Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Resident Evil 5 — New Character and Gameplay Detail

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 6 years ago | from the reanimating-a-dead-horse-to-continue-beating-it dept.

XBox (Games) 30

Erik Johnson writes "New details for Resident Evil 5 have been unveiled in the latest issue of 'Famitsu,' a Japanese video game magazine, including a familiar face returning to the hero role, some info on the enemy, and the revealing of a couple new characters."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

As intended? (3, Interesting)

enderjsv (1128541) | more than 6 years ago | (#23439062)

I wonder if the Ganados representing multiple races and the inclusion of a "dark-skinned" female character was always intended, or if it was just a reaction to the racism concerns.

Re:As intended? (2, Informative)

GweeDo (127172) | more than 6 years ago | (#23439428)

There are no "Ganados" in RE5. They are the villagers in RE4.

Re:As intended? (3, Funny)

enderjsv (1128541) | more than 6 years ago | (#23439650)

Oops. You're right. Also, I should have used "were", not "was". I messed up that first post, didn't I? On the other hand, the ability to mess up twice in one sentence is kinda impressive, no?

Re:As intended? (4, Insightful)

Robert1 (513674) | more than 6 years ago | (#23439536)

"The story takes place in Africa where Chris will face quite an epidemic. The enemies this time are not zombies or Ganados, they appear to represent multiple races which addresses the concern that all the enemies in the game would be of African descent"

This political correctness bullshit has got to stop. Why in the world would it be racist to think that the zombie-people you fight in Africa might be *gasp* Africans!

Conversely, in the last game why wasn't it considered racist when you went around systematically killing Spaniards?

By that logic every video game should just be a rainbow of enemies, all the time, regardless of the time period or location. We can't have a repeat of the blatant racism of Sid Meier's Gettysburg!, a game in which you command the wholesale slaughter of white Americans!

Re:As intended? (2, Insightful)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 6 years ago | (#23440088)

"By that logic every video game should just be a rainbow of enemies..."

Yeah, but that's not the logic being used, here. The logic is: "If we do this, will a really noisy group make a bunch of noise?" The fact is there are groups of people out there that are sensitive to certain things. Some of those groups have strong reasons that recently came about for being sensitive to them. The problems aren't equal, so the proportion of offensiveness isn't equal.

I agree with you that PC has gone overboard, but the reality is that lots of shit happens in this world. I wish people weren't so sensitive but it's not like you can draw a line and say "Okay, this is where your problems stop."

Re:As intended? (1)

FishAdmin (1288708) | more than 6 years ago | (#23440396)

The fact is there are groups of people out there that are sensitive to certain things. Some of those groups have strong reasons that recently came about for being sensitive to them. The problems aren't equal, so the proportion of offensiveness isn't equal.
Hmm, I'm not so sure about that. For the record, IAAA (I am an American), so these views will be about my homeland, the USA, vs elsewhere. However, since my country seems to almost ENJOY being the very height of PC, I think my opinions are at least as valid as the next person. Disclaimer aside, I agree that this PC crap has gone waaaay to far. From black people being offended by every reference to the term "slave" to Christians being offended that anyone would choose a homosexual lifestyle over a hetero one, we ALL need to stop being so freakin' sensitive! I am a Christian, and a happily married hetrosexual male. I also happen to be white. I'm also legally an Indian ("Native American") due to the fact that I have that heritage fairly strongly (1/8). Am I offended that other people choose to live differently? No. I might not like it, but this is supposed to be a FREE country. Now, I don't want to walk down the street and see two men making out. However, I would be just as upset if there was a man and woman making out, simply because that is a PRIVATE act, not a PUBLIC one! I've had a failr diverse set of friends over the years, ethnically and culturally speaking. I don't agree with my Athiest freinds, nor my Muslim friends, but we're still capable of being friends. I don't think anyone should be using racial slurs, but I think that should INCLUDE the members of that race! The fact that some people have suffered isn't reason to overlook over-sensitivity to subjects, and pander to a group's wishes. This is a free country. Your feelings got hurt, but nothing else? Get over it. No-one ever said life would be rosey and that we'd all get along. Now, the first time someone threatens someone else or physically harms them, they need to face the repurcussions of that act, but otherwise it's just words, people. They want to show Africa as being predominantly black? Guess what? It is! I think it would be MORE racist to have a game set in Africa and show NO black people! That would simply send the message "you aren't important enough for us to acknowledge your existence." Grow up, get over it all, and get on with your life.

Re:As intended? (3, Insightful)

apparently (756613) | more than 6 years ago | (#23442712)

I agree that this PC crap has gone waaaay to far. From black people being offended by every reference to the term "slave" to Christians being offended that anyone would choose a homosexual lifestyle over a hetero one, we ALL need to stop being so freakin' sensitive!

Are you actually criticizing people for being sensitive to events that are only three generations removed from them? My great-grandmother was still alive when I was born (and for ten years after): three generations is within familial reach. Any African-American born in the middle-20th Century was only three generations removed from the abolishment of slavery, and you can't respect that perhaps some of those people are sensitive to the circumstances of their world?
Do we need to discuss that it took another 100 years from the abolishment of slavery for the civil rights movement to actually ratify African-Americans as 5/5 human that could sit, drink, and learn as they want?
Do we need to discuss that even 40 years out from the civil rights movement, racism is still a factor in our politics?
Your perspective is astonishingly lacking.

Re:As intended? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23444306)

You're absolutely right. Three generations is certainly too recent. I mean, four generations might be forgivable, but three generations certainly isn't. Or (and forgive me if this sounds naive) maybe people should base their opinions on their own experiences. I mean, my father's father, as much as I respected him, had very little influence on my world view. It's not that he didn't try. I simply decided to judge things for myself. The past will be the past forever. We can learn from it, for sure. But to read into a video game the sins of fathers three (or more) generations old is a little extreme. There is a difference between caution and patronization. Editing black zombies to make them more politically correct would most likely fit into the latter, and is hardly what I think your forefathers had in mind when they thought of racial equality. There are real racial issues we should be concerned with. A Japanese game not yet on the shelf isn't one (in my humble opinion).

Re:As intended? (1)

Posting=!Working (197779) | more than 6 years ago | (#23448168)

The OP said "offended by EVERY reference to the word 'slave'" (caps are mine), it doesn't matter if you're talking about human bondage, sexual bondage, the setting on an IDE drive, or hard work (e.g. "slaving over a hot stove"), there are those who act offended if you use the word by any definition. Which is ridiculous, regardless of your perspective. We can't all carry thesauruses just to be PC. (I don't think there is another word for IDE slave, anyway.)

I'm Irish Catholic by descent, it wouldn't be very fun to talk to me if I got offended by the words orange, British, Protestant, famine, peasant, etc. There would be no words left if we all got offended by any reference to a horror in our ancestry. Everyone has slaves in their ancestry, if you look back far enough. If something horrible happened to you, I can understand being offended by a mention, but if it happened three generations back, it's just being antagonistic. It's a word, not an offense against your family. It could be used in a sentence to offend, but that doesn't make every use offensive.

Re:As intended? (4, Insightful)

Das Modell (969371) | more than 6 years ago | (#23449826)

Are you actually criticizing people for being sensitive to events that are only three generations removed from them?

Finland was attacked by the Soviet Union in the early 20th century, but you don't see me whining about it. Why would I? It happened way before my time, it has no effect on me and the people responsible for it are long gone.

Do we need to discuss that even 40 years out from the civil rights movement, racism is still a factor in our politics?

If white-on-black racism was still a real problem in the Western world, people wouldn't have to constantly make shit up, like this RE5 debacle.

I resent the way slavery is seen as a white invention that has never affected anyone except Africans. Slavery has existed forever, and in every corner of the world. There's still slavery in Africa, but I don't see anyone doing anything about it. I guess it's just too embarrasing to admit its existence since white people are not involved.

Re:As intended? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23456064)

Since when has the term "slave" been specific to black people? The Hebrews, as a Nation, were enslaved by the Egyptians for FOUR HUNDRED YEARS. The Africans that were enslaved by white Americans, consequently, were enslaved for less than a hundred years. The fact that there are any black people in the USA getting upset over the term slave, even when it's used in another connotation, is what I find ridiculous. First Generation? Of course. Second Generation? I can understand. Third generation and beyond? Sorry. You've hit too much detachment, especially when it's normally a grandchild or great-grandchild getting upset, NOT the grandparent them self.

Re:As intended? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23458528)

African-American?

  - you are racist and ignorant fool.

Because only slaves came from Africa.

Re:As intended? (1)

philspear (1142299) | more than 6 years ago | (#23463252)

I agree that this PC crap has gone waaaay to far.

It's really just a function of 1. Consumers having too much time and 2. Corporations and elected officials realizing that people were more likely to buy/vote in their favor if they didn't offend them.

Fortunately, that's also the only real upshot of PC. The two men you mentioned you wouldn't like to see making out aren't trying to pass laws forcing you to watch them any more than the man and woman you mentioned you don't want to see making out are. You're really making much ado about nothing, provided you're not working in PR or are an elected official. If you are, well you chose that field and you can take comfort on your yacht.

They want to show Africa as being predominantly black? Guess what? It is! I think it would be MORE racist to have a game set in Africa and show NO black people!

Yeah, if you bothered paying attention to the actual concerns people had rather than just assuming they were upset about some PC thing, you'd realize that wasn't the issue. I think it's more that the game is giving kids the situation where a bunch of poor black savages need to be dealt with through the buisness end of a shotgun. Its true that you have to take it out of context for that, but it's also true that most people who have concerns over this game are voicing them rationally with measured critiques. No one is calling for a boycott, Jesse Jackson is not delivering speeches. It's mostly just people saying "hey, this is troubling to me, here's why..."

In other words, you're making an ass of yourself by assuming this is an unreasonable protest.

Re:As intended? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23443056)

Yeah, but that's not the logic being used, here. The logic is: "If we do this, will a really noisy group make a bunch of noise?" The fact is there are groups of people out there that are sensitive to certain things.
Maybe we should take a shotgun to their heads too, in addition to the zombies'.

Re:As intended? (1)

BigJClark (1226554) | more than 6 years ago | (#23440598)


I myself, am perpetually offended by the vast majority of bad guys, since the days of nintendo 8bit, being of caucasian.

Re:As intended? (1)

journeymanmetal (1266822) | more than 6 years ago | (#23441678)

"For some reason, it's seen as less acceptable to kill starving Africans than it is to kill greasy mainland Europeans. Then again, both games were made in Japan, and we all know what a bunch of xenophobic dicks they are." (forgive me if I haven't got this word-for-word)

Um.. (1)

PhysSurfer (872187) | more than 6 years ago | (#23442568)

Fine, but then shouldn't the hero be African as well?

There may be a point here. There is possibly some racial colonization themes portrayed when the protagonist is of European descent and he goes around killing African zombies.

Re:Um.. (1)

NonSequor (230139) | more than 6 years ago | (#23447274)

Don't bother trying to communicate with them. They have their blinders on.

Re:As intended? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23447252)

Look, I'm not all that politically correct, but the original trailer made it look like they had deliberately tried to make a game based on Rudyard Kipling's "White Man's Burden". You'd have to be retarded, or Japanese, to not notice the symbolism in it.

I'm sorry about that Japanese crack. It's just that as a nation, they seem to be consistently clueless about racial issues in the world at large.

Re:As intended? (1)

Das Modell (969371) | more than 6 years ago | (#23449710)

Today's "racism," if you can call it that, is driven by two powerful forces of stupidity: black victimhood and white guilt. Of course in this case the developers are Japanese so we've only got black victimhood.

Re:As intended? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23466754)

It's a natural reaction. Imagine if the next outbreak were in a massive orphanage, and you were required to shoot zombie children and babies. Some people would find that very uncomfortable. And while the whole point of the horror genre is to make you feel uncomfortable, I think part of the criticism being thrown around here is due to the impression that Capcom deliberately chose to offend certain groups to get more attention. It's hard to feel good about a blond haired blue-eyed Japanese-American mowing down legions of impoverished Africans, even if they are the walking dead (or if you are a white supremacist, in which case, go fuck yourself you miscreant goat herder).

That being said, everyone needs to calm down, and look at the Big Picture. There is far more to be worked up about than this. Some people might find it hard to just laugh it off, but that's all you can really do, because making too much noise about it just makes you look bad.

Re:As intended? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23440376)

I never really thought of RE4 as racist, I just took it for what it was. I don't know anything about the setting of RE4 so I could not comment on whether the behaviors and settings were patterned after the actual population and location but it might as well have been made up anyway because there were no unaffected people in the game besides some of the main characters of the story, who were also made up. It just seemed like a cheesy action movie that was a lot of fun to play. Why is everyone upset about this game again?

Uh what? (2, Informative)

JMemmert (564338) | more than 6 years ago | (#23439090)

I just read the article... and I am astonished just how little content can make up an article. So we have one returning character and two babes, one maybe playable, but we don't know. We have different enemies that are different from the different enemies we had before (and yes, I purposely overused the word "different" here). And we have rumors on how they'll die, decompose, all the while burbling and turning into slime. Could someone please explain to me how this is relevant news concerning a new computer game? No details, no specs, no screenshots, just some Japanese magazine having seen a soon-to-be-released trailer and another newsfeed picking up the story, summarizing ineptly what will become perfectly obvious from watching the trailer which you'll be able to watch soon yourself. And yes, I must be new here and all, but please... wake me up when there's NEWS to be had.

On the Wii? (4, Interesting)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 6 years ago | (#23439670)

Will it come out for the Wii as well as 360 and PS3?

Re:On the Wii? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23440276)

Um, I think he was just asking a question, and it's a perfectly valid question considering RE:4 was released on the Gamecube. If you're the mod who modded this flamebait, you should probably fix it.

Re:On the Wii? (3, Informative)

iampiti (1059688) | more than 6 years ago | (#23443694)

Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] says it will be released on xbox 360 and the ps3...so I guess it won't be coming out for the wii.
I think it's a pity, but Nintendo knew where they were getting when they decided to build a console with considerably less hardware power than Microsoft's and Sony's offerings.
I'm not bashing the wii: They are making innovative games and loads of money but it just (obviously) won't be getting the hardcore games that have complex graphics and gameplay being released for the other two consoles.

Re:On the Wii? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23445312)

If you tried Resident Evil 4 on the Wii, you wouldn't be complaining. The control scheme more than makes up for a little less graphics

Re:On the Wii? (1)

Das Modell (969371) | more than 6 years ago | (#23449686)

Yes, but it's a GameCube port. Porting a modern 360/PS3 game to the Wii is different.

Re:On the Wii? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23445744)

but Nintendo knew where they were getting when they decided to build a console with considerably less hardware power than Microsoft's and Sony's offerings.

Maybe, but most people who bought a Wii didn't think of that. They just want to play some games. I didn't even think of that when I bought a Wii and I'm a hard core gamer. I would love to see these games on Wii as well, so that we could make a choice on which one we want. I would choose the one with superior controls and gameplay over the one with superior graphics. Other people may not, but we should at least be able to follow through with our choices.

Re:On the Wii? (1)

plague3106 (71849) | more than 6 years ago | (#23464414)

Ya, it's not looking good I agree. I just thought I'd ask since I haven't heard mention one way or the other.. that is, I can't find anywhere that said for sure "no, there won't be a Wii port."
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?