Submitted by DevastaTheSeeker t3_yi42cz in gaming
The game is just a joke. It feels really bad to play what is basically a free for all shooter with controls that were not made for a multiplayer experience. I'm glad that it's not something people are actually able to buy because it is just horrible.
The multiplayer game they released with 3 was so much better
For real. Re3 remake needed it but Village is absolutely fine as a stand alone product.
I think it's actually really fun. It feels outdated, but in a good way. It's just a simple fun multiplayer game that reminds me of an earlier era of multiplayer games. And I think the system where you respawn as a monster is unique and it makes matches really chaotic, and I like the scoring system too.
What do you mean by that?
The scoring system is the same as any other game really.
Kill=point go up
Don't die=point go up more
You get a lot of extra points for kill streaks, and you lose points when you die. So you're highly incentivized to get kills as the monster, because you want to offset the points you lose by dying, and your kill streak still continues between human and monster state. I think it's a really fun system because it makes you feel like a big payout is always within reach, and it's really satisfying when you get lucky with the virus vials and get a big kill streak with a high level monster.
To Each their own. I have personally enjoyed it. Is it a perfect multiplayer experience? No. But does it have to be? Also no. The matches are quick enough to get a few in if I'm waiting on something else. The game could use some more content atm but that is coming so I don't mind. I can see why some people don't like it but I enjoy it.
Same can't be said for Resistance... As someone who has over 3,000 hours in Dead by Daylight, some 500 hours in Friday the 13th and has started recently playing The Evil Dead game, Resistance is an awful asymmetrical game.
The survivor side of the game is too reliant on the team having extensive knowledge of the game mechanics for it to be enjoyable. Yea, if you have a group of 4 friends you can make it work but most of us don't have that. If someone goes afk, the game is over before it even starts.
In my experience, the mastermind side is either too OP or gets absolutely destroyed. There is no in between. It depends solely on if the survivors know what they're doing since you are too reliant on timers on your abilities.
But like I said, to each their own. I prefer Re:verse since it's much more approachable and simpler game. Resistance requires much more "getting into it" which isn't a very good design choice imo.
Re:Verse has no real structure and is only ever a free for all. You can't pick a loadout to choose which character you want to play with what creatures they turn into when they die.
Resistance isn't good either but it's better than Re:Verse. Each player has clear goals that they need to do. Re:Verse is just a mess that drops everyone into an arena and says "hey just shoot anything that moves"
You're saying it like it's bad thing. There is a reason why every Call of Duty has sold so well. People like simpler things. The more complicated games always have a smaller playerbase. But that of course doesn't mean one is better than the other because how popular it is. Re:verse is just more easily accessible and has more room to grow.
You do know most people don't play free for all in call of duty right? Plus not to mention that modern call of duty is made to be multiplayer. Re:Verse reuses the engine of a single player game. It has room to grow sure but it'd be better if they just remade the game entirely so it didn't play like ass.
Even in Team Deathmatch or Domination the basic principle is only to go in and shoot what you see. It's simple and people like it for it. And I personally don't see why Re:verse "plays like ass". I personally think the over-the-shoulder works just fine in pvp too.
It's not it being over the shoulder, it's the gameplay. Go play one match of fortnite (yes haha fortnite bad) and tell me that Re:Verse has good third person shooting in comparison. Because it absolutely doesn't.
Don't know what to say. I don't mind it. You clearly do. That's a shame.
It's cool that you don't mind it but the game is rough. If you can't see that then you've just been brainwashed. You can like something but don't act like it's better than it is.
So I'm brainwashed since my opinion differs from yours? I would say that's rich but sadly it's just the common practice for ignorant plebs, it seems.
No you're brainwashed because you refuse to see obvious flaws. It's like how pokemon fans don't see how bad the series is compared to most other rpgs out there.
They are obvious flaws to you, not to me. So you are ignorant to the fact that your opinion is not an actual fact but just something you see as right. My opinion is just as valid as yours.
Just because someone likes mayo on a cake doesn't make it good, just good to them.
You seem to be under the impression that there are definite answers to these questions. Like is something good. For someone it is, for someone it isn't. Neither is no more right than the other. That's why they are called opinions.
There are definite answers. I literally just used an example of something that someone in the world considers to be "good" that is not good.
I like the game Dark Cloud but the weapon durability system is a flaw because it destroys your weapon that you have been using for the entire game.
This is a fact. It is not an opinion.
Someone may like that it adds more value to your weapons in the game but the vast majority will say that it was a bad design choice to make the weapon you spend the whole game upgrading disappear. Which is why they changed it in the sequel along with cutting the amount of playable characters down to 2 to make it more sreamlined.
You see how I can point out objective flaws in the game that I consider to be my favourite despite it being my favourite game?
I knew you would try to bring the majority thing into this. That changes nothing. There used to be a time when majority of people "knew for a fact" that the world was flat. Remind me, how did that turn out, exactly? Mind you, some people still think that (I'm guessing you're one of them based on your ignorant views) but there are actual proof of that not being so. Can you point me a proof that mayo on a cake is not good? Other than you and likely many others just say so?
And if you want to bring Dark Cloud into this, I personally preferred the first one and thought the sequel wad kinda meh. But that, again, is my opinion on the matter. Doesn't make it a fact.
Both games were made by the exact same devs. Neobards is just a filler developer and they haven't done a particularly good job on either game.
Yeah, I wouldn't say resistance is good, just better than re:verse
Waste-Reception5297 t1_iuh544o wrote
It literally only exists to give Village more "value" for the price you pay and it's bad. I think Village is great enough on its own for $60