I’ve recently played Resident Evil 6 for the 1st time after playing Resident Evil 4 (an absolute masterpiece) & Resident 5 (a pretty good game). I was already aware of the hate this game got over the years. But after experiencing it, it’s only bad in an artificial way. Like yeah, it’s nothing like the classic games and it’s too much in the action category.

Otherwise, as someone who loves action games, it’s a pretty fun game. Especially in Mercenaries Mode, where it’s fun to mow down body-horror themed enemies. As a Resident Evil game, it’s pretty bad. But…as an action third person shooter with splatter punks, it’s quite well executed

  • Malica@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    24 hours ago

    I really like the 90s Romeo and Juliet, set in present day with the lines unchanged (mostly). I’m alone in this, I think.

    • tigeruppercut@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 hours ago

      That was huge when it came out. Pretty much everyone I knew loved it. I think it only started getting shit on recently.

    • rmuk@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      I remember someone saying it’s like the Rockstar Games’ version of Romeo & Juliet. I liked it in general, but that 90-second or so prologue always gives me goosebumps.

    • DarkFuture@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      21 hours ago

      I’m alone in this

      Alone with every single girl coming of age in the 90s who swooned over it cuz of Leo “Heartthrob” DiCaprio.

      I skipped it back in the day but my gf made me watch it last year and I liked it. Very stylish.

        • lemmy_outta_here@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          19 hours ago

          Weirdly, I think that is a strength of his performance. Romeo is a misunderstood character: people associate him with romance and chivalry when the Romeo from the play is obsessive, fickle, and impulsive. Kind of a dweeb, really. Juliet fails to see through his bullshit because she is so, so young.

          • Malica@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            19 hours ago

            They’re both annoying af I think that’s half the joke. I’m a big fan of Shakespeare’s sense of humor.

    • Psythik@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      20 hours ago

      It was alright but the fact that they didn’t modernize the language is what ruined the film for me. Who the hell spoke like that in the 90s? It made no sense.

      • sunsofold@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        17 hours ago

        That’s… that’s the point. It’s Shakespeare’s words given modern visual elements to make it more comprehensible by a modern audience. It’s the prose of Romeo And Juliet that make it Shakespeare, not the swords and doublets.

        • Psythik@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          16 hours ago

          Yeah and as someone who hated Shakespeare back in my grade school days (and still does), I couldn’t care less about that. I simply want to see a modern take on his plays with the script translated to a prose that I can actually understand.

          As someone with ADHD, it’s difficult enough as-is to focus on words on a page written in a modern dialect, let alone an ancient one! Canterbury Tales was an even worse time for me because of this. I have to be fully invested in the story, or I can’t understand a damn thing in these old manuscripts because my brain refuses to pay attention to anything that isn’t urgent, interesting, or novel to me.

          • sunsofold@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            16 hours ago

            Are you aware you’re asking for something that cannot exist? If you don’t have the Shakespearean prose, it’s not Shakespeare. It’s the identifying element of the thing. You can bend and stretch many aspects of a work, but you can’t remove the identifying elements. For poets, like Shakespeare, their word choice is core to the identity of the work. The ‘story’ is almost meaningless.

            e.g. Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening and Loveliest of Trees have the same ‘story,’ a man takes a moment to appreciate the aesthetic qualities of a treed landscape in winter, but one would never say they were the same thing.

            • Psythik@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              15 hours ago

              Why not? If religious people can update the Bible translations to use modern English, why can’t we do the same with non-religious texts?

              • sunsofold@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                9 hours ago

                Because the goals are different. They aren’t trying to share the poetry of the various original authors of the bible. They are trying to share the stories of the christian mythos to enable/convince people to be christians. We can create things like a movie from a book or translate a book/movie and somewhat call it the same thing (though, even then, it also somewhat isn’t) because the story/plot is the identity of the thing and word choice is considered secondary, but in poetry, so much of what makes a poem itself comes down to individual words and punctuation marks, changing one can be significant, let alone changing the entire text.