Resident Evil 6 confirmed...

[Vector]

says someone whose name is Vector

Operation Raccoon City isn't trying to hide about what it is -- a spin-off, co-op third-person-shooter with a heavy reliance on run-and-gun action. I'm more worried about another main, numbered RE game sucking as hard as RE5 did. I just don't see where they can go from this point.

And to be honest, to see all the people pining for Leon is making me very, very sad. He'll probably be the main character and he'll probably dual-wield pistols and run up walls and spew one-liners while dancing around like Vamp in MGS2...and some of you would like that.

[Zombie_X]

I wonder why does Capcom keep adding numbers to RE games' titles, when we have games like Code Veronica and Revelations that even without numbers still belong to the main storyline.

Code Veronica was supposed to be ''Resident Evil 3 Code Veronica'' but because of a exclusivity deal with Sony it got the 3 taken out and was made a side story. 'Resident Evil 3 Nemesis' was originally going to be a side story just titled "Resident Evil Nemesis" (Biohazard Last Escape) but was given the donation of 3 when the whole deal with Sony went down.

Sony wanted to keep the main series on the Playstation and RE3CV was already in development for the Dreamcast so CAPCOM just took the three out and gave it to Nemesis. Kinda shitty because E3 really does nothing with the plot of the series while CV added to it and was much more of a true sequel.

At least this is my understanding. I had heard that RE3 wasn't even in development but when they made the Deal with Sony they started to develop it for the PSX. This bit sounds iffy but I wouldn't doubt it.

[Grem]

And I disagree about killing off a main character. Especially one you're playing. If you can do it well (something I'm not sure Capcom can, but never mind) it can be a dramatic and emotional scene which adds massively to the impact of the story. A lot of books and movies end with the main character dying in some suitably heroic way. Resident Evil is perfect for this. You stand there, wounded and infected, desperately buying time for your comrades to escape, standing your ground against a monster you haven't been able to kill the whole game while the clock counts down, knowing even if you win you can't make it out because you, too, would become a monster.

Now, even if you add in someone showing up with the antidote and fleeing at the end that's a powerful scene, done well, if fairly cliché. That scene won't work at all in this situation - you know Chris and Jill will live, and I don't expect Capcom to make me care enough about the new characters to give a rat's ass.

While I agree for books and movies, I do not for video games and especially not for Resident Evil. Even if it's well done, dramatic and all, it will tell you that you're only purpose in the end is to die, which is not fun and takes away all the sense of implication in the game. Like I said, what drives you in RE is to avoid death at all cost. This is just in total contradiction with the "philosophy" behind RE. BUT I would accept the death of the main character if you ditch him in favour of another character during the middle of the game for example. That way, the first character can set the story at the beginning but dies later on when you're playing as someone else.

What you must ask yourself is why should he/she die? Will this death add to the series? Will it be relevant?

Take Wesker. He had to die. Why? Because the story revolved around him and if you want to move somewhere else storywise, he needs to die. Plus he's the main antagonist and as soon as all mysteries surrounding him are revealed he's no longer relevant to the story. This is what happened in RE5 and that's why his death is justified.

But what about Chris? What would Chris' death bring to the series? I hardly see a relevant reason to kill him. Plus his job is done. He destroyed Umbrella, rescued Jill and killed Wesker. Leave him alone and let him enjoy his return to a more normal life and having a family with Jill or whatever

He could die so that Claire comes back, perhaps? "YOU KILLED MY BROTHAA YOU WILL PAY!!" You don't want that, I'm sure
Jill is even worse since they already used that kind of twist for her in RE5.

The only way I can see their deaths being somewhat useful would be to set the path for a totally new main character in order to replace them.

As far as dramatic impact goes, I always thought it was awful to kill a character just so that we could shed a tear in one cutscene. That would be terrible to reduce them to that. But that's just my opinion.

I'm not suggesting that your character has to die. But the best RE games were the ones where the scenario adapted to your play through and frankly the choice to survive or fall was one I wish would be explored further.

In that sense, I agree with you. I love alternate endings in RE1 and the fact that your actions could possibly end up in failure at the end of the game is something I find very interesting. But what I don't like is when you're not given the option. You die and that's it. This is pretty bad.

I completely forgot about Jill in RE5. But I assume you were given the choice to rescue her or to let her die.

[RetroRain]

It's going to happen the same thing that happened with the first RE5 trailer, almost nothing shown in the RE6 trailer will be used and everything will be changed by the second trailer.

The new Resident Evil game cicle will begin again: people will make the most absurd guesses regarding who the character shown is, there will be hundreds of stupid theories with no sense whatsoever and everybody will say that the horror is back at the series, no matter what is shown. Also, there'll be bitching and moaning.

Pretty much this, in a nutshell.



I'm no longer hopeful for this series though. Even when Capcom says they're trying to make the main series games horror, I feel like they have a hard time with staying away from action. They'll add tons of ammo, action buttons, more melee moves. I see it happening. I don't get why they can't do what kicked this series off in the first place.

Scarce ammo, realistic modern environments, atmosphere, tough enemies, enemies crashing though windows and doors.

I would love for this game to be similar to what Resident Evil 1.5 was. Two brand new characters that have to escape the city of the undead. And depending on who you select, you start in different locations.

I know some of you are excited, but I am keeping my expectations low. Very low.

[Darkmoon]

While I agree for books and movies, I do not for video games and especially not for Resident Evil. Even if it's well done, dramatic and all, it will tell you that you're only purpose in the end is to die, which is not fun and takes away all the sense of implication in the game. Like I said, what drives you in RE is to avoid death at all cost. This is just in total contradiction with the "philosophy" behind RE. BUT I would accept the death of the main character if you ditch him in favour of another character during the middle of the game for example. That way, the first character can set the story at the beginning but dies later on when you're playing as someone else.

What you must ask yourself is why should he/she die? Will this death add to the series? Will it be relevant?

Take Wesker. He had to die. Why? Because the story revolved around him and if you want to move somewhere else storywise, he needs to die. Plus he's the main antagonist and as soon as all mysteries surrounding him are revealed he's no longer relevant to the story. This is what happened in RE5 and that's why his death is justified.

But what about Chris? What would Chris' death bring to the series? I hardly see a relevant reason to kill him. Plus his job is done. He destroyed Umbrella, rescued Jill and killed Wesker. Leave him alone and let him enjoy his return to a more normal life and having a family with Jill or whatever

He could die so that Claire comes back, perhaps? "YOU KILLED MY BROTHAA YOU WILL PAY!!" You don't want that, I'm sure
Jill is even worse since they already used that kind of twist for her in RE5.

The only way I can see their deaths being somewhat useful would be to set the path for a totally new main character in order to replace them.

As far as dramatic impact goes, I always thought it was awful to kill a character just so that we could shed a tear in one cutscene. That would be terrible to reduce them to that. But that's just my opinion.


In that sense, I agree with you. I love alternate endings in RE1 and the fact that your actions could possibly end up in failure at the end of the game is something I find very interesting. But what I don't like is when you're not given the option. You die and that's it. This is pretty bad.

I completely forgot about Jill in RE5. But I assume you were given the choice to rescue her or to let her die.

Honestly? The only reason for the characters to create an emotional response in you. I can see where you're going with the idea that the whole point is surviving, and having a character die sorta defeats that purpose, but so long as there's a good enough reason for it - saving another or preventing an outbreak - then I think it works.

It probably would work best if you played as multiple characters during the course of the game, but it can be done well with one character.

As for what it adds to the story...it makes the characters more human, more vulnerable. Right now, most of the characters but especially the big three are blown way outta all proportion with most people. They're fairly unreal - each has survived multiple scenarios where they've been stranded with no supplies and few allies and managed to come out alive without even mental scaring. If one dies, then the other two can too, and that makes them more like people.

I would accept a mental breakdown as an acceptable alternative. Jill is a good candidate - she's been nearly killed several times, held and mentally abused by Wesker, controlled via technomancy and her body screwed up with drugs. Some shell shock is fairly well warranted in such a case.

I certainly wouldn't mind seeing multiple endings, but I think that's too much like work for Capcom these days, and too likely to detract from the fun of the gun.

I know some of you are excited, but I am keeping my expectations low. Very low.

It depends - if you liked RE4 and RE5 you may well like RE6 too. Despite the talk of bringing back horror and reboots, I suspect the greatest change to the system is going to be run and gun - ironically the second biggest complaint behind lack of horror, and far easier to fix without making the things that people liked about the game not work.

[Mr. Rod]

Zombie_X: Just a clarification, RE3 Nemesis is still a side story and CODE: Veronica is still the true sequel to RE2. Having numbers or not doesn't affect that. Of course both games are important to the storyline.

[Grem]

As for what it adds to the story...it makes the characters more human, more vulnerable. Right now, most of the characters but especially the big three are blown way outta all proportion with most people. They're fairly unreal - each has survived multiple scenarios where they've been stranded with no supplies and few allies and managed to come out alive without even mental scaring. If one dies, then the other two can too, and that makes them more like people.

The problem, here, is how Capcom try to portray their characters. They should just stop trying to make them over-the-top. Hopefully RE6 will fix that. This is possible without having them tortured mentally or killed.

As for mental breakdowns. Capcom fails at showing these things. As a comparison, a lot of characters are supposed to be highly intelligent, but in the game even the so-called geniuses like Wesker, Alexia or Leon seem rather stupid sometimes.

Chris is supposed to be mentally scarred in RE5, but it's treated in such a superficial way that we're under the impression that he's just jaded.

This is just a matter of how Capcom show these things.

I would accept a mental breakdown as an acceptable alternative. Jill is a good candidate - she's been nearly killed several times, held and mentally abused by Wesker, controlled via technomancy and her body screwed up with drugs. Some shell shock is fairly well warranted in such a case.

You really want to make them suffer, don't you?

[Zombie_X]

Zombie_X: Just a clarification, RE3 Nemesis is still a side story and CODE: Veronica is still the true sequel to RE2. Having numbers or not doesn't affect that. Of course both games are important to the storyline.

I know that CV is the true sequel of course ;). I just hate how RE3 got made "canon" because of Sony's deal. IMO the only thing RE3 gave to the story is a bit of back story on the survivors of the Mansion Incident as well as a little new info on Umbrella and a few new B.O.W.'s. I still don't think it deserves the "3" in it's title and I think CV was the true sequel.

Also if RE6 is supposed to be a reboot, shouldn't they just call is Resident Evil? That makes more sense to me as 6 sounds like a continuation of the story. It'd be cool if they went all the way back to the original RE and made it more realistic. Maybe make the mansion look more like a real mansion and have the story overhauled so it's not campy and get all new puzzles. hey need to overhaul the characters so they are also more believable.

[Mr. Rod]

The reboot comment was never an official statement by Capcom. Reboot wasn't even the term Takeuchi used. He said that if RE wants to continue relevant, RE6 would need a new gameplay style like how Mikami did with RE4. I have the feeling RE6 will innovate in this but keep the story and characters we all know and love.

Ada and The Organization are good candidates for this entry IMO.

[Zombie_X]

The reboot comment was never an official statement by Capcom. Reboot wasn't even the term Takeuchi used. He said that if RE wants to continue relevant, RE6 would need a new gameplay style like how Mikami did with RE4. I have the feeling RE6 will innovate in this but keep the story and characters we all know and love.

Ada and The Organization are good candidates for this entry IMO.

I see so that statement was not even official. Ada would be interesting to see. TBH I would rather see Sherry in this installment. I really want to know what happened to her.

I do not want to see Leon as a main character again in the coming games. Leon has been done to death in RE4 and I really don't want to see his unstoppable self again, well maybe as a normal NPC maybe.

Also they need to do away with the Majini/Ganado. At least make faster and smarter Zombies CAPCOM.

[rehunk88]

Leon been done to death ??

re 2 re 4 then those gay railshooter so what thats 3

i hope its leon just to piss people off now course there seem to be so much hate for him

[Darkmoon]

Leon has been in less than Chris and Jill. However, he's still be in a fair bit.

RE2
RE4
RE: Gaiden
RE: Degneration
RE: New Movie I can't Remember
Umbrella Chronicles
Darkside Chronicles.

It's not the quantity of Leon that people seem to object too, though. Chris has been in more stuff, if I recall. It's that Leon's RE4 personality grated on the nerves of a lot of folks. A lot of people, myself included, wouldn't want to play another RE game full of one liners and Hero Screams and such. Someone did point out that Leon acts fairly reasonably when in the cutscenes, but given the chance to talk and he ruins any suspense by trying to be James Bond. He's not James Bond.

[rehunk88]

he never acted like he was james bond so i dont agree there
his special agent ( working for the us goverment)

james bond is british and working for Her Majesty's Secret Service

they did make him abit more smart ass with one linner kinda, but it dosent hurt his character in my book,
it made him much more cooler. i like him more in re 4 than re 2 just to be all honest
i hope he´s in re 6 i want him and ada back.

[Darkmoon]

Different strokes, different folks. I found him irritating, trying to be clever in a very schoolboy way and, far worse, I found him killing the mood. Why should I be worried about the giant monster bearing down on me when Leon isn't? Why should I care about the Plagas growing in his chest when he doesn't? Why should I care about some character whose had less than five minutes screen time when Leon doesn't...oh, wait. He did. Far, far too much for the cool, badass character they were trying to portray.

Leon was a part of why RE4 has to be categorised a action title - he has no place in a horror game. And I want a horror game, please Capcom. I promise to be good. No need to punish me anymore.

[rehunk88]

Different strokes, different folks. I found him irritating, trying to be clever in a very schoolboy way and, far worse, I found him killing the mood. Why should I be worried about the giant monster bearing down on me when Leon isn't? Why should I care about the Plagas growing in his chest when he doesn't? Why should I care about some character whose had less than five minutes screen time when Leon doesn't...oh, wait. He did. Far, far too much for the cool, badass character they were trying to portray.

Leon was a part of why RE4 has to be categorised a action title - he has no place in a horror game. And I want a horror game, please Capcom. I promise to be good. No need to punish me anymore.

Well okay its hard to care about something as las plagas becuse that idea is already stupid from the momment they put it in the story i dont think he acted in any kind of schoolboy way well then pray pray for re 6 as a horror title becuase you wont find it in operation racoon city or revalations its just more of the same.