Ryan: BSAA Remote Desktop

[News Bot]

Required info for the timeline. Does anyone have any idea when the event with the reflection of the woman in the screen and the blood splatter occurs? It's obvious that M. Suzuki murders Ryan, but I need the date for the timeline. Thanks.

[Mr. Spencer]

YOU WEREN'T SUPPOSED TO TELL 'EM ABOUT THE TIMELINE!

Secret PU project is now revealed to every mutant on THIA.

[Dracarys]

I believe it is filed under promotional nonsense.

[Det. Beauregard]

YOU WEREN'T SUPPOSED TO TELL 'EM ABOUT THE TIMELINE!

Secret PU project is now revealed to every mutant on THIA.

Oh noes! Teh world is upside down!!!



Nah I joke. I love PU; the Biology of Evil reports were freaking amazing. So much dedication! Can't wait for the timeline!

[News Bot]

I believe it is filed under promotional nonsense.

Guess what; it's not. Especially if you actually pay attention to the information it provides, and the daily reports from Ryan. It's actually vital to the BH5 storyline, and it's referenced in the game itself. I'll explain this in another topic. Ryan and M. Suzuki are the most important background characters in the game, and their actions in the Remote Desktop cause everything which happens in the game.

Also John, the PU timeline is mentioned on the front page of PU itself, so there's no information exposure.

[Guest]

I believe it is filed under promotional nonsense.

Hmm...don't think so. Judging from how deeply the background information ties into the game, I'd say both Adam's Blog and the BSAA Remote Desktop were primarily written by Tsukasa Takenaka, the man who provided the story background and files for RE5 (and is now the associate producer of Revelations, which gives me some hope in the in-game files in that game). News Bot is right: The BSAA Remote Desktop basically sets up the plot for RE5 – you don't need to read it to understand what's going on, but it helps establish the base for how wrong the mission went.

Does anyone have any idea when the event with the reflection of the woman in the screen and the blood splatter occurs? It's obvious that M. Suzuki murders Ryan, but I need the date for the timeline. Thanks.

That happened on March 9, 2009, four days after the game supposedly begins.

[News Bot]

Hmm...don't think so. Judging from how deeply the background information ties into the game, I'd say both Adam's Blog and the BSAA Remote Desktop were primarily written by Tsukasa Takenaka, the man who provided the story background and files for RE5 (and is now the associate producer of Revelations, which gives me some hope in the in-game files in that game). News Bot is right: The BSAA Remote Desktop basically sets up the plot for RE5 – you don't need to read it to understand what's going on, but it helps establish the base for how wrong the mission went.


That happened on March 9, 2009, four days after the game supposedly begins.

Thanks Prime. Much appreciated.

[Dracarys]

Hmm...don't think so. Judging from how deeply the background information ties into the game, I'd say both Adam's Blog and the BSAA Remote Desktop were primarily written by Tsukasa Takenaka, the man who provided the story background and files for RE5 (and is now the associate producer of Revelations, which gives me some hope in the in-game files in that game). News Bot is right: The BSAA Remote Desktop basically sets up the plot for RE5 – you don't need to read it to understand what's going on, but it helps establish the base for how wrong the mission went.


That happened on March 9, 2009, four days after the game supposedly begins.

It contradicts things stated in the actual game and well as making other things not make sense if it were true. There is no way RE5 took place in 2009 either, the ages of characters make it an impossibility and ages are solid and not open to interpretation though is plenty of this to back up it not being 2009.

In-game material should always trump marketing and promotional material. Thee is a thread dedicated to this somehere that contains most arguments for it.

[News Bot]

It contradicts nothing. And what does it make--not make sense? If anything, it makes other things make sense.

Also, no way RE5 took place in 2009? Explains why every official timeline says it does...

[Jill4EverSTARS]

Hope this doesn't sound dumb but what exactly is the Remote Desktop I never heard about it before

[Grem]

the ages of characters make it an impossibility and ages are solid and not open to interpretation though is plenty of this to back up it not being 2009.

I agree, there. Ages are completely messed up in RE5. There is no way Chris is 35 in RE5 if it does take place in 2009 considering his age in RECV or Umbrella's End.

I do not deny the importance of the remote desktop or Adam's blog at all since they really contribute to the understanding of the operation. But, they messed up with the timeline. RE5 takes probably place in 2009, but Chris should have been 36 then. But, oh well, they made him 4 cm taller in RE5 so anything can happen lol

[Guest]

There is no way RE5 took place in 2009 either, the ages of characters make it an impossibility and ages are solid and not open to interpretation though is plenty of this to back up it not being 2009.

There is no way Chris is 35 in RE5 if it does take place in 2009 considering his age in RECV or Umbrella's End.

We know for sure that RE5 takes place in 2009 as they specifically changed the date from the original plan (2008) to tie in with the marketing campaign.

As far as I remember, Chris is 25 in both Resident Evil and CODE:Veronica and there never was a concrete age stated for the "Umbrella's End" scenario. So him being 35 in RE5 makes perfect sense, placing his 36th birthday somewhere between January 9, 2009 (the start of the BSAA Remote Desktop which already had the Chris Redfield file with age 35) and July 24, 2009 (11 years after the mansion incident). No room for mistakes there.
I seem to remember some problems with Jill's age in RE5, but this does not affect the supplemental information in the BSAA Remote Desktop – so far, I have yet to see anything that actually contradicts the game.

[TheBatMan]

If you want in game evidence then Jill's age whether it is correct or not jumps ahead by 3 years from Lost In Nightmares to the main game. Lost In Nightmares took place in 2006 as Jill says in game that Raccoon City was 8 years ago. 1998 + 8 = 2006 +3 = 2009, simple math.

Its pretty clear that the game was originally supposed to be set in 2008 but like it or not it was changed fairly late on to 2009. This was to coincide with the delayed release of the game. RE5 was originally scheduled for Q4 2008 but was put back to Q1 2009.

The game itself takes place on March 5 2009 which is the exact same day as the game's release date in Japan.

[News Bot]

Do I need to point out how moronic it is to disregard entire books because you're not happy with a negligible digit that can be chalked up to minor error or has that been stated already?

It can't be stated enough as far as I'm concerned.

[Guest]

Do I need to point out how moronic it is to disregard entire books because you're not happy with a negligible digit that can be chalked up to minor error or has that been stated already?

These are still just put together by employees from Studio BentStuff, Enterbrain and Karitajian, and thus don't go beyond anything shown in the English guidebooks. Unless one of the writers comes out and says that CAPCOM provided them with all production notes, it is all just information deduced from the games. Nice to read, but little more than that.