Tuesday, December 27, 2011

Calling myself out on my video game hypocrisy


Now that I've posted my impressions of Uncharted 3, I thought it would be an appropriate time to point out my own hypocrisy.
Uncharted 3 was a great game, there's no denying that. But one of my biggest problems with it was that not enough was changed. It felt exactly like the previous two games, aside from a few minor tweaks. It's basically the same complaint I had about Bioshock 2. If you haven't played the other games, you'll probably enjoy the newest installment more because the experience will be new to you.
Is this a valid reason to be upset with a game? Maybe. Maybe not. Either way, that's not really the point.
I've made no attempt to hide my distaste for the direction the Resident Evil series has gone in. Or how disappointed I was with Silent Hill Homecoming's turn towards more of an action game. Resident Evil 4 and 5 went through drastic changes. They don't even feel like part of the Resident Evil universe...Which is why I hate them. (Although I do think RE5 is fun to play with another person.) And here I am, complaining about games like Uncharted 3 and Bioshock 2 not taking things far enough.
The only sense I can really make of this is that maybe it's a genre based issue. I have no use for shooters in general. Fight a group of enemies to get to the next area, where you'll fight another group of enemies...That just never did it for me. What's the point? It's repetitive. Uncharted and Uncharted 2 had enough platforming and puzzles to where it felt like I was actually accomplishing something. The shooting was broken up. Uncharted 3 didn't seem to have as much of either and I think that's where it went wrong for me.
With games like Resident Evil, there was a lot of strategy involved. You had a certain amount of item slots to carry your guns, ammo, healing items, keys and any random puzzle items you might need later on. You really had to consider what you were bringing with you when you left an item box. Your survival depended on it. And you could never kill every enemy you came across. Resident Evil Remake actually gave you an incentive NOT to kill the zombies. If you weren't able to burn their bodies within a certain period of time, they would turn into Crimson Heads...Super zombies. Not only would you have wasted precious ammo to kill them the first time, but you now had to kill them a SECOND time while they're running at you and attacking you with their claws.
It may also be an issue of a dying genre. Survival horror never seemed to be as popular as shooters are. And Capcom, in an attempt to save their series, have decided to "get with the times" and turn Resident Evil into a [poorly constructed] shooter so they could make more money. Meanwhile, games like Uncharted don't go through significant changes because they already sell so well.
I guess my problem is that the changes to Resident Evil 4 and 5 were too drastic, while the changes to Uncharted 3 weren't drastic enough. There needs to be a middle ground. Innovation is good, it keeps games new and interesting. But most companies seem to miss the mark. Be ambitious! But don't destroy what you've created in the process.

No comments:

Post a Comment