>Shinji Mikami Considers The REmake A "Commercial Failure"
Why did Resident Evil (2002) flop?
Lamecube exclusive. The thinking was that RE fans would love RE so much they'd buy a Gamecube to continue the series. That thinking was obviously wrong and it should have gotten xbox and especially PS2 releases.
Also they had made too many spin-offs so it was hard to get hyped for a new RE game when they came out every other weak for every console.
>it was hard to get hyped for a new RE game when they came out every other weak for every console
If you count every version separately (Director's Cut, etc) there's already 11 Resident Evil releases before REmake lol
[...]
Lamecube exclusive. The thinking was that RE fans would love RE so much they'd buy a Gamecube to continue the series. That thinking was obviously wrong and it should have gotten xbox and especially PS2 releases.
Also they had made too many spin-offs so it was hard to get hyped for a new RE game when they came out every other weak for every console.
it's genuinely laughable how people give capcom a pass for being worse than an EA or activision when it came to milking franchises.
like counting spinoffs & every versions i'm pretty sure there are more street fighters than maddens.
/thread
You guys can enjoy your long winded semantics arguments, but at the end of the day, that was the biggest deciding factor.
I hope the team felt proud at least, the RE1 remake is one of my all time favorite games. It rules. RE1 is my favorite in the series, the remake was like a dream come true for me.
>Ahead of its time
REmake was using dated design philosophies that its rival series had never used, that its sister series had initially abandoned outright, and that Resident Evil itself had ditched.
The only advantage pre-renders ever had was looking pretty, and it was worthless on sixth gen when far weaker hardware like the PS2 could pull off far more visually stunning games like Metal Gear Solid 3 or Silent Hill 3.
Nothing is "ahead of its time" about REmake.
>and no one knew how ahead of its time it really was
How? Its basically just the same gameplay as the original only slower and with weapons that can get you out of receiving damage from a grab. Graphically its great of course but its still only an evolution with a side step compared to the originals gameplay. Actually maybe not even. There are no decapitations.
It was exclusive to the fricking GameCube but most of the series’ fanbase was from the PlayStation. Why move into a platform that only had Capcom and Nintendo games to really play on?
What if I owned every 6th gen console including the Dreamcast?
8 months ago
Anonymous
Whatever fantasy you built in your head about the PS2's processor being more capable than the gamecube's gets destroyed by simply playing a few levels of Rogue Leader.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>rogue leader
nobody has ever played this game past the first level (mostly because it sucks)
>So what do we port to the Preskool-Station? >Our latest cartoon platformer? >No, the horror entry from the previous gen that uses tank controls...
What was Capcom or Nintendo thinking?
It wasn't really a flop. It's more that the mid-90s horror game fad set unrealistically high sales expectations. RE1 and 2 selling 5 and 6 million copies was a fluke.
Pretty much. Everyone saw the big numbers Capcom pulled with the first couple RE titles and decided to jump on the bandwagon with their own horror series. The overwhelming majority were complete nonstarters. The ones that had a strong start like Parasite Eve and Silent Hill went breasts up a few years later when the fad fizzled out. RE would have been just as dead as the rest if they hadn't completely changed course with 4.
>RE1 and 2 selling 5 and 6 million copies was a fluke.
lol frick off no it was not. They sold well because they were great games. The biggest issue for RE1 remake is the fact it was on the Gamecube and then ported to Wii so for a long time it was a Nintendo exclusive game despite RE's primary fanbase being Sony players.
the novelty wore off for the genre and they made a bunch of them quickly. RE1, RE2, RE3, Code veronica, Zero, Remake, all in a six year span. i think people had their fill which led to a sales decline.
mostly due to tank control fatigue. gamers didn't want to play that way anymore. same reason zero flopped. these games would have only sold marginally better on the ps2
No one was impressed by completely static pre rendered backgrounds anymore either. It would have been way more interesting if they remade the first game in full 3D with a dynamic camera and real time lighting like CV used.
No one was impressed by completely static pre rendered backgrounds anymore either. It would have been way more interesting if they remade the first game in full 3D with a dynamic camera and real time lighting like CV used.
That has literally nothing to do with why REmake bombed.
There isn't some grand public consensus about when a thing stops being trendy, especially not in a span as short as 6 years (and really 4 for most people, since RE2 was the big hit). We're currently 6 years deep into the latest explosion of RE games that all play the same, and nobody is sick of them yet. Superhero movies took over a decade to truly begin falling off (and even then, they still control box offices), and so on.
This weird idea that people just got sick of traditional RE is arm chair rationalization for something very easy to explain.
People who played Resident Evil games weren't buying Dreamcasts or Gamecubes, and PlayStation owned magazines or early blogs would routinely bash things not exclusive to the console. That's really it. I remember back in the day CV getting shit on when it was first announced as a DC exclusive, and it only cooled off when Code Veronica Kanzenban was announced for the PS2 (I remember a pretty funny shift where they would do a "review" that focused on how dumb it was for Wesker to come back ("Featuring characters like Albert 'Isn't He Dead' Wesker"), and then when Kanzenban got announced, it was all talking about how cool the new Wesker scenes are). Same shit happened for the GCN exclusives too.
You can see this in regards to what was actually bought on PS2. Outbreak, a predominately online spin off for a console that most people didn't have online support set up for, nearly outsold Resident Evil Zero, a mainline title. Resident Evil 4 on GCN underperformed, only did 0.3K more than REmake, comes to PS2 and does over 2 million.
The issue was always that RE fans weren't on the platforms that had RE games. Not some mysterious "everyone got sick of this thing despite it being routinely praised at the time", they were only four fricking games with fixed cameras by the time REmake even came out!
It's because Zero, Code Veronica, were all boring rushjob games. that's it. No one was going to buy a Dreamcast or gamecube for them, and people felt they were not just more of the same but total downgrades.
>It's because Zero, Code Veronica, were all boring rushjob games. that's it. No one was going to buy a Dreamcast or gamecube for them, and people felt they were not just more of the same but total downgrades.
This is a modern opinion. At the time, Code Veronica was routinely praised for its amazing visuals and music, as well as the 'cinematic quality' it present, and various additions to the gameplay. It's more common now to see it criticized, but at the time it was one of the highest scoring games Capcom had put out.
As for Zero, it received more criticism at the time, but so had a game like Resident Evil 3. In fact, I'd say the responses to both were remarkably similar.
This idea of Resident Evil 3 being "one of the good ones" is also a fairly recent thing, as it was one of the most criticized at the time for being effectively an asset flip and an incredibly linear game.
>This is a modern opinion. >This idea of Resident Evil 3 being "one of the good ones"
Nope I was there (I'm 39). In person and online forums had pretty similar views. None of my circle of friends who loved Re1-3 had any interest in playing Zero or Code Veronica. I had an RE fanatic friend who scoffed at all these new spin-off games an dhow lame they were. I remember reading online forum reviews of Zero and how terrible it was at the time which really put me off. I remember one person saying the monkey enemies were the final straw saying it was the worst RE game yet.
This isn't recent. Code Veronica and Zero were the nadir of the series where it felt they were making rushjob rehashes and the games were suffering. Code Veronica looks and feels like it's outsourced, with a plot that feels fanfic tier.
And I was also around there and posted back on re-horror when it was re-horror.
People certainly gave CV shit, but that was a minority opinion and people who hated CV were far less common than people who were disappointed with 3.
What I remember about CV was the glowing praise it often received at the time from anyone that wasn't currently laying their lives down for the PlayStation brand. Even Wesker was given a free pass because many people were excited by how good the FMVs looked, the visual upgrade in the gameplay, the new "more gothic" music (actual thing someone said to me), the return of Chris, etc.
>We're currently 6 years deep into the latest explosion of RE games that all play the sam
this isn't true. RE7, RE2 Remake, RE4 Remake all play very different
Fatal Frame somehow becoming a Nitnendo only exclusives is the same shit. Nintendy fans don't care for this shit at all. This series should be PS, Xbox, and especially Windows focused.
>this whole thread
kek, I guess the meltdown was similar to when bayonetta 2 was announced exclusively for nintendo? are there screenshots of people back then reeing at REmake on GC?
Game Cube exclusive
Lamecube exclusive. The thinking was that RE fans would love RE so much they'd buy a Gamecube to continue the series. That thinking was obviously wrong and it should have gotten xbox and especially PS2 releases.
Also they had made too many spin-offs so it was hard to get hyped for a new RE game when they came out every other weak for every console.
>it was hard to get hyped for a new RE game when they came out every other weak for every console
If you count every version separately (Director's Cut, etc) there's already 11 Resident Evil releases before REmake lol
thirteen, you forgot Super Resident Evil Turbo and Biohazard II EX Plus Alpha
it's genuinely laughable how people give capcom a pass for being worse than an EA or activision when it came to milking franchises.
like counting spinoffs & every versions i'm pretty sure there are more street fighters than maddens.
I agree. Capcom does for every IP. They burn them all to the ground and see what sticks.
Even the mainline titles were basically yearly releases from 96-2002. They only skipped 97 and 2001 but made up for it with 2 titles in 2002.
but that was the EXACT reason why I bought a gamecube; I wanted to play Resident Evil Remake..
It was on the Gamecube
/thread
You guys can enjoy your long winded semantics arguments, but at the end of the day, that was the biggest deciding factor.
I hope the team felt proud at least, the RE1 remake is one of my all time favorite games. It rules. RE1 is my favorite in the series, the remake was like a dream come true for me.
no evidence anyone wanted that slop on PS2 either
>Why did Resident Evil (2002) flop?
Again that question? For the last time, it was because of me.
Nice. I wish I had that power.
Nintendies don't buy third party games.
it was a remake of a game that was 5 years old and no one knew how ahead of its time it really was
it's aged very well
How was it ahead of its time? It was the same fixed camera slop they'd been churning out yearly since 1996.
>Ahead of its time
REmake was using dated design philosophies that its rival series had never used, that its sister series had initially abandoned outright, and that Resident Evil itself had ditched.
The only advantage pre-renders ever had was looking pretty, and it was worthless on sixth gen when far weaker hardware like the PS2 could pull off far more visually stunning games like Metal Gear Solid 3 or Silent Hill 3.
Nothing is "ahead of its time" about REmake.
>and no one knew how ahead of its time it really was
How? Its basically just the same gameplay as the original only slower and with weapons that can get you out of receiving damage from a grab. Graphically its great of course but its still only an evolution with a side step compared to the originals gameplay. Actually maybe not even. There are no decapitations.
It was exclusive to the fricking GameCube but most of the series’ fanbase was from the PlayStation. Why move into a platform that only had Capcom and Nintendo games to really play on?
They wanted to make the GC a Capcom machine
>They wanted to make the GC a Capcom machine
https://capcom.fandom.com/wiki/Category:PlayStation_2_Games
They could've put Maximo, Onimusha, Devil May Cry and Clock Tower 3 on there.
DMC would have looked and played like P.N.03. I don't think the GameCube's CPU could handle the series.
I don't think it's healthy to post use your post-purchase cope mechanisms 23 years after the fact.
What if I owned every 6th gen console including the Dreamcast?
Whatever fantasy you built in your head about the PS2's processor being more capable than the gamecube's gets destroyed by simply playing a few levels of Rogue Leader.
>rogue leader
nobody has ever played this game past the first level (mostly because it sucks)
mikami is a hack. tokuro fujiwara is the true father of capcom.
>So what do we port to the Preskool-Station?
>Our latest cartoon platformer?
>No, the horror entry from the previous gen that uses tank controls...
What was Capcom or Nintendo thinking?
*Playskool-Station
It wasn't really a flop. It's more that the mid-90s horror game fad set unrealistically high sales expectations. RE1 and 2 selling 5 and 6 million copies was a fluke.
Pretty much. Everyone saw the big numbers Capcom pulled with the first couple RE titles and decided to jump on the bandwagon with their own horror series. The overwhelming majority were complete nonstarters. The ones that had a strong start like Parasite Eve and Silent Hill went breasts up a few years later when the fad fizzled out. RE would have been just as dead as the rest if they hadn't completely changed course with 4.
>RE1 and 2 selling 5 and 6 million copies was a fluke.
lol frick off no it was not. They sold well because they were great games. The biggest issue for RE1 remake is the fact it was on the Gamecube and then ported to Wii so for a long time it was a Nintendo exclusive game despite RE's primary fanbase being Sony players.
the novelty wore off for the genre and they made a bunch of them quickly. RE1, RE2, RE3, Code veronica, Zero, Remake, all in a six year span. i think people had their fill which led to a sales decline.
1. released on Gamecube
2. "evelything berow 5M sold units is a shamefur dispray!"
In fact, it only sold marginally less than RE4, ON THE GAMECUBE
Resident Evil 4 also wasn't seen as a big hit. Capcom just had the foresight to greenlight a PS2 port behind Mikami's back.
Because not enough people bought it you dumb motherfricker
mostly due to tank control fatigue. gamers didn't want to play that way anymore. same reason zero flopped. these games would have only sold marginally better on the ps2
>tank control faituge
Black person RE4 also has tank controls
facts are facts, RE fans didnt own gamecube and didnt want to change systems
>RE4 also has tank controls
It's true but Anon probably meant tank+fixed camera angles
yeah it doesn't have fixed camera.
No one was impressed by completely static pre rendered backgrounds anymore either. It would have been way more interesting if they remade the first game in full 3D with a dynamic camera and real time lighting like CV used.
That has literally nothing to do with why REmake bombed.
There isn't some grand public consensus about when a thing stops being trendy, especially not in a span as short as 6 years (and really 4 for most people, since RE2 was the big hit). We're currently 6 years deep into the latest explosion of RE games that all play the same, and nobody is sick of them yet. Superhero movies took over a decade to truly begin falling off (and even then, they still control box offices), and so on.
This weird idea that people just got sick of traditional RE is arm chair rationalization for something very easy to explain.
People who played Resident Evil games weren't buying Dreamcasts or Gamecubes, and PlayStation owned magazines or early blogs would routinely bash things not exclusive to the console. That's really it. I remember back in the day CV getting shit on when it was first announced as a DC exclusive, and it only cooled off when Code Veronica Kanzenban was announced for the PS2 (I remember a pretty funny shift where they would do a "review" that focused on how dumb it was for Wesker to come back ("Featuring characters like Albert 'Isn't He Dead' Wesker"), and then when Kanzenban got announced, it was all talking about how cool the new Wesker scenes are). Same shit happened for the GCN exclusives too.
You can see this in regards to what was actually bought on PS2. Outbreak, a predominately online spin off for a console that most people didn't have online support set up for, nearly outsold Resident Evil Zero, a mainline title. Resident Evil 4 on GCN underperformed, only did 0.3K more than REmake, comes to PS2 and does over 2 million.
The issue was always that RE fans weren't on the platforms that had RE games. Not some mysterious "everyone got sick of this thing despite it being routinely praised at the time", they were only four fricking games with fixed cameras by the time REmake even came out!
It's because Zero, Code Veronica, were all boring rushjob games. that's it. No one was going to buy a Dreamcast or gamecube for them, and people felt they were not just more of the same but total downgrades.
>It's because Zero, Code Veronica, were all boring rushjob games. that's it. No one was going to buy a Dreamcast or gamecube for them, and people felt they were not just more of the same but total downgrades.
This is a modern opinion. At the time, Code Veronica was routinely praised for its amazing visuals and music, as well as the 'cinematic quality' it present, and various additions to the gameplay. It's more common now to see it criticized, but at the time it was one of the highest scoring games Capcom had put out.
As for Zero, it received more criticism at the time, but so had a game like Resident Evil 3. In fact, I'd say the responses to both were remarkably similar.
This idea of Resident Evil 3 being "one of the good ones" is also a fairly recent thing, as it was one of the most criticized at the time for being effectively an asset flip and an incredibly linear game.
>This is a modern opinion.
>This idea of Resident Evil 3 being "one of the good ones"
Nope I was there (I'm 39). In person and online forums had pretty similar views. None of my circle of friends who loved Re1-3 had any interest in playing Zero or Code Veronica. I had an RE fanatic friend who scoffed at all these new spin-off games an dhow lame they were. I remember reading online forum reviews of Zero and how terrible it was at the time which really put me off. I remember one person saying the monkey enemies were the final straw saying it was the worst RE game yet.
This isn't recent. Code Veronica and Zero were the nadir of the series where it felt they were making rushjob rehashes and the games were suffering. Code Veronica looks and feels like it's outsourced, with a plot that feels fanfic tier.
And I was also around there and posted back on re-horror when it was re-horror.
People certainly gave CV shit, but that was a minority opinion and people who hated CV were far less common than people who were disappointed with 3.
What I remember about CV was the glowing praise it often received at the time from anyone that wasn't currently laying their lives down for the PlayStation brand. Even Wesker was given a free pass because many people were excited by how good the FMVs looked, the visual upgrade in the gameplay, the new "more gothic" music (actual thing someone said to me), the return of Chris, etc.
>Code Veronica looks and feels like it's outsourced
Because it was.
>We're currently 6 years deep into the latest explosion of RE games that all play the sam
this isn't true. RE7, RE2 Remake, RE4 Remake all play very different
Fatal Frame somehow becoming a Nitnendo only exclusives is the same shit. Nintendy fans don't care for this shit at all. This series should be PS, Xbox, and especially Windows focused.
>this whole thread
kek, I guess the meltdown was similar to when bayonetta 2 was announced exclusively for nintendo? are there screenshots of people back then reeing at REmake on GC?
Is there a way to play this shit game on the hardest difficulty without being forced to use the meme bonus weapons with infinite ammo?
Who the frick thought this was a good design choice?