RESIDENT EVIL 6 SPOILER THREAD

[Pikminister]

You're arguments increasingly border on tedium.

You almost described my feeling about RE6's gameplay. Not being a fan of explosions and inane plotlines, all you got is something that is very tedious when played in its entirety. With its scripted events and limiting gameplay. That's how I feel about it. Not sure how you or anyone else felt about it. I was posting my impressions on it. No real harm done with that, right?

Being a game does not mean you aren't exaggerating. I'm not completely disagreeing with you, I agree with your basic point, just not how you're inflating it.

Well, I really didn't write any of what I posted here to hurt anyone's feelings. It was me thinking aloud so to speak. Sorry if that rubbed you the wrong way. Like I said, it was just me venting about something that bothered me about the gameplay.

[News Bot]

You're arguments increasingly border on tedium. Being a game does not mean you aren't exaggerating. I'm not completely disagreeing with you, I agree with your basic point, just not how you're inflating it.

[Pikminister]

My big beef with ORC is that it existed, both the story and gameplay were trash. Neither you nor I are more or less qualified to talk about gameplay, that's a stupid notion.

But really, there is no way that BH6's gameplay is superficial or even shallow. Loaded with little annoyances? Definitely. QTEs, vehicle segments and the camera zooming in on something out of your control are batshit ludicrous decisions and whoever decided on them needs to be stuck in a re-enactment of the torture scene in Casino Royale. But your arguments are getting more and more ludicrous. A point and click game? Seriously? This is a point and click game?

I'm not saying it doesn't have its problems or that there aren't segments where it does take control away, but you are grossly exaggerating.

We're talking about a videogame. So no... its not exaggerating things when talking about how those lame-os went about limiting player control with QTE's and cinematics. Which they clearly did.

And the point and click comparison was made because you really have a very limited repertoire of options to progress through it. The comparison wasn't suppose to be taken literally. So calm down. It's just that how the way gameplay works sometimes, it just reminded me of those type of games. They severely limit player actions just to fit the plotline. That is very obvious when playing as the secondary co-op partner. Can't do shit until the plot says I can.

IThat is not to say that the gameplay is not fun at times (if it wasn't, I wouldn't play it).

I agree that RE6 is not a bad game at all. Like I said before, its a 6.5 or a 7.5 in terms of scores. I did have fun with it.

It's just that the gameplay is a hurdle that limits its re-play value (for me).

[Det. Beauregard]

The gameplay IS shallow. For the producers of this game, the plot was more important than the gameplay. And that is clearly evident from how superficial and non-interactive it often is.

They really love to take the control away from you and have you just sit there and watch.

Everyone knows that the gameplay is not RE6's forte. Spectacle is.

And the way the game usually removes the player out of the way whenever it depicts something relevant or important, speaks volumes about how the producers valued said spectacle over player control almost every single time.

Most of the cool stuff in the game, you couldn't do it yourself. Because it was usually part of a cutscene.

It's hard not to agree with this. The developers even stated that the game is now "dramatic horror," meaning horror focusing on drama. Drama is not gameplay. Survival is.

That is not to say that the gameplay is not fun at times (if it wasn't, I wouldn't play it). However, much of the game consists of the player going through rather dull sections of gameplay just to get to the next big cutscene, which is something that was a bit of a problem in RE5, but not nearly to the extent that it is here. We are forced to endure tedious sections of gameplay, sometimes multiple times (the lab in China with the explosive floor vacuum bots comes to mind, as well as the numerous vehicle sections), and for what reason? Why do I want to play through the same boring section as Chris that I just played through as Leon? A typical developer response would be "to experience the same event from a different perspective," a response which is based upon plot as opposed to actual gameplay.

Game developers need to stop trying to be movie directors and start making games again. Games have gameplay; movies don't. Control is yanked away from the player countless times throughout this "game" just to show off some "exciting" event that is occurring, and most of the time, it cannot be skipped. An example that comes to mind is the BSAA hummer sequence in Leon's campaign, in which the player must sit through a minute or two of sad strings playing while viewing the chaos on the streets of China. This is all during gameplay, and thus cannot be skipped. To me, that is simply unacceptable. It's almost as if many developers today try to make a game that will be exciting on the first or second play, but boring beyond belief after that. Simply put, it's more like a movie than a game. Would you want to watch any movie three times in a row? No. But how many games would you want to play three times in a row? I can list many.

If I had the time, I could literally make a list of every section of every chapter of every campaign, and the fun/boring ratio on a repeat playthrough would probably be about 1:1. That's sad.

On a final note, something I miss that clearly should have been added is the examination of environmental details. They've been in every main game (and most of the side ones) in the series thus far, and as a result, RE6's locations come off as dull and barren. These were clearly omitted due to either developer laziness or the realization that many casual gamers would not stop to click on them (the latter of which I don't think is necessarily true). These details added so much life to past games, and were a large part of them to me. Color me disappointed.

[News Bot]

My big beef with ORC is that it existed, both the story and gameplay were trash. Neither you nor I are more or less qualified to talk about gameplay, that's a stupid notion.

But really, there is no way that BH6's gameplay is superficial or even shallow. Loaded with little annoyances? Definitely. QTEs, vehicle segments and the camera zooming in on something out of your control are batshit ludicrous decisions and whoever decided on them needs to be stuck in a re-enactment of the torture scene in Casino Royale. But your arguments are getting more and more ludicrous. A point and click game? Seriously? This is a point and click game?

I'm not saying it doesn't have its problems or that there aren't segments where it does take control away, but you are grossly exaggerating.

[Pikminister]

I'm talking about the game in general. Not comparing it to the amount of interactivity we had in RE4 or RE5. Those games were a different ball game to this one. I mean neither of those games reminded me of a point and click game. RE6 did with its numerous and intrusive QTE's. Which were a laughable excuse for gameplay, to the point of tears.

Anyway, we're not going to agree on that. And I am fine by that since you're more qualified to talk about plotlines than gameplay in my book.

I mean we both agreed that ORC was a less than stellar game. But the difference was that you're big beef with ORC was mainly that they fucked up the story,characters, plotline, Raccoon City maps and the timeline. My problem with the game however, was that it's gameplay was rather lousy and unpolished. Designed for the CoD crowd. And that's were I really centered all my complaints about said game. I did think some of the character/plot stuff was fucked. But that didn't really hurt the game for me.

And it seems that with RE6. we will not see things the same way. Big deal.

[News Bot]

It sounds like you're just talking about the Prelude. I was going to give you the benefit of the doubt on simply not being specific on what "gameplay" you're referring to, but calling the gameplay as a whole superficial is pretty laughable. After the Prelude and first ten minutes of Leon's campaign, you have full control, barring any interim QTE sequences (really only a factor in Leon's campaign) or vehicle segments where you are unlucky enough to not be the one driving. You have the same amount of control you had in BH4 and BH5 otherwise.

[Pikminister]

Sorry, no. The gameplay mechanics are some of the most diverse this generation. Non-interactive or sub-interactive segments in the campaigns do not change them, they just speak for the campaigns. You should be more specific if you want to get your point across.

Pffft. I don't need to explain myself on that. Everyone knows that the gameplay is not RE6's forte. Spectacle is.

And the way the game usually removes the player out of the way whenever it depicts something relevant or important, speaks volumes about how the producers valued said spectacle over player control almost every single time.

Most of the cool stuff in the game, you couldn't do it yourself. Because it was usually part of a cutscene.

Like I said, it had superficial gameplay that felt like they just had to allow the player to take part in it. To the point that they didn't even explained properly how to play the damn thing.

[News Bot]

The gameplay IS shallow. For the producers of this game, the plot was more important than the gameplay. And that is clearly evident from how superficial and non-interactive it often is.

They really love to take the control away from you and have you just sit there and watch.

The pacing is fucked too. Yes.

Sorry, no. The gameplay mechanics are some of the most diverse this generation. Non-interactive or sub-interactive segments in the campaigns do not change them, they just speak for the campaigns. You should be more specific if you want to get your point across.

[Pikminister]

The gameplay is far from that. I think you're referring to how the scenario progresses, in which case yes, very linear.

The gameplay IS shallow. For the producers of this game, the plot was more important than the gameplay. And that is clearly evident from how superficial and non-interactive it often is.

They really love to take the control away from you and have you just sit there and watch.

The pacing is fucked too. Yes.

[News Bot]

But how restricted, limited and shallow the gameplay is.

The gameplay is far from that. I think you're referring to how the scenario progresses, in which case yes, very linear.

[Wrathborne]

I am honest to God terrified that they even considered bringing Wesker back. It would be the worst move they could possibly make, and one I've been both seeing coming and dreading since RE5. If anything, the news that they were considering it just goes to show it will happen eventually. Capcom cannot keep it in there pants for Wesker, it seems. And when it does is the day I officially yell, 'Fuck you Capcom!' and stop playing the games entirely. It is The Straw.

...So, I take it there will be a new position open as Moderator in the next 3 months as they announce some DLC that implies that Wesker is still alive.

I'll have to grow a beard in preparation...

I knew the Prelude would be part of the end of Leon's campaign. I don't know why they insist on doing this, giving you a glimpse of the end before it's even begun, the start of Leon's campaign is perfect for introducing the characters to the system. Sad thing is, I actually thought the Prelude was better than how it turns out in the proper campaign, it seemed like they had been on more of a journey together, I was a bit disappointed when I got to it.

[Pikminister]

That's exactly what I meant, to clarify my position. I know we become more analytical and jaded as we grow older, which is why I was lamenting our lost youth when everything was so... awesome!

That said, the kid in me really liked pretty much all the enemy designs in RE6, even if a few initially made me raise my eyebrow in regards to their origin or location.

Well its like Jar Jar Binks. Most adults hate him. But in my experience, my young cousins, nephews, nieces, kids in general didn't really had a problem with him. Most of them found him amusing. Not love him as they would Elmo or Dora the explorer. But just likeable. Some did find him annoying (and more so if they were influenced by adults). But they didn't write long ass rants about how he raped their childhoods and destroyed Star Wars like some old nerds did. Those kids have yet to become as analytical, cynical and jaded, as we adults are.

Now my beef with RE6 is not how they handled the story, characters and plot. But how restricted, limited and shallow the gameplay is. Everything is so fucking scripted. Its like the producers want you to experience the game THEIR WAY. Instead of having you explore and try things to progress through it. I've said that past RE games were linear. But even those allowed you to wonder off and try things. Things that had nothing to do with activating the next cutscene or a Michael Bay explosion that would help keep you awake.

If I was a kid, maybe all the explosions and the Jackie Chan-like over-the-top action would've been cool. And if my experience with games was limited to just a couple of years. I do see now that a lot of kids like that stuff... quite a lot. But I do remember that when I was younger I really disliked games that limited your freedom. Such as many SEGA CD games (with its interactive video-games).

Anyway, other than writing about it here I'm not going to start petitions, create a blog or get on Capcom's case about them improving the series with RE7. I think their target audience would need to demand that. And I'm not their target audience anymore. So its not up to me.

I have to say that I did enjoy some of RE6. Like I said before, it's a 6.5 or a 7.5 in terms of scores. Not too shabby.

[Mr. Spencer]

I really don't think anyone is going into a Resident Evil game with the hopes of the series showcasing "good" messages and morals. Chris dying wouldn't have been a "crappy message" so much as it would've been tragically ironic. Of course, this is coming from someone who has a really solid stance on wanting main characters to die. The series almost needs it. I still think Jill should've really been dead, and I hold an even stronger belief that, because of the way RE6 was written, the opportunity to kill off Chris was truly wasted.

I agree, and it wouldn't have been a crappy message if Chris actually gave his life to save the world in a heroic act of self-sacrifice.