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