Resident Evil Secrets

Mullet_Wesker wrote:

zeolite wrote:

That reminds me of something I always wondered about. In the original RE Barry hands Jill some acid rounds for the bazooka when you meet him in the hallway early on. I'm sure it's possible to have all eight item slots full by that time and I wondered how the game would handle it if he tried to give you the acid rounds (which you have no choice but to take) and you had no free slots in your inventory. Has anyone seen this?

I've had that happen to me in REmake. I believe the cut-scene alters slightly and he mentions he'll leave them there for you, and you can pick them up at any point later on. I also believe the same thing happens in the original, but don't quote me.

Yeah, that's what happens.

Years after I had finally beaten REmake multiple times, I got into the habit of only playing as Chris. When I went back to Jill, I was blown away that there were multiple chance cuts-scenes involving Barry I never knew about, such as him reading the note, and already being on the balcony with Forest (how did he get through that locked door, hm?).

Mullet_Wesker wrote:

how did he get through that locked door, hm?

How do any of the supporting characters ever get ahead of you when you have to puzzle your way through multiple doors?

Exactly why Resident Evil needs a re-boot.

Thanks for the answers Mass, GL and DXP.

Mullet_Wesker wrote:

Exactly why Resident Evil needs a re-boot.

An 18 year old franchise needs a re-boot because characters in the very first game could go through locked doors? There are decent arguments to be made for a re-boot, this isn't one of them.

I meant that as a general statement towards most of Resident Evil's BS logic, I.E., most supporting characters are somehow beyond puzzles/locked doors that take you hours to get through, somehow knowing when to discard the right items, and that rocket launchers can fit into side-packs.

What I mean is, if it were to be re-booted, I would like some realism injected into both the game-play and story. Horror games needs some solid realism to actually scare us.

Sorry about that.

Mullet_Wesker wrote:

I meant that as a general statement towards most of Resident Evil's BS logic, I.E., most supporting characters are somehow beyond puzzles/locked doors that take you hours to get through, somehow knowing when to discard the right items, and that rocket launchers can fit into side-packs.

What I mean is, if it were to be re-booted, I would like some realism injected into both the game-play and story. Horror games needs some solid realism to actually scare us.

Sorry about that.

Realism in a RE game? None of them have been that even from the very first one from 96. As for horror....they don't care about that it has to be like COD with lots of explosions and action only. As for the so called BS....its game mechanics, you don't take them seriously...I mean the very first version of RE1 had a cyborg for gods sake explain that logic and realism?

Rebooting the franchise.....can it even be rebooted in the state its in? After 5/6/ORC its split and divided the entire community on a whole, you either prefer the originals, love the new ones or you love both. If it was rebooted it would have to be on par with revelations with enough horror involved to even barely cut the mustard...that is however my opinion.

And another point....not all horror games need to be realistic to scare people....Fatal Frame/Project zero, Silent Hill, Corpse Party etc have no form of realism but can and will scare the hell out of people.

Mullet_Wesker wrote:

I meant that as a general statement towards most of Resident Evil's BS logic, I.E., most supporting characters are somehow beyond puzzles/locked doors that take you hours to get through, somehow knowing when to discard the right items, and that rocket launchers can fit into side-packs.

Isn't that what every game ever does, though? I mean, in Uncharted you run into enemy goons behind some secret doors that you supposedly are opening for the first time in centuries and in practically every game with an inventory ever you are able to cram huge items in there. Funny thing is that RE5 actually did show the weapons on your character, making it more realistic.

Mass Distraction wrote:

Isn't that what every game ever does, though? I mean, in Uncharted you run into enemy goons behind some secret doors that you supposedly are opening for the first time in centuries and in practically every game with an inventory ever you are able to cram huge items in there. Funny thing is that RE5 actually did show the weapons on your character, making it more realistic.

yeah the UC thing is weird, sometimes they explain it like the other guy's army got there first or sometimes you enter a huge hidden temple, get in to do some puzzles and then the goons get there, but yeah weird

To be honest, I don't mind those weird game logic bullshitty things, unless they get too ridiculous. Rather that than making a game too realistic and hurting the gameplay with that. Gameplay above realism in those cases. I do love the bioshock series for explaining as much as they can.

Mullet_Wesker wrote:

I meant that as a general statement towards most of Resident Evil's BS logic, I.E., most supporting characters are somehow beyond puzzles/locked doors that take you hours to get through, somehow knowing when to discard the right items, and that rocket launchers can fit into side-packs.

What I mean is, if it were to be re-booted, I would like some realism injected into both the game-play and story. Horror games needs some solid realism to actually scare us.

Sorry about that.

They're simply game-play elements, I don't see why any of that would be relevant to a decision to throw away the story and start over. It's not like you read a file where a character said "I watched the man in formerly locked room as he shoved a rocket launcher into his side pack while mumbling about how he should discard that key after he opens one more door with it." They could easily change any of those things you mentioned in a sequel if they wanted to.

Just like how in nearly every zombie game ever made; if a character gets bit once, they're going to die, but zombies aren't a one-hit-kill during game-play because it would affect the game-play too much.

37 Narwhals wrote:

Just like how in nearly every zombie game ever made; if a character gets bit once, they're going to die, but zombies aren't a one-hit-kill during game-play because it would affect the game-play too much.

I liked the infection systems from Outbreak and ORC. They really made you not want to get bit, more than just out of fear of losing health.

A bleeding system is also a good one, like the one DayZ has. I think in Outbreak you could get the bleeding status too.

Those kinds of systems make regular enemies more of a threat while not making them annoyingly instantly kill you.