I'll be that guy and say I don't really see any value creatively or commercially in remaking 5 or 6. Remake the rest of 3, Code Veronica, and a maybe another redux of 1 then call it done.The rest of 3 should be next #justiceforjill and I really hope Code Veronica gets a spot before 5. Very curious about 9. Not sure what they'll do after 7&8.
Commercial success is irrelevant. It sold big at launch then critics and fans alike **** on it for good reason. You can see those diminished returns in RE6. I'm still confused as to what people think actually worked about that game. From a gameplay perspective, it was step backwards and laughably dated even for its time of release and not to mention the blatant racism. The story is also really weak even for this series. I think Capcom is smart enough to not go anywhere near that game with a 10 foot pole. I'd also argue that the majority of RE fans couldn't care less about a remake of six. It damn near killed the IP and forced them to so a soft reboot with 7. Also, they SHOULD be apologizing for the remake of 3, they released half a neutered game and charged a premium for it.Resident Evil 5 was a commercially successfully game, despite not being one of the most critically acclaimed RE games. Out of the numbered games, it sits with siX as the most divisive. And Capcom definitely has the resources to make the remake a big improvement from the original one. Taking out the ridiculous parts of the original (Chris punching a giant rock, the truck with the machine gun segment) and eXpand on what worked.
You folks are entirely too focused on the sales as opposed to the actual reception of it. Remaking a game that the vast majority of fans thought was a massive step backwards doesn't make sense regardless of how well it sold.
Another remake for Resident Evil 3 would just appear like an apology to the 2020 remake, and thats why it ain't happening.
That's not how that works. It was Capcoms best selling game of all time because nothing else they'd released in that time was able to move more units. That doesn't mean people kept buying it in droves over the years and it achieved that being the direct sequel to one of the most lauded and influential games of the time. I guarantee you that the vast majority of those sales were day 1. I'd love to see trade in data on it because I'd bet money those numbers aren't pretty.Honestly I think you're too dismissive of its sales. If it were truly terrible as you claim it, it would have tanked hard after initial release. Fading away.
But reigned for 9 years as the best seller. People for 9 years kept buying. I get you dislike it. But it's success is established.
A truthful Resident Evil 3 remake needs serious budgeting like these past remakes. Capcom is probably better off remaking Re5/6 as those would sell a lot more than a "lets do this RE3 remake again because the last one wasn't good enough".Doesn't need another remake though. It needs a large content patch. The game should be updated, not remade again imo. Ideally free but I'd settle for a paid DLC expansion if I had to, for the sake of funding it
The videogame industry is a business. The actual reception of a game only matters because it often correlates with the sales. By comparison, most Saw movies are received, uh rather lukewarmly. And yet they ran for 7 straight movies, every year, because they were profitable. Same applies here. If game profitable, they will make more and eventually try to recapture the success of game. It's that simple. Reception is always secondary to profit. If game is successful but hardcore fans voice their displeasure, the devs reaction is just gonna be *shrug*.You folks are entirely too focused on the sales as opposed to the actual reception of it. Remaking a game that the vast majority of fans thought was a massive step backwards doesn't make sense regardless of how well it sold.
I believe that much is obvious. To be fair, I was under the impression the sales dip with 6 was far more substantial.Yes Resident Evil 5 sold well and Resident Evil 6 also sold well.
Resident Evil 5 wasn't a flop game and didn't kill the brand (RE6's sales would have been affected if the over all reception for Re5 was so bad...). It didn't matter if Capcom didn't have plenty of games at that time... like as if that was even a factor for Resident Evil 5 to sold that amount of copies.
Just say you don't want a Resident Evil 5 remake.
A truthful Resident Evil 3 remake needs serious budgeting like these past remakes. Capcom is probably better off remaking Re5/6 as those would sell a lot more than a "lets do this RE3 remake again because the last one wasn't good enough".
I also think a dlc to a 3 year old RE game is unrealistic, especially when we already got new Re games after it.
Honestly do you think they would release a faithful Re3 remake in a form of a DLC for the worst reviewed RE remake recently - over a new game like RE5 remake???This isn't an either/or situation. Capcom release DLCs along with games. They can do an RE3 update and future projects. It wouldn't be 'remake again' either, it would be adding new content into the original campaign like countless games have done before.
DLC to the 3 year old Cyberpunk is one of the big releases this year. Along with a massive overhaul of the base game as well. It's not that unrealistic.
We agree that it isn't very likely, and that more money would come from a new title, but I'm not arguing for what is most likely or profitable. I'm talking about what I think they should do. Capcom have a reputation for excellent remakes and RE3 does not meet that standard. I think they should correct this. Will they? Probably not. Should they? Absolutely they should.
10.9 million as of March 2023 isn't that a big of a dip. And Re6 probably didn't sell as much as Re5, most probably because Re6 wasn't good enough, not because Re5 happened.I believe that much is obvious. To be fair, I was under the impression the sales dip with 6 was far more substantial.
I'd rather get a remake of Code Veronica first. From a narrative standpoint, 5/6 add little to nothing to the canon and were mechanically a joke.10.9 million as of March 2023 isn't that a big of a dip. And Re6 probably didn't sell as much as Re5, most probably because Re6 wasn't good enough, not because Re5 happened.
I don't love both games but those were still commercially successful. I'd like to see remakes that would rehaul those games. If there are any games in RE that needs some major makeover, its those 2.
Also remakes for RE2/4 also sold really well. So whoever only played these RE games recently (in the ps4/5 era) are probably purchasing the other numbered games like 5 and 6 as well. So I would welcome a definitive and much better RE5 and 6. Capcom probably knows what didn't work in those games and if they can drastically redo them and make them a lot better compare to the original, why not? Resident Evil 9 and sequels are still happening inbetween anyway.
Well we should have gotten a remake for Code Veronica remake before 4. But it looks like Capcom is ignoring mostly it because it isn't a numbered game (the sales of the original games is a big factor too, of course). After RE3R was released, the general public probably eXpected RE4 to be the follow up which is the case. So now, RE5R is likely neXt. Unless Capcom decided to look back on pre-RE4 games and remake those. But like we've said, RE5 was a big seller. I'd like to see Code Veronica neXt, but realistically, I think Re5 is neXt. Though it could still happen, just like a 2nd remake for Re1 and a remake for Re0.I'd
I'd rather get a remake of Code Veronica first. From a narrative standpoint, 5/6 add little to nothing to the canon and were mechanically a joke.
You literally kill Albert Wesker.I'd
I'd rather get a remake of Code Veronica first. From a narrative standpoint, 5/6 add little to nothing to the canon and were mechanically a joke.
From a narrative standpoint: RE5 is the last thing we saw from Jill and Wesker. While Re6 is the last thing we saw from Leon and Ada.You literally kill Albert Wesker.