Will future Resident Evil tiltes return to survival horror?

[Jimmy_Jazz]

"Concept arts don't literally mean "concept", they are drawn for a reason."

I have to disagree with this. That practice varies from dev to dev and many individuals and teams are given time during pre-production to experiment and prototype. Plus, 2D concept art is a great way of experimenting with lots of ideas and letting them evolve through natural selection before committing work to 3D, so many images are ditched.

[News Bot]

[EDITED] Was being abit harsh on NB for not providing links. I still feel as if this would be useful, but I've amended my reply.

Thanks for the concept art TheBatman, but there is a difference between "it was part of the plan from a very early stage." and "it was the plan all along". Resident Evil was released 2 years before that concept art was dated. There is no proof that they were harbouring the idea of resurrecting Wesker whilst making RE1.

The series was complicated before that. We each have our different ideas as to what "too complicated is" though.

I don't think anyone is saying that Wesker's revival was shoehorned in, but based on the evidence I have, I believe it's unlikely that the idea was conjured up during RE1's development. HOWEVER, your link to the Wesker concept art and the talk of the original Japanese text does shed some new light on this, which is why I'd like find out what the exact original wording in Japanese is.

And thank you for sharing those links TBM.

That does not imply any such thing about the original RE1. You could say that it was merely done to make the REMake fit in with the revelations of Wesker's revival in CV. If you have proof of otherwise, then please share it instead of telling people "no, no, no" without any explanation or facts.

There's a difference between an ambiguous fate involving life & death and being a child experiment with 2 different viruses in his blood stream. You have argued against my suggestion that much of his past was created after RE1.

How is he tied to BIO2's plot and not just an Easter Egg?

It was both a plan from an early stage and a plan all along. These are not mutually exclusive. The proof that bringing him back was an idea while making BIO1 is in BIO1 itself. How is this so hard to grasp? Mikami even confirms it and the person who asked (Japanese) knew there was some ambiguity to his fate beforehand, otherwise he wouldn't have asked specifically.

Can you tell us what happened to Chris, Barry, Rebecca and Jill at the end of part one? Did Wesker really die?.

M: All the Bio Hazard 1 characters are in the hospital due to extreme fatigue, whether Wesker is dead or alive is still unclear...

Don't lecture me on sourcing. I've sourced everything time and time again and don't have the time to go back and retrieve it all just for people to ignore it. You can find it all easily yourself because that's why we created things like the developer interview database. You can find that particular interview on Bioflames, which doesn't have a link directly to it. It's #5 in the misc section.

Zombie Brad was included from a plot perspective.

Q27. Explain the process in which Brad became a zombie?

A27. It's easy to imagine the recent events with Brad, after Chris returned from the mansion, given Brad's personality. In other words, he lived life as a coward, flattering the police and turning a deaf ear to Chris’ desperate plea, likely standing on the Chief's side. Brad remained in the police station untouched even after Chris left for Europe, and became entangled in the incident.

Denial does not undermine my point. There are countless elements in the games where certain developers took relatively free reign, for example the Delta Force soldiers in the BIO3 hospital that were added by the background artists but the writer only stipulated that they were in the abandoned plant.

What are you even going on about with the child experiment stuff? Wesker was only infected with one virus, not counting the time he infected himself with Uroboros at the end of BIO5. The Wesker Project was written for BIO5, and at no contradiction to anything else because Wesker's backstory until then had only started when he was 16. The Wesker Project elements took place when he was a child.

[Grem]

News Bot : I feel like repeating myself, but no Ada's survival has nothing in common with Wesker because we see her alive before the end of the game. If that didn't happen, Ada would have been dead just like Wesker. In RE2, they planned to make Ada a survivor. That's not the case with Wesker in RE1.

You're thinking about the series as a whole but you have to consider what was meant at the time. Again, Mikami statements about Wesker don't mean shit since it's after RE1 release when Capcom had plans to make RE a series and thought it would be cool to have Wesker come back as a superhuman antagonist. Simple as that.

And yes, your argument about Wesker being uncounscious is irrelevant. Here's a counter example : in the bad ending, Tyrant survived. Does the fate of Tyrant appear ambiguous to you ? No, because you're supposed as a player to destroy it in the majority of cases.

The same for Wesker. In the majority of cases, he's the villain and he dies by the hands of his own creation.

Let me ask you something. When you finished RE1 at the time, did you even think there was a possibility that Wesker could have survived ? No, and that's because his fate was not ambiguous. Even if you take the "uncounscious" thing into consideration I bet that not a single japanese player thought that Wesker survived RE1 at the time.

[News Bot]

Nothing in common? Both visibly appear to be dead in a pool of blood. In reality, both unconscious or feigning death. Exact same situation. The only difference is that only Wesker was left ambiguous. The timing of Mikami's statement doesn't matter, as the ambiguity to Wesker's fate was already there in the game itself. He only put into words what was already the case.

The fate of the Tyrant was ambiguous in BIO1. The game had no canon. Everything was ambiguous.

What I (or anyone else for that matter) thought at the time of playing is completely irrelevant against the facts. "Not a single Japanese player", haha. Just like the Japanese interviewer that outright asked if Wesker was really dead...

[Grem]

Just like the Japanese interviewer that outright asked if Wesker was really dead...

You know how it's like in fiction. Even if someone dies there's a possibility to bring him back when a sequel is established. That's what he asked, that does not mean his fate was ambiguous even in his mind. He's just asking for the status of all the major characters of RE1, nothing more.

You know people asked the same question for RE5 "Did Wesker truly died ?" Was it ambiguous in RE5 ? no, it wasn't.

For me, no, Ada and Wesker can't be compared. I'm sorry. When you play RE2, you know Ada faked her death. In RE1, there's nothing to suggest Wesker faked his death or used a virus to bring him back or whatever.

The fate of the Tyrant was ambiguous in BIO1. The game had no canon. Everything was ambiguous.

And yet, everything you see : the death of all the bravo, the destruction of Tyrant and even Wesker impalement by the latter is established in the canon. Conclusion : What you see in the game is partly canon. The whole game is not canon but some of the events are still set in stone. Enrico being shot by Wesker is canon, Tyrant being blown up to pieces is canon, Wesker being impaled is canon. What all the events have in common ? You can see that in both Jill's and Chris' scenario.

I'd really like to agree with you. I would like to think that Capcom planned Wesker's survival since the beginning. But, C'mon, how can buy that shit ? Wesker in RE1 was dead. It is obvious.

[News Bot]

All of those events are established in the canon only after BIO1. You don't have a point. Even the Tyrant's destruction wasn't actually stated until Wesker's Report. It is completely irrelevant whether they happened in both scenarios or not.

He wasn't confirmed dead in BIO1. A scenario where he is able to survive means his death wasn't set in stone. There is no way around this. They could do literally whatever they wanted with any of the events in BIO1 precisely because it has no canon of its own.

[Jimmy_Jazz]

What are you even going on about with the child experiment stuff? Wesker was only infected with one virus, not counting the time he infected himself with Uroboros at the end of BIO5. The Wesker Project was written for BIO5, and at no contradiction to anything else because Wesker's backstory until then had only started when he was 16. The Wesker Project elements took place when he was a child.

How is this so hard to grasp?

As far as I'm aware, the Wesker Experiment involved all candidates being injected with a virus and only a few of them survived. The virus was designed to evolve the children, so Wesker at the start of RE1 is already post-human.

I didn't say these developments contradicted RE1, but that many ways in which his past was expanded wasn't written during RE1, even if his escape was.

Brad remained in the police station untouched even after Chris left for Europe, and became entangled in the incident.

I'm not saying that this isn't the reason why he wasn't in the game, just that there was no information in the game that told this story. Nor anything in RE1 to imply he was a cowered. Whilst Brad's Note in RE2 N64 was added to create a stronger bridge between RE2 & RE3.

As for Retconning, going by RE1's English dialogue alone, it still reads like Wesker decided to steal the research upon hearing it was going to be destroyed because it was something he personally worked on. I've quoted his lines previously but like any rational person I'll be happily re-evaluate that if the original Japanese suggests otherwise or there is proof about Wesker & Birkin working together before RE0.

If you want to get really picky, you have the Clay Virus evolving over the first few titles, but that's the kind of background stuff that doesn't really matter.

Also, whilst 0 & 3 don't contradict 1 & 2, they throw such different perspectives on the events in 1&2 that they're not a seamless fit. They're contextually disruptive (there's probably a better phrase for it than that) despite if you like the additions or not.

He didn't rise, he was instated as S.T.A.R.S. Captain at the recommendation of Umbrella

You wouldn't become the Captain of an elite police unit without some kind of training or prior experience. This process of appointment hasn't been explained or explored and therefore it does have the potential to be looked at by future titles and could prove to be an interesting story. And personally, I find tales about human interaction (Chef Iron's getting bought out, Barry being blackmailed, Chris' departure from the airforce) more intriguing and worth exploring than another super human member of the Wesker family and an ambiguous relationship with Ada, all tied to another corporation trying to get its hands on bio weapons. That's all I'm saying.

But more importantly, this topic is veering towards the semantics of the past and not discussion of the future.

NB, I'd be curious to know, with your knowledge of the timeline and characters, where would you take the series next?

[Grem]

Better talk to a brick wall... :p

It is completely irrelevant whether they happened in both scenarios or not.

Yes, it is relevant because it shows the most probable outcome. I'm sorry but showing Wesker dying at the hands of the Tyrant thrice is enough. Again, they showed Wesker in the power room because they needed a character to activate the self destruct device. He got owned by a vulgar chimera. That's what I see. Uncounscious or not, he's not supposed to escape in time anyway. I mean even with that description you can't imagine him survive.

Future developpements of the series and willing to show everyone that the RE universe is very coherent and well made completely blinds you of facts beforehand.

If Wesker didn't come back in CV and you saw "he's uncounscious..." written on his body before you made you run for the chopper and saw the mansion exploding, would you have thought for a second that Wesker's fate was ambiguous ? I hope not, because if yes you're not a normal person.

[News Bot]

You're incorrect. The virus you're referring to wasn't used until 1998-- it's the one Wesker injects himself with. He's a normal human in BIO1.

There is no information in the game itself about Brad because there's nowhere to put it. The mythology of the series is huge. They don't have time to put it all in a single game. Brad's biography in BIO1 stipulated that he was a coward. It's the very reason the events of BIO1 actually occur because he flies away at the beginning of the game.

The BIO1 English dialogue is cock. Wesker chooses to steal the research because he's in a perfect opportunity to do so, and had always had his own plan of forced evolution and mass extinction, for which he needed the t-Virus and the Tyrant.

There's nothing wrong with the Clay Virus. It was just given another name (both are true). Everything else was the same.

When Wesker became an Umbrella intelligence agent, his first assignment was joining the U.S. Army as a chemical officer. He acquired training and experience there, which made it easy for Umbrella to assign him as S.T.A.R.S. Captain. There is no process of appointment, the R.P.D. was in Umbrella's pocket and they put him there themselves.

Better talk to a brick wall... :p

Yes, it is relevant because it shows the most probable outcome. I'm sorry but showing Wesker dying at the hands of the Tyrant thrice is enough. Again, they showed Wesker in the power room because they needed a character to activate the self destruct device. He got owned by a vulgar chimera. That's what I see. Uncounscious or not, he's not supposed to escape in time anyway. I mean even with that description you can't imagine him survive.

Future developpements of the series and willing to show everyone that the RE universe is very coherent and well made completely blinds you of facts beforehand.

If Wesker didn't come back in CV and you saw "he's uncounscious..." written on his body before you made you run for the chopper and saw the mansion exploding, would you have thought for a second that Wesker's fate was ambiguous ? I hope not, because if yes you're not a normal person.

There is no such thing as a "probable outcome" in BIO1. They are all equal. Take a look at Deus Ex Invisible War for instance, which does not follow a singular ending in Deus Ex, but incorporates all of them. BIO2 does exactly that, but it could just as easily have chosen different events. What you see is irrelevant because the game is the very definition of "what you see is not what you get." The same can be said for BIO2, due to its canon being a mixture of all four scenarios and ambiguity.

Wesker's unconsciousness is only one possible outcome in BIO1. He could've escaped just fine had CV went along with that path, but him being impaled by the Tyrant was chosen because other plot points made it possible to have him not die that way either. If CV or any other game didn't bring him back, then he simply died, which is another probable outcome but not one that has higher priority over the other. Such is the nature of ambiguity.

[Jimmy_Jazz]

Don't lecture me on sourcing.

So every time you provide a vague counter point to any of your statements we then have to play guess which interview you took it from via your website? That's the kind of nonsense that politicians love pulling because they know people don't have the time to sift through their data to get to the facts.

I can imagine it's frustrating if members of the community misinterpret things from the series, or make inaccurate statements due to a lack of information but why not embrace the role of wise owl of the RE universe?

[Grem]

News Bot : Ok, we're not going to agree anyway. Ambiguity or not, you cannot disregard most of the plot points made during the game. The general story is "you take control of a STARS member -> he sees all of his comrade from bravo team die -> it was all a setup by the umbrella corporation to collect combat data -> your leader happens to be a traitor and wants you to confront his most beloved creation -> the situation completely goes out of control for him -> he dies -> Player combat the Tyrant and defeat him -> Player escapes via helicopter"

That is what happens for sure. Canon or not.

But to put it simply, I just don't buy Wesker's uncounsciousness as any proof of ambiguity over his fate.

[Jimmy_Jazz]

You're incorrect. The virus you're referring to wasn't used until 1998-- it's the one Wesker injects himself with. He's a normal human in BIO1.

This is where it gets confusing:

"He was selected as Subject No. 12 in the "Wesker Project", the plan of Oswell E. Spencer to create a superior human species with the Progenitor virus."

http://projectumbrella.net/articles/Albert-Wesker

Which is different from the Prototype virus that he injected himself with at the end of RE1. Or was it?

"Spencer revealed that his goal was to create a new breed of humans -Albert included- and thus become a god over a new world. However, Albert was the only one that survived out of other individuals who were "manufactured" such as him, and the research itself was destroyed along with Raccoon City. As Spencer stood from his wheelchair to confront Wesker face to face, Wesker violently thrusted his hand through Spencer's chest, whispering to him that the right to become a god was now his, and had never been Spencer's."

http://residentevil.wikia.com/Oswell_E._Spencer

"Spencer then gave all the Wesker children a Prototype virus"

http://residentevil.wikia.com/Albert_Wesker

So were the Weskers engineered / altered with a virus or not?

As for the Clay Virus:

"The initial concept remains in the series, but its name, history and characteristics were altered several times by Noboru Sugimura until its final form in Resident Evil 5."

http://residentevil.wikia.com/Clay_virus

"Wesker chooses to steal the research because he's in a perfect opportunity to do so, and had always had his own plan of forced evolution and mass extinction"

Has anyone attempted a better translation of the original Japanese text to english and posted it online?

"When Wesker became an Umbrella intelligence agent, his first assignment was joining the U.S. Army as a chemical officer. He acquired training and experience there, which made it easy for Umbrella to assign him as S.T.A.R.S. Captain. There is no process of appointment, the R.P.D. was in Umbrella's pocket and they put him there themselves."

Again, there is no written process, but in real life you can't just transfer from the army to a police unit. But that doesn't mean this cannot be explored, even if Umbrella have the money to streamline the process. Furthering ideas requires that kind of lateral thinking.

[Jimmy_Jazz]

Alas it seems that the Resident Evil (1996) Translation Errors section of the Resident Evil Wiki is bust and showing errors from the REMake instead.

[News Bot]

Stop using the wiki as a source.

The "prototype virus" is a variant of the Progenitor Virus. The normal Progenitor Virus couldn't work on modern humans. The virus Wesker injects himself with is a result of development aimed at creating a weakened strain that would work on modern humans. He does not have two viruses, and most definitely doesn't have the original Progenitor Virus.

In real life there is no Delta Force training program for female U.S. Army soldiers either. Or organisms that can grow without any sustenance, for that matter. Wesker left the Army and joined S.T.A.R.S. Most of the unit's members had left another military unit. Rebecca joins right out of college, where she didn't even finish her degree. There's a difference between lateral thinking and simply forgetting that you're playing a fictional video game with its own world and rules.

[Jimmy_Jazz]

"Stop using the wiki as a source."

Care to elaborate? Or should I bring up the cutscene itself?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gB9iWye3cew

I don't mind there being an explanation for this, but please go ahead and explain.

There's a difference between lateral thinking and simply forgetting that you're playing a fictional video game with its own world and rules.

Says the person using some vague situations in a fictional world as a reason why other situations in that world cannot be explained further. It's fine if you don't think there's value in exploring STARS or any of its members before the Spencer Mansion incident, but don't cook up half hearted arguments against others exploring those ideas.