Could Fan Backlash Have Influenced Resident Evil 6 Scores?
I really didn't like reviewing Resident Evil 6.
First, it really is a game that feels like it wants to be several different things, and there are some obvious glaring issues. Still, it can be intensely fun and even memorable at some spots. Second, it's always tough when analyzing a new entry in an iconic and even legendary franchise. There's a certain mystique, a certain aura that names like "Resident Evil" have, and no matter how objective one attempts to be in the position of a critic, you can't ignore that fact. It's always there, lurking just at the back of your mind.
Leading into the launch of RE6, the demo had been available. Reactions to that demo were frequent and vocal and quite a few hardcore series followers immediately denounced the title. At the same time, there were many who actually liked the sample (which should've given us a clue as to the split decision the final product would ultimately earn). But as always, the negative reactions got the majority of attention and quite a few headlines began to reflect a growing unrest in the Resident Evil community. Also, let's not forget that such unrest began with Capcom dubbed the new installment "dramatic horror," thereby admitting it was no longer survival/horror.
So here's the question- Is it possible that any of this had a direct influence on certain review scores? What if some of those critics who hated the game were fans themselves, and simply despised the direction of the new game? I admit it's disappointing in a number of ways, but I fail to see how it can be given a 3 or a 4. And on the flip side, what if there were knee-jerk reactions to defend the adventure? What if there were some reviewers who had the opposite agenda? And when I say "agenda," I mean that in the nicest terms; i.e., if all the aforementioned reactions had a subconscious effect on the review. What do you think?
Related Game(s): Resident Evil 6
Tags: resident evil 6, re6, resident evil sequel, capcom, resident evil fans
10/3/2012 10:01:51 PM Ben Dutka
Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter
Comments (38 posts)
LimitedVertigo
Wednesday, October 03, 2012 @ 10:47:22 PM
LimitedVertigo
Wednesday, October 03, 2012 @ 11:24:29 PM
sawao_yamanaka
Wednesday, October 03, 2012 @ 11:59:56 PM
LimitedVertigo
Wednesday, October 03, 2012 @ 10:46:26 PM
Reply
RE6 does not exist within a bubble. It is part of an overall gaming experience that has been around for almost 20 years. Just like FFXIII may have been a good game it was not a good FF game. The same goes for RE5 and now RE6.
Beamboom
Thursday, October 04, 2012 @ 4:42:38 AM
Ludicrous_Liam
Thursday, October 04, 2012 @ 1:01:30 PM
Speaking of which, I thought PSX's review was one of the most balanced I've read, being both fair but firm in it's analysing.
EDIT: I'm not saying it's an exact science - thinking about it just now, games like Journey need to be reviewed in a different manner because of it's nature - but, generally, I think you need an objective focus when doing a review.
Last edited by Ludicrous_Liam on 10/4/2012 1:08:16 PM
SaiyanSempai
Thursday, October 04, 2012 @ 2:03:56 PM
At the end, if the reviewer wants to say, I give this game an 8/10 on the merits of quality, polish, and mechanics so if you like this style of games you might find this game fun, however, I personally don't.
That's fantastic! What is unacceptable is:
if you like this style of game you might find this game fun, however, I personally don't so I give it a 3/10.
It's this kind of bias or lack of objectivity we've seen in the RE6 reviews that undermines the value of reviews and reviewers everywhere.
They aren't supposed to "cater" to an audience but rather give us objective information about the quality of a game so that we can make smart purchasing decisions.
I'm just glad there are still people like Ben here that's doing an honest job at it all. My appreciation Ben!
main_event05
Wednesday, October 03, 2012 @ 10:53:08 PM
Reply
lol, on a side note, if you ever wanted to see what Ada looks like under that red dress, this is the game for you.
"Don't open that door!"
WorldEndsWithMe
Wednesday, October 03, 2012 @ 11:44:56 PM
Excelsior1
Thursday, October 04, 2012 @ 4:12:55 AM
RE6? I just got done with Leon's campign and all I can say is what a thrill ride!!! Intense is a word that comes to mind. I honestly can't recall having more fun with a game in the past few years. It was like riding some wicked a$$ roller coaster and I got a huge adreniline rush!! I would rate RE6 over RE5 based on Leon's campign alone. Another huge plus for RE6 is it's an absolute blast online with friends. Absolute coop bliss. I got my money's worth out of the game already and will be enjoying it for a long time.
As for this game pulling in 3's and 4's. That's just whack. The production values are sky high and the gameplay is tight. I just can't see how any PROFESSIONAL reviewer could score it that low. Sometimes I think review sites will pull something like that for hits. It's possible some sites could be playing to some of the fans who have seemed to want to hate on this game since its conception.
As for gamers or fans...we all know how vocal and demanding they can be. I see many that are bashing the game that have not even played the final game!
That's just not right. At least play the final product before ranting. Sheesh! You never know...you might walk away pleasently surprised like I did.
bigrailer19
Wednesday, October 03, 2012 @ 11:01:08 PM
Reply
I mean let's look at it this way... A reader from here (no names) and I had a decent conversation about RE6 and the demo. If he had reviewed the game based off his personal tastes, I could see why HE wouldn't like it. But after playing the demo myself last night, I was fine with it. It wasn't an epic demo but I didn't have any issues with it. And I'll admit the camera was out of control at times but being able to slow it down was the fix for that issue.
Anyways what I'm getting at is, review the game by what it presents, and maybe not so much what it represents. Because it may not be a good -insert title here- game but it could just be a good game.
Idk. Like I said yesterday its so hard to keep personal bias out of a review, that when it happens it's appreciated. Yet we ask for opinions to help make choices sometimes. So...
Last edited by bigrailer19 on 10/3/2012 11:01:48 PM
sawao_yamanaka
Wednesday, October 03, 2012 @ 11:08:57 PM
LimitedVertigo
Wednesday, October 03, 2012 @ 11:24:03 PM
RE5 for the most part was able to get away with not being faithful to the series because most reviewers enjoyed the game and considered it good. RE6 has not been so lucky, and rightfully so.
bigrailer19
Wednesday, October 03, 2012 @ 11:26:43 PM
I'm waiting for a buddy. He bought it today but he can't play it until tomorrow. Guess he's busy. He waited for me to play RE5 so I'll return the favor. But there is a plus to this. I need a new headset and tomorrow I should have time to get one so...
bigrailer19
Wednesday, October 03, 2012 @ 11:30:35 PM
I guess I'm having a hard time describing the bias I'm referring too. Not so much that it's something other than what we know RE to be, and that's disappointing, but rather because it has more action and the reviewer doesn't like action games. That doesn't mean it isn't good. Wether or not that means the game should get scored lower because it's something now that it isn't recognized for, well idk. Obviously that's the problem a lot of people have. Understandably.
WorldEndsWithMe
Wednesday, October 03, 2012 @ 11:49:50 PM
my 2 cents...
sawao_yamanaka
Thursday, October 04, 2012 @ 12:01:48 AM
bigrailer19
Thursday, October 04, 2012 @ 12:23:53 AM
I can't argue that. It's a very valid point. It's such a grey area Im at times having trouble even trying to explain it. So don't get me wrong if fans of RE of old are unhappy with the direction it's gone in, I understand.
I guess it's fair to say that if a series has gone away from it's roots it could potentially get scored lower? But maybe if it wasn't called by what its known for that would change things?
Really though what I'm referring to is just that. Wether or not RE is a great horror game or a great action game, the word great is still involved. That's where I'm coming from.
bigrailer19
Thursday, October 04, 2012 @ 12:28:29 AM
WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, October 04, 2012 @ 12:29:24 AM
sawao_yamanaka
Thursday, October 04, 2012 @ 1:49:23 AM
WorldEndsWithMe
Wednesday, October 03, 2012 @ 11:53:52 PM
Reply
Would this be getting 3s and 4s if it had a different name? I doubt it. But if someone can make a good case for why the schizophrenic nature of the game plus big action changes is just as bad as crippling technical errors inside a once great franchise then I'm open to hearing that viewpoint.
Gamer46
Thursday, October 04, 2012 @ 12:00:55 AM
Reply
Last edited by Gamer46 on 10/4/2012 12:04:22 AM
sawao_yamanaka
Thursday, October 04, 2012 @ 12:10:14 AM
Gamer46
Thursday, October 04, 2012 @ 11:34:29 AM
Last edited by Gamer46 on 10/4/2012 11:35:18 AM
WorldEndsWithMe
Thursday, October 04, 2012 @ 1:39:19 AM
Reply
telly
Thursday, October 04, 2012 @ 11:58:27 AM
trumpetmon65
Thursday, October 04, 2012 @ 9:08:15 AM
Reply
CrusaderForever
Thursday, October 04, 2012 @ 9:42:35 AM
Making RE6 with the current virus in a tank RE1 fashion would be suicide. We wouldn't stand a chance! RE5 walked the line with more intelligent faster moving infected. They were still slow but some of them moved fast. The chainsaw Infected with the bad on his head moved pretty fast towards me during the Oil Fileds level last night. I found myself wishing I could move while shooting. Reading all the documents is great and really adds light to what these evil people are trying to accomplish. Do you remember the battle with Wesker!!! HOLY SH1T! He was like Neo from the Matrix. Just like the virus RE is evolving too.
Veitsknight
Thursday, October 04, 2012 @ 10:46:19 AM
Reply
"Poor: 3s went wrong somewhere along the line. The original idea might have promise, but in practice the game has failed. Threatens to be interesting sometimes, but rarely."
It sort of fits. I don't understand for every game to be a 7 and above. For example, I personally loved Dragon's Dogma but wouldn't score it above a 6. Too many issues.
telly
Thursday, October 04, 2012 @ 11:57:06 AM
But I agree: different numbers mean different things at different sites. Three is certainly a terrible score, but their description of what a 3 is actually sounds pretty well in line with other reviews I've read. The idea of doing this sprawling, appeal-to-the-masses Resident Evil may not have been a terrible idea, but something just went WRONG in the creation process.
I dunno, I'll play it one day when it's in the bargain bin, probably.
telly
Thursday, October 04, 2012 @ 12:21:24 PM
Reply
I think it's fallacy to think the legacy and expectation associated with a series' name wouldn't, or perhaps shouldn't, influence a review. Imagine if Final Fantasy XV turned out to be, say, a hardcore racing simulator, GT-style. Image Square Enix actually did an amazing job at the game, so much so that a game critic closed his review by writing "Whatever you may think of this new direction for the series, Gran Turismo has a new challenger for greatest racing simulator on the planet. And it's name is Final Fantasy XV." Now, maybe this imaginary game really is a Gran Turismo-caliber racing sim, and maybe it's important for a game reviewer to acknowledge this. It probably is! But this approach misses something crucial: While you may be able to appreciate the game's qualities for what it tries to be, the fact that Square Enix decided to make their signature series into something completely different from what the fans loved in the first place would be a HUGE disappointment to damn near everyone who likes Final Fantasy. I think a reviewer in this hypothetical should acknowledge the quality of FF XV, the racing simulator, for what it is, but ultimately be critical of the game for being a huge disappointment compared to what we expected, as well.
Only illustrating a point, of course. Resident Evil 6 is not a racing simulator, and of course it shows some similarities with the earlier games. But part of the reason the game is such a disappointment is, clearly, because it doesn't deliver what many of us loved so much about Resident Evil in the first place, and would love to see more of in future installments. I for one am thankful plenty of reviewers called out Capcom for taking us SO far from what made Resident Evil special.
Really, though, legacy expectations only account for part of equation here. The other is simply the quality. This is why I can believe all the really low review scores: by all accounts the game is not good at what it tries to do. It's not a great cover-based action shooter with monsters in it. It's ok at best, lousy at worst depending on who's review you're reading. So going back to my earlier hypothetical, imagine if SE made FF XV into not only a racing simulator, but a SH***Y racing simulator!
Capcom brought this on themselves. Period.
Gamer46
Thursday, October 04, 2012 @ 11:16:33 PM
Last edited by Gamer46 on 10/4/2012 11:17:13 PM
Jotun
Monday, October 08, 2012 @ 6:29:37 PM
Reply
There are certain AAA titles that are released that have a very directed attack set on them before they're even released. Your use of the word agenda is apt.
Check Amazon reviews for this. From movies to tv shows to cds to games to books. Most of the most popular things, whether good or not, will never have an average score above 3.5 stars. So many amazing products are being "trolled" by non-reviews and too many people see it, leading somewhat to this bias.
Moreso than that though, it's just pure personal agenda. Someone got butthurt because RE5 was more of an action game than something like Dead Space or Silent Hill and they decided long ago in their subconsious mind to hate the next RE product that would be released. It's just how humans, but moreso gamers, are built.

Resident Evil 6









THEVERDIN
Reply
Wednesday, October 03, 2012 @ 10:42:16 PM
"You take this cause you're the Master of unlocking."