Will Resident evil 7 be survival horror?

#171Bob the AlmightyPosted 5/3/2013 4:10:36 PM
SerperiorThanU posted...
Bob, what about the wii sales of RE4? Or the wii sales of 0 and remake.


The Wii versions of Zero and REmake sold nothing. Capcom barely shipped those. They didn't sell well at all nor were many copies produced.

RE 4 Wii Edition sold 1.9 million (giving RE 4 a 5.8 million total). I didn't include the Wii version because it came out much later. But including those sales just further proves RE's staying power. You're taking about a franchise that has sold more than 55 million units...

The fact it came out years later Really isn't important to the topic which is why I didn't include them. But there you go just the same. ;)
---
You were the lightning in that rain. You can still shine through the darkness.
#172XxAxem_BlackxXPosted 5/3/2013 4:48:21 PM(edited)
RE4 got updated graphics and support for the wiimote while RE1 and 0 got nothing, not even widescreen support. Not really Capcom's fault though since they used prerendered graphics and would have had to redo both games from scratch. If they would have done that though and maybe added a new mode I think Archives would have done a lot better.
---
www.morbid-obsession.com
#173Bob the AlmightyPosted 5/3/2013 5:31:47 PM
jpv2000 posted...
Bob the Almighty posted...
Ironically the creators view RE 3 as the spin-off and Code Veronica as the follow-up to RE 2 but since RE 3 was given a number and Code Veronica wasn't the public views it the other way around.


I have to agree with this.


Yeah RE 3 is pretty much a throw-away game from a story standpoint. None of its events are important in the overall RE history. Code Veronica is much more important to the franchise's story than RE 3 was, especially with bringing back Wesker and really setting up the Wesker vs Chris feud that ties directly into Resident Evil 5.

To this day this is debate about whether RE 3 should be viewed as a side story in the over-all franchise. From what I read in the past the game originally was not going to be a numbered title but Sony got upset when Code: Veronica was announced for the Dreamcast so Capcom gave Resident Evil 3 a number to please Sony and Sony could boast about having a numbered entry. I don't know if this is true or not but that's just what I recall reading.

Also according to Wikipedia it sounds like RE 3 was handled by outside people to an extent. Maybe the core RE team went from developing RE 2 straight into Code: Veronica, which is why Code: Veronica is more important in the grand scheme of things.

You can read about it some here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resident_Evil_3:_Nemesis#Development

Resident Evil 3: Nemesis was created by a team of 50 staff members, who would become part of Capcom Production Studio 4 in October 1998.[1][2][3] During most of the development time, the game was referred to as Resident Evil 1.9.[4][5] However, three months before the initial release, the name was changed to Resident Evil 3, which project supervisor Yoshiki Okamoto later explained as a means of keeping the titles of the first three games on the PlayStation console consistent.[4][5] Unlike the majority of the early scripts in the series, the scenario of Resident Evil 3 was not created by Flagship employees but by internal Capcom writer Yasuhisa Kawamura.[5] Nevertheless, the story was proofread and sanctioned by Flagship to avoid continuity errors with other installments, an issue that was also given attention in monthly meetings between all directors and producers.[5]

XxAxem_BlackxX posted...
RE4 got updated graphics and support for the wiimote while RE1 and 0 got nothing, not even widescreen support. Not really Capcom's fault though since they used prerendered graphics and would have had to redo both games from scratch. If they would have done that though and maybe added a new mode I think Archives would have done a lot better.


Yeah with RE 4 the two re-releases (PS2 and Wii) were pretty substantial upgrades. That's probably why both of those versions sold so well compared to most Resident Evil re-releases.

Zero and REmake on the Wii were pretty much straight up ports with no new features or enhancements, much like the GameCube versions of RE 2, 3, and CXV. That's the reason why Zero and REmake didn't sell so well on the Wii. The Dreamcast and GameCube ports of RE 2/3 and GameCube version of CVX didn't sell great either.
---
You were the lightning in that rain. You can still shine through the darkness.
#174so_realPosted 5/3/2013 6:57:25 PM
Those interested in the classic style of RE should look into the fully playable release of 1.5 in the near future. It would seem as though they plan to release a proper demo at some point as well.
#175Morpheus102686Posted 5/5/2013 12:28:17 PM
I think it's safe to say that RE's declining sales had less to do with the gameplay going "stale" and had more to do with the series moving to systems that barely any of the fanbase had. It's not surprising to me to learn from Bob that RE4, despite its critical acclaim for its gameplay, didn't sell that well while looking at its individual versions.

As for the topic, yes I hope the series goes back to being a focused survival horror. That doesn't mean that I want tank controls or prerendered backgrounds to return. I just want an underpowered character with limited resources available in a creepy atmosphere with relentless enemies and puzzles in between.
---
New York Yankees
#176Bob the AlmightyPosted 5/5/2013 1:39:16 PM
Morpheus102686 posted...
I think it's safe to say that RE's declining sales had less to do with the gameplay going "stale" and had more to do with the series moving to systems that barely any of the fanbase had. It's not surprising to me to learn from Bob that RE4, despite its critical acclaim for its gameplay, didn't sell that well while looking at its individual versions.


Yeah as far as individual releases go RE 4 sold worse than RE 1, 2, and 3 did on the PS1. RE 3 shipped 3.5 million in six months and RE 4 took fourteen months to crack 3 million and that was across two platforms (PS2 and GameCube).

Still RE 4 PS2+GCN+Wii totals out to 5.8 million when all was said and done so it's not like the game wasn't a massive successful.

I think trying to move the series to other platforms (Dreamcast and GameCube) was more responsible for the decline in sales than anything else. I mean Code Veronica has a 93% on Game Rankings while REmake and Zero have a 89 and 84% respectively so it's not like those games were universally hated or considered bad.

That said any long standing franchise needs a major shake up every now and then. RE 4 was a fantastic game and one of the greatest games ever made.
---
You were the lightning in that rain. You can still shine through the darkness.
#177GoldsicklePosted 5/13/2013 1:08:04 AM
Bob the Almighty posted...
You have no way of knowing if 3 or 4 million of the people that bought RE 2 also bought RE 5 yet liked RE 2 more.

Can you stop overlooking some of my points?
I asked you what was your reaction to RE5, like if you bought it new, even if you were disgusted by the demo.

It's an extremely weak argument. I mean one would think that a franchise as old as RE would have a large number of original fans that has kept with the franchise.

It's not.
I grew up with the franchise since 1996 and despite that, I don't wanna see prerendered backgrounds or tank controls anymore.
There are probably many more fans like myself, further reducing the number of the so-called "true fans" who wants the old format to stay.

Also, do you see prerendered backgrounds, tank controls and skewed aiming in still being implemented today?
In general, such format has gone out of style.
The only ones who really wanted them back are those badly deluded by nostalgia (or just people being hipsters).

Now look at RE 6. Lower reviews than RE 5 and considered one of the weaker installments according to the fans. Result? Lower sales (and still sold out the ass too).

Whatever it is, fact remains that they're not going back to prerendered backgrounds and tank controls anytime soon.
If that's the point you're trying to make, of course.


In the end, whatever decision they make, RE7 will most likely be another over-the-shoulder action-adventure with modern controls and camera.
They can intensify the "horror" and "atmosphere" all they want but these are very subjective factors and people will complain either way.
---
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".
#178Bob the AlmightyPosted 5/13/2013 2:35:20 AM(edited)
Dude the last post in this thread was over a week ago LOL. This conversation is done. I'm not going to convince you and you're not going to convince me. Slatement. It's over. :p

And for the record I was never saying we'd go back to pre-rendered backgrounds or tank controls. We had to deal with those because of technical limitations back in the day. The hardware is advanced enough to give us full 3D movement in full 3D, interactive environments. If anything I would assume RE 7 is just a "modern" Resident Evil from a game design with more of an emphasis on horror. I mean think RE 5/6 minus a bunch of Quick Time Events or vehicle driving/flying sequences and more of Leon's RE 6 campaign/RE 4 campaign as the basis.

We're never going to see pre-rendered backgrounds anymore than we will see FMV sequences with real life actors. Both of those are relics of the 90s and aren't coming back. that doesn't mean you can't make a horror-inspired RE that plays like a modern RE. Just look at RE 4/RE 6 Leon's campaign and expand expand expand.

I can't really think of anything else to say. I'm not going to argue sales figures, sales projections, which is better (classic RE or new RE), if the series sold out to chase after that mythical Call of Duty crowd, or whatever. I just want to see the series continue and advance. I'm fully aware RE will never go back to the RE I grew up with (1/2/3/CV) but I never said I wanted it too. I'm fine with 4/5/6 style. I just want Capcom to amp up the scares and make the atmosphere creepy as **** again. No more, no less.
---
You were the lightning in that rain. You can still shine through the darkness.
#179GoldsicklePosted 5/13/2013 3:25:46 AM
Bob the Almighty posted...
Dude the last post in this thread was over a week ago LOL. This conversation is done.

Ha ha, bad try.

When you want to argue, you argue.
If you point out irrelevant stuff like me taking too long to post, bad spelling, grammar, etc. it means that you have ran out of things to say and are just nitpicking.

I can delay my post as long as I want because putting Luddites in their place isn't high on my priorities list.

If you have to ask, I had some computer problems.

If anything I would assume RE 7 is just a "modern" Resident Evil from a game design with more of an emphasis on horror.

The problem is that "horror" is subjective.
Like I said, they could intensify the "horror" and "atmosphere" all they want but fanboys will still complain because they're f***ing picky.

I just want Capcom to amp up the scares and make the atmosphere creepy as **** again. No more, no less.

One thing you need to consider is that it's possible that you're so accustomed to horror games that it has gotten harder to scare you.
---
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".
#180Bob the AlmightyPosted 5/13/2013 3:46:48 AM
What I mean is a year ago we were reading this:

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/167135/Survival_horror_market_too_small_for_Resident_Evil_says_Capcom_producer.php

"Looking at the marketing data [for survival horror games] ... the market is small, compared to the number of units Call of Duty and all those action games sell," he said. "A 'survival horror' Resident Evil doesn't seem like it'd be able to sell those kind of numbers."

And just a few months ago we were reading this:

http://www.gamesradar.com/resident-evil-producer-talks-horror-reboot/

And that essential nature? Referencing last year's distinctly disappointing squad shooter Operation Racoon City, Kawata muses that in light of the game, "I would say that I review my thoughts on that [the importance of action]. But I think itís undeniable to say the series returning to its roots is important, and those roots are horror."

The same RE producer made both of those quotes. I mean they completely contradict each other. In 2012 it was "survival horror games don't sell, we need to be action like Call of Duty." In 2013 it was "the roots of RE are horror and RE needs to return to its roots."

Once again the same Capcom employee (a Resident Evil series producer mind you) made both statements.

Based on that I say RE 7 will likely play (note: In my opinion :p) more like 4-6 than 1-3, only it will have a stronger focus on horror.
---
You were the lightning in that rain. You can still shine through the darkness.