ZombiU was a standout game at the Wii U's launch, bringing some excellent horror to the system while utilising the GamePad to enhance the experience. It was a tad rough around the edges, like launch games often are, but nevertheless did a lot of good things.
News of its impending re-release on PS4 and Xbox One (as Zombi) prompted a little disappointment, but it's interesting to see what's now been revealed - from the perspective of a Wii U fan. Ubisoft has announced that it'll arrive on 18th August on both systems, as well as PC, as a download-only game. It's also released a trailer, below.
It looks like a bare bones revamp to us, perhaps even more of a port than a remaster of any description, and is the same core game as on Wii U. We can't help but think that it'll be a little worse off without integrated dual screen play, too, and there's no mention of an equivalent local multiplayer mode; on Wii U that was reliant on the GamePad.
In any case, it's likely to be a budget-priced release, and it'll be interesting to see whether it performs well on other systems. Despite praise for the Wii U launch title, Ubisoft wasn't shy in being disappointed with its commercial performance.
Comments 141
A lazy port from UBISOFT!? **Gasps in surprise**
Cool trailer.
I still don't think it's going to sell very well...
They're citing all these old reviews for a game that now doesn't have a second screen anymore? That's not right.
I really enjoyed the original. If the price is right, I'll play it through on PS4 for the Trophies ( and the morbid curiosity of how it plays without the Gamepad)
Now they get to know what it feels likes to get dumped on by Ubisoft.
Are they expecting to recoup money or trying to see if the franchise could be serialized on the x86 twins?
Isn't this still the best selling 3rd party game on the system. Shows why Nintendo doesn't get 3rd party support.
I don't think anyone was expecting anything other than a straight port. There was nothing about the gamepad features I'd miss, so wouldn't think of this as inferior in any way, but it wasn't a very good game then so it's not going to be a very good game now.
They're just trying to recoup money from it. It probably cost them $30 million or more to make so half a million sales isn't enough to profit. The port probably only cost a couple of million however so they'd only need to sell a small fraction of thar to start turning profit on it. If they could sell another million copies across PS4, Xbone and PC it would probably cover the loss on the Wii U version.
It will probably sell 10,000 copies and get a sequel on PS4
I expect it'll sell better than the Wii U version.
I own the game on Wii U, I don't think I'm gonna try it on the XBOX ONE. I gave up on it because the high tense ended up to stress me instead of entertaining!
Cool game anyway.
The trailer is great i'll give you that much Ubisoft,but the game still looks bad! They haven't changed anything! Jesus i still might buy it and hey in the trailer the cricket bat has nails stuck in it! Does this mean you upgrade it? Oh
"on both systems, as well as PC, as a download-only game"
Aww I thought Ubisoft were bigger risk takers then that, at least when it comes to Sony and Microsoft.
This makes me want to start up a third playthrough of ZombiU. I'm overdue for one, anyway.
Cool trailer, I would say unique, but I could swear it is exactly the same they used for the Wii U version with some words and logos added here and there XD
Wow. Color me both wrong and disappointed. Looks exactly the same, the models don't even have a higher count. Very lazy, Ubisoft..
Outside of the Rogue-like death mechanic, I really don't see how this will stand out on the PS4/XB1 considering the game was completely built around the Wii U GamePad. As a Survival Horror fan, I love the game on Wii U and don't have a problem with it getting ported (it is an underrated gem that deserves more recognition) but it seems like a really bad move when the graphics don't look much better (hey Ubisoft, It's been 3 years since this game came out!), the main mechanics that made the game unique are gone (the GamePad), and it's a digital only release which means it won't even grab the retail audience that would normally go for this type of game on PS4/XB1. I work at an indie game store and Resident Evil fans who own a PS4/XB1 are shocked and surprised when I tell them they can get the awesome Remake on the digital store (they honestly have no idea these types of games are available). Your average gamer legitimately doesn't know/understand the digital storefronts of the newer machines. This whole thing is as baffling as the Rayman Legends situation in terms of bone headed Ubisoft decisions.
@Spoony_Tech I've not read that anywhere!?! I would have thought games like bayonetta 2, the Lego games or skylanders would have taken the crown by now. Does hyrule warriors count as 3rd party as thats sold over a million!?!
@Spoony_Tech Well according to VGChartz (and remember that is a very flawed source), it now sits at #14 for lifetime sales. It is still the number one selling third party title on the system however. Even then it sold less to less than 10% of Wii U owners (again from VGChartz, so grain of salt and all).
That second fact makes me very sad. Especially with fun games like MH3U, Deus Ex, Batman: Arkham Origins, Rayman Legends, and other great third party titles.
an game that is set in 2012 in which that game release in 2012 for Wii U will be release for XBOne, PS4 and PC in 2015!
seem to be a good idea! don't you think !?!
@ULTRA-64 Bayonetta2 and Hyrule Warriors would be considered 2nd party. Nintendo either paid or directed most of the content. As was posted above me to my knowledge I believe that's what I read as it was and still is the highest 3rd party. Sad but true that even if its off by a bit nothing seems to hit close to a million.
@Darknyht And we wonder why Capcom didn't want to do MH4U on the Wii U.
Really makes me wonder where the heads of Ubisoft are steering the ship.
The only thing that made the game interesting and unique in the first place were the Gamepad elements. The game's going to be pretty terrible without them. Worth a bit of a laugh though, that they actually decided to do this.
It didn't look like a straight port to me, I noticed some melee weapons not found in the original. Graphically the same though, too bad as they needed a remaster not port.
It looks like you can use melee weapons other than the cricket bat, that's a good change. If it comes out as a full price retail game it'll be a bit of a rip off.
@abbyhitter Trust me, with shoddy, buggy releases like the last Assassin's Creed, all major platform owners are no stranger to being dumped on by Ubisoft.
It's a fantastic showcase for the GamePad and a great horror game in its own right. I'm glad I own the definitive edition of this
I'll pick it up on the PS4 for the trophies and to re-play it again. Other than that, I think Ubisoft is re-releasing it to see if it could become a new series. Hopefully it sells well and we can see a sequel in the future.
looks basically the same..except no gamepad..i thought that remakes and revamps should be better than they were ,,, u can pik this up for 5 pound on wii u and imo the wii u version will be the better version,,,ubisoft i have no faith in you anymore
I enjoyed it but have left it for a while because I got stuck on the later areas and had bought a load of other games. I might revisit it now as this has reminded me it was pretty good. If it's a budget release for Xbox One and PS4 it may sell a few units but a lot of it was designed with the gamepad in mind.
@Spoony_Tech Again, that is VGChartz and their methodology is flawed at best. I know they kept Wii U games and console sales low for a while even after Nintendo released hard numbers on sales and that also doesn't account for digital sales. However, given the lack of internal storage on the console it is probably not too far off. I still know people with Wii U's that haven't even connected them to the internet.
To me it is a vicious cycle started by Nintendo not including enough storage and Third Parties bringing not bringing their "A" game. Launch was filled with old or inferior third party ports, which their target audience either already owned or bought a superior version on another console. This was either due to lack of storage for expansions, spite, or lack of understanding of audience by third parties. This led to the games being not purchased, which was used to justify not putting any additional efforts into the game. That resulted in those that only owned the console feeling mistreated by the third parties, and only solidified their desire to not support them. So the next round was even more lacking and less well received than the first.
I will give Ubisoft a little credit, they tried more than the rest. But they also did a fair share of burning down the house too. They should have treated Rayman Legends like they are currently treating ZombiU. Kept the Rayman release date on Wii U and after a time brought it to everything else.
I think they would have also benefited from doing like they did (and still do with the other consoles) with 360/PS3/Wii. Similar games but with the specifics of the system in mind. Just like we used to get wildly different games between the SNES/Genesis. It really shouldn't be a one size fits all solution everytime.
@Grumblevolcano you think they will break at least 700,000 digital?
So what's Ubisofts excuse going to be when it doesn't sell on the other platforms either.
@Spoony_Tech I think Lego city sold better than zombie u.
@Peach64 The majority of the gamepad features could transfer to a standard controller , but using the gamepad did add to the immersion of the game when playing. I gather you didn't like the game ? I thought it was a fairly decent launch title that had some interesting ideas , but was also a little clumsy in places. There is no way it cost $30 million dollars to make though. I know Ubisoft claimed they didn't make a profit on Zombie U , but as far as I'm aware they never released any figures to back that statement up. Ubisoft had unrealistic expectations for the game in my humble opinion. A new IP , in a niche genre , at a console's launch , then after release it received a few bad reviews. It will be interesting to see the gaming media's response to the game. A third of the trailer features cut scenes , with review scores for the Wii U game. Hopefully , they will have ironed out the bugs , glitches and random crashes - but this is Ubisoft so I'm not overly confident.
Using reviews from what is essentially the original superior version to sell more than likely gimped version of your game is pretty scummy Ubi.
@Spoony_Tech Smash Bros. and Hyrule Warrios are technically 3rd party. Lego City also sold better. Even then Bayonetta 2 is not too far behind ZombiU in sales and ZombiU was a bundled game which bundled games almost always sell more/ better and I am willing to bet a good number of those ZombiU sales were from the bundle. I had a few friends get the bundle all because it came with two games instead of one (at the time, you just got Nintendo Land) and it came with a pro-controller bundled inside.
That trailer is hysterical. PS4 graphic quality stills for the first minute, and then bam, it's a Wii game. I take back everything bad I said about the Star Fox graphics.
And whatever happened to MS - we won't publish a game after another console has it? Does removing the U from the title make it a different game, or the lack of Gamepad? Or was that just a 360 rule? Or a disc rule, digital is ok?
@ikki5 You cannot be a third party when you are published by Nintendo. You are technically a second party. To quote wikipedia:
Second-party developer is a colloquial term used by gaming enthusiasts and media often used to describe two different types of game development studios:
It will really annoy me if some of the same reviewers give this better scores!!
The only things I would change about Zombi U are; slightly better controls, less screaming from the survivor, all the graphics up to the same level as the best looking bits and less loading. I would love a sequel on Wii U with a 3rd person view and a massive portion of London to explore without loading screens. I wouldn't care if they went Red Steel 2 and made the graphics basic but stylised instead of scruffy but detailed.
@Peach64
Zombii U sales to date is 0,87M
http://www.vgchartz.com/game/70793/zombiu/
This is a falire on 10 milions consoles?
They probably made some changes to it, like making the zombies one hit kill with the bat, and placing ammo every few steps away. And they probably threw out the gamepad inventory screen and just gave you a bat, pistol and assault rifle to start so you'd never even need an inventory. They had to appeal to all those hardcore gamers on those systems after all.
@rjejr
http://www.purexbox.com/news/2015/07/spencer_xbox_one_parity_clause_is_dead
Bob Dylan has two '65 records, so looking forward to see them as your avatar. Two of his best to boot!
This is gonna flop HARD on PS4/Xbox One.
Surely this late, unoptimized port's flop will convince Ubisoft to pull all support for PS4 and X1, because clearly there isn't a market for their games on those systems. That's how they roll, right?
Haha! 9/10 I don't think so lets wait for a real review!
@sinalefa Nice of them to post that article today for me.
Only 1 album cover per band. Well unless I change my mind.
I think that it will end up being ANOTHER average zombie game on other consoles since there is no gamepad.
@cbkummer
Now PS4 and Xbox One gamers can taste with this what Wii U gamers tasted with Watchdogs - a super delayed and super sub-par port.
Watch this version get a higher review, contradicting all their original complaints of the Wii U version as praise because they "get it" now, and that the gamepad doesnt "get in the way of the action".
I'm indifferent to a certain extent, because lord knows I hate horror games, but I definitely wanna see how this goes down.
@faint Easily as it's coming to PC. Release game and then later make it part of many Steam sales and then that amount will be made by PC alone. Every Nintendo 3rd party exclusive lost is a win for Sony and Microsoft fans too.
This whole fiasco makes me kekekek. XD
I'm just waiting for all the reviewer sites to out themselves as PonyStable and Xbot fanboils. This port is inferior to the Wii U's iteration in every single way, and if they orgasm over graphics just because it's on the former systems, good gravy I'm gonna have a heyday.
I'm sure it will sell well on the PS4. Because If it doesn't, that would Mean that PS4 owners don't support 3rd Party Games. As they keep saying it's only Nintendo owners that don't support 3rd Party.
What, it's a bad port? No excuse, you should support 3rd Party
So if the game doesn't sell a million or two in the first week is it a flop?
Um...Ubisoft? Those were the reviews for the Wii U version. I doubt they'll be the same elsewhere.
@kensredemption
"PonyStable" and "Xbot fan boils"?
That wasn't very festive
@MrCanzine
It was a flop already. If ubisoft can make a few more dollars off this version they will be happy.
@MrGuinea
Maybe the Wii U version would have sold better if all the zombies were made of yarn, the world was made of rainbows and gumdrops and that it was impossible to die or run out of lives.
@Spoony_Tech @Darknyht that REALLY is sad!! I loved zombi u and it was the game I bought my Wii u with at launch. It should really have been left for dust by now though sales wise.
" Its Wii U owners fault that this happen, because they don't like mature games"-Ubisoft
@bmjy1000
What mature rated games have sold well on Wii U?
Actually, this was very good from the start. The reason why it was a flop is because the wii u sold poorly.
@rjejr
Microsoft are not publishing Zombi Ubisoft are.
good point.
@HollywoodHogan I meant will it be considered a flop for those systems if it doesn't hit two million out of the gate.
@HollywoodHogan not many mature games have sold well but those games usually have no advertising and often the studios themselves seem to not want it to sell.
@banacheck Ubisoft also published Rayman Legends
It will be very ironic if it sells well & gets a sequel on the other systems. Also the Gamepad features where far from ground breaking as others would have you believe. I think no body is going to notice them missing if the truth be told.
Having more and stronger hitting weapons sounds like a great improvement.
@banacheck I think it would damage Nintendo with the NX if that happened.
The only thing that made this game good was the gamepad. I've got over 100 hours logged and still enjoy playing it, but it's only because the gamepad give you the extra control you need. Overall I'd say this game is a "d" in the zombie genre compared to other games. With the gamepad, is a b+.
The game wasn't "Oh that game is amazing" without the gamepad. It was the atmosphere of tension along with the gamepad controls that made it great. Removing that doesn't leave much.
Having more melee weapons is great but IF they buff up the weapons where you get one-hit kills everywhere and ammo lying in every corner, the game will lose most of its tense charm.
Plus hardly improved graphics and a straight shoddy port is unlikely to make this game seem as different as it was on the Wii U.
I mentioned before in another post, mark my words, The game will look exactly the same on the other systems (without a gamepad) and for some reason the reviews will be rosy. I've seen this pattern before.
Ubisoft being Ubisoft yet again. And that's not a good thing. First I thought it was going to be a retail game but the fact that it's download probably makes it to where even less people will buy it.
at 1'17 theres a baseball bat with nails...I don't recall that being in the original!!
I find it strange that so many people seem to have forgotten the original trailer. I see comments of this being a cool trailer, trailer having PS4 graphics and what not, while it's THE EXACT SAME TRAILER as on the Wii U!!!
See?: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZbsXFoCHks
The only thing they added is the wonderful review quotes and they changed the music, actually making it worse. The original music in the Wii U trailer was both fitting and very atmospheric. It really emphasized the whole "this is a zombie game taking place in London" feel. Or maybe that's just me.
Anyway, I hope this will bomb really, REALLY hard. They don't deserve another penny for all the BS they spouted. It's okay to make a business decision about games, but just tell your audience the truth from the get go and don't continue to try and blow smoke in our eyes. And that goes for a lot of other third party developers too. Like they think we can't handle the truth or something.... (or the "truth" comes from "anonymous" developers)
As for the game: it looks exactly like the Wii U version, so nothing spectacular changed there, but like some of you have fortunately already said, the GamePad gave this survival horror that extra bit of tension and immersion that a normal controller/joypad just won't be able to emulate. Pausing to go into an inventory does not equal the feeling of having to look on your GamePad to inspect inventory or bodies while still being in the game and seeing zombies creeping up on your hunched figure on screen. Same as with using it as a search light: just that tiny added bit of immersion that made it different and not just the umpteenth survival horror game. And then there was also another fun bit in the subway: same sort of mechanic where you had to punch in a code on your GamePad to open the electronic door and on the TV you could see the zombies coming towards you. Nerve racking, I tell you.
Here are the two GamePad trailers that show the whole range of functions it offers in ZombiU, for all you slightly forgetful or curious ones...
trailer 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ot0bhlVDdSI
trailer 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aSthBI9onhE
Most of those examples cannot be copied to a joypad without losing the immersion or recreating the same sensation, so people thinking otherwise must either dislike the GamePad, have never played the game, or simply don't know what they're talking about. Take the subway keypad section for example: to still be able to see the zombies creeping up on you, you would have to display the keypad somewhere on the TV, immediately taking away the immersive feeling of having to punch in the numbers on the GamePad like on a real electronic door's keypad and using the TV screen to virtually look over your shoulder at the approaching zombies. And having a clean TV screen without stats displayed on it also adds to the immersion. It just isn't the same. It just isn't the same at ALL...
Having said that, I definitely could have done without all the "swing your GamePad around" motion controls, but the other functions were really well implemented, in my humble opinion.
And the graphics definitely weren't that bad either: a little rough around the edges here and there, but all in all they were very moody and there are quite a few effects and textures in there that you couldn't replicate on a Wii or whatever lower system, even if your life depended on it. And in ZombiU it does...
@Koniec that's because there wasn't. All we had was a trusty cricket bat, which is another sneaky reference to the game taking place in England, but now for all the Xbox One/PS4 dudebro players they've added the all-American (and obviously WAY cooler) baseball bat. Otherwise it probably wouldn't be hardcore enough for all the non-kiddie console gamers...
It will be interesting to see how this fares. The biggest issue I had with the Wii U version was the really low field of view, or so it seemed, which kinda just made the game a bit unplayable for me. If they haven't changed that then it probably will just be same old, but if they have fixed that, which I actually doubt, then it could improve the experience quite considerably imo. As much as the GamePad implementation was cool, I don't think the lack of it here will really matter that much to be brutally honest. I would be ironic, or something, if the version on PS4 and Xbox One does actually turn out to be the best version, because that will just be another kick in the teeth Wii U owners.
Well, I bought this game with my Wii U and loved it. I don't get how it didn't sell better. Almost lookin over your shoukder with this game. I don't see a reason to buy it in my PC or PS4. It was just dandy on my Wii U.
"Plus, Zombi features a slightly expanded field of view" – http://www.engadget.com/2015/07/30/zombiu-ps4-xbox-one-pc-zombi/#continued
Well; there it is right there.
It's already better than the Wii U version imo.
I don't really know Ubisoft's history of game making before the Wii U, but since then all they've seemed to do is port, re-skin, and swap a killer hoodie for a boke in a baseball cap with and cell phone whilst forgetting to optimise and bug test their games. Even EA make more effort.
Well, at least it looks like they added a few new melee weapons... That's nice, I guess.
@Kirk well, I'm not going into the whole immersion/GamePad thing again, since I already tackled that earlier, but I think that the original field of view was also part of creating tension and thus more immersion or at least a bit more fear, same as the turn character mechanics of the original Resident Evil games. A lot of people were irritated about that because "nobody turns like that in real life" but failed to see how that added to the tension in a MASSIVE way.
The expanded field of view, and even the added weapons (shovel and baseball bat with spikes) stink of making the game easier, so I would almost say that the Xbox One and PS4 owners are getting the kiddie version...
From the article:
Yep, I called it: the "hardcore" gamers are getting the care bear version.
They even upgraded the flashlight to give you a stronger light beam, and even though it also depletes the battery faster, that's another safety blanket adding to making the game less intense. But I don't have to worry about getting that inferior version since I own neither of the two adult consoles...
@Kirk No graphical updates or cinematic 24fps. Xbox and PS4 owners don't care about gimped gameplay. If it's not 1080p and 60fps it might as well have never released.
@Resh if you meant to cross out/strike through that text, you might want to replace the two letters "s" with the word "del"...
EDIT:
Ah, I see you already removed them, making my comment seem rather strange as a consequence...
@TheRealThanos Yeah I was trying to do strikethrough. Why can't we just use ~ to do strikethrough? It's far easier and better than BB code. pls Nintendo life admins.
@Resh Using "del" instead really isn't that much of an effort, see?
strike throughThey're just trying to recoup some of the initial investment by producing a cheap port. Can't really blame them to be honest.
@TheRealThanos
lol, care bear version.
This will just be another generic zombie game without the gamepad.
Considering how cheaply you can find physical Wii U copies, I don't really see the appeal of this port if it doesn't adress the original flaws.
Zombi U was quite a low budget title and I think it would have broke even or made a profit at 800k sales if it wasn't repurposed 3 times (first as a 360/PS3 Rabbids game, then as Killer Freaks and finally as Zombi U).
I get the feeling that it'll lose its appeal on XBO/PS4 though due to loss of GamePad features, the improved field of view and stronger weapons; because Zombi U was a below par FPS to start with but was a great survival horror game. No doubt a XBO/PS4 sequel would just be another Zombie action FPS rather than survival horror too.
@DarthNocturnal The Ac Unity Patch To Which you refer was actually 6-7 gb. The 40 gb patch was a glitch on the xbox one version. Agree with you in general, I guess publishers know that the video game industry is ripe for exploitation and many people will still pay up in spite of issues. Even wb and rocksteady were aware of the pc issues (according to anonymous insider leaks) yet they still released it anyway only pulling it down eventually for damage control reasons no doubt. And don't even get me started on that destiny guy, luke Smith I think his name is. Absolutely appalling way to speak about your so called fans
On topic, it seems ubi are testing waters for a potential sequel/ franchise treatment. That's apparently their modus operandi these days, according to a Dev in an interview a fair while back, their goal is to basically have multiple ass creed style franchises where they can churn them out on an annual basis. This 'must turn into franchise' mentality is really hurting the quality of their games in my opinion. Whatever happened to just trying to make a good game that people want to play and then if it proves a success the door's wide open to make a sequel, kind of like the original assassins creed funnily enough..
@heyzeus002 It's the same as Hollywood relying ever more on franchises; it seems that's how everything is going. It won't get this bad, but my gaming nightmare would be to have nothing but two types of games made any more: multi-million dollar AAA sequels and F2P mobile titles. (shudders)
On the plus side, am glad to see the game get more exposure, if only because the game was fun if damn scary tense. Of course the intent behind the action of doing so is probably is another story...
A standout game? I love zombies and got so bored of it and returned it.
@rjejr Phil Spencer has been telling there is no rule like that (anymore) so it was propably Xbox360 thing. Developers can add some new stuff in Xbox One ports like battletoads in showel knight if they want but it's not necessary.
Ahh. That game I played to death one weekend a few years back and thoroughly enjoyed. I hope whoever buys it on the new systems gets to enjoy it, as I got tired of telling friends way back when that it was only on Wii U. There were some XBOX/PS3 owners interested in the game but didn't want a Wii U. I loved it, and I hope new players love it... Though I know without the Gamepad and with their better weapons they'll never have the same experience I did.
@Kirk the low field of view added tension and difficulty tho
I had the option to work on this over at Straight Right ... no free time to even consider it though. Don't be too disappointed WiiU owners, this is pretty much a port and won't be as good as the original...
State Of Decay has a similar looting mechanic to Zombi U, where you loot items in real time while keeping an eye on your surroundings in case of danger. That was using a single screen and worked just as well as in Zombi U, so this should be fine.
@HollywoodHogan
It's for the exact reason I said why it didn't sell well. That and the launch didn't give much of an install base. But if you look at most reviews they complain about the slow gameplay and how zombies took too long to kill. Survival horror games have become run-and-guns for consoles these days so it honestly wouldn't surprise me if they made those changes.
@TheRealThanos Well I certainly disagree regarding both the field of view and turn mechanics.
Using a limited field of view to create tension in this way is just bad design imo, if it were actually implemented intentionally as a gameplay design element and not more likely due to limitations of the hardware, in terms of them likely reducing the field of view simply to help keep the game running smoothly on Wii U, or whatever reason they had. It's just technically easier to run high quality visuals if you use a lower field of view, and I know that's why most developers have done this repeatedly in the last few generations, as they try to make everything look as shiny as possible on the surface, pushing the hardware to its limits and often sacrificing some of the stuff that lies just beneath the surface layer in the process.
Same applies to the tank controls in the old RE games. I think there's good ways to create tension; such as through lighting, sound, the danger/threat that an enemy posses, creative set-pieces, good level design; and bad ways, like making the controls unwieldily and sluggish, such that you often take damage as a result of the clunky controls rather than the enemies actually being any real threat. Eternal Darkness' more direct player movement vastly improved on the more traditional tank-like control scheme found in these mostly fixed camera horror games, imo, and it didn't nothing to negatively affect the potential for great tension, horror, scares, or whatever. Replace the visuals and monsters of ED with RE and it would be one of the greatest RE games ever conceived as far as I'm concerned.
These kinds of arguments are very similar to when a whole lot of people were once saying you just had have fixed camera angles like in RE otherwise these horror games just wouldn't be tense and scary; before anyone bothered to try doing proper free camera third person or first person horror games—and then we got the likes of Resident Evil 4, Amnesia: The Dark Descent, Dead Space, Slender, Outlast, Alien Isolation, Silent Hill: PT...
In my opinion, tension should never be created by restrictions that negatively impact the quality of the basic/fundamental control and gameplay experience.
@faint It's a false "tension and diffculty". It really just made it hard to visually read the level and was slightly disorienting to a degree, like you were wearing blinkers. That's not a good device for building tension in an fps game, unless they explain you are wearing blinkers for some reason; or maybe you had been drugged or something, and then have a slightly weird/skewed view of the world would make some sense.
The slightly wider field of view can only improve the overall gameplay experience imo; and the fact they've increased it now, on these more powerful systems, tells you it wasn't so much a design decision for creating "atmosphere and tension" but more of a technical decision so they could push the graphics on Wii U and maintain a decent framerate. On these more powerful systems they can now have the same graphics alongside the increased field of view without worrying about any issues like potential slowdown or whatever, hence they've not increased the field of view to a slightly more comfortable level.
I mean ponder this for a second: Virtual Reality has for all intents and purpose a full field of view—it's like 100 degrees or so but due to how VR works it basically feels like it's the full 180 degree humans normally see, or whatever it is, and also like it wraps all around you too—and experiencing an fps horror game in VR is about as scary as the experience can get in gaming.
In fps games a low field of view is simply something that has almost entirely come about as a result of technical constraints, reduce the field of view to help maintain the framerate and higher poly-count etc., and not good game design. Let's not give it false credit that it simply isn't due.
ZombiU is the worst game I own this generation. To imagine the port is going to be worse is a scary thought.
Zombi U was a masterpiece on Wii U, one of the best games ever, but without GamePad it sucks.
@shaneoh "This will just be another generic zombie game without the gamepad."
Yep, it definitely will. In my humble opinion the only slightly interesting left will be the perma-death mechanic, but with so many things missing, also local multiplayer and so on, it sure doesn't have a whole lot going for it...
@Kirk Well, I can't do anything but agree with your elaborate explanation of the field of view changes, so I stand corrected on that part.
But as a Resident Evil purist, I strongly feel that we mustn't touch upon its control mechanics: that's utter blasphemy!
So, should I get from your arguments that you didn't like the original Resi games?
Of course I agree with you that, like the field of view, it was by and large more of a technical shortcoming, but (as with many technical shortcomings throughout the existence of game consoles/platforms) more often than not, programmers found interesting and/or ingenious ways to use them in such a way that they could implement them in games to add to the experience. That's obviously besides the fact that not everyone was equally enthusiastic about it all the time, as our disagreement on the Resi control scheme clearly illustrates. To me, not being able to immediately get away from the zombies was indeed an added value where tension/fear was concerned.
And as a programmer yourself, you probably also know about a lot more of these tricks to either hide or incorporate technical shortcomings into games. (fog levels in 16 bit racing games, anyone?)
Seeing that trailer again makes me want to get the Wii U version.
@bezerker99 You should probably be able to pick it up for around ten bucks now, which in my humble opinion is definitely worth it. The graphics may not be the best on the Wii U, but it is definitely one of the few games on the Wii U that makes good use of the GamePad, in versatile ways that really add to the experience, if you really take the time to get into it. And local multiplayer "King of Zombies" is great fun...
@Kirk I can agree with most of your argument, however, stating that ZombiU in anyway pushed the Wiiu on a graphical level is plain comical. I would go as far as to say that the graphics in ZombiU are barely bett er than Resident Evil 4 for Gamecube. Even Metroid Prime looks better than ZombiU. I thoroughly enjoyed ZombiU and my only issues with it were the glitches, the under par graphics and the lack of consistency with the cricket bat damage. I had a game breaking glitch right at the end of the game on my first playthrough and the cricket bat would explode a Zombies head in one hit sometimes while taking as much as 8 hits on another. Oh and the glitch I experienced was not being able to use manholes after I dow load/uploaded the cure at the end of the game and died.
@TheRealThanos was there fogging in 16 bit games? I don't remember.
I remember n64 Top Gear Rally and Toruk being very foggy, and Saturn being the pop up era (although I don't knock the Sega Rally conversion)
@Kirk With regards to field of vision, I've never heard this complaint before, I personally have never thought about it before. It's a fair point, but I don't think that is down to Technical limitations of the Wii U
@Ootfan98 Remember Lotus Esprit Turbo Challenge 2 on the Amiga? They used fogging there in four different ways: a fog level, a night level, a sand storm level and a snow level. Obviously all different implementations, but all to mask pop up/pop-in or lack of view distance.
@TheRealThanos yes remember it well, but I thought that was done deliberately to create the effect for those specific climate conditions, not to cover up technical shortfall (the 1st stage didn't have fog)
On the subject of Magnetic Fields' games, I preferred Super Cars
@Kirk I personally thought the low field of vision added to the feeling of claustrophobia and the general murkiness of the game ; I assumed it was a design choice or down to the fact the game had been rushed for launch. There is no way the technical limitations of the Wii U had any bearing on how Zombie U looked or played. It was a mid budget upgrade with some decent gamepad integration. The gamepad , difficulty and the perma-death gimmick were the only things that lifted the game above mediocre , in my opinion. If Zombi is just a straight port of Zombie U then I cannot wait for all the gaming sites to go all Devils Third about it's visuals.
Im just gonna pick up the physical wii u copy
@Ootfan98 I never said anything about the first stage containing fog. I don't know the exact differences between the stages and why some had fogging as a "solution" and why not, but maybe I'll look it up later. I just vividly remember reading an article on it. (not specifically that game, just the use of fogging in 16bit games as a whole)
@TheRealThanos My point was that I think the Fog in Lotus 2 was intentional to create a weather affect, where as games like Turok and TGR used Fog (the whole game) to mask limitation in draw distance or pop up.
No offence intended
@Ootfan98 None taken. Another great example was Sega using the "rainbow colored spots" from antenna interference on the Genesis that appeared because of the CRT filter effect from the cables that connected it to the TV. They added all kinds of colors, hues and some other tricks to games that are partially lost when you play these games on a Hi-def/HD TV.
@TheRealThanos I didn't know that
@Ootfan98 Yeah, they had some nifty tricks back then to mask all sorts of technical limitations of various systems. Using scanlines was another one. Of course the hardware was way less complicated back then, but sometimes it does feel as if they put in a lot more effort to make games work back then than they do nowadays.
EDIT:
Using scanlines to create certain effects, I mean. I tried to find you some documentation on 16 bit programming tricks, but I came up empty handed. Amazing that articles that I found online somewhere last year are already gone or have vanished under a mountain of new search results...
Should have put that page in my favorites... Oh, well.
@TheRealThanos #118 I love Resi 2, but its controls are still garbage
Fog in general
@Kirk " ...but it's controls are still garbage"
I use that same line every time I die even though it is "not my fault"...
@firstnesfan #121 You're misinterpreting what I'm saying.
It's not really important if the Wii U is technically more capable than what we saw in ZombiU. I'm sure it is. What's important is that my assertion that the lower field of view is there as a technical consideration, chosen to ensure a smoother framerate or some other graphical aspect of the game, and not some kind of USP gameplay design feature as I presume you imagine it is. Hence why it's now been changed, i.e. fixed, for the version running on the more powerful consoles.
@Ootfan98 #122 It's not a technical limitation of the system, just the code of that particular game; such that they've resorted to using a lower field of view than is ideal in fps games to make sure it runs smoothly. Otherwise, I'm telling you, they would not have made the field of view so small—and the testament to that is the fact they've now made it bigger with the port of this game to more powerful consoles, where they obviously took some time to polish the code a bit more and also the fact it's just running on more powerful hardware now. If it was intentional by design, for added "atmosphere" and "tension" of whatever else people imagine it was there to create, then they obviously would have kept it the same when porting it to the other consoles. They didn't. They changed it, i.e. fixed it. That should tell you all you need to know.
@kingofthesofa #125 Again; it's not a technical limitation of the Wii U. It's a limitation imposed by this game, and possibly because it was rushed or something like that. With more efficient code or whatever I doubt it would be necessary at all; hence why it's not there in the version coming to the other consoles.
Don't allow yourself to be tricked, by whatever/wherever you're getting this notion from, into actually giving the developers praise for what is in fact a design limitation in the game, probably as a result of being slightly rushed and having unoptimised code, and imo it's an actual flaw that results in a slightly less pleasurable viewing experience, at an objective technical level based on good design principles around field of view etc.. It's not a USP; It's a limitation—and it has now correctly been addressed, at least partially.
I'd try it out on PS4 or Xbox One (when i get one). Its a decent game on Wii U. Im sure many ps4, xbox one and pc gamers will take the plunge and try it out. Its got a unique macaque so all will be well. It would be interesting to see what it is like when its released.
@Kirk Thanks for clarifying , I read it ( and it seems others might have ) as though you were referring to the technical limitations of the Wii U rather than the game. Looking at the Ubi blog , I have to agree with @TheRealThanos #89 , it seems they are taking away some of the difficulty of the game. On the blog it also states : “There has been a slight increase in the field of view, and players can increase and decrease it a little if they want to, but not so much that it takes away that claustrophobic feeling. Some work was also undertaken on the control mapping and response to improve the look and feel of the first-person movement.” So there might have been some intent from them with the field of view , although I agree with you that it was probably , in the main , done to mask shortcomings / save time. No download price as yet on the Ubisoft store.
They're obviously increasing the field of view to make the game easier like the other changes. The quote from the blog proves it. Its not about any limitations. It was all about the difficulty. Of course narrow field of view was in purpose to produce that claustrophobic feeling they are mentioning. They are ruining it now to make the game easier for the less than Nintendo core gamers.
@kingofthesofa Well, I'll give them a little benefit of the doubt and accept it was partly an intentional gameplay feature that they believed would give a sense of claustrophobia.
What I would say to the developers however is that this is inherently bad game design imo, if it was actually a design choice and not a constraint or slightly rushed programming, and it is an incorrect choice of solution to achieve the desired result.
As far as I'm concerned, in an fps game running on a 2D screen, something like claustrophobia should not achieved by reducing the field of view to the point it's kinda disorienting and makes it hard to read the environment visually at a gameplay level. All that does is reduce the player's viewing comfort slightly, which some people might incorrectly equate to atmospheric—but that's just the same as when people interpret unnecessarily slow and clunky controls, ie. bad, as adding tension; as though having bad controls is what creates good tension. This is a false correlation. Claustrophobia should be achieved by things like the lighting, the size of the rooms and environments, the height of the ceiling, the ambient noise, making the player crawl through tight spaces, having certain environments close in on them, using certain effects sparingly to create the impression the player is becoming dizzy and getting tunnel vision (as they might suffer from if they were suddenly feeling claustrophobic), etc.—basically all the things that would create such a sensation of claustrophobia, tension and panic in real life. By overly restricting the field of view they have added a falsely correlated gameplay constraint that I believe is detrimental to the play experience. It's subtle, and most people won't even realise it's a slightly worse experience than it would be with a slightly increased field of view, but it's definitely below the kind of range the field of view should be going into imo.
If this were a game on VR, developers would actually be nearly doubling the field of view, and more if they could, to bring it as close to a natural human field of view as possible. And playing in VR is all about immersion, and in horror games a sense of tension and claustrophobia or whatever, which tells you that lowering the field of view is not really the key to creating such atmosphere or a sense of claustrophobia; the design of the environments and gameplay is.
Maybe they had good intentions but they did the wrong thing in this particular case imo.
Here's a post with some people talking about how a low field of view can have a negative effect, in some cases actually making them sick if it's particularly bad, which directly correlates to their enjoyment of the game:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=508388
And this is a great example video explaining why field of view is so important:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blZUao2jTGA
This video then shows the difference in action and goes into a bit more detail too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPDq_qvsKUA
Note: Most of the examples focus more on PC but the same problems do affect console games.
So, yeah, basically; I don't think the lower field of view is a good design decision.
@kingofthesofa Interesting, but although I can understand the intentions of the developers, I agree with @Kirk that they have not gone about it in the correct manner. But it is typical that the option to reduce the field of view is also in this version, so the developers themselves probably still believe in it being a correct design choice...
@TheRealThanos I think they're probably just covering the bases now (keeping everyone happy), especially since they've already released a version with the lower field of view, which some people might interpret as being atmospheric and claustrophobic, such that you might get people complaining if it's not the same or if they don't at least have the option to make it the same. If you're going to have/add options like adjusting the field of view then you might as well give people the ability to choose stuff that goes to slight extremes in either direction, because there's a lot of people out there and some people will genuinely believe they are having a better experience with possibly a lower field of view than even the original game.
@Kirk Or that could be the reason. Then again: while lowering the frame rate, they could also add the "film reel vibe" by displaying dust and dirt particles on screen, shuddering images, shaky cam and what not, to give it that whole original, George A. Romero zombie vibe...
But that would probably be WAY too American for a zombie game taking place in London made by the French, of all people... (which is a bit of a shocker already, knowing how a lot of English people still feel about them)
@TheRealThanos That kind of stuff would be cool too. I think they've probably done some of that in the game actually; if I'm remembering it properly. Don't think the framerate needs to be lowered though, as again I think that's another false correlation that a lot of developers make. You can still give the player a fully smooth gameplay experience, in terms of maintaining a high framerate, while also creating the illusion it's got that old jittery cheap b-movie feel or whatever. I mean they don't film those old b-movies at a lower framerate than any other movies to create that feel (not that I'm aware anyway); they just create that feel lol
My personal view is always to achieve all this stuff via actual artistry and talent, which is ultimately what great game design is all about, rather than cheat by compromising the actual underlying game on a technical level in ways that don't actually give the best user experience. It's kinda like getting an actual artist to paint something, when you're looking for an authentic painted look to say your background art in a 2D game, instead of turning on the "paint" filter on a photo in Photoshop and trying to clumsily recreate the look and feel of a painting, which just ends up in a much lower quality overall, if you get me.
@Kirk I get you and I completely agree, but because we do not know what the programmers were thinking or going for at the time, it may have been a thing, As for movies: my previous jest may have some truth to it because if I'm not mistaken, movies are filmed at considerably higher frame rates now, and the original Romero zombie movies are from the 70's, so to recreate that exact feel, dropping the frame rate might actually do the trick to accurately replicate that, although I'm not very knowledgeable in that field, so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
I know it is possible to artificially recreate it, although it kind of goes over the top most of the time instead of being a realistic representation.
House of the Dead Overkill on Wii is a good example of that, I don't know if you ever played that game, but it was made in the 70's style but also kind of made fun of it, so in that aspect it wasn't a genuine effort towards recreating 70's zombie flicks, if you know what I mean...
@TheRealThanos Yeah, that's actually a good point regarding getting the feel of older movies, especially since many movies are filming in much higher framerates than in the past. That's a relatively new thing though, and I'm not sure how many filmmakers have even started using the higher framerates for filming yet.
In the case of retro style movies I would totally agree with just filming in the original/standard film framerate (although apparently some early silent movies were in 16fps ), because it's not actually detrimental to the experience—I mean we've been watching movies at 24fps for like a hundred years or something and no one has ever complained that movies were running in too low a framerate or whatever; so it should be just fine and dandy. The increase in framerate is largely a gimmick to be honest, and probably more useful now that we have gone digital as well as the increase in computer generated special effects. In non-interactive motion pictures, a lower framerate isn't much of a problem as long as the perception is that the film looks smooth enough that you can't perceive the individual frames—else you might end up with a kind of 'animatic' lol
With games however, the ideal framerate has basically always been 60fps, since the days of early arcades and NES etc., so you'd want to maintain that even in modern games that are trying to go for a retro feel, and probably even a movie feel too. The big difference is that games are interactive and have to respond instantaneously to player input, or else they feel unresponsive and laggy. 30fps is fine but if you can get 60fps without any issues you'd basically always choose that over 30fps.
House of the Dead Overkill was pretty cool actually. I wonder what framerate they used, probably 30fps I'd guess—Just because, Wii. I would however hope for 60fps because with arcade style gun games you really want instantaneous trigger-to-shot response time, over any kind of aesthetic styling or whatever.
@Kirk Some weeks ago I watched a program, I think it was on Discovery, where they showed a bit about frame rates and how it compares to the old days. In the age of the silent film they sometimes used cameras that had to be operated by turning a lever manually, so frame rates were all over the place. They invented some projector/reel system so that when the movie was displayed in theaters, the effect was a bit less obvious, but it is still very noticeable if you watch them, especially to us, since we're used to a much higher quality nowadays.
And I also enjoyed House of the Dead Overkill, but my point was that it was so much over the top that it was truly making fun of the sort of movie it tried to emulate, for example by overstating all the cliches that movie characters blurted out back then. It was serious (more or less) back then, in a "so bad it was good" manner, but it fitted the era.
The game took it an ran with it, but made it comical. And I also think the lower frame rate was intentional to recreate part of that feel. The other House of the Dead games on Wii (The House of the Dead 2 & 3 Return) ran smoother, and Overkill also used some screen filter to make it look older. I remember seeing an interview with the programmers on YouTube where they explained how they achieved that effect. Having said all that, it was a great little zombie shooter, and I finished it several times, both in single and in multiplayer.
@Kirk Found it!:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cKHkdIImi8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=91K9C8QheHg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Ua6n6aoWe8
@TheRealThanos I'll have a wee look at it...
They are probably porting with slight enhancements like 1080p, but it is already a 2 year old game. Xbox 360 and PS3 probably aren't much of a priority anymore. Completely 8th generation software has to happen eventually.
Show Comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...