• We've completed one of the biggest updates to our forums in years and have pushed the update live! New forum structure that's all inclusive, prefix system categorizes topics per game title. More thread options such as articles, questions, deep dives, etc. Read more in the pinned thread!

RE8 Resident Evil Village Shown

RE5 has villages too. But yeah. It's a dumb name. It's too plaintive.

I also hate playing games where you DO NOT see the person you're playing as. It's tedious. In the story scenes, it's always seen from his or her point of view.

Some people also want to know why Chris uses a gun named after Wesker. Hello! Wesker was the bad guy. :D
 
I'm still bothered by the possibility of capcom making re7's story pointless by making chris kill that woman if she's mia.

They did something like this in re4 by killing umbrella in the intro instead of a good follow up from pre-re4 main entries' loose ends, in re7 / vendetta by not following up from re6's events' loose ends.
 
Capcom doesn't even care about any of that stuff. It's like trying to get water from a cactus, really. Capcom only goes pandering to what makes them the mega bucks they crave.

If a new game ends up being a bomb, they more or less just quietly move on from it. That's probably why you aren't getting the RE6 sequel you hoped for. Enough people on YouTube also talk about how RE7 is so disconnected from RE6 and every game before it, save for a pointless throwback to the reporter from 'Outbreak' or Raccoon City being mentioned. But ultimately, none of that matters. It doesn't even feel like it's the same series anymore. They just throw that stuff in out of nowhere to make you think it's relevant, when it really isn't.

The primary reason Chris is even in RE7 and RE8 is probably just to sell the game. It's doubtful any fan truly cares much for someone like Ethan. He's a nobody. Chris made the franchise. It's so sad how they've forgotten about Jill, save for midquel games and remakes, that is. I don't generally count those at all. They should focus on her instead of destroying the life of a man who is just some random person caught up in a war against the Connections. Or whoever else is responsible for this nonsense. They are basically replacing the heart and soul of the franchise with some new character you don't even see, so it's hard to relate to him. At least, you do not get to really see his face.

It's kind of disappointing to see remakes in third person, but we get two sequels back to back, designed in an 'Outlast' manner. That's just not the RE we grew up with...
 
The primary reason Chris is even in RE7 and RE8 is probably just to sell the game.
Exactly! This is why the appearance of Chris at the end of the game was left as a surprise and was not revealed in the trailers and other materials. To sell the game.

Chris appears in Louisiana because he is a high-class specialist whose help was needed in an extremely difficult task, which even the best BSAA specialists could not cope with. There was a risk that Lucas would send the data to an unknown buyer, and Evelyn was a very dangerous bio-organic weapon.

This is not the first time that Chris has been a key figure in a collaboration operation. And not to people who played Resident Evil 5 or watched the latest animated movie, I have to explain this.

Enough people on YouTube also talk about how RE7 is so disconnected from RE6 and every game before it, save for a pointless throwback to the reporter from 'Outbreak' or Raccoon City being mentioned. But ultimately, none of that matters. It doesn't even feel like it's the same series anymore. They just throw that stuff in out of nowhere to make you think it's relevant, when it really isn't.
Because Resident Evil 7 biohazard is a soft reboot, just like Resident Evil 4 was. However, it is quite a mistake to believe that these games did not affect the universe, even if they seem like outsiders.

Ethan's story may only seem disconnected at first, but the more you move through the story, the more you realize that Resident Evil 7 biohazard continues the storylines of Resident Evil CODE: Veronica and Resident Evil 4. The game's plot literally contains unambiguous hints that Evelyn was created through collaboration with a rival company and the influence of the t-Veronica strain. In addition, a restored Umbrella appears in the game, proving that Wesker's plans, which were ignored by Resident Evil 5, have finally come to true.

I can agree that this is not the most important game in the series, but it does exactly what Resident Evil and Resident Evil 4 did: it lays the groundwork and sets the course for future games. Many of the decisions that the developers made were designed to bring the essence of horror back to the series. You say that they took away the soul of the series when they made a faceless protagonist and focused on the environment, but "survival horror" is also the soul of the series, which was forgotten a long time ago.

You still have every right not to like this game. This is a fact that I do not dispute. Unfortunately, the Resident Evil community is very divided, so it will be impossible to please everyone, which the developers themselves have repeatedly admitted. For example, in the Russian community, where I came from, Resident Evil 4, Resident Evil 5 and Resident Evil 6, to put it mildly, are very disliked. And they have their reasons, too, though I don't agree with them. But I don't agree with the users of this forum either, which also upsets me.
 
If you don't mind, I'd like to say a little bit about what the new game might be about:

1. First of all, I think it's no secret that the game takes place in Romania on the Carpathian Mountains. Nowhere has this information been officially confirmed, but I am familiar with the visual representation of the area, because I myself saw these mountains when I visited my grandmother in a Ukrainian village. I'm sure you know the Carpathian mountains thanks to the famous Transylvania, where, according to the novel by Bram Stoker, count Dracula's castle stood. Also in the trailer on the gate in front of the castle, you can see images of execution, reminiscent of impaling, which were so common in the times of Vlad Basarab and Ivan the Terrible.

2. Of course, I was impressed by the architecture of the castle. I immediately wondered who owned this building. And I think the trailer hints at that.

This owner could be Oswell Spencer. I'm sure you've noticed the Umbrella symbol, but the clue is that this symbol, if you remember Resident Evil 2002 well, sprouts from the Spencer family cross.

The second clue is the coat of arms, which can be seen at the moment when lady Bathory (let's call her that) is talking to someone on the phone. The coat of arms is very similar to the mix of the Spencer coat of arms from Resident Evil 2002 and the Spencer coat of arms from Resident Evil 3.5.

The third clue is the bas-reliefs of lions with rings that adorn the entrance doors to the castle hall. As you may remember from Resident Evil 2002, such a bas-relief decorated the door that leads to Spencer's room.

3. If you look closely at the embryo, you will notice that it is parasitized by a foreign organism. This organism has several characteristics of the Las Plagas parasite, which is why I assume that Spencer's castle in Romania is the location of the parasites that Umbrella used for NE-α. Perhaps the castle was built very long ago and especially close to the source of these ancient organisms.

1216

As you know, the reason why Umbrella had to artificially recreate the parasite instead of just using it was because the only viable parasites were only in Spain, since they were mummified by Ramon's ancestors, so I expect the Spencers only found fossils.

Also note that the embryo closely resembles the technique that Evelyn was created using. If a mold gene was inserted into Evelyn when she was an embryo, that child was a victim of the parasite. Perhaps The Connections tried to use parasites to implement their project even before the discovery of the fungus and its cultivation with the help of a virus.

Perhaps, after Spencer's death, the castle was privatized, and the syndicate set up another research center there.

4. Note that one of the women in black who attacks the protagonist can release insects, thus reminding Margaret. So I assume that these three women are agents of the new girl, which is lady Bathory. If Evelyn ordered altars to be made for her older sisters, Bathory may also be prone to folk horror, so she founded a cult and recruits villagers using mental control (we've already seen in the trailer that someone tried to take control of one woman). Perhaps Bathory considers herself the new heir of the Spencer family, so the wings and nest resemble the cross of their family.

And she drinks blood because she believes that this way she can stabilize aging and preserve eternal youth.

5. Chris Redfield has always had a consistent personality. Even though he's a good guy, he's never been a perfect superhero. He could quarrel with his superiors and take the initiative into his own hands, even if this initiative is revenge. Therefore, if Chris suspects a corrupt connection between American politicians, Umbrella, and even the BSAA, Chris will not be idle. It is easy for me to believe that he can act as an illegal avenger in this story.

But!

If Chris and the masked men steal the baby, I suspect that Chris may be blackmailed, because I can't imagine any other reason for this act.

But why kill Mia? It's hard for me to justify this murder. I can only cite two reasons that underlie Chris's motivation.

Obviously, Mia is still a criminal who should be held responsible for the incident in Louisiana, but for some reason it didn't happen. Either Mia hid her involvement and Ethan backed her up, or Umbrella did. In the first case, something terrible could have happened that could have been prevented if Mia had not kept silent, so Chris carried out an act of revenge. In the second case, Umbrella may have a connection to the syndicate, and Chris was sent to clean up the mess and apprehend or destroy the traitor Lucas. In that case, if Mia is still working for the syndicate, she's still a useful ally. Then Chris simply punished her.

But both of these options are not excuses for me. If Chris did this consciously, he will have to be held accountable.

Thank you for your time! And sorry for my poor English. :)
 
Well, I know I've said this quite a bit on forums, and nobody seems to agree, but I think Chris is acting this way because of none other than Alex Wesker. If you think about it, this game is gonna be a sequel to both RE7 and Revelations 2. Claire, Moira and Barry were all last seen with Alex Wesker. Now, I doubt that an evil woman like her is going to just take off for Romania and leave her adoptive family unharmed, right? She would want revenge for having her plans messed up. Like, it would be along the lines of why the cult massacred Harry Mason in Silent Hill 3, or...

Abigail Anderson killing Joel Miller to gain revenge for him killing her father, who was one of the surgeons prepared to allow Ellie to die.

I cannot believe nobody else in the community thinks about that stuff anymore. Or maybe they don't want to convince themselves that maybe some beloved characters simply aren't going to be around forever.

If I end up being right next year, somebody PayPal me £50. It's peterandersonfilm[at] gmail.com if you don't know. ;)
 
Well, I know I've said this quite a bit on forums, and nobody seems to agree, but I think Chris is acting this way because of none other than Alex Wesker.
I can quite agree that Alex is blackmailing Chris into bringing Ethan's daughter to the village. I just don't understand why Wesker needs a child. It makes more sense for Evelyn's younger sister to kidnap Mia and Ethan's daughter.
 
I think the " His story comes to a close. " line is referring to chris.

I dont see how it would refer to ethan; his story was already finished in re7.

He found his wife and they got evacuated; he later on calls chris to talk to zoe and that's it.

Still dont know why capcom decided to use ethan again; he's just a random civilian that isnt even a character but more like an avatar; he isnt related to any anti-bioterrorism organizations while barely having any backstory other than being a system engineer.
 
You're right about the avatar part, mert20004. If you hack his model in the game, his face isn't shown. However, you can see his face slightly in the swamp and when Mia pushes him through the wall, during the flashback later on. It's like Capcom would prefer people not to really see his face. In a way we are supposed to "be" him. We're seeing the world through his eyes. :p
 
I dont see how it would refer to ethan; his story was already finished in re7.
Famitsu confirmed that this game will be a direct sequel to REVII, which will complete its story. In other words, Resident Evil 7 biohazard and Resident Evil Village are one story divided into two parts.

He found his wife and they got evacuated; he later on calls chris to talk to zoe and that's it.
As far as we can tell from the trailer and some inside information, the subject of interest will not be Ethan, but Mia and her and Ethan's daughter. The game's events stem from the aftermath of an incident in Louisiana.

he's just a random civilian that isnt even a character but more like an avatar;
In the first game and remake, I would describe Chris in the same way. If Redfield did not continue to develop in the future, it is unlikely that anyone would be interested in him. Nothing prevents the authors from spelling out Ethan's identity better this time. Moreover, he is not the only playable character.

Interestingly enough, all the evil characters in the trailer wear gloves, including Chris. If they are infected and subdued by mold, it makes perfect sense that someone doesn't want them to needlessly infect everything around them. Or some of them may understand that it is about mold, so they wear gloves. After all, it was unlikely that Chris had put them on so as not to leave fingerprints.

Maybe at some point in time, Chris found the syndicate, but the operation failed, so he was enslaved, and the new girl found out about Eveline. If Chris wanted to kill Mia, he would have done it earlier, because he found her photo in Not a Hero.
 
Famitsu confirmed that this game will be a direct sequel to REVII
I guess the game will be about blue umbrella then. Though ı still dont like how capcom's apparently planning to make re7's story pointless by making chris kill mia when that game's story is mainly about ethan trying to save his wife.

In the first game and remake, I would describe Chris in the same way.
Re1 and remake used third person fixed camera angles and they didnt make the players replace themselves with the characters unlike re7's case which makes the players replace themselves with ethan; one of the reasons why vr support exists for the game so that this replacing experience can be " improved " . Plus chris wasnt a civilian in those 2 games; he had military training in air force before joining stars with barry. Re1 guidebooks also had some nice backstory about the characters; in fact ı recently learned that one of them states about jill stating that her motive for joining stars was being unable to forgive evil that threatens civilians, but she also wanted to " experience the true feeling of life. " Re7's guidebooks dont have that much interesting info when compared to previous re entries' supplemental materials. Plus going from re5 / re6 / rerev2 to re7; it's like the story / characters and their development takes a huge step back in favor of gritty realism horror. I also have this issue with re2 2019 compared to og re2; in that game's situation, the things also feel mostly dumbed down unlike remake that greatly improves from og re1 without unnecessary amount of gutted elements.
 
I see your point and yes pre-re4 mainline entries ( along with outbreak games ) were more survival horror oriented compared to action horror trilogy but my points still stand.

If capcom wants to move the series forward; then ı dont think the realism route is the way to go.

Not to mention; re1 and remake were released in 1996 and 2002. Expectations were different back then. While re7 was released in 2017 and it feels dumbed down in story / lore in favor of gritty realism.

I dont think re7 being a more survival horror oriented is the problem; the problem is the execution. Rerev2 has better execution than both rerev and re7 while being improved from the former in many ways, both from gameplay and story perspective.

Plus ı cant stand 1st person camera in mainline entries; re7 feels more like a gun survivor entry rather than a mainline.
 
If capcom wants to move the series forward; then ı dont think the realism route is the way to go.
I don't quite understand what "realism" is supposed to mean. I can't call Resident Evil 7 a realistic game. This game is not shy of crazy things from the series like mechanisms or biology. Yes, this game is more grounded and dark, but the scariest games in the series have always been like this. This makes complete sense for horror.


Or if you're talking about "Westernization", I don't think it's a realistic style either. This is just another form of storytelling, which, by the way, was conceived for the series since 1996. American horror films of the 20th century might also seem more realistic than Italian Giallo, but this is just an American approach to art. This is absolutely authentic for Resident Evil 7, as the game is a homage to the horror culture of the 70s and beyond.

But if you say that the game has lost its Japanese roots, I will not agree. This game still has Japanese grotesque, Japanese approach to the plot, and even Japanese syncretism. In Louisiana, for example, no one builds such a grotesque basement system because the water table is literally several feet below the ground. From everywhere you can understand that this is a Japanese game.

Not to mention; re1 and remake were released in 1996 and 2002. Expectations were different back then.
I'm sorry, but I can't.

This is not some other time or outdated canons, but just a different art form. A lot of the decisions that the developers made were aimed at giving new players the essence of the original game from 1996. This is not even my opinion (although not without it), but the developers themselves have said this several times. A lot of decisions have been made to do this. For example, a "window into the past", when players from the 90s, starting to play the game, got into an old Gothic mansion with typewriters, although the characters of the game are modern people, and the events of the game also take place in the 90s. So is Resident Evil 7: a modern character in 2017 finds himself in an old Gothic mansion (the game implemented southern Gothic), where the old analog equipment is everywhere.

This is just one example. I could tell you about the quest with the shotgun, about the "ink ribbons", about finding the object in the books, about the scene in the bathroom and go so far as to end with a common plot and even a similar ending. This game literally feels like a remake of the original.

And yes, the tone and accents of the original were very different from the later games in the series, with which many players began their acquaintance.

I dont think re7 being a more survival horror oriented is the problem; the problem is the execution. Rerev2 has better execution than both rerev and re7 while being improved from the former in many ways, both from gameplay and story perspective.
Part of our common problem (not exactly mine and yours, but part of the whole community in all countries) is that we started playing with different games in the series, so we have different experiences. And we have different opinions about the plots, mechanics, and different decisions of the authors. There are, of course, those people who don't like one game because it's horror, or don't like the other game because it's action. But in most cases, people just don't have fun because they don't like "execution". At least that's what I noticed in my media space.

If you are interested in my opinion, I do not think that Revelations 2 is better than Resident Evil 7. At all. I don't like the structure of the story, the episodic format, the sense of progression, impact, and so on. I like this game, it's true, but if I compare it with others, it won't rank high.

So is Resident Evil 6. I don't think action is a bad thing. I don't think it's "not Resident Evil game". I don't even think it's a bad game. I just don't like the game design, the accents in the story, and so on. But I spent a lot of good time in the cooperative, The Mercenaries is fun and some of the knowledge in the lore seemed interesting to me. But this is not the direction I would like to see in the series.
 
Last edited:
So many franchises get ruined. Look at Alien and Resident Evil in their infancy. Bloody brilliant. Now? Now, they are just so, so different.

In fact, it's not just those either. Look at ALL of the franchises in the horror and action genre. Money talks. It sucks the soul out of everything.

But, I guess it's a business.
 
And many Japanese game series have also lost their grip. Especially the horror series. I still feel terrible about what happened to Silent Hill. And I'm not even exaggerating. On the other hand, I have to give credit to Capcom for not just continuing to support the Resident Evil series, but also producing really high-quality games, whatever direction they choose.

If you ask me what I really regret, it's that the soundtrack in the new games is not as legendary as it was in the days of the classic games.


 
I don't quite understand what "realism" is supposed to mean. I can't call Resident Evil 7 a realistic game. This game is not shy of crazy things from the series like mechanisms or biology. Yes, this game is more grounded and dark, but the scariest games in the series have always been like this. This makes complete sense for horror.


Or if you're talking about "Westernization", I don't think it's a realistic style either. This is just another form of storytelling, which, by the way, was conceived for the series since 1996. American horror films of the 20th century might also seem more realistic than Italian Giallo, but this is just an American approach to art. This is absolutely authentic for Resident Evil 7, as the game is a homage to the horror culture of the 70s and beyond.

But if you say that the game has lost its Japanese roots, I will not agree. This game still has Japanese grotesque, Japanese approach to the plot, and even Japanese syncretism. In Louisiana, for example, no one builds such a grotesque basement system because the water table is literally several feet below the ground. From everywhere you can understand that this is a Japanese game.


I'm sorry, but I can't.

This is not some other time or outdated canons, but just a different art form. A lot of the decisions that the developers made were aimed at giving new players the essence of the original game from 1996. This is not even my opinion (although not without it), but the developers themselves have said this several times. A lot of decisions have been made to do this. For example, a "window into the past", when players from the 90s, starting to play the game, got into an old Gothic mansion with typewriters, although the characters of the game are modern people, and the events of the game also take place in the 90s. So is Resident Evil 7: a modern character in 2017 finds himself in an old Gothic mansion (the game implemented southern Gothic), where the old analog equipment is everywhere.

This is just one example. I could tell you about the quest with the shotgun, about the "ink ribbons", about finding the object in the books, about the scene in the bathroom and go so far as to end with a common plot and even a similar ending. This game literally feels like a remake of the original.

And yes, the tone and accents of the original were very different from the later games in the series, with which many players began their acquaintance.


Part of our common problem (not exactly mine and yours, but part of the whole community in all countries) is that we started playing with different games in the series, so we have different experiences. And we have different opinions about the plots, mechanics, and different decisions of the authors. There are, of course, those people who don't like one game because it's horror, or don't like the other game because it's action. But in most cases, people just don't have fun because they don't like "execution". At least that's what I noticed in my media space.

If you are interested in my opinion, I do not think that Revelations 2 is better than Resident Evil 7. At all. I don't like the structure of the story, the episodic format, the sense of progression, impact, and so on. I like this game, it's true, but if I compare it with others, it won't rank high.

So is Resident Evil 6. I don't think action is a bad thing. I don't think it's "not Resident Evil game". I don't even think it's a bad game. I just don't like the game design, the accents in the story, and so on. But I spent a lot of good time in the cooperative, The Mercenaries is fun and some of the knowledge in the lore seemed interesting to me. But this is not the direction I would like to see in the series.
I already explained my issues with re7 in the past ( Re3 2020 thread. ) and how by unnecessarily focusing on realism; it seems to lose some of the franchise's identity.

Sorry but re1 / remake and re7 were released in different time periods. Expectations were different then. Plus remake improves on characters from the original game though ı wasnt a fan of how rebecca was handled. I think rebecca was handled better in re0 than remake. Cant stand mikami's stupid opinion when it comes to her; he's overrated.

Rerev2 is best modern ( Re4 and onwards ) survival horror experience imo plus it balances action and horror well and ı liked the story. I agree that episodic format is a bit lame and if you play the game in suggested order then the game jumps around a lot between claire's and barry's episodes ( They take place between 6 month time period. ) though this " jumping " seems more focused than rerev's jumping around method. Thankfully the game can be played in canonical order just like re6. Wished the game wasnt so butchered in localization though.

From the action horror trilogy; ı think re5 is the " worst " designed one in the bunch, re4 and re6 are better and more fun to play than re5. I remember thinking the game being better than re4 and it in fact does some things better than re4 but after thinking about it; some of my thoughts regarding to the game changed and ı started to appreciate re4 more in some aspects.
 
So ı've been seeing some people saying that chris is infected by mold and is the reason why he killed mia. I think that would be stupid cause he didnt get infected by nanan's gas in marhawa desire as well as the gas in not a hero section. Plus that would debunk the " Mold is related to t-veronica / c so it means it's based on progenitor. " theories.
 
So the new merchant lady is apparently called Morgana. There's supposed to be a "Gorilla-Man" too, who is able to kill Ethan in three blows. A lot of the villagers will also use swords with one-hit kills, but I still think they're making this game and basing it in a village, simply to cut corners for the pending RE4 remake.

 
Sorry but re1 / remake and re7 were released in different time periods. Expectations were different then.
The game was released much later than Grim Fandango and almost at the same time as Silent Hill 2. There are no any old expectations here.

Even at a later time, games were released that focused more on the environment, horror, and antagonist than on the main character. For example, Silent Hill 4 and The Evil Within. It's an art form.

it seems to lose some of the franchise's identity.
This is only your empirical experience. The series has already changed so many times and divided so many people that it is very naive to believe that everything was wonderful before Resident Evil 7. When I play Resident Evil 6, I can't believe it's the same universe as Resident Evil 2002.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom