It seems a lot of the reviews covered this like a single player game which is strange as it was always built to be a multiplayer experience. Loving Team Attack, Survivor and Heroes in particular. Some really nice, original ideas in there and it's always good to see more novel, interesting multiplayer experiences coming out, makes for a really nice change up to the usual team deathmatch tactics and really rewards using your brain over reaction speeds.
        Last edited by averybluemonkey; 26-03-2012, 23:07.

        Comment


          #5
          How can anyone be enjoying this utter Pish, I traded in my copy after having it for about 90 mins, 10 direct shots to the head and still standing, frame rate on the floor and so generic it's unreal. I think 3/10 is too generous the developers should be punished painfully by being made to play their own game, wouldn't even buy it for 48p

          Comment


            #6
            Did you play multiplayer?

            Comment


              #7
              I don't tend to do multiplayer, when I did try no connection so couldn't be bothered to retry, not the best guy for an opinion on any fps to tell the truth, I hate them all (more or less due to getting motion sick)

              Comment


                #8
                Thought it was a third person shooter?

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by averybluemonkey View Post
                  Did you play multiplayer?
                  It shouldn't matter. The game should be halfway playable without the online side of it.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Disappointing (though not surprised) to read the negative feedback regarding this, especially the fact that the single player mode is apparently useless (I have very little time to play online these days).

                    I always thought Outbreak was pretty much on the right track, they just needed to sort out the kinks.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by nakamura View Post
                      It shouldn't matter. The game should be halfway playable without the online side of it.
                      I couldn't disagree more. Multiplayer games are just as entitled to have titles catering to them as those that just play solo.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        On the other hand, if there is a solo mode, then it should surely work, right? In the same way that a single player with a 'tacked on' multiplayer is also a bad idea.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          I imagine the solo mode is only really there for you to have a practise and get to grips with the mechanics, this is the type of game that never works well unless you play with a group of other people becuase A.I. Is still nowhere near good enough to replicate what a human player would do in regards to teamwork.

                          If they wanted to give this a proper single player then they would have included a campaign of some kind where you didn't need to rely on teammates

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by averybluemonkey View Post
                            I couldn't disagree more. Multiplayer games are just as entitled to have titles catering to them as those that just play solo.
                            That is not what I meant. If the gameplay and control are ****e in single player, it shouldn't matter if he tried mp or not.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by nakamura View Post
                              If the gameplay and control are ****e in single player, it shouldn't matter if he tried mp or not.

                              Surely the 'gameplay' is completely different in single player to multiplayer, what do you mean by 'gameplay'?

                              The only controls criticism I saw was for a restricted movement section in the campaign. You wouldn't bemoan the CoD multiplayer based on the controls in one of it's fixed point vehicle sections would you? In the hypothetical case where there had been criticism of controls such criticism would be entirely dependent on context. For example take Call of Juarez: Bound in Blood. There the controls during the deathmatch modes made it feel like a generic shooter with a layer of old west painted over the top, it didn't feel realistic or fluid with regards the setting. But jump into the Legends of the West mode where the only difference was the objective of the levels and then all of a sudden it felt like you were in a movie, like you were role playing as a cowboy because the kinds of tactics and movements you performed were completely different and so there you can get two completely different judgements of the same control setup based on the way the controls respond within the context.
                              Last edited by averybluemonkey; 27-03-2012, 19:17.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X