Forum - View topicGAME: Resident Evil HD Remaster
|
Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | ||
|---|---|---|---|
leafy sea dragon
 Posts: 7163 Location: Another Kingdom |
|
||
Perhaps cheaters will find their way to the top of the leaderboards in short order, but I like what Nintendo did with Ultimate NES Remix: When you send a score to the leaderboards, if it's the top score, it will also send replay data so other people can look at what you've done and attempt to copy it or improve upon it. Its real intent, I'm sure of it, is to easily catch any cheated attempts. The 0' 00" 01 times are obvious. The less obvious ones are the ones slightly less than the time in 2nd place. It's an example that I hope more games will do in the future. Something like Resident Evil would probably be far too long to allow for replays though, unless the playthroughs get very efficient very quickly. Last edited by leafy sea dragon on Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:51 am; edited 1 time in total |
|||
|
|||
NorbieH
 Posts: 40 |
|
||
|
When I played this game originaly on the playstation it scared the hell out of me and so far it's the only game I played through without a break (not including toilet or bite to eat).
|
|||
|
|||
daveriley
 Posts: 117 Location: Philadelphia |
|
||
Obviously that's too difficult to retrofit into an existing game you're just up-resing, but it's nice to dream. Unfortunately, what make Resident Evil interesting to speed run (big, somewhat non-linear areas) isn't really what the series is about now, so I think it's a foregone conclusion either way. 
|
|||
|
|||
|
leafy sea dragon
Posts: 7163 Location: Another Kingdom |
|
||
|
Yeah, that's what Utimate NES Remix does: When you submit a top score or time, you're also submitting the exact timing for every input so that anyone else who has the game can access the leaderboards and see what you did to achieve that time.
Something like Resident Evil sounds very prone to cheating, which is why this comes to mind. |
|||
|
|||
Spoofer
 Posts: 356 Location: NY |
|
||
|
Great write-up.
I still prefer the original game (as it existed on the Director's Cut) in terms of aesthetics and gameplay structure, and especially the DC's Arranged/Advanced version's challenge, but REmake was definitely great for what it was. I have mixed feelings on the addition of Lisa, in terms of her narrative value in the game, and especially in terms of gameplay since she seemed to be a step backwards after the progression of the T-103s to the incredibly-intimidating Nemesis. Hope this sells well enough to encourage Capcom to port over RE0 as well. |
|||
|
|||
|
daveriley
Posts: 117 Location: Philadelphia |
|
||
|
I definitely love Arrange mode in DC. It would've been a great way to add value to this one just but putting something like that in, moving items around to create a semi-new experience. Then again, technological and manpower considerations aside, that'd reduce its ability to be a quick and easy grab for cash, as HD Remasters always are.
I don't hate Lisa, but I do hate the extended area with her in the caves. Don't know what they were thinking, adding more to what's people pretty much universally consider the worst part of the game. By and large, REmake is one of my favorite survival horror games, but that's my least favorite part in almost all of the series (except every part of Resident Evil 6?) I'd take a RE0 remake if I could get it, but I'm not gonna lose sleep over it. There are some parts I really like about that game, but it's maybe the blandest of all the pre-RE4 stuff. |
|||
|
|||
Stuart Smith
 Posts: 1298 |
|
||
|
Seeing complaints around the web about the "sadistic difficulty" of this game is kind of a shame. I know a lot of modern gamers are used to heavily casualized content like regenerating health, unlimited ammo, and unlimited saves, but I suppose a lot of younger people's first Resident Evil was either 6, 5, or 4 so it's not too surprising.
I've missed the old tank-control style games. With an emphasize on puzzles and hording your ammo and resources and just exploring and figuring out where to go and what to do. -Stuart Smith |
|||
|
|||
|
IanC
Posts: 685 Location: Essex, England |
|
||
|
Despite how annoyed I am over the lack of a Wii U version I bought this today (using the 10% off code. 14th download for PS4. Sigh. I swear PSN is slow at downloads comparednto the likes of Steam so I better start the download tomorrow morning…
|
|||
|
|||
|
Spoofer
Posts: 356 Location: NY |
|
||
|
People are saying it's "sadistically difficult", really? I'm absurdly out of touch as a gamer, as I don't think I've played a non-fighting game from the PS3 generation at all... But man, how much have games fallen if REmake is considered overly difficult? Certainly it has its own style of play and a unique learning curve, but it's not that bad at all. The original PS1 version and RE3 were both much more challenging.
I only played 0 once (compared to the billions of times I've played every other pre-RE4 game in the series), so it's not like I was ever in love with it, but as I can play pretty much every other RE release on my BC PS3, it'd be nice to replace that lone GC copy I have remaining in my collection. |
|||
|
|||
|
leafy sea dragon
Posts: 7163 Location: Another Kingdom |
|
||
|
I'm guessing that people are used to the action-hero, run-and-gun type of gameplay later Resident Evil games adopted, and by comparison, the slow and clunky movements and limited offensive capability makes it feel difficult. (While I have not played a Resident Evil game, I did hear such things when Banjo-Kazooie was re-released for the Xbox 360, with people talking about how hard it was. I found it more amusing than anything though, and as I've played a lot of platformers since, I know where these guys are coming from.)
In general though, there was a period where games got easier through the 5th and 6th generations because of constant complaints to the developers about their difficulty. It plateaued late into the 6th generation and seemed to go up slightly in the 7th, from what I can gather, as games like Super Mario Galaxy came out and now we started getting complaints that the games were too easy. An easy game is not necessarily a bad one though. This became an issue because you have new people coming into video gaming, and they are people who play video games to feel rewarded and for escapism, not so much for the challenge and the prestige that arcade games would have had. And with any new influx of people, you need to provide some degree of beginner-accessibility to them, or you will lose that audience in a hurry as is what happened to Sierra's point-and-click adventures. The other thing is that games are now more about length and content than difficulty. Earlier games were made very hard usually because they were short, and they were short because there was limited memory space. Hence, to extend the amount of time taken to complete a game (and, for arcade games, to get people to keep putting quarters into the machine), the difficulty is cranked up considerably. Now, games have become so large and the game systems' processing power so high that they don't need to do that anymore. It is debatable about whether short but hard games sell better than long but easy games, on the other hand, even without taking into consideration that a long game would ordinarily cost more to make. I have noticed some franchises make easy main games and some rather difficult side games, however, that retain the same gameplay. A good example is Genius Sonority's Pokémon games--while the handheld core series is consistently pretty easy (no doubt because they're aimed at small children), the side games from Genius Sonority retain the same battle system but are vastly increased in difficulty, expecting you to already know the basics when you begin and requiring in-depth knowledge of all of its mechanics, as well as using creative and perhaps unexpected applications of those mechanics, to achieve 100% completion. |
|||
|
|||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group