Top
70°
9.0

Resident Evil 6 | New Zealand Herald review

If you were left wanting in RE5, there's a good chance RE6 will satisfy you. There's a reason you're being fired at, there are plenty of tense moments, the storytelling is superb, and "zombies" make a return. RE6 isn't perfect but it's still a game everyone should own.

Read Full Story >>
nzherald.co.nz
The story is too old to be commented.
caseh1357d ago

Regardless of the score, at least they've acknowledged the fact that if you enjoyed RE5 then you will most likely enjoy RE6.

Scores coming in where the reviewer is giving it 4/10 after they reviewed RE5 higher than 8/10 show that the majority of reviews simply can't be trusted.

CynicalKelly1357d ago

It's actually really bothering me about scores. RE5 was completely different compared to any of the other Resident Evil games. Loads of health and Ammo, no dark settings, no horror elements at all. Yet it scored well compared to RE6 which is actually a decent game at worst.

It has it's flaws sure, but it's a step in the right direction and you can see where Capcom tried to please us with certain content.

Now, we are having reviewers and fanboys giving it a lower score than RE5, showing they don't know what they want, that they cannot be pleased and potentially confusing Capcom into making another RE5 mess.

Pozzle1357d ago

I can't help but think that RE5 was given a free pass by critics because they thought maybe it was a rocky experiment that would be greatly improved on in RE6. Unfortunately that wasn't the case, so people are a lot less forgiving this time around.

cleft51357d ago

I can't agree with you more. I stopped trusting reviews a long time ago.

matgrowcott1357d ago

The problem is this: reviewers giving the game less than 5/10 are focussing too much on the negative stuff to justify their score, rather than giving an unbiased view and raising the number.

Take a look at the Destructoid review. The one thing that stood out to me was that Sterling took two or three paragraphs to complain about the co-op, but focussed in on the odd occasion during which one player was given something to do and the other wasn't. I can only think of two occasions when that has happened, and it tended to be as part of a short, intense action scene.

It's still a valid complaint, but to mention that and then NOT mention the vastly more common occasions during which co-op is not only a fun addition, but during which it actually improves the game seems odd.

I noticed a comment on Joystiq where somebody reckoned the same could be said of their review (although I didn't read the full review).

caseh1357d ago

For me the only way the game could possibly score less to the extent where is got half the marks is if the following were true:

- Controls are crap
- Visuals are crap
- No story
- No Co-Op
- No Online

It doesn't appeal to most people as it doesn't appeal to those who loved the survival element. it deserves a slap across the face not a beheading, its is verging on obtaining a metacritic score on par with the likes of Haze and Lair, which to me is laughable.

sealava1357d ago

I agree with the 2 posters above .
reviewers should be a mirror to tell developers what gamers want , now they look like real amateurs and idiots who don't know what they themselves want .