Re3 Remake Thoughts

Resident Evil 7 biohazard, Resident Evil 2 and Resident Evil 3 are three different games that had a different direction and were created by different people. The fact that they were created on the same engine and have a realistic visual thanks to photogrammetry, does not mean that these games are obsessed with realism. And even the Western form of dialogues does not mean this.

Resident Evil 7 biohazard literally feels like a love letter to the old school of American horror: there's black humor, slapstick, grotesque, and even a chainsaw fight. Even at the very beginning of the game, Ethan's hand is cut off in the best traditions of The Evil Dead, although from the point of view of realism, first, it would be impossible to do this with a chainsaw, and secondly, Ethan would die before defeating Mia. At the same time, speaking of enemies or lore, Resident Evil 7 quietly uses concepts from early games in the series like DNA mimicry.

Resident Evil 2 was obsessed with realism, so, for example, the developers rewritten the ivy and even wanted to give up the alligator. For them, the original was a syncretic fantasy that needed to be grounded.

Resident Evil 3, on the contrary, as the director himself said, was conceived as a dramatic game like Resident Evil 6, for example. Therefore, they made the second form of Nemesis so spectacular and huge, and then made other decisions, so that there was more pathos and drama. This is different from the approach to developing the original, because the original was more realistic.



If you have a limited budget, 3 years to develop, but you need to redo the original in the modern language of game design, you will not be able to cover the entire volume of the original content. This is the root reason why the reimagining were made. The 2002 game still contains two-dimensional backdrops and the old combat system, so the developers, having the resources and knowledge, it was not difficult to redo everything. Now games, animations, and so on are becoming much more complex and require a lot more people. If previously a small team of artists could draw the backdrop of a clock tower and a million other locations, today at least one location is much more difficult to design, and you need to take into account other factors such as contextual animation of enemies and characters. If you think that the developers were just too lazy to make crows or worms, you are very unfair to them.
Sorry but ı dont get it.

You say it's impossible for ethan's hand to be cut off with a chainsaw in a realistic way and yet you think it's possible for claire / leon ( 1st run ) to get blown up by the rpd car in a realistic way while hitting their body very hard to another car only to get up and pretend it never happened? Or what about ada surviving annette's trap only to get her leg hurt followed by her surviving another fall ( Her leg is still hurt and the nest lab is in self destruct with debris falling. ) only to toss a rocket launcher to leon later on? Or what about the scenarios? They dont even connect to each other. Re6, the most action packed mainline entry, had proper campaigns that connected to each other storywise. Why cant re2 2019 do the same, especially when obsessed with realism unlike re6 that isnt obsessed with realism at all?

Re7 and re2 2019 also have dramatic moments and crazy huge monsters just like other games in the series, this isnt exclusive to re3 2020. Where was it said that the devs wanted a dramatic horror experience for re3 2020 just like re6? A source? Steam page doesnt mention " dramatic horror " while the steam page for re6 mentions " dramatic horror " . I got the idea that they wanted to give the game the " not a hero " treatment precisely cause re2 2019 is re7 with re2 skin along with some gameplay elements from remake and rerev2. And the not a hero episode is a more action packed experience compared to main game of re7 just like how re3 is more action packed than re2 and this carried over to re3 2020 and re2 2019 respectively. That's why they wanted to go back to more survival horror oriented / grounded approach with re7 ı think; to reuse that game's style / presentation when remaking / reimagining re2 and re3 which are more survival horror oriented than 4 / 5 / 6.

And ı still dont get how re2 2019 can be obsessed with realism but re7 and re3 2020 cant. What ı said stands. I dont dislike re engine but it isnt used well for those 3 games. This seems to be a problem with resident evil, ı dont have these issues for dmc5 which also use re engine similar to those 3 games but it manages to keep its style and tone similar to past dmc entries not to mention the writer for the game wrote some of the previous dmc entries.

As for the last statement; if they werent going to be faithful to og games, then they shouldnt have remade / reimagined the games. It feels like a waste of resources to recreate the games as " reimaginings " . They promised the fanbase to faithfully recreate the games and yet they get chickened out while going with the reimagining route instead. Not to mention; it also feels like a waste of time to go through those games cause they arent canon due to being " revisiting " . They unnecessarily convoluted the past too; none of the previous games in the series did that, they simply expanded on plot points. They didnt steal previous games' names in an unfaithful way while being seen as " replacements " to public.

Oh and might as well drop these:



 
And ı still dont get how re2 2019 can be obsessed with realism but re7 and re3 2020 cant.
Resident Evil 7 biohazard and Resident Evil 3 were not positioned as realistic games, but Resident Evil 2 was positioned. That's the difference.

I gave the example of the hand only to show what approach these games had. The developers didn't think about making a realistic situation. They needed to shock and stump the player, so they made this scene. This is not a realistic approach. Moreover, the game at times is not serious about itself. It allows itself self-irony, trash and humor, which Resident Evil 2 never does.

When the developers developed the game, they considered choosing a realistic approach, but then decided to give up realistic puzzles, because, according to the team, this is not what makes the game of this series itself:


Resident Evil 2 was created as a game with a plot that needs to be as grounded as possible. This was a very controversial decision, because the original itself never claimed to be realistic, so it is very difficult to make a realistic story out of it, but the developers tried. And people liked it.

Even the concept of DNA mimicry, thanks to which anthropomorphic plants were born, seemed unrealistic to developers, so they made an analog of Cordyceps from ivy, but in Resident Evil 7, mold is a fungal colony that mimics the human form. Yes, like the ivy from the original or Marcus's mimicry.

Where was it said that the devs wanted a dramatic horror experience for re3 2020 just like re6? A source? Steam page doesnt mention " dramatic horror " while the steam page for re6 mentions " dramatic horror " .
From the same site where we learned that Las Plagas and Nemesis are now linked: https://blog.playstation.com/2020/05/14/nemesis-invades-resident-evil-resistance-in-new-update-live-now/

I don't know how you can call Resident Evil 3 part of a realistic vision of the series, when it does exactly the same thing as Resident Evil 4: ignores the logic of situations in favor of entertainment and fun.

This seems to be a problem with resident evil, ı dont have these issues for dmc5 which also use re engine similar to those 3 games but it manages to keep its style and tone similar to past dmc entries not to mention the writer for the game wrote some of the previous dmc entries.
I am convinced that Resident Evil 7 biohazard is as close as possible to the tone of Resident Evil and Resident Evil Zero with the only difference that now we have westernized dialogues. If you think the series has always had a unified tone, I strongly disagree. If anyone puts Resident Evil 4 on a par with Resident Evil 2002, I would assume that they are different universes.
 
Resident Evil 7 biohazard and Resident Evil 3 were not positioned as realistic games, but Resident Evil 2 was positioned. That's the difference.

I gave the example of the hand only to show what approach these games had. The developers didn't think about making a realistic situation. They needed to shock and stump the player, so they made this scene. This is not a realistic approach. Moreover, the game at times is not serious about itself. It allows itself self-irony, trash and humor, which Resident Evil 2 never does.

When the developers developed the game, they considered choosing a realistic approach, but then decided to give up realistic puzzles, because, according to the team, this is not what makes the game of this series itself:


Resident Evil 2 was created as a game with a plot that needs to be as grounded as possible. This was a very controversial decision, because the original itself never claimed to be realistic, so it is very difficult to make a realistic story out of it, but the developers tried. And people liked it.

Even the concept of DNA mimicry, thanks to which anthropomorphic plants were born, seemed unrealistic to developers, so they made an analog of Cordyceps from ivy, but in Resident Evil 7, mold is a fungal colony that mimics the human form. Yes, like the ivy from the original or Marcus's mimicry.



From the same site where we learned that Las Plagas and Nemesis are now linked: https://blog.playstation.com/2020/05/14/nemesis-invades-resident-evil-resistance-in-new-update-live-now/

I don't know how you can call Resident Evil 3 part of a realistic vision of the series, when it does exactly the same thing as Resident Evil 4: ignores the logic of situations in favor of entertainment and fun.



I am convinced that Resident Evil 7 biohazard is as close as possible to the tone of Resident Evil and Resident Evil Zero with the only difference that now we have westernized dialogues. If you think the series has always had a unified tone, I strongly disagree. If anyone puts Resident Evil 4 on a par with Resident Evil 2002, I would assume that they are different universes.
I watched the re7 video you posted and it just proves my points. The " This is not a realistic approach. " statement of yours is only used for puzzles; mainly cause even for re7; there needs to be a limit in realism obsession. I'm not sure if you played the re games ( At least canon ones. ) in release order / timeline order but if you did that; then you'll understand what ı'm talking about when it comes to re7's weird direction. Some of the statements in that video also annoyed me; like all they cared when it comes to making re7 is " survival horror " . Survival horror is only one piece in the puzzle; it's not the only thing that makes resident evil games, resident evil. Not to mention; resident evil isnt the only survival horror franchise out there. Re7 has an identity crisis; it's like it wants to be a reboot but at the same time; it doesnt.

Re2 2019 also have humorous moments like the end of 2nd run or where claire and leon find each other for the 1st time while rain is happening. " Hope ı dont have to write a report on this. " This line too. Just cause those 3 recent entries are obsessed with realism dont mean they cant have humorous moments. Plus when ı was talking about japanese cheese, charm and charisma of the franchise; ı said " some " , not " all " . Those 3 games still have that but compared to previous entries; they feel nerfed in favor of gritty realism and this causes an identity crisis.

Problem with mold is the files dont reveal the origins of it well and it's not told if it's related to progenitor virus or any virus related to it in the files. I've seen people theorizing that it's related to t-veronica due to hcf getting mentioned but ı dont buy it. It can also be t-virus. And what if it's not related to any progenitor based virus at all? Re2 2019 confuses t and g viruses. With that logic; it can also be said that mold isnt related to progenitor. Plus it lazily steals aspects from other dangerous compounds. Thank you for giving me more examples but ı'll add more. Molded look like bloodshots, fat molded look like a combination of whopper and lepotica and eveline's mutated form looks like a ripoff from carla's mutated form. But anyway; the origins of it should have been fully revealed in re7; ı also have this issue when it comes to plaga which also have some cheapness to it since it's not fully confirmed if that's related to progenitor either. They could have made that parasite connected to progenitor in re5 but capcom didnt do it and instead only left hints. I recommend checking this video to understand what ı'm talking about.


I think capcom should have used c-virus in re7 instead of mold. Especially since re6 got 2 prequels and the files hint at enhanced c-virus being recovered by the family due to them getting their hands on simmons' corpse. Wonder when will leon will store simmons' corpse at a museum...

As for that article:

" Nemesis undergoes an even more dramatic transformation with Type 2 in the RE3 remake compared to the original game. Please discuss the goals and inspirations behind its Type 2 design. "

" In the original game, Nemesis’s second form is simply the restrictions coming off, allowing it to utilize its tentacle attacks. The differentiation from its first form was not as dramatic, both from a visual and gameplay standpoint. Our goal was to make a transformation more dramatic, not only from a visual standpoint, but also from a gameplay standpoint as well. "

It never mentions dramatic horror; it simply talks about nemesis' 2nd mutation and its dramatic effects. They also wanted to increase the drama in re2 2019 when compared to og re2. And ı still dont see how the devs wouldnt want to tone down some aspects of re3 when remaking / reimagining it while also wanting to tone down some aspects of re2 when remaking / reimagining it at the same time. Especially since like ı said; re3 is more action packed / crazier than re2.

I didnt say re games prior to re7 didnt have crazy impossible stuff happening in them but they werent obsessed with realism unlike re7 where starting from that game; capcom got obsessed with realism. Making the games feel both more grounded and more over-the-top absurd at the same time. Clearly that is why stuff had to be cut.

Sorry but ı think re7 along with the recent re2 and re3 feel less like resident evil compared to previous mainline entries. The " westernized " dialogue is one of the reasons. It's no different from saying that dmc reboot stays true to past dmc games' tones even though it doesnt and it's full of edginess while not feeling like devil may cry at all.

I dont think the series had a fully unified tone prior to re7 but ı would say most of the time; they knew when to take themselves seriously and when to not. And the japanese cheese, charisma, charm dont feel like removed from the games / other canon material up until re7 when the series seems to lose its identity in favor of gritty realism in an attempt to get more westernized.

As for re4; the story feels disconnected to canon lore ( Though despite killing umbrella in intro; the story still feels more connected than re7 which feels even more disconnected. ) but it's a good evolution of resident evil. I think re4 ( and re6 ) are better evolutions than re5. Re5 started to disappoint me these days. Not a big fan of the online exclusive gameplay elements or the game focusing mostly on chris and wesker while not focusing that much on sheva ( Her backstory barely any role in the story and due to this; she feels forced to the game just for the sake of being chris' partner. ) and jill, ( The p30 stuff is a lazy way to handle her plus without her antibodies; uroboros would have been more brutal. ) excluding barry and rebecca from the main story when the game's supposed to be a re1 reunion doesnt help either. The racism complaints also hurt the game's potential; ı'm so glad re4 and re6 didnt get racism type of complaints while it's painful to think that re5 got the racism complaints. I'm still glad it made re4 more connected to lore though but wesker's death could have been done better just like umbrella's destruction could have been done better. ( Both umbrella chronicles and re5 are written by the same person just like how darkside chronicles and re6 are written by another same person and ı prefer darkside / re6 to umbrella / re5. )

Might as well drop this essay:

" I disagree about re4; ı'm honestly glad it turned out the way it did. I prefer it over re 3,5 every single time. I think they were planning to kill leon in that version. Not to mention the weird supernatural elements it has along with hookman. ( Which came back in re7 for a weird reason. )

It's awesome and one of the best games ever. Plus the re games started to become more action oriented with re2 anyways. 4 / 5 / 6 being the way they are made sense; both from gameplay and story perspective.

Though ı have to agree that the game is a bit overrated, just a bit. I dont like when people say it's a flawless masterpiece. ( Overpraising re4 to heavens while overbashing re6 to death for example which is extremely annoying. ) I love re games; they are awesome but none of them are flawless masterpiece imo. All of them have at least one small aspect that annoys me, especially after replaying the games multiple times.

One thing that bothers me about re4 for example is mikami not hiring a writer for a weird reason. Plus killing umbrella in the intro is a weird decision mainly cause re2 / re3 / recv's endings heavily hinted at characters taking down umbrella. The main cast is still memorable though. ( Excluding re7 and the newest " remakes " ; all main re games have good story imo and have memorable main cast with the exception of rerev. While the story is good and ı found the backstory of bsaa interesting, characters feel boring. I think it's due to voice acting. I remember seeing somewhere; a interview or something, the devs told / forced the voice actors to sound dull or something. It's not as bad as re1 obviously but still pretty weird. Plus no patricia ja lee for jill... )

But anyways; ı also like plaga, the backstory is interesting unlike the lame mold in re7. Plus after t-virus and zombies; it feels like a nice change to keep things fresh. In terms of plaga monsters; ı prefer the ones in re4 over the ones in re5 even though re5 has a better story than re4 imo. I wished c-virus also appeared in another mainline entry tbh similar to how plaga appeared in re5 as well as the last 2 cgi movies.

I wouldnt call it a " reboot " unlike re7. Not even gameplaywise, mainly cause like ı said; the games started to become more action oriented with re2 and they continued this process in re3 and recv as well. The change in re4 ( And later on in re5 and re6. ) make sense. Storywise; it still follows previous re games, especially when it comes to leon and ada. ( Meanwhile for re7; they decided to call the main character " Ethan Winters " in an attempt to reference re5 but this doesnt work and comes off lame mainly cause " Ethan W. " died after 1998. )

Another thing ı want to say is ı dont think capcom knows to follow the storyline after re6. That's why they are remaking the games in a half baked way for quick nostalgia cause they are out of ideas. I mean remaking re4 literally says that. "
 
It is strange to hear to hear the opinion that the developers should have continued the story of Resident Evil 6, when the plot of this game is already finished. The conflict of the game was over. Moreover, the plot of Resident Evil 6 itself did not continue the storylines of previous games, but simply built its large-scale events on retcons: the Illuminati, the true goal of Ada, Simmons, fetishism and the grand piano in the bushes — the son of Albert Wesker. This is a story from nowhere to nowhere. This is the reason why the series needed a soft reboot: it became a soap bubble and reached a dead end.

You're talking about an identity crisis, but for me, Resident Evil 6 is such a prime example: there's nothing left in this game that I love about this series. This is a tokusatsu show, not the Gothic body horror.

And Resident Evil 4, which I really like, gave a push in this direction. This game, which dresses Ada in impractical heels and a dress, gives Leon Wesker's ability to jump from lasers from the Paul Anderson movie and does other crazy fun things to the detriment of logic. Do you remember the second floor of the first house? What's the point of it? This is just a single example of a different approach. When locations were characters in the series, they are now the background for gameplay.

Previous games were more serious and more contextualized the narrative and game design. You say that Resident Evil 4 feels like a natural progression, but I don't agree with that. The game goes against the philosophy of the series. This is no longer a classic survival horror, if only because the game encourages you to kill enemies, rewards you for killing, and allows you to farm currency to pump weapons and kill more enemies. This is a soft reboot that changes the tone of the series, its direction, and game design. If it wasn't, the game wouldn't have divided fans around the world.

Resident Evil 7 biohazard tried to re-invent the series as if the first game was created today. And in classic times, the series better contextualized the environment, mutations, and the rest. However, today is no longer the 90s, there is no longer this syncretism. This cultural appropriation is no longer so obvious, when the Japanese showed America and Russians in caricature, so Resident Evil has changed. What you call charm was just a stage in the history of language and cultural barriers. The first BIO HAZARD was released in Japan with English voice acting, because the developers wanted the game to be westernized, but they did not have enough knowledge and skill to do it authentic.

Starting with Resident Evil 4, the games in the series went towards tokusatsu and anime, so in Russia, for example, many of these games do not like: that's not why people started playing the series in 1996. And even with Resident Evil, Resident Evil Zero and Resident Evil 3.5, you can see how dark and more grounded the development of the series was before its reboot, and compare this with the retellings of classic games from The Umbrella Chronicles and The Darkside Chronicles, where there was a lot of action, jokes and fanservice.

You also say that Resident Evil 7 biohazard does not reveal the mold completely, but this is only because all the characters, including the syndicate's American scientists, do not have enough knowledge. This is the canonical epistolary style. Obviously, while visiting Europe, we will learn more about the syndicate and the origin of mold. What was needed to understand the story of Resident Evil 7 biohazard was told in Resident Evil 7 biohazard. But this is not the story of a single game, but a cross-cutting storyline.

People theorize about t-Veronica or C not only because the syndicate had a connection with H.C.F. The game gives other hints, including visual ones.

Like Alexia, Evelyn can remotely influence the flora with the help of pheromones. Because Alexia used the plant genome for her virus.

Like t-Veronica, mold can turn people into human-arthropod hybrids. Because Alexia found a retrovirus in ants that allows you to make such hybrids.

And that's not even all. If you look at Zoe's mutation and Evelyn's place in the hierarchy, it's easy to guess t-Veronica or C, which contains t-Veronica.

Even Dusk Golem advises fans to play CODE: Veronica before passing Resident Evil Village.

This is not the only storyline that Resident Evil 7 biohazard continues. The reorganization of Umbrella is also a development of the storyline. In Resident Evil 4, Wesker wanted to restore Umbrella and even hid the database in The Umbrella Chronicles. However, Resident Evil 5 and other games in the series ignore this storyline, and Umbrella Corps and Resident Evil 7 biohazard return to it, showing that Wesker's plans and legacy continue to live on. And this is a great event for the universe, because progressive methods of fighting bio-organic weapons will be able to stabilize the situation in the world.
 
It is strange to hear to hear the opinion that the developers should have continued the story of Resident Evil 6, when the plot of this game is already finished. The conflict of the game was over. Moreover, the plot of Resident Evil 6 itself did not continue the storylines of previous games, but simply built its large-scale events on retcons: the Illuminati, the true goal of Ada, Simmons, fetishism and the grand piano in the bushes — the son of Albert Wesker. This is a story from nowhere to nowhere. This is the reason why the series needed a soft reboot: it became a soap bubble and reached a dead end.

You're talking about an identity crisis, but for me, Resident Evil 6 is such a prime example: there's nothing left in this game that I love about this series. This is a tokusatsu show, not the Gothic body horror.

And Resident Evil 4, which I really like, gave a push in this direction. This game, which dresses Ada in impractical heels and a dress, gives Leon Wesker's ability to jump from lasers from the Paul Anderson movie and does other crazy fun things to the detriment of logic. Do you remember the second floor of the first house? What's the point of it? This is just a single example of a different approach. When locations were characters in the series, they are now the background for gameplay.

Previous games were more serious and more contextualized the narrative and game design. You say that Resident Evil 4 feels like a natural progression, but I don't agree with that. The game goes against the philosophy of the series. This is no longer a classic survival horror, if only because the game encourages you to kill enemies, rewards you for killing, and allows you to farm currency to pump weapons and kill more enemies. This is a soft reboot that changes the tone of the series, its direction, and game design. If it wasn't, the game wouldn't have divided fans around the world.

Resident Evil 7 biohazard tried to re-invent the series as if the first game was created today. And in classic times, the series better contextualized the environment, mutations, and the rest. However, today is no longer the 90s, there is no longer this syncretism. This cultural appropriation is no longer so obvious, when the Japanese showed America and Russians in caricature, so Resident Evil has changed. What you call charm was just a stage in the history of language and cultural barriers. The first BIO HAZARD was released in Japan with English voice acting, because the developers wanted the game to be westernized, but they did not have enough knowledge and skill to do it authentic.

Starting with Resident Evil 4, the games in the series went towards tokusatsu and anime, so in Russia, for example, many of these games do not like: that's not why people started playing the series in 1996. And even with Resident Evil, Resident Evil Zero and Resident Evil 3.5, you can see how dark and more grounded the development of the series was before its reboot, and compare this with the retellings of classic games from The Umbrella Chronicles and The Darkside Chronicles, where there was a lot of action, jokes and fanservice.

You also say that Resident Evil 7 biohazard does not reveal the mold completely, but this is only because all the characters, including the syndicate's American scientists, do not have enough knowledge. This is the canonical epistolary style. Obviously, while visiting Europe, we will learn more about the syndicate and the origin of mold. What was needed to understand the story of Resident Evil 7 biohazard was told in Resident Evil 7 biohazard. But this is not the story of a single game, but a cross-cutting storyline.

People theorize about t-Veronica or C not only because the syndicate had a connection with H.C.F. The game gives other hints, including visual ones.

Like Alexia, Evelyn can remotely influence the flora with the help of pheromones. Because Alexia used the plant genome for her virus.

Like t-Veronica, mold can turn people into human-arthropod hybrids. Because Alexia found a retrovirus in ants that allows you to make such hybrids.

And that's not even all. If you look at Zoe's mutation and Evelyn's place in the hierarchy, it's easy to guess t-Veronica or C, which contains t-Veronica.

Even Dusk Golem advises fans to play CODE: Veronica before passing Resident Evil Village.

This is not the only storyline that Resident Evil 7 biohazard continues. The reorganization of Umbrella is also a development of the storyline. In Resident Evil 4, Wesker wanted to restore Umbrella and even hid the database in The Umbrella Chronicles. However, Resident Evil 5 and other games in the series ignore this storyline, and Umbrella Corps and Resident Evil 7 biohazard return to it, showing that Wesker's plans and legacy continue to live on. And this is a great event for the universe, because progressive methods of fighting bio-organic weapons will be able to stabilize the situation in the world.
No; the story of re6 wasnt finished. The game left some plot threads to be followed up upon just like how re2, re3 and recv left plot threads to be followed up upon. With things like fos hacking communication between simmons and his men ( Which seems like indication that dso and other agencies will go after the family. ) the family selecting a new leader after simmons' death, ada being known to the whole world due to carla and neo umbrella spreading her name, bsaa going after jake to get his blood due to c-virus mutating, secret ending with jake. The game you're describing is re5, that game fully completed its story while not leaving anything to be followed up upon. Re6 follows previous events well; especially re2, re3, recv, darkside chronicles and re5. The files also explain some stuff. In terms of story and characters; it handles it better than re4 and re5 imo. Especially re4 which is a filler story. I think they did the game justice in these aspects. Plus the way 4 campaigns connect to each other is pretty impressive to me ( Something re2 2019 doesnt have cause " realism ". ) and ı liked the voice acting as well as character interactions between each other. None of the things you say are retcons. There are literally no retcons or plot holes in the series; only mistranslations due to garbage official localization. The family is just an expansion of the corrupted us government. Ada isnt changed, they simply expanded more about her backstory with her relationship to simmons and the family. ( It's heavily hinted that she hid jake and his mom from the family which is the reason why the family couldnt learn of jake being wesker son until after 2009. ) What's wrong with simmons' obsession with ada? That's not the only reason why c-virus was created not to mention previous villains also had crazy obsessions / motivations / interests. Like irons assaulting a female student during his younger days or the relationship between alexia and alfred. And jake isnt a contradiction for wesker either, wesker died and he will stay dead. They planned to revive him in re6 but ı'm glad they didnt. Wesker could have a purely physical contact with ms. muller while not caring about her in the slightest. During his younger days, wesker seems like a weird pervert type of guy; especially if the rebecca photo is taken into account.

So basically re6 has an identity crisis in your opinion cause it tries new things ( Even though previous re games also tried new things but sure let's blame everything on re6 cause that's all that matters. ) and it's the least survival horror oriented mainline entry in the series even though it makes sense for the game to be the way it is from gameplay / story perspective.

Mainline entries started to become more action oriented with re2 and this also continued in re3 and recv so it didnt suddenly happen with re4. I dont think re4 is a good evolution storywise but it's a good evolution gameplaywise. I think re6 is a better evolution than re4 and re5. Imo re2 and re6 are equally the best evolutions followed by re3 and recv equally, re4 and finally re5.

What's wrong with ada and her fancy outfits / toys? It fits to her playful style character. The only time ı didnt like ada was in re2 2019 cause they ruined her backstory while changing her relationship with leon in that game; ugh stupid fbi stuff. The laser room is a quick jab on live action movies cause they arent faithful to capcom's main franchise, this jabs started with outbreak games. ( Alyssa's unlockable outfit for example. ) Speaking of laser room; re6 handles the laser room better than re4 and umbrella chronicles do cause you dodge them by sliding instead of qtes.

Re4 also have serious tone sometimes, the og japanese script even more so. The game is really butchered in official localization just like rerev2.

T-103 in re2 and nemesis in re3 also drop loot when defeated, sure they are harder to defeat than 4 / 5 / 6's common monsters mainly cause they are more survival horror oriented but still.

Re4 in terms of gameplay evolution is good plus pre-re4 mainline ( plus outbreak games ) gameplay formula was getting stale so the change was nice while feeling fresh. Leon is a trained usstratcom operative and surviving an outbreak as a rookie cop while becoming a government agent in the process feels like a nice transition. I wished re4 showed more of leon's depression but ı'm glad they showed this in re6 when it comes to him without overdoing it like in degeneration.

Might as well drop this:


Re7 isnt a reinvention; it's just a lazy take on the franchise. I find it saddening that selective outrage led us back to having a run-of-the-mill survival horror game ( Re7 ) with no depth or replay value over an extremely unique shooter ( Re6 ) that actually requires proper mastery while having a lot of depth and replay value from both gameplay and story perspective.

As for darkside chronicles; it's more faithful to re2 than re2 2019 is. Better story, characters, locations etc. It feels more faithful to og game.

It's eveline, not evelyn. And sorry but what ı said about c and mold stands, re7 should had been a sequel to re6 instead of having an identity crisis due to not being able to decide whether it wants to be a reboot or not.

I know of the blue umbrella plotline but it wasnt used well especially due to the fact that capcom wanted to make re7 as disconnected to past re games as possible. Especially to re6. The only " connection " to re6 is in a paid dlc plus everyone loves microtransactions after all.

Most of the fanbase is lazy and they dont delve deep enough into the franchise. They only play the games ( Only numbered most of the time and anything not numbered is a spinoff to them. ) while not caring about other stuff at all.

I recommend checking this:

 
I would like to continue this dialogue, but it is difficult for me to write and understand English in such large volumes. This complicates the perception of someone else's point of view and the explanation of your own.

If someone asks me what games in the series I don't like, I will name very few games. Most likely, these are Umbrella Corps, Operation Raccoon City, and Gun Survivor 2. I don't want to say that Resident Evil 6 is a bad game or a poorly written game, but I don't agree with you. I don't like a lot of the ideas in it, not because it's an action game, but because it doesn't work so well. If you think that people who might have a different opinion are necessarily snobs, lazy people, or just illiterate people, then you are simply mistaken.

Might as well drop this:

Yes, and you really will be right, because CODE: Veronica has brought a world-saving trend to the series. And even brought back Albert Wesker, but you say there are no retcons or plot holes in the series.

Resident Evil 2 was such a good formula, because this sequel did not need the characters of the first game. It was a new story, new characters, and a new cause of infection that was only later linked to the mansion. But it was the same universe that revealed it from a new side and a new perspective. This is one of the reasons why I really like Resident Evil 7 biohazard.

There are literally no retcons or plot holes in the series; only mistranslations due to garbage official localization.
Now we have crutches and different sources that help put the story together, but it's still a big mess with discrepancies. We can't even say for sure how many missiles destroyed Raccoon City: one or more? And what kind of rocket was it? Different sources give different answers to these questions. And it's only a little thing: infrastructure of Raccoon City, too, has been rewritten more than once. Ada Wong, who was a spy for a rival company, became a mercenary who worked for different people to achieve her true goal. This is the retcon: the authors rewrite the story retroactively to make a new storyline. And my problem isn't that I'm against retcons at all. I'm against the universe focusing on characters in this way when it can tell other stories.
 
I would like to continue this dialogue, but it is difficult for me to write and understand English in such large volumes. This complicates the perception of someone else's point of view and the explanation of your own.

If someone asks me what games in the series I don't like, I will name very few games. Most likely, these are Umbrella Corps, Operation Raccoon City, and Gun Survivor 2. I don't want to say that Resident Evil 6 is a bad game or a poorly written game, but I don't agree with you. I don't like a lot of the ideas in it, not because it's an action game, but because it doesn't work so well. If you think that people who might have a different opinion are necessarily snobs, lazy people, or just illiterate people, then you are simply mistaken.


Yes, and you really will be right, because CODE: Veronica has brought a world-saving trend to the series. And even brought back Albert Wesker, but you say there are no retcons or plot holes in the series.

Resident Evil 2 was such a good formula, because this sequel did not need the characters of the first game. It was a new story, new characters, and a new cause of infection that was only later linked to the mansion. But it was the same universe that revealed it from a new side and a new perspective. This is one of the reasons why I really like Resident Evil 7 biohazard.



Now we have crutches and different sources that help put the story together, but it's still a big mess with discrepancies. We can't even say for sure how many missiles destroyed Raccoon City: one or more? And what kind of rocket was it? Different sources give different answers to these questions. And it's only a little thing: infrastructure of Raccoon City, too, has been rewritten more than once. Ada Wong, who was a spy for a rival company, became a mercenary who worked for different people to achieve her true goal. This is the retcon: the authors rewrite the story retroactively to make a new storyline. And my problem isn't that I'm against retcons at all. I'm against the universe focusing on characters in this way when it can tell other stories.
There's nothing wrong with opinions or not liking something however most of the criticisms ı've seen for re6 have more execution issues than the game does. I've already watched the " Did re6 suck? I settle it forever. " and " Re6 what happened? " videos; they were painful. They make many mistakes and in nerrel's case; he sucks at the game very, very badly while playing the game on amateur difficulty. I've never said re7, re2 2019 or re3 2020 sucked; ı simply dont like the new direction for the series starting with re7; the hate bandwagon for re6 also caused that. I started to grow more disdain for those 3 recent mainline entries.

I used the lazy word for people who dont delve into franchise or dont do their research; not for people who dont like re6. That article isnt exclusive to one game; it's about franchise as a whole.

As for wesker coming back in recv;


" Out of curiosity — did you plan for Wesker to survive? "

" Yes, we had plans to use him again down the line, since the T-Virus can revive people from the dead. "

I'm not the one who says " There's no retcons or plot holes, only expansions. " in the series; news bot is. I've discussed this in the past and he's right. I've even discussed this to biohaze and the people at that time confirmed his statements too. I agree with him when it comes to this. That being said; the franchise isnt fully consistent and there are errors that pop up here and there but no plot holes / retcons. At the end; things can be explained with common sense.

Re2 and re7 arent same. Re2 is connected to re1 and even the new characters feel connected to re1 in a way. And re2 is using new characters cause it's the 2nd game and there werent much characters at that time. Meanwhile re7 isnt connected to re6 at all. Besides prior to re7; the games also had new characters anyway. It's just that most of re7's characters are lame and arent interesting, especially ethan. Going from re6 and its characters who have good character development in the game to re7 and its lame ethan who's an avatar for the player rather than an actual character feels extremely insulting.

The missile that hit raccoon was single and an experimental thermobaric one instead of multiple ones showed in outbreak games. ( The way those 2 games happened are unknown just like re1 and re2's stories. ) Degeneration and re6 confirm this too.

And sorry but nothing you say about ada is a retcon. It's just expansion on her character. Not to mention; she's a spy, not a mercenary and that didnt change. ( Re2 2019 is NOT canon and annette's statement doesnt hold up due to this. ) They dont want to fully reveal about her character cause she's mysterious and that gives her a charm. If everyone was the same; then the things would be boring.

I remember thinking some time that the plot point between wesker and sherry has been retconned in darkside chronicles but after thinking about it; no that's false. Wesker saying " Sherry is on our hands now. " and another source saying " Wesker has his men inside the government. " isnt a difference. By having his men inside the government; wesker in a way still had his hands on sherry.
 
Last edited:
Why is something that was written retroactively not a retcon? You see, a retroactive continuity doesn't necessarily mean that something is being rewritten. This also means that there are any adjustments that give an impetus to something new.

Resident Evil 6 is not a direct sequel to Resident Evil 5. This is not an Alex Wesker story. Instead, the authors came up with new characters and new organizations that were written into the mythology to justify their existence. Simmons appeared out of nowhere, his relationship with Ada and Carla were written specifically for the game to cause conflict. Even a way to resolve this conflict also came out of nowhere: I'm talking about Jake, of course.

Once again, I don't want to say that this is a bad thing. I want to say that this story is not a natural progression of storylines. Even the participation of favorite characters is not due to the fact that someone is looking for a brother and went somewhere on a tip, but because they are just the main characters, so the whole universe revolves around them.

You say that Wesker's return has been planned before. I am familiar with this information, and I have seen concept art. But I'm saying that this was never originally intended, because since then, the developers have revised many solutions. Wesker's death was never Chekhov's gun that should go off. As in the comics, Wesker was brought back to kick-start a new storyline. The same thing was done in Resident Evil 5: Wesker's children were invented to write the relationship between Wesker and Spencer and lead Albert in the right direction for the authors. Before that, Wesker had other plans, but his biography was adjusted to fit the new narrative, because without the influence of Spencer and Wesker's children, the plot of this game would never have happened.

And this is how most of the games in the series are designed. With rare exceptions, many games tell independent stories that indirectly develop previous storylines.

Exactly the same story with Resident Evil 2. Dr. Birkin and the infestation of the city were not related to the events in the mansion when the game came out. We were told the story of the new characters, which is kept independently, but only periodically touches the storylines of the first game, because it is one universe, and the events took place in the same area.

Resident Evil 7 biohazard does the same thing, but in the context of the entire universe, not a specific game. The game has many references to the fact that this is the Resident Evil universe. The game is literally built according to the rules and canons of this franchise, so even the monsters have recognizable features, although the source of infection is partly new. And the story of this game is not finished yet, so it will have a direct continuation, which was CODE: Veronica in relation to Resident Evil 2.

The conflict of Resident Evil 6 was over, this story was put to an end. This game does not need a sequel, although the impact of Jake and The Family on the world can be told in a different context.
 
Last edited:
Why is something that was written retroactively not a retcon? You see, a retroactive continuity doesn't necessarily mean that something is being rewritten. This also means that there are any adjustments that give an impetus to something new.

Resident Evil 6 is not a direct sequel to Resident Evil 5. This is not an Alex Wesker story. Instead, the authors came up with new characters and new organizations that were written into the mythology to justify their existence. Simmons appeared out of nowhere, his relationship with Ada and Carla were written specifically for the game to cause conflict. Even a way to resolve this conflict also came out of nowhere: I'm talking about Jake, of course.

Once again, I don't want to say that this is a bad thing. I want to say that this story is not a natural progression of storylines. Even the participation of favorite characters is not due to the fact that someone is looking for a brother and went somewhere on a tip, but because they are just the main characters, so the whole universe revolves around them.

You say that Wesker's return has been planned before. I am familiar with this information, and I have seen concept art. But I'm saying that this was never originally intended, because since then, the developers have revised many solutions. Wesker's death was never Chekhov's gun that should go off. As in the comics, Wesker was brought back to kick-start a new storyline. The same thing was done in Resident Evil 5: Wesker's children were invented to write the relationship between Wesker and Spencer and lead Albert in the right direction for the authors. Before that, Wesker had other plans, but his biography was adjusted to fit the new narrative, because without the influence of Spencer and Wesker's children, the plot of this game would never have happened.

And this is how most of the games in the series are designed. With rare exceptions, many games tell independent stories that indirectly develop previous storylines.

Exactly the same story with Resident Evil 2. Dr. Birkin and the infestation of the city were not related to the events in the mansion when the game came out. We were told the story of the new characters, which is kept independently, but only periodically touches the storylines of the first game, because it is one universe, and the events took place in the same area.

Resident Evil 7 biohazard does the same thing, but in the context of the entire universe, not a specific game. The game has many references to the fact that this is the Resident Evil universe. The game is literally built according to the rules and canons of this franchise, so even the monsters have recognizable features, although the source of infection is partly new. And the story of this game is not finished yet, so it will have a direct continuation, which was CODE: Veronica in relation to Resident Evil 2.

The conflict of Resident Evil 6 was over, this story was put to an end. This game does not need a sequel, although the impact of Jake and the Family on the world can be told in a different context.
Sorry but what ı said previously stands. There's no retcon or plot hole in the franchise whatsoever; only expansions.

Re6 is a sequel to re5 when it comes to chris who's the main character in that game. Also alex doesnt have anything to do with re5's story; those files simply talk about past events.

Simmons appeared in sherry's re3 epilogue file just like how benford appeared in leon's re3 epilogue file. He's the one who made a deal with birkin to obtain the g-virus; that's why he's so interested in sherry since she has g inside her body and the government experimented on her constantly. He wasnt named in that file but that's him otherwise he wouldnt be so interested in her. So he didnt come out of nowhere.

It's re4's fault for handling wesker badly; they removed his interest with spencer ( His reports talk about this and then re4 ignores it. ) but it started to come back with umbrella chronicles and re5. Re5 handles him good when it comes to this though ı think his plan and death could have been more brutal with 4 rockets instead of 2 as well as a better usage of uroboros. And what comics are you talking about? They arent canon.

Not gonna bother with the others cause you're seriously mistaken. I dont think ı need to say anything more about this.
 
Sorry but what ı said previously stands. There's no retcon or plot hole in the franchise whatsoever; only expansions.
"Retcons sometimes do not contradict previously established facts but instead fill in missing background details, usually to support current plot points". Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retroactive_continuity#:~:text=Retroactive continuity, or retcon for,breaks continuity with the former.

Re6 is a sequel to re5 when it comes to chris who's the main character in that game.
The very fact that the character is involved does not mean that this is a sequel. The events of these games are not connected in any way, they are different stories in which Chris takes part, although another person could have taken part.

Simmons appeared in sherry's re3 epilogue file just like how benford appeared in leon's re3 epilogue file.
They didn't even exist then. They were invented much later and entered retroactively. It's now you know that these characters took part, but these classic games themselves don't mention it. Because they can't. Because this is an obvious retcon.

It's re4's fault for handling wesker badly;
I disagree. A cold-blooded Wesker who wants to have his power in the industry, I like much more than a madman supervillain who wants to take over the world.

Not gonna bother with the others cause you're seriously mistaken. I dont think ı need to say anything more about this.
You said it after you wrote the text above.
 
"Retcons sometimes do not contradict previously established facts but instead fill in missing background details, usually to support current plot points". Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retroactive_continuity#:~:text=Retroactive continuity, or retcon for,breaks continuity with the former.
That article needs to make up its own mind.

The " Retroactive continuity, or retcon for short, is a literary device in which established diegetic 'facts' in the plot of a fictional work are adjusted, ignored, or contradicted by a subsequently published work which breaks continuity with the former. " and " Retcons sometimes do not contradict previously established facts but instead fill in missing background details, usually to support current plot points. " statements pretty much contradict each other. One of the reasons why ı dont trust wikipedia that much.

The very fact that the character is involved does not mean that this is a sequel. The events of these games are not connected in any way, they are different stories in which Chris takes part, although another person could have taken part.
How so? It's still a sequel to re5; one way or another.


" Defeating Wesker will undoubtedly be a turning point. Due to this battle, I found the meaning behind "the purpose I fought for." But at the same time, due to finally killing Wesker who was involved in much bioterrorism, I also strongly held the thought that "my duty is finished."

I don't intend to stop my war on bioterrorism. But, from this point on, a younger generation with the same aspirations as me should bear it at the forefront. The possibility of someone like Wesker showing up again some day isn't zero.

At that moment, comrades confronting bioterrorism after me will be needed. I'll resign as an agent and move to a unit. For the future of the BSAA, I must raise my young comrades on the frontlines. "

It's connected to re5's ending and creatively follows from it for chris just like how re2 creatively follows from re1's story. ( Which also didnt left anything to be followed up upon other than some images for characters. )

Plus you realize re5 is also more of a sequel to pre-re4 mainline entries and umbrella chronicles ( Re1 reunion. ) than re4, right? Just like how re6 is also more of a sequel to pre-re4 mainline entries and darkside chronicles ( Re2 reunion. ) than re5. Re7 technically also references re6 but it doesnt feel like a follow up; it simply says edonia is in a better position after 2012.

They didn't even exist then.
So? Birkin didnt exist in re1 either. Neither did alexia in re2 or re3. How are those re6 expansions contradict anything exactly? They are not retcons cause they dont contradict something.

I disagree. A cold-blooded Wesker...
Wesker is also cold blooded in re5. He only cares about evolution and doesnt even care about excella despite her being interested in him.

I might drop these here too:

https://www.reddit.com/r/residentevil/comments/3i5kcs/_/cudiv9k
News bot's statements:

" There are no retcons or convoluted reasoning involved. Birkin was manipulated into giving Wesker the virus, not knowing that Spencer wanted him to. "

" They're not changing past events. Everything is the same, the only difference is that there is more information.

Wesker's betrayal was never intended by anyone but himself. The only subconscious thing planted in him was an undying interest in Spencer, which is something that has been around since Wesker's Report II. Birkin supplied the virus thinking it would benefit Wesker due to its unique properties, but he was going to be told to give it to him anyway, it just would've been for a different purpose as Spencer didn't want Wesker to defect.

The company's true purpose was always for human evolution. It was Spencer's, Wesker's and Birkin's shared goal. There is no retcon. The references to them are lost in the bastard English translations of the games, though. "
 
Last edited:
The Las Plaga were dug up in a fossilized state under Salazar’s Castle in Spain. Unless REmake 4 changes all this.
This is another translation error. In Spain, there were not fossils, but parasites mummified by Salazar's ancestors.

Luis' Notes 2 said:
The "Plagas" sealed at the time of the first castellan appeared to slumber in untouched condition beneath this castle. However, at the time Salazar released the seal, nobody seemed to think we could succeed in the experiment to revitalize the "Plaga."

This was because all the unearthed "Plagas" turned out to be mummified.
Only in Spain were there viable parasites that were able to secrete spores because they were mummified. And Salazar opened access to these parasites after the collapse of Umbrella. If the corporation had access to this source, they would not have had to recreate anything, so Umbrella found the parasite elsewhere and much earlier. Since they are unlikely to have been mummified by anyone else, only fossils were found. According to the interview, the parasites were found somewhere in the wild. Personally, I suspect that this is Africa or Romania.

Can you give me your thoughts specifically about re3 2020?
I only like this game in the context of a supplement to other interpretations (the original and The Umbrella Chronicles). As a substitute, it does not stand up to any criticism. But the game itself I like, although much less than the previous two.
 
Last edited:

A. Wesker

Fortes Fortuna Adiuvat
The only proper connection RE4 had with the series, in terms of viruses, is that Las Plagas is basically an ancient BOW either man made or not that was cool to think about.

This Nemesis parasite retcon nonsense is trash, a minor thing maybe, but I like the lore as it is. Stupid changes like this are annoying to me.
 

A. Wesker

Fortes Fortuna Adiuvat
Only in Spain were there viable parasites that were able to secrete spores because they were mummified. And Salazar opened access to these parasites after the collapse of Umbrella. If the corporation had access to this source, they would not have had to recreate anything, so Umbrella found the parasite elsewhere and much earlier. Since they are unlikely to have been mummified by anyone else, only fossils were found. According to the interview, the parasites were found somewhere in the wild. Personally, I suspect that this is Africa or Romania.
Something about this makes Saddler look like an idiot in my mind, someone who took the Plagas Kool-Aid and was too full of himself after doing it, what a pathetic villain.
 
Something about this makes Saddler look like an idiot in my mind, someone who took the Plagas Kool-Aid and was too full of himself after doing it, what a pathetic villain.
Despite everything, his entire army, which he wanted to take over the world, was powerless against one American agent. :)

On the other hand, he was able to create a parasite control tool that Umbrella was very far from having. Therefore, in essence, this retcon does not devalue anything. In my opinion, it is even useful, because the connection between Las Plagas and the Nemesis parasite has been speculated about since the time of Resident Evil 4. These parasites really have always been very similar. So why not link everything so neatly with an African flower?

Look, the G-virus was found in Lisa's body. It was caused by a reaction between a parasite and a Progenitor virus. As we can see, even visually, Lisa showed signs of G: she had a large eye. Saddler after the mutation also had eyes that resemble G. This may seem like a use of design and idea, but the game also mentions that Luis saw a strain of the Umbrella virus in Spain. He says this to Leon at the very beginning. Therefore, there is a theory that the dominant strain was created with the help of a virus, so we observe a G-reaction. Even Nemesis in the remake has properties of G: reproductive function (even similar visually, through the hand), the ability to build mass, and other forms that are similar to Simmons or Birkin. This may all be an interesting coincidence, but I like to think that the authors want to contextualize biology in this way.
 
Top Bottom