Quantcast
(UPDATE)Resident Evil 3 remake leaked Cover, New Jil Faces. Edit: Added Resident Evil Resistance Cover & Close up view of Jill Valentine

Forums - Gaming Discussion - (UPDATE)Resident Evil 3 remake leaked Cover, New Jil Faces. Edit: Added Resident Evil Resistance Cover & Close up view of Jill Valentine

Tagged games:

DonFerrari said:
Hiku said:

It's noteworthy because just a few years before that, Capcom couldn't even greenlight the R&D budget for Street Fighter 5. One of its biggest franchises.
And that's comping off the huge success that was Street Fighter 4. Before Sony offered to fund part of the development, Yoshinori Ono estimated that we wouldn't have seen SF5 until 2018 at the earliest. Capcom were in a bad financial situation due to poor investments into the mobile market.

It takes a lot to recover from that. Let alone be in a position where you comfortably greenlight the funding of a second remake before the first one even gets any fan feedback.

And Street Fighter 5 certainly didn't help, as it had a poor launch. The game was rushed out with minimal content, because Capcom wanted to have it out before the Capcom Pro Tour started that year, in February.
Over the years they managed to steer the ship right and make SF5 profitable, but it wasn't the big success they were expecting.

Marvel vs Capcom Infinite was their next big, from scratch, project. And that one failed spectacularly, and was never salvaged.
They abandoned all plans for continued support for it, almost immediately.

I believe Resident Evil 7, in Feb 2017, was the first big new project for them that ended up being a hit on home consoles. And the starting point of their comeback.

And that was several years after REmake 2 was announced. Which was announced in August 2015.
That's why I find the timing of RE3's funding noteworthy.

You can read my comment above for my thoughts on that.

But I just want to add that the development of RE2 was not 'a lot quicker' than RE7.
It was apparently the other way around. RE2 was in development longer than RE7.

Resident Evil 7 began development in Feb 2014.

"It's been 4 years since we saw a numbered Resident Evil game, when did you begin developing RE7?
Nakanishi: Well we began everything to do with the game around about February 2014, so a little over 2 years"
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/capcom-famitsu-interview-on-resident-evil-7.1235171/

RE7 was released exactly 3 years after it started development.


In August 2015, Resident Evil Remake 2 was announced to be in development. It started at some point before that announcement, but let's go with August 2015. That means by the most conservative estimate, REmake2 was released 3,5 years after it was announced to be in development.

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.

Last edited by Hiku - on 04 December 2019

Around the Network
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

Hiku said:

Marvel vs Capcom Infinite was their next big, from scratch, project. And that one failed spectacularly, and was never salvaged.
They abandoned all plans for continued support for it, almost immediately.

I believe Resident Evil 7, in Feb 2017, was the first big new project for them that ended up being a hit on home consoles. And the starting point of their comeback.

And that was several years after REmake 2 was announced. Which was announced in August 2015.
That's why I find the timing of RE3's funding noteworthy.

Marvel Vs. Capcom is a long running series, and infinite used tons of assets of Marvel Vs. Capcom 3, which did not look good when moved over to the new engine.  It was a very ugly game, with characters no one wanted, and going against a far superior tag team game, which had 3v3, when MvC went back to 2v2.  It is by no means, a "from scratch" game, when 75% of it is just the previous game's assets.

It's like saying any of the Tekken games are "from scratch" when they're all built over the previous games, using decades old animation, and the first game was a Virtua Fighter clone.

Considering how much Resident Evil 3's setting overlaps with Resident Evil 2, the time span doesn't seem too wild.  Jill is walking through the same police station Claire was in.  If I'm not mistaken, the first time around, things were minimally edited, and taken from different angles in RE3.  How much is this police station really going to change over the course of a few weeks?

Knowing that they'd make Resident Evil 3, just after Resident Evil 2, I'm sure they wouldn't have made things too complicated for themselves.



Burning Typhoon said:
Hiku said:

Marvel vs Capcom Infinite was their next big, from scratch, project. And that one failed spectacularly, and was never salvaged.
They abandoned all plans for continued support for it, almost immediately.

I believe Resident Evil 7, in Feb 2017, was the first big new project for them that ended up being a hit on home consoles. And the starting point of their comeback.

And that was several years after REmake 2 was announced. Which was announced in August 2015.
That's why I find the timing of RE3's funding noteworthy.

Marvel Vs. Capcom is a long running series, and infinite used tons of assets of Marvel Vs. Capcom 3, which did not look good when moved over to the new engine.  It was a very ugly game, with characters no one wanted, and going against a far superior tag team game, which had 3v3, when MvC went back to 2v2.  It is by no means, a "from scratch" game, when 75% of it is just the previous game's assets.

It's like saying any of the Tekken games are "from scratch" when they're all built over the previous games, using decades old animation, and the first game was a Virtua Fighter clone.

Considering how much Resident Evil 3's setting overlaps with Resident Evil 2, the time span doesn't seem too wild.  Jill is walking through the same police station Claire was in.  If I'm not mistaken, the first time around, things were minimally edited, and taken from different angles in RE3.  How much is this police station really going to change over the course of a few weeks?

Knowing that they'd make Resident Evil 3, just after Resident Evil 2, I'm sure they wouldn't have made things too complicated for themselves.

The 'from scratch' part was mainly to distinguish the difference between creating a new engine for a home console game, over something like some of their lower budget 3DS sequels they were working on at the same time, like Phoenix Wright 6. Which I left out of the equation for that reason. They don't even make changes to the UI there. So as much as they had re-used animations in Marvel Infinite, it's still in a different league compared to games like that. Especially considering the licensing they had to do with Marvel.



Hiku said:

The 'from scratch' part was mainly to distinguish the difference between creating a new engine for a home console game, over something like some of their lower budget 3DS sequels they were working on at the same time, like Phoenix Wright 6. Which I left out of the equation for that reason. They don't even make changes to the UI there. So as much as they had re-used animations in Marvel Infinite, it's still in a different league compared to games like that. Especially considering the licensing they had to do with Marvel.

That's still not true, because Marvel Vs. Capcom wasn't from scratch, it was made with Unreal 4.  Marvel Vs. Capcom 3 was made with MT Framework, which had been in use since 2006?  So that's not a new, from scratch engine, either.  I really don't understand what you mean, to be honest.



Around the Network

I like the look of Jill. Unlike RE2R Claire she doesn't have a soft dolly face. Nemesis looks good too. The makeover puts emphasis on his human origin.



Hunting Season is done...

Burning Typhoon said:
Hiku said:

The 'from scratch' part was mainly to distinguish the difference between creating a new engine for a home console game, over something like some of their lower budget 3DS sequels they were working on at the same time, like Phoenix Wright 6. Which I left out of the equation for that reason. They don't even make changes to the UI there. So as much as they had re-used animations in Marvel Infinite, it's still in a different league compared to games like that. Especially considering the licensing they had to do with Marvel.

That's still not true, because Marvel Vs. Capcom wasn't from scratch, it was made with Unreal 4.  Marvel Vs. Capcom 3 was made with MT Framework, which had been in use since 2006?  So that's not a new, from scratch engine, either.  I really don't understand what you mean, to be honest.

Assets can be reussed even in different engines I believe.

Still I think he is just pointing that this game had a lot more game put into it than a sequel in the same gen.



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

DonFerrari said:

Assets can be reussed even in different engines I believe.

Still I think he is just pointing that this game had a lot more game put into it than a sequel in the same gen.

Resident Evil 3 used pre-rendered backgrounds, so to get those different angles still took days to process. 



Burning Typhoon said:
DonFerrari said:

Assets can be reussed even in different engines I believe.

Still I think he is just pointing that this game had a lot more game put into it than a sequel in the same gen.

Resident Evil 3 used pre-rendered backgrounds, so to get those different angles still took days to process. 

Sure, but probably they were worked together for a good bunch of time.



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

DonFerrari said:
Burning Typhoon said:

Resident Evil 3 used pre-rendered backgrounds, so to get those different angles still took days to process. 

Sure, but probably they were worked together for a good bunch of time.

If memory serves, Resident Evil: Code Veronica was renamed (It was supposed to be resident evil 3) Because Sony had a deal with Capcom to have a resident evil trilogy released on the PS1.  Resident Evil 3 was developed probably by an outsourced studio.  Of course they had access to everything used in RE2's development, but rendering the same scenes at different angles no doubt took a while.

Remake 3 isn't going to have pre-rendered backgrounds, and will take place in much of the same areas as resident evil 2.  Items like handguns, cranks, etc don't need to be redone either.  same area, same time period.  Some things will be marginally different as the setting collapses to the zombie outbreak, but these are minor things that aren't the same as creating entirely new areas and scenes.

So RE3's development time really shouldn't be a surprise to anyone.