The five reasons Resident Evil 5 isn't very good
"Resident Evil 4" was one of, if not the, first games I played when I
was getting back into gaming in 2004 and 2005 (after a late high
school-through-early-20s hiatus) that utterly blew me away and
demonstrated how far the medium had progressed since I last saw it. So
I was super excited about "Resident Evil 5," if a bit wary based on
what I initially saw.
And now that I've played it? The phrase that comes to mind is "How the mighty have fallen." Or, as I put it in my Variety review that recently posted:
Sometimes a revered veteran falls behind the times. The highly anticipated "Resident Evil 5" offers few terrifying moments or new ideas, mixing tired features from the series' previous incarnations with poorly implemented ones borrowed from modern games, all set against a backdrop with disturbing racial overtones.
It's certainly not a disaster. The production values are excellent and there are a few unique touches, most notably the use of the bright African sun in the early levels to amplify the horror in a way I've never seen. Instead of feeling anxious in the dark, I felt exposed in the light (At least until the game abandoned that idea and moved into a bunch of generic caves and sci-fi backdrops).
I'll be honest: Overall, I wasn't just disappointed in "Resident Evil 5." I actively disliked it. If I hadn't been reviewing it, I would have stopped playing after a few hours. I think my review lays out my reasons pretty well. But for those who like lists, here they are one by one:
-"Resident Evil 5" is not scary. At all. I know that the series moved away from the horror and towards action with "RE 4," but there's still a pretense of horror here. The first header in the briefing book Capcom provided is "The horror continues" and the back of the box screams "You don't have to face the fear alone." Most notably, the game keeps many of the allegedly scary tropes from past incarnations: Tentacles exploding out of infected natives' heads; blood dripping from the ceiling; boss battles with giant slimy monsters. And in case you can't tell it's supposed to be scary, you can push a button to "investigate" and get eerie observations from Chris Redfield like "Looks like it was torn apart by animals. Not a good way to go." (That's my snarky way of saying that Capcom needs to show and not tell.)
It's
2009. Horror today is defined by the psycho-sexual gore of "Saw" and
the unpredictable terror of "Left 4 Dead." The "Resident Evil" series
either needs to catch up with some new scary ideas or just give up on
the horror concept entirely.
2. It's is a mediocre, derivative action game. The lack of scares would be somewhat acceptable if "Resident Evil 5" were a great action game. But it's not. Playing "RE 5" is, in many ways, a montage of action video game cliches from the past few years:
Turret gun on the truck? Check. Cover system to shoot above or around walls? Present. Exploding barrels? All over the place. Laser beams that sweep across the ground in timed sequences? It's a native African village, but they came up with a ridiculous way to make it happen.
Most importantly, these derivative features have all been done better. Most notably in "Gears of War," which I was surprised to find is the game "RE 5" probably resembles most. The cover mechanism, in particular, is embarassingly bad here. If you're going to rip off other games, at least match their quality.
3. The co-op doesn't work very well. Talk about another thing "Gears of War" did excellently that "RE 5" can't match.
The levels are designed adequately for co-op. Chris and Sheva occasionally break off to pull different levers, or snipe the enemies that the other is fighting from up close. And Sheva's A.I. when you're playing alone is perfectly decent -- She's not that helpful, but she rarely gets in the way.
However, drop-in co-op is a nightmare. When a friend joins your game, you have to re-start at the last checkpoint. And s/he starts without any weapons.
"No problem," you might figure. "'Resident Evil 5' has a robust, if slightly complex, system to swap weapons, ammo, and supplies. I've been doing it with the A.I. for a while."
Think again. For inexplicable reasons, the game forbids you from giving a gun to your friend. S/he is left running around with a knife, slowly picking up gold to buy a weapon. And you can't even buy a weapon for them. They have to save up the money from scratch. Did CNBC's Rick Santelli consult on this game?
4. "Resident Evil 5" is old-fashioned. And not in the cool, retro way.
Why, after all these years, are the controls still ridiculously complicated? It takes two buttons held simultaneously to use the knife, and three or four button presses to discard or swap items in your inventory. All the while, the "b" button (on the 360) is mapped to the eminently useless task of calling your partner when separated.
And when it comes to managing your inventory between levels, well, get comfortable. To give one example, here's how you upgrade a weapon: Click "organize"; click on the weapon; scroll down to "upgrade" and click again; scroll through the list of upgrades and click again; then click again to confirm. It's as simple as playing a Wii game online with a friend.
The story, dialogue, and voice acting are all similarly old-fashioned. Which is to say lame. There is a certain extent to which the "Resident Evil" series is like a B-movie and that's forgivable. But "Resident Evil 5" takes itself far too seriously to be a B-movie. We're supposed to care about the infection in Kijuju, Chris's missing partner Jill, Sheva's dead parents, and so on. Which means we're left to actually try and engage cheesy lines like, "The plan is in its final stages. I will not tolerate delays." Pick a tone and stick to it, "RE 5."
-The racial imagery is disturbing at times. No, that doesn't mean the game is "racist." Racism is the belief that race is a determining factor in human capacity and that some are superior to others. That's a tall order for a game and certainly not one "RE 5" fulfills.
But the game does contain some disturbing imagery reminiscent of the violent colonial past. Most of the game, especially when playing alone, is a White soldier who travels to Africa and kills thousands of natives. As Stephen Totilo correctly pointed out at MTV Multiplayer, they have red eyes and some other zombie features. But that's only visible when they get close. A lot of the time these zombies are shooting guns, riding motorcyles, and otherwise acting like regular folks who are really pissed off at you. And you're the white solder, walking through their villages, murdering every single one of them.
They're not even all modern African street people. Or soldiers. In a particularly ill advised choice, Capcom fills several levels with barely clothed tribe folks who look like 19th century stereotypes, complete with a spear in one hand, a painted shield on the other, and a mask on their faces.
To answer the obvious question, of course "Resident Evil 4" featured a White American soldier killing hundreds of infected natives. But anyone who won't admit the different historical meanings of White soldiers killing natives in Africa vs. Spain simply isn't being honest. It is different.
Does that mean you can't make an action game set in Africa, even with a White protagonist and Black enemies? Of course not. It just means you have to address the issue in some way because it's real and unavoidable. Making some of the infected natives Arab and giving Chris an allegedly Black partner -- though she's fair skinned and her race is never directly mentioned, so one could easily assume she's mixed race or even White -- doesn't fix anything.
Is it unfair that you have to address the race issue differently for a game set in Africa than for what was essentially the same game set in Spain? Sure. But, you know, colonialism was unfair too. Such is the reality of the world in which we live.
Oh, and one more thing about race: The traditional "Resident Evil" currency system where you earn money to buy guns by stealing gold from corpses and looting people's homes and treasure chests? That's a really bad idea for a game where you control a White soldier in Africa. Really bad.
Full review: Resident Evil 5
Update: As some commenters have pointed out, a drop in co-op partner can start with weapons, if they have already earned them by playing the game themselves. I still think that's a very flawed system, but I implied above that co-op partners always start bereft of supplies, which is incorrect.
Update 2: Readers interested in point 5 may want to check out a newer post: A simple question about race and Resident Evil 5
Chris Morris reports on the business and culture of video games and offers analysis of recent events and industry trends.
Subscribe to this blog's feed
Just to let you know.
You can change the controls. You have four types to choose from, an inverted Y-axis and an Inverted X-axis as well. You can have it so your controls take two analog sticks to move, or just one for everything.
So don't complain about the controls when you haven't explored them.
I do agree that I wish it was scarier. I was always scared shitless in RE4, especially with the regenerators. So that would be my one problem.
And racism included in the RE games is just an excuse to call it a bad game. Honestly, it's not discriminating, because you have many african americans helping with the BSAA. In RE4, it was spaniards.
Africans and Spaniards. Why is it that people are freaking out now that it's Africans and they barely said anything with Spaniards? I think it's because people just find reasons to become offended now-a-days and use that overindulgence to gain some sort of limelight.
For many years, RE was killing off American zombies. It's simply the fact that, within the story, they are infected people that the BSAA characters have to defend the rest of the world against. Be it Spaniards, Africans, Americans, Asians, whatever. So stop complaining. They're all people, regardless of race.
I don't know about you, but I greatly enjoyed the co-op system. Especially when my best friend and I played. It was challenging, yet strategically satisfying when we could defeat something together. The computer system is more complicated, but it adds for a challenge, and it's helpful to have someone else who carries ammo, health and someone to save your ass when you need it.
Especially when you're in Dying mode. It's awesome that you can be dying and, whether or not your partner has health they can still revive you.
Personally, I absolutely hate when people compare games. Especially Resident Evil with things like Call of Duty, Gears of War or Halo. These games are only similar in that you are fighting a common enemy, you're trying to stay alive, you have guns, and you have, at least in RE5, a partner to back you up. They may use similar tactics, but honestly, how many ways can someone 'cover you' or some such?
If it's affective soldier tactics, then obviously, they'd be used in more than just one fighting game. You can't compare games like those because you play one game and expect the same type of result with another. They are different in both large and small ways, so it's rather close minded to expect the same results as another.
Get it in your head (and not just you specifically, but EVERYONE whom I've heard complain about this.) RESIDENT EVIL HAS ALWAYS ALWAYS BEEN A STAND-STILL SHOOTER GAME.
Not ONCE has it ever been a run and shoot. That, I think, would make it even LESS challenging, and less realistic. You DO NOT have the luxury of large amounts of ammo to just shoot off into the distance when you're running off. You need to be strategic, preserve ammo, and make sure you AIM precisely. As 'realistic' as Call of Duty makes it seem, booking it through rough territory and wailing your gun and actually landing a hit, it is not a piece of cake to do such.
To me, it's more realistic, and it's more challenging. It's actually being hypocritical saying 'it's not hard' and then complaining about the shooting - it'd be even EASIER if it wasn't a stand-still shooter game. (And this, once again, is a general message.)
The controls can be the same as Resident Evil 4. If you're wondering, it's Control Type A.
Anyway, obviously, I'm quite fond of Resident Evil 5. It was not scare like Resident Evil 4, no, but it was very enjoyable and I'm looking forward to more.
Posted by: Alendra | May 06, 2009 at 08:41 AM
I dont know what you guys are talking about BUT i LOVE RE5
Posted by: Chris | April 18, 2009 at 09:11 AM
Whoever wrote this article is a knob. Best Coop game on the 360 in a while.
Posted by: Millertime | April 08, 2009 at 07:16 AM
About RE5... The only problem I had with this game was that they still did not improve the knife function... I mean c'mon, I'd like to move around while I slash some Majini!
However, as an african american man myself, this game was not racist in any shape or form. Chris did not single out the black natives, he killed the white and copper men as well.
America is the only country screaming out racism. It is a japanese game, and Capcom did not sit down one day and say 'Hey, let's let that crazy cracker kill some Nigers' (Hey, don't get on my case for using fowl language on here, I said Niger!)
What they did was actually, in my opinion, very progressive for the black community. They paid careful attention to the environment, modeling, and lifestyles of rural Africans. The detail in how they built their communities and villages, not to mention the Shantey Towns, was educational for those who've never really wondered. They broke a negative mold for blacks involved in the gaming world, in which they only seem capable of being thugs or poorly personified cops/soldiers. I would much rather see this than yet ANOTHER token black sergent/cop with the SAME voice/Mr T accent and SAME attitude with the SAME attitude and outlook of the world that gamers seem to warship, and also expect from their black friends. Examples include Agustus Cole (Gears of War), Avery Johnson (Halo), Barret Wallace (Final Fantasy VII; even I love Barret but the stereotype stands..., Deputy Wheeler (Silent Hill Homecoming) the list goes on. All of them are basically the same character.
The racism lies in the viewer, not the game. Why was it fine for a blonde, blue-eyed white male to slaughter a community of spaniards (RE 4) but not africans?
As for the racism from the african-american side, why is it only fine to slaughter a bunch of white people? Slaughter is still slaughter, and skin color shouldn't be on your mind when cornered by a horde of plagas-infected people.
Posted by: Blackie-Chan | April 02, 2009 at 06:08 AM
Ok...now I am a die hard resident evil fan and have been since it ever came out.So you can imagine my eagerness for RE5. With that said I will admit there were pros and cons to the game as there are with all games. My biggest complaint is that I would like to see RE5 return to its horror roots. Now don't get me wrong I love RE5 I'm actually quite addicted to it. However I miss the days of putting a real puzzle together and having to strategically place pieces and artifacts all over the place to open a door. I felt that I went through RE5 too quickly due to the lack of mental stimulation. I do think a problem though is people who don't really know anything about RE try to make blanket statements about it. The biggest complaint I hear is that you can't move and shoot. HELLO you can't move and shoot in any of them! Lol that is what helps bring the suspense and terror up. I just feel that RE5 had so much unused potential. They could have at least put a little more effort in placing the zombies in places that would really scare the bejeesus out of me. I wish there had been at least ONE chapter played during the night time.
With that said I will talk about the racial aspect. I am an african american woman and I found this game in no way offensive to me. As a resident evil fan I know the history of the game and the motives of the characters. I feel like the main people screaming racism are people who aren't even black themselves. I love the game and have played through it mulitple times without so much as an ounce of guilt or uncomfort. Honestly to me it shed light on something that really does go on today testing in places around the world on people who are deemed less worthy.Oh and believe me it could be my own momma coming at me if she was acting or looking like the zombies on there I would shoot her ass too. So let's all stop being sensitive here and look at things for what they really are. I'm more offended by Flavor of Love than Resident Evil 5 at least Chris Redfield is treating Sheva Alomar with respect. When all is said and done capcom is going in the right direction they just need to backtrack a little and remember the qualities about Resident Evil that kept it different and good. Align that with some of these new perks and it will perfect.
Posted by: Lynn | March 28, 2009 at 07:11 AM
Not to bash you or anything, but...
WTF?
Co-op is a great system, and the call button is so ONCE YOU TELL SHEVA TO STAY WHERE SHE IS, AND YOU WANT HER TO COME TO YOU, SHE COMES TO YOU! If you've ever played RE4, you know how sometimes you have to leave Sheva/Ashley behind so they don't do anything stupid or so they can attract enemies while you pop the mofo's in the head.
And it is scary in some parts, especially the mine. One person has to shoot, and the other carries a lantern that gives off minimal light; this causes you to be VERY cautious and on edge.
The racism thing...really? If you were a black guy in the US and you were unloading 4 BILLION bullets into their whiteboy skulls, noone would have a problem. Plus, if you haven't noticed, there are a few white tourists that got infected and some yellow ones too. You kill them aswell. "Oh, look, a black zombie! I better let him eat me. Just because he's a zombie doesn't mean that his already dead, disease ridden body doesn't have feelings. I'm sure he won't kill anyone else if I just let him kill me... Oh look, I'm dead.
And I think the controls are MEANT to be simple, but some stupid retard can't change his control setup in the aptly-named "Settings". Also, at the bottom of the screen, when you want to sell something, ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS PRESS R1 and confirm. Problem solved. L1 also works for upgrading. Basically, the only thing I would ask more from RE5 is a much longer story. I didn't want it to end!
Posted by: Evan | March 22, 2009 at 01:11 PM
Whoever wrote this article/review is a complete twit. First of all, for anyone who enjoys coop games, (especially slit-screen) this is a fantastic experience. This game has been the most fun I've had playing coop in a long while. Yes, not being able to move and shoot is odd, but it creates a different pacing to the game that's refreshing and not as frenetic as some of the other games (ie. FPS) out there. My last point, in reference to the race issue this article's author decided to comment on... is completely ridiculous. Further to that, the author is actually promoting racial divide by playing a race card that doesn't need to be played. Racism only exists when we give value to the idea of racism. I played a game that has men killing men (& monsters, & Sheva lol). Nothing more. What did you play? As young children we didn't see colour, we were taught to see it. This is just one more example of fuel to feed the racism fire, whether you're being racist yourself or looking for racism in others.
Posted by: LevelHEaded | March 21, 2009 at 12:21 PM
Wow. I actually almost took your review seriously until I saw the racist part.. Hahahahaha, PLEASE!! So is Josh (the black guy) allowed to kill other black guys? Or is that black on black crime? Seriously.. lets get real. The truth of the matter is, I can name a 1000 games where you kill white people. What your saying is it is wrong to set a game in Africa? So in 80 years or so when the War In Iraq is over, is it going to be wrong to have a white person killing terrorists? For once, why not try and write your own review instead of copying off of what EVERYONE else is saying.
Posted by: John | March 21, 2009 at 12:45 AM
Your write up is dead on. Being a hardcore Resident Evil fan the game highly dispoints. It stop being a real Resident Evil game since part 4. As it stand now,it just a action game with iffy control choices.
I also agree the game is racist at points. the fact they added navties to the mix wasn't needed and added nothing to the already over the top and straight bad story.
Posted by: Grim Santo | March 19, 2009 at 03:32 PM
Wow, speak for yourself!
Co-op is excellent! and works great, for me.
And bringing up the racial issue? If your in AFRICA, and there are DISEASED and DEADLY humans, that are TRYING TO KILL YOU, that just so happen to be african american, are you going to let them kill you? No.
Posted by: Kevin | March 19, 2009 at 02:32 PM
Co-op works flawlessly
And since when is killing a WIDE VARIETY of zombies racist? Or is it just the black zombies YOU are focusing on? OH! It isn't the "BLACK" thing, it is the "AMERICANS ARE EVILL!" thing. That is racism? I thought it was called being a liberal. Anyway, I seem to recall a French chick also being on the bad guys side. And was Wesker WORKING FOR AMERICA??!?!
And if you find the controls to difficult, go back to playing Sonic the Hedgehog. And turn in your drivers license since that must be BEYOND DIFFICULT for you.
Alongside Newsweek and that K'Uni guy's stupidity(whatever his name is) and now this, you both have reached the epic level along with Fox News of KNEE-JERK-VIDEO-GAME-P.C. STUPIDITY.
Posted by: bunnymud | March 19, 2009 at 10:36 AM
"The Co-op isn't very good"? Are we talking about the same game here? There isn't a title that has a co-op so evolved - if you think it sucks, maybe you should try changing your partner player.
If you are playing as Leon-only and are saying that Sheva sucks, well...RE 5 is the highest level of AI a game ever reached. You really don't have to worry about her getting in the way or keep her alive that much...
Maybe you didn't play enough - or well enough. Did a Plaga infected tribe kick your hiney and made you angry?
Posted by: Rafael Arbulu | March 19, 2009 at 08:18 AM
I think the controls needs to be updated. They are relying on a clunky old control system. Additionally, where are the good puzzles?!!! That was part of what made RE so good when it started.
Posted by: Shackled | March 19, 2009 at 06:25 AM
Didn't like the demo.
Love the game as a whole.
Posted by: klarax | March 18, 2009 at 08:14 AM
Just to let remind me, RE4 had a cover system, while very small and used very little, LEON had the ability to hide behind something (re5 has this same cover system, among the improved, side wall one)
Another thing, When was RE every scary? it was all about tense filled and anxiety moment, RE5 creates that, with its many enemies and overall keeps that surival feeling, even with a co-op partner, RE5 can get hard.
Like the poster said about, you expect Gears of War 3, Not an RE game, this is what i hate about you haters.
The co-op isn't done well? you kidding me? the new voice commands and melee's are unique and something RE5 does well.
I love the fact that capcom limited the gameplay, to keep the tension. RE5 is all about timing shots and making them count, you don't see swat teams and majority of cops running and gunning do you?
RE5 sets it self apart.
and just to remind you, if it wasn't for RE4, gears wouldn't be the game it is today.
Posted by: Blah Blah | March 17, 2009 at 11:34 PM
I thoroughly enjoyed Resident Evil 5. Because of that, I obviously disagree with most of what you said.
1. Resident Evil 5 is not scary.
That's true. I will agree that Resident Evil 5 lacked the scares that a survival horror game needs. They were trying for scary, and they missed their mark, but I must say I'm surprised that you found Left 4 Dead scarier, or that you wanted RE 5 to have the psycho-sexual gore of torture porn like Saw.
If you believe that today's horror is defined by such things, then you have been following the wrong crowd. Horror should be tension and fear of the unknown, not tons of blood and cheap jump scares.
2. It's a mediocre derivative action game
It's here that you begin to show your true colors. What you want isn't a Resident Evil game, you want Gears of War 3. Yes, it has cliches, but Gears of War 2 does as well. You mentioned the turrets and cover system both of which were in GeOW 2. The cover system in RE 5 was poorly implemented, yes, I won't disagree with you there.
You have played RE 4, you will of course note that RE 4 was a very campy game with crazy situations. The ancient laser system can be forgiven by the mere fact that it is a Resident Evil game.
3. The co-op doesn't work very well
It sounds as though your friend hopped into your game once you had gotten past the first part, and he had not even begun. In fact, it's a better system because you can't give guns you have found to people who haven't found them. You both would have known this if you had done a bit of research, and does starting at the last checkpoint really bother you that much when they are so plentifully placed throughout the levels?
4. Resident Evil 5 is old fashioned
You have clearly used your writing prowess to add an additional step to what is needed to upgrade a weapon. You need only go over the weapon you want to upgrade and press the RB, you are now in the upgrade menu. Yes, you have to click to confirm, but sometimes people click on the wrong option, the human race apologizes for making mistakes.
And would honestly want to have to go through the "complicated" menu system to reach your much coveted knife?
You do know about the D-Pad right? Most of your slots will be used by ammo, which means your guns and grenades can all be mapped to the D-Pad. Unless you have an unusually high amount of them. Learn to prioritize, it's not difficult, and it only takes about a second to use something that you haven't mapped once you get the hang of it.
5. Racism Issues
Actually, most of the game, even when playing alone, is about a white soldier and his black partner taking on multiple races in a fictional African country. While Sheva's race is never explicitly stated, it is assumed because the says multiple times that these are "Her" people being killed.
The virus has evolved, as you would know if you listened to the cheesy dialouge, so it stands to reason that they could perform human actions, such as shooting and riding a motorcycle, and it becomes nitpicky when you say that it isn't evident that they are infected until they get close. You KNOW that they are infected, you shouldn't have to see it.
And finally, there are still tribes in Africa. The tribe had this virus tested on them, and have been turned into blood thirty people, by AMERICANS! If anything, the video game is pointing out the evils of America more than picking on black people.
I"m sorry, but as someone stated above, your entire argument is based on opinion. As is mine, but as with most articles like this, yours has been stated as cold hard fact.
Posted by: DNelson | March 17, 2009 at 09:23 PM
The game is set in Africa. Did you expect the population to be Scandinavian?
Posted by: Lono | March 17, 2009 at 07:53 PM
@harrison schaerr
Nominated for dumbest comment of the week. I swear, those fools shouting that western colonialism is still in effect is so tiresome. Don't they teach history in schools anymore?
Anyway, I don't necessarily agree with everything you've said concerning the game but I recognize that a person would see things as you do. I was a little disappointed in the game myself, although I wouldn't compare it to Gears. Gears isn't that great a game either. It's pretty different. Anyway, interesting thoughts.
Posted by: Mike | March 17, 2009 at 07:07 PM
'reminiscent of a violent, colonial past'?
lol....
iraq, afghanistan, african dictators propped up by the usa, drug lords running every country.
wow... IQ blast. Did you actually think American/European colonialism actually ended?
lolololololololol.
we funded the genocide in darfur, gave them the weapons >=)
Posted by: harrison schaerr | March 17, 2009 at 06:51 PM
All the points are subjective. A lot of people said the opposite.
As for racism. This is one of the dumbest things I've ever heard. You really have no idea what you're talking about.
What about RE4? Is it racist too? You're killing poor Hispanic villagers? Is that not racist too?
Get out of here.
Posted by: ogb | March 17, 2009 at 04:55 PM
I agreed with everything you said, this game is not what I expected, some reviewers said the game is an evolution of the older ones and people that didnt like it just wanted the old games again... Wrong! I wanted them to evolve on what they did with RE4, not make the same game again only with shiney graphics. Its an evolution in the same way the dinosaur evolved from older reptiles, it's made itself extinct by as you said very poorly copying elements of modern action games... and thats the kind of thing that garnered games like Kane & Lynch poor reviews.
Oh, and no the game isnt racist, racially insensetive, or any other form of politically incorrect! People need to stop being overly PC, were all far too sensetive these days. It would hav been far worse to fill Africa with white people. And any sense that I was a white man murdering black men went soaring out the window with the giant bat creatures that came from their backs.
As far as games go, you know what your talking about... but after that you really need to grow up, develop a backbone and learn to differentiate between actual hatred and idiots who cringe at sensitive subjects even being raised.
Posted by: Brian | March 17, 2009 at 02:23 PM
The co-op can be frustrating joining in and isn't perfect, but one would think that Capcom will issue an update on the 360 or PS3 as downloadable content to fix it. Another thing I don't remember is joining a game midway through and not having weapons, as you keep your inventory through out the series and can return back later, even if you're with a friend whose just starting, you can bring your upgraded guns with you. That doesn't sound accurate about starting with out a gun unless you're starting from scratch.
The race issue, while understandable, I'll side with Capcom's choice. The native thing worried me a lil' bit but they did stick a file in the game to explain the choice behind that, and on top of that, the evolution of the series and the subject matter has always been gearing towards a more action route. Maybe I don't find it suprising at all because Silent Hill and Resident Evil redefined and created survival horror the best, and now both can't do horror at all anymore. If the story from the get go has ties to africa where the "virus" was initially found, you knew a game like this was eventually going to come to conclude out the arc of the major characters in the series. And by Japan not putting in direct mentioning in game to explain their choices or defend it, is probably a wise move as it would've given more leverage for people to attack the issue. Instead they provide subtle cues through files or even Sheva having moments of sympathy for her native land and fallen brothers. As she does both in the shanty towns and the tribal areas, express great sympathy and they use that to build up her character in her decision to go after Wesker and not retreat like ordered.
Bottom line, it's a good conclusion to the series, it shows how far it's evolved from where it started, but if the series started with horror because it was NEW to the story line, it's expected to evolve into a big climactic action story.
Posted by: CJ | March 17, 2009 at 08:17 AM
Very interesting review. I personally have no problems with this game whatsoever except after you mentioned the cover system is ridiculous. I agree with you there. The co-op is great. Your friend does, repeat, DOES start weapons. Your friends ENTIRE inventory is brought over to the game. So the only way I can think of your human partner not having any weapons is if they were stupid enough to sell every piece of equipment they had. The game doesn't let you trade weapons because thats considered cheating. Weapons in the game are supposed to be obtained by your own means, not given to you. Ammo and healing items can be traded amongst players though.
And the game is not racists. Its only racists to you because your looking for racism. I'm going to say that Sheva Alomar is black. In the strategy guide it says her race is African. Even says it on the internet. Two members of the Delta Squad they meet up with later in the game are black. So thats one white guy and three black people killing VIRUS INFECTED Africans. I know the game is fake and isn't even a possibility to become reality, but come on, if you were Chris Redfield, are you just going to let a bunch of people EAT/KILL YOU?
And the 19th century stereotype tribal folk looking people in the marshland is a modern looking thing to me. Watch National Geographic Channel/Discovery Channel. There are still people in Africa dressed like that today. In the game, the Tricel company decided to use that area as a testing site for their virus.
And until you explain to me a better system of currency to use in the game and a better way to obtain it, its going to have to do.
Posted by: Chris Redfield | March 17, 2009 at 08:09 AM
This article was interesting until it got to the bottom and then it all just seemed like blahblahblahblah.
Just because history is different doesn't make RE4 any "less racist" than RE5. Though I think neither are racist and people are just looking too far into it.
Of course if he was in the US doing it to white "zombies" that'd be fine. And I don't see why you keep putting RE5 in in inverted commas.
Posted by: Me | March 17, 2009 at 03:43 AM