>>446961739>You kill zombies faster/waste less ammo if you stand still tho due to the critical headshots
Why are crit hits tied to a faked RNG, in a real-time 3rd person shooter? >you'd literally one shot every zombie in the game due to the easy aiming.
So make it LESS EASY.
RE4 had free-aim instead of auto-centered sights, shaky aiming with any non-supported guns, and decent amount of recoil on each shot that did indeed affect your aim as well. REm2 has NONE of these.
You could also further compensate by increasing the number of enemies. If the demo and footage are anything to go by, you seldom face more than 2 or 3 enemies at once in a single room, which is less than half of what the OG RE2 could throw at you at once. It does not help that they also move SLOWER than before; even RE3 had zeds occasionally pretty much jogging after your anus.>and all of them love the controls?
Truly few of them complain about them at all after the first few minutes. That is called "mastering the game", something GenZ clearly has never had to do before.>true, but they were never an issue for people due the over the shoulder view
Exactly. But guess how many noobs even realize that.
Though in recent months, I've started to see more and more newfags complaining EVEN ABOUT RE4 and its apparently "clunky AF gameplay". Shows how accustomed to a single mold the younger generation is.>If RE2make had both fixed camera and tank controls there would be plenty of complainers
"Let people cry!" says everyone else to all criticism. Why would that be any different?
The core target audience would love it, and the new comers with even a hint of patience would learn to like them after a while. Hell, they could market it as "Dark Souls of horror games" or something equally cringy, and it'd instantly sell like hotcakes (as if REmake HD would not have already done that).>the puzzles seem like standard RE puzzlesagain, they could've gone step further, and make proper puzzles.