#1 Posted by dbene (88 posts) -

Why can't CAPCOM simply realize that if they made a game LIKE the old school pre-rendered environment RE games but with today's smoother graphics....it would be an amazing hit.

Think how giant the world could be with Blu ray technology. A game like RE2 but with 4 times the size and scope.

#2 Posted by Zevvion (2361 posts) -

Because it wouldn't. That's a thing you really want, but not a lot of people share that with you as Capcom's research showed them. They have nothing indicating them that it would be the right game to produce. That's not saying it would be incapable of becoming a hit, but the chances are low. And when you are talking a 30 million dollar investment or more; that's not a chance you're going to take.

#3 Posted by Marcsman (3286 posts) -

Forget RE. Capcom drove it into the ground. However a next gen Dino Crisis is what we really need.

#4 Posted by FriendlyPhoenix (467 posts) -

Resident Evil 6 sold 5.2 million copies in it's first year and RE5 has sold something like 7 million. There's a reason they haven't gone back to the old style games and that's because the new style is hugely successful for them. I would love to see them do a new old-school RE game, but there just isn't any plausible reason for them to take that chance.

Online
#5 Posted by seveword (188 posts) -

I want a AAA full and expansive Resident Evil game that is a roguelike survival game starring H.U.N.K. with limited ammo and no health regen.

And when you beat the game H.U.N.K. pulls off the gas mask and reveals that it was Barry Burton the entire time.

#6 Posted by dbene (88 posts) -

Resident Evil 6 sold 5.2 million copies in it's first year and RE5 has sold something like 7 million. There's a reason they haven't gone back to the old style games and that's because the new style is hugely successful for them. I would love to see them do a new old-school RE game, but there just isn't any plausible reason for them to take that chance.

So do you really believe people are buying the new games because of the style? or because of the name?

IMO, it's the name....all these people buy it because they are old school gamers who want to love the series and then they hate the new games (for the most part).

I think the same amount of people would buy the game I described but more would love it. I'm not saying keep it exactly the same. They could tweak a lot of the controls and things of that nature....but just bring back the actual survival horror vibe.

#7 Posted by mechahendrix (20 posts) -

I would like for Capcom to change the direction they are taking the series but they don't have to go back to the classic style. They can have the puzzle solving, slow pace, atmosphere and characters without the fixed camera angles and those controls. I would not expect a modern gaming audience to accept those tank controls.

They really need to look back at RE4 to see what was great about that game and do that. It was the cool environments, cool enemies, good level design, and really just being a good game.

#8 Posted by Sanious (793 posts) -

This is why I will be grabbing The Evil Within.

#9 Posted by Marokai (3141 posts) -

A game of the old style and controls wouldn't really play as a full release, but I'm still sort of surprised they never did any kind of throwback style Resident Evil as a cheaper downloadable title to test the interest of such a thing.

The last time they made classic-style Resident Evil it was Resident Evil 0 and REmake on the Gamecube, and they sold fairly well (both managed over 1.2 million, not counting the re-releases on the Wii) for being exclusives to the console that only sold more than the dead system that was the Dreamcast. It's not like the audience for those games completely fucking disappeared. Give it a shot again.

#10 Posted by Nightriff (5335 posts) -

I would prefer a game of the old school style, but it wouldn't do well as others have pointed out. I love RE4 but I understand that it is on the line of being a RE game and being "gears" before Gears. 5 and 6 are considerably further away from the franchise as a whole and did extremely well despite shitty reviews for 6. I think they need to return to a more horror/action style like 4 to save face with the mess they created but I can't see this in anyway happening, sadly. RE is an action franchise now, not a campy, crazy story, horror one anymore.

Online
#11 Edited by Yummylee (22535 posts) -

@marokai said:

A game of the old style and controls wouldn't really play as a full release, but I'm still sort of surprised they never did any kind of throwback style Resident Evil as a cheaper downloadable title to test the interest of such a thing.

The last time they made classic-style Resident Evil it was Resident Evil 0 and REmake on the Gamecube, and they sold fairly well (both managed over 1.2 million, not counting the re-releases on the Wii) for being exclusives to the console that only sold more than the dead system that was the Dreamcast. It's not like the audience for those games completely fucking disappeared. Give it a shot again.

Wait, what? Mikami at least has stated that the remake sold rather poorly (didn't reference Zero, but I would wager that sold less), and was the reason for why they opted to go in a more action-orientated route. Just curious where you got those numbers from.

Also, technically Outbreak File 2 was the last Resident Evil of the survival horror era to be released. It had multiplayer sure, and in fact even allowed you to play with regular analogue control and in File 2 even introduced the ability for you to move and shoot, but they were some pretty hardcore survival horror games all the same.

That said, I agree that it's weird why Capcom haven't even bothered to test the waters with something that harks back to the older games. But then that's probably what Revelations was; an attempt at bridging the gap between the old & new, only it unfortunately left you with a hodgepodge that didn't especially excel in either area. It was still comforting that they tried, though.

Anywhoo, as for the direction of Resident Evil... This thread discussion tends to crop up a lot and I basically always have the same answer: reboot the bloody thing and decide on a particular pacing and style and stick to it. Stop pandering to the old school fans with constant references to Raccoon City while developing a game that is now completely unrecognisable from the games that were centred in Raccoon City. Either make your balls-out action game with a completely new fiction & characters, or... wait and see what The Evil Within is doing and maybe try competing against that.

Online
#12 Edited by ToTheNines (830 posts) -

@marcsman: the first dino crisis was dino shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit.

Also I would like to point out that Resident Evil 2 sold 4.95 million copies, just on Playstation. So it's not like the old games didn't sell. That is actually an amazing number back in day. However I don't think an old school survival horror game would be marketable today. Or at least I don't think it would be wise to do with a triple A budget. Although if Capcom were to invest less they could proably do it. But I don't see it happening.

#13 Edited by believer258 (12183 posts) -

@dbene said:

@friendlyphoenix said:

Resident Evil 6 sold 5.2 million copies in it's first year and RE5 has sold something like 7 million. There's a reason they haven't gone back to the old style games and that's because the new style is hugely successful for them. I would love to see them do a new old-school RE game, but there just isn't any plausible reason for them to take that chance.

So do you really believe people are buying the new games because of the style? or because of the name?

IMO, it's the name....all these people buy it because they are old school gamers who want to love the series and then they hate the new games (for the most part).

I think the same amount of people would buy the game I described but more would love it. I'm not saying keep it exactly the same. They could tweak a lot of the controls and things of that nature....but just bring back the actual survival horror vibe.

You don't think that people got tired of clunky controls and fixed camera angles?

Revelations was kinda their attempt at bringing back atmosphere, but it doesn't seem to have succeeded all that well. Some people think it's good enough, though, so maybe try that.

@yummylee Wouldn't a spiritual successor be better? They could drop all of the baggage that comes with what people expect out of a Resident Evil game and keep most of the hype by saying "this is like old RE's". Apparently that's what The Evil Within is supposed to be, though, so I don't know. Capcom itself sometimes seems like it needs a whole fucking reboot.

#14 Edited by Yummylee (22535 posts) -

@believer258 said:

@dbene said:

@friendlyphoenix said:

Resident Evil 6 sold 5.2 million copies in it's first year and RE5 has sold something like 7 million. There's a reason they haven't gone back to the old style games and that's because the new style is hugely successful for them. I would love to see them do a new old-school RE game, but there just isn't any plausible reason for them to take that chance.

So do you really believe people are buying the new games because of the style? or because of the name?

IMO, it's the name....all these people buy it because they are old school gamers who want to love the series and then they hate the new games (for the most part).

I think the same amount of people would buy the game I described but more would love it. I'm not saying keep it exactly the same. They could tweak a lot of the controls and things of that nature....but just bring back the actual survival horror vibe.

You don't think that people got tired of clunky controls and fixed camera angles?

Revelations was kinda their attempt at that, but it doesn't seem to have succeeded all that well. Some people think it's good enough, though, so maybe try that.

Those clunky controls still seemed to be acceptable in Resident Evil 4 at least. And funnily enough the game that they actually developed in trying to modernise the series still controlled like ass. Not to mention that, in relation to their respective genres, controls worse than the old games I'd say.

Online
#15 Posted by believer258 (12183 posts) -

@yummylee said:

@believer258 said:

@dbene said:

@friendlyphoenix said:

Resident Evil 6 sold 5.2 million copies in it's first year and RE5 has sold something like 7 million. There's a reason they haven't gone back to the old style games and that's because the new style is hugely successful for them. I would love to see them do a new old-school RE game, but there just isn't any plausible reason for them to take that chance.

So do you really believe people are buying the new games because of the style? or because of the name?

IMO, it's the name....all these people buy it because they are old school gamers who want to love the series and then they hate the new games (for the most part).

I think the same amount of people would buy the game I described but more would love it. I'm not saying keep it exactly the same. They could tweak a lot of the controls and things of that nature....but just bring back the actual survival horror vibe.

You don't think that people got tired of clunky controls and fixed camera angles?

Revelations was kinda their attempt at that, but it doesn't seem to have succeeded all that well. Some people think it's good enough, though, so maybe try that.

Those clunky controls still seemed to be acceptable in Resident Evil 4 at least. And funnily enough the game that they actually developed in trying to modernise the series still controlled like ass. Not to mention that, in relation to their respective genres, controls worse than the old games I'd say.

The odd thing about RE4 is that it never felt clunky to me. Which, when thinking about the controls, sounds extremely weird, but I first finished it when it released on 360 in 2011 (I think) after playing many other third person shooters and never had an issue with it.

#16 Posted by Marokai (3141 posts) -

I personally adore RE4's controls; that game's controls are super tight and accurate, but I will say that probably my favorite thing about RE4 is that it fooled a lot of people into thinking it really changed the Resident Evil control scheme all that much. The dirty little secret is that the controls themselves are more like the old school Resident Evils than they are different, it's just that the camera angle has changed and given you a different perspective on the old controls.

Resident Evil 4 and 5 totally still have tank controls, and God bless them for that.

#17 Edited by Yummylee (22535 posts) -

@believer258: I should add that I was of course referring to RE6 regarding the game tried to modernise the series, not RE4. Though as for RE4's controls, the perspective definitely changes a lot. But like how everybody (including Brad for RE5) claims that the reason why you can't move & shoot (have to move with tank controls) is because you don't need to is exactly how I feel about the original games.

I would never classify the controls as being... accessible, though; they're very unorthodox to say the least. Despite that, because the original games' were rather slow paced and emphasised atmosphere and exploration over most facets, I similarly never felt like the controls were much of a hindrance. The older games still had plenty of combat, though it was all very simple; most bosses required that you simply run away, shoot, run away, shoot ect. The primary source of challenge was that you had to decide whether it's best using up some ammo to kill this enemy rather than try to run away. That might mean you get damage along the way, but... hey, you gotta adapt! That's basically the core appeal for me and survival horror: being forced to adapt because you've run low on supplies and have to think outside of the box and mix up your strategies. It's why I'm also a huge fan of The Last of Us not only for its story, but because it also had some really punishing gameplay.

Anywhoo, there's also the camera angles. Camera angles existed for the purpose of accentuating the atmosphere and directing specific scares; it allowed a lot of freedom for the game to actually show you what they want (or don't want) you to see. However analogue control (for a time) didn't quite mesh with camera angles very well. Think the original Devil May Cry, which had camera angles but also allowed you more freedom of movement; it lead to instances of you running from one angle to the next and then having to awkwardly shift to pushing the stick in the opposite direction sometimes. Though like I said this was only for a time, as with games like Onimusha 3 and the Outbreak games they had evidently figured that issue out. So that would at least explain why they stuck with the tank controls for so long even when analogues were introduced to controllers.

Now there's also the complaint concerning camera angles that you can get blindsided by enemies that you couldn't see. But every enemy in a Resident Evil game had a tell, be it a squishy footstep or growl for example, so you would always know if something was close by. Plus, from Resident Evil; Director's Cut onward you had auto-aim available, so even if you couldn't see it your characters would always aim directly at an enemy should one be within the vicinity. As such, I've always thought that the camera angles never got in the way that much, and they greatly benefited in attributing to the atmosphere of the games a great deal, especially in the first and its remake.

So anywhoo... I know you didn't ask for it, but that's my explanation of why I think those old games for what they are controlled fine. I'm not saying you or anyone else has to agree with me either, but I always think it's unfair how everyone is so accepting of the way RE4 & RE5 play yet so many also tend to lambaste the old Resident Evil games' controls as pure shit. And like I mentioned above, the reason why I liked playing Resident Evil games of old was because of the fear of noticing your supplies dwindle and being forced to improvise. Even if because of their age there wasn't that much to improvise to beyond running away... still, early days and all that. Plus that's also why I really enjoyed the Outbreak games (well, the first one anyway), because it felt like it was the culmination of what Resident Evil was about but for a more modern era. It had degradable melee weapons for example and randomised zombie encounters.

So really, it's not like I specifically enjoy tank controls and think they're better than regular analogue control, I just (usually) have no problem with them. Camera angles, however, I am definitely in favour for and think they genuinely have merit in building atmosphere, especially in conjunction with pre-rendered backgrounds <3.

Truth be told when it comes to survival horror games of that era you could have certainly done a lot worse! The Fear Effect games for example even I think are rather clunky and not quite as smooth (tank controls aside, they were always responsive and animated well; again no worse than RE4) as the old Resident Evil games. I also consider Dino Crisis to be a little uneven because of how equally fast and strong the dinosaurs are in that game, which felt like you were always at an unfair disadvantage. Plus I don't really like that game all that much to begin with; it lacks the atmosphere of Resident Evil in favour of drab facility buildings and long, sterile corridors.

EDIT: Man... I could have just made a whole blog about this >_>

Online
#18 Posted by ArbitraryWater (12106 posts) -

For as much as I'd sort of love a ridiculous return to clunky old-school Resident Evil, that will never happen outside of maybe that RE 1.5 restoration thing that appears to still be happening.

#19 Posted by Video_Game_King (36272 posts) -

@arbitrarywater:

What about an indie darling throwback that hams everything the hell up? Like a Zeboyd take on Resident Evil?

#20 Edited by Pr1mus (3946 posts) -

Sales of that style of RE games peaked with 2 and went down with each new installment afterwards. Some of that can be blamed on the platform (Zero and REmake) but it doesn't explain why 3 and Code Veronica or the Outbreak games didn't sell as well as 2.

They could still produce a REmake style game for RE2 and 3 today for comparatively little money though compared to what a full blown new RE in the style of 4-5-6 would cost and release them as downloadable 15-20$ games.

#21 Posted by ArbitraryWater (12106 posts) -

@video_game_king: if I liked zeboyd's RPGs and didn't think they were trying too hard, I would agree with you. But only if this hypothetical game was shitty in the ways that old resident evil and silent hill were shitty, but self aware.

It's the same attitude where I say that indies should stop biting off of SNES-era stuff for their quaint indie JRPGs and move on to bad polygonal graphics, unstoppable 90 second summoning animations and mini games that require a guide to complete.

#22 Edited by StarvingGamer (8554 posts) -

RE5 gameplay RE4 pacing and atmosphere

I will buy 100 copies

#23 Edited by GunstarRed (5448 posts) -

I was thinking about this the other day. The entire world in the Resident Evil universe is totally fucked. Almost every single part of the planet has zombies, monsters and bug people inhabiting it. I think they should just announce two games at this point. A small scale return to horror and then the balls out action movie they seem far more interested in making... just remove all of the horror completely.

Oh, and a crazy, over the top anime Resident Evil. How that hasn't happened already is baffling.

#24 Posted by crithon (3441 posts) -

Revelations was a fun game trying old gameplay designs while trying a bit of modernization. But really, I kept thinking about Dark Souls and how that reminds me how difficult original RE1 was and how rewarding that experience was.

#25 Edited by dbene (88 posts) -

I guess I just dont' understand the gaming industry as much as I thought. Seems like, to me, that a huge % of us are now over 25 and would LOVE these old school games. Also, seems to me that series like Resident Evil sell more on their old reputation than any kind of new age marketing and or gameplay. I am guessing of the 5 million or so that bought RE6.....around 4 milllion of those (at least) just bought it because it was a RE game...no matter what it was like. And I am guessing that a huge % of those 4 million would have liked it better if it was "old school".

I wouldn't even mind something totally new. Maybe something with a Dark Souls style camera but some of the clumsiness and real life awkwardness that fighting zombies would probably have. Maybe the old pre-rendered environments but with some cool zooming features, and polished controls.

I also agree the waters could be tested with a smaller released downloadable style game.

#26 Edited by AcidBrandon18 (787 posts) -

Game mechanics have moved on. I loved the old, shambling zombies of the first game, but they can't really be compelling enemies with the modern controls we have now. The Evil Within is the TRUE next Resident Evil game because Capcom no longer knows how to make one.

#27 Posted by SaFt (390 posts) -

As many others have already stated in here, it probably won't happen.

But i would love it if they actually made a classic Resident Evil style game on a lower budget than their numbered sequels and release it on PSN, XBLA. Kind of like what they did with Strider.

#28 Posted by colliderz (5 posts) -

We need a final game to end the story then reboot the series

#29 Edited by GalacticPunt (1105 posts) -

@colliderz: That final game was Resident Evil 5. Wrapped up all the Umbrella and virus stuff.

Just pretend RE6 never happened and reboot at will.

Online
#30 Edited by CakeBomb (223 posts) -

I've recently played Revelations, RE6 and revisited RE5 and I've gotta say, as bad as RE6 is, it's better than 5, because the partner is not a concern as much and the inventory system and healing method is more suited for an action game. Make no mistake, both are horribly flawed, but 6 at least realizes it's an action game, but both maximized RE4's flaws (QTEs, enemies with guns and partners), while discarding what made it good.

I think there us a future for the series, they just need an identity and a control scheme adapted for the type of game it is, be it action, horror or both. Also, give co-op a rest.

Revelations is a good bet, it's a little repetitive (enemies) but mixes both sides well. Going back to the old games is not viable, unless they use the modern inventory and heal systems. Basically release 5/6 as Chronicles rail shooters so we can get the story without playing the original games and reboot the series.

I like the smaller downloadable classic style game idea too.

#31 Edited by bartok (2582 posts) -

Onimushu needs to make a comeback. That game was pretty much RE but with Samurais and Jean Reno in the third game for some reason.

#32 Posted by Relkin (170 posts) -

I wouldn't mind seeing a game in that style (not necessarily RE) but we are definitely in the minority. Don't expect a big franchise like RE to cater to the minority. It wouldn't be smart business move. I'll keep an eye on RE 7 when its released, but after 6 I'm not particularly optimistic. I hope they do something good with Resident Evil again.

#33 Posted by Lydian_Sel (2501 posts) -

At this point it feels like more people associate the Resident Evil name with horror themed 3rd person action games ( like RE4, 5, and 6) while the people who are actually hungry for satisfying horror and survival gameplay have gone to games like Outlast and Amnesia.

I don't think Resident Evil can ever go back.