Would it be unwise for capcom too do this?

Mass Distraction wrote:

I would like to add to this conversation that ink ribbons are obsolete. Every single time I end an RE game with ink ribbons I have about 20 of them in my box collecting dust. Unless you save like every 5 minutes they're nothing more than a waste of space.

What we need instead is save points, like we had in RE4. That way you actually know when the game saves and you can do so as you please. One of the little things I don't like in Silent Hill Downpour (as an example) is because you can't save when you want, you need to find a place where the game saves for you.

02viperacr wrote:

no pointer telling you where to go

You can turn that pointer off. Go to the options menu and turn the HUD off. The only thing it affects is that pointer thing.

In my game I'm developing, you have laptops you have to turn on to email yourself your progress, effectively 'saving' the game. However, when you turn on the laptops, they emit a noise that alerts any enemies to your location (monsters crash through the walls, ceilings, and floor to get you). So saving is always available, but at the same time it can kill you. Since ammo is scarce in my game, it adds to the game's ultimate atmosphere and scariness

Just wanted to share something. (If you guessed it, I'm making a Survival Horror).

Mass Distraction wrote:

Mercy wrote:

3DS… a system that still hasn't taken off yet.

I thought it had started doing way better now that it actually has some good games on it? At least the system seems popular among Nintendo and RPG fans.

The system lacks third party support, just like the vita. There isn't an expansive library of games, or at least there aren't enough appealing genres. I do intend on getting Pokemon X&Y as well as the new Fire Emblem, but other than Revelations, and DOA, there isn't much incentive to own it.

ThomVD wrote:

Known_Hero wrote:

@ThomVD

Again, crappy gameplay mechanics=horror is the mindset of a RE fan who can't let go of the past(no offense). Dead Space proves your assertion wrong. Issac has a ridiculous arsenal of weapons and wears a state of the art Rig suit that has the ability to put enemies into stasis. Yet, the game still succeeds at scaring the crap out people.

Ah, the classic "people who prefer older games over the more recent entries are stuck in the past and need to move on" argument. Not even gonna bother replying on that because I think it's quite a silly argument that is overused by people defending more modern games that received hate because of too much change.

I didn't find Dead Space scary for that very reason. I just wasn't intimidated by the enemies because I could just gun them down easily. But to each their own opinion about scariness. Notice that you're also attacking RE4/5's controls, since those are exactly the same as in for example REmake.

About backtracking, a lot of people actually like it. Look at the metroid series. One of the most popular series out there and it's all about backtracking. It just makes it feel more like a world , instead of just a long linear road. I loved the backtracking in RE. I hate it in FF sometimes though *cough* random encounters *cough* Also, Ink ribbons are awesome!! They actually add to the survival element. Checkpoints are one of the worst things that ever happened to RE.

For the record, I love all RE games. (aside from maybe 6, haven't finished it because I couldn't be bothered.

Not everyone likes change

Jamesy wrote:

ThomVD wrote:

Known_Hero wrote:

@ThomVD

Again, crappy gameplay mechanics=horror is the mindset of a RE fan who can't let go of the past(no offense). Dead Space proves your assertion wrong. Issac has a ridiculous arsenal of weapons and wears a state of the art Rig suit that has the ability to put enemies into stasis. Yet, the game still succeeds at scaring the crap out people.

Ah, the classic "people who prefer older games over the more recent entries are stuck in the past and need to move on" argument. Not even gonna bother replying on that because I think it's quite a silly argument that is overused by people defending more modern games that received hate because of too much change.

I didn't find Dead Space scary for that very reason. I just wasn't intimidated by the enemies because I could just gun them down easily. But to each their own opinion about scariness. Notice that you're also attacking RE4/5's controls, since those are exactly the same as in for example REmake.

About backtracking, a lot of people actually like it. Look at the metroid series. One of the most popular series out there and it's all about backtracking. It just makes it feel more like a world , instead of just a long linear road. I loved the backtracking in RE. I hate it in FF sometimes though *cough* random encounters *cough* Also, Ink ribbons are awesome!! They actually add to the survival element. Checkpoints are one of the worst things that ever happened to RE.

For the record, I love all RE games. (aside from maybe 6, haven't finished it because I couldn't be bothered.

Not everyone likes change

Doesn't mean you can stop it.

Mercy wrote:

Mass Distraction wrote:

Mercy wrote:

3DS… a system that still hasn't taken off yet.

I thought it had started doing way better now that it actually has some good games on it? At least the system seems popular among Nintendo and RPG fans.

The system lacks third party support, just like the vita. There isn't an expansive library of games, or at least there aren't enough appealing genres. I do intend on getting Pokemon X&Y as well as the new Fire Emblem, but other than Revelations, and DOA, there isn't much incentive to own it.

Depends on the person. There's lots of games I'm getting for it, already have 8 that I want. Then there's of course the eShop that has come quite handy.

AWDCP wrote:

However, when you turn on the laptops, they emit a noise that alerts any enemies to your location (monsters crash through the walls, ceilings, and floor to get you). So saving is always available, but at the same time it can kill you.

That's a pretty cool idea.

will1234562 wrote:

AWDCP wrote:

However, when you turn on the laptops, they emit a noise that alerts any enemies to your location (monsters crash through the walls, ceilings, and floor to get you). So saving is always available, but at the same time it can kill you.

That's a pretty cool idea.

It also sounds like it could totally crap on your time spent on the game. It's like saving in Max Payne just when you stepped on a grenade. If you don't have alternate saves, start again.

Mass Distraction wrote:

will1234562 wrote:

AWDCP wrote:

However, when you turn on the laptops, they emit a noise that alerts any enemies to your location (monsters crash through the walls, ceilings, and floor to get you). So saving is always available, but at the same time it can kill you.

That's a pretty cool idea.

It also sounds like it could totally crap on your time spent on the game. It's like saving in Max Payne just when you stepped on a grenade. If you don't have alternate saves, start again.

It wouldn't be much of a problem if the monsters appear a minute or two after you've saved - it gives you enough time to get the hell out and raises the tension.

will1234562 wrote:

Mass Distraction wrote:

will1234562 wrote:

AWDCP wrote:

However, when you turn on the laptops, they emit a noise that alerts any enemies to your location (monsters crash through the walls, ceilings, and floor to get you). So saving is always available, but at the same time it can kill you.

That's a pretty cool idea.

It also sounds like it could totally crap on your time spent on the game. It's like saving in Max Payne just when you stepped on a grenade. If you don't have alternate saves, start again.

It wouldn't be much of a problem if the monsters appear a minute or two after you've saved - it gives you enough time to get the hell out and raises the tension.

That's the direction I'm going in. . You always have the option to save, but still: monsters will come after you a couple minutes after. It's like having a briefcase filled with money surrounded by barbed wire. You can get the money, but not without getting your hand ripped up.

Hey, I might put that in my game. Except it has a powerful gun in it, and not money.

@AWDCP

what kind of game are you making?

Mass Distraction wrote:

Mercy wrote:

Mass Distraction wrote:

Mercy wrote:

3DS… a system that still hasn't taken off yet.

I thought it had started doing way better now that it actually has some good games on it? At least the system seems popular among Nintendo and RPG fans.

The system lacks third party support, just like the vita. There isn't an expansive library of games, or at least there aren't enough appealing genres. I do intend on getting Pokemon X&Y as well as the new Fire Emblem, but other than Revelations, and DOA, there isn't much incentive to own it.

Depends on the person. There's lots of games I'm getting for it, already have 8 that I want. Then there's of course the eShop that has come quite handy.

If I can get 8 games that I really want then I'll consider it worthy. But still, I don't think I even have that much on mind that I desperately want. In general I don't think that many people own 3DS's.

Geez Mercy how can you have so much time on your hands too play 8 games in row

I guess some people have no lives. Oh well

Jamesy wrote:

Geez Mercy how can you have so much time on your hands too play 8 games in row

I guess some people have no lives. Oh well

Ahem. It was actually me who said I have 8 games to buy on the handheld. Mercy only replied to what I said.

Jamesy wrote:

Not everyone likes change

That is not a helpful comment for people like me, so let me clarify for Mercy and others who might have a similar misconception: I don't mind "change" at all. What I do mind, however, is when a game franchise suddenly changes entire genres because one specific one is a new fad.

Jamesy wrote:

Geez Mercy how can you have so much time on your hands too play 8 games in row

I guess some people have no lives. Oh well

And I guess you lack reading skills, because Mercy didn't say he was going to play them all in a row. I'm not going to presume to know his gaming habits, but for the average gamer, that's a year or two's worth of gaming right there.

weskersbarber wrote:

Money wise, yes it would be unwise as there isn't a big enough market for survival horror to complete with the likes of COD, FIFA etc so if they did make an REmake style game, it wouldn't sell well at all. Revelations is the closest we will get to it. Will you be getting Revelations when it's released for consoles?

This. Revelations imo was the prefect balance of survival horror and enough action to keep people entertained. As much as people say they want the older style and gameplay of older generation games, given the chance to play them once more and they wouldn't be long getting bored. For example, I found my old N64 the other year. Was SO excited to play Castlevania and the Pokemon Stadium mini games. After playing both for almost an hour, I shut off my N64 and packed it up once again. We look back at those times of playing those games, and remember being so entertained and happy because back then that was the best we had. That's all we have is our memories of happiness playing them, making us believe they'd still be enjoyable today and we'd still feel the same if we were to play them. However this generation of gaming is so fast paced, a slow game like the old RE's just wouldn't make it into today's market.

Teh Black Cat wrote:

As much as people say they want the older style and gameplay of older generation games, given the chance to play them once more and they wouldn't be long getting bored. For example, I found my old N64 the other year. Was SO excited to play Castlevania and the Pokemon Stadium mini games. After playing both for almost an hour, I shut off my N64 and packed it up once again.

Wow, I had no idea that, out of all the hundreds of times I've played the likes of RE: DC, REmake, RE2, and RE3 and had such a huge blast to the point where 6 PM became 6 AM before I ever even realized it, I was getting so bored out of my mind within just an hour that I wanted to throw my PS2, PS3, and Gamecube through the wall.

Ghost Leader wrote:

Teh Black Cat wrote:

As much as people say they want the older style and gameplay of older generation games, given the chance to play them once more and they wouldn't be long getting bored. For example, I found my old N64 the other year. Was SO excited to play Castlevania and the Pokemon Stadium mini games. After playing both for almost an hour, I shut off my N64 and packed it up once again.

Wow, I had no idea that, out of all the hundreds of times I've played the likes of RE: DC, REmake, RE2, and RE3 and had such a huge blast to the point where 6 PM became 6 AM before I ever even realized it, I was getting so bored out of my mind within just an hour that I wanted to throw my PS2, PS3, and Gamecube through the wall.

Obviously not everyone is the same, but most people who do complain about games becoming more fast paced or that they enjoy the older gaming generations more, is only saying that based on memories. How many people do you know that still play N64, Gamecube, or PlayStation?

Eh guess everyone is turning on me now.

Listen I just dislike Mercys tone and attitude on these forums. She would often insult some of my threads and call them 'trash' which is just mean and uncalled for even if it is true. Its not the first time a poster has gotten annoyed with the way I come across on the net either. Yes I know I could be hasty starting topics with not much thought behind them,

I am sure many of u here think I have bad attitude as well but each too there own I guess.



Maybe me and Mercy should call a truce? Just so we don't rub each other up the wrong way in the future

Teh Black Cat wrote:

Obviously not everyone is the same, but most people who do complain about games becoming more fast paced or that they enjoy the older gaming generations more, is only saying that based on memories. How many people do you know that still play N64, Gamecube, or PlayStation?

"Most" people? Have you got some actual numbers to prove that? Furthermore, how do you think such memories are even created in the first place, if such games supposedly aren't as much fun as we think they are? By your logic, GTA IV shouldn't be collecting dust on my shelf in favor of Vice City, San Andreas, and all the other previous gen GTAs that I've been playing up the wall since November because being newer somehow makes it better. I also threw in the original SOCOM: US Navy SEALs a couple days back and enjoyed it far more than any recent military shooter, yet by your logic I should be enjoying CoD more because it's "faster paced". Hell, I don't even own any CoD games anymore. If they're so fun and so much better, how is that so?

Jamesy wrote:

Eh guess everyone is turning on me now.

Listen I just dislike Mercys tone and attitude on these forums. She would often insult some of my threads and call them 'trash' which is just mean and uncalled for even if it is true. Its not the first time a poster has gotten annoyed with the way I come across on the net either. Yes I know I could be hasty starting topics with not much thought behind them,

So we should sugarcoat everything for you, praise you as the greatest, most intellectual topic poster of all time? Mercy just calls it the way she sees it. Maybe she's being a little too "public" about it (no offense, Mercy), but it's not an insult toward you. I see topics and posts on here and elsewhere by various people I think are shit (not to name anyone in particular), but I hold nothing against the posters for it, just like I doubt Mercy holds anything negative against you as a person for this one.

Quote :

I am sure many of u here think I have bad attitude as well but each too there own I guess.

If Nite, Spike, and others are still putting up with my cynicism, I'm fairly sure your attitude as of this typing isn't an issue.

Ghost Leader wrote:

Teh Black Cat wrote:

Obviously not everyone is the same, but most people who do complain about games becoming more fast paced or that they enjoy the older gaming generations more, is only saying that based on memories. How many people do you know that still play N64, Gamecube, or PlayStation?

"Most" people? Have you got some actual numbers to prove that? Furthermore, how do you think such memories are even created in the first place, if such games supposedly aren't as much fun as we think they are? By your logic, GTA IV shouldn't be collecting dust on my shelf in favor of Vice City, San Andreas, and all the other previous gen GTAs that I've been playing up the wall since November because being newer somehow makes it better. I also threw in the original SOCOM: US Navy SEALs a couple days back and enjoyed it far more than any recent military shooter, yet by your logic I should be enjoying CoD more because it's "faster paced". Hell, I don't even own any CoD games anymore. If they're so fun and so much better, how is that so?

Jamesy wrote:

Eh guess everyone is turning on me now.

Listen I just dislike Mercys tone and attitude on these forums. She would often insult some of my threads and call them 'trash' which is just mean and uncalled for even if it is true. Its not the first time a poster has gotten annoyed with the way I come across on the net either. Yes I know I could be hasty starting topics with not much thought behind them,

So we should sugarcoat everything for you, praise you as the greatest, most intellectual topic poster of all time? Mercy just calls it the way she sees it. Maybe she's being a little too "public" about it (no offense, Mercy), but it's not an insult toward you. I see topics and posts on here and elsewhere by various people I think are shit (not to name anyone in particular), but I hold nothing against the posters for it, just like I doubt Mercy holds anything negative against you as a person for this one.

Quote :

I am sure many of u here think I have bad attitude as well but each too there own I guess.

If Nite, Spike, and others are still putting up with my cynicism, I'm fairly sure your attitude as of this typing isn't an issue.

But u would not call someone's thread 'trash' would u? Even if that's what u were thinking you would not be that blunt.

Jamesy wrote:

But u would not call someone's thread 'trash' would u? Even if that's what u were thinking you would not be that blunt.

Hmm... fair point.

Mercy, I might have to spank you for being a bad girl.

Mercy is just another rebellious american girl who thinks there gangsta by talking trash on the internet

Jamesy wrote:

Mercy is just another rebellious american girl who thinks there gangsta by talking trash on the internet

What else is the Internet for?

Oh, right, there's free porn, too.

Hope you guys realize I'm a dude. Click on my profile. Male.

Ghost Leader wrote:

Teh Black Cat wrote:

Obviously not everyone is the same, but most people who do complain about games becoming more fast paced or that they enjoy the older gaming generations more, is only saying that based on memories. How many people do you know that still play N64, Gamecube, or PlayStation?

"Most" people? Have you got some actual numbers to prove that? Furthermore, how do you think such memories are even created in the first place, if such games supposedly aren't as much fun as we think they are? By your logic, GTA IV shouldn't be collecting dust on my shelf in favor of Vice City, San Andreas, and all the other previous gen GTAs that I've been playing up the wall since November because being newer somehow makes it better. I also threw in the original SOCOM: US Navy SEALs a couple days back and enjoyed it far more than any recent military shooter, yet by your logic I should be enjoying CoD more because it's "faster paced". Hell, I don't even own any CoD games anymore. If they're so fun and so much better, how is that so?

Back it up there a little. I didn't say the more fast paced a game is, the better it is. The thread asked would it be wise if Resident Evil returned back to it's older style gameplay. Personally no, I don't think it would be such a wise idea because most gamers today are used to more fast paced games, and by "fast paced" I don't exactly mean non stop action like CoD or Gears of War either. However you have to look at it this way as well; look at how popular and well the CoD franchise is doing. Just because YOU don't like it nor own it anymore, doesn't mean it's not doing well when obviously it is. You can say how YOU preferred one game over another but that doesn't represent the majority. It's common sense most people don't play those older games anymore. I don't need "numbers" to prove something which should be common sense. Like I already asked; how many people do you know that still play or even own a N64, PlayStation 1, or Gamecube anymore?

The reason why I said what I did was because A LOT of gamers are blind by nostalgia and while they say they'd like to return to the older ways of gaming, most of them would not be as entertained as they think they'll be. I'm not saying ALL gamers either, but clearly most and especially new gamers.