Resident Evil: Operation Raccoon City

[alexdz]

Oh, I remember reading somewhere about Nemesis (the one in RE3) being the second produced out of four T-103's inserted with the NE-Alpha parasite.

So that whole back story was just made up then or was it just the "T-02" name that was fabricated?

Nemesis T-Type was created by a inserting the NE-Alpha on a T-103, there weren't other Tyrants inserted with the parasite, the Nemesis on RE3 is the only Nemesis and the parasite was only used on him and Lisa Trevor.

[Vito]

Thanks Smiley , for embedding the vid !
I cant view it Cause of this age gate crap ! , but when embedded i can , I already saw it anyway !
Oh How Crap is this game ! it would be Hilarious if it got scrapped early before release lol !

@REHunk , How can you be sure that they wont port it ?
Remember Revelations was first supposed to be RE5 cause they wanted to port RE5 First , and there is a possibility that they have an Original High Definition version who knows ? Considering that they also used the same engine as Revelations for "RE6" .... Not far from getting a console version , since capcom wants every cent they can get !

[Vixtro]

Nemesis T-Type was created by a inserting the NE-Alpha on a T-103, there weren't other Tyrants inserted with the parasite, the Nemesis on RE3 is the only Nemesis and the parasite was only used on him and Lisa Trevor.

Okay thanks for clearing that up. The NE-Alpha parasite is a marvellous thing when you think about it, it gave us the Nemesis T-Type and it was the catalyst that caused Lisa Trevor to develop the primitive strain of the G-virus. Although the latter was pretty much a ret-con and could have easily been something completely different altogether.

[Dracarys]

I got a few PMs here and elsehere asking me to copy/paste something I typed on CU. The questions are badly worded in my opinion so the answers are not clear what is being answered. I'll try clear it up durng the copy/paste since was several posts.

-----

Depends how you compare the answers to the actual questions asked. Parrallel to main series isn't very clear, what is the main series? Most people on forums refer to RE0,1, 2, 3, 4, 5, CV as main series and the rest as side games and side stories, RE3 runs parallel to RE2 for a part, the Outbreaks games run parrallel to both RE2 and 3. What do Capcom see as main series? Nobody can say for sure, only guess.

Unfortunately the question was not worded for a clear answer either, instead of simply asking "Is the game possibly a part of the official timeline" they bring up the 'what if' part in the question which I think anyone already knows the killing possibilties are not possible to be canon, and then ask if it is a major part of the timeline which the answer would be 'no' for the what if parts.

So just to reference my first paragraph for its question...what does Capcom count as main series, even assuming they count main series as 'every canon game' was they answering the question for ORC as a whole or as the 'What if' parts? It is not clear. The same problem is in a later question, the question asks about 'what if' part instead of the entire game.

These are poory worded questions that ask too many things as one so the answer is not clear, especially when taking into account -

- Kawata has previously said that ORC is "Not necessarily entirely in the canon" which means that it is possible to be canon or not.
- This backs up a claim by Mike Jones a US producer who says "you can play it in a way that does not disrupt Resident Evil 2 or 3 at all." so the game can be played in a way that does not conflict with canon.
- Kawata has also claimed "It is fully integrated into the chronology of Resident Evil, and it is totally immersed into the mythology." Chronology is another term for timeline, try searching something with chronology in on google, it brings up search results for 'timeline'.
- Adding a third name to the mix, Adam Boyd the creative director claims "We're not changing the Resident Evil canon, we're not changing the Resident Evil storyline. We're working in with it."

So that is three different people working on the game all claiming it is canon, or its in the timeline, or can be played in a way that fits canon if you want. This vs an answer to a messy question that could possibly be claiming not canon.

Four people if you want to count a nameless PR rep who claims canon is up to player choice, http://www.relyonhorror.com/latest-n...want-it-to-be/

-------
Later on thanks to link I could actually prove part something in that above post.
-------

http://www.projectumbrella.net/articles/INSIDE-BIOHAZARD-DARKSIDE-CHRONICLES#CHRONICLESOFTHEDARKSIDECHRONICLESpage182185

CV - "The fourth main volume series product that was released" CV is the fifth game, so if it is the forth main volume series then Capcom must not consider Survivor (which is listed 4th/released 4th) a main series game, meaning the main series are what I listed.

More from link...

Resident Evil Dead Aim (Heroes Never Die in japan) - "It was introduced as an "extra edition" in the "GUN SURVIVOR" series, but the world-view is the same as the main volume series." So it claims it is canon but NOT the main series. Again evidence Capcom do not consider side games as main series.

...and more

Outbreak - "The product which describes the story of average citizens who are going to escape from Raccoon City in the same time axis as the main volume series "BH2" and "BH3". Once again a side game seperated from being labled as main series.

Only RE1, 2, 3, CV, 0, 4 and 5 are listed as main series.

---------



So I am still being objective about this being canon or not, I think these were some messy questions that asked too much at once and asked in the wrong way. Should not ask about the 'what if' parts being canon, we know they are "Hypothetical", should of asked in a much clearer and specific way. When you take into account the much clearer quotes from Kawata, Mike Jones and Adam Boyd I do not see how canonicity of the game as a whole can be solidly confirmed or denied.

- No drama for an objective/unbiased view please.

[TheBatMan]

I just wish they had announced it was to be non-canon from the very start and save all this hassle. At least we know for sure now.

[News Bot]

Kawata and Seto have said the entire game is a parallel (doesn't intersect with the main-series canon, unlike SURVIVOR, CHRONICLES and OUTBREAK) and hypothetical scenario. Your "what-if parts" don't exist, and can be traced back to the initial incorrect statements which implied that the game would be canon if you kept the main characters alive. There's more to the game's storyline than that, and none of it is canon. Keeping the main characters alive does not magically make it fit, and no amount of Mike Jones or Adam Boyd will change it.

ORC is set between RE2 and RE3 - how does this game fit into the overall RE universe?

This title was set in the timeline between RE3 and RE2. However, this is a totally different story, which has not so much to do with the RE history. This is a world of "if"s. And because of this setting and the point of view, we were able to broaden our possibilities and realise all the new ideas.

Q1: Is Operation Raccoon City merely a“what-if” scenario or does it have a major role in the timeline of the Resident Evil series as a whole?

A1: The title is a parallel story to the main series, so it hypothetical and not part of the main story timeline. We feel that this has allowed us to take the gameplay in a new direction.

Q4: How is the “what-if” aspect of the game handled in the online co-op campaign? Can players choose specific scenarios to play?

A4: The scenarios are essentially presented in chronological order. They are hypothetical stories, but they tie in with the worlds of Resident Evil 2 and Resident Evil 3.

Q11: Will there be an explanation for the discrepancy between the time period of the game’s setting (September 1998) and the advanced technology featured?

A11: As the game’s story is hypothetical, we have prioritised gameplay when designing the scenarios. In particular, Umbrella Corporation have the technology to create BOWs, which is advanced compared to Spec Ops.

Dracarys; your post only reinforced the fact that it is not the same kind of spin-off as the other spin-offs which are acknowledged as canon; it is a "what-if". Not canon. It is another GAIDEN. Not once does Kawata or Seto ever refer to what-if "parts". They call the entire game a what-if. Please stop attempting to pass off Kawata's first statement on the game as evidence that it is canon. Although his words were very vague ("immersed in the mythology and chronology" applies to every single piece of material on the series ever produced, canon or not canon), he was not saying that it was part of the main series story/timeline (the canon). The fact that CAPCOM Japan wrote the "outline" for the scenario also does nothing to help your argument, as everything related to the series is either written, edited, supervised or approved by the BIOHAZARD Team, with some leniency in the case of the Anderson movies and S.D. Perry novels.

I also do not need to point out the fact that Operation Raccoon City contradicts everything and simply does not fit. You are blind to this, though, and have ignored repeated requests to attempt to explain how it fits and contradicts absolutely nothing at all despite not fitting and contradicting a lot in grotesque and gratuitous amounts.

- No drama for an objective/unbiased view please.

[Guy Fieri]

This game looks like shit. I may rent it or buy it used sometime down the line, but no way in hell am I dropping $60 to encourage Capcom to make more of these.

Also, the pissing match between News Bot and Draycars is incredibly annoying. I found myself skipping whole pages of this thread because of those two's arguments ruining the conversation.

[News Bot]

Also, the pissing match between News Bot and Draycars is incredibly annoying. I found myself skipping whole pages of this thread because of those two's arguments ruining the conversation.

I personally apologize.

[Mrox2]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]6074[/ATTACH]

What

[Dracarys]

If you cannot understand the questioning of the wording do not reply to it, you are posting quotes which I already covered as unclear in definition and explained how they are unclear but simply bolding parts of them does not change anything about my questioning of them.

They raised the issue with the 'what if' which gives confusion to answers, and the last question you quoted talks about in the answer "Umbrella Corporation have the technology to create BOWs" which sounds to me like he is talking about the entire RE universe being disjointed with technology of the time setting rather than just the game since Umbrella making BOWs matches up with the entire RE series. The person who asked that question likely meant the guns and cars and cloaking, but they did not ask that and as such the answer doesn't match such a question. Do you see this issue?

The statements from Kawata can be arguable either way depending on how to interpret them and how japanese translation and wording goes, canon or not canon. I've said this before. However the statements from Mike Jones and Adam Boyd are very clear and in english so no translation excuses for this and I've never seen a trace of evidence that these people don't know about the game they are making outside of minor details that a majority of RE fans probably are not aware of or do not care about. A date being off by 3 days to most RE fans is about a big an issue as an RPD door being different in RE2 and 3 and window getting broken in a prequel when it is fixed in a chronologically later game. Nothing on the scale of a game being canon or not.

I am well aware that even with a canon playthrough like has been claimed there are some heavy liberties that are going to be taken, a lab getting a complete redesign to suit gameplay purposes for example, however the difference beteen you and me here is that you seem to think a liberty being taken is the same thing as ripping out the entire foundation of the story. It isn't. Is like the people claiming 'Han Shot first' in Star Wars, saying the shooting second change Lucas made completely changes the attitude and story of the character, does it really though? Is Star Wars canon completely changed because of it or do most fans not even realise many of the changes he makes?

[Wrathborne]

I'm afraid you've ruined everything by expressing your opinion Dracarys.
Your punishment is to play RE: Gaiden, for 15 minutes.

[News Bot]

You did not cover the quotes accurately as you outright did not read them properly, as evidenced by your continued "what-if only in parts" nonsense. The producers know exactly what they are saying, as did the people who asked the questions. They asked if the game was a "what-if" scenario. The producers said that it is a "what-if" scenario. How much clearer do you want it to be before you're satisfied?

However the statements from Mike Jones and Adam Boyd are very clear and in english so no translation excuses for this and I've never seen a trace of evidence that these people don't know about the game they are making outside of minor details that a majority of RE fans probably are not aware of or do not care about.

Mike Jones is a PR horse and Adam Boyd is a Slant Six employee. Neither have any authority over the series canon in general, and are directly contradicted by Kawata and Seto, probably the two leading figures in the series right now.

I am well aware that even with a canon playthrough like has been claimed there are some heavy liberties that are going to be taken, a lab getting a complete redesign to suit gameplay purposes for example, however the difference beteen you and me here is that you seem to think a liberty being taken is the same thing as ripping out the entire foundation of the story. It isn't. Is like the people claiming 'Han Shot first' in Star Wars, saying the shooting second change Lucas made completely changes the attitude and story of the character, does it really though? Is Star Wars canon completely changed because of it or do most fans not even realise many of the changes he makes?

Changing dates, story backgrounds, events, enemy backgrounds, enemy origins, character information, so on and so forth is not "taking liberties". It's writing a completely different storyline. Which the producers admit to openly. I can understand level design changes from a gameplay perspective (though they bear zero resemblance to the areas they are supposed to be, not even a little). There is no comparison to "Han Shot first", just like there is no comparison between this game and REmake. They are not deliberate changes to the canon, it's a brand new "re-imagining" story which is set in the same world/universe, but bears otherwise no resemblance. Events happen differently. Going by your logic, 4D-EXECUTER should be canon because it doesn't contradict anything, even though CAPCOM say it's not. Leon's death in GAIDEN totally doesn't matter as it's just a "liberty", so it should be canon. Chris and Jill meeting Wesker in 2003 in "Prelude to the Fall" is also totally canon because it's just a "liberty" when RE5 and UC both contradict it. It doesn't work like that. "Fans don't notice" is also irrelevant. Project Umbrella has shown that fans don't really notice a lot about the storyline, we still reveal information that nobody knows yet it has been around for 15 years. Are you trying to say that they are going to throw away 15 years of established information and canon (which they are still working on) for a third person shooter spin-off they say is not connected to the canon? The events in Operation Raccoon City are not deliberate changes to the canon. They are contradictions, which are allowed because the game is not intended to be canon. The same way the Wildstorm comics are allowed to have a telepathic G-Virus, or the Osamu Makino novels are allowed to have a Wesker who is psychic and can control B.O.W.s with his mind.


It's not canon. You are probably the only person who thinks so at this point. It is another GAIDEN story. Described the exact same way by Kawata too, no less. Nothing to do with the main series, in comparison to the likes of the GUN SURVIVOR, OUTBREAK and CHRONICLES spin-offs.

[Vixtro]

This game looks like shit. I may rent it or buy it used sometime down the line, but no way in hell am I dropping $60 to encourage Capcom to make more of these.

Yes, the game does look like shyte overall, the worst offender IMO being the atrocious AI.

Yet, while I didn't drop any money for a brand new copy of RE5 (I bought it second hand), I feel obliged to buy this game brand new to show some support. I want Zombies back, I want the good ol T/G-virus BOW's back, so I have to suck up my Resi Evil pride and just jump in.

At the end of it all, the game looks like it could and should be fun with 3 other players anyway. RE5 taught me that, that game may have been a disaster overall (more-so than RE4 to some, but I wouldn't go THAT far ), but the co-op was fun.

[News Bot]

Oh look. A statement from Kawata/Seto/CAPCOM about how canon Gaiden is.

"As this subject unfolds, Gaiden is not related to the main story as its name suggests."

And oh look, a statement from Kawata/Seto about how canon Operation Raccoon City is.

"it hypothetical and not part of the main story timeline"

[Reston]

IMO, this game is not canon unless they somehow bring new information to the table that is not contradicting and even then I would still question Slant Six and their source material. It's just a retelling of the story from a different point of view with changes made to customize the controls and style the developers were going for. Much like the UC and DC portions of RE-RECV. It's really to please new fans who want more action and now seeing what RE6 controls are like, this game seems to have been a beta for the control style that is being used for that.

I don't see where this argument is coming from anyways. Slant Six developers were told to make a game in which they did. It's quite obvious that there are a blunder of mistakes in the game. A lot of people already stated obvious ones but for example; Four-Eyes being able to turn zombies into crimson heads. If I'm not mistaken, that is only possible through the V-ACT which was experimental in the Arklay Research Facility, and therefore has no purpose from a story point of view in Raccoon City. It's obvious it was just to heighten the tension for gamers while ignoring the story. Just accept it for being entertaining and parallel. Sorta like how UC/DC both have many contradictions when they re-tell the stories of RE0-RECV in terms of both story elements and creatures used (like why there are crimson heads/eliminators in Russia since one is based on progenitor and the other V-ACT) it's just to appease to the control schematics and angle they are going for.

I for one do not really care much for the story of ORC. A lot of us know the story. I am more interested in the city itself and to see how it comes together in a 3D perspective. Just enjoy the game for what it is.