Support NeoGAF

[Bernardougf]

*****Spoilers for Resident Evil 4 and Resident Evil 4: REmake. ****




So, before I start, second disclaimer: I love Resident Evil 4. It was the first RE game I played, it got me interested enough to try and fall in love with all the other main entries. I also love RE4R. Actually just finished my first playthrough last week because I was taking so much time exploring and experimenting and enjoying scenery. This isn't a bait topic, nor is it one discussing which iteration of RE4 is t3h goatest of awl times bahhhhhhh.

Now, the point of the thread: Pre-release, every preview, review, back door Demo invite, postcard, whatever released for the remake of RE4 was absolutely gushing. Things that stuck out to me as selling points were the claims that it's the most "skill intensive," or "moment to moment engaging," entry in the series. But alongside all of the praise, came what felt to me like an agreed upon behind the scenes journo decision to elevate the game to the originals detriment. As an attempted observant consumer, this is the first time I've ever seen this particular marketing tack in regards to a remake of a beloved title.

It's subtle, but there's lots of slamming the originals' graphics, enemy AI, ignoring the fact that the original was designed on GameCube hardware, erroneously referring to it as a PS2 title (when the PS2 port was INFAMOUS for looking like someone smeared Vaseline on a camera and then recorded a TV set of someone playing the game on the GCN. Just weird disingenuous (or worse yet, poorly researched) stuff.

For a direct comparison, look at how the marketing ran for the remake of Resident Evil 2, less than a decade ago. The original game (by contemporary standards) looks, controls, plays, and has performances that were molded from gorilla feces. The PS1 to PS4 felt like a bigger leap than the GCN to the PS5 (PS4, let's be honest, cross gen bros) but the original game, even the laughable and campy bits are revered in the reviews of it's remake that mention it's Origins as a PS1 title. Again, not slamming or praising any game mentioned, it's just a weird shift to observe.

But then it gets stranger: Reviews and hands on reports, etc mention just absolutely REDUNDANT nonsense. Here's a few of my favorite bits I've heard about why RE4R trounces RE4:

- You get an item box. Nevermind the fact that the case was made to replace the item box initially, but fuck it, why feel pressure in your choices on the field?

- The game is A LOT MORE tense because it gets dark way earlier and most of the game is in Spooky night time! ....despite the transition to nightfall being in the exact same place as the original.

- There's now a loot system! ...just Like in 2005.

- Ashley is WAYYY less annoying now! - Except her gameplay segments are basically 1:1 with the original and everyone I've seen on earth has murdered her accidentally at least once.

- The island segment is shortened and flows SO MUCH BETTER. ....they took out U3. That's literally all the fuck they changed. That and nerfing J.J. Oh, they got rid of the vehicle segment and the crane, too. It's like exactly the same shit with all of the gameplay variation removed. Fight > hallway > fight > hallway probably does flow better, but like, the point of this mountain of text is...

They're praising this game for doing shit that the original did. Wholesale. And At the same time, they're like....BOY, I'M GLAD THE REMAKE DID ALL THE THINGS THE ORIGINAL DID BECAUSE THE ORIGINAL SUCKED, BUT IT WAS ALSO A CLASSIC just...gives me this 17 year old dreadlocked white teenager wearing a Zeppelin shirt vibe. Have we reached the point where people who never played games are writing legacy pieces about them? Is this just the agreed upon strategy in 2023 decided upon in Nathan Grayson's Discord Coalition of Evil? Am I overreacting? Imagining things? Purple?

Newsflash for you mate... classic journalism and press specially game press has been dead for about five to ten years ... they are now a bunch of activists and/or payed shills

I dont enter any gaming site or care for any award in the entertainment midia for about some time and it only made my life better and my decisions easir and more accurate

You should try

 

[Neff]

Capcom let the lore writers connect the entire map in a more coherent way, and they cut the filler. Fans of the original will argue that the filler wasn't filler, but there's very clear padding in the second half of that game that makes the pacing feel slowed and off, compared to the first half that felt greatly paced up until the castle section.

Like you say it depends how you define filler. If we're talking about the smaller areas between the big iconic set piece locales, I'd argue that they have their place. Pacing is determined (especially in a horror title) by peaks and valleys of intensity. And RE4 imo balanced it very, very well. It was something I particularly appreciated when they jumped to RE5, because that game has few quiet moments to speak of. You're shuttled from one major encounter to the next with very little time to relax, and it becomes numbing. Scenes which should be inducing panic aren't allowed to catch you off-guard, because they're more or less constant. A great game, but it didn't do pacing nearly as well as RE4 did. Thankfully the RE4 remake gets it right and understands how pacing works. There's definitely less quiet moments than the original, but I don't agree that they cut the 'filler'.

Also it's worth considering that they added/expanded quite a few sections to compensate for the consolidation of legacy locales, so did they add filler? Whatever they did, I'm fine with it, game's amazing.

The children's puzzle has a singular level of complexity, the Freezer Room puzzle has four, and the Hexagon puzzle is incomprehensible to me.

The electric puzzle can be solved by a process of elimination, there's only one way it will work, you just have to be able to hold several potential solutions in your head at once.

The rotating puzzle, like the original RE4 sliding puzzle, is already half-solved for you. You can solve it from the default configuration with only a couple of moves. You can really fuck both up though if you make the wrong moves, which I admittedly did first time.

 

[FeastYoEyes]

After sitting with it for a couple months, I still feel like I prefer the original. I've had the itch to go back to it.

 

[March Climber]

Rykan I’m asking this next question with all due respect. Is English your secondary language? I’m just trying to understand why my posts on RE4 are being misinterpreted to such a high degree and if you’re ESL it might explain a lot for me and how we interact going forward.

 

[TheInfamousKira]

Like you say it depends how you define filler. If we're talking about the smaller areas between the big iconic set piece locales, I'd argue that they have their place. Pacing is determined (especially in a horror title) by peaks and valleys of intensity. And RE4 imo balanced it very, very well. It was something I particularly appreciated when they jumped to RE5, because that game has few quiet moments to speak of. You're shuttled from one major encounter to the next with very little time to relax, and it becomes numbing. Scenes which should be inducing panic aren't allowed to catch you off-guard, because they're more or less constant. A great game, but it didn't do pacing nearly as well as RE4 did. Thankfully the RE4 remake gets it right and understands how pacing works. There's definitely less quiet moments than the original, but I don't agree that they cut the 'filler'.

Also it's worth considering that they added/expanded quite a few sections to compensate for the consolidation of legacy locales, so did they add filler? Whatever they did, I'm fine with it, game's amazing.

I agree with a lot of this take, too.

What others may call filler in the original, I (I've already stated this here, somewhere) have always chalked up to gameplay variation. The original game had a (somewhat muted, but still present) gameplay loop from the outset that consisted of:
- Light exploration through a quiet, wide-linear (for 2005) map.
- Large battle
- Repeat, with occasional esoteric riddle thrown in.

Old Guard Capcom knew they had a fun system, so they just threw in as many little flourishes into the formula as they could.
- Big, open Village fight.
- the water Hall, mixing in Ashley.
- the giant Salazar statue, mixing in verticality.
- the mine cart ride
- the excavator gauntlet.
- the trash crane.

Basically every other fight had some special encounter specific handicap, so no two battles really ever seemed the same.

Not saying the remake does this worse, either. The updates made to the gameplay and controls over all gives you a lot more agency in battle and you always seem to have six more choices to deal with a crowd of opponents than what you'd have in the original

 

[Rykan]

Rykan I’m asking this next question with all due respect. Is English your secondary language? I’m just trying to understand why my posts on RE4 are being misinterpreted to such a high degree and if you’re ESL it might explain a lot for me and how we interact going forward.

Mate, nobody is misinterpreting your post. Just like noone is doing any goalposts moving either.

I don't quite understand why you continue to defend the claim that the game has filler content. It's not that there is anything wrong with your criticism per se. In fact, I agree with a lot of it. I also find the castle section to be too long, and I share your views on the island section.

However, none of that has anything to do with filler content because RE4 doesn't have filler content. It's a very straightforward, mostly linear game with few distractions.

There is no extensive backtracking. There's no plethora of side quests. There's no boss rush at the end of the game. There's no extremely limited inventory to force backtracking. There's no boss fights you have to do twice with different characters. There's no "2nd scenario" in which you have to play through the game again to get the full experience.

There is nothing in RE4 to which you can point to and say that this was specifically designed to extend the duration of the game.

 

[TheInfamousKira]

Newsflash for you mate... classic journalism and press specially game press has been dead for about five to ten years ... they are now a bunch of activists and/or payed shills

I dont enter any gaming site or care for any award in the entertainment midia for about some time and it only made my life better and my decisions easir and more accurate

You should try

I mean, you got solid advice, there. But my thread is more based on the pretense of observation. I don't think I've ever made or withheld a purchase based on review scores. Most of the games I play and purchase are parts of well established IPs unto their own right, so I usually let the developer's pedigree determine my spending habits more than a random person with an opinion who happens to get paid for said take.

 

[OCASM]

Sometimes I wonder if people who shit on these remakes even played them in the first place...

In the original supplexes were activated from any position near a stunned enemy. In the remake you have to position yourself behind the enemy. That causes a lot of people to miss them. It's bad design.

 

[anthraticus]

You were supposed to have stopped paying attention their bs.. like over a decade ago. LOL

 

[TheInfamousKira]

In the original supplexes were activated from any position near a stunned enemy. In the remake you have to position yourself behind the enemy. That causes a lot of people to miss them. It's bad design.

In the original, you could only suplex opponents who were on their knees, and only after the Village. It wasn't AS specific as RE4R, but it was still a "hidden move,"

 

[OCASM]

In the original, you could only suplex opponents who were on their knees, and only after the Village. It wasn't AS specific as RE4R, but it was still a "hidden move,"

A lot less hidden than having to be on the backside of an enemy. I don't think anyone missed supplexing during their playthroughs in the original.

 

[TheInfamousKira]

A lot less hidden than having to be on the backside of an enemy. I don't think anyone missed supplexing during their playthroughs in the original.

I've anecdotally seen a few people IRL who had to be told about it in the original, but you're correct, it's a bit more intuitive to figure out through trial and error in the OG.

I found it in the remake because I knew to look for it from the original, people without that prerequisite knowledge will probably go entire playthroughs without figuring it out.