He's correct about RE6!

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.
I think an alternate path is a good explanation but that leaves open to interpretation which is the true one canonically, since we have books that deal specifically with that (Archives and Archives II) so in my view the best way to avoid extra confusion about it would be releasing another archives book that defines properly if 2 and 3 remakes do alter canon with their peculiar paths and timetable, or even if the remake just adds news description for places to Raccoon City but discards parts of it when those details or events clash with what was already deemed canon before.
 
Last edited:
I wished re6 didnt get the reception it got. Re7 would have been very different and a possible sequel to re6 that way if the game received more positive reception.

A shame really not to mention capcom wanted jake as the main character for re7 before discarding that idea.
 
I wished re6 didnt get the reception it got. Re7 would have been very different and a possible sequel to re6 that way if the game received more positive reception.

A shame really not to mention capcom wanted jake as the main character for re7 before discarding that idea.
As far as I know, RE7 came out the way it came out, because Jun Takeuchi wanted a scary game in the style of The Evil Dead, and not because RE6 was shit or something in the style of comments from the Internet.

The series rarely makes direct sequels, actually. I noticed this when Wesker's Umbrella was ignored in RE5. Or when RE6 didn't develop the storyline of Dr. Wesker's children, but instead introduced new villains.

I also had no doubt that RE7 would be about something different and with a different approach. It's up to the development team to decide what game they want to make next. And everyone has their own ideas.
 
So sorry for reviving this but a thought came into my mind and ı want to say it here.

Personally ı never liked the " return to the roots " statement used by fans; especially when it's used for re7. Imo the so called " roots " of re isnt about survival horror, it's about biohazards. With that capcom can create anything, either survival horror or action games. That's what makes the series fresh to me.

I dont like statements like " True re game " , " Good game, bad re game " either. The only re game that's not resident evil ı think is umbrella corps which is the only bad re game imo. There are more games ı dont like but ı wouldnt say they are bad, they are mediocre instead.
 
Well, this ain't really the time or the place to target his opinions. While I don't agree with him, he is still allowed to say how he feels.

I mean, I don't like how a lot of fanboys support some of the nonsense that Capcom incorporated into the franchise. Nemesis on YouTube is another one who talks a lot to make himself sound good. He said for years that Capcom were money grabbers and I do remember him saying he would not purchase the RE2 remake. Now he gets interviews with the voice actors, does the odd stream on Twitch, and very rarely ever makes rant videos defending the sad state of the series anymore. It's a shame, but I think that BioDevil_Dom and Renegade Operative corrupted him into being that way. But I am not a shill at all. Like, I stand by what I said about the nonsense that plagues the franchise wrecking it, like these merchants having the power to teleport around. The Duke especially. Uh!

With that said, I declared myself semi-retired from posting RE rants at the end of March. It's just because there comes a time when you have to say, "Fudge it! It's just a game!" Life is too short to dwell on these faceless airheads that pollute the Internet and one of them from Australia, actually stalks me. But, yes. Fanboys online aren't easy to deal with. It's like whatever Capcom makes, they're gonna follow the pack anyway. :)
 
Another reason why the game is underrated imo is due to the fact that it's directed by eiichiro sasaki ( Who directed outbreak games. ) and written by shotaro suga. ( Who wrote the 1st 2 cgi films as well as darkside chronicles. ) I always thought outbreak games, darkside chronicles as well as the 1st 2 cgi films are underrated just like re6.

I think the story is good cause characters are likeable, campaigns connect to each other ( unlike re2 2019 ) , good character development, underrated villains, nice backstory within the files etc. It even has a manga dedicated to it.
 
I like the in-between segments in both Chronicles games, but I detest the retelling parts. Some are just outright silly. I get why they changed the story, but it was a bit dumb in parts.
 
It’s still a bit jarring to even watch the Chronicles segments in between main games, like they should of been extra scenarios in their respective games.

The whole Beginnings and Nightmare scenario’s are grey canon. Wesker never fights the proto-tyrant Birkin sent after Rebecca and Billy. Richard was bitten in the East Wing of the Mansion not the West Wing Library. In Death’s Door, Ada never encounters the Mr. X from End of the Road. It’s a bit of a nonsensical mess in that regard.

These were mentioned in threads at the old Biohaze when it was argued whether Chronicles were canon or not. But alas this is supposed to be an RE6 thread so I’ll cut it here.
 
I only mentioned darkside chronicles though instead of both chronicles. Umbrella chronicles is written by re5's writer, haruo murata.

Personally ı liked both re2 and recv sections, especially when considering that they feel improved from umbrella chronicles' retelling sections. Sure they may not be fully accurate but that's cause the game is a low budget spinoff and not fully including every tiny piece of little detail is understandable due to this. Not to mention they are memories of leon.

I definitely agree that the retelling sections of umbrella chronicles are disappointment but ı still like wesker and hunk episodes. Death's door is ok but compared to wesker / hunk episodes, it isnt as interesting. Also the extra episodes are %100 canon. No reason why they cant be. The retellings are grey canon instead. Files of chronicles games are also %100 canon btw.
 
The retellings are grey canon instead.
Interestingly, the concept of "grey canon" was brought by the administrator of Resident Evil Wiki, because she is a fan of Star Trek, and the community of this franchise often uses this concept during discussions. But she brought it to describe radio dramas and other sources, the canonicity of which is definitely unreliable. As for the retellings and new remakes, they were always absolutely canonical and none of the developers questioned this, as far as I remember.
 
What other sources?

Also if retellings and reimaginings are canon; then we might as well accept gaiden and reorc canon too. Especially the latter. Reorc for example has footage shown at marhawa desire manga. Idk but ı dont think reimaginings' status are reliable either. At least retellings are confirmed to be memories of wesker / leon so that confirms that they are grey canon. Meanwhile the reimaginings arent memories of anyone and they have conflicting info with other titles which cant be excused unlike chronicles retellings.

Like for example:

" RE:2 conflicts with the entire Desperate Times scenario of Outbreak File 2 and the 1969 construction of the R.P.D. conflicts with that game's 1980s date. Ada's false death was clarified as being due to the Tyrant rather than the fall, RE:2 conflicts with her BIO3 scar. Wesker's Report says HUNK found Sherry's G sample thrown away by Leon after he got it from Sherry. In BIO2 and the Chronicles games, the Tyrant was mainly sent to recover Sherry's pendant sample, but the pendant doesn't even have the virus in RE:2.

RE:3 conflicts with BIO3 even more explicitly. Tyrell Patrick is essentially a completely different character. It changes a lot of established names to the point it's hard to tell what some are even meant to be replacing. The P-12A Waste Incineration Plant is "Raccoon Nuclear", conflicting with Umbrella Chronicles. Then there are countless lore changes like the nature of the railgun, NEST2, Nathaniel Bard, etc. In both games, the events of 0&1 are mostly ignored and all the old connections to the original game are gone, like Ada's cover. The Archives books are essentially the series story bibles which the developers have used for the past 15 years, but the reimaginings contradict much of them. "

" OG RE3 has all the hospital staff dead by Sep 26th. Remake 3 files has the hospital still operating and treating patients on Sep 29th, the same day Leon and Claire arrive in town, meaning The Hive scenario in Outbreak physically cannot occur. Likewise the newspaper in Remake 3 reports only the third zombie attack incident this month on Sep 25 - thats a whole day after the military blockaded the city in OG 3 and two days after the army of zombies was blown up on Main St.


Remake 3 treats Outbreak like it never happened, yet compensates by throwing in easter egg references with its locations etc. "

News bot's and thebatman's statements.

Another thing is before the release of re2 2019; some of the pages for characters at re wiki werent using any statement from chronicles retellings. Why? But with the release of re2 2019; some of the pages started using " This section is based on a game with branching story paths, or several games with conflicting accounts. For more detail on differing portrayals, see this page. " statement. This is another reason why ı think that reimaginings arent canon in a similar fashion to reorc. Which are what if alternative takes on re2 and re3's events just like that game.

About re2; the definitive version is og game and the canon version is a mix of all 4 scenarios. ( Mostly claire a and leon b but some elements from leon a and claire b is canon. Like claire saying " Chris. I have to find you. " at the end which fits better to one of re3's epilogue files. ) As for re3; the definitive version is og game once again and it's the canon version.
 
What other sources?
For example, the light novel The Wicked North Sea and the film Executor.

Also if retellings and reimaginings are canon; then we might as well accept gaiden and reorc canon too.
I think there was a confirmation somewhere that Operation Raccoon City is not a canonical game. However, I really don't know much about this game.

Speaking of Gaiden, this game was not considered in the chronology even before the release of Resident Evil 4, so its canonicity was always questioned in the community.

Idk but ı dont think reimaginings' status are reliable either.
Yoshiaki Hirabayashi and Peter Fabiano clearly said that the games are canonical.

1340

Meanwhile the reimaginings arent memories of anyone and they have conflicting info with other titles which cant be excused unlike chronicles retellings.
You see, the point is not whether the new remakes conflict with other sources or not, but which sources are relevant to the chronology and which are not. All the scenarios of the first game and its remake also conflict with other sources, but they are still canonical.
 
Another thing that ı really liked in this game is the campaign connecting sections. It handles its multiple campaigns best compared to other entries with multiple scenarios imo. I wished re2 2019 also had scenarios that connected to each other just like re6.

Though ı still dont understand how og games, retellings and reimaginings can be canon at the same time. I know re1 / remake had parallel scenarios where you fought the same bosses while not being able to get the canon ending but in re2, the scenarios connected to each other and you didnt fight the same bosses. If re2 2019 handled its boss fight approach similar to re6; where you fight the same bosses but in a way that made sense, then ı feel like it would have been better.
 
Though ı still dont understand how og games, retellings and reimaginings can be canon at the same time.
Yeah, it's pretty confusing, and we don't have any official source that can systematize all this conflicting knowledge.

I see it in such a way that none of the scenarios are really true. They only contain different elements that developers can use to establish new stories. This is all one big unreliable story that is open to interpretation.
 
Another thing ı dont understand is dmc reboot. Why does that game have very positive rating on steam? Meanwhile re6 has mostly positive rating. Are dmc fans more forgiving compared to re fans or something?

I tried that game on pc and ı just didnt like it. That game is also controversial just like re6. I think it's trash unlike re6 which is great imo.

I wonder how my opinion would be for re6 if it wasnt the 1st re game that ı played or if ı played it with a gamepad instead of keyboard and mouse.

Speaking of dmc; ı've seen some people stating that re6 is dmc2 of the franchise. I dont think so. Dmc2 has a trash combat system and extremely easy difficulty. While re6 still offers some challenge and you cant just blast everything with guns ( You need to use the melee attacks. ) in the same way as dmc2 and it has the best combat system in the franchise and one of the best combat system that ı've played in a tps. Mechanics work fine in campaigns too, ı can perform counters well, especially by using a trick the game provides. ( Using the voice commands prevents your character from performing normal melee attacks but you can still perform melee attacks that shows a prompt, including counters. )

It's more similar to dmc3 rather than dmc2, reboot or even dmc4. It even has a manga just like dmc3. Dmc5 also seems to use some ideas from re6.
 
Top Bottom