So I've recently been down a fun Code Veronica hole and it got me remembering what it was like around release and trying to piece together memories. Firstly - it sure feels like a mainline Resident Evil entry, so why does it have a weird 'code' subtitle? It's certainly closer to Resident Evil 2 or Resident Evil 0 than Operation Raccoon City or The Umbrella Chronicles are.
Firstly, it's fun to remember exactly when Code Veronica released. Surprisingly (and this might give us our first clue as to the name!), Code Veronica released on the Dreamcast just three months after Resident Evil 3 came out on the PS1. That's the equivalent of Resident Evil 8 coming out this Friday and then Resident Evil 9 releasing in August. It's crazy. These two proper Resident Evil sequels were being developed side by side for different (competing!) platforms and ended up releasing so close to each other. Literally one on each side of Christmas.
Now, Code Veronica continues the story of Claire (and Chris!) Redfield directly following the events of RE2. It features Claire exploring (and trying to escape from) an Umbrella owned island that she came to in search of her brother. In everything other than the name, it's a sequel to Resident Evil 2. It follows the same characters from the previous games (one from each) and directly follows up their stories. So why is it not called Resident Evil 3 (or 4)? Why did two different mainline Resident Evil games release so damn close together on two different platforms? There are a ton of fun presumptions but the truth might be fairly boring.
What's fun about the whole Resident Evil naming saga is that it seems that Code Veronica was actually meant to be the proper mainline sequel to Resident Evil 2 and RE3: Nemesis was supposed to be the side-story game. Yep, we were supposed to live in a world where Code Veronica and RE3: Nemesis were spin-pffs. Resident Evil: Code Jill or something (probably just Resident Evil: Nemesis in all likelihood).
The actual details of the naming switch arounds has seemingly become something of a fan speculation fest and, typically, everyone has a different 'truth' about why different Resident Evil games all had their names switched at the last minute.
Some say that Sony bartered for exclusivity of three mainline RE games on PlayStation so Capcom threw the number 3 on the side-story PS1 game (Nemesis - keep up) to fulfil that deal so they could move on with making proper sequels on next gen hardware. This has seemingly been revoked in more recent interviews but it's not beyond the realm of possibility. It'd mirror how bands often release quick Greatest Hits or Live albums to get themselves out of record deals that require a certain amount of records released for a label. I could see it.
Some put it down to the fact that, as the games got closer to release, Capcom were realising that the Dreamcast just wasn't going to be the monster console release that they expected and they had to reassess how many copies they'd ship of Code Veronica. Meanwhile the PlayStation continued to be the juggernaut home console in terms of sales. Doesn't it make sense to keep the proper sequel on the console that's gonna shift the most copies and be the biggest success, even if that means rebranding them? Maybe…
Perhaps least sexy are the reports that "producer Shinji Mikami and Flagship president Yoshiki Okamoto told journalists they wanted to keep the numbered chronology on the PlayStation systems, and give subtitles to Resident Evil games on all other systems". I mean, yeah, I guess.
Regardless, I've always loved the release of Code Veronica and the stories of the development and why it exists. I love that it apparently exists purely out of Capcom's failed attempts to port Resident Evil 2 to the Saturn. I love that they really did promote the game as a mainline proper Resident Evil title despite the name change and the fact that it was releasing THREE MONTHS after Resident Evil 3 came out on PlayStation. I love that, while it didn't sell anywhere near as well as previous entries (hi Dreamcast), it sold amazingly well to the Dreamcast audience. Seriously, as a Dreamcast owner it was supremely exciting to have the TRUE, NEXT GENERATION RESIDENT EVIL coming to your console of choice exclusively. This was later mirrored for GameCube owners when the TRUE, NEXT GENERATION RESIDENT EVIL game came exclusively to Nintendo fans (until six months later it came to the PS2).
Most curiously for me… will they do a proper remake of Code Veronica? I'd say, even moreso than RE4, it deserves it. Code Veronica has the same tank controls and classic feel of RE1,2 and 3. It's a struggle for some these days. It's also not available on PlayStation consoles beyond PS3. I'm sure many would want to continue the true story of the Redfields after RE2 wrapped up.
TL;DR: watch the intro cutscene. It's etched onto my brain from watching it so many times on demo discs in 1999.
Firstly, it's fun to remember exactly when Code Veronica released. Surprisingly (and this might give us our first clue as to the name!), Code Veronica released on the Dreamcast just three months after Resident Evil 3 came out on the PS1. That's the equivalent of Resident Evil 8 coming out this Friday and then Resident Evil 9 releasing in August. It's crazy. These two proper Resident Evil sequels were being developed side by side for different (competing!) platforms and ended up releasing so close to each other. Literally one on each side of Christmas.
Now, Code Veronica continues the story of Claire (and Chris!) Redfield directly following the events of RE2. It features Claire exploring (and trying to escape from) an Umbrella owned island that she came to in search of her brother. In everything other than the name, it's a sequel to Resident Evil 2. It follows the same characters from the previous games (one from each) and directly follows up their stories. So why is it not called Resident Evil 3 (or 4)? Why did two different mainline Resident Evil games release so damn close together on two different platforms? There are a ton of fun presumptions but the truth might be fairly boring.
What's fun about the whole Resident Evil naming saga is that it seems that Code Veronica was actually meant to be the proper mainline sequel to Resident Evil 2 and RE3: Nemesis was supposed to be the side-story game. Yep, we were supposed to live in a world where Code Veronica and RE3: Nemesis were spin-pffs. Resident Evil: Code Jill or something (probably just Resident Evil: Nemesis in all likelihood).
The actual details of the naming switch arounds has seemingly become something of a fan speculation fest and, typically, everyone has a different 'truth' about why different Resident Evil games all had their names switched at the last minute.
Some say that Sony bartered for exclusivity of three mainline RE games on PlayStation so Capcom threw the number 3 on the side-story PS1 game (Nemesis - keep up) to fulfil that deal so they could move on with making proper sequels on next gen hardware. This has seemingly been revoked in more recent interviews but it's not beyond the realm of possibility. It'd mirror how bands often release quick Greatest Hits or Live albums to get themselves out of record deals that require a certain amount of records released for a label. I could see it.
Some put it down to the fact that, as the games got closer to release, Capcom were realising that the Dreamcast just wasn't going to be the monster console release that they expected and they had to reassess how many copies they'd ship of Code Veronica. Meanwhile the PlayStation continued to be the juggernaut home console in terms of sales. Doesn't it make sense to keep the proper sequel on the console that's gonna shift the most copies and be the biggest success, even if that means rebranding them? Maybe…
Perhaps least sexy are the reports that "producer Shinji Mikami and Flagship president Yoshiki Okamoto told journalists they wanted to keep the numbered chronology on the PlayStation systems, and give subtitles to Resident Evil games on all other systems". I mean, yeah, I guess.
Regardless, I've always loved the release of Code Veronica and the stories of the development and why it exists. I love that it apparently exists purely out of Capcom's failed attempts to port Resident Evil 2 to the Saturn. I love that they really did promote the game as a mainline proper Resident Evil title despite the name change and the fact that it was releasing THREE MONTHS after Resident Evil 3 came out on PlayStation. I love that, while it didn't sell anywhere near as well as previous entries (hi Dreamcast), it sold amazingly well to the Dreamcast audience. Seriously, as a Dreamcast owner it was supremely exciting to have the TRUE, NEXT GENERATION RESIDENT EVIL coming to your console of choice exclusively. This was later mirrored for GameCube owners when the TRUE, NEXT GENERATION RESIDENT EVIL game came exclusively to Nintendo fans (until six months later it came to the PS2).
Most curiously for me… will they do a proper remake of Code Veronica? I'd say, even moreso than RE4, it deserves it. Code Veronica has the same tank controls and classic feel of RE1,2 and 3. It's a struggle for some these days. It's also not available on PlayStation consoles beyond PS3. I'm sure many would want to continue the true story of the Redfields after RE2 wrapped up.
TL;DR: watch the intro cutscene. It's etched onto my brain from watching it so many times on demo discs in 1999.
Last edited:
