>Shinji Mikami Considers The REmake A "Commercial Failure"Why did Resident Evil (2002) flop?
/thread
The shitcube, well, it sucked ass. Simple as.
>>12631123IDK but my dad wanted me to rent this game from Movie Gallery in 2002 and I declined because I was too scared and got Super Monkey Ball instead.
>Although the game received critical acclaim, it sold worse than expected.[47] As a result, Mikami and Capcom decided that subsequent games in the Resident Evil series would shift away from the survival horror genre and incorporate more action-based elements, starting with Resident Evil 4 in 2005.[47] it's failure directly saved the franchise
>>12631127Yet RE4 was an exclusive (for a while) and sold mega numbers on the 'cube.
>>12631515Uh, but it sold far more on PS2, which Mikami didn't want to do for some retarded reason
It was a Gamecube exclusive and most Gamecube owners weren't interested in survival horror.
>>126315151.6 million isn't "mega numbers" for one of the most hyped games of the generation, though by GameCube standards it is impressive.
>>12631123It's still the 25th best selling game on the platform somehow and the 6th best selling game not published by Nintendo at around 1.3 million copiesIt only sold slightly more tan RE0
>>12631515RE4 also happens to be one of the most revolutionary and impactful games ever made, literally solidifying the third-person shooter genre after many missteps while simultaneously reinventing the then-stale-and-tired Resident Evil series.Most people who bought an N64 probably didn't expect to be wanting a James Bond FPS so much either, but you can't just ignore the release of legitimately groundbreaking title.
>>12631541>25th best selling game on the platformI thought Gamecube only had 20 games.
>>12631123M-rated game on da cube
>>12631930I bet that was funnier in your head. Now get mad
>>12631524I respect him for it; he was adamantly against sacrificing game quality for profit.
>>12631123Because despite what people say it wasn't that great. Most people saw it as a pointless remake of a game that at that point wasn't even very old. RE4 was what everyone was waiting for. As a reminder Code Veronica was the most recent big release and the traditional survival horror was seen as played out and stale. Outbreak at least had multiplayer, not the case with RE1 and 0. These games could have literally been the greatest games of all time and they wouldn't sell well because people just didn't want them anymore.RE4 was pretty much the perfect game for the RE franchise, Devil May Cry being related to RE4 was also a big reason for the more action direction as it sold better than RE1 and 0 combined also rated better than 0 and similarly to 1, something I rarely hear brought up.
Ahead of its time in terms of remake culture, while behind the times in terms of Japanese and hardcore gamers who would jump on a new or updated version of a great game. The market was already moving to the west while Japan was going handheld and more kid-based, and in the west a 'remake' of such a popular game was seen as a rental, not a buy.
>>12631123Sold way better than Twin Snakes, it was pretty successful when put into perspective.
>>12631442>>12631539If that quote is really about this game, then it seems like they misread the situation. It was not about re1-3 + remake being bad, it was that gamecube was child console. I mean it still turned out well for them to make a few new drafts on what re4 should be and they were even able to resurrect the series later so they aren't stupid.
>>12631123Because it's shit, on a shit console, and substantially worse than the original game.
>>12631123It didn't. It sold well. The HD Remasters also proved it sold well.
>>12631123Maybe it was the fact he was stupid enough to make it a Gamecube exclusive?
>>12631127This but you didn't even need to say /thread anon since your picture speaks for itself and would be more impactful without the text.
>>12632012It was certainly very graphically impressive for the time. The leap in 3D graphics from fifth gen to sixth gen was pretty incredible. Like you said, the original RE1 was only six years old when REmake came out.
Anyone else here likes the remake but still likes the original game better? I don't think in extremes. I find both games to be great but I prefer the OG over the remake because I feel it plays better in terms of gameplay speed and I also like the depiction of the original mansion over the remake. Its a bit more believable in the game world that scientists were living in the OG mansion where as the remake comes across more as a spooky Halloween style haunted mansion.I can totally understand people preferring the remake though. In terms of just pure horror its probably much better at that. Its dark with an incredible atmosphere.
>>12631541>>12631540so that means RE4 was a commercial failure too since it only did 300k more sales.
>>12633795This is true and it's pretty much the main selling point of REmake. RE still holds up well and looks better than early 360 games.
>>12634686Partly, the GameCube was a death sentence. RE4 proved this by being a system seller but the second it was freed from the cube it became one of the greatest selling games of all time.
>exclusive to a console no one owned>remake of a game released only like two years ago
>>12631524Have you seen what RE4 looks like on PS2? It's better that they pretended a PS2 port would never happen, it means the game could be much more ambitious.
>>12636221>but the second it was freed from the cube it became one of the greatest selling games of all time.>PS2 sales: 2.3 millionEven with GC and PS2 sales combined, it didn’t sell as many copies as the first two did individually on PSX.
