Resident Evil 2 Remake

[Assisted Living Godzilla]

By RE2 they're throwing tons of ammo at you and the fucking thing has become an action game. I'd also say that resource and inventory management are far more interesting aspects of the game in RE4 than any other Resident Evil game. Beyond the first Resident Evil needing to really think about inventory management isn't much of a thing either, as later games have areas that are far more linear than the mansion.

Really? Even more so than 0? I disagree. A game that forces you to drop any items that you can't carry with you because there is no inventory box, and that you have to think ahead of time of the best places to drop them (and that's really after you realize you might have to go back for certain items you've dropped) is less interesting than the tetris mini-game inventory management from RE4? The same game where if you know what you're doing you can immediately sell the pistol to get the TMP because it's a better weapon if you're melee-ing enemies, and suplexing them? And this is not me even taking into account that one difficulty in REmake where items aren't shared between inventory boxes. TheHeroOfTime already covered RE3.

I don't remember the lack of the inventory box being a problem. For me being able to drop things wherever I wanted made things vastly simpler. Figuring out good places to drop off surplus inventory wasn't exactly hard to figure out in 0.

RE4 throws you a ton of ammo so you never really have to think about ammunition. I mean sure, you decide which weapons you want to use and upgrade, but they're all just as viable one way or another. I've gotten close to running out of ammo on RE4 on Professional like once throughout a playthrough, and even then I never worried about it because sure enough they'll throw more at me.

I didn't say I had to think about ammo like that in RE4. I think that might only become a problem if you've got too many guns and the game's adjusting difficulty thinks you're doing too well and stops giving you ammo for what you're using most.

You're right about the later games being more linear than RE1 so maximizing your pathing isn't as pertinent in the sequels, but it's still there regardless. You still think about which areas you revisit the most and kill the enemies in those areas. If you only visit a room once and there's a few/single enemy in there, you don't waste your ammo; just get your shit and get out.

It's not there enough to be a problem of any kind. Like I said before, I didn't think there was any tension in that in the original game, I sure as hell didn't think there was in later games.

RE3 is particularly weak about this, but makes up for it in different ways with Nemesis, and the gun powder. Are classic RE games particularly hard about this? No, but it's another layer of resource management that's completely absent from RE4.

Never played this one.

It'd probably be better to say that combat in general in RE4 is the source of tension, which is a combination of things like repositioning your character, not being able to move while you're aiming, and having to reload weapons in realtime. It's all stuff that works to allow enemies to advance on you while you're still, while making you think where to move to next. Although I think having to reload in realtime would be the biggest source of creating that tension, as it was never something I felt in previous RE games where I had the safety of the inventory screen to reloaded instantly. Removing the ability for the player to shoot a enemy, reloaded in a paused state, and come out of that state and shoot the enemy more goes a long way to making enemy encounters more tense. I never had problems with the tank controls beyond the first time I originally played Resident Evil. Outside of the first few moments I first played the first game running around zombies and other stuff wasn't something I'd really call tense or difficult.

Slightly change your first sentence you're basically describing the old RE games; you have to reposition your characters if you're shooting multiple enemies (in smaller areas than RE4), can't move while aiming/shooting, and you're limited on resources. Not to mention that boss fights are far more tense than RE4.

I never felt any tension in having to reload a weapon in RE4. The game has so many different ways to kill enemies, and the knife is really strong, that simply shooting most of them dead -- especially in the beginning -- is something I rarely do. Only exceptions are certain enemies like the chainsaw guys.

Yeah, you slightly change it and gone is the thing that can add tension to encounters. Having to reload in realtime means you're spending time in which enemies can advance and might hit you from afar. Being able to pull up a time freezing inventory screen that lets you reload their means that's a problem that isn't actually a problem. Before RE4 if an enemy is about to hit you and you didn't have ammo you could use the inventory screen to safety reload and either knock the enemy back so you can get away, or kill them. If you were fighting a boss you could use it to cut out animations and maximize the amount of time you have to shoot them without distance being closed.

 

[Ash]

Did you play Resident Evil 1 as Chris? Ammo and inventory management is peak there. Chris has less inventory slots, finds less weapons, and less ammo overall. Also no lockpick, but small keys. Meaning carrying even less healing or armament for a period.

 

[kalganoat]

Are people okay with TPS? IIRC the consensus before was people wanted something like RE remaster

 

[Ash]

I am totally OK with it. there is little to nothing to gain from a "faithful yet not actually faithful" remaster, just as there wasn't with RE1.

The original Resident Evil games looked like this:

And sounded like this:



What, exactly, do you think some modern corporate slave purple-haired game dev should touch? Upscaled resolution and audio sampling or some shit, i.e not worth the time or money. This leaves what they SHOULD do:

1. a relatively faithful extension of the game. Better gameplay. Lots of little details. For example, add the 180 degree quick turn introduced by RE3. More diverse AI behaviours. A hard difficulty mode. Neat new events and touches, fill out dead space in the original design. RE2: Mercenaries. More areas added here and that don't feel out of place and extend the game in a meaningful way. Alongside minor graphics whoring touch ups and whatever else. Leave the soundtrack and general audio alone.

OR

2. take the game in a wildly different direction, a reimagining, as they have done.

And don't say they should turn it into some monochromatic shit like they did with Resident Evil 1's "faithful" remake. Gameplay-wise they had the right idea though, they tried to extend the game.

 

[Adon]

I don't remember the lack of the inventory box being a problem. For me being able to drop things wherever I wanted made things vastly simpler. Figuring out good places to drop off surplus inventory wasn't exactly hard to figure out in 0.

It's not about it being a problem. It's about the fact that nothing in RE4 is more interesting in regards to resource management compared to RE0.

I didn't say I had to think about ammo like that in RE4. I think that might only become a problem if you've got too many guns and the game's adjusting difficulty thinks you're doing too well and stops giving you ammo for what you're using most.

See above.

It's not there enough to be a problem of any kind. Like I said before, I didn't think there was any tension in that in the original game, I sure as hell didn't think there was in later games.

Again, see above. It's not about it being a problem. Let me reiterate that the game aren't intrinsically hard, but it's more resource management that's absent from RE4. Your point was that resource/inventory management is more interesting in RE4 than other games. I don't see how.

Yeah, you slightly change it and gone is the thing that can add tension to encounters. Having to reload in realtime means you're spending time in which enemies can advance and might hit you from afar. Being able to pull up a time freezing inventory screen that lets you reload their means that's a problem that isn't actually a problem. Before RE4 if an enemy is about to hit you and you didn't have ammo you could use the inventory screen to safety reload and either knock the enemy back so you can get away, or kill them. If you were fighting a boss you could use it to cut out animations and maximize the amount of time you have to shoot them without distance being closed.

Oh yeah, having to reload weapons in real time is tense. It's not like there's wide open areas and the enemies are very slow which gives you plenty of time to run far away enough to reload without having to worry about enemies hitting you.

By that logic, RE5 is an even more tense game because looking at your inventory doesn't pause the game the way even RE4 does. Again, reloading in real time is something that never added tension to the game for me in RE4.

 

[Wunderbar]

I don't remember the lack of the inventory box being a problem. For me being able to drop things wherever I wanted made things vastly simpler. Figuring out good places to drop off surplus inventory wasn't exactly hard to figure out in 0.

so you had no problems with hookshot?
suure bro.

 

[SumDrunkGuy]

This was really a thing? I never noticed it in 4 or 5...

 

[Ventidius]

I hope they don't change the area layouts, as the level design was one of the highlights of those games. Then again, I also don't want to feel too familiar with the locales as that would just take away a lot of the challenge. Changing the enemy placements a bit is probably one way of balancing those two imperatives. Adding new areas that connect with the old ones through well-placed shortcuts and key items would be another way of doing that, albeit a riskier one with a greater chance of sullying the foundation. That said, I'm feeling optimistic, perhaps because I was satisfied with the work that Capcom did with REmake. Then again, Mikami was still around in those days, and in his prime, so perhaps optimism is not yet warranted.

Resource management definitely could use a rebalancing, they could at least implement that in the harder difficulties, I imagine, especially if the new mechanics make knifing easier to use, which they most likely do. As for the combat, if they are going to emulate, or at least use as a foundation, the combat mechanics of one of the recent ones - as seems likely - the best choices would be either the system from Revelations 2 or that of Mercenaries 3D. Yes, the latter is a 3DS game with awful portable controls, but the system itself was essentially the same quirky one from RE4/5 plus the much needed QoL feature of being able to move while aiming. The system is by no means outdated and supports a lot of depth through its body part-dependent melee setup mechanic, as demonstrated by The Mercenaries 4,5, and 3D. The basic premise of this system gels very well with an action-survival hybrid because you don't have to be stylish/efficient, but you get to save resources if you are. Melee exists, but it is a reward for merit, not an awesome button. Plus, it's fun.

The other option is the Rev 2 system, as this one too is a further refinement of the RE4 system, but even though it is solid, I think it might make the game too easy, especially due to the dodge mechanic. However, if they can tune the fights to be challenging despite dodging - not too hard to do if the cramped environments are retained - then more power to them. The one system they should avoid is that of RE6, as that gives you way too many tools to deal with enemies, cramped environments or not. In a campaign oriented towards exploration and resource management like RE2 should be, there is no place for that, especially because of the OP melee that has the potential of bypassing the resource tax of large chunks of the game.

Enemy variety is always a good thing in a RE game, and more BOW varieties should be added, especially if they are lore-friendly, e.g. they are creatures that we know existed and were loose in Raccoon City during the outbreak. Some of the enemy types seen in RE3 are obvious choices in this regard. In particular, I hope we see Hunters make it into the remake, they are a classic and have an unique fighting style that should spice things up nicely.

On a less serious note, I am kind of peeved that they changed Leon's appearance. He looked fine in 4-6, they should have taken that as a template and made him a bit younger, that's it. They always change the appearance of my favorite characters, like when they gave Jill a rhinoplasty in Revelations that no one asked for.

 

[Tacgnol]

It would actually be nice if they reduced the amount of ammo from the base game. RE2 ammo scarcity was almost non-existent after a certain point.

This looks more action heavy though, so I doubt that will happen.

 

[Master]

. RE4 is a game where you kill an enemy and then he drops you shotgun cartridges (I think the enemy ammo drops in that game are determined by the weapons you're using most or something like that but whatever)

This is the shittiest part of the game. Its like a form of level scaling. How is it different than Oblivion? If you have low health the enemy or a crate will drop a green herb, but if you have full health it will never drop it. Pretty fucking cheap. Dead Space did it too but to a lesser extent.

 

[Ash]

Yeah, it's coddling design. Playing poorly is meant to be punished, you're meant to lose, until you get gud. Still, it's somewhat minor. It's only one aspect of the game that was doing it in RE4 (resources). Enemies didn't suddenly become braindead and miss every shot or anything like that.

 

[Momock]

plus the much needed QoL feature of being able to move while aiming

Why? How is having to wait for an imaginary crosshair to allow you to aim right again (because you made a fez steps back) superior to stop aiming, make a few steps back, and aim again with full precision? Both are arbitrary limitations but at least the second give me full control of my character and my aiming, and I don't have to wait for a damned cooldown to tell me when I can shoot again.

 

[Ivan]

This was really a thing? I never noticed it in 4 or 5...

Same in God Hand

 

[sullynathan]

This was really a thing? I never noticed it in 4 or 5...

It's one of those things you never notice until someone tells you, not sure if it's genius

 

[Ventidius]

plus the much needed QoL feature of being able to move while aiming

Why? How is having to wait for an imaginary crosshair to allow you to aim right again (because you made a fez steps back) superior to stop aiming, make a few steps back, and aim again with full precision? Both are arbitrary limitations but at least the second give me full control of my character and my aiming, and I don't have to wait for a damned cooldown to tell me when I can shoot again.

Have you played Mercs 3D? It is essentially the same system as 4/5, no drawbacks at all, no "cooldown", just more comfortable and smooth, and that game retained the skill ceiling of the older Mercs, even if it lowered the skill floor a bit with that feature. The only issue was the crappy portable controls that didn't gel well with the shooting mechanics, but that shouldn't be a problem in other platforms.

 

[User0001]

Nice! R1 Remake was awesome

 

[TheHeroOfTime]

I didn't say they were the same. I said ammo management was only a thing in Resident Evil, and specifically one version of it. I also said that resource management wasn't a thing outside of the first game as well. The mansion isn't linear like later game areas, so thinking about what you're actually carrying around is something you've got to do their (especially if you're playing Chris) but it's not really a thing in later games outside of Code Veronica from what I remember. And it's not even bad in Code Veronica.

I didn't say RE4 derives tension from ammo management or resource management, so I've no idea why you're going on about that. I did say RE4 has more interesting resource management, as that game actually has an inventory that soon becomes something you have to think about while playing. I also said I never found the things Momock brought up to be sources of tension at all, IE, I don't think there's tension in resource management...not even in the one game I thought that was a thing that actually had to be thought about. Lost progress isn't really a thing that matters in those old RE games, you could spend hours figuring shit out, die, and get back to where you died in minutes. That first game only takes an hour to beat once you know what you're doing. Was playing Code Veronica on Dreamcast before I got a VMU, which meant I had to start over if I died, which didn't happen much, and that game takes an hour to get to the end too.

My point is that resources management is a thing in every single Resident evil game before RE4, and is not related with resources being lacking or very hard to find. Is about choosing what suits you depending the situation, what is need and that is not. Level linearity has nothing to do with it. Is about the limitation of inventory slots, the chests and the enemies that force you to wear more or less weapons/ammo/healing items, meaning that you can have more or less inventory slots for other key items. Always depending the situation. My point with RE4 is that it has almost zero resource management. The only it has is about the amount and size of the weapons that you can wear at once, amount and size that increases over time because you can buy briefcase expansions during all the game. Key items and treasures aren't even are located on the briefcase, but in an apart and unlimited inventory for them. Because Resident evil 4 is not a survival horror, is an action horror game. A very good one. But it doesn't offers the same in terms of gameplay that the previous entries (Maybe it does in terms of horror and atmosphere).

This is the shittiest part of the game. Its like a form of level scaling. How is it different than Oblivion? If you have low health the enemy or a crate will drop a green herb, but if you have full health it will never drop it. Pretty fucking cheap. Dead Space did it too but to a lesser extent.

Well, for me it would be a problem if RE4 were a survival game like the others. But as I said before, it is an action game. So ammo drops work like a kind of... cooldown mechanic? Were it limits you how much you can use a certain weapon depending of how has been that weapon improved. I'm talking specifically about ammo drops because I don't remember or mind the healing items. Because they are almost unlimited. You can buy them from the seller. Only yellow herbs are truly scarce.

Enemies sometimes popped out of existence if you died too many times; the most notable example being the water room where the two crossbowmen wouldn't appear.

I'm not sure if it depends about how much time you die. I think you can't kill youself with grenades and stuff to decrease difficulty. You must get killed by enemies, getting hit by projectiles and failing QTEs intentionally to do it. At least this is the way Speedrunners do it I think. Here's an explanatory video about the overall system, worth to check.



I think that a dynamic difficulty system is good when is designed for skilled players, and not for making the things easier for those who fail constantly (AKA Oblivion). For example in RE2 remake, I wish the throw me a lot more of zombies and lickers if I'm permorming to well, to still having a challenge. But if I'm failing, I wish that a good amount of enemies are still there for forcing me to improve and get better and the game. I mean you can increase the difficulty, but you should never decrease it below the standard.

 

[DragoFireheart]

Spoiler alert:

Spoiler

RE was always shit until RE4.

 

[Master]

I didn't say they were the same. I said ammo management was only a thing in Resident Evil, and specifically one version of it. I also said that resource management wasn't a thing outside of the first game as well. The mansion isn't linear like later game areas, so thinking about what you're actually carrying around is something you've got to do their (especially if you're playing Chris) but it's not really a thing in later games outside of Code Veronica from what I remember. And it's not even bad in Code Veronica.

I didn't say RE4 derives tension from ammo management or resource management, so I've no idea why you're going on about that. I did say RE4 has more interesting resource management, as that game actually has an inventory that soon becomes something you have to think about while playing. I also said I never found the things Momock brought up to be sources of tension at all, IEdon't think there's tension in resource management...not even in the one game I thought that was a thing that actually had to be thought about. Lost progress isn't really a thing that matters in those old RE games, you could spend hours figuring shit out, die, and get back to where you died in minutes. That first game only takes an hour to beat once you know what you're doing. Was playing Code Veronica on Dreamcast before I got a VMU, which meant I had to start over if I died, which didn't happen much, and that game takes an hour to get to the end too.

My point is that resources management is a thing in every single Resident evil game before RE4, and is not related with resources being lacking or very hard to find. Is about choosing what suits you depending the situation, what is need and that is not. Level linearity has nothing to do with it. Is about the limitation of inventory slots, the chests and the enemies that force you to wear more or less weapons/ammo/healing items, meaning that you can have more or less inventory slots for other key items. Always depending the situation. My point with RE4 is that it has almost zero resource management. The only it has is about the amount and size of the weapons that you can wear at once, amount and size that increases over time because you can buy briefcase expansions during all the game. Key items and treasures aren't even are located on the briefcase, but in an apart and unlimited inventory for them. Because Resident evil 4 is not a survival horror, is an action horror game. A very good one. But it doesn't offers the same in terms of gameplay that the previous entries (Maybe it does in terms of horror and atmosphere).

This is the shittiest part of the game. Its like a form of level scaling. How is it different than Oblivion? If you have low health the enemy or a crate will drop a green herb, but if you have full health it will never drop it. Pretty fucking cheap. Dead Space did it too but to a lesser extent.

Well, for me it would be a problem if RE4 were a survival game like the others. But as I said before, it is an action game. So ammo drops work like a kind of... cooldown mechanic? Were it limits you how much you can use a certain weapon depending of how has been that weapon improved. I'm talking specifically about ammo drops because I don't remember or mind the healing items. Because they are almost unlimited. You can buy them from the seller. Only yellow herbs are truly scarce.

Enemies sometimes popped out of existence if you died too many times; the most notable example being the water room where the two crossbowmen wouldn't appear.

I'm not sure if it depends about how much time you die. I think you can't kill youself with grenades and stuff to decrease difficulty. You must get killed by enemies, getting hit by projectiles and failing QTEs intentionally to do it. At least this is the way Speedrunners do it I think. Here's an explanatory video about the overall system, worth to check.



I think that a dynamic difficulty system is good when is designed for skilled players, and not for making the things easier for those who fail constantly (AKA Oblivion). For example in RE2 remake, I wish the throw me a lot more of zombies and lickers if I'm permorming to well, to still having a challenge. But if I'm failing, I wish that a good amount of enemies are still there for forcing me to improve and get better and the game. I mean you can increase the difficulty, but you should never decrease it below the standard.

Oh man, that video. "Dynamic" difficulty? The "flow"? The genius secret of RE4? What?
Sure wont forget to subscribe and Patreon this dude.

 

[Multidirectional]

Wrong. Play it again and actually play it for more than 20 mins, and drop expectations set by the older RE games or other shooters.

What makes it gud: Satisfying weapons. Diverse, fun to interact with AI. Good level design. Fun secrets. Mercenaries. Good weapon upgrade system. DX/SS2-tier inventory. fun scripted events. Awesome boss fights. Every room they throw something different at you, no one challenge is the same. Even has some horror moments despite claims to the contrary (regenerators!). Is it a good Resident Evil game? Probably not. Is it a good game? Absolutely.

It has great pacing and variety, while also having a good length (around 15 hours I believe). That in itself is admirable. Easily one of best console action games I've played, if it didn't have those QTE sequences it would've been truly great. I actually saw someone here before crap all over RE4 while saying RE5 is good, which is just nothing short of mindblowing, considering that the only good things about that game are the ones copied from RE4.

 

[Master]

Dead Space 1 was better. At least it didnt remove any enemies. Afaik. Or does DS have a secret too?

 

[Momock]

Have you played Mercs 3D? It is essentially the same system as 4/5, no drawbacks at all, no "cooldown", just more comfortable and smooth, and that game retained the skill ceiling of the older Mercs, even if it lowered the skill floor a bit with that feature. The only issue was the crappy portable controls that didn't gel well with the shooting mechanics, but that shouldn't be a problem in other platforms.

But you've seen gameplay from RE2Remake right? There is a drawback when you move while aiming. So I keep my question.

 

[iZerw]

And sometime soon we'll get the true HD version of RE4:

 

[Ash]

plus the much needed QoL feature of being able to move while aiming

Why? How is having to wait for an imaginary crosshair to allow you to aim right again (because you made a fez steps back) superior to stop aiming, make a few steps back, and aim again with full precision? Both are arbitrary limitations but at least the second give me full control of my character and my aiming, and I don't have to wait for a damned cooldown to tell me when I can shoot again.

I'll answer your question for you.

Being able to move while aiming prevents awkward positioning situations such as where you stop moving thinking you got a good angle, aim, find out it's not actually a good angle because the target moved 1cm behind a pipe blocking your headshot perhaps, have to stop aiming, change position and aim again...among being just generally convenient and a little more realistic. The accuracy penalty you get is just that, an accuracy penalty. You can still shoot while moving, it's just only ideal close range. It's a good solution to letting you move while aiming and preventing some control awkwardness, while still resulting in generally stationary combat as RE has always had, and as they're clearly going for here. The main drawback is needing the crosshairs on screen as a visual representation of accuracy, impacting immersion. It will also probably mean very little in the case of close range weapons (shotgun, flamethrower), the accuracy penalty won't mean much when they're inherently close range weapons to begin with. But we'll see.

 

[Ventidius]

Have you played Mercs 3D? It is essentially the same system as 4/5, no drawbacks at all, no "cooldown", just more comfortable and smooth, and that game retained the skill ceiling of the older Mercs, even if it lowered the skill floor a bit with that feature. The only issue was the crappy portable controls that didn't gel well with the shooting mechanics, but that shouldn't be a problem in other platforms.

But you've seen gameplay from RE2Remake right? There is a drawback when you move while aiming. So I keep my question.

Well, you quoted me analyzing some of the previous combat systems with their pros and cons, and how Capcom could learn from them for the new remake, I wasn't exactly defending the new one. Not that there is much to defend atm, is there? We don't know much about it yet, and videos can only go so far in giving you an idea of how it will be. We'll have to wait and see until it comes out to know how it stacks up overall to the previous systems.