Resident Evil Village

Post Reply New Topic

To me, "the beginning of the end" really started with RE4. Now, as successful as RE4 was, that game shifted away from the core elements of the series, and abandoned the Umbrella storyline. At the start, the narrator just says that they were put out of business. So that build up in the previous games didn't amount to anything worth a damn. Shouldn't there have been a 'big final battle' or something, to make the storyline conclude in a satisfactory manner, right?

A few years later, they released a rail shooter on the Wii, which included a new story that was supposed to clear up the things I am referring to, but it also had multiple remake style sections that were not quite accurate to the original releases. But that's pretty sad, because it's like somebody used chicken fat in their chicken salad, to try to make a decent meal out of something you know is tasteless and bland, so to speak.

Things have gotten so bizarre in the series now, that it really does feel like Capcom just makes up things as they go along. Like with RE7 for example, it only feels like it's linked to the other games once Chris Redfield returns and gets off the chopper at the end, after Ethan has survived the last boss battle. Although they changed everything about him. He looked way too young, and his muscular appearance wasn't there anymore. Yet they kept his super punching the same, as you get to play him as he is looking for a guy in these mines, who is called Lucas, and he acts like John Kramer from the Saw movies.

And the remakes are not that good. They make everything look less bright. You can have a horror game being scary, without the need to blanket everything in darkness. And the cut content was not good either. So I'm definitely not a big fan of Capcom's tactics to churn out these half baked games.

Does anybody know of Microsoft's Gears of War 3? Well, a few years after that game came out, Capcom released RE6. And RE6 is forever going to be known as the Ed Wood of RE games. It's just awful.

Anyway, RE6 is basically a rip off of that game. You run around decaying areas with a squad, called the BSAA. Since I don't play GOW, I couldn't tell you any of the names of the characters and enemies. But RE6 basically has these Locust style, giant ogre looking things as well. Not only that, they have a reference to the game where you can go to a park in a city, and play on a slide, which is what you can do in GOW as well.

There's other games they've been copying ideas from as well. But I try not to make my posts too drawn out. But yep. They do do that, a lot.

It's like Hollywood too. They had something good going with Saw in 2004. Then they milked that for a number of years, ended it for almost a decade when fans knew it was getting dumb, then decided to milk it again. But it's the same with video games. They know the IP is a million selling goldmine, so they can just keep milking it forever by going back to Raccoon City.

I've no doubt in my mind that they changed over to action and then first person, just because of action games, and then Steam started putting out these walking, horror games. Which I don't like, as you just go around rooms having to avoid the threat, and combat is often completely omitted. But as it was a trend, and P.T. was hyped up heavily, they just wanted to seize the chance to imitate that 'new style' of gaming.

You should always be able to fight back to some extent in a horror game. It's a natural reaction to danger.

Yeah I pretty much agree with everything you said. And the video game industry has pretty much turned into Hollywood lately which sucks. It's all about milking money from gamers and not about about making games that are fun and creative.

Speaking of milking money, I really despise DLC nowadays because it often feels like a ripoff. That's why I wasnt really that bothered that the remake of RE3 didnt have much DLC. I hate having to pay extra money to feel like i own a complete game.

Here's how Capcom could have did the remakes better / differently.

Don't cut / change content.

In the original RE2, Leon and Claire enter the city at separate spots. Leon sees a woman on the road, so he gets out of his car to have a look.

Claire goes into a diner nearby. They both meet their first zombies before the famous "Get down!" line occurs. But in the remake, they use the same gas station as their opener, boss fights are repeated throughout the game, and whatnot. That's not supposed to be the case, and Super Tyrant was only ever in the B scenario. It's like both characters are in the same locations. They are both supposed to be elsewhere, either helping Sherry Birkin or Ada Wong.

The police station was changed, and they left out the scene where Leon explains to Claire that her brother left to go to Europe to try to have Umbrella implemented. Instead, they added in cheesy stuff like flirting in the rain that felt rather pointless. There was also plot aspects they just altered in general, which I didn't think helped for pacing reasons.

In RE3, they also cut out a lot of enemies and several locations from the original could not be visited, but they didn't have Barry Burton in the ending, which I find is a particularly crappy mistake on their behalf. The canonical ending has always been that Barry came to save Jill as a favour, so she could get out of Raccoon City before the big nuke happened. And although I don't know how he knew of her precise location, she may have been monitored by radio. But still. They didn't include him.

There was also a lot of enemies that got cut, like the spiders. The plants in the lab were also changed into ones that look like people, and Nemesis didn't look right, and just didn't seem as menacing. And the RE3 remake doesn't have the Dead Factory for the finale. It's just another lab, like the one from the RE2 remake. They probably just decided to copy and paste things across, to save on resources.

I also would change how the zombies die, as they always took a ridiculous amount of bullets to kill. Even some of the better guns sounded weak and didn't feel very impactful. But that's how I would change things.

The movie reboot "Welcome to Raccoon City" had infected crows, yet the game didn't have any. But that's silly, because they have the orphanage where Irons was revealed to be a child molester. So that was also pretty dumb.

Changing the race of the characters also doesn't look right. Jill isn't supposed to be Mexican, and Wesker is not African-American. And they really need to stop going back to 1998, because Raccoon City was destroyed in the original RE3. But every so many years, a spin off comes out, or a remake. They could go to another country for a change, instead of rehashing the same type of storylines.

Technology is definitely good enough for online gameplay, so an Outbreak remake could work wonders. But to play it without experiencing any lag, you would need to use fibre broadband.

In the UK, I am under contract with TalkTalk. But I only achieve a speed of 1 MBPS with their Internet, and my download speed is just as atrocious.

Even my mobile data outdoors is quicker than their abysmal connection...

I don't really like those side story games that Capcom published over the years. Many are non canon. All are just utter trash, and therefore pointless.

He is portrayed by Lance Reddick in the series on Netflix.