/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.9829546]

Why did REmake sell poorly? Shinji Mikami said they were seriously considering making RE2 with the same engine in 2002.

[Anonymous No.9829548]

>>9829546
They put it on the Gamecube. Next question.

[Anonymous No.9829558]

>>9829546
Everyone and their mother already played it just a few years prior, and this was more of the same, fixed camera prerendered background. And it came out after Silent Hill 2 changed Everything.
Thank god they didn't remake 2 in this style, the final RE2 Remake was absolutely fantastic, much more than this game would be.

[Anonymous No.9829575]

1) gamecube
2) did they even market it? I didnt even know about REmake or RE0 on the cube until around the time RE4 released and I happened to see them at my local game store too, years after initial release

[Anonymous No.9829582]

>>9829546
because everyone was still playing the original games like on day one. nobody saw a need to get the remake. and almost nobody had a gamecube

[Anonymous No.9829587]

>>9829558
Completely this, Not only was the stuck on an undersold platform the rest of the library was over saturated with the other RE ports and had an underwhelming, overpriced prequel that same year.

Even worse, REmake is probably one of the best games on the GC meaning resellers overpriced it right from the start.

GC was one of those systems people would buy, play the top 10 games for about a year or so and then pawn it off for a newer system.

[Anonymous No.9829601]

Because Mikami sold out for a big fat check signed Nintendo

[Anonymous No.9829610]

gamecube exclusive remake of a 5 year old playstation game

[Anonymous No.9829613]

>>9829558
>And it came out after Silent Hill 2 changed Everything.
Wasn't Silent Hill 2 a commercial failure too when it was released? A lot of people complained it barely had anything to do with the first game (that's why they went back to the cult plot in SH3).

[Anonymous No.9829621]

>>9829548
That's a stale cope. CV sold about the same on PS2 as it did on the Dreamcast. RE4 didn't blow the doors off when it got ported either. There's no reason to think a remake of a game every Playstation owner already played a few years before would sell worth a shit.

[Anonymous No.9829629]

>>9829558
2's remake was hardly fantastic given that it had nothing in common with the original

[Anonymous No.9829636]

Why did they make a remake so soon? The game was like 5 years old still, what were they thinking?

[Anonymous No.9829650]

>>9829636
They were completely out of ideas and spinning their wheels.

[Anonymous No.9829658]

>>9829558
Soilent hill 2 was a pretentious copy of a PS1 walking sim, it did change everything but not for the better

[Anonymous No.9829672]

>>9829621
>cope
You surrender is accepted.

[Anonymous No.9829678]

>>9829658
>soilent hill
oi am ploiying soilent 'ill tonoight bruv

[Anonymous No.9830918]

>>9829613
It was a flop but it did have some pretty impressive looking environments rendered in full 3D with nice lighting effects and a camera you could move around however you wanted for the most part. On a technical level, fixed cameras with static backgrounds looked absolutely primitive in comparison.

[Anonymous No.9830921]

>>9829546
Consoomers have shit taste. Remake and Zero are the best games in the series.

[Anonymous No.9830937]

>>9829621
Tendie cope. literally the only reason it didn't happen WAS because it was on GC. that's it.

[Anonymous No.9830945]

>>9830937
That didn't stop them from porting 4 almost immediately. Why not also do REmake and 0 if they were such sure fire hits?

[Anonymous No.9830954]

>>9830945
>That didn't stop them from porting 4 almost immediately.

they poured too much money to have the entry waste away on a not-really-trending gaming console at the time. from a business perspective, it makes perfect sense for them to port it over to other systems. same shit with some of the Sonic games.

[Anonymous No.9830973]

>>9829636
Gaming moved fast in those years. Lots of games got remakes in that amount of time since ports functionally were remakes in the 90s. It wasn't until sixth gen began to standardize everything under lowest common denominator that tech advancement stopped. In order to get every game onto every system, you had to make the game entirely out of middleware that was too much of a hassle to change with later ports, so you don't bother changing anything because everybody will be impressed with the HD resolution anyway.

>>9830954
You didn't answer his question. That's not a reason to not port REmake.

[Anonymous No.9831013]

>>9830945
How binding was that agreement with Nintendo anyway? Because they also released Viewtiful Joe and Killer 7 on PS2.

[Anonymous No.9831039]

>>9830973
>>9830945
its all speculation from the audience's end, but 99% it was likely a binding agreement with Nintendo that they couldn't work around. RE4 was more than likely brought over to other consoles because after the poor sales reception of REmake and 0, made sure the contract would allow them to put 4 onto other systems.

[Anonymous No.9831048]

>Game's only 5 years old
>Everyone who wanted to, has already played it
>Even then, it's just more of the same pretendered backgrounds+fixed camera angles that Capcom had been churning out , which weren't going to fly as easily on next gen hardware
>Exclusive to a console few had/wanted
>Nintendo console demographics shifting to where the people left mostly just played Nintendo games (RE4 for GC had half the attach rate of Code Veronica on the DC, an even bigger failure of a console where games could be easily pirated)
Why wouldn't it sell poorly?
And even then, it's still the 4th best selling (non Nintendo published) game on the GameCube. Honestly, I'd consider that to be pretty impressive all things considered.

[Anonymous No.9831060]

>>9831048
Sums it up quite nice.

I dont think modern remake culture wasn't really a thing yet either.

[Anonymous No.9831064]

>>9829546
Nintendo fans refuse to buy things from collaborators.

[Anonymous No.9831080]

>>9829629
yea the gameplay is different,it was for the best tho and actually made RE2 a true survival horror.

[Anonymous No.9831110]

>If only they would have ported REmake to PS2 it would have sold a million billion copies!

[Anonymous No.9831120]

>>9829548
Always love when I see the first post in a thread being so good to the point.

[Anonymous No.9831124]

>>9829546
People weren't as crazy about remakes as they are today.

[Anonymous No.9831128]

>>9831048
to be fair, 5 years was a long time back in those days. There's a huge gap in power between the GC and the PS1. Not like today where there's barely any significant difference between PS3 and PS5 games other than resolution and MAYBE framerate. The step up in graphics between RE1 and REmake was fucking massive and gives the game an entirely different vibe. Plus being on a nintendo console theoretically meant an untapped audience that didn't play it before since they presumably had N64s rather than PS1s. But of course that's just theory, since in reality it really just comes down to the RE craze dying down and nintendo fans only wanting kiddy shit and being notorious for not touching anything besides nintendo first party games.

[Anonymous No.9831129]

>>9831048
Attach rate for a single game means nothing when you're talking about millions of sales on tens of millions of console units. Attach rate did not justify the DC version of Code Veronica, and in fact REmake has the tacit excuse of taking far less time to develop and was partially funded by Nintendo, meaning actual sales are what matters. A single REmake disc being sold probably made Capcom more money.

It is true that GCN owners mostly just bought Nintendo games for the system, but people overhype that in some cases. REmake is not a case of that.

[Anonymous No.9831175]

Is it wrong to believe that REmake is the best game ever made?
>has graphics that have held up 20 years later
>has a great and dark ambient ost
>has wide enemy variety
>requires strategy on how to deal with enemies
>has 3 different bonus modes
>loads of replay value
Does it honestly do anything wrong? The original is slightly harder when not on bonus modes and has more a b movie feel if you prefer that, but that’s it

[Anonymous No.9831182]

>>9831175
Sorry, it doesn't have a character to be widely licensed on lunchboxes and shit, so Sonic wins again.

[Anonymous No.9831386]

>>9829636
It was just a way to introduce tendies to the whole series since RE4 was planned to be an exclusive.64 got RE2 and GBC got gaiden(both featuring him may be why 4 is based around Leon) but it had been years by then

[Anonymous No.9831454]

>>9831110
>vgchartz

[Anonymous No.9831516]

>>9831454
Capcom
https://www.capcom.co.jp/ir/english/business/million.html

[Anonymous No.9831520]

Why did he hate PS2

[Anonymous No.9831562]

>>9830921
>>9829548
>>9829558
This, this, and this... but it still sold well enough considering. More than anything it was the GC and its smaller install base and their tastes. Classic RE was a little stale but the visuals were a spectacle in 2002, and that alone sold it despite classic RE getting old. Definitely remember thinking a cutscene was about to start, but it was in fact playable a few times. RE4 only sold 150% better on the GC despite everyone (rightfully) tonguing its anus regardless of platform ownership and loyalty.

[Anonymous No.9831570]

>>9831520
He got over it enough to make God Hand for it. I imagine it was because he recognized the GC as the more powerful Japanese console. REmake probably wasn't possible as it was on PS2, and 4 had some pretty gnarly downgrades. I'm sure 4 could have been an impressive PS2 game if developed for the ground up for it, but it would have played to different strengths.

[Anonymous No.9831578]

>>9829546
It was release in the worst possible time on a console that didn't suit the game.

Maybe if it release right after RE4 between 2006-2008 on multiple consoles then if would had more commercial successful.

[Anonymous No.9831591]

>>9829546
I dunno. I bought it.

[Anonymous No.9831628]

>>9829546
Did it sell poorly or did it not make all the money in the universe?

[Anonymous No.9831682]

>>9829587
wtf is all this "overpriced" shit. At release it retailed at $50 just like every other quality title that generation, which was an improvement from the previous generation where you could see new releases pushing $70 depending on the game. REmake & Zero both ended up dropping to $30 with the resellers fairly quickly with Zero ending up falling all the way to $10 a few years later. It was the RE2/3 ports where the resale market was retarded with Gamestop & other resellers actually increasing the price from the original MSRP (though 3 eventually dropped down to $40). I assume CVX on GC had the same issues in the resale market, but I wasn't familiar with the pricing for it since I've never seen a physical GC copy of CVX & I don't think they actually exist.

[Anonymous No.9831726]

>>9829546
Considering the butchered RE1 remake atmosphere I'm glad they didn't. That shit would have been really dumb inside the police station. People don't seem to get that another part of original RE series charm was also its voice acting and actiony movie vibe it had about it. For RE1 the horrendous VA was so bad it was funny. The sequels greatly improved upon this and the lines and VA there is also so memorable but less so because it was funny. This was complimented well by RE's action horror movie type of vibe.

None of this is captured as well in REmake which even feels like it may have some slight paranormal elements to it. I grow tired of people thinking it is somehow some replacement to the original.

[Anonymous No.9831743]

Anyone complaning "game was only 5 years old" is wrongly applying modern logic to this. Yeah, there is very little difference technically speaking between a 2018 game and a 2023.

But between 96 and 01 the difference and technical leap was HUGE, and nobody, NOBODY at the time thought the remake was unnecessary or that "it's exactly the same game I just played!" or that a remake was unwarranted.

And for that matter Super Mario All Stars and the Dragon Quest remakes on SFC prove you all wrong and the technical leap was even bigger for REmake.

[Anonymous No.9831881]

>>9831726
You sound like a butthurt 50yo faggot

[Anonymous No.9831916]

>>9831743
Yeah it was long enough for Capcom to make 3 mainline sequels and in doing so exhaust the concept enough to justify a complete shift to RE4 a couple years later.
And like many other anons have said, look at the jump in graphics from PSX to Gamecube like holy fuck. There's less contrast between RE4 and its remake that just came out.

At the end of the day while it's sad that a product as nice as REmake proved to be a misstep, we still get to enjoy it. It could be worse, it could've not been made.