By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Hiku said:
DonFerrari said:

Your reasoning makes sense.

But your initial post is what got the confusion. If you had said that you didn't expect they to greenlight before RE2 shipped to great acclaim you tied it more to being before they discover they outdid their forecast.

But yes From the comments that they didn't had budget for SF5 without the help from Sony (so it would take a lot longer to release) to being able to make 2 remakes almost simultaneously is a little odd.

But perhaps they made the PS1 way on the shared assets and team so the additional cost of RE3 was small compared to just RE2.

Yeah, I left out a lot of details to save some time, in case it was already known to the reader, and to not make it too long.

But another detail to consider here is that when they announced REmake 2 in 2015, they said this:





It was "finally" approved, after passionate fan request.
In other words, they wanted to do it before, but weren't allowed to.

RE team: "Can we do it now?"
Capcom: "No."

RE team: "Can we do it now?"
Capcom: "No. We can't even do Street Fighter, and you want money for a remake of an old game??"

RE team: "...Can we do it now?"
Capcom: "Sure."
RE team: "Can we also do REmake 3 before we see how well RE2 does?"
Capcom: "Sure."

It looks like something happened at Capcom around that time, where they went from being very frugal with their budget, to greenlighting multiple large scale games and taking risks again.
If this was after the huge success of MHW and RE7 and all that stuff, it'd be easier for me to point at that and say I understand why Capcom were in a position to make these decisions comfortably.

But whoever made some of these 'risky' decisions at that time (and that includes moving Monster Hunter from portable to home console) are probably looking pretty good right now in the eyes of Capcom's higher ups.

Yep whoever took the lead to approve MHW, RE7 and RE2R made some good decision and will be well seem by higher ups.

I'm sure I liked the REs decision and although I don't play MH people have really show support for it.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."