Resident Evil 2 N64 showed classic Resident Evil design doesn't need tank controls back in 1999. The people who cling to tank controls because "muh challenge" are desperately trying to hold back improvements to game design because of a variation on Baby Duck Syndrome.
>push stick slightly = rotate in a circle.
>Turn stick more = move in the direction stick is pushed relative to camera.
>Camera angle change = keep moving in direction established before camera angle change, and realign the movement directions to match, until character halts.
Survival horror is built to an extent or dodgy controls. Its how you build in real life awkwardness.
What most people don't realize is that the tank controls actually worked a ton better than the alternative because of the fixed camera angles.
You could never have half the cinemagraphic/tense angling if they didn't have tank controls, otherwise every time you changed rooms you would disorient and end up running back out of the room.
Plus it had the added benefit of making your character feel weaker which is important against a slow enemy like a zombie.
>>321104912
Wait, what difference does this have with the PS and PC versions?
I doubt they went as far to eliminate "tank controls" Those were in the game.
>>321105502
>What most people don't realize is that the tank controls actually worked a ton better than the alternative because of the fixed camera angles.
>You could never have half the cinemagraphic/tense angling if they didn't have tank controls, otherwise every time you changed rooms you would disorient and end up running back out of the room.
Except the new control system was designed specifically to address this. If you don't change directions, there is literally zero way to fuck up. It's like people have never played RE2 N64 for few hours or something.
>>321105610
>Wait, what difference does this have with the PS and PC versions?
Angel Studios (Rockstar now) added a new control system which behaves as the OP says. It still defaults to normal tank controls. Options C and D are the new system. IMO, they're a dramatic gameplay improvement. People who think they "break" the game also tend to (wrongly) think The Twin Snake's improvements were detrimental.Thank god MGS1 didn't have tank controls or we'd be fucking stuck with them in 2015 because "muh challenge"
>>321105898
Oh, it is impressive they went that far with a port. However tank controls were ridden of any difficulty after the introduction of joysticks in consoles.
It was only a problem in the first Resident Evil or if you didn't have a Dualshock on PS1
>>321104912
Tanks controls and camera angle specific movements are not difficulty based they are mental state based.
I actually find what you propose there to be more difficult than tank controls. Tank controls offer a consistency and allow you to put yourself in the characters shoes, it's for people who can see things from others perspectives. What you want is a watching method where you see only from your perpective, it does not allow you to be within the character.
When REmake came out on PC I was having massive difficulties with the controls and kept fucking up and going the opposite direction than I meant to go and I realized it's because the new control scheme was on by default. Had to go put it back to tank controls and it just felt much better and natural.
There should be an options for both types.
It all goes back to bleeding Mario 64. Mario 64 established that movement should be relative to camera position. This became the gold standard for N64 titles. The N64 Indiana Jones game is a prime example of a tank controls to full 3D conversion, but it also allowed you to rotate on the spot by pressing the stick slightly left like RE2 N64. And Mario 64 used a semi-automated camera that allowed for "dramatic" camera angles--which could fortunately be overridden.
Resident Evil 6, bless it, made the mistake of using fixed camera angles at random points in the game for dramatic tension.
>>321106275
>However tank controls were ridden of any difficulty after the introduction of joysticks in consoles.
It's not a question of "difficulty". It's the fundamental fact that you can't walk in arbitrary directions at will. If Mario 64 had used Croc-style tank controls with sidestepping, it would not be the universally venerated classic it is today.
Tank controls are crippling. They prevent you moving the character the way a normal human being would move. They turn your character into something akin to a human forklift.
>>321106371
>When REmake came out on PC I was having massive difficulties with the controls and kept fucking up and going the opposite direction than I meant to go
Does REMAKE HD work like RE2 N64 (and modern Silent Hill games) in that when you hold a direction, your character moves in a straight line regardless of camera angle changes until you stop moving? You've got to stop moving to make the camera's angle compension reset.
>>321106713
Resident Evil games are not supposed to be played as Mario games though.
Tank controls enhance the experience of vulnerability, as well as fixed camera angles, that's just the way they are made.
You can have a mid terms, which is the camera following the character on certain areas, Dino Crisis did this to some extent of success.
>>321104912
>control scheme is created with a effect in mind
>even has some unintended side effects
>the effects work and people love it once they get used to it
>NO ITS WRONG OMG IS SO WRONG
>>321106713
is not the wrapping of a big mac, is a game, not everything needs to be perfectly designed for easy and instantaneous consumption
>>321107018
I just booted it up again to test and it is exactly what you describe there.
I don't know how you deal with that control scheme, I spent a few minutes just running around having the camera angle change it it's confusing and annoying. I press down and she runs towards the camera in the dining room, then the camera flips sides, she is instead running away from the camera, and I press up and she keeps running away, to turn I have to stop pressing down then press down again. I don't see how this is good controls at all. It's confusing as fuck. I like the consistency that tank controls offer.
It was also hard to walk in a straight line and be really precise with your movements for some reason, unlike with the tank controls that allowed for greater turning and mobility while on the move, while your scheme allowed greater turning and mobility only while still.
>>321107221
>Resident Evil games are not supposed to be played as Mario games though.
RE games were "supposed" to be cooperative games. What they are "supposed" to be was subject to available technology. Namely using the Saturn and PS1 instead of the N64. Tank controls are a pre-Mario 64 relic that was chiefly popular on the PS1 in the 5th generation.
>Tank controls enhance the experience of vulnerability, as well as fixed camera angles, that's just the way they are made.
Bad game design is bad game design. Nobody is bashing fixed camera angles here. They're not a problem so long as they're used CONSISTENTLY. Even on PC, where camera movement is tied to directional movement because PC gamers make direction adjustments with the mouse+8 digital directions to compensate. Removing mouse camera control limits them to 8 directions, which is a bitch. Switching back and forth is a really bad idea, as RE6 demonstrated with its "Oh, look, the giant fish monster is coming. FIXED CAMERA ANGLE TIME!" I love RE6, but trying to replicate that was more idealistic than practical.
>>321108057
>Were supposed to be cooperative games
No...Resident Evil originally were intended to be FPS, probably for arcades as the main competitors of House of the Dead, later they made it an action graphic adventure with horror and suspense ambientation, the first RE's were single player experiences. The exceptions are the Outbreak games and qhen the franchise went full action.
I can see you are from that part of the fandom that prefers the actionized Resident Evil, so I won't try to convince you, I just prefer the old formula, which wasn't bad game design at all.
>>321107972
>to turn I have to stop pressing down then press down again.
That's the idea. The trade-off for flexible 3D movement is momentarily halting to reset the character's positioning relative to the camera.
>It was also hard to walk in a straight line and be really precise with your movements
Full 3D movement with fixed camera angles is not exactly designed for walking in straight lines. Mouse and keyboard players have to walk/run in zigzags. Analogue stick players usually end up swerving slightly as they move.
>unlike with the tank controls that allowed for greater turning and mobility while on the move
You can push in a 90 degree angle and the character will immediately move in that direction. No more quick turn. No more awkward rotating. How is that less mobility while on the move?
>>321108526
Mikami originally envisioned the Resident Evil games as cooperative experiences.
>>321109083
Oh, you mean that, there is actual footage of Jill and Chris cruising the mansion together, that was scrapped.
It was for the best though, the game would have plunged in quality as it happened with Zero, even if the reasons were the limitations of the technology.
>Camera angle change = keep moving in direction established before camera angle change, and realign the movement directions to match, until character halts.
Really? As i remember it when the screen changed the controls would still be matched to the screen you started walking in and you had to completely halt for the controls to change it
>>321108526
it seems us older folk that played them way back when they just came out, actually prefer the tank controls and helplessness that you might get dead round the next corner
the newer players prefer the new run and gun style
>old and new are different genres
>its like comparing kamidori to cod
>old = survival horror
>new = third person shooter
>>321109083
So Umbrella Chronicles is the closest to the original vision?
>>321109478
>>Camera angle change = keep moving in direction established before camera angle change, and realign the movement directions to match, until character halts.
>Really? As i remember it when the screen changed the controls would still be matched to the screen you started walking in and you had to completely halt for the controls to change it
What it means is that if the camera angle changes from "looking down street" to "looking across street", pressing "up" will still have your character walking down the middle of the road even when the camera angle changes to side-on. Only when you halt will the controls realign so that "up" means "walk across street to sidewalk".
>>321109714
You could say that, but Gun Survivor was the first RE that used the original idea, then UC and DC did it properly.
>>321104912
No its because they removed the horror for dude bro action gameplay. Also go fuck your self for a bait thread op.
>>321109998
>No its because they removed the horror for dude bro action gameplay.
RE4 was 10 years ago. The salty wounds still haven't healed, eh?
>Also go fuck your self for a bait thread op.
You really need more RE2 N64 in your life.
>>321109998
Horror died in RE the moment you found the shotgun for Chris.
>>321108874
>The trade-off for flexible 3D movement is momentarily halting to reset the character's positioning relative to the camera.
I don't like it though. But you are right it's a trade off, I prefer the alternate choice.
>Mouse and keyboard players have to walk/run in zigzags.
I really don't like this aspect.
> How is that less mobility while on the move?
Because once you are actually moving, tank controls give greater precision in your movements on the smaller scale. Sure with your preferred system, from the stop start you can move any direction but once you start moving it is very awkward and as you say you start zig zagging around like a spastic. With tank controls you are like a tank when stopped but you have a very fine amount of control over you direction once you have actually started moving. I prefer this.
The other issues here is I don't see the advantage of moving my character based on my sight of him from my perspective. It's worse for me. I always by default see the game world from my characters point of view, so a camera angle flipping around does nothing because I can map 3D spaces in my mind very easily and am firmly in my avatars head and know where things are anyways. So I want my forwards, to be my characters forwards. The alternative is just immersion breaking for me. I see my character and go to make him run forward and he ends up turning to his left and running up the screen.
>>321104912
To be honest I had more trouble getting accustomed to the controls in Remake HD compared to RE2-3.
After you have played for a while the tank controls just feels pretty nice I thought.
>>321109998
None of the RE games are scary.
>N64 faggots thinking they know anything
>>321109569
I played through Remake-5 only a few months ago for the first time and I liked the tank controls better.
Grated that first time playing RE2 felt pretty awkward. But by the end of it I was zooming around like a god and it felt surprisingly good.
>>321110481
>The other issues here is I don't see the advantage of moving my character based on my sight of him from my perspective.
It has nothing to do with perspective. The problem with tank movement was never perspective. It's the fact you CAN'T. WALK. SIDEWAYS.
I dunno where this silly "tank controls are too confusing/you just need to git gud" stupidity came from. The problem with tank controls is they prevent arbitrary directional changes. You can't run in tight circles with tank controls. You can't run in a square shape without stopping. You are forced to slowly halt and realign yourself for every 90 degree angle change. This might appeal to people who find the "tension" of this enjoyable, but it's bad game design. It's akin to how the original Tomb Raider had awkward, clunky controls but the lead dev/animator/Lara's designer abandoned the series before he could rework them because he was so butthurt over them sexualising his waifu. So the series went on with game after game using tank controls because that was the tradition.
>>321111136
>It's the fact you CAN'T. WALK. SIDEWAYS.
You never have too and if you did it was because you weren't paying attention.
All the enemies are designed around this. they have tells or move slow.
That's where the whole YOU'RE AN IDIOT thing comes from.
>>321111334
>You never have too and if you did it was because you weren't paying attention.
I WANT TO. You never "have to" walk backwards in Resident Evil. Let's remove backwards walking in RE, too.
>All the enemies are designed around this. they have tells or move slow.
Beside the point.
>>321111768
You are just trying to transform RE in something it isn't.
It is not a generic action adventure game, it is literally a graphic adventure with action/exploration elements added to it, if you want something different play RE4 onwards, classic fans love the classic games for what they are, and that is the cult fanbase.
>>321112259
>if you want something different play RE4 onwards
RE2 N64 and its new control scheme predate RE4 by six years.
> it is literally a graphic adventure with action/exploration elements added to it
A graphic adventure where you can walk sideways.
>classic fans love the classic games for what they are, and that is the cult fanbase.
The "classic fans" are suffering Baby Duck Syndrome. The "classic fans" live in a fantasy world akin to Original Trilogy Star Wars fans.
Eternal Darkness doesn't have tank controls. It has full 3D movement with dynamic fixed camera angles. It's a god-tier game. If the game had featured tank controls, people in 2015 would blindly defend them as somehow essential to its design.
