Final-Fan said: So by 'the RE series', you meant 'RE4'? Gotcha. Now, please tell me how I should have divined this information, lacking psychic powers as I do. If you had said "predecessor" instead of "franchise" in the post that I originally responded to, this particular issue might never have come up. |
I also meant the series a a whole though there is a more solid argument to be made on the behalf of RE4 as the new standard for moving on beyond the original story arch. The series before RE4 was dependent on the Raccoon City/Umbrella/T-Virus story arch which has now been exhausted. The point of comparing RE4 is to say, "without the imagination of those who were able to save RE from becomming just another tappering franchise, how can yet another sequel hope to take this series anywhere that isn't worrisome or retroactive?".
I still doubt it will live up to the rest of the RE series which sustained its standard on the continuity of plot, because Capcom has already exhausted the viability of the Racoon City/Umbrella/T-Virus story arch which sustained many of the earlier games and the one game which managed to break away from that into new territory (RE4), Capcom no longer has the talent or vision of in their ranks anymore. At the best I expect this game to tread water in terms of gamer satisfaction, playing it safe in the way of moving the story and playing it safe in gameplay.
