shoul RE5 have scored higher than 8.5?

No. It felt like a Gears of War hybrid. It didn't even feel like Resident Evil. Resident Evil 4 at least had some creepy moments, mostly because of the environments, while this was just an action survival game.

AA sounds about right to me.. The game is simply too short and too easy. I've only owned the game for like 3 days and I've nearly got 100% trophies. I don't even consider myself to be that good of gamer. Looking at the leaderboards some japanese dude has completed it in like 1hour and 20 minutes, thats ridiculous even by speed run standards. The fact that capcom are selling a versus mode as dlc to an already short game is riduculous. The whole game just feels rushed to me, some of the chapters can completed in 4 minutes, insane. The storyline aswell. Rushed.

Gave it an 8.0 myself. Co-op is fun, but there's some stuff in there that just doesn't seem right. It's replaced RE: Zero as my least favourite of the main RE games.

AA sounds about right to me.. The game is simply too short and too easy. I've only owned the game for like 3 days and I've nearly got 100% trophies. I don't even consider myself to be that good of gamer. Looking at the leaderboards some japanese dude has completed it in like 1hour and 20 minutes, thats ridiculous even by speed run standards. The fact that capcom are selling a versus mode as dlc to an already short game is riduculous. The whole game just feels rushed to me, some of the chapters can completed in 4 minutes, insane. The storyline aswell. Rushed.

Dahaka-UK

http://speeddemosarchive.com/ResidentEvil.html

Evil 1 Speed runs.. 1Hour36Mins is the slowest time on there. So i'd say thats just about 1Hour20Mins. As for difficulty.. There isn't any hard games anymore.

[QUOTE="Dahaka-UK"]

AA sounds about right to me.. The game is simply too short and too easy. I've only owned the game for like 3 days and I've nearly got 100% trophies. I don't even consider myself to be that good of gamer. Looking at the leaderboards some japanese dude has completed it in like 1hour and 20 minutes, thats ridiculous even by speed run standards. The fact that capcom are selling a versus mode as dlc to an already short game is riduculous. The whole game just feels rushed to me, some of the chapters can completed in 4 minutes, insane. The storyline aswell. Rushed.

Antikyth3ra

http://speeddemosarchive.com/ResidentEvil.html

Evil 1 Speed runs.. 1Hour36Mins is the slowest time on there. So i'd say thats just about 1Hour20Mins. As for difficulty.. There isn't any hard games anymore.

The ps3 version deserved a 9 since its a superior version. the 360 and pc versions shouldve gotten lower imo. more like in the 7s

The ps3 version deserved a 9 since its a superior version. the 360 and pc versions shouldve gotten lower imo. more like in the 7s

LunchBox-

If gears and killzone are AAA, I see no reason RE5 shouldn't be there also. Gears 2 is like a 7 imo.nmaharg

I agree with you. And by the way RE 5 is the best looking game in this gen so far (spetially in 360, although I have a PS3). It might not play as gears or uncharted, but its graphics has set a new standart of quality for games. Before RE5, the graphics evolution was pretty even, among MGS4, Dead Space, Gears series and Uncharted. Now, all the developers that wanna be among the top, must aim higher than they ever did. Upcoming top notch games like God War 3, Gears 3, Uncharted 2, Resistance 3, Killzone 3, the upcoming Halo and whatever comes from Kojima, better do more than they were doing so far. By looking for videos and screens avaible of some of these titles, it is clear that they are going to be behind RE5, in terms of graphics if they don't improve by now. Even Killzone 2 stayed behind.

Because video games should not be graded on graphics alone :|

This didn't bring anything new to table in terms of gameplay, its flaws were obvious.

The ps3 version deserved a 9 since its a superior version. the 360 and pc versions shouldve gotten lower imo. more like in the 7s

LunchBox-

Actually it is the otheway around. Go to http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/face-off-resident-evil-5-article?page=1 and check out the head to head comparisson. It is a fair one. The 360 version overcame the Ps3 one in every aspect, but by a short margin. During gameplay is hard to see any diference though. At the very end of the comparisson they say that PS3 is more powerful, why then games don't look as good. Well their explanation spilts into two main reasons. One: the PS3 version started its development one year after 360's; and two: although the game was coded for each system, taking the advantages of each one, when the game started to be developed, Capcom's choice was to make extensive use of the 10MB of 'EDRAM' that is directly attached to the Xenos GPU in order to maximise its visual effects. And the RSX Cell combo works in a different way.

At the end 360 version had a year of advantage and a game developed in an architecture that suits it better than it suits PS3. It is said though because it's always the same story: o yeah PS3 is very powerfull but no one uses its advantages. And to make things worst, no first party developer was able to deliver a more astounishing looking game than RE5 yeat. So, right now, 360 has the edge, once that its RE5 version looks better than any other game so far.

Just to let it clear, I've both consoles, and I want more of the PS3, of course.

Because video games should not be graded on graphics alone :|

This didn't bring anything new to table in terms of gameplay, its flaws were obvious.

Synthetic_NinJI

Because video games should not be graded on graphics alone :|

This didn't bring anything new to table in terms of gameplay, its flaws were obvious.

Synthetic_NinJI

You are right about that, but I am so impressed about the work on this game, I mean it came to a level of refinement never seen before. But sure, I mean there is gameplay, fun factor, online, replaybility,... . I just wanted to point something that gamers are not pointing, I just wanted to make this discussion richer. that's all.

no MP....not longer then 10 hours...not the same feel as past RE games....it got what it deserved...

no MP....not longer then 10 hours...not the same feel as past RE games....it got what it deserved...

stereointegrity

I read the review and it all seemed pretty reasonable.

It sounds to me like its a good game, though the controls may not be to everyones taste, and most importantly, getting into a co-op game is a problem.

Anyway, 8.5 is still a great score...

I think an 8.5 is fair. I'll probably give it more when I come to rate it but an 8.5 is nothing to shake a stick at. [QUOTE="Big-Boss56"]No i think 8.5 was generous considering how short and unscary the game was.Silent-Hal

Yes it should've it was better then 4 in everyway, Story, Gameplay(especially Melees) way more guns :D. Returning Enemies from Past games. It was more RE then RE4 was :|. Plus why should every sequal bring something new?:? look at Gears 2 that didn't bring anything new and it got a 9 :| RE5 didn't bring anything new and it got lower ?:?. And i'm sick of you guys saying it should have Walk and Shoot. No it shouldn't why? cause its not like other games. Games shouldn't all be the same thats why we have different games. This is Capcoms take on Action not someone elses.

Yes it should've it was better then 4 in everyway, Story, Gameplay(especially Melees) way more guns :D. Returning Enemies from Past games. It was more RE then RE4 was :|. Plus why should every sequal bring something new?:? look at Gears 2 that didn't bring anything new and it got a 9 :| RE5 didn't bring anything new and it got lower ?:?. And i'm sick of you guys saying it should have Walk and Shoot. No it shouldn't why? cause its not like other games. Games shouldn't all be the same thats why we have different games. This is Capcoms take on Action not someone elses.

KrazyKev26

Capcom's take on action? How ironic that Infogrames' Alone in the Dark predated it (first Resident Evil) by 4 years, and Origin System Inc.'s BioForge predated it also by year. I see that in eyes of majority, the most recognisable feature of Resident Evil that makes it stand out and is representative of what the whole series is about standing while shooting.

imo opinion it should have been 9.0 but i can see why people may have not liked it. if your were to ask me how to describe RE5 in one pharse i would say RE4.5 HD + co op. so while the gameplay is almost the exact as it was in RE4 the co op more than makes up for it however it still has it pitfalls. While teamwork is suppose to be an emphasis and there are a few instances where you really have to cordinate well as a team(cave part) there isn't enough of that imo which really would have made the game better and added a real element of survival horror into it. it would have been much better if they added the multiple pathway system the gears of war created in it's co op. However Re5 is still one hell of a time and the mercinaries mode is amazing

LOL

Today the mods are resting.

No i think 8.5 was generous considering how short and unscary the game was.Big-Boss56

The ps3 version deserved a 9 since its a superior version. the 360 and pc versions shouldve gotten lower imo. more like in the 7s

LunchBox-

it should have gotten a 9

[QUOTE="stereointegrity"]

no MP....not longer then 10 hours...not the same feel as past RE games....it got what it deserved...

McdonaIdsGuy

15 hours?? What were you doing, standing still for 9 hours?? I seriously doubt it took you over 2 hours per chapter to finish the game.

Anyway, I was looking at some of the lower scoring reviews on GameRankings to see if I agreed with any of the negatives they gave the game. The ones I agreed with were:

Inconsistent enemies. They can ride motorbikes while throwing things at you, and can fire weapons pretty well, but as soon as you get close to them they suddenly become slow moving and a bit stupid.

The cover system. I like the addition of it, but I'd rather they added it properly. Why can you only do it in certain places? Also, I would rather be able to move while in cover. If I want to move from side of a wall to the other, why do I have to get out of cover just to move two feet to the side and then get back in cover? It's nothing major, but it IS clunky and annoying. I'm not even asking to be able to move while shooting (I actually like the way it is).

I guess those are the main things that bring the score down for me. There aren't many big problems, just too many minor ones and, as an action game, I feel there are games out there that do what RE5 does much better.

I do feel, however, that this game has come in for some unfair criticism in regards to it being too similar to RE4, while other games have been allowed to get away with it. Maybe it's just me, but that's how it seems.

That's my opinion, anyway.

[QUOTE="McdonaIdsGuy"][QUOTE="stereointegrity"]

no MP....not longer then 10 hours...not the same feel as past RE games....it got what it deserved...

BZSIN

15 hours?? What were you doing, standing still for 9 hours?? I seriously doubt it took you over 2 hours per chapter to finish the game.

Anyway, I was looking at some of the lower scoring reviews on GameRankings to see if I agreed with any of the negatives they gave the game. The ones I agreed with were:

Inconsistent enemies. They can ride motorbikes while throwing things at you, and can fire weapons pretty well, but as soon as you get close to them they suddenly become slow moving and a bit stupid.

The cover system. I like the addition of it, but I'd rather they added it properly. Why can you only do it in certain places? Also, I would rather be able to move while in cover. If I want to move from side of a wall to the other, why do I have to get out of cover just to move two feet to the side and then get back in cover? It's nothing major, but it IS clunky and annoying. I'm not even asking to be able to move while shooting (I actually like the way it is).

I guess those are the main things that bring the score down for me. There aren't many big problems, just too many minor ones and, as an action game, I feel there are games out there that do what RE5 does much better.

I do feel, however, that this game has come in for some unfair criticism in regards to it being too similar to RE4, while other games have been allowed to get away with it. Maybe it's just me, but that's how it seems.

That's my opinion, anyway.

Yeah, in the cut-scenes, they are fast, aggresive, and pretend they're dangerous, but once cut-scene ends they just resort to their usual clunkiness and stupidity, and they are quite the opposite of being dangerous.

If all popular highly hyped games got 9s then they wouldn't be doing there job. Compared to other games we've already gotten not to long ago its a 8.5. Also the game is no longer survival horror its action. As an action its controls sucked

[QUOTE="kholdstare61"]

Gamespot doesn't give sequels that are too similar to their predecessors AAAMcdonaIdsGuy

i enjoyed it. personally, its a 9.5 in my book :)

I don't really think it should have been AAA because there was nothing to different from Resident Evil 4 only better graphics and co - op gameplay but I do find it fun but not as good as number 4.

No, its a very fair score.