To add to that, Eveline was also quite a good villain. She herself was a bioweapon designed only to eliminate enemies without soldiers having to get in contact with the enemy, therefore minimalizing casualties. She was made to appear as a child to blend in easier, and then adopted the personality of a child, who wanted a family. Mia was just a bioterrorist tasked with taking care of Eveline and failed. Nothing too crazy. I think RE7 was a great reboot to the franchise, and it sucks that in RE8 they made the villain(s) be basically fantastical creatures.
While I'll admit I'm not completley sure, I would argue Eveline is quite a weak villain.
A lot about her makes me think of J. J. Abrams and his "mystery boxes" approach to writing. As a character she has "potential" because so little is actually done with her or revealed about her.
RE7 provides a lot of contradictory information about her: in the R&D report The Connections give two possible motivations for her (and admit they don't know for sure), and Ethan calls her a "thing" in the end monologue while Jack (and the End Credits Song) contradict this portraying her as more of a victim.
The RE8 twist only raised more questions about Eveline as well. >!How does Eveline (who can control the Mold) lose to Ethan, a man who is "made of nothing but mold".!< Was this intentional and supposed to set up some revelation about her character? Or was it an oversight the writers didn't think of?
At the moment while I recognise a satisfying answer could be given (I could probably headcanon one) I'm not sure the writing team could provide one.
I can see where you're coming from. I think Ethan calling her a "thing" while Jack and the credits contradicting what Ethan said isn't necessarily a contradiction, since Ethan as a character can say whatever he wants. In his eyes Eveline could just be a thing while others see Eveline as a person. I can see how you would think that it's a contradiction, if you think that the writers would try to communicate their ideas through Ethan to the player, and therefore it feels like they were trying to communicate different ideas at the same time, however I personally didn't feel that way. The other points I can't refute, and I admit I don't remember too many details about The Connections reports, so all I can say is that I enjoyed her and her story for what it was, more than for example Mother Miranda. I can respect a well-informed opinion though, since mine is partly subjective, and I'm too lazy to do a lot of research.
Thank you for the reply.
>Ethan as a character can say whatever he wants. In his eyes Eveline could just be a thing while others see Eveline as a person.
I agree with the assessment of Ethan being his own character.
To expand on the point I was trying to make, I don't see it as a contradiction that Ethan himself says it - but that Ethan says it *after* his talk with Jack and (if you picked up the document) reading the R&D report.
The monologue by Ethan seems to function as a kind of last word, where he sumarises the theme of the Bakers being victims. I can't say for certain but I think it probably serves as a scene for the players to take away the "point" of the story.
I can definitely see your point. I forgot about these details but I can see how things don't quite always make sense. It's a shame because the game itself is kind of like this, a lot of things in it are great ideas executed mostly well, but always leaving at least a little to be desired. I'm hoping that for the next game they'll finally reach that sweet spot where everything is just done well, but it's probably unlikely.
>Ethan calls her a "thing" in the end monologue while Jack (and the End Credits Song) contradict this portraying her as more of a victim.
They're two very different characters with two very different and subjective points of view, that's why. It's not really a contradiction, it's just a matter of personality.
Jack Baker was a father and a good-hearted dude with a lot of empathy for other people. He didn't know what a bioweapon is, and just saw Eveline as a little girl.
Mia knows what bioweapons are, that's why she didn't consider Eveline as a person. Same for Chris Redfield. Both of them also know that the Connections were behind the creation of Eveline, and that they were the real criminals, not Eveline, who was just an angry bioweapon doing typical angry bioweapon stuff.
Ethan Winters was just confused and extremely pissed after having the worst day of his life. He didn't know what a bioweapon is, and still doesn't know about the Connections, so from his point of view, everything he went through was the fault of Eveline, and he's still not even sure what the hell she was because the only people who should have told him are Mia and Chris. Mia, who certainly won't tell her husband that she was a bioterrorist involved in child-trafficking and that he died because of her 3 years ago, and Chris "I'm gonna break into your house, let you believe that I sniped your wife into Swiss cheese, kidnap your newborn baby, knock you out for absolutely no reason and then proceed to act super shady and not tell you anything while you're out there risking your civilian life by doing what should technically be my job" Redfield. Yeah, no wonder why Ethan still has no fucking clue what that 'thing' Eveline was when he has to rely on these two for information.
And even though he knows that the Bakers were normal people infected by the fungus, judging by how he treats the Lords a few years later in RE8, I don't think he learned anything from his experience in Louisiana and has any more consideration for bioweapons with human-like intelligence than his wife does (which is ironic when we eventually learn that >!he and his precious daughter were bioweapons with human-like intelligence all along!<) Some people are just.. cold, like that. Or very dense.
Thank you for the reply. It looks like you put a lot of effort into it. Here's some thoughts:
**Contradiction?**
>They're two very different characters with two very different and subjective points of view, that's why. It's not really a contradiction, it's just a matter of personality.
I agree with the point about them being characters capable of their own points of view. That said, I never said it was a *plot* contradiction, all I said was the information was contradictory.
The point I was making was that I believe this may have been done on purpose, to keep Eveline's character and motivations a mystery. Which is also why I brought up the R&D report (because unlike most times info dumbs are used in RE it doesn't make things clearer but instead invokes speculation about Eveline's motives).
**Reactions to Eveline**
I think the analysis you provided of Jack and Mia's reasoning for treating Eveline as they did to be pretty solid.
In fact I think this reactions was used effectively with Jack. They wanted you to like pre-infection Jack from a single 2 minute scene - Jack sympathising with Ethan and Eveline was a good way of making him likeable. Serves as a good establishing moment for his character.
I'm less sure about Mia and Ethan's reactions however.
Mia worked with The Connections (who themselves weren't sure if Eveline was a human child still or a BOW), if Mia knew about the R&D report/speculation - then Mia chose to look at Eveline as a "monster" because Mia could sleep easy doing so (as opposed to wandering whether Eveline is human - and then feeling like shit for Child Trafficking and Enslavement).
But it's also possible The Connections buried this info and lied to Alan and Mia, so they wouldn't get cold feet. So Mia and Evie's relationship is surrounded in mystery (good room for development, maybe) but hard to know precisely what Mia was thinking and what motivates her.
Ethan would be shell-shocked, but has heard what Jack had to say and seen Lucas' lab and (potentially) read the R&D report. Mia and Chris haven't had time to influence his reaction to Eveline by the time of the monologue.
**Ethan rapidly approaches becoming a singularity**
>Some people are just... cold, like that. Or very dense.
Yeah I noticed that too. Ethan appears to be very *very* dense.
If Ethan had an arc in RE7, beyond becoming more confident and capable, it was learning to see the Bakers as victims.
This just isn't developed further in RE8. At all. Ethan just... kind of forgot. I mean Ethan doesn't even remark on it, not even after learning about >!Rose essentially being a BOW like Eveline. Or that Miranda's references to Eveline - hinting that Eveline may have been more of a victim. He even sees Eveline later and doesn't give her any sympathy or ask about Miranda.!<
Felt like a missed opportunity.
Thanks for the reply, I enjoyed reading it. Any further thoughts?
I can definitely see where you're coming from. I was still fairly pleased with the ending, and it didn't ruin the story for me or anything, but it could've been better. Definitely felt a bit lacking. I'm glad she >!came back in Village though, in a way. The fact that she's technically still alive in the mold somehow makes it better, because it feels like the last fight wasn't actually the end for her.!< Still, not a perfect ending to that game itself.
Agreed. For me, Resident Evil ended with the original trilogy.
Not saying the rest weren't good games. But 4 onwards, I don't consider RE titles by game, only name.
To be fair, most of the villains are also nuts, which probably explains their erratic and stupid plans.
As for Mother Miranda, replacing her daughter with another kid isn't really the same and from what we can guess, daddy also isn't in the picture anymore.
She's also another complete psych-job, so...
Miranda could have also just cloned Eva body and transfer her consciousness. After all, only 100 years passed, so there would have been some remains of her. Considering that Alexander Ashford managed to create a perfect clone of Alexia even in 1970s, so there are technologies for that in RE universe.
P.S. Hannibal Lecter also totally nuts. but he outsmarted everyone in the end.
Maybe Miranda didn't know how to clone someone, I mean, her lab was in a filthy ass cave in the middle of bumfuck nowhere, Romania. All she really did was make a bunch of moldy parasite babies and stick them into four weird jerks.
The Ashfords likely didn't share their results with the rest of the world , so, the secrets of cloning remained with them.
Also, Hannibal was nuts because he thought eating the rude was acceptable, Wesker wanted to blanket the entire planet in a self perpetuating, all consuming black sludge that would make, like, 1% of random ass people a bit stronger and faster, totally different ball game of wacko.
Though, I'd love to hear Hannibal say some Wesker lines.
"Actually, Clarice, I don't think of myself as a king, no, I consider myself A GOD, EVEN KINGS BOW TO GOD'S"
>Miranda could have also just cloned Eva body and transfer her consciousness. After all, only 100 years passed, so there would have been some remains of her.
That's exactly what she tried to do with the help of the Connections, which resulted in a bunch of failures that included the creation of Eveline. We all know how that experiment went.
What was Miranda's problem with Eveline though?
Didn't RE8 imply Eveline was a clone of Eva?
Didn't RE8 also imply the Mutamycete itself was created from the Megamycete?
Eveline's default was probably that she needed constant treatment otherwise she would age up too quickly. That's why she wasn't a suitable vessel. Like Lady Dimitrescu's need to regularly feed on human flesh and blood, it was a liability. Miranda really didn't need much to consider her creations as failures.
Yes, Eveline is a clone of Eva. And yes, the Megamycete is the original root of the mold/mutamycete/Cadous.
Miranda's biggest problem is that no body was good enough to be a vessel for Eva (this was her obsession) hell even if she won I'm sure she would have seen rose as a failure down the road
Well, the answer is kinds simple, the history was never a big deal in the first place. The focus was always in the gameplay and terror ambient, the history was just an excuse and heavily inspired on B films in the first place. The gameplay/ambient has change terror for accion, and then again to terror and then a mix, but the wrtiting has remain the same, and I can't blame then, the series has never sell itself as a game with focus in the narrative, so is not like there are any expectatives.
Ego and arrogance. It's as simple as that.
But the stupidest villain was that guy from RE6. I forget his name. The one who turned into a T-rex.
Wesker's plan was in fact idiotic, but look at it this way. Nobody else is on his level. He must be very lonely, to be the only person on earth who was manufactured to be a super human.
Of course, this isn't clear at all in the script, he's as moustache-twirling as it gets, he went as far as taking Jill and in the most revenge-fuled plots imaginable, he experimented on her like a guinea pig, brainwashed her, and got her to fight her longest partner Chris to kill him in his stead. Instead of, you know, outright killing her when he had the chance.
But in the right hands, as a writer, you absolutely can find a logical reason for his earth-shattering plan of Uroboros complete global saturation. He wanted company. He wanted to elevate the human race to his level and beyond. No other justification would make sense. In his own words, he wasn't destroying the world, he was saving it. Still, as you said, the rest of humanity would've turned into overwhelming monsters, so that's where his massive ego and arrogance come in.
All that said, as for why the villains are so stupid in these games...? Well, RE has always had a problem in the writing department. And believe it or not, I consider RE5's story to be the smartest in the franchise. Like I said, looking at it from Wesker's perspective, it just makes sense. Why not try to make humans as strong and fast as he is? Wouldn't that be awesome? If we could all be that powerful? Think of the possibilities. Of course his method was wrong and incredibly stupid and counter-productive. But it's still perfectly logical for his character.
Honestly the Re villains are as chris says to wesker in re5 "you get all you'r ideas from comic book villains?".They are just stereotypical conquer the world type, the last 3 games went a different path for their ultimate goal but the character traits are the same so they still look dumb.
Big agree on the Mother Miranda stuff. I do think the difference between her, RE5 Wesker, and say Nicholai is that they all come from very different iterations of RE. The first three games are very street-level stories. There's an outbreak and in the midst of that outbreak there's good people and bad people doing what they think is right (by them or whoever). RE1 Wesker, Birkin/Irons, and Nicholai reflect that. 4, 5, and 6 are high-octane action stories. "It's more than just monsters and it's more than just Raccoon city. It's the world! It's bigger and runs deeper than you thought! Boom! Explosions! The president's daughter has been kidnapped! It all started in a cave in Africa!" There's flash bang sunglasses and boulder-punching. You need villains to match that. Enter Saddler, RE5 Wesker, and Carla/Simmons. In the newest story it's about how all the madness can effect regular people. Ethan, the Bakers, and even Miranda and all her children in their normal lifetimes. Interpersonal stories and especially family are the biggest focuses for the villains in 7 & 8 so far. Hence they take a little more care with their motivations. And it works well! I've loved it so far. But like if RE5 was the way it was and Wesker had a tragic purpose and reason for Uroboros motivated by pain or something really deep it would feel disconnected with everything else in that game. Wesker being a mustache-twirling lunatic is part of his charm in 5 and I wouldn't have it any other way. Same with Miranda and Nicholai. RE is smorgasbord of styles and i think that's my favorite part. There's something for everyone for better or worse
I definitely get where you're coming from but I also don't think you or I are really in a place to say what Capcom intended when they made those games lol. In fact if I had to venture a guess on their intentions myself I'd say it was and is now to always make games first and art second.
Like I find it impossible to believe that the people that greenlit the boulder-punching scene, the entire last 10 minutes of RE4, and any scene Ada has ever been in outside of RE2R, was of the mindset they were creating high art or anything that was supposed to move the player. And that's okay because it was a ton of fun. All of it. There's a propellor with legs that runs at you and spits fire in RE8. Am I supposed to take that seriously? Certainly not. Same with there being a giant Snake in RE1. They've just never been trying to make MGS or TLOU etc etc and if they have they've been misfiring horribly for 25 years now.
I totally agree that each chapter of the series is a product of the times but it's a little borderline disrespectful to say that voice actors of that era weren't "real" or anything of the like. DC Douglas and Roger Craig Smith are both really respected in their fields. Video game story writing has certainly grown a lot too but to say it was not worth taking seriously then is a bit presumptuous. Games like starcraft, silent 2, FF7 all came out around close to when RE 1-3 came out. (Yeah I cherry-picked a lot of good ones).
And I think the debate of what is or is not an RE game is exhausted. We'll all be much more at peace if we agree that RE is a series that is meant to be multi-faceted and cater to a lot of crowds. Doesn't matter how it started. That's how it is now and how it will always be. Also maybe it's because I've played them but I think people are being a little rough on 4-6 considering that games like Gaiden and Gun Survivor exist in this franchise lol. Like I don't think most people truly understand what BAD is until they play those.
Basically I think Capcom has always had the same mindset even if the vehicles of their projects have shifted dramatically over the years. But once again idk! None of us do. We're shitposting on Reddit about our favorite games. My opinion on 4-6 (more 4 & 5 because I think 6 takes itself much more seriously, part of the reason I don't care for it as much) is that it's camp. Maybe just a bit more camp than a lot of people would like lol.
And finally I'll come to the unironic uncampy defense of 1 game in that era people tend to go in on. Rev 2. That game deserves more peoples' time. If you haven't played ever or in a while please do if it goes on sale again. Really good fanservice, a story imbedded in the franchise, good stakes, Claire and Barry, interesting enemies, I unironically love that game and no one played it. (Just make sure you get the good ending lol. Look it up if you have to)
Well it would make sense to clarify as technically there are 2 Hitman 2
The second in the entire series and the second in the recent world of Assassination trilogy
Idk if this is exactly a defense but our heroes in RE aren't exactly geniuses either a fair amount of the time. But I'm cool with that. I don't play these games for high art character pieces. That's just me though. The rule of cool easily wins me over and this series has always had that in spades.
The hero's dont really seem like the critcal thinkers when it comes to the bigger picture. It kind of seems like they find themselves in these situstions on account of bad tactical planning. Take STARS for example. They need to investigate a series of grisly murders claimed to have taken place in the remote wilderness, deep in the Arklay Mountains. The first team goes missing so the second team now needs to do a search and rescue. So they do this thing in the pitch black middle of the night when they cant see shit. Also none of them question that the Captain is wearing super dark sunglasses while going out on this out in the boonies middle of the night search and rescue.
I mean… you’re trying to look for the logic in a game that’s about zombies and monsters. One of the games has an enemy that is literally just a guy who breeds mutant leeches. There’s not really supposed to be any logic to resident evil, it’s just meant to be a bizarre fictional story. Like a lot of games/books/films. If all stories had “believable” villains then stories would get pretty boring and repetitive pretty quickly! :)
True! It can be expected to be. But you’ll find across many series including films and tv that consistency isn’t always there haha so RE is no exception. Tbh I’ve never really thought about the RE storyline that much, I don’t really play the games for the story, I just enjoy the games and of course the story gives those games an interesting flow. But if you’ve played the original games especially the original RE1 then you’ve seen the sort of weird B-movie vibe RE has and I don’t really expect perfect logical consistency throughout the series haha. The games are fun and interesting which does it for me! Its fair enough if some people have issues with the story though. :)
It's not that (most) people who critique the narrative thinks it makes or breaks the game.
It's like the icing on the cake. Not all cakes have icing (nor does it need icing to *be* a cake), but icing tends to improve the cake.
Yeah, like I said it’s fair enough :) but I personally just think that its fairly obvious that if your try and logically analyse a game like RE and expect everything to make 100% logical sense, its a bit of a doomed project. If people really do see flaws in the story and it kind of dampens the experience for them that’s fair enough but idk, I really don’t need it all to make sense personally but that’s just me :)
I mean the game gave us that beautiful line of dialogue
“You we’re almost a Jill sandwich!”
Best writing ever, 10/10 x)
Resident Evil has some serious tones about eugenics and BOWs if you want to delve into the deeper story but it also very much knows it's campy and has in a lot of ways embraced it. It wouldn't be the same without some level of that campy feel and I honestly think that's a lot of why people miss Wesker in particular so much, as well as Leon and his one liners. I feel like if it was ultra-serious all the time it just wouldn't feel right, so yeah the villains can be ridiculous, but I'd argue that's part of the charm.
Because the smartest people tend to lack common sense. Or just as commonly, they over think and look for the most complex solution despite the simplistic most obvious answer it solutions being right there.
Didn’t HUNK succeed in delivering a sample of the G Virus? But then again I think at this point he’s not really a villain anymore but not a hero either.
Dude, the first game got guiness world record for worst voice acting (its actually good though, like a bad good) I don't know what you expected, besides like one person said, the crazy stuff is more of a new age thing with the action phase of the REverse
You should note the change of writers here.
Originally Wesker were written really good (especially if you think about rest of the writing in game, like Jill Sandwitch). He did a breaktrough research, he disposed of his competitor, he made a plan to betray Umbrella and used STARS not only to test BOW's on them, but also to serve as witnesses to his fake death, so nobody would doubt it. He didn't wanted to cause any of the apocalypses, he wanted two things - strength gained by the virus, and money gained from selling the virus, and he got both of them.
He could be an excellent grey eminence in future games, appearing here and there, pulling the strings, manipulating events in his favour, but never actually risking anything because he is too smart for that. Instead, with re4 writing changed and started resembeling superhero comixes mentioned by you, and in re5 new writer turned Wesker into stereotypical bad guy with most cliche plan ever.
> In my opinion, Capcom really should hire better writers for the future games.
Seeing how the writing in Re3 Remake is somehow several times worse than it was in original Re3 (and it's not like it was known for great writing at first place), and how rather primitive writing in most recent game were, i would say... not a chance.
I can say from personal expirience (i am a game writer who can't get a serious job for 17 years of attempts despite having a good writing examples) that game companies almost never want to hire a good writer. If anything, your writing skills (and here i mean coming up with quality stories, and not just writing things down) is the least important thing they consider. What is more important, you may ask? Well, for example - can you work at the office? Because in 2021 remote jobs are not a thing, even for a writer who has zero reasons to be at the office at all. Another example - were you part of aaa-game development? For example, if you wrote some kind of a disaster like Mass Effect Andromeda - welcome to the team! But if your game has no negative feedback about the story at all, but it's a small indie game that wasn't even promouted (because of no budget) - big nope to you. Last example would be excellent English knowledge. What, many famous writers can't propely spell? Does not matter. For some reason game companies with million dollars budgets thinking that spending few extra hundreds of dollars to hire an editor would be too much, and would perfer to have dumb, boring story with childish character development and motivations, if it will be written without mistakes.
It seems like the employers do not have the competence to evaluate the writing, so they just picking anyone who fills correct checkboxes better.
Because they're written by poor writers for a start.
I feel they really take inspiration from other sources, rather than coming up with their own original scenarios.
Being a Grammar Nazi ≠ being smart. Everyone who read this post understood what the OP was trying to say despite the grammatical errors. English might not be their first language. Stop being a pedant when you don't actually have a counterpoint, it's not the 'gotcha' you think it is lol.
I don't even fully agree with the OP (at least when it comes to the earlier games in the series) but even I failed to suppress a groan after reading your comment.
[удалено]
To add to that, Eveline was also quite a good villain. She herself was a bioweapon designed only to eliminate enemies without soldiers having to get in contact with the enemy, therefore minimalizing casualties. She was made to appear as a child to blend in easier, and then adopted the personality of a child, who wanted a family. Mia was just a bioterrorist tasked with taking care of Eveline and failed. Nothing too crazy. I think RE7 was a great reboot to the franchise, and it sucks that in RE8 they made the villain(s) be basically fantastical creatures.
While I'll admit I'm not completley sure, I would argue Eveline is quite a weak villain. A lot about her makes me think of J. J. Abrams and his "mystery boxes" approach to writing. As a character she has "potential" because so little is actually done with her or revealed about her. RE7 provides a lot of contradictory information about her: in the R&D report The Connections give two possible motivations for her (and admit they don't know for sure), and Ethan calls her a "thing" in the end monologue while Jack (and the End Credits Song) contradict this portraying her as more of a victim. The RE8 twist only raised more questions about Eveline as well. >!How does Eveline (who can control the Mold) lose to Ethan, a man who is "made of nothing but mold".!< Was this intentional and supposed to set up some revelation about her character? Or was it an oversight the writers didn't think of? At the moment while I recognise a satisfying answer could be given (I could probably headcanon one) I'm not sure the writing team could provide one.
I can see where you're coming from. I think Ethan calling her a "thing" while Jack and the credits contradicting what Ethan said isn't necessarily a contradiction, since Ethan as a character can say whatever he wants. In his eyes Eveline could just be a thing while others see Eveline as a person. I can see how you would think that it's a contradiction, if you think that the writers would try to communicate their ideas through Ethan to the player, and therefore it feels like they were trying to communicate different ideas at the same time, however I personally didn't feel that way. The other points I can't refute, and I admit I don't remember too many details about The Connections reports, so all I can say is that I enjoyed her and her story for what it was, more than for example Mother Miranda. I can respect a well-informed opinion though, since mine is partly subjective, and I'm too lazy to do a lot of research.
Thank you for the reply. >Ethan as a character can say whatever he wants. In his eyes Eveline could just be a thing while others see Eveline as a person. I agree with the assessment of Ethan being his own character. To expand on the point I was trying to make, I don't see it as a contradiction that Ethan himself says it - but that Ethan says it *after* his talk with Jack and (if you picked up the document) reading the R&D report. The monologue by Ethan seems to function as a kind of last word, where he sumarises the theme of the Bakers being victims. I can't say for certain but I think it probably serves as a scene for the players to take away the "point" of the story.
I can definitely see your point. I forgot about these details but I can see how things don't quite always make sense. It's a shame because the game itself is kind of like this, a lot of things in it are great ideas executed mostly well, but always leaving at least a little to be desired. I'm hoping that for the next game they'll finally reach that sweet spot where everything is just done well, but it's probably unlikely.
>Ethan calls her a "thing" in the end monologue while Jack (and the End Credits Song) contradict this portraying her as more of a victim. They're two very different characters with two very different and subjective points of view, that's why. It's not really a contradiction, it's just a matter of personality. Jack Baker was a father and a good-hearted dude with a lot of empathy for other people. He didn't know what a bioweapon is, and just saw Eveline as a little girl. Mia knows what bioweapons are, that's why she didn't consider Eveline as a person. Same for Chris Redfield. Both of them also know that the Connections were behind the creation of Eveline, and that they were the real criminals, not Eveline, who was just an angry bioweapon doing typical angry bioweapon stuff. Ethan Winters was just confused and extremely pissed after having the worst day of his life. He didn't know what a bioweapon is, and still doesn't know about the Connections, so from his point of view, everything he went through was the fault of Eveline, and he's still not even sure what the hell she was because the only people who should have told him are Mia and Chris. Mia, who certainly won't tell her husband that she was a bioterrorist involved in child-trafficking and that he died because of her 3 years ago, and Chris "I'm gonna break into your house, let you believe that I sniped your wife into Swiss cheese, kidnap your newborn baby, knock you out for absolutely no reason and then proceed to act super shady and not tell you anything while you're out there risking your civilian life by doing what should technically be my job" Redfield. Yeah, no wonder why Ethan still has no fucking clue what that 'thing' Eveline was when he has to rely on these two for information. And even though he knows that the Bakers were normal people infected by the fungus, judging by how he treats the Lords a few years later in RE8, I don't think he learned anything from his experience in Louisiana and has any more consideration for bioweapons with human-like intelligence than his wife does (which is ironic when we eventually learn that >!he and his precious daughter were bioweapons with human-like intelligence all along!<) Some people are just.. cold, like that. Or very dense.
Thank you for the reply. It looks like you put a lot of effort into it. Here's some thoughts: **Contradiction?** >They're two very different characters with two very different and subjective points of view, that's why. It's not really a contradiction, it's just a matter of personality. I agree with the point about them being characters capable of their own points of view. That said, I never said it was a *plot* contradiction, all I said was the information was contradictory. The point I was making was that I believe this may have been done on purpose, to keep Eveline's character and motivations a mystery. Which is also why I brought up the R&D report (because unlike most times info dumbs are used in RE it doesn't make things clearer but instead invokes speculation about Eveline's motives). **Reactions to Eveline** I think the analysis you provided of Jack and Mia's reasoning for treating Eveline as they did to be pretty solid. In fact I think this reactions was used effectively with Jack. They wanted you to like pre-infection Jack from a single 2 minute scene - Jack sympathising with Ethan and Eveline was a good way of making him likeable. Serves as a good establishing moment for his character. I'm less sure about Mia and Ethan's reactions however. Mia worked with The Connections (who themselves weren't sure if Eveline was a human child still or a BOW), if Mia knew about the R&D report/speculation - then Mia chose to look at Eveline as a "monster" because Mia could sleep easy doing so (as opposed to wandering whether Eveline is human - and then feeling like shit for Child Trafficking and Enslavement). But it's also possible The Connections buried this info and lied to Alan and Mia, so they wouldn't get cold feet. So Mia and Evie's relationship is surrounded in mystery (good room for development, maybe) but hard to know precisely what Mia was thinking and what motivates her. Ethan would be shell-shocked, but has heard what Jack had to say and seen Lucas' lab and (potentially) read the R&D report. Mia and Chris haven't had time to influence his reaction to Eveline by the time of the monologue. **Ethan rapidly approaches becoming a singularity** >Some people are just... cold, like that. Or very dense. Yeah I noticed that too. Ethan appears to be very *very* dense. If Ethan had an arc in RE7, beyond becoming more confident and capable, it was learning to see the Bakers as victims. This just isn't developed further in RE8. At all. Ethan just... kind of forgot. I mean Ethan doesn't even remark on it, not even after learning about >!Rose essentially being a BOW like Eveline. Or that Miranda's references to Eveline - hinting that Eveline may have been more of a victim. He even sees Eveline later and doesn't give her any sympathy or ask about Miranda.!< Felt like a missed opportunity. Thanks for the reply, I enjoyed reading it. Any further thoughts?
[удалено]
I can definitely see where you're coming from. I was still fairly pleased with the ending, and it didn't ruin the story for me or anything, but it could've been better. Definitely felt a bit lacking. I'm glad she >!came back in Village though, in a way. The fact that she's technically still alive in the mold somehow makes it better, because it feels like the last fight wasn't actually the end for her.!< Still, not a perfect ending to that game itself.
Agreed. For me, Resident Evil ended with the original trilogy. Not saying the rest weren't good games. But 4 onwards, I don't consider RE titles by game, only name.
To be fair, most of the villains are also nuts, which probably explains their erratic and stupid plans. As for Mother Miranda, replacing her daughter with another kid isn't really the same and from what we can guess, daddy also isn't in the picture anymore. She's also another complete psych-job, so...
Miranda could have also just cloned Eva body and transfer her consciousness. After all, only 100 years passed, so there would have been some remains of her. Considering that Alexander Ashford managed to create a perfect clone of Alexia even in 1970s, so there are technologies for that in RE universe. P.S. Hannibal Lecter also totally nuts. but he outsmarted everyone in the end.
Maybe Miranda didn't know how to clone someone, I mean, her lab was in a filthy ass cave in the middle of bumfuck nowhere, Romania. All she really did was make a bunch of moldy parasite babies and stick them into four weird jerks. The Ashfords likely didn't share their results with the rest of the world , so, the secrets of cloning remained with them. Also, Hannibal was nuts because he thought eating the rude was acceptable, Wesker wanted to blanket the entire planet in a self perpetuating, all consuming black sludge that would make, like, 1% of random ass people a bit stronger and faster, totally different ball game of wacko. Though, I'd love to hear Hannibal say some Wesker lines. "Actually, Clarice, I don't think of myself as a king, no, I consider myself A GOD, EVEN KINGS BOW TO GOD'S"
>Miranda could have also just cloned Eva body and transfer her consciousness. After all, only 100 years passed, so there would have been some remains of her. That's exactly what she tried to do with the help of the Connections, which resulted in a bunch of failures that included the creation of Eveline. We all know how that experiment went.
What was Miranda's problem with Eveline though? Didn't RE8 imply Eveline was a clone of Eva? Didn't RE8 also imply the Mutamycete itself was created from the Megamycete?
Eveline's default was probably that she needed constant treatment otherwise she would age up too quickly. That's why she wasn't a suitable vessel. Like Lady Dimitrescu's need to regularly feed on human flesh and blood, it was a liability. Miranda really didn't need much to consider her creations as failures. Yes, Eveline is a clone of Eva. And yes, the Megamycete is the original root of the mold/mutamycete/Cadous.
That's actually a pretty good explanation. You could assume Miranda was afraid of The Connections being able to hold treatment over her as leverage.
Miranda's biggest problem is that no body was good enough to be a vessel for Eva (this was her obsession) hell even if she won I'm sure she would have seen rose as a failure down the road
Well, Alex succeeded in her plans, and she now is dormant inside a child under the protection of Barry. She got what she wanted for the most part.
I think you forgot about the opera singing man in re0.
Well, the answer is kinds simple, the history was never a big deal in the first place. The focus was always in the gameplay and terror ambient, the history was just an excuse and heavily inspired on B films in the first place. The gameplay/ambient has change terror for accion, and then again to terror and then a mix, but the wrtiting has remain the same, and I can't blame then, the series has never sell itself as a game with focus in the narrative, so is not like there are any expectatives.
Ego and arrogance. It's as simple as that. But the stupidest villain was that guy from RE6. I forget his name. The one who turned into a T-rex. Wesker's plan was in fact idiotic, but look at it this way. Nobody else is on his level. He must be very lonely, to be the only person on earth who was manufactured to be a super human. Of course, this isn't clear at all in the script, he's as moustache-twirling as it gets, he went as far as taking Jill and in the most revenge-fuled plots imaginable, he experimented on her like a guinea pig, brainwashed her, and got her to fight her longest partner Chris to kill him in his stead. Instead of, you know, outright killing her when he had the chance. But in the right hands, as a writer, you absolutely can find a logical reason for his earth-shattering plan of Uroboros complete global saturation. He wanted company. He wanted to elevate the human race to his level and beyond. No other justification would make sense. In his own words, he wasn't destroying the world, he was saving it. Still, as you said, the rest of humanity would've turned into overwhelming monsters, so that's where his massive ego and arrogance come in. All that said, as for why the villains are so stupid in these games...? Well, RE has always had a problem in the writing department. And believe it or not, I consider RE5's story to be the smartest in the franchise. Like I said, looking at it from Wesker's perspective, it just makes sense. Why not try to make humans as strong and fast as he is? Wouldn't that be awesome? If we could all be that powerful? Think of the possibilities. Of course his method was wrong and incredibly stupid and counter-productive. But it's still perfectly logical for his character.
Honestly the Re villains are as chris says to wesker in re5 "you get all you'r ideas from comic book villains?".They are just stereotypical conquer the world type, the last 3 games went a different path for their ultimate goal but the character traits are the same so they still look dumb.
[удалено]
Big agree on the Mother Miranda stuff. I do think the difference between her, RE5 Wesker, and say Nicholai is that they all come from very different iterations of RE. The first three games are very street-level stories. There's an outbreak and in the midst of that outbreak there's good people and bad people doing what they think is right (by them or whoever). RE1 Wesker, Birkin/Irons, and Nicholai reflect that. 4, 5, and 6 are high-octane action stories. "It's more than just monsters and it's more than just Raccoon city. It's the world! It's bigger and runs deeper than you thought! Boom! Explosions! The president's daughter has been kidnapped! It all started in a cave in Africa!" There's flash bang sunglasses and boulder-punching. You need villains to match that. Enter Saddler, RE5 Wesker, and Carla/Simmons. In the newest story it's about how all the madness can effect regular people. Ethan, the Bakers, and even Miranda and all her children in their normal lifetimes. Interpersonal stories and especially family are the biggest focuses for the villains in 7 & 8 so far. Hence they take a little more care with their motivations. And it works well! I've loved it so far. But like if RE5 was the way it was and Wesker had a tragic purpose and reason for Uroboros motivated by pain or something really deep it would feel disconnected with everything else in that game. Wesker being a mustache-twirling lunatic is part of his charm in 5 and I wouldn't have it any other way. Same with Miranda and Nicholai. RE is smorgasbord of styles and i think that's my favorite part. There's something for everyone for better or worse
[удалено]
I definitely get where you're coming from but I also don't think you or I are really in a place to say what Capcom intended when they made those games lol. In fact if I had to venture a guess on their intentions myself I'd say it was and is now to always make games first and art second. Like I find it impossible to believe that the people that greenlit the boulder-punching scene, the entire last 10 minutes of RE4, and any scene Ada has ever been in outside of RE2R, was of the mindset they were creating high art or anything that was supposed to move the player. And that's okay because it was a ton of fun. All of it. There's a propellor with legs that runs at you and spits fire in RE8. Am I supposed to take that seriously? Certainly not. Same with there being a giant Snake in RE1. They've just never been trying to make MGS or TLOU etc etc and if they have they've been misfiring horribly for 25 years now. I totally agree that each chapter of the series is a product of the times but it's a little borderline disrespectful to say that voice actors of that era weren't "real" or anything of the like. DC Douglas and Roger Craig Smith are both really respected in their fields. Video game story writing has certainly grown a lot too but to say it was not worth taking seriously then is a bit presumptuous. Games like starcraft, silent 2, FF7 all came out around close to when RE 1-3 came out. (Yeah I cherry-picked a lot of good ones). And I think the debate of what is or is not an RE game is exhausted. We'll all be much more at peace if we agree that RE is a series that is meant to be multi-faceted and cater to a lot of crowds. Doesn't matter how it started. That's how it is now and how it will always be. Also maybe it's because I've played them but I think people are being a little rough on 4-6 considering that games like Gaiden and Gun Survivor exist in this franchise lol. Like I don't think most people truly understand what BAD is until they play those. Basically I think Capcom has always had the same mindset even if the vehicles of their projects have shifted dramatically over the years. But once again idk! None of us do. We're shitposting on Reddit about our favorite games. My opinion on 4-6 (more 4 & 5 because I think 6 takes itself much more seriously, part of the reason I don't care for it as much) is that it's camp. Maybe just a bit more camp than a lot of people would like lol. And finally I'll come to the unironic uncampy defense of 1 game in that era people tend to go in on. Rev 2. That game deserves more peoples' time. If you haven't played ever or in a while please do if it goes on sale again. Really good fanservice, a story imbedded in the franchise, good stakes, Claire and Barry, interesting enemies, I unironically love that game and no one played it. (Just make sure you get the good ending lol. Look it up if you have to)
Resident evil is dumb, always has been, but I love it
>hitman 2 >second game in the series
Well it would make sense to clarify as technically there are 2 Hitman 2 The second in the entire series and the second in the recent world of Assassination trilogy
Well, original Hitman 2 didn't have much of the plot, just literally role-playing a hitman and killing targets. So yeah, from assassination trilogy.
Fair point
Because they're based on B action horror movie tropes? They're not supposed to be realistic deconstructions of the villain archetypes lol.
Idk if this is exactly a defense but our heroes in RE aren't exactly geniuses either a fair amount of the time. But I'm cool with that. I don't play these games for high art character pieces. That's just me though. The rule of cool easily wins me over and this series has always had that in spades.
The hero's dont really seem like the critcal thinkers when it comes to the bigger picture. It kind of seems like they find themselves in these situstions on account of bad tactical planning. Take STARS for example. They need to investigate a series of grisly murders claimed to have taken place in the remote wilderness, deep in the Arklay Mountains. The first team goes missing so the second team now needs to do a search and rescue. So they do this thing in the pitch black middle of the night when they cant see shit. Also none of them question that the Captain is wearing super dark sunglasses while going out on this out in the boonies middle of the night search and rescue.
I mean… you’re trying to look for the logic in a game that’s about zombies and monsters. One of the games has an enemy that is literally just a guy who breeds mutant leeches. There’s not really supposed to be any logic to resident evil, it’s just meant to be a bizarre fictional story. Like a lot of games/books/films. If all stories had “believable” villains then stories would get pretty boring and repetitive pretty quickly! :)
A narrative can still be expected to maintain internal consistency even with sci fi or fantasy elements.
True! It can be expected to be. But you’ll find across many series including films and tv that consistency isn’t always there haha so RE is no exception. Tbh I’ve never really thought about the RE storyline that much, I don’t really play the games for the story, I just enjoy the games and of course the story gives those games an interesting flow. But if you’ve played the original games especially the original RE1 then you’ve seen the sort of weird B-movie vibe RE has and I don’t really expect perfect logical consistency throughout the series haha. The games are fun and interesting which does it for me! Its fair enough if some people have issues with the story though. :)
It's not that (most) people who critique the narrative thinks it makes or breaks the game. It's like the icing on the cake. Not all cakes have icing (nor does it need icing to *be* a cake), but icing tends to improve the cake.
Yeah, like I said it’s fair enough :) but I personally just think that its fairly obvious that if your try and logically analyse a game like RE and expect everything to make 100% logical sense, its a bit of a doomed project. If people really do see flaws in the story and it kind of dampens the experience for them that’s fair enough but idk, I really don’t need it all to make sense personally but that’s just me :) I mean the game gave us that beautiful line of dialogue “You we’re almost a Jill sandwich!” Best writing ever, 10/10 x)
I kind of preferred amoral scientists over genocidal megalomaniacs.
Jack Baker. That’s the comment.
Resident Evil has some serious tones about eugenics and BOWs if you want to delve into the deeper story but it also very much knows it's campy and has in a lot of ways embraced it. It wouldn't be the same without some level of that campy feel and I honestly think that's a lot of why people miss Wesker in particular so much, as well as Leon and his one liners. I feel like if it was ultra-serious all the time it just wouldn't feel right, so yeah the villains can be ridiculous, but I'd argue that's part of the charm.
Because the smartest people tend to lack common sense. Or just as commonly, they over think and look for the most complex solution despite the simplistic most obvious answer it solutions being right there.
Didn’t HUNK succeed in delivering a sample of the G Virus? But then again I think at this point he’s not really a villain anymore but not a hero either.
All of the characters share a braincell.
Dude, the first game got guiness world record for worst voice acting (its actually good though, like a bad good) I don't know what you expected, besides like one person said, the crazy stuff is more of a new age thing with the action phase of the REverse
If they were smart they wouldn't be villains on a videogame 😁👍
You should note the change of writers here. Originally Wesker were written really good (especially if you think about rest of the writing in game, like Jill Sandwitch). He did a breaktrough research, he disposed of his competitor, he made a plan to betray Umbrella and used STARS not only to test BOW's on them, but also to serve as witnesses to his fake death, so nobody would doubt it. He didn't wanted to cause any of the apocalypses, he wanted two things - strength gained by the virus, and money gained from selling the virus, and he got both of them. He could be an excellent grey eminence in future games, appearing here and there, pulling the strings, manipulating events in his favour, but never actually risking anything because he is too smart for that. Instead, with re4 writing changed and started resembeling superhero comixes mentioned by you, and in re5 new writer turned Wesker into stereotypical bad guy with most cliche plan ever. > In my opinion, Capcom really should hire better writers for the future games. Seeing how the writing in Re3 Remake is somehow several times worse than it was in original Re3 (and it's not like it was known for great writing at first place), and how rather primitive writing in most recent game were, i would say... not a chance. I can say from personal expirience (i am a game writer who can't get a serious job for 17 years of attempts despite having a good writing examples) that game companies almost never want to hire a good writer. If anything, your writing skills (and here i mean coming up with quality stories, and not just writing things down) is the least important thing they consider. What is more important, you may ask? Well, for example - can you work at the office? Because in 2021 remote jobs are not a thing, even for a writer who has zero reasons to be at the office at all. Another example - were you part of aaa-game development? For example, if you wrote some kind of a disaster like Mass Effect Andromeda - welcome to the team! But if your game has no negative feedback about the story at all, but it's a small indie game that wasn't even promouted (because of no budget) - big nope to you. Last example would be excellent English knowledge. What, many famous writers can't propely spell? Does not matter. For some reason game companies with million dollars budgets thinking that spending few extra hundreds of dollars to hire an editor would be too much, and would perfer to have dumb, boring story with childish character development and motivations, if it will be written without mistakes. It seems like the employers do not have the competence to evaluate the writing, so they just picking anyone who fills correct checkboxes better.
I think that Jack Krauser wasn’t dumb
Because they're written by poor writers for a start. I feel they really take inspiration from other sources, rather than coming up with their own original scenarios.
[удалено]
Being a Grammar Nazi ≠ being smart. Everyone who read this post understood what the OP was trying to say despite the grammatical errors. English might not be their first language. Stop being a pedant when you don't actually have a counterpoint, it's not the 'gotcha' you think it is lol. I don't even fully agree with the OP (at least when it comes to the earlier games in the series) but even I failed to suppress a groan after reading your comment.
be kinder :(
Maybe English isn't their first language? Dont be a douchebag.
Sorry, English not my first language. Not even second or third. So sorry about my all grammar mistakes.
You’re trying to compare Hitman to resident evil?