Resident Evil 2 for N64 is awesome. The new C and D control profiles

>N64 version of anything being the best one

The only good thing about the N64 version is the item randomizer mode.

File: ps1-vs-n64.jpg (119KB, 640x960px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 640x960px

>>2915805
>>N64 version of anything being the best one

>>2915805

OP didn't say it's "a best", he said it's awesome and that the new control schemes make it more enjoyable to him.
Best is maybe DC or GC versions, but N64 version is still cool, better than the original PS1 at least.

>>2915812
Also no loading times and dolby surround audio.

File: RE2_N64.png (27KB, 184x118px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 184x118px

>Left: Most emulators.
>Right: GLideN64's experimental texture filtering mode.
Sadly, RE2 is one of the most advanced N64 games when it comes to textures. GLideN64 doesn't have the dirty hacks other plugins use to render the backgrounds. It'll need more work to get things working accurately.

>>2915840
The real shocker is that Capcom re-released RE2 for the Gamecube and didn't implement First Person Controls. I guess they learnt their lesson because RE: Remake HD and RE: Zero HD both have the control scheme. As a default now, I think?

Granted, it has some minor problems, but it's an acceptable trade-off, IMO.

>Also no loading times and dolby surround audio.
It's a pity RE2 N64 uses Factor 5's MORT instead of MP3 for voices. Someone made a romhack for Perfect Dark that uses the audio from the XBLA version, since PD will read any MP3 you inject so long as it meets certain specs.

Also, while RE2 has iffy voice quality and the odd tinny sound effect, the music quality is really, really good.

I wish they did 1 and 3 for n64, its weird they chose to only do 2. I wonder why...

>>2915879
because somewhere between a prototype and an afterthought, there was a marketable product.

>>2915879
>I wish they did 1 and 3 for n64, its weird they chose to only do 2. I wonder why...
Complicated market reasons, I think. RE2 was very much Capcom's "flagship" Resident Evil title. They apparently gave Angel Studios a budget of $US1,000,000 to port it to the N64. RE1 was old news. RE3 was being developed at the same time as RE2 N64. Make no mistake, Capcom were very much onboard with the N64, since RE0 was supposed to be an N64 game.

But what really puzzles me is this -- Capcom supposedly ran into problems when making RE0 N64 due to N64 64MB cartridge limitations. This was a chief factor behind the shift to GC. This all sounds fairly normal. 64MB isn't a huge amount of data. But from what I can see, Capcom were making RE0 on their own with no input from Angel Studios.

Now this may sound a bit prejudiced, but it's true - most Japanese developers, coders in particular, absolutely suck at writing clean, efficient, "to the bone" code. The sort of thing you need when creating a game like Resident Evil using limited cartridge space. Angel Studios had really, really good coders and engineers who did a fantastic job in collaboration with Factor 5, who were equally good engineers. I honestly think Capcom's problem with N64 development lay in their (games industry-wise) lack of technical savvy. Same thing happened with Nintendo and Mother 3, where they were hitting walls and needed the help of the Pokemon Stadium team (who also had contact with Factor 5, for the MORT speech codec used by Pokemon Stadium.)

tl;dr, Japanese devs sucked at making N64 games because very few Japanese devs since the SNES-era can code for shit.

>>2915840
> dolby surround audio

You will not make me believe that sound quality on a game that uses CD musics and voice acting is better on N64.

Besides, sound in RE games work in a simple way: you hear sounds depending on the point of view of the camera. Let's say there is a large camera angle and your character goes from left to right of that camera angle, you will start by hearing the footsteps on the left, and gradually going rightwards.
Any sound will be "located" in a similar way, even those which are off-view.

I really don't see how you can make it better than that.

>>2915852
>the music quality is really, really good.

That's because the codec Angel Studies used to encode the audio samples was a lot more effective at compression (better sound quality while using less space) than the old fashioned ADPCM 4:1 that the PS1 version uses.

One big advantage of the N64 in sound is that you can microcode any codec you want onto the RSP chip, while the PS1 sound chip is always locked into ADPCM 4:1 no matter what.

>>2915920
I'd like to get a definitive answer on the N64's actual surround sound capabilities. Particularly, whether N64 Dolby Surround can actually do positional audio. Half the info you find on forums is full of shit.

>>2915926
>I'd like to get a definitive answer on the N64's actual surround sound capabilities

The N64 has no built in sound capabilities, everything is achieved in software, so theoretically anything is possible as long as the hardware isn't being pushed too hard.

That being said, the RSP chip is very effective at processing sound but it also has to process graphics, so there's a bit of a contest for its resources.

>>2915841
Last time I checked the game was unbeatable on emulators, as it crashes somewhere in the lab near the end.

If you know of a way to play the item randomizer mode on emulator, do tell, as I have found no help on the crashes, no save games with the mode unlocked, no gameshark codes, etc

>>2915932
>Last time I checked the game was unbeatable on emulators, as it crashes somewhere in the lab near the end.
I beat it on PJ64 1.6 many years ago. Sound was garbled the whole time. I'm currently playing through the game on a modern version of PJ64 I built myself from the source code. Aside from Glide64's shitty texture filtering and the odd graphics bug, it looks and sounds fine. When I do finish the game, I'll upload the save file to /vr/ because there does seem to be a bit of demand for an unlocked game file.

>>2915974
Thanks a lot. I wonder what was up with that crash, I remember trying twice, in seperate moments in time, and iirc using 2 different emulator versions and it crashed both times at the same moment.

I've never played RE2, sadly. Which version should I emulate? PS1, N64 or GC?

>>2916010
Dreamcast if you can, or PC.

>>2915982
>Thanks a lot. I wonder what was up with that crash, I remember trying twice, in seperate moments in time, and iirc using 2 different emulator versions and it crashed both times at the same moment.
RE2 crashes are usually cased by large recompilation blocks or by the sound system shitting itself. Most emulators don't handle RE2's speech codec very well. mupen64plus just plain can't do it. I think 1964 kinda does it. And PJ64 only does it because of its weird "fixed audio timing" function that was intended for netplay.

>>2915932
Get an Everdrive64.

>>2916010

Can you read Japanese? If so, PC version.

failing that, probably GC? I don't know how well that emulates mind.

>>2916215
The first PC version was released in English and it's better than most console versions.

You may just need to take a couple of mins and check a tutorial to get it running.

File: re2 version guide.png (1MB, 1326x2260px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1326x2260px

>>2916010
It doesn't really matter much in the end. I'd say all versions have pros and cons.

PS1 one is the original, and quite a safe bet if all else fails.

>>2915926
Dolby Surround is old school surround, it's encoded in a stereo feed and decoded by the receiver. The technology basically matured into Dolby Pro-Logic. Even some DS games used Pro-Logic for surround in the same manner.

>>2916194
Disgusting. This is akin to damnation.

>>2917128
I like the n64 costumes best

RE2 N64's C & D control schemes underpin all fixed camera angle Resident Evil games now. If RE2 Remake has fixed camera angles, there is no way in hell it is defaulting to tank controls, even if it supports them.

>>2915852
>The real shocker is that Capcom re-released RE2 for the Gamecube and didn't implement First Person Controls.
RE2 (and 3) on the NGC were done in-house (or at least done by someone other than Angel Studios).

>>2917370
>>The real shocker is that Capcom re-released RE2 for the Gamecube and didn't implement First Person Controls.
>RE2 (and 3) on the NGC were done in-house (or at least done by someone other than Angel Studios).
I'm aware of that, but you'd think Capcom could take a hint. You'd think Nintendo would take a hint, since they loved Eternal Darkness so much and Eternal Darkness uses a similar control scheme.

Capcom were weird.

>>2917378
It really wasn't a big deal back in the day. People were still trying to figure 3D controls out.

>>2917347
I am not sure what your point is, but the reason why REmake and 0 re-releases have camera centric controls is because the vast majority of modern gamers are lazy fuckwits who'd rather have all games play the same rather than learn a new control scheme.

They are ruining their own games just to catter to "norms" which do not correspond to those the games. You can't just zoom in on a 4/3 fixed background and pretend it's okay because "we made the background move so there is no loss!" , it completelys ruins the visuals and the point they were trying to convey.
You also can't just put a new control scheme giving a lot more freedom of movement just because you want to catter to lazy people and to the mainstream of the market. It completely ruins the entire gameplay balance, and this stands for RE2's N64 control scheme too.
This would be like re-releasing SMB3 and giving it double jump if double jump was the norm in platformers.

>>2917748
That's an extremely cynical view of Resident Evil.

>You can't just zoom in on a 4/3 fixed background and pretend it's okay because "we made the background move so there is no loss!" , it completelys ruins the visuals and the point they were trying to convey.
How does it ruin them, taking for granted the new backgrounds would be higher resolution?

>It completely ruins the entire gameplay balance, and this stands for RE2's N64 control scheme too.
People say the same thing about console FPS and TPS games being ported to PC proper with mouse and keyboard controls. It's a moot point. If you've got a fetish for challenge, play with tank controls.

Heck, from a pragmatic standpoint, when playing with a keyboard alone, tank controls have some advantages.

>>2917914
>How does it ruin them, taking for granted the new backgrounds would be higher resolution?

Higher resolution doesn't mean you seem more. Using 16/9, you see less of the screen, and instead the screen moves as the character moves. So you see less at all times, and static screens become mobile. If that's not ruining them I don't know what it is.

>People say the same thing about console FPS and TPS games being ported to PC proper with mouse and keyboard controls. It's a moot point. If you've got a fetish for challenge, play with tank controls.

It's not a question of challenge, and it's different than your example. When using keyboad/mouse on a console FPS, you're changing the controller, but you're not changing the controls. In the case of RE2 N64 or REmake/RE0 HD, they are changing the controls, meaning that you are not playing by the games rules anymore, meaning it's a form of cheat. You are not supposed to directly go in any direction you want at any time, and the environment AND the enemies were designed with that in mind. By being able to move in any direction directly at any time, it makes fighting and avoiding enemies a LOT easier than it's supposed to. If the controls would have been like that originaly, the enemies would have probably been made faster or more reactive, or the environment would have been different.

>Heck, from a pragmatic standpoint, when playing with a keyboard alone, tank controls have some advantages.

I really don't see what you mean by that

>>2917378
Good thing too, since those 2D / "first person" controls suck ass in static camera-angle games.

>>2917968
>I really don't see what you mean by that
Not him, but the "tank controls" fit KB only gaming like a glove. I still play DOOM with KB only, just like back in the days, and that skill allowed me to run through RESIs and SH games on emulators just fine, without any kind of controllers.

The tank-controls work best on digital, directional keys, such as arrows / WASD.

>>2918054
>Good thing too, since those 2D / "first person" controls suck ass in static camera-angle games.
They work just fine. Eternal Darkness used them. Certain Silent Hill games used them. Also, for some odd reason, people seem to forget that RE2 N64 has a momentary pause before each camera angle change. It's not like the camera angle suddenly changes and leaves you unprepared.

>>2918065
>Eternal Darkness used them.
and I never understood why it's so highly praised.
>Certain Silent Hill games used them
= all the worst games in series.

>It's not like the camera angle suddenly changes and leaves you unprepared.
It's just not natural at all to me, and I definitely do not want to stop every two seconds to rethink which way I need to press now in order to run forward. In REmake for example, that can get you killed.

I seriously believe that only people with problems understanding 3D space can "prefer" the 2D control scheme over the vastly smoother 3D controls

>>2918082
Basically, this is one of those unwinnable disputes akin to people who think they can rationalise inverted aiming "cos that's how airplanes work".

On that point, literally the only reason pulling back on a flight stick "looks up" was so pilots could use their body weight to yank an uncooperative stick upwards to avoid becoming a crater.

It's a tradeoff. We've got the exact same dispute ongoing with modern Resident Evil. Should the camera be forced over the shoulder, or should the character move freely, independent of the camera? Games games ranging from Cold Fear to Alan Wake to RE6 and even, in a limited form, Revelations 2 adopted the latter. Even The Evil Within. Even Fallout 4. But some people find that sort of 3D camera disorienting.

>>2918095
i couldn't give a shit about the game angle as long as the new RE's have a great story and great gameplay.

Hilarious how people thing the camera and the controls are what make a good resident evil game.

>>2918095
This is the issue for me. I don't care what control scheme you like best.
I don't have a problem with camera centric controls either, I've played Eternal Darkness, those other SH games and Project Zero games just fine. It's totally fine because those games WERE made with that control scheme in mind.

But RE wasn't, and just like giving "tank controls" to Eternal Darkness without changing anything else would make it unfairly harder, putting camera centric controls in RE make the game unfairly easier.

People need to realize that everytime they avoid a zombie using that type of controls in the N64 version of RE2 or in the HD rerelease of REmake and 0, they are in fact cheating.

When you are playing the steam re-release of Final Fantasy VII or 9, and using the "boost" features to give you magic or money, it is not called a cheat, it's glorified under another name, but you are cheating. It is the same with those controls in RE games that weren't designed for it.

>>2918114
>People need to realize that everytime they avoid a zombie using that type of controls in the N64 version of RE2 or in the HD rerelease of REmake and 0, they are in fact cheating.
lol. Holy shit.

>>2918114
>putting camera centric controls in RE make the game unfairly easier.
I think you're putting far too much emphasis on difficulty as a measure of good gameplay. As for "cheating", I don't think it's cheating anymore than playing GTA V on PC and being able to deliver perfect headshots while driving at high speed is "cheating", since console players are unable to competently drive and shoot at the same time due to the limitations of a dual analogue controller compared to mouse and keyboard.

There's nothing wrong with adding game features without going out of your way to make the game "harder" to compensate. Look at Outbreak 1 vs Outbreak 2, where the second game added the ability to shoot while moving. It wasn't some "game breaking" feature like some paranoid RE fans would have you believe.

>>2918128
I don't know where people get the idea that RE2 N64-style controls magically remove all difficulty. The combat is unchanged. When in a narrow hallway, you're still going to get grabbed if you run too close to a zombie. The only real difference is more versatile movement and the ability to deal with enemies in open areas and stairwells and blind corners and such more easily. I mean, remember when Capcom added quick turning and broke the formula forever?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wgz7pm_qPv4

>>2918137
180 quick turn and the dodge/ammo crafting ruined RE FOREVER!!!
Jokes aside that n64 footage looks great.

>>2918129
>I think you're putting far too much emphasis on difficulty as a measure of good gameplay.

I never said that.
My point is play by the game's rules. This is like

> I don't think it's cheating anymore than playing GTA V on PC and being able to deliver perfect headshots while driving at high speed is "cheating", since console players are unable to competently drive and shoot at the same time due to the limitations of a dual analogue controller compared to mouse and keyboard.

Like I said before, changing the controller type isn't the same thing as changing controls. If you want the GTA example, it would be like giving the character the ability to run faster in a later port.
Extra movement you're not supposed to be able to do.

If they wanted to have be able to do that when they made the game, they would have. But no, they didn't. Because not every game needs to have the same controls and movement possibilities. So either you play by the game's rules or you play something else, or else you might as well be playing Mario with double jump or Mario Kart with turbo boosts at all times.

>Look at Outbreak 1 vs Outbreak 2, where the second game added the ability to shoot while moving. It wasn't some "game breaking" feature like some paranoid RE fans would have you believe.

Yeah, no problem with Outbreak 2, as long as the game was designed like that. That's different than designing the game without it and then adding it in another port without changing anything else.

Take Resident Evil 1 on DS for instance. They gave extra movement : being able to do a 180° turn and being able to use the knife at all times. BUT they did something to compensate that: they made the zombies smarter and harder to dodge.

If you want to play RE2/REmake/0 with the possibility to go in any direction at any given that you need to change other things too, like enemy. You might as well change the entire game then. Or you know, play RE4 if that's what you want.

>>2918139
Granted, there are moments where the camera angle changes and you're not sure which end of the hallway you just came from, but I think it's an acceptable tradeoff for free movement.

And as far as I can see, Capcom are dedicated to keeping tank controls in these types of games for those who want or need them. So there's no need for everybody to get so salty about it. I've seen people genuinely distressed that basically everyone playing RE0 HD pre-release has been using the "modern" control system, because this will somehow lead to RE2: Remake being terrible.

>>2918141
>Or you know, play RE4 if that's what you want.
RE:4 had tank controls too, tit.

>>2918141
Everything said in this post was already said in previous posts by the way, just differently. Turning in circle here because you refuse to believe the simple concept of video game controls, which is like the concept of rules in games in general. You play by them, OR you're cheating. It's as simple as that and it's not fucking hard to understand. I'm fine with cheating, it's no big deal, I've used cheats too in the game, but I understand it's a cheat. Not fucking hard.

>>2918137
>I don't know where people get the idea that RE2 N64-style controls magically remove all difficulty.

Never said that either. I said it made it easier.

>.I mean, remember when Capcom added quick turning and broke the formula forever?

Again, as long as the game is designed with it..... FUCK, why is this so hard to grasp for anyone?! A game has rules, another game has other rules. But don't expect to apply game#4 rules on game#2 and call it fair.

>>2918143
>Granted, there are moments where the camera angle changes and you're not sure which end of the hallway you just came from, but I think it's an acceptable tradeoff for free movement.
Thats the thing tho. They have options for different control schemes, yet you still have people like nesfag that think this is totally unacceptable and wrong.
How can giving people more options to play a bad thing?

>>2918152
I do think NESfag has a point. Tripfag just isn't great at looking at the bigger picture.

>>2918149
>Again, as long as the game is designed with it..... FUCK, why is this so hard to grasp for anyone?! A game has rules, another game has other rules. But don't expect to apply game#4 rules on game#2 and call it fair.
In my view, there's no problem with changing game mechanics of an existing game so the game becomes "too easy". Changing them so the game becomes "too hard" is where problems arise.

To look at things another way, if you make a mod for a game like, say, STALKER, and you tamper with the game mechanics to make everything super hard, people have valid complaints to make if they keep dying. But if you make a STALKER mod which isn't "hardcore" enough for some players, then that's really their problem. At least in my view. Making games less difficult requires far less justification than making them more difficult, regardless of what changes lead to that end.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I remember reading somewhere that the n64 version did a good job compressing all of the game's data to the cartridge

>>2918183
Good job is an understatement. Its amazing what they did.

>>2918167
Difficulty being easier is an issue, but not as much as people not understanding that the reason for it, is changing one of the game's rules to the player's advantage.

It's just a matter of understanding that you're not playing by the game's rules anymore, and that is somehow beyond people's grasp.

>>2918183
They took advantage of the fact that due to microcode programmability you can turn the N64's GPU into a decompression engine. Wouldn't have been possible otherwise.

>>2917748
>because the vast majority of modern gamers are lazy fuckwits who'd rather have all games play the same rather than learn a new control scheme
Tank controls are really shit though, I don't blame anyone for choosing to not use them if possible.
They might not have implemented them with the most thought, but it's a marked improvement in how the game feels.

>ruining their own games
>this optional feature you have to toggle in the options destroyed the game

>>2917968
>meaning that you are not playing by the games rules anymore
Or they added an optional ruleset.

>By being able to move in any direction directly at any time, it makes fighting and avoiding enemies a LOT easier than it's supposed to.
I guess, in the same sense that playing Doom with freelook can be regarded as cheating, but I honesty don't care if it is. Original intentions were to only use the mouse for turning and to compensate for the lack of vertical aiming by the means of auto-aim, which worked for the time, but is just a very clunky way of playing an FPS. I've played a lot of original Doom, the auto-aim works alright, but freelook without auto-aim is just an objectively better way to play an FPS featuring any degree of verticality.
Likewise, a free stick is an objectively superior way to navigate a character from a fixed perspective, even if it was added practically as an afterthought.

>>2918065
>They work just fine.
They're a functional solution to the issue of fixed cameras but again, there's seriously better ways to orient yourself in a space from a fixed perspective.

>>2918095
>Should the camera be forced over the shoulder, or should the character move freely, independent of the camera?
I think that now that tech is good enough, devs don't have to rely on pre-rendered environments, thus they aren't forced to have a fixed perspective.
A fixed perspective is fine, but combining them with tank controls are a horribly dated idea and there's really not much of a reason to do that now.

>>2918128

Great argument.

You guys are getting blown out.

I support Nesfag in this thread. I think that anyone arguing with him doesn't comprehend his posts correctly.

>>2918103
That too. I hated 5 for it's gameplay and story.

>>2918114
>I don't care what control scheme you like best.
Well shit I guess that feeling is mutual.

>>2918141
>My point is play by the game's rules.
If there's a better ruleset I'll take that instead. I'll play the game in the way that seems most fun.
Would you argue that using BMouse with Blood is cheating?

>If they wanted to have be able to do that when they made the game, they would have. But no, they didn't.
Probably because people didn't know better at the time.

>Because not every game needs to have the same controls and movement possibilities.
While true, some controls and movements are just better than others.

>So either you play by the game's rules or you play something else, or else you might as well be playing Mario with double jump or Mario Kart with turbo boosts at all times.
So what if I fucking do? How does it matter to you how I play games? I'm not playing online games here.

>>2918141
>Or you know, play RE4 if that's what you want.
Except RE4 plays nothing like REmake with a free stick.
RE4 has tank controls but the camera follows over your shoulder. I just went back to 4 today after having played REmake without tank controls for a week, and I had to spend time readjusting because the movement and perspective (and gunplay), is WAY different. Leon doesn't move even close to as smoothly as Chris or Jill in REmake.
RE has a fixed perspective and forced tank controls, REmake has a fixed perspective but allows for better movement controls, RE4 controls like the old gamea largely but has a chasecam perspective.
The difference is vast.

>>2918143
>moments where the camera angle changes and you're not sure which end of the hallway you just came from,
That was only really an issue to me in a few select rooms.

>but I think it's an acceptable tradeoff for free movement
I agree.

>>2918149
>But don't expect to apply game#4 rules on game#2 and call it fair.
I can however call it fun.

>>2918541

The original Doom had mouse support

>>2918574

>So what if I fucking do? How does it matter to you how I play games? I'm not playing online games here.

That's fine. Just don't go around telling people that you beat those games then, because it doesn't count if you cheat.

>>2917128
they a version of this for the original resi?

>>2918197
>you're not playing by the game's rules anymore
But it is the rules available to the player, as added by the devs.

>>2918575
I never said otherwise.
Doom supported mouse turning, but not freelook. It had autoaim to compensate for the lack of vertical look, as tilting the perspective up or down in a raycaster rendered game noticably distorts and stretches the perspective (as you can see in ZDoom when using freelook in the software renderer, and to some extent in Duke Nukem 3D).
Some of Doom's challenge and level design is actually based around this limitation, but most of it is inconsequential if you change it.

>>2918579
>it doesn't count if you cheat
I don't consider an alternate control scheme available in the options, added by the devs, as a cheatcode.

>>2918541
>but it's a marked improvement in how the game feels.
Even that I disagree on, when using that control scheme to me it feels like it doesn't belong, like we're mixing two games. Besides, it's implemented poorly, like in REmake HD, the way the character just "teleports" to another direction without any animation in between, it's ridiculous, that was super lazy on them, don't tell me they didn't have access to the models.

>Or they added an optional ruleset.

But it's not appropriate, you can't just remove some restrictions, add more movement possibilities and not change anything else, it completely ruins the entire balance of the gameplay system.

>in the same sense that playing Doom with freelook can be regarded as cheating

Yeah.... Kind of. Except that in Doom, the influence of freelook on gameplay is minimal. Due to vertical autoaiming, the only times when you can use freelook as cheating, is when you're just below a high paltform, up against the wall, with an enemy up there, and instead of having to move back and get yourself exposed in order to shoot that enemy, you can just look up. I can sincerely only think of one moment when this could be the case in the game by memory, so there must not be many.
In the case of RE2/REmake/RE0; it influences the entire game. Every single enemy.

>>2918574
>Would you argue that using BMouse with Blood is cheating?

bMouse doesn't give extra movement possibilities. It's not like Doom's freelook. It's even more minimal than that.

>So what if I fucking do? How does it matter to you how I play games? I'm not playing online games here.
What matters to me is making people understand how big the influence on gameplay that new control scheme is. It's not just like playing a console FPS with kb+mouse, it really changes the rules of the games, and as seen in this thread, people don't seem to realize that.

>>2918574
>Probably because people didn't know better at the time.
I don't think so. Resident Evil was far from being the first 3D game. And even if this was true, this is beside the point. The point is the game was made with, and for, "X" movement possibilities and not "X+Y" movement possibilities.

And yeah RE4 was not a good example, my point was I have the feeling they added this control scheme in REmake and 0 to please RE fans who've discovered the series with 4 onwards. Although this can not be true for RE2 N64. So yeah, bad example.


>>2918597
>But it is the rules available to the player, as added by the devs.

It's not the rules the game was made with and for. Some of the rules got changed without thinking and taking care of the consequences of that.
Also, not the same devs but that's besides the point.

Would you also say that the "stat boost" feature of the re-release of Final Fantasy 7/8/9 are "new rules, as made by the devs" too ? So, giving yourself 1million gil in a single click at the start of the game is not a cheat?

>>2918624
Why can't you think of the different control schemes as difficulty settings?

If the developers give you the option to use another control scheme that's not cheating.

By your logic if I play Resident Evil on Training instead of Standard that's also cheating because in Training you get more ammo than in Standard and the game doesn't ajust to that change.

>>2918624
>What matters to me is making people understand how big the influence on gameplay that new control scheme is. It's not just like playing a console FPS with kb+mouse, it really changes the rules of the games, and as seen in this thread, people don't seem to realize that.

I agree, Nesfag. Just so you know that there are people who agree with you.

>Probably because people didn't know better at the time.

Does anyone else hate this mentality? Newer gamers act like people were complete retards just a few years ago. They say shit like Super Mario 64 looked good to people at the time, and could only look good to people then, as if they were less intelligent. It looked the same to a person playing it for the first time back then as it would for someone playing it for the first time now.

>>2918642
>Would you also say that the "stat boost" feature of the re-release of Final Fantasy 7/8/9 are "new rules, as made by the devs" too ? So, giving yourself 1million gil in a single click at the start of the game is not a cheat?

I still can't believe this is real. I thought people were making this up.

>>2918642
ff7 is easy as fuck, who cares

>>2918679
>Does anyone else hate this mentality? Newer gamers act like people were complete retards just a few years ago. They say shit like Super Mario 64 looked good to people at the time, and could only look good to people then, as if they were less intelligent. It looked the same to a person playing it for the first time back then as it would for someone playing it for the first time now.

You're just being sensitive, grandpa.

>>2918642
>Also, not the same devs but that's besides the point.

Not the same guy you were arguing with but I just wanted to jump in that Hideki Kamiya actually approves of the N64 port of RE2. He usually hates ports of his own games made by other people, but RE2 N64 (and I think Okami HD) are some exceptions.

>>2918642
>So, giving yourself 1million gil in a single click at the start of the game is not a cheat?
I'd say that's a cheat, but I'd also say it's the option to cut out a lot of grinding, which I can see a good rationale in.

As for the new controls making it easier to dodge monsters, I don't really know if it changed that much, typically I would back up and shoot from a decent distance to avoid getting hurt, if I got hurt it was because the monster was faster than me, typically I would just avoid putting myself in harms way as much as possible, I didn't really make that many dead turns in combat, it just made it less frustrating to move about the game in general.

I don't know if the stick really changed aiming much, but it didn't feel like it. I typically didn't miss because I typically didn't shoot from too long ranges (though I'll say that aiming up against a zombie to get a headshot is trick, the game doesn't make it at all clear if your aim is true because the barrel of your gun doesn't %100 correlate with where the bullet actually goes, and sometimes it seems like it would change, this was with the pistol at least).

>I have the feeling they added this control scheme in REmake and 0 to please RE fans who've discovered the series with 4 onwards.
I honestly don't have a problem with that, it's not like it retroactively changes the old games.

>>2918665
This is kind of what I'm getting at.

>>2918679
>Newer gamers act like people were complete retards just a few years ago.
That wasn't really my point, more that home consoles with 3D was a new thing and people were still figuring out the best ways to go, some console FPSs had ultimately odd controls that people would move on from. That doesn't mean the game wasn't great, but say you're making an FPS for a console today, would you change the standard idea of moving with the right stick and looking with the left?

I like the old RE games but I always hated the controls, even as a kid.

>>2918665
>Why can't you think of the different control schemes as difficulty settings?

Because difficulty settings don't change things like "what movements the player is allowed to perform", that's changing how the gameplay system works, not variables within the system.

>>2918679
Also, I'd say that Mario 64 has aged well graphically as it has a stylized and cartoony aesthetic, which lends itself well to simple rendering techniques and low model definiton.

Mario (and the rest of the cast) have low model fidelity, but their designs are abstracted and use a lot of flat colors, which helps mask the low polycount, the game was made to look like a cartoon, and that's what it looks like.

>>2918728
>Because difficulty settings don't change things like "what movements the player is allowed to perform
I don't see why it couldn't.

Movement is rules.
Difficulty settings are rules.

>>2918728
But giving more ammo to the player changes the gameplay too.

You don't longer avoid combat because you have so much firepower that you don't even care anyomre.

The gameplay system is changed, it goes from avoiding combat to a shoot em up. Then yes you would tell me that beating the game on Training is also cheating.

>>2918727

FF7 doesn't require any grinding whatsoever, so your first point isn't valid.

>>2917128
That thing about analog control isn't entirely true. You definitely have analog control of your turning speed in the Dual Shock version.

Do modern RE fixed camera games use the N64's analogue walk-run system? On the N64, there's no run button. You just push the stick further to run.

File: 1451883752215.jpg (73KB, 780x453px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 780x453px

>>2918727

>Grinding in FF7

Look at this fucking plebeian

>>2918728
>Because difficulty settings don't change things like "what movements the player is allowed to perform", that's changing how the gameplay system works, not variables within the system.
Unless we're talking stuff like stealth games. Splinter Cell: Blacklist, for example, disables Mark and Execute on higher difficulties.

>>2918790
>>2919328
Never played FF7, I just assume it featured grind as it's typical for a JRPG.

I just made a video to make an example of the things you can do with the new control scheme, that you're not supposed to be able to do.

I don't have RE2 N64 at hand so I used REmake HD release.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xl1yrt4Scec

Start of the video : baiting a zombie with the new control scheme; followed by baiting it with the old control scheme.

With the new controls, you can bait zombies incredibly safely. Run back&forth at the a fair distance until he's baited with no danger whatsoever.

Of course, this is applied to zombies here but I could make other videos with other enemies, only zombies can be "baited" like this, but you can use the new controls to avoid every enemy in a way you're not supposed to be able to.

If the game was made with this type of controls in mind, enemies would certainly not act like this at all. They'd act very differently. The ENTIRE gameplay is ruined. It really is like my example of putting double jump in a Mario game; or like "boost" features in FF7/8/9 re-releases.

>>2920228
In case people don't know, "baiting" a zombie like this mean you can then run safely past it; and it's not supposed to be as easy as it is with the new control scheme.

sage

Am I the only one that prefers tank controls (actually a first person control scheme) for the isometric games? Analog controls let you change your momentum way too quickly and how are you supposed to shoot while moving baackwards?

>>2919315
>On the N64, there's no run button

This is a lie. B is the run button, as the D-pad can be used for digital input.

The stick deflection does control whether you're running or not too, but it's kinda dodgy when turning and running simultaneously, so it's better to simply play it as if you had to hold the run button anyway.

>>2920254
>This is a lie. B is the run button, as the D-pad can be used for digital input.
I stand corrected.

>The stick deflection does control whether you're running or not too, but it's kinda dodgy when turning and running simultaneously, so it's better to simply play it as if you had to hold the run button anyway.
This only applies if you're using tank controls. But fair point.

>Am I the only one that prefers tank controls (actually a first person control scheme) for the isometric games? Analog controls let you change your momentum way too quickly and how are you supposed to shoot while moving baackwards?
You can turn basically instantly. You run, turn, shoot, run, turn, shoot. It's not that hard. There's not point in awkwardly shuffling backwards in between shots.

>>2920228
Nice little bit of the 'tism. This is why I love vr

>>2920246
For fixed camera RE games, I prefer them.

Dunno how the others work, but RE2 N64's non-tank controls behave extremely weird when you go through a camera transition, so they often end up being more of a hassle than anything, so in that case, I explicitly avoid them.

>>2920467
>behave extremely weird when you go through a camera transition
They behave like modern Silent Hill's do. Keep moving in a straight line. When you stop moving, the relative positioning resets.

>>2920460
Why "autism"? This isn't even nitpicking here. We're talking about completely changing the very chore of the gameplay, and therefore the entire game. It's pretty big.

that video is just an example, it doesn't just help for baiting zombies, but for just about every fighting or dodging.

Playing with those controls just isn't playing the game. Or rather, it's like playing it with superpowers, akin to the upcoming "wesker mode" of RE0. Same shit.

>>2920549
This tism right here breh

>>2920471
Except tank contols work more or less the same in RE and SH. But these '3d' controls are ten times more responsive and overall faster in movement than those in SH,.

>>2915926
It's three channel surround. Left, right, rear mono.

>>2920549
>character steers less like a motorically challenged inbred elderly person who doesn't understand the weight of the situation
>it's like playing it with superpowers
I know what you're trying to get at, but, man.

>>2920814
NESfag is a shitlord but he is right about this for sure.

If you enjoy this shitty neo/v/ control scheme you may as well kill yourself.

>>2920817
>shitlord
>neo-/v/
Oops! Looks like it's you who should be killing yourself!

>>2920771
So, correct me if I'm wrong but unless you actually have a sound system that's at least 3.0 you won't hear the difference.

>>2920768
No he means that RE2 on N64's "analog" control scheme works just like late Silent Hill games; though I don't remember which SH plays like this, maybe The Room and Origins, the others definitely don't.
If you want another example he means it works like in Project Zero. The controls are camera centric, but when there is a camera angle change, it only adapts after you stop your current movement. Meaning that, as long as you're holding a button and your movement isn't over, you're still going in the same direction , even if after the camera change, that direction now equals to a different button.


I always found that a little weird in Project Zero to be honest because it meant pressing another direction to keep going the same way once your current movement is over. However, it works fine in PZ because 1) fights don't take place within those camera angles, they are in first person and 2) you mostly have long, moving camera angles viewed from a great distance.
In RE it's all the contrary with more numerous, closer and static camera angles; in which fights do take place. So it's not appropriate; and like I've already explained it's even less appropriate when the enemies aren't designed around those movement possibilities.

>>2920850
I dont know about n64 because that is arguably the worst rendition of RE2.

But you posted the REmake webm. Let me set this straight right away - tank control games are meant to be played with a dpad. People who play that shit with sticks are autismal as fuck.

So, in REmake if you press, lets say Up and character moves, and goes through the transition scene. Regardless of new direction, he will indeed keep the same pacing until the button is released. Wrong - even if you keep holding that one button and want to add holding Left to simply turn a bit, character will turn around. That's the true problem with the shitty mechanic.

>>2920858
>But you posted the REmake webm. Let me set this straight right away - tank control games are meant to be played with a dpad. People who play that shit with sticks are autismal as fuck.

Oh god, I understand now why some people here were saying tank controls are "better with a keyboard". That's because they're playing with a stick. Jesus.... thank you.

That would have never come to my mind. I mean, personally I bought an adapter letting me use a PS2 pad on Gamecube so I could play REmake and 0 decently (there are other ways to do this, but an adapter is the cheapest). And I did the same to play Genma Onimusha on XBOX.

But yeah, it doesn't help that the GC and N64 have a terrible d-pad; come to think of it, maybe that's even why they invented that new control scheme for RE2 N64 (because afaik, they were the first to come up with it)

>>2920863

Woah! I was with you all the way until you said N64 had a shitty dpad. I think it's one of the greatest d-pads of all time! I prefer it to a large degree over the PlayStation d-pad.

Also, the N64 d-pad is pretty much the same as the SNES.

>>2920858
Jesus christ, those people should be banned from playing a videogame with tank controls and pre rendered backgrounds.

Also, is not only a RE "problem", in Parasite Eve II you can't really play with the analog stick.

>>2920858
>I dont know about n64 because that is arguably the worst rendition of RE2.
Nah, I thought it was one of the better ones, though it's still a step below the DC version. If I could consider what's the worst version of RE2, it's the GC version.

>>2921194
GC version doesn't have the polygon jiggle. It's probably the best looking version of RE2 just thanks to that alone.

N64 has:

>lower res texture
>compressed to shit audio (I dont care its surround, you can be surrounded by shit and its still shit)
>terrible FMV quality
>gimmicky misleading "randomizer item" mode where it just turns every single item to shitty blue herbs: the game
>no nightmare mode difficulty

Nahhh I'll pass.

>>2921197
>compressed to shit audio

That's only true for voice acting and FMV. The music samples are higher quality than the PS1 version.

So how is emulation on the N64 and the Dreamcast version of the RE2?

>>2921205
....which doesn't mean much because ps1 audio was fine to begin with.

>>2917128
The Dreamcast version would have been the best in terms of graphics and content, especially the VMU feature, but sadly the death scenes are censored. At least on the NA version, not sure if JP or PAL are censored as well.

>>2921197
>GC version doesn't have the polygon jiggle. It's probably the best looking version of RE2 just thanks to that alone.
>though the game rare does close-ups of the character models aside from like, two scenes
But at what cost?

>>2921194
The GC version is the only one in which you can skip cutscenes. It can't skip doors like the PC versions though but if i had choose, i'd rather skip cutscenes, as I'm tired of hearing every word spoken during cutscenes in my head a second before they are said. I've played it too much.

Best versions for me would be DC and PC versions because they both look the best (minus the polygon jiggle), are also the smoothest (no loading times between camera angles) and have the most bonuses including Nightmare difficulty (which is the best difficulty setting of any RE game ever).
For me PC gets extra points for mod support, there are a couple out there worth playing, and because I couldn't care less about the VMU.

Worst version would be Game.com although this doesn't really count as it is almost an entire different game. I bought the 'console' and the game out of curiosity and it's one of the worst gaming experience i've ever had, although that is as much the fault of the console as of the game itself. There is a game.com emulator out there with all the roms if you look hard enough, and it's not as bad as playing on the actual thing, but it's still very bad. I don't recommend it, even out of curiosity.

For someone who just wants the play the game on normal difficulty either PC, GC or DC are fine really.

File: Bio2 SRT.png (331KB, 1003x541px) Image search: [Google]

331KB, 1003x541px

>>2921419
>because I couldn't care less about the VMU

If people do care about the VMU, there's a mod to allow that. It's called Bio2 SRT.

>>2920858
>So, in REmake if you press, lets say Up and character moves, and goes through the transition scene. Regardless of new direction, he will indeed keep the same pacing until the button is released. Wrong - even if you keep holding that one button and want to add holding Left to simply turn a bit, character will turn around. That's the true problem with the shitty mechanic.
The free movement compensates for this enough to matter.

Also I'll say that the DPad doesn't make it better, I've done em all, sister.

>>2918624
People fails to realise every enemy on old RE games are placed in a challenging but fair way. The game is designed around tank controls. New control scheme is just there for people accustomed to new controller standarts. But even if i totally agree with your point, we know that Capcom blames the tank controls for the original REmake bombing on GC, so is expected for them to add a more friendly control scheme.

>>2922287
>People fails to realise every enemy on old RE games are placed in a challenging but fair way.

Yes exactly, for every single room, there is always a relatively easy way you can find to get out of there with no harm and without using any bullet. It's all a matter of dodging at the right time. Meaning that any time you get hit, it's your fuck up; although some rooms have a harder pattern to find than others which is where I'd use the gun.

>we know that Capcom blames the tank controls

I don't know why devs listen to pro reviewers.
The reason why REmake bomb was the GC exclusivity. You can't release some half of your games of the series on GC, half of the others on PS2, and except your fans to buy both consoles; and at a time when choosing between a PS2 and GC, most people would just buy a PS2.
Besides, RE:CV started as a Dreamcast exclusive and was ported to PS2 very quickly. So fans were supposed to what, get a Dreamcast for CV, a PS2 for Outbreak1 and 2, and a GC for REmake and 0, only to realize CV was coming on PS2 too ?! Fuck that shit. That's what made it bomb imo.

I was a very big RE fan and I did not play REmake until YEARS later.

>>2922595
Expensive, Kamiya-approved RE2 port was on N64. RE0 was an N64 game moved to GC. REMAKE was a GC game. RE4 was meant to be an exclusive, and the PS2 port was terrible.

Why exactly would a Resident Evil fan choose a PS2 over a GC?

>>2922645
Well, the series started on PS1. But at that time, people understood the concept of "exclusivity". It was years later that people started to bitch over REmake being GC/Wii exclusive. REmake was originally disregarded as another Twin Snakes situation (oh boy, they were wrong). To this day, RE exclusivity is a joke. But back then, RE was one of the flagship PS titles alongside Metal Gear. Some PS fans just can't let go i guess.

>>2922595
I got a GC exclusively all that gen, and i couldn't find nowhere a copy of REmake, because i'm not from the USA. I got introduced to the series by a friend with a PS1 and later a Dreamcast. But my first, true RE was the N64 port, and i loved it. But that's why i agree with your overall point. I was introduced to the series as a kid with the original versions, so even back then, being a dumb 12 years old kid, i could see how the new "3D control scheme" was odd. There's nothing unfair about the original design overall. People dislike tank controls because they are weird, but not bad at all. RE4 resurrected RE with tank controls from another perspective, and everybody loved it, so what the fuck.

But with all that considered, i can't really blame Capcom for slapping a easy modo control option for re-releases. Getting a Re-REmake is weird in the first place. Getting an official RE2 remake is just plain weird.

>>2922645
Because people had already bought a Dreamcast for CV, and had realized they got fucked over because it was released on PS2 only one year after.

Besides, RE games already had tons of ports on many system, I honestly genuinely remember many people on forum saying they're not getting a GC and REmake because they couldn't afford another brand new console, and because well RE exclusivity doesn't last long.

Capcom didn't play smart with its exclusivity.
Basically they wanted to have the money given from console makers to make exclusivity for them; but while not respecting the exclusivity, and everyone realized that.
That's why RE3 was named RE3 at all, to get rid of the exclusivity with Sony.
That's why main games of the series, like CV, are officialy "spin offs", because the main series is exclusive to another console.
That's why we got all those quick lazy ports on Gamecube, because they were supposed to have a SIX games exclusivity with Nintendo; and even that was bullshit because RE4, started as exclusivity, got ported everywhere as well.
Then you have games like Outbreak which are not part of the main series so the exclusivity doesn't work, right, except the games are just as good, if not better, than the ones released for Nintendo.

There is a saying in my country that goes like, "you want the butter and the money for the butter." That was Capcom.
And some of the fans got lost in the crossfire.

>>2922709
What country are you from?

I recall a lot of people being fucking pussed when RE4 was announced for Nintendo. Many people thought they wasted their money on the GameCube and others thought that Capcom was fucking over Nintendo.

The PS2 port wasn't as good anyway.

>>2922740
From France. I used to go on a RE forum all the time, and I vividly remember tons of people who'd be all over Outbreak but still hadn't played REmake.

>>2922740
I have to agree. I went to sell my N64 collection for some GC games (and i regret it to this day), and i met a dude buying an Xbox. He was like

>Halo is the best thing, but fuck you! you got RE4!

I felt like the hotest shit in that store at that moment. RE was a PS flagship, and the GC was like the only old school console worth a shit. Then, i found out the gems of PS2 and fuck. Idort since that very day.

I see references to something called "K/OS Engine", which suggests to me that RE2 N64 is actually a recreation of Resident Evil 2 on an entirely new engine, akin to how recent Capcom remasters/"ports" of older RE games have used MT Framework.

>>2922760
>an entirely new engine, akin to how recent Capcom remasters/"ports" of older RE games have used MT Framework.

Are you sure about that? The HD remaster feels like it plays totally the same to me.

For instance Capcom claims Megaman Legacy is a remake in a new engine but it's just roms in an emulator.

Alternative or changed control schemes should not make enemies obsolete. When you don't have to turn in Resident Evil, it's basically impossible for you to get cornered or surrounded by zombies. It ruins the game. Challenge is gone.

I wouldn't call it cheating, but it certainly isn't just "improving the controls". It's changing a major part of the game. Traversing rooms/corridors isn't just about "movement" in Resident Evil. It's a strategic puzzle. It's a finicky obstacle that requires patience. You're supposed to clear out a few rooms, so you don't need to do it over and over.

The constant, eternal cycle of Resident Evil:

>If you're low on health/have no herbs, you clear out all rooms by using weapons.

>If you don't have ammo, you can take a hit instead.

>If you don't want to take a hit, you can use herbs to heal yourself.

This is the balance that makes Resident Evil. By removing the challenge of movement, you remove a huge chance of getting hit, which removes the needs for healing, which makes the limited ammunition a non-issue.

You can't "improve" the controls without also changing the gameplay completely. End of story.

>>2922942
I think the worst part in all that is that the devs know very well what they are doing.
>Let's just ruin a couple of games, that should make people happy

People are clueless, they haven't REALLY played the game with its intended controls, otherwise they should realize their mistake.

But the devs are guilty.

>>2922975
Does an optional feature you have to turn on really RUIN a game?

>>2922975
>>2922942

I'm really glad there are good posters left on this board who understand the theory behind great games.

>>2923703
You mistakenly referenced NESfag as a good poster there, anon.

He's a well-known shithead on every other subject he opens his fat mouth on.

>>2923703
>NESfag patting himself on the back as anon

>>2922975
>People are clueless, they haven't REALLY played the game with its intended controls, otherwise they should realize their mistake.
Except RE2 N64 defaulted to tank controls, meaning basically everyone who prefers RE2 N64's first person controls understands exactly how the tank controls work.

>>2924804
What I mean is, you wouldn't understand why the camera centric controls break the game if you don't know the game's mechanics well.

Anyway I just replayed RE2, Claire A, Leon B, that is worse scenario folowed by best scenario. Tons of fun, played on the original PC version which is a real pleasure.
Leon B is the scenario that I played the least out of them all and turns out it's the best. it's the one which requires the least backtracking, and I think I realized for the first time that by going in the basement ASAP you can then take care of the remaining locked rooms of the Diamond (pink) key while taking care of the Leaf (green) rooms at the same time, it saves time.

The game totally drops the cake once your each the sewer in terms of supplies though, especially on scenario B. Even if you don't go to the two optional supply rooms, near the first small elevators, next to the 2 save rooms at the entrance of the sewer, you're still swimming in supplies, and that was after killing tons of enemies. And if you go into those 2 rooms it's just a joke.

Great game but it misses so much things that made RE1 good (lack of real puzzles, no different paths depending on your actions, environment trying to kill you, not being given different options against bosses, etc)

>>2915834
The Dreamcast version of sarges heroes was the best version.

Does RE3 PC version have fully customizable gamepad buttons?

>>2926115
Of course. Right-click or F2 for setup. Disable "texture correction" if you get weird ilnes all over the backgrounds.

>>2926168
Is there any point to playing Sourcenext Bio3 over old RE3 on PC?

>>2926197
Yes, two actually.

1, it looks slightly better. Although the difference it only makes a huge difference with FMVs, which are uncompressed.
2, unlike the other PC release, it has both the jap difficulty and the western difficulty. However it's not like RE2 where the difference is bigger as it involves different enemy and supply item palcement, here the difference only involves amount of dmg you take and amount of dmg you deal to enemies, the Jap version being easier on those two points. "Arranged" corresponds to the western version.
That re-release has all Jap text though so it's only recommended for people who already know the game.

Speaking of Sourcenext, I know they also re-released Dino Crisis 2 on PC, a 2nd PC port, but I was unable to ever find it anywhere except on Jap ebay-like websites.

I heard it was pretty much just the original version put on a DVD though, which is why i didn't bother to order it. I'd love it if someone could confirm that though, because if the difference in quality is just like their RE2 and RE3 ports i'd love to have it.

>>2926245
so basically bio2 SN just has an additional easy difficulty? eh who cares. I will stick with old RE3 on PC because I had some serious glitches and issues with Sourcenext Bio2 (corrupted save files, game would just fail to save etc)

>>2916225
I thought the japanese version had reduced difficulty compared to usa and eu?

Don't the higher res character models stick out against the low res backgrounds in the PC versions? Or did they re-render the backgrounds in higher res?

>>2926251
>so basically bio2 SN just has an additional easy difficulty?
If you mean Bio3, then yes.

> I had some serious glitches and issues with Sourcenext Bio2 (corrupted save files, game would just fail to save etc)

Weird, this usually happens on the original PC release and NOT on the Sourcenext release. Nothing that can't be fixed by playing the game in Windows 95/98 compatibility mode I'm sure.