True. The thing that I've liked the most about the game so far is the quality of voice acting. I think it's easily the best the series has seen. So far at least.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Resident Evil TGS Special Stage Event Stream on Sep 17th (RE7, Vendetta, & More)
- Thread starter Dusk Golem
- Start date
True. The thing that I've liked the most about the game so far is the quality of voice acting. I think it's easily the best the series has seen. So far at least.
MiamiWesker
Member
I'm enjoying this kind of gameplay breakdown so let's keep it going. What has been talked about obviously sounds a lot like old school RE but in a new perspective. I want to talk about how the more realistic setting and first person alters the game, let's use the demo has an example. The demo takes place in what I assume is some extra housing section from the main mansion. The sense of scale is vastly different from the old games.
Try to imagine the RE7 demo house in an old RE game. The first floor would be broken up into 5 rooms I would say; the starting room, the two side hallways, the kitchen, and the tiny doll room. Upstairs the second floor would be one room. The third floor would be three rooms, the hallway, the phone room with the extra broken wall area and the locked door. In an old RE game nearly every room would fit one or two enemies in there with enough space for your character to run around them. Try to do that in RE7, doesn't work, the hallways barely fit you in them much alone another thing to run around. Rooms feel a lot smaller because it's realistic, old RE games proportions were exaggerated to fit the action.
So a key component of old RE was running or fighting. Do I waste bullets here to clear a path or run around them and have to deal with them later but save bullets for tougher enemies later. The way the game made you search for items and manage inventory forced you into these hallways multiple times which made that decision to fight or flee very important. So in this more realistic setting how is that going to work. It doesn't look like running by an enemy will be a viable option unless the levels get much larger. I assume it's going to be a lot more about using multiple paths to get around things that chase you. Like backtrack into a room, exit a different door, try to lose them by using the entire location which is something the old games couldn't really do as each room loaded and most enemies couldn't follow you. Or the other option which is kill the damn thing so you can proceed easily.
The reason why I want to see the game played is to see how the combat fits in this world. Are the levels going to be designed in a way where fleeing is encouraged, what will the balance be between forced combat and optional combat, are there ever going to be a big open space like in RE4 games where things come at you from all sides? I feel the balance of how survival and combat works will be the key for this game, it being in first person changes a lot and I hope they are ready for that. I think if they lean too heavily toward non combat and hiding it won't be good, if they make it so combat becomes to easy and you can overpower the game the game will also probably end up being not that good. It needs to be a careful balance.
Try to imagine the RE7 demo house in an old RE game. The first floor would be broken up into 5 rooms I would say; the starting room, the two side hallways, the kitchen, and the tiny doll room. Upstairs the second floor would be one room. The third floor would be three rooms, the hallway, the phone room with the extra broken wall area and the locked door. In an old RE game nearly every room would fit one or two enemies in there with enough space for your character to run around them. Try to do that in RE7, doesn't work, the hallways barely fit you in them much alone another thing to run around. Rooms feel a lot smaller because it's realistic, old RE games proportions were exaggerated to fit the action.
So a key component of old RE was running or fighting. Do I waste bullets here to clear a path or run around them and have to deal with them later but save bullets for tougher enemies later. The way the game made you search for items and manage inventory forced you into these hallways multiple times which made that decision to fight or flee very important. So in this more realistic setting how is that going to work. It doesn't look like running by an enemy will be a viable option unless the levels get much larger. I assume it's going to be a lot more about using multiple paths to get around things that chase you. Like backtrack into a room, exit a different door, try to lose them by using the entire location which is something the old games couldn't really do as each room loaded and most enemies couldn't follow you. Or the other option which is kill the damn thing so you can proceed easily.
The reason why I want to see the game played is to see how the combat fits in this world. Are the levels going to be designed in a way where fleeing is encouraged, what will the balance be between forced combat and optional combat, are there ever going to be a big open space like in RE4 games where things come at you from all sides? I feel the balance of how survival and combat works will be the key for this game, it being in first person changes a lot and I hope they are ready for that. I think if they lean too heavily toward non combat and hiding it won't be good, if they make it so combat becomes to easy and you can overpower the game the game will also probably end up being not that good. It needs to be a careful balance.
MiamiWesker
Member
At GDC they had a panel showing off the REengine and they showed what were basically zombies, not traditional ones they were infected by something else.
Not sure about aiming down the sights, but yes, there will be more enemies than just the Bakers. I believe it was from a recent leak, but there will be zombie like creatures as well as bosses, potentially including a Del Lago esque underwater creature. This IS a Resident Evil game, as much as Capcom seemingly wants to convince everyone otherwise. Here's a link I found with some info: http://www.gamesradar.com/resident-evil-7-plot-gore-weapons-and-monsters-leaked-by-esrb/
Yes, I agree wholeheartedly. The balance between forced and optional combat will be crucial. Aside from tight corridors, another thing that makes avoiding enemies more difficult is the First Person perspective. The FOV seems pretty narrow compared to past games, and especially the older games with fixed cameras that could give you full view of an entire area, and allowed you to keep track of enmies. I would expect that the approach to level design will be quite different, and potentially incorporate multiple paths, as you said.
If there is a focus on avoiding enemies and using multiple paths though, I wonder how we'll keep track of them? Perhaps simply through good sound design, or maybe other things like footprints? I doubt there'll be threat indicators or detective vision or anything like that, since that kinda stuff would pretty immersion breaking for a Horror game. This is assuming they can wander about on their own, of course.
Dusk Golem
A 21st Century Rockefeller
Let me first say while RE7 is currently my most anticipated game, I don't work by the thought process that anticipate = quality. It means there's something there I think has potential which I'm excited for, but the thing about potential is that it can be met or fail to meet the hopeful expectations. Something good on paper doesn't always translate to something good in action, and the same can be true visa versa. Especially when it comes to execution on a game like this; the execution is super important. The game can have as many interesting ideas as it wants, but what really will make or break it is how it executes those ideas and the game experience it will provide.
I can tell you right now RE7 is not an Outlast clone. More so, I think some people really don't understand what Outlast actually is. I see it get mentioned all the time in first-person horror game topics, but does anyone actually know what made Outlast different from other first-person horror games? It only gets mentioned because it was a more popular first-person horror game, and is used as a stigma for what these type of games can provide. Similar to the term "COD-clone" for a game that's a first-person shooter as a sort of blanket statement to just say the user doesn't prefer this type of gameplay style in general. But it's an empty argument that's not based on anything but a personal dislike of what one perceives to be first-person horror games and other games cloning that game. Outlast is a parkour horror game that focused on fast movements to run and climb things made by people who worked on Mirror's Edge and Assassins Creed, they prioritized fast movement over hiding mechanics and the gameplay design focuses more on running from enemies than actually hiding from them. Hiding is an option and an important part of gameplay, but the mechanics of Outlast are designed around its parkour system. But when people say "Outlast clone" they don't actually mean Outlast, they're just using it as a 'popular example' of a recent first-person horror game they view as a trend-setter, not realizing what Outlast actually is, but more what they view it to represent. I doubt most people who compare first-person horror games to Outlast even really got all that far in Outlast. Does Resident Evil 7 seems like a parkour horror game where the focus is to run really fast to safe points from enemies that run after you, but you can outclimb and push things aside and hide to avoid being caught? I mean, for starters your movement speed seems pretty slow in RE7...
But for the general statement of first-person horrors, I think RE7 is chasing the tail of these other games less than many expect. That's not to say there's no inspiration from them here, I think it's pretty clear RE7 is wearing its inspirations on its sleeves, and it even has some direct calls to the things its referencing. I even remember when signing up for the ambassador program they asked what some of your favorite horror/atmospheric games were, and while most of the RE games were on the list, it included everything from the Silent Hill series, to Fatal Frame, to Dark Souls, to Forbidden Siren, to Outlast, to Amnesia, to The Suffering. That list I think isn't purely coincidental, and it's been mentioned in interviews the Capcom team played and watch a lot of horror works when going into RE7. But I think the inspiration runs deeper than "lol its Outlast" like some people think, and I do fully believe that their biggest inspiration is actually the older RE's, particularly the first game. They went through a long look at Resident Evil and the horror games that spawned from its popularity to try and figure out how to make a 'modern horror' Resident Evil game. That's my earnest belief based off of everything shared so far, and some things shared subtly but left unsaid.
And there's nothing wrong with that. Almost all of the horror games we know today would not exist without Resident Evil. Things pull and build off of what came before all the time, it's part of the way a medium progresses. The important thing is that they end up making an enjoyable product that forges its own identity. It's the whole, "Last of Us was compared to everything before it released, and now then it came out and now everything is compared to Last of Us" deal (which applies for a LOT of things, but I'm using Last of Us as its a more recent popular example). People will pull comparisons from what they know, and when it comes to first-person horror games, most have only played/know about the most popular of the popular, so things like Amnesia, Outlast, P.T., and Slender will pop up over and over again, despite the fact all of those games weren't even the first games doing what they're doing, they just ended up being the most popular ones (which is ironically also true for RE1, there were a few fixed camera-angle horror games like RE before RE came about, RE1 just managed to be the most popular one). But coming from someone who plays a lot of horror games, classic and modern, and has played over a 100 first-person horror games by now, if you include freeware stuff probably over 200, they're a lot more diverse and varying in quality of execution than one might imagine. Many of the 'popular' ones aren't even close to my favorites, but it is what it is.
Outside of face value of it being first-person and there being a stalker enemy, the gameplay presented even in gameplay videos is quite different to what's out there. There's a very obviously Japanese influence at play here, and more so a budget behind the game. The level design has a very Capcom feel to it from what's been shown that isn't as reflective of many first-person horror games than many seem to think, and the budget at play allows for much more impressive moments than someone with no budget could muster. The pacing is also scaled to a longer, $60 pricetag where variety and a broader consumer base is being appealed to, and its evident in its design decisions. This is also just judging the stealth and exploration gameplay we've seen in the demo and Lantern gameplay, not even getting into things like combat and other elements the game has.
But for all of these points, all that really matters is how the game executes itself. The game could of been just a straight up Outlast clone, but could of easily surpassed it with better execution. Outlast's biggest singular flaw was repetition, the creators didn't know how to vary their experience with the tools they had and it ultimately became a glaring flaw that you sort of just did the same thing over and over again, which reduced not only enjoyment, but pacing and design. It's why you encounter the exact same scenarios in Outlast again and again, ie, "Press the three whatevers to continue", "navigate these corridors until you climb something to escape," they lacked the budget and creativity to diversify itself, but could get away with it due to more impressive visuals than your typical first-person horror and the parkour gameplay being solid and enjoyable which set itself apart from the likes of Amnesia, which is a much slower game. RE7 could of just been an Outlast clone as others said, but still been great if it managed to nail the execution that Outlast honestly faltered and failed to meet past the opening hour.
However, Resident Evil 7 is not a first-person defenseless parkour game, and I don't think RE7 will suffer from Outlast's flaw of repetition. This said, what RE7 needs to get right is execution, and that is to be seen, as execution is not just an interesting idea, but multiple elements coming together to make an enjoyable experience with good design, pacing, and engagement.
---
Responding to more, but I knew I was going to make a long post like that, so there you go.
Theanine3D
Member
Alien Isolation was amazing in this area, and the best example of how sound design can be used to a horror game's advantage. I've no doubt RE7 will try to follow behind it.
Dusk Golem
A 21st Century Rockefeller
01.) That I do not know, and we'll need to see more of the gunplay in action. Especially as our character is supposed to be an 'average guy'.
02.) By 'normal enemies', do you mean like a typical zombie, ganado, majini, or the like? If so, then the answer is no. There's no 'popcorn' enemy in RE7 to my knowledge, there is probably an easier first enemy and the enemies get tougher as the game goes on, but I think RE7 is dealing a virus that makes regenerating monstrosities that doesn't easily spread through bits or whatever, in fact the current appearance is the opposite and you may have to consume something to turn into one rather than being eaten. I think we'll have reoccurring enemies that get more and more twisted and probably some special enemies for specific scenes, than anything like a 'basic' enemy we can take down in numbers over the course of the game. The enemies can be defeated in the scenes they appear with you (outside of things like the VHS tapes), but they will come back later until eventually killed off for good. I also predict (but this is just a theory) we may eventually get to a point where more than one of them attack you at once.
However, it has been confirmed there are mutated monsters. I predict the Bakers have been doing things with people and animals who have come near their plantation. I won't be surprised if we meet a mutated dog enemy or even something like an alligator (I actually am betting the underwater behemoth that was leaked will be something like a mutated alligator).
I am 90% sure the house in the demo will be in the main game, especially because of the recent localization pictures released, which are all from the final game and clearly one shot shows the demo area. Also the tape in the demo mentions its a recording of the "Derelict House", and the Famitsu article mentioned you meet Camille in the main game at a location named the "Derelict House."
I actually don't think you're meant to get attacked in this part of the house is something I'll mention, the Famitsu article again does mention you meet Camille there, so I think it's for exploration/a story moment. I also partially say this since I know exactly what you mean by the 'big hallway' thing, but some of the other footage where we know there's enemies you'll notice bigger-than-they-should-be hallways. For example, the Lantern demo area features bigger areas and the hallways are notably also bigger on scale. In the footage with Jack, the hallway where he breaks out from is large, but we find out in a bit since it's enough room for him to walk in and hold his shovel as he approaches you, blocking your way making you need to tread backwards. Keep in mind the VHS segment for the Lantern demo will also probably (like almost 100%) also be appearing in the main game, where you're not defenseless and have to go through. So I think some environments have multiple purposes attributed to them from a gameplay design perspective. Which is also what I meant in a previous post about RE7 being designed with very 'gamey' logic. Another example is in the Lantern gameplay, the spider figurine you need for the shadow puzzle is placed where you're likely to go hide. It's actually placed there so you'll see it and head that way as Marguerite comes in, and so you'll go that direction where the most obvious place you can easily hide is. they're using the shiny to lure you that way since you'll be safest hiding there. I also assume this is in part since this VHS sequence is probably pretty early in the game and introducing the idea of hiding as an option, in the VHS segment it's required, but would introduce players to the thought, "I have the option to hide from enemies, not just fight or run."
The balance is important, and part of the execution I talked about before. However, the game is designed with game design in minde, and despite the more photo-realistic quality, the world itself is more designed like a video game world. That's a bit hard to explain simply, so I'll keep it at that, but if you want me to go more in-depth I certainly can. The location seems like exaggerated life to me, and I don't doubt that there will be whacky shenanigans to the plantation. We already have a doll pier over the buoy, a hidden passage accessed from a fireplace, a room with a locked window and chairs sprung about, and a way to crawl behind the walls by casting a spider shadow over a projector.
The voice acting in the series has generally been better in each numbered title. RE7 > RE6 > RE5 > RE4 > RE3 =(?) RE2 > RE1.
So progress on that front!
Deckard Chapel
Banned
Same here!
I always have high hopes for CAPCOM's Resident Evil games and this one seems to be totally bringing the series back to it's roots. My favorite RE game has always been the Resident Evil remake and of course the PlayStation original, due to it's atmosphere, sound design, soundtrack, claustrophobic setting, tension and fear for what's around the next corner.
If this game can deliver all of that with photo-real graphics and in VR - then we're in for a real treat!
Astral Dog
Member
RE desperately needed a good shakeup in the localization, acting and writting departments.
MiamiWesker
Member
Great posts Dusk, I've never understood the outlast comparison. I am not a fan of the horror games where you have to hide for minutes on end for some random thing that can't be killed to finally randomly ignore you and disappear. Those games are like amnesia or alien, outlast really isn't that. Aside from being a runner style game the enemies in outlast have actual patrols and AI that makes sense. It's a lot more like a traditional stealth game where you need to use there patrol patterns against them, create distractions and so on to move undetected.
Contrast that to amnesia where a monster is randomly going to appear and force you to sit in a dark corner for a few minutes until it randomly walks away. That's awful game design. I disliked amnesia, didn't care for alien, and actually very much enjoyed Outlast.
The latern demo is kind of in the middle, Margerite isn't as random as the amnesia monster but it doesn't look like you can really change her path much. She seems super scripted and you are funneled to hide in certain places for chunks of time.
Contrast that to amnesia where a monster is randomly going to appear and force you to sit in a dark corner for a few minutes until it randomly walks away. That's awful game design. I disliked amnesia, didn't care for alien, and actually very much enjoyed Outlast.
The latern demo is kind of in the middle, Margerite isn't as random as the amnesia monster but it doesn't look like you can really change her path much. She seems super scripted and you are funneled to hide in certain places for chunks of time.
MiamiWesker
Member
Another thing that kind of gets forgotten here is the VR aspect, which is huge. I know most people don't even think of it because they will never play this in VR but I think this is the most important VR game to ever be released, it is easily the most high profile VR built game. perhaps the issues with movement is why they haven't shown the game yet, they want to show it in VR as well and they can't do that until they nail the options for movement.
We know they got tons of feedback from E3 and have been working on adjusting things. Have we heard of any impressions from TGS of the demo, did they change things with the movement?
We know they got tons of feedback from E3 and have been working on adjusting things. Have we heard of any impressions from TGS of the demo, did they change things with the movement?
Do not surprise. Some people who compare this game to Outlast might not even touched Outlast before but say it purely from the hatres toward FPS type of game.
Son Of Sparda
Member
You went a little too far into explaining what Outlast is and how RE7 can't be a clone of that particular title. I appreciate the fact that you did, but honestly that's not the reason why I said "RE7 is an Outlast clone with some added ineffective combat". Though reading that part again I could see how you might've interpret it that way (and think that I don't know what are differences between RE7 and Outlast) so that was bad wording on my part and I apologize for it.
What I see in RE7 is the same thing that I saw in Outlast, in a sense that it seems to be one of those frustrating games where you don't really have a way to fight back against your enemies. You either run or you hide. And I personally don't find either of those options fun or amusing. In that sense, what we've seen of RE7 thus far is an Outlast clone to me. And you are right, I didn't play Outlast for more than an hour or so cause as I said above, having no way to fight back *efficiently* against enemies was more frustrating to me than scary.
RE7 seems to have the same overall design mindset for its gameplay. All they've shown thus far is the player running away or hiding from super powered enemies without any efficient way of fighting back. I loved watching TGS trailer (I wouldn't mind watching a full movie like that) but it did nothing to change my earlier perception of the game. Showing two seconds of firing a handgun against an enemy that doesn't even give you any feedback, won't make me go "Oh cool, the game has combat!". On the contrary it made my worry even more cause "Yep, just as feared. Fighting back is not an option. Just another hide and seek game."
Now, I know you can provide me with tons of links from developers saying that you can kill enemies and that there will be more combat and ESRB rating descriptions. I also know that I'm taking things at face value. But:
A) Honestly, after so many years of following Capcom and development of their titles, devs can scream their head off that (for example) next DMC game would have OG Dante in it as the main character, but I won't believe one word from them until I actually see him in the game myself. That's how much I trust Capcom devs and their statements after being lied to so many times in the past. Especially when it comes to RE titles.
And in regards to ESRB rating, yes. It does say that you fight and kill enemies but for all we know those descriptions could be from real time cut scenes and scripted events cause ESRB doesn't specify how and in what form these events occur. Even if they are from gameplay, who is to say that these aren't fairly short and limited occurrings that might only happen once in the entire game, while over 90% of the game would be just hiding and running away with close to zero combat?
B) Taking everything has been showed by Capcom at face value is the only way to avoid disappointment. Many people didn't do this with their latest big AAA release SFV including myself, and we all ended up being massively disappointed.
"But I didn't see an arcade mode in those menus in the latest trailer..."
"Oh, come on. Capcom has been doing fighting games for DECADES! Of course there will be an arcade mode. They probably didn't show it cause it's obvious that there would be one and it's nothing too unique to try and sell your game by it. Also, they said that this game would try and cater to casual audience, so of course it will have most basic stuff like an arcade mode. We also didn't see a Vs CPU. What? Next you wanna tell me the game won't even have that? lol, come on."
"Hahaha, you are right man. That makes sense." *Pre-orders the game digitally*
So, yeah. Taking things at face value is the best way to avoid being disappointed when it comes to Capcom.
I've read some of your theories before man. They are very exciting and personally I know I would enjoy a game like that. But until Capcom actually shows the things that you are talking about, I'll treat those stuff as wishful thinking and personal hopes for RE7. No offense, but I just can't trust Capcom like that anymore.
Deckard Chapel
Banned
This is the very definition of a shit-post.
If not the definition, a thesaurus version at least
Jawmuncher
Member
This is the very definition of a shit-post.
If not the definition, a thesaurus version at least
How? He explained in depth, why the game has yet to appeal to him and why he doesn't trust capcom. That's a good post in my book, even if his ideals don't match up with yours or others.
Especially since i agree to numerous parts. A lot of people were giving capcom the benefit of the doubt with SFV and we all know how that turned out. So even if Capcom is saying one thing, just due to prior problems in the past. It's better to be cautious than to just assume it'll all work out.
As for the Outlast part everyone is talking about, we're arguing over semantics at this point and broad generalizations are being thrown. "Oh they say the game looks like outlast because they hate FPS horror".
Which for some isn't even the case, as a broad comparison it works. Since right now everyone is comparing what we have seen, so I don't blame anyone for perhaps saying that is what they're reminded the most of at this post.
Really all I can say is for those of us who haven't been sold on the game yet, obviously just stay on board and keep checking when new info hits. That way we can see if what they show later on changes what our current perception is. Worse come to worse, we'll just have to wait until some actual reviews/gameplay from streamers to see what the game is.
As for the rest I would say to ease up on those who aren't sold on the game yet. Just because someone is being negative over what is currently being shown, doesn't mean they are out to hate this game and never give it a chance. Resident Evil means a lot of things to numerous people. So it's understandable that not the same selling points for one person will be the selling point for another. How many here are sold already on RE7 just because it isn't like (from what we know) RE4-6? A lot, so it's worth keeping that in mind. Some people's RE are the action games, so they want to see the combat. Some people's RE are the survival and management aspects, so they want to see that. Some people's RE is the lore, so they want a better idea on how it all fits, and so on. Right now the marketing isn't going to appeal to everyone. Hell right now the marketing itself doesn't appeal to me at all. But the community and what we have gathered is what has me the most interested about the game.
OrbitalBeard
Member
Did you watch the latest trailer? When a giant flaming man is coming for the main character, he shoots him multiple times with a pistol. That's not running and that's not hiding.
I think it's pretty obvious that "hide-n-seek" will be a component of this game, but I also think some of you are willfully ignoring things. Why, I have no idea. I mean, why on earth would Capcom make extra ammo a pre-order bonus if you only fight like, four enemies in the game. That would be really pointless.
Of course, you should skeptical...because it's Capcom. I doubt anyone would fault someone for that.
Jawmuncher
Member
I think people are just hung up on how he used outlast. Right now the most comparable game to the bits we have got is Alien Isolation, I would say. Which at it's core is still a "hide-n-seek" style game over anything else. Even though you are shooting androids, and keep to fight back the alien from time to time.
It really just boils down to people wanting more than a tease for a lot of this stuff being shown. As I said, hopefully the demo can really show what the game has to offer once the final update is out.
A demo where you get the axe and pistol, do a puzzle, put some items in a box with a typewriter, and fight an enemy would go a long way for a lot of people. If anything I think it's just a case of not wanting to get your hopes up and getting crushed. 2016 has been a terrible year when it comes to games promising and not delivering.
OrbitalBeard
Member
Heck, I agree....don't get your hopes up.
But I don't think you're getting your hopes up by expecting the following:
- Combat
- Exploration
- Puzzle solving
Honestly, this type of game doesn't really demo well. Maybe that was a bad idea to begin with, even though I liked it for what it was. It's really just there to give you a sense of the game's atmosphere.
F0rneus
Tears in the rain
Let's say that's the only time you shoot a gun in the game. Is that right? Probably not. But I don't know for sure. Do you? Have you seen any other combat?
All I saw in the trailer was 2 hands holding a pistol, and shooting twice towards a major character that seemingly cannot die. That's not combat. That's not even stopping the Outlast like stalker.
Now if Capcom didn't talk about the combat at all, and let that be just a taste...something to make us talk...Perfect! Amazing even. It'd wet my appetite for more.
But no. This isn't what Capcom is doing. They are describing the combat in great detail. Including how the damage on enemy limbs work. They aren't being secretive. They are spilling the beans..........on combat they aren't showing. Why? Why should I believe them? Dusk Golem's posts are great, but they are essentially wishful fan interpretations.
OrbitalBeard
Member
There's a pre-order bonus that includes ammunition. You obtain a shotgun. So yeah, I'm actually very confident that's not the only time you shoot a gun.
F0rneus
Tears in the rain
Ok. So let's say there two shooting sections then. One with a pistol, the other with a shotgun. What if there's nothing else? What if it's scripted? What if it's like Beach Head? You are stuck in one spot and must shoot the weak points?
What if the preorder bonuses are only for those cheap segments, giving you more ammo? Yeah that's totally not the truth. But shit, there's no evidence either way! Why is Capcom so willing to talk about the details of RE7 but not showing them? This is not being secretive. Again they described in detail, how damaging enemies work. But they won't show any of it.
It's one thing to be hyped for a game (like I said, I already prepaid the deluxe edition). It's another to accept fan interpretations as being part of the main game without question, just because of hype. Capcom isn't showing anything from the game they are describing in great detail. This isn't keeping secrets. This is selling fluff and promises.
OrbitalBeard
Member
Man, that would be a weak pre-order bonus then, even for this industry.
Son Of Sparda
Member
"LOL Crapcom at it again."This is the very definition of a shit-post.
If not the definition, a thesaurus version at least
That's a shit post.
I gave a detailed explanation of why I feel the way I do about RE7. You might not agree with me, I understand that. But please don't try to make me look like a salty troll who is just hating RE7 because of reasons.
Thank you for actually reading and understanding where I'm coming from.
Yes I did. I actually talked about it in that same post.
And in regards to ammo packs being a pre-order bonus, I believe F0rneus already covered that bit. I also did say this about the possibility of different combat scenarios being one time only deals with RE7 and how the rest of the game could be just the usual hide and run stuff that they are focusing on with their marketing.
Also, Capcom had micro-transiction for stuff like red orbs and proud souls in DMC4SE. Stuff that you would easily get tons of just by simply playing through the campaigns and they actually significantly increased their drops with the new release. So it made absolutely zero sense for Capcom to sell them separately and at that high of a price. But that didn't stop them now, did it?
Nestled_Grizzly
Member
Fighting back is an option. The ESRB rating already mentioned killing mutant creatures.
http://www.polygon.com/2016/8/26/12658940/resident-evil-7-who-is-ethan-combat-details-esrb
http://www.polygon.com/2016/8/26/12658940/resident-evil-7-who-is-ethan-combat-details-esrb
Son Of Sparda
Member
OrbitalBeard
Member
I actually do think that combat isn't going to be a huge focus, so if that's your central concern, it's probably justified.
Son Of Sparda
Member
It is. I can deal with the game having FP perspective and I was actually pretty hyped for the game after its initial announcement at E3. With RE7, I though we were gonna get classic RE in FP view and more modernized format so I was really looking forward to it. But the more they show the title, the more I worry about the lack of combat.
Setting and story seem really interesting and thus far I like what I've seen from its graphics. I'm actually really intrigued by some of the ideas in RE7 like playing in VHS tapes and seeing more backstories like that, or changing the present through your actions in the past (I loved this in Rev2 as well). But the crucial point for me is the combat. If the game doesn't have the basic gameplay loop that I've come to expect from a survival horror title through the years (especially classic RE games), then I genuinely don't see myself enjoying it.
MiamiWesker
Member
Yeah, I want at least as much action as RE1. Also the bosses need to be good. They cant screw that up.
darkslayer101
Member
The guy barely flinched dou and the explosion felt way too scripted.
Regarding the matter, yeah I think it is best to take things on face value with capcom at this point. They could talk about combat and it would end up as the exact same as alien isolation, which would be heartbreaking.
There is nothing in the trailer or videos shown so far indicate that there is an 'RE action' part of it. But then again they haven't shown much
F0rneus
Tears in the rain
At the very least, I expect Capcom to show more at TGS. I mean it's the biggest gameshow in Japan. Perfect opportunity to truly show what RE7 is all about.
Wait...
Dusk Golem
A 21st Century Rockefeller
I actually would argue they did show a decent amount at TGS.
The issue some individuals had is it didn't show them what they specifically wanted to see. But it seems to have overall been a success since the new trailer was successful in generating interest.
Aswitch
Member
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Deckard Chapel
Banned
Deckard Chapel
Banned
No offense or anything - we're just having intelligent discussion here, right?
It was your incessant joking and playing light of everything that made me think that perhaps that was made as some kind of troll post.
I'll read your post again to see your true intentions.
Does that make us an effective team?
Because troll posts tend to be multiple paragraphs of actual thought out arguments, right. I mean, if you couldn't be bothered to read it, either way; that's fine, it's a long post; but you responded to it calling it a "shitpost".
A shitpost adds nothing to the discussion, it dismisses others' ideas off-hand. They're normally short and can be churned out quickly, and take little effort to come up with. They're often used to stifle discussion and/or insult other's integrity or capabilities.
Kinda like this one:
This is the very definition of a shit-post.
If not the definition, a thesaurus version at least
Deckard Chapel
Banned
"Resident Evil 6 HD is now available for $19.99 for PS4, with comparable pricing on Steam and other platforms."
Son Of Sparda
Member
And your point is...?
I wanna know for sure/see how much of an actual combat RE7 has and as a result if the game is for me or not. What's that supposed to do with RE6, a title that I played back in 2012?
Deckard Chapel
Banned
What is your problem with me?!? You've been on me in here regardless of what my opinion is.
Let's just have a "We all love Resident Evil, so let's just discuss this topic amicably" type of discussion.
Okay?
SneakersSO
Member
Uh, what? Look, Capcom has not made any claims that this wasn't a Resident Evil game, or some sheep in wolves clothing of a product with the RE name slapped on the box. In fact, from the very first interview the game director did at E3, the notion that this Resident Evil would be a return to the horror roots of the series & also feature more puzzle solving than the last few entries (5 & 6) have had is something they've said since day 1. In that same breath and interview, however, they have said that combat is also a part of the game.
In fact, in that first interview the Game Director did, he said that combat is one of the 4 key pillars to the Resident Evil franchise, and the reason they hadn't included any in the demo was because they wanted to specifically focus on how they were re-prioritizing horror & atmosphere after having ignored it for so long in the series.
As stated in the Famitsu interview, this isn't a Resident Evil game where we'll be mowing down hordes of enemies & picking up loot that they drop upon being killed along away. Combat is gonna be slower & more methodical process, harkening back to the RE 1-3 era. But mowing down hordes of enemies has never been the sole defining pillar of the RE franchise. Combat has been a part of it yes, but its only been a part of it. For many fans who loved the atmosphere & horror the series used to focus on 14 years ago or so, this entry is super intriguing. I know it'll have combat & gunplay and all that visceral action that I do want to see, I just know that its not gonna be on the same scope or scale as earlier RE titles.
SneakersSO
Member
Let's just read between the lines and put it out there - if we are going by both the language they have used to describe combat, what we have seen, and the recent Famitsu article, I think it is more than safe to say that if you're going into RE7 expect combat on the same scope, scale, or pacing of RE 4-6, then RE7 is not going to be the game for you.
Its going to be a slower game. Its going to have a larger emphasis on melee weapons. It's going to feature a smaller amount of enemies on screen at any given time or that the player must directly deal with at any one time. Yes, there will be guns, but I think anyone expecting gunplay on the level of RE 4-6 can already look elsewhere - this is not going to be the game for you.
Does that mean it has no combat? Absolutely not. It just means its very different and of a different pacing than most recent entries in the series. If the thing you come to the Resident Evil franchise for is that crazy, anime-inspired storylines or visceral, white knuckle combat, then RE7 will not be an entry you're going to enjoy, I can already tell you that.
With how much of a clean break from the more recent entries RE7 is providing, from a narrative & gameplay perspective, I think its safe to say Capcom is going to want to appease their older install base and continue the RE 4-6 gameplay era with the Revelation series, and I think its safe to assume a Rev 3 is in development. I haven't heard anything concrete on the matter though
What does this even mean? This is more cryptic than the usage of the finger in the RE7 demo...
Anyways, on topic, do you guys think RE7 became a first person game because it simply wanted to use VR tech? Is VR to blame here? (i'm still not sure whether i like the first person view - not a big fan of in your face type jump scares)
OrbitalBeard
Member
I have to assume everyone in this thread isn't expecting RE6 levels of combat.
I think some people are worried it won't even have combat on the same level as something like REmake.
My gut tells me it probably won't, BUT it will still have a decent amount.
Of course, who knows. I'd be frustrated if the last three mainline RE games weren't filled to the brim with action, but since they were, I really don't care how much or how little combat is in this game. I mean, I want some for sure, but I don't need a lot. I'm far more interested in great exploration, puzzle solving, and a moody atmosphere.
SneakersSO
Member
He's basically saying if what you're looking for is the gameplay loop that defined the RE 4-6 era, then RE6 is currently on sale on current-gen consoles for $19.99, which is further commentary that RE7 will not be that gameplay experience.
SneakersSO
Member
You would think that, but there are totally people here who are looking for RE 4-6 levels of combat from this game. Sure, that isn't what they are saying directly, but its definitely what they are implying. In fact, there are many gamers, and I wouldn't be surprised if there are some within this very thread, that never even knew the RE series before 4 redefined it - that RE to them as a franchise is what RE 4-6 laid out.
REmake has quite a few stretches of non-combat & focusing entirely on exploration & puzzle solving. If you throw in segments where you are being actively hunted with an enemy you can't kill, then I think that might be more what we can come to expect from RE7 - REmake levels of combat (with melee weapons instead of strictly gunplay) with specific encounters where enemies must be hidden from entirely.
For people who have followed the franchise long enough, we know we have seen the fanbase go through this about a decade ago when RE4 first launched. People talking about how they were worried for the franchise, how it was losing its identity, how it was unrecognizable as a Resident Evil title (Where is the zombies? Where is Umbrella? Where is Wesker or STARS?).
I'm hearing the same sentiments now as we did then, but that makes sense to me - this is a series that is defined by reinvention during its lifetime. In fact, its one of the many reasons why its lasted as long as it has. The series needed a complete shake up and RE7 is giving it exactly what it needed.
If that was indeed his intention, then that's a weird / borderline passive aggressive way of saying it.
Deckard Chapel
Banned
You said that combat was a central focus for you regarding RE7.
I merely gave the suggestion that RE6 would give you that fulfillment, as it's central focus is in fact, combat [IMHO, to it's detriment].
I do see your point regarding just how much combat will be included in RE7 - but at the same time, too much is just that and not enough will leave some players unsatisfied.
With that as logic, how will CAPCOM please everyone?
"You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you cant please all of the people all of the time".
N'estce pas?