No more 100-round pistols, please

I hope Capcom takes a more realistic approach to magazine capacities in RE6. A large part of the survival and suspense aspects of the game, to me, was having to watch how much ammo you have left in your weapon, less you run out at an inopportune time. What I would like to see is ammunition capacity upgrades that are closer to those of real world magazines, instead of them being capable of holding 57,000 rounds, or some other ridiculously large number, at a time.

Take the Beretta 92FS pistol as an example. The base capacity of the magazine would be 15 rounds, as it is in the real world. The first upgrade would extend that to 20 rounds (extended capacity magazine designed for the Beretta 93R machine pistol), while the final upgrade would extend that to 32 rounds.

I'll use the SIG 556 rifle as a second example. Since it feeds from regular AR-15 magazines, you can, in reality, find virtually any capacity mag you want. Therefor in the game, it would start out with a base magazine capacity of 30 rounds. The first upgrade would extend that to 40 rounds, the second to 45, and the final to 90 rounds (equal to that of an MWG snail drum magazine).

The problem is then youll interfere in the new shooter direction of the game, the one where you just blow anything to smitherines. Plus the little twelve year olds will be all pissed off saying the game got boring and stuff. I agree with you, but, just sayin.

00biohazard wrote:

The problem is then youll interfere in the new shooter direction of the game, the one where you just blow anything to smitherines. Plus the little twelve year olds will be all pissed off saying the game got boring and stuff. I agree with you, but, just sayin.

There's no new shooter directoini where you just blow everything to smitherines.

@GL, I concur, and would definately want a more realistic approach in other ways in addition to magezine capacity.

Spike991 wrote:

00biohazard wrote:

The problem is then youll interfere in the new shooter direction of the game, the one where you just blow anything to smitherines. Plus the little twelve year olds will be all pissed off saying the game got boring and stuff. I agree with you, but, just sayin.

There's no new shooter directoini where you just blow everything to smitherines.

@GL, I concur, and would definately want a more realistic approach in other ways in addition to magezine capacity.

I dunno, RE4 still had a survival horror emphasis, but RE5 just seemed like a poor mans gears of war. Not hatin on RE5, I love the story, the graphics and the levels, but thats just what it seemed like to me. Capcom was trying to hard to attract the COD, GOW crowd, and it showed.

Agreed with GL.

00biohazard wrote:

The problem is then youll interfere in the new shooter direction of the game, the one where you just blow anything to smitherines. Plus the little twelve year olds will be all pissed off saying the game got boring and stuff. I agree with you, but, just sayin.

I want to interfere with the new shooter direction. Little 12 year olds shouldn't be playing M-rated games like Resident Evil in the first place.






Unless you were trolling me with that post, in which case... LOL

00biohazard wrote:

Spike991 wrote:

00biohazard wrote:

The problem is then youll interfere in the new shooter direction of the game, the one where you just blow anything to smitherines. Plus the little twelve year olds will be all pissed off saying the game got boring and stuff. I agree with you, but, just sayin.

There's no new shooter directoini where you just blow everything to smitherines.

@GL, I concur, and would definately want a more realistic approach in other ways in addition to magezine capacity.

I dunno, RE4 still had a survival horror emphasis, but RE5 just seemed like a poor mans gears of war. Not hatin on RE5, I love the story, the graphics and the levels, but thats just what it seemed like to me. Capcom was trying to hard to attract the COD, GOW crowd, and it showed.

Not controls, but gameplay-wise, RE5 definately felt that way, really in the later parts of the game where the enemies were armed with AK's....

Ghost Leader wrote:

I hope Capcom takes a more realistic approach to magazine capacities in RE6. A large part of the survival and suspense aspects of the game, to me, was having to watch how much ammo you have left in your weapon, less you run out at an inopportune time. What I would like to see is ammunition capacity upgrades that are closer to those of real world magazines, instead of them being capable of holding 57,000 rounds, or some other ridiculously large number, at a time.

Take the Beretta 92FS pistol as an example. The base capacity of the magazine would be 15 rounds, as it is in the real world. The first upgrade would extend that to 20 rounds (extended capacity magazine designed for the Beretta 93R machine pistol), while the final upgrade would extend that to 32 rounds.

I'll use the SIG 556 rifle as a second example. Since it feeds from regular AR-15 magazines, you can, in reality, find virtually any capacity mag you want. Therefor in the game, it would start out with a base magazine capacity of 30 rounds. The first upgrade would extend that to 40 rounds, the second to 45, and the final to 90 rounds (equal to that of an MWG snail drum magazine).

I think RE 4 and RE 5 are very loosely based on 'reality' and i have my reasons.

1)How come running away to a safer location always succeeds in a zombie apocalypse. Why can't they be fast enough to chase you down?

2) (Specific to RE 5) How can stomping kill majinis. As far as i know, There was no documentation supporting the weaknesses of majinis?

3)How come we are not open while performing melees or climibing ladders. Why can't majinis attack while performing melees?

4) How can reloading a weapon from the inventory menu be realistic?

RE 4 and 5 have evolved to be action based than suspense. From the looks of the trailer of RE 6, It is going to be action based which i think is the better direction.I also think that smaller capacity would be a hindrance in modes like mercenaries. Even so, I believe the capacity was jus enough to survive and keep combos going in RE 5. I don't think the game starts off with the unnatural capacity. It is an option to upgrade your weapons. If you do not prefer them, there is no need to upgrade. And you can continue the game with smaller capacity. Other options can be utilised as increasing fire power and reload speed.

chrisredfield84 wrote:

1)How come running away to a safer location always succeeds in a zombie apocalypse. Why can't they be fast enough to chase you down?

I wasn't aware any zombie apocalypse had happened that proved that to be truth. Besides, what does that have to do with this topic?

Quote :

2) (Specific to RE 5) How can stomping kill majinis. As far as i know, There was no documentation supporting the weaknesses of majinis?

Because if I stomp on your head hard enough, it will kill you. And I ask once again, my original post made no mention of stomping on peoples' heads, so that has what to do with this topic?

Quote :

3)How come we are not open while performing melees or climibing ladders. Why can't majinis attack while performing melees?

Because Capcom didn't make it so that they could. Personally I think it would be a great addition. But that has shit to do with the magazine capacity of a weapon.

Quote :

4) How can reloading a weapon from the inventory menu be realistic?

I never said it was. Besides, you can't do this in RE4 and 5, so that's as moot as a moot point can possibly be.

Quote :

RE 4 and 5 have evolved to be action based than suspense. From the looks of the trailer of RE 6, It is going to be action based which i think is the better direction.

Do REF a favor and don't pursue this line of discussion with me. Believe me, nobody wants that.

Quote :

I also think that smaller capacity would be a hindrance in modes like mercenaries.

No, it would make it much, much better because then it would be more about strategy, like Mercenaries originally was when Operation: Mad Jackal was introduced in RE3, than it is about shooting everything in sight like a mindless... well... zombie.

But then again, this generation of gamers is pretty lacking in coherent thought due to their inability to utilize more than a trigger finger, so many would likely collapse into fetal balls on the floor and begin crying when faced with a situation they can't just shoot their way out of.

Quote :

Even so, I believe the capacity was jus enough to survive and keep combos going in RE 5.

Just enough to survive? LMAO, that's hilarious. I've dealt with pistols that only held 15 rounds instead of 50,000 in previous games and got along quite well. So did NiteKrawler, Spike, and numerous other members of this forum.

Quote :

I don't think the game starts off with the unnatural capacity. It is an option to upgrade your weapons. If you do not prefer them, there is no need to upgrade. And you can continue the game with smaller capacity. Other options can be utilised as increasing fire power and reload speed.

Yeah, you know, I actually don't upgrade guns I use in the game beyond reasonable magazine capacities, but that doesn't mean putting more survival horror aspects into a franchise that's supposed to be survival horror is a bad thing. This isn't fucking Gears of War here.

Ghost Leader wrote:

chrisredfield84 wrote:

1)How come running away to a safer location always succeeds in a zombie apocalypse. Why can't they be fast enough to chase you down?

I wasn't aware any zombie apocalypse had happened that proved that to be truth. Besides, what does that have to do with this topic?

Quote :

2) (Specific to RE 5) How can stomping kill majinis. As far as i know, There was no documentation supporting the weaknesses of majinis?

Because if I stomp on your head hard enough, it will kill you. And I ask once again, my original post made no mention of stomping on peoples' heads, so that has what to do with this topic?

You failed to quote my first statement of how Resident evil is loosely based on "reality". And no stomping does not kill anyone unless you have mechanical legs. For someone who talks shitload of reality, You don't have a clue of wat reality is.

Quote :

3)How come we are not open while performing melees or climibing ladders. Why can't majinis attack while performing melees?

Because Capcom didn't make it so that they could. Personally I think it would be a great addition. But that has shit to do with the magazine capacity of a weapon.

Quote :

4) How can reloading a weapon from the inventory menu be realistic?

I never said it was. Besides, you can't do this in RE4 and 5, so that's as moot as a moot point can possibly be.

You did not quote the first point i made of RE 4 and RE 5 being loosely based on "reality". Apparently you wanted the game a more realistic approach which is why i had to explain myself of how Resident evil universe is so loosely based on reality.

Quote :

RE 4 and 5 have evolved to be action based than suspense. From the looks of the trailer of RE 6, It is going to be action based which i think is the better direction.

Do REF a favor and don't pursue this line of discussion with me. Believe me, nobody wants that.

I can state watever i want as i have every right to do so. I am not posting to attract attention. I am here to state my opinions on subjects and have backed my thoughts on game being more "action" oriented. If you don't want to discuss, shut the fuck up and ignore them.

Quote :

I also think that smaller capacity would be a hindrance in modes like mercenaries.

No, it would make it much, much better because then it would be more about strategy, like Mercenaries originally was when Operation: Mad Jackal was introduced in RE3, than it is about shooting everything in sight like a mindless... well... zombie.

But then again, this generation of gamers is pretty lacking in coherent thought due to their inability to utilize more than a trigger finger, so many would likely collapse into fetal balls on the floor and begin crying when faced with a situation they can't just shoot their way out of.


It's a shitty notion that a gamer who can use smaller rounds is better than a gamer who relies on extra rounds. It does not prove a thing . If you must know, Reloading will make you open to attacks. And you can't escape reloading at a safer location, cuz the enemies will constantly be on the move and you might miss out oppurtunities of having a better score and rely on non-orthodox reloading as inventory relaods whcih is more unrealistisc.Nobody's crying to be saved due to lower ammo rounds. Capcom very well know wat to add and wat not. It ain't your game to argue and insult gamers for expecting better gameplay elements than fucking up gameplay with reloading every now and then.All that matters to me is wat capcom finally decide. Fucking troll all you want on this.

Quote :

Even so, I believe the capacity was jus enough to survive and keep combos going in RE 5.

Just enough to survive? LMAO, that's hilarious. I've dealt with pistols that only held 15 rounds instead of 50,000 in previous games and got along quite well. So did NiteKrawler, Spike, and numerous other members of this forum.

Did you even play mercenaries, FYI - there are no ammo upgrades. You are making no sense in insulting me as i found the ammo capacity good enough for the missions and would not prefer any lesser. If capcom give me fifteen rounds to play with, I can deal with it. They would make a worthy challenge of it. And you can't score no shit with jus fifteen rounds. You must rely on ammo drops in the location to continue the mission to have a better score. Which is more unrealistic than having more ammo rounds. As i said earlier, Reality is not a valid reason to have smaller ammo capacity.

Quote :

I don't think the game starts off with the unnatural capacity. It is an option to upgrade your weapons. If you do not prefer them, there is no need to upgrade. And you can continue the game with smaller capacity. Other options can be utilised as increasing fire power and reload speed.

Yeah, you know, I actually don't upgrade guns I use in the game beyond reasonable magazine capacities, but that doesn't mean putting more survival horror aspects into a franchise that's supposed to be survival horror is a bad thing. This isn't fucking Gears of War here.

How does having enough rounds in an action game compare to gears of war? You are quite delusional in saying that new gamers are losers who bitch about their requirements. Apparently, it is you who is bitching about your claims as so heavenly that you go about insulting gamers who are fine with the game.If you are not fine with them and all you wanna do is bitch about them, knock yourself out. Finally, wat capcom decides is matters to me. They found it was necessary to add more rounds per magazine and i am fine with it. For someone who wants more "reality' in the game, there are other elements that don't make the game realistic as i pointed it earlier. So shut the fuck up as to having smaller magazine rounds would make the game realistic.

EDIT: This is how realistic would be if we were to use smaller magazine rounds:

ChrisSherry wrote:

This has happen to us once or twice in our Resident Evil gaming lives.

I can't help but try to use some reason here before things get out of hands. Again. Nobody wants that.

First of all, GL is not insulting you. This is called an argument. I like the newer games and I've made my opinion on them rather clear and I don't recall GL ever once insulting me on that.

Now don't take this personally but I must say that I'm with GL here. The ammo capacity upgrades should be more confined in the main game as you can earn unlimited ammo anyway. It would just make more sense that way. I don't care what the thing is in Mercs, though, as that's just a minigame.

Btw. Have you ever tried stomping anyone really hard? I hope not, because people have actually died like that. You don't need bionic legs for that.

Mass Distraction wrote:

I can't help but try to use some reason here before things get out of hands. Again. Nobody wants that.

First of all, GL is not insulting you. This is called an argument. I like the newer games and I've made my opinion on them rather clear and I don't recall GL ever once insulting me on that.

Now don't take this personally but I must say that I'm with GL here. The ammo capacity upgrades should be more confined in the main game as you can earn unlimited ammo anyway. It would just make more sense that way. I don't care what the thing is in Mercs, though, as that's just a minigame.

Btw. Have you ever tried stomping anyone really hard? I hope not, because people have actually died like that. You don't need bionic legs for that.

Using profanity and laughing out loud at some one's opinion are insulting. You can always argue without using profane language. as i did on my first post. I would have not given such a reaction if smileys were used to be indifferent.

btw, show me proof on someone stomping to death with one stomp.May be then i will agree.

EDIT : I resorted to profanity as i found it was directed at me.I did not intentionally resort to them.If i have offended GL, My apologies.

My point is "reality" has little to do in resident evil universe. Ofcourse the events and fiction can be related but gameplay-wise , not much can be found in real world except for the ammunitions which is very true.

I also think it is an option for the gamer to upgrade weapons to such numbers. In my defense, I think it is an achievement to unlock infinite ammo. It is not mandatory to progress in the game to upgrade weapons to such capacity. So i see it as an achievement and not as an "unreal" feature in the game.

Again , if i have offended GL, My apologies. I need to work on my temper. I tend to lose it every now and then.

chrisredfield84 wrote:

You failed to quote my first statement of how Resident evil is loosely based on "reality". And no stomping does not kill anyone unless you have mechanical legs. For someone who talks shitload of reality, You don't have a clue of wat reality is.

You did not quote the first point i made of RE 4 and RE 5 being loosely based on "reality". Apparently you wanted the game a more realistic approach which is why i had to explain myself of how Resident evil universe is so loosely based on reality.

You did not quote the first point i made of RE 4 and RE 5 being loosely based on "reality". Apparently you wanted the game a more realistic approach which is why i had to explain myself of how Resident evil universe is so loosely based on reality.

I didn't need to quote it. I know quite well what reality is, hence the reason I posted this topic. Otherwise I wouldn't be complaining about a Beretta holding 100 rounds, now would I?

Besides, Metal Gear Solid has cyborg ninjas, walking battle tanks, and vampires that can walk on water, yet it maintains some semblance of reality. Why is RE different?

Quote :

I can state watever i want as i have every right to do so. I am not posting to attract attention. I am here to state my opinions on subjects and have backed my thoughts on game being more "action" oriented. If you don't want to discuss, shut the fuck up and ignore them.

I didn't tell you not to state an opinion, I just requested that you avoid that subject with me because I hate RE's current direction more than anyone else on this website.

But if you want to open Pandora's Box, I'll gladly oblige you. Shall we meet outside the great city of Athens and decide who will take the mantle of the god of war?

Quote :

It's a shitty notion that a gamer who can use smaller rounds is better than a gamer who relies on extra rounds. It does not prove a thing . If you must know, Reloading will make you open to attacks. And you can't escape reloading at a safer location, cuz the enemies will constantly be on the move and you might miss out oppurtunities of having a better score and rely on non-orthodox reloading as inventory relaods whcih is more unrealistisc.Nobody's crying to be saved due to lower ammo rounds. Capcom very well know wat to add and wat not. It ain't your game to argue and insult gamers for expecting better gameplay elements than fucking up gameplay with reloading every now and then.All that matters to me is wat capcom finally decide. Fucking troll all you want on this.

If you hit your target in the right place, what caliber you're using--9mm, .40S&W, etc.--is totally irrelevant. But what I'm talking here is magazine capacity, not caliber.

Anyway, I said nothing about relying on fewer rounds, because 100 rounds is 100 rounds whether the gun you're using is capable of holding 15 in the magazine or 50. I'm talking about the magazine capacities, not.

Quote :

Did you even play mercenaries, FYI - there are no ammo upgrades. You are making no sense in insulting me as i found the ammo capacity good enough for the missions and would not prefer any lesser. If capcom give me fifteen rounds to play with, I can deal with it. They would make a worthy challenge of it. And you can't score no shit with jus fifteen rounds. You must rely on ammo drops in the location to continue the mission to have a better score. Which is more unrealistic than having more ammo rounds. As i said earlier, Reality is not a valid reason to have smaller ammo capacity.

Did you even comprehend what I was talking about? Where did I say there were ammo capacity upgrades in Mercs? Nowhere. All I said is that having to reload every now and then would put a little bit of strategy into it.

Quote :

How does having enough rounds in an action game compare to gears of war? You are quite delusional in saying that new gamers are losers who bitch about their requirements. Apparently, it is you who is bitching about your claims as so heavenly that you go about insulting gamers who are fine with the game.If you are not fine with them and all you wanna do is bitch about them, knock yourself out. Finally, wat capcom decides is matters to me. They found it was necessary to add more rounds per magazine and i am fine with it. For someone who wants more "reality' in the game, there are other elements that don't make the game realistic as i pointed it earlier. So shut the fuck up as to having smaller magazine rounds would make the game realistic.

RE used to be survival horror, now it's about nothing but shooting. It might as well be Gears of War. That's how it compares to Gears of War.

Quote :

EDIT: This is how realistic would be if we were to use smaller magazine rounds:

ChrisSherry wrote:

This has happen to us once or twice in our Resident Evil gaming lives.
https://www.youtube.com/v/l1ocAEBNSDU

Yeah, I should really take a YouTube video with airsoft guns as a testimony of how combat actually plays out.



Anyhow, I gotta run. I'll be back later to continue this.

chrisredfield84 wrote:

show me proof on someone stomping to death with one stomp.May be then i will agree.

I seriously hope you are trolling. I dare you to lay someone on the ground and put real force into it. After that you are a murderer. (Seriously, don't do that.) Stomp someone in the right place with the right amount of force and voila, you got a dead body. You only needed that one hit.

Mass Distraction wrote:

chrisredfield84 wrote:

show me proof on someone stomping to death with one stomp.May be then i will agree.

I seriously hope you are trolling. I dare you to lay someone on the ground and put real force into it. After that you are a murderer. (Seriously, don't do that.) Stomp someone in the right place with the right amount of force and voila, you got a dead body. You only needed that one hit.

Not to mention how big and strong Chris is.

And yeah, Resident Evil is still a video game series but it is on the realistic side of things. Some things are just a bit exaggerated and made more convenient so that you can progress in the game comfortably.

Curb stomp that Majini!

Mass Distraction wrote:

chrisredfield84 wrote:

show me proof on someone stomping to death with one stomp.May be then i will agree.

I seriously hope you are trolling. I dare you to lay someone on the ground and put real force into it. After that you are a murderer. (Seriously, don't do that.) Stomp someone in the right place with the right amount of force and voila, you got a dead body. You only needed that one hit.

Seems I missed that one.

I'd like to introduce him to something called "traumatic brain injury".

Quote :

Traumatic brain injury happens when a bump, blow, jolt, or other head injury causes damage to the brain. Every year, millions of people in the U.S. suffer brain injuries. More than half are bad enough that people must go to the hospital. The worst injuries can lead to permanent brain damage or death.

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/traumaticbraininjury.html

So the lesson here is that, yes, a person can indeed die from a stomp to the head.

did anyone here watch that movie with edward norton when he is a nazi and kills that black guy by stepping on his head?thats realistic man, people die from that shit!!

00biohazard wrote:

did anyone here watch that movie with edward norton when he is a nazi and kills that black guy by stepping on his head?thats realistic man, people die from that shit!!

That's something a little bit different, though. Massive blood loss, and by extension shock, is (most of the time) the cause of death in that case, not brain trauma.

00biohazard wrote:

did anyone here watch that movie with edward norton when he is a nazi and kills that black guy by stepping on his head?thats realistic man, people die from that shit!!

American History X fool!

And would you believe I had that exact scene in mind when I posted that? True story.