He's correct about RE6!

Doing Indie stuff does plenty to open your eyes about game development.

Reading or watching stories about game development also helps a lot.

Recurring elements could be seen as "recycling" to make it easier on the development but outsiders who have no game development experience will mistakenly see it as an "identity that is being preserved".
It could be a case of "identity" if we asked the developers directly but the fact that a lot of recurring elements can be discarded at the drop of a hat shows it's not an "integral identity" factor.

Maybe someone out there will think that "if an old fan of the original RE2 works on the remake, it will be much more faithful" but we can see that is not the case.
Every now and then i see some making of videos where developer can go in depth about the game development process, and that is kinda of a good way for people to get to know better the gaming industry.

I am just not sure why you said the fans that worked on RE 2 (2019) ended up making the new version not faithful to the original?
Isn't the director, the script writer and those closer to them on development the most important people in order to see what is deemed to be faithful enough for all team to pursuit in making the game?

I know this is debatable but overall the gaming community considered RE 2 superior to RE 3 in terms of remakes or "reimagined" version.

Still i wonder if the decision of doing this new RE 2 was mostly due to 2 reasons:
1) the demand for a remake since the sales of RE 1 Remake HD Remaster?
and
2) the developers from Capcom, now with RE Engine, wanted to make a Remake to test how good of a game they could get using the over the shoulder view perspective with the new engine?

ok, since I don't know if those were mostly the reasons why, just my suspicions, maybe you guys/gals from the community here could elaborate further.
Also aside from a money/business perspective do you have an opinion about what Capcom should focus? Proper new iterations or remakes/reimaginations?
Do you feel it's a good opportunity to add new elements for instance if a RE 5 or RE 6 gets a reimagination or it's just going too far and they should get RE 4 and that's already as far as it should go, if a bit out of hand?
 
Man, it's 2020 and people are still defending this cookie cutter, half-baked, soulless BS that has infested my top franchise. Maybe Mark5 and I are among the relatively few fans who understand what the franchise is supposed to actually represent.

Who honestly liked the two rushed, development hell remakes we got, or this first person hillbilly crap? That's just Capcom clutching at straws when it comes to incorporating new ideas. The last several games they published have either stolen ideas from other games, or just been blatantly unworthy of being associated with the series in general. Like those God awful spin off titles. Plus, I don't care for a guy with a face we don't even see.

There have been times where I have been on the verge of quitting with Capcom, because since Shinji Mikami left them high and dry all of those years ago, the series has delved into a real convuluted mess that is hardly making any sense. Now they're going back to Raccoon City with a new movie, that's a reboot. Talk about a cash cow. Uh!
 
Man, it's 2020 and people are still defending this cookie cutter, half-baked, soulless BS that has infested my top franchise. Maybe Mark5 and I are among the relatively few fans who understand what the franchise is supposed to actually represent.
Mr. Caffeine, maybe I did not make myself very clear but i don't have any problem with Capcom, even if my opinion is really that most of the newer games do lack the flair and charm of the classics i am not pissed about it because times have changed, because time does exactly that, it changes most of what we once had with high steem, i grew up playing many of these games, not only RE games, but the classic games of the nineties, the Genesis, Super Nes and PS1 era but i know that due to nostalgia that made me see that era with rose tinted glasses, and maybe that is why fans can end up feeling "betrayed" but trust me, the best thing one can do in that situation is exactly as some has said, don't feel it as personal to you, and just use that energy for better things, i for one decided some time ago focus on my personal growth, and set goals for next year, and down the line i think this will improve my life and also for the ones around me.
Maybe next year I'll not be around much on the forums here, but I'll make sure to come discuss a bit when Village gets released.
 
Who honestly liked the two rushed, development hell remakes we got, or this first person hillbilly crap?
Resident Evil 7 is my favorite game in the series. I like the new Resident Evil 2 as much as the original. I liked the new Resident Evil 3 better than The Umbrella Chronicles, although less than the original.
 
I am just not sure why you said the fans that worked on RE 2 (2019) ended up making the new version not faithful to the original?
I didn't say that.

I said:
"Maybe someone out there will think that "if an old fan of the original RE2 works on the remake, it will be much more faithful" but we can see that is not the case."

When I mean "faithful", I meant the RE2 remake having the same mechanics the original, such as fixed camera and wide-hitscan shooting.

Still i wonder if the decision of doing this new RE 2 was mostly due to 2 reasons:
It was Hirabayashi who pushed for it.
He was the one who wrote the pitch/design document to submit to Capcom back in 2015.

To put into perspective: if he didn't pitch for the game, development would have never begun.
There was no sign of anyone ever showing interest in remaking RE2.

Sales of REmake HD has nothing to do with it.
Hirabayashi has been wanting to remake RE2 even before Capcom released REmake HD.
As I said, it's something one would pick up if they followed interviews with Hirabayashi over the years.

understand what the franchise is supposed to actually represent.
What is the franchise supposed to represent?
 
OK. I am on my phone, so this response won't be very lengthy.

If you play the original, it's atmospheric, or the 2002 remake, which is a better example, the games both have great ambiance, feel intense, feel scary, have memorable lines, at least a dozen enemies, awesome characters, and a great plot that draws you in from the start. Not to mention the original game's opening scene was pretty amazing for a game out in 1996.

RE7 has two enemies. The Molded (which all look mostly the same) and the Bakers. Now the Bakers are interesting and in themselves, quite intense. But it doesn't quite have that old RE feeling. Going from RE6 to that style is weird, as people have a hard time accepting they are meant to be related games. For the most part, they really are not.

The remakes had no build-up. Things played out so differently. For example, when Jill meets Nicholai, in the original, he has vibes of a villain, but he didn't exactly announce it so soon. In the remake, everything felt like a video on fast forward. There was little character development. Everything just happens, as if Capcom thought that it would appeal to mostly the OG fanboys and girls, who were already familiar with the game's history. It was very watered down. They also removed features from the RE2 remake, cut out a lot of enemies, made Nemesis look and act stupid, and it was just a horrible mess. And like I so often say, they keep returning to 1998 to milk it more. It's pretty much time they just moved ahead. But I don't think they know how themselves.
 
Well, Grim Fandango was released in 1998 and makes every Resident Evil game from the 1990s and early noughties look like a silly porn movie.

It may be a shock to some, but it happens that a person can play games in the Resident Evil series from childhood and, suddenly, have a different opinion.
 
OK. I am on my phone, so this response won't be very lengthy.
Could you be more specific about what the franchise is supposed to represent, like maybe listing down traits?
I don't know what you're getting at with your last post.

It may be a shock to some, but it happens that a person can play games in the Resident Evil series from childhood and, suddenly, have a different opinion.
I've been playing since 1996 and Resident Evil was one of the reasons I bought a PlayStation in the first place.
Always amuses me when people in GameFAQs or Capcom Unity assume I'm a "newbie who started from RE4" just because I show support to the modernization of the series.
 
To put into perspective: if he didn't pitch for the game, development would have never begun.
There was no sign of anyone ever showing interest in remaking RE2.

Sales of REmake HD has nothing to do with it.
Hirabayashi has been wanting to remake RE2 even before Capcom released REmake HD.
Yes, Hirabayashi was the one who pushed for the RE 2 Remake I remember seeing the "we do it" video that was the official confirmation from them the game was going to get a remake, the guy who confirmed it was Hirabayashi, right?

About no one wanting to remake RE 2, that is solely correct if you meant anyone working for Capcom but I recall Invader Games doing what could be considered a "Remake" of RE 2, and that they eventually got to meet people from Capcom offices, which is interesting since after the meeting Invader Games obviously no longer worked at their RE 2 project, but Invader used that experience to develop Daymare 1998.
 
Well, Grim Fandango was released in 1998 and makes every Resident Evil game from the 1990s and early noughties look like a silly porn movie.

It may be a shock to some, but it happens that a person can play games in the Resident Evil series from childhood and, suddenly, have a different opinion.
Nicely said Russident, but when I was younger I played mostly PS1 and had a not so good PC, so back then i didn't play LucasArts games but as I got older i was able to go back and see that even around that same era we had games that had much better design and higher production values, but my vision then was from a teen and as I got older i got deeper into it and when I got a job now i had the means to use my money to buy games and a pc good enough to play the games that surpassed PSOne.
 
Last edited:
Since the day I got the Internet, there hasn't been a single game in the series that hasn't been criticized and hated. Despite the fact that I enjoyed these games, I once believed that people are right. I understood how different certain games were, so I started using this to prove that the series had changed for the worse.

But then Resident Evil 7 came out, which brought back classic mechanics, metroidvania and a sense of fear, and I realized that nothing had changed. Capcom are releasing games that I enjoy, and people are constantly complaining because they idealize classic games and can't think of anything but the sensations from memories that can't be brought back.

So, yes. I like these games. And I see no reason why I shouldn't like them: they are high-quality and interesting.
 
I dont think you needed to create a separate thread for this video. You could have simply posted it to " Happy birthday Re6! " thread instead.

But anyways; good video that ı agree with.
 
Well, I really enjoyed Revelations 2 and I think that's among my favourite RE games. That's because it was atmospheric, finally had Barry playable, and actually had Albert Wesker's sister. All in all, it was just such a fantastic game, that I couldn't really hate it. But if they could retain third person, and not make it so linear and garbage the next time, I may start enjoying the franchise again. But I think the problem is that they just want to go back to Raccoon City over and over again, because RE2 is so popular.

I called in on Skype last night to talk to Michael Does Life and he agreed. They go back to 1998 because that's when the series was booming. But banking off of nostalgia ultimately isn't doing them many favours. They cannot just keep doing remakes, or copying whatever is trending. But I suppose all forms of media more or less has that practice anyway.
 
Since the day I got the Internet, there hasn't been a single game in the series that hasn't been criticized and hated. Despite the fact that I enjoyed these games, I once believed that people are right. I understood how different certain games were, so I started using this to prove that the series had changed for the worse.

But then Resident Evil 7 came out, which brought back classic mechanics, metroidvania and a sense of fear, and I realized that nothing had changed. Capcom are releasing games that I enjoy, and people are constantly complaining because they idealize classic games and can't think of anything but the sensations from memories that can't be brought back.
Your text pretty much sums it up, RE over the years suffered this case of divided opinions within it's fan base, sadly but I still think that even when that part of fans complain they still always come back for more.
 
Also, just for the record, I will never stop buying and playing RE games, even if the games end up more dog shit than they already have been at various times over the last few decades. It's my favourite series.

In fact, I don't play an awful lot of non horror games anyway. Therefore, it hardly matters. But I just know Capcom is gonna keep copying stuff. It's not like they give a flying frog's butt about how we feel in any case. They go where the money is to be made, so that's that.
 
I know this thread was more about RE 6, but i just saw a video and i think that it would be nice to share here.
i´ll say first that while i enjoyed RE 2 and RE 3 newer "versions" Capcom´s stance of considering them canon really messes the usual timeline, any old fan can see how it reeks of inconsistency, with RE 3 suffering the major blow through and through.
Although all they say doesn´t really bother me, and i still like the reimaginings of both RE 2 and RE 3, i can understand why the people who love the RE lore with a vengeance got so upset about the major changes that happened to the lore because of these reimaginings now being considered overlapping with old games. So i still like Capcom and all the games
but that stuff about lore they should clarify.

There´s almost no complain about timeline and all the RE universe rich backstory, files, etc, and to me that´s one of the strongest points of the games, and its almost a miracle, and one of the key aspects why RE still goes on after so long, but if that´s one thing i had to nitpick, that would be it (but again, not that this bothers me so much, you know, at least not anymore since you know, basically its just a videogame, at the end of the day, it shoudn´t matter that much to anyone, i think that´s the healthiest way one should go through their gaming life/hobby).

 
Last edited:
But then Resident Evil 7 came out, which brought back classic mechanics, metroidvania and a sense of fear, and I realized that nothing had changed. Capcom are releasing games that I enjoy, and people are constantly complaining because they idealize classic games and can't think of anything but the sensations from memories that can't be brought back.
Even back in 1998 to early 2000's, people were already complaining that RE2 & RE3 was "too much action".
Just goes to show that people will complain about anything.

I remember reading an old review from that time-frame about RE3 and the reviewer says "I don't like this "new style" of RE and I hope they don't continue this in future titles".
He's in for a surprise with RE4, ha ha.
 
I know this thread was more about RE 6, but i just saw a video and i think that it would be nice to share here.
i´ll say first that while i enjoyed RE 2 and RE 3 newer "versions" Capcom´s stance of considering them canon really messes the usual timeline, any old fan can see how it reeks of inconsistency, with RE 3 suffering the major blow through and through.
Although all they say doesn´t really bother me, and i still like the reimaginings of both RE 2 and RE 3, i can understand why the people who love the RE lore with a vengeance got so upset about the major changes that happened to the lore because of these reimaginings now being considered overlapping with old games. So i still like Capcom and all the games
but that stuff about lore they should clarify.

There´s almost no complain about timeline and all the RE universe rich backstory, files, etc, and to me that´s one of the strongest points of the games, and its almost a miracle, and one of the key aspects why RE still goes on after so long, but if that´s one thing i had to nitpick, that would be it (but again, not that this bothers me so much, you know, at least not anymore since you know, basically its just a videogame, at the end of the day, it shoudn´t matter that much to anyone, i think that´s the healthiest way one should go through their gaming life/hobby).

Well, it was a hot time when the remake of the second game was released. I'll never forget it.

But I want to say that I may have a little understanding of what Capcom means when they say that games exist at the same time.

If you look at the latest remake, a lot of things are completely new. Not retcons that rewrite old knowledge, but new locations. For example, the game has a cafe where they sell donuts. At first I thought it was the same place where one version of Jill meets Carlos, just rewritten. But no, the crab restaurant is still in the remake, we're just not allowed in.

So is the Bard's lab: it's not a factory. Even the railgun was named differently and has a different origin. It seems to me that this was done with a certain intent: to show an alternative scenario. Show Jill's alternate path, which adds another interpretation to an already unreliable story.

On the one hand, the game is a remake, so the authors supported the thematic parallel and added tyrants and a railgun, on the other — Sergei could still send tyrants to the factory, the Americans could still assemble their gun. These elements exist in parallel.

I also don't think the remake rewrites Survivor, since I didn't see any direct contradictions in the game regarding the production of tyrants.
 
Top Bottom