We've all been
back and forth about the control scheme of the upcoming Resident Evil game. Many hold the position that the controls are perfectly fine. Not only are they perfectly fine but they can also magnify the mood (tension, suspense, fear) that the game intends the player to feel. They also claim that if you don't like the controls, then you are calling RE4 crap.
On the other side of the fence, you have those who believe that the game's control scheme should keep up with the Jones' by giving it a more Gears of War/Dead Space style. Instead of agreeing that the controls highten the tension, suspense, and fear, this camp believes it actually takes away from the game's quality and fun factor.
While I'm going to make it clear where I stand in this argument, I want to emphasize that I fully understand where the former camp is coming from and why they hold that argument.
No matter what the fans say, this late in development, I doubt anything will be changed about RE5's controls before launch. This is a good thing for some of you and a bad thing for some others. I have RE4 in my game collection on the GameCube. I specifically purchased a GameCube for RE4 even though I already had a PS2, I'm no stranger to the resident evil control scheme.
I have been looking forward to RE5 specifically because of the Co-op feature. I am GOING to buy it regardless of how I feel about the controls and I can't wait to get online with my buddy and kill some fast yet somewhat slow to attack "zombies".
I empathize with the supporters of the RE4 control scheme for RE5 because I hate to think that every game will (d?)evolve into an FPS just because thats what the mainstream gamer wants and likes. I love old school RPGs, I don't want to play an FPSRPG. I love my old school action adventure games, I don't want God of War to turn into Mirror's Edge with blades. But at the same time, I don't want things like controls to hold a great game like Resident Evil back.
>Why I believe the controls should be changed<
The original Resident evil was made for a Playstation controller. No joysticks, just d-pad, 4 face buttons, and 4 shoulder buttons (only 2 more buttons than a SNES). You had the option of 2d and 3d controls. One of those would make your character walk in the direction you pressed on the d-pad, and the other would constrict you to pressing up on the d-pad to walk forward no matter which direction your character was facing. This kind of thing was done because of the limitations of the controller, and the design of the camera system.
Up until RE4 the controls remained generally the same, optionally changing the d-pad for the joystick. RE4 hightened the gameplay and increased the fun factor of the Resident Evil series by simply moving the camera behind the protagonist and giving the player >more freedom< of movement with the aiming system. You could now shoot an enemy in the leg to slow him down and blast his head off to conserve ammo. For this fact, Resident Evil 4 will probably go down in history as the best Resident Evil game in history.
FREEDOM!
I believe that they should continue to give the player more freedom in the control scheme in order to highten the game's fun facter even more. I'm going to now use Metal Gear Solid as an example. The original Metal Gear games on the 8 bit systems were designed around the limitations of the systems. Years later Metal Gear solid came out for the Playstation and blew everyone away with it's similar play style to the original games, but with more freedom of controls and the ability to go into first person to look around. Each Metal Gear Solid game gave a little more freedom than the previous. Fast forward to Metal Gear Solid 4. I loved Metal Gear 4 >way< more than either MGS2 or MGS3 (nothing could supplant MGS) simply because of the controls. I liked the story and characters of MGS3 (out of MGS2,3,4) the most, but it doesn't hold a candle to the fun that I had with MGS4 because the controls were that much of an improvement. I played through Metal Gear Solid 4 three and a half times in a row because I loved it so much. I haven't ever done that with any game I've ever owned. That is how much power a simple, easy to use, and fun to play control scheme can be. And as a huge MGS fanboy, I welcome change for the better.
Control schemes are very important to me, I don't completely avoid a game simply based on it's controls, but I will cast a scornful eye on it if the controls are difficult or don't make sense. While I can see where the purist RE4 hardcore fan stands, I don't want all of my beloved franchises to become UT fragfests. But I wholly disagree with the logic of stagnating gameplay features.
All I want is my freedom, and if you hate freedom, well, then fuck you.
U.S.A!
U.S.A!
U.S.A!
U.S.A!
U.S.A!
Besides that, I find the current control scheme to be a blast to play. I don't want it to change, as it features some of the most satisfying gunplay ever conceived IMO. If they let me move slowly like Dead Space, I could live with it, but I'd prefer it to stay the way it is.
Evolved form the 360 version to the PS3's...
(( For the better! & because of Critics. ))
Just take Tomb Raider : Underworld's example...
(( "d?evolution" is the name of game... ))
Here's to hope RE5's set pieces make up for any "frustrating"/"annoying" controls...
(( I haven't played the RE5 demo. But i hear the clamoring. ))
RE4 and 5 still have the same shitty controls you're talking about. You have a bit more freedom yes but Leon/Chris still move slowly and the quick turn is in place because you still have a slow turn speed.
Its not freedom, its just masked under something else.
I do have an issue with one statement....you claim that not changing the control scheme to the more commonly used "run and gun" style is "stagnating gameplay features".
On the contrary, I feel that by keeping the controls the same from game to game, Resident Evil is making the choice to be different in order to not stagnate the genre. Imagine if every 3rd person shooter had the same controls. Sure, lets say they are the BEST CONTROLS IN THE WORLD! (TM).....where would the originality and variety be in that?
To me, by staying true to their roots, RE is making a statement about what they want their games to be...and that is NOT Gears of War, or [insert "run-and-gun" game here]
And really, the controls aren't that bad. To those who are really complaining (and I know its not you brain...), get over it. Learn to play the game the way the game wants you to play it....finding secure areas to shoot from before you start shooting, run past hordes of zombies, put your back against a wall, take a couple of steps back if the zombies are too close so you are slightly out of range. These are all lessons taught by previous RE games and they are still applicable here. In a Resident Evil game. (Fancy that :D)
How intense would it be wheeling away from Zombies!?
Anyone see Silver Bullet!?
RE4 is almost 4 years old and was probably the first real over-the-shoulder 3rd person shooter. That doesn't however mean they did everything right the first time and that the series only needs a graphical update.
The enemies being scary and threatening make it survival horror. The need to conserve ammo and health packs, if you even get health packs, make it survival horror. Atmosphere makes it survival horror. Shit controls don't make it anything other than a game with shit controls. Sheva seems to heal you automatically if you've got the herbs available, and I think that will be far more damaging to RE5 than actiony controls would have.