Arachnid
Member
Lol. We are on complete opposite sides of the spectrum here. Where do I even start?RE2 doesn't have gunplay or movement, it's a "aim and shoot" type of game, with zero mechanical deep, while in RE3 good reflexes are rewarded with headshots and counter-attacks. You can feel the Platinum/Clover background in the game.
Turning the Chief into an immortal stalker NPC would be terrible and against the arcadish action gameplay that made RE4 so good.
The RE3 team is simply more skilled for this type of (action) game. Sometimes you don't need to listen to fans, Capcom.
Literally the only thing RE3 added was the dodge function with some aim assist after. That's it. You're acting like it's some giant evolution of 2. "Aiming and shooting" is gunplay. Simplified description, but that's what it is. Different guns had different stats, recoil, crits, effects, damage, rates of fire, reticle function (some with no reticle), ammo types/management, and upgrades. Resident Evil 2 also had more guns and more upgrades than RE3 (and RE3 just pasted over some guns from 2). You could simplify any shooting game by saying you just "aim and shoot".
Anyway, the point of my post is that RE2 already has everything OG RE4 had along with movement while shooting. The only thing they'd have to add is the quick time events/button prompted melee/dodging. Bring over the dodge mechanic from 3 if you like, but tighten it up and make it look better (leon cartwheeling or something vs Jill doing a sidestep with a corny screen effect and I-frames). Mechanically, it's already all there for RE4.
Also, disagree with an immortal enemy being so terrible in an action game. If anything, that just adds to the stress/tension situations that RE4 was famous for. Having to deal with legions of Ganado while also trying to slow down or barricade against a bigger threat you can't kill is pure tension. It reminds me of blocking the front door from the Dr. Salvador and holding off the rooftop from ganado and feeling overwhelmed in the intro. Sure, Salvador is killable, but almost no one kills him in that section first time through because it's so difficult and you're just trying to survive at this point (until you eventually get saved by the bell). That is essentially the same dynamic, but more elongated with a stalker.
Thank FUCK the RE3 team isn't making RE4. Their action was abysmal and their game was nowhere near as tight as RE2 was. Anything they didn't ape from 2 was awful (every enemy type here is in 2 except for the plagas type parasite zombie), and some things like the damage system were heavily downgraded. Terrible map design (with less overall area), worse and less bosses (one of them was even reused), Nemesis wasn't a wart on X's behind as a stalker, and there was a serious lack of content. Thankfully, Capcom did listen to fans and brought back the RE2 team.
It's not just fans. RE3make is currently one of the lowest critically rated RE games, down there with Rev 2 and RE6. Meanwhile, RE2make is one of the highest rated games in the series up there with RE1make and RE4. Fans blasted 3 and so did critics. This is like RE6, where every once in a while, you get the vocal fan who tries to claim it's underrated or did what it did well. It's not, and it didn't.
Last edited: