Resistance Capcom Producer Praises The New Direction Of Project Resistance

[Caffeine Addict]

I no longer like RE4. At all! We should have gotten a definitive conclusion to the Umbrella storyline. Instead, Capcom acted like none of that even mattered.

Return to Silent Hill... as a slot machine.

Yep! Konami is at it again. Although Capcom are still in my bad books as well, I think Konami sucks. ?

 

[Evil Resident]

CAPCOM needs to professionalize the production of screenplays, storylines and dialogues. If I'm not mistaken, the original RE2 and RE7 were storylines produced by professional writers. After Mikami has left, the ideas have been rude, silly, childish and cheesy. In RE4, we have Leon pirouetting in the air, a dwarf dressed in Napoleon, a hybrid Alien and Predator monster, Franciscan monks armed with maces and shields, a Moria troll, a giant fish. Anyway, Mikami's trilogy gave at least one explanation of the effects of the virus produced by Umbrella's science and technology. Las Plagas were bacteria found underground.

Now, with this "Project", we have magical portals, mousetraps, X-Men and superpoweres , Mr. X boxing sonic booms, golden lickers, zombies with lasers eyes. Anyway, these are very bad and tacky decisions.

Mikami was director of RE4. His ideas have been some of the stupidest, and other talented writers were responsible for the good story aspects (like Kenichi Iwao, who wrote RE1) while Mikami takes the credit.
The english writer involved in RE7 just wrote the English script to sound natural. He didn't create the story.

Plaga are a macroparasite, not a bacteria. It's abilities are the the most outlandish, really.

The explanations behind the viruses in this series, while too not grounded in real science, are still consistent.

 

[Caffeine Addict]

RE4 however, is like the U-Turn of RE.

 

[TheBatMan]

However devisive, I think RE4 is a major reason the series is still going strong today. Without it Resident Evil would either be long dead or have been rebooted by now.

 

[Caffeine Addict]

Well, I like RE4 as an action game, but RE5 and especially 6 are pretty "Rank Hovis" (terrible) to me. I don't really like the story in RE4 and the enemies are among the most unusual for the series, and the merchant character is kind of stupid too. How does he get his stalls set up between areas, and how does he move around in general anyway? Meh! That aside, I'm also of the opinion that the series had to evolve somehow, to keep things looking brand new. Now that the action era has seemingly kind of came to an end, I think if there's enough demand, we could get another drift in the franchise if enough people start to whine about the new games being too much about horror, which could be why they went and became third person shooters in the first place.

One idea would be to have extra DLC with very action heavy scenarios, so they have a mix of both categories that can satisfy the fans. Otherwise, people will moan that the games have too much of this, and so little of that. You know? But one thing that gets to me is how they abruptly ended the Umbrella stoyline right as RE4 starts. When all of the other games helped to establish something, it was a huge waste in the long run to do something like this. Unless you count the Chronicles games. But hey, I know they kind of sucked.

 

[Evil Resident]

However devisive, I think RE4 is a major reason the series is still going strong today. Without it Resident Evil would either be long dead or have been rebooted by now.

Oh definitely. Say what you will about the story, but as a game it's near perfect for what it is, in my "closest to objective" opinion.

 

[Evil Resident]

One idea would be to have extra DLC with very action heavy scenarios, so they have a mix of both categories that can satisfy the fans. Otherwise, people will moan that the games have too much of this, and so little of that. You know?

They are trying to appease action fans with side games like PR or DLC like NaH, while the series primarily focuses on survival horror.

 

[Caffeine Addict]

Yeah, I know that. But some spin offs look nothing like the main games, and feel kind of gimmicky. I know they're lower budget games, but it would be more dignified for a fan to get something more worth their while. Like, say this had been an actual Outbreak sequel. That would have been Capcom keeping up that great streak. This to me could prove to be a forgettable game eventually. Only time will tell. I'm just saying that, from what I've seen, it's not typically what we've get from Resident Evil. So we're kind of concerned it's a cash-grab sort of thing.

 

[Mark5]

Yeah, I know that. But some spin offs look nothing like the main games, and feel kind of gimmicky. I know they're lower budget games, but it would be more dignified for a fan to get something more worth their while. Like, say this had been an actual Outbreak sequel. That would have been Capcom keeping up that great streak. This to me could prove to be a forgettable game eventually. Only time will tell. I'm just saying that, from what I've seen, it's not typically what we've get from Resident Evil. So we're kind of concerned it's a cash-grab sort of thing.

You see, even old fans have to understand companies have to focus on making some quick buck once in a while, and that´s because they have many investors and also other special projects with big budgets, so its natural for them to develop a lower budget title in between their most valuable games to get some cash (they sure need the money for a new numbered RE or a more respectable sub-series entry such as the Revelations games).
And also the fact Project Resistance is getting their attention now does not rule out that RE Outbreak won´t get a remake or reboot, so i don´t really get why fans get upset with Resistance... the worse thing will be if this game ends up getting mildly accepted by critics and fans of online 1vs4 game because the old fans will be cursing it, and say that Resistance took the spot that Outbreak deserved to take, but even then i don´t think fans should get so concerned, maybe the fans should just make sure to tell Capcom: "We want a classic Outbreak Resi to return, so please make that happen!" I´m sure if Capcom gets lots of fans demanding it, a new Outbreak game will be made!

 

[Caffeine Addict]

Personally, I hope they don't do something like this again, or at least not too often, in the same way I don't want another sequel like Resident Evil 4 to ever happen.

RE 4 is a great action game, but I kind of look back on it and see that as the beginning of "bad RE games" - and I know that's a bit harsh for me to say, as RE 4 isn't a bad game in general, or even a bad RE sequel per se. It's just that the story and gameplay kind of went way off track to the point where it began to intentionally disregard what the franchise started out as. Hell, Umbrella wasn't even a thing when the game started. They're just mentioned very briefly by Leon before his mission gets underway in Europe, and then the actual game is unrelated to the previous titles. It sort of made them irrelevant, in a sense, and it took Capcom a long time to kind of realize that they did screw up in some places by altering the story, and making them about shooting, and co-op, and upgrading your weaponry.

I mean, it just felt really stupid to me how every enemy that got killed would suddenly drop money, points and bullets. And people are gonna say that this is what occurs in action games. Yeah, I guess, but if you hike back mentally to RE 1 etc, the zombie cops and soldiers didn't even drop anything for you to use. Some had fuel cans strapped to them, which was a blessing or a curse, but still. Zombies didn't drop stuff, and you had to find ammo in lockers and drawers for example. It was just Nemesis that dropped things as a reward in a sense, and also Mr. X in RE 2. So that's why I'm glad that Capcom eventually did away with that kind of gimmicky stuff. It really had nothing to do with the fundamentals of what RE was meant to be. But that's just my opinions.

 

[Mark5]

I mean, it just felt really stupid to me how every enemy that got killed would suddenly drop money, points and bullets. And people are gonna say that this is what occurs in action games. Yeah, I guess, but if you hike back mentally to RE 1 etc, the zombie cops and soldiers didn't even drop anything for you to use. Some had fuel cans strapped to them, which was a blessing or a curse, but still. Zombies didn't drop stuff, and you had to find ammo in lockers and drawers for example. It was just Nemesis that dropped things as a reward in a sense, and also Mr. X in RE 2. So that's why I'm glad that Capcom eventually did away with that kind of gimmicky stuff. It really had nothing to do with the fundamentals of what RE was meant to be. But that's just my opinions.

What you meant is consistency with internal logic of gameplay (but really i don´t think 4 biggest problem was with the new gameplay, but rather the thin links with prior RE universe stories).
You see, RE 4 variety and lots of ways to dispatch enemies, the quick melee assistances and use the environment was really a game changer and brought lots more fans to the franchise.
In order to appeal to the public i guess they need to keep gameplay with fluid dynamic, although usually survival horror tries to restrain a bit player capabilities to fight off enemies and be more on the run, however previous games suffered a bit from not having as many enemies or having simpler AI, zombies specially could be avoided way too easy, its just a glaring limitation specially obvious when comparing RE 2 classic with RE 2 Remake, remake´s zombies are really tougher and put up a fight (they really are as much a threat then any other type of enemies on harder difficulties).

I kind of agree though that RE 4 featuring ganados dropping itens or money isn´t exactly what was expected for RE, and feels kind of out of place, but still i think there should be some form of incentive, mainly through gaining experience points while the player progress through sections of the game, with a ranking system and also some sort of upgrade system to weapons similar to what was implemented on TLOU or RE Revelations 2.
But i´m usually a fan of how Capcom always tried to include some new features into each new entry to the series, and even how some of those connect with their main inspirations to RE (take for instance the way ammo could be combined in RE 3 or how Zero implements partner zapping and leaving items almost anywhere mainly inspired by Sweet Home, the game that is NES "RE grandfather".) I´m not saying some of those changes are inherently better for the game, but its good that it makes for each game of the series having its own "special thing" or identity.
I keep thinking however if future RE could rely on interesting new type of mechanics to enhance the survival horror aspect but still keep gameplay fluid and engaging, one of the things i think they could experiment with is make the player deal with a system that for each new weapon or ability you gain you also need to deal with a drawback, although a few games touch upon the premise of loosing all your main weapons for a section and such, i think one really interesting but hard to pull off mechanic such as a limiting factor to gameplay could enhance survival horror gameplay if done right, and almost instantly make players more aware of how to strategically deal with what they can or can´t do to progress through the game. One interesting example to this mechanic is the game "Sinner: Sacrifice for Redemption".

 

[Caffeine Addict]

In my opinion, I think Capcom should have did RE 4 about the downfall of Umbrella, then RE 5 should have had the plot of RE 4, and then I would have been okay for the series to move forward. What they actually did was release an on-rails game, and not everybody enjoys those kind of games. To me, it was like Capcom just wanted to convert everything into a shooter, as RE 4 started that concept in 2005. But I just feel that they should have did it more properly. It's like what they did with the movie Freddy's Dead: The Final Nightmare. They wrote the real Elm Street off, and made out Freddy went to look for another Elm Street in other towns. So it just skipped over everything that was built upon throughout the franchise.

 

[Mark5]

Back in the early 2000's Sugimura was planning for each of Umbrella's founders to be tied into the storyline with their own game's ( Ashford's in Code Veronica, Marcus in Zero and finally Spencer in RE 4) but when the first version of 4 became PS2's Devil May Cry, much of the story was modified, they went to Gamecube and that's when the project went through the hurdles of RE 4 Castle version.
The developers were not satisfied with how Progenitor Virus black mist was put into the game, probably the engine had some graphic limitations back then.
Also both RE 1 Remake and RE Zero did not perform exceptionally well, upon release the critics seemed to bash at Zero somewhat, saying the survival horror formula was getting stale, so to me this is why Capcom and Shinji Mikami reformulated RE4 to more of an action adventure game. And by that time they had to deliver whatever a product, and that's probably why 4 storyline was kind of shoehorned and not really what fans who followed the series were expecting.
As others said before, this was the right decision because otherwise the game would probably underperform and the RE series could've been permanently cancelled.

 

[Caffeine Addict]

Still. It was a pity to mess up such a well established story. I think a lot of the sequels are soft reboots anyway. They do reference other games, but the plot is usually disconnected overall to where it feels more like fan service.