Resident Evil 7

It'd even out or decrease depending. I.E. all of the proper true Resident Evil fans, both hardcore and average alike (I consider myself average as I've played most of the titles but not every single one.) will leave the franchise all together while the new "casual" fanbase will take their place or not quite meet the requirement. Or it'd increase and become the false fanbase. Much like how I don't think most "fans" of Metroid haven even played any of the games, as much as just oogle over Samus Aran fanarts of her in the moronic Zero Suit and develop a twisted vision of who Samus truly is.

I have met true Metroid fans, and heck I'm about to join the beta testing of a Metroid 1 Nes romhack that goes above and beyond the call of rom hacks. That is once the file is ready for the final beta testing and then move onto the final release. It'll be the best "new" Metroid game we're gonna get, and while Samus isn't the lead of this romhack, it's a rare exception of where that really isn't an issue. Look up Metroid Rogue Dawn and you'll see what I mean.

But yeah, the "casual" gamer market is a bit of a problem. Mostly because of the fact is that, well while it is sad that some gamers sadly can't play video games, that's kinda the key point. They simply can't play video games. If you're a person who's able to play just about every single type of genre of game without issue, then ok, more power to you. But there are those who can't play video games at all very well, and at times can't even play a particular generation of games.

Me? Well, again I consider myself average. I primarily excel at platformer titles like Mario, Castlevaina, Mega Man, Sonic, Metroid, Contra, list goes on. 2D or 3D, side scrolling shooter, third person shooter, point and click adventure games(Where you can SEE who you're playing as. Is anyone else getting fed up with all the stupid hidden object games that are "considered" adventure games?) action RPGs, I'm ok with some FPS games but I tend not to get into too many of them. But I can not for the life of me play traditional RPGs. I'm just not good at them. Do I hate them? No! In fact particular franchises I like are RPGs for the characters and stories, I just sadly can't experience them as a proper gamer.

But I can switch between old and new games at the drop of a hat. A lotta people seem to struggle with that and I do feel sorry for them but otherwise at this point I'm able to adapt to a game's gameplay unless it's just relentlessly unforgiving and more or less busted in some fashion. I.E. buggy or bad programming that no amount of skill helps. I can also do beat em ups but some of these are pretty darn brutal. Mostly a bit because of their technical limitations. Or are intentionally designed that way. I.E. I never played Streets of Rage back when it was released and while I was growing up but played it a few years ago and recently, pretty much mastered it after a bit of practice. Might still die a few times but I rack up a ton of lives in the process so it doesn't matter too much.

But thing is some of these gamers who can't really play particular types of games, especially one particular one who basically bashes old classic games because they "are old" and all that jazz and basically berates you for being, well, born and enjoyed these games when they were made like a big stuck up Mr. know it all jerk. Sure he doesn't outright say that but it's more than a little implied that's exactly what he means. I understand some people grow up under different circumstances and might not get into gaming until later in their life but does that give them a right to trash and berate games and gamers that grew up on them just because they didn't and can't seem to get into it?

That's a bit of a big resounding no I'd say. A bit of a random tangent but I suppose what I'm getting at is that and this is a pretty big misconception by a lot of people, not every game is for everyone. In the end I say forgo looking at reviews of games of people just giving their "opinions and personal take" and try out certain games for yourself. It really does heavily depend on if a game is actually legitimately BAD. Like, let's take the sequel to Flashback, Fade to Black. It is a bit different from Flashback but it still retains most of the elements of the title and I admit, it is pretty challenging. But once you master the controls, after picking one of the control schemes (Expert 1 gives you all the controls onto each button.) and it has a save function where you can save anywhere at anytime even without a memory card so you don't have to restart the stage from scratch.

Only "one" particular stage in the game ever gave me any real trouble but the rest? I didn't have nearly that much trouble with it as much as people would lead you to believe. And the biggest point I'm getting at here is that, well, even IF this Resident Evil 7 game turns out to be "ok" or "mediocre" for some people, it'll be bad for other reasons especially for Resident Evil fans like us whom have played the original titles just about to present date. I myself haven't even touched 5 or 6 yet but I own Resident Evil 1 in the forms of it's DS port, GameCube remake, Resident Evil 2's GameCube port, a PS1 copy of Resident Evil 3, PS2's Code Veronica X, most versions of 4 almost, PC versions of Revelations 1 and 2 and that's about it. I have dabbled slightly into the Outbreak series but anything else, nope. But even then with that this game feels like an utter sham. And with some franchises, it'll take more than "fun, decent gameplay" for us to consider it good. If a game makes you feel miserable throughout the game because of the characters and or story, then not even the supposedly "superb" gameplay can save it. I'm looking at two particular titles in this instance for that but I won't name names.