Capcom Tries Space Dinosaurs, Online Zombies

Thanks to GameSpy for their review of Capcom's Dino Crisis 3, in which their Xbox-exclusive "second-tier survival-horror franchise" barely survives a bizarre transition into space, thanks to "stunningly inane combat sequences" and "a camera that constantly switches between useless views of the action." A brief interview with the producer reveals even he thinks the franchise "...maybe not as [viable] as Resident Evil." On that note, TotalVideoGames.com has an interview with the producer of Resident Evil: Outbreak, the forthcoming PS2-exclusive online title, and he suggests: "Whereas other games have and will make use of voice chat, we decided not to. The main reason for this is to preserve the essence of Resident Evil games, namely the fear." Do these Capcom franchises still grip gamers like they used to?

Comments

Not likely, but it can be done

[wynterwynd]

Repetitive suspense scenes, godawful voice acting, and plots with holes Nemesis could hopscotch through without ducking have leeched much of the suspense away I fear. As with many horror movies and games, the first will always be the best. The most potent fear is that of the unknown.

Not to say that it can't be done, but it's gonna take a restructuring of Craven-esque proportions to bring back the chills and screams to the series.

And don't get me started on Resident Dino, I don't have the strength. Something has survived.... and it wasn't gameplay, plot, or thrills.

Camera problems

[Decaffeinated Jedi]

...barely survives a bizarre transition into space, thanks to..."a camera that constantly switches between useless views of the action."

Is it just me, or are camera problems becoming pretty much a continual problem in third-person games? It seems like we're almost due for a revolutionary new system that will make this issue a thing of the past.

Something tells me, however, that it probably won't come in the form of Tomb Raider 6: Keep Raidin' Them Tombs.

Ive said it before, its unfortunate...

[quantax]

I no longer play any capcom games due to the fact that capcom has honestly not really made a new game since their first releases of their various concepts: street fighter, resident evil, dino crisis, etc. Street fighter original was great and so were its immediate relatives like Street Fighter 2, but then came "Street Fighter: Electric Boogaloo" and all its brothers, which was crap. Same exact games as Street Fighter, just with updated graphics. Resident Evil has taken on the same update formula; I enjoy a good story like anyone else and while RE has a good story, unfortunately, I hardly think its good enough to justify "Directors Cut" that was made of one version and then to make many sequels that ultimately did not innovate that much. Capcom has not made a new game for a long time since they've had the blessing of having very bright developers from the start that they can keep reusing their concepts over and over again, even now years after and never have to worry about actually taking a risk on a game. What was once good is no longer, so do everyone a favor and do not buy Capcom games, for by doing so you support the creation of endless clone titles. Witness Dino Crisis 3...

Biohazard, cameras, and such...

[analog_line]

I admit it, I own and enjoy all (except Biohazard: Zero) or the Resident Evil games. I don't enjoy them because they're scary, because frankly they aren't particularly so. They're suspenseful to a certain extent, but in the end it's more of a sci-fi zombie anime kind of thing. A bit campy, and intended to be.

I think changing the name from Biohazard to Resident Evil did the series a disservice in people's expectations. Resident Evil sets you up to be some kind of dark mystical haunted mansion your characters are walking into. It's OK for the first one, as it ended up, for me, working like a plot twist (Ahhh, evil corporation testing a virus, interesting). Biohazard implies mad biologists, or some kind of 28 Days Later type plague happening, which sets you up better.

In the end though, I like these games (and most "survival horror" type games, be they scary or not) because I believe they're the direct descendents of the venerable text adventure. Encounter various puzzles walking your path, find the key item or whatever to get through. Backtracking to rooms you couldn't open before to find different key items. Set piece monster battles (for the most part). The parallels in the game structure between Resident Evil/Silent Hill and the various Infocom text adventure games are pretty stark. I remember way back when, all the dead trees me and my family printed "verbose" logs of Zork 1 on, trying to work out the best way through the game. It's no different from people methodically working their way through Resident Evil or Silent Hill, trying to get the shortest complete times, etc.

And about "camera problems." Every game I've ever played and liked, SOMEONE lambasts it for having horrible camera problems, and 99% of the time, I don't have a clue what they're talking about. Spiderman was accused by zillions of having horrible camera issues, to which I say, how the hell would you implement a camera that perfectly tracks a guy who can CLIMB ON WALLS for goodness sake. No one has given me an answer that's any better than what Neversoft did. And with most survival horror games, people complaining about the camera just don't get it, and aren't worth arguing with. I'm not saying that Dino Crisis' camera isn't horrible, because I don't know, and not having an Xbox, I'll probably never know unless I seek out someone with DC3 to check it out. However, I'm suspicious of all reviews that blame the camera for a bad rating.