Today a bit of news was revealed about Resident Evil 6. The website "Gamerzine" has a tidbit article about 6 player Co-op in Resident Evil 6. The news is currently on the front page. The article states, and I quote:
"According to the listing, between 2-6 players can jump into the game's online co-op mode, with offline split-screen co-op restricted to two players.
At this stage, it's unknown whether Resi 6's co-op will be linked to the game's campaign or will form part of a separate mode. Could Capcom have a six-player Mercenaries mode lined up, perhaps?"
Notice that at this point there is still speculation about how the co-op is going to be included in the game. It has not been definitely revealed that the 6 player co-op will be included in the 6 player campaign or if it will be part of a separate game mode. However, what is known is the reaction the news has received on N4G. And that reaction is outrageous.
The very first comment in the thread section for this submitted article from Gamezine is a purely reactionary rant about how "Capcom keeps ignoring its fans." Some people are visibly upset by the notion of cooperative play. Some people want the campaign to be single player only. Notice that I say "SOME" and not "ALL" or "MOST" or "THE MAJORITY." The reason why I say some is because it's the only logically factual statement I am entitled to make. I don't have a statistical report laid out in front of me that will let me know definitely where the fans of the Resident Evil franchise stand on the topic of cooperative play. Neither does anyone else.
And yet, there are way too many people agreeing with certain users who are a bit trigger happy when it comes to using the terms, "many," "most," and "majority." If you have an opinion about something, that's fine. My agreement or disagreement with your opinion is not going to cause me to respond with enthusiastic praise or hatred, though there is something that may. What really does grind my gears about users on this site is how effortlessly they piss away logic for the sake of sounding passionate. If you have an opinion, do not start your posts with, "We didn't want this" or "The majority of us gamers...." If you have an opinion, say "I think..." or "I'm really happy/unhappy about...." There is no cause for you to pretend that you speak for everyone. You don't have the evidence in front of you to make bold claims about what the majority of people want. It's true, you may get a ton of agrees on N4G for saying something very negative about Capcom, but don't let that fool you into believing that you're right about your claims. This website is not an accurate representation of the population. If you don't like something, you should value your opinion enough to say that it's your opinion, rather than pretend that it's popular opinion.
Another thing I want to talk about is the co-op mode. I was a little frustrated by the number of people jumping in to attack Capcom over very little information. Very few people in the thread praised Capcom for announcing 6 player co-op. Six players playing together is not common. I'm a little surprised by the negative reaction considering the positive reaction that Uncharted 2 received for having a co-op mode, and the positive reaction Killzone 3 received for having a co-op mode. I know, it may be "different" because some people think having co-op in Resident Evil makes it less scary.
I'm not sure if I agree with the idea that co-op makes something less scary. What is important to note is that it hasn't yet been confirmed if the campaign will be co-op only or if it will simply have the option for cooperative play. Until then, people should refrain from jumping to conclusions. On a final note, I dislike when fans of a series take it upon themselves to decide what is appropriate for a sequel in the series. Hey, I get it. You like the series, but that doesn't mean you're entitled to control its direction. If you want to control the direction of a game, go learn how to program video games, apply for a job at a game studio, then control the direction of the game. The developers at Capcom consist of people who worked really hard to get to where they are today. They have ideas about what kind of game they want to make, and they're doing it. If you're a fan of their games, good for you, but don't get all pissy when they start doing what they want to do. You're entitled to share your opinion, but please have the decency to note that your opinion belongs to *you* and not to the "majority." I pointed this out to the user who started the rant, and the user commented back saying that most people would agree with him/her. This user still doesn't understand what it means to make false claims. If you don't actually KNOW what the majority of the fanbase thinks about something, don't say that you do. Don't pretend that you do. No matter how many agrees you get on N4G, your claims are still invalid.
The Final Fantasy VII Rebirth combat director has expressed that he wants the final part in the trilogy to offer players "even more freedom".
I love the game so far but please don’t make the final part a mini game fest
Everytime I get to a new part in Rebirth it’s “mini game time”
Hope ya don't mind me asking since it seems like you've played it, did it feel like a decent step up from the last game or was it more like the best from the last but more polished?
It makes Remake feel like a demo.
9.5/10 imo. And I think the “mini games” did a great job of adding variety to the gameplay. Purely optional as well.
Here's my thoughts
I think it's a big step up from the first instalment, I'm enjoying it way more.
I thought keeping it just in Midgar was silly, it felt dragged out and it didn't have much variation in terms of the scenery.
However with Rebirth, as soon as you get out of Kalm you have a big world to explore and it's great to just wander round and explore.
Now that I'm half way in though, despite still liking what I'm playing, the gameplay loop is now starting to slow down on me. I've got to a new region and I'm like "Yaaay...need to go and find those towers again, oh look another special beast marker, is that a bird I see in the distance? Better follow it to another Mako Crystal"
It's like....you know how Peter Jackson was only supposed to have two Hobbit films then Warner Bros wanted a third film so he stretched the second film out as much as he could so he could keep stuff for the third film making a trilogy? Yeah it feels like that, so these mini games are a part of that overall gameplay loop to keep us going and stretch the game out overall so they have something for the third and final game.
I personally think you could have had the first instalment get you out of Midgar and through to Grasslands / Junon and the second game finishes things off.
I had a weird cycle of love/hate for all the mini games as I played through. At first I really hated the seeming need to check all these boxes while exploring the grasslands. I didn't enjoy the Gilgamesh quest initially, and thought Queen's blood was fine but didn't want to commit to it. The side quests didn't really grab me either.
Then for some reason everything in Junon region changed my mind and I did pretty much everything. I liked most of the side quests, I actually liked playing fort condor (didn't care for it in the intergrade dlc). And my interest for completing these quests stayed pretty much through to Cosmo Canyon.
Then they added that horrible Lifestream memory/battle mini game and I started getting so burnt out of it all. I just wanted to do the story. I didn't do any side quests in neibleheim and beyond except for the summon. I abandoned Gilgamesh.
So what I'm saying is I would like the third part to go back to the focused progression from remake. Keep the mini games to the gold saucer. Start the game snowboarding if you want, but from there keep the story rolling.
That's funny you say that because I did everything in the Grasslands but once in Junon I started to slow down a little until Corel where by the end I was burnt out. I'm still currently going but I'm just doing what I can while things keep getting thrown at me.
I would have preferred half of these mini game side fillers / collectibles for some really beefy side quests that really adds onto the world of FFVII.
Sounds like they hadn't really figured out what they wanted to do with Remake and this one is more of what they thought of doing which is probably why they're dragging it out to make a trilogy. Disappointed to hear it has towers cause man do i hate towers lol. It's been a while since I've played the first and it'll be a while longer to play the sequel, but it sounds like I'll enjoy it. 7 really impressed me especially after being disappointed with 15, felt like Square finally realized that FF was THEIR big franchise again.
As long as it comes out on PS5 to have the entire series on one platform, do whatever you want
The combat is my favorite thing about Rebirth. Would be really cool if they can improve it even more.
I hope after FF7 Square will either give a new FF game the remake treatment. Or give some of their older titles a remake treatment like Chrono Trigger, Chrono Cross, even Xenogears.
Wccf tech writes: "Kingdom Come Deliverance 2's scope was impacted by the Xbox Series S hardware limitations, as developers could only make a game that was 25% bigger than its predecessor."
This is the issue with things like this
Xbox Series X is apparently to MS the worlds most powerful console
However the Series S is obviously a limitation because it’s underpowered and developers have to go for parity.
So what’s the point of the world’s most powerful console if you are holding third party developers back? They aren’t going to push themselves if they have to think about the weakest console.
The issue wouldn’t be as bad if it was just Xbox but you are also affecting the PS version aswell
I think developers need to start just taking advantage of a console and if one of them can’t do X Y and Z then f*** them…why should the others suffer. What’s MS going to do? The bigger the franchise the least chance MS are going to tell them to f*** off. Baulders Gate 3 seemed to have stood their ground and suddenly their “strict” parity rule didn’t really matter. We suddenly got super optimisation efforts for the Series S that got things sorted.
I agree, and the sad part is use normal folk saw it the second they announced their plans.
Agree 100% this is why I didn’t want the M$ Monopoly, now PS5 version will be held back too.
If PS5 Pro comes out and Series S is still a thing it’ll be interesting what differences and what devs choose to do. Really hoping Rockstar pushes the PS5 pro with GTA6 and we get the best version possible.
More info from the author of the article, I think: https://www.reddit.com/r/ki...
Quote:
"1) I was told this info from the producer of the game Martin Klíma.
2) He specifically said the game will have only one mode.
3) And this mode is 4K 30 on PS5/XSX and 1440p 30 on XSS.
4) He said that the game is already running north of the 30 FPS cap so the performance should be stable on launch, much better than KCD1.
5) The limitation was XSS because of the 10GB memory. He said that's why they wanted to make the game 25% larger.
6) Speculation on my part: the output resolution is probably upscaled and the reason why there won't be a 60 FPS mode is because it'll most likely be very CPU heavy, like Dragon's Dogma 2 for example."
Doesn't seem like they're adding a 40fps mode on PS5/Series X for launch even if they can handle it.
I'd much rather have 1440p/60fps or even 45fps. Having just one, even with the Series S in mind, is disappointing.
Remember when xbots were adamant that the series s won’t hold back the gen?
Microsoft just needs to let go of the mandatory parity. Who cares if your grandma doesn’t understand that a game cannot be played on the S. It’s not like it she can buy you a physical game for it anyway. Before buying the game put up a notice that it only works on series X. If you’re buying for a friend-allow for a refund.
Bam. Everyone is happy. Most series s owners are for casuals that want Game Pass anyway and most likely don’t purchase most games.
If the developers want it to run on S, let them figure it out.
“During the event, the Kingdom Come Deliverance 2 producer also revealed that on PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X, the game will run at 4K resolution and 30 frames per second“
Another “creative decision” right? 🤦♂️
Since you're not an amateur and clearly know more than them, can you over there and help get the game running on the S without having to sacrifice their true vision. Us gamers would really appreciate you using your wisdom for good 🙏
Thousands of games run just fine on S.
But Kingdom Come is the game that can’t. Must be one hell of a game!
Thousands of games run on PS4 and on Switch. If developers want them to run on those systems. Fine. Those two platforms still get new games. Sony isn’t making studios also make a ps4 pro version, or Nintendo a wiiu version. Microsoft technically is.
If games like Alan Wake 2, GTA6, COD, hellblade all run on S, no excuse for this 100x smaller and 100x worse looking game to be held back.
Custom Controller Company HexGaming launched a Kickstarter campaign for their latest pro controller, Hex Phantom. - IS
But let us - however - consider CAPCOM's track record: it ain't lookin' so good. If the game does indeed have 6-player co-op for the campaign, you can pretty much kiss goodbye any connection RE6 might have with the rest of the series (other than the characters, of course).
If 6-player is in story campaign, it will be a chaos trying to keep everyone nearby all the time. And all the 6 characters that can be co-op most be together in the story campaign or someone in the co-op team will loose control over the character in parts of the story.
If 6-player co-op is more likely to be on non-story or standalone mini story co-op mode.
I doubt the main Campaign with be 6 player co-op but it would be nice if they had a separate Campaign mode that was Co-op focused, don't really want another Mercenaries mode as it wasn't all that great. I could see them doing a horde type mode though for the 6 player co-op I just hope it's a little more interesting than the Mercenaries stuff that had in RE5 and instead of it just being little stages it be more like L4D and have it be huge area's and you have to make it to the end.
Nah, I don't think the story mode will be 6 player coop. I guess it'll be 2 players as in RE5. Maybe they have added an option to play it alone too so everyone can be satisfied. That's what I'm hoping anyway.
For the 6-8 player I'm guessing they have some new multiplayer or maybe a survival coop mode. That would be nice...
Yeah, I pretty much agree with the OP of this blog has to say.
I was probably one of the very few that posted on that article's comment section actually looking forward to it and raising the question of whether or not the 6 player co-op was actually for friends getting together to have fun and socialize through a new zombie horde mode or Mercenaries mode after you completed the single player story.
Almost every single RE game I've played and owned has some sort of bonus mode after you complete the game. The lack of evidence or logic for people assuming and getting angry about the thought of them making it available for the single player is almost ridiculous.
But again, good blog OP. It was well made and did some justice for the whole affair.