Associate
- Joined
- 31 Dec 2008
- Posts
- 1,400
i heard resident evil 4 was a really bad port with graphics worse than the ps2 version. i hope resdent evil 5 doesnt follow suit
Resident Evil 5 PC-13/03/09
- Thread starter AWPC
- Start date
No, you're missing the point. You're comparing games that came out in 2008 with a game that was released in 2005. See how much of a fool you're being now? Of course the graphics are going to get better. If you think games won't look better in another 3 years you're a fool!
Even if it was easier to programme why is that a problem if it makes the gameplay better and original? RE4 wouldn't be as intense and people wouldn't of given it so much praise if it wasn't a fixed 3rd person camera because that's what adds to the gameplay.
After the patch, the graphics were identical to the PS2 version, except you could run at higher resolutions.
Capcom have also stepped up there PC version's by creating them in house instead of handing them off to other random developers. There recent ports have been rather good (DMC4 in particular being brilliant).
Capcom have also stepped up there PC version's by creating them in house instead of handing them off to other random developers. There recent ports have been rather good (DMC4 in particular being brilliant).
Actually Tomb Raider Anniversary was released in 2007 which is incidentally the same release date as RE4 on the PC in fact it was released after Tomb Raider Anniversary. It's now pointless to continue this discussion as we will never agree.
The problem you're having is that you're talking about a console game in the PC section.
I'm talking of the PC game.
M.
P.S. You really think fixed viewing was a first in any game (i.e. an original RE4 feature)? Now to think that is foolish. Most reviews I've seen for RE4 by the public never got it over 80%. Most reviews Gave it 3/5 stars (60%) so where is this massive praise?
The fixed camera didnt add to the gameplay it took it away. It's fine for a gamepad on a console but not on a PC with a Mouse.
The problem you're having is that you're talking about a console game in the PC section.
I'm talking of the PC game.
M.
P.S. You really think fixed viewing was a first in any game (i.e. an original RE4 feature)? Now to think that is foolish. Most reviews I've seen for RE4 by the public never got it over 80%. Most reviews Gave it 3/5 stars (60%) so where is this massive praise?
The fixed camera didnt add to the gameplay it took it away. It's fine for a gamepad on a console but not on a PC with a Mouse.
Last edited:
Sorry I was off by one year. The point still stands. And the only difference between the PC version and the Gamecube/PS2 versions where the graphics, which as someone mentioned was brought up to date with a patch.
The gameplay, story and everything else about the game was the same, and it was still what the franchise needed to stay alive.
But you're right we won't agree, and I guess the majority won't agree with you, because no one wants to see the series return to the RE1/2 days.
Just checked Metacritic, 96 it says.
No, but since when did a game need to do something first to be good? Half Life wasn't the first game with a gun.
By the way PCs can handle controllers.
Last edited:
It's not about doing something first but good. I've played games since the early 80's and prefer gameplay to graphics. I'm not bothered about it turning back to RE1 but, in my opinion, I prefer that to 4 because 4 is just another third person shooter to me. It doesn't have the puzzle solving of the first games that made the series.
Gamespot: 7.8/10
IGN: 7.7/10
Amazon: 3/5
And the list goes on. Remember we're talking about the PC version not the console.
M.
Gamespot: 7.8/10
IGN: 7.7/10
Amazon: 3/5
And the list goes on. Remember we're talking about the PC version not the console.
M.
Why are we? I've been quite clearly talking about the console version from my very first post in this thread.
G4 TV - 100
IGN - 98
Gamespot - 96
1UP - 95
Edge - 90
If you actually read the reviews of the PC game you want to talk about, it only lost points because of the shoddy port. And has Ogs has said, they handle PC games in house now. None of the reviews said it was a bad game or poorly programmed because it was a fixed camera. And should have stayed with the boring RE1/2 gameplay.
And as I've said in my previous posts it's not just another 3rd Person Shooter, but you gloss over those. And it's been 3 years since I played it, but I'm sure it did have puzzle solving.
Last edited:
Just to add, the GameCube/Wii versions of RE4 got the better graphics, more effects were in play, especially the lighting, check this out to see what i mean -
The PC version got the PS2's cut down graphics, sadly. There are however plenty of mods that bump up the PC's graphical quality
.
The PC version got the PS2's cut down graphics, sadly. There are however plenty of mods that bump up the PC's graphical quality
.Whats the story behind the dudes that are trying to kill you in 5? Are they possessed as well? I miss zombies as much as the last person but they couldn't throw things and are were pretty slow. I could imagine them being a lot easier to take out with 4's perceptive
Those RE1 figures are from the original, Directors cut and Dual Shock version combined, but the real question is...would it still sell in those numbers today? The last old-skool RE game on PS2 (Outbreak File#2 which came after RE4) failed miserably, which proved the new approach was the right one.
From what I slightly remember, Umbrella closed down and sold the T-Virus to the weird characters from RE4. And they've carried on the experiments and reworking the virus to get to where we are today.
I didn't see those figures he posted. The vast majority sold on the Wii, yet according to Wiki where you said you get the numbers from it broke down as:
PS2 - 2m
Wii - 1.8m
Gamecube - 1.6m
And considering the install base for the Gamecube (especially compared to the Wii) I'd hardly say that's the vast majority.
PS2 - 2m
Wii - 1.8m
Gamecube - 1.6m
And considering the install base for the Gamecube (especially compared to the Wii) I'd hardly say that's the vast majority.
Not really a fair comparison, considering the game was entirely co-op based and pretty much insisted on you playing online (which they totally removed from the European versions). The controls were really fiddly compared to the originals, it just wasnt the same game. A better comparison would be the Resident Evil 1 remake, anyone have any sales figures ?
1.35 million according to Wiki. Doesn't mention if that's worldwide or just NA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resident_Evil_(video_game)#Ports_to_other_platforms
Arrgggggh! I have pointed out in pretty much every post that I was on about the PC version. This is the PC Games forum after all and if you want to continue talking about the console version of a game then perhaps it should be done there. The puzzle solving was what made the originals so good. The fact you can not remember it was because it was so limited. I also think, if you haven't gone back to a game in 3 years, that you are viewing it with an old fondness rather than an up to date perspective.
As for my 'vast majority sold on the wii' comment that was because on Wiki and ssumed it was just Wii sales.
Resident Evil 4/Wii Edition5.05
M.
No you didn't, you pointed it out after a few posts. But that doesn't make a difference, the only thing that really separated the console version and the PC version were the graphics.
So even if the console version was ported over perfectly, you're having problems with the controls, gameplay and the lack of puzzles. So stop trying tot make out that I'm talking about some alien product. The differences are not that big.
I haven't gone back to it in 3 years because I sold my Gamecube after completing it. But I did play the added extras on the PS2 at a friends. Which added the same gameplay but in a more arcade fashion. And the gameplay was still fun and everything I loved about the Gamecube version.
Plus the fact I've been playing the Resident Evil 5 demo which keeps everything I loved about RE4, but adds amazing graphics (you can compare this so as many 07/08 games as you like) and online co-op play with my friends.
Pointless discussion continuing this. I asked several times whether you were on about a console game or the PC game released in 2007. Which was the same year as Crysis, Bioshock, COD4 and others. Now compare the graphics of this to those mentioned. Compare the gameplay to those mentioned.
M.
M.
RE4 is based around a religious cult formed around a long dead bug found in fossils as they mined under the village.
Its got nowt to do with the T virus in R4
Why compare AAA titles to a shoddy port that wasn't even made by the same team? Even then it's still a 2005 game. And you're trying to compare it to a 2008 DX10 title that even most PCs can't handle maxed out at a high resolution. You're trying your hardest to make RE4 into a bad game but it's not going to happen.
As for gameplay, you've just mentioned 3 FPS that are not similar to RE4 at all.
Seriously you're going nowhere with this. My very first post said that if it was a shoddy port again I wouldn't touch it with a stick. But if it was ported properly, like Ogs said other Capcom games have been since they started doing it in house. It'll be one of the best PC games of the year.
Would you say Half Life 2 was a bad game, just because the Xbox port wasn't that good and the graphics on the PC are a million times better? Of course not. So why try and make out that RE4 was a bad game just because it was a bad port?
Hmmm... I thought the new film linked them with Umbrella or so I've been told. I'd best go and watch it.