![]() ![]() ![]() Looking back, it's hard to believe there's barely more than a five year gap between Resident Evil 3 and 4, but that's how quickly technology and game design were evolving at the time. The remakes of Resident Evil 2 and 3 made both games as pretty and detailed as possible with cutting-edge graphics, of course, but mainly they served to bring both into the post-RE4 era, with familiar controls and a comfortable camera perspective. Resident Evil 5, 6, and later spin-offs all more or less followed RE4's new playbook, though none of them did it as well. It did away with static camera angles, which had been practical on the PlayStation's limited hardware and also deliberately evoked the creepy cinematography of horror movies. It put the focus on action, not horror, though it was still tense and gross and sometimes outright scary. ![]() In 2005, RE4 marked the start of Resident Evil's modern era. Resident Evil 4 just doesn't need a remake, period. Not because the RE3 remake has shaken my faith, though. Now Resident Evil 3 is proof that a remake isn't necessarily a surefire home run, and I hope that Capcom isn't planning to go after RE4 next. After the stellar Resident Evil 2 remake last year, it seemed like Capcom was destined to keep going, updating its greatest hits with a new generation of technology.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |