I was talking with Nite and just thought I would see what others thought. Do you think that they are too similar?

Do you think that RE 5 is just a copy? Or it's own game, that stands out so much more

Post your thoughts below! And please use evidence to back up your claims!

I have stated what I thought already, so I just want to see what others say.

Resi 5, like DMC 4, attempted to ride off the success of the previous game (Resi 4) by implementing the same formula, but with some changes/additions.

First of all, Resi 5 removed most, if not all, of the survival horror aspects featured in the previous games, making it even more of an action game then Resi 4 (which still had some elements of survival horror in it)

Second, the plot in Resi 5 was more relevant to Resi cannon, featuring, arguably, the three most prominent characters (Chris, Jill and Wesker) and served as the end of the current story (with Wesker's death). In comparision, Resi 4's plot is only relevant due to the Las Plaga's being in both Resi 4 and 5, and only features two prominent characters (Leon and Ada, with Wesker lurking in the background)

The most obvious difference between them though, is the inclusion of Co-op. While it may have been good on paper, and is good for mercs, co-op makes the game even less scary then it already was, and Solo Professional runs even harder (especially in the 7 mins Wesker fight)

Bottomline, Resi 5 is similar to Resi 4, but with some noticeable differences, some of which make the game, imo, inferior to Resi 4 (which i consider to be the best Resi game so far)

There's my two cents

No. Absolutely not. Saying RE5 copied RE4 is like saying Sonic 4 is like Sonic 1. Just does not make any sense. Of course the sequels are gonna have stuff from previous games and even look alike to some degree. If they didn't the developers would have to pull stuff out of their asses every time they make a new sequel just to make in completely different. Eventually that would destroy the story, gameplay consistency and the series overall.

One example that made me facepalm so much my face hurt: Years ago I was watching a game review show on TV. It had some Tony Hawk game in it, might've been THUG2 or something. They gave it a bad review JUST for the fact it was too much like the previous game. They even said it themselves. How the hell are you supposed to make a completely different game out of skateboarding? Add fire breathing dinosaurs? Geez... Besides, for me, THUG2 had maybe too much new put into it.

Bottom line is, to me RE4&5 are completely different games. I never once thought of RE4 while playing 5. The enemies are easily distinguished form the previous game and the only enemy that was too similar to one of RE4's was N'desu. Still, the battle against it was way different and felt new. I could go on and on about this but I think I'll stop here.

I'll add a few points that were brought up here, I believe RE5 far outstripped RE4 but that's not what this thread is about. I just saw that FullMetal said he thought RE4 was the best of the series. Have you played REmake or any of the old games Metal? Anyway, To me, the only thing that is kind of inexcusable was the JJs, and they could have made it better if they reskinned them at least. Also, the chainsaw guys (Dr. Salvadors, whatever you want to call them) were too samey to look past. This is just because what they do and wear is a choice. Like, would their really be that many bag wearing chainsaw wielding maniacs in the world? Does Las Plagas influence them to do such particular things? The Ndesu on the other hand, I feel is more than understandable. You can easily argue that Las Plagas can create such a monster just like the T-Virus can create Tyrants. It's not like the Ndesu had some clothing that the El Gigante wore. I think that the El Gigante/Ndesu is just a product of some crazy Plagas engineering. So yeah, they will look the same and act the same.

Ask yourself this question first.... Did Paper Mario copy Final Fantasy?

All RE games copied their predecessors, one way or another. RE5 is as guilty as RE2.

I think there were a few really annoyingly, unoriginal enemies, like the JJ and Ndesu. I think the chainsaw guy was different enough, maybe because I liked his screaming.

Otherwise, I can't really think of too many things that make it a copy. The only people that I would expect to actually think that, or would say that when reviewing RE5 are typically the people that are more mainstream gamers, who expect tons of changes from game to game, otherwise it's pointless.

Thats a bit annoying, since as a fan of the series, I don't want tons of changes, just for the hell of it, so that it's different. If they make changes legitimately, cool, not just because.

I don't get how the Ndesu is a copy to you guys and the chainsaw guys aren't. The Ndesu is a creature like the dogs, or hunters. If you say the Ndesu is a copy, then so are hunters. Logic.

Well, it is still not fair to argue that the Ndesu is a copy. Just because you don't like the encounter or whatever. That's the only point I'm trying to make.

Again Paper Mario = Final Fantasy

I guess I should rephrase it to excusable copy. I think the Chainsaw guys and JJs are near inexcusable, whereas the Ndesu and hunters are examples of excusable copies. Do you agree?