SetsunaFS posted... Pretty sure it's after. It wouldn't make any sense to set it before RE5, given the scale of what is going on, Jill not being with Chris(both BSAA and Sheva was his first partner after Jill's death) and yeah, the President's death would have been mentioned. And Degeneration takes place a year before RE5 right? Don't see both of these happening in the same year.
Degeneration is set within the same canon universe as the original video games, taking place "seven years from Raccoon City." -- directly from RE wikia
So 1998+7 = 2005. So not not a year before.
Also: A lot of you are ignoring the fact that this is USA. So having a dead president (and subsequently having a VP replace him for the duration of the term) is not that far fetch when we can have a NEW president in the 2008 election.
So just b/c RE5 takes place in 2009 "didn't mention about the president" doesn't mean it can't happen before.
Vegeta1000 posted... This game is not a prequel. That 10 years later line is so vague. It doesn't have to take place exactly 10 years after. All of the numbered games have been in chronological order. The president being dead would of been mentioned in RE5.
AG15 posted... Ughhh, why is everyone obsessing over this game being a damn prequel!
Do you ACTUALLY want a prequel? Jeebuz
I don't see anything wrong with prequels as long as they flush out the storyline more. As technical as some people may be, people can allow the "laws of physics" being broken, but people can't allow inconsistent events. (ie Just look at the Zelda timeline right now)
Even the 2 Chronicle games were a nice addition which added new events to fill in the gap in between main franchise titles like RE4 and RE6.
What people hate is that they're left with a blank gap of history whenever RE jumps several years ahead in timeline.