Would it be unwise for capcom too do this?

Wow! Brutal punch by Teh Black Cat!!!

Ghost Leader is down for the count! I don't think he's getting up!

Known_Hero wrote:

Wow! Brutal punch by Teh Black Cat!!!

Ghost Leader is down for the count! I don't think he's getting up!

I really hope I'm not coming on too strong. I just really don't believe it would be a wise idea and I didn't mean to refer to all gamers when I said those games wouldn't be as entertaining today. There's always exceptions.

Teh Black Cat wrote:

Known_Hero wrote:

Wow! Brutal punch by Teh Black Cat!!!

Ghost Leader is down for the count! I don't think he's getting up!

I really hope I'm not coming on too strong. I just really don't believe it would be a wise idea and I didn't mean to refer to all gamers when I said those games wouldn't be as entertaining today. There's always exceptions.

Everything you said was 100% correct.

Some of our RE brethren are still clinging onto the past and combating evolution. Long running franchises NEED to evolve with the times in order to stay relevant. As much as I enjoy RE5 and 6, I will say that Capcom is beginning to stray away from the path they started out on. They're losing their identity. RE needs to get back to it's survival horror roots. However, this doesn't mean re-implementing ink ribbons and bad camera angles. It's time to show some innovation and creativity.

Known_Hero wrote:

Teh Black Cat wrote:

Known_Hero wrote:

Wow! Brutal punch by Teh Black Cat!!!

Ghost Leader is down for the count! I don't think he's getting up!

I really hope I'm not coming on too strong. I just really don't believe it would be a wise idea and I didn't mean to refer to all gamers when I said those games wouldn't be as entertaining today. There's always exceptions.

Everything you said was 100% correct.

Some of our RE brethren are still clinging onto the past and combating evolution. Long running franchises NEED to evolve with the times in order to stay relevant. As much as I enjoy RE5 and 6, I will say that Capcom is beginning to stray away from the path they started out on. They're losing their identity. RE needs to get back to it's survival horror roots. However, this doesn't mean re-implementing ink ribbons and bad camera angles. It's time to show some innovation and creativity.

And like I said in my first post; I think Revelations was the prefect balance of this. You don't need to wipe out the action altogether, it just needs to be dimmed down a little and replaced with more horror.

Teh Black Cat wrote:

Back it up there a little. I didn't say the more fast paced a game is, the better it is. The thread asked would it be wise if Resident Evil returned back to it's older style gameplay. Personally no, I don't think it would be such a wise idea because most gamers today are used to more fast paced games, and by "fast paced" I don't exactly mean non stop action like CoD or Gears of War either.

While this is true, it's perfectly possible that a change of pace would be appreciated by a decent amount of people, look at Amnesia, it didn't have a huge publisher or developer like Capcom to back it up, it didn't wasn't part of a well known series that's guaranteed to sell like Resident Evil, it seems to be be a pretty slow paced game ( I've never played it ), and it wasn't even available on consoles, but it still managed to do pretty well.

Teh Black Cat wrote:

Like I already asked; how many people do you know that still play or even own a N64, PlayStation 1, or Gamecube anymore?

I know plenty of people that still play PS1, PS2 and GameCube games. Most PS3 owners I know have some PS1 games they still play.

I think an older style game could work as a spin-off, not every game needs to have a huge budget and compete with CoD.

37 Narwhals wrote:

While this is true, it's perfectly possible that a change of pace would be appreciated by a decent amount of people, look at Amnesia, it didn't have a huge publisher or developer like Capcom to back it up, it didn't wasn't part of a well known series that's guaranteed to sell like Resident Evil, it seems to be be a pretty slow paced game ( I've never played it ), and it wasn't even available on consoles, but it still managed to do pretty well.

Yes. I didn't say the more fast paced a game is, the better it is. Personally, I don't like neither CoD nor Gears of War. I like a bit of balance, and I felt like Revelations had that. If they remade the older games as a 3rd person shooter, with puzzles, horror, and a bit of action, I'd be very pleased but to go back completely would be unwise imo. I wanna take a step forward, not a step back. If I really wanted to play the older games so bad, I'd play the older games. Now by no means am I'm saying the newer games are flawless, they could be massively improved if they'd just add some more damn horror, which seems to be the main issue here.

Quote :

I know plenty of people that still play PS1, PS2 and GameCube games. Most PS3 owners I know have some PS1 games they still play.

I guess I'll just take your word for it, but I still think it's pretty much common sense that most gamers don't play those older games very often anymore.

Quote :

I think an older style game could work as a spin-off, not every game needs to have a huge budget and compete with CoD.

Every gaming franchise wants to do well. That's why they make games, isn't? To make money. They want to branch their games out to a variety of gamers, not just one select group. They need to consider what EVERYONE wants. Not just ONE group.

Quote :

Quote :

I think an older style game could work as a spin-off, not every game needs to have a huge budget and compete with CoD.

Every gaming franchise wants to do well. That's why they make games, isn't? To make money. They want to branch their games out to a variety of gamers, not just one select group. They need to consider what EVERYONE wants. Not just ONE group.

If they want to make EVERYONE happy, then releasing a spin-off for the fans of the classics while still releasing games with the new style would be the best way wouldn't it? Also just because a game won't sell as well as CoD doesn't mean it isn't successful. According to Capcom's website "sales of more than one million units is the generally accepted standard for a major hit." Meaning that RE0 was a major hit, and they haven't released another main old style RE since. Also keep in mind that we're talking about a company that released 2 new NES style games on current gen consoles and then said they were happy with the sales.

I'm not saying that they should stop making the newer ones, RE4 is one of my favorites and I hope I'll enjoy Revelations too.

Teh Black Cat wrote:

Back it up there a little. I didn't say the more fast paced a game is, the better it is.

How else does your claim that gamers won't be as entertained by older, slower-paced games as they think they will be hold up then? Generally, the better the game = the more entertained the gamer. Unless you're one of those types that only plays games you hate, for some bizarre reason.

Quote :

The thread asked would it be wise if Resident Evil returned back to it's older style gameplay. Personally no, I don't think it would be such a wise idea because most gamers today are used to more fast paced games, and by "fast paced" I don't exactly mean non stop action like CoD or Gears of War either.

Whatever happened to making different games for different audiences? That's kind of what they used to do back in the day and guess what? The gaming industry is still here today.

Quote :

However you have to look at it this way as well; look at how popular and well the CoD franchise is doing. Just because YOU don't like it nor own it anymore, doesn't mean it's not doing well when obviously it is.

Like how the Paul Anderson RE films are an undisputed financial success, drawing in hundreds of millions of dollars in gross profit, despite supposedly being so terrible?

At any rate, I never said CoD wasn't successful, just that my enjoyment of more focused shooters like the original SOCOMs isn't based on nostalgia like you claim. Besides, being successful doesn't necessarily make something better, it just means more people bought it. As of January 2013, Honda has sold more Accords than Toyota has Corollas, but that doesn't automatically make the Accord the better car.

Quote :

You can say how YOU preferred one game over another but that doesn't represent the majority. It's common sense most people don't play those older games anymore. I don't need "numbers" to prove something which should be common sense. Like I already asked; how many people do you know that still play or even own a N64, PlayStation 1, or Gamecube anymore?

The reason why I said what I did was because A LOT of gamers are blind by nostalgia and while they say they'd like to return to the older ways of gaming, most of them would not be as entertained as they think they'll be. I'm not saying ALL gamers either, but clearly most and especially new gamers.

I never claimed to speak for the majority, you're the one doing that. "Most gamers...", "a LOT of gamers", blah blah blah.

And I know more people that play those older games than you probably think. I say "older games" because most of them use emulators or play rereleases or HD remakes on current consoles, rather than hunting down used consoles in varying condition. I have a neighbor that bought a PS3 just for PS1/2 classics on PSN after his PS2 died.

37 Narwhals wrote:

Ghost Leader wrote:

Both of you need to take off your nostalgia glasses. Saying that the older style of RE would succeed into today's gaming generation, is completely idiotic. Why do you think they stop selling older consoles? Because PEOPLE STOP BUYING THEM. They move on to the next thing. Stop using completely irrelevant examples about other games, cars, and how you "know" so many other people who play older games, when once again it's COMMON SENSE a lot of people don't anymore. If they did, The N64 would still be on the market. I'll never understand how some gamers actually believe taking a step back is a good idea or how certain franchises don't need to change. If they don't, they get repetitive, people get bored, and new gamers won't even bother. It costs money and time to make a game. So while you think they should be making an older style game just for you and another small group of people, remember not everything in this world is put here to please you. Things CHANGE. Games change when they try to branch out to a bigger audience, not a small group of older fans who still believe they want games to go back to the way they were. It's COMMON SENSE a lot of today's gamers don't get out their old PS or N64 and spend their day playing it. You do? Congrats, but you or the "people you know" who still play them aren't the majority and that is (once again) COMMON SENSE. Also, by no means and I'm saying I speak for the majority either. I'm just not blinded by nostalgia and I realize gaming companies can't be putting time and money into a game that won't do well. However for some odd reason, you both believe that doesn't matter, but it DO. Companies make games to make money! Doing well and getting good sales tends to mean it's successful. Doing poorly or having bad sales tend to mean it wasn't successful. To say otherwise is well... just silly.

Now, if they remade the older games and found a good balance, I'd believe they'd do great but if they just made it completely the same; same camera angles, same gameplay, etc, but just added better graphics, I'd think people would get bored with it pretty quickly. Including a lot of the people who say that's what they want. For example; There's a high demand for a Final Fantasy 7 remake. However at least most fans admit they'd like the graphics AND gameplay to be improved.

Resident Evil just needs to find their balance. While the older games done great back in the day, they'd wouldn't be so successful now. They realize and acknowledge this, however they keep going in the wrong direction, thinking removing the survival horror altogether is the best route to go. Doing this, they're kicking older fans in the ass and branching out to an audience which isn't really there. We already have Gears of Wars, CoD, Halo, etc. While they keep trying to get a piece of that action, they can't compete because that isn't what Resident Evil is known for. That isn't why people buy the games. Once again, they need to find their balance and try a whole new different direction altogether. Going back to the same gameplay they had in 0, 1,2, etc isn't the right way to go either. I honestly believe Revelations was a step in the right direction.

I don't think going back to the beginning would benefit the RE franchise. As much as I want people to enjoy solving puzzles and reading notes/diaries....Nobody wants that anymore. They want action sequences and guns and....EXPLOSIONS! Resident Evil 6 is one of the best selling games of the series. As long as there are fans of it and more importantly as long as units are sellings the games will continue this path. Going back to the old survival horror formula would alienate too many of the newer fans to the series. I doubt we're going to ever see any full remakes of any of the games. I'd say the possiblity of more "reimaginations" like ORC or Umbrella Chronicles is more realistic. Sure, ORC got some awful reviews but the game sold well and it could've been decent if they didn't rush it out and work out all of the glitches.

So my examples of Megaman 9 & 10, two games created by the developers of RE, are completely irrelevent, but your example of Final Fantasy 7, a game made by a completely different company, is relevant. That sounds logical >.>

Tell me, why the hell would someone buy a PS1, when they can play the same exact games on their PS2, PS3, PSP, or PC?

Here, allow me to summarize our conversation:

ME: Why not create both types of games to please everyone?

Teh Black Cat: Because everything old is boring, it doesn't matter if Capcom already did it twice in the last 5 years with a different franchise that's older than RE, everything that sells less than 3 million copies in the first week is a failure.


Success isn't just "sell as much as CoD or it's a total failure." For example: Only 4 Mega Man games have ever sold more than a million copies, but they've been successful enough for Capcom to create over 50 games. Plenty of series create a spin-off series and still stay successful.

I'll make my point as obvious as I can: WHY CAN'T WE HAVE TWO SEPARATE SERIES? Creating a "RE:Pleasing the Purists" series would not interfere with their popular "RE:Chasing the Trends" series.

I also love how I'm idiotic for using information from Capcom's website and examples of things Capcom has done, but I guess your argument about consoles ( why would I need a ps1 again? ) and saying COMMON SENSE over and over, is pretty intelligent.

37 Narwhals wrote:

So my examples of Megaman 9 & 10, two games created by the developers of RE, are completely irrelevent, but your example of Final Fantasy 7, a game made by a completely different company, is relevant. That sounds logical >.>

I mentioned Final Fantasy 7 as a game people have longed for, for a nice while. Same as some people long for the old days of Resident Evil. However they realize it's not just the graphics that need to be changed. If that worked, gaming companies would just be making the same games over and over again, but just make them "prettier". It would just get repetitive and boring.

Quote :

Tell me, why the hell would someone buy a PS1, when they can play the same exact games on their PS2, PS3, PSP, or PC?

Doesn't excuse my point. Newer games are selling more NOW than older PS2, PS1, etc, games. I don't recall seeing Megaman 9 in the top selling games of 2012.

Quote :

Here, allow me to summarize our conversation:

ME: Why not create both types of games to please everyone?

Teh Black Cat: Because everything old is boring, it doesn't matter if Capcom already did it twice in the last 5 years with a different franchise that's older than RE, everything that sells less than 3 million copies in the first week is a failure.

Lol cute. Putting words in my mouth. I can do that too;

You: Resident evil should go back to the exact same way it was! Gameplay and all! I don't care if they make no money from it and goes bankrupt, as long as I'm happy! That's what the gaming companies are here for, to make me happy! Although I don't know nothing about the market or the time, effort, and money it it acquires to put into a game, I'll just go by my own personal experience and think if I like something, EVERYBODY must like it.

Me: They can't just dish out the same old used up gameplay from back in the day, add more fancy graphics and expect it to do well. There's lots of things which need to be improved to keep people's interest. A lot of the older fans of the RE series has either moved on or stopped playing video games. While there's still a select group of people who want them to return back to the old RE days, it wouldn't capture the interest of any new gamers or even some of the old gamers. Gaming franchises want to branch OUT. They want to make MONEY. If they spent all their time and money to please one group of people, they'd go bankrupt. It's not as cut and dry as; Me and a few others want a remake of that game, so why can't they make it?! There's a lot more to it.

Quote :

Success isn't just "sell as much as CoD or it's a total failure." For example: Only 4 Mega Man games have ever sold more than a million copies, but they've been successful enough for Capcom to create over 50 games. Plenty of series create a spin-off series and still stay successful.

What is it with this "If it don't do as good as CoD, it's bad." when did I ever say that? I just stated the game done and still is doing well for itself.

Actually this is how CoD came up; Ghost mentioned CoD is a newer game and they don't like it. Trying to prove that not all newer games are better than older games (which is true to some degree). I replied back with this; "However you have to look at it this way as well; look at how popular and well the CoD franchise is doing. Just because YOU don't like it nor own it anymore, doesn't mean it's not doing well when obviously it is." The point was CoD is an extremely popular game. Hell, it even got people who didn't pick up a game before in their lives to play. That's what every gaming industry wants; what CoD has. Never said that makes it "good" but it sure as hell makes it successful. Personally, I don't even like CoD. If I HAD to pick between CoD or Mario Kart for N64, I'd pick Mario Kart but if I could, I'd much rather play the new Mario Kart for the Wii because it's a lot more up-to-date, exciting, more options, etc.

Quote :

I'll make my point as obvious as I can: WHY CAN'T WE HAVE TWO SEPARATE SERIES? Creating a "RE:Pleasing the Purists" series would not interfere with their popular "RE:Chasing the Trends" series.

BECAUSE IT'S NOT AS EASY TO MAKE A GAME AS YOU SEEM TO THINK. It acquires a lot of time, effort, money, etc and it's just not worth it if isn't going to keep up with the newer games of today.

Quote :

I also love how I'm idiotic for using information from Capcom's website and examples of things Capcom has done, but I guess your argument about consoles ( why would I need a ps1 again? ) and saying COMMON SENSE over and over, is pretty intelligent.

Never stated you were idiotic. Once again, you're putting words into my mouth. What I said was; "Saying that the older style of RE would succeed into today's gaming generation, is completely idiotic". However this statement itself is indeed idiotic as well, considering you never provided me with any actual proof, no sites nor links to "back anything up". At least it should be common sense that newer games today sell more than older generation games. I mean, if you want legit proof I'm sure I could go find a site showing the top games for the past few years. Pretty sure any games from the 90's or mid 00's won't be on it though. x]

Teh Black Cat wrote:

Doesn't excuse my point. Newer games are selling more NOW than older PS2, PS1, etc, games. I don't recall seeing Megaman 9 in the top selling games of 2012.

http://www.destructoid.com/destructoid-interview-grillin-capcom-s-seth-killian-124414.phtml

Seth Killian wrote:

We don’t discuss specific numbers, but we were definitely happy with the sales of Mega Man 9. I can tell you it was our best-selling title ever on WiiWare (also our only title there so far).

I realize that it wasn't a huge top selling game, but Capcom was happy enough with the sales to release a sequel.

I think an old style RE could do well enough to make up for the effort used to create it, I am not saying that all the new ones should be like the old ones, just that it'd be nice for RE to get it's own Mega man 9. You seem to think it'd be a complete waste of time and that's fine, because I don't really feel like continuing this.

RE got its "throwback" game in the form of Revelations. Capcom is going to try to squeeze a little more money out of it by releasing it for consoles. That's probably the best you're gonna get.

37 Narwhals wrote:

Teh Black Cat wrote:

Doesn't excuse my point. Newer games are selling more NOW than older PS2, PS1, etc, games. I don't recall seeing Megaman 9 in the top selling games of 2012.

http://www.destructoid.com/destructoid-interview-grillin-capcom-s-seth-killian-124414.phtml

Seth Killian wrote:

We don’t discuss specific numbers, but we were definitely happy with the sales of Mega Man 9. I can tell you it was our best-selling title ever on WiiWare (also our only title there so far).

I realize that it wasn't a huge top selling game, but Capcom was happy enough with the sales to release a sequel.

You also have to look at it this way; Mega Man has been a classic for years, ever since SNES. Also, it was always more fast paced than the old Resident Evil games. How they improved Mega Man 9, I have no knowledge of because I never played the game however I'm assuming they did in some aspects.

Quote :

I think an old style RE could do well enough to make up for the effort used to create it, I am not saying that all the new ones should be like the old ones, just that it'd be nice for RE to get it's own Mega man 9.

Sure, but there's many of things they'd need to improve to make it successful in today's market. I'm not agasint going back to their survival horror roots, not in the slightest. However going back to awkward camera angles, reading books, searching for clues, and perhaps running into one or two zombies, would bore most gamers to tears now of these days. Switching to a completely action genre game isn't the answer either but like I've already pointed out; Resident Evil still hasn't found their perfect balance between action and survival horror.

Quote :

You seem to think it'd be a complete waste of time and that's fine, because I don't really feel like continuing this.

Honestly, me either. Didn't mean to go this far with the argument. It wasn't even my intention to get into one when I posted in this thread.

Teh Black Cat wrote:

It's common sense most people don't play those older games anymore. I don't need "numbers" to prove something which should be common sense. Like I already asked; how many people do you know that still play or even own a N64, PlayStation 1, or Gamecube anymore?

At this point I feel like I should throw in my two cents. There is a reason why indie and retro games have a place in the market, even now. There is also a reason for the existence of PS1 and PS2 games on PSN and why Nintendo eShop exists in the first place. Then, of course, there are whole retro consoles being made like Retron3 for example. They sell and they have a market. The reason is, there is enough people who still like to play games like that. It's all about the game itself and how well it has been executed. Look at the latest Mario games, for example. They haven't really changed in all this time, it's just the same old with new looks and still it sells.

I could also take an example from my own small circle of friends. I have a couple of friends who can't stand old games. Then, I have the same exact amount of friends who still enjoy playing old games. I'm one of those latter people and even went and bought that new Neo Geo X. The limited edition of those have been sold out, by the way. I got one. So awesome.

In any case, getting back to RE. I think they should go back and remake RE2 in the style of the first remake. I still enjoy the original RE2 and play the crap out of it but having never been able to play the first remake I'd be happy to play at least one. As for the upcoming RE games, they should do them in the style of Revelations. I don't mind games like RE6, I enjoy them too, but I still prefer the style RER had.

Teh Black Cat wrote:

Why do you think they stop selling older consoles? Because PEOPLE STOP BUYING THEM.

The reason they stop selling older consoles is technology. Technology advances and so the console manufacturers try to keep up to date with their hardware. Older consoles don't stop selling, they become obsolete in the market for the reason of backwards compatibility (back then) and downloadable titles (now) in the next consoles. PS2 was still selling even a year ago but they stopped making them only recently. Why? There's already a PS4 coming, time to move on. You asked why they don't sell N64s anymore. The reason is simple: the system got upgraded into Gamecube. There are still retro consoles being created and old consoles sell for a high price, so people must still be into them.

ChickenHeart wrote:

I don't think going back to the beginning would benefit the RE franchise. As much as I want people to enjoy solving puzzles and reading notes/diaries....Nobody wants that anymore. They want action sequences and guns and....EXPLOSIONS!

There's still a thing called "Innovation". Not everything needs to be a carbon copy of each other, otherwise the market get saturated with similar games (it's already happening) when it doesn't really even matter which series you support.

ChickenHeart wrote:

RE got its "throwback" game in the form of Revelations. Capcom is going to try to squeeze a little more money out of it by releasing it for consoles. That's probably the best you're gonna get.

ACTUALLY, they are re-thinking their direction for the series. RE6 didn't sell as much as they were expecting so now they are looking into possibly rebooting the series or continuing on something like Revelations.

If they do reboot the series, I wonder what they would do with the original characters? Maybe something like DmC Devil May Cry (which is an awesome game in itself ). Maybe have the characters have sort of a different personality, look, and occupation, but still get pulled into the mix somehow. Like having them all, work for UMBRELLA!! Duh Duh Duh Duh!!! Just kidding, that would be an awful idea.

Still, would hate to say permanently goodbye to the RE Characters we have grown up with and loved. Still, if they bring in new ones, i would be okay if they make them as badass as the current ones.

Mass Distraction wrote:

No offense, but I'm honestly really tired of discussing this. A few of the points you made, I'm pretty sure I already addressed with either Ghost or Narwhals.

However I do agree this statement;

Quote :

In any case, getting back to RE. I think they should go back and remake RE2 in the style of the first remake. I still enjoy the original RE2 and play the crap out of it but having never been able to play the first remake I'd be happy to play at least one. As for the upcoming RE games, they should do them in the style of Revelations. I don't mind games like RE6, I enjoy them too, but I still prefer the style RER had.

I felt like Revelations had a really good balance of survival horror and action. I actually wouldn't even mind if they still attempted to take out abit more of the action in the next installments. I'm just going to repost this, as my last post in this thread;

Resident Evil just needs to find their balance. While the older games done great back in the day, they'd wouldn't be so successful now. They realize and acknowledge this, however they keep going in the wrong direction, thinking removing the survival horror altogether is the best route to go. Doing this, they're kicking older fans in the ass and branching out to an audience which isn't really there. We already have Gears of Wars, CoD, Halo, etc. While they keep trying to get a piece of that action, they can't compete because that isn't what Resident Evil is known for. That isn't why people buy the games. Once again, they need to find their balance and try a whole new different direction altogether. Going back to the same gameplay they had in 0, 1,2, etc isn't the right way to go either. I honestly believe Revelations was a step in the right direction.

Teh Black Cat wrote:

Mass Distraction wrote:

No offense, but I'm honestly really tired of discussing this. A few of the points you made, I'm pretty sure I already addressed with either Ghost or Narwhals.

What I said was after I had literally read every single post written by you guys, took me forever. I just pointed out there's still market for old games because, you know, they sell.

The point is that the old gameplay mechanics of the classic RE games will not translate well into the current gen. Going backwards isn't the answer. Capcom needs to put on their thinking caps and start coming up with some fresh ideas.

Known_Hero wrote:

The point is that the old gameplay mechanics of the classic RE games will not translate well into the current gen. Going backwards isn't the answer. Capcom needs to put on their thinking caps and start coming up with some fresh ideas.

Was I saying that?

Mass Distraction wrote:

Known_Hero wrote:

The point is that the old gameplay mechanics of the classic RE games will not translate well into the current gen. Going backwards isn't the answer. Capcom needs to put on their thinking caps and start coming up with some fresh ideas.

Was I saying that?

No, I was saying that. That's why my name is attached to it.

Considering that you already agreed with TBC on that on the previous page and you saing that just after me, I thought you just replied to what I said. I'm pretty sure you know what I mean.

Mass Distraction wrote:

Considering that you already agreed with TBC on that on the previous page and you saing that just after me, I thought you just replied to what I said. I'm pretty sure you know what I mean.

I was trying to turn attention back to the original topic.

I agree with you that there's still a market for retro games. However, like TBC has already said, the current gen market is obviously more profitable. In the end, it doesn't matter. It doesn't answer the OP's question.

Ya, that's true. In any case the only way I see the old style working is another remake.