Why does GL hate the newer games?

todd, if you haven't played Lost in Nightmares(Addon for RE5) you really should. It tells how Jill 'died'. And you can even switch back to original RE cameras! Just examine the front door three times.

Mass Distraction wrote:

I still think that Jill's "death" is one of the greatest plot twists in the games.

toddx77 wrote:

Mass Distraction wrote:

There's only one thing I need to add.

toddx77 wrote:

Why wasn't he working with the organization?

Because he betrayed them to gain his own goals.

Why would he though. Better yet why didn't the organziation send someone after him to kill him? The organization has plans for the world and surly if Wesker succeeded in his plans that wouldn't be well for them.

Because the Organization wasn't what he needed to fullfill his own plans and he was through with them? I don't really think the Org had any people capable of killing Wesker as they propably didn't even know of the drug that was first needed in order to do so.


As for Spencer, well, they could've dragged his character along but there's only so much an old man in life support could do. He's death was just fine.

I never considered Jills death a plot twist since like I mentioned earlier I just knew she wasn't truly dead.

But Wesker breaking away from the organization didn't make sense with what he was doing in previous games. Why would he go through the trouble of going to Rockford Island, the Arctic base, and monitor Ada in Spain for the virus samples only to just want to destroy the world? I get where your coming from with his goals were different, but to me it seemed just out random for him to want to destroy the world in 5 when in past games nothing gave off the idea of thats what he wanted. As for the organization having people that can kill Wesker I think they have some pretty powerful people. If they didn't what was stopping Wesker from taking over?

Capcom should have atleast let Chris and Jill have a dialogue with Spencer before Wesker killed him or something. I just felt his appearance was too short.

The Knife wrote:

todd, if you haven't played Lost in Nightmares(Addon for RE5) you really should. It tells how Jill 'died'. And you can even switch back to original RE cameras! Just examine the front door three times.

I have Lost in Nightmares and I honestly think if that was the games prologue I might have been more surprised at Jills return. Just think about it: Capcom doesn't mentioned a word about Jill dying in any trailer and only shows her in trailers from footage of Lost in Nightmares. You don't even see Sheva at all so they kind of pull what Konami did with Metal Gear Solid 2. So you start the game and are like "nice Chris and Jill back together, this game is gonig to own" only to see Jill die and have the game go to 3 years later. That would have been perfect.

toddx77 wrote:

As for the organization having people that can kill Wesker I think they have some pretty powerful people. If they didn't what was stopping Wesker from taking over?

I bet they didn't have any people capable of taking down a person with superhuman powers. Like I said, they would've needed to know of the viral agent first before even considering KILLING him. I don't think Wesker wanted to take over an organization that he felt was inferior so why would he have?

toddx77 wrote:

Capcom doesn't mentioned a word about Jill dying in any trailer

Jill's tomb was clearly shown in the trailers. That should've been enough to deduct something's not right.

@todd, palpatine is exactly how ive looked at him, and not because he sounded like him.

but short and sweet is still better than long, drawn out or whatever, like dc douglas wesker.

Mass Distraction wrote:

toddx77 wrote:

As for the organization having people that can kill Wesker I think they have some pretty powerful people. If they didn't what was stopping Wesker from taking over?

I bet they didn't have any people capable of taking down a person with superhuman powers. Like I said, they would've needed to know of the viral agent first before even considering KILLING him. I don't think Wesker wanted to take over an organization that he felt was inferior so why would he have?

I have to disagree on that. You dont start up an organization to take over the world and dont have any protection. Plus the organization had to have something incase Chris failed.

toddx77 wrote:

Capcom doesn't mentioned a word about Jill dying in any trailer

Jill's tomb was clearly shown in the trailers. That should've been enough to deduct something's not right.

I know that but that last part of the post was me saying that capcom should have included Lost in Nightmares with the game and that would be the prologue to the game and by not telling us Jill died in any trailers it would be more of a shock. Think of it like this. In all the trailers for re5 you would have only seen Jill in the Lost in Nightmares parts and the parts where she is freed and you never see Sheva. So naturally you would think she would be with you the whole game, but once you would see Jill die in Lost in Nightmares you would be shocked because you never saw it coming, then the game goes 3 years later to Africa and you meeting Sheva. Think of it like Konami did with Metal Gear Solid 2. All you saw in the advertisements was the tanker level where you played as Snake. Even in the games opening music video you saw Snake in the tanker except at the quick glimpse you saw Raiden at the end. So when you started playing Metal Gear Solid 2 you thought it would be like the first where your playing as Snake the whole time. Then as soon as you start the big shell...BAM!! your playing as this new guy Raiden out of the blue and hear that Snake died in the tanker.

Spike991 wrote:

@todd, palpatine is exactly how ive looked at him, and not because he sounded like him.

but short and sweet is still better than long, drawn out or whatever, like dc douglas wesker.

Capcom could have atleast given us 5 minutes of him lol.

I do agree that LIN should've been placed at the start of the game and not as a seperate prologue.

Still, there would've been a bunch of fans crying over the fact that you couldn't play as her for the rest of the game.

Mass Distraction wrote:

I do agree that LIN should've been placed at the start of the game and not as a seperate prologue.

Still, there would've been a bunch of fans crying over the fact that you couldn't play as her for the rest of the game.

Screw em lol. We survived only playing as Snake in the beginning of MGS2 lol.

Remember the outrage that came from that in the MG fanbase? There will always be a huge chunk of fans in every fandom who won't be pleased with anything they get.

toddx77 wrote:

We survived only playing as Snake in the beginning of MGS2 lol.

Speak for yourself. I despise Raiden with every fiber of my being for that and only played the tanker chapter of MGS2, like, 3 times because of him.

toddx77 wrote:

Capcom could have atleast given us 5 minutes of him lol.

Or maybe some flashbacks of guys like him and Marcus.

This thread was still on the first page, so I guess it doesn't count as resurrection.

NiteKrawler wrote:

RE is not about horror. It never was.

As Mass Distraction already said, it's an individual thing. Therefore there is no right or wrong; one can make objective observations about the different styles or changes thereof, but judgments of "better" or "worse" are invalid, or at least limited to personal preferences. It's up to each gamer to develop a sense of what makes RE loveable and what not, given the lack of a single entity to "officially declare" what RE is actually about. Every fan of anything owns shares of a brands intellectual set-up, and as such you can feel rewarded, approved, acknowledged, or downright double-crossed.
For me, RE actually is about horror. Not in a supernatural beyond-the-senses horror kind of way as (my beloved) Eternal Darkness or Silent Hill are, but I'd still want RE to more closely resemble these games, albeit horror in a realistic way. With a compelling story that explains why there are zombies, hyper-aggressive dogs/sharks/[insert species] and some bigger boss monsters in the first place, but with no necessity to actually go down the war-road implied in Bio-Organic Weapons, focusing on darkness and the feeling of danger; focusing on the gamer's fear to encounter the enemies around the corner more than on the bulletfest upon encountering them, let alone in masses.
I do not question RE4's and RE5's plausability and compatibility with the RE universe, one can logically go down the action road. For me, however, it just makes RE more interchangeable, a Medal of Honor or Tom Clancy's Whatever with added gore and seeming alien larvae.

NiteKrawler wrote:

True, but he was old. I didn't really care.

Coincidence has it that I think Spencer – or whatever could have become of him in a moment of confrontation and a virus injection nearby – combined with a comprehensive soliloquy about Umbrella and his schemes would have been a much more interesting villain than Wesker ever was. If there is one thing I don't share with most earlier and later games fans it's their euphoria with Albert Wesker, whom I always deemed somewhat pathetic, developing megalomania alongside an inferiority complex upon hearing that his parents are actually a test tube.
Not that Spencer would have been especially important to me. I loved to find out how the godly Umbrella logo is based on his family coat of arms, but Umbrella's great fascination always stemmed not from having one "personified evil" representative, but from being a vague ominous threat of it's own. I liked the Marcus/Birkin/Wesker/Alexia storylines of how Umbrella scientists tried to outresearch and outkill each other, but only insofar as it added to the impression of corruption that was the Umbrella Corporation. For me, the corporation was the main evil.

Mass Distraction wrote:

Still, there would've been a bunch of fans crying over the fact that you couldn't play as her for the rest of the game.

That would be me, then. Or not, given that the RE5-Jill hardly resembles Jill 'Sandwich' Valentine. But at least her tight suit covered both of her legs...

EDIT: typos fixed.

I see you have promise as an avid RE fan. That said, I feel your lack of experience has misguided you. I do agree that any fan of this series can make up their own mind as to what RE is all about. But if they come to the conclusion that it is about horror first and foremost, I will not consider them a true fan. It is a completely misguided statement brought about by the label RE so often gets of being the grandfather of survival/horror. You say that you wish RE to more closely resemble Eternal Darkness (an absolutely astonishing game) and Silent Hill. By stating this, you are stating that we should change what RE has always been. ED and SH have always been about psychological fear. RE, on the other hand, has used fear but has not ever dwelled upon it. Instead, it has chosen a more story oriented path about huge corporations, the ever present hunger for power, and the means to obtain power (bio-organic weapons). This brings me to my second point. You say the series shouldn't go down the BOW road? No offense, but maybe RE isn't the franchise for you then because this plot device has been in place since the very beginning, driving the series to great success. Having a relatively new fan come in an question this is unsettling. My last point is merely about a bit of information you seem to have gotten wrong, like so many others before you. Albert Wesker had real parents. He was not "manufactured" in the normal sense of the word. He was not a "test tube baby/experiment" as many have come to believe. I think you still have a lot to learn about this series. I'm sorry if I'm coming off as abrupt or inarticulate. I'm typing all of this on an iPhone which is ridiculously tedious.

NiteKrawler wrote:

You say that you wish RE to more closely resemble Eternal Darkness (an absolutely astonishing game) and Silent Hill. By stating this, you are stating that we should change what RE has always been. ED and SH have always been about psychological fear. RE, on the other hand, has used fear, but has not ever dwelled upon it. Instead, it has chosen a more story oriented path about huge corporations, the ever present hunger for power, and the means to obtain power (bio-organic weapons).

The "I want RE to be like ED/SH" thing wasn't meant literally, it was (without further distinguishing between the kinds of fear evoked) a general statement about my preference for a fear-and-shock-based RE in contrast to what I think is now a third-person shooter RE, albeit with for this genre unusual story depth.

NiteKrawler wrote:

This brings me to my second point. You say the series shouldn't go down the BOW road? No offense, but maybe RE isn't the franchise for you then[.]

No offense taken, but I actually said there is no necessity to "go down the war-road" – admittedly, though, that's quite vague, so maybe I should explain what I meant: the production of BOWs was the purpose of Umbrella's research. It's the reason why all the fluffy creatures exist, and using such a BOW to have it do what a BOW is supposed to do (haunt down and kill/destroy/anatomically re-organize) worked wonderfully for Nemesis or general bossfights. The bossfights, though, are not my quarrel with the newer games, it's about the "ordinary" enemies and, consequently, what behaviour is demanded from the player during most of the game. I don't mind action once in a while, but I do mind if that is what the game is being reduced to.
Plus, I never really developed any fascination with las Plagas as I did with T and G.

NiteKrawler wrote:

Albert Wesker had real parents. He was not "manufactured" in the normal sense of the word. He was not a "test tube baby/experiment"[.]

Consider me now educated.

wesker was stupid in re5. they messed him up and had him take spencer's plans...pathetic is how i would describe dc douglas wesker.

but as far as the horror goes, its still part of the series, even in re5.

thats definately not the one thing it was about though.

id go with story being the biggest thing. i know thats whats kept me playing and foruming all these years.

I'm sorry, but the fear and shock never really existed in RE to begin with. At least not to where RE should be defined by it. There are only a few shocks in the first RE, namely the famous dog/window scene. The story, as you will find out when you play more of the franchise, is the series' primary boon. It always has been. And it does stay intact, though it was shaky in RE4 to say the least. The "ordinary" enemies in RE4 and 5 are the logical next step. I mean, T-zombies were never supposed to exist anyway. Umbrella, nor any other corporation ever wanted them to be roaming around. Only a slight few experiments were ever able to be controlled. Using the viruses (by themselves) has proven time and again to be unreliable. So obviously what the new villains are going to use is something that can be controlled, like Las Plagas. We can't just have new corporations running around trying to use the viruses to gain power again and again. It wouldn't make sense. So although many fans dislike the departure from the viruses and zombies, it had to be done.

NiteKrawler wrote:

I'm sorry, but the fear and shock never really existed in RE to begin with. At least not to where RE should be defined by it. There are only a few shocks in the first RE, namely the famous dog/window scene.

In the PS version they were doubtlessly sparse, alongside other aspects that don't make for a frightening experience, and I would argue that this is due to the capacities of that console generation. However – and I guess this is where one has to say that the version and game you played first coins your expectations – this can't be said of the REmake. I am not Bravey McNoshock, but nor am I overly chicken-hearted, and for me the REmake sustained a fairly prominent atmosphere of fear. And given the artistic freedom (besides the obvious restriction that it had to, in terms of setting and plot, resemble the original) and improved technical possibilities Mikami had with this version, I dare claim the REmake has some informative and expressive value with regard to what aspects are characteristic for RE.
But, as I've said before, I'm not interested in discussing: "This is RE, right or wrong?" There is not one entity that has the right to say what RE is about, not even the inventor – not after the brand was made public and became part of the "emotional property" and treasure of experience of other people (apart from the fact Mikami was also part of the developing team of RE4, so it would be indeed rubbish to say RE4 [or RE5, which is an – in its ways – improved RE4] is not RE anymore).
What I am interested in discussing is: what's the reason that some titles have an estranging effect on certain gamers, and it's obvious that RE4/5 are deviating from earlier titles. I suggest that these changes – and perhaps it's only the amount of them, all at once – are enough, and justifiedly so, to make these titles far less enjoyable for some people. And I don't think that I'm blinded by nostalgia or re-inventing RE's past, because I played RE4 right and shortly after the REmake, without contact to any community that forced me to choose sides, artificially imposing a thinking of "old games vs new games" upon me – to feel underwhelmed and foreign while playing RE4 was an achievement of my own.

NiteKrawler wrote:

The "ordinary" enemies in RE4 and 5 are the logical next step. […] We can't just have new corporations running around trying to use the viruses to gain power again and again. It wouldn't make sense. So although many fans dislike the departure from the viruses and zombies, it had to be done.

First of all, generally spoken: a logical step is by no means a necessary or required step, and usually not the only one possible. I'd be hesitant to uncompromisingly implement real-life necessities like "You can't dwell on that subject for too long or the premise will become non-credible." I wouldn't think that’s an enrichment for videogames, a handfull of which truly meet that requirement, the vast majority of which turning unrecognizeable if consistently following it.
Specifically thinking of an alternative, I'd be tempted to say the story of Degeneration proved that a post-Umbrella RE story is possible while at the same virus-centred and still ringing sufficiently familiar.

@Trichos, you're gonna have to get over the parasites thing. we can have viruses, parasites or both.

@Nite, re4 wasnt shaky anything, it was fine.

Spike991 wrote:

@Trichos, you're gonna have to get over the parasites thing. we can have viruses, parasites or both.

Nemesis and NE-Beta being good examples of both.

Mass Distraction wrote:

Spike991 wrote:

@Trichos, you're gonna have to get over the parasites thing. we can have viruses, parasites or both.

Nemesis and NE-Beta being good examples of both.

Damn straight.

theres so much logic against all the re4 hate.

re and sh are similar, and id like to see aspects of it, but by no means does it need to try to be like any thing.

Some of the monsters in Revelations look a bit Silent Hill-ish, if that helps

Trichos wrote:

not after the brand was made public

It hasn't been, it's still a copyrighted property of Capcom.

Mass Distraction wrote:

Some of the monsters in Revelations look a bit Silent-Hill-ish, if that helps

Oy, I herewith retract my SH statement, I didn't wanna open that Pandorra's box.

Ghost Leader wrote:

Trichos wrote:

not after the brand was made public

It hasn't been, it's still a copyrighted property of Capcom.

"Made public" as in "revealed to the public," not "handed over entirely to the public."

Did you really just add that hyphen in the quote

Mass Distraction wrote:

Did you really just add that hyphen in the quote

No-comment-.

Ghost Leader wrote:

toddx77 wrote:

We survived only playing as Snake in the beginning of MGS2 lol.

Speak for yourself. I despise Raiden with every fiber of my being for that and only played the tanker chapter of MGS2, like, 3 times because of him.

I felt the same way back when I was 14 and MGS2 came out but now that I'm older, looking back I thought it was rather interesting idea and a great shock to the player. I prefer playing as snake but I can appriciate what konami was trying to do.