New RE5 Trailer!

[Dot50Cal]

Please please please be gentle here and dont link anyone else to the files guys. Our host has re-enabled the video domain. Ive uploaded the Biohazard and Resident Evil versions of the trailers in SD and HD, you can get them at the video page.

http://www.the-horror.com/index.php?id=re5vid

Keep this as secretive as possible, as the host is monitoring the site for any massive activity.

[Ridley W. Hayes]

I'm afraid that won't be posible, there are always people from other sites visiting this forum and linking the video to the forum they participate. Please, to the visitors, don't spread the link, if you read the issues about the bandwidth you'll understand.

BTW, about the thing with RE4. I don't feel betrayed at all, I'm disappointed about the direction that took the hole history. That's it.

[Archelon]

I didn't miss the "point," at all. And I am someone who's followed the story religiously from the beginning as well, but I have no problem with RE4's story or where it's taken the series as a whole. I enjoyed RE4's story just as much as any other game's in the series. Even though Umbrella's downfall was described within just a few minutes of the intro, I felt it brought fine closure to the Umbrella saga (and it was certainly a heck of a lot more realistic than a small band of people taking out an entire multinational conglomerate on their own; you don't nuke one of your own cities and let the people responsible for forcing you to make that decision slide, folks). I was always more interested in Wesker's machinations than Umbrella's anyway.

And that's one thing I appreciated about RE4's story. It showed that Umbrella isn't so much a corporation as it is an idea. Saddler, love him or hate him, embodied that. Even if Umbrella the corporation is gone, there will always be someone or something to take its place, whether it's a single person or another corporation entirely (like this "S" introduced in Ada's Report), and carry on its legacy, even if said person or corporation has no connections whatsoever to Umbrella. And I'm happy with that, but that's me.

[Borman]

I didn't miss the "point," at all. And I am someone who's followed the story religiously from the beginning as well, but I have no problem with RE4's story or where it's taken the series as a whole. I enjoyed RE4's story just as much as any other game's in the series. Even though Umbrella's downfall was described within just a few minutes of the intro, I felt it brought fine closure to the Umbrella saga (and it was certainly a heck of a lot more realistic than a small band of people taking out an entire multinational conglomerate on their own; you don't nuke one of your own cities and let the people responsible for forcing you to make that decision slide, folks). I was always more interested in Wesker's machinations than Umbrella's anyway.

And that's one thing I appreciated about RE4's story. It showed that Umbrella isn't so much a corporation as it is an idea. Saddler, love him or hate him, embodied that. Even if Umbrella the corporation is gone, there will always be someone or something to take its place, whether it's a single person or another corporation entirely (like this "S" introduced in Ada's Report), and carry on its legacy, even if said person or corporation has no connections whatsoever to Umbrella. And I'm happy with that, but that's me.

See, but a lot of us feel like there was this building towards something huge from 1 through CV, like climbing Everest, and then with 4 we were already down the mountain, drinking some Hot Chocolate and planning the next adventure. Sure, UC might describe some of it, but RE4 would have been the way to describe at least in a bit more detail what the hell went on. Heck, I wouldnt mind if RE4 became 5 (and so on), and stayed as is. Its just that missing link that Im not sure even UC can fill that bothers me.

[Alzaire]

You know, I had a rather long post explaining why Resident Evil 4 is no less of a Resident Evil game than any other game in the series, and that "hardcore fans" who think so are no less "hardcore" than the "hardcore fans" who hated the game. Then I realized, what's the point? Nothing I type is going to change your minds, nothing you type is going to change my mind.

I guess all I basically wanted to say was that there are some longtime fans who are happy with the direction Capcom has taken the series, and not because they were tired of the old gameplay mechanics and/or story, mind you. And I, for one, certainly don't feel like I've been betrayed or abandoned by Capcom in any way. I'm clearly in the minority, though.

My post isn't really to change anyone's minds. My WoT posts are usually just a clarification of my opinion that I try to go ahead and include my reasonings to get them out of the way.

I'm not trying to insult the people who liked the games, or the fans of the series that were completely alright with, or loved, the change. It's all a matter of preference obviously.

How to describe this... I'm sure you and others could point out facts and similarities that would make this seem just like any other BH game. However, there are key components that made the series in the beginning. This is where the opinions will start splitting.

There are a few aspects that made the series what it was. I imagine most will agree the two biggest factors were zombies and the Umbrella factor. Both missing starting at RE4.

Argument: Ganados are sort of like zombies, just faster and use weapons, and have a bit more intelligence. Still the cannon fodder.

Ok, good point. Counter: DawnRomero and Dawn04 (Dawn of the Dead). Both have the same name. Both have zombies. One the zombies are slow shamblers, the other marathon runners. Without getting technical about producers, ect., these aren't the same worlds. Romero enthusiasts generally didn't like the idea of running zombies (exceptions of course). Same here, in my opinion.

Argument: Umbrella is still behind the scenes. Defeated topside but likely still underground. Wesker is still around, and the game involves Leon and Ada both from previous games. Game still has boss characters and even a lab at the end, plus a parasite (comparable to virus) and a town 'infected'.

Again, good points. In general, yeah that sounds Biohazardish. Problem is without the secondary plot points, the game is about a crazed person who wants to infect Ashley and send her to the US to infect them because of a vendetta. The premise of an infection and the use of Ashley and the parasite as a bioweapon sounds exactly like previous games with the t/g-virus infections and bioweapon creation. Problem is/was that it is -not- about Umbrella's fall, not about a mistake of Umbrella to cause some kind of outbreak, not about a former STARS member or similar hero going after Umbrella. It was a total side-story with backplot elements such as Wesker talking about reviving Umbrella, the parasite itself being possible use in connection with viruses, the virus itself mentioned briefly by Luis, and the inclusion of Leon and Ada. Other than those elements that could be completely removed and/or changed a bit and the game totally stand on its own under another name, this story of BH4 as a "plot furthering" game was unrelated and too far a leap forward in time to be acceptable.

There are plenty of other arguments and counter arguments that could be made. Like you, I know nobody is gonna change anyone's mind here. I don't think I'm more hardcore or less hardcore a fan than anyone that is a -fan- of the series (this doesn't count casual gamers who play the game without a care to overall/original/past/future story or the name of the game). I don't feel betrayed, nor do I expect Capcom to "fix" anything at this point or anything either. They made a business decision that obviously won over the casual gamers better and managed to delight fans who were getting tired of the old formula and the rest either continue to love the series or still buy it just cause its Biohazard while still disappointed in the story and sudden drastic changes.

I tell you what I'm gonna do. Pretend I'm a florist for a moment. I make artificial flowers. Cool? I'm gonna give you a rose that I made. It's called "Rose". You love it. A little while later, I'm gonna give you another rose, but this one's petals are dyed purple instead of red. I'll call it "Rose 2". You also love that one. Then again, after more time passes during my creation period, I'm'll give you a third rose. This one will be pretty with red and purple and slightly new, but still familiar scent. Obviously, as naming goes, this one is "Rose 3". You thoroughly enjoy that one as well and are awaiting the next one. So, this time, a lot of time passes. During this time, I re-release my old Rose 1-3s, remake and slightly enhance Rose 1 (say, a stronger fragrance, but still the same fragrance), ect. Then finally, after a large amount of time and waiting (longer than between previous Roses), I give you my latest rose. Except this one is a lilly... with thumbtacks glued on the stem and the petals colored red with a magic marker. Sprayed some lilac fragrance on the bad boy and gave it to you with the name "Rose 4". Even did something totally new and gave it a nice white ribbon tied in a pretty bow below the flower head to give it a new spin. Awesome right? Thumbtacks are prickly like thorns. The petals are still red. Still has a nice smell. And hey, something new, a ribbon!

A rose under any other name is still a rose. A lilly is not a rose, no matter how you dress it up like one.

[Scream]

They re-enabled it, that's good. I had a feeling they wouldn't Though it does mean you have to be careful in the future, I would plan how to make a big release in the future without disrupting your hosting service.

[Archelon]

One of the problems I have is when people blame RE4 for singlehandedly ruining the series. I'm not implying that that's what anyone here is saying, because clearly no one is saying that, at least not to the extent that I'm meaning, anyway. It should first of all also be mentioned that Shinji Mikami said on several occasions that he intended from the get-go for the fourth installment to be a complete overhaul of the basic gameplay system (though obviously not as much of an overhaul as the original DMC build of RE4 would have been).

Now, on to the so-called "ruining of the series" as so many fans have put it (again, no one here has said that, I'm just clarifying my position). The blame should not be put on RE4, or even Shinji Mikami's choice to change the gameplay and separate the game from the previous games in the franchise storyline-wise. The blame should be put on Capcom's decision to milk the franchise until the proverbial teat had been squeezed dry. Think about it.

CODE: Veronica was originally supposed to be Resident Evil 3, correct? Well, we all know how that worked out. Instead, we got another installment that I still maintain added nothing important storyline-wise save for the nuking of Raccoon, which could have been easily summarized (and was, for that matter) in a later installment's (CODE: Veronica's, for example) intro. Then came Gun Survivor. Numerous ports and re-releases later, we get the REmake.

Then, finally, we get RE0, the first real new RE game since CODE: Veronica. However, instead of actually adding anything worthwhile to the plot, we get yet another wrench thrown into the already convoluted and plothole-filled storyline. The only worthwhile plot point in RE0 was that Marcus released the T-Virus in the mansion. Something that hardly needed an entire game to reveal. Personally, I liked not knowing how it was released.

Personal preferences aside regarding the storyline, the point is that we hadn't seen a true sequel since CODE: Veronica. Every rehash and side story Capcom released only saturated the market, which is why so many people thought the series had become stale to begin with. Now, if Capcom hadn't started down the road they did with RE3, and just went straight from RE2 to CODE: Veronica, then the drastic changes in RE4 may never have had to happen (though they may still have considering Mikami's aforementioned comments about the fourth game in the franchise).

Leaving out all of the needless side stories, remakes, re-releases, rehashes, and whatnot, Capcom could have created a more cohesive and contained storyline, and fans could very well have seen the fall of Umbrella they envisioned for so many years with Resident Evil "4" (I put the 4 in quotations, because there's no telling what it would've been numbered if 1, 2, and CODE: Veronica were the only games in the series). The formula would still have been fresh enough also that the fourth game could have retained all the same mechanics as the previous games, but with maybe a few tweaks here and there, and I don't think anyone would have made such a big deal about it (as they did when RE0 came around and complained that it was the same thing all over again).

However, I think if the series was to survive, let alone thrive, Capcom had to take drastic measures. Mind you, I would have been perfectly fine with a new game that played exactly like the older games and nothing like the RE4 we have, but I really don't think it would have achieved the success that it has. And because of that success, Capcom can go back and fill in the blanks that fans were crying for with RE4. Not only is Umbrella Chronicles going to attempt to answer a lot of the unanswered questions (though I suspect it will only make things even more convoluted rather than less), but even RE5 looks like it will be doing much the same, as Takeuchi stated that we'll get to learn just what Chris has been up to in the 10 years between RE1 and RE5. And if that girl is Sherry, Capcom will be tying up one major loose end in the process.

However, suppose Capcom made RE4 like the previous games and even had the downfall of Umbrella as its focus, there would still be the question of Wesker. But if Capcom did make RE4 like the previous games, it's not unreasonable to assume that it wouldn't sell nearly as well as this version of RE4 has (though maybe it would have, maybe it would have even sold better, I'm just speaking hypothetically here), and if it sold really poorly, there's a good chance it would have been the last game in the series. And if it was the last game in the series, then we'd never get closure regarding Wesker. Sure, we'd get real closure with Umbrella, but what good is that if we never got to find out what ultimately happened to the real mastermind behind the series?

Now, suppose Capcom released another game in the series after this hypothetical version of RE4. What if it was the overhaul to the series that the real RE4 was? Capcom would probably have to do it for the same reason they did it with RE4: to keep the series alive. If it dealt with the downfall of Wesker, then Chris would no doubt have to be the main character.

Would it be considered more of a "real" Resident Evil because the Umbrella arc had officially been closed, and Capcom could move on to Wesker? Or would people still complain about the game mechanics, story, characters, etc? Obviously we'll never know, because this is all hyperbole, but I often wonder. If Capcom brought an end to Umbrella, but not Wesker, and then used RE4's style gameplay for the game that brings down Wesker, would people still be upset? And would they instead want yet another game in the old style that explained the downfall of Wesker?

Quite frankly, I'm glad the series has had a revival, regardless of how that revival came about, because it means that I can play my favorite video game series of all time for many more years to come. Maybe some would have rather it just ended with 4 and that's that. Resident Evil 4, like Umbrella Chronices and RE5 after it, is still a Resident Evil in my eyes, and at the end of the day, I guess that's all that really matters.

That was more like 2 dollars than 2 cents, but I applaud and appreciate anyone who actually read through the whole thing.

[dmkf]

BSAA?

[wBirkin]

I read the whole thing, Archelon. it was really good. i agree in many aspects. i don't even want to voice my opinions anymore haha. i have to go pack for las vegas. woot. haha can't you tell how excited i am?

and BSAA...i really wanna know what it is. something AMERICA. Bull-Shitting Assholes of America?

[Krispy]

and BSAA...i really wanna know what it is. something AMERICA. Bull-Shitting Assholes of America?

If you were trying to come off as an asshole, you did a pretty good job. Its not like "A" could stand for "Association" like every other acronym in existence, that would be crazy!

I'm thinking "B" stands for "Biohazard" or "Bio-Weapon" in which case it would most likely be UN organization since they monitor those areas in the real world for the most part (America has a weapon disarmament program that does something similar, but only in territories it is invested in). Of course, RE isn't always grounded in the real world so it could very well be an American organization although I doubt it would reverberate the country's accused abuse of authority.

[wBirkin]

If you were trying to come off as an asshole, you did a pretty good job.

hehe i wasn't, just being a kidder

[SlyBeast]

Let me just say that this new trailer melted my face completely off. Wow.

[itchytasty]

i need chris's body.

[TheSelfishGene]

I really didn't realise how stale the series was becoming until I played RE4.
I'm still rather critical of RE4. I don't even think it was that great. I see it's biggest problem being a lack of enemy variety, which makes the whole game feel very repetitive, but thats just my $0.02

Like it or not, it is a resident evil/biohazard game. It says so on the very box. Whether it lives up to your (no one in particular) preconceived notions of what a resident evil game should　be is irrelevant. You have to accept that the series has changed. Personally I think it's changed for the better. I'd MUCH rather to play the old games, however I think the change is for the better, becaue ultimately, the nth iteration of 'resident evil' would start to wear thin after a while.

And never forget folks, this is Capcom we're talking about. Masters of versions and ports. Street fighter 2 anyone? Or maybe megaman X?

Playing rehash after rehash after rehash would surely be alot worse than playing through resident evil 4, no matter how much you hated it.

I commend UC for trying something 'new' with the series, ignoring survivor, but I'm still very skeptical that it will answer the questions left hanging in the series. Remember last time they tried to clear up plot holes? Wesker's report anyone?

[Alzaire]

I agree with most of what you said Arch, I think we're on the same general page. Just people like me are more outwardly bitter that, as Borman said, the story was built up in anticipation that we were going to somehow see and take part in the fall of Umbrella. And when BH4 FINALLY came out, they set that aspect aside in a prologue. And like a lot more people than I expected seem to think, I too think UC probably isn't gonna do as well as it could filling in story gaps solidly. Not to mention it's a shooter, which has been the worst games in the series arguably, and on the Wii which the main series is not on.

But anyway, I've always felt RE4 was a good game. Just not very happy that they went so far ahead and the only current way they are stepping back to fill in the gap is with another unconventional game that a lot are agreeing atm is going to be subpar.

Anyway, the BH5 trailer looks like it will be fun, though at the moment it does look a lot like BH4 and I agree with TSG that more enemy variety would have been better. Sounds hypocritical, I know, that I love the old formula with tons of zombies being the staple enemy, but didn't like the number of ganados. I think it has to do with BH4 felt more actiony and kept throwing them at you over and over in more numbers than any of the previous games (save Outbreak) did with zombies.

Oh well, I will still be waiting to see the next trailer.