So it took Capcom 9 years to realize that RE audience wants the survival-horror

#61GoldsicklePosted 2/16/2013 2:02:00 AM
_Uwye_ posted...
according to you people bought PSs to play it. So...uh? What's the difference?

Not that many people willing to buy GameCubes just to play REmake and Zero.

You're right about "different times" and "different situations".
By now, the overall format is stale.

There really is no way to "meaningfully" change it without doing so drastically, since the series has been built upon outdated technology and increasingly unpopular gameplay.

You are seriously desputing this?

Yes. Now where are your sources?

You have no idea how many copies shipped and how many copies RE:CV sold in the last ten years.

That's what online sales statistics are for.

Again, show me proof that the old games didn't sell most (say, more than 90%) of the total in the first year or so. You keep talking as if they sold 200k copies per year instead of X millions in the first months and then a few thousand copies every year.

You're actually gonna nitpick yourself into a corner?

http://www.capcom.co.jp/ir/english/business/million.html
As of now, RE5 has sold 6 million copies, which took them 4 years to achieve.

RE2 took more than 10 years to achieve lesser sales.

There's really no need to "do the math" anymore at this point.

Which has inherently nothing to do with the RE5 formula being fresh or the old style being inherently flawed. Unless you think that COD reivents itself in every iteration.

Sales influences directions and decisions.

If this is what the mainstream wants, then this is the direction it will go.

Lucky me that I also like this direction.
---
There is no such thing as a "Quick Time Event done right".
A game that has Quick Time Events is a "video game done wrong".
#62vgman94Posted 2/16/2013 4:38:30 AM
Sheesh. RE needs to evolve as a world. every franchise does. To expect RE to stay survival horror forever is like expecting your parents to stay alive forever. It's just not going to happen. Things change with time, and it should be welcomed in most cases (not that parent example obviously). RE is fascinating as is with an action format while utilizing horror elements, and DmC's punk style reflects the modern American attitude rather accurately. It should be appreciated that developers change things up and grow their franchises beyond their humbler roots. Despising every change that comes our way will only lead to a stagnant world. And stagnation is never something to seek. I was never into RE until 6 or this series until DmC for example, and it's not like I'm the only newcomer because of these installments. What does that say about these evolutions being horrible? An inability to adapt or appreciate a new style? Because I doubt many people would outright say that anyone who appreciates these new installments are "noobs".
#63MadigariPosted 2/16/2013 4:59:54 AM
vgman94 posted...
I was never into RE until 6 or this series until DmC for example, and it's not like I'm the only newcomer because of these installments. What does that say about these evolutions being horrible? An inability to adapt or appreciate a new style? Because I doubt many people would outright say that anyone who appreciates these new installments are "noobs".


You're apt to find out just how misplaced that doubt is.
---
Gamertag is Madigari, for both Xbox 360 and PSN.
Of all the things I've lost, I miss my originality the most.
#64darkdragon_9600Posted 2/16/2013 5:18:51 AM
I'm okay with RE going back to SH.

Just keep RE6's movement. Jumping back, rolling and remaining on the ground is so awesome. Just work with it, no need to gimp us.
---
Can I haz cheezburger?
#65vgman94Posted 2/16/2013 5:21:40 AM
Madigari posted...
vgman94 posted...
I was never into RE until 6 or this series until DmC for example, and it's not like I'm the only newcomer because of these installments. What does that say about these evolutions being horrible? An inability to adapt or appreciate a new style? Because I doubt many people would outright say that anyone who appreciates these new installments are "noobs".


You're apt to find out just how misplaced that doubt is.


It was sarcasm.. I was waiting for someone to reveal themselves as elitist and/or callous to people of other demographics. I've been on the boards long enough to know not to expect much from Antis...
#66_Uwye_Posted 2/16/2013 7:26:12 AM(edited)
Goldsickle posted...
Not that many people willing to buy GameCubes just to play REmake and Zero.


Not many people were willing to buy a GC for RE4 either apparently. And yet the GC+PS2+Wii versions combined sold 5.8 millions copies, just shy of the PS3+X360 sales of RE5. It's almost if total userbase does make a difference, "successufl game=/=system seller" and things aren't just so black and white.

Another example of why your reasoning of just comparing numbers is botched?

Street Fighter 2 Turbo SNes: 4.1 millions.
Street Fighter 2 Turbo MD: 1.65 millions.

Why such a difference if context is irrelevant?

There really is no way to "meaningfully" change it without doing so drastically, since the series has been built upon outdated technology and increasingly unpopular gameplay.


You lack imagination. And there's a world of difference between being unable to reinvent a formula and changing pretty much nothing (guess what made the series?).

Yes. Now where are your sources?


Check wikipedia, "awards" and "impact" sections, if you are so interested in the opinion of the VG journalism.

That's what online sales statistics are for.


Ok. Link?

You're actually gonna nitpick yourself into a corner?

http://www.capcom.co.jp/ir/english/business/million.html
As of now, RE5 has sold 6 million copies, which took them 4 years to achieve.


Do you even understand what I'm asking? Do you even remember what was the starting point of this part of the discussion?

RE5 has sold 6 million copies in six years, RE:CV has sold 2.5 million copies in 10 years. How many copies did they sell in their first two year? How much sales in the following years added to the total?

Maybe a refresh will help.

You: RE formula was getting stale and sales after RE3 were going down.
Me: But the last three old-style games were on unsuccessful consoles.
You: Doesn't matter. people would have bought the consoles to play them regardless since it happened in the past, and they needed ten years to reach half the sales of RE5 anyway.

First point is a fallacy, second point doesn't mean anything until we know the rate of the sales (big success out of the gate or mediocre sales and slow burner?).

RE2 took more than 10 years to achieve lesser sales.

There's really no need to "do the math" anymore at this point.


Your logic makes no sense, you are just comparing numbers out of context.
#67GoldsicklePosted 2/17/2013 3:36:30 AM
_Uwye_ posted...
Not many people were willing to buy a GC for RE4 either apparently.

Shows that the RE brand has difficulties getting off the ground even though they revamped.

Try as you might but the series being on GC isn't the only factor to be blamed for the old school format being a commercial failure.

Sales dropped starting from RE3, which was still on the PlayStation.
It already grew stale, as I said many times.

And there's a world of difference between being unable to reinvent a formula and changing pretty much nothing (guess what made the series?).

As mentioned, even the notable staff members themselves were tired of the same formula.
Even when discussing about DmC's rebooting or MGR focusing less on stealth, it's always like what I said: the developers and IP owners can do whatever they want with the series they're working on.

Ok. Link?

The only reliable ones I know of are VG Chartz.
Dunno if you accept those.

Do you even understand what I'm asking?

Do you have any f***ing common sense?

The sales total I showed you are the most recent totals (as of December 2012).
If we were discussing this 2 years ago, you could still get away with plausibility but by now, the sales of RE5 has overtaken the sales of RE2.
And RE5 took only a few years while RE2 took over a decade.

There's no doubt about it anymore. RE5 sold more and faster than RE2.
---
There is no such thing as a "Quick Time Event done right".
A game that has Quick Time Events is a "video game done wrong".
#68_Uwye_Posted 2/17/2013 4:33:15 AM(edited)
Goldsickle posted...
The only reliable ones I know of are VG Chartz.
Dunno if you accept those.


"Reliable" and "VGChartz" don't belong in the same sentence. Just try to cross check data regarding the DMC games.

There's no doubt about it anymore. RE5 sold more and faster than RE2.


*throws arms in the air*

Ok, I'll try one last time. This part of the discussion started when discussing wether or not RE:CV was a success or not. At one point you said:

Sorry but it's not about the total but the rate of sales.


But there's a difference between selling 50% of the total the first year and the remaining 50% in the following ten years, and selling 90% of the total the first year and the remaining 10% in the following ten years. The latter case also can convince the producer to print extra copies which will extend the total sales in the years to come which makes the sheer comparison of the total numbers even more pointless.
#69FulvipPosted 2/17/2013 4:22:31 AM
vgman94 posted...
Sheesh. RE needs to evolve as a world. every franchise does. To expect RE to stay survival horror forever is like expecting your parents to stay alive forever. It's just not going to happen. Things change with time, and it should be welcomed in most cases (not that parent example obviously). RE is fascinating as is with an action format while utilizing horror elements, and DmC's punk style reflects the modern American attitude rather accurately. It should be appreciated that developers change things up and grow their franchises beyond their humbler roots. Despising every change that comes our way will only lead to a stagnant world. And stagnation is never something to seek. I was never into RE until 6 or this series until DmC for example, and it's not like I'm the only newcomer because of these installments. What does that say about these evolutions being horrible? An inability to adapt or appreciate a new style? Because I doubt many people would outright say that anyone who appreciates these new installments are "noobs".


They should evolve within what they are, not turn into something else. Resident Evil went from survival horror to a generic TPFPS with zombies. It may not be a bad game, but it's a terrible RE. Just like DmC is a half-decent action game, but a terrible DMC. It's just taking advantage of the name because there's no faith in the game making it out there on it's own, which I think would actually be a better idea.
---
Official Auron of the boards. The only one bad*** enough to like Light.
CP: FFXIII, DmC, Folklore
#70GoldsicklePosted 2/17/2013 6:33:35 AM
_Uwye_ posted...

"Reliable" and "VGChartz" don't belong in the same sentence.

But I don't really need those stats now, do I?

RE6 took a few years to outsell RE2's decade-old sales total.
No more math to be done.

But there's a difference between selling 50% of the total the first year and the remaining 50% in the following ten years, and selling 90% of the total the first year and the remaining 10% in the following ten years.

Implying that these totals are final.

RE5 could sell even more in the next 5-6 years.
---
There is no such thing as a "Quick Time Event done right".
A game that has Quick Time Events is a "video game done wrong".